History of Painting in Italy

From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia

(Redirected from A New History of Painting in Italy from the Second to the Sixteenth Century)

"The triple vaulted ceiling of the Sala is of the same century , and possibly of an earlier time than that of Conxolus . A lamb in the centre of the first carries a cross and is surrounded by the symbols of the Evangelists with human ..."--History of Painting in Italy (1864-66) by Crowe and Cavalcaselle

"In the most prosperous times of Rome the arts never attained to the perfection of the models created by the genius of Greece. Long before the golden age of the Antonines, sculpture and painting had degenerated from the high standard upheld in the great times of the Empire. From that period till the rise of Christianity they pursued an uniform path of degeneracy, yet they retained such vitality as to impose their laws on the nascent Christian school. It is not the object of these pages to trace the decline of classic art or to record its fall. A study of Christian art from its beginning in the catacombs of Rome and Naples, to its decline and fall in the first ten centuries, and the final development of its genius, as it rose to the perfection of Giotto, Ghirlandaio and Raphael, — such is the purpose to which these pages are devoted."--History of Painting in Italy (1864-66) by Crowe and Cavalcaselle

{{Template}} History of Painting in Italy (3 vol., 1864-1866) is a book by Giovanni Battista Cavalcaselle and Joseph A. Crowe.

[edit]

Full text of vol. 1[1]

A NEW

HISTORY OF PAINTING

ITALY

FROM THE SECOND TO THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY.

DRAWN UP FROM FRESH MATERIALS AND RECENT RESEARCHES IN THE ARCHIVES OF ITALY; AS WELL AS FROM PERSONAL INSPECTION OF THE WORKS OF ART SCATTERED THROUGHOUT EUROPE.

By J. A. CEOWE & Q. B. CAVALCASELLE,

at;thoes of ' THE eakly flemish painters.'

Vol. I.

LONDON:

JOHN MUEKAY, ALBEMARLE STREET.

1864.

The right of Translation is reserved.

SIB CHAKLES LOCK EASTLAKE,

PRESIDENT OF THE ROYAL ACADEMY, AND DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL GALLERY,

WHOSE EEFINED TASTE AND UNTIEING EEEOllTS AEE SECUEING TO ENGLAND A NOBLE NATIONAL COLLECTION, —

TO THE SKILFUL PA1NTEE WHOSE KNOWLEDGE OE THE HISTOEY AND LITEEATUEE OF HIS AET IS UNSUEPASSED IN OUE DAY,

ARE RESPECTFULLY AND GRATEFULLY DEDICATED

BY THE AUTHORS.

EEEATA TO VOL. I.

For ' Read.

S.S. Nero etc page 2 line 34 S.S. Nereo, etc.

„ 4 „ 25 Id. Id.

7 „ 11 id. Id.

„ 50 „ 1 Id. Id.

Coiistantine „ 32 „ 40 Justinian.

seems „ 35 „ 5 seem.

angel „ 62 „ 29 Virgin.

last century note to „ 70 „ 1 1823.

Gregory the Great „ 85 „ 15 Gregory IX.

A.D. 1127 „ 85 „ 15 1227.

S. Apostolo „ 113 „ 1 S.S. Apostoli.

many „ 155 7 may.

committed note to „ 162 5 commissioned.

Parrocia „ 184 22 Parrochia.

mouths „ 188 „ 14 mouth.

Capello note to „ 209 „ 12 cappello.

capelloue „ 338 „ 2 cappellone.

5 ,. „ 361 „ 20 should be omitted.

Enoch „ 363 „ 16 Moses.

esentially „ 384 „ 10 essentially.

Francesca „ 393,, 1 Francesco.

painted „ 471 „ 32 pointed.

Antonio ,, 582 „ 36 Antonino.

flexibile „ 584 „ 20 flexible.

PEEF ACE.

It is not our intention to dwell on the importance of the subject treated in the following pages. We shall leave it to the reader to consider that we cannot hope to charm him with a narrative like that of Yasari, copious, varied, relieved by lively local tints, and mellow with age ; — nor captivate him with a sketch as curt and light as that of Lanzi. We believe that the history of Italian art has received such valuable additions from a direct com- parison of extant works among each other, and from the discovery of documentary evidence Jn archives hitherto inaccessible or unsearched, that no new edition of Vasari, even with the completest commentary, would satisfy the demands which may justly be made upon writers of the present day. That these demands will be satisfied we do not pretend to anticipate. The volumes now offered to the public are however an honest — an earnest- effort to that end.

We shall not enter into the considerations which dictated the form into which the work has become compressed. We shall not attempt to recapitulate

a 3

PREFACE.

the sources from which documentary evidence has been derived. It is sufficient to say, as regards the first point, that the matter seemed almost naturally to arrange itself into the shape it has now assumed ; — with respect to the second, that we have obtained assistance from many well-wishers, each of whom to thank in turn would exceed the space at our com- mand, but to whom collectively we hereby offer our grateful acknowledgments.

We have presumed to place before the reader an instalment of two volumes, comprising the History of Painting complete to the close of the fourteenth century, partially so to the end of the fifteenth, leaving the sixteenth untouched. Our future plan involves the termination of the fifteenth century, with a narrative of the decline of the Siennese and the rise of the Perugian schools, and the develop- ment of Venetian, Sicilian, and Neapolitan art. The lives of the Florentines of the next period will immediately follow, and be made to contrast with those of artists in other parts of Italy till the tide of the great Eevival halts at the full. This result we hope to attain in two subsequent volumes.

The plates which illustrate the pages now issued have partly appeared before in the work of Kugler ; but their number has been swelled by the addition of others of great interest engraved especially for this occasion.

CONTENTS of Vol. I.

CHAPTER I.

Art to the close of the sixth century — The catacombs, and earliest mosaics — Early Christian sculpture and miniatures . . Page 1 to 40

CHAPTER II.

Italian art from the seventh to the thirteenth century — The latest catacomb paintings — Decline of art in mosaists — Neo-Greek influ- ence at Rome — Continuation of the decline at Rome — Miniatures of the eighth century — S. Elia of Nepi and its wall-paintings — Early art in South Italy, chiefly at Capua, — on the coasts of Sicily — Miniatures of the Siculo-Norman period, and cotemporary Italian works of the same kind — Mosaics of the twelfth to the fourteenth century — Wall-paintings at Subiaco, at Parma, and in the Baptistery of Florence — Jacobus Torriti 41 to 95

CHAPTER III.

The Cosmati — Their works at Civita Castellana, Anagni, Rome — Pietro Cavallini 96 to 113

CHAPTER IV.

Sculpture in Central Italy from the twelfth century — The forerunners of Niccola Pisano at Pistoia, Lucca, Pisa, and Parma — Niccola Pisano, and his assistants — - Earlier and cotemporary art in South Italy — Works of Niccola, of Arnolfo, of Fra Guglielmo, of Giovanni Pisano — Orvieto cathedral 114 to 154

viii

CONTENTS OF VOL. I.

CHAPTER V.

Decline of painting in Central Italy in the thirteenth century — Crucifixes — Painters of Lucca, Pisa, and Sienna — Guido — Painters of Arezzo ; Margaritone and Montano Page 155 to 194

CHAPTER VI.

Early Florentine art — Tafi — Cimabue 195 to 209

CHAPTER VII.

S. Francesco of Assisi — Works of Cimabue and Giotto, in the upper church — Gaddo Gaddi and Rusutti 210 to 233

CHAPTER VIII.

Giotto : His early years — His wall-paintings in the lower church of Assisi, and at Rome — His return to 'Florence — and frescoes of the Palazzo del Podesta • • 234 to 270

CHAPTER IX.

Giotto : Story of the 0 — He engages to go to Avignon, but remains in Italy — He paints at Padua, in the Arena, and at S. Antonio; at Verona, Ferrara, and Ravenna 271 to 295

CHAPTER X.

Giotto : Florentine works ; in Santa Croce, for the Peruzzi, Bardi, Baron- celli, and other chapels ; in Ognissanti — Anecdotes .. 296 to 316

CHAPTER XI.

Giotto : His visit to Naples — State of art in that capital — Early painters : © Simone — Frescoes in S. Chiara — Chapel of the Incoronata — Roberto di Oderisio, Gennaro di Cola, and others — Colantonio del Fiore — Nicholaus Tommasi — Final residence of Giotto in Florence — S. Reparata — Death of Giotto 317 to 342

CHAPTER XII.

Giotto's influence on the sculptors of his time — Andrea Pisano, Nino Pisano, Tommaso, and others 343 to 353

CONTENTS OF VOL. I. ix

CHAPTER XIII.

Taddeo Gaddi, and his works at Florence and Pisa — Cappellone dei Spagnuoli Page 354 to 375

CHAPTEE XIV.

Puccio Capanna and other Giottesques — Peter and Julian of Ri- mini 376 to 386

CHAPTER XV.

Buffalmacco — Chronology of the paintings of the Campo Santo in Pisa — Francesco da Volterra — Bruno Giovanni 387 to 397

CHAPTER XVI.

Stefano Fiorentino, and what remains of his works .. .. 398 to 401

CHAPTER XVII.

Giovanni da Milano 402 to 409

CHAPTER XVIII.

Giottino : Difficulty of classifying the works assigned to him at Florence and Assisi — Giovanni Tossicani .. 410 to 424

CHAPTER XIX.

Orcagna, as painter, architect, and mosaist, at Florence and Orvieto — Frescoes assigned to him at Pisa — Andrea da Firenze — Bernardo Orcagna and Bernardo of Florence 425 to 454

CHAPTER XX.

Traini : His alleged relationship with Orcagna ; his altarpieces at Pisa — Niccola Tommasi and Mariotto Orcagna 455 to 462

CONTENTS OF VOL. I.

CHAPTER XXI.

Agnolo Gaddi and Cennino Cemiini Page 463 to 479

CHAPTER XXII.

Antonio Veniziano and his claims to rank in the history of Florentine art — His frescoes at Sienna, Pisa, and Florence 480 to 492

CHAPTER XXIII.

Gherardo Stamina : His career — His education of Masolino — His assistant, Antonio Yite 493 to 498

CHAPTER XXIV.

Masolino and the frescoes of Castiglione di Olona — Style developed there compared with that observable in the Carmine at Florence — Maso- lino's chequered career — His journey to Hungary .. 499 to 518

CHAPTER XXV.

Masaccio — His birth, precocious power, and employment at Rome — His poverty — Commission to paint the Brancacci chapel — His manner — Frescoes in the Carmine and S. M. Novella — His death .. 519 to 550

CHAPTER XXVI.

Religious art continued in convents — Lorenzo Monaco and other friars of the Camaldoles 551 to 558

CHAPTER XXVII.

Fra Giovanni da Fiesole : His character and style ; altarpieces in various places ; frescoes in S. Marco of Florence ; and miscellaneous works — Visit to Orvieto and Rome — Death 559 to 596

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.

Vol. I.

Page

Picture of Christ ; from a ceiling in the Catacombs of SS. Nereo ed

Achilleo, at Rome 4

Head of Christ; from the Catacomb of S. Ponziano in Rome 9, 10

Mosaics of the 6th century in S. Vitale afe Ravenna, representing Justinian

and Theodora . ! 27

Head of Christ ; from the Catacomb of S. Ponziano in Rome 42, 43

Mosaics of the 9th century in S. Prassede at Rome 51

Mosaics of the Tribune of S. John Lateran in Rome 92

Mosaics of the Tribune of S. Maria Maggiore in Rome 94

Large painting by Guido da Siena, in the Church of St. Doraenico at Siena,

dated 1221 181

Madonna Enthroned, by Cimabue, in S. Maria Novella at Florence 203

Perspective of the Upper Church of S. Francesco, Assisi 214

St. Francis in Glory ; a painting by Giotto on the Vault of the Lower

Church at Assisi 237

St. Francis wedded to Poverty ; a painting by Giotto, in the Lower

Church of S. Francesco at Assisi 237

Allegory of Chastity ; a painting by Giotto in the Lower Church of

S. Francesco at Assisi 238

Allegory of Obedience ; a painting by Giotto in the Lower Church of

S. Francesco at Assisi 240

The Navicella ; a mosaic, partly from a design by Giotto, in the Vestibule of

St. Peter's at Rome 253

Portraits of Dante, Corso Donati, and Brunetto Latini ; painted by

Giotto, in the Chapel of the Podesta at Florence 2G5

Youthful Portrait of Dante, by Giotto ; after restoration 265

Perspective of the Chapel of the Arena at Padua 277

xii ILLUSTRATIONS.— VOL. I.

Page

Allegorical Figures of Justice and Prudence, by Giotto, in the Arena Chapel

at Padua 286

Allegorical Figures of Fortitude, Temperance, and Infidelity, by Giotto,

in the Arena Chapel at Padua 286

Confession ; a fresco in the Church of the Incoronata at Naples 328

Holy Orders ; a fresco in the Church of the Incoronata at Naples 328

Marriage ; a fresco in the Church of the Incoronata at Naples 329

The Misfortunes of Job; a fresco by Francesco da Volteria (?) in the

Campo Santo at Pisa 384

Orcagna's (?) Last Judgment and Hell 447

Orcagna's (?) Triumph of Death 445

The Daughter of Herodias before Herod; a pa'nting by Masolino

in the Baptistery of Castiglione di Olona 504

St. Catherine ; a fresco by Masaccio, in S. Clemente at Rome 522

Perspective of the Brancacci Chapel at the Carmine of

Florence 528

The Fall, and The Expulsion of Adam and Eve, by Masaccio. Frescoes

in the Church of S. M. del Carmine at Florence 529

The Tribute Money; a fresco by Masaccio in the Church of S. M. del

Carmine at Florence , 530

St. Peter Baptizing ; a fresco by Masaccio, in the Church of S. M. del

Carmine at Florence 534

Resuscitation of the King's Son, by Masaccio and Filippino Lippi ;

a fresco in the Church of S. M. del Carmine at Florence 536

Judas receiving the Money, and Christ's Entry into Jerusalem, by Angelico da Fiesole. Panel compartments from the presses formerly in the SS. Annunziata , 574

The Flight into Egypt, and The Annunciation, by Angelico da Fiesole.

Panel compartments from the presses formerly in the SS. Annunziata 574

Coronation of the Virgin, and Miracles of St. Dominiok; a picture

by Angelico da Fiesole, now in the Louvre 584

St. Stephen Preaching; a fresco by Angelico da Fiesole, in the Vatican

Chapel of Nicolas V 593

St. Lawrence ; a fresco by Angelico da Fiesole, in the Vatican Chapel of

Nicolas V 594

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

CHAPTER I.

ART TO THE CLOSE OF THE VI. CENTURY.

In the most prosperous times of Rome the arts never attained to the perfection of the models created by the genius of Greece. Long before the golden age of the Antonines, sculpture and painting had degenerated from the high standard upheld in the great times of the Empire. From that period till the rise of Christianity they pursued an uniform path of degeneracy, yet they retained such vitality as to impose their laws on the nascent Christian school. It is not the object of these pages to trace the decline of classic art or to record its fall. A study of Christian art from its beginning in the catacombs of Rome and Naples, to its decline and fall in the first ten centuries, and the final development of its genius, as it rose to the perfection of Giotto, Ghirlandaio and Raphael, — such is the purpose to which these pages are devoted.

The unconquerable aversion of the primitive Christians to images and pictures rapidly subsided in the second and third centuries; and though it seemed yet a rash and sa- crilegious act to attempt the delineation of the Eternal,

VOL. I. - 1

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

it was no sin to represent the Redeemer under the form of the good shepherd or of Orpheus, or to symbolize His miraculous birth, His passion, death, resurrection, and ascension by episodes of the old, prefigurating those of the new, testament.

The painters of the catacombs, whose works afford the earliest examples of Christian art, were but too evidently under the influence of pagan models and customs to give their subjects that depth of feeling, that Christian type which marked the period of the great revival. They twined the Christian theme in garlands of pagan flowers. Cupid fluttered in the vine leaves around the figure of the good shepherd. The chlamys and tunic clothed the forms of the Virgin, the pallium that of the prophets; whilst the Phrygian dress and cap covered the heads and frames of the shepherds or the Magi. The attitude, mo- tions, forms and distribution were those of the classic time, the degenerate imitation of the greatness of past ages. Whilst the face of the Redeemer distantly revealed the features of the Olympian Jove or of Apollo, the pro- phets were but too frequently reminiscent of the Greek Philosopher. Labouring in the dark and intricate pass- ages or vaults in which the first Christians held their conventicles, the semi-pagan artists boldly stained the rough coated walls with light and lively tinted water- colours, hastily defined their animated figures with dashing lines, and left the spectator to imagine the details and modelling of the form. Their representations had some- thing classical and bold in movement. Their groups clo- sely resembled those of the pagan time, and their exe- cution was naturally rude, hasty and slight.

Such, from the remains that are now visible, was the character of the paintings of the second or third century in the catacomb of S. Nero e Achilleo1 in the vault vul- garly called Stanza dei Pesci, where the Redeemer is seated in the centre of the roof in the attire of a shep-

1 Of old S. Calixtus.

Chap. I.

THE CATACOMBS.

herd, carrying the Lamb, and surrounded by an ornament of tendrils and Cupids.1 Such from the feeble traces that remain, were the paintings of the third or fourth century in the vault usually called Stanza delle Pecorelle,2 where the Redeemer was depicted in the lunette as the good shep- herd, carrying the Lamb,3 accompanied by two figures and a flock; whilst below, Moses strikes the rock and Jonah is swallowed by the whale. Here indeed the attitudes were not without grandeur, in so far as simple lines can render the human form; nor were the masses of light and shade without breadth, the colour without harmony or the drapery without simplicity.4

Yet if painters still hesitated to imitate the features of the God-man as he might have existed after reaching the age of adolescence, no such scruple affected them when it was necessary to depict him as an infant on the knees of his mother. The Virgin herself, though less venerable to the early Christians than to the later followers of the Gospel, was already in honour in the third and fourth cen- turies and might be seen enthroned and either receiving the offerings of the Magi or attended by those prophets of the old testament who had foretold her coming. Amongst the very earliest catacomb pictures is one in San Calisto which represents the Virgin sitting in profile on a throne holding the infant Saviour and receiving the offerings of the Magi who stand before her in Phrygian caps and dresses. In the medallion centre of the roof sits the good

1 Traces of the head, legs and body of the principal figure re- main.

2 S.S. Nero e Achilleo, late S. Calixtus.

3 Similar examples of the good pastor may be found in old Sarco- phagi for instance in Sarc. No. 76 in the Campo Santo of Pisa where the sandalled Saviour is repre- sented beardless, youthful and with the face of Apollo.

4 A careful analysis of the tech- nical process in use at Rome in

the 3d and 4th century may be obtained from these wall-paintings. On a light ground a general warm yellow red tone was thrown over the whole of the flesh parts of a figure. The shadows were worked in with a deeper and thicker tint of the same warm colour in broad masses and without detail. The outline was rapidly drawn in black as were likewise the eyes, nose and mouth. The draperies were coloured in the primary keys and with tolerable knowledge of the laws of harmony.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

shepherd with two lambs on each side of him. No halo or nimbus indicated as yet the saintly character of Mary or of the infant Saviour.1

The adoration of the Magi in S. Calisto and another almost similar in the catacomb of S. Agnese, in which the presence of the Magi is more certainly determined by the guiding star painted above and on one side of the Virgin, were in the antique style, and afforded further examples of the veneration in which scenes combining the presence of the Virgin and Saviour were held.

The Virgin with the child was depicted at the same period in the catacomb of S.S. Marcellino e Pietro receiving offerings from two figures on each side of her in Phrygian costume. At a later period Isaiah and Jeremiah were represented on each side of episodes from the life of the Virgin and the two figures here depicted may have been intended to represent those prophets. A gentle cast of features, a slender frame marked this early and still classical representation of the Virgin.2

A gradual yet sensible decline may be traced with the lapse of time, even in the rude and hasty works of the catacombs. The figures without losing the character of the Roman antique become sometimes square and short in their proportions, at others inordinately long; and they are executed if possible with more haste and greater neglect of detail than before. In the vault called Chapel of the four Evangelists in S.S. Nero e Achilleo, the Saviour was represented in a recess in the character of Orpheus taming with the sounds of his lyre the wild beasts, that surround him. Camels, birds, a lion are well grouped about the principal figure. The Saviour, still symbolically represented, wields the power of faith to convert the heathen and savages. The prophet Mica stands above the recess on the left. Moses on the right strikes the rock

1 The figure of the Virgin is in part effaced and the Saviour al- most gone.

2 The Virgin's head is draped, the colour of the painting gay and harmonious.

Vol I p. I

of CEIUST, from a ceiling in the Catacombs of SS. Nereo ed Achilleo, at Rome.

Chap. I.

THE CATACOMBS.

and in the centre the Virgin holds the infant Saviour be- fore the Magi. On a neighbouring wall, Daniel stands in a recess between two lions, whilst above on the right Moses ties his sandals. On the opposite space traces of Elijah's ascent to heaven in a classic biga. — Above, a female with open arms. — Further Noah, looking out of the window of the ark, and Lazarus rising from the grave in the presence of the Saviour. On the fourth wall, traces of a figure remain, and in the medallion centre of the vaulted roof the feeble remnants of a bust representing a man with long hair divided in the centre, a small beard and a piece of drapery covering his left shoulder.1 A doubt may exist as to whether the painter intended to portray the features of the Redeemer or those of a person whose piety might have rendered him conspicuous in life and worthy of commemoration after death.

But the Christians had now completely overcome the scruples which forbade them to represent the visible form and features of the Saviour in his manhood. As an in- fant in the arms of his mother he had already been ex- hibited. It now became meritorious rather than sacri- legious to delineate his countenance and frame. We may admit that a pious forgery2 helped the artists of the fourth century in the difficult task of representing the Saviour, yet in the types which were at first adopted the antique was closely imitated, whilst a little later, when more im- portance was given to the head, it was thought sufficient to present the regular forms of a man in the vigour of

1 These paintings are rapidly disappearing. The adoration of the Magi is almost gone, the faint lines of the Virgin still remaining. The figure of a prophet right of Daniel above the second recess is obliterated. A square orifice for a grave has been pierced in the recess where Orpheus sits. The ascension of Elijah is only explained by parts of figures , a chariot and headless horses. The episodes of Moses striking the rock

and Lazarus rising from the dead are almost gone. On de 4th wall are vestiges of but one figure. — The remains show no change in technical execution from that no- ticed in the first paintings of the catacombs. The ground is still white, the flesh tints reddish and the shadows a deeper shade of the same tone.

2 See as to the letter of the Consul Lentulus the historians of the Empire.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

manhood; calm, of regular proportions and features, with an imposing brow, a straight nose, passionless eyes ex- pressing solemnity, and a broad and muscular neck. The beardless and curly headed type of the good shepherd changed gradually from an imitation of Apollo to an imitation of Jupiter. It became bearded, slightly in some cases — fully in others. The chin and mouth were al- ternately bared or concealed according to the fancy of the artist or the will of his employer ; or the hair was divided in the middle and fell in curls on the shoulders.

Under the transition form yet still reminiscent of Apollo the Saviour was represented in the fourth century or be- ginning of the fifth between the four Evangelists in a vault of S. Calisto called Stanza dei Quattro Evangelisti young, beardless, and with a curly head. In full front and with outstretched arms he is seated on a Roman chair, with his right hand giving the benediction, with his left holding the Gospels, whilst on each side of him two figures stand in classical attitudes and natural motion. One of these figures on the left points triumphantly to a star painted above him and seems thus symbolically to mark the mission of the Saviour in the very manner in which it was revealed to the wise men of the East.1 A simple nimbus, the first that meets the eye in the catacombs, and the Greek initials of the Saviour's name indicate the holy character of the Redeemer. In his face however not a trace is to be seen of that noble resignation of that con- sciousness of His mission which animated the Redeemer as painted in the fourteenth century. It may be urged indeed that in a pictorial representation such as this necessarily rude one of the catacombs, damaged besides by loss of colour, it is difficult to judge the powers of the artist;

1 This painting is damaged ; and the head of the Saviour almost discoloured. There are traces of a red tunic and blue mantle. The execution is slight, the colour, where it remains, clear. A copy

of this painting exists in the Mu- seum of S. Giovanni Laterano, sufficient to illustrate the style but not the technical execution of the original.

Chap. I.

THE CATACOMBS.

but as the examples are numerous, it remains undeniable that early Christian artists were not imbued with power or sentiment to render the sublime idea of the Redeemer, and that, influenced by classical types they imitated them in the features of the Saviour. A little later they strove to express something more than majesty, and in the effort they fell into an exaggerated mode of delineating human passions. They declined in the power of representing form in proportion as time enlarged the gulph between them and the great classical ages. In a group of the fourth or fifth century in the catacomb of S.S. Nero e Achilleo representing the Virgin, child and four figures in Phrygian dress making an offering1 this decline is not as yet very noticeable. It may be traced distinctly in a painting of the period, in the same catacomb,2 representing the Saviour enthroned in the midst of the apostles, — in remains of figures on the lower part of the same wall busy it would seem, with the ark, — and in the good pastor amidst the shepherds and their flock, carrying the lamb on his shoul- ders. Rapidity of execution had now been joined to de- fective forms and absence of fit proportion. The heads were small and the bodies long.

Whilst the art of Rome thus followed in its decline that of public welfare and prosperity, it went through simular phases at Naples in whose catacombs a few ex- amples remain. Two life sized bust figures of S.S. Peter and Paul painted in the fourth or fifth centuries 3 prove the imitation of classical models, whilst they derive ad- ditional interest from the fact that these saints had already become fixed and immutable types. In the austere features, the square head and beard, the short hair of S. Peter, in his yellow tunic, the curious inquirer may trace the original of many subsequent delineations of that apostle. In the long head, grave features and pointed beard of

1 Possibly the 4 prophets, Jere- miah, Isaiah, Malachi and Da- niel.

2 S.S. Nero e Achilleo. Cappella dei Dodici Apostoli.

3 Naples catacombs. Braccio Sinistro. Seconda Sepoltura.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

the second figure he may note the unalterable lineaments of the apostle Paul. Nimbi already proclaim their saintly character, nor will it be found that any sensible difference existed between the technical execution of the Naples catacombs and that of the artists of Rome. In both capi- tals painters followed the rules of their pagan predecessors whose works still adorn the ruins of Pompeii. 1

A glance will suffice for a female figure of later date with outstretched arms in a niche in the same catacomb. Her name Vitalia and the words "in pace" indicate the commemorative nature of the picture, and this is con- firmed by the costume and the drapery which covers the head as well as the frame.2

The tomb of a most famous Neapolitan Saint — Januarius — possibly of the fifth or sixth century is close by, protected by a figure of the Saviour erect in a recess with outstretch- ed arms and dressed in a tunic and sandals. A youthful beardless face, surrounded by a nimbus with the Greek P. the alpha and omega, two candelabra above, reveal the intention of the painter to depict the Redeemer. Two females on each side of him with their arms held up before them complete a composition which, taken as a whole, betrays the same progress of decline at Naples as was noticed at Rome.

The decline was not however as rapid as might have been expected, and at Rome in the end of the fifth or first half of the sixth century, the painters of the catacombs still produced works which testified how deeply the classic forms were impressed upon them and how hard it would be to supplant them by others of a character more suited to the development of the Christian idea. S.S. Peter, Gorconius, Marcellinus and Tiburtius were represented in the walls of a vault in the catacomb of S.S. Marcellino

1 The letter j? indicates the name of both apostles. S. Paul is in a mantle of blue. The flesh tints have a general reddish tone,

the high lights and shadows are put in with body.

2 The head of this figure and

HEAD OF CHRIST; from the Catacomb of S. Ponziauo in 1

Chap. I.

THE CATACOMBS.

e Pietro 1 at the side of the lamb standing on a rock from which the four rivers issue. In the long frames and small heads, in the defective feet and hands of these figures the declining antique may still be traced. But in the centre of the arch of the vault is the Saviour seated on a Roman chair wearing the tunic, pallium and sandals, giving the benediction with his right hand and in his left holding a book. The head, surrounded by a simple nimbus and, on each side of it, the Greek alpha and omega, is of a long shape but of a youthful type. The broad and open brow, the calm and regular eye have a certain majesty. The hair falls on the shoulders in locks; and a pointed beard adorns the chin. The outline of the frame is also fine. As regards pure form indeed this was one of the best types of head of the decline of the sixth century. It was equal to some produced at Ravenna2 and nearly approached some produced at the great revival in the four- teenth century. To the right and left of the Redeemer stand S. Peter and S. Paul distinguished as they had already been at Naples by those peculiar types which remain characteristic of them for centuries. An appearance of excessive length and exaggerated action is imparted by the nature of the space which the figures occupy. The converging shape of the furnace vault made it difficult for the painter to combine good distribution of space with faultless shape and movement.

A century after this, the Saviour was still depicted, as for instance in S. Ponziano, in the act of benediction and of imposing aspect, but the painter had already lost the ease of hand, and had never acquired the knowledge of form, of his predecessors. He had sunk to a certain conventionalism of delineation which was betrayed in

other parts are discoloured, but the outlines remain.

1 Cappella di S.S. Pietro c Mar- cellino. There remain traces of a nimbus and the Greek symbol above the lamb. The name of

"Petrus" is inscribed above the head of that Saint. A copy of this painting is in the Museum of S. Giovanni Laterano.

2 With some modification of age at S. Apollinare Nuovo.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. J.

the straight nature of the falling hair, the regular suc- cession of the curls of a small beard, the semicircular curves of the brows and eyelids and the breadth of dark outlines. The brow was still open and fair, the nose straight, the neck broad ; but the eyes had already an un- pleasant gaze, the lower lids being distant from the iris and the upper unnecessarily arched. An effort in fact had thus been made to render the idea of power by inspiring the spectator with terror.1

Long before this time, however, the painters had ceased to conceal themselves in the catacombs, and the higher orders of the Italian clergy had resolved that Paganism could not be eradicated with greater ease than by the multiplication of pictures. The curious may study Paulinus, Gregory and the partisans of images to acquire an insight into the mo- tives which led them to adorn the old basilicas and newly erected churches with biblical subjects. The mosaics with which the holy edifices were adorned, had no other character than the paintings of the catacombs, nor is the influence of classic forms less visible in them than it was in the ruder or more hasty works of the early wall painters. Critics have been long deceived by a so called mosaic in the Christian Museum of the Vatican into the belief that the Saviour was represented in the earliest times in the green tunic, long hair and beard, and kthe classical forms of a Greek philosopher. 2 A latin inscription vouches for the truth of a theory which analysis entirely overthrows. The celebrated ikon is but a plaster imitation of mosaic, andmay have been a copy of an old classic portrait.3

1 Catacomb of S. Ponziano 6th or 7th century. The figure is co- lossal. The nimbus is here adorn- ed for the first time with the Greek cross. A star is painted at each side of the head. Al- though the type is declining, the technical execution of colour re- mains the same as before. The surface of the wall is very rough and the execution hasty.

2 ,, Icon vetustissima Domini nostri Jesu Cristi, in parentinis sacrorum ese materiorum Romanse urbis speciem exhibens musivi operis antiquis".

3 The able and critical Rumohr who pitilessly overthrows great structures of fable, when records assist him in his task, is often helpless when forced to decide by artistic judgment.

Chap. I.

EARLY ROMAN MOSAICS.

A painting in the same Museum said to be of the fourth century is equally unsatisfactory to the critic.1

No mosaics of earlier date than the fourth century are to be found at Rome, nor do these afford material for a fair and impartial judgment. There are indeed but three edifices in Italy that contain mosaics of the fourth cen- tury and these are so damaged that very little of the original remains. Those of the Baptistery built at Rome by Constantine in the fourth century and now called Santa Costanza leave little doubt as to the time when they were executed. Here the more essentially pagan peculiarities of the early centuries were curiously marked. The Saviour was represented in the centre of one of the arched doors, as the ruler of the world, sitting on the orb, in tunic and sandals, and giving the Gospels to one of the apostles, probably S. Peter standing to the left in front of two other figures.2 Another representation of the Saviour adorns the arch of a second door in the same edifice. He stands and gives a scroll to an old and venerable figure on the left, whilst his right is stretched out in the direction of two apostles probably S. Peter and S. Paul. The words "Dominus pacem dat" indicate the general aim of the Gospel which is to spread peace among all men , whilst a tree on each side of the Saviour and four lambs at his feet further confirm the kindly nature and the steady growth of the faith. In both these mosaics the Saviour's head is surrounded by a simple nimbus, whilst the apostles have none. In the spandrils of the arches of the cupola are ornaments of vine issuing from vases. Figures of Amor gather the grapes whilst birds flutter amongst the branches, children play musical in- struments; and females may be seen amongst the leaves. The Christian and profane are thus commingled as they

1 Originally executed in the cata- comb of S. Sebastian, it represents the Saviour holding a scroll and touching the shoulder of one near him whilst other figures are seated around. This painting, semicircu-

lar in form seems to represent the last supper.

2 Behind S. Peter are two and to the right of the Saviour seven trees.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

were in the earliest catacomb picture in SS. Nero e Achilleo, and the general appearance of the remains proves that the same spirit of classic imitation animated the mosaists and the painters.1

The Baptistery of Naples , also of the time of Constantine2 — an irregular octagonal building surmounted by a cupola — contains mosaics whose style may be traced amidst the repairs of restorers both in mosaic and in painting.3

Amongst the prophets on the broad sides of the octagon some of whom hold Crowns and others offerings, varied attitudes, suitable action and classic draperies remind the spectator of the fine figures of previous ages. Scenes from the life of the Saviour, such at least as might serve to impress the multitude with the idea of His supernatural power and benevolence, also adorned the cupola but are so altered by restoring as to be worthless to the critic. 4

Again in the fourth century the Saviour was represented in S. Pudenziana at Rome enthroned in the act of bene- diction holding the Gospel in his left hand and supported on each side by a regular array of saints, of whom the lowest in rank, S. Pudenziana and S. Praxedis, close the procession on the two extremes. The attitude of the Saviour, the outlines of his face and form were grand, noble and regular. The long hair, the beard that covered the chin and upper lip, the straight nose and regular

1 These mosaics are rudely exe- cuted and damaged by restorations of various dates. Some of the restorations are mosaic others merely of painted plaster.

2 An old inscription in this Baptistery which is now called S. Giovanni in Fonte supports the tradition that Constantine erected the building in 303. This fact is confirmed by the chronicles of S. Maria del Principio inVillani (Gio.) but contradicted by Asse- manni, a modern who pretends that the erection took place under the auspices of Bishop Vincenzo

between 556 and 570. The evi- dence of the mosaics is less fa- vorable to the theory of Asse- manni than to the tradition which assigns them to an earlier time. See Luigi Catalani, le chiese di Napoli. 8°. Naples 1845. Vol. I. p. p. 46. 47.

3 Of the four symbolical figures of the Evangelists, that which represents St. John in the form of an angel has the head of an aged man the regular features of the classic Roman time.

4 In the centre of the cupola is the Greek monogram and cross.

Chap. I.

EARLY ROMAN MOSAICS.

features were quite in the antique style. The broad masses of light and shade the luminous and rosy flesh tones, where they are not marred by restoration, produce a good harmony, nor were the forms inclosed as yet in those dark outlines which marked the later progress of the decline. The scene of the Saviour's glorification was not laid in heaven. The blue sky in which white clouds were de- picted was adorned with the symbols of the cross and the four evangelists. A tapestry hung behind the Saviour; and buildings formed the background. The distribution of the space and the general array of the figures was not in- ferior to nor essentially different from those of the pagan period. It must be repeated, the state of this mosaic is not such as to permit a fair and impartial judgment.1

The mosaics of the arch of triumph and great aisle in Santa Maria Maggiore at Rome, executed in the middle of the fifth century, are more satisfactory, more interesting monuments of their time. They may be accepted as a convincing proof of the difficulty under which the mosaists laboured in the attempt to render scriptural subjects of which the typical compositions had not as yet been invented. So long indeed as the idea of a heavenly messenger had no other representative than the old Roman Victory so long as the saints of the bible were only conceived as prototypes of the deities of the pagans; and the Israelites of the old testament were confounded with the legionaries of the Caesars, so long was it impossible to give Christian art its fit character.2

1 This mosaic has been repaired at different periods and some parts entirely removed. The head and figure which preserve their cha- racter most completely are those of S. Pudenziana. That saint and S. Praxedis are represented hold- ing crowns in their hands. The head of the Saviour is by no means exempt from restoring. The whole group to the right of the Saviour including the lower part of that figure is new. Though

restored however this mosaic has the character , the costumes and the style of that of Santa Co- stanza.

2 The arch of triumph in Santa Maria Maggiore is divided into three courses of mosaics in which scriptural subjects were repre- sented without as yet any very distinct comprehension of time, place or fitness. In the upper course to the left, the Virgin | Mary, represented in Roman attire

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

Of two figures of colossal stature in Santa Sabina at Rome symbolizing, as the inscriptions testify, the Ecc- lesia circumcisionis and Ecclesia Gentibus, little need be said except that they have the character of the fifth cen- tury and recal by their good proportions, movement and

crowned and seated on a chair with figures right and left of her. The dove of the Holy ghost des- cends from heaven on one side. An angel flies down on the other whose form and gesture are those of an antique Victory but whose nimbus proclaims him a tenant of paradise. Amongst the figures to the right of the Virgin is one standing by a house, with a winged angel near him. The whole group is composed and arranged in clas- sic style; the forms and dresses are Roman', but the subject ap- pears to be the double annunciation to Mary and Zacharias, crushed into one. In the centre of this course the words ' SixtusEpiscopus plebi dei.' Sixtus III. A. D. 432. 440. ■ — In the same course to the right a series of figures are distributed under round arches. In the first stands the Virgin crown- ed and holding the infant Saviour, the latter with a nimbus above which is a little cross. In the next is a group of three figures one of which is an angel, further two male persons, one of whom bends forward reverently and seems to present an offering, whilst the other with a head like that of Jupiter stands behind look- ing on. Of these five figures, that to the left looks in the direction of the Saviour held by the Vir- gin and may be Simeon. The next is an angel. The third, a female, may be the prophetess Anna (Luke c. II v. 36). The fourth is probably Joseph bearing the turtledoves. These groups arranged in antique style and drawn in the classical form of the apostles in the Stanza dei quattro Evangelisti at S. Ca- listo illustrate but feebly the rea-

lity of those scenes of the new testament which were afterwards so completely rendered by painters of the 14th century. In the se- cond course to the left the Saviour as a child sits enthroned on an enormous Roman chair, a nimbus of gold Surmounted by a cross proclaiming his divine origin. Near him sits the Virgin dressed like a Roman matron and behind her two figures erect holding offerings. The star Avhich guided the magi is stationary above the Saviour's head. It may be concluded that this scene represents the adoration of the kings. The next compo- sition in the second course is probably the return of the Virgin and Joseph with the Infant Sa- viour from the temple. The lowest course represents Jerusalem and Bethlehem. Defective as these compositions are if considered in their religious character, they are still interesting as showing that the spirit of the antique lingered in the Roman artist of the 5th cen- tury. They exhibit the Roman mosaist as still possessed of breadth of hand, capable of grand design, of broadly massing his lights and shadows, of diffusing over the scenes he depicted a golden light and harmonious colour, of giving to the human frame a proud and manly character and grand proportions. It is true the bar- baric style of ornament had al- ready crept in and overloaded the Roman dress, but as yet without serious detriment to the figure. The upper walls of the great aisle of Santa Maria Maggiore are still adorned with mosaics, thirty one in number depicting scenes from the lives of Moses and Joshua.

Chap. I.

EARLY ROMAN MOSAICS.

a fine cast of draperies the Roman antique. Both the figures are executed on the wall inside the portal of the church. The first, a female enveloped even to the head in purple drapery and wearing a stole with the cross upon it, has been much restored and is more modern in appearance than the second which is likewise a female in Roman purple and pointing with her right hand to a book open in her left.1

Amongst the remains of the same century at Rome are the mosaic decorations of the chapel annexed to the Bap- tistery in S. Giovanni Laterano, the cupola of which is adorned with borders of tendrils on a blue ground with the lamb and four doves in the centre.

If the mosaics of the arch of triumph in the basilica of S. Paolo fuori le Mura at Rome can be considered as the best example of the kind in the capital of the Popes during the papacy of the great Leo, they betray a speedier decline than that which is traceable in the painting of the same period. Classical still at Santa Maria Maggiore as regards distribution and type, mosaics ceased to possess those qualities in the latter end of the fifth century. The object of the artist seems to have been, to represent, under the superintendence of the clergy, merely the glorification of the Saviour. A colossal size was given to the Re- deemer, that a fit idea of His grandeur and majesty might be imparted to the faithful; and the subordinate angels, apostles and prophets were placed in the order of the heavenly hierarchy in uniform rows above and without re- ference to each other. The bust of the Saviour in S. Paolo is enclosed in a nimbus of vast diameter and rainbow

These mosaics have also been damaged by time and by resto- rers. Some 'have been patched together. Others are overpaintcd. In these the religious idea found no place. The Roman mosaist represented in animated and strik- ing movement the battles of the Israelites as he would have re-

presented those of the legions of his country, and pretty much as the sculptor of Trajan's column had depicted the victories of the Emperor over the Daci.

1 An inscription on the wall between these two figures would place their execution in the time of Pope Celestin A. D. 427. 432.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

hue, from which rays of light diverge. A violet tunic and mantle enclose his vast frame and with hands dis- proportionately small and defective, he gives the blessing and holds on his shoulder the pastoral staff. A short co- pious beard parted in the centre and brushed down over the cheeks, thick hair parted in the middle and falling in wiry lines behind the back inclose a face careworn, aged and grim. The eyebrows are semicircles, the nose straight; and a reminiscence of the regular classic forms is preserved, but the mosaist accuses the degeneracy of the times, and his attempt to express majesty betrays the feebleness of his power.1 The two angels that bend reverently at each side of him, the prophets and apostles in double rows of six advancing towards him with crowns are diminutive when compared to him. The symbols of the evangelists high up on the gold ground, a cross above the Saviour's head and in the lower course two figures of S. Peter and S. Paul complete the ornament of the arch, wich in consequence of the fire of 1823 retains but little of its original colour. Four fragments of mosaics representing animals in fine movements and infgood style, are preserved in a room adjacent to the sacristy of S. Paolo and may serve to give a faint idea of the original ornaments of the external front of the basilica, whilst three colossal heads of apostles, in the same place in a later style may be useful hereafter to illustrate a foreign Greek or Byzantine element in the art of Italy in the twelfth or thirteenth century. Had the mosaics of the great aisle been preserved, they would have been of much interest to the critic as showing how the Sa- viour's miracles and the lives of the saints and churchmen were represented. Almost a century elapses between the period which witnessed the adornment of S. Paolo and that which produced the mosaics of S.S. Cosmo and Da- miano,2 yet as regards the spirit in which the apsis and

1 This figure has been very much restored.

2 This church was erected dur-

ing the time that Felix IVth was Pope of Rome, between 526 and 30. The period which intervenes

Chap. I.

EARLY ROMAN MOSAICS.

triumphal arch of this church were adorned , it is evident that little change had taken place in the sentiment; which dictated pictorial delineation. It was still the aim to glorify the Redeemer and the saints by representing them in majesty and dominion and by multiplying angels as heavenly messengers. Yet withal the classic Roman form still held sway and struggled for mastery over purely religious art. The four angels/ who stood guard on each side of the Lamb in the triumphal arch of SS. Cosmo e Damiano were but little different from those of S. Maria Maggiore.2 In their short stature, their heads adorned with tufts of hair held back by cinctures, their free move- ments and classic draperies, flying in the wind, they were still reminiscent of the art, local and peculiar to Rome. The artists had not yet fallen so low as to possess no technical ability, and the masses of light and shade were still well defined.

The mosaics of the apsis were executed with less force of relief than those of the triumphal arch.3 The Saviour in tunic and mantle and as usual colossal stood out against golden edged clouds in the centre of the space, stretching out his right arm in token of command and holding a scroll in his left hand. A gold nimbus en- circled his head and a hand issuing from above pointed down to him symbolizing the first person of the Trinity

between the date of the mosaics of S. Paolo fuori le Mura and those of S.S. Cosmo e Damiano, is marked by the invasion of the Goths and Vandals, by the two successive sacks of Rome in 455 and 472, by the fall of the western Empire, and the desola- tion of Italy. The completion of S.S. Cosmo e Damiano took place, after peace had been restored to Italy, by Theodoric the Great.

1 These angels have blue nimbi.

2 The lamb stands on an altar with the cross above him. Three candlesticks are on one side of him, 4 on the other. Left and right of these are two winged angels, 4

VOL. I.

in all nimbed (blue) and standing on clouds. Of old the symbols of the Evangelists appeared above the angels. One of these, repainted anew, and symbolizing S. John alone remains on the extreme left. The triumphal arch seems to have been reduced in size during re- pairs, for the prophets on the lower course are cut away and an arm with a hand and crown pro- jects singly at each side and indi- cates the place where these figu- res stood. This mosaic is executed on gold ground and has been restored.

3 Or restoring has impaired that quality.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

whom it was still sacrilegious to depict. At the Saviour's feet flowed the waters of Jordan and below it the Lamb on the source of the four streams of the gospel, and the twelve sheep, that were the emblems of the apostolical mission.1 Although the Saviour still had a spirited attitude and regular forms, his frame and head had changed to a longer shape whilst the neck remained broad and massive, but the brow was muscularly developed, and the eyes, gazing like those of a steer, seemed fitted to inspire terror. The hair, divided as usual, fell in regular spirals behind the shoulders and the short beard, equally divided, left part of the chin bare. It was a type still Roman but inferior to those of the earlier mosaists of S. Pudenziana and Santa Costanza and even to that of the painter of the S. Marcellino catacomb. As for the draperies they had lost much of their flexibility. Attendant on the Saviour and on each side of him were, left, S. Peter leading S. Cosmo and Pope Felix the IV. bearing crowns, right, S. Paul leading S. Damian and S. Theodore. All these figures moving sidelong, that they might present their full face to the spectator, have been modernized either in to- tality or in part, so that they are no longer subjects for criticism.2

Two centuries had thus elapsed since the death of Con- stantine and still the arts had continued to exist at Rome maintaining in their decline a prominent and unmistakeable character. Rome however had long ceased to enjoy the honours of an imperial court, and in the splendor of her modern basilicas she only disputed the palm with the humbler but more secure Ravenna. When Honorius re- tired from the defenceless place of Milan to a safer asylum —

1 Six on each side of the Lamb.

2 This apsis mosaic has been much restored. The figure of S. Felix is new. Those of S. Da- mian and S. Theodore are mo- dernized, and von Rumohr had already noticed that these figures wore boots, whilst the Saviour is

in antique dress (v. Rumohr, It. Forschungen, Vol. I, p. 172). The figure of S. Cosmo is preserved. Of the apostle Peter half the figure only is preserved. S. Paul is repainted. The best part of the mosaic is the ornament in the midst of which the Lamb stands enthroned.

Chap. I.

EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

when Ravenna became the capital of Italy, churches and edifices were raised to suit the splendor of a court, which in pride if not in vigour, laid claim to equal rank with that of Byzantium. A baptistery and many churches of fine architecture were built in the early part of the fifth century and the mosaics which adorn them are the most beautiful in Italy.

When Constantine laid the foundation of the city which bears his name, he had reason to lament the decline of the arts in the whole extent of the empire. Schools of architecture were created by his orders in various pro- vinces. For the embellishment of his favorite residence the cities of Greece and Asia and perhaps those of Italy were despoiled of the noblest monuments of art ; and Con- stantinople might boast of possessing the finest statues of Phidias, Lysippus and Praxiteles.

Perfect art had had one great epoch, — the ancient Greek, in which the highest ideal of the pagans had been attained. What the Roman republic in the full enjoyment of power and wealth failed to preserve, it was vain to expect of a Roman Emperor. Constantine could not revive the splendor of Greece. In the attempt to arrest the decline, he had not only to struggle with the flood of rising bar- barism but to deal with a new religious element, which in its turn was, after the lapse of centuries, to produce its ideal. The art of Greece was now no longer suitable to the decline of the Roman empire or to the develop- ment of the christian faith. The want of a new language was felt, but with this want and the necessity of satis- fying it the fall of the old and the birth of the new went hand in hand. The efforts of Constantine therefore only served to prolong the agony of the classical antique. Yet this antique in its dying moments maintained its grandeur and its majesty; and in the mosaics of Ravenna the in- terested spectator may watch the last expression of its power.

To affirm that these mosaics are of the same class as those which were produced at Rome during the fifth cen-

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap, t

tury would be to place on the same level the artists of Santa Maria Maggiore and those of the Baptistery of Ravenna and the monumental chapel of the Empress Galla Placidia. It must be conceded that the latter were far abler than their Roman cotemporaries and that they were acquainted with models not merely Roman but Greek. Whether they were Italians or Greeks is of little moment, but if it be admitted that they were taught in Greece or at Con- stantinople, it will appear that the efforts of Constantine to arrest the decline of art had not been in vain and that he had done something to prolong the existence of the pure antique.

The mosaics of the octagonal baptistery of Ravenna,1 however they might be considered, left a pleasing im- pression on the spectator. They were admirably distri- buted within the space which they were intended to adorn. The mutual subordination of the figures and the architecture, both real and feigned, which gave to the building its peculiar character, was perfect. The figures themselves were majestic, bold in movement, varied in atti- tude, and individual in character. They were finely de- signed and relieved by a broad distribution of light and shade. The ornaments which served to set off the figures were of their kind beautiful, and the colour was both har- monious and brilliant. Seen from below the forms of the Saviour, the apostles and the prophets seemed to have the size of life and were therefore colossal. Yet every where a sense of repose and a general harmony prevailed. The cupola was divided into three circles, the smallest of which was the medallion centre of the vault where the Baptism of the Saviour was depicted. Separated from this central mosaic by a wreath of festoons, and from each other by a beautiful ornament of growing plants, the apostles were represented in classic flying draperies, in long and steady stride holding crowns in their hands and supported on a base formed of feigned pilasters between

1 Now S. Giovanni in Fonte I saics in the first half of the 5th said to have been erected in the century. 4th century, but adorned with mo- |

Chap. I. EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

which alternate thrones and emblems were placed.1 Be- neath the windows and in the birth of the arches stood eight prophets in white raiment, surrounded by elegant foliated ornament. These prophets, the lights of whose garments were touched in gold, were of fine form and classically draped, standing boldly, enveloped in their mantles, holding scrolls or conversing. If any thing was to be urged against the figures of the apostles, it might be that something of form and proportion had been sacri- ficed to the necessities of the space, — that the heads were small for the frames 5 ■ — but it was quite as difficult a task to preserve faultless form in this instance as it had been in the furnace vault of the catacomb of S.S. Mar- cellino e Pietro. The long stride and the flying draperies were necessary to fill the diverging space of the cupola. The prophets were the finest in character that had yet been produced by the art of the early centuries. The Saviour was represented in full front in the centre of the cupola standing above the knees in Jordan, whose pellucid wave unlike that of nature permitted the limbs to be seen. His attitude was simple and natural, his form well proportioned and finely modelled. His hair divided and fall- ing on the shoulders, was long and of copious locks. Above him was the dove of the Holy ghost. S. John stood on the bank to the left, one foot raised on a stone, his head erect, and with his right hand he poured the water from a cup on the Saviour's head. With his left he held a jewelled cross.2 His attitude was fine, his body a little long for the size of the head, — in the antique style more than that of the Saviour. Floating on the water to the right, looking up to the Saviour and holding a green cloth in both hands, was Jordan — a bearded river- god holding a reed and resting on a vase — a form well drawn and anatomically rendered, but robust and Hercu-

1 Amongst these the square I 2 We may be indebted to a head and beard of S. Peter and j restorer for this strange addition the long shaped head and pointed to the mosaic of the baptism, beard of S. Paul were prominent.

lean and recalling the old times of Greece. Is it neces- sary again to point out how difficult it was for artists, living on memories of the pagan past, to conceive such a subject as the Baptism of Christ in the form most fitted to satisfy a religious aspiration.

The mosaists of Ravenna like those of Rome executed their work with cubes of a large size, but whilst the latter put them together roughly, the former used more care. In the Baptistery of Ravenna the cubes forming outlines were of a warm reddish tint, decisive enough to mark the shape without hardness. The lights were of a brilliant yellow red, the half tints a deeper shade of warm tone, the shadows of a reddish brown. The general effect was a gorgeous sunny glancing colour. — Such were the earliest mosaics of the new Italian capital. Such they are now and may long remain if more care be taken of a work so interesting and so rare.1

1 As usual the mosaics of the Baptistery have been restored. In the central 'Baptism' the head and shoulders and right arm of the figure of the Saviour, the head, shoulders and right arm, the right leg and foot of the Baptist and the cross in his left hand have been repaired, and thus the type and character of the heads may have been altered. And here it may not be useless to give a word of advice to those under whose care monuments like these of Ravenna are placed. It is ludicrous to suppose that resto- ration is sufficient if the original cause of the damage remains. The roof of the Baptistery of Ravenna is not water -proof and the rain filters even through the repairs lately made. A new roof is required. Again it might be adviseable when restorati ons are undertaken to intrust them to skilful hands and not to mere mechanical mosaists, ignorant of design and form, however able they may be in the technical difficulties of their art. Before

touching monuments such as these, Italy should possess a school de- voted to the study of the charac- ter and style of art in various periods. A competent person should be employed to study the mode in which emblems and acces- sories were used in different epochs. For there is no doubt that the period in which a monument was erected oradorned maybe detected by the peculiar character of its emblems or accessories; and the use of false ones by restorers pro- duces endless deception. Examples can and will be produced to con- vince the reader of the evils of the present system. One gentle- man of independent fortune in Italy, Baron Mandralisca seems inclined to do his utmost to im- prove or encourage honest resto- ration. He gave all necessary support to that of the Cefalu mo- saics by the Signor Riolo, and has thus done good to Italy. Hopes may be entertained that in Sicily at least a school will be formed which may recommend itself to the fostering care of the Italian

Chap. I.

EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

Still more classical and if possible finer were those of the monumental chapel of the Empress Galla Placidia.1 Nor is it uninteresting to find that it fell to the lot of artists who took their inspiration from pure Greek models to depict the allegory of the birth of the christian faith and its triumph over the Arian heresy. The youthful Pastor bidding his Hock to "go and teach the nations" was represented, as is fit, above the inner portal and, in the choir, the triumph was symbolized by the figure of the Saviour burning the books of the heretics. Christian art had not as yet been illustrated by so noble a repre- sentation of the good shepherd as that which now ador- ned the monument of Galla Placidia. Youthful, classic in form and attitude, full of repose he sat on a rock in a broken hilly landscape, lighted from a blue sky grasp- ing with his left hand the cross and his right stretching aslant the frame to caress the lamb at his sandalled feet. His limbs rested across each other on the green sward. His nimbed head, covered with curly locks, reposing on a ma- jestic neck and turned towards the retreating forms of the lambs, was of the finest Greek type and contour. The face was oval, the eyes spirited, the brow vast and the features regular. The frame was beautifully proportioned, classical and flexible in the nude. The blue mantle shot Avith gold was admirably draped about the form. A warm sunny colour glanced over the whole figure which was modelled in perfect relief by broad masses of golden light, of ashen half tones and brown red shadows. No more beautiful figure had been created during the christian period of the Roman decline, nor had the subject of the good pastor been better conceived or treated than here.

As in the rise of the faith the symbolic type of the Saviour must necessarily be youthful, so in its triumph it was natural that the Redeemer should have the aspect of one mature in years. In the choir of the monumental

government and that ultimately I few remaining monuments of Italy, something will be done to save the J 1 Now, S. Nazaro e Celso.

Chap. I.

chapel of Galla Placidia he was represented in the ful- ness of manhood, majestic in attitude, bearded, with an eye breathing menace, his flying white draperies ex- pressing energy of movement, his diadem, the cross resting on his shoulder and the book in his left, emblematic of the triumph of the gospel and of the church. Right and left of him a case containing the fathers and an oven in which the heretical works were burning indicated the end of the Redeemer's mission. His figure was as grand as fine in conception and execution as that of the good pastor, nor were the prophets in couples conversing about the arches of the cupola less worthy of admiration. The ornaments of the chapel were completed by a cross in the centre of the dome by the symbols of the evangelists on red clouds relieved on a blue " ground, spotted with stars, by rich foliated ornament on blue ground enlivened with figures in the thickness and by the Greek initials of the Saviour in the keys of the arches. A mysterious and sombre light trickled into the edifice through four small windows in the dome.1

If time had spared the numerous edifices with which Ravenna was adorned during the feeble reign of Valen- tinian, if the buildings remained which the great Theodoric erected and adorned, it might be possible to trace the decline of art in this portion of the Peninsula; but the close of the fifth century and the rise of the sixth afford no materials to the historian and with the exception of the Baptistery of S. Maria in Cosmedin there is no trace of the continuation of that classic art which so justly claims our admiration.

1 Of this period we have an example in the Cappella S. Satiro now incorporated into the church of S. Ambruogio at Milan. The centre of the cupola is adorned with a half length of S. Victor whose name is inscribed on a book in his grasp. The hand of the Eternal issues from above. The whole in a medallion on gold ground framed in a green

garland. A series of feigned niches in the sides is rilled with medallions containing heads, the 4 symbols of the Evangelists now absent, and figures of S.S.Ambrose Protasius, Felix, Maternus, and another. The style is that of the close of the 5th century, the mo- saic much injured and now in course of repair.

Chap. I. EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

Santa Maria in Cosmedin was, under the barbaric rule, a Baptistery of the Arians, but is supposed to have been adorned with mosaics after the expulsion of the Goths. The cupola of the octogon is divided into circles like that of the earlier baptistery. The same subjects adorn the basin of the dome and the circle immediately beneath it.1

Jordan, instead of floating on the water, sits on the bank to the left partly draped in green resting his right arm on a vase, holding a reed in his right hand, and looking on.2

The capture of Ravenna by Belisarius introduced Greek art anew into that capital, and the exarchs under the orders of Justinian and his successors either embellished the city with new monuments or old churches with new mosaics. But the art of which S. Vitale was an example proved how surely the mosaists of the Eastern empire had declined in the application of the great maxims of plastic and pictorial delineation. In knowledge of form, in type, in distribution they were inferior to their prede- cessors ; and, as if conscious of this inferiority, they sought to restore the balance by more minute and careful exe- cution, or by the use of the most gorgeous materials. This period of the decline may truly be called Byzantine. Its stamp was impressed on the mosaics of Ravenna during the exarchate, on some mosaics of Rome in the seventh century

1 The apostles, Peter with the keys and Paul with a scroll, stand on each side of a cushioned throne above which is the cross. The keys and other emblems in this mosaic are very suspicious. — But the restorer has been very busy here, and the time in which the body of the work was exe- cuted may be judged only from the distribution and the forms. The mosaic is certainly of much earlier date than San Vitale, — commenced in 541. The rest of the apostles, in white draperies of antique style, though of somewhat angular and broken folds move

towards the throne, separated from each other, — no longer by beauti- ful foliated ornament, but by the less graceful palm. In the baptism the Saviour, youthful and beard- less, still distantly recals the clas- sic type and form. A nimbus surrounds his head, and the dove sheds green rays uponhis features. St. John, on the right, finely shaped, with long hair and beard holds a reed in his left hand, and places his right on the Saviour's head.

2 His head is strangely adorned with the claws of a lobster. Not an uncommon symbol.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

and casually on paintings and mosaics in various parts of Italy at a still later period. San Vitale begun by Theo- doric was completed by order of Justinian and consecrated by Maximian archbishop of Ravenna in 547.* The patron Saint of the basilica, — S. Vitalis was to receive the crown of the martyrs in the apsis, Justinian and Theodora their glorification in the sanctuary, whilst in the solia or quadrangle at the centre of the edifice scenes of the old, prefigurating those incidents in the new testament which artists had not as yet ventured to depict, were represen- ted. In the glorification of the Saviour as the distributor of all divine favours, the artists did not abandon the measure of nature so far as to exaggerate the proportions of the Redeemer, they did not even attempt to render the idea of his eternal power by aged features. On the con- trary, they considered it more natural to convey the idea that his youth was eternal. The Saviour was therefore represented in the apsis of San Vitale with the round smooth face of an adolescent. The universality of his rule was indicated by his seat on the blue sphere of the world and by the imperial purple of his robes ; and an effort was made to impress the spectator with the aw- fulness of his power by the gaze of two very large round eyes. The forms of the features, however, betrayed the decline of art. The nose was bent, — the mouth small — copious but short hair covered the head which was sur- rounded by a cruciform nimbus adorned with jewels. In the left hand was the book with the seven seals. A crown was extended in the right to the bending form of S. Vitalis, who, as if unworthy of touching it, held out his arms covered with the drapery of his mantle. An angel in white with a golden nimbus, holding a staff, seemed to protect the martyr by laying a hand on his shoulder. A similar figure on the right indicated S. Ecclesius holding in his hand a model of a church. Red and blue clouds fleeted over the golden ground above the group

1 Agnellus part. II, p.p. 38, I Rubeis, Hist. Ravennse. Lib. Ill, 39, in Muratori, and J. de I p. 541.

Vol. I. p 27.

Mosaics of the 6th century in S. Vitale at Ravenna, representing JUSTINIAN AND THEODORA.

Chap. I. EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

and an ornament of cornucopias served as a frame to the picture. The Saviour's feet rested on a rocky green sward beneath which flowed the four rivers. On the arch above him the Greek monogram was inscribed. The rest of the mosaics may be described as follows:

The glorification of Justinian and Theodora was depicted in two mosaics on the sides of the sanctuary, the golden halo that surrounded their heads still betraying the habit of the Komans to pay divine honours to the sovereign. Justinian in the imperial purple and diadem held a basin of gold; on his right stood Maximian, archbishop of Ravenna, bareheaded, in robes, and carrying a short cross. Between them, but a step in the rear waited a bareheaded dignitary, admirably portrayed with straggling locks hanging over his forehead , and two priests with incense and censer stood at- tendant on the archbishop. On Justinian's right three cour- tiers and a body guard with round shields completed the group.1 On the opposite side of the sanctuary the Empress Theodora also in imperial purple and jewelled diadem held a gold basin and was followed by a suite of seven persons in variegated costume. Two courtiers seemed to await her commands and one of them had drawn back the curtain of the door through which she was to enter.2 Nothing could be more remarkable than the portraits in these mosaics. The artists, freed from the necessity of following classical models, concentrated their efforts on the likenesses of the chief persons. Justinian's thin nose, heavy cheeks, and ill humoured mouth , his angular brows and broad fore- head covered with stray hairs seemed but too truthful an imitation of nature. Theodora with her broad face, long nose, thin lips and arched eyes and brow, her slender neck and form, Maximian's long head and cunning eye were equally characteristic, yet strangely in contrast with the conventional immobility produced by the stiffness of the frames, the limbs and the small pointed feet. The figures seemed indeed to hang in rows and overlap each other. They were precisely drawn and conscientiously de- picted ; the masses of light and shade were fairly indicated and the colours well and harmoniously distributed; the profuse ornaments gave a certain glance to the picture,

1 The four figures of the body guard more rude in exeeution than the principal ones, carry

round shields with the monogram of the Saviour upon them.

2 A fountain stands in the opening.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

but amidst the glitter it was impossible not to perceive the decline of art and the conventionalism to which it was hurrying.

The solia, or quadrangle, forming the centre of the nave and transept, was ornamented on four sides with mosaics. On the face of the arch leading into the sanctuary in full flight and exaggerated action, contrasting greatly with the calm heavenly messengers of Santa Maria Maggiore at Rome, two angels held between them a medallion enclosing the symbol of the Cross ; and at their feet J erusalem and Bethlehem sparkled with gems. An ornament of vine ten- drils issuing from vases and animated by birds filled the upper part of the space. An arch of the same dimensions divided the solia from the nave and in the archivolt the Saviour, of the usual type and form, wearing a stole over his purple tunic, was represented in a medallion with twelve apostles in similar frames below him; and last, the S.S. Pro- tasius and Gervasius. The screens of the solia under whose arches the spectator might wander into the transepts were adorned with the prefigurative episodes of the old testament. In the recess above the lower course of arches to the right, Abel in the antique shepherd costume — a skin and red cloak — offered up the firstling lamb, at a table upon which the wine stood in a vase, whilst Melchisedek nimbed seemed to have issued from a temple behind him and to call the blessing upon the bread which he raised aloft. The presence of the Eternal was indicated by the hand appearing in a cloud. The form of Abel well proportioned in the nude was roughly but simply lined and his head not re- markable for beauty. The movement of Melchisedek was energetic and not ill rendered. A landscape and a sky with red clouds completed the picture. On the face of the arch Moses as a shepherd petting a lamb , and again untying his sandals at the bidding of the Lord whose hand appeared above him, Isaiah prophesying, filled the spaces ; and these episodes were crowned by two angels in flight and holding between them the medallion of the Cross. Above the arches of the gallery on the same side the Evangelists Mark and John were depicted and the rest of the wall was filled with an ornament of vases and doves. In the screen to the left and similarly distributed, Abraham was seen carrying food to the three angels, whilst Sara in the form of an antique matron stood laughing at the door. Again the sacrifice of Isaac was arrested by the hand of the Lord. On the wall above, Jeremiah stood prophesying and Moses received the

Chap. I.

EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

law, whilst the people of Israel waited beneath. Two angels as usual soared aloft and held between them the medallion of the Cross. In the uppermost spaces sat the evangelists Luke and Mathew with their symbols. The cupola was divided by diagonals forming four triangular segments, per- pendicular to whose base rose an ornament terminating in an enormous blossom which served as resting point to four angels, each of whom supported on his extended arms the central medallion inclosing the Lamb.

Thus, in the course of a few years, the spirit of the antique which lingered in the earliest artists of Ravenna had almost passed away. A reminiscence of old classic forms might still be noticed, but by its side naturalism had arisen — a naturalism which confined itself entirely to expression, and which seemed to assist in killing form, movement and relief. If for example the good shepherd in the Chapel of Galla Placidia was remarkable for per- fect rotundity and well fused masses of light and shade, for softness of outline and harmony of colour, the figures in S. Vitale were but too generally feeble in relief, abrupt in the passage from light to shade and confined by distinct outlines. It was possible to distinguish the high lights by the side of reddish half tints and greenish grey shadows. Yet in the distribution and choice of ornament, in the harmony of the general colour, whose brilliancy was incontestable, the artists of S. Vitale were still great and worthy of admiration.1

Were S. Vitale a solitary example of the art of its

1 It must indeed be borne in mind that these mosaics like most of those in Italy have been altered by restoration at different periods ; and one may distinguish the parts which have lost their original form or freshness. The dress and nimbus of the Saviour in the ap- sis for instance have been res- tored. The head of S. Maximian in the sanctuary is partly new. The heads of the apostles in the medallions of the archivolt (en- trance to the nave) are much

damaged by repair. The evan- gelists in the quadrangle, or solia, are almost, ruined by the changes they have undergone. The mo- saics of Justinian and Theodora are excessively rich in gilt orna- ment and jewellery, the ground gold, in most parts. The orna- ments on the arch leading into the sanctuary are on blue ground. The ornaments of the ceiling of the cupola are on gold. The cubes at Ravenna are still large and cemented at the base only.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

time, it might be considered unsafe to pronounce a de- cisive opinion as to the general degeneracy which pre- vailed, but, in addition to the mosaics of S. Michele in Africisco1 the remains of which have been transferred to the Museum of Berlin, Ravenna possessed other monu- ments cotemporary to S. Vitale; and in the Chapel of the archiepiscopal palace, completed in 547, the mosaics were of a style similar in every respect to the first that had been completed under the exarchate. Nor was this chapel less remarkable for the close imitation of the types, forms and workmanship of S. Vitale than for the fact that in the figure which adorned the wall above the altar the spectator might discover one of the first examples of the glorification of the Virgin.

The Chapel, (so our notes,) was evidently dedicated to the mother of the Saviour, and a gold nimbus showed that she had thus early been raised to a supreme rank in the heavenly host.2 As depicted by the mosaists she was of colossal form yet long and slender and of good proportions. A cap of curious shape covered her head; and over it fell the dra- pery of a blue mantle, whilst a white stole with the cross upon it depended in front. Her extended arms and open palms, her attitude seemed to express the meaning of the words, MP -O-V — words often found in the Greek form and character in later mosaics and which may once have ex- isted here.

In two circles on each side of her were two busts of saints. On the right hand wall near the altar stood the Saviour, juvenile and beardless, with long hair cut straight across his forehead, and features exactly resembling those of the Redeemer in the apsis of S. Vitale. On his right shoulder he carried the cross and in his left an open book on which these words are written: "Ego sum via Veritas His dress was that of a warrior, his attitude a distant imita- tion of the splendid one in the choir of the Chapel of Galla Placidia.;< Here indeed the contrast between the mo-

1 S. Michele in Africisco was consecrated in 545.

2 The words Sancta Maria in latin are inscribed on the gold ground above the shoulders of the Virgin. Archeologists may be

able to decide whether this is not a late addition to mosaics which date from the period of the Exar- chate of Ravenna.

3 The lower half of the figure is restored.

Chap. I. EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA. 31

saists of the fifth and sixth century at Ravenna might be watched, and it was possible to mark the decline from classic form, bold movement and splendid drapery to con- ventionalism and immobility. The vaults of two arches which spanned the waggon roof of the Chapel were adorned with medallion busts of the Saviour in the centre and three similar busts of apostles at each side. Both heads of the Saviour (one near the door is now restored vertically to the extent of half of the figure) were of the same type and form as that of the apsis of S. Vitale. Of the busts representing male and female saints on blue ground on the archivolts and sides of the two windows the greater part are now repaired and repainted. 1 The symbols of the Evangelists in the ceiling near the door have so far shared the same fate that one of them, that of S. John with a human head, is entirely new and coloured, whilst the angels in the diagonals who support the central medallion con- taining the monogram of Christ have all more or less under- gone restoration also.

The miserable state to which the mosaics of S. Apol- linare in classe near Ravenna have been reduced seems calculated to puzzle and deceive the spectator.2 Yet in the midst of the ruins the Byzantine art peculiar to the first monument of the exarchate may still be traced. In some heads and figures the reminiscence of the old style is preserved, and a certain breadth of treatment may be conceded, whilst in one composition at least, that of Abel offering the firstling lamb before Melchizedek, the conception recals a similar scene in S. Vitale.

S. Apollinaris in Classe was built by the treasurer Julian in 534 and consecrated by Maximian archbishop of Ravenna in 549. The basilica was dedicated to S. Apollinaris and the figure of that saint occupied a splendid place in the

1 These saints, are, in one win- dow SS. Sebastian, Fabian, Da- mian , Cassian , Chrysogonus and Chrysanthus, in the other SS. Eufemia, Eugenia, Cecilia, Duria, Perpetua and Felicity. In the key of the arch of each window is the monogram of Christ.

2 A close inspection of the various figures and episodes which

fill the apsis, the tribune and the arch of the tribune reveals not merely restoration on a large scale but repairs executed with mate- rials unknown to the mosaist. A large part of the left side of the apsis is repainted on stucco; and the same may be said of most of the figures and inscriptions in the tribune and arch.

Chap. L

tribune, but the seat of honour was still reserved for the representation of the Saviour, whose head was depicted in the curve of the apsis in the centre of a cross enclosed in a blue nimbus containing the Greek name of the Redeemer, the alpha and omega and the words "Salus Mundi". This head of the Saviour was of fine outline. The divided hair which fell nobly down on the shoulders and a long beard inclosed a face of regular features. The hand of the Lord pointed downwards from the key of the arch, and seemed to issue from a red circle studded with precious stones. On each side of the cross Moses and Elias hovered in a golden heaven studded with clouds. S. Apollinaris, nimbed and with outstretched arms, presented himself colossal in the space between the curve of the apsis and the windows of the tribune and looked up reverently to heaven. At his sides the space was divided into three courses, the first containing a Christian flock of twelve sheep, the second rocks and trees, the third three sheep symbolizing apostles, separated from each other by trees. Between the four windows of the apsis stood the figures of the four bishops Ursinus, Ursus, Severus and Ecclesius, the head of the latter being amongst the best preserved in the whole basi- lica — all of them standing under niches with a little dais over the heads. To the right of the windows, the sacrifices of Abel, Melchizedek and Abraham were represented in one picture. Melchizedek, sitting gravely behind the table, whilst Abraham presented Isaac, and Abel, the firstling lamb in the presence of the Lord whose hand, as usual, appeared above the scene. The figure of Abel, now ruined by restoration was similar in movement to that in S.Vitale.

To the left of the window, the tender of its privileges to the church of Eavenna was depicted. An archbishop to whom the name of Maximian has been given stood in the centre of the mosaic, whilst in front of him one, in purple and white, handed a scroll bearing the words privilegia to another in ecclesiastical robes. To the right of the latter were three priests bearing fire, incense and a censer. To the left of the former, three figures in yellow drapery, all of them in stiff and motionless attitudes and overlapping each other as in the glorification of Constantine at S.Vitale. This scene is now supposed to represent S. Maximian, in presence of Constantine. The archbishop and the four figures to his right have nimbi painted on stucco. A mo- dern painted inscription declares that Constantine, Heraclius and Tiberius " imperatores" are present at the ceremony, and

Chap. I.

EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

many are the conjectures to which these inscriptions have given rise. The portrait of Maximian is not in the least like that in S. Vitale,] and none of the imperial persons wear the diadem. Any attempt to draw an inference from this restored work must be abandoned.

On the arch of the tribune, a medallion bust of the Saviour was placed. The Redeemer in his purple robes was presented as in the act of benediction and holding a book in his left hand. His long hair and beard were usual, but the features were no longer the calm and regular ones of the Saviour in the cross of the apsis. Muscular developments in the forehead, a brow knit by terrible thoughts, gazing eyes, a nose bent at the end, proclaimed the progress of that more modern idea which sought to increase the majesty of the head by adding the terrible, as the Romans had already done in mosaic and painting.

Lower down in the courses , J erusalem and Bethlehem, the twelve apostles in the form of sheep, two palms, the archangels Michael and Gabriel, S. Mathew and S. Luke were represented.1

1 It behoves those who reject a received opinion to state most accurately the reasons that in- duce them to express one directly contrary. It may therefore be necessary to describe in detail the changes that repairs have produced in mosaics which, ac- cording to one of the most recent art -historians, "are old and ge- nuine". Taking first the mosaics of the apsis. — The white tunic of the figure of Moses is repainted. Half the face from the nose down- wards and both the hands of Elias are restored. The head of S. Apollinaris is in part damaged, the left hand and lower part of the figure destroyed. The sheep on the sides of S. Apollinaris, but particularly those on the right of that figure are almost com- pletely modern. A large part of the left side of the apsis is re- painted. Of the four bishops be-

VOL. I.

tween the windows of the tribune the head of Ecclesius is preserved, the lower part repainted. The head of S. Ursinus is a new mo- saic and the lower half of the figure is restored. In the mosaic of the sacrifice half the head from the eyes upwards and part of the arms of Abel are repainted. The legs have become dropsical under repair. The figures of Abraham and Isaac are almost completely repainted and the hands and feet are formless for that reason. This mosaic is repaired in two different ways with white cubes coloured over and with painted stucco. In the mosaic representing the tender of the privileges, the nimbi as already stated are new, but be- sides, the lower part of all the figures is repainted on stucco, and the heads are all more or less repaired. Of the figures on the arch that of the archangel Gabriel

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

The great nave of S. Apollinare in classe either was never adorned with mosaics, or these have long since disappeared to make room for a series of portraits of dignitaries of the church of Ravenna.

In the church of S. Apollinare Nuovo, on the con- trary, the mosaics of the nave are preserved whilst those of the apsis and triumphal arch have disappeared. This basilica, originally built in the time of Theodoric and consecrated anew by the orthodox clergy of the exarch- ate, appears to have received its final adornments in the reign of Justinian and under the auspices of Agnellus archbishop of Ravenna. Mosaic portraits of both those dignitaries were placed on the wall above the portal, and though one of these has disappeared, that of Justinian still remains and is now covered by the organ. It would be difficult to note any very marked difference between the mosaics that cover the three courses of the nave and those of other basilicas of Ravenna in the sixth century. The mosaists were still remarkable for judicious distri- bution of space, yet in reference to each other the figures had hardly a bond of union; — being placed in rows without relation to their neighbours or to the general composition. But S. Apollinare Nuovo was remarkable in one sense, inasmuch as, in the numerous episodes of the life of the Saviour which filled the upper spaces of the nave a nearer approach was made to those scenes of the Redeemer's life which are known as scenes of His Passion. As yet however the final and melancholy epi- sode of the crucifixion had not been touched, and the scruples which restrained the clergy from representing that subject and others immediately connected with it were not removed till a later period.

is half ruined and half restored, and part of S. Mathew and S. Luke are new. All these repairs are of various periods, the latest that of Battista Ricci, completed, as is vouched by an inscription behind the organ, on the 10th of

May 1816. Nor is it strange that repairs should be constantly ne- cessary in a church the floors of which are green with damp and the crypt of which is constantly full of water.

Chap. I.

EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

The right side of the nave was devoted to the glorifi- cation of the Redeemer by the martyrs and prophets and to incidents immediately preceding his death. Above the first series of arches twenty six martyrs, bearing crowns, seems to have issued from the palace of Ravenna (Pala- tium) and are formed in a single front line extending to the side of the Saviour who sits enthroned between four angels. A palm separates the martyrs from each other. MS. records in S. Apollinare Nuovo state that as late as 1580 this procession, if it deserves that name, was headed by S. Stephen who with his right arm extended seemed to introduce to the Saviour S. Martin who led the band of holy men. It is startling to find that, as the mosaic now stands, the figure of S. Stephen is gone and the space which he occupied has been filled up by the total renewal of one of the angels at the Saviour's side on a scale stouter, and in a space broader than the original. The same records affirm that the Saviour sat enthroned between four angels and held in his left hand a book on which the words "Ego sum rex glorise" were written. It would be vain now to look for the book in the Saviour's hand.1 It will be seen on the contrary that, as the figure stands at present, a sceptre is placed in the hand which of old held the book. The movement of the arm is changed, and thus not only is the figure altered but a new attribute is introduced, according to the fancy of a restorer who seems to have repaired one entire vertical half of the form. Judging from that portion of the Redeemer which remains, the spectator might admit that he was majestic in character,

1 The restoration of the figure of the Saviour and the alteration of the distribution of the space are evident at first sight, and led naturally to the inquiry whe- ther it had always been so. Then it was that by the kindness of the prior it became possible to consult a memorandum MS. in folio, preserved in the records of the church and written in 1580 by Father Giovanni Francesco Malazappi da Carpi, where at folio 45, the description of the mosaics is given, as narrated in the text. The absence of one saint in the procession of martyrs is evident from a comparison with

that of the females on the other side. 24 of these with the three Magi complete the number of 27. The spaces are similarly divided on both sides. Hence it was obvious that one saint on the right side had disappeared, since, without him the number would be reduced to twenty six. Butbesides, the memorandum above quoted mentions each saint by name, the first nearest the Saviour being S. Stephen, the second S. Martin and so on with the rest. The names of the saints are still in- scribed and S. Martin is now the nearest the Saviour.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

that his attitude was commanding and noble. His purple tunic and mantle of different shades nobly draped the body and limbs. The head, framed by rich locks of hair and a divided beard, was of a fine outline. The features were regular though somewhat aged, the forehead and brow open, the eyes fairly expressive though a little gazing. The nose, on the other hand, a little bent at the end, betrayed the Byzantine decline. The type and the figure were indeed one of the finest which the sixth century had produced, and though slightly different in movement might rival those of the catacomb of S.S. Marcellino e Pietro at Rome. The angels at the sides were with one exception of the long slender Byzantine type. The second course of mosaics above the procession of martyrs comprised a series of sixteen prophets in niches between eleven arched windows, some of which, being walled up, were filled with ornament, whilst on the ground above the niches, peacocks, partridges and other birds were depicted.

The third course, of smaller dimensions than the rest and cut down by a new roof lower than the old one, erected by Cardinal Gaetani, represented thirteen scenes of the life of the Saviour alternating with a niche adorned with a cross, a crown and a dove. The first of these scenes was the last supper in which the guests lay recumbent on seats round a table in form of a horse -shoe; the second the kiss of Judas, the last but one the procession to Calvary — the Saviour's cross being borne by Simon of Cyrene , — the last, the Saviour in the midst of the apostles. In all these compositions the Redeemer appeared as a man of full age and bearded, as suited the idea of Him who in the prime of manhood suffered for the sins of the world.

A procession of female martyrs similar in movement and arrangement to that which advanced to honour the Saviour, moved on the opposite side of the nave to adore the Virgin. It appeared to have started from the port of Ravenna, whose waters, ships and edifices bore the name "Civi Classe". The Virgin sat enthroned opposite the Saviour, between four angels and received the adoration of the Magi. A nimbus of gold encircled her head which was covered with the folds of her mantle. Her form was of that developed Byzantine which already marked the decline of art. The infant Saviour, seated in the centre of her lap and in full front, gave the blessing, whilst the three Magi advanced in bending attitude in simple file to her right. On their heads were crowns, since exchanged for baronial caps as may be

Chap. I. EARLY MOSAICS AT RAVENNA.

seen by the grotesque novelty of this part of their costume.1 The angels guarding the Virgin were doubtless like those by the side of the Saviour ; but, with the exception of one, they have lost all antique character under the hands of the restorer. The upper courses were filled with sixteen prophets and thirteen scenes representing the miracles of the Saviour who was no longer depicted in the fulness of age but, on the contrary, in the bloom of youth, beardless, and wearing the purple; doubtless under the impression that, to show the power of the Redeemer in this phase of his existence, it is also necessary to declare, by such means as the poverty of art possesses his innocence and freedom from guile. Amongst the miracles represented were — the cure of the sick man who takes up his bed and walks — the casting out of a devil — Peter and Andrew called from their nets, and the distribution of the loaves and fishes. These subjects like those on the opposite side of the nave were more reminiscent of the antique than the rest of the mosaics. Yet one may hesitate to give a resolute opinion as to these works as a whole, when one considers that the figures of the first course have for the greater part lost originality and that those of the upper courses though less damaged have also undergone changes.

The portrait of Justinian in the organ loft is destroyed with the exception of the head and bust. The former, covered with a diadem and adorned with a couple of jewels pendant like cherries from the ears, is older, fatter and squarer than that of S. Vitale, but similar in features. Were it not presumptuous to speak of the general colour of mosaics which have suffered so severely as these from restoring, it might be said that the tones particularly in the upper courses are chosen with the knowledge of har- mony and the feeling for massive light and shade which

1 Flaminio di Parma, in Me- morie storiche d e ' conventi e c li i e s e d e i F r a t i in i n o r i della Provincia di Bologna. Parma 1760, describes these mo- saics and alludes to the crowns then covering the heads of the Magi — P. 290. In the time of Ciampini (p. 176) the Magi still had crowns as may be seen in the engraving of that author: but]

these heads and crowns, as Fla- minio states, were even inCiampi- ni\s time painted restorations. (Fla- minio ubi sup. p. 292.) The heads with baronial caps are now res- tored in mosaic, a proof of the nu- merous successive changes which these works have undergone. The mosaics were in the hands of restorers as late as 1861.

Chap. I.

characterized the mosaists of Santa Maria Maggiore at Rome. 1 With the close of the sixth century Ravenna's importance came to an end. Art no doubt maintained itself there as in most Italian cities, at that modest standard which might satisfy humble wants, but could leave no monument to posterity. Plastic art might be traced to a later period, it yielded to that of mosaics in the earlier centuries, but still left traces of its existence in urns and sarcophagi, respecting which let the reader take these few notes.

Amongst the funeral monuments at S. Apollinare in classe, one containing the ashes of an archbishop is remarkable for a bas-relief on its front representing the Saviour with the book, enthroned and receiving a scroll from S. Paul, whilst S. Peter, on the other side, advances with the cross and keys. The youthful and beardless Christ and the forms of the apostles and attendant figures reveal an artist of the sixth century. 2 An adoration of the Magi on the tomb of the exarch Isaac affords a striking proof of the tenacity with which old forms were preserved by sculptors.3 The Virgin without a nimbus holds the nimbed Saviour on her knee4 and the Magi advance in a row, clothed in the Phry- gian dress and cap. Daniel also with a Phrygian cap stands between two lions. Lazarus rises from the grave before a figure of Christ without a nimbus. The forms, attitudes and arrangement are those of the early catacomb paintings at Rome. Amongst the monuments in the cathedral of Ravenna are two urns in the chapel of the Madonna del Sudore, one of which, according to a late inscription encloses the remains of S. Barbatian, confessor of Galla Placidia , the second — contains the remains of S. Raynardo. The latter is adorned with a bas-relief representing the Saviour nimbed, holding the book, and seated on a throne resting on a rock out of which the four rivers flow. 5 Long hair falls behind his

1 Between the 6th and 7th cen- in the apsis of S.S. Cosmo e turies may be classed the mosaics Damiano at Rome.

of the side chapel in the church 3 The exarch Isaac died at of S. Lorenzo of Milan represent- Ravenna in 644, but the sarco- ing Christ, amongst the apostles j phagus may be of an older date, in niches, and the sacrifice of Isaac, 4 The nimbus round the infant much damaged by restoring. Saviour's head is radiated with

the oblique Greek cross; and con-

2 The Saviour's head is encircled tains the alpha and omega.

by a nimbus with rays, like those 5 The Saviour's nimbus is Greek

Chap. II. EARLY CHRISTIAN SCULPTURE.

shoulders, but a beardless face indicates the intention of youth. With one hand outstretched he accepts a crown from S. Paul, whilst S. Peter bearing a cross strides towards him with a similar emblem. The apostles are easily dis- tinguishable by their well-known types, but like the Saviour, they are rudely represented. The same subjects and the same types may be found on the tomb of S. Barbatian as on that of S. Raynardo. 1 The Saviour and the apostles however stand in separate niches parted by columns; and the sculpture is still more rude than the last. The bas-reliefs of other tombs on a wall in the passage to the sacristy of S. Vitale represent — Christ giving a scroll to S. Paul, Peter on his right, and a male and female figure right and left of the apostles and parted from them by a palm — Christ again, with a damaged head2 and an arm wanting, standing at the top of a flight of steps with a small figure of Lazarus in a winding-sheet near him. All these bas- reliefs exhibit more or less the decline of antique art, and the defects peculiar to it. Of two the dates are fairly as- certained, the rest may have been produced at intervals as late as the close of the seventh century when the ex- archate disappeared. The pastoral chair of S. Maximian 3 filled with ivory reliefs is likewise of the antique school of the sixth century: and it might be possible to recognize the same style in the great silver crucifix of the cathedral, had it not been unfortunately restored in the sixteenth and eighteenth centuries.

The miniaturists of the first ages yielded examples of little more importance than those produced by sta- tuaries but still interesting as showing the predominance of antique types, or peculiar technical modes of exe- cution.

One may note in a parchment of the Vatican 4 represent- ing scenes from the life of Joshua character very similar to that of the reliefs on the column of Trajan. The com- positions recal early Christian art at Rome. Well con- nected scenes, groups, marshalled according to true maxims follow each other in quick succession. Joshua may be

like the last. The cross and 4 Parchment, 30 feet long in

monogram are on the ends of the the library of the Vatican. See

tomb. Agincourt Vol. V, Plates 28, 29,

1 The same symbols likewise. HO for engravings of some of these

2 And a Greek nimbus. miniatures. The compositions are

3 In the cathedral. generally good and animated, and

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. I.

constantly recognized not merely by his nimbus but by his tall stature, by his face and warrior's dress. A rapid and sketchy execution in thin water-colour of light rosy tones, freely carried out with the brush in the Pompeian style; — all this, though combined with some defects of anatomy and coarseness of extremities, reveals an artist of the earlier times. Yet an inscription on the parchment would lead the student to consider these miniatures as a work of the ninth century. If this were so, it must be conceded that the painter not only imitated the antique in form and composition but also in technical execution.

Vignette miniatures of still more classical forms, inter- spersed among the leaves of an old MS. of Virgil 1 at the Vatican, are interesting in another sense. Their technical execution may be accurately described by a careful analysis of parts bared by the dropping of the upper surface. In landscape scenes, for instance, the whole surface appears to have been covered with an uniform blue tone, upon which antique groups and the short square Roman figures were drawn. The colour of the flesh tints and vestments was then laid on in body colour, the shadows strongly marked with a deep brown tint and the lights of draperies with gold.2 The execution is probably due to an inferior artist of the fifth century, spirited in rendering incident but feeble in knowledge of form, as the coarse figures and large round eyes fully' prove, yet imitating in the most faithful manner the classic forms of antiquity. One may indeed point to a Laocoon, which is but too evidently an inspiration from the celebrated marble of that group. Another work of this time or of the close of the fourth century is the Homer, now in the Ambrosiana at Milan , quite in the character of the Roman art of the period under notice, the classical move- ment for instance of a figure of Homer its warm and trans- parent colour combining to make it one beautiful of its kind.3

some attitudes are quite artistic. Defects of anatomy in the ex- tremities may be frequently no- ticed. The technical execution is that of a water-colour of light transparent tones. The drawing which may be seen, where parts of the miniature have been rubbed down is executed with a brush, not with point, and the system is not that which can be found in later miniatures.

1 Rome, Library of the Vatican. MSS. Nr. 3225.

2 The colour is laid on with great impasto , of a general red tone in the flesh tints. The lights of the draperies are touched in gold. The forms, though imitated from the antique, are not without defects, and the eyes particularly are large, round and staring.

3 Of course allusion is made only to those parts which are not damaged or retouched.

Chap. II.

DECLINE OF PAINTING.

CHAPTER II.

ITALIAN AET FROM THE VII. TO THE XIII. CENTURY.

The annals of Roman art immediately after the con- quest of Italy by Belisarius and Narses, impose on the historian a tedious task. Yet at the risk of wearying the reader he is bound to dwell upon the formless pro- ductions of centuries, remarkable for a general decay, but in which the threads which unite the art of succeeding periods and the germs of future development may be traced. In Rome itself painting and mosaic continued to live upon traditional forms and received from the Neo- Greek ar- tists of Ravenna but a passing influence. Christian forms of composition, grafted at first and in a few rare examples on the imitation of the antique, gradually became typical. Types were altered without being improved, and form became daily more defective. After three centuries of continuous decline, the technical process of painting be- gan to change. A new Greek or Byzantine art then appeared in the South of Italy, displaying rudeness and defects equal to those of Rome. Sicily shone for an in- stant with unwonted brilliancy and displayed in a fine series of mosaics powers of a high class. This momentary revival was succeeded by a new period of darkness during which Rome again seized the lead and kept it till Tus- cany took it up and distanced all rivals.

To follow the decline of painting at Rome, the cata- combs again afford the most instructive examples :

The first subject, which strikes the visitor to S. Pon- ziano as a production of the seventh or eighth cen-

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

tury is a Baptism of the Saviour, roughly sketched and painted in the old technical style, but essentially dif- ferent in conception from those which have been noticed at Ravenna. The artist represented the Redeemer naked up to his middle in clear water, with a nimbed head of regular features inclosed by long falling hair and a small beard. S. John, standing on a bank to the right and holding a reed imposed a hand on the Saviour's head, as in the Baptistery of S. Maria in Cosmedin at Ravenna. But instead of the river- god floating on the water or sitting on the bank, an angel seemed to fly on the left, holding the necessary cloth. The form of the Saviour was still good in its intention and attitude; the composi- tion was still fair, but one peculiarity might be remarked which diminished its effect. The Saviour seemed to receive the Baptism in a ditch. Yet artists of later centuries, those even who might lay claim to superior genius of conception never thought fit, or were never allowed to alter this form of composition.1

Still more characteristic, as showing the degeneracy of painters in the seventh and eighth centuries, was a large bust of the Saviour with a cruciform nimbus and a jew- elled book in his hand, also in the Pontian catacomb. Here the artist sketched out with dark lines on a roughly prepared wall a form and type different from those of previous times, but frequently met with in the eighth and ninth centuries and even in the thirteenth. Hitherto the Saviour's head had been regular, though the features had in the course of time undergone change. During the predominance of antique feeling, the long flowing hair served to give the head an agreable outline. Now the forms of the face and the contour of the head and locks changed for the worse. The painter of the Pontian catacomb pro-

1 The angel is all but gone. At its feet on the hank is a stag or deer. The three figures have the nimbus. Above the Saviour are indistinct traces of what once no doubt was the dove of the

Holy ghost. S. John wears san- dals and a yellow skin dress, ex- posing his frame and legs. The flesh tones are light and warm, the outlines heavily marked.

Vol. I, p. 42.

HEAD OF CHRIST ; from the Catacomb of S. Pouziauo in Rome

Chap. II. DECLINE OF PAINTING. 43

duced a face almost as long as it was broad, with arched brows, staring eyes with drooping corners, a nose whose ball projected, a prominent cheek-bone and a small chin. A vast mass of hair, divided in the middle and leaving two locks pendent on the centre of the forehead, formed a circle round the face and gave to an otherwise broad neck the appearance of thinness. A small straggling beard covered the under part of the chin. The right hand, rai- sed in the act of benediction was formless. The draperies had lost all breadth and were marked by angularity. The flesh tone was yellowish, the narrow shadows dark.1 Yet if this were a poor example of the spirit left in Roman art, it was not the poorest: one might see in the chapel of S. Milix and S. Pymenius in the Pontian catacomb two coarsely executed figures of those saints standing at each side of a cross painted in imitation of jewelled gold. These figures were rude and almost formless in outline, the heads were without shape and the eyes staring. S. Py- menius wore the antique costume. The colour of the flesh was a species of yellow red. Equally defective were five figures standing erect in a row in the same catacomb and betraying the usual absence of drawing, of form, and of thought in the artist.2

As the eighth century closed, even the majesty of the Redeemer was forgotten in the shapeless inanity of dark outlines and false forms, and the Saviour, as depicted in the chapel of S. Cecilia in the catacomb of S. Calisto, was only worthy of attention as exhibiting with a certain solemnity the complete prostration, — the dotage, of the

1 This large bust of the Saviour has been lately discovered on the side of the vaulted recess where the above mentioned Baptism is depicted. It is painted on a very rough surface, and the lower part of the painting- including a portion of the hand has fallen. The colour of the draperies is almost gone, but the mantle bears traces of blue and the tunic of red. The nimbus is yellow at the outer rim

with a simple cross on a light blue ground. Part of the left eye and of the chin of the figure are gone. The outlines, though strongly marked, are not black. Beneath the ^bust are the words. "De Do- nisDi Gaudiosus fecit".

2 Representing S.S. Peter, Mar- cellinus, Pollio and other saints. The extremities of these figures are exceedingly defective, the hands indeed scarcely indicated.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

art of the time.1 Nor was this state of collapse in pain- ting of short duration or confined to Rome. It might be traced in remains of old wall paintings representing the Saviour and other saints in the crypt of S. Ansano at Spoleto, rude and ill drawn figures executed apparently in the ninth century without change in the old technical methods.2 It might be exemplified by figures of S. Curtius and S. Desiderius in the catacombs of Naples , equally defective in form,3 and in a bust of one holding a book in a circular frame resting on two cornucopia, rudely sketched in the same catacomb, — • in manner so far tech- nically changed that colour of much body and consistency was used.4 The decline was in fact general throughout Italy, just as in its processes painting was everywhere the same.

The utmost rudeness and the eclipse of all feeling, com- bined with barbaric costume might be traced in the tenth century, first in a wall painting in the crypt of S.S. Cosmo e Damiano which seems to have represented the Virgin

1 There is something calm and solemn in the ugliness of the youthful, large eyed, and narrow head. The breadth of the face at the level of the eyes is ex- cessive. The brows and eyes are arched, the iris staring. The nose is straight thin and long and ends in a point, the upper lip long, the beard a succession of curls round the base of the chin. The figure holds a book in its left and blesses with its right. The fingers of the shapeless hands are coarsely in- dicated. The type is one which repeats itself in the 9th century. The outlines are thick and strong- ly marked. The nimbus is cruci- form and the cross jewelled, the mantle blueish and tunic red. The niche in which the figure is represented, seems to have been painted of an uniform yellow body colour Avhich served for flesh tone in lights and above which the shadows and half tints

were painted in. Above the recess is a figure of a female saint older in date — perhaps of the 7th cen- tury. The catacomb of S. Calisto was closed at the end of the 8th century and these paintings cannot be later than the date above given.

2 The Saviour here as usual in a red tunic but with a light co- loured mantle of red shadows. The nimbus is yellow and with- out the cross. The tones light water-colour.

3 The saints with yellow nimbi. — Desiderius with a cross in his right hand. The hands large and wrists small. Curtius is dressed in blue , ornamented with white flowers. The outlines coarse, shad- ows black, back ground coloured and ornamented.

4 The execution of this figure is very rude. The colour, of much body, has faded away.

Chap. II.

DECLINE OF ART IN MOSAISTS.

and child, secondly in a wall painting in the crypt of 8. Clemente at Rome where, amongst other figures, the Vir- gin, crowned and dressed in jewel -decked apparel of close fit, holds the infant Saviour on her knee.1

That the mosaists followed the same course as the painters is not doubtful. They confined themselves to the reproduction of the simplest subjects, such as the glori- fication of the Saviour, the Virgin and saints, and seemed either unwilling or unable to trust themselves to any effort of composition. Amongst the relics of mosaics executed at the close of the sixth and during the seventh centuries the mixture of Roman and Neo- Greek types and forms prevailed with more or less intensity and per- sistence, yet this, as may be seen, was but a passing im- pression. In the mosaics of the inner side on the tri- umphal arch of S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura, the Saviour glorified had a poor aspect; the gazing eyes and de- pressed noses, the long outlines of the attendant saints re- vealed the rapidity with which artistic power was disap- pearing, yet at the same time the persistence of the classic feeling.2

In S. Theodoro the Saviour was again glorified in the apsis exactly as he was on the triumphal arch in S. Lo- renzo; and some of the heads revealed a style approaching to that noticed in the mosaics of S.S. Cosmo e Damiano mingled with that of the later decline,3 betraying already the impress of the Neo -Greek mosaists.

1 This fresco is also painted with much body of colour on a rough surface, the outlines broad and marked.

2 The Saviour sits on the orb, a cross in his left, S.S. Peter and Paul respectively present S.S. Lawrence, Pelagius, Stephen and Hypollitus, Lawrence and Pela- gius still reminiscent of the forms of the 6th century. Round the head of the Saviour is a cruci- form nimbus. His draperies are dark. — On the lower sides of the arch are Jerusalem and Beth-

lehem. The church seems to have been built by Pope Pelagius; cer- tainly his presence in the mosaic with a model of the edifice indi- cates the period of the work i. e. 570—590. With the exceptions noted above , the mosaic has the character of the 9th and 10th cen- turies, and this owing merely to repairs and restoration.

i S.S. Peter and Paul, severally

introducing S. Theodore and an- other saint, the former slippered, with a long pointed beard, holding a cross. The heads of Peter

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

The apsis of S. Agnes was devoted to the glorification of that saint in the presence of Honorius the first and S. Symmachus. The long motionless figures stood side by side on a green ground, without much gravity of attitude or of features. Antique feeling might be traced in the relief of the male heads and in the broad draperies: but the spread of the Greek style might be noticed in the straight lines of the features and folds, whilst the gradual progress of decay was marked by sombre colour, dark and abrupt shadows, heavy dark outlines and a rude exe- cution with the ill jointed cubes peculiar to Roman art.1

In the middle of the seventh century the apsis of S. Venanzio was devoted to the Virgin who stood with outstretched arms in the centre of the space with S.S. Peter, Paul, John the Baptist and five other saints on each side of her. Above her a colossal bust of the Saviour, resting on red clouds floating in a golden heaven, gave her the benediction. A face of long but regular forms was inclosed by long hair falling on the shoulders, and a short beard beneath the chin. Two angels in flying draperies, nimbed, with broad round heads, and powerful necks, with hair bound by bands whose ends floated in the wind, held guard on each side of him. Their forms as well as those of the Saviour were com- pletely reminiscent of the antique. In the upper face, outside the apsis were the symbols of the Evangelists, Bethlehem and Jerusalem, whilst, swelling the row of

and Paul are almost all of the old work remaining-. The head and hand of the Saviour are quite modern, the latter formless. The purple mantle is also in great part new. S. Theodore holds a cross. The saint introduced by S. Paul is totally altered. The feet and draperies of S. Paul himself partly renewed, the feet and hands of S. Peter modern, the whole on gold ground.

1 The hand of the Eternal issues

out of a triple star -bespangled halo with a crown for S. Agnes, whose head is encircled with a nimbus. She wears a purple tunic and a gold mantle lined white, and a jewelled collar, — in her hands a scroll, the latter in part restored. Honorius, with a model of the church in hand, wears a white tunic and purple mantle. S. Symmachus in a purple dress carries a book. The mosaics may be assigned to the time of Hono- rius the Ist, 625. 638.

Chap. II. NEO- GREEK INFLUENCE.

supporters on each side of the Virgin eight figures of saints might be seen. It might almost be conceived that the Saviour and angels and the apsis figures generally were of an earlier Roman period than those on the arch, as the latter recalled the Neo-Greek character of S. Vitale of Ravenna, not only in slenderness of form but in a more careful execution, more harmonious colour and a certain straightness of lines in draperies such as had already marked the figures in S. Agnes.1

Equally reminiscent of the art developed in S. Agnes were the mosaic figures in the apsis of S. Stefano Ro- tondo, where in the heavy dark outlines and broad dra- pery, defined with straight lines, one might still trace amidst a mass of repairs the character of the seventh century.2

A solitary example of the Neo - Greek influence at Rome and the last of the seventh century that can be found there, is a fragment removed to S. Pietro in Vinculis by Pope Agathon in 680, and now adorning an altar to the right on entering that church. Here the artist represen- ted the long slender form, the young and slightly bearded face of S. Sebastian not nude, as in more modern repre- sentations of that martyr, but holding the crown, dressed in barbaric and richly ornamented costume and wearing a long mantle fastened to the shoulder with a brooch. This figure distinctly exhibited the impress of the more modern art of Ravenna in its type and form. The dra-

1 S. Venanzio is an oratory or side chapel to the Baptistery of S. Giovanni Laterano. Some res- toration may be noticed in the figure of S. Peter and in the angels on each side of the Sa- viour. The saints on the arch to the left, areS.S.Paulinian, Telius, Asterius and Anastasius, those to the right S.S. Maurus, Settimanius, Antiochianus and Cajanus.

2 S. Stefano Rotondo was built on the Celian hill about A. D.

642—49, in honour of S.S. Primus and Felician who are represented in the mosaic at the sides of a jewelled cross beneath a medal- lion of the Saviour, the hand of the Eternal with the crown issuing as usual from the prismatic rain- bow. Very little of the original mosaic remains. The cross and part of the back ground including the medallion of the Saviour are tilled up with stucco and repainted. Part of the figure of S. Felician is also coloured stucco.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

peries were somewhat angular, the lights and shades fairly indicated but leaving by the absence of breadth a certain sense of flatness. The attitude was however still marked by a certain dignity.

With the close of the seventh century, old Roman feeling resumed its sway, and the Neo- Greek influence which had penetrated to Rome a century after Ravenna had ceased to yield a single monument of art, — vanished as it had come, leaving as a solitary trace of its passage a certain tendency to slenderness and length of form. It was characteristic indeed of the independence of Roman art that, whilst history tells of iconoclastic struggles and of a general flight of Byzantine artists to Italy; — not only was not a trace of their influence to be found at Rome, but the older Neo-Greek impress had disappeared. — Of the early productions, attributable to the eigth century at Rome, but a fragment remains. Yet this and the mo- saics of the time of Leo the third and Pascal the first would alone suffice to show how Roman artists trod the path of decline independent in their weakness. To the faults which had been confirmed by centuries of existence others were superadded. To absence of composition, of balance in distribution and connexion between figures were added slenderness of figure, neglect and emptiness of form, a general sameness of features, and the total disappearance of relief by shadow. Still the reminiscence of antique feeling remained in certain types, in a sort of dignity of expression and attitude, and in breadth of draperies, which, though defined by mere parallel lines, Avere still massive. The Greek stare had completely dis- appeared from the eyes. That art so reduced could still appear imposing to nations of low cultivation, is apparent from the fact that Charlemagne found it useful to take Italian architects and painters to Germany, and that with their means he created schools whose influence was un- doubted, though it has probably been exaggerated by the partiality of German writers.

Part of an adoration of the Magi — the fragment to which

Chap. II.

allusion has been made was transferred, from the old basilica of S. Peter to the sacristy of S. Maria in Cosmedin and was executed in the first years of the eighth century. The face of the Virgin, although it betrayed a gross neglect of form, was not without an expression of quiet repose. The eyes were natural, the attitude equally so 5 the shadowless draperies, sculptural in their mass, were indicated by few straight and parallel lines, and seemed to cling flatly to the frame. The form of the infant was defective, that of an angel, of antique type and regular features. The absence of shadow, the blue lines in the white draper- ies, the red lines in the flesh contours, the thinness and length of the figures, gave this fragment a peculiar appear- ance, yet one which characterized more or less the art of the whole century. The execution was in every respect rude.1 Time, which dealt unsparingly with the monuments of this period, did not respect those of Leo the Third, whose activity appears as remarkable in art as in politics. Leo who invited Charlemagne to Italy, not only built edifices, but caused many churches to be repaired; and amongst them S. Apollinare of Ravenna, whose roof already threatened to fall in. Yet of the mosaics which he caused to be executed in the Triclinium of S. Giovanni Laterano,2 to illustrate the victories and the power of Charlemagne, nothing remains but two heads in the Vatican museum which recal the art of the eighth century, and a copy of the lost apsis mosaic representing the apotheoses of Charlemagne and S. Syl- vester, and the Last supper.3

1 The Virgin, seated on a cush- ioned chair, is in the usual red tunic and blue mantle, the in- fant on her knee in a gold tunic, the angel to the right behind the Virgin in white robes, S. Joseph on the left of paltry form. An arm with a present is all that appears of the Magi. This frag- ment is on gold ground. The Saviour has a cruciform nimbus. S. Joseph without one. The mo- saic has been restored and some of the outlines are overpaintcd,

VOL. I.

cubes large and rough. The date of the mosaic about 705.

2 A. D. 795—816.

3 In the Vatican museum is a figure , crowned with a diadem, aged and bearded, in white tunic and purple mantle, inscribed "Ca- roli M. Imperator effigies nongen- tos ante annos lectorio depicta. S.S. Benedicto XIV. P. M. A. clericis regularibus devotis nomini majestatique ejus oblata". The figure seems to be a fresco of the 13th century.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

In S.S. Nero e Achilleo, however, an example of art at the time of Leo may be found. On a triumphal arch, the Saviour might be seen standing in an elliptical glory with Moses and Elias at his sides and S.S. Nero and Achilleo prostrate before his feet. Right and left were the annunciation, and the Virgin and Saviour guarded by an angel. Here the general character of the eighth century was completely maintained. The long slender figures had at least the dignity of repose and were far from vulgar in form; — their attitudes were simple and their proportions fair. The angels were of the Roman type, the draperies indicated by free and few straight lines, the faces rouged, and the outlines of the nude marked in red. As before, a total absence of shadow might be noticed*, but whilst art in its essentials displayed an in- creasing depression, beauty of ornament revealed the maintenance of the old feeling for accessories and details.1 This feature became indeed more evident as art retrograded. It was prominent in the time of Pope Pascal and might be noticed in the apsis mosaics of S. Maria called the Navicella on the Celian hill. There for the first time in a glorification of the Virgin the conspicuous defect of overcrowding first became remarkable. The preponderant size of the Virgin as compared with that of the attendant angels and prostrate Pope Pascal , showed the desire of the artist to impress the spectator with her supernatural power. The defects of the mosaics were those of the eighth century and the execution rude as ever.2

1 S.S. Nero e Achilleo below the baths of Caracalla at Rome, is a church of the time of Leo III. The background of the mosaics on the arch is dark blue with white and reel clouds; — the Sa- viour's halo blue of a lighter tone. Moses and Elijah are not nimbed. The head of the Virgin has been damaged by restoring and many other parts have suf- fered from the same causes, but not enough to render a judgment impossible.

2 A very pretty foliated orna- ment on gold -ground springing from vases forms a cornice to the apsidal arch. The Virgin is en- throned with the infant amidst slender angels and adored by a miniature figure of Pope Pascal, prostrate and holding one of her feet. The angels rest on a ground strewed with flowers. — Above, — the Redeemer on a rainbow with the apostles in a row at his sides, at the birth of the arch the Vir- gin's special prophets.

Chap. II.

THE DECLINE AT ROME.

That art now hurried to its fall was evident from the fact that in the short lapse of one papal reign the mo- saists of the close were feebler than those of the opening. In the apsis mosaic of S. Praxedis, a mere imitation of that in S.S. Cosmo e Damiano executed in the time of Pascal the First,1 the figures had all the defects of their predecessors, with less brilliant colour and darker backgrounds. In the triumphal arch a quaint and realistic representation was given of the New Jerusalem2 laid out in the form of an irregular polygon, in the midst of which the Saviour stood guarded by three angels, and received the homage of the elders, whilst at the gates, angels seemed to invite the chosen people to enter. A chapel in the same church called the garden of Paradise was likewise covered with mosaics, — the archivolt with double rows of saints and prophets in medallions,2 — the cieling with a medallion centre representing the Saviour in benediction supported in the diagonals by four angels resting on globes. None of these mosaics exhibited an improvement on the rude forms and execu- tion that had now prevailed since the opening of the eighth century, but a change had taken place in the mode of rendering the features of the Saviour, and the type had become the same which marked the colossal form of the

1 Subjects — The Saviour with S.S. Paul, Peter, Praxedis, Puden- ziana and the 24 elders advancing on the arch to cast their crowns. The church of S. Praxedis, on the Esquiline^ was adorned with mo- saics by Pascal the 1st A. D. 817. 824. The apsis figures stand within a space bounded by 2 palm-trees on one of which is as usual the phoe- nix. Above the Saviour the hand holds a crown. Below flows Jordan beneath which Bethlehem and Je- rusalem, the saints, and 12 sheep. Anastasius (de vitis Pont.) and the following inscriptions prove the exact date of this church and its mosaics. In the frieze below the semidome "Emicat aula pise

variis decorata metallis Praxedis — Pontiticis summistudioPaschalis."

— The paintings which Rumohr mentions in this church no longer exist. Forschungen Vol. I, p. 246.

2 Upper row, the Saviour blessing

— centre — lower row, the Virgin and child, centre. The medallions on the row right and left of the Virgin contain 10 female and 2 male saints. Those in the row on each side of the Saviour are apostles and prophets. Below the birth of the arch of the door on each side are two modern medal- lion portraits of Popes. In the spandrils of arch busts of pro- phets. These mosaics have been extensively restored.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

Redeemer in the Pontian catacomb. 1 The face had be- come as broad as it was long, the prominent cheeks were relieved on a mass of hair disposed in a circle with a pendent lock on the centre of the forehead. It was a type which, though defective and unpleasant, had been gener- ally adopted in the ninth century and was revived as late as the thirteenth.

Two or three edifices in Rome still exist to mark the complete fall of art at this time. In S. Cecilia the apsis mosaic glorifying the Redeemer, S. Cecilia and Pope Pascal, was filled with mere flat and empty forms, darkly out- lined, shadowless, rouged on the cheeks, long, stiff and defective in shape. 2 Art in fact had in this monument, parted with every species of character, and in it Roman and Neo- Greek manner were lost in a miserable cento.

Yet if possible the mosaics of S. Marco,3 the church of the Venetians, showed a still deeper decline. If one excepts the medallion Saviour on the arch of the apsis and the figures of prophets at the side pointing to him — the former being of the type already noticed in S. Praxedis as an imitation of that in the Pontian catacomb — the figures were of the second infancy of delineation, each of them standing or hanging on a little pedestal.4 All previous defects might be found in them and new ones in addition, the faces and features being angular, beards pointed, heads without forehead or cranium, —

1 The Saviour inscribed "De do- nis drii Gaudiosus fecit" is here intended.

2 Subject — Saviour erect blessing — six saints about him, S. Peter introducing a male and female saint with crowns, S. Paul, for the first time with the sword introducing S. Cecilia who in her turn recommends Pope Pascal. The church owes its mosaics to Pascal the Ist. The background is so dark as to be almost black and on it are red clouds. The palms, phoenix, Jordan, the Lamb and sheep as in S. Praxedis. Pope

Pascal is said to have caused scenes of the life of S. Cecilia to be painted in the church. A fragment of these paintings re- mains, but is so blackened by time as to defy criticism. An en- graving of some of them may be seen in Agincourt, Plate 84, No. 3.

3 This church was restored in 833 by Pope Gregory the IVth.

4 Subject — the Redeemer be- tween S.S. Mark, Agapitus and Agnes (left),Felician and Mark in- troducing Pope Gregory IV. (right).

Chap. II.

THE DECLINE AT ROME.

feet and hands deformed , outlines broad and dark and edged with red. Yet this unpleasant mosaic was still surrounded by a rich and beautiful ornament.

A doubtful example of mosaic, insofar as date is con- cerned , may be noted in the small and dark Chapel of the Sancta Sanctorum in the Lateran, sacred to papal meditations. Here in the centre of the roof an artist of the eighth or ninth century depicted the Saviour blessing the world and holding the book, in the type and form peculiar to the mosaists of the time of Pascal the First, or to the painter of the Pontian catacomb. The Redeemer was delineated with a round head, pendent forelock, and a small beard divided into curls. His features were, how- ever, less irregular than those of other figures of the same class. Four angels in flight and laboured movement sup- ported the medallion, and still recalled the antique with a mixture of a later Greek character which remains to be noticed in Italy. Figures of saints in the same style filled the lunettes.

In the same manner in which the Neo- Greek influence extended for a while from Ravenna to Rome, it spread in the beginning of the ninth century to Milan where the church of S. Ambrogio was brought to a certain degree of splendor by the execution of mosaics, whose character was not essentially different from that which might be expected from artists who followed the precepts of the later mosaists of the Exarchate. The Saviour was represented in the apsis of S. Ambrogio, enthroned, with S. Protasius on his right and S. Gervase on his left. The archangels Michael and Gabriel, guardians of the two saints, seemed to hover above them with a certain vehe- mence of action, holding in their hands reeds and crowns.1 These mosaics displayed more of the character of the

1 Beneath the pedestal of the throne three saints, Marcellina, Satirus and Candida, were de- picted in medallions, and, at the sides of these , were two com-

positions, the first illustrating the sermon of S. Ambrose at Milan and the second the burial of S. Martin at Tours by the same bishop.

the Roman productions of the seventh or eighth cen- turies,1 than that of later mosaics in the capital of Italy. Had art continued at Ravenna, it would probably have assumed the form which characterized S. Ambrogio in the ninth century. It would have presented to the spectator the same costumes and attitudes, the same gazing eyes, the same vehemence of action and richness of ornament. 2

Of the manuscripts of the period illustrated in this chapter, it might be unnecessary to speak, were it not that they confirm the historian in his judgment of the gene- ral character of art at Rome during the time of its de- generacy and fall. The independence of Roman painters and the persistence with which they clung to the tradi- tions of the antique, are indeed curiously exemplified in their miniatures, of which here is a sketch for the more curious.

In a Terence MS. of the eighth or ninth century, now preserved at the Vatican, 3 one figure at least and a pseudo- portrait of the dramatist, in a medallion carried by two masks, characterize the period completely. The figure in- scribed "Prologus" was depicted by the miniaturist with the grotesque face of an antique mask, in a violet Roman tunic and a light red mantle, and holding a bow in his left hand. This is the only figure which has not been altered by restoring. Its proportions are fair, though the hands are coarse and large. The outlines are of a dark red and the colours of the flesh of a light warm yellow. The portrait of Terence is likewise characteristic and reminiscent of the antique. Feebler and apparently the effort of a childish imitator of classic forms are the miniatures of an MS. Virgil at the Vatican executed apparently in the ninth century and much

1 For instance S.S. Teodoro, Agnes, Venanzio, Pietro in Vincu- lis, where the impress of Kaven- nese art at Rome has been noticed.

2 The mosaics of S. Ambrogio are said to have been executed in 832 by order of Gaudentius a monk. They have been much restored at various times and probably as early as the 12th and 13th centuries, the form of the

Saviour being evidently too fee- ble and lank to be of the same period as the head which seems well preserved. The inscriptions of these mosaics arc Greek. Above the archangels are the words OiP. MIXAHA and OiP. TABPIHA. Yet the cubes of these mosaics are large and rude.

3 MSS. No. 3868 of the Vatican library.

Chap. II.

MINIATURES.

restored. 1 That the artist was ignorant and inexperienced is proved by the deformity of the figures, feet, hands and articulations. Yet the compositions are imitated from of those of a better time.

Equally rude, but interesting perhaps as an example of the technical processes of the period, is a pontifical of the ninth century executed for the use of Bishop Landulfus of Capua, now in the Minerva at Rome. Vasari's epithet of "tintor" might be applied to the artist. Roman art in its fall may be traced in the stout short heavy figures that convey the representation of a clerical ordination of the period. Some animation and action may be said to compensate for absence of true form. The large square heads, round black eyes and rouged cheeks — the shadowless forms , drawn with coarse dark outlines combine with the draperies of uniform colour and marked out Avith parallel strokes, to present a miniature counterpart of the apsis figures in many a Roman church of the eighth and ninth century. The tech- nical execution is as usual a light thin water-colour of a warm yellowish tinge in the flesh. 2

From the seventh to the end of the eighth century Rome merely affords examples of formal ceremonial pic- tures. Of religious compositions in the true sense of the word there is scarcely a trace in mosaics or painting. The miniatures of the period which remain are either feeble imitations of the antique, or so low in the scale of art as to leave little room for criticism. It may there- fore be interesting to discover, if in sculpture something can be found to fill up the void. The wood reliefs of the gates of Santa Sabina at Rome are in this respect valuable remnants. Santa Sabina was built on the Aven- tine hill by Pope Celestin the First in 421, but the gates were only placed in it by Innocent the Third , some years before the church was granted by Honorius the

1 MSS. No 3867 of the Vatican library.

2 Another miniature of the 9th eentury, representing- the rite of baptism by immersion , may be noticed here. It belongs to an unnumbered MS. in the Minerva at Rome. The short figures, the

draperies, are even more reminis- cent of the antique than the Terence No. 3868. The drawing, particularly of the extremities, is defective, the eyes are very round and open, the mode of colouring the same as in the Terence MSS, the outlines very marked and coarse.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

Third to the Dominicans. The gates are divided into numerous square panels containing scenes from the old and new testament. It may be remarked at once that the panelled and beautifully ornamented framing of the reliefs is of a different wood from that of the sculptures which it incloses, and that the subjects are older than the border which surrounds them. A careful examina- tion of the sculptures will easily convince the observer that their character is not of the twelfth century, and that, if they were executed in the pontificate of In- nocent the Third, they are copies of older works. But experience will hardly warrant the assumption that a copyist could produce such a work as this in the twelfth century, and were it so, the gates of Santa Sabina would be a solitary example of their kind. In style these carved subjects are a continuation of that imitation of the classic antique which prevailed in the earlier centuries, yet com- posed and executed with remarkable spirit. The sculptors, whoever they may have been, gave animation and action to their figures such as were unknown to the mosaists or painters even of the time of Leo the Third. Their figures were mostly of the short Roman character, wherever the necessity of subject and space did not oblige them to slenderness. Their ideas of costume and of drapery, their conception of bible scenes, were of the kind which had been consecrated by time in the paintings of the cata- combs or in the mosaics of Santa Maria Maggiore. With- out wearying the reader with minute descriptions of all the subjects in the gates a few examples will amply suffice to justify the foregoing conclusions.

For instance, Elislia is represented receiving the mantle of Elijah. The latter in a classic car drawn by two horses, is directed to heaven by an angel in flight whose form imitates the bold action and the attitude of a figure of Victory. Nothing more classical, no better draped figure, was produced by any of the imitators of the antique during the Christian decline. Nor is this a solitary figure, being but the counterpart, as regards the qualities above referred to of another angel anointing the head of one standing

Chap. II. GATES OF SANTA SABINA. 57

beneath him. The figure of Elisha is slender and elegant, and contrasts with others which are short and thickset, as for instance in the composition in which Moses performs the miracle of the serpents. In a third relief representing the Hebrews landing from the Red sea, and welcomed by an angel, whilst Pharaoh appears in a biga in the midst of the waves, it is impossible not to remember the colossal figures of the Monte Cavallo at Rome , imitated by an ar- tist of a later time. In the adoration of the Magi, where the Virgin in a Roman chair holds the infant and receives the offerings of the three kings who are dressed in Phry- gian costume, it is difficult to forget the same forms of composition in the earliest catacomb pictures. Again the Saviour may be seen on the road to Calvary, by the side of Simon of Cyrene who carries the cross. The figure of the Redeemer, the head, bearded and inclosed by long hair recal the old types of the Christian time, whilst the com- position itself is reminiscent of the mosaics of S. Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna. The Saviour in an attitude of command in one of the medallions, with his simple nimbus, and fine drapery, is very different in type from the Redeemer even of the ninth century, whilst in a similar medallion, Christ giving the benediction and sitting in glory, is short in stature and wears the antique costume, the leggings of the same figure in the funeral monuments of Ravenna.

But for the fact that short and slender figures are found in close proximity, one might suppose that these sculptures are of a date as early as some of the mosaics of Ravenna. They have indeed much of the character which distinguished the sculptures of the close of the Exarchate. The symbols and monograms are the same as those of the sarcophagi. It may be reasonable there- fore to give these bas-reliefs a date anterior to the tenth and even to the ninth century. Nor is a certain amount of historical evidence wanting to confirm this view. The gates of Santa Sabina are referred to in "Annales ordinis predicatorium" by Thomas Maria Mamachio1 as of "seculo etiam VII0 fortasse vetustiores."

That Rome, during the tenth and eleventh centuries, yielded no examples of mosaic or painting is neither strange

1 Rome 1756. Vol. I, c. XVII, p. 569.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

nor unnatural. Yet that art still continued to exist in this the most unhappy and troubled time of the papacy, is proved not merely by one example which shall be no- ticed, but by the fact that, when Gregory the seventh res- tored some of its power to the church, the arts reappeared, maintaining after the lapse of more than a hundred years the character and the peculiarities for which they had been remarkable in the period immediately preceding their ap- parent disappearance.

To the Benedictines accrued in some measure the merit of having preserved the traditions of art; and in one of their churches, in the neighbourhood of Rome/ the works and, for the first time, the names of Roman artists are preserved.

To the North of the Capital and about seven miles from Nepi, on the road to Civita Castellana lies the castle and the Benedictine church of Sant Elia, the latter an edifice of very old Christian form, and covered internally with wall paintings by two brothers Johannes and Stephanus and their nephew Nicolaus of Rome. The exact period in which these artists executed the internal decorations of S. Elia cannot be ascertained 5 but they were men who combined the imitation of forms and compositions, cha- racteristic of various ages of Roman art, with a technical execution which can only be traced as far back as the tenth century. Their work, though it has suffered from the ravages of time, illustrates a phase hitherto compara- tively unknown. They seem to have been men accustomed to mosaics, for they mapped out their colours so as to resemble that species of work. They used, not the thin water- colour of the early catacomb painters at Rome or Naples, but the body-colour of the later artists, who painted the Christ of the chapeli of S. Cecilia in S. Ca- listo and the figures of Curtius and Desiderius in the catacomb of S. Januarius. On a rough surface of plaster they laid in the flesh tones of an uniform yellowish co- lour, above which coarse dark outlines marked the forms, red tones the half tints and blue the shadows. The lights

Chap. II.

SANT ELIA OF NEPI.

and darks were stippled on with white or black streaks, and a ruddy touch on the cheeks seemed intended to mark the robust health of the personage depicted. The hair and draperies were treated in the same manner. They were painted of an even general tone streaked with black or white lines to indicate curls, folds, light and shadow. The result was a series of flat unrelieved figu- res, which were, in addition, without the charm of good drawing or expression.

In the semidome of the apsis, the Saviour was repre- sented standing with his right arm extended and in his left holding a scroll.1 On his right S. Paul in a similar attitude was separated from S. Elias by a palm on which the phoenix symbolized Eternity. S. Elias, in a warrior's dress, pointed with his left hand to S. Paul. To the Sa- viour's left S. Peter, whose form is now but dimly visible and probably another saint were depicted. A background of deep blue, spotted with red clouds of angular edges, relieved the figures. This was in fact an apsis picture similar to those in the numerous churches of Rome, and in arrangement not unlike that of S.S. Cosmo e Damiano. The form of the Redeemer indeed, his head, of regular features with a nose a little depressed and the flesh cu- riously wrinkled, his high forehead, and long black hair falling in locks, his double pointed beard, tunic, mantle and sandals, had a general likeness with those of S.S. Cosmo e Damiano. The saints, on the other hand, in their slender forms, S. Elias with his small head and long body, were reminiscent of later mosaics, whilst their at- titude, and movement, their draperies, defined with lines, their defective feet and hands were not unlike those of S.S. Nero e Achilleo. The Neo - Greek influence might be traced in other parts of the paintings of S. Elia. Beneath the green foreground, where the four rivers gushed from under the feet of the Saviour, and the Lamb stood pouring its blood into a chalice, an ornament separated the

The hand of the Eternal above in the key of the apsis.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

paintings of the semidome from those in the lower courses of the apsis. In the uppermost of these, Jerusalem, and in the intervals of three windows, twelve sheep in triple groups between palms, were depicted. Bethlehem no doubt closed the arrangement on the right, but is now gone. In the next lower course the Saviour sat enthroned be- tween two angels and six female saints, amongst which S. Catherine in a rich costume and diadem and S. Lucy may still be recognized. The rich ornaments, the round eyes and oval faces of these female saints were not with- out admixture of the foreign element which had left its impress on Rome in the seventh and eighth centuries. Still, the angels with their hair bound in tufts and their flying bands were of regular features. The painters co- vered the sides of the tribune with three courses of pic- tures, fragments of which remain. On the upper to the right, the prophets with scrolls, on the second, martyrs with the chalice, on the third, scenes from the old testa- ment. On the left the lowest course was likewise filled with biblical subjects taken from Revelation. The aisles and nave were also doubtless painted, but the pictures have unfortunately disappeared. The painters inscribed their names as follows beneath the feet of the Saviour in the apsis — Joh. FF. Stefanu frts. picto . . e . . Romani et Nicolaus Nepv Johs.1

These paintings of S. Elia are far more instructive and interesting than those of a later date, and even than the mosaics of the eleventh century at Rome. From all these,

1 The scroll in the hand of S. Paul is inscribed " Certamen cer- tavi, cursu consumavi. Fide se- paravi". S.Peter holds a scroll inscribed uFues Christi filius dei Vivi quid nunc mundu venisti". On each side of the medallion in which the lamb is depicted is the inscription "Vos qui intratis me primu respiciatis omnibus ar- dua clamidat, ac si a divas otia qua &c. " The sheep are painted on a yellow ground simulating gold. The nimbus of the Saviour

and those of the saints are also yellow imitations of gold. One of the windows between which the sheep are represented, is rilled up and contains a figure of S. John of the 15th century. The angels on each side of the Sa- viour in glory on the wall beneath the semidome carry in one hand the labarum, in the other parti- coloured circles of blue and white. The female saints are on a blue ground spangled with stars.

Chap. II. THE EARLIEST CRUCIFIXION.

indeed^ one may conclude that whilst the Italians were on the threshold of a new political and social life their art was but a continuation of that mixture of Roman and Byzantine feebleness and of those errors which had sprung from the troubled nature of earlier ages. The art of Italy rose indeed after the tenth century. Whilst, how- ever, it showed no rapid development of power in thought, conception, or expression, it imbibed a better taste in the less important branch of ornamentation, a change which had begun in the lowest period of the decline and which consisted in the use of the richest borders and foliage tracery and in the substitution of gold for dark blue back- grounds. A more interesting change, however, was the development which became apparent in the sphere of subjects which artists were enabled to treat pictorially. The most painful incidents of the Passion of our Lord had till now been avoided; and the nearest approach to them, that had as yet been attempted, was the road to Calvary where the Saviour was represented proceeding to Golgotha accompanied by Simon of Gyrene carrying his cross. The tenth and eleventh centuries displayed not merely all absence of dislike but a certain mournful pleasure in depicting the sufferings and death of the Redeemer. The numerous crucifixes in which he is depicted in the various phases of his agony, may perhaps serve a little later to illus- trate a chapter of their own. In churches where this epi- sode was first represented, it was generally placed exactly opposite to another, where Christ after the resurrection sat in glory to judge "the quick and the dead/7 In S. Ur- bano alia Caffarella at Rome, for instance, the crucifixion was painted in the eleventh century inside the portal. The Saviour stood with head and frame erect on a pro- jection, where his feet were separately nailed to the wood. A slight drapery surrounded his hips. On the right Cal- phurnius held up the spunge, whilst on the left Longinus struck the Saviour with his lance.1 Yet in this period

1 The names are Inscribed.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

of his agony the Redeemer maintained the serenity and open eyes of one that should not betray a sign of pain. Right and left stood the Virgin and S. John Evangelist, and above them the thieves, one of whom repentant looked towards the Saviour, both in quiet attitudes and with arms bound behind the cross. At the foot of the in- strument of death a strangely dressed figure, intended perhaps for the Magdalen, held a cloth and seemed willing to support the projection on which the Saviour's feet rested.1 Above the Saviour two half figures of winged angels stood. The sequel of the story of the crucifixion extended to both of the side walls on which scenes of the Passion, and the legends of S. Urbanus, S. Cecilia, S. Lawrence and others saints were depicted. In the choir, and facing the crucifixion, the Saviour sat enthroned giving the Messing and holding a book between two angels; S. Peter and S. Paul on each side of him. In the episodes of the Passion, Christ might be seen now carrying his cross. Were these paintings not so totally repainted and restored they might serve further to illustrate the methods in practise in the beginning of the eleventh century. The least damaged parts are on the walls of the aisle to the left. One may remark generally that old Roman characte- ristics of composition and line still remain. In the ado- ration of the Magi the three kings are in Phrygian caps and dresses. There is a certain repose -in the somewhat slender figures, yet more animation in gesture than in the compositions of S.S. Nero e Achilleo.

In the annunciation, where the angel sits on a throne whilst the angel presents himself, an old woman in fair action may be seen in a neighbouring room. The dra- peries are also more free in fold than before.

Of a class not dissimilar from these are a series of

1 At the base of the crucifixion are the words "Bonizzo fft axri M. XI," an unusual mode of ex- pressing the date of A. D. 1011. But the inscription is repainted possibly over an older one. Ru-

raohr (Forsclmng-en, Vol.1, p. 277.) had already noticed this. The inscription is repeated according- to him in an old MS. with minia- tures copied from these paintings in the Barberini library at Rome.

Chap. II.

EARLY ART IN SOUTH ITALY.

paintings removed from S. Agnese of Rome and now in the Museum of S. Giovanni Laterano, the oldest of which are scenes from the lives of S. Catherine and S. Agatha. Here the proportions of the figures are similar to those in S. Urbano but perhaps a little more slender. The small round eyes, thin noses, mouths and necks are not more disagreable than the wiry red outlines, the yellow flesh tone, painted with full body colour over a prepara- tion of verde, and the rouged cheeks. In continuation of these one may further notice in the same Museum eleven scenes of the life of S. Benedict of similar system and style.1

Whilst painters thus continued to exist at Rome and handed down to each other mere traditions of form, art was recruited in the South of Italy from the workshops of the East; and Leo of Ostia relates that in 1070 De- siderius abbot of Montecassino sent for Greek mosaists to adorn the apsis above the high altar, and ordered the no- vices of his order (he was a Benedictine) to learn the art of mosaic "which since the invasion of the Lombards had been lost in Italy".2 That Leo of Ostia was rash in the latter assertion needs no better proof than the narrative in the foregoing pages.3 A question of more real interest is, whether the Byzantine Greeks imported by the abbot of Montecassino were better artists than their cotempora- ries at Rome. It is a question, however, which must re- main unanswered, because the mosaics of Montecassino have disappeared. Yet it may be sufficient to recollect, that in the ninth century the mosaics of S. Ambrogio of Milan were no better than those of the same period at Rome. In the absence of mosaics, it is gratifying to be able to point out a series of paintings of the same time executed for the Benedictines of S. Angelo in Formis at

1 0ther fragments of frescos in this Museum, for instance a head of a bishop and a figure of a saint (aged), are more modern and probably of the 14th century.

2 Leo of Ostia a p. Mura- tori Rer. Ital. Script ores IV, p. 442.

3 He may have meant that the art of mosaics had been lost in

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

Capua, which, being essentially of a Greek character, will prove first, that artists from Greece or Constantinople were employed in South Italy in the eleventh century, and secondly, that they were in no respect superior to their Italian cotemporaries. As to the period of these paintings it may be necessary to consult some historical records. In 1058 the Norman Richard became possessed of the Principality of Capua and, having been anointed with the holy ampulla at Montecassino, he conceded to the Benedictines the right to found a new monastery at S. Angelo in Formis near Capua. This monastery and the church of S. Angelo were endowed in 1065 with the funds belonging to the churches of S.S. Giovanni, Salvadore, and Ilario of Capua which time had completely ruined.1 The church of S. Angelo was, however, not enlarged until 1073? when, at the request of Pope Gregory the seventh and with the assistance of Richard of Normandy and Erveo, archbishop of Capua, the works were commenced by Desiderius the third abbot of Montecassino2, the same who had already restored and adorned with mosaics the chief convent of the Benedictines in South Italy. About 1075 the church of S. Angelo was consecrated by Erveo archbishop of Capua,3 and the successful termination of his labours was recorded by Desiderius in the following inscription now on the architrave of the great portal:

Conscendes caelum si te cognoveris ipsum ut Desiderius qui sacro flamine plenus a complendo legem Deitati condidit aedem, ut capiat fructum qui finem nesciat ullum.

The artists employed by Desiderius painted the fol- lowing subjects:

In the apsis the Saviour was enthroned in the act of

South Italy and particularly under the Lombard princes of Beneven- tum and Capua, whose rule lasted till the middle of the 11th cen- tury.

1 Lo Monaco's Dissertazione sulle varie Vicende di S. Angelo in Formis Fol. Capua 1839, p. 13.

2 Ibid. p. 12.

3 Ibid. p. 15.

Chap. II.

THE LAST JUDGMENT.

benediction and holding the book. The symbols of the Evangelists were at his sides, and the hand of the Eternal appeared out of an opening surrounded by a fan-like or- nament. Beneath the semidome, and on the wall of the apsis the three archangels Michael, Gabriel and Raphael separated the abbot Desiderius, standing with the model of the church in his hand, from a figure of a Benedictine now almost effaced.

On the opposite wall and therefore above the chief portal, the Last Judgment was depicted. High up in an elliptical glory the Saviour sat enthroned, and distributed the blessing and the curse with his hands, the only part of the figure now remaining. Below him, an angel raised high above his head a long scroll of which the inscription has disappeared ; whilst two angels at his sides held scrolls likewise inscribed with the words, "Venite Benedicti" and "Ite Maledicti". Above the Saviour and between the upper windows, four angels sounded the last trump. Beneath, in two courses on each side of the Saviour, were twelve angels in adoration and twelve apostles on long benches. At the sides of the Angels, below the Saviour, were grouped the blessed saints, martyrs and confessors of both sexes on one hand, and devils pursuing condemned souls into the everlasting abyss on the other. On the lowest course to the left, groups of the just, plucking and wearing flowers were made to contrast with others on the right, tortured or carried by Demons to the foot of Lucifer, a vast monster, now unfortunately headless, sitting in chains with claws for hands, and holding under his arm the writhing form of Judas Iscariot. The action and terrible movement of this infernal picture showed the interest which was already taken in the eleventh cen- tury in the delineation of the everlasting torments reserved for sinners ; and the importance given to the size of Lucifer proved the desire of impressing spectators with dread of sin.

The rude painters of S. Angelo in Formis indeed suc- ceeded much better in representing the tortures of hell than the majesty or the joys of Paradise. Their idea of the Saviour, as it was exposed in the apsis, was inexpres- sibly painful. It is difficult to discover a more unpleas- ant type of Christ than they here depicted. A thin feeble figure with formless hands and feet was surmounted by a large grim head, of bony aspect inclosed by flat lank red hair, and lined out with dark contours. A wrinkled

VOL. I.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

brow, arched over large round gazing eyes, — a thin long pointed nose, a little mouth and a short straggling beard, two daubs on the cheeks, were the characteristic features of the Redeemer.

The Archangels of the apsis were round-headed, and had large almond shaped eyes and pointed noses. A mere line indicated the mouth. Patches of red on the cheeks, broad necks, wings, dresses profusely covered with gold in square patterns and precious stones, completed their tawdry delineation. One of the Evangelists and the angels blowing the trumpets of the Judgment were figures taking long and vehement strides in empty space ; and an attempt seemed to be made to imitate flying draperies by mean- ingless triangular flaps of stuff. Here and there a grand intention might be traced in a solitary figure, as for instance in the angel beneath the Saviour of the Last Judgment, whose attitude was fine, and found imitators in later centuries. On the walls above the arches of the central aisles three courses of paintings represented, first, the prophets and kings of the old testament, next, scenes from the Passion, and last, a series now obliterated by white- wash. Amongst the scenes of the Passion, one was the crucifixion in which the Saviour was represented erect with his feet nailed separately to a projection. His face, slightly bent towards the virgin who stood below on the left, seemed to express menace. His frame and limbs were well proportioned but most rudely drawn. The pectoral muscles and lower ribs were marked by triple red lines. The Virgin and S. John near the cross were stiff and motionless. At the sides, the rending of the garment , the crowd of priests and soldiers on horseback were repre- sented. Above the Saviour, the sun and the moon, the latter under the form of a wailing female, were depicted, and angels in attitudes expressive of agonizing grief flew about the cross.1 Outside the church, a double recess above

1 In S. Angelo each side aisle I a Virgin between two angels with had an apsis, of which that to six busts of female saints below, the right still preserves traces of I

Chap. II. TECHNICAL METHODS. 67

the architrave of the chief portal contains a half figure of the Virgin with raised arms wearing a heavy diadem of gold, and richly gilt close fitting vestments, in a medal- lion supported by two flying angels of slender forms and fair movement. Beneath, in the inner lunette, a half figure of an angel, likewise in close fitting dress adorned with lozenge patterns of gold and winged, holds a reed in its right and a disc on which is written MP -e-v. These two figures, less rude and of fairer type than the paintings inside the church, seem to have been painted by one having supervision over a commoner sort of artists, who must have carried out the labour of the interior under his orders. His colours were used on the same principle as theirs, but with better judgment1, The ge- neral character of these paintings is that of stamping or tarsia. They are executed on a single layer of plaster or intonaco prepared for flesh parts with a general coat of verde, covered with a thick yellow body colour in the lights, shadowed with a brownish red. The draperies are tawdry and sharply contrasted in tone. The painters, Greeks, as is proved by the inscriptions, by the costumes and by the exaggerated form and action of the figures, knew no other technical processes than their Roman rivals at Nepi, but were inferior even to them in knowledge. S. Angelo in Formis is interesting merely because it reveals the state of the Byzantine art of the period in its pure deformity, and because it presents the earliest example of the complete ornamentation of a church with subjects in subordination to each other. It affords further the first known example of that great subject of the Last Judgment, which became so constant a favorite with artists of later centuries.

S. Angelo in Formis is not the only monument in Capua whose erection was due to the zeal of Desiderius. He caused the monastery of S. Benedetto to be rebuilt, and

1 Lunettes of porch are adorned | and S. Paul the Hermit, now in with painted scenes from the le- part obliterated, gends of S. Anthony the abbot

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

ordered that the Saviour and the apostles Peter and Paul should be represented in mosaic in the apsis of the church.1 Ornaments of the same kind, begun at his desire in the aisles, were finished by his successor Oderisius abbot of Montecassino.2 To the latter the church of S. Giovanni of Capua owed its mosaics, a part of which were subse- quently transferred to the cathedral. Thus, if the mosaics of the time of Desiderius are absent, those of his successor may afford a criterion as to their value. The remnants of the mosaics of S. Giovanni represent the Virgin holding the infant Saviour in her arms, whilst the two S. John's stand at her sides. The words MP-OV indicate the Greek origin of the mosaists, quite as much as the figures recal low Byzantine art. The Virgin and saints are deformities, with angular draperies, and wooden attitudes. The Saviour is long, thin and lean. The mosaic is in fact no better than the worst part of the paintings of S. Angelo in Formis; 3 and posterity may therefore look with equanimity on the loss of the mosaics of Montecassino and other churches of Capua. Still further to the South of Italy the defect- ive Byzantine style of Capua may be traced at Otranto and Amalphi ; 4 and its continuation till late in the thirteenth century can be followed, first, in pictures of the Naples Museum and other galleries , assigned to Bizzamano d'Otranto ; 5 and finally in a Virgin giving the breast to the infant Saviour in the monastery of Montevergine near Avellino. This Virgin indeed with her vast diadem and gilt dress and her ugly form and features is quite of the low Byzantine art and inferior to one at Amalphi.6

1 Lo Monaco ubi sup. cites the original record, p. 20.

2 Oderisius or Odericus was abbot of Montecassino in 1089 as appears from a document of that year in the archives of the chapter of Capua. See document in Appendix to Marco Lo Monaco's Varie Vicende ubi supra.

3 This mosaic is besides much damaged by moving and repair.

4 Church of the Madonna del

Rosario, in which is a painting of the Virgin and child.

5 A picture in the Naples Mu- seum quite in this oriental style and assigned to Bizzamano repre- sents S. George on horeseback as- sisted by a miniature figure help- ing him to spear the dragon. The Eternal's hand appears above and the usual female on one side.

6 The gilt nimbus of the Virgin of Monte Vergine projects at an

Chap. II.

SICULO- NORMAN ART.

The Norman princes of South Italy were not long con- tented with the poor productions of such mosaists and painters as those of Capua — artists who cannot indeed be supposed to represent the best that the East could produce in the eleventh century. After they had invaded and conquered Sicily in the twelfth century, they found no apparent difficulty in bringing together some hundreds of workmen who adorned with mosaics a vast number of churches. The patriotism of the Sicilians is not satisfied with the assertions of some historians, that the mosaics of Cefalu, Palermo and Monreale were executed by artists from Greece or Constantinople. They labour to prove, with- out much success, that, as Greek elements had always existed and necessarily survived the Saracen dominion in the island, the Christians who had lived, nay laboured under the tolerant laws of the Moslems, only revived an art which had previously existed in Sicily. Their op- ponents on the other hand are equally puzzled to dis- cover, or to prove whence the artists of the twelfth cen- tury in Sicily derived their origin. The question is in truth difficult to settle in the absence of all records, and may be left as a fit and natural food for argument to the holders of the two extreme opinions.1 It is proper, however, to remember that art after a long period of ico- noclasticism was cultivated anew at Constantinople in the ninth century and that Italy still possesses in the niello gates of the cathedral ofAmalphi of the year A. D. 1000, and in the gates of the cathedral of Salerno of 1099, no contemptible examples of the power of drawing which the artists of Constantinople still wielded in the eleventh century.2 Nor can it be forgotten that between the coasts of South Italy and those of Greece and the straits, an active commerce, in which even Pisa took a share, was in existence.

angle, so as to exhibit the head more clearly to the spectator.

1 See Domenico Lo Faso Petra- santa's Duomo di Monreale. Fol. Palermo 1838. p. 18.

2 Similar gates were sent from Constantinople to Pope Gregory the VIIth at Rome in 1070 which were placed in the church of S. Paolo fuori le Mura. These

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

The oldest mosaics of the Norman period in Sicily are those of the cathedral of Cefalu, an edifice of which the first stone was laid by Hugo archbishop of Messina in 1131. 1 In the apsis an inscription declares that king Roger caused the mosaics to be executed in the year 1148. The only parts of these that now remain are in the semidome, apsis and sanctuary, in the first of which a colossal bust of the Saviour was represented in glory and benediction between four angels holding the labarum, and medallions of Melchi- zedek, Hosea and Moses (the latter now destroyed2) on a level with him in the side walls of the sanctuary. In a second course in the apsis and sanctuary the twelve apostles were placed, — in a third the Virgin in the centre with the prophets Joel, Amos and Obadiah, and lower down, a double row of prophets, elders and saints.3 In these mosaics, a far higher class of art than the Roman of the period was to be distinguished. The space was well distributed, and the apostles by no means displayed that absence of design or of form to which previous cen- turies had been accustomed. The draperies were good, and recalled by a certain breadth and elegance older and more classic times; although in the vestments of some angels, their close fit and lozenge or square shaped ornaments of gold still displayed an oriental taste. The features of the apostles were of traditional types, those of the tall angels whose hair, bound by ribbands, flowed down their necks, were quiet, plump and round, and though Byzantine in the depression of the nose, less than usually unpleasant in gaze.

perished in the fire of last cen- tury.

1 Pirri. Ecc. Mess. p. 389, in Lo Faso ubi sup. p. 75.

2 Signor Riolo has in part res- tored these mosaics admirably, and will, it is hoped, restore the Moses. Gratitude should be ex- pressed for his care, and to Baron Mandralisca for the love of art which leads him to favour the

j restoration of a splendid monu- ment.

3 Originally S.S. Peter, Vincent Lawrence, Stephen, Gregory, Au- gustin, Sylvester, Dionysius, Ab- raham, David, Solomon, Jonas, Micah, Naomi, S.S. Theodore, George, Demetrius, Nestor, Ni- colas, Basil, Chrysostom, Gre- gory and Theodosius. Some of these have perished.

Chap. II.

SICULO - NORMAN ART.

The Saviour was dressed in a purple tunic shot with gold, and a blue mantle draping the left arm and shoulder in angular and involved folds, the mass of which seemed to impede rather than assist the development of the form. The head, though apparently that of an ascetic, — thin, bony and of sharp features, was surrounded by very heavy masses of hair overlapping each other, hanging in a succession of curves on the shoulders, and with the now usual double forelock on the wrinkled forehead. The brows were regularly and naturally arched and the eyes without gaze. The nose was thin and long, the mouth small. A regular beard covered the lips, cheeks and lower part of the chin. The bare neck, muscularly developed, was not without evident defects of anatomical form. Fine and even majestic as this figure certainly was, it ap- peared inferior to those of the apostles below it; and it seems characteristic of the artists of this time that, in the effort to create a Christian type whose features should not be reminiscent of the antique, they produced nothing that indicated a creative spirit. They imagined the Saviour lean from abstinence, but by no means of ideal form. They might thus satisfy the simple tastes of little cultivated minds, but the struggle for a new type was still left unde- cided. The Christian artists had started with imitations of the antique, which time altered, and at last disposed of. To reach ideal form again, not the inventive genius of an artist was required, but a return to the study of the purest classical models. This it was that led to the re- vival of art in the thirteenth century. That the mosaics of Cefalu were the labour of more than one hand is evident from the superiority of those parts which are nearest the spectator, over others that are more distant. In all of them, however, the drawing was precise and care- ful, and displayed no longer the coarseness or darkness of line which so disagreably marked earlier works. The forms of the figures , as is proved by the red outlines on the binding substance, were perfectly made out previous to the laying of the cubes; and the damaged state of

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

some parts is thus of advantage to the student, as it reveals the process of the work. True harmony of tones and a correct appreciation of the laws of distance, a fair knowledge of relief and a proper subordination of tine ornaments to the pictures must also be conceded to the artists of Cefalu. In the flesh lights nature was closely imitated. In the shadows verde prevailed. As a final characteristic, it might be noticed that the mosaists had become technically perfect in the close jointing of the cubes. 1

Cotemporary with the Cefalu mosaics but inferior to them, either because originally intrusted to inferior hands, or because restoring has impaired their beauty, are those of the Palatine Chapel at Palermo built in 11 32 2 by Roger king of Sicily and consecrated in 1140. 3 The mosaics finished after the consecration, partly in 1143, 4 and partly later, filled the sanctuary, the cupola of the transept and the walls of the nave and aisles. Scenes from the life of S. Peter and S. Paul in the side aisles, figures of saints or prophets above the arches of the nave and in the left transept5 rivalled the most perfect ones of Cefalu. The Saviour in benediction between S.S. Peter and Paul, above the marble throne at the bottom of the nave, were less perfect in type and form and betrayed a later and feebler art. The same might be said of the Saviour and angels in the cupola.6 Rich ornaments of animals and

1 The backgrounds of these apsis mosaics are grey. Many of the outlines are reinforced with colour, and evidently by the ori- ginal mosaists.

2 Pirri, Tab. Reg. cap. Palat. in Lo Faso ubi sup. p. 74.

3 The completion of the build- ing in this year is proved by the following mutilated record cited from the archives of Palermo by Abate Buscemi in Giornale Ecc. p. la Sicilia Vol. I.

IIII K. Ma . . . odem die dedi- . . . tio ecce S. Petri . . . pellae Regise

. . . panormitanse

. . . acta fuit tempore

. . . oriosi et magni

. . . regis Rogerii

. . . nno dominice

. . . ncarnationis M°C°X°L.

The church was consecrated on the day of its completion Ibid.

4 An inscription in the cupola proves that some of the mosaics were finished in that year. See Lo Faso ub. sup. p. 27.

5 S.S. Gregory, Sorgius, Basil, John the Isaurian and another.

6 These mosaics have been da- maged by many successive repairs.

Chap. II.

SICULO - NORMAN ART.

foliage on gold ground of the same period adorned one of the rooms of the palace of Palermo. Nor was the splendor of the first king of Sicily and his taste for ornamenting churches confined to him alone. The great admiral, Georgio Antiocheno ordered the church of S. Maria deli'Ammiraglio, now la Martorana, to be erected at Palermo. The edifice was consecrated in 1113, finished and endowed by king Roger in 1143, 1 and adorned with mosaics which have been severely injured by time and restorers. An elegant and majestic half figure of S. Anna holding a palm, of regular proportion and features is well preserved in the lateral apsis of the right transept. A composition of the death of the Virgin may be seen above one of the arches of the cupola in which the body lies on the tomb surrounded by the Marys, angels and apostles, one of whom bends over the breast of the recumbent figure to listen for the beating of the heart. This and figures of saints and angels in various parts of the edifice are fully equal to the finest of the mosaics of Cefalu. The birth of the Virgin above one of the arches of the cupola, is on the contrary inferior in every sense. The cupola itself is too dark to allow the spectator to see the mosaics with which it is covered.2

The cathedral of Monreale, built in the twelfth century, entirely on the model of the Greek ones of Constantinople and Ravenna of the sixth, was the most imposing in Sicily for the extent of its mosaic ornaments, yet below the cathedral of Cefalu and the churches of Palermo in the artistic value of these works. . A bull of Alexander the Third proves that it was not yet finished in 1174, whilst a bull of Lucius the Third testifies to its completion in 1182.

The mosaics of the tribune and | 2 The merits of the artists of apsis are modern. I this church may be understood

j from solitary figures or parts, the 1 Morso, Palermo antica, gives mosaics generally having been the original diplomas which are restored and renewed at various copied in Lo Faso ub. sup. p. 86. I times.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

The mosaics were intended to illustrate first those por- tions of the old testament which prefigurate the coming of the Messiah ; secondly, the life of the Saviour to the descent of the Holy spirit, and finally the glory of the Redeemer and the triumph of the Church. The bust of the Saviour of colossal stature, and of a type and form inferior to that of Cefalu, with features of a heavy character far from regular or animated — was represented in the semidome of the apsis; 1 and beneath, he was depicted again at full length enthroned by the side of the Virgin between the archangels and the twelve apostles. The spaces over the arch, dividing the sanctuary from the minor tribune, were adorned with figures of twelve prophets. An arch, leading from the minor tribune into the transept, was reserved for a half figure of Emmanuel with eight medallions of prophets on each side. On the op- posite face of the arch was the annunciation. The transepts were filled with double courses of mosaics representing scenes from the new testament, the archivolts of the solia or quadrangle in the centre of the church with medallions of the progenitors of the Saviour according to the genea- logy of S. Mathew. An arch which divided the solia from the nave was adorned with S. Sofia, or the wisdom of God, adored by the archangels Michael and Gabriel. Two courses of mosaics in the nave illustrated the scenes of the old testament. The walls of the side aisles were filled with scenes from the new testament subordinate to those in the transept, and the apsis of each aisle contained scenes of the life of S. Peter and S. Paul.

Amongst the transept mosaics, those which represented the story of the Passion were not essentially different from the traditional ones which had now been frequently depicted, and which were afterwards to cover the walls of the nave in the upper church of S. Francesco at Assisi. The compositions were animated; and it was remarkable in some of them, as for instance in that of the resur- rection, to find in the forms of the sleeping sentinels bold and even foreshortened movements. In the crucifixion, however, the form of the Saviour was conceived differently by the mosaists of Monreale and by older artists ; and here the hanging belly and distorted frame, the bent and dole-

1 The originality of the head of the Saviour in the apsis of Monreale may be doubted.

Chap. II.

SICULO- NORMAN ART.

ful head accused the progress of materialism in art. Yet the habit of nailing the feet separately to the cross had not been abandoned, and as a study of muscular anatomy, the figure was not imperfect as it afterwards became. In the corner of the left transept, above a marble throne, the Saviour was depicted imposing the crown on the head of William the Second. This and a solitary figure of S. John, removed from the old baptistery near the right transept, to a niche in the right aisle, were amongst the most careful and best mosaics in the edifice. In general, however, the forms and features of the apostles and saints were no longer equal to those of Cefalu, and a certain stiffness or contortion of attitudes might be noticed; the eyes had become more open and gazing, the draperies more straight and angular. Nor were the harmonies of colour preserved in their purity 5 and greyish red shadows with lines of a broader and more cutting character marked the decline of art in Sicily. Ere long, and hardly a cen- tury later, the mosaists produced examples at Messina which were not superior to those of the eleventh century at Capua.1

On the Italian continent, as for instance at Salerno the influence of the Sicilian mosaists was felt. But the mo- saics of the Cathedral2 are so damaged that they defy all criticism. A solitary half figure of S. Mathew, in a door lunette, is however not without character, and makes

1 These examples adorned the 3 apsides of the cathedral of Messi- na. In the central one, less de- fective than the two others, yet much damaged, Eleanor, wife of Frederic of Aragon, and Elizabeth, Queen of Peter of Aragon, wore represented kneeling at each side of a throne on which the Saviour and the Virgin sat together guarded by angels and female saints. The apsis to the right was devoted to king Louis of Anjou and John, Duke of Athens, placed on each side of S. John the Baptist and supported by saints. The apsis

to the left, was honoured with the kneeling figures of king Fre- deric and king Peter with Guido, Bishop of Messina , saints and angels, all beneath a very defec- tive figure of the Saviour in glory. The first of these apsis mosaics was remarkable for long dra- peries of intricate fold, for ill drawn figures, yet less defective than those in the semidomes at the sides, where disproportion of form and rudeness of design were combined.

2 This cathedral was founded by Robert Guiscard in 1084.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

a near approach to the better productions of Sicily. Two pulpits in the same cathedral, where architecture and mosaic ornament are judiciously combined, prove that the art at the extreme of South Italy was not more defective than in other parts of the peninsula. These pulpits were ordered at the close of the thirteenth century by John of Procida; and one of them is adorned at the angles with figures of the Evangelists, one of which, S. Mathew holding the serpent as the emblem of wisdom, is by no means a contemptible example of the art of the time.

At the opposite extremity of the Peninsula, but still connected with the East by its trade and commercial navy, Venice shared with Sicily the labours of Greek mosaists. It would be vain, if not foreign to the object of this work minutely to seek from the midst of mosaics such as those of S. Mark, parts that may have been pro- duced by artists of the eleventh and twelfth century. There is no doubt that the cupolas of the vestibule are adorned with compositions from the old testament, which have a character akin to those of Sicily; but these, like most of the mosaics of this cathedral, have been subjected to centuries of restoration; and it is safe only to assume that at Venice, as in Sicily, mosaists of Byzantine edu- cation were employed, perhaps as early as the eleventh century.

The Greek art of this period, such as it appears in miniatures, exhibits the characteristics which are found in the Sicilian mosaics; and those who may desire to learn something of them, may read the following excerpt :

Amongst the sixty illuminated drawings of a Greek "Menologio" preserved at the Vatican library,1 the art of Cefalu seems reproduced.2 The Saviour in glory surround- ed by the apostles exhibits the type and slender form — noble head and dignified movement — the apostles, — the long lean shape but stem and characteristic heads of the Siculo- Norman period. In succeeding miniatures, sym-

1 No. 1613. I older date than the mosaics of

2 The miniature may be of | Cefalu.

Chap. II.

GREEK MINIATURES.

metrical and well distributed compositions may be found, and that of the birth of the Virgin is marked by the well- known classical attitude of S. Anna on the bed, whilst females are busy preparing the bath for the infant. An ado- ration of the shepherds is likewise remarkable for the typical form and arrangement repeated by the painters of the upper church of Assisi, by Cavallini at S. Maria in Trastevere of Rome, and the school of Sienna, so remarkable for the tenacity with which it maintained the habits of earlier times. In some overweight of head, square sculptural character of drapery, and defective extremities, the Greek miniaturists here snared the peculiarities of their countrymen the mo- saists; and even the occasional violence of action remarkable at times in the latter can be noticed in the martyrdom of a saint torn by a lion. In the crucifixion of S. Peter and another saint,1 the nude is rendered with a certain vigour if not without conventionalism. In the Baptism of Christ, S. John places his hand on the head of the Saviour, whilst three angels attend on the opposite side. Precise outlines and accurately defined forms, — a lively, clear and tolerably fused colour of some impasto, the technical mode of pain- ting flesh tints over a general tone of verde, mark the whole of the miniatures.2

In continuation of these, the miniatures of the Climacchus of the eleventh or twelfth century, also in the Vatican li- brary,3 exhibit the same technical execution, careful and minute drawing together with slenderness of shape. But a weaker art may be noticed in the loose attitude, the affrighted glance and the confused drapery. The first miniature of the series representing the elect advancing under the guard of angels up the steps of Paradise, on the top of which the Saviour sits in glory, gives a fair idea of the manner of the artist.

In the meanwhile art at Rome, unmoved by the By- zantine influence on each side of it, maintained its old individuality ; and whilst in painting it produced works of which few examples remain to our time, it resumed the practise of mosaics which had been interrupted during the very darkest age. Amongst the wall paintings whose value can hardly be discerned because of age and repairs,

1 p.p. 296 and 427. and lips tinged with red.

2 On gold ground; the cheeks | 3 No. 394.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

the following may be still observed: first, a crucifixion of the twelfth century in the chapel del Martirologio annexed to the church of S. Paolo fuori le Mura;1 besides numerous figures on the walls and ceiling;2 — secondly, the communion and coronation of Peter de Courtenay, and biblical episodes in the porch of S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura at Rome; — thirdly, scenes of the life of S.Lawrence in the body of the same church.3 All these paintings are interesting notwithstanding the state to which they have been reduced, because they are of the same school and manner, because in composition, distribution and a certain animation of movements they now and then recal the antique, and because they are free from the exaggerated action which had already begun to mark the decline of a different art, the purer Greek or Byzantine. In order, at the same time, that it may be unnecessary to revert to the subject of Roman miniatures, we may bestow a passing glance on certain MSS., in which subjects taken from the Gospel are disposed by the miniaturists in forms which become afterwards typical, and which in some schools were maintained with more or less fidelity till the rise of the fourteenth century.

In continuation of miniatures of an MSS. volume at the Minerva opening with the "Benedictio fontis", a series of scenes from the Passion may be noticed. They are rudely drawn with very marked outlines, and some of the figures are very short and ugly, and presented with little more art than those upon playing cards. Technically, they are co- loured with body upon a preparation of verde, with red

1 The Saviour is represented, as "before, open eyed and erect, the arms a little bent, and the feet separately nailed to the wood. His proportions are good. Above the cross, the sun and moon and two busts of angels. Right and left of the cross are the Virgin and S. John, and at their sides a mounted soldier with helm and lance. The long and slender figu- res resemble those at S. Urbano.

2 Apostles Peter and Paul, S.S.

Stephen, Lawrence and other saints and in the ceilings the symbols of the evangelists. All these paintings may be assigned to the end of the 12th century.

3 These paintings were com- missioned by Honorius the IIId, and are probably of the year 1217. The figures are small, long and thin, the draperies good in intention. The flesh tints are pre- pared in verde.

Chap. II.

ROMAN MINIATURES.

patches on the cheeks. In one of them the Saviour, a long thin wooden figure, seems to have forced and to tread upon the gates of hell. He holds out a helping hand to a hoary sufferer (probably Adam) who thus emerges from limbo. Behind him is a crowd of persons. In a second, the Saviour crucified and with the feet nailed separately to the cross, still stands erect and with open eyes. On each side of the cross are the Virgin and S. John the Evangelist; and above it the sun and the moon. Again the creation is symbolized by a female figure giving the breast to two monstrous animals ; light on one side being conveyed tri- vially by the emblem of the candlestick, and darkness by a mourning female. In the upper part of the miniature the Saviour sits in glory and the hand of the Eternal ap- pears out of a cloud.1 Scenes from the Passion, equally realistic in character and equally rude in execution, may be seen in a Bible at S. Paolo fuori le Mura. Similar de- fects of drawing, but a different technical execution in a poem at the Vatican written by one Dionisio in praise of the princess Matilda of Tuscany.2 The most interesting miniatures for typical composition are however an Exultet of the close of the twelfth century at the Barberini palace at Rome. On the first page a priest (levita) in a pulpit, reads the hymn for the benediction of the pascal taper which is placed on a candelabra behind a group of clergy, some of whom wave censers. In the rear stands the con- gregation. On the third page the "Noli me tangere" is de- picted. The Saviour turns in abrupt and violent movement towards the Magdalen kneeling with outstretched hands. Further on, the Earth is emblematically represented as a naked female giving the breast to an ox and a serpent on a flowery meadow in which the trees of good and evil are growing. Elsewhere Adam with his left hand on his breast takes from a serpent, whose body is twined round Eve's legs, the forbidden fruit and eats at the same time an apple which Eve presents to him.

In a " Christ at the limbo" which follows, the Saviour holds

1 This miniature is very much damaged. The MS. is probably of the close of the 12th century.

2 MSS. No. 4922. Vatican li- brary. The miniatures are out- lined with a pen and the flesh tone lightly tinted in transparent yellow. The cheeks of the figures are touched with red. The co-

lours are sharply contrasted and shadowless as in playing cards. Here and there arc touches of body colour due to restorers. This MS. is likewise of the close of the 12th century. Millhi in Rumohr mentions a copy of this work. (Forsch an gen, Vol. I. p. 242.)

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

the cross in his right hand and treads on the form of Lu- cifer, the composition otherwise being a repetition of that already described. In an ornament above the scene, a half figure of the Eternal (here for the first time depicted) points to the Saviour in the limbo with a vehement action and seems to say "Ecce Agnus Dei".

A pope with a triangular tiara — a bishop and a monk at his sides — a figure gathering honey in an orchard, where bees of gigantic proportions may be seen in flight, complete the whole of what is noteworthy in these minia- tures. If these productions are less defective than others of the same period,1 and if a certain regularity may be no- ticed in the forms, still art may be said to remain very low. The heads and eyes are round, the cheeks rouged, the outlines red -and -black fillets. The flesh tints are yel- low, the draperies coloured in sharply contrasted tones, lined out without shadow. The nude is most defective and ugly, the colour without body and thinly laid on a white ground.2

When mosaics were resumed at Rome in the early part of the fourteenth century, they were more remark- able for luxury of ornamentation, than for any great improvement in arrangement or form. The apsis of the church of S. Francesca Romana, one of the earliest that can be assigned to the twelfth century, was still devoted to one of those formal scenes, which have been so fre- quently described. The Virgin and child stood in the midst of saints under arches, and a lavish display of triangular crowns, gilt draperies and backgrounds, a wonderful profusion of gay colours in dresses and a large fanlike ornament, seemed intended to conceal the excessive im- mobility and defective forms of the figures.3

1 For instance, the poem in praise of the Princess Matilda.

2 Rumohr (Forschungen p. 245, Vol. I.) judges from the form of the writing that the MS. is of the 11th or 12th century.

3 The Virgin and child are sup- ported on each side by S.S. James and John on the left, S.S. Peter and Andrew on the right. The

whole mosaic has been excessively restored, but was originally of the rudest execution. The best preserved figure which is that of S. Andrew, is of better form, how- ever, than the figures in S. Marco. The Virgin wears a triangular crown similar to those of the miniatures in the Barberini Exul- tet. Her close dress is full of gilding and imitations of jewelry.

Chap. II.

THE DECLINE AT ROME.

Gay colour, ornament, and perhaps better proportions, marked a later mosaic of the twelfth century represent- ing the Virgin and child between the seven wise and the seven foolish Virgins, on the front of the church of S. Maria in Trastevere. The Virgin and Saviour, enthroned together in the apsis of the church were remarkable for similar qualities and defects. The Saviour, of larger size than the Virgin, — the Virgin herself with a splen- did crown and gilt draperies, the richly coloured fan ornament, — the twining branches and foliage in which birds seemed to twitter, — the figures of saints on the tribune, short, thickset and lame in attitude, — all ex- hibited Roman art at this time as almost reduced to mere decoration.1 The decorative principle was applied with still more exclusiveness to the apsis of S. Clemente, where, in the midst of rich vine tendrils, the Saviour was represented crucified, with twelve doves about the head, the Virgin and S. John Evangelist at the base of the cross. Four fathers of the church, shepherds, goats, birds were scattered about the ornament, below which the four streams of paradise, the Lamb, and the two cities were placed. On the arch of the tribune Isaiah, S. Law- rence with the gridiron, S. Paul under the form of a pilot, S. Peter, and a symbolical figure with an anchor, — in the upper centre, the Saviour and the symbols of the four Evangelists, completed the mosaic. The attitude of the Saviour on the cross, the closed eyes, betrayed the progress of a new religious idea in reference to the pic- torial delineation of the Redeemer. The figures were less defective than at S. Maria in Trastevere, but the dra-

The use of red and black in the flesh tints is less frequent than in S. Marco, but they are of a flat and unrelieved yellowish tone. The figure of the Saviour is long, lean and ugly.

1 On each side of the throne S.S. Calixtus, Lawrence and Inno- cent the II. (1139), S. Peter, the popes Cornelius and Julius, and

VOL. I.

the presbyter Calipodius. Below the throne, Bethlehem, Jerusalem the 12 sheep and 4 rivers on a blue ground. — ■ On the arch of the tribune, Isaiah and Jeremiah, above them children, vases and flowers. On each side a tree and the symbols of the Evangelists. Above the centre the cross and seven candlesticks.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

peries were still stiff and angular, and it was evident that, if art was progressing, it was advancing less in the essentials than in the accessories of detail, ornament, and rich distribution of colour.

With the close of the twelfth "century a wide field is opened to the student of art in Italy. Examples accumu- late; and, were it absolutely necessary to follow chrono- logical order, the reader would be carried, by the natural succession of time, from North to South and from East to West, to contemplate works having no other connection than that of date. Leaving aside certain rude frescos of the twelfth century at Spoleto, in the church of S. Paolo fuori di Porta Romana, whose merits, or rather defects, may well be left to the humble compass of a note,1 — set- ting aside a certain number of early crucifixes executed in various parts of Italy ; it may be of greater advantage for the present to continue the narrative of art in Rome, and to trace the slight influence which the later Byzan- tine art, as it appears in Sicily, exercised in the capital of Italy. The semidome mosaic of S. Paolo fuori le Mura is but a repetition of the old subject of the Sa- viour between a double row of saints, and adored by a small kneeling figure of Pope Honorius the Third. In the lower course of the apsis, two angels and twelve apostles stand stiff and motionless in a row, separated

1 These frescos, executed on one intonaco like those of Nepi and S. Angelo in Formis, are to be found in that part of the old church of S. Paolo which is above the false roof. There , one may- see remnants of paintings repre- senting- scenes of the old testa- ment, the creation of Eve and the expulsion from paradise — a head of the Saviour and figures of prophets. — The rude drawing and broad outlines of these frescos indicate a feeble artist, but the shapes of the heads and the repose in the glance of the eyes, cer- tain forms that recal those in the

Barberini Exultet, proclaim an Italian painter of the 12th cen- tury. Of the same period is a mosaic above the portico of the cathedral of Spoleto representing the Saviour enthroned in bene- diction with a book in his left hand, the Virgin and S. John at his sides, almost entirely renewed. The work is interesting only for the following inscription "Hec est pictura quam fecit sat Plagiura: Doctor Solsernus hac summus in arte, modernus, annis inventis cum septem mille dugentis. Ope- rari Palmeri D. Saso "

Chap. II. THE DECLINE AT ROME. 83

from each other by palms, on each side of an altar, bear- ing a cross. The figures are remarkable for careful exe- cution, a fair definition of light and shadow, a fine and accurate outline, and perfectly jointed cubes of mosaic. The head of the Saviour, of colossal dimensions, is modern, and the body a lay figure; but amongst the apostles, S. John is of fair character, and the rest hard- ly inferior to similar ones at Monreale. The forms in general, however, are disagreable, the eyes of the angels and others are round and gazing, the noses depressed as at S. Angelo in Formis, the shadows of flesh tints are green, the lights streaked with white, the hair map- ped out in masses defined by lines.1 This purely Byzan- tine method, which may be seen in three heads, saved from the mosaics of the front after the fire of 1823,2 would prove that the whole of this church was adorned with mosaics by Greeks.3

Paintings of similar character, but very defective in form and dull in colour, may be seen in the chapel of S. Sylvestro near the church of S.S. Quattro Coronati, representing the Saviour holding the cross, enthroned with the Virgin and S. John the Baptist at his sides, and the twelve apostles, sitting upon each other on each hand, — a most unpleasant and common product of the Byzantine art of the twelfth century. 4 The list of works of this

1 These mosaics are greatly restored, but in general the care- ful Byzantine execution may still be traced.

2 Now in the sacristy of S. Paolo and executed with all the care and mastery of those of Cefalu. The cubes are closely packed, the flesh parts well de- lined, and expressing the forms, the features and wrinkles marked by fine hair outlines, the ears large and defective , the lights clear yellow and shadows grey, the lips bright.

3 A much restored mosaic of t he same class, but very unpleasant, and representing formless figures

of small size, is a Christ between the Virgin and other female saints, S.S. Lawrence and Honorius the IIId, in the porch of S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura at Rome.

4 According to Agincourt these paintings bore the date 1248 which is now obliterated. Art could scarcely fall lower than it is here exhibited. The Saviour's head is of a circular shape without draw- ing, the frame ill designed, and feet enormous. Muscular develop- ments are indicated by false lines. The figures are stiff, striding, or flat, the colour dull and without transparence. Passigli in Di- zionario. Vol. IV, p. 527. men-

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

period in Rome may be swelled by a notice of the paintings on the tomb of Cardinal Guglielmo Fieschi, in the church of S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura,1 the motionless figures in both of which are long, thin and without draw- ing. Yet the form of the Saviour's head, in the first, is more regular and less defective than those in cotem- porary productions at Rome or in the neighbouring Bene- dictine foundation of Subiaco — the Sacro Speco.

It would be needless to seek in this old and remark- able abbey for paintings of the time of S. Benedict. But in the so-called Seconda Grotta di S. Benedetto, one of the natural caves which tradition assigns as a residence to the holy man, a Virgin and child of warm tones, marked outlines, and large staring eyes, is painted on the bare rock, and reveals the technical execution of the artists of Rome at the close of the eighth and rise of the ninth centuries. A figure of the Saviour guarded by two angels, and a painting said to represent S. Benedict, — much da- maged and in great part repainted, outside the cave, betray the rude manner of the twelfth century. Equally poor and of the same period are the paintings on the entrance wall of the Sala di S. Benedetto in the lower part of the Sacro Speco itself, to the left of which a vaulted niche contains a Virgin, child, and angels, inscribed "Magister Conxolus pixit hoc op.", 2 whilst to the right, Innocent the Third gives a papal bull to John the Fourth, abbot of the Sacro Speco. The green shadows, yellow flesh

tions Pietro Lino "pic tor" and his assistant Guido Guiduccio as having- painted in S.S. Quattro Coronati in the 12th century (1110 to 1120).

1 Cardinal Fieschi (William) was appointed by Innocent the IVth and died at Rome in 1256. He was buried in S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura. (Dizionario di Erudizione storico Eccles. Vol. XXIV.) On each side of the Saviour in the act of benediction S. Lawrence recommends a small kneeling figure of Pope Innocent the IV. behind

whom stand S.S. Hypollitus and Stephen introducing the kneeling figure of Cardinal Fieschi, the pope's nephew, behind whom stands S. Gustavus. To the right, on a neighbouring wall, is a Virgin and child in which the defects, common to the 13th century, are exhibited.

2 A picture on !panel repre- senting S. Benedict in his cave receiving food from S. Romanus, with compartments in which scenes of S. Benedict's life are depicted, is in the abbey of Subiaco and as-

Chap. II.

SUBIACO.

lights, and bright red patches on the cheeks and lips are of the Roman character of the thirteenth century. 1 The triple vaulted ceiling of the Sala is of the same century, and possibly of an earlier time than that of Conxolus. A lamb in the centre of the first carries a cross and is surrounded by the symbols of the Evangelists with human bodies, and the heads of an angel, an ox, an eagle, and a lion.2 The second represents S. Benedict with saints in the circumjacent space, one of whom only, S. Lawrence, is not modernized.3 The third is devoted to the Saviour (centre) with SS. Peter, Paul, John, Andrew and four angels bearing sceptres. The chapel of S. Gregorio in another part of the Sacro Speco, is enlivened by a repre- sentation which, according to an inscription on the wall, is the consecration by Gregory the Great (AD. 1127— 1241) of two holy personages who stand by, whilst an angel hovering over them seems to address a figure which, from the name on the wall, is the monk Odo. — All these paintings, with the exception of the Virgin and child in the cave of S. Benedict, may be assigned to the close of the twelfth and rise of the thirteenth centuries, a time in which Roman and Byzantine character were confounded in a common degeneracy. They must not be mistaken for paintings of a later date in the chapel della Vergine, a S. Gregory dated 1479 by a feeble Italian painter, or for works attributable to "Stammatico Greco pictor. p." whose name is written high up on a pilaster opposite the Scala Santa. Of these paintings, scenes of the passion and of the life of S. Benedict and his disciples, which may be seen in two vast compositions on the walls and ceilings after entering the church, the Baptism and alle-

signed to Conxolus; but it is now I 2 Here also the colour is sombre, totally repainted. the outlines marked. In the angel,

1 History records the date of the flesh tones are yellowish , the this bull which is of June 24, shadows green. The form of the 1213, but does not vouch for the latter figure is slender, but it date of Conxolus1 existence. John i has been altered by retouching, the VIth died in 1217. The paint- | 3 S.S. Sylvester, Peter the Dea- ing is in part rubbed away and con, Gregory, Komanus, Maurus, the figure of Innocent repainted, j Onoratus, Placidus are repainted.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

gories on the Scala Santa itself possibly betray, by pecu- liar forms of composition and a third rate talent, the work of a Greek of the fourteenth century. Nor would it have been necessary to mention these further, were it not desirable to reduce to their just and humble va- lue productions which have recently been placed on a level with those of Cimabue and Giotto. 1

The Sacro Speco was visited in 1216 by S. Francis whose self imposed mendicancy and miracles were at a later period to be illustrated by the greatest painters of Italy. There, an attempt was made, apparently by some of the artists employed in the abbey, to paint his por- trait on the wall of the chapel in which the consecration of Gregory the Great was afterwards represented. Certain it is that on a wall to the right of the entrance to the Chapel, stands a life size figure of a youthful monk in a high conical cowl, — the frock and cord of a mendi- cant friar, inscribed with the words FR. FRACISCU. Partially restored and retouched, the head may still attract attention by its character. Though lean from abstinence, the features are regular, the brow open, the eyes large, and the nose straight. The tonsure is visible across the forehead and along the temples to the ears, which are not remarkable for smallness. A straggling beard, and

1 A volume was published at Rome in 1855, entitled "Imagerie du Sacro Speco" giving illustra- tions of the painting's in that edi- fice with a text. It is pleasing to see old works illustrated and commented. It is folly, however, to try and pass third for first rate painters. The writer affirms of Conxolus that he departed from the Byzantine manner before Ci- mabue and deserves the more credit. He forgets that Byzantine art was not extended generally to all Italy, and that Conxolus, in common with many painters, fol- lowed old methods, whereas Ci- mabue commenced the reform of Italian art by setting these aside,

in a certain measure, or improv- ing them. Stammatico , he com- pares with Giotto , yet it is evi- dent that this painter laboured after the death of the great Flo- rentine, and has no excuse for being a third rate painter except the poverty of genius. Again cer- tain paintings in a parlour of the Sacro Speco , which are in the manner of such second rate artists of the Umbrian school, as Tiberio d'Assisi or Melanzio, are described as the forerunners of Raphael who led the first footsteps of the art of the Revival. Such nonsense deserves and ought to receive the reproof of criticism.

Chap. II.

S, FRANCIS.

a downy upper lip complete a far more pleasing- portrait of brother Francis than those which in hundreds, at a later time, were placed in every monastery and convent of the order. A miniature kneeling figure of a donor at the monk's feet seems to have been added at a later time. It is remarkable that Francis is depicted without the Stigmata, and if it be, as is pretended, a genuine portrait, it must have been executed, if not in 1216, at least before 1228, when the monk was canonized, and perhaps by one who had seen and conversed with him. If considered as a work of art, it differs in no wise from other early pictures in the Sacro Speco.1 The pious world however seems to have cared little for the reality of the portraits of the founder of the Franciscan order; and in the earliest pictures of him at Assisi and elsewhere, it seemed rather the painter's aim to symbolize asceticism than to repro- duce the true features of the saint. It was not till the end of the century that S. Francis became a type, and then it had lost all claim to the name of likeness. In the chapel contiguous to the sacristy of the convent degli Angeli at Assisi, the standing figure of the saint is painted about half the size of life on the wood of his own pallet, and the fact is vouched for by the following inscription "Hie michi lectus fuit et morienti". These words are written on a book in S. Francis' hand, whilst on the lower border of a carpet which forms the background of the panel, another inscription refers to the impress of the Stigmata on his hands and feet. A gold arabesque nimbus surrounds the bare head, a cross in the right hand and an angel on each side with the reed and host complete the picture. S. Francis is here a round headed man with a contracted brow, small eyes, a long thin nose and a mouth indicated by three straight lines. In another por- trait in the Sacristy of S. Francesco of Assisi the head

1 This portrait of Francis, with- out nimbus, and executed before he received the Stigmata, has been recently restored; and parts, where

the colour had entirely fallen off, renewed. The background is all repainted.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

is again of a different character, — bony and lean, and the forehead beyond measure high. The large gazing eyes have a frightened look, and the nose a depression familiar in late Byzantine works. Many more examples might be enumerated here, but as these may be noticed at a future time, when treating of the early schools of central Italy, they may be omitted for the present, sufficient proof having been given that S. Francis in the pictures of the middle ages is a symbol and not a portrait.

Whilst the painters at Subiaco thus followed the ex- ample of Rome, those who laboured in the more northern parts of Italy exhibited in the thirteenth century pecu- larities of another kind. Numerous monuments on a large scale might be mentioned to prove that painting existed every where at a low ebb*, but that in the centre of the Peninsula, as elsewhere, it was subordinate to monumental and sculptural decoration. At Parma, in the first half of the century, painters of no great power adorned the double octogon of the Baptistery with courses of subjects inclosed within spaces framed in feigned sculptural ornament and inscribed with words simulating carving in stone.1 These painters showed, in the arrangement of the parts and in their subordination to a general presiding idea, an unison of harmony which was not without grandeur, although, taken separately, the figures or groups might not be entitled to admiration. They represented:

In the upper course of the dome the twelve apostles enthroned in ribs of ornament radiating towards the centre of the cupola, with the symbols of the Evangelists in the intermediate spaces, — in the second course the Saviour enthroned in the act of benediction, with the Virgin and S. John the Baptist standing at his sides,1 and numerous pro- phets in niches; — in the third course, scenes from the life of S. John the Baptist, amongst which one, in particular the Baptism of the Saviour, was represented in a form which was but an amplification of that adopted in the catacombs

1 The Baptistery of Parma was commenced in 1196 and only com- pleted in 1281.

2 The hair of the figure of the

Saviour is repainted, as also the head of S. John the Baptist, part of the vestments, nimbuses, and background.

Chap. II.

PARMA.

of Rome. The Redeemer was placed in the middle of a running stream, S. John on the right bank imposed a hand on his head, and on the left stood three angels. A minia- ture figure at the Saviour's feet held a reed shaped into the form of a cross, an obscure and curious addition to the scene, yet repeated in a second Baptism on the wall behind the altar of the Baptistery.1 Beneath the balcony of the Dome the recesses of the arches were likewise painted with scenes from the old and new testament;2 and amongst them might be noticed a strange winged figure imperfectly ren- dering the monster with four heads and innumerable eyes, the car of fire and the symbols of the Evangelists described in the Vision of Ezechiel, an angel in relief, the six winged seraphim of Isaiah, and a Franciscan apparently addressing the latter.3

Without being free from retouching or in parts from total renewal, the greater portion of these paintings pre- serves enough of original character for a correct defini- tion of their value. If considered with reference to type, it might be observed that the Saviour in the cupola, of a feeble frame surmounted by a large head, was disfigured by the strangest frontal developments forming curves with the wrinkles of the forehead, and seemed a reminis- cence of Ravenna ; whilst the double forelock on the fore- head appeared as a Roman peculiarity. The round head of the Virgin with its angular brow, the protuberant root of the nose, the painful expression of the face were but a mixture of old and well known features. The broken draperies of the Saviour's dress contrasted with the more antique and flowing ones of the prophets, just as His feeble body and large head contrasted with their small faces and square frames. In these prophets, repose, in other figures, as in the beheading of S. John the Baptist, violent efforts of action which passed all reasonable bounds. The nude was no better than might be expected from the period; and the long thin figures were not without the

1 This Baptism is almost obli- terated.

2 Some of these arc retouched and others quite modern, as for instance the visitation.

3 This recess has been much repainted , and the figure of S. Francis with a nimbus seems to have been added later, as here he is supposed to have received the Stigmata.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

usual anatomical defects and formlessness of extremities. The execution was rude, the masses of light and shade abrupt, without semitones. The draperies were painted of an uniform colour, streaked with white in the lights, with black in the shadows. Here were the technical methods of Nepi as of S. Angelo in Formis, the vehemence and exaggeration of the Byzantine and the weighty breadth of the Roman. The painters were evidently striving to advance, but without any fixed principles, and falling for that reason into extremes.

Those who may desire to convince themselves of the low state in which inferior artists found themselves, even towards the end of the thirteenth century, may acquire an insight into the common Italo-Byzantine decay of that time, by examining a picture in the Museum at Parma inscribed "Melior pinxit A. D. 1271." They will find in a Saviour in benediction and holding a book, types and forms of the most repulsive kind, combined with curious gold ornamentation and nimbuses stuffed with real stones. The colours which emulate the hues of the snake, are thickly laid on — the outlines heavily marked and defined, and the forms a mere pretence of anatomy. The Vir- gin and S. Peter, S. John and S. Paul at the sides, of equally hideous character and placed in round niches supported on short thick columns, would seem to be Greek, were the inscriptions to be admitted as proving an origin. Yet no one will pretend that Melior is the name of a Greek.

In Florence the tribune annexed (AD. 1200 *) to the Baptistery of S. Giovanni was worked in mosaic by one Jacobus, a monk of the order of S. Francis in the year 1225-2

1 Note 3 to Vasari, Le Vite,jwho affirmed that the mosaist etc. Flor. Le Monnier 1846. I Jacobus , who executed the orna- Vol. I, p. 284. I merits of the tribune of the Bap-

2 Fra Mariano's chronicle of the tistery was native of Torrita. Franciscan order, and Mark of Vasari (Vol. I, p. 284) followed Lisbon, are the first (annot. to them, but this opinion is not Vasari life of Tafi, Vol. I, p. 291) supported by records andisfounded

Chap. II.

FLORENCE BAPTISTERY.

The mosaic filled the triangular spaces of the vaulted ceiling, the outer frame and the thickness of the arch leading into the tribune. In the ceiling, the central me- dallion inclosing the lamb holding a banner, was supported by figures half angel half caryatide, resting on vases, at the sides of which were two deer. Each of the intermediate spaces contained two figures of prophets1 in a fiddle or- nament, the whole surrounded by a circular framing suppor- ted in the diagonals on the hands of four kneeling figures resting on capitals, whilst on the prolongation of the dia- meter sat enthroned S. John Evangelist and the Virgin and child. The frame of the entrance arch was divided by 13 medallions of the Virgin (centre) and twelve prophets, the archivolt by medallions of the Saviour (centre) and twelve apostles. Beneath the capitals at the angles of the ceiling, four scrolls bore, each, two lines of an inscription pro- claiming the date and* author of the work.2

These mosaics may be compared with advantage to those of the adjacent baptistery executed at a later period by Tuscan artists. It will be observed that the former are not of the Florentine but of the Roman school, and of that pecu- liar style which characterised the mosaic pictures of S. Cle- mente3 and of S. Maria in Trastevere. The, mosaics of the tribune of S. Giovanni at Florence were indeed one of the last inspirations of a school based on the imitation of the antique, which had for centuries been peculiar to the great capital of the Popes. The system of diagonal ornamentation recalled; though it had not the lightness of that which in the first centuries of Christian art had filled

on a superficial reading of the inscription on the apsis Mosaic of 8. Giov. Laterano at Rome. The mosaist there signs himself Ja- cobus Torrit. ; and historians have jumped at a conclusion from the similarity of the Christian name and profession of Jacobus.

1 Eight in all: Moses, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Jacob, Isaac, Abraham, all standing.

2 Annus papa tibi nonus curre- bat Honori

Ac Eederice tuo quintus monarca decori

Viginti quinque Christi cum mille

Ducentis Tempora currebant per secula

cuncta manentis Hoc opus incepit lux Mai tunc

duodena

Quod Domini nostri conservot

gratia plena Sancti Francisci frater fuit hoc

operatus

Jacobus in tali pre cunctis arte probatus.

3 As regards style of figures, not as regards ornamentation.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

the catacombs. A reminiscense of the antique might be traced in the broad forms of the prophets about the me- dallion of the lamb, in the movement and massive draperies of the apostles in the archivolt.1 The Virgin and S. John, though not exempt from the defects of form and design noticeable in the apsis of S. Maria in Trastevere and S. Clemente — from angularity of contours and coarseness of extremities, were still fairly proportioned. This tribune mosaic was in fact Italian in its types, and, in its general character, far less Byzantine than the works of Cimabue. Here was no superabundance of gilt ornament, no con- fused arrangement such as that which detracts from the beauty of some productions of Rome ; relief was given by a judicious mass of grey shadow in the flesh tints; and soberness every where prevailed. The name of Jacobus the mosaist of Florence now forces attention back to Rome and to a series of works in S. Giovanni Laterano and S. Maria Maggiore. The mosaic of the semidome in S. Giovanni Laterano appears from its arrangement, which resembles that of S. Stefano Rotondo, to have been an old one, altered and renewed in the pontificate of Nicolas the Fourth AD. 1290. Beneath a bust of the Saviour, surrounded by a glory of angels, a large cross, surmoun- ted by the dove and guarded at the base by a seraph between two towers, separates two lines of saints. To the left the Virgin presents the miniature figure of Pope Nicolas the Fourth, by whose side is a small S. Francis and taller figures of S.S. Peter and Paul. To the right are S. John the Baptist, a small S. Anthony, S. John Evangelist and S. Andrew. Deer and other animals sur- round the base of the cross, under which the four streams well out into a river filled with figures of cupids in boats. This mosaic is inscribed on the lower border to the left "Jacobus Torrit.. pict. ohc op. fecit." A critical exami- nation of it may possibly clear some disputed points.

1 The head of S. John the Bap- tist in the archivolt is lean, the hair frizzled. Yet the character

and type are not Byzantine as in Cimabue.

Chap. II.

JACOBUS TORRITI.

The head of the Saviour, far from being of the inelegant form peculiar to the thirteenth century, has the simple outline of that in S. Costanza, or the apsis of S. Apol- linare in Classe at Ravenna with a fine flow of falling hair, a long full beard and regular features, and a simple nimbus of one line drawn on the blue background be- decked with red clouds. It is a type and form which would have placed Torriti "high in the ranks of the Chris- tian imitators of the antique, but which differ essentially from those by the same mosaist in S. Maria Maggiore; nor would it be easy to maintain that the same artist could at one moment produce the Redeemer in - the form of the fourth, fifth, or sixth centuries, and at another in that of the thirteenth.1 Amongst the angels in the glory round the Saviour, one on the extreme right seems to have been renewed by Torriti. The head and mantle of S. Paul, the Virgin, S. John the Baptist, Nicolas the Fourth, S. Francis and S. Anthony are likewise renewed or introduced by him.2 It is evident indeed that the three last mentioned personages are mere excrescences, not fitting the place they occupy, either in accordance with the laws of space, or the distribution of the older parts. As a concluding argument it may be observed that the mosaic bears not the least resemblance to the style of that executed by the monk Jacobus at Florence.

Far different is the character of a mosaic forming a lower course to that of the semidome. Here, between the windows, and parted asunder by trees, are nine pro- phets of square frame and broad neck, whose draperies in their cast, whose attitudes in their variety, and whose action in its expressiveness resemble those of the tribune in the Baptistery of Florence. On the lower border to the left is a miniature figure of an old Franciscan with a large compass and rule. On the lower border to the right

1 The head of the Saviour may have undergone repair, but if so maintains the character described,

namely that of the imitation of the antique.

2 The figure of S. Andrew is quite modern.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. II.

is a youthful kneeling figure of a Franciscan with a hammer striking on a board. This latter figure is inscribed "Fr. Jacob, de Camerino soci magri opis recommendat se mise Pi et ...itis (meritis) beati Johis".1 There can be little doubt that this mosaic is the work of the old Franciscan with the compass and rule painted on the left, whose name is not inscribed; or, having been inscribed, is lost, and that his assistant is the monk Jacobus de Camerino. In no case can the mosaic be assigned to Jacobus Torriti whose name is only on the mosaic of the semidome. The old Franciscan may be the same who laboured in the tribune of the Florence baptistery, but this can only be assumed from the similarity of style between the two mosaics. As to the date of this lower course of mosaics there can evidently be no certainty, but that it preceded the labours of Torriti is probable. So the absurdity which resulted from making Torriti at Rome the same artist as Jacobus at Florence, — a theory which gave the artist a fabulous age is avoided in a most simple and natural manner.

Jacobus Torriti in his unadulterated character may be studied in the apsis mosaic of S. Maria Maggiore.

Richness of ornament and gaiety of colour are the only claims of this mosaic to the attention of the spectator. The Saviour, closely draped in a gold shot mantle is of a heavy frame. His large head, inclosed in a mass of rolling hair is of a round shape. His eyes are large and gazing, his nose depressed, and mouth ill shaped. The draperies are a maze of folds concealing the figure and movement. The Virgin is a thin feeble and large hea- ded woman. The saints are long, lean and lame in atti- tude, the angels better and not without an intention of action. All these defects are glaring because of the enormous size of the mosaic. They are less conspicuous in the small compositions which have still something of

1 One Giacomo da Camerino is I by Delia Valle (Storia del D° d. recorded amongst the painters Orv°) Fol. Rome 1791. p. 383, yet at the Duomo of Orvieto in 1321, | here he is not called Fra.

Chap. II.

JACOBUS TORRITI.

the traditional antique and a certain animation and na- ture.1 Torriti, whose name is inscribed on the left hand border of the semidome "Jacobus Toriti pictor hoc opus mosaicen fecit" with the date 1295 on the op- posite side, is thus an artist of the close of the thirteenth century, who continued to improve art in the less impor- tant parts of decoration, but who left form and composi- tion to be taken up by other and superior artists.1

1 These compositions have points of contact with some assigned to Cavallini.

2 Vasari having determined that Jacobus the Franciscan, of Flo- rence, was a native of Torrita, and having made of him and of Jacobus Torriti one person, con- fuses matters still further by affirm- ing that "Fra Jacopo da Torrita was taken from Rome to Pisa

where, with the assistance of Tafi andGaddo Gaddi, he executed in the Duomo the Evangelists and other works afterwards finished by Vicino" (Vasari, Vol. I, p. 285). Vasari here probably confounds, his Fra Jacopo with one Turretto, a mosaist, whose name is cited in records published by Ciampi. The mosaics of the Duomo of Pisa were not begun before 1300; as for Vicino, a word of him later.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. III.

CHAPTER IIL

THE COSMATI AND PIETRO CAVALLINI.

It is characteristic of Italian historians that their opi- nions and ideas as to the revival of art are frequently biassed by narrow views and local prejudices. Far more important in their eyes was the claim of some favoured city to the honour of that revival than a true and com- prehensive exposition of the extent or peculiarity, the causes which led to it, or the effects which it produced. True of Florence, of Sienna, and of Pisa, this general reproach would be unjustly extended to the historians of Roman art, who, on the contrary, have done little to illu- strate the names of the Cosmati, and their cotemporaries.1 These artists, whose history fills the whole of the thirteenth century were utterly unknown to Vasari; yet they were not without influence on the general development of Ita- lian sculpture, architecture, and painting. Nay had not the policy of the papacy led to a memorable schism, and thus deprived Rome for a time of its influence, it is likely that that capital might have played a considerable part in the history of the revival of art, and that the Cosmati would have been celebrated as the forerunners of a purely Roman school.

1 The Cosmati have been no- ticed by Agineourt, by Cicognara, and by Delia Valle. The latter (Stor. del Duomo di Orvieto ub. sup. p. 264) states that he treated of this artistic family in an academic oration at Rome in 1788, but this oration seems

to have remained unpublished. Rumohr (Fors chungen, ub. sup. Vol. I, p. 270—1) devotes a few lines to them. The merits of the Cosmati were best understood by Karl Witte of Breslau, of whom an interesting paper appeared in the Kunstblatt (Stuttgardt and

Chap. III.

THE COSMATI.

At no great distance to the north of Rome lies Civita Castellana, whose cathedral boasts of a respectable anti- quity. A fine flight of steps leads up to a porch of fair pretensions, flanked by porticos. The porch opens on to the chief portal by a broad arch resting on pilasters and crowned with an entablature and balcony. The portal is a series of entering pilasters and columns, above the archi- trave of which is a recess with a fan window. The arched border of this recess, as well as the pilasters, friezes, and wall are worked in mosaic. In the key of the border is the lamb, on the pilasters, the symbols of the Evangelists.1 The following inscription on the architrave reveals the name of the author:

Laurentius cum Jacoho, filio suo, magistri doctissimi Romani hoc opus fecerunt. 2

Two lateral doors flank the chief portal, and in the lunette of that to the right is a bust figure in mosaic of the Saviour, with a cruciform jewelled nimbus holding a book and stretching out his right hand in the act of benediction. A natural movement and fair contours mark the figure, which has none of the usual grimness or vehemence. The oval head, inclosed by hair falling in a triple wave behind the shoulders, has at least an expression of repose. The chin, broad and bare, is fringed with a short beard, the nose is straight, the mouth small and the eyes without stare. A red tunic with gold borders and jewelled blue cuffs, a gold mantle, complete the dress which is shadowless and flat, but fairly lined. The yellow- ish flesh tints tend to red on the cheeks and are outlined with red in the lights and black in the shadows. On the architrave below this gay and not unpleasant mosaic are the words:

T ii 1 1 i n g e n , series of the year 1825) beginning- at No. 41.

1 The architecture of Civita Castellana is purely Roman with- out a trace of Gothic.

2 These two artists worked also at the old church of Fallen, 3 miles

VOL. I.

from Civita Castellana, where, ac- cording to Karl Witte, is the fol- i lowing inscription: f Laurentius cum f hoc opus Jacobo filio suo Quinta vatt. fecit hoc opus. fieri fecit.

Kunstblatt ub. sup. 1825. No. 41.

Chap. III.

, ' ' ' n ..It Rainerius Petri Rodulplii fieri fecit, bus m. fecit,) r

This mosaic is doubtless executed by Jacobo the son of Laurentius. On the frieze below the cornice of the portico is the following inscription:

Magister J .a.c. . . obus, civis Romanus cum

sma  fili .  .  J  . .  .  u         anis  ohc  (sic)

opus anno dni MCCX

This mutilated inscription with its imperfect date,1 al- ready points to the family of the Cosmati, who appear as "doctissimi Romani," — mosaists and architects in the first half of the thirteenth century. The extent of their practise is proved by numerous monuments. Agincourt, Rumohr, and Karl Witte had already, in the last century, noticed the inscriptions at Civita Castellana. They noted the name of Laurentius and his son Lucas on the dwarf arch of a cloister in S. Scolastica at Subiaco,2 and on a cornice of the ruined church of S. Alessio at Rome in- scribed:

t Jacobus, Laurentii fecit has decern et novem columpnas cum capitellis suis." 3

Their family name of Cosmati is more certainly proved by works in the cathedral of Anagni, on the stone pave- ment of which the following inscription may be read :

t Dominus Albertus venerabilis anagnen eps fecit hoc fieri pavimentum pi. costruendo magister Rai- nalus anagninu canonicus Dni Honorii III. p. p. subdiacon et cappellan. c. obolos aureos erogavit. Magist. Cosmas hoc opus fecit."

1 Rumohr assumestlie date of 1210, ( For s chungen ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 270) and promises the inscrip- tion which he afterwards omits. The date is shortened by the loss of some of the numbers. It is possible that the mosaics inside the porch and about the chief portal may be earlier than others signed by Jacobo alone. The date of 1210 would ill suit the latter who lives till the close of the century.

Karl Witte falls into a similar error.

2 According to Agincourt as follows: Cosmas et fil. Luc. ia. aet. Romani cives in marmoris arte periti Hoc opus explerunt abatis tpe. Landi. Kunstblatt, year 1825, ub. sup. No. 41. Ac- cording to MSS. records, says Witte, this inscription should bear the date 1235. Ibid.

3 These columns were inlaid with

Chap. III.

THE COSMATI.

On the pediment of the altar of the lower basilica erected A. D. 1227 — 41 in the time of Gregory the Ninth is also the following:

Magister Cosmas civis Romanus cum filiis suis Luca et Jacobo fecit." 1

Of Laurentius and Luca Cosmati the historian now takes leave, as their names cease to appear on monu- ments, but Jacobus seems during a long career to have followed his father's profession with success.

The Villa Mattei at Kome whose grounds on the Celian hill are visited by tourists for the splendour of its views, was, in the thirteenth century, a hospital for the redemp- tion of slaves.2 An arched recess above the portal con- tains a medallion mosaic representing on a large scale the "signum ordinis Sanctce Trinitatis et Captivorum". In the centre of this medallion, on gold ground, the Saviour sits enthroned, extending his hands to a white and black captive standing bound on each side of him. The space is well distributed, the colour harmonious and gay. The Saviour, feeble of body and large of head, has a melan- choly expression. The broad round forehead, pendent forelock, pointed chin, and beard, divided like the tail of a drake, the almond shaped eyes, do not combine to form a pleasing type; but doubtless its original cha- racter is much impaired by restoring. The yellow flesh tints verging into red semitones and green shadows, fairly render the idea of relief. The outlines are red in light and dark in shadow, the draperies marked out with lines without shadow. The captives, nude with the exception

mosaics in the style peculiar to j riosissimi mart, presulis magni the Cosmati at Civita Castellana, j infra quod fuit inventum i qdam and to the tombs which shall be j pilo marmoreorudi pretiosum corp. noticed. ips. mart. q. kt. maji seqntis toti

1 On the wall of the same edi- I p. p. publico ostenso eodem die

fice, according to Karl Witte, was the following: "Anno DniMCCXXX i XI die exeunte aprili, pont. drii Gg. Villi, p.p. ann. ej. V ven. Alberto epo, rcsidente I. Ecc. Anag. p. man. magre, Cosme civis romani fuit amotum altare 2flo-

cum ympnis et laudib. in eodem pilo sub altari hoc oratorio in ipsius honorem condito funditus et reconditum cum honore."

2 Called by Delia Valle, Stor. del Duomo di Orvieto p. 2 $4 . S. Thommaso in Forrais.

100

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. III.

of the cloths on their waists, are square of frame with defective extremities.1 The following inscription is en- graved on the arch of the portal:

"Magister Jacobus, cum filio suo Cosmato fecit ohc (sic) opus."

If not as fair as the Saviour at Civita Castellana, this much restored one of the Villa Mattei is still by the same hand, and confirms the belief that Jacobus the son of Laurentius is the same who now appears in his turn as- sisted by the Cosme his son. Nor is it too much to as- sume that the architecture, which is of the Roman style, and the mosaic are the joint production of both.

The graceful chapel of the Sancta Sanctorum probably by Jacobo and inscribed on the left hand pilaster of the entrance with the words "Magister Cosmatus fecit hoc opus",2 is of a simple and light architecture which does honour to the family. The vault is supported on four slender pillars, and the light streams in from a range of trefoil windows resting on twisted columns. The groined ceiling is painted with the symbols of the Evangelists, and the faces of the arches with subjects from the lives of S.S. Peter, Paul, Stephen, Lawrence, Agnes and Nicho las; but these are all so completely restored as to defy criticism.

Coincidence of style with the mosaics of Civita Castel- lana and the Villa Mattei may justify the attribution to Jacobo Cosme or his son Giovanni, of a Virgin and child in benediction with the half figure of an angel at each side, in a lunette above the lateral door leading from the Capitol to the church of Araceli. The Virgin ex- presses in her attitude dignity and repose, but the group loses in balance on account of the small size of the Sa- viour. The violet drapery which covers the Virgin's head

1 There is much restoring in all these figures, but particularly in the nude of the slaves, and in the background. The white cap- tive bears a cross apparently to

distinguish him from his fellow of another colour and religion.

2 The Sancta Sanctorum atRome was rebuilt in the pontificate of Nicolas the III. A. D. 1277. 1281.

Chap. III.

THE COSMATI.

101

and shoulders is of easy folds , but flatly lined out as in the Saviour of the Villa Mattei. The head itself is large and broad of cheek, the nose a little bent, the eyes round without stare, and the mouth small. The hands are re- gular and the fingers pointed ; and a fair division of light and shade gives a certain relief to the flesh. The Sa- viour, though defective in type, is draped in the elastic folds of a red tunic shot with gold. The angels, disco- loured and in part restored, are also in shot vestments. The outlines are everywhere precise and clear.

The mosaics of Civita Castellana and of the Villa Mattei already exhibited the Roman school in its purely Italian characteristics. The former showed an improvement upon those, for instance, of S. Clemente, and the existence of that Italo-Roman school which began at S. Maria in Cos- medin, and might be traced upwards to the thirteenth century. The Saviour of Civita Castellana was of that natural and regular form which already marked the figures at S. Urbano alia Caffarella, and even disclosed a link by which to confine within the Roman school the tribune mosaics of S. Giovanni of Florence. The mosaic of the Virgin and child at Araceli was, on the other hand, ap- parently executed at a time, when the influence of Giotto in transforming the old schools was felt, — when By- zantine-Italian style became more Italian, and when types were remodelled on a more ideal Christian form. Nor was it strange that Jacobo Cosme should follow the im- pulse of changes which had already affected the schools of Florence and Pisa, and which could not but be felt at Rome when Arnolfo visited the capital in 1285, — the more, as between 1290 and 1300, Jacobo himself left Rome for Orvieto,1 and was employed there as an architect with Ramo di Paganello, of whom a cotemporary record says : "Est de bonis intaliatoribus et scultoribus de mundo,"2 and numerous architects and painters besides.

1 Delia Valle (Storia del Duomo di Orvieto p. 264) cites the ori- ginal record without giving its

text, and without fixing exactly the year.

2 Ramo di Paganello was capo

102

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. III.

Amongst the monuments which bear characteristic fea- tures of resemblance with the architectural style developed by the Cosmati family is that of Cardinal Anchera, now transferred to the Chapel del Crocifisso near the high altar of the church of S. Prassede. The cardinal's extended frame lies on a slab, resting on a tomb, whose cornice is supported on slight pillars adorned with mo- saics. The cloth which seems to fall over the sides of the slab, is adorned with the star and lily. Cardinal Anchera died in 1286, and the tomb bears that date.1 Another monument of somewhat different character but of the thir- teenth century, is that of the Savelli in the chapel of that family at Araceli. It is based on an old sarcophagus filled with bacchic ornaments, and is crowned by an edicule, on the summit of which is the statue of the Virgin hol- ding the infant Saviour. Mosaics are let into the columns as in other monuments of the time of the Cosmati, yet this tomb is assigned to the Siennese Agostino and Agnolo, who are supposed to have executed it from the drawings of Giotto.2

Of Johannes Cosme, who may not unnaturally be con- sidered the son of Jacobo, monuments have been preserved, which reveal in him an universal talent for mosaic archi-

maestro del Opera at Orvieto in 1290. 1300. Delia Valle, Stor. del D° d. Orv. also Lettere Sanese of the same. Rome. Fol. 1785. Vol. II, p. 19.

1 With the following inscription: Qui legis Ancherum duro sub mar- more claudi

Sinescis aldis quern nece perdis he r um

Creca parit puerum laudunum dat

sibi clerus, CardinePraxedis titulatur et istius

sedes defuit in selis. Largus fuit: atque fidelis : Demonis a telis serva Deus hunc

csepe coelis anno milleno centum bis et octua- geno sexto decessit hie prima luce novembris.

2 A manifest error, if dates and

style be considered. The tomb contains the bodies of Luca Sa- velli, father of Honorius the IVth, who died 1266, and other members of the family. The latest date on the tomb is 1306. There is some resemblance between the tomb of Cardinal Anchera de- scribed in the text and that of Boniface the VIIIth (1294—1303) in the W. transept of the Nuove Grotte in the basilica of S. Pietro at Rome, a tomb which Vasari, in the Giuntina edition, assigns to Arnolfo, saying that it is in- scribed with his name. Cicognara gives an engraving of it (Vol. I, plate 22) adding in the text that the name of Arnolfo was not to be found there, and that the tomb is in the style of the Cosmati.

Chap. III.

THE COSMATI.

103

tecture and sculpture. The tomb of Cardinal Gonsalvo in S. Maria Maggiore is inscribed:

Hie depositus fuit quonda dns Gunsalvus eps albanen. ann. Dni 1299. hoc op. fee. Johes magri Cosme civis Romanus.

The recumbent statue of the Cardinal lies in episcopals on a slab, whilst two angels standing at the sides seem reverently to disclose his person by lifting the folds of a winding sheet. A cloth hangs over the tomb which is worked in mosaic; and a trefoil niche contains a mosaic of the Virgin enthroned holding the infant Saviour and supported on each side by the standing figures of S. Martin and S. Mathew. A certain readiness of movement and nature in the attitudes reveal the progress of art in the family of the Cosmati. More it would be idle to say considering the very great damage produced by res- toring.1

But Johannes Cosme yielded the most convincing proof that the impulse given to art by Giotto2 was not lost upon him when, in 1304, he executed the tomb of Guillaume Durand, bishop of Mende, at S. Maria Sopra Minerva, a monument in which earnestness of purpose and judicious balance of parts were combined with progress in the rendering of form. The bishop was represented at full length on the slab of a tomb covered with an embroid- ered cloth, whilst two winged angels, firmly standing at each extremity, raised a curtain. In the recess formed by an arch supported on inlaid pillars, the Virgin sat enthroned in a vast chair, holding the infant Saviour in the act of blessing, between a saint in episcopals and the bending form of S. Dominick.3 This group was executed in mosaic, now half restored in stucco and repainted, and the arch forming the recess, —

1 Agiucourt (Vol. II, Text, p. 51 note a) sees the hand of Arnolfo in

2 Giotto had been at Rome be- tween 1298 and 1300.

the sculpture of this monument and that of Johannes Cosme in the ar- I :i Behind each of the side tigu- chitecture.but what of the mosaic ? I res a candelabra.

104

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. III.

the scutcheons on the front of the tomb were, like the pillars, similarly adorned. The figure of Durand, evi- dently a portrait, was broadly chiselled with well marked planes of features. The angels were of that form and proportion which Giotto had already introduced, though still of the old style in the imperfection of the features. The draperies were, for the time and place, a remarkable instance of progress. In the mosaic, the stature of the personages was fair and well proportioned. A large head on a thin neck — a melancholy expression in the almond shaped eye, might be noticed in the Virgin. There lingered something still of the old Roman forms of the eleventh and twelfth century.1 The nose was depressed and some- what masculine, but the hands were more than usually neat and long-fingered. The infant Saviour was well proportioned, and the saints pleasing by their natural air of humility.2 The group was indeed as remarkable for a certain expression of religion and piety as for the ab- sence of that grimness which had so long characterized the Italo-Byzantine manner.3 On the base of the tomb were the words:

Hoc est sepulcrum Dni Gulielmi Durati epi mi- matensis ord. pred .... rediit domini sub mille trecentis quatuor amotis annis.

Johs films magri Cosmati fee. hoc. opus.4

In the same year 1304, the tomb of Cardinal Matteo d'Acqua Sparta was erected in the left transept of Araceli. It was conceived and carried out on the same principle

1 For instance those beginning at S. Urbano alia Caffarella.

2 The figure of the bishop is long, with a certain antique feel- ing in the form of the features.

3 The whole of the lower part of the mosaic , including almost the whole of the kneeling bishop, the draperies of the Virgin from the knees downwards, is restored with painted stucco. There is quite a family likeness between

this monument and that of Card. Anchera at S. Prassede.

4 In a corner is the following: " Camillus Ceccarini restaur1 fe- cit anno 1817."

Van der Hagen in "Briefe, &c. gives the following inscription on a tomb in S. Balbina at Rome.

f Johes Alius magri Cosmati fecit hoc opus . . . hie jacet .... Domin. Stephan D. Surd. Dni p. p. capttan.

Kunstblatt 1825. No. 41.

Chap. III.

THE COSMATI.

105

as that of Durand but adorned in the recess with painting instead of mosaic. On the slab, as usual, the bishop in episcopals with angels raising the curtain, in the recess the Virgin and child enthroned, S. Francis presenting the kneeling figure of the deceased and S. John Evangelist, — on the key of the arch of the recess, a painted bust of the Saviour in benediction — and on the arch and pillars mosaic patterns. The architecture and ornament were but a repetition of those of the Cosmati, who, if this mo- nument be assigned to them, as it may without presump- tion, thus appear as a family uniting to the profession of architects, mosaists, and sculptors that of the painter.

The most interesting works, however, of the school of the Cosmati are the mosaics which cover the lower part of the tribune and arch of the tribune in Santa Maria in Trastevere. On the sides of the arch are the birth and the death of the Virgin. In the tribune itself the annun- ciation, the nativity, the adoration of the Magi, and the presentation in the temple. These compositions, conceived in the old forms which had been religiously preserved from former times, were equally remarkable for balance in the distribution of the masses, for the truth and ani- mation given by the artist to his figures, and for his fair attainments in design and colour. If not entirely free from exaggerated action, he knew at times how to temper the agitation of one figure by the comparative repose of another. In the "birth of the Virgin" well balanced groups might be particularly noticed.1 S. Anna might be seen in a fine attitude attended by two servants with a jug and basin, in graceful attitudes; and this incident, which in the pose of the Virgin recalled the antique, was kept injudicious equilibrium by another in the foreground, representing a female with the infant Virgin on her knees, stooping to feel the temperature of the water in a pan which another figure was filling. The forms of the in-

See the same composition in the Menologio. Miniature of the Vatican. No. 1613.

106

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. III.

fant were natural and regular and the figures significant in their action. The nativity was equally well distributed, the Virgin still in the old action and shape, but the angels not without elegance. In the "death of the Vir- gin" the subject was animated in movement, whilst in the annunciation and adoration of the Magi, the types and attitudes were still reminiscent of the Italo-Byzantine manner in their exaggerated character, and revealed the struggle of a new element in art with old and worn out forms. The figures were generally somewhat slender. In colour these mosaics were harmonious, and had so to speak, the nature of painting, as if it were of little moment to the artist in what material he laboured. The execution was conscientious, the drawing fairly accurate, the dra- peries good, the masses of light and shade well defined. S. Maria in Trastevere was in fact to the Cosmati what Assisi is to Giotto.

In the spaces beneath the foregoing subjects at S. Maria in Trastevere is a mosaic representing the bust of the Vir- gin and child in a prismatic medallion. The Saviour looks down towards a kneeling figure of Bertoldo Ste- faneschi presented by S. Peter, whilst S. Paul looks on at the opposite side.1 In front of Bertoldo are his scutcheon and the words repainted in oil "Bartolus filius Pet . . . P The Virgin may be said to represent, in her features and draperies, the perfection of the manner of the Cosmati. The features of the Saviour and the folds of his red mantle, touched in gold, are fine. The figures of S. Peter and S. Paul, both long and slender and of noble mien, are finely draped, individual in character, and modelled in good relief with broad masses of light and shade. Here the Byzantine style had disappeared and made room for the improved one of Giotto. Life and

1 These saints are of traditional types. They stand on a meadow, the rest of the background being gold. The feet of S. Paul, the left foot of S. Peter and part of the kneeling figure are repainted.

S. Paul wears a blue tunic and purple mantle, S. Peter a blue tunic. Part of the flowers on the foreground and of the inscription are repainted.

Cham. III.

PIETRO CAVALLINI.

107

individuality had succeeded to the defects of earlier times, Giotto had evidently shed his influence on the artist; and if it be true that the upper scenes of the life of the Virgin were commissioned by Bertoldo Stefaneschi in 1290, he must have ordered the votive mosaic at the very close of the century. Vasari affirms that Pietro Cavallini is the author of the mosaics in the tribune of S. Maria in Trastevere. His assertion may be accepted. It places the master high in the ranks of the painters of his time as one preserving the style of the Cosmati and of the Roman school.

So far it has been necessary to proceed, to trace the passage of the manner of the Cosmati into that of Ca- vallini.1

The birth of Pietro Cavallini has not been recorded, but Vasari pretends ? that it occurred when Giotto "had given life to Italian painting,"2 a very general and un- satisfactory assertion. That he was an artist of talent and perhaps extensively employed at Rome when Giotto visited the capital; that his training was under the Cos- mati and that he did not disdain to acknowledge the su- periority of the great Florentine, may be assumed from the character of the works that can be assigned to him.

1 Before taking leave of the former it may be proper to assign to them in their architectural ca- pacity a fine Roman porch, with a square front of white marble, erected by one of the Gaetani family as entrance to an hospi- tal, but now serving as ingress to the church of S. Antonio Abate at Rome. In style, like the porch of Civita Castellana cathedral and the gate of the Villa Mattei, this example of the architecture of the 13th century is worthy of the talent of Jacobo Cosme. In- scribed :

Dns petrus ca...oc card, man- davit costrui hospitale loco issto

(sic) et dni o Tuscul. eps et

J.Gaetan, card, executores et fieri fecerunt pa...ce dni pet. cap cc.

The Cosmati family is said to have had a descendant — Deo- dato or Adeodato, to whom a marble tabernacle in S. Maria in Cosmedin is assigned, and of whom it is likewise said that he laboured in Santa Maria Maggiore, but no record exists that connects this Deodato , with the name of Cosme. See note in comment, to Proemio of Vasari's lives. Vol. I, p. 213. The only trace of a Cos- mato at S. M. Maggiore is the name of Johannes on the tomb of Cardinal Gonsalvo. — The words "Magister Deodatus fecit hoc opus" are noted by Ciampini Vett. Mon. Tom. I, p. 181 on a tabernacle of 1290 in S. M. in Campitello at Rome.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 81,

108

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. III.

That he visited many parts of central Italy is stated by Vasari, who has not been confirmed hitherto by re- cords. There is, however, a certainty that Cavallini was in 1308 in the service of Robert of Naples, at a high salary, and it is only to be regretted that no trace of pic- torial productions due to him can now be found in the southern capital.1 As to his works elsewhere, it will be necessary in some cases to resign them to their real authors, men, as will appear, of little talent or pretensions, in others, to admit the propriety of Vasari' s judgment. Cavallini appears with truth to be considered as the author of a mosaic in S. Grisogono2 at Rome, representing, on a large scale, the Virgin enthroned with the infant in the act of benediction, supported by S. James holding a book, and S. Chrysogonus in a warrior's dress grasping a sword. A slightly Byzantine character, more noticeable than at Santa Maria in Trastevere, would place this mosaic amongst the earlier works of the master. The Virgin, of a majestic presence, still displays, in unfavorable contrast, feeble lower parts and overweight of head. Her eyes are somewhat large and open. The child's head is regular and its atti- tude natural. The figures generally are long but well draped, and the colour pleasant. Of the paintings in this church, assigned to Cavallini by Vasari, not a trace re- mains, but there are still vestiges of frescos in the church of Santa Maria in Trastevere, which, though damaged by time, are in the style of the mosaics of the tribune. Above a door, to the right as one enters, is a half figure of the Virgin with the infant Saviour holding the orb in the act of benediction.3 This group is inferior to the mosaics

1 See the original document in H. W. Schulz , Denkmaler der Kunst desMittelalters. 4°. Dresden 1860. Vol. IV. p. 127. He is de- scribed as receiving 30 ounces of gold per annum with 2 ounces in addition for lodging.

2 In the tribune of the transept behind the altar. The paintings assigned to Cavallini in S. Gri-

sogono (Vas. Vol. II. p. 81) no longer exist. The frescos in Ara- celi are likewise gone. Ibid. p. 82, and the same fate has attended the frescos at S. Cecilia in Tra- stevere and S. Francesco appresso Ripa. Ibid. Vol. II. p. 82.

3 The head of the infant Sa- viour is not without nature. The general tone of the flesh tints is

Chap. III.

PIETRO CAVALLINI.

109

in design; and whilst the large head and slender neck, the defective hands of the Virgin betray a certain feebleness, the marked outlines and angular draperies, and the ab- sence of relief by shadow prove that Cavallini was a better mosaist than painter. Another Virgin with a small and puny Saviour in her arms, a little less defective than the foregoing, but much repainted, may be noticed near the chief portal.1 It makes a nearer approach in character to the apsis mosaics. In the portico outside, are two fres- cos, one of which represents the annunciation with a figure of a prophet, the second depicts the same subject with the addition of the Eternal sending to the Virgin the in- fant carrying a cross.2

Cavallini here appears as a follower of the Roman school from which he evidently sprung, yet as an artist whose power had reached its full development. It must indeed have been fortunate for Giotto that, on his arrival, he should find such a man ready to assist him and to admit the superiority of his genius. It was but natural then that Cavallini, having helped Giotto in the mosaics of the basilica of S. Pietro,3 should insensibly adopt something of his style. So when Vasari states that Cavallini was the disciple of Giotto, and later "that he mixed the Greek manner with that of Giotto"4, he only confirms the im- pression created by the works of a master who, after having been educated in the old Roman school, adopted, at least in his mosaics, something of the Florentine man- ner. But Cavallini went still further, and in adorning the arches in S. Paolo fuori le Mura, he was content to carry out the designs of Giotto even after that master had left Rome. On the arch of the tribune, whose mosaics of the thirteenth century have been described, the Virgin

yellowish, and the outlines marked with a deep red colour.

1 The draperies are almost all repainted.

2 These two annunciations are likewise almost entirely over-

painted, the last, however, more than the first.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p.p. 81. 82. These mosaics have disappeared.

4 Vas. Vol. II. p. 82.

HO EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. III.

and child enthroned and guarded by two angels was re- presented also in mosaic with the symbol of S. John Evangelist above her, and on the opposite side Pope Be- nedict XL in prayer (AD 1303—1305) presented by S. John the Baptist, with the symbol of S. Mark the Evan- gelist above him. The medallion in the centre of the arch of triumph, representing the Saviour in benediction with the book, was held aloft by two Giottesque angels in fine attitudes; — the symbols of the Evangelists, Luke and Mathew, being depicted at each side in the more mo- dern Florentine manner. The figures of S.S. Benedict and John the Baptist, as well as that of the Saviour in the medallion of the arch of triumph are modernized; but the rest of the mosaic shows that in 1305 but a few years after the departure of Giotto from Rome, an artist, prob- ably Cavallini, was found willing and able to carry out de- signs not his own.1

Had Vasari said that Cavallini painted the apsis of S. Giorgio in Velabro, the subject of which was the Sa- viour sitting on the orb of the world, with the Virgin, S.S. George, Peter and Sebastian at his sides, he would not have been far from the truth. This work indeed seems but a repetition of a mosaic previously there, yet the execution betrays something of the Giottesque man- ner, whilst the types and slender forms of the saints about the Saviour are reminiscent of the mosaics of Santa Maria in Trastevere. This much injured and restored painting, ordered by Cardinal Gaetano Stefaneschi after 1295, is however assigned to Giotto himself.

Vasari brings Cavallini to Florence and assigns to him the annunciation, a fresco in the church of San Marco.1 Yet the annunciation of S. Marco is very different in

1 According to Vasari, Cavallini executed the mosaics of the front and nave of S. Paolo, which perished in the fire of 1823. Vasari (p. 82. Vol. II.).

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 82. Other

works given to Cavallini at S. Marco, the portrait of Urban the Vth with S.S. Peter and Paul, were whitewashed in the time of Vasari. Ibid. p. 83.

Chap. III.

PIETRO CAVALLINI.

Ill

character from the paintings and mosaics of Rome. The Virgin sits on the right of an interior on a cushioned bench. Before her is the bending figure of the angel with a vase of lilies in front and traces of a kneeling person behind him. Above was no doubt the Eternal sending the dove of the Holy Ghost . whose ray alone may now be seen illuminating the Virgin's forehead. This much damaged and repainted fresco might have been executed by a painter of the fourteenth century. The movement may even be said to display something in the intention that recals Angelico, though the work is possibly of an earlier period. The stature and forms of the figures are not without elegance; but the half closed eyes, the small mouth and chin, and the absence of all feeling betray a very inferior artist.1 The miraculous annunciation of the S.S. Annunziata at the Servi of Florence is a repe- tition of the fresco of S. Mark and seldom visible to profane eyes.2 Hence the absence of an opinion upon it may be pardoned. A third annunciation at S. Basilio which doubtless perished in the demolition of that church (AD. 1785) completes the series of paintings at Florence to which Vasari alludes. Continuing his jour- ney through Italy, adds Vasari, Cavallini painted in the north transept of the lower church of San Francesco at Assisi a crucifixion and other incidents of the Passion of the Saviour.3 These are still in existence, but the bio- grapher seems to have confounded Pietro Cavallini with Pietro Lorenzetti. The character of the painting is not Giottesque, either in distribution or in composition, or in

1 Not the slightest resemblance can be traced in this annuncia- tion to those in the church of S. Maria in Trastevere at Rome.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 85. See also in Richa Chiese. Florentine. Folio. Flor. 1754. Vol. VIII. p. 89, a chapter on this annunciation with a supposed criticism by Michael Angelo. The tradition at Flo-

rence was that the Virgin's face Avas painted by an angel.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 82. Richa, Chiese. Vol. I. p. 292. quotes Baldinucci who assigns to Pietro Cavallini a fourth annunciate Virgin preserved in the church of Orbatello at Florence. Vas. Vol. II. p. 83—4. He adds, the altarpiece bears the date of 1485, which destroys the whole theory

112

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. III.

character, type, drawing, drapery, ornament or colour. It is Siennese and of the school of the Lorenzetti. Nor is it possible, in all the subjects that have been enumera- ted, to trace any variety of hand. The school of Giotto is sufficiently represented at S. Francesco of Assisi to ren- der all mistake impossible. Were there any trace of the Giottesque in the paintings assigned to Cavallini, it might be granted that Vasari was right. Cavallini, who was great, especially when he followed the designs of Giotto, and who revealed his Roman education when he had not Giotto for a guide, cannot be the author of paintings, which bear the unmistakeable stamp of the school of Sienna; and Vasari by assigning them to him, simply contradicts his own description of the style of Cavallini. But that Vasari. put the materials of this life together at haphazard is suffi- ciently proved at Orvieto, where he assigns to Cavallini the frescos in the chapel del S.S. Corporale,1 paintings of a third rate order, signed by their author, Ugolino di Prete Ilario. That Cavallini was a successful sculptor need excite no surprise, were it proved that he executed any works of that kind. The examples of the Cosmati were near at hand and numerous at Rome, but the wooden Saviour on the crucifix in S. Paolo fuori le Mura (chapel del Crocifisso)2 is of that colossal and developed anatomy which betrays the age of Donatello more than that of Cavallini.3

Vasari, uncertain as to the period in which Ca- vallini lived, says: "His works were about the year 1364 and he was buried in S. Paul at Rome.774 He gives an epitaph which seems as much entitled to credit as that celebrated one in which archbishop Turpin con-

of Baldinucci. Yet it is probable that the date is that of the orna- mental frame, not of the picture.

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 84.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 85.

3 This crucifix is, according- to Pistolesi, (annot. to Vas. p. 84.

Vol. II) the same mentioned by Vasari. If so it deserves atten- tion only for a miraculous con- versation between the crucified Saviour and S. Brigitta in 1370. Vas. Vol. II. p. 84.

4 Vas. Vol. II, p. 85.

Chap. III.

PIETKO CAVALLINI.

113

secrates the church di S. Apostolo at Florence in the presence of Roland and Oliver.1

The only disciple of Cavallini according to Vasari is one Giovanni da Pistoia. Such an artist existed in the four- teenth century at Pistoia and a few lines may be devoted to him at the proper time.

1 Vas. Proemio. Vol. I. p. 210.

VOL. I.

114

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

CHAPTER IV.

NICCOLA AND GIOVANNI PISANI.

Whilst the sister arts of building, sculpture, and painting revived at Rome during the thirteenth century, Pisa dis- tanced every rival in plastic delineation. Previous to that time she had distinguished herself by an active trading spirit and by the creation of a navy which claimed and wielded a natural supremacy. Her gallies were the dread of the Saracens, whom she assisted to expel from Sicily, and she had alternately subdued, or favoured the small trading cities of the west and south coasts of Italy. Commerce yielded natural fruits in power, wealth, and in- fluence, and these entitled Pisa to hold the foremost rank in the regeneration of art. Niccola, usually called Pisano, or the Pisan, was the chief of a school which restored to sculpture some of its past greatness. He was the forerunner of an array of men, who accomplished much for Italy, and who deserve the place which a grateful posterity assigns to them. But he is entitled to further consideration as one who gave an unexpected impulse to an art which had sunk into the deepest decay. It is less for the purpose of giving a full and precise account of Italian sculptors than with the intention of elucidating the course of the Pisan revival that the following sketch is attempted.

Previous to Niccola Pisano, sculptors existed in most parts of Italy, and humbly illustrated, amongst others, the cities of the centre and the North. Florence had not as yet taken the lead in painting, and was not to envelop sculpture in her influence till later. But in Pisa, Pistoia,

Chap. IV. SCULPTURE IN CENTRAL ITALY.

115

Lucca, and other towns, examples of the twelfth and thir- teenth centuries were numerous. With the assistance of these it may be possible to satisfy the following inquiries. Firstly: Was not Niccola the sole representative of the greatness of sculpture in the middle of the thirteenth century in central Italy? Secondly: Was not the art of Pistoia, Lucca, and Pisa one from which no good culti- vation was to be expected? The earliest sculptures of Pistoia are those of Gruamons, who carved scriptural scenes of the rudest kind on the chief portal of S. Andrea1 and on the architrave of the lateral portal of San Gio- vanni Fuorcivitas. Both are inscribed, — the latter with the words:

"Gruamons magister bonus fee. hoc opus." but the epithet "bonus" applied to one so poor is a telling comment on the art of the time.

Cotemporary with Gruamons was one who, in 1167, executed in relief the Saviour in the midst of the apostles on the architrave of the chief portal of S. Bartolommeo in Pantano. This rude work is inscribed

"Kodolf (?) no. S.P anni Domni. MCLXVII." At S. Andrea again, the reliefs on the pilasters of the chief portal, representing incidents from the new testa- ment, are the defective work of one signing himself "Magister Enricus me fecit."

Equally rude with the sculptors of Pistoia in the twelfth century were those of Lucca, one of whom, Biduinus, executed in low relief a subject on the architrave of the portal of the ex -church of San Salvadore, which he in- scribed with the words:

"Biduvino me fecit hoc opus." in style as defective as the latin of the inscription. The period in which Biduino lived is revealed in the bas-re- liefs cited by Morrona, at San Cassiano near Pisa.2 He was an artist of the close of the twelfth century, and

1 The date 1166 and the sculp- I Pisa Illustrata. Livorno. 8°. 1812. tor's name are inscribed. Both Vol. II. p. 33. are correctly given in Morrona.) 2 Signed: "Hoc opus quod cernis

116

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

neither better nor worse than Gruamons of Pistoia. Ro- bertas, his cotemporary at Lucca, executed incidents taken from the old testament on a baptismal font, to the right as one enters the church of S. Frediano. He was a sculptor less defective than Gruamons.1 One of the completest monuments of the twelfth century, however, is the quadran- gular pulpit of S. Michele at Groppoli,2 the faces of which represent, in low reliefs of soft stone, incidents from the new testament.3 A mutilated inscription may still be read as follows:

"Hoc opus fecit fieri hoc opus (sic) Guiscardus

pleb anno dni Mil. CLXXXXIIII.4

Defective as those of Gruamons at S. Andrea, the figures of Groppoli are cut into the flat without any sort of rounding. The incidents are in the old traditional forms, but represented by one living in the infancy of art. The figures, like slender dolls, have draperies marked by rectangular or circular incisions. The flat square heads form but one plane with the neck. The limbs hang, as it were by threads, together, the features being merely scratched on the surface.5 About the close of the twelfth century, Bonamico seems to have been extensively em- ployed at Pisa. Bas-reliefs that may be assigned to him on the curved cornice or frieze of the east gate of the Baptistery, represent the Redeemer, the Virgin, and S. John with apostles and angels.6 The same flat surface, the

Biduinus docte peregit. Undecies centum et octoginta post anni tempore quo Deus, est, fluxerant de Virgine natus." Morrona ubi sup. Vol. II. p. 39. See this childish work fully described in ErnstForster, Beitrage zur neueren Kunstges chi cht e. Leipzig 1835. p. 8.

1 His font is inscribed: Mi.M.e CLI Robertus magist

2 Now the oratory of the Villa Dalpino — 5 miles on the road from Pistoia to Pescia.

s The visitation, the nativity, and the flight into Egypt. A ser-

pent at one of the angles supports the desk. The pulpit rests on columns whose capitals are filled with heads of animals and mon- sters, — whose bases rest on the backs of lions. Of the latter, one paws a man, the other a dragon.

4 Ciampi. op. cit. p. 28 gives this inscription minus the word "Guiscardus".

5 An archangel killing the dra- gon, of old above the portal and now transferred into the church, is an example of the same style.

6 Half lengths.

Chap. IV. SCULPTURE IN CENTRAL ITALY. 117

same forms indicated by incisions, may be noted here as at Groppoli; and perfect identity of style with that of a tomb in the Campo Santo, reveals the artist whose name is inscribed there:

"opus quod videtis Bonusamicus fecit .p. eo orate.m A life size figure in a niche of the Duomo, near the gate of S. Raineri exhibits the same style and manner. Yet it may be observed that the figures of Bonamico are shorter and stouter than those of Groppoli.2 That this sculptor lived at the close of the twelfth century is apparent from the resemblance of his work to others of that time. The Baptistery of Pisa was founded in 1153 3 and remained incomplete till 1278. It may therefore be in- ferred that Bonamico was one of the first artists employed there.

A better sculptor, but still of feeble powers, was Bonanno, who executed in the Duomo of Pisa, in 1180, bronze gates which perished in the sixteenth century,4 and, in 1186, those which still close the portal of the Duomo at Mon- reale.5 These gates represent in high relief 43 scenes of the old and new testament, and appear from a comparison with Ciampini's engravings of those of Bonanno at Pisa, to have been cast in the same mould. Nor can any sen-

1 This tomb, to the left of the entrance in the Campo Santo, is carved with the Saviour, enthroned in the act of benediction in an elliptical glory , the symbols of the four evangelists, and the lamb and star. Beneath is a figure of David playing, not intended for this tomb, but by the same hand.

2 The annotators of Vasari cite an inscription in the church of Mensano near Sienna as follows: "Agla opus quod videtis Bonus- amicus magister fecit pro eo ore- tis".

3 As appears fromSardo's chron. in Archivio storico, Vol. IV. p. 83. with funds in part granted by Roger king of Sicily — byDeoti- salvi, as is vouched for by the

following inscription on a pilaster " M.CLIII.menseaug. fundata fuit hec Ecclesia", — on an opposite one, "Deotisalvi magister hujus operis". Of the same architect is S. Sepolcro of Pisa, inscribed on a marble "Hujus operis Fabricator Ds te Salvet nominatur".

4 The gates of Bonanno were dated 1180. They perished in a fire, Octob. 25 (Pis. style) 1596. Morrona ubi sup. Vol. I. p. 169— 70.

5 The gates of the Duomo of Monreale by Bonanno are in- scribed "MCLXXXVI. Ind. III. Bonannus civis Pisanus me fecit". They represent 13 scenes from Genesis, 7 from the patriarchs and prophets, 23 from the new testa- ment.

118 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. IV.

sible difference be perceived between these and the gates of the south transept of the Duomo of Pisa.1 Various and sometimes ludicrous are the conjectures of historians respecting the origin or authorship of the latter. All agree in considering their sacred subjects in high relief as grotesque and exaggerated.2 Yet they are less defec- tive than the reliefs of Gruamons or Biduino, and can not be of an earlier period than the middle of the twelfth century. The date may indeed be defined almost with certainty by observing the mode in which the crucifixion was represented. The Saviour was exposed on the cross with a nail to each foot. The body was slightly bent and the head inclined towards the Virgin, standing at the base of the instrument of death. The eyes were closed. The Redeemer on the cross was never depicted with closed eyes in the eleventh century. At S. Urbano in Rome, and S. Angelc in Formis, he may be seen alive and serenely suffering. It was not till the twelfth century, as at S. Clemente (Rome), that the idea of agony and death was expressed. The south gate of the Duomo of Pisa may therefore be assigned to that time and to Bon- anno, who thus appears as an artist continuing and but slightly improving the art of sculpture, as it found ex- pression in Pistoia.3

With scarcely perceptible progress sculpture was prac- tised in Parma at the close of the twelfth century (1178 — 96) by Benedictus, respecting whom the reader may study the following excerpt:.

On the pilasters and lunette of the northern gate in the Baptistery of Parma, he carved the roots of Jesse and of

1 Called gates of S. Raineri.

2 Morrona, whose patriotism cannot be denied. Vol. I, p. 314—15.

3 Bonanno may be the same who, in 1152 to 1164, gave de- signs for the walls of Pisa. See Muratori. The subjects on this gate are : the annunciation , the visitation, the birth of Christ, the adoration of the Magi, the pre-

sentation in the temple, the flight into Egypt, the massacre of the innocents, the baptism of Christ, the temptation, the transfiguration, the resurrection of Lazarus, the entry into Jerusalem, the washing of the feet, the last supper, the capture, the crucifixion , the des- cent to limbo, Christ at the se- pulchre, the ascension, and the death of the Virgin.

Chap. IV. SCULPTURE IN CENTRAL ITALY.

119

Joachim, and scenes from the life of the Saviour and S. John the Baptist.1 — On the pilasters of the eastern gate, the seven works of mercy, the parable of the labourers in the vine; — on the architrave, the resurrection, and in the lunette, the Last Judgment; — on the third gate, a medallion of the Saviour in benediction with the Lamb and S. John the Baptist at his sides; — and in the lunette, the trees of good and evil and allegorical subjects; — in the body of the building various episodes. His name was carved on the architrave of the northern gate: "Bis binis demptis annis de mille ducentis incepit dictus opus hoc sculptor Benedictus."

All these reliefs are in the manner of Benedictus, whose works in the Duomo deserve greater attention and may serve as a better illustration of his manner. He executed in 1178 a descent from the cross in the third chapel to the right of the chief entrance in the Duomo. Without shrinking from the apparent difficulty of the task, he executed this work in high relief similar to that of the bronze gates at Pisa, and crowded together about 22 figures within a frame cut out in patterns filled up with black. Traces of gold and colour on some of the figures reveal the custom of colouring- carved work, common to most countries of the continent at this and a later time. . The Saviour, a long wooden form cut into the flat with scarcely any rounding, was supported tenderly by Joseph of Arimathea, whilst the right arm, freed from the cross, was held by the Virgin and an angel in a horizontal flying position. Between the Virgin and Joseph, a figure holding a cup and gathering the blood from the Saviour's side, was inscribed "Ecclesia exaltatur". Behind the Virgin, S. John, whose melancholy resignation was not ill rendered, and the three Marys, completed the composition. The feet of the Saviour were still separately nailed to the cross, as well as the left arm, which Nicodemus on a ladder was in the act of removing. At the foot of the cross, a priest with drooping head, seemed crushed by the hand of the angel Raphael flying horizontally and reproaching him in the words of the inscription "Vere iste films dei erat." Near the priest, the centurion who believed, and a row of persons, in front of whom, the dicers playing for the garment. The figure of the Saviour, wooden, and indicated in the nude by mere linear incisions, was not so long or ill pro- portioned as those around him; nor was the head as re- pulsive as many of the period, but the closed eyes and the

1 In the baptism the Saviour I up to the middle by a mere and S. John are both concealed | wave.

120

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

contracted brow indicated the agony endured. The angels, in horizontal positions, did not in the least produce the im- pression of flight. Their heads were like those of the re- maining figures, large. The draperies were straight and meaningless and the embroidered borders and slippers were incisions stopped with colour.1

This primitive but curious work, exhibiting merely so much progress in art as might serve to place Benedictus on a level with Bonamico and somewhat above Gruamons and the sculptor of Groppoli, was inscribed.

"Anno milleno centeno septuageno octavo scultor patuit mense secundo antelami dictus sculptor fuit hie Benedictus."2

Years continued to elapse, and sculpture remained al- most in its primitive state. In Lucca, the front of the church of S. Martin was completed in 1204 by one Gui- dectus, who perhaps excelled Benedictus in the proportions of his long figures, in rendering movement and draperies, and defining the nude. Yet in a figure in high relief of S. Martin on horseback dividing his garment, great rudeness of execution still remained.3 Later works in the portico

1 The inscriptions are interesting. The high priest whose head droops beneath the touch of Gabriel is in- scribed: "Sinagogadeponitur."The figure drawing the nail of the left arm is inscribed: "Nicodemus",that of the figure supporting the body : "Joseph ab Arimathea1'. The figure gathering the blood from the lance wound is "Johannes Nazarenus". The Virgin, "S.Maria", the Marys, "Salome, Maria Jacobi,MariaMag- dalene". The sun and moon above the cross are inscribed "Sol et Luna". The cross is of rough un- hewn logs.

2 A pulpit in S. Leonardo, near the porta S. Miniato at Florence still exists, of which Forster (Bei- trage ubi sup. p. 13) gives an accurate description. It was of old in S. Pietro di Scheraggio at Florence. One of its bas-reliefs is a descent from the cross, whose composition is not unlike that of Benedictus of Parma. Forster' s

theory, that this pulpit, being exe- cuted at Florence, proves the exis- tence of a school from which Nic- cola arose, is untenable. Rumohr noticingthis pulpit assigns it to the 9th or 10th century. Forschun- gen. Vol. I. p. 252. A print of the bas-reliefs may be seen in Richa. Chiese. Vol. II. p. 18. The author affirms that the reliefs were originally taken in the 11th century from the captured Fiesole.

3 An inscription: "Mille que sex denis templum fundamine jacto lustro subbino sacrum stat fine peracto" shows that this church was founded in 1060.

On the front beneath the last column to the right of the gallery, a figure holds a scroll on which is written: "Mille CCIIII. con- didit electi tarn pulcras dextra Guidecti." Guidectus is the archi- tect and probably also the sculp- tor of the front.

Chap. IV. SCULPTURE IN CENTRAL ITALY.

121

of the same church, representing scenes from the life of S. Martin, allegories of the seasons, the Saviour in glory guarded by two angels — the Virgin and the twelve apostles on the architrave, — showed that, as late as 1233; sculpture must still make a weary progress before it could be entitled to serious admiration.1

Still later a sculptor of Pisa adorned the pilasters and architrave of the eastern gate of the Baptistery with scenes from the old and new testament,2 the compo- sition of which contrasted advantageously with those of Bonamico on the frieze above them. The figures were distinguished by a certain movement and animation, by good proportion in their slenderness, and by fairly in- tended draperies. The principal one of the Saviour in benediction was not without dignity, and technically su- perior in design to the Saviour above the portico of S. Martin of Lucca. In the accompanying seasons, the in- cidents were conceived with spirit, and the nude recalled the antique. It was a work which could not date earlier than the middle of the thirteenth century, yet how distant from those of Mccola of the very same time. Not only were the conception and execution, compared to his, rude and primitive ; but, as in all the works of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries previously noticed, the creation of men of a different spirit and school.

But even in 1250, Guido da Como who executed the pulpit of S. Bartolommeo in Pantano at Pistoia, showed himself little better as a sculptor than Benedictus of Parma, Bonamico of Pisa, or Guidectus of Lucca. Guido's com- position was symmetrical, his forms and types animated with a gentle religious spirit, but his figures had repose approaching to immobility. They were long and slender

1 The following inscription is concluding- with his visit to limbo, in the portico "Hoc opus cepit and a figure of David, the seasons fieri Abelenato et Aldebrando ope- in a winding ornament, — on the rarii A. D. 1233". architrave the sermon of S. John

the Baptist. The same before

2 On the pilasters the Saviour j Herod, the dance before Herodias in glory, with incidents of his life | and the decapitation.

122

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

in stature and carved on the flat with little more art than those of Groppoli. Yet feeble as his talent appears, Guido never wanted employment; and took rank as late as 1293 amongst those who laboured in the Cathedral of Orvieto.1 Pages have been written to support or to refute the contrary theories that Pisan art before AD. 1250 was in- fantine or decrepid, but the contest rests on a simple and admitted fact; and it may be sufficient to observe that Pisan art was rude and primitive; — that in the earliest

1 Vasari does not hesitate to call the works of Guido da Como, "goffe" (grotesque) Vas. ubi sup. Vol.1, p. 283. See Delia Valle stor. del Duomo d'Orvieto. p. 263.

The pulpit of S. Bartolommeo in Pantano is quadrangular and of beautifully polished white mar- ble. It stands in the chaunting loft, and is supported on three pillars, the capitals of which are adorned with small figures, whilst the pediments rest on a winged lion, a lioness, and a man, the first gnawing a basilisk, the se- cond accompanied by her cub. The annunciation and the adora- tion of the Magi adorn the sides, and in the front are the nativity, the presentation in the temple, Christ at Emmaus, his descent to limbo, his appearance to the disciples , and the incredulity of S. Thomas. Three figures on one pedestal, support the desk at one angle of the pulpit, and at the opposite one stands an angel with a book resting on the head of a horned monster, with the eagle above him.

On* the border is the following inscription :

Guido de Como me cunctis car- mine promo, anno domini 1250.

Est operi Sanus superestans Tur- risianus namque

ride prona vigil. ..Deus inde corona.

The figures on the angles are better than the rest and a cer-

tain inferiority may be noticed in the execution of the two side re- liefs as well as in the nativity and the incredulity of S. Thomas; but the pulpit, as a monument of sculpture, cannot hold a high rank amongst the productions of the 13th century. See also for com- parison the bas-reliefs with short large headed figures on the frontof the Duomo of Modena, represent- ing Enoch and Elias with thejfol- lowing inscription between them: "Inter scultores quanto sis dignus claret scultura nunc honore Wili- gelme tua"; the still ruder sculp - tures on the Roman gate at Milan erected after the defeat of Fre- derick IId at Milan and inscribed "Gerardus de Castagnianega fecit hoc opus", the prophets above the portal of the cathedral of Cremona by' 'Magister JacobusPor- rata de Cumis" 1274. Anselmo da Campione was architect and sculptor in the Duomo of Modena in 1209. Calvi, Memorie, Mi- lan 1859. See also the rude sculp- tures on the cathedral of Verona inscribed: "Artificem gnarum qui sculpserit hsec Nicolaum hunc concurrentes laudent per secula gentes". The same epigraph with the date 1135 marks the period of similar work on the Duomo ofFer- rara. The oldestknown sculptor of Sienna is Gregorius, whose name and the date 1209 according to Milanesi(Storia civile ed artistica di Sienna, ubi sup. p. 76) were on sculptures above the portal of S. Giorgio of Sienna.

Chap. IV.

NICCOLA PISANO.

123

works of Pistoia, sculpture was homely in conception and childish in execution ; — that in Parma and Lucca, though still rude and defective, it had a conventional Christian spirit; — and that in the early part of the thirteenth century, it maintained that spirit at Pisa without any very sensible progress in the expression of form. Such was the character of sculpture when, in 1260, Niccola Pisano completed the pulpit of the Baptistery of Pisa.

This remarkable monument, erected in the form of a hexagon, rested upon nine columns; viz. one, central, based on the shoulders of a man, a griffin, and animals, quaintly grouped together, three reposing on the backs of lions and a lioness with her cubs, three on simple pediments, and two supporting the steps. A trefoil arch spanned the space between each of the six principal pillars; and pilasters start- ing from the capitals, regulated the ornamented cornice of the pulpit. In front of each of these pilasters stood a statue symbolizing one of the Virtues. Fortitude was represented by a figure of the Juvenile Hercules with a lion's cub on his right shoulder and his left hand in the mouth of a slain lion; — Fidelity by a female holding a dog in her arms; — Charity by a woman with an infant. Of other figures , the emblematic meaning was less apparent. For instance at the angle near the steps, an angel was repre- sented sitting on a lion with a deer in its teeth. In one hand, he bore the stump of a sceptre, in the other a small bas-relief of the crucifixion. Possibly this was intended for the symbol of Faith. In the births of the arches four evan- gelists and six prophets were ingeniously placed. Seven triple columns supported the parapet of the pulpit, and framed five bas-reliefs representing the birth of the Sa- viour, the adoration of the wise men, the presentation in the temple, the crucifixion and the Last Judgment.

In these bas-reliefs Niccola displayed but elementary knowledge of the maxims of composition. In one of the subjects, that of the adoration of the Magi, a certain sym- metry might be found, but elsewhere all equilibrium of mass was absent. Yet in the midst of an obvious imita- tion of the antique, and subservience of pagan models to Christian subjects and thought, Niccola showed himself gifted with a lively fancy, a considerable talent in the expression of the ruder forms of passion such as despair.

124

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

anger. But this peculiarity, contrasting with a certain cold and imperfect imitation of old classic models, could not but unfavorably impress the spectator, especially when he considered the short and herculean build of the figures. Niccola however, with an energy and vigour beyond praise seemed resolved to allow no difficulty to repel him. He chiselled his figures in the highest possible relief, detached them completely, and followed without hesitation the old Roman system of sculpture. He polished the marble with most praiseworthy care, working it out according to a cold, conventional, but unwavering system. With the drill, he cut out the corners of mouths, the pupils of eyes, the nostrils and ears, and stopped the perforations with black paste. The hair and ornaments he gilt; and traces of the gold are still in parts visible. None of the compositions of the pulpit more strikingly illustrates the system of classic imitation peculiar to Niccola than that of the birth of the Saviour. In the middle of the space, the Virgin, recumbent on a couch, would be a fit representation of the queenly Dido, and the figure behind, pointing to her with a gesture and apparently conversing with an angel, is more like an empress than the humble follower of a carpenter's wife in Bethlehem; Joseph, with an air of wonder, the two classic maids washing the infant in a basin, the sheep on the foreground, and the episode of the adoration of the shepherds, crowded in the right of the background, are a strange and confused medley of antique forms and old typical Christian conceptions of subject. Of Christian sentiment not a trace is to be found. In the symmetrical arrangement of the adoration of the Magi the florid Roman style of the figures is most characteristic ; but the irregular proportion of the figures, as compared with each other, is striking. The heads are uncommonly large, especially in the more distant figures. The angels are not messengers of heaven but Roman antiques, and the horses are equally reminiscent of the old times of the declining empire. In the presentation at the temple, the simple groups and figures are mere imitations also, whilst

Chap. IV.

NICCOLA PISANO.

125

in the crucifixion, the body of the martyred Redeemer re- minds one of nothing more than of a suffering Hercules. In the Last Judgment, which is the finest of the series, Niccola's vigour and energy found play. In the upper centre the Saviour sat enthroned in a fine attitude, beneath him the elect, the damned, resurrection and Lucifer. It would be difficult to find a better imitation of the classic nude in various attitudes than is here to be noticed, especially in females. Strange are the figures of the de- vils and of Satan; the latter with a grotesque head and ears, the body and claws of a vulture united to legs re- sembling those of an ox. Equally so is the figure of a devil with the body of an infant and a head as large as the torso, revealing the features of one of those hideous masks peculiar to antiquity. This curiously conceived devil seems to swallow one of the arms of a sufferer convulsed with agony, as he lies trodden down by the claws of Satan. The same study of the classic was be- trayed in all the isolated figures, such as those at the angles below the cornice of the pulpit. In the symbolical figure of Fortitude, the movement and attitude and the short stout form recalled the antique, an antique of a coarse and fleshy character, but conventional and mo- tionless.1

Niccola thus suddenly appears in Pisa in the year 1260 as one who rejecting the conventional religious senti- ment which had marked his predecessors and cotempo- raries, revived the imitation of the classic Roman period, and remained a mere spectator at first of the struggle for the new and Christian types of the early school of Florence. Grand in comparison with Guido and his pre- decessors, whose religious sentiment was allied to the ru- dest and most primitive execution, he gave new life to

1 "This pulpit suffered a few [ Roncioni. Istorie Pisane , of the years ago a serious and memora- I 16th century published by Fran- ble damage, the heads of many i cesco Bonaini in Archiv. figures having been broken off by Stori co. Flor. 1844. Vol. VI,

Lorenzino dei Medici to em- i p. 284.

hellish and adorn his study." |

126

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

an apparently extinct art, and had in common with the men of his time at Pisa nothing but the subject. Pagan form subservient to Christian ideas, such was the cha- racter of Mccola's sculpture. To nature he owed little — to the Roman antique much, and hence occasional stiff- ness and coldness. In general expression, the idea of ten- derness was sacrificed to that of masculine force and mus- cular fleshiness of knit. In form, the stout square her- culean type of the Roman decline, somewhat conventionally generalized, was that which he preferred. Even his fancy and occasional vehemence in the delineation of suffering and pain, were imitated from the antique more than from nature, and the heads of his devils or of Lucifer were but the grotesque masks of antiquity. In composition, the equilibrium of the masses was seldom attended to or con- sidered. In execution, the figures were detached and mo- delled like those of ancient Rome; the marble was highly polished and worked with technical skill, but less in obedience to inspiration than to rule.

The astonished observer pauses before this wonderful production of the thirteenth century and asks whence the artist came.1 His memory may retrace the wonders of the chisel of Michael Angelo, and he may assent for a mo- ment to the belief that Niccola, a miracle at his time, was a creative genius capable at once of transforming the art of Pisa. But this impression vanishes with the conviction that he is not a creative genius, and the re- collection that the works of Michael Angelo in their grandeur still reveal also the greatness of Ghirlandaio and Donatello. The Ghirlandaio and Donatello of Niccola he cannot discover in any of the schools of Central Italy, any more than he can trace a single similar work previous to this pulpit, which is the creation of a man in the ma- turity of his talent. He will inquire, if it be possible that all previous efforts of the master should have pe-

of Giovanni that he studied in Rome. Vol. I. p. 277.

Chap. IV.

NICCOLA PISANO.

127

rished, and he will smile at the baseless theory, which would found his style upon the imitation of a single classic monument of Pisa.1 He may then either consign the problem to the limbo of unsettled questions or conclude that the artist received his education elsewhere.

Pisa lies on the sea. She commanded in the thirteenth century the trade of the west coast of Italy. She had fought and made alliances with the Normans of Sicily and Apulia, and she was the protector of some amongst the small trading republics at the southern extremity of the Peninsula. Her population was sometimes recruited by emigrants from the most distant parts of the South, and amongst these in the thirteenth century was perhaps one Peter of Apulia, the father of Niccola, known to the readers of Vasari as the Pisan. That Niccola became a citizen of Pisa and lived in the parish of S. Blasius of Ponte di Pisa is proved by records of certain authen- ticity. That his father Pietro di Apulia was dead in 1266 is equally certain,2 but no document reveals either his previous age, profession, or habitation.

1 According to Vas. (ub. sup. Vol. I, 258—9) Niccola having studied under Greek sculptors in the Duomo and Baptistery of Pisa imitated the chase of Meleager carved on the tomb of the Coun- tess Matilda in the Campo Santo. The chase of Meleager is a da- maged monument of the decline of classic art. Vasari errs in supposing that it is on the tomb of the Countess Matilda, this mo- nument having also reliefs but of another subject.

2 See Rumohr (Forschungen) Vol. II. p. 145 and following, and Gaetano Milanesi, Documenti per la Storia dell' arte Senese. 8°. Sienna 1854. Vol. I. p. 145 and following. In the records Niccola is called variously: 1266: "Ma- gister Niccolus de parrocia S. Blasii de ponte de Pisis quond. Petri." (Milanesi. Vol. I, p. 145)... 1266. May 11: "Magister NicholamPietri de Apulia." (Ibid.

p. 149.) 1272: "Magister Nichola pisanus quondam Petri de .."Ciam- pi. Not. Ined. p. 122) 1732: "Ma- gister Nichola quondam Petri de Senis S. Blasii pisani." An in- teresting question is, whether the name of the place, as Apulia or Senis, applies to Niccola or to his father. In .the record of 1273 no doubt "de Senjs" applies to Nic- cola and not to Pietro. These records prove that the freedom of a city entitled a person on whom it was conferred to declare him- self "of that city". Hence Nic- cola is at various times of Apu- lia, of Pisa, and of Sienna. It has been assumed indeed, and we have heard it urged with reference to the surname of Apulia, that Nic- cola being originally a Pisan ob- tained it after a journey and a stay in South Italy. Yet the first work produced by him at Pisa is in the style of productions existing in Apulia.

128

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

It might be presumed from the absence of all produc- tions due to Niccola, before 1260, as well as from the evident uncertainty of Vasari's notices, that the sculptor had not been long in Pisa before producing the pulpit of S. Giovanni. The question which remains to be answered is simply, whether in South Italy, and namely in Apulia, there was an art superior to that of Pisa.1 It has already been proved that in Sicily and on the south coast, mo- saists of superior talents had been found by the Normans in sufficient number to adorn in the twelfth century many splendid edifices. It is equally curious and interesting to find that sculpture in South Italy was still at a high standard in the thirteenth. At Ravello near Amalphi — a trading republic devoted to Pisa, — the cathedral of S. Pan- taleone possesses a pulpit resting on columns borne by lions. The steps which lead up to the desk support a marble balustrade inlaid with mosaics ; and above the arch leading into the pulpit is a latin inscription recording that Nicolo Rufolo commissioned it in 1272 of Nicholas de Bar- tolommeus de Foggia. The key of the arch of the door- way is a fine classical bust of Sigalgaita Rufolo, of life size, in a diadem from which hangs a long rich tassel. Her hair, divided and gracefully twined along the ears, exposes a fine forehead and a face of oval shape. The brow and eyes are noble, the nose regular, and the features elegantly chiselled and broadly carved. The neck is massive. Nicholas de Bartolommeus of Foggia evidently studied the antique like his cotemporary Niccola at Pisa, and perhaps better models. The two styles are essentially similar. The marble has the same high polish and technical execution. The use of the drill is common to both on

1 It may be inferred from Va- sari himself, that in South Italy there were some very remarkable architects. The fabulous Fuccio, " a Florentine architect and sculp- tor," whom he invented, is con- sidered by him to have completed j some great monuments ; such as |

the Castel di Capoana and the Castel del Uovo at Naples the foundation of which was due to the equally fabulous Buono — the gates by the Volturno at Ca- pua and the walls of the hunting park at Amalphi. Vas. p. 262. I Vol. I.

Chap. IV.

NICCOLA PISANO.

129

the capitals of the door are other portraits, one a male profile, less happily rendered, but still of the same hand. Had not the name of Nicholas been united to that of Bartolommeo of Foggia, thereby proving the existence of two cotemporary sculptors of different families, the busts of Ravello and the pulpit of Pisa might have been as- signed to one hand. Foggia was in the thirteenth century the ordinary residence of the Emperor Frederick the Se- cond. Delia Valle, in his Lettere Sanese,1 devotes two chapters to prove that monarch's patronage of art, and mentions coins of his reign as worthy of serious admira- tion. His palace at Foggia was erected in 1233 and on the solitary arch of it which now remains may be read the following inscription:

"Anno ab incarnation f, 1223 m. Junii. XI. ind. Reg.

Dno n Frederico imperatori rex sep. aug. a III et

Regis Sicili?e XXVI. hoc opus feliciter inceptum pphato

Diio perficiente.,;

"Sic Cesar fieri jussit opus pto (?precepto) Bartolo-

meus sic construxit illud,"2

Bartolommeus, the architect of Foggia, may possibly be the father of Nicholas the sculptor of the pulpit of Ravello.

The pulpit is not the sole monument in S, Panta- leone. Of equal interest though of an earlier time are the bronze gates, in compartments, representing subjects from the Passion of the Saviour, executed, as appears from the inscription, for Sergio Muscetola and his wife Sigel- gaita in 1179-3 The compositions of these gates are those of the early Christian time, but well ordered as to space, and filled with animated figures of somewhat slender forms. In character they recall to mind the fine mosaics of Ce-

1 Delia Valle, Lettere Sanesi. Vol. I. p. 205 and following'.

2 It is amusing to find Delia Valle, Lettere Sanesi. Vol. II. p. 20, change the words pto into Pis. in order to prove that Bar- tolommeo of Foggiu is the same as Bartolommeus Pisanus ;i bell founder at Pisa in the L3th cen- tury. This theme Morrona (Pisa

Illust. Vol. II. p. 97) extensively develops.

3 Here the Saviour deposed from the cross , and the Christ at the limbo are counterparts of the same scenes repeated in cotemporary miniatures and paintings. The Saviour is crucified with the feet separately nailed, as usual up to this time.

VOL. I.

130

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

falu and Palermo and exhibit the same moving principle in the artist. Gates from the same casts may be seen at Monreale, rivalling those of Bonanno and signed by the artist whose name is inscribed "Barisanus Tranensis me fecit." At Trani itself is a third edition of them/ and thus in South Italy, as early as the twelfth century, and three years earlier than Bonanno, a sculptor of Trani is traced, who so far surpasses the Pisan that one might say his art is new and admirable. Trani, Foggia, both in Apulia, seem to have had good and intelligent artists in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, sculptors in every sense superior to those of Pisa,2 and one of them, Nicholas di Bartolommeo , so like Niccola of Pisa in style that their works may be confounded. It is therefore neither con- trary to fact nor to experience to suppose that Niccola of Pisa was a born Apulian, and that he was educated in that country. It might be urged indeed that in the in- scription of the pulpit of Pisa he is called Pisanus, but every citizen had a right to that qualification after he had taken the freedom. It might be argued that Nicholas of Foggia was a pupil of Niccola of Pisa; but if so, might it not be natural to expect that history should record his presence elsewhere than in the South of Italy where his work is alone preserved, and would not his style have made a nearer approach to the later one of Giovanni?

It is a remarkable circumstance that one of the ear- liest works which Vasari attributes to Niccola Pisano,

1 The gates at Monreale are divided into 7 courses of 4 com- partments separated from each other by somewhat heavy orna- ments containing- medallions with semi-figures. The two central upper compartments contain the same figure of the Saviour, with S. John on the left and S. Elias on the right. The four next subjects are the crucifixion, the resurrection, the Virgin and child, and S. Nicho- las. In the 3d, 4th, 5th and 6th are apostles. The 7th course con-

tains a genius, an archer, and the arms of D. Giovanni di Rohan.

2 There were many monuments of classic art at Naples in the 13th century. Even now see S. Paul of the Theatines rebuilt on the site of a temple of Castor and Pollux , the antique lower course and statues being preserved with figures of Apollo, Jupiter, Mer- cury, and what not at Psestum, Reggio, Locri, Sibari, Tarentum, Brindisi, Elis, Baise , Pozzuoli.

Chap. IV.

NICCOLA PISANO.

131

is the arch of S. Domenico at Bologna, executed, he says, in the year 1231/ but which was only completed in 1266 — 7 by Fra Guglielnio. No records have ever con- firmed the biographers assertions respecting the erection or remodelling, in the earlier part of the century, of edifices in divers parts of Italy by Niccola Pisano,2 whilst in many instances these assertions have been posi- tively contradicted. The oldest records of the Duomo of Sienna (1229)3 make no mention of Niccola Pisano, as being present at the foundation of that edifice ; and as the annotators of the latest edition of Vasari sensibly affirm, the biographer, after having stated that fact, con- tradicts himself when he afterwards declares that the Siennese commissioned of him the pulpit of their Duomo because "the fame of that of Pisa'7 had reached them.4 The fame of Niccola would have been great long before the year 1260, had he, as a Pisan, executed the numerous works which are assigned to him previous to that date. It was on the fifth of October that he signed a contract in the Baptistery of Pisa, where he was then apparently employed, with Fra Melano, supervisor or operarius of the cathedral of Sienna,5 by which he bound himself to the following conditions:

Firstly: That ho, should, between October and the No- vember next following, deliver at Sienna eleven columns of white marble with the necessary capitals, and sixteen smaller pillars and slabs for the erection of a pulpit in S. Maria. He was also to furnish the lions or pediments, which probably were to be found ready made at Pisa. Secondly: From

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 260.

2 M. Ernst Forster affirms that he saw a record at Pistoia prov- ing that Niccola worked in the Duomo in 1242. The record itself lie does not give. Is he quite sure of the date? See Beitrage ub. sup. p. Gl.

3 Kumohr quotes original re- cords of payments for work in the Duomo of Sienna, as early as 1229. Forschungen, ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 124. Gaetano Mi-

lanesi going- back still further (Sulla Storia civile ed ar- tistica Senese. 8°. Sienna 1802. p. 59) notices Bellamino who in 1198 restored the Fonte Branda which was repaired anew in 1248 by Giovanni Stefani, then capo maestro of the Duomo.

4 Vasari, Vol. I aim. to p. 2GG.

5 Vasari erroneously states that Guglielnio Marescotti was podesta of Sienna ;tt this time. See annot. to Wis. Vol. 1. p. 267.

132

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

and after the next month of March he was to reside at Sienna until the pulpit was finished, and to accept no other commission ; but he was, if he desired it, to have, four times a year, a fortnight's leave to visit Pisa, either for the purpose of giving counsel in the matter of the completion of the Duonio and Baptistery there, or for his own business. Thirdly : In the same month of March he was to bring with him to Sienna his pupils Arnolfo and Lapo, who were, likewise, bound to remain at Sienna till the pulpit was completed. Fourthly: The price of the marble columns and slabs was fixed at sixty five Pisan pounds, the daily pay of Niccola, at 8 — that of his pupils 6 Pisan "solidos," besides bed and lodging. Fifthly: If Johannes, the son of Niccola, declared himself ready and willing to work under his father, he should receive half the salary of the latter. Sixthly: None of the sculptors were to be subject to any real or personal service in the republic of Sienna. Seventhly : Breach of contract on either side was forbidden under a penalty of 100 Pounds Pisan.1

It was not long before this last clause threatened to become a serious charge. Arnolfo had not made his appearance in Sienna in May of the following year, and Fra Melano issued a peremptory injunction to Niccola to fulfil the contract. This done, the pulpit was com- menced, and about November of 1268 completed, Niccola, Giovanni his son, and Arnolfo, Lapo 5 Donato and Ooro, Florentines, being employed together in its erection.2

The pulpit, of octagonal form, rested upon nine columns, four of which were supported on lions and lionesses, four on simple pediments and the central one upon a group of 9 figures in half relief. Seven bas-reliefs covered the faces of the pulpit. Firstly: The nativity. Secondly: The ado- ration of the Magi. Thirdly: The presentation in the temple. Fourthly: The flight into Egypt. Fifthly: The massacre of the innocents. Sixthly: The crucifixion. Se- venthly: The Last Judgment.

The nativity. One of the finest groups in this relief is that of the women washing the infant Saviour. The latter

1 See the original document in R u m o h r , Forscliungen. Vol'. II. j), 145 and following-, and Mila-

nesi, Doc. Sen. uL. sup. Vol. I. p. 145 and following.

2 Rumohr. Milanesi, ub. sup.

Chap. IV.

NICCOLA PIS AND.

133

however, of a powerful and bony build, is essentially classic in form.

The adoration of the Magi. It would be difficult to find a finer group in this century, than that of the Virgin and child adored by the kneeling king, who kisses the Saviour's foot. The foreground figures on horseback seem to be copied from the Roman antique.

The presentation in the temple is ill ordered and over- crowded, the flight into Egypt simple and not ill rendered.

The massacre of the innocents. Niccola had an opportunity here of expressing action in the most varied forms; and the movement of single figures is accordingly fine and forcible ; whilst some faces are remarkable for character and expres- sion. One cannot but mark in the vehemence of gesture of soldiers, tearing babes from the grasp of their mothers, or in the act of killing them, a certain tendency to exaggera- tion. Yet it is obvious that Niccola's treatment of these groups was of service to later artists and even to Giotto. The massacre of the innocents is however a subject in which even the great Florentine found some difficulty to conciliate action with good distribution, and Niccola is here less suc- cessful in arranging his groups than in the pulpit of Pisa.

The crucifixion. The student of Roman classic form will find it here, but Niccola endeavoured, as it would seem, to combine classicism and the study of nature; hence a per- ceptible want of unity. Not only was the Christian ideal of the divine nature of the Redeemer absent from the mind of the sculptor, but he lost the conventional nobleness of the classic form in a painful realistic study of nature. The Saviour is here less after the Roman antique than in the pulpit of Pisa, but he is also worse proportioned. The thorax is that of Hercules, and the arms disproportionately short. In the group of the fainting Virgin , to the left of the cross, the head is painful in expression and large for the frame, and the draperies are of many and meaningless folds. The angels about the Saviour's head are short and defective.

The Last Judgment. The same faults mark the Saviour distributing blessings and curses and the Saviour crucified. Here is little repose, or dignity, but a mixture of conventional classic form with realistic anatomy. The proportions are defective, but the arms, instead of being too short, are too long, whilst the torso is small. The angels around

134

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

the throne are heavy and colossal. The nude figures in the foreground, rising from their graves, are presented in various attitudes and positions to the spectator, and are frequently remarkable for elastic and natural movement. In the Inferno, Lucifer is again a monster with the head of a grotesque mask, the ears of a dog, the horns of a bull, the legs of a vulture and the talons of a griffin. Double groups of figures superposed adorn the angles of the pul- pit and represent allegorically the Virtues, angels and scriptural subjects. In the birth of the trefoil arches are fourteen prophets. But the most interesting and admi- rable productions in the whole pulpit are those which adorn the base of the central octagonal pillar. Here astro- nomy is symbolized by a female holding a book and look- ing through a level; grammar by one teaching an infant; dialectics by an old female in contemplation ; rhetoric by a woman wearing a diadem and holding a book; philo- sophy by one with a cornucopia, from which flames issue; arithmetic by a female writing on a slab, and so with geo- metry and music.1 If the allegory be imperfectly conceived, it is less the fault of the artist than of the person who gave him the subjects. Each figure as a work of art is fine and in admirable movement.

The inequality which may be traced in the various parts of this noble monument is perhaps assigneable to the diversity of talent in the pupils employed by Niccola. Still the compositions, all doubtless by him as director of their joint efforts, betray less regularity and order in distribution than those of Pisa. The study of the antique which is sufficiently displayed every where, was varied by an evident reference to nature, and precisely where this occurred, the master's ability was least visible, and he produced defects of proportion and even of flesh and muscular form. The fancy and liveliness of spirit, which characterised Niccola at Pisa, were illustrated anew and without repetition at Sienna. But though he now varied his somewhat arbitrary study of the classic with the imi- tation of nature, he showed no symptoms of religious

1 See the dissertation upon the mode of representing the seven sciences in Sebastiano Ciampi's

Letters of Gio. Boccacci. Flor. 1827. 8°. p. 101 and following.

Chap. IV.

NICCOLA PISANO.

135

feeling and his work, fine as it is, remains somewhat cold and classic in beauty.

Omitting for the present the arch of S. Domenico which, as already remarked, is more properly a monument executed by Fra Guglielmo, one may trace the hand of Niccola in the beautiful fountain of Perugia where, amongst the figures 1 which adorn the angles of the upper basin, his peculiar style may be noticed, whilst in the reliefs of the lower basin, the allegories of the seasons, the sciences and the arts, display the broader style of his son. Giovanni indeed appears to have overtaken Niccola. In the fountain of Perugia (1277) he revealed power in distribution, in reproducing energetic types and chastened movements, and, in the study of the nude, a genius not merely imitative or realistic, but creative.2 Father and son worked side by side in more than one great monu- ment in the cities of Italy from the early years when Giovanni, as a youth, was admitted at a low salary to share the labours of the pulpit of Sienna, to the later ones when the fountain of Perugia was completed and when S. Margaret of Cortona was restored.3 The noblest mo- nument of their chisel, or of their school, the deposition from the cross in the lunette above the portal of S. Mar- tin of Lucca — may be admired as the perfection of an art, which, developing itself at Pisa, Sienna, and Perugia, seemed at last but to await Michael Angelo to bring it to perfection. No example of the century can be said

1 One of these figures is now replaced by one quite modern.

2 The inscription on the foun- tain of Perugia, recovered not long since from beneath the plas- ter by Professor Massari, proves that the works up to P277 were conducted by Niccola and Gio- vanni. Arnolfo is not mentioned in it, though he seems after 1277 to have been released for the com- pletion of thefountainby Charlesl. of Anjou. Annot. to Vas. Vol. I.

p. 269—70, and Mariotti (A) Let- tere Pittoriche. 8". Perugia 1788. p. 24. 25.

3 According to Vasari, Niccola restored the Pieve di Cortona, and founded the; church of S. Margaret in the same city. Vas. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 268. Morrona pretends that this was in 1297, yet Niccola had then been dead some years. He read in the Campanile the names of "Niccola and Johannes" ; if so the date is false. Morrona, Pis. 11 lust. Vol. II. p. 69.

136

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

to have combined in the same degree skill in composition and grouping, with boldness of attitude, foreshortening and vigour of handling, — a deep study of nature and ana- tomy with lofty character and expression.

The body of the Saviour, still supple in death, had just been taken from the cross and was held in the powerful grasp of Joseph of Arimathea. On his shoulder the head, recumbent on the outstretched arm, hung powerless. That arm the Virgin tenderly embraced, whilst S. John carefully upheld the other. Nicodemus strove to extract the nail from one of the feet. A youthful soldier near the evangelist, leant on a staff and grasping the hilt of his sword, seemed inspired with the wish to avenge the cruel agony of the Saviour. At his feet knelt one with a spunge on a plate waiting for the washing of the body, whilst behind the Virgin stood two of the Marys. In the Saviour's supple- ness of limb and frame, fine foreshortening, and perfect proportion, in the figures around, force allied to natural movement, might fetter the attention of the most careless spectator, whilst the more critical observer, remarking a certain squareness of stature and a slight overcharge of drapery, — some feebleness of frame and classic imitation in the females might point to these as the only defects that could possibly be noticed. If compared with the earlier works of Pisa and Sienna, it would be admitted that the artist had gradually freed himself from much of that merely imitative character which previously marked the school; and had given power and animation to figures by the study of nature 5 yet that, to the last, religious sentiment remained as foreign to his mind, as it was later to that of Donatello or Michael Angelo.

Equally interesting as a monument of the revival under the teaching of Niccola and Giovanni is the tomb of S. Margaret in the church dedicated to that saint at Cor- tona, where excellent distribution of space and grouping combined with progress in the rendering of form, and va- ried character in expression or attitudes , mark one of the finest productions of mixed architecture and sculpture in the thirteenth century.

The body of the tomb resting on three brackets in the wall of the door of the sacristy is adorned with four bas-reliefs representing incidents from the life of the saint

Chap. IV.

NICCOLA PISANO.

137

— S. Margaret taking the vows, — receiving the holy be- nediction, — sick in her cell, and on her deathbed, after receiving the sacred oil. Nothing could be finer as regards composition than these episodes. Beneath the brackets, the miracles of S. Margaret, her cure of the sick and lame, and the casting out of a devil at her shrine, are repre- sented with equal power and intelligence. Some shortness and squareness of form may be noticed in figures which are otherwise of fine proportions and natural attitudes. A slight overcharge of drapery detracts at times from the beauty of the groups, as in the lunette relief of S. Martin at Lucca; but the monument as a whole is one of the great works of Pisan sculpture. On the slab of the tomb lies the statue of S. Margaret beneath a dais held up by two angels, — the whole within a double pointed trefoil recess, supported on each side by twisted columns crowned at the pinnacle with statuettes, and supported in the centre on a bracket leaning upon a figure with a scroll. An airy lightness in the architecture, a harmonious subordination between it and the sculpture, form , together with the arrange- ment and execution of the bas-reliefs, an excellent whole.

Vain is the attempt to ascertain exactly the authors of such monuments as these. To Niccola nothing can be assigned later than 12781 at which period he is noted

1 Vasari affirms that Niccola, worked in the Badia di Settimo, that he executed the old Palazzo of the Anziani at Pisa and other palaces and churches. No records remain to prove or disprove these assertions. The church of San Michele in Borgo at Pisa is not by Niccola but by his pupil Fra Guglielmo. The building of the Campanile of S. Nicolo at Pisa is of uncertain date and the author not proved to be Niccola. Equally arbitrary is the assertion that Niccola gave the design of S. Ja- copo of Pistoia, this chapel of the cathedral being of older date, but altered and restored in dif- ferent periods (Tolomei. Guida di Pistoia. ub. sup. p. 11). He laboured at S. Jacopo ac- cording to Ciampi, Not. Ined. p. 122 in 1272—3. The Santo at Padua is not acknowledged as a

work of Niccola, though Vasari assigns it to him (Selvatico Guida di Pad ova per gli Scienziati). He may be the architect of the Chiesetta della Misericordia and the church of the Santa Trinita at Florence; but the convent of Faenza was only founded in 1281, previous to which time Niccola died. (Annot. to Vas. Vol. I, p. 266.) That Nic- cola was not at the foundation of the Duomo of Sienna has been suggested in the text; and as for the church of S. Giovanni of the same city, it was not commenced till after 1300. (See proofs in annot. to Vas. Vol. I, p. 272.) There is nothing to prove or dis- prove the assertion of Vasari as to Niccola having in 1254 enlarged the Duomo of Volterra (Vas. Vol. I. p. 267) ; and the same may be said as to S. Domenico of Arezzo

138

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

with the fatal quondam,1 but it must not be forgotten that, besides Fra Guglielmo whose known works are in- ferior to those under consideration, Giovanni, Arnolfo, Lapo and his brothers Donate and Goro, existed and shed some lustre on the architecture and sculpture of the thir- teenth century.

Of Arnolfo, who, according to Vasari, was born in 12322 and learnt drawing from Cimabue,3 little more is known than that he is not the son of Lapo, but of one Cambio of Colle4 di Val d'Elsa, that he was a disciple of Niccola and worked under him at the pulpit of Sienna. Numerous architectural monuments. have been assigned to him; and there is no doubt that in 1310 he died in possession of the title and office of chief architect and sculptor of S. Reparata of Florence.5 Time has dimmed the lustre of his services as a sculptor; and most of the works as- signed to him have perished except the tomb of Cardinal de Braye executed, according to Delia Valle, in 1280, at S. Domenico of Orvieto.0 Supported on brackets high up in the right transept of the church, this monument is, like those of the Cosmati at Rome, a mixture of mosaic, sculp- ture, and architecture. The body of the Cardinal lies on the slab of the sarcophagus whose sides are adorned with mosaics. A pointed trefoil tabernacle supported on twisted columns is pointed at the apex and sides with statuettes

(ib.p.277). Of Niccola's repairs in S. Domenico at Viterbo and works at Naples there are no authentic records.

1 Vasari, Vol. I. p. 271. See further the original record of 1284 in Milanesi, Doc. Sen. Vol. I. p. 163, in which he is noted as dead. How then could Niccola be the author of bas-reliefs in the Duomo of Orvieto, an edifice only commenced in 1290. (Vas. Vol. I. p. 268.)

2 Vasari complains in the life of Arnolfo that he is unable to discover the architects of the Cer- tosa of Pavia and the Duomo of

Milan. Bonino da Campione la- boured in the Duomo, in 1388 — 93. The Certosa is due to Bernardo da Venezia in 1396. See Calvi Notizie. Milan. 1859.

3 Vas. Vol. I. p. 249.

4 Gaye (Carteggio in edit o. Flor. 1839. 8°. Vol. I. p. 445.) publishes a record of April 1. 1300, granting to Arnolfo certain privileges at Florence.

5 See the authentic record of his death note 2 to p. 255. Vol. I of Vasari, ub. sup.

6 This tomb, according to Delia Valle, Storia delDuomodi Orvieto, p. 248, was inscribed "Hoc opus fecit Arnolfus".

Chap. IV.

FKA GUGLIELMO.

139

of a square Roman build.1 It might have been possible to judge of Arnolfo's style, had his work at S. Paolo Rome been preserved.2 Of Lapo, who likewise aided Niccola in Sienna, the following records arc preserved:

In company of his brothers Donato and Goro, he peti- tioned for and obtained the freedom of the city of Sienna in 1271 — 2; and the records which authenticate that circum- stance prove further that the father of the family was Ciuccio di Ciuto of Florence. In 1284 Lapo was architect of S. Angelo in Colle; and in 1289 he was deputed by the government of Sienna to destroy the property of the Caccia- conti.3 Donato was in 1277 superintendent of the works at the bridge of Foiano on the Merse4 and employed at the Fontebranda outside Sienna.5 Goro repaired in 1306 the fountain of Follonica6 and brought up 3 sons, Neri, Ambrogio, and Goro , in his profession. Of their works in sculpture no trace remains.

Fra Guglielmo, apparently the oldest of Niccola's pupils left to posterity monuments inferior to those of his master. He entered the Dominican order as a lay friar in J2577 and spent his years of novitiate in the convent of the fraternity at Pisa, an edifice which had already been com- pleted in 1252. 8 The chief monuments of his chisel are the bas-reliefs of the tomb of S. Dominick at Bologna.

1 Vasari does not say that Ar- nolfo was employed in South Italy. Yet he was not unknown to Charles the Ist of Anjou, who in a letter dated Sept. 1277 recommends him to the authorities of Perugia as Magister Arnulfus de Florentia, and one of ability to continue the works of the fountain which had been all but finished by Niccola and Giovanni. Mariotti. Let- tere ub. sup. p.p. 24. 25. (Richa, Chiese. Tom. VI. p. 17. Ru- mohr, Forschungen. Vol. II. p. 155.

2 Here he executed the dais of the high altar, with four statues upon it of Peter, Paul, and two other apostles. "Somewhat short in build but fine" according to

Rumohr. The following inscription was on this work which perished in 1823. "Hoc opus fecit Arnolfus, cum socio Petro. anno milleno centum bis et octuageno quinto, summe Ds = Q, hie Abbas Bar- tholomew = fecit opus fieri = sibi tu dignare mereri." — (For- schungen. Vol. II. p. 15G — 7.)

3 G. Milanesi, ub. sup. Docu- menti, Vol. 1. p. 154.

4 Ibid. p. 154.

5 lb. p. 156.

6 lb. p. 154.

7 Chron. of S. C at a r in a of P is a , in A r ch i vi o Stor.Vieus- senx. Flor. 8°. Vol. VI, p. 468.

Annali, MSS. p. 4, in Arch. Stor. ub. sup. Vol. VI. p. 468,

140

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

The morta remains of that saint had originally (1221) been confined in a wooden bier, from which they were removed with considerable pomp, twelve years later, in presence of the archbishop of Ravenna and the magistrates of Bologna (May 23. 12331)- Inclosed on this occasion in a simple urn of stone, they remained sealed until the completion of a marble sepulchre whose execution was entrusted to Niccola and Fra Guglielmo. The former, however, being bound by his contract at Sienna, can scarce- ly have contributed more than the designs and composition of reliefs which were only completed in 1267.

This work by Guglielmo comprised several incidents of the life of S. Domini ck and his disciples on the sides of a quadrangular tomb.2 In one of the fronts, the saint res- tores to life the youth Napoleon; in the second the books of his doctrine are saved from the fire which consumed those of the manicheans of Languedoc, and between the two, a statuette of the Virgin and child. On the opposite front, three scenes of the life of the bcato ^Reginald of Or- leans — S. Dominick appearing in a dream to Pope Ho- norius the Third and supporting the falling church. Honorius examining and granting the rules of the order. On the short sides, S. Dominick receives the gospels from S. Peter and S. Paul, entrusts the same to his disciples; and angels bring food to the followers of the nascent brotherhood of the order. At the four angles are four doctors of the church.

Fra Guglielmo in the execution of these subjects pre- served, but enfeebled, the style of Niccola, — imparted to the figures but little character, expression, or design, — overcharged the draperies and crowded the groups. The tomb, as a monument of the time, was however no contemp- tible proof of the extension of the influence of Niccola, who on the occasion of the transfer of the remains of S. Dominick succeeded in obtaining leave to be present at the ceremony. Guglielmo as a brother of the order naturally expected and received no pecuniary reward for his labour;

1 Padre Marches e. Memorie, &c. 8°. Flor. 1854. Vol. I. p. 70.

2 The tomb was completed with a cover by Maestro Niccola quon-

dam Antonii , of Apulia in 1469, with statuettes by later artists, and a base by Alfonso Lombardi. (Marchese ub. sup. p. 74 — 80.)

Chap. IV.

FRA GUGLIELMO.

141

but to repay himself for the trouble and time he had ex- pended, and also that he might enrich his own convent of Pisa with a precious and inestimable relic, he stole one of the ribs of S. Dominick and carried it away with him, incurring thereby, had his offence been known, the penalty of excommunication. The theft fortunately was not noticed; and it was only on his deathbed that Gugli- elmo confessed and rejoiced the hearts of his brethren with the news that S. Catherine of Pisa was richer by one rib of S. Dominick than it had hitherto supposed.1

From Pisa Fra Guglielmo seems to have proceeded to Pistoia, where he executed, most probably in 1270, the pulpit of S. Giovanni Fuorcivitas, traces of his name and the foregoing date having been discovered in the records of Pistoia and on the pulpit, 2 which besides (and this is more to the purpose) displays his style and hand. In form, it was quadrangular, with four reliefs on two of the faces and two on the third, representing scenes from the new testament. 3 Whilst here the vigour with which Niccola compensated the frequently defective distribution of his groups, was wanting, the general characteristics of his composition and manner were reproduced. Without the marked square- ness or shortness of stature, without the peculiar classicism of Niccola, the style was still far from that of one who as a member of a religious fraternity might have desired to impart a purely devotional spirit to his work. In the angel with the symbols of the Evangelists, the finest

1 Chron. of S. Cath. of Pisa in Marchese, ub. sup. p. 86. Vol. I. and Arch. Storico, Vol. VI. p. 467. A bone of S. Dominick is preserved in S. Marco at Florence. Richa, Vol. VII. p. 160.

2SeeTigri, Guidadi Pistoia. Pistoia 1854. p. 223.

3 Representing 1. the annuncia- tion and the visitation, 2. the nativity and the adoration of the Magi , 3. the Saviour washing the feet of the disciples, 4. the cir-

cumcision , 5. the deposition from the cross. 6. Christ at the limbo, 7. the ascension, 8. the descent of the Holy Spirit , 9. the Saviour appearing to the Virgin and apos- tles , 10. the death and ascension of the Virgin. In the angles were six apostles and in the middle of the front face the angel with the symbols of the Evangelists. Sup- ported on the wall by two brackets, the pulpit rests on two columns reposing as usual on the backs of lions.

142

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

figure of the pulpit, some repose and Christian feeling might be detected; but in general, the heads, large for the small frames, were of the cold imitated Roman style. Fra Guglielmo was employed in the loggia of the Duomo of Orvieto in 1293 1 and as late as 1313 at S. Michele in Borgo of the Camaldoles of Pisa. 2 He died in the convent of S. Catherine of Pisa, having been 57 years of the Dominican order. 3

If Vasari were to be credited, Giovanni Pisano had sufficient proficiency in 1264 to produce a marble tomb at Perugia for the remains of Urban the Fourth.4 This as- sertion it would be idle to discuss, since the tomb had perished in Vasari's own time. That Giovanni was hardly considered capable of great labours as late as 1266 is proved by the low salary which he received at Sienna. In a few years, however, he progressed so as to rival Niccola and exhibit, in the fountain of Perugia, qualities of a new and superior order. As an architect he executed shortly after his father's death the Campo Santo,5 and the ornaments of S. Maria della Spina at Pisa,6 whose external colonnades, niches, and statuettes, were evidently, and not in the best taste, by him and his pupils. 7 Still earlier than this , he might possibly have been the author of the external additions to the Baptistery of Pisa, by which that ancient edifice was in 1278 incrusted with balconies, arches, pillars, and statuettes ; and the old frieze

1 Delia Valle. Stor. del Duomo di Orvieto. ub. sup. p. 2G3.

2 See inscription to that effect, transcribed in Morrona. Pis. II lust. Vol. II. p. 101—2.

3 Chron. and annals of S. Cath. of Pis. in March ese ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 398. One of Fra Guglielmo's pupils was Fazio, a lay brother Dominican, who died 1340. See Chron. of S. Catherine of Pisa, in Arch. Stor. Vol. VI. p. 504.

4 Vas. Vol. I. p. 269.

5 Commenced in 1278. See the

original inscription to that effect in Vasari, p. 271. Vol. I. G Ibid. p. 271.

7 Vasari (p. 271. Vol. I.) says the Virgin and child on the pin- nacle of La Spina is by Giovanni. The height is great for a critical examination, but the cast reveals the hand of Giovanni. He men- tions also a portrait of Niccola there. In the life of Andrea Pi- sano he adds that in La Spina Nino produced a portrait of his father. Has he not confounded these portraits, which do not exist, with a statue of the apostle Peter?

Chap. IV.

GIOVANNI PISANO.

143

of Bonamicus on the Eastern gate was crowned by a standing figure of the Virgin and child between two saints, one of whom, S. John, introduced to her the youth- ful kneeling figure of one Pietro. 1 Here Giovanni laboured in that grand style Avhich marked his work at Perugia, a style by which other works of the same period might likewise be distinguished. The life size Virgin and child in the interior of the Campo Santo2 may be placed amongst this class and admitted as one revealing in the master a feeling of grandeur allied to a study of nature in its happiest mood. The infant's playful smile pleasantly con- trasts with the classical features of the Virgin, her antique profile and broad fleshy throat — and under the artist's hand the marble seemed to represent elastic forms, articulations that promised motion , hands not without elegance, and draperies of considerable breadth. A ta- bernacle on the front of one of the gates of the Campo Santo likewise inclosed six statues of saints, and the ar- chitecture as well as the sculpture did the Pisan honour. 3 From Pisa, in 1283, to Naples where he is said to have enlarged the Castel Nuovo, Giovanni, says Vasari,4 wandered and laboured, and thence retiring northwards again he be- came in 1284 a citizen of Siennaf) and probably capo maestro of the Duomo. That for some time previous to 1288 he had occupied that high and responsible office is certain.0 Hence it might be doubted whether he did more than furnish a design and the assistance of his pupils for the erection of the altar in the Vescovado of Arezzo and the chapel of the Ubertini family in that edifice. 7 Vasari

1 Beneath the Madonna is the inscription: "Sub Petri cura fuit hsec pia sculpta fig-ura Nicol nato scultore Jo he vocato. " Vasari says, the kneeling' figure is Pietro Gamba cort i, operaio of the Duomo, which the annotators deny. They might have noticed that the relict' is not on the Duomo but on the Baptistery.

2 Beneath the first fresco of Benozzo Gozzoli.

3 Of the same period perhaps is the Virgin and child on the pinnacle of the front of the Duomo.

4 Vasari, Vol. I. p. 272. Castel Nuovo was commenced in 1279, by Charles the Ist. (Camera. Annali del Regno di Napoli. Vol.1, p.322.)

> Milanesi, ub. sup. Doc1. Vol. I.

p. 163.

fi Ibid. Vol. III. p. 274.

7 Vasari, Vol. I. p. 272—3.

144

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

who dwells with peculiar care on the artistic monuments of his native city devotes two pages to a description of this altar, which being situated in the middle of the church was visible from all sides. Yet the ensemble of heavy and inelegant architecture, ill distributed as to space, and filled with figures of feeble frames and large heads, and draped in ugly festooned vestments, was far from displaying either the talent or the peculiar style of the great Pisan sculptor. The compositions are invariably ill ordered. — In one of the reliefs representing the crucifixion, the Saviour is as a man of attenuated frame, large head, and protruding ribs. The Virgin, one of the chief figures, supported on each side by Honorius the Fourth, as Gregory the Great, and S. Donate the protector of Arezzo, is feeble as to form and type, and the remaining figures vulgar in feature and lame in attitude. The technical execution is in parts slovenly and the marble rudely worked.

During 1288, and through 1290, 1295 and 1299, Gio- vanni remained at the head of the works of the Duomo of Sienna, 1 undertaking at times other labour, and in- curring penalties and fines for its non- completion or for breach of contract, yet so necessary and so difficult to replace that the government preferred to absolve him from liability rather than force him to a precipitate departure.2 He might therefore in these years have visited Florence, where however no work by him exists , 3 and Bologna. 4

1 Milanesi, Doc. Sen. Vol. I. p.p. 161—2.

2 Ibid. p. 161—2.

3 The bas-reliefs of the font of 8. Giovanni of Florence assigned to him by Vasari cannot be his as they are dated 1370. (See annot. to Vas. Vol. I. p. 274.) The Virgin and child, between two angels, in the lunette above the door leading out of the church into the canonry of S. Maria del Fiore in Florence, is of a medi- tative character and expresses a

religious sentiment unknoAvn to Giovanni Pisano. The softness which pervades these figures is more characteristic of Nino da Pontedera. — Vasari assigns to Giovanni the architecture of the convent of the nuns, the restora- tion of S. Domenico, of Prato. But the latter could not be restored since it remained unfinished till 1322. (Seeannot. to Vas. Vol. I. p. 275.)

4 At Bologna, says Vasari, he restored the choir of S. Domenico. Vas. Vol. I. p. 274.

Chap. IV.

GIOVANNI PISANO.

145

In 1299 he abandoned Sienna for a time, and resided ap- parently in Pisa, where amongst the first productions of his chisel was an ivory for the canons of the Duomo, 1 and possibly a Virgin and child carved in the same sub- stance now in the Sanctuary of the cathedral. He may then perhaps have executed for S. Pietro in Vinculis, at Castel S. Pietro near Pisa, the bas-reliefs of a font seen there by Morrona, 2 and inscribed with his name and that of one of his pupils.3

Pistoia next claimed his presence*, and at S. Andrea, in 1301, he completed a pulpit, whose bas-reliefs were almost the same as those which he immediately after- wards undertook at Pisa, and in a style not much dif- fering from those of his father at Pisa and Sienna. In composition he was still deficient, and in rendering form frequently unfortunate; yet in his representation of the Saviour he less imitated the antique than Niccola, and made a nearer approach to the less Roman but feebler models of Fra Guglielmo at S. Giovanni Fuorcivitas. His Inferno, less fantastic perhaps than that of Niccola, and unlike those of Pisa and Sienna, was presided by the usual strange figure of Lucifer holding a toad in his hand. In the Last Judgment, the Saviour, of bony form and somewhat rude extremities, seemed to accept from the Virgin, separated from him by the emblem of the cross, the good souls who had gained a place in Para- dise at his side. On his left, an angel struggling with one of the condemned, offered an example of bold conception and execution. In the crucifixion, the Saviour was bony, small, and lean, and the thieves defective in form, whilst the group of the fainting Virgin on the left of the cross was a reminiscence of the art of Nic- cola. Amongst the episodes relative to the Magi, one group representing the angel warning them in a dream

1 See the original record of the 2 Morrona, ub. sup. Vol. II.

order and the price in Morrona p. 80.

ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 422 — 3, and 3 "Magister Joannes cum dis-

Ciampi, ub. sup. p. 123. cipulo suo Leonardo fecit hoc

VOL. I. 10

146

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

not to return to Herod (Math. v. 12. C. II.) was essen- tially worthy of attention, the angel being amongst the fine productions of Giovanni. Equally good was the relief of the nativity. But the best portions of the pulpit were undoubtedly the statues in the angles, amongst which that of the angel, with a book, and surrounded by the signs of the three remaining evangelists, was the most splendid classical group he had yet produced — re- markable alike for firmness of attitude and animation — and impressed in the features with the character of an antique Alexander. Here, as it is natural to suppose, the master was assisted by pupils to whom the feebler por- tions of the monument may be assigned. 1

He surpassed himself, however, in a small monument at S. Giovanni Evangelista of Pistoia — a font resting on a central group of three and supported at the angles by four figures of virtues, which were thus represented together in classic attitudes, expression, and movement. This was a monument which required no religious feel- ing and to which the style of Giovanni was admirably appropriate; and hence it may be called the finest pro- duction of the master.

Returning to Pisa in 1302, Giovanni commenced there the pulpit of the Duomo 2 which afterwards suffered from a most unfortunate dismemberment, having been deranged, and part of the bas-reliefs set aside and fixed to the wall in an upper passage. 3 If however this pulpit be in thought

opus ad honorem Dei et Sancti Petri apostoii."

1 The following inscription gives the name of the author and the date of the execution: Laude dei trini rem ceptam copulo fini

Cure presentis sub primo mille tricentis

Princeps est operis plebanus vel

dator eris Arnoldus dictus qui semper sit

benedictus. Andreas unus Vitelli quoque Tinus

Natus Vitali bene notus nomine tali

Despensatores hi dicti sunt me- liores

Scuipsit Johannes qui res non egit inanes

Nicholi natus sensia meliore beatus Quern Genuit Pisa doctum super omnia visa.

2 Commissioned by Borgogni di Tado as appears by the inscrip- tion, for which, see Morrona ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 33G.

3 This took place in the 16th century after the fire which de-

Chap. IV.

GIOVANNI PISANO.

147

restored to its original form, it still offers the same qualities and deficiencies as that of Pistoia. 1 In the crucifixion, the Saviour was still of a lean and attenuated form, anatomically studied, but ugly, whilst the group of the fainting Virgin was an improvement on previous ones. As before, the best of the reliefs was that of the birth of the Saviour, in which the composition was fairly dis- tributed and the movements were both natural and ani- mated. In the centre, the Virgin in a grand attitude still reminiscent of the antique, raised the veil which covered the infant asleep on a cushion. More to the left, Joseph sat; whilst near him the Saviour was held, preparatory to being washed, by a woman feeling the temperature of the water poured out by another female. In the upper space, the episode of the angel appearing to the shepherds was new, though in a form frequently repeated subse- quently and, amongst others, under the same laws and maxims, by Ghiberti in the north gate of the Baptistery of Florence — a fact which need cause no surprise, as it only proves that in the fifteenth century, artists returned anew to the study of the classic and took up the art where it had been left by the great Pisan. In the flight into Egypt, the Virgin seemed to play with the smiling Sa- viour as she sat on the ass, accompanied by the youth- ful Joseph, a most interesting group, common to Giovanni and to the Giottesques. On the other hand, the ignoble figure of the Saviour at the column showed that, when the sculptor sought to imitate nature with more than usual closeness, he was but the more imperfect in render- ing form. The remaining reliefs of the massacre of the innocents and the adoration of the Magi were marked by considerable action and nothing more. The Last Judgment, with the resurrection and paradise, may be seen in the wall above the door of the Sacristy in the Duomo, and

stroyed many of the monuments I was put together under the super- of the cathedral. See Morrona intendence of the Operaio Ceoli ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 299. in 1607. Morrona ub. sup.

1 The pulpit in its present shape | Vol. I. p. 302.

10*

148

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

exhibit similar defects to those already noticed in the Sa- viour of Giovanni at Pistoia. 1 — The pulpit, as Vasari declares, was inscribed:

,,Laudo Deum verum per quern sunt optima rerum Qui dedit has puras homini formare figuras Hoc opus his annis Domini sculpsere Johannis Arte manus sole quondam, natique Nicole Cursis undenis tercentum, milleque plenis . . . .2

During the nine years expended at intervals on this work, Giovanni is said to have laboured to erect the tomb of Benedict the Eleventh3 in the church of S. Domenico at Perugia. It was a very fine monument, resting on a base under a painted tabernacle supported by winding columns. On the tomb lay the statue of Benedict ex- posed to view by two angels holding back a curtain,4 and supporting a cover, on the summit of which were a sta- tuette of the Virgin and child, a bishop and a monk

1 Amongst other isolated por- tions — one representing four Evangelists in one block Avith their symbols and a kneeling figure in front of S. John Evangelist, seems to have been the central support of the monument, and dis- plays the best qualities of Gio- vanni in classic heads and dra- peries, fleshy articulations and animated movement.

Other bas-reliefs have been brought together in the choir of the cathedral, evidently forming part of an old pulpit, represent- ing 1. the annunciation, 2. the birth, 3. the presentation, 4. the adoration of the Magi, 5. the flight into Egypt, 6. the massacre of the innocents ; all but the first and last are in the manner of an in- ferior artist. (These four bas-re- liefs were formerly a part of a pulpit in the church of S. Michele in Borgo of Pisa. See comments of Francesco Bonaini to the Cronaca del Convento di Santa Caterina, in Arch0

S tori co. Vol. VI. p. 472, and Morrona, Pis. Illust. Vol. III. p. 167 , who assigns them to Fra Guglielmo.) The annunciation and the massacre seem more in the style of Giovanni. In the pulpit of the Duomo, the figures on the angles, — of the Saviour with his right hand on his breast and hold- ing a book, three prophets and four Evangelists, seem to be by Gio- vanni. Other remains, also by him, for instance, a base with the 8 sciences, are, now in the Campo Santo. No. 136.

J This inscription is incomplete, and gives only the date of the completion of the pulpit. But it appears, (annot. to fas. Vol.1, p. 277) from another inscription in a pilaster outside the church, that the monument was commenced in 1302.

3 Benedict XI died in 1304 and was buried at Perugia.

4 On the faces of the cover four half figures of prophets.

Chap. IV.

ORVIETO CATHEDRAL.

149

presenting a kneeling ecclesiastic. Yet in the style of the sculpture a softer and less energetic manner than that usual to the Pisan7 might be traced. Still it is possible that he may have entrusted the design to some of his pupils. 1

As regards the bas-reliefs on the front of the cathedral of Orvieto, which Vasari assigns to Niccola, Giovanni, and other artists whom he generalizes under the name of "Tedeschi", 2 it is at the present time impossible to fix either the date of their completion, or the names of the numerous sculptors who assisted in producing them. — Delia Valle, in the Storia del Duomo di Orvieto, had reason to complain of numerous gaps in the collection of records which he consulted. He therefore assumed some facts and invented others, and thus added to the confusion which he might have helped to clear. A few facts may to a certain extent elucidate the question. The Duomo of Orvieto was commenced in 1290, and the foundation was laid amidst great rejoicing by pope Nicholas the Fourth in that year. The author of the original plan has hitherto remained unknown, and Delia Valleys assertion that Lo- renzo Maitani of Sienna was appointed to make it, is sup- ported upon no records. It is suspected indeed by the diligent Gaetano Milanesi, :J that Lorenzo Maitani was not born till 1275, so that he would have been fifteen years old when the Duomo was founded. The greatest sculptor employed at the cathedral in the first years after its foun- dation was Ramo di Paganello "de ultramontis", a master who, after the commission of some offence against the laws of Sienna, had been exiled and then pardoned in 1281- Ramo remained in Sienna and found employment in 1288 in the Duomo under Giovanni Pisano, who was then chief of the works. That the Orvietans should have engaged

1 Vasari notices a Virgin and child with two kneeling1 children on one side , and the Emperor Henry II'1, by Giovanni above the portal of the Duomo facing the

campanile, and Morrona saw the ruins of it. See Vas. Vol. I. p. 278.

2 And who are probably men of Como.

3 Doc. Sen. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 173.

150

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

Ramo is almost a proof that they were unable to secure the services of his superior Giovanni Pisano — nor indeed is there any record to confirm the assertion of Vasari that Giovanni laboured there. With Ramo di Paganello in 1293 were Jacobo Cosme of Rome, Fra Guglielmo of Pisa, Guido, and a number of other sculptors from Como. No trace of a superior or guiding spirit is to be found at the works of Orvieto cathedral in the earlier time of its erection. They had been sufficiently advanced in 1298 for Boniface the Eighth to read the mass there; but the state of the edifice, and the irregular manner in which it had been raised, were made evident in 1310, when the council of the cathedral, upon the election of Lorenzo Maitani to the office of capo-maestro, was fain to confess that the church threatened to fall in, and that it was ne- cessary to rebuild the wall <{ex parte anterior iv. The bas- reliefs of the front sufficiently prove that sculptors of different periods executed various parts of them; and as the labours of the edifice lasted till 1356 under Lo- renzo and his son Vitale Maitani, it is apparent that, in addition to works that might have been completed in the loggia at an early time, others of a much later period were used. 1 The principal ornaments of the front are four pilasters, of which the two central ones are finely composed and exhibit figures in bold action and broad drapery, but short and square in frame. The two pilasters on each side are a mixture of two or more styles, the upper portion of both being in the manner of the central ones, the lower of a later character. Taking, for instance, the first pilaster on the left, representing scenes from the creation to the settlement of the children of Noah; the creation of Adam and Eve, in the lowest course, is a fine composition, full of truthful and natural movement, no longer in the conventional and sculptural forms peculiar to Niccola and the continuators of his manner, but by one who sought to follow, and if possible to improve upon,

See for all these facts. Doc. Sen. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 173.

Chap. IV.

ORVIETO CATHEDRAL.

151

nature. The nude had not hitherto been rendered with more spontaneity or force; nor is it possible to find any- thing approaching it except when, later, Giotto shed his influence on the schools of Italian sculpture. They may therefore be by Andrea Pisano. 1 The temptation, and Adam and Eve hiding at the voice of the Lord, — the expulsion, and our first parents labouring by the sweat of their brow, — the sacrifice of Cain and Abel, and the mur- der of the latter, were of that advanced art which seemed to foreshadow the manner of Pollaiolo. Noah teaching his children, Tubal Cain and Seth in the uppermost course, were no longer in the same style, but revealed, in their short and square figures, the manner of the followers of Mccola. The second pilaster was devoted to the genealogy of the house of David, and terminated at the upper part by a relief of the crucifixion. The third was occupied by incidents from the life of the Saviour, admirably com- posed and grouped, but recalling, like the second, the styles of Niccola and Giovanni's followers. In the fourth pilaster, the upper course representing the Saviour in glory was of the same class; but the lower compartment, far dif- ferent, exhibited more modern types, and seemed the perfection of the manner of Giovanni Pisano. It would have been difficult to find a more fertile fancy, greater skill in rendering form, more vigour or character in the beginning of the fourteenth century than were exhibited in the resurrection of the dead from their graves, and in the agonies of tortured souls in the Inferno. Here, Lucifer was no longer the quaint hybrid of Niccola and Gio- vanni, but a monster in a more human form, writhing with bound hands, and supported by hissing dragons, whose scaly frames were twined round his. The most inex- haustible invention seemed hardly taxed by the variety of pain inflicted and endured by the sinners ; nor would it be easy to find more truthful imitations of nature in

1 He is proved to have been | son Nino in 1347 — 9. Ann. to capo maestro of Orvieto with his I Vas. Note to Vol. III. p. 11.

152

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

the most varied motion than in the figures of those in the grasp, or hanging from, the jaws of the devils. Such life and motion might well have caused wonder in Signo- relli when he laboured in this very Duomo, and in Michael Angelo, whose imaginative mind might be struck with the ingenuity of one in whom he could recognize a spirit akin to his own. The author of these reliefs no longer rendered the short and heavy forms of the school of Nic- cola, but more slender and active ones, in good motion, with well jointed limbs and extremities, and animated features. 1

Above the architrave, a carved and coloured Virgin and child was represented by Andrea Pisano, seated beneath a dais supported by six angels. 2 — In the front of the edifice were statues of prophets , 3 some of which have been considered to recal the style of the later Siennese, Agostino and Agnolo.4

Giovanni Pisano died, says Vasari, in 1320 5 leaving unfinished the works of the cathedral of Prato, but having completed at least the chapel of the Sacro Cingolo. He was buried in the Campo Santo of Pisa by the side of his father. G — Yet if he be the author of the monument of Enrico Scrovegni erected at the Arena of Padua in 1321 and signed "Jonis. Magister Niccoli", his death must have occurred later than Vasari states.

The progress of sculpture has now been traced to show

1 Above the pilasters are the symbols of the Evangelists in bronze ; one of them modern.

2 See the authoritative state- ment of this in notes to Vasari. Vol. III. p. 11.

3 Three of which are modern.

4 The first notice of Agnolo of Sienna is of 1312, the latest 1349. (Doc. Sen. Vol. I. p. 206.)

5 According toCiampi, Giovanni

had a son, Bernardo, who laboured in the Duomo of Pisa between 1299. 1303. Notiz. ined. p. 45.

6 That Giovanni had the inten- tion of leaving his bones at Sienna is proved by the following inscrip- tion now in the front of the Pa- lazzo arcivescovile. "Hoc est sepulcrumMagistri Johannis quon- dam Magistri Nicolai et de ejus eredibus." Annot. to Vas. Vol. I. p. 280.

Chap. IV.

PROGRESS OF SCULPTURE.

153

the state to which it had been reduced previous to Nic- cola, and the changes which it underwent in his hands. It is evident that in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, as in earlier ages, sculptors existed in every part of Italy, but that, having lost the true idea of form, they had preserved merely the traditions of Christian composition. In the South of Italy however, a vein of the imitative antique had extended and still derived life, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, from a source which elsewhere had been clearly exhausted. That classicism, suddenly transported to Central Italy by Mccola, should naturally create wonder amongst men reduced to an almost primitive generalization of art, was only what might have been ex- pected. Conventional as Niccola's manner was, it could not but create emulation and rivalry in the study of mere form; and the examples of Pisa in this sense were of advantage to all the schools of Italy. But whilst Niccola infused a new spirit into the minds of his countrymen, he could lay no claim to the creation of Christian types. His art, had it remained unsupported by the new current of religious and political thought so sensible in the thirteenth century, would perhaps have perished without leaving a trace behind it. Mere classical imitation could not suf- fice for the wants of the time*, and thus it was that, whilst Niccola created on one side an emulation that was to produce the noblest fruits, he was himself convinced that, without a return to the study of nature, no progress was possible. In his attempt to graft on the conventional imitation of the antique a study of nature he failed; nor would his son and pupils have succeeded even in the measure which is visible in their works but for the examples which were created for them in another and greater school, — the Florentine. The spirit which had been roused throughout Italy by the examples and mi- racles of S. Francis contributed to the development of an art based on nobler principles than those of mere imitation, and that spirit, of which Giotto was the in- carnation spread with uncommon speed throughout the

154

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IV.

whole of the Peninsula, — affected the schools of sculpture, and assisted them also in the development of a new life. Thus, whilst Niccola revived the feeling for true form, others gave to that form a new meaning, created the Christian types of this and succeeding ages, and laid the foundation for the greatness of Italian art.

Chap. V.

PROGRESS OF RELIGIOUS FEELING.

155

CHAPTER V. PAINTING IN CENTRAL ITALY.

To the general picture of the degeneracy of Italian painting from the earlier times to the middle of the thir- teenth century, it may be now useful to add more par- ticular notices of special schools; and as the rise of sculpture at Pisa has been traced, the course pursued by painting there and in the neighbouring Lucca, Sienna, and Arezzo many naturally claim the first attention.

In the absence of all public spirit and enterprise, the dark ages could not yield great monuments of painting; and artists are accordingly found chiefly confining them- selves to the reproduction of one great and universal sub- ject, that of the Saviour on the cross. In proportion as the movement was slow and gradual by which the martyr- dom of Christ was allowed to become a fit object for delineation, in the inverse ratio was the speed with which artists yielded to the tendency of representing his suffer- ings and agony. With steps hesitating and reluctant at first, they accompanied him on the road to Calvary, with- holding from the masses the spectacle of his shame, when, carrying his cross, he was dragged to the place of execu- tion. Slowly, this sentiment of repugnance gave way, till in the eleventh century, the whole tragedy was unfolded. Yet whilst the sentiment of painters led them to the final resolution of actually presenting the Redeemer as he stood upon the cross, a remnant of respect for the ideas that swayed early churchmen, forbade them to deline- ate any signs of grief or pain. So in the earliest crucifixions

156

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

the Saviour was presented, as has been seen, erect, with each foot nailed to the cross, open-eyed and either serene or menacing. The modification of this last feeling can be traced with surprising accuracy in the crucifixes of Lucca, Pisa, Sienna and other places, until S. Francis, with the miracle of the Stigmata, may be said to have changed the current of religious thought in this respect in a final and irrevocable manner. The number of crucifixes which is to be found in the eleventh, twelfth and thir- teenth centuries proves at once the general nature of the requirements of the faithful of all classes, and the sub- stitution of the material symbol for its presentation on the walls of edifices. The mere delineation of the Saviour on the cross was not however considered sufficient and was never taken alone 5 but in order to complete the holy history, and fitly to convey the idea of the sacred tragedy, the^ evangelist John, and the Virgin were usually painted at the extremity of the arms, the Saviour in glory and benediction at the top, and the scenes of the Passion at the sides, of the cross.1

Amongst the earliest crucifixes of this kind is the co- lossal one in San Michele in Foro at Lucca,2 where an artist of the eleventh century represented the Saviour erect, of good proportions, and fairly designed with simple but somewhat rough and dark outlines, — open-eyed, and with the feet separately nailed. 3 The head, slightly in- clined to the right, was somewhat long, the nose equally so, and the mouth and eyes small. The form, imperfectly rendered, did not betray an effort at reproducing the false anatomy of later examples.4 Plastic had been used to

1 One may notice the similarity of this form of composition and that of churches built in the shape of the Latin cross with side cha- pels added to it.

2 On a pilaster to the right of the arch of the tribune.

3 The stature and position of the Saviour is the same as that in the crucifixion at S. Urbano

alia Caffarella at Rome , — and that of the MS. miniature at the Minerva at Rome, and in that of the bronze gates of Bonanno at Monreale.

4 The hair divided in the middle falls down the shoulders , and a gold drapery is fastened by a jewelled girdle to the hips. The cross is painted blue on a gold

Chap. V.

CRUCIFIXES.

157

assist the painter's art in the reproduction of relief; and whilst the whole figure was painted of an uniform colour, somewhat darkened by time and restoring, the idea of rotundity was given by the projection of the frame, which culminating at a central line merged into the flat at the neck, wrists, and feet. These last, feeble and pointed, were painted on the flat like the head, which, however, with its nimbus, projected forward, that it might be more visible to the spectator. The whole of the figure was painted on a primed canvass beaten into the gesso which covered the wood.1 A later example of the same# kind is the cru- cifix of S. Giuglia at Lucca painted on wood without relief, and representing, besides the Saviour, evangelists, saints, and angels, the same scenes of the passion as that of San Michele. But the decline even of this art might be noticed in the forms and attitude, and in the mode in which the painting was executed. The figure was still erect, but the head a little more bent than before. The outlines of the nude were more defective. Green half tints contrasted with reddish shadows. The modelling of the parts was rendered as geographers are wont to represent the swells of hills, by meandering lines, the features, by closely re- peated red, black, and white, and the anatomy by black streaks. This crucifix which is connected with a miracle of the year 1209,2 may be of the latter half of the twelfth

ground. An ornamented border runs round the panels at the sides. The outlines have suffered from restoring.

1 The Saviour at the top of the cross was represented in the act of benediction and holding the book, with a green halo, and vest- ments of the traditional colours. At his sides knelt two angels in adoration. One of these is mo- dern. Beneath the Saviour in glory the words on a label "Jesus Naza- renus Rex Judeorum". At the ex- tremities of the branches were the symbolic figures of the Evan- gelists and an angel in flight. Right and left of the cross and

beneath the horizontal limbs were three courses of small panels, representing the Virgin and S. John the Evangelist the cruci- fixion of the thieves , Christ de- posited in the tomb, and the Marys at the sepulchre, rudely executed in the old typical forms common to the paintings and miniatures of earlier centuries. On a small panel at the foot of the cross Peter might be seen seated, listen- ing to the questions of the serr vant.

2 See the opuscule of Cano- n i c o T e 1 e s f o r o B i n i. 8°. L u c c a, p. 13. 18.

158

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

century. Two more crucifixes, exactly similar in character and plan, but somewhat damaged by time, are in S. Do- nino, 1 and S. Maria de' Servi at Lucca, and thus prove the existence of painters there in the eleventh and twelfth centuries. That the art of painting, far from improving, retrograded at Lucca, except perhaps in certain technical modes of execution, is evident from the works of the Ber- linghieri, a family of artists which can be traced back to about A.D. 1200. Amongst the names of men who signed the treaty of peace with Pisa in 1228 occur those of five painters. Lotharius and Ranuccius of whom no works are known, and Bonaventura, Barone and Marco Berlinghieri. 2 Of the latter the names are repeated in another record of the same period, from which it ap- pears further that Bonaventura and Barone were the sons of one Berlingherus a Milanese.3 The latter still lived in 1228. 4 Marco, according to the capitular records of Lucca, was a miniature painter and the author of an illuminated bible executed in 1250. 5 Barone had, according to the same authority, executed several crucifixes, one for the Pieve of Casabasciana in 1254, another for S. Alessandro Maggiore at Lucca in 1284.(i Of Bonaventura whose works have alone been preserved, panels and wall-paintings were known to have been completed in 1235 and 1244. 7 It is not many years since a picture assigned to Marga- ritone in the church of San Francesco of Pescia, was

1 This crucifix is damaged by time and repairs.

2 Can0 Telesforo Bini, nb. sup. p. 15.

3 Ibid, same page.

4 Atti della R. Acad, di Lucca. Vol. XIII. p. 365.

5 Archives of the Chapter of Lucca. Lib. LL. 25 fol. 78. in Bini ub. sup. p. 15.

c Archives of the Cancelleria del Vescovado. Lucca lib. 6 fol. 10 in Bini ub. sup.

7 Bonaventura painted on the wall in Lucca, in 1244. (Arch, of the Cane1 of the V e s c o - |

vado. lib. LL. 18. Fol. 115.) He painted in 1243 a panel for the archdeacon of Lucca (ib. 17. Fol. 12). Barone Avas summoned to complete within a given time a Madonna which he and Buona- ventura had commenced at S. Alessandro of Lucca (ib. L. No. 3. Fol. 2 in Letter a del prof. M. Ridolfi al Marchese Sel- vatico, 8°. Luc. 1857." p. 15.) Again Barone promises to paint a room for the canons of the cathedral of Lucca in 1240. Same arch. lib. II. 18. Fol. 115. in Lett era ub. sup. p. 16.

Chap. V.

THE BERLINGHIERI.

159

subjected to a rigid examination by Professor Michele Kidolfi, who discovered that according to a practise not uncommon in past times, the head of the principal figure was on a lower panel, whilst the rest was painted on another, superposed.1 This later addition having been removed, a standing figure was laid bare, of S. Francis, holding a book and showing the Stigmata, with two archan- gels at his shoulders, and six incidents of his life in a triple course of panels at his sides. Beneath his feet were the following lines:

A. D. M.CCXXXV.

Bonavetura Berligheri de Lu

S. Francis wras of a long form, in cowl, frock and cord. His shaven head, of regular shape, was of a lean and bony form, with sharp features and a wrinkled brow, and supported on a very thin neck. The figure seemed to hang in air with a pair of very ugly feet pointing downwards. The flesh tints were of a bronzed yellow, with green shadows stippled in black, and broadly defined by dark outlines, the lights marked by streaks of white. The execution was perhaps more careful and the idea of rotundity less feebly conveyed than in the crucifix of Santa Giuglia, but the method was the same in both. The drapery of the frock, being all of one colour, was indicated by lines.2 The angels, mere half figures with embroidered dresses in the old motionless style, and the episodes of the Saint's life were rendered with childish simplicity, coloured in sharply contrasted keys of colour. There was indeed in the resolute intention of conveying the subjects

1 Canonico Telesforo Binijvery pretty quarrel of pamphlets ub. sup. p.p. 18. 19. respecting- its originality. See

the Marquis Campori's sensible

2 The picture is on gold ground, remarks on this subject. (Gli S. Francis over life -size. At Mo- artisti Italiani e Stranieri dena in possession of Count Monte- negli stati Estensi. 8°. Mo- cuculi is a picture of S. Francis dena 1855. p. 8G.) The picture? of inscribed : Bonaventura Berlingeri I Count Monte cuculi is from the me pinxit de Lucca. AD. M. castle or Bocca of Guiglia. See CC.XXX.V. Painted in oil on can- alsoLanzi. Roscoe's trn.Bohn. vass it is a copy and the signa- Vol. II. p. 843. 1847. and Vol. I. ture a forgery. Yet there is a p. 37.

100

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

something approaching to the ludicrous. S. Francis might be seen talking to sparrows of a gigantic size, perched on trees growing out of a conical hill. His cure of the lame was shown, not merely by the straightening of the limb of one sitting on a rock in a stream, but by the figure of another retiring whole with his crutches on his shoulders.1 This was an art as primitive, as that of the sculptors who had preceded Niccola Pisano in Central Italy, an art which, assisting itself at first by the use of plastic form, improved but slightly in technical execution, and never could rise even to mediocrity. The student who cannot visit Lucca may satisfy himself of the in- fantine nature of Lucchese art in the thirteenth century, by examining in the Gallery of Fine Arts at Florence a crucifixion2 with the usual episodes.3 He will see in this work, originally executed for the nuns of S. Chiara of Lucca, the decline of the school of the Berlinghieri, and the Saviour hanging dead on the cross with sunken head and closed eyes , as it was customary to depict him, when it became meritorious to represent the divinity in the lowest stage of human suffering.

After the Berlinghieri came Deodati Orlandi, the author of a crucifix now in the magazines of the palace of Parma, after having been in S. Cerbone, 4 and in the ducal chapel of Marlia. Deodato lived in the close of the thirteenth cen- tury; and his crucifix is inscribed:

AD. M.CCLXXXVIII Deodati filii Orlandi de Luch. pinxit.

He represented the Saviour on the cross in a more de- fective and unnatural shape than the Berlinghieri, with a long and ill proportioned frame, overhanging belly, and a

1 The remaining subjects are S. Francis receiving the Stigmata, restoring the child to life , giving alms, and expelling devils. In the latter some figures of males and females, possessed, offer a va- riety of ugliness. The little devils fly quaintly out of their mouths.

2 No. 28. goldground, almost gone.

3 The Virgin fainting in the arms of the Marys, the Evangelist convoying Christ on the road to Calvary and the Virgin and child between S.S.John the Bapt., Peter, Clara, and five other saints.

4 Two miles outside the gate of S. Pietro at Lucca.

♦

Chap. V.

DEODATO ORLANDI.

161

sunken head ; — with scarcely any brow, but a caricature of expression. The features were contracted by angular lines ; and the beard or massive hair was indicated by a series of curves. The frame betrayed an effort at representing play of muscles without any knowledge of their real form. The shoulders were broad, the waist thin, the joints swollen and without any promise of motion, the feet and hands defective.1 A tawny green general tint prevailed in the flesh, piercing through the muslin drapery on the hips. The lights were painted and stippled in over a local tone of verde, whilst the cheeks and lips were tinged with red. — The head of the Sa- viour, in the act of benediction at the top of the cross, contrasted in so far with that of the crucified Eedeemer, that it was of an oval and regular shape, whilst the Virgin and S. John Evangelist, lamenting at the extremity of the arms, were mean and vulgar, revealing the deficiency of the artist in the power of imparting expression otherwise than by contraction of brow and features.2

Deodato still painted as late as 1301, when he execu- ted a Virgin and saints in five arched compartments in- scribed :

"AD. M.CCCI. Deodatus Orlandi me pinxit." now in the gallery of Fine arts at Pisa.3 He gave to the Madonna the high forehead, the small chin and neck of the Virgin in the foregoing crucifix. To her features he imparted the usual painful expression by wrinkles and contraction of brow, whilst, as regards colour, he apparently gained some lightness from the study of new examples which were- now increasing in numbers under the impulse of the Florentine revival. Here then was a school of painting which, from the eleventh to the fourteenth cen- tury, had merely prolonged the agony of Christian art in

1 Yet this is no worse produc- tion than those of the period ge- nerally. See, later, a crucifix as- signed to Cimabue in the Sacristy of Santa Croce at Florence, and the deformities attributed to Mar- garitone.

2 The outlines in the crucifix are of a certain tenuity and cut into the surface. — The nimbus

VOL. I.

as usual projects. The blue mantle and red tunic of the Saviour in glory have been retouched. The latter is shot with gold lights. The Saviour crucified is also re- touched here and there.

3 The Virgin and child enthroned between S.S. James, Damian, Pe- ter, and Paul.

162

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

its decline, and which even in the person of Deodato showed no traces of improvement. Were local histo- rians to be credited, that artist succeeded at last in producing one picture worthy of admiration, yet this picture has less the character of the school of Lucca than that of a Siennese painter of the fourteenth cen- tury. 1

But in Lucca there were mosaists as well as painters and sculptors. Rumohr quotes Brunetti2 for the interest- ing fact that in 754—763 Astolph the Lombard employed a Lucchese mosaist of the name of Aripert. But the mosaists, who in the thirteenth century represented Christ in a glory carried by angels and the twelve apostles on the front of the church of S. Frediano were entitled to very little consideration. They displayed indeed in a dis- proportioned figure of the Redeemer, in angels of vehe- ment and exaggerated movement, in apostles of excessively defective forms, no greater art than their comrades in painting or sculpture.

As at Lucca, so at Pisa, painters existed apparently in very early times. There are notices of Enrico a minia- turist at Pisa in 1238.3 As far back as 1275, it appears that money was voted by the "comune" for the purpose of restoring or repainting "the images of the Virgin Mary

1 Padre Antonio da Brandeglio, in a life of S. Cerbone, alludes to Deodato's crucifix of 1288, and adds that the same Deodato was committed to paint "una imagine" for the nuns of S. Cerbone. In 1295, the convent was on fire, and the crucifix with a picture of the Virgin and child in the midst of saints was saved with difficulty. (Atti uf fizi ali clella Reale Acad. Lucch. Lucca 1845, by prof. Ridolfi. Vol. XII. p. 20.) There is now at S. Cer- bone a picture of the Virgin hold- ing the Saviour tenderly, in good movement and well draped, with the narrow eyes, peculiar to Si- mone and Ugolino of Sienna — of

clear flesh tints, and neat outlines, — of S.John Evangelist with along flowing beard and a face full of character coloured with much im- pasto. Both figures , painted on the verde for flesh tint with sha- dows stippled in red, red cheeks and lips , betray the manner of the school of Sienna, and a far later date than 1301. But even if of 1301, how could this picture be saved from fire in 1295? and again how could Deodato paint a better picture before 1295 than that of 1301?

2 Rumohr, Forschungen. Vol. I. p. 188.

3 See Ciampi ub. sup. p.p. 86 and 141. Doc. XXL

Chap. V.

EARLY PISAN PAINTING.

163

and other saints on the gates of the city," because they were then wellnigh obliterated.1 The earliest examples of painting are however again crucifixes, the oldest of which, at S. Marta, has a general likeness, as regards the position and expression of the Saviour, [to the crucified Eedeemer in S. Angelo at Capua. The body is low in reference to the position of the arms, but the frame is still erect, the eyes open and menacing and the feet apart. This crucifix probably belongs therefore to the eleventh century.2 Its side panels are interesting. A composition of the Capture repeated in an MS. (Greek) of the twelfth century at the Vatican, of which D'Agin- court gives an engraving, (Vol. II. pi. LVII) is remark- able in this sense, that the artist thought it neces- sary to show the superiority of the Redeemer by a certain prominence of stature, in the midst of a crowd of smaller mortals. To the left, Peter, erect, smites Mal- chus, whilst in the miniature of the Vatican, the latter is prostrate and S. Peter kneels as he threatens him with the sword. In a deposition, one of the Marys stands on a stool and assists to lower the body held by Joseph of Arimathea, whilst the Virgin kisses the hand and Nicodemus extracts the nail. In the last subject, the angel sits on the tomb; and the Marys listen with sur- prise to his announcement of the resurrection, whilst a soldier still sleeps at the foot of the sepulchre. These subjects3 deserve to be noticed, because they may be seen repeated in the same traditional forms and group- ing by later and more able artists. They were repre-

1 Bonaini, Notizie Inedite. p.p. 87. 88.

2 The bust of the Saviour in glory, apparently broken off from the top of the cross, is now placed immediately above the projecting nimbus of the crucified Redeemer. The figures on the arms of the cross as usual represent the Vir- gin and S. John, but the episodes at the sides slightly differ in ar-

rangement and subject from those of Lucca. In the upper course is the capture and Christ before Pilate, in the next the Saviour crowned with thorns and flagel- lated, in the last, the deposition and the Marys at the sepulchre.

3 Some of the small scenes are partly damaged by time and re- storing.

11*

164

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

sented in the crucifix of S. Marta with some animation of movement, with distances of red houses on gold ground, and they were painted with considerable body of colour. On two little compartments, at the foot of the cross, S. Peter sits before a fire, and a figure may be seen knock- ing at a door.

Another crucifix of the same period has been recently discovered in San Sepolcro of Pisa, in which the Re- deemer is represented in a position more erect than before, and as usual in fair proportions.1 The painter of this crucifix was a rude executant. He lined the forms with red in the lights, and black in the shaded side. The features are everywhere marked by lines as if in profile*, the nude feebly defined, and the colour, of an uniform reddish tone unrelieved by shadow. The face of the Sa- viour is indicated by elementary lines — the eyes large, and the nose bent.

That the painters of Pisa and Lucca, in their mode of representing the Saviour, merely followed customs fa- miliar to them by numerous examples of an earlier time, has been sufficiently proved at Rome and in South Italy. If additional proofs were required, they would be found in the crucifix of Sarzana, in character like that of S. Marta of Pisa, where the open eyed Saviour was placed erect on the cross in the simple attitude familiar to the eleventh century.2 They would be found likewise in a crucifix at S. Giovanni e Paolo of Spoleto3 inscribed at the foot as follows:

"AD. MCLXXXVII. M. opus Alberto som »

Without describing the attitude of the Saviour which

1 The Saviour in glory at the top is wanting; and instead of the Virgin and Evangelist on the arms are two small pictures of the last supper, and Christ washing the feetof his disciples. Again, instead of S. Peter and the servant, at the foot of the cross, the descent of the Holy Spirit is introduced. The six side compartments contain,

the capture, crucifixion, Marys at the sepulchre, meeting atEmmaus, last supper, and final interview with the apostles.

2 With the usual episodes of the Passion at the sides.

3 This church or chapel is held in peculiar reverence, and is diffi- cult to enter.

Chap. V. EARLY PISAN PAINTING. 165

does not essentially differ from that of the Redeemer in the Cappella del Martirologio at Rome it may be remarked that this Alberto gave to the head the bullet shape oc- casionally to be found in pictures and mosaics at Rome after the seventh century, combined with a high forehead, hair falling in waves along the sides of a slender neck, round eyes, and a nose protruding at the end like a ball. The feet and hands are long and pointed, and the forms bounded by a continuous wiry outline, broad at the thorax retreating towards the waist. Some little shadow of a reddish hue relieves the general yellowish tone. The cheek is a little rouged, and the whole carried out on a parchment stretched on the wood.1

Superior to this but doubtless of a later date is the crucifix in the Cappella Maggiore of the Campo Santo at Pisa, in which the lean figure of the Redeemer on the cross is marked by a certain yielding elasticity. The bending head and closed eyes indicate here the develop- ment of a later religious conception, though as yet the sense of pain was rendered without exaggeration of ex- pression and rather by a quiet mournfulness. Still the drawing is not without the usual defects of the time. The features are rudely made out, the diaphragm and stomach indicated by lines, and the extremities thin and pointed. The attendant episodes are the same as be- fore, but more animated and somewhat truer in action.2

1 The loins of the Saviour are enveloped in a transparent green cloth bordered with red. The head and nimbus project as usual. The Saviour's hair is a dull red as at S. Elia of Neppi. The blood from the wounds flows into a death's head below, the emblem of the first man; and at the sides, instead of the usual scenes of the Passion are two panels representing the Virgin and the Evangelist.

2 They represent the deposition, almost in the same form as at S. Marta, the Marys at the Sepulchre

with the angel sitting on the tomb — the Pieta — in which the body of the Saviour lies on the lap of the Virgin, saints at each side, and 3 angels above. — Christ at Emmaus, — the entomb- ment and the incredulity of S. Thomas. At the extremities of the arms, the Virgin and Evan- gelist occupy one panel, whilst the other is devoted to the 3 Marys. On a second horizontal limb the 4 archangels are re- presented with the orb and sceptre, and at the foot the Saviour ap- pears in limbo.

160

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

The date of this crucifix may be fixed with accuracy by the attitude and expression of the Saviour, between AD. 1150 and 1190. 1 Hence it is difficult to assent to the opinion of those who assign it to Appollonius a Greek, whom Vasari rescues from oblivion, but who seems, if Del Migliore be not mistaken, to have lived a century later.2

The progress of the mournful in the conception of the Saviour was marked with greater force in a later crucifix at S. Pietro in Vinculis now S. Pierino of Pisa,3 in which, though the feet of the colossal Saviour were still separ- ately nailed to the cross, the belly and hips hung out- wards and gave realism to the idea of death. At the same time, grim care and age were expressed in the face. The oblique brows, forehead, and closed eyes, were furrowed with wrinkles, and created strange corrugations by their contraction. Anatomy seemed to have been studied in vain, and the execution showed the gradual decline of art even from the standard of previous years, in dark strong outlines and a thin yellowish colour.4

With this doleful representation of the divinity of the Saviour, the spectator is introduced to the degenerate style of Giunta Pisano who though not the author of it, carefully copied its defects. Giunta, so far from exhibit-

1 This crucifix was formerly in S. Matteo of Pisa, where Morrona, Pis. Illust. Vol. III. p. 184. mentions it as an " anticaglia" possibly by Giunta. It was pre- viously in the suppressed convent of S. Lorenzo. Rosini St. della Pittura. Pis. 1839. Vol. I. p. 83.

2 Commentary on the life of Tafi, in Vas. Vol. I. p. 288. Del Migliore pretends to have read a record of 1279 in which were the words "Magister Apollonius pictor Florentinus".

3 To the right on the wall be- hind the high altar.

4 The medallion of the Saviour in glory at the top is supported by two angels in flight, and on a

tablet below it the descent of the spirit is depicted. Between the two is the following inscrip- tion: "Mortis destructor, vitae reparator et auctor". Rosini, Stor. della Pittura. Pis. 1839. Vol. I. p. 87, doubts the genuineness of this inscription. — But why? At the ends of the horizontal limb two archangels stand holding the orb and sceptre. The Virgin and S. John are on the sides, as in the crucifix of Spoleto, and at the foot, S. Peter and the ser- vant, — the whole painted on a primed canvass stretched on the gesso. This crucifix is as usual on gold ground, and the projec- tions at the sides an ornament of black and red fillets.

Chap. V.

GIUNTA PISANO.

167

ing the characteristics of one destined to regenerate art, merely followed it in its decline. Art, thus reduced to the representation of one figure, which in itself should combine all excellence, had reached in him a level below which it was only just possible to fall. He executed, in the crucifix of S. Raineri e Leonardo at Pisa, a work more calculated to repel than to invite observation 1. Whilst he preserved the custom of keeping the feet of the Saviour apart, he realized the idea of death and pain, as regards the figure, by the overhanging belly and hips, and as regards the head, not merely by its total abandonment to its own weight, but by a hideous exaggeration of grief. It would be difficult to find anything more vulgar or re- pulsive than the angular contractions and swollen muscles of the brow, the vast and unnatural forehead, the large nose cut into two or three sharp planes, the mapped out hair lined at angles as it lies in masses on the shoulder, or worse proportion in the long falsely anatomized body, short arms, and long pointed feet. The head of the Sa- viour in glory at the top of the cross corresponds sin- gularly with that of the crucified Redeemer, insofar as its lean bullet shape, round gazing eyes, and enormous wig are ugly and repulsive — a character to which the Virgin and Evangelist at the extremity of the limbs are equally entitled. 2 Painting in Pisa was evidently at a low ebb at the time of Giunta, and no better proof of this fact need be sought than that afforded by the rude works of S. Pier d' Arena, now S. Pietro in Grado out- side the town, on the road to Leghorn. In the first half of the thirteenth century the chief aisle of this edifice was painted in the style then usual throughout Italy, that is , with a due subordination of the pictorial to the archi- tectural adornment. In the upper course beneath a painted

1 This crucifix is inscribed be- the convent of S. Anna of Pisa,

lowthefeetof the Saviour. "Juncta 2 Here the episodes of the Pas-

Pisanus me fecit" and hung in sion are wanting. The figure of

the time of Morrona (Pis. II lust, the Saviour in glory is on gold

Vol. II. p. 135) in the kitchen of ground.

168

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

cornice, angels were depicted as if appearing at open or half closed windows, made by a rude sort of perspective to imitate recesses and openings. In a lower course, episodes from the lives of S. Peter and S. Paul were depicted, amongst which the martyrdom of both are fairly visible. Lower again, a series of painted arches were filled with portraits of popes, some of which are now modern. The whole of the architecture, real or feigned, was coloured in raw and startling tones. The figures were heavy and square in proportions, and large of forehead and head, the features being indicated by profile lines of angular or oblique direction. The eyes were large and round, the mouths small and expressed by three lines like half of a hexagon, the beards by three or four strokes of a brush. The outlines generally were red. Yet in all this rudeness the painters still preserved the cha- racteristic traits of S. Peter and S. Paul. The technical execution was that well known method which consisted in covering the space within the outlines in verde, over which the yellow lights were laid with a red patch to mark the cheeks. If Giunta be not the author of these paintings, there can be no doubt that the artists were of the school from which he comes. Here indeed is no more trace of the Greek manner, respecting which so much has been said by the historians of Italian and chiefly of Pisan art, than is to be found in all the works of this period. Nay, in one sense the rude paintings of S. Pietro in Grado are so far different in design from such Greek works as the mosaics of Monreale and of the chapel of S. Silvestro1 at Rome, that the figures have not an affrighted glance, but an air of comparative repose. But it is probable that even the moderns share with Vasari a certain dislike for works which are surely not to be higly prized, except by those who may contemplate in them an useful source, from which to derive a correct idea of the state of Italian art in the beginning of the thirteenth century. Besides

S.S. Quattro Coronati.

Chap. V.

S. FRANCESCO OF ASSIST.

169

the paintings of S. Pietro in Grado other works exist in Pisa itself, which betray a lamentable barbarism. Such for instance are the damaged wall paintings in the "opera" of the cathedral1, a work darkened by time, coarsely out- lined and painted with much body of tempera colour.2

With little better art, and in the mixed architectural and pictorial manner of S. Pietro in Grado, the middle aisle of the lower church of S. Francesco at Assisi seems to have been painted, between 1225 and 1250, with scenes from the life of the Saviour on the left hand (which are partly effaced) and scenes from the life of S. Francis on the right3. An effort may be traced in ,the artist to give animation to his slender figures, which in type and mode of execution are like those in the paintings of San Pietro in Grado. An interesting scene is that which still represents part of the form of the naked Saviour lying on the sepulchre, whilst the Virgin falls backwards in a swoon into the arms of the Marys, who in their fea- tures express the agony of their grief. The painter had a clear intention and exhibits some dramatic power. In this and other points there is a slight superiority at Assisi over the paintings of S. Pietro in Grado. It is difficult however to explain why these paintings should be assigned to Greeks , unless it be resolved that every thing poor in art is Greek in the thirteenth century, and in that case Giunta would be the most genuine of all the Byzantines4. Whatever may have been this painter's real birth place, there is no doubt that he is claimed by the Pisans, and in this they are authorized by the signatures on his paint- ings in which he calls himself Pisanus. Ciampi has pub- lished a contract of sale executed in 1202 5 at Pistoia

1 Where the Virgin and child are enthroned between S.John the Baptist and S. John Evangelist in niches.

2 See a print of this rude work inRosini.Storia , dellaPittu- ra ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 76.

3 Vasari Vol. I. p. 223, assigns these paintings to Cimabue.

4 Still earlier wall paintings were noticed by Rumohr in the crypt of S. Francesco of Assisi (Forschungen, Vol. 1. p. 193) ; but they have since been obli- terated.

5 But the record was in the Archivio diplomatico of Florence.

170

Chap. V.

between one Struffaldus and one Juncta quondam Guidotti pict., and another of 1229 in which the same name appears, but the link which should confirm the identity of the party to the contract with Giunta is wanting. In the last named document, Giudottus is called "de Colle", upon which signor Morrona jumps at the conclusion that Giunta is of the noble family dal Colle1. A more satisfactory record is that which preserves the name of "Juncta Capi- tenus pictor", as having sworn fealty in 1255 to the arch- bishop Federigo Visconti of Pisa.2

That Giunta painted in the first half of the thirteenth century is a fact confirmed as much by the foregoing record as by the evidence of style ; and as , in the crucifix of S. Raineri e Leonardo, a genuine example of the master is extant, one may accept or reject the works assigned to him, according as they approach or recede from the ori- ginal pattern. Setting aside, for this reason, two cruci- fixes in the Cappella Maggiore of the Campo Santo,3 a third, colossal, in the hospital of Pisa, so dark from age and position that it can hardly be distinguished, and a fourth in S. Caterina of Sienna,4 Giunta may be followed to Assisi where after 1220 he is said to have painted in the upper church of S. Francesco. The annalists of Pisa, Wadding and father Angeli, vouch for the truth of state- ments according to which Giunta painted a crucifixion with father Elias, the first general of the Franciscans embracing the foot of the cross, on a large panel which hung until 1624 on a transom in this edifice5. The in- scription:

Frater . Elias . fieri fecit

Jesu Christe pie Miserere precantis Helie" Giunta Pisanus me pinxit A. D. 1236.] Ind. 9.

See Ciampi. Not. Ined. ub. sup. p. 140.

1 Colle is a village near Flo- rence.

2 See Morrona. Pis. Illust. Vol. II. p.p. 116 and following.

3 As being- by other hands, and repainted.

4 From S. Crestina of Pisa. Morrona. Pis. Illust. Vol. II. p. 142.

5 See the passages quoted in

Chap. V.

S. FRANCESCO OF ASSIST.

171

would fix the date of Giunta's presence at Assisi, and his residence there. And the probability of this fact is con- firmed by the existence of a crucifix in S. Maria degli Angeli, inscribed with the words

nta  Pisanus

iti P. me fecit.

Though here, the head of the crucified Redeemer as well as that of the Saviour in glory above it, is almost gone, the forms and execution closely resemble those of the crucifix of S. Raineri e Leonardo at Pisa; whilst they also display, with more distinctness than the latter, those of the crucifix of S. Pierino. The usual half figures of the Vir- gin and Evangelist on the horizontal limb likewise betray the style of Giunta , whilst two figures at the sides which are in the manner of Niccola da Foligno may be taken as additions of a later period.

Time has almost obliterated the painted decorations of the transepts and choir of the upper church of Assisi assigned partly to Giunta and partly to Cimabue1. That the former laboured there is affirmed by Wadding and Angeli on the authority of the conventual records,2 and prob- able from the style of the work which is that of a rude artist of the early part of the thirteenth century; but by the side of these early paintings are others, likewise of early date, of no very high pretension, but in a different manner; and, with all deference to the opinion of Rumohr3, it may be possible and not unimportant to determine which are the earlier of the two, always bearing in mind, how- ever, that great part of what remains is mutilated and damaged as regards colour, whilst in general the con- tours remain, where the plaster has not fallen or been removed. A large stone altar in the Western side of the

Morrona. Pis. Illust. Vol. II. p. 126 and following.

1 The paintings of the choir are assigned by Vasari, Vol. I. p. 223, to Cimabue.

2 See in Morrona. Pis. II lust. Vol. II. p. 119.

3 Rumohr (Forschungen. Vol. II. p. 37) thinks it impossible and unimportant to attempt discover- ing the masters who may have painted in the upper church of Assisi in the 13th century.

172

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

South transept has almost entirely cut away a crucifixion of which the upper part is obliterated, whilst a half figure of the Virgin, falling backwards in a swoon, and pieces of figures, nimbuses in relief, and angels are all that can be seen of the lower. In this figure of the Virgin the spectator may yet discern in the long head, projecting brow, and depressed nose, — in the broad red outlines and angular draperies, coarsely traced in black, the defects of a painter who , like Giunta, lived before the revival of art. In the large flaws, he may remark that the painting was upon a single intonaco, and that the original design was sketched on the bare wall, whilst, as regards colour, a slight shade of yellow in the flesh, apparently laid in as tempera, is all that remains. Along the arches of the colonnade which divides the upper from the lower course of the edifice and serves as a practicable gallery, me- dallions seem to have contained the forms of angels, and prophets to have adorned the walls of the gallery itself. In the lunette, the transfiguration was originally depicted. All this, where the design exists, reveals the same hand, which may be traced likewise in the three divisions of the end wall of the transept. Of these one is obliterated whilst the two others represent in mere outline the cruci- fixion of S. Peter and Simon Magus carried away by the ministers of Satan. In the latter, the vehement action of the old style may be noticed, and would alone suffice to prove that the painter preserved the forms and peculiar- ities of an art approaching extinction l. In the lunette above the window are the figures of the angel appearing to Mary. The east face of the transept is bare; but in the pentagonal choir are still remains of painting. In the first side, the artist evidently intended to delineate the Saviour and the Virgin on a common throne with angels singing about it, and on the colonnade of the gallery, pro- phets ; ■ — in the second, the death of the Virgin of which that portion remains which depicts her carried to heaven

See a print of the painting in D'Agincourt,

Chap. V.

S. FRANCESCO OF ASSIST.

173

in an elliptical glory by angels; in the third, above a great throne, two portraits of popes; in the fourth, the death of the Virgin, of which all that is now visible is a figure of the Saviour with her infant form in his arms; in the fifth the birth of Mary, with S. Anna lying on the bed in the antique attitude. In the lunettes of the choir were scenes from the old testament. Painting here ge- nerally was subordinate, as in the Baptistery of Parma, to a general architectural arrangement, the arches, recesses, cornices, and columns being coloured, and with the painted subjects, subservient to. a general harmony.

The end wall .of the North transept was divided, like that of the Southern, into three parts in which are ves- tiges of the Saviour enthroned in an elliptical glory supported by four angels blowing trumpets; — vague re- mains of four winged skeletons with heads of aged men and horns in their hands in a landscape, and between these two compositions, one, figuring a throne with the symbols of the four evangelists and angels. The Saviour in glory is characterised by paltry forms and a large head. A vast circular wig of hair with a heavy forelock overhangs a broad forehead and semicircular eyebrows. The nose seems to start from a projecting triangular root and is flattened at the end; and the face is ter- minated by a small pointed chin and beard. These were features less characteristic of Giunta than of Cimabue's manner. The blue draperies, of which the red preparation alone remains, are less angular than those of the fainting Virgin in the opposite transept. The hands and feet are defective and broad. The angels blowing trumpets are of a heavy and rotund form, with short round noses and chins, and expanded cheeks. The whole is painted over verde which served for the semitones, whilst the shadows are red. Above the gallery are angels and saints, as in the colonnade of the Western face, where they are of a colossal character, but in a great measure obliterated. Taking the paintings of both transepts into comparison, it is obvious that those of the Southern are older in date

174

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

and inferior in character to those of the Northern. The paintings of the choir, assigned by Vasari to Cimabue, it may be difficult to judge, but those of the Northern tran- sept certainly make a nearer approach to the style of Ci- mabue than to that of Giunta.

It is but natural that Giunta, having lived and painted about the time when the fame of S. Francis had been increased by canonization, should be associated in name with the so-called portrait of the saint in the sacristy of the great sanctuary. This work,1 if examined more par- ticularly in an artistic sense, did not differ much in exe- cution from that of the successors of Giunta, but was painted with much body of yellowish colour, shadowed in dark tones, and outlined in black, and might date as far back as the close of the thirteenth century. The pictures in the small compartments are composed of figures in the usual exaggerated manner of the time. The effigy of S. Francis was repeated an hundred times in this form in the convents of his order, and a sample, nearer in style to the foregoing than others, may be seen somewhat da- maged in the Museo Cristiano at the Vatican.2

After Giunta, art did not revive at Pisa. It main- tained itself at a low level in every sense, improving neither in types, form, nor execution, yet producing still with an industry truly tiring. Nor are examples of this nature confined to Pisa. A specimen of the fee- blest kind may be found, in the shape of a crucifix, at S. Bernardino of Perugia, inscribed "Anno Domini MCCLXXI Gregorii P. P. X." At Pistoia, in the anti- chamber of the chapter of the cathedral, is a crucifix, exaggerating all the defects previously noticed,3 and re- peating the well known scenes of the Passion, almost as at S. Marta of Pisa. Yet it can not be said that the painter was a Pisan since artists obviously existed at

1 See postea, comparison be- 3 Livid in flesh tone, but light tween this and other portraits of in general colour, and the high S. Francis. lights almost white; much im-

2 Case No. 19. pasto.

Chap. V.

SUCCESSORS OF G1UNTA.

175

Pistoia as elsewhere, and the name of Manfredino d' Al- berto is preserved as the author in 1290 of frescos in the sacristy of S. Procolo.

Another unpleasant example of crucifixes in this cen- tury may be found at S. Eustorgio in Milan, probably by one Fra Gabrio of Cremona, 1 which combines every sort of defect and represents the Saviour hanging out from the cross in the most contorsive movement.

Towards the close of the thirteenth century at Pisa, the names of painters become more frequent in records. "Giuc- chus, pictor, films Bindi Giucchi pictoris7', appears in a chart of 1290— 1300, 2 whilst in the works of the Duomo, several mosaists and painters are mentioned immediately previous to the arrival of Cimabue. Amongst these, the chief, no doubt, was Francesco, who in 1301, new style, held the office of capo maestro for the mosaics of the great tribune, and who afterwards, with his assistant Lapo, and his son Vittorio was the colleague of the Florentine in that work.3 In subordinate employ were Gavoccius.4 Barile, Cagnassus, Parduccius, Povagansa and Turetto, 5 Tanus, and Ghele di S. Margarita.6 Cotemporary with these, but not regularly employed in the Duomo, though equally unknown by their works, were Vanni of Sienna, supposed to be the father of a line of painters,7 Bor-

1 Consult. MSS. Chron. of the Dominican, Galvano Fiamina at Milan, who assigns this crucifix to the year 1288 and to Fra Gabrio of Cremona.

2 Bindus had painted in the cloisters of S. Catherine of Pisa. See Mem. d'lUust. Pis. Vol. I. p. 258 by Tempesti extr. in Arch. Stor. Vol. VI. p. 495. The chart mentioned in text is No. 1110 of the Archivio arcivescovile in Bonaini. Not. Ined. p. 88.

3 Uguccio Grugni and Jacobus Murci were then superintendents of the Duomo. Francesco's daily pay was 10 soldi, the same which Cimabue afterwards received. Vit- torio works later (1302) for 4 soldi

8 den. See Bonaini who quotes the original records, and corrects Rosini's statement that Francesco was capo-maestro after Cimabue. (Notiz. Ined. p.p. 90. 1. 2.)

4 As "puer" or "famulus" at VIII den. per diem. Ibid. p. 86.

5 The four first seem mere la- bourers ; the latter was a mosaist and has been confounded probably with Fra Jacopo (di Torrita) by Vasari (Vol. I. p. 285). — Ibid, p. 89.

6 These two are painters. Ibid, p. 92.

7 Vannes quondam Boni painted in 1302 for 9 lire the hall of the compagnia d'arme della cerva Nera, and gilds a Virgin and child

176

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

done di Buoncristiano, his son Colino, 1 Vivaldo and Paganello,2 all living at the beginning of the fourteenth century. Yet of pictures, as old as the thirteenth century, Pisa possesses few, and these are by no means productions of merit. The oldest that can be pointed out is perhaps a Virgin and child in the Academy of Pisa, with S. Mar- tin on horseback on the pediment, and incidents of the life of the Saviour at each side. This picture, assigned to Cimabue has something of his manner in the action of the ugly infant Saviour, whilst the Virgin betrays, in the depressed nose and black outlines, the hand of one continuing the style of Giunta. Another picture in five arched compartments in the same academy, representing half figures of the Saviour in the act of benediction be- tween the Virgin and S. John Evangelist, S. Sylvester, and S. Catherine, has been assigned to Giunta,3 but dis- plays the defects common to the beginning of the fourteenth century, combined with that lighter style of colouring which may already be noticed in the latest work of the Lucchese, Deodato Orlandi. Nor indeed is there much difference, in the mode of drawing the sharp features and ugly hands of the Redeemer, between this and the third rate productions of the painters of Lucca.4

Pisa therefore in the thirteenth century, though great for its school of sculpture, was feeble as regards painting. Her artists produced, besides crucifixes, vast works such as those of S. Pietro in Grado and Assisi ; but they dis- played no peculiarities which can be called exclusively Pisan. They betrayed on the contrary a character com- mon to painters throughout the whole of Italy, to the artists of Parma, of S. Angelo near Capua, and even of Rome. The list might be increased indeed by the pro-

above the portal of the Duomo. Bonaini. p.p. 88. 89.

1 The first is known as a painter of banners, the second had more extensive employment. Bonaini, p. 90.

2 The latter, alive 1304, the for-

mer dead in the same year. Ib. p. 94.

3 M or r on a. Pis. II lust. Vol.11, p. 142. This picture was, in Mor- rona's time, in the church of S. Sil- vestro of Pisa.

4 The tones of the draperies in

Chap. V.

EARLY SIENNESE ART.

177

ductions of those early workmen who in 1237 executed, in the palace of the Podesta at S. Gimignano, the incidents of a hunt of which some vestiges still exist, — men of small attainments, and more rude in talents than those who painted the central aisle of the lower church of Assisi.1 At Sienna, the parent stock of S. Gimignano, art shared the mediocrity of Pisa and of Lucca. In the oldest example of a school which was afterwards to occupy the second rank in Italy, — a lunette fresco of the Saviour, with one arm raised, and the other holding a scroll, in the front of the church of S. Bartolommeo, the slight figure, regular head, and sharp features, — the straight draperies and stippled execution, betrayed no characteristics by which the painter could be distinguished from those of his class elsewhere. In a Virgin and child preserved at the ora- tory of S. Ansano in Castel Vecchio, the system of mixed relief and painting betrayed a community of thought and education between the artist and those of neighbouring cities. The execiition was feebler indeed than that of the crucifix of the earlier period at Lucca ; yet if it were true that this Virgin was produced in commemoration of the decisive battle of Monte Aperto (1260), it might be considered that the painter was one of the ablest of his time. The Madonnas of Tressa, of the Carmine, and of Betlem, of which so much has been said, and to so little purpose, may be passed over, as no excuse is needed for withholding an opinion upon works so extensively repaired, but others of the early part of the thirteenth century only confirm the belief that Siennese art shared the common degeneracy. The custom of combining the plastic and pictorial was maintained; and altarpieces are preserved in the Academy of Arts sufficient to demonstrate the poverty of that species of production. Without multi-

this picture are light, gay, and i "Comune" at S. Gimignano ; and shot with gold. the expense was borne by the city.

1 In November 1237, a number See Pecori (Can0. Luigi) Sto of youngFlorentines obtained per- ria della Terra di S. Gimig mission to hunt in the woods of the nano. 8°. Flor. 1853. p. 565.

VOL. I. 12

178

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

plying examples, it may be sufficient to notice a "paliotto"1 of 1215 representing the Redeemer in the act of bene- diction in an elliptical glory between two angels and the symbols of the Evangelists, in which the latter, as well as the Saviour, are painted reliefs. In later pictures, where relief was not used, equal feebleness may be traced, as in the Saviour blessing and holding the book between the Virgin and Evangelist; 2 — in S. John enthroned and blessing, with a diadem stuffed with glass stones, whilst, on each side are six scenes from his life, — composed of animated figures, painted in a clear tempera of much body in the lights, and verde in the shadows;3 — in S. Peter, likewise enthroned, with three incidents of his life in small panels on each side,4 and finally in a crucifix from S. Chiara of S. Gimignano, in which the Saviour is presented in the old attitude with the usual scenes of the Passion at his sides.5 Yet if Siennese painters failed to give an impulse to art, the cause lay in no wise in want of encouragement, or in the absence of rivalry. The early school of the old Ghibeline state is, in the thirteenth cen- tury, richer in names than the Florentine. The building of its cathedral was commenced and diligently pursued. Mosaics were commissioned for its front.6 Pictures, com- memorative and votive, were ordered for churches and public edifices, amongst which the Palazzo pubblico was the chief. Justice and law owed some of their efficacy perhaps to artists who painted the likeness of criminals,

1 No. 8. Academy of Sienna. Three little incidents are at each side , representing gaily coloured, but ill drawn, episodes of the Passion. This altarpiece is in- scribed: "Anno domini millesimo CCXV. mense novembri hsec tabu- la facta est". It comes from the church of the Badia Berardenga.

2 No. 2, 3, 4 and 5: Academy of Sienna.

3 No. 1. Acad, of Sienna. The pictures are from the suppres-

sed convent of S. Petronilla agli Umiliati.

4 No. 15. Acad, of Sienna. See also the same general features in No. 9, 10, 11, 13 of the same col- lection.

5 No. 14. Acad, of Sienna.

6 Of Michele de Ser Memmo , a goldsmith and mosaist, who exe- cuted for the facade a figure of the archangel Michael and who lived between 1340 and 1370. (Doc. Sen. Milanesi. Vol. I. p. 103—4.

Chap. V. EARLY SIENNESE ART. 179

pilloried in effigy on the great square of the city. Ban- ners and flags were adorned/ and even the registers of public offices were covered with portraits of the officials who kept them, or with the arms of the people and „commune". The commissions for most of these paintings unfortunately, in most instances, outlived the works them- selves; but amongst the latter class, some specimens have been preserved which reveal the style and manner of Gilio2 and Dietisalvi.3 The latter appears indeed from 1264 to 1276 as a monopolist of this sort of work in Sienna. Four book covers, adorned with portraits of the clerks of the Camarlingo di Biccherna, are preserved in the Academy of Arts. The first by Maestro Gilio, repre- senting a monk of S. Galgano in a white dress, seated in profile on a chair, is dated 1257. 4 Two others by Dietisalvi, of 1264 and 1269, are portraits of one Ildo- brandino Pagliarese; the fourth of 1276, likewise by Dietisalvi, represents Jacobo di Rodilla. 5 These four figures, interesting on account of their age and authenticity, are painted with a viscous colour of much impasto on a general ground of verde, shadowed in black and tinged on the lips with dark red. They reveal no sensible pro- gress in the art of the time.6

1 Painters of banners, in 1262, are Piero, Bonamico andParabuoi. See Arch, della Biccherna in Rumohr, (Forschungen. Vol. II. p. 23).

2 Gilio is noticed in Delia Valle, Lettere Sanese. Vol. I. p. 241.

3 Dietisalvi Petroni appears first in records of 1267 as painter of the arras of the Camarlingo ; — in 1269 — 70 as painter of the books of the Camarlingo, for which work he receives X soldi. Again, of similar work in 1281 — 2, and finally in 1290 of a picture of a "Ma- jesty" in the Palazzo pubblico, see Rumohr, Forschungen. Vol.11, p. 25, and Della Valle, Lettere Sanese. Vol. I. p. 241. In 1292, one Vigoroso painted books for the Camarlingo, and there are notices, of Guido Gra-

tiani, of whom a word later, Jacomino, Morsello Cili, and Cas- tellino Pieri painters. Rumohr, ub. sup. p. 24. 25.

4 No. 19. Acad, of Sienna. The date 1257 is on a book in the monk's hand.

5 No. 20, 21, 22. Acad, of Sienna.

6 A complete series of examples of this kind may be seen in the collection of Mr. Ramboux at Co- logne , and though of slight im- portance, being small matters and damaged, may yet be noticed. The series extends from the earliest times of Siennese art to 1492. In it one may remark No. 338, a portrait by Dietisalvi of Don Bartolommeo di Alexis , paid at the rate of 8 soldi. Date — 1278. 339. a similar portrait of

12*

180

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

Omitting here a Madonna assigned to Dietisalvi in the convent church of the Servi at Sienna, 1 which appears to have been the work of Coppo di Marcovaldo, a Florentine ; and a St. George of the fifteenth century in the sacristy of S. Cristoforo at Sienna, engraved by Rosini as the work of Salvanello,2 a Siennese artist of the early time, it will be interesting to pause before a picture in the Academy of Arts at Sienna, assigned to Guido,3 repre- senting a half figure of the Virgin and child in a frame, at the angles of which are two flying angels. The Vir- gin, vast in shape, points with her right hand to the infant on her knee, who gives the benediction and grasps a scroll in his left hand. Her round head, a little bent, and supported on a slender neck, is most dis- agreable to contemplate. The nose, starting from a pro- jecting angular root, terminates in a broad depression, flanked by two large nostrils. The arched lines of the brow are but the continuation of a long curved lid ex- tending towards the temple far beyond the outer corner of the eye. The canthus, instead of forming a loop as in nature, is drawn at a drooping acute angle. The iris, instead of being round, is oblong, and thus conveys an unnatural expression of extasy. The mouth is indicated by dark lines and by two black points at the corners. Out- lines, red in light, black in shadow, bound the form, which

Guido a monk by Rinaldo — date 1279. No. 340, portrait dated 1282, assigned to Duccio on the strength of a record of the time. No. 341, date 1296, and so on. Finally No. 354, a figure of the "Reggi- mento" of Sienna, with persons around holding attributes, such as may be noticed later. Date 1363.

1 Engraved by Rosini in the atlas to his, Storia della Pittura — table VI, as by Dietisalvi; but see later.

2 Salvanello is mentioned by Della Valle, Lettere Sanese, as a painter at Sienna in 1274. The

S. George is so obviously of the 15th century, that it is difficult to understand Rosini's error. It represents the saint striking at the dragon whose tail is wound round the leg of the horse. On the breast grip of the martingale are the arms of Sienna. In the distance, a landscape, with the usual fe- male, is relieved on a golden sky. The costume of S. George is of the 15th century, the draw- ing very precise and in the style of the painter Giovanni di Paolo, though better than in the usual run of his works.

3 No. 6. Acad, of Sienna.

Vol I. p. LSI.

Chap. V.

GUIDO OF SIENNA.

181

is coloured in flat tones of enamelled surface, placed side by side as in works of marquetry. The hands are thin and inarticulate. The mantle, falling over a close cap to the shoulders, and partly covering a red tunic, shot with gold, is fairly accurate in fold, but lined with mazes of angular and meaningless strokes. The nimbus is full of glass stones. The same class of features, design, and draperies marks the infant Saviour, whose ears are of an enormous size. In character, this painting reveals the hand of one who lived between AD. 1250 and 1300, and, if it be by Guido, would prove that he was of the close, not of the rise of the thirteenth century. This minute description, was necessary as it may help to elucidate a question which has long engrossed critical attention, and involves Siennese and Florentine claims to the title of regenerators of Italian art. It is well known that the church of S. Domenico of Sienna contains a picture by Guido, which apparently establishes the supremacy of Sienna over Florence. This picture represents the Vir- gin and Saviour enthroned in an arch of three curves, above which three angels stand at each side. In the triangular pinnacle, now in the convent of the Bene- dictines of Sienna,1 the half figure of the Saviour with the book, in the act of benediction, stands between two angels. The vast throne in which the Virgin sits is adorned with abundant tracery, and lined with a drapery. She points with her right hand to the Saviour, who sits crosslegged, in a yellow and gold tunic, on her lap. In her large and angular form, as in that of the angels and of

1 The convent of the church of | wing's hung- apart from the centre S. Domenico. This pinnacle was j on the walls of the church of S. in its place, when Rumohr wrote. Domenico. According" to Padre See Fors chungen. Vol. I. p. 335. | Carapelli in "Chronotaxis Sancti The whole altarpiece, according j Dominici in Camporeg-gio the to Tizio, was in his time on the J altarpiece which had been long- altar of the Chapel de1 Capaci to , above the portal in S. Domenico the left on entering- the church ; was in 1705 placed on the altar of S. Domenico, and had been of the chapel of the Venturini. previously in the church of S. See Milanesi (Gaet.) Delia Vera Gregorio. It was originally a Eta di Guido, pittore S anese. triptych, and Tizio says that the 8°. Sienna 1859. p. 3 — 4.

182

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

the Saviour in glory on the pinnacle, — in the drawing and draperies, the peculiarities and defects of the latter half of the thirteenth century may be traced. A striking resemblance may indeed be noticed, in this respect, between the Virgin of the Sienna Academy and that of S. Domenico. The hands of the Madonna are thin and inarticulate, the outlines red in light and black in the shadows. The draperies are shot with mazes of gold lines. In the Christ on the pin- nacle as well as in all the figures of angels, the features are drawn in the style of the Virgin of the Sienna aca- demy : the former, with a vast circular wig and forelock, a wrinkled forehead, arched brows and long tailed eyelids, the angels with ugly faces and paltry forms. The flesh tints are mapped out in abrupt and sharp tones, and side by side, without fusion ; the lips and cheeks spotted with red. If however the head of the Virgin and child be examined, a new and different style may be observed in them; and one may remark that beneath the painting of those parts, such as they stand at present, the engraved outlines of other and larger forms can be traced, whilst at the same time the lesser and newer ones are in a style totally different from that of the rest of the picture, or generally of the thirteenth century. That artists of the fourteenth did not disdain to repaint pictures of earlier masters is proved by a record of the year 1335 in which Ambrogio Lorenzetti contracts to execute anew "the face, hands, and book of the Virgin of the Duomo". 1 The flesh parts of the Madonna's head in the altarpiece of S. Do- menico are executed in the technical method common to Cimabue, for instance, in the picture of S. Maria No- vella at Florence, to Duccio, Ugolino, Simone Martini and others of the Siennese school of the fourteenth century. Although that school was celebrated for maintaining old and typical forms, it did not remain so faithful to one, exact and immutable, but that one may follow the dif- ference between types and outlines of the thirteenth and

1 G. Mil an e si, Doc. Sen. Vol. I. p. 195.

Chap. V. GUIDO OF SIENNA. 183

fourteenth centuries. The type, outline, and drawing of the heads of the Virgin and child of S. Domenico are those of the fourteenth century and quite as good as those of Duccio and Ugolino. The shape is more pleasing, the eyes more natural and regular, but above all, the execu- tion is different from that of the rest of the altarpiece. Instead of sharply contrasted tones without fusion, a light flesh is painted over a general, tone of verde which forms the shadow, and is fused carefully in the passage to half shades. The lips and cheeks are of a more na- tural colour. So again with the head of the infant. The type is newer, more pleasant and less grim, the colour carefully melted together.*

At the base of the picture is an inscription all but per- fect in its letters, but strangely enough, carried up at its close from the border of the panel to that of the Virgin's dress. It reads as follows:

"Me Gu...o de Senis diebus depinxit amenis;

Quem XPS lenis nullis velit agere penis ano ~Dl

MCOXXL"

That this inscription has often been retouched and, in some places, even repainted in oil, is evident from in- spection. Signor Milanesi2 affirms indeed that the whole signature is in more modern character than was used in the beginning of the thirteenth century. Be this as it may, the picture, had it remained unchanged as regards the heads of the Virgin and infant Saviour, would have created no controversy, but have been classed — with the Madonna of the Academy assigned to Guido, — amongst the works of the thirteenth century, which indicate that art merely existed at Sienna at the same level as in

1 The dress of the Virgin has been repainted in parts and at various periods, some patches being in oil. One of the angels — that to the Saviour's right on the pin- nacle, was totally renewed appa- rently in the 14th century.

2 Gaetano Milanesi. Delia Vera Eta di Guido Pittore

Sanese. ub. sup. p. 7. He finds between the MCC and the XX space for an L and after XX space for two other letters; for this reason he thinks the pic- ture by Guido Gratiani, of whom something must be said hereafter. Thus, even the more modern res- toration would, according to this view, have been partly obliterated.

184 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. V.

Lucca; Pisa and elsewhere. The heads of the Virgin and Saviour in the altarpiece of S. Domenico alone justify the encomiums lavished on Guido; but as they are evi- dently not by him, but by a later painter of the Siennese school, the wonder ceases, and Cimabue remains entitled to the position of first regenerator of Italian art. The arguments against Guido are not, however, exhausted by the evidence that painting, till late in the thirteenth cen- tury, maintained itself at a comparatively low standard in Sienna, or that the picture assigned to the year 1221 bears an altered inscription. All the industry of Delia Valle, of Rumohr, and of Milanesi has failed to discover records of a painter named Guido, earlier than 1278. One Guido Gratiani is noticed in an account of the Camar- lingo di Biccherna of that year1 as the painter of a banner. He superseded Dietisalvi in 1287, 1290, 1298 as painter of the books of the Biccherna.2 He executed in 1295 a "majesty between S. Peter and S. Paul" in the public pa- lace of Sienna, and gilt 300 letters for an image of the Virgin. In 1302, he produced the portraits of 12 forgers for the front of the tribunal of Justice.3 Guido was one of three sons of Gratiano, and lived in the Paroccia di S. Donato ai Montanini, the painter's quarter celebrated for its street called the Via de' Pittori. He brought up to his profession a son named Bartolommeo, or Meo, who afterwards settled at Perugia, (1319) and painted for the church of Montelabate. Guido's brothers, Mino4 and Guar-

1 G. Milanesi. Delia Vera Eta &c. p. 9.

2 Ibid, and Rumohr, For- schungen. Vol. II. p. 24.

3 In the Ramboux collection at Cologne, under No. 24, is a nati- vity, of the Siennese school, of the close of the 13th century, whose execution and style recal that of the angels in the altarpiece of S. Domenico by Guido. This would justify the name given by M. Ram- boux. The composition is repeated by Duccio a little later in the great altarpiece of the Duomo.

4 See the amusing error of Delia Valle in theLettere Sanese. Vol. I. p. 282, who confounds Mino with Torriti. See also, later, the ques- tion of Mino and Simone Martini as to whether the formerhad a share in the large fresco of the Virgin and Saints in the Sala del Con- siglio of the Palazzo pubblico. Sacchetti in his 84 Novella (ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 45) gives a pic- ture of Mino's shop , in which stood six crucifixes , four of which were of carved wood and two painted, all leaning against the

Chap. V.

EARLY PAINTING AT AREZZO.

185

nieri or Neri, were artists also. The former , in 1289, painted a Virgin and saints for the hall of the great council in the old Palazzo pubblico of Sienna. He wor- ked in another part of the same edifice in 1293, and in 1298 produced the portraits of several false witnesses. In 1303, he executed a S. Christopher in the Palazzo, and, 1329, disappears from the public records. Of Guarnieri nothing is known but that he left behind him three sons, Giacomuccio or Muccio, Ugolino, and Guido, who i,n 1321 was matriculated as a painter in the company of surgeons and grocers of Florence.1

Sienna can lay no claim to superiority in art during the thirteenth century. She was indebted to Niccola and Giovanni for the chief ornament of her cathedral*, and under the guidance of these and other strangers, the school of which Agnolo and Agostino were the ornaments arose in 1300. Her children rivalled the Florentines in the art of painting, but only after Cimabue. Whilst her Duccios, Ugolinos, Simones and Lorenzetti are entitled to well de- served admiration, their influence remained ever second to that of Florence.

Painting may be said to have followed much the same course at Arezzo as at Lucca, Pisa, and Sienna. Cruci- fixes, portraits of S. Francis and a few Madonnas were the staple of its production, and these were of a more decidedly repulsive character than the works of other Italian cities. A small crucifix, of the close of the twelfth century at S. Maria della Pieve, in the old form, in which the Saviour, half size of life, stands erect and open eyed, another, of the same character and date, in the chapel del Sacramento, contiguous to the Collegiata of Castiglione

wall of the bottega and standing on a desk, ready for customers. Mino one night surprises his wife , who seems to have been of frail manners, and her gallant saves himself by assuming the attitude of the Re- deemer against one of the crucifixes .

1 See G. Milanesi. Della Vera Eta &c. p. 9. Other pain-

ters of this period, equally unre- presented by authentic works, are mentioned by Della Valle, Lettere Sanese. 1262 Ventura di Gualtieri, 1271, Rinaldo, 1281, Romano di Paganello, 1289,Guccio, 1293 Rin- forzato, Minuccio di Filipuccio, 1298, Vanni diBono, already re- corded at Pisa.

186

Aretino, and a third, — colossal, of a later period in S. Domenico of Arezzo, in which the feet of the Saviour are still separate, but the belly and hips overhang, mark the progress of the same decline at Arezzo as elsewhere.1 Margaritone inherited and prolonged the agony of this degenerate style. He stood in the same relation to Arezzo as Giunta to Pisa, and would never have emerged from obscurity, had not Vasari been moved by a laudable de- sire to rescue the art of his native city from oblivion. He was born apparently about 1236,2 had certainly reached the age of manhood in 1262,3 and lived long enough to shrink before the praises so justly due to Cimabue and Giotto.4 He is said to have laboriously executed frescos in S. Clemente of the Camaldoles of Arezzo ; but they are certainly not to be regretted,5 if they resembled other pro- ductions from his hand, such as a Madonna and a co- lossal crucifix with S. Francis at the foot of the cross, in S. Francesco of Arezzo, both darkened in colour and executed without spirit, knowledge of design or movement.0 These two works of Margaritone are, it is true, without authentic signatures ; but they are noticed by Vasari, and are exactly in the style of two altarpieces signed with Margaritone's name, lately in the Ugo Baldi collection. The first of these has found its final resting place in the National Gallery. It represents the Virgin and child in an elliptical glory supported by angels, with the sym- bols of the Evangelists; and, on the sides, scenes from the life of S. John the Evangelist, S. Catherine, S. Be- nedict, and S. Margaret.7 The second represents S. Nicho-

1 This crucifix has indeed much the character of those of Margari- tone. The yellowish lights are pain- ted over a general tone of verde.

2 Vasari. Vol. I. p. 308.

3 A record of the convent of S. Michael at Arezzo contains the name of Margarito pictor filius quondam Magnani, and the date 1261. Annot. to Vas. Vol. I. p. 302.

4 Vas. Vol. I. p. 302.

5 They perished with the church in 1547.

6 These works are assigned to Margaritone by Vasari and still exist. See Vas. Vol. I. p. 303.

7 This picture now in the National Gallery No. 564. was long considered lost, having disappeared when the great transom of the church of S. Margaret of Arezzo on which it hung was removed. It is signed "Margarit. de Aritio me fecit".

Chap. V.

MARGARITONE.

las in cathedra with four episodes of his life at the sides.1 Both these works are repulsive, coloured like playing cards, and of that childish style common to the Lucchese, Pisan, and Siennese schools of the thirteenth century. Yet Margaritone was not without a spark of pride as to the value of his works, if it be true that as a token of gratitude for the spirit with which Farinata degli Uberti saved his country from danger and ruin, he presented to the great Florentine a colossal crucifix "alia greca."2 This crucifix, adds Vasari, "is now in Santa Croce between the Peruzzi and Giugni chapels. " Now, such an one, as- signed to Margaritone, is suspended in an antechamber common to the sacristy and chapel of the novitiate of that church, but displays less the feeble manner of the Aretine than that of a second rate painter of the four- teenth century. A second, in the same edifice, of older date than the foregoing, may likewise be seen in the sa- cristy. The attitude of the Saviour and the parted feet indicate an artist of the close of the thirteenth century and therefore a cotemporary of Margaritone and Cimabue ; but the warm flesh tones, shadowed in grey, are less characteristic of the former than of a Florentine, who laboured in the vicinity of the latter. Less distant from the style of the Aretine is a crucifix, much damaged and darkened by age, in a passage leading to the sacristy of S. Francesco at Castiglione Aretino, in which the Saviour is made fast with four nails, the Magdalen grasps the foot of the cross and the usual episodes complete the ornament of the fatal instrument. Nothing can be more curious or more calculated to convince the spectator of the deep decline of art, than the effort to render the ana-

Vasari's wonder at the duration of this work would be increased, had he lived till now. Yet one may express surprise at his remark that "a picture on canvass should have been preserved so long." (Vol. I. p. 303.) The canvass in question is primed and stretched on gesso like all others of the

time. See Lanzi's curious error in reproducing Vasari's remarks. Vol. I. Eoscoe's translation Bohn. London 1847. p. 37.

1 Vasari notes a picture at S. Xiccola of Arezzo, which is proba- bly this one. Vas. Vol. I. p. 307.

'2 Vas. Vol. I. p. 304. This would have occurred in 1260.

188 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. V.

tomy of the human body, an effort, which consisted in representing the veins of the legs in relief.1

Margaritone's chief industry seems, however, to have been the constant reproduction of the figure of S. Francis, of which numerous examples are preserved. The least re- pulsive is perhaps that which hangs in the convent of the Frate de' Zoccoli at Sargiano near Arezzo, where the saint is represented a little less than life size, holding the book, showing the stigma on his right hand, in frock and cowl, and on tiptoe.2 The head may be called re- gular in form, the figure stout, and in this, contrasting with the portrait by Berlinghieri. The features are however expressed in the most elementary manner, the mouths with a zigzag stroke of red, wrinkles with parti- coloured streaks. The extremities are rude and ill drawn, with the nails of the fingers and toes out of place, the draperies tortuous, and the colour, of full body in lights, superposed above a general tint of grey.3 In Santa Croce at Florence, the altar of S. Francesco is honoured by one of these portraits, with 8 episodes on each side, four below the feet, and a tree of the order between two angels at the top. The name of Cimabue has been falsely exchanged here for that of another painter, whose enamel colour, darkened by age, whose general style are very like those of Margaritone ; 1 nor is this a solitary example. A S. Francis with 16 side pictures, of old assigned to Lippo Memmi,5 may be seen in the Cappella Bracciolini at S. Francesco of Pistoia, another in the convent of S. Francesco of Pisa.6 The same figure in S. Francesco out-

1 Vasari assigns to Margaritone a crucifix on a transom in the upper church of Assisi, thus un- consciously robbing Giunta of one of his works.

2 Does Vasari, when he speaks of this as "ritratto di naturale", mean that it was painted from life, or only life size? Surely the latter. Vas. Vol. I. p. 303—4.

3 This picture on panel covered with a primed canvass, fast to

the gesso, is in part restored and

bears the inscription " rgarit

de Aretio pingebat", the latter word retouched.

4 This picture is assigned to Cimabue by Vasari. Vol. I. p. 221.

5 SeeTolomei. Guida di Pis- toia, ub. sup. p. 130. The ori- ginal of Memmi has perhaps ex- isted and been replaced by this which falsely bears his name.

6 This also is assigned by Vas.

Chap. V.

MARGARITONE.

189

side Sinigaglia, signed "Margaritonis devotio me fecit," has not been preserved,1 but in its place is one without a signature. Three more exist, — in S. Francesco of Castiglione Aretino ; — in the Academy of Arts at Sienna,2 — and in the Museo Cristiano at the Vatican.3 The first, in part covered by another picture, represents the saint upright, cowled, with a cross in his right and a book in his left hand; — and is inscribed "Margarit. de Aritio me fee". The second, painted with a hard enamelled surface, is signed "Margarit de Aretio m. f." and is excessively ugly, short in stature and gazing. The last, equally repulsive,

bears the mutilated inscription " de . . . . o me fecit.4

That a good painter may also be a good architect and a talented sculptor, is so fully exemplified in the history of Italian art that it creates no surprise; but that a bad painter should become a good architect and sculptor passes all belief. Yet Vasari vouches for the fact, and says that Margaritone executed the model of the Palazzo and of S. Ciriaco, at Ancona, 5 and the tomb of Gregory the Tenth in the episcopal palace of Arezzo. The palace of Ancona has undergone a total change since the sixteenth century,6 and the church of S. Ciriaco dates from the tenth century, but the portal of the latter edifice is filled with heads of apostles which display the rudeness peculiar to the thir- teenth, albeit nothing characteristic of Margaritone. The monument of Gregory the Tenth — in the cathedral, and not in the episcopal palace at Arezzo, — displays the style of the pupils of Niccola Pisano. The body of the pontiff lies on a slab under the trefoil arch, at the point of which the Saviour in the act of benediction is represented in a rae-

Vol .1. p. 222. to Ciraabue. According to Tronci MSS. in Archiv. Stor. Vol. VI. p. 406, there were two pictures by Margaritone in the church of S. Catherine of Pisa, one representing S. Francis, the other S. Catherine.

1 Annot. to Vasari. Vol. I. p. 304.

2 No. 18.

3 Case No. 18.

4 The commentators of Vas. Vol. I. p. 304 notice a 4th as re- cently exported from Florence, a 5th mentioned by Vas. as still existing at Ganghereto sopraTerra nuova di Valdarno. Ibid. p. 305.

5 Vas. Vol. I. p. 307—8.

f' Annot. to Vas. Vol. I. p. 308.

190

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

dallion. The statue of Gregory is naturally and broadly treated; whilst in three statuettes at the pinnacle , fair action is coupled with shortness of stature, a characteristic feature in the works of Arnolfo and other Pisan sculp- tors.1 Is it necessary to add that there is no resemblance between this monument and the sculpture of the portal of S. Ciriaco of Ancona.

Vasari, however, notices in the life of Arnolfo, one Mar- chionne, who after executing works at Rome and else- where, produced certain sculptured figures on the front of the cathedral of Arezzo,2 which by their rude execution rival the paintings of Margaritone. The biographer may have confounded two names which are not unlike each other in sound ; but his mistake is more difficult to pardon if one considers, that the painter Margaritone and the sculptor Marchionne could not have existed at the same period.

Whilst Margaritone and Marchionne thus stamp the art of Arezzo as inferior even to that of the cities in its vicinity, another painter did honour to the birth-place of Vasari, and this is Montano.

A glance at the history of these days may reveal the influence which the house of Naples wielded in Italy at the close of the thirteenth and rise of the fourteenth centuries, during the struggles of the Guelphs and Ghibe- lines. Charles the First and Second, and Robert the Wise played a conspicuous part in the politics of Florence. Niccola, Arnolfo, and Giovanni had, it is said, been em- ployed in the latter part of the thirteenth century in the construction or enlargement of the castles which over-

1 A modern inscription at the base of the monument declares, does not prove , that it was exe- cuted by Margaritone.

2 The inscription on the front of the cathedral of Arezzo, which can only refer to the sculpture, as the greater part of the front and J

church are of 1300, runs as fol- lows. AnniD. MCCXVI. Ms.Madii. Marchio sculpsit Phrmathus rau- nera fulsit itpe archipBi z." Va- sari also gave to Marchionne the tomb of Honorius the IIId in S. Maria Maggiore at Rome, which in his second edition he assigns to Arnolfo. Vas. Vol. I. p. 244.

Chap. V.

MONTANO OF AREZZO.

191

awed Naples , or made the city a strong place of arms. Churches had been built and endowed; and according to the custom of the time, painting was required to complete the adornment of the latter as well as that of the royal chapels within the fortresses. Numerous as were the mosaists and sculptors of South Italy in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, painting seemed to have been less successfully pursued, and though Dominici records the names of artists of most fabulous antiquity, his statements are doubtful and seldom trustworthy. One might indeed repeat respecting him the opinion of a late lamented author who affirmed that Dominici's book was hardly less fabulous than the Metamorphoses of Ovid. The oldest painting in Naples which has really the character of the close of the thirteenth century is a fresco in the "cortile" of the monastery of S. Lorenzo Maggiore, above the door leading into the church. The Virgin, a slender and small eyed figure, holding the infant Saviour on her knees, plays with one of his hands, whilst he, with not ungraceful motion, grasps a flower. The fingers of the hands are thin, but coarse at the extremities. A small figure at the Virgin's feet kneels in prayer, whose shield hangs to the right.1 This work would indicate that painting at Naples had sunk to the general level of the thirteenth century all over Italy. Montano d'Arezzo had more talent prob- ably; and the works which he undertook were vast and important. He painted in 1305 in two chapels of the Castel Nuovo,2 and in 1306 in two chapels of the Castel del Uovo.3 He had been the favorite of Philip of Tarento, and on the death of that prince became the

1 On gold ground.

2 In the Register No. 1305, letter G, Folio 226, verso, of the Royal Sicilian Archives is the following: "Magistro Montorio ('? Montano) pictori pro pictura duarum eapel- larum Castri nostri Novi Neapolis ct aliis necessariis ad pingendum eapellas easdem, unciarum V. Da- tum Neapoli die 20 Augusti. In-

dict. III. an. 1305." (InLettere sulla Chiesa dell' Incoro- n a t a , &c. by Gius eppe Ange- luzzL 8°. Naples 184G. p. 12.)

3 In the same records. Register Fol. 228: "Magistro Montano pic- tori pro pictura duarum capella- rum Castri nostri Ovi unciarum VIII. Sub die ultimo Augusti. In- dict. HI. an 1306." (Ibid. p. 14.)

192

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

"familiar" of king Robert who (1310) knighted him and endowed his title with lands near Mariliano.1 A chapel in the monastery of Montevergine near Avellino, for which king Robert had a special reverence, was adorned by his hands, and he is, by tradition, the author of a Madonna at that honoured shrine. The head of the image is said to have been brought home from the crusades; but this is a fable sedulously maintained with the aid of a fictitious reading of old records and by a diligent concealment of all but the features under an ornament and diadem of jewelled silver. Nor would it have been easy to form an idea as to the value of a picture exhibited at a shrine of such celebrity but for the circumstance that, not long since, the whole figure was laid bare for the sake of being copied, and it became possible to remark, first, that the whole altarpiece is the work of one hand and secondly that it corresponds in style to that of a painter living

1 In the same records Regist. Let. E. F 27 a tergo an. 1310: "Robertus rex universis presentes litteras ispecturis, tarn presenti- bus quam futuris. Inducti nos instituis naturalibus et ratio ut

cum affectibus in hiis maxi-

me per quae et sequentibus merita digna pervenit, et opera muni- ticentise per quoddam honestatis debitum, nec indigno clarescunt sane Montanus de Aretio pictor et familiaris carissimi fratris nos- tri Filippi principis Acahie et Taranti ndelissimus in presentia nost. Majestatis.... quod idemprin- ceps, de Grata servitia quae idem Montanus sibi hactenus prestatum est prsestabat suae dirigens con- siderations intuitum specialem sibi fecit gratiam et cessit que proinde litteras suo pendenti si- gillo munitas quas nostro cospetui presentavit tenoris, &c. Philippus clare memorie.... servitiis quae Magister Montanus de Aretio pic- tor familiaris noster nobis exhibuit et exhibere non cessat maxime in pingendo capellam nostram tarn in domo nostro Neapolis quam

in Ecc. B. Mariae de Monte Vir- ginis, ubi specialem devotionem nab emus eidem Magistro Mon- tano et ejus eredibus utriusque sexus et ejus tempore legitime descendentibus natis, jam et in antea nascituris in perpetuum de a R. terra olim nemoris seu silva Larje quae est in terra nostra co- mitatus acerrarum, sita inter Ma- rilianum et Summam, quam Sil- vam in toto trahi et extirpari, &c." Ibid. p. 15.

The manner in which the fore- going has been altered for an evi- dent purpose may be seen in the following Extract from "Privilegi Incepti e baronali. Fol. Naples. Vol. II.

"1310. Privilegio del Re Ro- berto con cui dona a Montanara d'Arezzo, pittore, una stanza di Maggia 100, site tra la Cerra e Marigliano per aver dipinto il bus to del Quadro di nos. Sign, de Montevergine e la cappella del D. Re in Napoli."

There is not a word of the Virgin of Monte Vergine in the record, still less of her "bust".

Chap. V.

MONTANO D'AREZZO.

193

in the first years of the thirteenth century. The Virgin, of large size, enthroned in a chair, holds on her knee the infant, who grasps the dress at her bosom and is clothed in a red tunic shot with gold. With her left hand she firmly supports him, whilst with her right she seems to draw attention from herself to him, an action common to the early schools. Two small angels wave censers at the upper angles of the chair, at the foot of which are six of the heavenly messengers. The form of the infant, small for that of the Virgin, the diminutive size of the angels, impair the balance of the group. The Madonna is of a slender and not quite ungraceful shape. The head is of a regular outline, but like that of the infant and angels, reveals in the painter a lingering attachment to old forms, and a mixture of the manner still visible in Cimabue with that of the Giottesques. The hands are long, and the fingers slender but coarse at the extremities. The draperies, with gilt embroidered borders, fall with a comparatively easy fold, and are all shot with gold. It is a work which may be classed betwixt those of Sienna and Florence, graceful enough to remind one of the former, without the breadth peculiar to the latter, but not so ta- lented as to explain the high position of Montano at the Neapolitan court at a time when Giotto was already famous. It must however be borne in mind that the whole picture has been rubbed down, so that in the heads of some angels the original drawing may be seen. The gold ground is gone, and the colour, now hard and raw, seems to have been thinly painted on a slightly primed panel. The shadows are still however warm in tone. The fabulous history of the head being a relic of the crusades arose from a very natural desire to increase the reverence due to the shrine, but seemed confirmed by the fact that this part of the panel, being formed of a separate block, pro- jects with its nimbus at an angle to the plane of the pic- ture, a practise common to all the schools of the eleventh, twelfth and thirteenth centuries. But besides the evident presence of the same hand in every part of the work, vol. i. 13

194

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. V.

the projection is of the same wood as the rest of the panel. The record of Montano's knighthood in no wise supports the fable of a relic brought home from Constantinople; but merely states that the painter laboured at Montever- gine in 1310. The picture seems to have been executed at that period, and may therefore be assigned to Montano, the more, as there are vestiges of painting of the same kind in one of the chapels of the church.

In Naples, little remains that recals the style of a pain- ter whose industry was so great, except a half figure of a bishop in episcopals, in the act of benediction and aged about threescore, in the dormitory dei Giovanetti of the Seminario Urbano. This figure is not without grandeur and seems to be one of a series of three, the remainder of which have perished. Above the figure of the bishop stands S. Paul with the sword and book, of good features and character, more modern in style than Cimabue and somewhat Giottesque in type. The contours are a little black, the colour rubbed down. Montano may possibly be the author.

Chap. VI.

RISE OF FLORENTINE ART.

195

CHAPTER VI. EISE OF ART AT FLORENCE.

The rise of the Florentine school may be said to date from the period when Jacopo the Franciscan adorned the tribune of the baptistery of S. Giovanni with mosaics 5 but there are written records of old date to prove the existence of art at Florence as early as the eleventh cen- tury. One Rustico "clerk and painter" lived there in 1066. The memory of one Girolamo di Morello, also a "clerk and painter" in 3112, is preserved in a document of the time; and these names not only prove the existence of artists, but that they were chiefly of the religious orders. In 1191 Marchisello of Florence painted a picture which still existed at the time of Cosmo de' Medici on the high altar of the church of S. Tommaso. In 1224, the prior of S. Maria Maggiore of Florence was indebted to one "Ma- gister Fidanza dipintor" 1 and sold a house to satisfy his creditor. In 1236, Bartolommeo, a painter, lived at Flo- rence. 2 One Lapo di Florentia painted on the front of the cathedral of Pistoia in 1259; 3 and as early as 1269, one of the streets of Florence already bore the name of Via de? Pittori. 4

The earliest artist mentioned by Vasari, is Andrea Tafi, who, according to a doubtful chronology, was born in

1 R u m o h r , F o r s c li u n g e n , gives the original record Vol. II. p. 28. 191.

2 Gaye. Carteggio. Vol. I. p. 423. 8° Flor. 1839. quotes from a record of Aug. 1292. at Florence one Fino, "pictor1', who executed work in the "palatium comune".

3 C i amp i, lib. sup. Doc. XXI. p. 142. The subjects were the Virgin and child between two saints , half figures.

4 See also for these early ar- tists, commentary on the life of Cimabue in Vas. Vol. I. p. 233—4.

13*

196

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VI.

1213. 1 Tafi, "being not the most talented man in the world, and considering that mosaic, because of its durable qualities , was in greater estimation than any other kind of painting, proceeded from Florence to Venice where certain Greeks were working in that material. Having become their companion, he succeeded, by means of money and prayers, in bringing a Greek painter named Apollonius to Florence, who taught him the art of baking mosaic cubes and of making the putty for joining them". 2 Without denying that Tafi visited Venice, or that Apollonius3 abandoned the works of S. Mark for those of S. Giovanni, it may be observed that the art of mosaics required no new rules in the thirteenth century, and that, even at Florence, Fra Jacopo perfectly succeeded without the aid of Greeks in producing (1225) the mosaics of the tribune in the very edifice which Tafi afterwards helped to complete. This obvious fact apparently puzzled Baldinucci, who cleared the difficulty by making Fra Jacopo a pupil of Tafi,4 mindless of the fact that the latter being, according to Vasari, born in 1213 and in reality perhaps later, he could not have taught a mosaist who laboured in 1225. Andrea Tafi indeed was more probably a pupil of the Franciscan, as is very truly observed by the latest com- mentators of the Aretine, who quote, much to the point, a passage5 in which Tafi and Gaddo Gaddi are made to assist Fra Jacopo, and this at a time when Tafi had be- come "famous throughout Italy". 6

The baptistery of Florence was, according to Vasari, executed jointly by Tafi and Apollonius7, one figure alone being due to the undivided industry of the former. In the

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 285.

2 Vas. Vol, I. p. 281.

3 The existence of Apollonius is doubtful. Del Migliore, MS. notes to Vasari in the Maglia becchiana (com. to Vas. Vol. I. p. 288) pre- tends that he read in a record of 1279 "Magister Apollonius pictor Florentines." Rich a. (Chiese Fiorentine. Vol. V. p. XL1I.)

says he saw the name of Apol- lonio in the records of the baptis- tery; but the records themselves are not to be found.

4 Baldinucci (F.) Opere. 8°. Milan 1811. Vol. IV. p. 93.

5 Vas. Vol. I. p. 285.

6 Vas. Vol. I. p. 284.

7 Vas. Vol. I. p. 282.

Chap. VI.

ANDREA TAFI.

197

converging sides of the cupola, the Saviour erect, in the act of benediction and holding the book, is surrounded by thrones, virtues, the emblems of rule, angels, arch- angels, powers and domination. Beneath the Saviour in glory, and above the entrance to the tribune a colossal Redeemer sits on a rainbow in judgment; — at his feet the resurrection of the dead, and in three courses at his sides, the angels sounding the last trump, the apostles, Paradise, and hell. These three courses, continued round the octogon, are filled, in the upper, with scenes of the creation from the separation of light and darkness to the deluge, the second with incidents from the life of Joseph and his brothers, and the third with episodes from the history of the Saviour. The fourth and lowest row is devoted to the mission of John the Baptist. All this is not the produce of one, or even of two hands, but of many. The distribution and general arrangement may be of the thirteenth century, but it is very doubtful whether the whole was at once completed. The mosaic, imposing by its symmetry and the due subordination of the architect- ural and pictorial parts, reveals various periods of labour and restoration, and a consequent loss of original character. Amongst the least defective and, probably earliest, parts are those immediately to the right of the Redeemer in judgment, and especially one in which a half figure of the Eternal, standing with raised arms and creating the sun and the moon, is distinguished by regularity of propor- tions. Yet in the sequel of this series different periods may be noticed. The first mentioned, however, make a nearer approach to the tribune mosaics than the rest, and the latter, whatever Vasari may have thought or pretended, are superior to those of the octogon. 1 The course devoted to the life of the Saviour displays a more modern style, the legs of the crucified Saviour being nailed over each other, contrary to the practise of the thirteenth century.

1 See Vasarfs depreciatory re- I especially on those of Fra Jacopo. marks on all these mosaics, but | Vol. I. p. 284.

198

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VI.

The most feeble and defective figure in the baptistery is the much damaged and restored one of the colossal Re- deemer in judgment, specially assigned to Tafi, which is remarkable for the size and grimness of the head, the deformity of the extremities and the overcharge of gold in the confused draperies. Akin to this figure in its faults, the angels and apostles of the judgment betray, in their vehement and ill rendered action, the general cha- racter of the works of the thirteenth century, and seem but a continuation of the style of S. Angelo in Formis near Capua. That Tafi should have much credit for this colossal figure is surprising and probably untrue. In the Inferno, the figure of Lucifer, sitting upon dead bodies, with serpents hissing from his ears, was conceived much in the spirit which prevailed later in Giottesque pictures, and may possibly be a restoration by one of the Gaddi.

If Tafi is one of the feeble artists of the last period of the decline, and does not charm by any species of talent, he may still amuse us by his timidity and super- stition which Franco Sacchetti1 has ridiculed with as much gusto as Vasari rallies his grotesque style. That style the Aretine affected to consider purely Greek, starting from the wilfully erroneous opinion that everything feeble in art in Italy should be attributed to foreigners. He might have been nearer the truth, had he affirmed that Tafi combined the defects common to Italians and By- zantines at this period ; for there was a feeble Greek art, but by its side a feeble Italian style; and both were so degenerate as to be hardly distinguishable. Tafi being no more Greek than Italian in manner, might have learnt quite as much from masters of one as of the other na- tionality.

Of Tafi's supposed works in Pisa no record has been

1 Franco Sacchetti Novel. CXCI. Ed. of Gaetano Pog- giali. 8°. Milan. 1804. Vol. III. p. 136. Sacchetti, according to Bottari's preface to the above

Edin p. XXII, was born about 1335, a year before the death of Giotto, and completed his Novelle about the year 1376.

Chap. VI. ANDREA TAFI. 199

preserved. He died, according to his biographer, in 1294.1 It might have been interesting to compare with his mosaic at the baptistery those of S. Miniato, outside Florence, executed, as is proved by an inscription, in 1297. Those of the front, as well as those of the choir, were in existence in the time of Rumour, who describes the first as of the eleventh century, and without a trace of Byzantine cha- racter, the second as in Greek taste.2 At the present time the mosaics of the front, which had almost been ob- literated, have been renewed, whilst those of the choir have undergone the worst sort of repair. 3

Vasari notices as a curious circumstance that, when Alesso Baldovinetti, and after him, Lippo, restored the mosaics of the baptistery, it might be seen that the de- sign was previously drawn and coloured in red on the stucco. 4 This was a common custom, and may be noticed at Cefalu. All artists used the same method, whether for mosaic or for fresco, and it may be seen in the cathedral of Assisi and, as late as the fifteenth century, in the frescos of Benozzo Gozzoli at the Campo Santo of Pisa. In mosaics, the cubes were simply laid according to the de- sign on the stucco. In drawing for wall painting, the

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 285—6. Of his pupil Antonio di Andrea Tan no- thing further is known than that he is inscribed in 1348 in the com- pany of S. Luke at Florence. (Gaye. Carteggio. Vol. II. p. 37.) Of Bonamico or Buffalmacco a word later.

2 Rumohr (Forschungen. Vol. I. p. 354—5).

3 This mosaic represents the Saviour between the symbols of the Evangelists, with the Virgin erect and stretching out her arms on the left, and S. Miniato pre- senting a crown on the right. Or- naments with medallions of apos- tles, animals, and birds, form the border. The mosaic has the mu- tilated inscription "AP o Dni MCCXCVII. tep pee P. P...sto

opus". This mosaic has been restored on the system pursued in S. Mark at Venice, namely re- moved and re-executed after trac- ings had been taken of the re- mains. It is needless to say that the character of the original has been lost in the copies. It is sur- prising that an art commission like that of Florence should in the year 1861 countenance such practises, particularly when else- where the palace of the Podesta has been so ably restored, and when at Pisa, the conscientious and able Pietro Bellini has re- stored the cathedral, superin- tended the works of the baptistery and Campo Santo, and renewed, ex- actly in its original style, S. Paolo a Ripa d'Arno.

4 Vas. Vol. I. p. 283.

200

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VI.

artist first transferred, either to the raw surface of the wall, when the work was to be on one intonaco, or to the first intonaco, when two were used, the original design. This was done by means of comparative squares, by which a small original drawing in the painter's hand was transferred in larger proportions to the space intended for it. After this transfer, the necessary improvements having been made on the wall were transposed as corrections to the original small drawing. The final intonaco was then laid on in portions and retraced with the assistance of the squares on the still uncovered parts and on the corrected design. The use of a single intonaco lasted to the close of the thirteenth century. Two were introduced at the time of Giotto, and continued by his successors; and it was not till the fifteenth century that cartoons were pricked and pounced.

Cotemporary with Tan was Coppo di Marcovaldo, a Flo- rentine painter, who possessed no qualities superior to those of his predecessors. In a picture of the convent church of the Servi at Sienna, assigned to Dietisalvi he displayed no better acquirements than his neighbours.1 The subject of the Virgin enthroned in a vast chair, and holding the infant Saviour, with two angels at the upper angles, is rendered in the old manner; and in the com- position, attitude, and features, as well as in the draperies and ornaments, Coppo continued the defective manner of the period, differing perhaps from the Siennese in this that his forms had something of the Florentine weight. As a colourist he cannot be criticised, because the surface of his picture has been rubbed down, darkened by age and restoring, but if one can judge from the remains, his tones were mapped out in sharp contrasts on a rough

1 This picture has been engraved by Rosini as a work of Dietisalvi of Sienna. Atlas, tab. VI. But Padre Filippo Buondelmonte , in his chronicles of the convent church of the Servi, says that the picture was by Coppo di Marcovaldo,

whilst, in a MS. description of Sienna, by a doubtful author, but of the 17th century, it is stated to have been signed and dated:

"M.CCLXI Coppus di Florentia pinxit.1' See comment, to V as. Vol. I. p. 235.

Chap. VI.

CIMABUE.

201

surface of gesso. The date of this work, if credit can be given to records, was 1261. There are further notices of Coppo as having executed wall paintings in 1265 at the cappella S. Jacopo of the Duomo in Pistoia, and a Virgin, in 1275, in the choir of the same edifice.1

Such was the state of art in Florence when, according to Vasari, the governors of the city thought fit to invite Greek painters to restore that which he declares to have been totally lost in Italy. 2 Without wasting further time or space to refute an assertion which is confirmed neither by facts nor by record, and remembering, that not only in Florence but throughout Italy, painting was indeed re- duced to a low ebb, but, so far from being lost, was in the full possession of life, it is a sensible relief to the student to mark the gradual revival which took place under Giovanni Cimabue, who, born in 1240 of the re- spectable family of the Cimabui,3 was led by a natural inclination to the study of design, and, in the course of time, infused life into the old school from which he sprung. Cimabue was destined to stand out in history as the fore- runner of a new era. He was to reanimate old and worn out types, to infuse energy and individuality into empty forms, to soften the harshness of a degenerate school, and to shed over a barbarous time the poetry of senti- ment and of colour. Surrounded by examples which are the evident ground work of his style, for he did not issue beyond a certain measure from the rudeness of his age, he had no need of the Greek masters who are supposed to have taught him. It would seem indeed as if Vasari, anxious to carry out in literature that law of contrasts which is so essential to the painter, should have thought it necessary to place his hero under the most despicable

pella S. Jacobo were removed to make room for others by Alesso d'Andrea and Bonaccorso di Cino,

1 See Ciampi. pp.86 and 143. Tigri. Guida di Pistoia. pp. 122. 138. Tolomei p. 16. Ciampi mentions (p. 86) a crucifix by Coppo j in 1347 in the cathedral of Pistoia, which 2 v v i t oiq has since perished. It was dated j vas' vo1- A' p' 1275. — The frescos of the Cap- | 3 Vas. Vol. I. p. 219.

202

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VI.

of tutors, that his superiority might shine out the more splendidly afterwards. In pursuit of this system, he chose for the teachers of Cimabue certain Greeks who, he af- firms, in pursuance of the imaginary invitation of the Florentine government, painted the chapel of the Gondi in S. Maria Novella.1 Unfortunately for his theory it is proved that Santa Maria Novella was only commenced forty years after Cimabue's birth. Succeeding authors, desirous to support the falling edifice of Vasari's history and chronology, supposed that the paintings of the so- called Greeks were rude ones executed in the chapels of S. Anna and S. Antonio, in the old church beneath the sacristy of S. Maria Novella. These, representing the birth of the Virgin, and scenes from her life, were en- graved by DAgincourt in ignorance of the fact that they were of the fourteenth century. Delia Valle and Lanzi,2 in the same path, fell back at last upon some older paintings discovered beneath the foregoing, which they assigned to the Greeks of Vasari, but which merely exhibited the rude hand of one amongst the feeble artists common to Italy in the thirteenth century.

It is sufficient to know that, whatever Vasari may have thought and written respecting the early education of Ci- mabue, he was right in affirming that the Florentine was the best painter of his time, and that he was the regenera- tor of the art of his country. Whether, in Cimabue, the struggle towards a truer expression of nature was a con- sequence of the general tendency in the age to emerge from barbarism, abate corruption, and acquire liberty ; or whether some special cause might have led him to feel the abject condition of an art which had merely consisted at last in the perpetuation of defective models consecrated by time and custom, is a question which the silence of history does not give authority to answer. It may be presumed, however, that with the new spirit which arose in religion, politics and letters, the progress of art must

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 220.

| 2 Lanzi. ub. Sup. Vol. I. p. 41.

Vol I p. '-'03.

MADONNA ENTHRONED ; by Cimabae, in S Maria Novella at Florence.

Chap. VI.

CIMABUE/

203

needs go hand in hand. That Cimabue was not merely sensible of the necessity for a change, but proud of ha- ving given the first impulse towards it, may be learnt from the pages of one who lived and wrote but thirty years after his death. 1 Nay, it is even said that he Avas vain of the progress which he had caused, though, in the author of .the Divina Commedia, he found a more lenient judge, and a milder verdict than was accorded to one who was not the teacher of Giotto.2 — Dante, indeed, contributed to the fame of Cimabue, who shared with Giotto the halo thrown around the Florentine master by a poet, honoured, hated, and afterwards deified by his countrymen. Cimabue's pictures, known by tradition less than by record, were admired by his cotemporaries, and, when he had finished the colossal Madonna of the Ru- cellai for S. Maria Novella, it was carried in a festive procession of people and trumpeters, the fame of its beauty having been spread through the city by a visit from Charles the First of Anjou, in company of a numerous suite of highborn dames and gentlemen, to the painter's atelier.3 In this altarpiece, the largest that had yet been seen, the spectators might notice the Virgin, whom they held in so much veneration, in a red tunic and blue mantle, with her feet resting on an open worked stool, sitting on a chair hung with a white drapery flowered in gold and blue, and carried by six angels kneeling in threes above each other. A delicately engraved nimbus sur-

1 See the text of these com-| ments in Vasari. Vol. I. p. 227.1 The author was the first illustra- tor of the Divina Commedia, and is usually called the Anonimo.

2 Oderisio da Gubbio. See in Dante's Purgatorio the well known passage :

Credette Cimabue nella pintura Tener lo campo; ed ora ha Giotto il grido

Si, che la fama di colui e oscura. Canto XI v. 94.

3 It has been inferred from the silence of such historians as Ma- Lespini and Villani, as to this visit, which is only recorded in Vas. (Vol. I. p. 225) that its truth may be contested. There is however nothing improbable in it. The further statement that the quar- ter in which Cimabue lived, "Borgo Allegri", derived its name from the public joy on the occa- sion, is proved to be untrue. See notes of commentators to Vas. Vol. I. p. 225—6.

204

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VI.

rounded her head and that of the infant Saviour on her lap, dressed in a white tunic and purple mantle shot with gold. A dark coloured frame surrounded the gabled square of the picture, which was delicately traced with an ornament, interrupted at intervals by no less than thirty medallions on gold ground, each of which contained the half figure of a saint. In the face of the Madonna, the admiring beholder might praise the soft and melancholy expression ; in the form of the infant, a certain freshness, animation and natural proportion; in the group, affection but too rare at this period. He might sympathize with the sentiment in the attitudes of the angels, in the movement of the heads, and in the elegance with which the hair was wound round the cinctures, falling in locks on the neck. He would be justly struck by the ener- getic mien of some prophets; above all he would have felt surprise at the comparative clearness and soft har- mony of the colours. The less enthusiastic spectator of the present day will admit, but qualify this praise. In truth, a certain loss of balance is caused by the over- weight of the head in the Virgin as compared with the slightness of the frame. The features are the old ones of the thirteenth century, only softened, as regards the expression of the eye, by an exaggeration of elliptical form in the iris, and closeness of the curves of the lids. The nose still starts from a protuberant root, is still depressed at the end; and the mouth and chin are still small and prim. In the Saviour, the same coarse nose will be found united to a half open mouth and large round eyes; and the features will be considered less in- fantine than masculine and square. The hands of both Virgin and child will attract attention by the thinness and length of the fingers, their wide separation, as they start from the palm, and by joints which have something of the lay figure, whilst the feet are similarly defective. In the angels, the absence of all true notions of composi- tion may be considered striking. Their frames will appear slight for the heads, yet their movements more natural

Chap. VI.

CIMABUE.

205

and pleasing than hitherto. One, indeed, to the spectator's right of the Virgin, combines more tender reverence in its glance than any that had yet been produced. In the flow of his drapery, Cimabue made no sensible progress ; but he might be justly proud of the change which he in- troduced into the methods of drawing and colouring practised in his time. After somewhat softening the hardness of the fine engraved outlines, he gave to the flesh tints a clear and carefully fused colour, and imparted to the forms some of the rotundity which they had lost. With him vanished the sharp contrasts of hard lights, half tones, and shades. He abandoned the line shadowing, ignoring form, for a careful stippling which followed and developed it. He relieved the general light verde under- ground with warm shadows and pale, but warm, lights. A ruddy tinge lighted, without staining, the cheeks and lips. Unity and harmony were given to the whole by a system of final glazes, which, having now in part disap- peared, exaggerate the paleness of the flesh lights. His draperies were painted in gay and transparent colours; reds, gently harmonizing, by their lightness, with the flesh and with the light, but brilliant, blues and rosy pinks. In ornament, he followed the practise of his predecessors, but infused into it more taste and a better subordination to the remaining parts.1 From the date of this altarpiece the preeminence of the Florentine school begins to de- velop itself, expands later in the person of Giotto, to reunite in Ghirlandaio all the branches of its progress, and finally to culminate in the greatness of Michael An- gelo, Raphael, and Leonardo da Vinci. The altarpiece of S. Maria Novella would alone suffice to explain the superiority of Cimabue over his predecessors and cotem- poraries, the rise of Giotto and the principles on which he started. Without it the principal link of artistic his- tory at Florence would be lost and Giotto's greatness un-

1 Time has unfortunately not spared portions of the picture; which besides being longitudinally

split in three places, is damaged as regards several of the saints in the border medallions.

206

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VI.

explained, because neither the Madonna of the Academy of Arts at Florence nor that of the Louvre give a just idea of the master. The altarpiece of the Academy of Arts may, it is true, rank higher than that of the Rucellai as regards composition and the study of nature; but the old types are more obstinately maintained there; and, above all, the colour has been so altered by time and restoring that the excellent qualities of Cimabue in this respect can hardly be traced any longer.1 Cimabue here, gave the Virgin a more natural attitude and a less rotund head, but a weightier frame, stronger outlines, and a less care- ful execution than before. He characterized with a wild energy the two prophets in the centre niche and gave them individuality of features and expression. 2 In a Madonna of the same form as those of S. Maria Novella and the Academy, now in the Louvre3, the old ornamented frame with its twenty six medallions is reminiscent of the Virgin of the Rucellai chapel and shares much of its character, but seems less carefully executed and has since lost of its value from necessary restoring, the glazes being removed, and the green of the shadows as well as yellows of lights being bared. The draperies which were of old shot with gold, are now repainted, the gold ground and nimbuses regilt, and many of the

1 The Virgin, enthroned, with the infant in the act of benediction on her knee (Nr. 2 of Catal. Gallery of large pictures, coming from S. Trinita), on a chair sup- ported by eight guardian angels; — the throne upon a floor rest- ing on niched supports in which the four prophets stand, who fore- told the Saviour's coming; such is again the simple subject of the altarpiece at the Academy of Arts at Florence , whose gable form has been modernized into a rectangular one.

2 In these indeed, as well as in the two occupying the side niches, and looking up to the Madonna he surpassed himself in the ren-

dering of form, giving to one, ani- mation, to others a staid gravity. In the drapery no change is to be noticed. This Madonna was origin- ally in the Badia of S. Trinita at Florence, and is now No. 2. in the Acad, of Arts. Another Madonna and child enthroned with angels adoring, lately in the Ugo Baldi Gallery and now in the National Gallery (No. 565.) partakes to a certain extent of the character noticed in Cimabue, and is supposed to be that mentioned by Vasari as at S. Croce (Vas. Vol. I. p. 221.). Time however and re- touching have done much to im- pair its value.

3 No. 174 of Louvre Catal.

Chap. VI.

CIMABUE.

207

heads in the medallions renewed in oil. Originally in S. Francesco of Pisa, the presence of this altarpiece there might be taken as evidence of the painter's stay in that city, were it not already certain that, in the last years of the century, he was appointed capo maestro of the mosaics in the Pisan Duomo. To Pisa therefore, neglecting the series of works falsely assigned to the painter by Vasari and others, 1

1 Before proceeding to notice the works assigned to Cimabue, it may be advisable to state that the fol- lowing, mentioned by Vasari have perished, viz. the wall paintings in the hospital of the Porcellana (Ibid. p. 221). S. Agnes, a panel with side pictures of the life of the Saint, of old in S. Paolo a Ripa d'Arno at Pisa (Ibid. p. 223), wall paintings representing scenes from the life of the Saviour in the chiostro di S. Spirito at Florence, and paintings sent by the master to Empoli (Vas. Vol. I. p. 225). In the Academy of Arts at Flo- rence, a Virgin and child (No. 43) from S. Paolino of Florence, is as- signed with a query to Cimabue, but is evidently not by him. Va- sari mentions as one of Cimabue's first works an altarpiece in S. Cecilia at Florence (Vol. I. p. 221). A picture in the Uffizi formerly in S. Cecilia, and later in S. Stefano (No.2.Catal. of the Uffizi) has been supposed that to which Vasari alludes. It represents S. Cecilia enthroned with a book in her left hand and her right raised. At the upper angles of the throne two angels wave censers. On each side are four episodes of the life of the saint. This picture is exe- cuted according to the methods, form and proportions characteristic of the beginning of the 14th cen- tury,^ more in the (xiottesque man- ner in fact; and this may be noticed specially in the principal figure. No one who has seen the dead colour paintings in the Scro- vegni chapel at Padua will hesi- tate as to the school in which the painter was educated. A noble

attitude, the improved forms, broad draperies, and elegance of the school of Giotto, exclude, as they were unknown to, Cimabue. The small incidents are very animated, the figures long and with small heads. Some of the latter, it is true, are marked with the old type; and the action is at times exaggerated, yet not in the man- ner of Cimabue. In a baptism administered by a bishop, the same mode of composition may be observed as in a group of women in wonder at the resurrection of a female, who revives to be con- fessedby S. Francis, as in one of the series of frescos of the life of that saint, in the upper church of As- sisi. Unfortunately this altarpiece at the Uffizi creates a disagreable impression by its colour which is damaged by time and restoring. Vasari assigns to Cimabue the S. Francis of Santa Croce, which has already found a place amongst the works of Margaritone; and a crucifix in the same church, which, in technical execution, makes some approach to the Florentine master, but is rather of his time than by the painter himself. Kugler attributes to Cimabue a picture in a dark passage leading to the sacristy of S. Simone at Florence. This represents S. Peter in the act of benediction and holding a cross, enthroned, bareheaded, in pontifi- cals, with two angels at each side of him, and the inscription: ulstam tabulam fecit fieri societas beati Petri apostoli dc mense Junii sub annis dominiMCCCVII." The date alone excludes Cimabue. The heads of the angels are repainted

208

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VI.

Cimabue may be followed with advantage. That the Pisans should employ him in the mosaics of their Duomo, and supersede for his sake their old capo -maestro Fran- cesco, that the latter should think it consistent with his pride not only to yield to Cimabue but to labour in a subordinate situation under him, is one of the strongest proofs that the Pisans were unable to find in their own school one equal to the Florentine.1 The Saviour enthroned in glory, or as the records of the time have it, the "Ma- jesty", between the Virgin and S. John Evangelist in the apsis of the Duomo of Pisa, was probably the last of Cimabue's labours, as, according to Ciampi, the latter figure remained unfinished. Unfortunately the mosaic has suffered excessive damage. In the Saviour, the feet and other parts, in the Virgin, the face, and in St. John, subordinate portions have been deprived of their original character by restoring. Yet in the forms and features of these figures, and in the colossal overweight of the Saviour the manner of Cimabue can be discerned. He gave the Re-

in oil. As for the remaining- parts, the execution is rude, the shadows dark, the outlines black and the feet large and defective. Yet the colossal figure of the Saint is im- posing- in attitude.

Vasari finally attributes to Ci- mabue the S. Francis of S. Fran- cesco of Pisa, which exists, and is, in style, worthy of Marg-aritone, to whom it will be found assigned in the foregoing- pages (Vas. Vol. I. p. 223).

In the late Campana Gallery at Rome was a picture of S. Chris- topher, supposed to be the same which, according to Vasari, was painted by Cimabue in his house in Borgo Allegri at Florence (Vas. Vol. I. p. 225). This picture, however, besides being [exten- sively damaged, is too evidently a work of the first half of the 14th century. Richa, Vol. IV. p. 306, notices a crucifix by Cimabue in the convent church of S. Jacopo di Ripoli at Florence.

1 In Ciampi (Notizie p. 144) is a record of 1301/i302 iQ which Ci- mabue's name appears as receiv- ing in company of his "famulus", pay at the rate of X. solidos per diem, for the execution of the "Majesty" in the Duomo of Pisa. Bonaini (Notiz. Ined. p. 91) cor- rects Rosini who affirms that Francesco only laboured in the Duomo after Cimabue. See Ro- sini Stor. della Pittura, Vol. I. p. 258. It is an error of the annotators of Vasari, note 2 to p. 226. Vol. I. to state that Ci- mabue only executed the figure of the Evangelist in the mosaic of the Duomo. The document given in Ciampi says: "Cimabue pictor magiestatis sua sponte confessus fuit se habuisse &c. lib. de- cern... de figura S. Johannis quam fecit juxta magiestatem." Thus he had already completed the "Majesty" when he commenced the figure of S. John.

ClTAP. VI.

CIMABUE.

209

deemer a melancholy rather than a grim expression and a certain majestic air of repose in the attitude and features. The Christ's head, was still of that bullet shape which had never been lost in Italy, since it was first conceived by an artist in the Roman catacombs.1 The brow was still heavily projected and wrinkled, but the eyes had lost the gaze of the degenerate period; nor were the features without regularity and proportion; and thus Ci- mabue, who had reformed in a certain measure the type of the Virgin, raised that of the Saviour from the depth of degeneracy into which it had fallen in the hands of his predecessors. To the bending figure of the Evan- gelist he also gave a certain languid reverence peculiarly his own. Finally, as a mosaist, he proved himself superior to the artists of the baptistery of Florence and even to Gaddo Gaddi, whose works at S. Maria Maggiore in Rome are likewise an example of the impulse given to Florentine art.2 Of Cimabue's presence at S. Francesco of Assisi there is not the slightest reason to doubt. But as the study of his works there involves the whole question of the rise of Giotto, it will be necessary to devote to this sanctuary a special chapter.

1 See the Christ of the Pontian catacomb inscribed "De donis" &c.

2 Cianrpi ub. sup. pretends p. 91, that the mosaic of the Duomo was left unfinished; because he finds by an inscription, that it was com- pleted, "having been left un- finished", by one Vicinus a painter in 1321. Vasari affirms that Ci- mabue died in 1300. Vol. I. p. 226. This is evidently an error, as he

still appears in the records of Pisa in 1301—2.

The Anonimo edited by Morelli. "Notizia d'opere &c. Bass0 1800, p. 17." notices a hftfld of S. John in fresco by Cimabue framed in wood. Having been saved from fire in the Carmine of Padua, it was preserved in the 1st half of the 16th century in the house of M. Alessandro Capello in Borgo Zucco at Padua.

VOL. I.

210

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VII.

CHAPTER VII. THE BASILICA OF ASSIST.

Assisi, the sanctuary of the oldest mendicant order, was celebrated in the earlier centuries by the martyrdom of RufinuS; and had already received some pictorial adorn- ments at the time of the Lombard rule. Famed in the thirteenth century as the final resting place of one whose life and miracles were audaciously compared with those of the Redeemer; it attracted the devotion of the peasants of Tuscany and Umbria who humbly made pilgrimage to the shrine of S. Francis. The example of a wealthy youth who had willingly surrendered his worldly substance to live a life of poverty and abstinence; was well calculated to strike the minds of a people, which; though coarse and superstitious; was yet alive to the prevalent vices of both laity and clergy. But the power of an order which might boast that it had revived the spirit of religion, and sup- ported the degenerate church; was no slight cause of its further increase. Many a strong man esteemed it of equal advantage to his temporal and spiritual welfare to share the power and enjoy the blessings of the mendicants; and for that reason enrolled himself at least in the ranks of the lay brothers. Great was the enthusiasm; large the contributions to the order; and S. Francesco of Assisi arose, a monument of the zeal; the religious ardour of Umbria and Tuscany. One church was piled over another in honour of the Saint; and pictorial art made manifest to the pilgrims at the shrine his miracles in juxta- posi- tion to the incidents of the life of the Saviour. Subjects; entrusted at first to rude artists of S. Francis' own time,

Chap. VII.

THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSIST.

211

were repeated by the ruder hand of Giunta, who in his turn yielded precedence to Cimabue. A whole school of artists then formed itself in the sanctuary. Out of this emerged Giotto, and others, who carried Florentine art to the ends of Italy, whilst in competition with them the school of Sienna lent the talents of Simone and Loren- zetti to contend for the palm of excellence. Assisi thus became equally famous in a religious and pictorial sense, and is now visited by the curious from all parts of Europe with little less frequency than, of old, by the pilgrims who came for the "pardon" of S. Francis. In the lower church, whose aisle had been painted in the early part of the century, Cimabue probably adorned the South transept. 1 Amongst the works of Giotto on the West-side of this portion of the edifice is one of an earlier date represent- ing a colossal Virgin and child between four angels. Placed above the altar of the Conception, and much da- maged by repainting, it reveals the manner of Cimabue. Its position amongst the frescos of Giotto indicates that it existed previous to his time, and was thought worthy of preservation when the rest were sacrificed to afford room for a more talented painter. To Giotto indeed may well be ascribed that reverence for the works of his master, which would induce him, like Raphael, to spare a me- mento of one who had trained him in the path of art. Equally old and remarkable is a large figure of St. Fran- cis, close to that of the Virgin and child.

In the upper church of Assisi however, Cimabue may have been also employed, but not alone. It is not possible to contemplate the series of works which decorate its transepts, choir, aisles, and vaulted ceilings, without coming to the conviction that here lies concealed the history of early Florentine art, that years elapsed before the whole of the space was decorated; and that at least two gene- rations of artists succeeded each other there. Nothing can

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 223. assigns j those of the ceilings, to Cima- HOt only the aisle paintings, but | bue.

14*

212

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chat. VII

be more interesting than to trace on those walls the progress of the art from Giunta to Cimabue, from Cimabue to a series of artistic hands of inferior genius, but moving forward with the times, and exhibiting at least a technical progress; and finally, from these, to Giotto whose style developed itself under the influence of the numerous examples which might here instruct his mind, his eye, and his already skilful hand. From the poor productions of Giunta in the Southern to the superior ones in the Northern transept a step towards the revival of form might be noticed. In the figure of the enthroned Saviour, whose remains are visible in the latter, the character of Cimabue might be traced. Its outlines indeed revealed the hand of him who had produced the altarpiece of the Academy of Arts at Florence, whilst, in comparison with the mosaic of the apsis in the Duomo of Pisa, it displayed a slighter and feebler character. The angels in the Western side of the Northern transept likewise revealed the somewhat angular and heavy style of Cimabue in the altarpiece just cited*, and the continuation of the same manner appeared with little alteration in the central ceiling of the transept. Here, the space was divided into the usual diagonals, whose ornament, issuing from vases, and enlivened with quaint conceits, recals the late Roman style of Jacopo Torriti. The evangelists, with their sym- bols sit enthroned in stately chairs, inspired to the task of composing the gospels by angels, flying down from heaven to lay their hands upon their heads. Deprived by time of their colour, these figures, of slight frames and weighty heads, betray in their outlines the hand of the painter of the Northern transept, whilst the angels, with their slender forms, exhibit some progress in the art of rendering motion; but, where traces of colour remain, the tones are raw and sharply contrasted. A different spirit marks the ceilings of the aisle, two of which, adorned with figures, alternate with two more which merely represent a blue sky studded with golden stars. In that nearest the transept, the diagonals form an or-

Chap. VII.

THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSISE

213

nament growing out of vases ; at each side of which stands an angel bearing the host and the labarum. Snakelike the green tracery and foliage on a red ground open out into ellipses filled with cupids, whilst blossoms seem to give birth to horses. In the four spaces of the ceiling, medallions are set, representing the Saviour in the act of benediction, S. John, the Virgin, and S. Francis. Com- pared with the Redeemer in the apsis of the cathedral of Pisa, or in general with the works of Cimabue, the figure of Christ displays more nature than had heretofore been bestowed upon him, especially in the forms of the features and chiefly of the eyes. The latter indeed were more an imitation of reality than those of Cimabue, who, as before remarked, sought to produce expression by long closed lids and an elliptical iris. The Virgin offers the same peculiarities in the features, united to more regular proportion and better action than was to be found in the altarpiece of the Rucellai, whilst, in the drawing of the hands, the artist abandoned the long pointed forms for small and short ones. But whilst in these and the two remaining figures, a certain progress in the study of nature may be noticed, the sentiment of Cimabue has disap- peared and made room for a more spiritless art, but little dissimilar from that which will be found to mark the nerveless and ungenial works of Filippo Rusutti at Rome.

Yet another and a different style is displayed in the ceiling nearest the portal, where, in the intervals of an ornament rising out of vases, supported by cupids, and enlivened with flowrers and animals, the four doctors of the church inculcate their lessons to the clerks of the Franciscan order. Sitting in high chairs opposite to the monks who attend to their words, they collect or dictate their thoughts. 1 In the centre of the ceiling, the Saviour, winged, seems to give a heavenly sanction to the spi-

1 S. Gregory speaks under the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, which in the usual form of the dove whispers in his ear. S. Am-

brose, S. Angustin and S. Jerom, combine or express their ideas in a similar manner.

214

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VII.

ritual teaching of the doctors. Here again, regularity and truer proportion than those of Cimabue were allied by the artist to a colossal or weighty style, equally devoid of expression and of sentiment; whilst in the conception of the whole the spectator is impressed with the idea that every thing had been made subservent to a con- ventional decorative principle, grand of its kind, and an improvement on the art which took its rise at S. Cle- mente of Rome and culminated in the works of Jacopo Torriti, but inanimate, and soulless as the mosaics of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Even the artifice of colour reminds one of mosaics of raw and sharp contrasts peculiar to the previous age.1

In the upper recesses of the aisle above the gallery on each side, the painters of Assisi unfolded in two courses of frescos the history of the Jews from the creation to the finding of the cup of Benjamin, and the life of the Saviour from the annunciation to the resurrection, and in the wall above the portal, the ascension and the descent of the Holy Spirit. Following the old consecrated forms of composition, which they sometimes improved and some- times marred by a mixture of the homely, they grouped their figures with more art, and gave them occasionally more repose and better proportion than their predecessors, but they frequently, on the other hand, exaggerated ani- mated action, neglected the drawing of nude form, and produced ugly features 5 and they seldom rose above their age in design or execution. The importance of these' frescos as a guide to future investigation, will justify the following somewhat dry catalogue of subjects which however must remain incomplete on account of the total

1 Shadows of an orange red, semitones of verde, and lights all but white, red stains on the cheeks, reveal the decorative artist, whilst the broad rectangularly disposed outlines, the straight draperies are like the piece work of the mosaist.

The ceilings of the aisle , imposing by their general distribution and effect, exhibit in fact the pro- gress of artists accustomed to deal with the decoration of large spaces, intended to flatter the eye at a distance only.

Chap. VII. THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSISE

215

obliteration of the paintings of several of the com- partments.

I. God creates the world. — Part gone. II. God creates man. Part of the figure of the Eternal may be seen, seated on a globe, giving life with a gesture of command to Adam recumbent on the right.

III. The creation of Eve.

IV. The temptation, in which the ugly nude of the figure of Adam alone remains.

V. The expulsion from Paradise. VI. VII. VIII. obliterated. IX. The building of the ark.

X. obliterated.

XL Abraham offering up Isaac. The angel and back- ground are gone; and in the two principal figures, the vehemence and exaggerated action of the old style may be noticed. XII. obliterated.

XIII. Esau selling his birth-right.

XIV. Esau with the pottage before Isaac.

XV. Joseph in the well — almost obliterated. XVI. The steward rinding the cup in the sack of Benjamin.

a. The annunciation.

b. obliterated.

c. The adoration of the shepherds.

d. obliterated.

e. The presentation in the temple — almost obliterated.

f. The flight into Egypt. St. Joseph and part of an ass remain.

g. Effaced.

h. The baptism of the Saviour.

i. The marriage of Cana, of rude execution, and in great part gone.

/. obliterated.

m. The capture on the mount, — well preserved.

n. obliterated.

o. Christ bearing his cross.

)>. The crucifixion.

q. The Pieta.

r. The Marys at the sepulchre. s. The ascension. t. The descent of the holy spirit. U. v. S. Peter and S. Paul in medallions.

210

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VII.

In the creation of Eve,1 fair proportion and repose mark the long form of the first man.

To our first parents, ignominiously leaving paradise the painter gave an ugly form of nude, and a lame motion, whilst in the action of the angel kicking out Adam with his foot the most vulgar triviality prevails.

Natural motion and fair proportion mark a party of sawyers in the building of the ark ; but the faces of the patriarchs are ugly and repulsive. A reminiscence of the antique may be traced in the figure of Isaac, lying on his bed and feeling the hairy hand of Jacob; whilst in the neighbouring composition of Esau presenting him- self with the pottage before Isaac, the surprise of the latter, and the group of Esau and his mother are very fairly rendered.

The adoration of the shepherds is one of those scat- tered traditional compositions , which betrays the distance at which the early artists of the thirteenth century re- mained from their more talented followers of the four- teenth.2 This subject had been so conceived and preser- ved for centuries, and is similar here to that of Caval- lini in S. Maria in Trastevere at Rome, and to that of the miniature (1613) of the Vatican.

The Baptism of the Saviour is an exact reproduction of the arrangement which had become typical in the seventh century and remained fixed from that time.3

In the capture, the Saviour is of a superior size to the rest of those around him, and of a stern but serene

1 The artist depicted the Eternal sitting on the globe of the world, enveloped in a red mantle, mak- ing a gesture of command , upon which the form of Eve seems to rise from the side of Adam, who sleeps recumbent with his head on his hand, and in a reverent action to extend her arms towards the creator.

2 The Virgin sits by the side of the infant in his cradle. S. Jo- seph, pensive on the right , whilst

the shepherds advance with their sheep in the foreground, looking up at the angel , whose figure is in part concealed by the hill form- ing the background. So in the relief by Niccola Pisano in the pulpit of the baptistery of Pisa. Two angels on high holding a scroll between them seem to sing Hal- lelujah whilst a third looks down- wards.

3 The same in the Vatican MSS. No. 1643.

Chap. VII.

THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSISE

217

bearing.1 Trivial conception marks the scene of the Saviour carrying his cross , where, on account of the ex- cessive weight of the fatal instrument, the Redeemer ap- pears to express weariness, whilst, in the faces of the bystanders, a foolish wonder is rudely delineated. The Saviour on the cross has the overhanging belly and hips and sunken head of the lowest decline. Two angels wailing above the cross seem torn by the most vehe- ment grief. The Pieta though better balanced in the groups, is but a repetition of the same scene in the cruci- fix of the Cappella Maggiore of the Oampo Santo at Pisa.2 The attitudes and expression of the figures which are unfortunately mutilated, are not free from exaggeration; but the composition is more like that which Giotto af- terwards conceived than any other before or since. The Marys at the sepulchre,3 is a composition in the typical form already observed in the small episodes of the cru- cifix of S. Marta of Pisa.4 The roof of the church at the bottom of the aisle, being supported by an arch, painted to imitate a series of superposed niches, each of

1 Embraced by Judas, he seems with the right hand to sign to Peter, kneeling over the prostrate Mal- chus on the left, to cease resist- ing. The crowd of soldiers with lances, and spectators surrounds him, but is better divided into groups than in the old typical com- positions , reproduced, otherwise almost without change, from the period of the crucifix of S. Mar- ta. In this episode of the cru- cifix of S. Marta, S. Peter is erect, here kneeling. See also the same episode in MSS. Vatican of the 12th century engraved by d'Agin- court plate LVII.

2TheSaviour, of long and colossal dimensions, lying outstretched on the ground is raised by the Vir- gin and supported' on her lap, whilst behind her to the right and left the wailing Marys kneel in grief. The prostrate S. John em- braces the Saviour's hand, whilst the Magdalen kisses his foot. In

the background, to the left of a bare and arid rock, a figure stands and points with one hand towards the lifeless frame of the Redee- mer, with the other seems to foretel by a gesture towards heaven his ascension. Two figures in col- lected attitudes listen on each side. To the right of the rocky background two other figures look on, and three angels (of old 4, as may be seen in Agincourt. plate CX) in vehement action , look down upon the scene.

3 Receiving from two angels the news of the resurrection, whilst the soldiers, four in number, sleep in various attitudes on the fore- ground.

4 The upper part of the figures of the Marys and angels is -one, the single intonaco having fallen and laid bare the stones; — on which however the first drawing in red is visible.

218

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VII.

these recesses is filled with standing figures of nuns and monks, some of which remain, whilst others have been in part or totally effaced. A rose window lights the church from the space above the portal, and, high on each side of it, are medallions of S. Peter and S. Paul. Below, but still above the practicable gallery are the remains of the annunciation and the descent of the Holy -Spirit. Immediately above the portal the Virgin and child be- tween two half figures of angels sit enthroned.1 "All this work, says Vasari,2 was so truly grand, rich, and well con- ducted, that, to my mind, it must have filled the world in those times with wonder, painting having so long re- mained in total blindness. To me, who saw it again in 1563, it seemed very fine, as I considered how Cimabue could have enjoyed so much light in the midst of such darkness/' Yet Vasari cannot really have failed to notice the variety of hands which characterizes the paintings of the transept, ceilings, and upper part of the aisle. Had he thought the matter more worthy of observation, or been less intent on giving to Cimabue alone the credit of reviving the degenerate art of Italy, he might have traced in the south transept the passage from the manner of Cimabue to that of one following his style, but deficient in sentiment; he could have dwelt on the change which art again underwent in the paintings of the ceilings ; how, under a succession of artists, impressed essentially with the weighty style of the school of Florence, a certain tech- nical progress declared itself, and more attention was paid to the equilibrium of masses, and to the principles of art than before. He might have seen that, in the paintings of the upper aisle, the grave and weighty character of Tuscan composition manifested itself; and thus he could have inferred the presence at Assisi of more than one Florentine artist. All this he neglected to do, but attributing to Cimabue the whole of a series of painting which bears the impress of numerous hands,

1 Of the paintings in this part of! have in great part disappeared, the aisle the colour and intonaco | 2 Vas. Vol. I. p. 224.

Chap. VII. THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSISE 219

he condescended to stop there and to say, that Cimabue had hardly entered upon the lower series of paintings which were to illustrate the life of St. Francis , than he was called away, and left the incomplete work to be finished "many years after" by Giotto. Yet when one contemplates the lower series of frescos in the aisle of the upper church of St. Francesco at Assisi, it is obvious that the same technical style was displayed there as had already marked the subjects of the upper courses, and that here again was a continuation and gradual develop- ment of Florentine art. It would have been difficult for Vasari, looking at the 28 scenes from the life of St. Francis in the order in which they were executed, not to admit that those which illustrate the earliest incidents of the life of the Saint, were executed in a rude and mecha- nical manner, hardly superior to that of the frescos in the upper courses; that as the life of S. Francis unfolds itself, the power of the artists seems to increase, the com- positions to win a better form, the figures to exhibit more animation and individuality, until, towards the close, an art apparently new, another language, expressive of higher thought, reveal the development of the talent of Giotto.

But the frescos of the upper church of Assisi do not merely tell the story of art, they were intended to de- clare to a religious congregation the abstinence, the piety, and the miracles of S. Francis. And as a sketch of these from the legend may be welcome to the reader, here it is:

The son of Pier Bernardone, a rich citizen of Assisi, he was born to affluence, but preferred, even in those years in which the passions prompt youth to the pursuit of plea- sure, the exercise of charity. Of a kindly and generous dispo- sition, it is related of him that, though at first he was no! free from worldly aspirations, his conduct became exemplary ; so that, even before his mind had turned to the contempln tion of spiritual things, he was reverenced by the poor and simple. He had excited the admiration of a man who threw his cloak into the dust, that he might tread on it,1 and, like S.

1 This subject is the first of the series at Assisi and is marked No. 1

in the plan.

220

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VII.

Martin he did not hesitate to give his cloak to one who seemed to want it. 1 Then visions come upon him in the night; visions, which did not, like those of the maid of Or- leans, foretel that he should rescue his country from a fo- reign yoke, but that he should save the church which was obviously nodding to its fall. In a dream he saw a splendid edifice adorned with arms and ensigns and with the symbol of the Saviour's crucifixion2, and this was the edifice of the church which, by command of God, he was to restore3. This and other visions led him to expend the money given to him by a prodigal father in the erection of a church. But Pier Bernardone who, before, could refuse no gratification of his son's pleasures, was angered by this species of extravagance, and cited Francesco before the consuls. The bishop inter- fered. But the father, followed by a crowd of relatives, called on his son to restore the funds he had spent. Francis, how- ever, had nothing left but his clothes, which, stripping himself, he offered to his angry progenitor. Saying "hi- therto have I called thee, Pietro Bernardone, father, from hence forward I shall call upon our father which art in heaven." The bishop covered the youth's nakedness with the episcopal robe; and as the children around caressed the stones which they intended for Francis, he entered de facto into the order of the mendicants4. Then followed the well known series of incidents which led to the foundation of the Franciscan order. Innocent the Third saw the poor brother in a dream supporting the crumbling church5, he approved the rules of the new order6. Disciples followed the path which he had opened and spread the fame of his miraculous power. One of them saw from the pulpit his form in a heavenly car brilliant with light7. S. Francis saw a seat reserved for himself in heaven, and heard a voice which promised that he should one day occupy it8. The monks of the order cast out devils in his name9. He visited the lands of the infidel and — a second Daniel — went through the ordeal of fire before the Soldan and shamed the false priests10. He was in constant communion with the Lord, and had been seen by his followers with awful rever- ence, kneeling in a cloud and receiving the instructions of

1 No. 2. of plan.

2 No. 3. of plan.

3 No. 4. of plan.

6 No. 7. of plan.

7 No. 8. of plan.

8 No. 9. of plan.

9 No. 10.

4 No. 5. of plan.

5 No. 6. of plan.

10 No. 11.

Chap. VII.

THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSISE

221

the Eternal1. In obedience to supernatural orders, lie re- presented the adoration of the shepherds at Greggio2. He quelled the thirst of a man , by a miraculous draught of water. 3 He could discern that the sparrows twittered praises to the Almighty, and at his bidding they forbore and flew away. 4 He prophesied sudden death to his host, who, accord- ingly died immediately after confession5. He preached with such fervency before Innocent the Third and his cardinals as to convince them, that his words were the real wisdom ofGod;u and, though absent in the flesh, he comforted the Beato, Antony of Aries, as he preached in the cathedral, by appearing to him in the act of benediction, — a vision seen likewise by Monaldus and other brethren.7 The supreme proof of his communication with heaven was, however, when, on the rugged rock of the Vernia, the Saviour appeared to S. Francis in the form of a Seraph, crucified, and impressed miraculously on his hands, feet, and side, the stigmata.8 A church had already been erected , with the contributions of the faithful , at Santa Maria degli Angeli ; but S. Francis frequently came away from this , the first asylum of his order, to the episcopal palace of Assisi, where, a short time before his death, he was staying. Here, foreseeing his approaching dissolution, he resolved to withdraw to Santa Maria, and being unable to walk, he was carried by the brethren and followed by a respectful crowd. Outside the town, he stopped and looking back at Assisi gave it his blessing. Retiring then into Santa Maria, he lay down on his humble pallet, and on the fourth of October 1226 departed to another Avorld. It was observed by one of the brethren that his form had ascended to heaven !l. At this very moment, the bishop of Assisi, who was on a journey and then stopping at S. Michele di Monte Gargano, was miraculously assured of tin1 death of him, whom 20 years before he had covered with his protection, as he forsook the world for a life of poverty10. The miracle of the Stigmata had not so much credence but that some still doubted of its reality, and accordingly, one Girolamo, a doctor of Assisi, made his way into the cell of S. Francis, as he lay after death, for the purpose of testing its truth. With his finger in the wound he imitated the

1 No. 12.

2 No. 13.

3 No. 14.

4 No. 15. 6 No. 1G.

G No. 17.

7 No. 18.

» No. 19.

9 No. 20.

10 No. 21.

222

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. YU.

incredulity, and gained the conviction, of a second S. Thomas1. The body was brought in great pomp from S. Maria or La Porziuncula to Assisi, where, in the church of S. Damiano, his sister S. Chiara embraced his remains2. He was canonized in S. Giorgio at Kome by Gregory the Ninth, 3 whose un- belief had ceased when S. Francis, in a vision, presented him with a vial containing blood from his side4. His ap- paritions after death were numerous and convincing. To a lady near Beneventum, who had never confessed, and was about to die, he spared a heavy penalty in the next world by arresting her death till she had made her peace with God.5 Before this, he had, at Ylerda, saved the life of a wounded man given up by the doctors6, and he liberated a prisoner of Assisi confined by the orders of Gregory the Ninth7.

Such was the life of S. Francis as depicted on the walls of the upper church of Assisi. That it was a life abounding in subjects worthy of the pencil, is not to be doubted. Many of the incidents were indeed essentially fitted for pictorial delineation, and afforded ample oppor- tunity for the display of the greatest qualities in art, distribution, action and expression. But if the spectator start from the first pictures in the Southern wall of the aisle, nearest the transept, and sets aside No. 1 in the plan, as a composition of a superior order ; he will remark that, up to No. 15, many of the defects which mark the frescos of the upper course and ceilings are repro- duced; although it may be admitted that a broader style of drapery, more freedom of hand, and a more studied composition prevail.8 In the scene where the angry form of Pier Bernardone may be noticed grasp- ing the clothes of his son and, with difficulty, held back by his relatives from assaulting Francis whose naked- ness is covered by the mantle of Guido, there was room for a display of the most varied action and expression, of anger in the father, of supreme trust in the bounty of

1 No. 22.

2 No. 23.

3 No. 24.

4 No. 25.

5 No. 27.

6 No. 26.

7 No. 28.

8 No. 8. 4. and 5. have been damaged by time.

Chap. VII.

THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSISE

223

heaven in Francis, of surprise or compassion in the by- standers, of triumph in the bishop and clergy. The in- tention of action and expression is manifest, and its real ab - sence the more noticeable. Two children with their clothes tucked up evidently contemplate throwing the stones, con- cealed in the folds of their garments; and here may be traced that tendency to combine in a solemn subject one of those simple ideas which have been urged as one of the blemishes in the style of Giotto. 1 Baron von Rumohr dwells indeed upon this peculiarity in the great Floren- tine with unnecessary harshness, applying to it the epithet of burlesque, and affirming that it was exclusively a Giottesque tendency; but the tendency was in the age, not in the man, nor is it possible to find in Giotto such bathos as that which disfigures the expulsion from paradise at Assisi, where the guardian angel seems literally to kick our first parent out of Eden. That a simple bit of nature enhances, rather than detracts from, the beauty of com- positions, even of the most solemn order, may be con- sidered a truism. Giotto did introduce such incidents, and in doing so displayed a deep observation of nature. He was not the first to do so, however; but as he carefully avoided the ridiculous, he is entitled to the credit of having, even in the humorous mood, preserved the majesty and grandeur of art.2 — The human form was rendered by the painter of this scene with a certain amount of truth, but comparatively without feeling. One may find, indeed, in the stiff square nude of the youthful Francis, in the large and coarse extremities, and defective arti-

1 The hand of the Eternal ap- pears in the sky of this scene.

2 Surely " the liveliness of movement and action" which Ru- mohr admits "as giving charm and interest" to Giotto's works, does not deprive them of the "greater earnestness of previous efforts", when we sec on the contrary that the humour of Giotto is nobler and less childish than that of his

predecessors. It is an ungrounded reproach which Rumohr makes, when he says, that Giotto in a great measure set aside the noble refinement of holy and godly cha- racter, and led Italian painting to the representation of actions and passions, in which, according to the habit of monkery, the bur lesque found play by the side of the pathetic". SeeFo rs c hunge n, Vol. II. p. 56. 57.

224

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VII.

dilations , repose approaching to the inanimate , — a character akin to that of some figures in the upper course of frescos, and of the four doctors of the church in the ceiling, and a manner not dissimilar from that which was developed at Rome by Gaddo Gaddi. The drawing is striking for its continuous dark wiry line and its mechanical rudeness. The leaden red shadows, verde half tints, the ruddy stain on the lips and cheeks, the white lights, the broken contrasts of tones, are those of a mosaist. The rest of the scenes up to No. 15. offers more or less the same general features, though even in these, a general progress in arrangement, and sometimes in execution, is visible. A more sensible advance becomes striking in the Northern side of the aisle. It would be hard to find in earlier Christian compositions one more forcible, expressive, and natural, than that in which the gentleman of Celano "suddenly dies as he rises from table in fulfilment of the prophesy of S. Francis".1 The latter, no longer of the square and stiff form which characterized the earlier numbers of the series, stands behind the table j calm in the foreknowledge of the event, whilst the dis- tracted relatives support the dying man, or exhibit their grief in a most natural manner. Without being free from the old vehemence, the figures have more nature and truth in form and expression, and are more deeply studied than they had been hitherto. Without stopping to analyse minutely the three next scenes, one may pause to examine the twentieth fresco where S. Francis lies on a pallet over which stoop the bending forms of his grieving brethren, one of whom, however, looking up, sees the ra- [ diant image of the founder of his order carried in a glory to heaven by ten angels. Interesting as this picture must be to those who may wish to study the gradual progress ; of the art of composition in the Florentine school; it is still more so when considered with reference to the im- | provement of the human form as shown in the angels,

1 No. 16.

Chap. VII. THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSISI. 225

who with gentle and elastic movement seem wafted through the ciir by their wings , and whose features already ex- press that heavenly repose and noble kindliness, which so strongly contrasts in the Giottesques with the vehement action and grimace of the angels of the old style. Nor is the semblance of flight merely a result of the attitude ; but it is due also to the sensible improvement of the flying drapery, which, aiding the development of the form and its action, contributes to the pleasure of the beholder.1 Fine as a composition, and beautifully arranged as regards the groups of monks with tapers and crosses, is the twenty second fresco representing the incredulity of Girolamo.2 But superior still is that where the body has been carried on a tressel towards the church of S. Damiano. The bearers have just dropped their load ; and S. Chiara bends in grief over the remains. Whilst two nuns kiss the hands of the cold corpse, others bend over it. A couple communicate their thoughts ; and the crowd behind look on in lamenta- tion. The grief of the monks issuing in a column to the left out of a neighbouring convent is well depicted 5 and an affecting sense of genuine regret is visible in all the faces. In the females, a graceful choice of form, in the head of S. Francis, a good expression of the repose of death and select features 5 in the figures generally, true proportion and flowing draperies, varied attitudes and individuality, in the artist an improved knowledge of drawing and of form, a great variety within the bounds of nature combine to convince the spectator of the progress already made by the artists of Assisi.3 The fresco of the canonization is unfortunately obliterated with the exception of a group of women and children who witness the scene; but as regards composition, the next picture which represents Gregory the Ninth in a dream receiving from S. Francis the flask of blood is

1 This fresco has lost most of I 2 The colour in No. 22. is in its colour; but the original design J great part gone, is everywhere visible. No. 21. is 3 Part of the intonaco of the much damaged. ! foreground has fallen.

VOL. I. 15

226

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VII.

grand and well conceived. 1 A triumph of distribution, ac- tion and expression is to be found in the twenty sixth fresco, where the wounded man is brought to life by S. Francis, whilst his wife and servant dismiss the hopeless surgeon at the door. The latter with a shrug, and by his features and gesture, seems to say there is no hope. The lady who has followed him, bears her grief nobly, and still seems unconsciously to ask, is all then over. The servant at her side cannot restrain her tears. — In the meanwhile S. Francis has miraculously, appeared behind the bed ; and the sufferer raises his head, and smiles as he feels the wound healed by the hand of his deliverer. Behind, an angel holds a sceptre and a pot of ointment, whilst a second draws down the coverlet. The beholder may choose which he is disposed to admire most, the distri- bution of the figures and the noble truth of the attitude which, in the lady, recals the antique, the grave and beautiful features of the latter contrasting with the weighty but not less expressive ones of the surgeon, or the fine proportion and simple flowing draperies. For har- mony and equilibrium, for expressiveness in every sense this is indeed a work of a high order. The same qua- lities of composition form the attraction of the twenty seventh fresco, where the sick dame confesses to S. Francis, at the very moment when the clergy, with the cross and tapers, have appeared for the purpose of removing the remains. 2 An angel in the air claps its hands, and drives away the devil exorcised by S. Francis, an humorous incident, whilst in the heaven the Eternal grants the pardon of the repen- tant soul on the intercession of the Saint. In the final scene of the liberation of the prisoner, the nude of the

1 S. Francis stands behind the couch on which lies the recumbent pope, who raises his right hand to the offering-, whilst the monk with his right points to the Stigma in his side. The figure of a sleep- ing attendant, two others in con- verse and a fourth telling his

beads, could not have been better j arranged.

2 A group of women on the right j naturally renders the various look, the movements and impressions ! which such a scene might elicit from persons of different age and quality.

Chap. VII.

THE UPPER CHURCH OF ASSISI.

227

latter is well executed, and a figure of S. Francis ascend- ing to heaven is fine in its motion ; whilst, as regards the background, the usually accessorial nature of the edifices is insofar improved that a column is represented with exquisite bas-reliefs. Keverting to No. 1. of the whole series, it may only be necessary to say that it seems to have been executed by the same hand as the five last, and is vastly superior to the frescos in continuation of it.

The art progressing throughout this succession of works, culminates at last in the comparative perfection of one who can be no other than Giotto; but Giotto, youthful and feeling his way, already in advance of his generation as regards composition, able and precise in design, but still imperfect in the technical processes of colour. 1 In this respect, indeed, a certain hardness and coldness must be conceded. The verde shadows, warmed up here and there with stippling of a wine red colour, the lights, also stippled up, produce a certain rawness, and show the per- sistance of the system pursued by the older painters of Assisi, at the same time that some progress of handling is exhibited. Whether the compositions of the series are due to one leading spirit who is not Giotto, or whether they are in reality his, it is impossible to affirm. In the first case, Giotto, when his turn came to execute, altered and improved ; in the last, inferior hands marred the beauty of his conception. Enough however has been said to justify the remark that the paintings of the Upper church of Assisi comprise and explain the history of the revival of Italian art, and that this edifice is undoubtedly the most important monument of the close of the thirteenth century. Independently of names, it teaches the beholder to trace the progress of painting, as it changed and im- proved itself till, after casting off its old garments, it appeared in more youthful and promising ones. At Assisi

1 Insofar. as can be judged from the parts that remain. Where the colouring matter is gone the dead colour of the preparation is pre-

served. This is a proof that the frescos of Assisi are a secco and not buon fresco.

15*

228

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VII.

alone can the first steps of Giotto be followed, as in Assisi the lover of the fine arts can see the culminating point of his greatness. But Assisi also conceals the names of other artists, and it is pertinent to this inquiry to determine, if not by records, at least by analogy, who those artists may have been. One may seek, for in- stance, amongst the works assigned to, or known to be by, artists of the thirteenth century, whether some analogy may not be traced between them and the authors of frescos which, like those of the Upper church of Assisi, follow those of Cimabue and precede those of Giotto. Two artists offer themselves to the inquirer, and these are Filippo Rusutti, of whom Vasari says not a word, and Gaddo Gaddi respecting whom his biography is superficial.

On the front of S. Maria Maggiore at Rome, a space now covered over by the portico, is divided into two some- what heavy courses of mosaics representing the Saviour and saints.1 On the margin of the circular glory, sur- rounding the principal figure, the following inscription reveals the name of the author: "Filipp. Rusutti. fecit, hoc opus." This mosaist laboured in a style different from that of the Roman school, as it is found in Torriti and the Cosmati, and displays the weighty manner of the Tuscans. The type of the Saviour and the forms of the angels are more regular and more modern than those of Cimabue, and have a resemblance of type and cha- racter with the medallion figures of the Saviour, Virgin, S. John and S. Francis of the aisle ceiling in the upper church of S. Francis at Assisi.2 The mosaics of Rusutti

1 The highest of which is oc- cupied by a figure of the Saviour, enthroned in the act of benedic- tion, in a circular glory, supported by 4 angels, of which two wave censers, and two hold candelabra. The Virgin, S. Paul, S. James and another Saint are ranged to the left, S. John the Baptist, S. Peter, S. Andrew and another

apostle to the right. Above these figures, the symbols of the four evangelists and an ornament stud- ded with figures of angels complete the mosaic.

2 The figure of the Saviour at S. Maria Maggiore , for instance, has still the bullet shape of older models; but the outlines are an improvement, and the cheek bones

Chap. VII.

GADDO GADDI.

229

have the character and faults of that work, and it is by no means impossible that this artist should have been one of those who resumed at Assisi the labours which Cimabue had not completed.

Gaddo Gaddi was, according to VasarPs biography, the intimate friend and cotemporary of Cimabue. A pleasing conformity of mind and thought united them, 1 and hence it would have been agreable to them to labour together in one edifice like that of Assisi. But the talents of Gaddi were evidently inferior to those of his friend, and Vasari does not hesitate to place him, though an older man, in the second rank of those who illustrated the Flo- rentine school. Born in 1239, 2 he survived Cimabue twelve years, after laying the foundation of a fortune which raised his posterity to the highest social position attainable in those days. With Giotto he lived also on terms of friendship, and his son Taddeo, held by the former at the baptismal font,3 became one of the most industrious of the great Florentine's assistants and imi- tators. A single date, not a single record of undoubted authority connects the name of Gaddo with works of art. The silence of Richa4 would seem to contradict the asser- tion, that from Tafl Gaddo learnt the art of mosaic, and that he executed the figures of prophets in the course beneath the windows in the baptistery of S. Giovanni at Florence, winning by his industry "a great renown";5 but if the mosaic inside and above the portal of S. Maria del Fiore at Florence be really his work, as Vasari

do not protrude too much. The 4 angels have some nature in movement, and some greater breadth of drapery than hereto- fore. The figures of apostles are not quite so motionless as those of Jacopo Torriti, and the colours arc well chosen. This mosaic is on gold ground and not free from restoring.

1 Vasari, Vol. I. p. 293.

2 lie died, according to Vasari,

in 1312, aged 73. Vas. Vol. I. p. 296. and Richa, Chiese, ub. sup., states that he had seen the record of his burial in S. Croce. Vol. I. p. 56.

3 Vas. Vol. I. p. 296.

4 Chiese Florentine, torn. V. p. XLII. Richa does not mention the name of Gaddi amongst the mo- saists of the baptisteryof Florence, although he records that of Taddeo.

5 Vasari, Vol. I. p. 294.

230

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VII.

affirms,1 it is truly the production of one who combined the old manner, miscalled Greek, with the style of Cima- bue.2 Again, if the name of Gaddo be truly appended to the eggshell mosaic in the gallery of the Uffizi,3 it would leave the impression that the author was one of those old artists who combined all the defects of art in its decline.4 But the mosaics inside the portico of S. Maria Maggiore at Rome, which form the course imme- diately below those of Rusutti, are distinctly pointed out by Vasari as works of Gaddo,5 and exhibit unmistakeably a style approaching to that of the ceiling nearest the portal in the upper church of Assisi, or that which may still be found in the second, third, fourth, and fifth frescos

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 294.

2 The semicircular recess which confines this mosaic, is tilled with a coronation of the Virgin, in which the Saviour and his mother sit side by side on the same throne, and the latter bends reverently towards the former with her arms crossed on her breast, as she receives the heavenly di- adem. Groups of angels blowing enormous trumpets are crowded on each side of the throne, over which the symbols of the four evangelists are placed. In the two principal figures the weighty, masculine, and colossal, style of a Florentine may be traced, whilst in the face of the Redeemer age is indicated by angular wrinkles. A large nose, a low forehead, and defective extremities betray the still feeble powers of the artist. As a group , the whole is better intended than carried out. The space at least is symmetrically divided and filled up, but the draperies are mapped out like marquetry work and adorned with profuse gold lights. The angels are more pleasing than those of the baptistery of Florence and the mass of light and shade fairly divided. The colour is gay and bright, whilst the outlines remain

sharp and angular. The head of the Virgin has suffered from res- toration and other portions here and there likewise.

3 This work has been only as- signed to Gaddo Gaddi, because, Vasari says, he executed such works for the church of S. Gio- vanni at Florence. Vasari, Vol. I. p. 295.

4 The Saviour, here represented with the open gospel, and in the act of benediction, was conceived in the lowest type of the degener- ate times, with a long head, pointed nose and beard, red and black outlines, yellowish shadows and hair. The folds of the yellow tunic are indicated by rectangular lines, and the lights touched in gold now darkened by age. The hand in the act of blessing is short and broad. To Gaddo this mosaic can only be assigned, if it be assumed that other works are falsely attributed to him. This mosaic, really executed with stones composed of eggshell, is slightly painted over, so that colour was obviously used to assist the ef- fect. The stones were laid on a coat of wax. A part of the book and left hand are gone.

5 Vas. Vol. I. p. 294.

Chap. VII.

GADDO GADDI.

231

of the series assigned to" Giotto in the aisle of the same edifice. The space allotted to the mosaists at S. Maria Maggiore, was that on each side of a vast circular win- dow, which, being divided into four irregular compart- ments/ is filled with episodes having some relation to the foundation of the church.2 These mosaics, more modern in style and execution than that of Rusutti, are probably those executed by Gaddo Gaddi in 1308, 3 and not only recal the manner exhibited in the frescos already selected for contrast, but the style of architectural adornment peculiar to the paintings at Assisi. A simple comparison between the figures of the third compartment at S. Maria Maggiore with those of the second, third, fourth, and par- ticularly the fifth fresco of the series at Assisi, which repre- sents incidents of the life of S. Francis, will show almost conclusively that the same hand executed both works. The same laws of composition, the same weighty form in the human figures, similar heads, marking the transition be- tween the style of Cimabue and Giotto, a rude and wiry outline, draperies of better flow than of old: all this may be found in Assisi and at S. Maria Maggiore. Nay more, the faulty extremities, the broad mass of light and shade the natural movement of figures, the architecture common to both and peculiarly Florentine, are displayed at Rome and Assisi. Nor is this similarity to be found in general

1 The compartments are divided by feigned columns and a feigned cornice above.

2 In the first, to the left, the Vir- gin and child, in a glory, supported by 4 angels , appears in a dream to one of the founders of the church, Pope Liberius, recumbent OH a bed below; and the only part of this mosaic which retains its old character, is that which re- presents the virgin, child, and angels. The second compartment represents a similar dream, and the apparition of the Madonna to the patrician Giovanni. Here some sitting ligures at the foot of the

bed are new, and the figure of the Virgin is retouched. The third compartment, represents the ap- pearance of Giovanni before the pontiff. The fourth shows the Pope accompanied by clergy, tracing out the plan of the church under the protection of the Virgin and Saviour in glory above them.

3 Vasari, Vol. I. p. 294, gives this date as that of Gaddo's pre- sence in Rome. On the mosaics of S. M. Maggiore the arms of Colonna, the patron of Jacopo Torriti, are to be found; and this would confirm the accuracy of Vasari's chronology, usually so untrustworthy.

232 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VII.

features only. The figure of the Pope in the third com- partment at S. Maria Maggiore is of the same type and character as that of the third compartment in the scenes of S. Francis' life at Assisi. That Gaddo Gaddi was not merely a mosaist, but a painter, is affirmed by Vasari-, and if it be admitted that, in the former capacity, he exe- cuted the mosaics in the portico of S. Maria Maggiore, it must be conceded that he painted at Assisi.

Any further search for the works of Gaddi would be vain. In the chapel of the Incoronata in the Duomo at Pisa, according to Vasari, he executed a mosaic of the ascension of the Virgin, with the Saviour awaiting her in heaven. Such a work still exists, without the figure of the expectant Saviour*, but, though damaged, seems to have been executed in the latter end of the fourteenth century.1

It may be sufficient, however, to have pointed out the probability that Gaddo Gaddi and Rusutti should have taken part in the works of the upper church of Assisi. The presence of these Florentine artists at Rome enables the student at the same time to compare the progress of Flo- rentine with that of Roman art; and the comparison be- tween Gaddo and Rusutti, and the Cosmati and Cavallini, will be found not very disadvantageous to the latter. It will be granted that the Roman school which had never ceased to exist, was not inferior, at the close of the thir- teenth century, to those of the rest of Italy, or particularly

1 Amongst the works of Gaddo, which time has obliterated since the publication of VasarPs lives, are the mosaics in the choir of S. Peter at Rome and those of the front of the same church repre- senting a colossal "Dio Padre and many figures" (Vas. Vol. I. p. 294.), the mosaics of the old Duomo outside Arezzo (Ibid. p. 295), the altarpiece of the "tra- mezzo" of S. Maria Novella at Florence. The portraits of Gaddo and Tafi were painted, according

to Vasari (Vol. I. p. 296) by Taddeo Gaddi, in the Baroncelli chapel at S. Croce, in the Sposa- lizio. If the portraits of these two artists in the editions of Va- sari are considered, it will be found that the figures cited as the originals by the latest commen- tators of the Aretine are not the real ones. See note I to p. 297. Vol. I. The two figures in ques- tion are on the extreme right of the foreground, in the fresco of the presentation in the temple.

Chap. VII.

GADDO GADDI.

233

to that of Florence. It may indeed be affirmed that, set- ting Giotto aside, the artists of Rome were in a measure superior to those of Florence, until he arose. Rusutti and Gaddo Gaddi belonged to a class of decorative painters, whilst the Cosmati and Cavallini displayed more nature and more individuality, more character and truth in the rendering of form, than their Florentine rivals.

234

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

CHAPTER VIII. GIOTTO.

The early training of Giotto at Assisi may not have been without influence on the development of his career. Two mendicant fraternities divided with their influence the mass of society in central Italy, at the close of the thirteenth century. The Franciscans and Dominicans ad- mitted indistinctly into their ranks men and women of every class in life, and Peter de Vineis affirms that, in his time, hardly a single person could be found who had not secretly or openly assumed the frock of lay brother or sister. 1 The Franciscan order, however, appealed more naturally to the feelings of the masses than the Domi- nican, and certainly took the lead in representing its sovereignty in a majestic edifice which the art of suc- cessive painters adorned. It is difficult to appreciate in our day the services which art and letters yielded to the order of S. Francis, but the pen of Dante and the pencil of Giotto were both devoted to it, and hence probably the connection which arose between two great men, of whom one sprung from the ranks of the noblesse, the other from the cottage of a peasant.

The humble condition of Giotto who, as a child, led his father's 'flock through the scant and solitary pastures of Vespignano, his early feeling for art as exhibited to Cimabue on the public roadside,2 the simple confidence

1 Cesare Guasti. Opusculi. I 2 He was drawing- with a coal, Flor. 1859. p. 20. j on a stone, the figure of a lamb.

Chap. VIII.

GIOTTO'S EARLY TRAINING.

235

with which the old labourer Bondone entrusted his infant son to a stranger; is related by Ghiberti and Vasari. 1 Giotto born in 1276, was ten years of age,2 when Cimabue, taking him away to Florence, initiated him to the first rules of art. Any attempt to trace the progress of Giotto under the guidance of his early teacher would be perfectly useless, inasmuch as the first fruits of his industry have perished;3 but that he laboured when still young at As- sisi, is evident to those who can study the scenes of the life of S. Francis in the aisle of the Upper church. That he had entered upon manhood when he painted the alle- gorical ceilings of the Lower church is equally evident. It is therefore probable that he executed the latter when, according to Vasari, he was called to Assisi by Fra Gio- vanni di Muro,4 elected fourth general of the order of S. Francis in the year 1296. 5 —

1 Ghiberti (2d Commentary in Vas.ub.sup. p.p. XVII— XVIII.) explains that Bondone gave up his son because he was "pove- rissimo".

2 Vas. Vol. I. p. 310. Ghiberti (ub. sup.) says, Giotto was then "di pi cool a eta". — There is a strange coincidence of name between Giotto di Bondone the painter, and Giotto di Buondone, who, between 1301 and 1321, oc- cupied important posts in the re- public of Sienna. (Rumohr. ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 41.) But there can be no error as to the name of the painter's father, as in a document of 1312 the former is called Bondonis. See not. to Vas. Vol. I. p. 329.

3 Paintings in the Badia of Flo- rence. Vas. Vol. I. p. 311,

4 Vas. Vol. I. p. 315.

5 Wadding, Ann al. ord. Min. Vol. V. p. 348. Anno 1296. Va- sari (Vol. I. p. 315) pretends that, on his way to Assisi, Giotto, pass- ing through Arezzo, painted in the Duomo, without the city, a chapel in which he represented

the stoning of Stephen, and, in the chapel of the Pieve d'Arezzo de- dicated to S. Francis — a portrait of that saint and of S. Dominick, on a column. As the Duomo was razed in 1561, the " stoning of S. Stephen" perished with it, but the figures of S. Francis and S. Dominick still exist in the Pieve : the former standing with a book, the latter with a lily in his hand. These figures, on tiptoe, hardly outlined, with some research in the detail of form, but of a paltry shape , ill drawn as regards the extremities, and feeble in the dra- peries , is evidently not by Giotto but may possibly be by Jacopo di Casentino. A crucifix in the Badia di S. Fiore at Arezzo is likewise assigned to Giotto (see annot. to Vasari p. 324.), Va- sari having stated that he painted one there; but that which now exists, so far from being in the style of Giotto, is in the man- ner of a Siennese painter, possibly Segna, whose works may be men- tioned later. Further, as to a figure of S. Martin painted for Piero Saccone on a pilaster of

236

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

Next to the aim of making manifest to the people the acts and miracles of S. Francis, that of illustrating the principles upon which the order was founded, would na- turally be considered imperative. Hence Giotto was called upon to demonstrate with the feeble aid of allegory the virtues which ostensibly distinguished the mendicants of Assisi. Poverty, wedded to Christ and widowed in Gol- gotha, was the spouse which S. Francis chose, a spouse whose rags and suffering, as she pursued the thorny path of life, were still not without charm. For poverty, though her way is amongst briars, enjoys the bloom of the roses. She may be stoned by the heedless, feared and despised by the worldly, but she is the foe of avarice and lust, the friend of charity; and hope whispers to her that she may inherit eternal happiness. He who gives his all to the poor, is himself a beggar, but the consciousness of good is as the rose on the briar, and the reward is a seat amongst the angels. Yet poverty without penitence for past sin, — poverty without chastity, was, according to the teaching of the thirteenth century, no blessing. Of him therefore who would take the vow of the mendicants, purification and penance were demanded. To undergo the ordeal, fortitude was required; but he who had strength and faith, drove out the sins of the flesh, and, by the help of prayer, was admitted to the fortalice of chastity, whose walls, if guarded by prudence, justice, temperance, and obedience, would be impregnable. Obedience however was the ne- cessary yoke imposed upon the mendicant brother. With it, humility and prudence went hand in hand, for whilst the first taught contentment, the second was a defence against pride, envy, and avarice; and whoever willingly bore the yoke, was certain of paradise, and would occupy with S. Francis a seat in glory amongst the heavenly host. Such was the theme which Giotto was to develop pictorially on the central ceiling of the lower church of

the choir in the Vescovado (Vas. Isaid; inasmuch as the fresco has Vol. I. p. 324.), nothing can be J perished.

Chap. VIII.

ALLEGORIES AT ASSISI.

237

Assisi. He depicted in one of the spaces the mystic mar- riage of S. Francis united to Poverty through Christ, telling at the same time, as well as he could, the allegory, and illustrating it by incidents from the life of the Saint, and thus endeavouring to impress on the spectator, not only the spiritual advantages, but the actual course pur- sued, by the founder of the order.

So in the left hand foreground, a pauper, holding out his hand for alms, seemed welcomed by a youth depriving himself at once of his cloak, an act witnessed and encour- aged by the youth's guardian angel, who pointing to the mystic ceremony in the centre of the picture, seemed to in- culcate the maxim that, by helping the poor, man is fitted to aspire to the vows of the mendicant order. In the middle of the picture, Poverty, in rags amongst flowers blooming on the briar bush which strews the ground, is united to S. Francis by the Saviour, and looks kindly on the saint. Faith on her left gives her the ring, and Charity shows that she has a burning heart. A host of angels on each side of the principal group form the spiritual court, before which, according to Dante, the mystic marriage took place. A dog barking at the feet of poverty, a child goading her with a stick, and a boy throwing stones at her, indicate the contempt and fear which she inspires to the world. In contrast with the kindly action of the youth who shared his cloak with a beggar, another at the opposite side of the picture vainly addressed by an angel, displays by the in- decent gesture of his fingers and a falcon on his fist his preference for worldly pleasure, whilst to his right a figure with a bag of gold symbolizes avarice, and a third between the two seems to point towards the charitable group , and give worldly advice1. In the upper part of the picture, an angel in flight bears the garment of the charitable boy; a second also in flight holds up a mimic edifice surrounded by a wall, in the court of which grows a tree. Both seem to be received gratefully by a figure looking down with open arms from the vail of heaven.

Giotto in this allegory evidently followed the instruc- tions of his employers. His own ideas on the subject

1 The drawing of this group by Giotto himself, designed with a pen on vellum, has recently passed

from the collection of Mr.F.Reiset into the possession of H. R. H. the Duke d'Aumale.

238

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VIII.

of poverty he embodied in rhyme, imperfect as regards metre and language, but very remarkable for common sense.1 According to his ideas, Poverty, commended by those who observed it as a rule, was by no means com- mendable, though it might exist without vice. Involun- tary poverty led the world but too frequently to evil, judges to corruption, dames and damsels to dishonour, and men in general to lying, violence, and theft. As to poverty elect, it was very obvious that it was as fre- quently evaded as observed. Yet, as regards the obser- vance, thai certainly could not be good which required no discretion, knowledge, or qualities of any kind, nor could that justly be called virtue which excluded what is good. But this common sense view did not prevent Giotto from doing his duty by the Franciscans ; and though he might scorn the general reverence in which they were held, or could perceive their weaknesses, he worked for them diligently and well, serving them as he no doubt served others, caring as little for their peculiarities as for party distinctions in lay employers. It is indeed, from the out- set, characteristic of Italian artists that they were welcome every where, and that they yielded service to Ghibelline or Guelph with the same readiness as Kaphael did later to the friends and foes of the court of Urbino.

Continuing the cycle of subjects, Giotto devoted a second compartment to the allegory of Chastity, a fit comprehen- sion of which as of the two remaining ones the student may gather from the following:

On the left foreground three figures representing the three orders of Franciscans, the monk, the nun, and the terziario or lay brother, might be seen gladly greeting S. Francis, accompanied by a band of angels and soldiers of the faith. Whilst an angel presents the cross to the nun, S. Francis ex- tends his hand to the would be monk, and the lay brother seems animated with the utmost desire to join the holy company. This group is appropriately significant of the ardor of S. Chiara, Bernard of Quintavalle, and another to accept

1 See Giotto's Canzone on po- I II. p. 51. and in Vas. Vol. I. verty in Rumohr, ub. sup. Vol. | p. 348.

Chap. VIII.

ALLEGORIES AT ASSISI.

239

the aid of S. Francis and assume the vows of his order. One of the soldiers behind the Saint already holds the instrument of penitence in his hand, which is a whip of many tails. Further to the right, a novice stands naked in a font, and whilst an angel in robes imposes hands on his head and shoulder, another on the right pours over him the purifying water. Two angels with the dress of the order stand by, waiting till the ceremony of purification is over; whilst in rear of the whole group two figures symbolising purity and fortitude hold in readiness a banner and shield, and with them lean forward from the wall which surrounds the tower sacred to chastity. To the right of the scene of purification stands one of the flagellators, hiding the instru- ment of punishment behind his back, and indicating that he awaits the novice, whilst another by his side and seen more in front, wields the instrument as if the flagellation had al- ready taken place upon one to the right, winged, cowled, and bearded, who strong in purity and penitence and with the marks of the flail on his torn garment and back, has already driven away and prostrated the unclean spirit in the shape of a winged boar, and strikes with a trident a naked winged female blindfolded and symbolical of lust. Her feet are as the talons of a bird, her form youthful, and her head crowned with roses. But from her shoulder hangs a quiver and a string of human hearts. Behind, the skele- ton of death grasps the hand of a figure emblematic of im- pure passions, and hurls him into the flames of the ever- lasting abyss. The penitent is aided against his foes by three noble and youthful females with helmets, one of whom pricks lust with a lance, whilst another repels her with a vase, and the third with the cross and the remaining symbols of the passion. Behind these again, are three old helmeted war- riors holding lances. Chastity, a youthful female, in profile, stands in prayer in the upper part of the tower guarded by purity and fortitude. Two angels in air at the sides of the tower offer her a crown and a vase, out of which grows a palm. The tower itself, the symbol of the force of chastity stands in a quadrangular fortalice flanked with square tur- rets crenelated triangularly after the Florentine fashion. A bell at the top indicates the necessity of vigilance.

Under the name of obedience Giotto symbolized the rules of the order of S. Francis whose practise secures the ascent to heaven. On the right foreground he depicted an animal of three natures, part man, part horse, and part dog, ad- vancing with a red cloak on his shoulder, and symbolizing

240

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

pride, envy, and avarice. His career seems suddenly ar- rested by a ray which glances on his face from a mirror in the hand of prudence, a double headed figure sitting on the extreme left of a portico, in which are present likewise obedience and humility. The portico or lodge is symbolical of the sanctuary of S. Francis. In it hangs a crucifix. In front of it and beneath the symbolic figure of prudence an angel comforts and holds by the hand one of two kneeling figures. The first looks at the hybrid's repulse and seems to signify that prudence teaches us to repel pride, envy, and avarice. The second, directed by a gesture from the angel, casts its glance towards humility who stands in the portico to the right, holding a torch in her hand signifying that humility lights the sinner to virtue. In the centre of the portico, obedience in the dress of a Franciscan and wearing a yoke, inculcates silence with its finger on its mouth and imposes on the shoulders of a kneeling monk a wooden yoke. Above, S. Francis is drawn up by the yoke to heaven, and two angels, at each side of him, hold scrolls on which are in- scribed the rules of the order. On each side of the fore- ground, angels kneel, the two nearest carrying cornucopia, the others in prayer. In the fourth compartment Giotto represented S. Francis in cathedra holding the book and cross, in a glory of angels varied in attitude and motion, some dancing, others sounding instruments of different kinds, and others holding lilies and palms.3 The centre of the diagonals is a medallion with a figure of the Eternal, as he appeared to S. John, that is, the figure of "one girded about the paps with a golden girdle, his head and his hairs white like wool, as white as snow".... and out of his mouth went "a sharp two edged sword".2 This vision of the Eter- nal holds in its left a book inscribed "Liber ecclesiae divinae" and in its right the keys. In the ornament of the diagonals, the Lamb,3 with three crowns, the symbols of the four evangelists,4 winged, "the white horse" and he that sat upon him holding a bow,5 "the black horse", and he that sat upon him holding a pair of balances in his hand,6 "the red horse," and the rider wielding a great sword,7 death on the pale horse,8 angels, seraphim, and emblematic figures of the virtues.

1 These 4 frescos are on gold ground.

2 Rev. Chap. I. v. 13. 14.

3 Rev. C. V. v. 6.

4 Rev. C. IV. v. 6.

5 Rev. C. VI. v. 2.

6 Rev. C. VI. v. 5.

7 Rev. C. VI. v. 4. s Rev. C. VI. v. 8.

Chap. VIII.

ALLEGORIES AT ASSISE

241

Rumohr says of these ceiling frescos, that the "allegory which they illustrate is monkish-childish, and was cer- tainly so ordered by the monks and not thought out by Giotto". He passes them over "because of late a Ger- man tourist has described them at length, 1 who seems to have contemplated with delight how the angels draw up poor sinners of monks with the healing cord of S. Fran- cis to heaven.772 No doubt the allegory was not his, nor was it in his mode of thought; but if it be the aim of an artist to expose clearly that which he desires to ex- press, the meaning is here perhaps as clear as it could have been, had the same thoughts been conveyed in rhyme or prose; nor would the task of a critic be heavy, who should thus allow his scorn of the mere form in which a subject is presented, to dispense him with the duty of considering the art which distinguished the painter.

These allegories, next to the frescos of the upper church of Assisi, enable the beholder to study the progress which Giotto had made as he emerged from adolescence into the enjoyment of independent life. In the frescos of the upper church of Assisi the laws of composition and dis- tribution had already been successfully developed.3 The space had been judiciously distributed; and the groups were bound together with such art that the resulting lines were at once simple and grand. 4 Whilst the greatest and most difficult law of delineation was thus ably en- forced, other maxims had not been forgotten. The painter explained his meaning every where. Not a movement but suited the general action; not a figure whose cha- racter was not befitting his quality and the part allotted to him in the scene; not a personage whose stature was not well proportioned, whose form was not rendered with intelligence of the action, the nude, and even of per-

1 Kohlcr in Kunstblatt 1821. Nos. 40 and following.

2 Rumohr. Vol. II. p. 67.

3 Die Kunst, den gegebenen Raum mit dem bestimmten Gegen- stand auf eine angemessene und

VOL. I.

schone Weise auszufullen, gehort vielleicht mit zu den erheblich- stenVerdiensten Giotto's." Forster, Kunstblatt, No. 8. an. 1834.

4 This applies particularly to the fresco No. 26.

242

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

spective. Nor was the latter quality of small value at a time when the science of placing objects as they ap- pear in life was not ascertained in any way. Even the forms of architecture and distances , though they still remained the most imperfect of the accessorial parts of paintings had been so improved as to exhibit at least greater nature, taste, and elegance of proportion than heretofore, and a purer style in decoration and orna ment. This alone would point to Giotto as the au- thor of the latest of the series of frescos in the upper church of Assisi. In the ceilings of the lower church, known and admitted to be by him, they are to be dis- cerned, in conjunction with a greater facility of hand, and better study of nature. For, as will be noted here- after, Giotto improved with every year of his artistic life, till he reached the zenith of his power in the frescos of the Peruzzi chapel at Florence. But, in one direction particularly, the progress of Giotto was more remarkable than in any other. In the frescos of the upper church at Assisi his drawing is slightly hard, his figures tall and slender, his colour cold in general tones, somewhat raw and ill fused. In the ceilings of the lower church the figures gained better proportions, more nature and repose. The extremities were less defective and more in accord with the rest of the person. The whole in fact gained harmony. The feeling for action vehemently ex- pressed made place for a quieter and truer movement. The outlines, no longer hard, determined the forms with greater accuracy. The draperies were reduced to the simplest expression by the rejection, even to a fault, of every superfluous or useless fold. A spacious mass of light and shade imparted to the form a relief and rotundity which had long been absent. The system of colouring underwent a considerable change, and whilst it gained in breadth of modelling and fusion, preserved a light- ness and clearness equally new and remarkable. The general undertone instead of being of a dark verde was laid on in light grey. Over it, warm colour glazed with

Chap. VIII.

GIOTTO'S STYLE.

243

rosy and transparent tints , gave clearness to the flesh. The high lights were carefully stippled and fused without altering the general breadth of the masses. Giotto, in fact, founded a new law of colour, and entitled the Florentine school to assert its supremacy in this respect. In a re- gular and ever progressing sequence, Giotto, Orcagna, Masolino, Angelico and Masaccio, and at last Fra Bar- tolommeo and Andrea del Sarto, carried the art of colour- ing in fresco to perfection. Raphael, though he surpassed all others in most qualities of art, remained behind the pure Tuscan school in this ; whilst in the quality of chia- roscuro the master of all in the sixteenth century was Coreggio. In the hands of Giotto, art in the peninsula became entitled for the first time to the name of Italian,1 for in composition, form, design, expression and colour, he gave it one uniform stamp of originality in progress, an universal harmony of improvement.2 To Cimabue, Giotto owed certain peculiarities of form. As in the first one may trace, in the altarpiece of the Rucellai, the change from open gazing eyes to long closed lids and an ellip- tical iris, a reaction from one extreme to another, so in the second the maintenance of this reaction may be ob- served. But although this feature descended generally to almost all the Giottesques, the master himself in his maturity seemed inclined to correct it. Again, as regards colour, Cimabue, with his light clear tones, seemed to protest in the liveliest manner against the dark mapped

1 Tu vedi, says Cesare Guasti, I says Boccaccio in the novella No. 5 (Opuscoli ubi sup. p. 5.) per j of the 6th day (Decam. Lon- la mano di Giotto sostituirsi nuovi don 1774. 12°. Vol. III. p. 499.) tipi, che volentieri chiamero na- dalla natura, . . . fii che egli con tionali alle maniere de ' Bizantini, lo stile e con la penna e col in tanto che la barbarie del feu- ' penello non dipignesse si simile dalismo cedeva alia costituzione a quella, che non simile, anzi dei Comuni; e dal rozzo latino ! piu tosto dessa paresse; intan- svolgevasi labella lingua dTtalia." [ toche molte volte nelle cose da

lui fatte, si truova, che il visivo

2"Arreco, says Ghiberti very I senso degli uomini vi prese errore, truly (comm. in Vas. Vol. I. quello credendo esser vero che p. XVIII), Parte naturale e la era dipinto." — A poetic exaggera- gentilezza con essa, non uscendo tion — but showing the enthu- delle misure." — Niuna cosa, siasm of a great admirer.

16*

244

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VIII.

out tints of his predecessors, by a tendency to paleness which touched the opposite extreme. Giotto also some- times gave paleness to his flesh tones; but the reaction is probably more sensible at the present day than in Cimabue's or Giotto's own time, in consequence of the disappearance of those light glazes which heightened the general tone and gave it warmth and life. In judging of Giotto's works it must never be forgotten that he is a painter of the thirteenth century, from whom it would be vain to expect the perfection of the sixteenth. But taking into consideration the age in which he lived, and more particularly the allegories of Assisi, it will be seen that his works will justify even more than the general praise awarded to them. — To close this theme the reader may peruse the following:

In the first allegory, poverty was represented by Giotto as a lean and physically suffering person , dressed in a long patched robe, torn so as to expose a breast, of which the anatomy was fairly rendered. Long neglected hair confined beneath a white drapery, bound round the head with a yellow and gold cincture, inclosed a face worn by toil and pain, but still smiling. S. Francis, in extasy, as he accepted the ring, admirably rendered the poet's thoughts: La lor concordia e lor lieti sembianti Amore e Maraviglia e dolce sguardo Facean esser cagion de' pensier' santi: and in the glance of the saint the soft look and sacred love were expressed. No painter had as yet so well con- trasted the soft and youthful but healthy forms of an af- fectionate boy, all overflowing with charity, as he surrenders his dress to the poor, and those of the more mature ado- lescent, richly clad but of hard and vulgar features, grinning maliciously, as he indecently gesticulates to mark his pre- ference for mundane pleasures. Rigid decorum may object to the grossness of certain actions ; but decorum was variously conceived in various ages, and even now is judged accord- ing to different standards by divers nations. We do not tolerate the coarseness of our forefathers, and modern dra- matists or poets are not allowed the liberty of Shakspeare or of Dante.1 Signification, individuality, and firmness of

1 Mark in Dante the passage I in a manner equally new and in which Lucifer blows a trumpet | startling.

Chap. VIII.

GIOTTO'S STYLE.

245

intention were thus prominent qualities in Giotto ; and this was fully illustrated in the various movements and expres- sions of the flagellators, in the allegory of chastity. These figures, repeated in various phases of the action, unmistake- ably expressed the stern sense of duty, where the novices are received by S. Francis; expectation, where penitence is about to be administered; calm repose, where the punish- ment has been inflicted. Every where, the movement was resolute and unhesitating. It would have been difficult to express more insinuating kindliness, or gentleness, than Giotto gave to S. Francis welcoming the aspirants to the order. In his noble and youthful form and features a certain inspiration was apparent, but no material affecta- tion of maceration or suffering. A soft and modest con- fidence, a ready but dignified action marked his motion. Again in the allegory of S. Francis in glory, extasy and triumph were delineated in the regular features. Amongst the angels around him some were marked by that weighty and masculine character peculiar to the school of Florence; whilst in those which adorned the other frescos a more feminine , a softer character prevailed. It was, however, from the former that the powerful character of Ghirlandaio and Michel Angelo was afterwards developed. The nude in the penitent and the figure of "lust" in the allegory of chastity, and in the hybrid of the allegory of obedience, was not as yet rendered as Giotto afterwards delineated it; but it was carried out in a manner appropriate to the general character of the rest of the work, and in accordance with the laws of proportion. The drawing and form were in fact subordinate to a general idea, and Giotto evidently cared more for the whole than for the parts. An arm, as he painted it, might still be wanting in the anatomical form of the muscles, in the completeness of its details; it was never defective in the action of the limb itself. The func- tion which he desired to express was therefore always evident; nor is it doubtful that it was better in an age, rude as that of Giotto still was, to sacrifice details to the mass, the proportion, and the action.

Thus Giotto before the close of the thirteenth century became eminent as a composer, a designer, and a colourist, and united at a common level all the qualities which constitute the universal genius of the artist. Art after him became divided. Some clung to the more special aim of developing form, and in this were at first not

246 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VIII.

very successful, others chose colour, or relief, others again sunk themselves in a search for accessories or detail. None took up art in all its branches where Giotto left it. His pupils had neither their master's genius, nor his talent; and art therefore declined in their hands, till in the fif- teenth century it verged towards naturalism. Then Ghir- landaio supervened, who gathered together and concentrated in himself most of the various branches of its progress. It was reserved for Raphael . at last to perfect it in all its parts, and bring it to a high general level similar in comparison to that upon which it rested at the death of Giotto. Italian art may therefore be said to remain con- fined within three great names, those of Giotto, Ghirlandaio and Raphael: yet it must be understood that the great merit of many intermediate artists contributed, each in its measure, to this general result.

Giotto executed for the lower church of Assisi other frescos than those of the central ceiling. The scenes from* the life of the Saviour and of S. Francis in the Southern transept exhibit not merely the character of a work of the rise of the fourteenth century, but the development and perfection of Giotto's manner. These frescos have been assigned by Rumohr to Giovanni da Milano, 1 in accordance with a very arbitrary reading of Vasari. It is quite true that the biographer says of Giovanni, that in Assisi "he painted the tribune of the high altar, where he executed the crucifixion, the Virgin and Santa Chiara, and on the faces and sides, scenes of the life of the Vir- gin ; 2 but the frescos of the South transept are evidently not those meant by Vasari, firstly, because the tribune of the high altar is not the transept, and secondly, because the subjects in the transept are different trom those given by the biographer. These cover the East and West wall in three courses beginning at the top of the latter with

1 Rumohr (ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 87.) who thus contradicts the positive statement of Ghiberti (comm. 2. in Vas. Vol. I. p.

XVIII.) "Dipinse nella chiesa di Asciesi quasi tutta la parte di sotto."

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 120.

Chap. VIII. GIOTTO'S PASSION FRESCOS.

247

the birth of Christ and the salutation, and continuing with the adoration of the Magi, the presentation in the temple, and the crucifixion. On the East face are, in similar order, the flight into Egypt, the massacre of the innocents, Christ in the temple, Christ taken home by his parents, the miracle of the resurrection of a child of the Spini family, an effigy of S. Francis by the side of a skeleton of death, and above the lunette of a door, a half figure of the Saviour. All these subjects were divided from each other by painted architectural ornament, in- terrupted by small figures of prophets, on gold ground, and miniature allegories.

In the birth of the Saviour, which is perhaps composed with too much symmetry, there is a soft and unworldly repose which is charming.

The Virgin smiles as she lies on the couch holding the swaddled infant in her arms; a double choir of angels sings canticles in the air of the hut, at the bottom of which the ox and the ass ruminate. Another double choir sings praises about the roof, which is cleft in the centre by a ray from heaven. An angel, flying down to the right, apprises two shepherds of the birth of the Saviour, and the soft expression and quiet aerial motion of the messengers contrasts admirably with the energetic attitude, the surprise of the pastor whose flock treads the foreground. S. Joseph, pensive as in the old typical compositions, sits in the left hand corner of the pic- ture with his head on his left hand. In the centre front is the usual group of nurses preparing to wash the infant.

The improvement wrought in this composition is evident, if it be compared with the confused and scattered one of the upper church. The salutation is a composition of the severest artistic metre, simple, and marked with a religious sentiment akin to that of the Angelico.

In it the painter imagined the human form of a tall and slender shape. The Virgin, in the adoration, sits in front of a portico appertaining to a vast palace, guarded at each side by an angel, one of whom already holds the offering of the oldest of the Magi. One of these, kneeling, kisses the foot of the infant Saviour, whose tiny hand is imposed on his head in token of blessing. To the left are two Magi, one of them removing his mantle that he may more rcve-

248

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

rently appear in the sacred presence, whilst the other holds a cornucopia. Behind stands the suite and two camels.

This subject was never painted with more feeling, more naturally or beautifully composed than here. A supreme sense of religious decorum and repose prevails in the well proportioned, dignified, and softly animated, figures ; and it is impossible but that Angelico, in whom the ut- most religious feeling of his time was represented, should have studied here, and with fruit. The presentation in the temple is a very animated composition of five figures in a beautiful groined interior.

The moment chosen is that in which Simeon has just taken the Saviour from the hands of the Virgin and looks up to heaven. The figure of the Saviour in the crucifixion is of a noble type and form with both feet superposed, as now became the habit of Italian painters, simply designed and of good proportions. The angels about the cross still vehemently express their grief, some holding their cheeks, others tearing the tunics from their breasts. One receives in a cup the blood from the lance wound; at the foot of the cross the Magdalen; at its left side S. John and the Marys supporting the swooning Virgin ; to the right S. Fran- cis and other monks of the order, and a more distant group of figures complete the picture. In the face of the Saviour all absence of contortion or grimace, no bleeding wounds from a crown of thorns, — in the general outline of the forms, great simplicity and flexibility, make the figure a startling contrast with previous attempts to reproduce this subject. S. John, looking up, wrings his hands in grief. A female behind him looks up likewise and shows her despair by throwing back her arms and shoulders. A second, still more in rear, holds her arms more in surprise. Consummate skill is in fact displayed in expressing various forms and phases of grief or passion. The Virgin, senseless, is raised up under the arm by one of the Marys, and supported by the two others at each side of her. It is a group full of truthful nature, of movements feminine, and forms suiting the general action. Amongst the bystanders on the right, two reasoning with each other, one tearing his beard, others angry and turning away, express the variety of the feel- ings which animate their souls. With this, — grand lines of composition, religious feeling, and features of la noble type, combine to fetter the attention of the beholder. The

Chap. VIII.

GIOTTO'S PASSION FRESCOS.

249

flight into Egypt is most simply arranged, and one of the most beautiful representations of this incident. S. Joseph, with a pilgrim's pole and gourd, leads the ass upon which the Virgin rides, carrying the infant Saviour in the drapery of .her mantle; a youth pushes the ass along from behind, whilst an old woman follows with a load on her head supporting her steps with a stick. In the distance, castles and hills and two angels guide the way. The lines of this composition are simple, the figure of the Virgin elegant and graceful, that of the old woman with the load classic and reminiscent of the antique. Again the religious sentiment of Angelico rises in the mind of the spectator; wThilst he recognizes in the form and action of the ass the universality of Giotto's genius. In the groups of the massacre of the innocents, fertility of imagination, versatility in expression, and energy in action are found combined with an absence of concentration. Three women on the left, one of whom weeps over the body of her child on her lap , whilst another kisses a little corpse, and a third rends her clothes, remind the spectator of similar conceptions in Eaphael. In the foreground to the right, a woman fainting in the arms of a soldier contrasts with an- other of these executioners seizing and threatening with his sword an infant whose mother strives to elude his grasp. In a tower, Herod orders the massacre. The whole scene, though varied, is confused. Wonder and dislike are well depicted in the faces of the doctors disputing with the youthful Saviour in the middle of the temple. In the return, S. Joseph keeps a firm hold of the Saviour for fear he should escape. A majestic half length of the Redeemer is in the vaulting of the door.

To the right of the door S. Francis, in full front, points to a crowned skeleton of death, in which a much deeper study of anatomy is revealed than has ever been con- ceded to Giotto. It is evident, indeed, from this example alone that the great artist had a fair knowledge of the proportion and conformation of the human frame, of the bones and their articulations. It may even be affirmed that he carried this study further than artists of a later time. When, for instance, Luca Signorelli painted the skeletons in the Duomo of Orvieto, his art extended to give to the frame and limbs impetuosity of movement. The forms of the bones were sometimes exaggerated so as to become false. Signorelli therefore, great as he un-

250

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

questionably appears, had, to a certain extent, a false lan- guage of art which contrasts with the true and simple one of Giotto. It can not surprise the spectator, there- fore, that Giotto should be able in reproducing nude form, as it is manifest that he was scientifically certain of the position of the human bones and muscles.

The miracle of the resurrection of the child of the Spini family is barbarously cut down by the work of an orchestra built for the use of the choral singers in the church. The left side of the composition is thus absent.

In the centre of a group of women, formed in a circle round him, is S. Francis looking up, as if inspired, to heaven and raising with his arms the fallen child. By his side is a kneeling monk. Anxiety, curiosity, smiling confidence may be traced in the faces of kneeling females, all enveloped in beautifully simple white draperies. One of these, im- mediately behind S. Francis, looks at the infant with an anxious tenderness, which reveals the mother. Her hands are joined in prayer. Around this first kneeling circle, a second, of males, upright, in various attitudes, expresses thanks- giving in some, hope in others. Of those to the right of the principal group some are monks, one of whom looks up to heaven and seems to perceive the form of S. Francis, of which traces remain as well as of an angel.

For just proportion, for ampleness and spacious masses of drapery, and foreshortening of folds, it would be difficult to find a finer example than is afforded by the foreground figures of this fresco.2 The heads are en- veloped in their mantles with elegance and art. Some of the profiles are full of expression, and evince much delicacy of feeling. In the softness of some, or the mascu- line nature of others , as much versatility is shown , as, in the rendering of forms such as those of neck and breast,

1 The legs of the falling child also remain, the whole scene being laid in the space in front of a convent, out of which the monks appear to have issued.

2 A fragment from the border of the fresco. No. 29 of Mr. Ram- boux's collection, at Cologne is j

called by him in error " Sancta Paupertas". Mr. Ramboux pur- chased it from Sign. Cavalier Fron- dini. It was a head in the rib orna- ment just above the fresco under notice. Veiled in white round the chin it has a flame issuing from the ornament in the hair.

Chap. VIII. GIOTTO'S PASSION FRESCOS.

251

arms and hands , true elegance and beauty of shape are attained. Nor were the figures, crowded as they are to- gether, without that relief which keeps them in the place they are intended to occupy. The quality which became so conspicuous in Masaccio is indeed already apparent, and Giotto manifests a due sense of the importance of aerial perspective. This result he attained by great breadth of modelling, giving rotundity by relief without darkness of shadow. The colour is clear, light, well fused, and laid in with the greatest dexterity of hand. True harmony is attained in the tones of drapery. The outlines are firm and easy, and the practised manipula- tion exhibits a marked advance upon that of the ceilings. It is difficult to conceive who else than Giotto could have executed this fine series of frescos; nor is there one amongst Giotto's followers, who inherited the maxims of his art, that could have developed them as they are here conspicuous.1

Whether Giotto more than once visited Assisi, is difficult to say, but these frescos were without a doubt produced after the ceilings of the lower church. That he was already a master, and that he was aided by nu- merous apprentices is probable. Yet it would be pre- sumptuous to affirm which of his pupils assisted him in this or that fresco. It is sufficient to express the con- viction that these works, only less vigorous and dramatic than those of the Arena at Padua, are stamped with the qualities of Giotto's earlier time, and with a simplicity and religious sentiment peculiar only to himself. They cannot be productions of one who, like Giovanni da Mi- lano, rose out of the school of the Gaddi, ■ — ■ a school

1 Some parts have been re- touched; but the methods of Giotto are very manifest. Here are the same touch and manipulation on a highly polished surface as in the dance of the daughter of Herodias at S. Croce, and the allegories of Virtue and Vice at the

Scrovegni of Padua. Regret at the loss of the sequel of these scenes from the Franciscan mir- acle is unavailing; but who will not deplore the barbarism which consented to the destruction of the sides of the choir for the sake of erecting an orchestra.

252

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

which, under Taddeo, had already fallen below the stan- dard of the master. In a general sense it may be ad- mitted that, where tall and slender figures are produced as in the fresco of the Salutation, Taddeo Gaddi was the assistant of Giotto at Assisi, but Giovanni da Milano, a painter of the close of the fourteenth century, is out of the question.

Modern research has not as yet elicited much as to the chronological sequence of Giotto's works. It would therefore be vain to class them otherwise than according to the general law of progress in style. There is reason to believe, not only from the natural working of this law, but from a certain concord of historical facts, that Giotto painted in Rome between 1298 and 1300. Not only are his pictures there marked by great resemblance with those of the ceiling of the lower church at Assisi, but they were executed for one who is historically proved to have been his patron and protector. — Gaetano Jacopo Stefa- neschi, nephew of Boniface the Eighth, received a cardinal's hat on the seventeenth of Dec. 1295, with the title of S. Giorgio in Velabro.1 The tribune of the church of that name was, it is said, painted by Giotto; at his request and for S. Peter's, of which he was a canon, he ordered a mosaic2 representing S. Peter and his companions res- cued from the storm.3 The chapel of S. Giorgio e Lo- renzo in S. Peter's was built by him, and was destined to be his burial place in 1343. He was the author of various manuscripts, of which some, adorned with minia- tures by Giotto, may still exist in the library of the Vatican; and he commissioned of the Florentine a cibo- rium for which he paid 800 florins of gold.

1 See for this and subsequent statements in elucidation of the life of Stefaneschi and his con- nection with Giotto, Morone (Gaetano),DizionarioNibby, and Cardella (Lorenzo) p a r - roco di S. Vincenzo. Mem. Storic. de1 Cardinali.

2 Vas. Vol. I. p. 322, and also

Ghib. com. 2. in Vas. Vol. I. p. XVIII.

3 See the original obituary pub- lished in Cancellieri (de Secre- tariis veteris Basilicse Va- tic a nse p. 863), in which the authorship of Giotto and the price are given.

Chap. VIII.

GIOTTO IN ROME.

253

A mosaic is preserved in the portico of S. Peter's at Rome representing Christ saving Peter 'from the waves, whilst in the background a ship manned by the apostles struggles with the winds, allegorically represented in the clouds. Other figures, four in number, look down from heaven on each side of the composition. Stefaneschi in prayer shows his head and shoulders in the right corner of the picture, whilst on the left an angler fishes in the water.1 Cardinal Stefaneschi is said by one historian to have given Giotto for this subject the sum of 2,200 florins. The mosaic has been so extensively altered and restored, that it is difficult to fix the time of its execution or the hand which produced it. Still, when closely considered a part representing the vessel and the crew, has the cha- racter of a work of the thirteenth century, and some- thing of the manner of Giotto. A register preserved in the Vatican contains indeed, according to Baldinucci2 and others, a record from which it appears that this mosaic was executed by Giotto in 1298. A more cer- tain and satisfactory example of his manner is a series of three panels painted on both sides, now in the sacristy of the canons of S. Peter, with three panels evidently forming part of the predella upon which the principal ones rested.3 This is no doubt the ciborium of Cardi- nal Stefaneschi. The form in which the panels stood may be assumed from the representation of them in miniature in the hand of a bishop, kneeling before a majestic figure of S. Peter on the altarpiece itself; and with this primitive model it might have been easy to

i Albertini (Francesco) in Opus- culum de Mirabilibus Nove et Veteris Urbis Rome. 8°. Rome, p. 54, a work published in 1510, notices this mosaic as being then under the portico of S. Peter. The angler was restored by Marcello Provenzale and by Orazio Ma- netti, under the direction of Ber- nini. See not. to Vas. Vol. I. p. 323. We may add that the

Saviour and S. Peter, the cardi- nal and the two figures of the winds were also restored, whilst the four saints above are obvious- ly modern additions.

2 Baldinucci (F.) Milan. 1811. Opere. Vol. IV. p. 132.

3 This work is evidently that referred to by Ghiberti. Cora. 2. Vol. I. of Vas. p. XVIII.

254

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

replace the separate parts in their original situation. On one side, Giotto represented, in the central panel, the Re- deemer enthroned in the act of benediction, and holding the book,1 with a choir of angels in ranks above each other at his sides,2 and a kneeling figure of Cardinal Stefaneschi in prayer at the foot of the throne.3 The cardinal's hat on the mosaic floor in front of him indicates that he had already attained the highest dignity but one which the church confers.4 The principle, according to which the Redeemer should express the superior majesty of his presence by proportions vastly superior to those of his guardian angels, ministers and worshippers, was carried out to the letter in this picture, where, to sym- metrical form and regular proportions, a certain immobility in the attitude, and in the expression of the mouth and eyes was maintained. It was an attempt, perhaps at the prayer of the patron, to preserve a traditional idea and type respectable at least for its age; but, even under these conditions, Giotto was not unable to impart a certain elegance of outline to the holy effigy. In the angels, which were placed, according to the plan of Cimabue, in rows, the formality of the arrangement was mitigated by a fair choice of form, great diversity of character, and justness of proportion, and a feeling of fervent adoration.

1 The Redeemer wears a blue mantle embroidered Avith white flowers, lined with white, embroi- dered with gold flowers.

2 There are eight angels at each side.

3 Stefaneschi is dressed in blue and wears a purple mantle. He seems aged about 50.

4 Of this picture Cancellieri (ub. sup.) says, "ad ejus pedes (Sospitatoris nostri) provolutum Cardinalem Jacobum Caietani de Stefanescis. . . . qui DCCC. Flo- renor. sumptu . . . hujus modi ta- bulas a Jotto depingendas cura- vit." p. 1464. The Saviour sits

under a trefoil gable, in the key of which is a half figure of the Eternal with the orb and keys, and a two edged sword issuing from his mouth ; whilst in the ang- les of the trefoil two medallions of prophets are depicted. The Eternal wears a gold tunic and belt and a blue mantle. In each pilaster, supporting the gable, a beautiful ornament is inter- rupted at equal intervals by three figures of Saints and Evangelists. This panel has suffered from clean- ing, but not from restoring. Some heads, particularly those of the uppermost angels, have lost colour by rubbing.

Chap. VIII.

GIOTTO IN ROME.

255

The religious sentiment of which Giotto was so great an exponent , was indeed rendered with the utmost success in the foremost figure of an angel, kneeling by the side of the throne, opposite to the donor.

The panel immediately to the left is devoted to the martyrdom of S. Peter, in which the saint may be ob- served crucified with his head downwards in the centre of the space. 1

Living and serenely looking out into space in spite of his agony, S. Peter's features, though somewhat swollen, are true to the type preserved in the traditions of the church. His well proportioned forms are animated, full of life and elasticity. The nude, indeed, is here rendered with an intelligence surprising, if one considers the period. Not only are the parts divided according to rules which Michael Angelo laid down with authority in the sixteenth century, hut the articulations and the muscles occupy their natural places. Even the external outlines showing the flexibility of the flesh and its adherence to the muscles and joints, the play of the parts about the neck and collar, bone are analyzed with precision. Admitted, indeed, that something may be wanting to perfect detail of anatomy, still in general all is correct. 2 The only indication of suffering, which Giotto ventured upon, was the contraction of the toes and muscles of the feet nailed separately to a cross board. A female, emulating the grief of the Magdalen grasps the foot of the instrument of death, whilst behind and in front of her, a noble group of women and a child wail over the tortured saint in the most varied yet chastened attitudes and expressions.3

1 According to the legend, he was so crucified at his own re- quest. Vide Cap. LXXXIX of the Legenda Aurea.

2 One may discern that Giotto intended to depict the frame and flesh of a man advanced in years.

3 One of these, seen from behind, throws back her arms with a mo- tion which is so often repeated in Giotto's pictures that it was evidently a favorite with him. It may be seen in the crucifixion at Assisi (lower church), in the Scro- vegni Pieta, but in both with

more vehemence of passion than here. On both sides, soldiers on foot and horseback are grouped round the principal figure. In rear of the women, to the left of the saint, one with the face of Nero holds a hammer in his hand. Two pyramidal towers form the background on each side , and above the cross, two angels come flying downwards to comfort the tortured saint, one, of aged fea- tures holding an open book, an- other clasping its hands, both in fine draperies flying in the wind.

256

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

On the panel to the right, the martyrdom of S. Paul is painted with great power and with novel richness of fancy.

The body still kneels in prayer though headless. On the ground lies the nimhed head, whilst in front the executioner with grief in his features restores his sword to the scabbard. More nature or truth in the expression of pain and lamen- tation could not have been given than is depicted in the faces of the two women, bending over and kneeling before the trunk of the fallen saint, or in that of a man contemplating in despair the consummation of the sacrifice. Groups of soldiers on each side with shields, lances and banners, one blowing the trumpet on the right, balance the composition. 1

On the back of these panels S. Peter sits enthroned in pontificals, in the centre, holding the keys and giving his blessing. He also surpasses in size the two angels who majestically stand at each side of him, and the two bishops with their guardian saints kneeling in front to his right and left. 2 On the panels at each side, which like the

In the upper space of the trefoil, S. Peter winged may be seen kneeling on a cloud as he is carried to heaven by angels. In the point of the gable, Abraham wields the sword against his son Isaac; in the sides of the trefoil two medallions of prophets, and in the pilasters figures of saints as before, complete the ensemble of a panel in which the dramatic power of Giotto is developed. The six Saints in the pilasters are admirable for movement and ex- pression.

1 One on the left, looking up, sees two angels darting down from heaven and majestically clasping their hands in desolation. In the upper space, S. Paul winged, on a cloud, is carried to heaven, and his mantle, cast down from the sky, falls towards a figure on a hill in the landscape distance, whose hands are raised to re- ceive it. The traditional type of S. Paul is here well main-

tained. The points and pilasters are adorned like the others.

2 The latter in mitre and robes is recommended by S. George, and is doubtless Cardinal Ste- faneschi. Cancellieri again says: ub. sup. p. 1464. "a tergo prima tabula conspicitur S. Petrus se- dens, idemque cardinalis Cajetanus in genua provolutus." In his hands he holds a hexagonal ci- borium from which it may be inferred that the panels now under consideration were not, of old, back to back as at present. The former, also in mitre and robes, is honoured with a nimbus, holds up a book and is introduced by a saint in a rich ecclesiastical habit. Individuality in the por- traits, an imposing gravity in the figure of S. Peter, a noble cast of features in the angels, mark this panel, which has been much blackened by time and damaged by a vertical split. The fallen colour exposes the primed parch- ment beaten into the gesso upon

Chap. VIII.

GIOTTO AT ROME.

257

central one, are ornamented with figures and medallions similar to those on the three other panels, are, to the right, standing, S. Andrew and S. John the Evangelist, 1 to the left, S. James2 and S. Paul. 3 The predellas here are three in number, and of these, two are divided into five compartments each, in the first of which the Virgin and child are enthroned between two angels, S. Peter and S. Andrew ; in the second, are five standing apostles ; in the third, are three busts of S. Lawrence and two other saints.4 The three remaining predellas are gone. Giotto gave to the Virgin a serious gravity, more like the old conven- tional type than usual; yet he infused into .this old form a certain freshness of aspect, whilst he imparted to the shape a better proportion than of old. His attentive observation of nature is illustrated by the beautiful infant Saviour, whose occupation is the usual childish one of sucking its tiny hand. No longer the grim infant of moody expression, whose face contrasts by gloom with the idea of infancy, without really imparting that of su- preme power, it is an earnest simple babe. 5 Though time has dealt unkindly with this series of Giotto's works, and parts have suffered damage, no restoring has taken place, and the student can fully instruct himself as to the manner of the greatest of the early Florentine masters.

which Giotto painted. The pi- lasters of this panel are not or- namented with figures, but with mere arabesques. In the medal- lion at the top of the gable is an angel with a book and poin- ting with his right hand. He wears a blue tunic and a golden belt. The marble foreground has lost its colour and under gesso.

1 In the medallions at the points of the gables are a prophet and an angel. The figure of S. John is damaged and blackened.

2 The figure holding a book and staff is youthful and finely rendered.

3 S. Paul carries the sword on his shoulders; both this and the

VOL. I.

S. James stand in niches; and, above them, is a figure of a pro- phet holding a scroll.

4 This part of the predella is damaged and seems to have suf- fered from the lights on an altar.

5 In the vestments of the Ma- donna the drapery is grand. The angels, holding censers on each side, are in just motion; and the deep religious feeling in their ex- pression supplies the absence of any peculiar beauty. S. Peter, with his wellknown head , short grey beard, and austere features, was seldom presented in better character. Nor in the other figu- res of apostles was Giotto want- ing in variety or propriety.

258

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

This ciborium alone would justify the assertion that Giotto was the founder of a school of colour, and that, in this respect, he was as great in pictures on wood as in fresco. Here, indeed, the same qualities of tone may be found, as mark the wall paintings of Assisi ; — the colour being trans- parent, and warm, but light, of a grey verde in the shadows, verging through warm ruddy semitones to lights superpo- sed with massive breadth, well defined, fused, and rounded. The draperies, — in clear bright keys, — are of charming soft harmonies, folded with an ease superior to that of pre- vious examples, and most tastefully ornamented.

No other work of Giotto has been preserved at Rome, except a fragment of a fresco in S. Giovanni Laterano, representing Pope Boniface the Eighth in full pontificals, at a balcony, announcing the opening of the Jubilee.1 Blackened by time and considerably retouched, this fresco has no longer any charm of colour; but it still reveals, on a close inspection, the great talent for portraiture, for delineating the human form and face in distinct and in- dividual features , for proportion and mutual harmony, that characterized Giotto. It displays, besides, some progress in the art of drawing extremities and such features as the eyes, whose generalized shape evidently began at the opening of the fourteenth century to form a more special study on the part of the master. But this fresco is further of interest as it confirms the belief that Giotto was still at Rome after the proclamation of the Jubilee of 1300. 2 The mighty influence of his genius upon the artists of the capital, and especially upon Pietro Cavallini, the readi-

1 Two clerical persons on his right and left stand likewise at the balcony; one of whom ex- hibits a scroll on which are the words "Bonifacius Episcopus". On the right stands a fourth figure. The arms of the Orsini are em- broidered on a green cloth hang- ing over the balcony; and the announcement of the Jubilee is engraved in an inscription below.

2 At Rome, according to Ghi- berti and Vasari, Giotto painted several frescos in S. Peter (Ghi- berti comm. 2. Vol. I of Vas. p. XVIII. Vas. Vol. I. p. 323) and, in the church of the Minerva , a crucifix in tempera. These have perished, but in the latter church is a wooden crucifix assigned for no imaginable reason to Giotto.

Chap. VIII. RETURN TO FLORENCE. 259

ness with which the latter adapted his style to that of the Florentine; will not have been forgotten. Cardinal Stefaneschi, who had employed Giotto, also protected Cavallini; and the fresco of the apsis of S. Giorgio in Velabro, with the mosaics of S. Paolo fnori le Mura, still prove the influence which he wielded.

The career of Giotto now became more intimately connected with that of his native country. Leaving Kome, he returned to Florence at a critical period of her history.1 After a long and frequently doubtful struggle, that republic had finally asserted her superiority in Italy. Feared by her enemies and therefore respected abroad, she might have enjoyed in peace the fruits of her success, and ex- tended her influence by means of her great wealth and activity; but for the mischance common in such states, that no sooner is the outer enemy reduced, than the union which produced that result is broken by the jealousies of faction. The struggles of the Cerchi and Donati, or of the "whites" and "blacks", have exhausted the pens of chroniclers, and are the property of history. Nor is it intended that they should be dwelt upon here at any greater length than is necessary to elucidate the career of Giotto. The feud divided the city of Florence into two distinct camps. Corso Donati led the party of the Neri, Vieri de Cerchi that of the Bianchi, which had, en- rolled in its ranks, the immortal Dante. The poet had had occasion, when at Rome for the Jubilee, 2 to cultivate Giotto's acquaintance, 3 and during the short period which intervened between his return to Florence and the em- bassy to Pope Boniface the Eighth which preceded his perpetual exile,4 this acquaintance might have matured

1 The earliest works of Giotto in Florence, according- to Vasari (Vol. I. p.p. 311. 312), were in the Badia. But the Virgin annun- ciate, which he describes there, is by Lorenzo Monaco, and the pic- ture of the high altar is lost.

2 Dante says himself in the XVIII Canto of the Inferno, v. 28.

Come i Roman, peiTesercitomolto, L'anno del Giubbileo su per lo ponte

Hanno a passar la gente modo tolto.

3 "Dante Alighieri coetano ed amico suo grandissimo." Vas. Vol. 1. p. 311.

4 The exile of Dante was pro-

17*

260

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

into friendship. It was therefore about this time, no doubt, and between 1300 and April 1302, that Giotto painted the chapel of the Palace of the Podesta or Bargello of Flo- rence; 1 and? in it, depicted one of the numerous incidents which illustrates the memorable feud of the "Blacks" and "Whites". Neither the lessons which the pictures of this chapel were intended to convey, nor the presence in one of them of Dante, were sufficient to save the building from the hand of the whitewashes or the sug- gestions of an ill-judged economy. The beautiful chapel of the Podesta, which had been preserved till after the period of Vasari,2 was divided into two by the introduc- tion of a false ceiling. The upper part became a prison, the lower a magazine, and the walls of both were white- washed.3 The false ceiling was subsequently removed and the chapel4 completely cleared. The walls were then scraped with razors, and the frescos rescued, though not without considerable damage. In the paintings of Giotto thus restored, every charm of colour had disappeared. Nothing re- mained to please the eye. In many parts the compositions were mutilated, in others totally effaced ; yet in the remains, the conception and the drawing are preserved; and are of incalculable value to the student of Giotto's manner.

Constructed in the form of a rectangular oblong on an area of 936 feet, 5 and ornamented with a waggon roof, the

nounced whilst he was at Rome on an embassy to Boniface the VIII. April. 1302. See Balbo's life and the historians generally.

1 Vasari, Vol. I. p. 311. Ghi- berti (C o m. p. XIX. i n 'V a s. Vol. I.) calls the chapel cappella di S. M. Maddalena.

2 "II quale (Giotto) ritrasse, come oggi ancor si vede nella cappella del Palagio del Podes- ta"... (Vas. Vol. I. p. 311.)

3 Three promoters of art, Canon Moreni, Luigi Scotti, and profes- sor Missirini, proposed in the pre- sent century the rescue of this interesting work of art; but the

energy of Seymour Kirkup and the willingness of an intelligent American, Mr. Henry Wild and Mr. O. Bezzi first overcame the obstructiveness of the authorities. At their request Signor Marini pro- mised to remove the whitewash for the sum of 240 Francesconi; and the plan would have been carried out at their expense, had not the Cav. Remirez di Montalvo and the Marquis Grirolamo Ballati-Nerli ordered that the work should be executed at the charge of the Tuscan treasury.

4 The height of the chapel is sixty feet.

5 About 36 by 26.

I Chap. VIII. CHAPEL OF THE PODESTA. 261

chapel of the Podesta was entered through a door at one of the small ends, above which was a fresco of the Inferno. On the opposite side, the wall, lighted by a window, was adorned with a fresco of Paradise, and , on the remaining spaces, were incidents from the lives of the Magdalen and ! Mary of Egypt. 1

Gianozzo Manetti in his Specimen Historiae, Filippo Villani, and Vasari, concur in stating that the chapel ! was painted by Giotto , and that, in it, were portraits of , Dante Alighieri, Brunetto Latini, and Corso Donati. Villani adds, that Giotto's own portrait was there, executed by himself "alio specchio7\ But this evidence is almost super- fluous to any visitor of the chapel itself, who is acquainted with the style of the master. In the first scene which j adorns the side walls, S. Mary of Egypt kneels and receives j the blessing of bishop Zosimus enthroned in a church.

1 The long face to the right of the entrance is pierced with two windows. The frescos are all high on the spaces, being dis- tant at their base about 11 feet from the ground. The long face to the left is divided into a double course of 4 frescos, com- mencing at the bottom , near the

door, with a scene from the life

of S. Mary of Egypt, and con-* tinning with the communion of the Saint, a scene from the life of Mary Magdalen and the Noli me tangere. The only remains here visible are those of the Mag- dalen in part, and a portion of | another figure holding a heart. Above in the same order, the Marys at the sepulchre, a sub- ject now destroyed, the resurrec- , tion of Lazarus, and the Magda- \ len anointing the feet of Christ. All these subjects are divided by a beautiful ornament, at the corners of which are lozenges containing half figures of angels. One of these, pouring water from a vase, is excessively graceful. On the opposite side , right and left of the windows, is a double

course of single frescos, repre- senting the dance of the daughter of Herodias, — a subject now almost effaced, the miracle of the merchant of Marseilles and an episode now obliterated. — Be- tween the two windows, a winged angel, with a palm and book, is depicted, at the foot of which, on a scroll, was an inscription now illegible, below which, on a bor- der, another inscription was placed , of which the words "hoc opus".... still remain. In the sides of the windows are painted shields of arms, and roses; and in the key of one, a head of the Saviour. The vaulted ceiling is divided into four parts, framed in the same ornament as the rest, inter- rupted by lozenges in which figu- res of angels, now almost gone, were depicted. In the centre, the Lamb stands on an altar supported by two hypogriffs , and around it are the symbols of the 4 Evan- gelists. The ceiling was painted blue with gold stars , but is now white, the blue having fallen out. In one of the lozenges is still an angel holding a censer.

262

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

Fragments of four other figures still remain.1 In the communion, the Saint may be seen kneeling before Zosimus extending to her the wafer of the host and holding the cup. A figure on the right bears a taper. 2 In the "Noli me tangere" the upper part of the Magdalen, the lower part of the Saviour remain,3 but from the movement of the former's head and its longing glance, the beauty of the whole picture may be judged. The power of expres- sion, conveyed in this single head, is indeed remarkable. Though totally devoid of colour, there is a feeling in the outlines and in the movements of the features and neck which creates a lively sense of regret at the loss of the remainder.4 Most of the composition in the Marys at the sepulchre remains in outline only.5 A fine character and movement mark the Saviour in the resurrection of Lazarus, whilst in the kneeling Mary and Martha, life and animation are pleasingly conveyed. 6 The outlines of the Magdalen, prostrate before Christ, who sits with Simon and another, whilst a servant brings in the meat, are all that remains of that composition.7 Herod, a guest, and part of the dancing figure of Salome are the only pieces extant of a subject, of which another and more perfect example by Giotto may be seen in the Peruzzi chapel

1 Two figures with tapers stand near the bishop. Their heads are obliterated. To the right of the kneeling figure two heads of angels are still preserved. Above , are vestiges of angels carrying a figure to heaven.

2 The flesh tone of the kneel- ing female is gone , but the en- graved lines of face, hands, and feet remain, whilst the rest of the figure is boldly laid in with a brush in red. It would seem in- deed as if the lines had been engraved with a style running over a lucid drawing.

3 Part of the sepulchre and dis- tant trees may still be seen. The usual preparation of verde beneath the flesh tints is revealed by the rubbing off of the colour.

4 The usual preparation of light verde is still visible. The forms are traced in red, and the hair, worked out in very fine lines, still preserves a fair warm yellow co- lour. The mantle, prepared in red, was evidently glazed over in blue.

5 The chief part, indeed, of the Marys and sleeping soldiers are obliterated; but the form of the angel, sitting on the sepulchre, is beautiful and noble in attitude. Part of the landscape distance is still visible.

f) The figure of Lazarus has vanished.

7 At the angle of this compo- sition is an angel, bearing a lance, beautifully designed in a lozenge ornament.

Chap. VIII.

CHAPEL OF THE P ODE ST A.

263

at Santa Croce.1 The miracle of the merchant of Mar- seilles is better preserved.2 A group of six figures, one of them kneeling , is drawn together at the feet of the recumbent female, near whom is the infant. In the dis- tance is a ship labouring in a sea, and remains of a figure in the air.3

The Inferno is, like the rest, discoloured; but many figures are preserved, as they were boldly drawn in with red on the wall, and shadowed with a deeper tinge of the same colour. The Lucifer, colossal, stands in the centre of the space, and is conceived exactly in the form described by Dante in the thirty fourth canto of the Inferno :

0 quanto parve a me gran meraviglia Quando vidi tre facce alia sua testa ! L'una dinanzi, e quella era vermiglia: L'altre eran due, che s'aggiungeno a questa ...

Sotto ciascuna uscivan duo grand' ali Quanto si conveniva a tant' uccello : Vele di mar non vid' io mai cotali Non aven penne, ma di vispistrello

Era lor modo , .

Da ogni bocca dirompea co denti Un peccatore a guisa di macmlla.4

In his grasp two sinners, — about his frame serpents, whose jaws crush the bodies of evildoers or gnaw at Lucifer himself, his hairy legs and claws resting on a prostrate body, crushed at the same time by two scaly monkeys; — about him bodies chained or clubbed by demons,

1 At the angle on this side also is a beautiful archangel, overcom- ing- the demon, drawn in a lozenge.

2 As this is a subject frequently repeated in frescos of the 14th century, it may be well to explain its meaning. A merchant of Mar- seilles having promised to the vision of S. Mary Magdalen, that he would become a Christian and visit the holy land , if he should thus become blessed with children,

saw his wish satisfied. Shortly after- wards, however, his wife died on a voyage and was left with her new born babe on a solitary rock. Two years after, the merchant returning to revisit the spot, found his child living by the side of its recumbent mother.

3 The arms alone are preserved.

4 Inferno XXXIV11' Canto, v. 38 and following.

264

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

a centaur, and one holding his head in his hand. This Luci- fer and the fantastic groups about him display the varied nature of Giotto's studies and his comprehension of move- ment. Yet, as in Dante the imagery is often literal, and the contrasts terrestrial, so in Giotto who followed the Dantesque idea, nothing more than a fantastic materialism was exhibited. In this, however, both poet and painter embodied the thought and traditions of older times; and Lucifer reminds us of the Cerberus of antiquity.1

The Saviour in glory, in the space opposite the Inferno, presides over the array of the hierarchy of the blessed, equally divided on each side of the window of the chapel. Little of the upper part has been preserved, but the lower affords matter for most interesting studies, not merely because the figures have been in great part pre- served, at least in outline, but because under the sem- blance of a paradise, Giotto obviously embodies pictorially the transient peace which Cardinal d'Acquasparta , in the name of his master Boniface the Eighth, imposed on the Florentines in the winter of 1301. 2 Uniting the two principal groups at each side by two figures of angels, now in part obliterated, which stood guard over the lily of Florence,3 he represented to the right of these, near the lower angle of the window, the standing figure of a prince, wearing over the long hair of the Frenchmen of the period a coroneted cap. This youth, of somewhat disdainful glance, but of majestic mien, with his arms

1 The colour of the fresco has fallen, without affecting the polish of the plaster surface, which still remains as smooth as ever. The outlines of the Lucifer are en- graved in the plaster. The rest of the forms are firmly lined and shadowed with reddish brown. Con- sidered in reference to technical execution, this fresco reveals a mixture of two methods, buon fresco and fresco retouched a secco. The knit of four great portions is still visible, on which it would seem

that the outlines were in part en- graved and part painted whilst the plaster was still wet. This part has been in a great measure preserved. The colouring of the flesh and draperies, according to the old me- thod, is that which has not resisted time, whitewash, and restoring.

2 Consult the historians of Flo - rence , amongst them Ammira- to (Scipio).Dell' I storie Flo- rentine, &c. 4°. Flor. 1600. p. 160.

3 Now newly painted in.

Vol. I p. 265.

PORTRAITS OF DANTE, CORSO DONATI. and BRDNETTO LATIN I ; painted by Giotto, in the Chapel of the Podesta at Florence.

Youthful Portrait of DANTE, by Giotto ; after restoration.

Chap. VIII.

CHAPEL OF THE PODESTA.

265

folded in ample sleeves/ heads a procession of standing figures, and seems too proud to imitate the kneeling posture of one in magistrate's robes in front of him.2 The look and dress of this youth, the crown on his head, reveal Charles of Valois, 3 the cousin of the king of Naples and Sicily, called to Florence by the arts of Corso Do- nati, and admitted as pacificator by the unwilling Flo- rentines. Behind him stand Dante Alighieri, Corso Donati, Brunetto Latini,4 and a fourth person whose features have vanished. Behind these again, other dignitaries, in varied attitudes, and calm repose; and in rows above them, the saints, male and female of the heavenly hierar- chy, nimbed, crowned, bareheaded or draped; — marked by an elegant and graceful variety of features, and ex- pression, and though grave in mien, still full of life and nature. 5

In the same order on the left side of the window, Giotto painted a cardinal standing in prayer, evidently the Por- tuguese Matteo d'Acquasparta, in front of whom a ma- gistrate of Florence kneels in prayer, exhibiting the profile of a face evidently taken from life, with a long aquiline nose and upper lip. At his side hangs a dagger, and beneath him his shield of arms.6 Behind Acquasparta, whose square and muscular build contrasts with the slen- derer form of Charles of Valois, stands a procession of figures, grouped in the same order as those on the op- posite side, and headed by a row of three, the hindermost

1 Part of the face has been lost.

2 Great part of the head of this figure is gone.

3 "Tempo yegg' io non molto dopo ancoi,

Che tragge un altro Carlo fuor'

di Francia, Per far conoscer meglio e se e i

suoi."

Purgatorio. Canto XX. v. 70.

4 Dante, certainly. The rest are conjectured to be the persons named.

5 These qualities will be ad-

mitted only after a close and cri- tical observation; for some of the heads are in part damaged, whilst many are quite obliterated.

6 In a red cloak lined with white fur. Spots of the original red still remaining. The head dress is in part effaced, and part of the head gone. The face seems to have been broad ; and the nose is short. See antea a description of his tomb by one of the Cosmati. He died in 1304.

7 The arms on the shield are in a great measure obliterated.

266

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

of whom is insofar worthy of special remark as his face is not dissimilar from that of one in the frescos of the Arena at Padua , generally considered to be Giotto himself.1 — j The head of Dante corresponds in every sense to the well known mask which has hitherto served as a model to artists of every age. The high and fair forehead; the regular curve of the brow, and somewhat deep sunken eye, the hooked nose, classic mouth and slightly pointed chin, are all equally characteristic. But this, which was true when the head was first rescued from whitewash, is much less so now.2 The profile has been taken up and revived, but the outline much enfeebled in the operation. A portion of the eye which was gone, including the greater part of the iris to the upper lid, has been, with a part of the cheek, supplied anew by the restorer. No care or trouble can, indeed, ever secure an exact similarity of tone between old and new colour, the latter tending to continual change, whilst the former remains compa- ratively fixed; but here it would seem not only that the vacant space has been filled up , but that an attempt has been made to harmonize the new with the old by glazing and touching up the latter. The result is a general feeble tone of yellow without light or transparence — ■ which after all are the best qualities of fresco. The bonnet has not only been restored, but altered in colour as well as in

1 This figure, the most distant of a row of three , close to Car- dinal Acquasparta is that of a man about 25 years of age, hav- ing a broad forehead overshadowed by a cap, out of which straggle a few hairs. A yellowish dress is fast at the neck by a small short collar. His look is directed to- wards Dante on the opposite side of the window. At the Arena of Padua, in the paradise, in the third rank of the blessed, and second from the left side of the picture, is a figure like this, but more aged. This figure at Padua is tradition- ally honoured as that of Giotto. This however and the similar one

in the chapel of the palace of the Podesta have no likeness to the portrait of the painter (so-called) at Assisi, but more to that which, a century after his death, was exe- cuted for Giotto's monument in S. Maria Maggiore of Florence.

2 To M'\ Seymour Kirknp is due the merit of having taken an exact tracing of the head of Dante previous to the restoration. With this in hand it was possible to compare the restoration with the original, and detect the changes. Mr. Kirkup's tracing has also been published by the Arundel Society.

Chap. VIII.

DANTE'S PORTRAIT.

267

form. Nay, such is the change wrought in it, that the shape is no longer that of the time of Dante, nor such as it exists in numerous figures in the fresco of the Ca- pellone degli Spagnuoli at S. Maria Novella, or in the paintings at Santa Croce. Ungraceful beyond measure is the present red cap with a bag, puckered on to it, and left of a white tone. The original colour was not white and red, and this is obvious from a close inspection of the bag, and of the repainted red part. The scraper, in removing the whitewash, took out the colour of a por- tion at the back of the head and of the pendent part, which may now be seen gashed by the razor; but, here and there, a red spot by chance remains even in the pendent portion, showing that the bonnet was red all over. The seam which now unites the bag to the rest of the bonnet never existed before, and is a mere fancy of the restorer, who at the same time has falsified the outline by raising the point of the hood. When he repainted with red that portion which covers the back of the head he might have repainted with red also the pendent hood. The change of outline, the introduction of a seam fasten- ing the latter to the rest of the cap are unpardonable. Not but that in the beginning of the fourteenth century particoloured caps were worn; but there is no example of such a distribution of colours as now defaces the por- trait of Dante.1 On the other hand there are numerous examples of hoods of one colour; and one at least exists to prove that Dante usually wore a red one. The Flo- rentine Domenico Michelino painted a posthumous like- ness of the poet in 1465 which may now be seen in S.

1 Striped dresses and striped stockings were not so common in the 14th century, but they moved the observer sometimes to laughter. Franco Sacchetti in his LXXIX novella, Vol. II. ubi sup. p. 29, amusingly relates how Bo- ninscgna Angiolini was struck dumb, with astonishment in S. Piero Scheraggio, when he saw

certain figures there painted with striped socks. The audience re- tired wondering; one saying: "the stripes are not so extraordinary as the Siennese dress which is frequently half black and half white." Of this white and black costume there are painted exam- ples in the frescos of the Loren- zetti.

268 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. VIII.

Maria del Fiore, and there Dante wears a red hooded cap and a red vest, nor is there any reason to doubt, that Michelino executed this likeness with the assistance of Giotto's in the fresco of the chapel of the Podesta. 1 Corso Donati, if indeed it be really the ambitious and astute leader of the Neri who is here depicted, has a most characteristic head. No greater contrast can be conceived than that displayed in the aquiline forms of Dante and the straighter ones of his neighbour. Thought prevails in the former, in the latter craft, lurking especially in the eye. Tenacity of will and physical strength are in Corso, whilst in the features of Dante intellect rules a slender and delicate frame. Corso has the vigour of the tiger, Dante of the eagle. Corso's hands are joined in prayer and part of the fingers remain. Half the face of Brunetto Latini is preserved, and is remarkable for a bold cast of features. Like Corso Donati he wears a cap. Yet it is difficult to account for his presence in the position assigned to him as he died about 1294 5 2 and though he was Dante's tutor, he was consigned by his pupil to the Inferno.3 Still a lingering sense of gratitude may have prompted Dante to suggest to Giotto his introduction into the picture, and possibly the poet, who was himself a designer, may have furnished the necessary likeness.4 As a group, these three figures are the best illustration that

1 As for the rest of the costume, in which the poet was painted by Giotto, it consists in a white under cap, a red vest of close fit, fast at the neck with the help of a lace, turned over and faced on the breast and relieved at the chin by a strip of white shirt collar. Beneath the vest at the bo- som, a green under waistcoat ap- pears. Dante holds in his left hand a closed book of which a part is obliterated, and in his right , or rather the thumb and forefinger of it which remain, a stem with three pomegranates, possibly emblematic of the three great poems of which he is the

author. This hand and stem were relieved on the dress of the next figure supposed to represent Corso Donati. The colour of this dress has vanished, and what remains of the hand of Dante, is only the first preparation in red colour.

2 His tomb with a modern in- scription placing his death in 1394, is in the church of S. Maria Maggiore. See Richa, Chiese, &c. Vol. III. p. 287.

3 XV. Canto. Inferno, v. 30.

4 Balbo, Vita di Dante, p. 54. who quotes for this fact Leo- nardo Aretino.

Chap. VIII.

DANTE'S PORTRAIT.

269

can be found of Giotto's power of individualizing. A gene- ral charge of sameness in the delineation of the human face has been admitted against him even by some of his greatest admirers , 1 but in the fresco of the chapel of the Podesta this charge cannot be supported. Each form varies, yet harmonizes with the other. In the features, the character of the person portrayed is distinctly revealed. Nor is this more true of the Dante, Corso, and Brunetto than of Charles of Valois, Acquasparta, or the saints and martyrs of the church.

All inferences to be deduced from the subject and form of these frescos point to the date of 1301 -— 2.2 — It may be inquired whether they were executed by Giotto at the time, and this inquiry can only be satisfied approxima- tively. It may be inferred that Dante's portrait would hardly have been introduced into a picture so conspicuously visible as this, had not the poet at the time been influent in Florence. United by family ties to the Donati, being married to Emma a daughter of that house, and intimate with Forese and Piccarda, the brother and sister of Corso,3 he was still by policy a partisan of the Cerchi, and his influence did not survive the fall of the Bianchi. His exile and their's dates from April 1302. Dante's age in the fresco corresponds with this date, and is that of a man of thirty five.4 He had himself enjoyed the highest office of Florence from June to August 1300. In the fresco he does not wear the dress of the " priori but he holds in the ranks of those near Charles of Valois an honorable place. It may be presumed that the frescos were executed previous to Dante's exile, and this view

1 For instance E. Forster. Bei- trage ubisup. p. 131 and follow- ing.

2 Charles of Valois entered Flo- rence on the Ist Nov. 1301.

3 See Balbo, Vita di Dante. Dante meets Piccarda in Paradise. She had been a nun, was taken by force from her convent by Corso, and married against her will .

SeeParadiso, C an to III. v. 49. Forese is in Purgatory, where Dante meets him purging the vice of passion. Purgatorio. Canto XXIII. v. 48.

4 Dante was born in 1265. It is difficult to judge from the por- trait the age of Corso Donati. He looks, however, more advanced in years than Dante.

270

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. VIII.

is confirmed by the technical, and artistic progress which they reveal. They exhibit indeed the master in a higher sphere of development than at Assisi and Rome.1

1 It is worthy of remark that many years later, but still before the death of Giotto, a decree was issued at Florence, prohibiting any rector or official of the people or "commune" from painting-, or causing", or allowing1, to be painted in any house or place, inhabited, or used by such officers in the exercise ot their duty, any picture ; and further ordering- all such pic- tures, or statues, as manifestly existed, in contempt of this decree, to be destroyed, with the excep-

tion of such as should represent the Redeemer and the Virgin, or such as should represent a vic- tory , or the capture of a city to the advantage of the Florentines. Giotto's pictures in the chapel of the Podesta were saved, no doubt, under one of these exceptions; but it would be curious, were a list to be found of pictures or statues destroyed under this decree which is dated 1329. See the original decree, in Gaye. Carteggio In- edito. Vol. I. p. 473.

Chap. IX.

THE O OF GIOTTO.

271

CHAPTER IX. GIOTTO AT PADUA.

The well known story of the O has been told by Va- sari to illustrate the cause of Giotto's visit to Rome. The story has apparently its kernel of truth concealed in a superfluous husk of legend and untruth. Though wTell known to Boniface the Eighth, Giotto was personally a stranger to Benedict the Eleventh, who seems only to have heard the rumour of the painter's fame. He therefore sent a legate from Treviso to Florence to test Giotto's ability, 1 and Vasari is probably correct in the details of an interview which gave rise to a joke familiar to the Tuscans of a later age.2 The courtier, who had visited Sienna to gather examples of the art practised in that city, made his way one morning into the "bottega" of Giotto at Florence, and introduced himself as the envoy of the Pope. He explained the intentions of his master and the manner in which he was commissioned to carry them out, and concluded by asking for a specimen of the painter's ability. Giotto took a sheet of paper, and a brush clipped in red, and firmly pressing his elbow to his side so that the lower limb of the arm might act as the branch

1 By a misprint no doubt, Va- sari's text speaks here of Bene- dict the IXth. Vol. I. p. 320.

2 "It is well known, says an annotator to Schorn's edition of Vasari (Stuttgardt und Tubingen 1832. Vol. I. p. 116.), that Bene- dict the XIth, at the express wish of Petrarch, sent a legate to seek out the best artists of Italy for the purpose of restoring and adorn-

ing the churches and palaces of Rome Avhich were falling into decay." But if the courtier of Vasari was really an envoy from Benedict the XIth the residence of Giotto at Rome could not be owing to the circumstance related. For Benedict succeeded Boniface the VIII, under whose papacy the Florentine painter executed the mosaics and frescos above noticed.

272

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

of a compass, he completed with one sweep a perfect circle. "Here is my drawing" said Giotto. Am I to have no other than this, replied the courtier scenting a joke in the manner of the artist. "Enough it is and more than enough," was the answer. The Pope, a better judge than his envoy, admitted the superiority of Giotto, and the story, repeated from mouth to mouth, became the foundation of a pun on the word tondo. For it became proverbial to say of men of dull or coarse character, that they were rounder than the O of Giotto. — Free hand drawing is better understood in our day since the foundation of schools of design, than it was of old ; and the practical mind of M. Ruskin recognizes in the feat of Giotto something more than a joke.1 In this he is right, for a free hand can alone trace bold sweeps of ornament; and ornament now receives an attention which was acknowledged in the thirteenth century, though long denied to it in the nine- teenth. Vasari prefaces this amusing anecdote by saying that Benedict was led to inquire respecting Giotto's talent, because the fame of his illustrations to the life of Job in the Campo Santo of Pisa had reached him. The reader may note, as he proceeds with these pages, that Vasari blundered here as in other places, and that the series of the frescos of Job are by another and feebler hand. The result of Benedict's inquiries however, was, that he engaged Giotto at a large salary to proceed to Avignon, to exe- cute a series illustrating the lives of the martyrs. But before Giotto had had time to start, the death of his new patron intervened, and the commission was not executed. This fact, authoritatively stated by Albertini, 2 has hitherto escaped the commentators who follow the error of Vasari, and describe Giotto as having visited Avignon and other

1 See in the publications of the Arundel Society Mr. Ruskin's able exposition of the style of Giotto and his admirable comments on the paintings of the Scrovegni at Padua. Those also who are una- ble to judge of Giotto's talent

from the originals, may study the excellent engravings which Mr. Ruskin's pen illustrates.

2 Opusculum ubi sup. p. 54. The passage runs as follows : "Fuitque (Giotto) a Benedicto XI pont. max. in Avinionem, ad pin-

Chap. IX.

GIOTTO AT PADUA.

273

parts of France ; the truth being that no trace of Giotto's pre- sence has ever been discovered out of the Italian Peninsula.

It may have been after the failure of this plan that Giotto left Florence (circa 1305) and proceeded to the North of Italy.

It happened, says Benvenuto of Imola, that, whilst Giotto was painting at Padua a chapel erected on the site of the old circus, Dante visited that city and was received with honour by the painter at his own house.1 In 1301 Enrico Scrovegno, a rich citizen of Padua, had been raised to the rank of a noble by the republic of Venice.2 He devoted some portion of the wealth accumulated by his father3 to the erection of a chapel which was completed in 1303 and dedicated to the annuntiate Virgin.4 The painter employed to adorn its walls was Giotto, as Benvenuto da Imola distinctly states*, and, as the date of Dante's visit to Padua has been accurately ascertained, that of Giotto's labours may be inferred. Dante lodged in the contrada San Lorenzo at Padua in 1306, 5 having ft Bologna in January of that year.6 It might be diffi-

gendum martyrorum historias accit ngetiprecio. Morte interveniente, pus omisit." benvenuto da Imola, in Mu-

ratori, Antiquitates Ital.

Tom. I. p. 1186.

2 Pietro Brandolese Pit- ' lire, &c. di Padova, 8°. Pad.

795. p. 213.

3 Reginaldo Scrovegno is con- igned to the Inferno by Dante n account of his usury and ava- "ce. Inferno. Canto XVII. v. 64.

4 "L'anno 1303, istituita di M. nrico de' Scrovegni- Cavalier."

nonimo, del Morelli (Jaco- o.) Bassano. 1800. 8°. p. 23, and . 116, as follows: "Fu eretta la

chiesuola nel 1303, di che ne fa fede l'iscrizione presso lo Scar- deone." See the inscript. in Scar- deone. B. Hist. Patav. p. 378 of Vol. VI. p. III. Thes. antiqui- tatum, J. G. Graevii, Lugd. Batav. 4°. 1722. A record proves that

VOL. I.

the consecration took place only in 1305. Vid. Selvatico. Scritti. Flor. 1859. p. 284.

5 "Dantino, quondam aligerii de Florentia nunc stat Paduae in contrata Sancti Laurentii," says a public record or affidavit pub. in "Novelle Letter. Flor." 1748. p. 361. quoted in Kosini ub. sup. p. 245, and in Balbo, Vita diDante.

6Vasari affirms that Clement the Vth, having succeeded Benedict the XIth at Perugia, forced Giotto to accompany him to Avignon. The transfer of the papal court to Avignon took place in 1305. There- fore Giotto must have travelled into this and other parts of France in or after that year (Vas. Vol. I. p. 303). This alleged journey and the assertion that Giotto painted many frescos and panels at Avig- non and in other parts of France, is proved to be deserving of no cre- dit. Besides, in 1306 Giotto was

274

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

cult to prove that Giotto, besides illustrating the inte- rior of the chapel of the Arena with scenes from sacred history, was the person employed by Enrico Scrovegno to erect the chapel itself 5 but the perfect manner in which the interior is adapted to the plan of its pictorial adorn- ment, suggests and might justify that assumption. Emi- nently in the spirit of Christian thought, dramatic in the force with which the idea is evolved, yet so simple as to convey their meaning to the least gifted of mankind, these paintings reveal in Giotto, young as he then was,1 an intimate acquaintance with the character, the types, the passions of men. Conceived and distributed according to the highest maxims of art, they disclose in him the pos- session of uncommon taste united to most remarkable technical powers. Erected in the form of a single vaulted aisle with a choir merely separated from the body of the chapel by an arch, the building is lighted by six windows piercing the side to the right of the portal. Giotto arranged the subjects in obedience to the maxims which for centuries had ruled their distribution, but with a sense of their mutual value and position quite unusual. On the wall, above the entrance, was the Last Judgment. On the arch leading into the sanctuary, the Saviour sat in glory guarded by angels. Beneath him the annunciation was depicted, and in a triple course along the walls, were thirty eight scenes of the life of the Virgin and of the Saviour. These subjects were inclosed in a painted ornament of a beautiful kind, interrupted at intervals by little frames of varied forms, containing subjects from the old and new testament. All rested on a painted marble cornice supported on brackets and pilasters, in the intervals of which were fourteen figures in dead colour representing the virtues and the vices. As in the chapel of the Podesta, so at the Scrovegni, the waggon roof was spanned by two

at Padua, and though many pain- tings exist in Avignon, in the ca- thedral and papal palace, they are not by Giotto, but by Simone

Martini of Sienna, as may be more fully proved hereafter.

1 "Adhuc satis juvenis," says Benvenuto da Imola, ub. sup.

Chap. IX. CHAPEL OF THE SCROVEGNI AT PADUA. 275

feigned arches. The field of the vault was blue and starred, adorned in the centres with medallions of the Saviour and the Virgin, and, on the sides, with eight medallions of pro- phets. By this division of subject and of ornament an admi- rable harmony was created. The feigned cornice with its feigned bas-reliefs illustrates completely the ability with which Giotto combined architecture with sculpture and painting, whilst in the style of the ornaments themselves, the most exquisite taste and a due subordination of parts were combined. The spectator is at once struck, as he enters, by the grandeur of one great episode, that of the Saviour in glory. Then his eye wanders naturally to the less solemn but not less interesting exposition of the sacred history, as de- rived from the old, the new, testament, and the proto-evan- gelion. Beneath the Saviour enthroned, the annunciation; on the wall, at one side of it the salutation, and facing it on the other side, the Saviour betrayed by Judas, prefigurate the birth and death of the Redeemer. The incidents of the lives of Mary and of Christ follow in rapid succession on the side walls. Facing each other on the marble skirting, the virtues and antagonistic vices are pitted against each other. At the lowest part of the arch, leading into the choir or sanctuary, are two interiors painted in dead colour. In each of them a lantern hangs alight. One symbolizes the light which guides man to virtue ; the other is emblematic of the light which saves us from the path of vice. The practise of all the virtues leads man to paradise; accordingly the first of the virtues, which is hope, is appropriately turned towards that part of the Last Judgment which comprises the happy. The pursuit of vice leads to the everlasting abyss; and the last of the vices, despair, is accordingly seen drawn by a devil towards the everlasting fire in the Inferno. The paintings of Giotto had thus an aim , and were not mere representations of given subjects without connection, a mere assemblage of groups, or only an at- tempt to charm by movement, expression, or colour.

From the earliest centuries, peculiar attention had been directed to the distribution of certain classes of subject

18*

276

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

in sacred edifices. At Ravenna, the majesty of the Sa- viour was fitly honoured in the apsis of basilicas. The Virgin, too, was honoured by a preeminent position in the most sacred part of a chapel or church. At S. Angelo in Formis, whilst the Redeemer stood in glory in the choir, the old and new testament were illustrated in the nave. The prophets were displayed beneath, and the Last Judg- ment above, the portal. At Pomposa, where a modern hand has painted anew scenes from the old and new testament and from Revelations, the latter were placed on the arches of the aisle. In S. Francesco of Assisi, the incidents of the life of S. Francis, to whom the church was dedicated, were painted below those of the old and new testament. At the Scrovegni of Padua, the chapel devoted to the Virgin annunciate was still reserved, as regards its place of honour, to the figure of the Re- deemer; then came, beneath, the Virgin and the angel of the annunciation in each spandril of the arch of the sanctuary. At the sides were the scenes from the new testament, and beneath these, virtues and vices, the for- mer of which at Assisi had been confined to the ornaments of a ceiling. Here the incidents of the old testament were thrown into the ornament, a change which may have a deeper meaning than might at first view appear.

If the spectator directs his attention to the order in which the episodes of the proto-evangelion and new testament are placed, he will find the first story told in the upper course of the side wall, to the right of the Saviour in glory. The numbers then run round the building and the thirty eighth fresco is the lowest of the last course, by the side of the arch of the sanctuary, and to the left of the Saviour in glory. It would ill suit the purpose of these pages to attempt a minute description of all these works in succes- sion. The following index, with such remarks as may be necessary to explain the actual condition of each fresco, will, however, be useful. Those subjects which deserve a more special notice may be dealt with at greater length afterwards. The series begins with:

Chap. IX. CHAPEL OF THE SCROVEGNI AT PADUA.

277

No. 1. The rejection of Joachim's offering — a well pre- served fresco.

No. 2. Joachim retires to the sheepfolcl. Fine and grand are the figures of the old man with two shepherds watching the flock.

No. 3. The angel appears to Anna — a well preserved subject. It may be noted that in the movement of an old servant, spinning, at one side of the picture, the painter has not merely reproduced a most natural action, but that he could delineate as well as discern the difference of qua- lity between the types of various classes of people.

No. 4. The sacrifice of Joachim — a middling composition.

No. 5. The Vision of Joachim. The angel appearing is here very fine and natural in movement. The attitude of Joachim is well chosen and ably rendered.

No. 6. The meeting at the golden Gate.

No. 7. The birth of the Virgin.

No. 8. The presentation of the Vigin — a fine and well preserved subject.

No. 9. The Eods are brought to the high priest. S. Jo- seph, nimbed, is of a well defined character. The fresco is in a good state.

No. 10. The watching of the rods — in good condition.

No. 11. The Betrothal of the Virgin. — The blues of draperies have all disappeared.

No. 12. The Virgin's return home. A very fine composi- tion but much damaged by time. The youths preceding the bridal pair and sounding trumpets have especially suffered.

No. 13. The angel of the annunciation, kneeling.

No. 14. The Virgin of the annunciation, kneeling. This figure is agreeable and beautiful in movement and features, the face full of a serene and grave majesty.

No. 15. The Salutation is marked by much affectionate feeling.

No. 16. The birth of Christ.

No. 17. The offering of the wise men. A fine composition, in which the feeling, afterwards developed by Fra Angelico, may be noticed. The arrangement is here the same as in the South transept of the Lower church of Assisi. Again the blue of the Virgin's dress has vanished and the red pre- paration alone appears.

No. 18. The Warning. The angel is very fine, and the composition able. The blue draperies are here also obli- terated.

No. 19. The flight into Egypt. The affectionate action

278

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

of the Virgin as she holds the infant Saviour, the admirable manner in which the two figures are grouped, are as remar- kable here as in the similar composition at Assisi. They also recal the bas-relief cut by Giovanni Pisano on the pulpit of Pisa. But here a beautiful angel leads the way. The blue draperies are rubbed off, and the red under- ground visible.

No. 20. The massacre of the innocents. This composition is scattered and less able than that of Assisi. The. forms of the children are by no means fine, but the action is still very animated. The blues as usual have vanished.

No. 21. Christ among the doctors. This fresco has been greatly altered and is blackened by damp. The colours are in part gone, and where they remain, are raw and unpleasant.

No. 22. The Baptism of Christ.

No. 23. The marriage in Cana. This subject is preserved and a few spots only disfigure the blues; one may note the classic forms of the vases.

No. 24. The raising of Lazarus.

No. 25. The entrance into Jerusalem. Much damaged, particularly in the blues of drapery and sky. Two or three heads are quite gone.

No. 26. Christ expelling the Pharisees from the temple. The composition does not lack beauty, but the vulgarity of certain heads is remarkable.

No. 27. The hiring of Judas. A demon behind the traitor grasps his shoulder.

No. 28. The last supper. Here the blue draperies have all disappeared and the nimbuses, with the exception of that of the Saviour, have become black.

No. 29. Christ washing the feet of the disciples. This is by no means one of the finest of the series, and the exe- cution is rude. The draperies as usual gone.

No. 30. The kiss of Judas — rudely executed — but the colour of the lower parts of the figures has fallen, laying bare the under preparation.

No. 31. Christ before Caiaphas. Middling composition and rudely carried out. The red preparation for blues visible.

No. 32. Christ scourged — a poor composition, ill ren- dered. The Saviour is stiff, motionless, and gazing.

No. 33. Christ bearing his cross. Giotto is not free from the reproach of embodying the somewhat trivial idea of weariness in the Saviour, because of the great weight of his cross. The expression of the Virgin is more masculine than

Chap. IX. CHAPEL OF THE SCROVEGNI AT PADUA. 279

is necessary. The draperies are in general damaged, and the figures in the background have suffered a great deal.

No. 34. The crucifixion.

No. 35. The Pieta.

No. 36. The Noli me tangere.

No. 37. The ascension. This is a fine composition, in which the painter really conveys the idea of a form in mo- tion; and a great advance is made upon the primitive re- presentation of the same subject in the upper church of Assisi. Whilst, there, the Saviour's form is partly concealed, here, he is completely visible rising on a cloud, surrounded by a choir of angels. Below him are the apostles.

No. 38. The descent of the Holy Spirit.

It will be remarked that in this series of sacred history Giotto had to depict the birth of the Virgin as well as that of the Saviour. In the first, he brought some of the usual graceful incidents together in a very charming form. In the second the moment is chosen when the infant is given by its mother to an attendant.

Giotto, in representing the episode of the Saviour's baptism, did not venture to alter the time-honoured form of a composition which had been repeated without change since the seventh century. For this he has been blamed, and perhaps justly, by M. Ruskin. 1 No doubt, the Saviour stands in a hole, S. John on the right, accompanied by two followers, pouring water over his head, whilst, on the left, two angels hold the Redeemer's vestments. In the oldest Christian form of this subject, at Ravenna, the necessity of bringing the two banks of Jordan into close proximity, had been avoided by the surrender to a river- god of an office, which, in later conceptions, was performed by ministering angels. The gradual disappearance of pagan forms in the progress of centuries seems to have left the Christian artist no alternative but to sacrifice the composition to the necessities of a subject of which the type was unalterably fixed. It may be asked, why it

1 See Mr. Ruskin's comments I in the publications of the Arundel on the frescos of the Arena chapel | Society.

280

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

might not have been possible to represent the angels in flight over the water. A divine of the fourteenth cen- tury might have answered, that in the baptism of Christ, the angels that minister must be supposed to perform a terrestrial duty. The Saviour having condescended as God-man to be baptised on earth, the angels must con- descend to earth also, being subordinate and inferior even on earth to him. Be this as it may, as Giotto here main- tained a typical form of composition, when in other cases he did not hesitate to depart from old ideas, it is obvious that some formidable reasons existed for the course he pursued.

The raising of Lazarus shows how literally the Bible text was followed by Giotto. The body and legs have been wound round with a sheet according to the direc- tions of scripture.1 Swaddled and incapable of motion, Lazarus is placed erect on the right receiving the bles- sing of the Saviour; before whom, to the left, Martha and Mary kneel in attitudes and with action highly ex- pressive of confidence and hope. Surprise and gratitude animate the features of the bystanders, yet repose and decorum are in every movement of the crowd. The com- position is admirable and amongst the finest in the chapel. 2

Though finely and dramatically conceived and executed, the crucifixion at Padua was less successfully presented by Giotto than that of the lower church of Assisi. Of the nude, as treated in the crucifixion of S. Peter at Rome, enough has been said to make any further remark unne- cessary. It may suffice to say, that the proportions of the

1 That this treatment of the body is scriptural is clear from the following passage: "Then took they the body of Jesus and wound it in linen clothes with the spices, as the manner of the Jews is to bury." S. John. Chap. XIX. v. 40.

2 Two figures on the right of the

foreground are replacing the cover of the sepulchre. At Assisi, in the Chapel dellaMaddalena whose paintings are erroneously assigned to Buffalmacco, a pupil of Giotto copied this scene and made chan- ges quite detrimental to the beauty of the composition.

Chap. IX. CHAPEL OF THE SCROVEGNI AT PADUA. 281

Saviour are correct, the form well chosen and the expression dignified and gentle. Pain is visible in the features ; and the mouth is open. But we have parted here with the hideous contorsions of past ages and painters, with the overhanging belly of the crucifixes in the Lucchese, Pisan and Aritian schools. The moment chosen is that of death, when the angel gathers the last stream of blood from the wounded side. The hands are a little contracted, but the limbs are well jointed and in repose. The head is bent to the left in the direction of the group of the fainting Virgin supported by the holy women and S. John Evangelist. The group is however more remarkable for force than feeling ; and this may be noted as a general feature in the frescos of the Scrovegni chapel, where the Florentine gravity and weight prevail more than in those of the South transept at Assisi. The Virgin also is like a copy of an ordinary fainting female, and reveals that tendency to an accurate study of nature which in the highest degree characterized the style of Leonardo da Vinci.1 The angel, that "uccel divino" whom Dante so beautifully describes, tears his white dress and bares his breast with extraordinary energy; and in this force the dramatic effort overpowers sentiment.

A better expression of the majesty and dignity of the Saviour, akin indeed to that of Assisi, is to be found in the crucifix painted by Giotto and suspended high up in the sanctuary of the Scrovegni chapel. The head, there, is full of repose and resignation, and renders the idea of the God -man, the purely Christian idea of the Saviour who perished for the sins of the world, better than any that has been hitherto noticed. Yet even here, greater force, energy and thought, and less religious feeling are disclosed than was afterwards conveyed in the Christ of Angelico which expresses the acme of resignation. Giotto painted many crucifixes; and an authentic record exists of one which he executed in the early part of the

1 The same remark may apply I gelist, Avhose head rests on a broad to the figure of S. John Evan- | and powerful neck.

282

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

century for the church of S. Maria Novella at Flo- rence. In his will, dated the fifteenth of June 1312, Ri- cuccio quondam Pucci, of the quarter of S. M. Novella, left a legacy of five pounds in small florins for the pur- chase of oil to feed a lamp, all the year round, before the crucifix painted in the church of the Dominicans by "egre- gium pictorem nomine Giottum Buondonis,1 qui est de dicto populo Sancte Marie Novelle." The same Ricuccio left twenty pounds as a legacy to the Dominicans of Prato for a lamp to burn before a picture by Giotto in the church of their convent.2 The crucifix now in S. M. Novella at Florence, though it has been assigned to Giotto, is too obviously executed by one who had not freed his style from the influence of old defective models. It has something Giottesque in the attitude and may be by Puccio Capanna, though this is by no means certain.3 But in S. Marco and in the Gondi Dini chapel of the Frati Umiliati in Ognissanti at Florence, two crucifixes, evidently by Giotto, exist; whilst a third, in S. Felicita, may be classed, though with less certainty, in the same category. These works, embodying a subject which was the test and touchstone of the genius of the Christian painter in the fourteenth century, display the talents of Giotto at the opposite pole from that of the painters who immediately preceded him. It would seem that after a series of efforts and struggles which lasted for centuries, Giotto struck out the noblest and fittest ideal of the Sa- viour on the cross. That it was difficult to create a better one is proved by the sequel of Florentine art history. Not one of Giotto's pupils improved the type of which he became the founder. Angelico alone, after him, was

1 This document is one of nu- merous proofs that Giotto's father was really a Buondone. See the record at length in note 4 to Vasari. Vol. I. p. 329.

2 Ibid.

3 Vasari mentions a crucifix in

S. M. Novella, partly executed by Giotto partly by Puccio Capanna. If the crucifix now in S. M. No- vella be that to which Vasari al- ludes , it may be by Puccio, whose style is not known; but the de- sign is certainly not Giotto's. (Vas. Vol. I. p. 329.)

Chap. IX.

GIOTTO'S CRUCIFIXES.

283

able to impart to the Redeemer tenderness, abnegation, and angelic resignation *, but in doing this, he sacrificed the energetic reality of thought which characterized the age of Dante, and substituted for the more natural type of Giotto one more becoming the essentially religious feeling of a pious monk. The crucifixion of Angelico in the mo- nastery at S. Marco may be taken as the best illustration of this truth. 1

The conception of the early centuries — , that namely of the Saviour erect and alive on the cross, with a nail to each foot, was undoubtedly superior to that which succeeded it in the hands of the Pisan, Lucchese and Aritian painters. Repelled probably by their vulgar real- ism, Giotto altered and improved the position of the holy figure, which he represented almost erect though lifeless, and with the head softly inclined. The proportions which he assigned to the frame were the most just that could be found; but his great effort, his triumph, was in the regeneration of the type, which he reduced to the simplest form. In the calm repose of a noble and youthful frame anatomically realized, not merely with reference to muscle but also to articulation, he rendered suffering without contorsion, and fettered the attention of the spectator by perfect harmony of lines and softness of expression. — There was no material display of muscular form, no useless exhibition of ribs and tendons as in the sculpture of the Pisans. The mosaists of the Ravenna Baptistery had created the most suitable type of the Redeemer in their age ; and the student will seek in vain for similar fitness in the decline which supervened. But he will pause when he sees and admits that this quality existed in Giotto. Giotto did not, indeed, attain the perfection of form which the earlier mosaists possessed, but his ideal was certainly more in accordance with Christian feeling.

One peculiarity of the crucifixes of the fourteenth cen-

1 That in which the figure of S. Dominick grasps the foot of

the cross.

284

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

tury is the disappearance of the side panels. This pecu- liarity may be noticed in the crucifix of Giotto at S. Marco of Florence. 1 At the extremities of the arms are the busts of the Virgin and S. John in desolation. The me- dallion above the Saviour's head represents, however, only a pelican stripping its breast, whilst at the foot of the cross is the death's head that typifies Adam, and a small figure in prayer. 2

The crucifix in the Gondi Dini chapel at Ognissanti is surmounted by a medallion figure of the Saviour in the act of benediction and holding the book. The youthful head, at whose sides a flood of hair falls in locks, is of a fine contour and of a regular and dignified type. It nobly suggests the idea of omnipotence. 3 The calm feat- ures of the crucified Redeemer, on the other hand, contrast with the troubled and somewhat exaggerated ones of the Virgin and S. John at the extremity of the horizontal limbs. Again, the position of the crucified body, the lines of the frame are less simple in direction and curve than those previously noticed ; — the anatomy is more studied ; more suffering is expressed in the head, and the hips are of more than usual breadth*, the feet are nailed over each other; and some contraction in the hands indicates pain. Nor is the subordination of the parts as well main- tained as might be desired; but the general outline is the most perfect as yet rendered by Giotto. 4

1 Above the portal, inside the church. This crucifix was usually followed by crowds when carried in procession. By will of Mona Fantini in 1357, the Silvestrini monks of the convent were bound to keep a lamp perpetually burn- ing before it. Rich a. Vol. VII. p. 143.

2 Contrasted with the crucifix of the Scrovegni and the cruci- fied Saviour in the Lower church of Assisi, this of S. Marco is equal to the former, but slightly inferior to the latter. The nimbus here,

as usual, projects. The colour is light and clear.

3 The raised arm and the bent hand are as those in the Saviour above the door in the Southern transept of the Lower church of Assisi. The light clear colours of flesh and draperies are finely harmonized.

4 The light and harmonious co- lour is a little livid, as if Giotto intended to give the idea of a dead body. This crucifix is noted by Vasari (Vol. I. p. 331).

Chap. IX. GIOTTO'S CRUCIFIXES. 285

In the crucifix of Santa Felicita,1 which presents the character; type, and outline of those of Giotto, a certain progress in the art of moulding out the articulations, in the study of anatomy, is noticeable. The Virgin, S. John resting his head on his hand, both in desolation at the extremities of the horizontal limb, are very expres- sive figures. The lights and shades are well managed throughout, but the execution is an advance upon the age of Giotto. Yet it would puzzle a student of Floren- tine art to say which of his pupils, supposing Giotto not to be the author, attained to such perfection.2

Returning from this digression, which will be pardoned as it helps to bring out Giotto in his true light as a regenerator of type and form in Italian art, the study of the frescos in the Scrovegni chapel at Padua may be resumed.

In the Pieta, Giotto not only produced one of the finest compositions in the edifice, but one almost equal to the highest creation in that direction which is due to his genius. The gradual transformation of this subject, from its typical form in the aisle of the upper church of Assisi to one more artistic in the present series, is most interes- ting to study. At Assisi, the Saviour lay stretched on the verge of the foreground. The Virgin, the Marys and the Evangelist were placed by the painter at the head, feet, or side of the principal figure which was thus in full and unobstructed view. Giotto with consummate art added three figures to the group, placing them so as to form a composition, the balance and distribution of which are perfect. The Virgin held on her lap the head and shoul- ders of the dead Saviour, whilst in a circle round her, three women stooped down grieving or assisting. Two females at each side of the body kissed the lifeless hands, and in rear of them S. John Evangelist bent his looks and frame to the Redeemer and threw back his arms in the

1 At Florence, on the wall op- I 2 Above the Redeemer is the posite the high altar. | pelican.

286

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

attitude which had now become a favorite of the master. The Magdalen held the Redeemer's feet. Ten angels in the air fluttered over the scene with wild grief, terror, and surprise in their features. In each figure an indivi- dual passion seems the motive of the action. The execu- tion of this fresco is most careful, and, in the Saviour, minute to a surprising degree. But side by side with this careful handling appears that of the master himself exe- cuting the final touches, and with a broad and sweeping hand, laying in masses of spacious light.

The Noli me tangere, though of less absorbing interest than the Pieta, is still worthy of special attention. Yet the Magdalen has not the beauteous look of supreme longing which is so attractive in the same subject at the chapel of the Podesta. The figure of the Saviour here may explain, also, that which is wanting in the mutilated one at Florence. 1

The Virtues and Vices2 are the complement of the lesson which the painter gives in these frescos. The former are naturally all turned in the direction of the Paradise; the latter face the Inferno above the door of the chapel. Hope had been represented by Niccola Pisano, in the pulpit of Sienna, as a female looking up to heaven. It was afterwards conceived in the bronze gates of the bap- tistery of Florence by Andrea Pisano as a winged female, seated, but raising her face and arms with supreme con- fidence towards a crown above her. Giotto, at Padua, imagined the figure winged, but erect, and as it were, raised from the ground by the ardent desire to attain the crown held up to her view by the Saviour. In the costume, the drapery, the cast of the profile and dress of the hair, Giotto almost attained to the severe elegance of an an- tique bas-relief. As in hope, the mere longing seems in part to secure that which we desire, so despair may be

1 The figure of the Saviour may explain what is wanting in the mu- tilated picture at the Florence Bargello. Seethe same composition

copied in the chapel della Madda- lena at Assisi Lower church.

2 See plan: Virtues: a, c, &c. Vices: b, d, &c.

Chap. IX.

VIRTUES AND VICES.

287

said to realize its own foreboding. This was as well con- veyed by Giotto in one case as in the other. Despair is a vulgar female with clenched hands, already struggling in the agonies of death self imposed with a cord. The devil with a grapple drags the figure towards the abyss close by.

Charity had already been depicted by Giotto in the allegory of poverty at Assisi, and was here again repre- sented as a standing female with a triple flame issuing from her head, a garland on her brow, and a vase of flowers in her right hand. Looking up with supreme ab- negation in her features, she offers with her left hand a burning heart to the Lord.1 Envy, on the opposite side, is a fine contrast. Grasping with claws instead of hands a purse, the horns on her head twisted round with a piece of drapery, and standing in the midst of flames, she is presented as bitten on the forehead by a serpent issuing from her own mouth.

Faith had been somewhat cumbrously symbolized by Niccola Pisano, in the pulpit of S. Giovanni at Pisa, by an angel sitting upon a lion, and holding in one hand a relief of the crucifixion. Giotto rendered the idea better by a majestic figure, with a diadem, seen in full front, resting a cross on a prostrate idol, holding a scroll in- scribed with the creed.2 Unbelief, at the opposite side, is signified by a helmed warrior, winking, and with his right holding an idol. The idol, bound to him by a string, seems to lead him towards the flames that burst from the left hand corner of the foreground; whilst a spirit above appears to give counsel. Unbelief, whose ears are covered with the lappets of a cap, seems however deaf and heedless.

The inexorable impartiality of justice was ably render- ed by Giotto in a majestic sitting figure, crowned, in a

1 This figure is badly damaged by a vertieal split in the wall, which cuts it into two. There whs here originally a door.

2 Two heads at the upper sides, of an angel and a spirit, have sonic meaning, now difficult to divine.

288

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

tunic and mantle, holding at an equal height the disks of a balance suspended above her head. In one disk, an angel, like an antique victory, crowns industry, seated behind an anvil. 1 In the other, an angel executes retri- butive justice on a criminal,2 by cutting his head off. The symbolic meaning of this allegory was aided by a feigned bas-relief beneath it, in which a group of three figures is beautifully depicted in dead colour, and represents one playing cymbals for two dancers; whilst, on each side, two figures on horseback are seen returning from the chace. For where justice reigns are also peaceful pleasures.

The natural counterpart is Injustice, of ignoble aspect, yet in the dress of a judge, resting his left hand on his sword, and with his right, which is a claw, grasping a double hook. He sits within a fortress whose approach is impeded by trees. Rapacity and covetousness are thus symbolized as concomitant with injustice; whilst, in a feigned bas-relief below, the figure of a female lies stripped near a pond, and three soldiers are plundering her. On the left, a restive mule is held by a thief near the dead body of a man. The philosophy of injustice could scar- cely be rendered more truly, nor could the subject have been better conceived or designed than it has been by Giotto in this splendid composition.

The noble restraint of temperance was indicated by the painter in a beautifully draped figure curbed with a bit and holding a sword whose blade is tied to the scabbard, the fatal impulse of anger by a woman with swollen fea- tures and dishevelled hair tearing the dress from her breast. 3

Fortitude which Niccola Pisano had represented in the guise of a youthful Hercules in the pulpit of Pisa, was represented by Giotto as a female in a cuirass, and pro- tected by a shield up to the eyes. On the shield, embossed

1 The head of this figure is ob- literated.

2 The head of this figure is da- maged.

3 The mouth is contracted by anger. The head of the figure is slightly damaged.

Chap. IX.

VIRTUES AND VICES.

289

with a lion, the arrows of fortune have fallen and been blunted. In her right hand she carries a mace ; on her head the skin of a lion's front.

Inconstancy is a girl vainly trying to balance herself on a wheel rolling over polished marble. She has already lost her veil, which flies away and gives to the scene a semblance of motion.

Prudence, with two heads, the one aged, the other youth- ful, holding a mirror and sitting with a compass at a desk, is contrasted at the opposite side by Folly, a pot- bellied and grotesque personage, wearing a head-dress of feathers, shaking a mace in his right, and defying with his left.1

In the principal series of frescos it is obvious that Giotto was aided by his pupils. His own hand probably traced every one of the Vices and Virtues. He never ex- hibited more care in the choice of the materials, or dis- played greater qualities of mind or of hand, than are here to be found united. Beauty of form and of drapery, ver- satility in rendering expression, exquisite design, preci- sion of hand, great fusion of colour and broad relief of light and shade, all combine to make these allegorical figures worthy of admiration and study.

In the Last Judgment above the portal of the chapel, Giotto was assisted in covering a vast space by the in- dustry of his assistants; and it is apparent that, at least in the inferno, their labour was below the standard of the rest of the paintings in the building. Yet as regards distribution, the Last Judgment must be admitted to ful- fil the requirements of the highest art. On each side of three small windows throwing light into the edifice from the highest elevation, two warrior angels seem to hold back a curtain, disclosing the celestial hall of justice, over

1 Completely new on fresh , intonaco; — traces of Giotto's figure visible at the sides of the new one. These figures will be

VOL. I.

found marked alphabetically in the plan of the Arena chapel, from a upwards, in the order in which they are described.

290

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

which the sun and the moon shed their influence. Im- mediately beneath them, legions of warriors with shields and swords, angels with flags and tapers, hold guard in three mighty divisions, over the majesty of the Saviour, who sits below them in a glory, borne by countless cherubs and seraphim. At the four cardinal points, the archangels sound the trumpets of the Judgment, whilst the Ke- deemer, with the features of perpetual youth,1 holds up his right hand to bless the blessed, and curses the evil- doers with his left. At his sides, two winged figures in armour, and lance in hand, with aged heads, the bodies of centaurs, and the limbs of goats, stand in attitude of watchfulness.2 In a long row of thrones on each hand, sit the apostles, — all marked by their peculiar and individual character, and for the first time, in perspective order.3 To the left of the Saviour's feet, the Virgin in a diadem,4 majestically draped and carried by angels in a glory of rays, heads the procession of the happy, leading the aged St. Anna. Monks, bishops, saints , male and fe- male, follow, guarded by angels.5 Amongst them, in a corner to the left, three figures stand in profile the cen- tral one of which is, according to tradition, the portrait of Giotto himself.6 The cross as symbol of redemption, held aloft by two angels in the centre of the space, se- parates the elect from the condemned. Between it and the procession to paradise, the donor, Enrico Scrovegno, in a purple dress and bonnet, kneels before a group of three noble female figures, presenting as it were to their

1 In a red tunic and blue mantle ; but the latter has fallen from his shoulders.

2 Of these two figures that to the right is partly effaced,

3 A part of the left side of the fresco is damaged and theintonaco gone. One of the apostles and half of another are completely obliterated; and likewise several figures beneath them.

4 She wears a gold tunic and white mantle.

5 Many figures in the procession are gone, others damaged, and in some places, the intonaco threatens to drop.

6 Yet here, the face is that of a man older than the so-called portrait of Giotto in the chapel of the Podesta at Florence, and certainly contradicts the words of Benvenuto da Imola, which de- scribe the painter as " satis ju- venis".

Chap. IX.

THE INFERNO.

291

notice, the model of the chapel, supported by a priest in white. The Virgin heading the group, stoops to receive the homage; whilst her two companions, nimbed like her- self, look on. In the foreground the resurrection completes that side of the picture. From the Saviour's feet, a torrent of fire pours its fury out on the right, envelop- ing a host of struggling souls in its burning course. Lucifer, the chief of this seething domain, sits, as usual, in the lowest part of the abyss, colossal and triple headed, on two dragons whose mouths engulf sinners ; — his ears being as two serpents with figures in their jaws; whilst between his legs is a grinning crowned head. On all sides is a confused mass of torment, rudely executed.1 The figure of Lucifer is not carried out as in the chapel of the Podesta at Florence, and the pupils of Giotto, to- gether with restorers, have effectually reduced the value of this portion of the fresco.

Whatever may have been Giotto's reputation previous to the completion of this noble work, it could not but have increased. In the wealthy Padua it was acknow- ledged and rewarded by numerous commissions; and the frescos recently recovered in the Santo, or church of S. Antonio, not merely testify in favour of his industry and skill, but confirm the statement of Michael Savonarola as to his prolonged residence in the city.2

The church of S. Antonio was commenced about the middle of the thirteenth and finished, with the exception of the cupola over the choir, in the first years of the fourteenth century.3 Giotto painted in the chapter house

1 The colour here is in part altered, in part obliterated. Three figures of a more modern kind seem painted over others of a bet- ter style, of which the vestiges can still be distinguished.

2"Et tantum dignitas civitatis eum commovit, ut maximam suae vitse partem in ea consummaverit." Michael Savonarolae commentario- lus. De Laudibus Patavini. In

Muratori Scrip, rer. Ital. Tom. 24. p. 1170. Savonarola wrote in 1440. Vasari makes Giotto pay two visits to Padua. (Vol. I. p. 323 and 334.) In the second only, according to the Aretine, Giotto painted the Santo, being commissioned for that purpose by the Scaligeri.

3 "Anno M.CCC.VII opus illud perfect urn est." licrnardini Scar-

19*

292

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

incidents of the lives of S. Anthony and S. Francis.1 But the edifice having been thrice burnt out in 1394, 1567, and 1749, these paintings were destroyed or muti- lated by repairs. A new vaulted roof was built be- neath the original ceiling; and the principal subjects, which doubtless were placed above the painted cornice at present visible, were lost. "The beautiful chapel" which Vasari was still able to describe in the sixteenth century,2 was thus altered in shape, and now forms a species of hall in the vicinity of the sacristy, lighted from the clois- ters of the old convent. It was apparently whitewashed after the change, and is now in a state not unlike that of the chapel of the Podesta at Florence. Still the draw- ing and movement of several beautiful figures enable the heholder to admire Giotto's talent in reproducing majestic form and variety of individual types.

Entering the hall from a door recently opened from the sacristy, to the total destruction of some amongst the remai- ning frescos, the spectator may still see the remnants of six figures in niches, supported on a painted cornice and separated from each other by painted pilasters. In one, he will see the standing figure of S. Chiara, whose face is one of the least damaged in the building. In others S. Francis, without hands, and repainted as to the feet, but fairly pre- served as regards the head; — part of the face of an aged saint, of stern features; — a much damaged representa- tion of a prophet, and an equally damaged one of a perso- nage crowned whith a diadem. On the opposite wall, at each side of an altar, in similar niches, three figures ; one, of an aged person of a grave aspect, much altered by damp; — another of a youth, holding up his hand as if in the act of speaking; S. Anthony with a scroll in his hand, partly rubbed out and partly restored; — and a portion of a painted skeleton.3 Little has been saved of the painting on the wall to the left of the entrance, except the two lunettes. In one of these, — S. Francis receiving the Stigmata from the Savi-

deonii Hist. Pat. in Thes. anti- quitatum by J. GT. Grseve Lugd. Bat. Fol. Vol. VI. p. III. p. 104. Brandolesi. (P.) Pitture, &c. di Padova. Pad. 1795. 8° p. 23. 1 "Capituluraque Antonii nostri

etiam (Giotto) sic ornavit." Sa- vonarola com. ubi sup. Mur. Vol. 24. p. 1170.

2 Vas. Vol. I. p.p. 323—4.

3 The figures in two of the niches are gone.

Chap. IX. FRESCOS IN THE SANTO OF PADUA. 293

our in the form of a Seraph, we have the mere outline of a composition similar to that of the picture in the Louvre1 by- Giotto. In the other, besides the annunciation, the martyrdom of the Franciscans at Ceuta is partially preserved, and the tyrant, who orders the execution, may be seen enthroned in the centre of the space. In the annunciation, the figures of which are diminutive , it is worthy of note that Giotto ex- pressed in the face and raised arms of the Virgin, a certain surprise and terror at the visit of the angel: a new mode of representing the subject, which moved Vasari in another place to some wondering remarks. It is characteristic of the haste with which he wrote that, whereas he might with pro- priety have made those remarks upon the Virgin at the Santo, he lavished them upon a picture falsely assigned to Giotto and now proved to be by Lorenzo Monaco.2

It has been affirmed that Giotto also painted in the great Salone of Padua.3 In one of the compartments of the hall, to the right of the principal entrance, is a figure of an astronomer seated, beneath which the name of Giotto is inscribed. Yet, neither this nor any other fresco in the vast number which now decorates the walls, is in the manner of the great Florentine master; and whether it be true as the Anonimo affirms on the authority of Cam- pagnola, that the painters were one Juan Miretti and a Ferrarese,4 it is certain that the Salone, as it is now, was adorned by several hands, a part of whom were under the influence of the Giottesque manner at the close of the fourteenth century, and the rest were without tincture of it.

1 The outlines and first prepa- ration in verde are here alone preserved.

2 (Vas. Vol. I. p. 311.) The more mystic Angelico rejected this form of expression in the Virgin annunciate, which may be seen carried out in the arch lead- ing to the chapel del Sacramento in the Lower church of Assisi.

3 Riccobaldo Ferrarese, in his Compilatio chronologica , says: "Zotus, pictor eximius Florenti-

ne agnoscitur . . . testantur opera facta per eum in ecclesiis mino- rum Assisicis, Arimini, Paduae, ac per ea quae pinxit Palatio Comi- tis Paduae et in ecclesia Arenae Paduae." Muratori Rer. Ital. Script. T. IX. p. 225. Riccobaldo died in 1313, and the paintings of Giotto must therefore have been executed previous to that time. See Jocher (C. G.) Gelehrten- Lexicon. Bremen, 1819, and Muratori 's preface. The Sa- lone was burnt down in 1420. 4 Anonimo, ub. sup. p. 28.

294

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. IX.

From Padua to Verona was for Giotto but a step ; and Vasari states that he painted there, for Can Grande, a por- trait and other paintings, and, for the church of San Fran- cesco, an altarpiece ; but neither paintings nor records exist to confirm this portion of the Aretine's biography.1 Fer- rara was equally close to Padua; and here also, accor- ding to Vasari,2 he produced various paintings in the palace of the Duke of Este and in the church of S. Agostino. But the same disappointment will befal the student at Ferrara as at Verona. At Ravenna, however, he will find, not the paintings of the church of S. Fran- cesco,3 which no longer exist, but those of a ceiling in the first chapel to the left, in the church of S. Giovanni Evangelista. Here Giotto depicted, in a rectangle cut by two diagonals, at the centre of which the lamb and cross are painted in a medallion, the four doctors of the church and the four Evangelists, enthroned and facing each other in the angles of the ceiling, and above them the symbols of the Evangelists. Though much damaged by restoring, and veiled as it were with a greyish glaze, there can be no doubt of the authenticity of this fresco, in which Giotto exhibited all the qualities of which he was so complete a master in his prime, — nobleness and choice of form, nature in action and movement, individua- lity of features and manliness of expression.4

Many churches and edifices in Ravenna are adorned with paintings attributed to Giotto, but they will not bear the test of examination, any more than those of Pom- posa which Federici assigns to him. Like those of S. Maria in Portofuori outside Ravenna, and in the ex- chapel

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 324.

2 Vas. Vol. I. p. 324.

3 Vas. Vol. I. p. 324.

4 S.S. Ambrose and John sit facing each other in one compart- ment, the former, with his hand on a scroll, looking at the Evan- gelist who holds a book half open on a desk in front him.

S. Augustin, who reads in a book, is inspired by S. Mathew, who mends his pen. S. Jerom reads, whilst S. Luke holding a pen looks at him. S. Gregory sits with his right hand in the act of enforcing speech, whilst. S. Mark sits pensive with a pen in his hand. Each of the figures has a gold nimbus and the background

Chap. IX.

FRESCOS AT RAVENNA.

295

of the abandoned church of Santa Chiara (now attached to a riding school) in Ravenna itself, these paintings are by humbler artists, as there may be occasion to show.

is a starred heaven. The sym- bolic figures above each hold a book arid are nimbed. The Lion

is fine, the angel in admirable repose. Yet all these figures have been retouched.

296

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

CHAPTER X.

PERUZZI E BARDI.

Amongst the potent families of Florence , in the four- teenth century, that of the Peruzzi was most distinguished, for the extent of its trading connection, the greatness of its fortune, and the generosity with which it patronized the church of Santa Croce. From the time when that edifice first rose from its foundations,1 the Peruzzi sub- scribed largely to its erection and built at their sole expense a chapel or sacristy which was adorned with frescos by Giotto;2 "nor, says Cesare Guasti,3 did the re- verence of the family for those sacred walls and for art diminish with the lapse of years; but there came a time when that reverence was obscured by a fatal niggardli- ness: — when to restore meant to destroy. So when one reads on the floor of the chapel that Bartholommeo di Si- mone Peruzzi "restaurare fecit AD. MD.CCXIV," he will guess that the brush of a common whitewasher ruthlessly passed over the scenes from the life of St. John the Bap- tist and St. John the Evangelist which Giotto had painted on the walls.4 In 1841, the dance of the daughter of

1 May 3. 1294.

2 At what time it is difficult to say ; but it is proper to note that, according to a record of 1307, alluded to by Richa (Chiese Flo- rentine. Vol. I. p. 13), Giotto was then in Florence, where he made a donation to the Company of Orsanmichele.

3 Opuscoli, ub. sup. p. 6.

4 This is confirmed by the fact that,whenCinelli, inl677, published the Bellezze di Firenze by Bocchi with new comments, the paintings of the Peruzzi chapel were still in existence, whilst, in 1754, when Richa published his Chiese Flo- rentine, they were no longer vi- sible.

Chap. X.

THE PERUZZI CHAPEL.

297

Herodias was rescued from oblivion; later, the ascension of the Evangelist was brought to light; and finally, at the commencement of 1863, the rest of the scenes was restored. The admirer of Giotto may now contemplate the finest series of frescos which he ever produced, a series which justifies all that has been said respecting the grandeur of his style, — whose obliteration by white- wash is an opprobrium and a stigma not only on the person who ordered, but on the country which allowed it. The recovery of these paintings may indeed be said greatly to enhance the merit of Giotto and, in proportion, to lessen that of his successors in the esteem hitherto ex- tended to them. They are the vouchers which clear cotemporary admirers from the charge of exaggerated admiration and unwarranted flattery, and which, whilst they vindicate the judgment of the fourteenth century, remove the doubts of modern critics, — reduced hitherto to assign to Giotto creations not above mediocrity.

Passing by eight half figures of prophets in the vaulting of the entrance arch,1 many of which are damaged by res- toring passing by also the symbols of the Evangelists in the ceiling the spectator meets with two series of subjects on the walls of the chapel. One side is devoted to the life of the Evangelist, the other to that of the Baptist. In the lunette of the latter, Zacharias stands on the steps of the altar waving a censer, with two lute -players and a piper behind him, when suddenly and to his great emotion, for he draws back with astonishment in his face and movement, the angel, winged, lithesome, playful, ap- pears under the altarporch, and gives him the news. Two women behind the angel are witnesses of the miracle, the youngest of whom points out the wonder to the other, who, more aged, seems absorbed in thought and tremulous with fear. The lower course, divided into equal parts, shows us a grandiose composition of the Precursor's birth: S. Eliza- beth, lying in a classic attitude (head repainted) and hardly attending to the question of a maid behind the bed, near

1 The least damaged are those in the centre of the vaulting-. Some are all but new.

2 Whose head and hair are much damaged.

298

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

whom another maid, with a vase in her hand, gracefully bends her head and looks at a grand figure with his back to the spectator. 2 A partition with an opening in it se- parates this from the next scene, where Zacharias, to the left,1 writes the child's name in a tablet on his knee. He glances as he does so at the infant, held up naked before him2 by a male and female figure, behind whom stand three others. Beneath again (third or lowest course), Herod sits with two guests behind a table in a beautiful portico, whose slender pillars are pointed with statuettes. In front of him, a soldier presents the nimbed head of S. John the Baptist on a plate. The graceful daughter of Herodias dances in front of the table to the sound of her own lyre, timing her touches and steps by the strains of a viol played by a youth who stands to the left of the picture. Two figures behind her contemplate the dance or commune as to the execution; whilst, to the right, Salome kneels with the head before Herodias. In the lunette of the opposite side, the Vision of Patmos is depicted: the Evangelist asleep on a solitary rock, — above him in a cloud "the Son of man" holding in his hand a scythe, on his right, the angel calling on time to reap,3 the travailing woman pursued by the dragon,4 the mystic child in its cradle, the angel and the four beasts;5 the whole much damaged and repainted. Be- neath this, a splendid composition represents the resurrection of Drusiana; the saint on the left of the picture, with one kneeling at his side; two followers; a cripple on crutches and two other spectators behind; in front of him the kneel- ing relatives of Drusiana who has risen on the couch held up by a bearer behind her; the priests and clergy. Finally in the lowest course the resurrection of the Evangelist.

Giotto was seldom more classical in composition than in the apparition of the angel to Zacharias, seldom more true to the scriptural text which he had to illustrate.6 It would be hard for any artist to render more ob- viously than it is here, the troubled look of Zacharias as he waves the censer and shrinks for fear before the

1 The head , hair and beard 4 Revelation, Cap. XII. the in- much damaged. fant in a cradle at her side, she,

2 It smiles. calm, and fearless of the dragon.

3 Revelation, Cap. XIV. v. v. 14. 5 Each angelholding the nostrils, 15. The Saviour is youthful with opening or closing the mouth, of long beard and hair, but much da- | a monster.

maged. | 6 g. Luke. Cap. I.

Chap. X.

THE PERUZZI CHAPEL.

299

heavenly messenger. No painter of the time could have given a finer form to the angel, or impressed more firmly on the face of the pensive female, the idea of anxious thought. If from this scene the spectator passes to the birth of the Baptist, he will admire the grandeur of the composition, the antique pose of Elizabeth, the juvenile grace of the females at her bedside, and the masculine force and concentration of the standing figure. The grave Zacharias, close by with his legs crossed, with penetrating glance directed towards the fine and graceful naked babe, in a noble attitude and draperies, will remind him of the classicism conspicuous in the statuary of the Greeks. He will be struck by the natural motion in the aged man who grasps the infant's shoulder and points with his right hand, evidently intending to attract the parent's attention. He will be pleased by the portly stature of the woman, who looks on to the right and smiles. He may grieve at the fact that in the whole of these three compositions the backgrounds have been so repainted by the restorer in heavy tones as to damage the general aspect of the whole, to deprive the figures of aerial perspective and the out- lines of their softness.

Although little beyond the outlines of the splendid com- position of the dance of Herodias is preserved, it cannot fail to convince the beholder, not merely that Giotto displayed a faultless precision of arrangement, but that he abandoned in a great measure that generalization of certain features which characterized his earlier works. In no picture by Giotto were the figures distributed with more perfect art, — the groups bound together more naturally, — or the age, action, and attitude, of each person, more truly weighed and considered. Seldom, even in later times, had a fitter move- ment or a more comely face been produced than those which mark the viol -player. None but a painter capable of re- taining in his memory the happy mood, the free attitudes of youth, could have rendered so truly the firm pose, the elas- tic bend of arm and finger, the open and mirthful glance 5 for the player looks at Salome as she dances. His eyes

300

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

are no longer of the long narrow conventional form, but drawn, in perfect accordance with nature, with a round iris and a canthus of the exactest form. His features, fore- shortened as he looks up, are rendered with perspective truth ; and the chin and neck are noble and elegant. The purest profile is given to Salome kneeling before the pregnant Herodias.1 Surprise is ably depicted in the full face of Herod's guest who sits at end of the table with a knife in his right hand, and the left raised in wonder. That such beauties may yet be traced in a fresco muti- lated as this is, speaks for the greatness of the painter.

But Giotto surpassed himself in the next series, where, if we set aside the composition of the Vision, much damaged by various accidents, the miracle of the resur- rection of Drusiana and ascension of the Evangelist will be found to display a severe and classic grandeur which, in spite of the absence of harmony of colour,2 is marvellous in the century which Giotto illustrated. The resurrection, indeed, shows Giotto in all his strength and greatness, and in the fullest possession of the true maxims of composition and harmony. It proves how deeply he considered, how aptly he rendered, individual character and action, according to age, sex, and quality. Life and animation are in the kneeling females at the Evangelist's feet, but particularly in the graceful one kneeling in pro- file, whose face, whilst it is obvious that she cannot see the performance of the miracle on Drusiana, expresses in the noblest manner the faith which knows no manner of doubt. See how true is the figure and form of the cripple;3 how fine the movement of Drusiana,4 how in-

1 The head of Herodias is a mere outline, and that of Salome', kneeling before her, has lost the freshness of its colour, but has great beauty of form, as well as of expression. The hand of Herod is damaged, as is likewise the head of the saint in the hands of the soldier The form of the viol-player is perhaps a little broad. Behind him in the

background is a fine double storied square tower.

2 The colour is altered by abra- sion and retouched in many pla- ces ; and the outlines are mostly refreshed.

3 His arms and legs are re- painted.

4 What shall be said of the restorer here, who makes Drusiana

Chap. X.

THE PERUZZI CHAPEL.

301

teresting the group on the right in the variety of its mo- vements ; how beautiful the play of lines in the buildings, which form the distance; how they advance and recede in order to second the lines of the composition and make the figure stand out. Every thing is calculated to enliven the scene; and here, it is an advantage that the houses and sky are less repainted than the rest of the frescos in the chapel, and the groups appear more truly in their places.

The ascension leads the spectator to the contemplation of a still more severe and classic scene. The legend of S. John the Evangelist declares

"that the favorite apostle being on the verge of ninety, ascended a lofty mountain after praying his disciples to dig for him in the church a deep grave. Finding on his return that his followers had yielded to his prayer, he threw his mantle down into the opening and, descending, composed himself there to sleep. His disciples after a time judged that he was dead, and as the morning broke, a crowd gathered to see the body. But- when the disciples looked into the grave, S. John had disappeared, and nothing but his sandals betrayed that he had once been there.

Giotto imagined S. John rising from the tomb in the centre of the church whose lines are broken by the des- cent of the Saviour and his celestial guard, who stooping, help the aged apostle to ascend, and shed around him the rays of their glory. To the right of the opening, a prostrate form seems to have been struck down by the wondrous brightness that prevails, and hides his head in his hands. Another, looking up, is forced to guard his eyes with his palm. Behind appear the ministers of reli- gion with the cross, the book, and tapers. To the left of the grave, one stands with his finger to his mouth in doubt- ful thought. Immediately in front of him an aged disciple bends an inquiring glance into the grave ; a third in rear of the latter has looked, and seems to rise from a stoop-

point with her finger towards the I which Giotto would never have Evangelist: a senseless motion | conceived.

302

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

ing attitude with an expression of conviction. "Here he is notv? he seems to say. A fourth, satisfied, expresses wonder; whilst a fifth looking up is surprised, for he sees S. John ascending. In these five figures, Giotto realized a sequence of ideas as plainly almost as if he had spoken*, and this is one of the greatest triumphs of art. Who will not see that the maxims applied by the painter in the miraculous healing of the sick man at S. Francesco of Assisi are here applied with in- creased power. Raphael alone in "the school of Athens" carried out with success the same principle. 1 The laws applied to a single group were maintained at the same time by Giotto in the connection of each group with the other, and with the architecture, to which he gave light and pleasing proportions. As solitary figures, it would be difficult to find one more grand than that of the ascending apostle, one in finer and more energetic movement than that of the prostrate disciple, or one more natural than that of the man veiling his eyes against the light emanating from the Saviour. Not less remarkable is the ability with which Giotto repeated in this fresco the same figures, as appear in the resurrection of Drusiana, but in different attitudes, movement, and expression. The preservation of this fresco is not good ; and it is again surprising, not that one should find in it beauty of com- position, but that the impress of the painter's thought and versatility in expression should still be there. Yet this is so, and to Giotto, for these works alone, must be awarded this praise, that having studied and thought out every possible phase of his subject, he displayed them all in composition, movement, expression and design. Happily for the student, this fresco has only been partially restored; — the figure most damaged by this operation being that on the right in profile. The restorer, having gone so far, perceived that he was only spoiling the fresco, and left the outlines of the remainder as he found them. It

In the group of Euclid with his pupils.

Chap. X.

CHAPEL OF THE BARDI.

303

may therefore still be observed that the picture was painted in large, and few portions on a surface of excessive smooth- ness. The broad and well modelled shadows were painted in with a soft ashen colour, merging through clear half tints into broad massive lights, — the whole nicely fused together.

In Santa Croce, Giotto painted no less than three chapels besides that of the Peruzzi, — those of Ridolfo de7 Bardi, of the Giugni, and the Tosinghi and Spinelli;1 of the two last, the frescos still remain under whitewash, but that of Ridolfo de' Bardi has been scraped, and the frescos both of the walls and ceilings are once more ex- posed to view. No records of the Peruzzi family exist to show at what time their chapel in Santa Croce was erected; but, as Cesare Guasti very truly observes,2 it cannot be supposed that a temple so vast, and sumptuous as this of the Franciscans of Florence, should have been so far advanced in the opening of the fourteenth century as to justify Vasari in affirming that the chapels painted by Giotto were finished previous to the frescos of Assisi ; and it is much more likely that they were completed after 1307. This view is amply confirmed by the paint- ings themselves, and by the few facts which are known of Ridolfo de? Bardi, a nobleman whose father, Bartolo, had filled the highest offices of the republic in the thir- teenth century. Ridolfo was bred in his youth to the pro- fession of arms. He fought against the Ghibellines led by Louis of Bavaria,3 and was conspicuous amongst the patriots who urged the war against Mastino della Scala. Almost ruined by the insolvency of Edward the Third of England, yet still so powerful as to rouse the jealousy of the Florentines, his family preserved its influence, con- spired against the state, and tasted the bitterness of exile.

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 312. In the Giugni, the martyrdom of various saints. In the Tosinghi, scenes of the life of the Virgin, her birth and marriage, the annunciation,

adoration of the Magi, the presen- tation in the temple, and the death of the Virgin were depicted.

2 Opuscoli, ub. sup. p. 25.

3 1327.

304

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

Brought again to the verge of financial ruin in 1342, they acquiesced in the tyranny of the Duke of Athens, suc- ceeded to his power and shared his fate. Ridolfo's father only died in 1310; and it is unlikely that his son should have had occasion to divert any part of Bartolo's wealth to the adornment of the family chapel before he became sole master of his actions. At what period a man so busied, as was Ridolfo with public and private affairs, found time to think of building and adorning a chapel, it would be useless to inquire. It is sufficient to have fixed a date after which, only, Giotto could have been commis- sioned to paint the walls of the Cappella de' Bardi. Ridolfo, like many other nobles, seems to have affected partiality for the mendicant order, as it afforded an outer show of humility useful though unreal. His son, Giovanni, died a Franciscan at Nice;1 and the chapel was exclusively adorned by Giotto with episodes of the life of S. Fran- cis. In three courses upon two of the walls, he represented the saint surrendering his worldly substance, the institu- tion of the order, the ordeal of fire before the Soldan, the apparition to Anthony of Padua at Aries, the trans- fer to S. Maria degli Angeli the bishop's dream, and the death of S. Francis. In the first of these scenes , which covered the lunette to the left of the entrance into the chapel, Giotto closely followed, yet improved the subject as represented in the upper church of Assisi. The angry father, held back by the consuls and his friends, seems desirous of darting at his son whose clothes he holds in his arm. But S. Francis is already under the protection of the bishop, who covers his nakedness with the episcopal mantle. In form, the saint is youthful and more agreably depicted than at Assisi. The subject also, as given in the legend of S. Buonaventura, is at once better composed, yet more literally carried out, than before. Two principal groups occupy the sides of the picture, and the attitudes have the nature and harmony which might be expected from

Cesare Guasti, ubi sup. Opuscoli p. 28.

Chap. X.

THE BARDI CHAPEL.

305

the progress made by the painter in his career. The children on the left are held back by a woman who stri- ves to prevent them from throwing stones at the naked youth. Another mischievous varlet on the right has been caught by the hair as he threatens to stone S. Fran- cis , and is restrained by a priest of the bishop's suite. The idea only in embryo at Assisi, is thus fully deve- loped here, in the very words of the legend.1 In the opposite lunette S. Francis may be seen kneeling before the pope who , sitting enthroned with two bishops at his side, hands to him the approval of the rules of the order. The principal charm of this composition lies in its sim- plicity. It is much and irreparably damaged ; but in some parts it still preserves some of its original character.

The Soldan may be seen, in the course below the first lunette, seated on a throne and energically pointing out to his reluctant imams the example of S. Francis, who approaches a fire, with the intention of passing through it, to the astonishment of the attendant monk whose attitude and look are those of doubt and hope. On the left, two attendants of the Soldan endeavour to encou- rage the infidel priests to imitate the firmness of S. Francis, whilst they retire with consternation in their faces. The energy of movement and expression in this much damaged fresco is remarkable.2

The apparition of the Saint to Anthony in the church at Aries was given with less energy by Giotto in the Bardi chapel than by the painter at Assisi, S. Francis, in the latter, being of imposing stature. The expression may have been better in the fresco at Florence, but this has been impaired by damage and restoring.3

1 "Lapidibus impetebant, et 2 The figures are in great part tamquam insano et dementi clamo- repainted, amongst the rest the sis vocibus insultabant." Buona- whole of the background and the ventura, C. 2. p.p. 4—18. This j lower part of the figure of S.

lunette at the Bardi has suffered from whitewash, but is that which has received the least subsequent restoration. The background is of a fine architecture.

Francis.

3 S. Francis, in both frescos, ap- pears in the centre of the church, Anthony standing in the attitude of a preacher at the left end of

vol. i. . 20

306

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. X.

As S. Francis was carried on his bed of sickness to S. Maria degli Angeli, he stopped at a hospital on the road side, and ordering his attendants to turn his head in the direction of Assisi, he rose in his litter and said: " Blessed be thou amongst cities; may the blessing of God cling to thee , 0 holy place ; for by thee shall many souls be saved ; " and having said this he lay down and was carried on to S. Maria degli Angeli. On the evening of the fourth of October his death was revealed at the very hour to the bishop of Assisi on Mount Gargano. These two subjects, Giotto represented in one fresco at the Bardi, as they had al- ready been given in the great sanctuary, but in a form more truly in accord with the maxims of art, inas- much as the Saint at the Bardi does not turn his back to the scene of the Vision. A monk raises the curtain of the bed as S. Francis sits up with his hands in prayer. Another, at the foot of the bed, reads a canticle, whilst the rest of the brethren stand around grieving. Close by, the Saint appears at the foot of the couch, on which the bishop sleeps, and is seen by an attendant crouching at the head of it. A second attendant sleeps at the foot. Little of the original design remains unimpaired.1 Where S. Francis, on his deathbed, lies outstretched and bewailed by the brethren, the incredulous Girolamo kneels at his breast, and puts his finger in the wound. Two monks kiss the dead saint's hands, two more his feet. Four be- hind the litter stoop, looking at the corpse with expres- sions of grief and regret. The clergy, with tapers and cross , stand at the foot, whilst the funeral service is read at the head. One monk, looking up, sees with wonder the ascent of the Saint to heaven in a glory supported by angels. In the composition of this scene Giotto pro-

it; whilst the audience of monks is seated in a triple row along the picture.

1 After the fresco was white- washed a monument was placed against the wall which cut away

the whole of one, and the greater part of the other, figure of S. Francis, besides one half of the monks on the left side of the first subject. The remainder has suf- fered from retouching.

Chap. X.

THE BARDI CHAPEL.

307

duced a masterpiece which served as a model, but too often feebly imitated by his successors. Good arrange- ment, variety of character and expression in the heads, unity and harmony in the whole, make this an excep- tional work of its kind. As a composition, worthy of the fourteenth century, Ghirlandaio and Benedetto da Maiano both imitated , without being able to improve, it. No painter ever produced its equal except Raphael, nor could a better be created except insofar as regards im- provement in the mere rendering of form.1

The ceiling of the chapel cut into four by diagonals, is adorned with the three virtues peculiar to S. Francis, and proclaimed by the brothers of his order.2

At the sides of the altar, and in the entrance vaulting of the chapel, saints are represented, of which a S. Chiara best preserves its original character. 3

The church of Santa Cro.ce was quite a museum of the works of Giotto ; for, besides his frescos in the private oratories of four or five great Florentine families, it con- tained a vast picture on panel with which the Baroncelli

1 Atombhadbeen placed against this fresco after it was white- washed, which has damaged the three figures kneeling in front of the bed and part of the standing clergy at its head and foot. One may mark two spectators on the extreme left of the picture, one of whom, according to Vasari, is Arnolfo the architect of S. Croce. S. Francis in the glory is new, but the angels are in part preserved. The rest has all been more or less retouched; and no judgment can be given as to the colour of this or any other of these works.

2 Poverty, chastity, and obe- dience, and S. Francis in glory, occupy each a space in the ceil- ing. Poverty, a lean but grace- ful figure, crowned with roses and briars, is dressed in a tattered gar- ment, bound to the waist by a cord. In her left hand she carries a stick with which she seeks not

to defend herself from a dog that barks at her. It is a figure which, being less damaged than many in the chapel, disclosesthe versatility of Giotto in rendering a subject al- ready differently treated at Assisi. The figure is like its companions, framed in a pentagon of curves. Chastity, a mantle covering her head, is seen from behind, in her tower, with two angels flying at her sides. Obedience is symbolized by a monk with a yoke and his fin- gers to his lips. S. Francis with his arms up shows the stigmata. These three figures , on blue ground , are all more or less retouched.

3 At the altar sides the two S.S. Louis, Eliz. of Hungary, and Chiara. Of S. Louis of Thoulouse the hand with the book is new. The S. Louis King is quite new, S. Elizabeth almost completely so. The figures in the vaulting mostly renewed.

20*

308

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

adorned their chapel. A sepulchral monument,1 to the right of its entrance, contains an inscription to the effect, that in February 1327 the chapel was completed by Bi- vigliano Bartoli, Salvestro Manetti, Vanni, and Pietro de' Baroncelli in honour of God and of the Virgin Annun- ciate to -whom it is dedicated. It is not to be assumed that Giotto's altarpiece of the coronation of the Virgin in the Baroncelli chapel was executed in 1327, for it may have been finished earlier ; but as to this, no proof exists, the date which Vasari describes as accompanying the name of the painter having disappeared,2 no doubt, when the five panels composing it were set in a new ornament by which part of the central one was shortened at the summit. 3 No traveller to Florence will have failed to visit Santa Croce or to study the Baroncelli altarpiece. It was long a standing piece for the critics of Giotto's style. It will therefore be needless minutely to describe the beauties of the principal group, the Saviour crowning the Virgin, or the varied qualities of the attendant saints and angels. It may be sufficient to note the calm kindliness, the tender solicitude in the action of the Saviour,4 the deep humility in the attitude and expression of the slender Virgin, 5 and to point out that Giotto was equally able in the representation of a quiet religious scene and in the expression of dramatic power or playful incidents. Let the student mark also how admirably the idea of a

1 In style not unlike the work of Andrea Pisano. In the Archivio Centrale di Stato at Florence is a vellum, originally in the Strozzi Collection (No. 1102), on which is a fine drawing of a monument, of which the gabled point is cusped in trefoil — on which trefoil are the Baroncelli arms. On the back of the vellum, in character of the time (i. e. 14th century) is written. 'Carta cioe esempro della forma e modo della capa che Tano e Gherardo Baroncelli fecero fare in S. Croce per loro e per li des- cendenti loro." This monument,

now no longer in existence, was probably at the side facing the pre- sent tomb. This notice due to S. Gaetano Milanesi.

2 Beneath the cornice on which the five panels rest, are the words : "opus Magistri Jocti".

3 This change probably made in the 15th century.

4 His head is long and somewhat pointed, the costume a departure from the usual one, and for this criticised by the moderns.

5 With the veil passing round the chin.

Chap. X. THE BARONCELLI ALTARPIECE.

309

heavenly choir is rendered; how intent the choristers on their canticles, the players on their melody; how quiet, yet how full of purpose, how characteristic and expressive are the faces; — how appropriate the grave intentness and tender sentiment of some angels; how correct the action and movements of others; how grave yet how ar- dent are the saints, 1 how admirably balanced the groups. Nor will he pass by without a less than cursory glance the five figures in the lower hexagons, the Ecce Homo, with a broad thorax, and wasted arms, calmly grieving, but a type reminiscent of more distant times, the wild, austere, and emaciated Baptist, with his long unkempt locks and arms reverently crossed on his naked breast, and S. Francis showing the Stigmata. 2 To perfect decorum and repose, Giotto added in this altarpiece his well known quality of simplicity in drapery. His art as a colourist is not fitly represented, successive varnishes having dulled the usual lightness and transparence of his work, and substituted a yellow opacity of tone.3

Many and important were the works which Giotto executed in addition to those already mentioned in the church of Santa Croce. A crucifixion, with the Virgin, S. John, and the Magdalen grasping the foot of the cross, "above" the tomb of Carlo Marzuppini was by him. The annunciation " above" the tomb of Leonardo Aretino was also his work. Both have perished. 4 Not so the panels of the presses in the sacristy of the church, which have been preserved; — not so the Root of Jesse, the crucifixion, scenes from the life of S. Francis and S.

1 Fine contrasts are those of Peter and Moses on the left wing, Paul and Abraham on the right. Might not Michael Angelo have been inspired by, and did he not exaggerate the type of, Moses standing with the horns on his head.

2 Two other saints are there — one holding a cross, much damaged, the other in episcopals wielding a crozier.

3 In the Ecce Homo, though it is rubbed down, one may still discover the undertone laid on with bold strokes, a broad distri- bution of light and shade, and greyish shadows well fused into the half tones by stippling. Partial restoration, and a darkening of the fine engraved outlines may be noticed.

4 "Above" seems to indicate a position horizontal not vertical.

310

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

Louis, and the Last supper, all of which fill the end wall of the old refectory of Santa Croce. 1 But all these panels and frescos must be assigned to pupils or followers of Giotto, and may as such be treated of more fully later. It is indeed needless to swell the list of Giotto's works in Florence with apocryphal ones, when enough has been recorded to show his enormous activity. 2

The Virgin, from the Frati Umiliati at Ognissanti, may now be seen in proximity to that of Cimabue, in the Acade- my of Arts,3 and the comparison may serve to show how Giotto transformed the art of his time. Sitting in majesty on a throne amidst saints and angels with the infant on her knee,4 the Virgin must have appeared singularly venerable to the crowds that knelt at her shrine. The picture is of an imposing character, arranged with much order and symmetry as regards the groups, and harmonious in the juxtaposition of colours. In it, the angels have a peculiar elegance of stature and movement, great feeling in the expression of the features, and simple flowing draperies. The Virgin and child are still of a stature superior to

1 Now a carpet factory.

2 Besides the crucifixes of S. Marco and Ognissanti which have been noticed, he painted, in the latter church, an entire chapel, and four pictures (Vasari, Vol. I. p. 331) , one of which still exists in the Academy of Arts at Florence; in the Carmine, it is said, the chapel of S. John the Baptist, of which fragments remain (Vas. Vol. I. p. 314) ; — in thePalace of the "Parte", a fresco of "the Christian faith," containing a portrait of Clement the IVth" which has perished (Vas. Vol. I.p.314). (The Palace of the Parte is noAV divided into the Monte and the Uffizio della Comunita) ; — in the convent of thenunsofFaenza, fres- cos and altarpieces which disap- peared with the edifice that contain- ed them; a votive picture for Paolo di Lotto Ardinghelli representing that person, his wife, and S. Louis, in the church of S. Maria Maggiore

(Vasari. Vol. I. p. 330); — a small picture for Baccio Gondi, a Flo- rentine (Vas. Vol. I. p. 330); — a small crucifix for the Camaldole convent of the Angeli at Florence (Vas. Vol. I. p. 331);— an altar- piece for the nuns of S. Giorgio, frescos in the Badia; and the great allegories in the Hall of the Pa- lace of the Podesta of Florence (Vas. Vol. I. p. 334.); — a Virgin which Petrarch willed to a friend (Vas. Vol. I. p. 335) ; — a Virgin for the Dominicans of Prato painted before 1312 (see note infra as to the will of Ricuccio quon- dam Pucci. Note to Vas. Vol. I. p. 329), by order of one Ricuccio: all of which have been lost.

3 No. 15 of the Cat.

4 14 figures in all. Two angels in front kneeling present vases of flowers two others standing a box of perfumes and a crown. The infant as usual blessing.

Chap. X.

FRESCOS OF THE CARMINE.

311

[ that of the surrounding angels, the Saviour, of that con-

| ventional severity peculiar to an older time, not the kindly laughing babe of the Stefaneschi altarpiece at Rome, but still pleasing. In the Virgin, beauty was sacrificed to the claims of tradition; and the consecrated language of old Christian

! art was carefully preserved. Here again no charms of

colour seduce the eye of the beholder.1

The following may suffice for the so-called remnants

I of Giotto's frescos at the Carmine.

Of the frescos at the Carmine at Florence six episodes and five heads have been published in the work of Patch.2 In con- sidering such copies, it may be well to remember that the master was so usually assisted by his pupils that it is sometimes diffi- cult to judge of pieces, which may after all be no more than parts executed under superintendence. At the Carmine, too, many followers of Giotto's manner, Agnolo Gaddi for in- stance, laboured; and it is impossible to say to which portion of the church the fragments belong, which have been reproduced in the above mentioned work. Two heads of S. John and S. Paul, now in the National Gallery, in London, are remnants from the Carmine which most recal the style of Giotto.3 Three frag- ments in the Liverpool Gallery representing a group of holy women with an infant and the daughter of Herodias receiving the head of S. John the Baptist, have been so much damaged and are now so dark of outline, that, though Giottesque in style, it would be difficult to affirm that his hand produced them. In the Cappella Ammanati of the Campo Santo of Pisa, six other parts are likewise pre- served. One representing a couple of angels, is the finest of the collection, but reveals less the types of Giotto than those of Taddeo or Agnolo Gaddi. The outlines are indeed very inferior to those of the great master, and the mus- cular development, the weighty character of the forms, a certain slovenly ease in the execution would tend to confirm the opinion that a later artist worked here; and this view may be further strengthened by noticing the research with which detail is made out to the detriment of the whole.

1 Whilst the surface has been rubbed down, many outlines have been retouched and blackened, particularly in the angel to the left, bearing the crown, whose forehead is in part repainted.

As usual , the ground is gold.

2 Selections from the works of Masaccio Fra Bartolommeo and Giotto. Fol. Florence 1770, 1772. Part III. by Thomas Patch.

3 No. 276. Nat. Gal. catalogue.

312

Chap. X.

Another piece representing one playing a harp , seems ne- cessarily to have belonged to the dance of the daughter of Herodias; but the difference between this and the figure of the player in the Peruzzi chapel is very marked. Other fragments of John the Baptist, S. Anna, and a youth, painted evidently with a coarse vehicle, reveal a far weaker hand than that of Giotto.

Had Giotto executed but a part of the works which have been noticed, it would still be evident that his resi- dence in Florence was a long one. In the will of Ricuc- cio he is described as living in the parish of S. Maria Novella; and this is confirmed by a later document of which an extract is given by Baldinucci. 1 In the earliest years of the century, he married Ciuta di Lapo di Pelo, and by her, had no less than six children , some of whom were already growing up in 1306, when Dante visited the painter at Padua. The poet, indeed, was so struck with their peculiar ugliness, that he asked Giotto, how it was that he, who could paint such beautiful figures, should be the father of such very plain children. "I paint by day" said Giotto repeating a jest from the Saturnalia of Ma- crobius.2 Not that Giotto had studied letters, for Dante did not believe that the jest was quoted, but, that he should thus hit upon a conceit which disclosed a shrewd natural wit, created some surprise in the poet. But Giotto's readiness at repartee, his humour were quite as remarkable as his artistic talent; and Boccaccio's anecdote in the fifth Novella and sixth day of the Decamerone, illustrate it most amusingly. 3

Pamphilus, in order to show how nature at times con- ceals most wonderful talents in men of the ugliest exterior, relates the following incident: "Messer Forese di Rabatta was of a short stature, and deformed. His face and nose were flat; but he was so perfectly versed in the study of law, that he was considered by many as a well of know- ledge. Giotto was a man of such genius, that nothing was

1 Notizie, &c. di Filippo Baldi- nucci, 8°. Milan 1811. Vol. IV. p. 170.

2 P> finve nuto da I mo la. Com.

in Muratori. Antiq. It. Vol.1, p. 1185.

3 Novella V. Giornata VI. Vol. II. of Decamerone ub. sup. p. 298.

Chap. X.

ANECDOTES.

ever created that he did not reproduce with the stile, the pen, or the pencil, so as not merely to imitate, but to ap- pear nature itself But though his art was great, he

was neither in appearance nor in features, handsomer than Messer Forese. Both of them had property in the Mugello, and Messer Forese having taken advantage of a holiday to pay his a visit and ride thither on a sorry horse, met Giotto, who had also gone on a tour of inspection and was returning to Florence, neither the horse nor the harness of the painter being in any way better than those of his neighbour. They joined company, and were both caught in a shower, which drove them for shelter into the house of a farmer. The rain, however, appeared disinclined to stop, and the travellers being both anxious to return the same day to Florence, borrowed from the farmer two old cloaks and two hats worn down to the weft, and proceeded on their journey. In this guise they rode, drowned in wet and stained with splashes, until the weather began to clear, when Forese after listening for some time to Giotto , who could always tell a good story, began to look at him from head to foot, and not heeding his own disordered condition, burst into a fit of laughter, and said: "Do you think that a stranger who should meet you in your present state for the first time, would believe that you are the best painter in the world!" Giotto without hesitation replied: "I think that he would believe it, if looking at you, he should also conclude that you knew the a, b, c.;; An answer which caused Messer Forese to admit that he had been amply repaid in his own coin.

Giotto had inherited property from his father at Ves- pignano, and added to it by successive purchases. His son Francesco, who had been declared of age in 1318, and who took orders in 1319, 1 represented his father's interest, when the latter was absent from Florence, and shared this responsibility at various times with Nicholas his brother. Bice, one of Giotto's daughters, was a lay nun of the Dominicans of S. Maria Novella, and married Piero di Maestro Franco in Mugello a year after Giotto's death. Catherine, her sister was the wife of Ricco di Lapo a painter at Florence, Lucia, another sister, was betrothed

See the genealogy of Giotto in Baldinncci ubi sup. Vol. IV. p. 167 and following.

314

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

in 1335 to one Zaccherino di Coppino of Vespignano. A third son of Giotto was called Donato di Bondone.1

Giotto's profession kept him no doubt either confined to his shop in the parish of S. Maria Novella, or obliged him to journey wherever important commissions might lead him. His family evidently lived much on the property in the Mugello, which Giotto could only visit on holidays or Sundays. He was proud of his superiority in a profession in which he had no rival at least in Flo- rence, and though Boccaccio pretends that he was too humble ever to assume the title of master, 2 a story, told by Sacchetti, would prove that he considered himself far above the usual run of painters.

"A coarse artisan, he says, desiring perhaps to enter npon a new office, 3 appeared in Giotto's shop followed by one who carried a scutcheon. Accosting the painter: "God keep you master, he said, I wish you to paint my arms upon this shield." Giotto, considering the man and his manner, curtly enquired. "When will you have it?" and having learnt the time, added "Let it be"; and the man left the shop. Now, thought Giotto, what does this mean! Is this man sent to chaff me? In my life no one ever came here to have shields painted. The simpleton talks of his arms as if he were of the royals of France. I must cer- tainly give him something new. Giotto took the shield and painted upon it a helm, a gorget, a pair of armlets, a pair of gauntlets, two cuirasses, a couple of greaves and leg pieces, a sword, a knife, and a lance. "What the deuce have you done with my shield, cried the injured customer as he saw Giotto's work, I wouldn't give four farthings for it now." What did you tell me to do, said Giotto? Why to paint my arms. Pray, are any of them wanting. What are you? continued Giotto. You hardly know your- self, yet you order your arms to be painted, as if you were

1 Baldinucci ubi supra. Vol. IV. p. 167 and following.

2 Novella Vth ub. sup. p. 299. — Yet in the altarpieees of the Baroncelli chapel and of the Brera his work is "opus magistri Jocti." The inscription of the former is perhaps modern. In the picture of

the Louvre, we have "Opus Jocti Florentini."

3 Sacchetti ub. sup. Vol. I. Nov. LXIII. p. 203. "There is some bitterness, says Rumohr, in this supposition of Sacchetti. He hated the frequency with which people of small estate were appointed to offices'Torschung. Vol. II. p. 49.

Chap. X.

ANECDOTES.

315

of the Bardi. What is your crest? who are your forefathers? The injured customer brought an action against Giotto, which the painter traversed with a demand for two florins, and gained the cause easily. " So says Sacchetti, not a little proud of his own birth and blood, those who know no measure, are measured. Every beggar now-a-days must have arms, and ancestry, even he whose father died in an hos- pital."

That Giotto should have acted from the motives which urged Sacchetti is not to be presumed, but he was evidently prouder of his position as a painter than Boc- caccio believed. His readiness and motherwit are how- ever clear from the quickness with which he practically punned on the word "arms". His humour and dry causticity, his lightness of 'spirit are further illustrated in a second Novella of Sacchetti, which, containing some slight allusions to S. Joseph, seems to have frightened Vasari. 1

"Those who are acquainted with Florence, know that on the first Sunday in every month, men and women go to San Gallo, more perhaps for pleasure than from contrition. Giotto with his company, being on his way thither, one Sunday, and having stopped in the via del Cocomero to tell some story, was so rudely caught by a pig running down the street, that he fell. He rose however very quietly, and smiling, turned to the person nearest him, saying: "The brute is right. Have I not in my day earned thousands with the help of his bristles, and never given one of them even a cup of broth. They went on without further ad- venture to San Gallo, and returning by San Marco and the church of the Servi, where they looked, as usual, at the pictures, one of them, having examined particularly a fresco of the Virgin with S. Joseph on one side, cried out, "How is it that Joseph is always represented with such a melan- choly face;" upon which Giotto replied, "Is it not natural

99  All  returned  home  declaring  that  Giotto  was  not

only a great painter, but master of the Seven liberal arts.

The excessive lightness of the last jest has been con- sidered by Rumohr as exhibiting in the painter some frivolity combined with a certain coolness of spirit widely

1 Nov. LXXV. Vol. II. p. 13.

316

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. X.

different from that which might be expected from one who should enthusiastically and unreservedly acquiesce in the superstitions of his time. But who, in the first place, can vouch for the exact truth of the anecdote, or of the words which Sacchetti places in Giotto's mouth. Giotto, no doubt, was far from yielding implicit faith to the claims of monks to sanctity. He had had occasion to observe their weaknesses. The immorality of many amongst the clergy was probably quite as well known to him as to his cotemporaries , and he could jest where jesting was permitted; but that he had a sense of the greatness of Christian truth is shown in his works; and no one who admits that a poet can only develop or ex- press the highest aspirations of which the human mind is capable, when he is himself convinced of, and imbued with, the greatness of his theme, will fail to perceive that, without a profound conviction and a deep sense of the truth in his subject, Giotto could not have produced the noble works which afford to posterity the means of jud- ging his genius and his talent.

Chap. XI.

GIOTTO VISITS NAPLES.

317

CHAPTER XL

GIOTTO AND HIS COTEMPORARIES AT NAPLES.

v Giotto had been commissioned at Florence, in 1328,1 to paint in the Palazzo dei Signori the portrait of Charles of Calabria kneeling before the Virgin.2 This prince who was the son of Robert of Naples, had been elected ruler of Florence in 1326, and retired from his office at the close of 1327. He seems to have made his father acquain- ted with the fame of Giotto; and Robert, in 1330,3 invited the artist to Naples to decorate some of the numerous edifices which then adorned that city.4

1 Vasari relates as occurring in 1322, events which, had they been as he states, must have taken place in 1328. He says that Giotto visited Lucca to paint in S. Mar- tin, for Castruccio, a Virgin and saints adored by a Pope and an Emperor. (Vasari, Vol. I. p. 324.) The altarpiece at all events exists no longer, though Rosini (Stor. Vol.11, p. 64) pretends to have seen it: "Many believed, adds the Are- tine, that the pontiff and Emperor were Frederic of Bavaria and Nicolas the Vtb." Louis, not Fre- derick of Bavaria was crowned in Italy when Nicolas V. ascended the papal throne, and the date of this is 1328 not 1322. But in 1328 Giotto was in Florence.

2 Vasari. Vol. III. p. 274. Vita di Michelozzo Michelozzi. The portrait has been lost.

3 As the record is rare, here it IS in full:

1330. January 20. Neapoli. Ro-

bertas rex Joctum (vulgo die, Giotto), &c. Reg. Rob. 1329 A p. 20.

Robertus, &c. universis, &c. Quos morum probitas approbat et virtus discretiva commendat, fa- milie nostre libenter consorcio aggregamus. Sane, attendentes quod Magister Joctus de Floren- tia pictor familiaris et fidelis noster, fulcitur providis actibus et exercitatur servitiis fructuosis, ipsum in familiarem nostrum re- cipimus, et de nostro hospicio re- tinemus, volentes, ut illis honoribus et privileges potiatur et gaudeat, quibus familiares alii potiuntur, recepto provide solito juramento. In cujus rei testimonium presen- tes exinde fieri et pendenti ma- jestatis nostre sigillo, jussimus communiri. Datum Neapoli, anno Domini MCCCXXX0 die XX° Ja- nuarii XIII Ind. regnm nostm XXI0. Vide Schulz. Denkma- ler. ub. sup. Vol. 4. p, 76.

4 On his way to Naples, says Vasari in the life of Agostino and

318

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XI.

If Neapolitan historians can be credited, art was at a high standard in South Italy in the rise of the fourteenth century. Of Montano d'Arezzo they say nothing ; but Dominici somewhat pompously dwells on the accomplish- ments of Pippo Tesauro, Thomaso degli Angeli, Simone Napoletano, Francesco di Simone, and others, of whom not only no positive records exist, but of whom no pain- tings can be found. Thomaso degli Angeli is supposed to have been a cotemporary of Cimabue and to have lived between 1230 and 1310. 1 To him, the frescos of the Mi- nutolo chapel in the Duomo of Naples are assigned. They represent scenes from the legends of the apostles.2 These paintings have however been so completely renewed in various periods, that they do not convey any idea of the century in which they were produced. They certainly do not at present appear to be of the thirteenth century. The same uncertainty pursues the beholder when he contemplates a Madonna in the church of S. Maria la Nuova at Naples. Of Philippo Tesauro, who is supposed to have lived in 1270, is a picture in the Museum at Naples representing, the Virgin with the infant Saviour holding a basket of cherries, in the midst of saints,3 and, in a lunette above the principal scene, the martyrdom of S. Lawrence. Philippo Tesauro, if he were really the author of this picture, must have been an artist of the fourteenth and not of the thirteenth century. To these somewhat mythical painters may be added a more genuine

Agnolo, Giotto stopped to see the sculptures of the Duomo, and re- commended to Piero Saccone of Pietramala the two Siennese sculp- tors as best fitted to execute his (Giotto's) design for the tomb of Guido d'Arezzo. Vas. Vol. II. p. 4. 5. Agnolo is known by re- cords to have lived between 1312 and 1349. Of Agostino there are notices from 1310 to his death in 1350. Agnolo's real name is "Angelo Venture". Agostino went under the name of Agostino di maestro

Giovanni. He may thus be the pupil of Giovanni Pisano. Vid. Doc. Sen. Vol. I. p.p. 203—206.

1 See Dominici's very unsatis- factory reasons for believing Tho- maso superior to Cimabue.

2 The liberation of S. Peter from prison and his crucifixion, the beheading of S. John and the stoning of Stephen. On the lower part of the walls are portraits of the Minutoli.

3 SS. John, Andrew, Francis, Jerom, and Nicholas the Hermit.

Chap. XI.

SIMONE NAPOLETANO.

319

mosaist who executed in S. Restituta at Naples a Vir- gin; crowned with a diadem; between S.S. Januarius and Restituta, and holding the infant Saviour in full front on her knee. An inscription at foot runs:

Annis datur clerus jam instaurator Parthenopensis Mille tricentenis undenis bisque retensis. Hoc opus Fecit Lellus

from which it appears that one Lellus restored the mosaic in 1322. Yet the Virgin's form has the thin and slender shape, the sweeping draperies of the earlier cen- turies, and is not without merit. Dominici assigns the mosaic to one Tesauro who lived in the time of Constantine !

The most famous painter in the annals of Neapolitan art is however Simone Napoletano whose services must indeed have been great, if in the course of a life ex- ceeding the ordinary span conceded to mortals, he exe- cuted pictures exhibiting in their variety the charac- teristics of distinct schools and periods. For of Simone there are in truth no records whatever; and the pictures assigned to him have no dates, and do not bear his name. It may be worth while to examine somewhat critically the works which are supposed to have been the produce of his hand. In the refectory of the convent of S. Chiara, a large fresco represents the Saviour in glory between the Virgin and saints, 1 whilst, in front, King Robert and his family kneel in adoration. This is the product of a Giottesque of feeble powers, who seems at a later period to have been employed in painting, beneath the archivolt of the tomb sacred to the remains of King Robert in the church of S. Chiara,2 a fresco representing S.S. Louis of France and Louis bishop in a choir of angels. To fix the date of these paintings one need but remember that King Robert died in 1343; 3 and it may be assumed that

1 SS. Louis, Chiara, Francis, and Anthony.

2 A record in Schulz. Denk- maler (ubi sup. Vol. IV. p. 153) notes the existence of oneBartolom- meo d'Aquila who in 1328 receives

20 ounces of gold for paintings in a chapel of S. Chiara of Naples.

3 The tomb which by Dominici is falsely assigned to Masuccio the IId was ordered in 1343 by Giovanna the Ist of Baccio and

320

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

the artist who produced them, was acquainted with the style of Giotto, which he rudely imitated, whilst he im- parted to his figures a weighty and colossal character. Simone, were he the author, would be an artist of the first half of the fourteenth century. But in the chapel of S. Antonio Abate at S. Lorenzo Maggiore of Naples, he is said to have painted an altarpiece, on arabesque gold ground, of S. Anthony holding a book and a lily, and attended by four angels, whose heads are surrounded by halos in high relief. On the pediment of this picture, the year 1438 is inscribed, and nothing in the character of the figures is calculated to invalidate the reality of this date. A more important and interesting altarpiece assigned to Simone Napoletano, in the church of S. Lorenzo Mag- giore, is that which represents S. Louis of Thoulouse enthroned and placing a royal diadem on the head of his brother Robert. Five scenes from the life of the saint adorn the pediment, which is divided into arches, in the spandrils of which may be found the syllables of the following inscription. "Symon de Senis me pinxit". This is not the only Siennese picture, however, which has been gratuitously attributed by the partiality of the Nea- politans to their favorite Simone. 1 A triptych in the Minutolo chapel of the Naples Duomo, represents the Sa- viour crucified, and S. Mary Magdalen grasping the foot of the cross which is supported by the Eternal. Right and left are the Virgin and S. John, and on the wings figures of saints.2 On the closed shutters the arms of Cardinal Enrico Minutolo are painted; and it is known that when he died in 1412, this ecclesiastic left the trip- tych as a legacy to the church. Here is a painting ex-

Giovanni, brothers of Florence. From orig. records in archivio generale of Naples, Let. F. fol. 8. Feb. 24. 1343. in Catalani (Luigi) Le chiese di Napoli. Vol. II. p. 92.

1 How can the judgment of Kugler have led him to affirm,

that the two altarpieces just men- tioned are by Simone Napoletano. See Handbook, p. 190.

2 S.S. Januarius and John the Baptist, Peregrine and a female — Gable — Saviour in glory between two prophets in me- dallions.

Chap. XI.

SIMONE NAPOLETANO.

321

hibiting some of the peculiarities of the Siennese painter Vanni.

Of another class , but still assigned to Simone Napole- tano, is the panel on the tomb of Giovanna d'Aquina Countess of Mileto and Serranova in S. Domenico Mag- giore at Naples. This lady who died on the sixth of April 1345, was honoured with a beautiful marble sepulchre, in the niche above which the Virgin is represented nur- sing the infant Saviour. A most circumstantial account appears in the Guida dei Scienziati of 1845, of the tri- umphal reception given to this picture at Naples when it was carried to the church of S. Domenico, and a hope is apparently entertained that Simone Napoletano should be acknowledged as the Cimabue or the Duccio of Naples. 1 Yet on close inspection the altarpiece is obviously the work of an Umbrian painter of the school of Fabriano, and in the style of Francescuccio Ghissi. Of that school and its derivation from the Siennese something may be said here- after. It may be sufficient for the present to note, that the tenderness and affectation of grace peculiar to the Umbrian branch of Italian schools, is here particularly marked. The church of S. Domenico Maggiore is remar- kable for other paintings of the same manner, to which the name of Simone has been likewise attached. The Virgin della Rosa, to the right before entering the large Chapel del Crocifisso, is another of the well known Um- brian Virgins, giving suck to the infant Saviour, with S. Dominick at her feet. 2 The chapel of S. Andrea is also filled with frescos of the same kind,3 all fairly preserved and remarkable for slenderness and feeble drawing of figures. After carefully examining all these works, the student will be called upon to decide, whether Simone Napoletano is a painter of the fourteenth century,

1 Napoli e sue vicinanze. Guida offerta agli Scien- ziati nel congresso del 1845. Vol. I. p. 296.

2 But this figure, which is com- VOL. I.

pletely repainted, seems to have been added to the picture.

3 Subjects — Noli me tangere, S. Mary of Egypt in her cave, the crucifixion with the Virgin

322 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XI.

of the declining Giottesque school, as at the refectory and church of S. Chiara, or a painter of the fifteenth cen- tury, as at S. Antonio Abate in S. Lorenzo Maggiore. He will have to judge, whether Simone Napoletano and Simone Martini of Sienna are one and the same person, or whether the former is not an Umbrian painter of the middle or close of the fourteenth century. With these facts before him, the reader will be further called upon to believe that Simone Napoletano had a son called Fran- cesco di Simone, and a pupil called Colantonio del Fiore. It will be easy to prove hereafter, that Neapolitan his- torians affirmed quite as much, and knew quite as little, of the two latter as they did of the former. When Giotto reached Naples, he may have found assistants, but no rivals; and it is evident that the South continued, in the fourteenth century, to depend upon Central Italy for its painters. It is characteristic of the condition to which the pursuit of art and letters has been reduced at Naples, that, although one undoubted work of Giotto exists up to the present time in the old convent church of S. Chiara, which, according to Vasari, he was specially com- missioned by King Robert to paint,1 yet that work has remained hitherto completely unknown, whilst, on the other hand, the frescos of the seven sacraments at the Incoro- nata, which are not by him, have been considered as such by numerous writers, including Lanzi and Rumohr.2 By some, the presence of Giotto at Naples has been doubted altogether, though Vasari, and before him Ghiberti, affir- med that he painted there. 3 These doubts have been finally set at rest by the discovery of authentic records, one of which has already been given, whilst another of a later date proves that in 1333 Giotto was involved in legal proceedings at Naples with one Giovanni of Putheoli. 4

and S. John at the sides, and a Dominican monk.

1 Vasari Vol. I. p. 325.

2 Lanzi ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 3.Rumohr, Forschungen. ubi sup. Vol. II. p. 65.

3Ghiberti. comment, in Va- sari. Vol. I. p. XVIII.

4 Doctor Matteo Camera of Amalfi, whose annals of Naples are one of the most useful works of our time in Italy, extracted

Chap. XI. GIOTTO'S FRESCOS IN S. CHIARA NAPLES.

323

If the visitor to Naples approaches the old convent of S. Chiara in the direction of the gate which opens to- wards the New church del Gesu, he will find at No. 23 a furniture shop, under the name of Francesco Tittipaldi. This furniture shop is part of a vast hall appertaining of old to the convent. At its extremity is a great fresco filling a square space circumscribed by a lozenge striped with the arms of Robert and Sanchia. Here Giotto, in one of those beautiful compositions which are his grand claim to the admiration of the world, symbolized the alms- giving of the Franciscans of Naples by the miracle of the loaves and fishes. He represented the Saviour youthful and majestic in presence, preeminent in size, in the act of benediction on an elevated seat between two palms. At his feet, baskets of loaves have been brought by the apostles, who are grouped beneath him on each side. One of these, on the left, carries a basket which is to be added to those already destined for the poor. Another carries a couple of fish on a plate. To the right, an apostle is in the act of throwing a loaf to the crowd; and in front of him, S. Peter, recognizeable by his well known type, distributes bread to a group of men, women, and children, kneeling in a circle in front of him. In the foreground at that side, S. Chiara kneels in prayer whith a chaplet between her fingers. In the foreground to the left, S. Francis kneels in prayer with a bag containing bread slung over his shoulders. Amongst the apostles on the left, none more fully expresses youthful simpleness and piety than he who carries the fish; none more fully repre- sents the bloom and freshness of youth than the apostle in the rear, looking at one more aged than himself, in profile, with flowing hair and beard.1 Nothing can be more happy than the repose in the group of poor, the

the following from a pandect of I 1332—33: "Joannes de Putheolo notices excerpted from the Sici- j litigat cum notario Amico et Ma- lian archives, in the 17th century, gistro Jotto pictore de Florentia.1' before the originals were burnt. 1 The heads of the group of At p. 970. from p. 93. a tergo of apostles on the right are almost the original archives under date obliterated.

21*

324

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

satisfaction wich beams in their faces, except perhaps the air of delight with which the apostles minister to their wants. There is no finer figure in the group than that of the female in profile taking the loaf from Peter's hand, and holding- a child on her knees. The religious senti- ment expressed in the face of the kneeling S. Francis is reflected in the noble profile of S. Chiara. It is a picture combining the idea of charity with the majesty of reli- gion : a sublime mixture of the heavenly and lowly. Ren- dered by Giotto with artistic perfection of distribution, the fresco is equally remarkable for bold breadth combi- ned with great softness and fusion of modelling and warm luminous tones. This quality, however, can unfortunately be assigned to a part only of what remains, the fresco having suffered considerably.1 To the figure of the Sa- viour Giotto imparted youth and majesty, to his head a noble yet simple outline, to the features perfect drawing and pleasingly regular form. A thin downy beard covers his chin and lips. The eyes, no longer of the conventional shape, are designed, in perfect obedi- ence to the laws of nature, with a round iris and regular can thus. The type is the final transformation of the old ones into a new model, fitted for the imitation of future ages. Contrasted with other heads of the Saviour in glory by Giotto, it shows what progress the painter himself had made between the rise and the close of his career. In the half figure with the double sword and keys of the altarpiece at S. Peters, the bullet form of head inherited from the time of Giunta, had been brought to simpler proportions. The terrified gaze of the time of

1 The blues, being- painted in tempera, have been altered by time. The verde tones in the dresses have become dark, — es- pecially in the figure of the apostle holding- the fishes, and in the green mantle of the female taking- the bread from S. Peter. When it is stated that this fresco, when first observed, was concealed

by chairs and other articles of furniture hung upon nails to the wall, it will be easier to conceive the ruin of some parts than to understand how any portion was preserved. The fresco adorned the lower part of a wall, the up- per part is however gone , as is likewise every vestige of painting in other parts of the hall.

Chap. XI. GIOTTO'S FRESCOS IN S. CHIARA NAPLES.

325

Pope Pascal, which was preserved more or less till the close of the thirteenth century and was noticeable even in the pictures of Cimabue, disappeared, and made room for a more natural yet equally earnest glance. The same improvement marked the apocalyptic figure in the medal- lion of the allegorical ceiling, and that of the Redeemer above the door in the South transept of the Lower church at Assisi. Giotto, in fact, returned in part to the earlier forms and outlines of the catacomb paintings of Rome in the fifth and sixth centuries, of the mosaists of the Baptistery and of S. Apollinare Nuovo at Ravenna. The Redeemer in benediction, on the crucifix of Ognissanti, was a majestic youthful type, of a graceful outline, and essentially religious and Christian in expression. To the mere regularity and gravity of the oldest period Giotto added an appearance as of inspiration. Majestic repose, calm serenity, and elegant proportions marked the Saviour in glory in the ciborium of S. Peters and the similar re- presentation in the Scrovegni Chapel at Padua. The mild, peaceful, yet intellectual face of the Redeemer at S. Chiara of Naples seems however best to render the Christian idea, being of the fittest and grandest external outline ; whilst, in the proportions and movement, every requirement is satisfied. A clear and open glance conveys the idea of soft beauty and majesty. A spacious forehead reveals powerful intellect. The hair, divided and falling in locks, adds charm to the oval form of the face. The neck is strong, the expression is that of benignant command.

Of old, painters had made the Redeemer imposing but stern. The judge was presented to the admiration of the faithful. Here he was to produce reverence by kindliness of glance. Yet this was a more manly ideal of the Sa- viour than that of Angelico; and the expression of resig- nation was not attempted as fully as it was at a later time. Giotto's was in fact an ideal presented in the simplest lines and combined with gesture equally simple and easy. Nor was his progress less remarkable in another sense than it had been in finally establishing the type of the

326

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

Redeemer. The form of the angel , already matured by him in the upper church of Assisi, 1 — improved, even in the progress of the series devoted to the life of S. Fran- cis,2 finally acquired a noble lightness of form and a sweetness of features, of which the heavenly messengers, in the allegories of the Lower church, were the best ex- pression. - Here again , Giotto transformed and re-created the type of the Christian angel, setting aside for ever that, of old founded on imitation of the classic time, and infusing into form and features, elegance, proportion, and a spirit exhaling celestial kindliness and affection. It was reserved for Angelico to display the excess of mystic and religious sentiment which was not in Giotto.

The most careful search will not enable the student to discover any frescos of Giotto in the present monastery of S. Chiara; and with the exception of the feeble production assigned, as before stated, to Simone Napole- tano, there is not even a Giottesque picture there. Of the church appertaining to the monastery, the walls have long been whitewashed;3 and as to the portable altarpiece there, the Madonna delle Grazie , assigned to Giotto , is a miserable example of art in the fourteenth century , such as it displayed itself in most Italian cities of that time.4 That Giotto, however, painted frescos in the Castel Nuovo and Castel dell7 Uovo 5 is pretty certain, though these naturally perished with the edifices that contained them. That he also painted pictures on panel may be inferred from the remains of two figures of saints preserved by Count Gaetani at Naples. One of these is a bishop of the Franciscan order with the arms of Robert and Sanchia embroidered on his dress, and holding a crozier, the other is a saint carrying a book. The nimbus, in both, is re-

1 No. 9. of series of scenes from the life of S. Francis.

2 No. 20. where the Saint is carried to heaven.

3 By Borrionuovo the governor of the church in the first half of the last century. See annot.

to Vas. Vol. I. p. 325. note 6.

4 Lanzi mentions this picture as by Giotto. SeeHist. of painting. Vol. II. p. 3.

5 Ghiberti. 2d com. in Vas. ubi sup. Vol. I. p. XVIII.

Chap. XI.

CHAPEL OF THE INCORONATA.

327

freshed, the rest ruined by time ; still the panels preserve enough original character to justify their attribution to Giotto.

In the chapel of the Incoronata, a painter whose edu- cation had evidently been influenced by the teaching or the maxims of Giotto painted the seven sacraments, of baptism, confirmation, communion, confession, ordination, marriage and extreme unction, and subordinate scenes from the old testament. These frescos were long assigned to Giotto, although, in the sacrament of marriage, the cere- mony represented was that of the nuptials between Louis of Tarentum and Giovanna queen of Naples which occurred in 1347, eleven years after the death of Giotto. Nay more, the church of the Incoronata was only com- menced after the coronation of Louis and Giovanna, which took place with much pomp in 1352 in the Palace of the Princes of Tarentum, outside the Porta Petruczuli and near the Castel Nuovo.2 Petrarch, in a passage of the Itinerarium Syriacum, has been the sole and unwilling cause of subsequent errors as to these frescos. He ad- dresses his friend John de Mandello:3

"Here stands Naples, a city that has seldom had its like amongst those seated on coasts. Here is an artificial haven and by it the royal palace, where, if you land, you will not fail to enter the chapel of the King in which a painter, late my cotemporary and the chief of our age, has left great monuments of his genius and his hand."

For a long time it was generally believed that the In- coronata was the chapel of the King here alluded to by Petrarch, and for this reason: On the site of the Incoro- nata was of old a chapel called the Cappella di Giustizia which according to several authors was built by King Robert.4 It was incorporated afterwards with the Incoronata, and

1 Historians who wish to pre- serve these works to Giotto, say, the nuptials are those of Andrew of Hungary with Giovanna.

2 See regis t. Arch. K.Siclae. an. 1302. 17. 32.47, &c. in Giu- seppe Angeluzzi's Lett ere s u 11a chics a dell' Incoro-|

nata. 8°. Naples 1846. p.p. 6. 7. 8.

3 Tiraboschi. Storia dell a Letteratura. Tom. V. Lib. I. 8°. Naples, 1777. p. 101.

4 Aloe, Ventimiglia and Gallo's I Annals.

328

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI

hence, topographers assumed somewhat hastily, that this chapel was that to which Petrarch alluded. The Cappella di Giustizia, however, was built, not by Robert, but by Charles the Second, 1 and never was called Cappella del Re. On the other hand, the royal chapel is proved by docu- ments to have been an appendage of the Castel Nuovo, founded by Charles the First in 1279 2 and still unfinished in 1309, when Charles the Second died.3 It was in this chapel that Montano d'Arezzo painted for King Robert previous to the arrival of Giotto. That the Castel Nuovo was close to the Palace on the Naples harbour is certain from the records in the Sicilian archives. 4 That Giotto should have painted in the Castel Nuovo may thus be inferred from the words of Petrarch. That he painted in the Palace is affirmed by Ghiberti, who states that he adorned the great hall with portraits of the illustrious men of Naples. It is possible that he also worked in the Castel deirUovo, seeing that Montano d'Arezzo had al- ready laboured there. It is not possible that he should have executed the frescos of the Incoronata; for as works of art they but too evidently bear the impress of another hand.

These paintings cover the groined vaults of the choir of the chapel and are of irregular shape. The artist repre- sented the rite of baptism in the centre of an open octo- gon temple , where a naked infant is held by a nurse over a font and receives the holy water from a cup in the hands of a priest. Behind the latter an assistant holds the salt box, whilst the second godfather and the godmother looked on at the opposite side. A youth, on the steps of the bap-

1 Giuseppe Angeluzzi ub. sup. p.p. 6. 7. 8.

2 Camera, Annali di Na- poli; anno 1279. Vol. I. p. 322.

3 Giuseppe Angel uzzi ub. sup. p.p. 10. 11.

4 " Joanellus Pacca et Julianus de Angelo de Napoli magistri tar- sienerii, Tarsienatus Neapolis in- ventarium faciunt bonorum om- |

niumexistentium in ipso ; et dictus Tarsienatus situs est juxta hospi- tium ammiratpe platese portus civitatis Neapolis, et juxta raolum parvum juxta regium Castrum Novum, juxta turrectam moli magni et ecclesiam Su Nicolai. Ex regest. Arch. R. Siclae Part. 2. Anno 1382. Arc. F. moz. 6. No. la. in Angeluzzi ub. sup. p. 13. 14.

Vol I. p. 320.

MARRIAGE ; Fresco in the Church of the Incoronata at Naples

Chap. XI. CHAPEL OF THE INCORONATA. 329

tisteiy, holds a lighted taper, whilst, in the foreground, three women look at the infant as two females deposit him in a basket. An angel flying down hovers over the scene with a torch in his left, giving a blessing with his right hand.1 In the Confirmation, a princess, wearing a diadem, stands with an infant in her arms, which a bishop, in front of her, confirms. Behind, are a female and a girl holding a child, whilst, in the foreground, another child is led up the steps of the church by a dame. An angel hovers over the building. 2 A group of kneeling Christians preparing for the communion, is ably placed inside an open temple by the artist. To the foremost of them a bishop, with a chalice in one hand, gives the sacred host, whilst the atten- dant clergy stand behind , and two figures remained in rear of the kneeling group, looking on. In the air, two angels wave censers.3 The sacrament of Confession seems to take place in an open portico outside a church. A- dame kneeling at the feet of a listening priest unburdens her conscience ; and three penitents may be observed holding flails and retiring with their faces concealed in their hoods to perform penance. In the air, three devils fly away as if exorcised by the blessing of the priest.4 A pope, in the sacrament of Ordination , is seen under a dais , placing his hands in the palms of the candidate, whilst churchmen of various degrees stand around. In this fresco more than usual individuality and variety of attitude are conveyed.5 The ceremony of Marriage is represented in a church hung with rich tapestry. A monk unites the hands of a princely pair beneath a dais, held by four attendant courtiers and in presence of a crowd of churchmen and friends of both sexes. Two figures may be seen sounding long bra- zen trumpets; whilst in the foreground a troup of dancers

1 The group of women putting the child into a basket, is almost obliterated. The figure leaning over is likewise almost gone, and the heads of the two remaining figures are repainted. The whole of the upper part of the Bap- tistery and the figure of the an- gel are new, and the figure, most to the left in the building, is also modern, with the exception of the head.

2 Here again the figures of the princess and infant and part of the figure, with the child behind

her, are all of this painting that has not been retouched , or renewed.

3 This fresco is better preserved than the two others; but the pro- files are low, and the drawing of the figures broken and angular.

4 The lower part of this fresco is gone, and the figure of the first penitent restored.

5 The greater part of the eight foreground figures is almost ob- literated. An angel here also flies downward.

330

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

moves to the sound of a viol and a pipe. In this group a certain beauty may be noted in the heads , with some grace of motion and costume;1 and, in general, the distri- bution of the scene is better conceived than in the re- maining frescos. In the sacrament of Extreme Unction the gaunt figure of a sick man may be observed, raised on a bed by a female, whilst the priest anoints the lips with the holy oil, and another ecclesiastic looks on, holding a taper. The wailing relatives stand or kneel around. Out- side, angels chastise devils, and are not deficient in ac- tion; but the body of the dying man is stiff and motion- less. 2 Modern criticism has assigned to each of these subjects its real meaning. In the first, Charles, the son of the Duke of Calabria , receives the rite of Baptism. In the second, the three children of Giovanna, Charles Martel, Catherine, and Francesca, are confirmed; — in the third, Giovanna takes the communion; in the fourth, she confesses; — in the fifth, Louis of Anjou is consecrated bishop of Thoulouse by Pope Boniface the Eighth; in the sixth, Gio- vanna is married to Louis of Tarentum; and in the last, Philip of Tarentum receives the final consolations of reli- gion. In the lunettes of the chapel, vestiges of scenes from the life of Joseph may still be seen: Joseph appears in prison; — he resists the temptation of Potiphar's wife; and here the figure of Joseph, hiding his face with his hand, is not without character ; and Jacob is told of the death of Joseph. In other parts of the chapel the finding of Moses and the burning bush can be traced.3

Historical evidence having at last been satisfactorily adduced to prove that these frescos could not have been executed by Giotto, they are now decried with as much persistence as they were before praised. 4 They are in truth but a development of the Giottesque manner by a pain- ter of the middle of the fourteenth century who enjoyed but a flicker of the flame which lighted the path of

1 The head of the Queen and two nearest attendants, the upper part of the officiating monk, are repainted anew.

2 An eighth fresco now almost totally obliterated seems to have represented the Saviour in glory, in front of whom stands a figure of Religion holding a chalice, whilst,

on each side, saints are grouped who hold flags.

3 These vestiges of painting are altered in tone by mastic varnish.

4 Kugler, in his handbook, finds in them the portrait qualities of Giotto. Yet what a difference be- tween these and the portraits of the chapel of the Podesta!

Chap. XI.

CHAPEL OF THE INCORONATA.

331

Italian art in Giotto's time, and who sought to carry out the master's grand maxims without his genius or energy. The legacy of Giotto to his pupils and followers was so great that, divided as it was amongst a number of medi- ocre men, it still maintained a certain preeminence. Com- position and distribution did not, again, materially decline. Giotto's pupils followed their master's example. They perpetuated certain compositions, and preserved certain typical forms; but the difference between him and them was great. He improved, they degraded, the bequests of an older art. In the ratio of their talent, they approached or receded from the models which he created. The test of their ability was no longer to be found in the distri- bution or arrangement of incidents which, being ever the same, required no new effort. The real touchstone was design and execution. The painter of the Incoronata fres- cos, judged by this standard, was not a rude but to a certain extent a polished imitator of the Giottesque man- ner. Yet he must be placed in the second rank of the followers of the great Florentine. If a Neapolitan in name, he was a Tuscan in style. If Giotto made a long stay in the South, there is no reason why Neapolitans should not have adopted his manner with partial success. Giotto could not take with him in his travels all the pu- pils or apprentices who worked in his bottega at Florence. He might naturally trust to chance to find amongst local artists one more capable than the rest, to help him. At Rome, Pietro Cavallini was evidently a good acquisition. At Naples, if Cavallini were no longer there, Simone Na- poletano might have been his assistant;.1 but of all the painters of Naples, the most competent seems to have been one respecting Avhom historians have been hitherto silent, and this is Robertus di Oderisio. A crucifixion executed by this artist may be seen to advantage in the church of S. Francesco d'Assisi at Eboli. 2 The figure of

2 Signor Giuseppe Angeluzzi whose diligent research has been thankfully made use of in these

332

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

the Saviour is Giottesque, though it lacks the pure sim- plicity of form which characterized Giotto. Six angels in vehement action hover about the horizontal limb of the cross, tearing their dresses or gathering the blood from the wounds. The Magdalen grasping the base, S. John and the Virgin in the arms of the Mary's, and the usual crowd at each side, complete the picture. A monk kneels in prayer on the foreground and on a scroll near him are the words:

"Hoc opus pinsit Robertus de Oderisio de Neapoli."

Here then was a Neapolitan painter who had evidently been in the school of Giotto, possessing a certain dramatic power, a fair talent for expression, and as much know- ledge of proportion and design as might fit him to hold a place amongst the good, if not amongst the best, pupils of the master. Robertus was, above all, a conscientious draughtsman. He carried out the clear system of co- louring of Giotto and, in the production of drapery, was master of a broad and simple style. In the portrait of the kneeling monk and in some profiles, no mean power of imitating nature was exhibited. And in these qualities, as in others, he was not too distant from the painter of the Incoronata frescos to exclude their being assigned to him. In the whole of the Neapolitan school, such as it is presented to us by Dominici, it would be vain to seek a single painter whose works would entitle him to claim a place by the side of Robertus. Amongst the artists of the fourteenth century, who are supposed to have been the pupils of Simone, are Gennaro di Cola and Stefanone, Francesco di Simone, and Colantonio del Fiore. The first of these, who is said to have been a cotemporary of the second, was born, according to present chronology in 1320. A series of frescos in San Giovanni in Carbonara of Naples, long considered to have been their joint produc-

pages , was the first to call attention to this work of Roberto di

Oderisio.

Chap. XI. COTEMPORARY NEAPOLITAN ART.

333

tion, has recently been surrendered to its real author Leonardo di Bisuccio of Milan.1 The frescos in the cha- pel del Crocifisso at the Incoronata of Naples, would prove Gennaro di Cola to have been a very feeble painter of the close of the fourteenth century, untaught in the art of composition and unable to depict the nude:2 and this is true insofar as a part of these paintings is concerned, one of them, a combat, being by a later and still poorer hand. No different conclusion will be forced on the be- holder who sees the three panels which stand under the name of Gennaro in the Naples Museum. These formerly belonged to the church of the Incoronata , — are in the form usually called in Italy the "Conception",3 between characteristic figures of S. Peter and S. Paul , and are coloured in warm tones with the precision and care of a miniaturist. A certain relation may indeed be traced be- tween these pictures and the frescos in the chapel del Crocifisso. The painter is of the close of the fourteenth century, with local Neapolitan peculiarities and not parti- cularly Giottesque. 4 Were Stefanone to be judged by a much damaged fresco of the root of Jesse in the cha- pel de' Preti Missionari of the cathedral at Naples, he would be, as stated by Dominici, a painter of the rise of the fourteenth century. If, on the other hand, one consi- ders a Virgin and child in the Piccolommini chapel of the church of Monte Oliveto,5 he will appears as a pain- ter of the fifteenth century, influenced by the manner of

1 These adorn the octagonal chapel of Ser Giovanni Carraciolo, and the tomb of that person, and are inscribed "Leonardus de Bi- succio de Mediolano, hanc capel- lam et hoc sepulcrum pinxit." — The discovery of this inscription is due to Luigi Catalani. See his D is cor so ub. sup. p. 8.

2 Representing a combat, a pro- cession, portraits of bishops and saints, and S. Martin dividing his cloak. These frescos are, how- ever, partly obliterated, partly

renewed, and the rest, much da- maged by damp. The nude of the beggar to whom S. Martin gives his cloak, is bad and ill drawn.

3 Namely the Virgin on the lap of S. Anna. The Saviour on the lap of the Virgin.

4 One may note the tendency to represent hands with pointed fingers. The three panels are much damaged.

5 Enthroned under a canopy be- tween S. Jerom and another saint, and adored by a miniature donor.

334

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

the early Flemings; and this may be inferred as much from the character of the landscape distances as from the disproportoinate size of the heads; — the vulgar features of the Virgin , — the coarseness of the anatomy , — the angularity of the draperies, and the darkness of the high surface shadows.1 But the uncertainty which exists as to the works of Stefanone is proved to absurdity by the attribution to him of a picture of the sixteenth cen- tury in S. Domenico Maggiore,2 finished, according to the Guida dei Scienziati; by Franco d'Agnolo, a painter of the close of the fourteenth!

Francesco, according to tradition, the son and pupil of Simone Napolitano, has been considered the author of a Madonna in a recess of the tomb raised at S. Chiara in honour of Antonio di Penna, secretary to Ladislaus king of Naples (1386 — 1414). Antonio and his brother Onofrio kneel at the Virgin's feet and adore the infant Saviour, who holds a flower; but the lower part of the fresco is obliterated. The remains may truly have been executed by the son of one who lived in the fourteenth century, but the style in which they are painted, is different from any displayed in the various frescos assig- ned to Simone, and have nothing in common even with the works of Francesco's alleged cotemporary and fellow pupil Colantonio del Fiore. Dominici declares, that this painter was born in 1352 and that he died in 1444; but there is every reason to believe that he knew nothing of the artist whose life he wrote, and that the dates he gives are those of paintings arbitrarily attributed in spite of evidence. The sole assertion of the existence of Colan- tonio is made by the architect Summonzio, whose letter, written to a friend at Venice a century after the artist's alleged death, pretends that del Fiore abandoned the old method of tempera for the Flemish mixture of oils which

1 A picture in the Naples Museum assigned to Stefanone, and representing S. James read- ing in a glory of angels, is in the

style of the picture of Monte Oliveto.

2 Kugler's handbook p. 190.

Chap. XI. COLANTONIO DEL FIORE.

335

he learnt from Rene of Anjou.1 It might almost be sup- posed that Summonzio, when speaking of Colantonio, in- tended to speak of Antonello of Messina, who certainly began to paint in oil about the close of Rene of Anjou's reign, the more as Colantonio is said to have been Anto- nello's master, and it is hard to conceive, how one who had learnt to paint in oil under Rene , should be the master of another who had already proved himself a per- fect master four years after Rene's death.2 The proofs which Dominici, Tutini, Celano, Eugenio Carraciolo, and all subsequent writers, including Kugler, set forth to establish the existence of Colantonio in 1375, is a triptych in the choir of the church of S. Antonio Abate at Naples, representing S. Anthony enthroned and in the act of benediction amongst angels and saints.3 Tuscan in com- position, style; drawing, colour and draperies, this picture is by one whose name may have given rise to the legend of Colantonio's life. On the pediment may be read as follows :

A. MCCCLXXI Nicholaus Tomasi, de Flore, Picto. That Niccola, or Cola Tomasi, is not synonymous with Niccola, or Col Antonio, is true, but del Fiore is evidently a corruption of de Flore, which means neither more nor less than "de Florentia". Of Nicholas Thomasi of Flo- rence, there may be occasion to speak. His name is in the list of the first artists who joined Jacopo di Casen- tino in founding the guild of S. Luke at Florence. As a proof that Colantonio still lived and produced in 1436, the authors above quoted trust to the evidence of a picture in two parts, of which the upper represents S. Francis surrounded by a choir of angels and saints, the lower is devoted to the subject of S. Jerom extracting a thorn from a lion's paw. The first of these pictures, separated

1 See Summonzio's letter to Marcantonio Michele at Venice dated 1524, and published by Puc- cini in his Memorie di Antonello da Messina.

2 See Crowe and Cavalca-

selle's Flemish painters. London, Murray. 8°. 1857 and Antonello's portrait in the Berlin gallery of the year 1445.

3 SS. John Evangelist, Louis of Thoulouse, Peter and S. Francis.

336

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

from its companion, hangs in the church of S. Lorenzo at Naples under the name of Zingaro, and is remarkable for a close resemblance to the manner of the Fleming j Van der Weyden. The second, in the Naples Museum, I is essentially in the Flemish style also. Both are utter- ly different from other pictures assigned to Colantonio. The date of 1436 is not now to be found in either of the panels under notice.1 As to a damaged fresco of Giottesque character assigned to Colantonio, which still remains in the lunette above the portal of S. Angelo a Nilo at Naples,2 it is not easy to speak with any cer- tainty. The four works, however, assigned to Colantonio, represent him variously as a Tuscan or a feeble Giottes- que of the close of the fourteenth, or a Fleming of the fifteenth century, and it may be fairly assumed that no such painter ever existed.

That Giotto exercised a certain influence in the king- dom of Naples is evident, but there, as in other parts of Italy, he bequeathed the art of which he was the sole master to inferior men, who followed the letter more than the spirit of their master. His intercourse with Robert of Naples, as Vasari describes it, illustrates anew the powers of retort and the readiness of Giotto, whilst it places the king in the light of a condescending and con- i siderate patron. Robert often visited the painter to hear him tell stories, or see him work, and seemed so pleased with his company that on one occasion he went so far as to say, he would make Giotto the greatest man in his kingdom. The painter's answer was no doubt clever, but cannot be understood in our day. Clearer to modern ears was his reply when Robert advised him to suspend his labour, on account of the great heat, "I should cer- I tainly suspend it, said Giotto, were I King Robert." Again the king having expressed a wish, that he should paint a picture comprising a miniature view of the kingdom of

1 Angelo Criscuolo, indeed, af- firms that it never existed. See a quotation from his MSS. in

Chap. XI. S. REPARATA. 337

Naples, Giotto ; who could not obey such a demand as literally as John van Eyck when asked to paint the whole | world, drew a saddled donkey pawing a new saddle at i his feet. On both, the royal arms, the crown and sceptre were emblazoned. The king could not understand the joke till Giotto explained, that the kingdom and its subjects j were here allegorically depicted, they being ever anxious to find new masters.1

On his return from the South, Giotto visited Gaeta where he painted, in the Nunziata, scenes from the new testament.2 Thence to Rimini where he produced fres- cos which like those of Gaeta, have since perished.3

Finally at rest again at Florence, he was appointed by the Priori, on the twelfth of April 1334, master of the works of the cathedral of S. Maria del Fiore then called S. Re- , parata, and architect of the walls of Florence and the cities within the confines of the state.4 Giotto was thus enabled, in the fulness of his career, to prove to the world that in architecture he could perform services as great as those which he had done to painting.

Founded by Arnolfo in 1298, and unfinished when he died in 1310, S. Maria del Fiore had as yet no bell-tower and no cupola. Its front had received but few and slight ornaments in accordance with the original design, preserved in the time of Baldinucci amongst the curiosities of the

kneeling figures of S. Michael and Cardinal Rainaldo.

1 Vasari. Vol. I. p. 327.

2 These pictures perished during the modern alterations of the church. They were already se- riously damaged in Vasari's time.

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 327.

3 Vas. Vol. I. p. 327. S.Thomas Aquinas reading to his brethren in S. Cataldo of Rimini, no longer exists. The painting was known to Riccobaldo Ferrare.se (in Mura- tori, vide infra). Those in S. Francesco representing, as Vasari says, the miracles of the Beata

VOL. I.

Michelina, cannot have been by Giotto; for Michelina only died in 1356.

4 See the original document in Baldinucci ub. sup. Vol. IV. pp. 30. 31. and G aye, Car- teggio, Vol. I. pp. 481. 482. Richa states, that in the records of the Arte dellaLana at Florence, Giotto is appointed, in 1332, to continue the works of the Florentine ca- thedral, and is forbidden in the meanwhile to leave the city. Richa however does not give a copy of the alleged record. See Chiese Vol. VI. pp. 23. 24.

338

Scarlatti family. 1 Giotto removed the ornaments of Arnolfo, and with the assistance of Andrea Pisano, substituted for them others more suited to the grandeur and proportions of the edifice.2 He placed four great statues of prophets in the lateral niches of the portal , — above the latter, a tabernacle, supported on pillars, in which the Virgin and child sat enthroned between S. Zanobi and S. Reparata, the patron Saints of Florence.3 In similar tabernacles above the lateral portals were, the birth of Christ, and the death of the Virgin. Above and between the portals, the pro- phets, apostles, and confessors, stood in niches in courses above each other. Pope Boniface the Eighth, Farinata degli Uberti, and many Florentines of note, found their apotheosis in this noble medley of sculpture and archi- tecture.4

Whilst this grand [work was proceeding, Giotto con- ceived the plan of the present bell -tower, which met with eager approval as it seemed to satisfy a wish not less ambitious than daring, expressed in the following decree.

"The Florentine republic, soaring even above the concep- tion of the most competent judges, desires that an edifice shall be constructed so magnificent in its height and qua- lity that it shall surpass any thing of the kind produced in the time of their greatest power by the Greeks and Ro- mans." 5

1 It is represented in the great fresco of the Capellone dei Spag- nuoli at S. M. Novella in Florence. A drawing of the front, from Ar- nolfo's design in possession of the Scarlatti, may be seen in Richa, Chiese Vol. VI. p. 51.

2 See Baldinucci. Vol. I. p. 310, and Vas. Vol. II. p. 35.

3 As in a sanctuary whose curtain is held back by two angels.

4 According to Richa, Chiese. Vol. VI. p. 51, the facade of 8. Maria del Fiore, as it was left unfinished by Giotto, was accura- tely painted by Bernardo Pocetti in a lunette of the first cloister

in the convent of S. Marco at Florence. A full description, taken j from Rondinelli's excerpts from the Scarlatti records, may be also found in Richa, Vol. VI. p.p. 52. j 53. Giotto's facade enriched with sculptures by later artists, was i taken down in 1588, as will be j seen in the life of Ghirlandaio j (post). A view of the facade left j by Giotto may be examined in a | fresco by this painter in the Sala dell' Orologio in the Palazzo della j Signoria. It does not give details but shows to what point the facade I had been brought up.

5 Richa (Chiese Fioren- \

i Chap. XI. S. REPARATA. 339

_  .

The best judges in every age have agreed that Giotto

I "soared above the conception of the most competent ar- I chitects" in the model which he created; and that in the ornaments of bas-relief and sculpture which Andrea Pi- \ sano executed upon his designs,1 the most perfect com- i bination of subjects , the most admirable form were happily brought together. That Giotto was not himself i a sculptor may, in spite of Ghiberti's commentary, be 1 taken for granted*, 2 for the reliefs, which the latter assigns to him, are avowedly by Andrea. Nor would Giotto have been able to leave Florence even with the permission of the government, as he did, to paint for Azzo Visconti at Milan, had he been obliged to labour in person at the

edifice of which he only furnished the plan and drawings,

and superintended the execution, j Of his works at Milan nothing remains; but the Brera I Gallery contains a Virgin and child from his hand, of old the I centre of an altarpiece in S. Maria degli Angeli at Bologna, S the wings of which are now in the Pinacoteca of the latter city.3 A regular oval head, a smile in the long slit eyes, a i movement more maternal than religious, are the salient fea- > tures of the Virgin of the Brera. The child, in its white and 1 gold tunic, is intended to be playful, but its smile scarcely

i tine. Vol. VI. p. 62.) copies this record which is dated 1334 from p. 56 of Del Migliore's MS. The first stone of the campanile was laid with great pomp on the 28th of July, in presence of the clergy and religious orders, the gonfalo-

I niere, priori, magistrates, and Si- mone Salterelli, the fugitive arch-

bishop of Pisa.

1 "Che gli disegn6 Giotto." Va-

sari. Vol. III. p. 106. "Secondo ildisegno di Giotto." Ibid. Vol.11, p, 38.

2 "Fu dignissimo . . . ancora neir arte statuaria. Le prime ! Storie sono nell' edificio, il quale i fu da lui editicato, del Campanile da S. Reparata, furono de sua

mano scolpite e disegnate." Ghi- berti 2d Commentary in Vas. Vol. I. p. XIX.

3 Restored to its primitive form, this altarpiece originally in S. An- tonio Abate of Bologna represents the Virgin veiled even to the neck and chin, holding the infant in her arms , whilst the Saviour grasps the border of her dress and, smil- ing, plays with her. She sits en- throned in a niche between the archangels Michael and Gabriel, S.S. Paul and Peter; and the me- dallions of a pediment are filled Avith the Ecce Homo, the Vir- gin and S. John Evangelist, S. John the Baptist, and the Mag- dalen.

22*

340

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

coincides with the stiff attitude of the body. The half lengths in the predellas are below the usual vigour of Giotto. On the border of the footstool in the Brera panel , the inscription: "Op Magistri Jocti de Flora" is painted. The central part, which is well preserved, is remarkable for the natural tone of the colour. The sides at Bologna have been altered by cleaners who flayed off the gla- zes and weakened the outlines, so as to show in parts the original preparation.1 It is a tradition in Bologna that the altarpiece was ordered of Giotto by Gero Pepoli, who, in 1330, erected the church of S. Chiara degli Angeli, fuori di Porta Castiglione, and that, having taken eight months to paint the walls of the church itself, he had board and lodging in the convent of the Angeli. 2 The Graticola di Bologna, published by Lamo, 3 states that four figures painted on the sides of the old Galliera Gate of Bologna were commissioned of Giotto by one Scannabecco. But the MS. which Lamo publishes with comments, is hardly entitled to credit if one considers that it assigns to Giotto the frescos of Mezzarata, which are very inferior productions of later Giottesques.4

That Giotto painted a picture representiug S. Francis receiving the Stigmata, and sent it to the convent of S. Francesco , at Pisa, is certain , as the picture still exists in the Louvre, and though much damaged by restoration, 5 preserves the character of the master, as well as his sig- nature. "Opus Jocti Florentine. 6 — That Giotto should

1 This is essentially visible in the feet, hands, and neck of the angel Gabriel.

2 See Zanotti. Guida anon, di Bologna of 1792, p. 398, in Lamo's Graticola di Bologna 1844. p. 2.

3 Lamo, ub. sup. p. 27.

4 Lamo, Graticola ub. sup. p. 16.

5 No 209. Louvre Catal. All colour is gone.

6 The attitudes of the saint and of the Seraphim are exactly as those of the fresco in the upper church of Assisi, and similar to

the remains of the same subject in S. Anthony of Padua. The character, type, and expression, are the same in all; the mo- vement likewise bold and natu- ral. It would seem as if in this subject, Giotto endeavoured to im- press upon the saint a sense of pain to support which requires energy of will combined with re- signation. The three little scenes ! in the pediment, the Pope's dream of S. Francis supporting the fall- ing church, the granting of the j rules of the order, ant the saint i

Chap. XI.

GIOTTO'S LAST DAYS.

341

have painted in the Campo Santo of Pisa is however impossible; as the frescos assigned to him are obviously of the close of the century, and by one who had inherited | some Giottesque peculiarities, but not the style of the mas- ! ter. In the collection of the late Mr. Bromley was a pic- | ture representing the entombment of the Virgin,1 — the tra-

ditional religious ceremony, in which the angels take a part

1 with tapers and censer. The Virgin is lowered into the sepulchre by two angels and one of the apostles. 1 The Saviour, in the centre, takes to his bosom the soul of the Virgin, a smiling infant stretching its arms towards ' him. The composition, of numerous figures, has the style and the feeling of Giotto with his mode of distribution.

Much injury has been done, however, by the abrading of

the painting, and the consequent absence of the original harmonies of the colours and final touches. In the same collection a coronation of the Virgin assig- 1 ned to Giotto is without the qualities of the painter and i has but the general features of the school. ! Giotto, in the last days of his life, was so busy with ! great enterprises, that it would be hardly possible for him to pay much attention to the execution of small works. There are pictures, however, of those years which 1 bear the impress of his spirit, and one example is now in the Treasury of the Duomo at Florence. A half figure of the Virgin looks out from a balcony pointing to one of two miniature figures kneeling at her sides, supported each by her patron Saint.2 The inscription at foot runs: "Alio Dni MCCCXXXIIII die XV Februari." This well preserved piece has the Giottesque stamp

' with the birds, are in the typical form, and counterparts of the same subjects in the upper church of Assisi.

1 Lately sold to Mr. Martin for 050 guineas — Vasari describes a picture representing this sub- ject in Ognissanti at Florence, and says, it was painted with much diligence, adding that it had been

highly praised by Michel Angelo. The same subject treated by An- gelico has been engraved in the Etruria-Pittrice as the work to which Vasari alludes. This pic- ture, also in England, belongs to Mr. Fuller Maitland.

2 Left, S. Catherine. Right, S. Zenobio. Gable point, Christ in the act of benediction.

342

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XI.

particularly in the figure of S. Zenobio at the side. The Virgin recals those of Taddeo Gaddi,1 and shows us the passage from the works of Giotto to those of his pupils. Other pictures in various galleries and private collections are assigned to Giotto but deserve no peculiar mention, being evidently false attributions.

Giotto died at Florence in 1336, 2 leaving the facade of the church of S. Maria del Fiore incomplete and the bell- tower unfinished. He was buried in the church of which he had been for two years the architect and master, and was honoured in later times by a monument upon which Benedetto da Maiano carved his portrait. 3

1 See postea, the Berlin altar- piece and a triptych of the same period at Florence, and the fresco of the Virgin and child above the tomb at the entrance of the Baron- celli chapel.

2 January 8. according to Villani. (G.) Book XI. C. 12.

3 At Ognissanti, says Vasari, Giotto painted an entire chapel and four altarpieces. One of these, hanging above a door leading to the choir, is mentioned in a record of 1417 published by Richa, Chiese. Vol. IV. p. 259.

In the Gallery of the Uffizi (No. 4 first corridor) is a picture assigned to Giotto representing the Sermon on the mount, with a predella on which are represented the capture and Christ outraged by the Jews. The Giottesque cha- racter of an artist of the close

of the 14th century may be noted in this picture.

At Munich under the name of | Giotto is a Last Supper (No. 547. Cabinets), and 10 saints (No. 541. 544). The first of these seems to have been part of a predella and represents only the good school of Giotto. The two last have suf- 1 fered much from cleaning.

Of the pictures at Berlin as- signed to Giotto more shall be said when Taddeo Gaddi is considered. But one may at once declare, that the Virgin and child (No. 1040) and the descent of the Holy spirit (No. 1073) are far below the merits of the great Florentine.

A very pretty little Last Supper in Lord Ward's collection, in the Giottesque spirit but not by Giotto, may be recommended as a work of the time of the Gaddi.

Chap. XII.

ANDREA DI PONTEDERA.

343

CHAPTER XII.

ANDREA DI PONTEDERA, AND THE SCULPTORS OF THE XIV. CENTURY.

"There is no example of prosperity or perfection in the art of painting, unaccompanied by a relative display of excellence in that of sculpture; and an attentive student ' of the works produced in every age will be convinced that the two arts are sisters, born at the same time, and governed by the same spirit". With these words Vasari opens the life of Andrea commonly called Pisano. That the two arts were sisters in the thirteenth century is true ; but that sculpture might justly claim the right of primo- geniture is equally so. Hence the argument of Vasari is, in a certain measure, false. The converse of his pro- position would not yield a true conclusion; for in the time of Niccola Pisano, sculpture found no sister of equal birth in painting. When Niccola bequeathed his art to Giovanni, it underwent, in the hands of the latter, a per- ceptible change. To a cold and inanimate imitation of the antique succeeded a return to the study of nature. Giovanni, however, in the attempt to revert to the first principles of plastic delineation, had too much to forget; and he wavered ever between reminiscences of the formal classic and a material or false copy of nature. What Gio- vanni failed to compass was happily attained by Andrea Pi- sano, under the influence of Giotto ; for he owed to the great Florentine the design of the bronze gates in the Baptis- tery of Florence, 1 that of the reliefs on the campanile, and

1 "Una delle porte della quale aveva gia fatto Giotto un disegno bellissimo." Vasari. Vol. II. p. 38.

344

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

no doubt also, that of the figures which so long adorned the front of S. Maria del Fiore.

Andrea was born at Pontedera1 in the Pisan territory, and is supposed to have served his apprentice- ship to Gio- vanni Pisano, as early as 1305. 2 His father was one Ugolino Nini ; and he inscribed his works with his own, his father's and his grandfather's name. Taking example from the works of his Pisan predecessors and from those of Giotto, he displayed precocious talents in certain works at S. Maria a Ponte in Florence; but, if Vasari truly assigns to him the plans of the castle of S. Barnabas, called the Scarperia, he must as early as 1306 3 have acquired all the knowledge necessary for the profession of the archi- tect and engineer. Yet the great works of Andrea date no further back than 1330, when he completed the bronze gate of the Baptistery of Florence, in which, to the per- fection of composition and distribution due to Giotto, he added a clear and simple language free from all redun- dance, — expressing the leading idea of his subject in the clearest form. He displayed a novel power in the re- production of the nude, — and the most perfect knowledge of proportion and harmony of parts allied to elegance of outline and beauty of modelling. His drapery, in itself simple, nobly clad his figures. These qualities are to be found in the eight reliefs of the Virtues , in which the emblematic character of each figure is impressed upon it with unmistakeable force. The sense of hope had not been more ably rendered by Giotto himself than it was by Andrea in the sitting figure of a youthful and beautifully clad female, raising her head and arms with supreme lon- ging to the crown which she awaits. Nerve and force could not have been better rendered than they were in the muscular arm and frame of Fortitude , clad in the

1 See the document to that ef- fect in Bonaini, Memorie Ined. ub. sup. p.p. 60—61. 127. 8—9.

- 2 Ciampi and Morrona assume that "Andreuccius Pisanus, famu-

lus Magistri Johannis," who ap- pears in a document of the Pisan archives, is no other than Andrea di Pontedera.

3 Giovanni Villani. Lib. VII. C. 86.

Chap. XII. ANDREA DI PONTEDERA.

345

spoils of the lion, and holding a mace and shield. In the upper subjects from the life of S. John the Baptist , the idea predominates over the form without detriment to the form itself. Strength, tenderness, every sentiment which gives life to action, may be seen appropriately display- ed, without triviality or vulgarity. These gates are in- scribed :

"Andreas , Ugolini Nini de Pisis me fecit AD. 1330" and they deserve in every sense the praise which they elicited, as well as the curiosity of the public; — who, according to Simone della Tosa,1 went in crowds to their inauguration in presence of the ambassadors of Naples and the "Signoria" of Florence.2

The statues of Boniface the Eighth, of S. Peter and S. Paul, the prophets, the four doctors of the church, S. Lawrence and S. Stephen, all forming part of the orna- ment to the front of S. Maria del Fiore, were removed in 1588. The remains of the first of these figures may be seen mutilated in the garden of the Riccardi family, at Valfonda, together with those of two of the Doctors of the church, S. Peter and S. Paul; — whilst the two remaining Doctors lie in the garden walk leading to Poggio Imperiale, and remnants of other parts of the monumental front are to be seen in the amphitheatre of the Boboli. 3 But the bas-reliefs of the Campanile are in their places; and it is possible still to distinguish those which Andrea executed from the designs of Giotto. Of these the follow- ing is a list:

On the west side nearest the Duomo, a series of hexagons forms the lowest range of ornament, and contains, — the crea- tion of man; the creation of woman; the first labours; Jabal, the father of those that dwell in tents and have cattle ; — Jubal

1 In Morrona. Vol. II. p. 367.

2 The assistant of Andrea in casting- the bronze was according to Richa (Chiese Florentine), Maestro Leonardo del Q. Avanzo da Venexia. The aid of Lippo Dini and Piero di Jacopo, gold-

smiths, was also secured to An- drea, probably for polishing and gilding the bronze. See also Gio- vanni Villani. Lib. X. C. 176.

3 See engravings of the Boni- face and apostles in Cicognara. Plate XXXII.

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XII.

the father of all such as handle the harp and organ ; — Tubal Cain; — Noah's discovery of wine. On the South side: — Early Sabianism; — House building; — Woman constructs earthenware ; — Man trains the horse to the course; — Woman weaves at the loom; — Man makes laws; — He migrates and explores. On the East side. Man invents ships and navigates them; — He destroys the wild beasts; — He ploughs; — He invents the chariot. On the North side are the seven liberal arts and sciences. Phidias represents sculpture; — Apelles, painting. But here the work of Andrea, on the designs of Giotto, ceased; and Grammar, Poetry, Philosophy, Astrology, and Music, are la- ter works assigned to Luca della Robbia. Above the gate of the tower is the Redeemer between Enoch and Elias, also by Andrea. In the next higher course of ornament, in starlike spaces, are: — West, the seven cardinal Virtues; — ■ South, the seven works of mercy; — East, the seven beatitudes, — North, six of the seven sacraments, the se- venth being replaced by a relief of the Madonna. Amongst the statues in the niches, above the second course, four pro- phets, on the South front, are by Andrea, the rest by later hands; and though some of these reveal the genius of Dona- tello, they suit the character of the edifice less than those which the great Florentine conceived, and the Pisan car- ried out.

Here, in all its vigour, and with a purely Italian cha- racter, statuary disclosed itself, free from the mannerisms or deficiencies of Niccola or Giovanni. It had assumed the types of Giotto, and clothed itself in a new garb, in which not a trace of the pagan remained; but in its stead, a more Christian sentiment prevailed. It is not pos- sible to find any thing finer in the century than the noble figure of the Eternal, softly approaching the recumbent Adam, extending his hand and issuing the fiat, in obedience to which the man seems to live and to raise a part which has begun to receive animation. As a com- position of two figures, assisted by the judicious pla- cing of two or three trees , this is a masterpiece of art- ful simplicity. Again, in the creation of woman, the su- preme repose of man, naked and bare on earth but drea- ming of heaven, is admirably contrasted with the dawn of consciousness in Eve, who floats forward into life aided

346

Chap. XII. ANDREA DI PONTEDERA.

347

by the hand of the Eternal to inhale the vivifying breath, with an elegance of motion and of shape quite remarkable. — In one, absolute rest, in the other, partial motion. Nothing indeed can be more poetic than the rendering of this subject; nothing more choice in form, in Ghiberti, Donatello, Michael Angelo, or even Raphael. It is a return to Greek art. It is living flesh, modelled in true and ad- mirable proportions, draped in the simplest vestments. Take any other of these reliefs, see how man trains the horse, the elegance of the outlines, the truth of the action. Mark how the will is expressed in the rowers who sym- bolize navigation. The hand is that of Andrea Pisano. It is stamped with the genius of Giotto, and carries out his commands. One sees in these compositions, as in those of the bronze gates, his versatility, his fancy and vigour. Giotto had already painted the virtues at Assisi and at Padua, he conceived them again for Andrea in a different form. Inexhaustible, he never repeats himself.

The finest nude of the fourteenth century is that of the Saviour in the Baptism of the bronze gates; the most pleasing composition in the same series is the Salutation. The former is a figure which, for perfection of modelling, breadth of drapery, and beauty of shape, rivals the Re- deemer of the Baptistery of Ravenna. The art of Giotto preeminent in painting and in architecture, thus appears equally so in sculpture, which, though carried out by the hands of another, is vivified by his spirit. It is the grea- test monument of the rise of the fourteenth century, and gives final polish to the art of Pisa.

Andrea, according to Vasari, executed numerous com- missions at Florence for the Duke of Athens , 1 about 1343. In 1345 he was invited by the canons of

1 Vasari. Vol. II. p. 44. A ano which was rebuilt in 1332.

provision of Oct. 6, 1342, refers We know from Gaye (Carteggio.

to the works of the new palace Vol. I. p. 491) that the gates of

erected by the Duke of Athens: S.S. Giorgio, Miniato, Niccolo,

Gaye, Carteggio. Vol. I. p. 493. Camaldoli, and Ponte alia Carraia,

According to Vasari, Andrea gave were renewed in 1340. the plans for the Porta a S. Fri- 1

348

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XII.

Orvieto to direct the labourers at the mosaics, and to com- plete the numerous works of sculpture which still remai- ned unfinished there.1 He laboured at Orvieto several years with his son Nino; and no doubt, many of the reliefs of the more modern time were by him. In 1351 he had finished and coloured the Virgin and child above the cen- tral portal, of which some thing has been said in the no- tice of the Orvietan works; and in 1359, he was one of those who received and welcomed Andrea Orcagna, his rival in sculpture, and one of the greatest masters of his time in painting. 2 It is not stated when he died, but Vasari's assertion that this occurred in 1335, is manifestly wrong.3 Of the sculptures assigned to him, in addition to those already mentioned, some have disappeared and others are not the produce of his hand; and, without alluding further to these, one may trace in a rapid sketch the progress of his sons, Nino and Tommaso, the first of whom, having assisted his father in the bronzes of the Baptistery,4 and in the works at Orvieto, inherited the maxims of Giotto's art, whilst the latter sunk to the rank of a very inferior sculptor. It will thus appear that the Pisan school having first extended its influence over Giotto, and afterwards, received its last embellishment from him,5 sunk into insignificance, and shared the decline of the city which gave it life.

Nino Pisano seems after his father's death to have left Orvieto for Pisa. In Florence he had executed, probably

1 Delia Valle, Storia del Duomo d'Orvieto, p. 113, no- tices this fact, but assumes that the Andrea mentioned in the re- cords is a painter and not the celebrated sculptor of that name. A renewed search in the records, however, reveals the name also of Nino , the son of Andrea di Pontedera. Vide Vas ar i, Vol.111, note to page 11.

2 Vide Orcagna. Andrea Pisano is noted in Document 44 of Delia Valle's Duomo d'Orvieto, p. 284,

as present at the dinner given to Orcagna.

3 Vasari. Vol. II. p. 44. Ghi- berti is the only authority for assigning to Andrea works at S. Maria della Spina of Pisa. Com- ment, ubi sup. p. XXVII.

4 Vas. Vol. II. p. 39.

5 "Essendo poi migliorato il di- segno per Giotto, molti migliora- rono ancora le figure de' marmi e delle pietre; come fece Andrea Pisano e Nino. Vasari Pro emio. Vol. III. p. 10.

Chap. XII.

NINO PISANO.

349

in his early time, for the Minerbetti chapel, in S. Maria Novella/ a virgin and child, left unfinished by Andrea, and above the door leading to the canonry of S. Maria del Fiore, a Madonna between two angels, with bronze wings.2 Six or seven of his works remain in Pisa. A half figure of the Virgin giving the breast to the infant Saviour, placed between the two doors of the Western front of S. Maria della Spina, disclosed first in Nino a modification of Giottesque feeling and a tendency to na- turalism. Nothing can be truer than the movements of mother and child. The former bends her head down with an expression of maternal affection, apparently struggling to suppress the sense of pain caused by the draught of the child at her breast. The eyes are partially closed; and mixed pleasure and pain are cleverly combined. The infant scratches one foot with the toe of the other, and drinks evidently with supreme contentment. Here are the elegant forms, the fine draperies, without the essen- tially religious feeling of the Giottesque period. Another example of this pecularity in Nino is the standing Virgin and child between S. John and S. Peter, in three niches by the high altar of La Spina. The head of S. Peter holding the book and keys is a portrait of Andrea Pi- sano3 somewhat disproportioned, and remarkable for the shortness of the arms. The Virgin is, or should be, in the act of presenting a rose to the Saviour,4 who expresses in his face and action a desire to take hold of it. Here, Nino again admirably expressed maternal affection, and the face, figure, and draperies, are so admirably carved, that the sculptor deserves the praise of having " deprived marble of its hardness and infused into it the life of flesh".5 Yet the figure, with all its grace, is slender, and affects a bend similar to that which in Parri Spinelli's painting became a ludicrous exaggeration. Nature and grace,

1 Of Florence.

2 This Madonna Vasari assigns to Giovanni, see antea and Vas. Vol. I. p. 274.

3 Vasari. Vol. II. p. 43.

4 The rose and part of the hand are broken off.

5 Vas. Vol. II. p. 44.

350

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XII.

without the severity or nobleness of Andrea and Giotto, are the characteristics of Nino, who grafts a mixture of realism and affectation on the more solemn and grander forms of his teachers. Yet in this realism there was as yet no trace of vulgarity. As to polish and fine work- manship, Nino surpassed all his predecessors. One of the Virgins on the pinnacles of La Spina, as well as the angel and Virgin annunciate at each side of a picture by Fra Bartolommeo in the church of S. Catarina of Pisa are also by him or some of his pupils.1 Animation and cheer- fulness are in the face of the angel, but the length, slen- derness and affected bend of the frame are particulary characteristic of the sculptor. In the hair and vestments the old gilding and tinting may still be seen. 2 The annun- ciation, carved in wood and rotting neglected in a store- room of the same church, is also very probably by Nino,3 who, according to a funeral inscription quoted by Vasari, was an ivory worker, and is proved by documents to have been also a goldsmith.4

The only remaining monument produced by Nino, and one in which he preserved, with most fidelity, the Giot- tesque feeling, is a tomb erected in honour of the Domini- can, Simone Salterelli to the left of the entrance in S. Ca- tarina of Pisa.

On a base adorned with three bas-reliefs , a bier is pla- ced within a tabernacle, supported on pillars, spanned by trefoil arches. Two angels raise a curtain at each side; and, on the slab, lies the body of Simone, who died arch-

1 These figures which, according to Vasari (Vol. II. p. 44) , were inscribed: "A di primo Febbraio 1370: queste figure fece Nino figluolo d1 Andrea Pisano," can hardly have been executed at the time stated; since it is proved that Nino was dead in 1368. They were first in the church of S. Zenone of the Camaldoles of Pisa , and were afterwards purchased by the fraternity of the Battuti di S. Gregorio. This fraternity having hired the oratory of S. Salvadore,

dwindled down to one member in 1487, when its property passed to the Dominicans. See Bonaini. Not. Ined. p. 65—6.

2 These figures were, of old, in front of the pilasters of the choir. Morrona, ub. sup. Vol. III. p. 102.

3 The figures are long, affected in movement, and coloured. The hands and arms are broken.

4 See the document in Bo- naini. Mem. Ined. p. 126 — 7.

Chap. XII.

NINO PISANO.

351

bishop of Pisa in 1342. 1 Above this, between two pinnacle statues of S. Dominick and a monk, rises a tabernacle divi- ded into three niches, beneath which a relief represents the archbishop carried to heaven; whilst in the niches, the Virgin stands, holding the Saviour under the guard of two angels. In the lowest reliefs, which are carved with a certain breadth, three incidents of Simone's life are deli- neated.

The angels raising the curtain are not without grace, whilst the figure of the archbishop is noble, well propor- tioned, finely draped, and a good portrait. The angels at the Virgin's side are reminiscent of the Giottesque manner. They are clad in simple vestments, and combine severe simplicity with elegance. The extremities are better than they were usually in the paintings of Giotto's followers. S. Dominick, though damaged, is a fine, well proportioned figure. The monument however is heavy, disproportioned and out of harmony; and it is evident that Nino, who so carefully carved details, succumbed to a very common temptation, by sacrificing the whole to the parts, and mar- ring general effect.

In 1364, Pisa found itself one morning, to its great surprise, deprived of republican institutions, and subject to a rich but very vain merchant named Giovanni dell'Ag- nello de7 Conti. Taking the Venetian title of a doge, he indulged in a state worthy of an emperor, rode with a golden sceptre in his hand,2 and showed himself to the people at the windows of a house festooned with cloth of gold. Yet, mindful of the instability of human affairs, and desirous of securing to his family a final resting place worthy of his high station, he commissioned Nino to erect a sumptuous tomb outside the front of the church of San Francesco. In spite of his wealth, he forgot to pay, and it was not till after his death, in 1368, that the debt was claimed by Nino's heir, Andrea, and paid to Tommaso, the tutor and uncle of the latter. The record in which the memory of this proceeding is given, is of

1 Morrona, ub. sup. Vol. III. p. 109. 2 F. Villani XI. 101.

352

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XII.

special interest; because it shows, not only that Nino was free of the guild of Pisan goldsmiths, but that he died between 1364 and 1368. Another record of 1358 shows, that Nino worked in silver for the cathedral of Pisa, to- gether with one Coscio quondam Gaddi, and Simon called Baschiera. 1 Giovanni dell'Agnello, however, employed not only Nino, but Tommaso the second son of Andrea, like- wise a goldsmith, an architect, and a sculptor. Having caused the palace of Pietro Gambacorta to be destroyed, the Doge commissioned Tommaso to furnish a plan for a new one, of which the foundations were laid before his fall, and further entrusted to him the making of the mo- del of a ducal helmet, the design of a regal chair, to stand in the choir of the cathedral, and a tomb for the remains of the doghessa Margherita.2 — This tomb was executed in due time by the artist, but perished afterwards in a fire. For none of these works was Tommaso paid; and it was not till popular rage put an end to the government and the life of Giovanni deirAgnello, that the debt was cancelled. The remains of Tommaso's works do no honour to the family. A tabernacle erected by him in the church of San Francesco, and now in the Campo Santo, is inscribed:

"Tomaso figluolo (.m.a.e.)stro Andrea f(.e.c.e.) (>u)esto la- voro et fu Pisano.'^

It represents the Virgin standing with the infant be- tween S.S. Peter Paul and another saint in a niche, the curtain of which is drawn back by two angels. Seven reliefs, representing scenes from the passion, cover the base of the tabernacle. In these works the tendency to slenderness and affectation of bend is exaggerated beyond measure. A superabundance of drapery clothes figures, remarkable for feeble movement and deformity of feet and hands. In one of the lateral chapels of the Campo Santo, two stone monuments disclose the manner of Nino

1 See the record in Bonaini, ub. sup. p.p. 127, 8— 9, and p.p. 126—7.

2 Bonaini, ub. sup. p.p. Gl, 127—9.

Chap. XII.

TOMMASO PISANO.

353

and Tommaso; more of their works might be noticed; but they need not be alluded to further, the object of the foregoing sketch being only to trace the general course of Pisan sculpture, its rise under Andrea to a level with the progress of Giotto, and its subsequent fall. It might be necessary, were it the aim of these pages to write the history of sculpture, to notice the works of Giovanni di Bal- duccio who is the author of various fine sculptures under- taken for and in the time of Azzo Visconti, — the arch of S. Peter Martyr at S. Eustorgio, the gate of S. Maria in Brera in Milan, the pulpit in the church of S. Maria del Prato at S. Casciano, and the tomb of Guarnerio di Castruccio of Lucca at S. Francesco near Sarzana, all completed in the first half of the fourteenth century and inscribed with the sculptor's name. It might be well to mention the works of Alberto Arnoldi, who executed, above the altar of the church of the Misericordia at Flo- rence, a madonna assigned by Vasari to Andrea Pisano, and who laboured up to 1362 in the Duomo of Florence; — Cellino di Nese of Sienna, who planned and carried out the tomb of Cino d'Angibolgi in the chapel of S. Ja- copo of Pistoia, and who worked in 1359 in the Campo Santo of Pisa; — Tino di Camaino author of the tomb of Henry the Seventh in the cathedral of Pisa; — Agos- tino and Agnolo of Sienna sculptors of many fine monu- ments. To dwell upon the peculiar merits or defects of these men would be outside the aim and purpose of these pages.

VOL. I.

354

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIII.

CHAPTER XIII. TADDEO GADDI.

It is the privilege of a commanding genius to absorb all inferior but congenial elements and mould them into a form conducive to its own development. As the satel- lites, gravitating round a planet's orbit, reflect more dimly the lustre of the parent star, so the artists of Italy reflec- ted the genius of Giotto. He had concentrated round him the minor talents of his country, moulded them to his will and used them for his purposes. But when he died7 the light which he imparted to fhem disappeared; and art, without progress, languished for a time. For twenty four years, Taddeo the son of Gaddo Gaddi had been the constant helpmate of Giotto 1 and was bound to him by the bond of service, the friendship of Gaddo, and the ties of daily social intercourse. Giotto was his god- father. How often had Taddeo, following the instruc- tions of his friend and teacher, laid in the drawing and colour of a fresco which awaited only the final touch of the master to become the work of Giotto? What was Taddeo' s art but the dim reflex of the genius of the lat- ter? When left to pursue alone his unaided fancy, what may have been his feelings? "Art has fallen very low since the death of Giotto" said Taddeo, when asked to name the greatest painter of Italy. 2 Impartial history con- firms the words and admits their truth. Yet it was no hopeless struggle that now commenced. Those who had

1 See Cennino Cennini's remark to that effect, most easily found in Vas. Vol. II. p. 158.

2 Sacchetti ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 221. Nov. CXXXVI.

Chap. XIII. TADDEO GADDI. 355

served the master and contributed to his greatness, could not but echo his instructions, copy his conceptions, liter- ally interpret his meaning. But too intimately connected with his ways, they could not rise, or shake off the shack- les which held them to the letter of his commands. But by their side, arose others, that were freer participators of the impulse which Giotto had given, fettered by no personal memories of the past, or above the vulgar class of mere imitators. It would be a more pleasing task at once to dilate upon the merits and services of the latter. Yet the deficiencies of the former may have had some influence upon the progress of their age as showing what art had to avoid; and the immediate pupils of Giotto claim naturally the first attention of the student. The melancholy but unquestionable truth respecting these is that they reduced what in Giotto was art, to the dimen- sions of a trade. Whilst they enjoyed the advantage of his compositions which they copied; whilst they conside- red themselves freed from the necessity of exercising the gifts of fancy, they were but too obviously induced to devote exclusive attention to ease and rapidity of hand. With boldness, the result of practise and experience, but without the spirit of natural observation, they conventio- nally copied forms, less with reference to their real appea- rance than to a false model which had become usual with them. But this system is pernicious insofar, that, as the source of all art which is nature being distant or faintly remembered at first, becomes more so in the evo- lution of time, not progress but retrogression is certain; — till false forms become so familiar that they are assu- med to be exact representatives of the reality. This was the misfortune and the peculiarity of Taddeo Gaddi, whose artistic career seems to have commenced when Giotto left Florence to visit Naples. In that year, as has been previously noticed, the Baroncelli chapel in S. Croce was completed, and Taddeo, after painting, as the style alone warrants the critic in asserting, the Virgin and child between four prophets, on the funeral monument at

23*

356

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

the entrance/ executed on the walls of the chapel it- self the following scenes from the proto-evangelion and new testament.

On the lunette of the side, to the left of the entrance, he represented the expulsion of Joachim from the Temple and in four compartments below the lunette,2 the meeting of Anna and Joachim, the birth, the bethrothal, and mar- riage of the Virgin. On the wall facing the entrance , at the sides and above a window which lights the chapel, he placed the Annunciation , the Salutation, the angel appearing to the shepherds, and their adoration, the Magi journeying to Bethlehem, and their adoration.

The first of these scenes, which Giotto had already carried out at the Arena of Padua, was distributed in truly Giottesque perfection by Taddeo, and illustrated by a very animated, often vehement action.

With anger in their faces the priests pursue Joachim, who precipitately retiring, seems pushed out by the shoulder by the chief of them. The more fortunate Jews, who have not incurred the anger of the priests, kneel or stand to the right and left, holding the lamb offerings, and with surprise depicted in their faces. Clad in broad draperies, in noble bearing and of well proportioned frame Joachim retires from the scene of his discomfiture. Outside, he may be seen comforted by the angel.3

Equally fine as a composition is the meeting, at the gates of the town, of Joachim, followed by a servant, carrying his rejected offering, and Anna with a suite- of three graceful females.

The birth of the Virgin is not essentially different from the typical one of Giotto and his predecessors.4 The pre-

1 Under a pointed arch, in the apex of which the arms of the Baroncelli are counterparts of those on Giotto's altarpiece inside.

2 The compartments are divided by painted winding columns and cornices of feigned architecture.

3 A fine natural figure in a glory, the rays of which are all re- painted. Joachim sits on a rock.

His green dress in great part re- touched in yellow. In a distant landscape three shepherds.

4 The figure of Anna, on the bed, has been obliterated, and a new intonaco introduced but not filled up. The composition thus loses all balance. The nurses have washed the babe, with whom one of them plays.

Chap. XI. THE BARONCELLI FRESCOS.

357

sentation of the Virgin at the temple, of which a beautiful small design on grey paper exists in the gallery of drawings at the Louvre, is a crowded composition, to present which would have required in the artist a knowledge of perspec- tive not to be demanded of one living in the fourteenth century. The Virgin may be seen ascending the steps of the temple accompanied by Joachim, Anna, and an infant, to meet the high priest standing at the head of the flight, accompanied by his suite, and surrounded by spectators.1 On each side of the foreground groups kneel; and, promi- nent on the right, behind two beautifully drawn females, a man with a long beard in profile holding his dress, and looking with eagerness at the Virgin, discloses the features of Gaddo Gaddi, the painter's father such as Vasari engra- ved them in the life of that painter, and near him another, also bearded, in a cap, and of fierce aspect for so timid a man , revealing the face of Andrea Tafi. 2

Utter want of repose and order characterizes the compo- sition of the Sposalizio ; — the bridal pair and their parents being surrounded by a crowd, some of whom, to the left behind Joseph, have a look of contempt,3 and others, such as the youth breaking the bough, are ugly in form, features and expression. 4 To the left front of these, two musicians express very fairly in features that are not without nature or beauty, the act of blowing the pipe. Confused as the scene undoubtedly is, a certain individuality and some character in a few heads somewhat retrieve its principal defect. The profile of the bridegroom is fine, — that of the high priest, uniting the pair, equally so. A group of females to the right is elegant, especially so the female with the diadem next but one to the Virgin.

Who will not admit that, compared with Giotto, Taddeo was conventional, in expression, movement, and execution?

1 The whole of the figure of the Virgin, part of that of Joa- chim and S. Anna, the steps are repainted on a new intona- co. A kneeling figure of a man to the left is repainted as to the dress. The figures in the middle distance are short and ill pro- portioned.

2 Modern critics, in error, would have us [take these portraits in

the next compartment of the Spo- salizio.

3 Near these, according to the commentators of Vasari. (Vol. I. p. 207), the portraits of Gaddo and Tafi.

4 The blue dress of this figure repainted. In the centre of the foreground another figure breaks a stick under its foot. To the right, a group of females seems to have accompanied the Virgin.

358

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIII.

His ideas of proportion were, indeed, different from those of his master; and his partiality for long slender shapes discloses almost at once who it was that assisted Giotto in the Southern transept of the Lower church at Assisi. But he was not even true to a fixed standard in this, though better perhaps then other pupils of Giotto. Fancy he did not possess; and he seldom desired to express ac- tion without falling into an exaggeration of vehemence. The affected air of the heads was increased by constant neglect in defining the forms of eyes, which he usually gave with long lids, hardly open and unfinished at the corners. He drew with that sort of facility which the Italians call bravura, making the heads long, narrow, and without projection at the back. A peculiar obliquity was given to the face by the false line of the cheek and chin, which instead of contrasting with that of the nose, gene- rally followed it in an aquiline course. The neck always seemed inordinately long, the short, coarse, hands and feet neglected in drawing, the nude stiff and hard, the draperies broad but arranged. Without the sobriety of Giotto, he painted the vestments in gay contrasts and of changing hues. His colour was laid in with an ease and consistency of texture that betrayed facility and haste; and he seldom took the trouble to fuse his tones. His shadows were dark,1 their mass patchy. The idea of relief by light and shade was imperfect, and the surface generally flat. Taddeo's execution was, in fact, rapid, de- corative and conventional. Yet to a distant observer, his style was effective, and sometimes imposing. Lower than Giotto in the scale of art, he was essentially inferior to him in rendering character and expression, — lacking, at once, his softness and gravity, his elegance and severe simplicity.

That the religious feeling, peculiar to Giotto, could not be maintained by Taddeo is evident in the annuncia-

Dark verde, and the lights stippled in a somewhat purple tone, the outlines of a wine-red.

Chap. XIII. THE BARONCELLI FRESCOS.

359

tion, where the Virgin sits and quietly awaits the angel who flies down from heaven. In the Salutation, he chan- ges the typical form of the composition and makes Eliza- beth kneel before Mary. In the apparition to the shep- herds, he painted a graceful angel; to the shepherds he gave vulgar features but true and energetic action. In the Adoration, S. Joseph sits to the left with his knee between his hands. In the progress of the Magi, it is no longer a star but the figure of the infant Sa- viour in the sky that guides them.1 One who looks up under the hand which he raises to protect his eyes, dis- closes a very common type in Taddeo Gaddi, a long nose and chin, and a forehead and head that preclude the idea of brains. In the pilasters at the sides of these scenes, S. Joseph with the blooming rod is a figure of some beauty, whilst David below, trampling on Goliath, is fine and natural. Here, however, greyish lights are pain- ted over red semitones and red shadows ; and the system of changing hues is carried even into flesh tints. In the dia- gonals of the double ceiling Taddeo placed the eight virtues, faith, hope, charity, prudence, justice, temperance, fortitude and humility, all painted in dead colour, but without the fancy of Giotto. But one example need be cited to show how little the pupil had inherited of this quality. Giotto, at the Arena of Padua, represented temperance with a bit in her mouth, holding a sword bound to its scabbard; Taddeo merely represented a female holding a sickle. Nor were the figures less defective as regards movement and design than they were in respect of invention and fancy when compared with those of Giotto at Padua.

It has never been doubted that these frescos, which Vasari assigns to Taddeo, were really executed by him. But, if tried by a sure test, that is, by comparison with works of the artist which bear his name and a date, it will be seen that Vasari's biography is, in this instance,

1 All the figures here are re- I in the text. The adoration of the painted except the head noticed | Magi is likewise repainted.

360 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

correct. One of these works is an altarpiece now exhi- bited in the museum of Berlin and inscribed on the cen- tral panel1 with the words:

"AnnoDniMCCOXXXIIIImensis septembris Tadeus mefecit."

Here the infant Saviour, with broad head and cheeks sitting on the Virgin's knee, faintly attempts a smile as he caresses her face. The slender narrow faced Virgin, in a simple atti- tude, trying to smile, shows a strange exaggeration of tender- ness in the long half closed eyes. 2 Some nature is observable in the portraits of the patron and his wife, kneeling at the foot of the throne ; stern gravity and a finished execution in the saints on the border of the antique frame at each side.3 Here then is a genuine work which may be compared with those of Giotto. Taddeo succeeds in imparting an affected sense of maternal tenderness and nothing more. Religious feeling he clearly does not possess. A certain seriousness and steadiness of gravity may be noted in the figures of apostles ; the drawing is precise and more than usually careful, especially in the extremities. The colour is luminous and so rich in vehicle as to appear moistened with oil, yet a little flat in general tone; the draperies in gay and changing hues. In the right hand wing, the birth of the Saviour is, with some slight change, but a repetition of the same subject by Giotto in the lower church of Assisi.4 Above this scene is one from the life of S. Nicolas of Bari, dramatic and truly Giottes- que in character;5 whilst in the left hand wing,6 be- neath two prophets in the angles is the crucified Saviour, no longer the fine simple figure of Giotto, but a long slender nude, as yet not colossal, as Gaddi afterwards

1 No. 1079. Berlin catalogue.

2 As usual the line of the cheek follows that of the nose and mouth.

3 S.S. John Baptist, Francis, and 12 apostles.

4 The group of women washing the child is absent. In the dis- tance the adoration of the shep- herds.

5 Where Taddeo represents the

saint returning the child to its parents, and the affection of the latter is well shown by the ac- tion. A natural incident, too, is that of the dog recognizing in the child an old friend. In the upper angles 2 prophets. The Berlin catalogue calls this a scene from the life of S. Catherine. 6 No. 1080. Berlin catalogue.

Chap. XIII.

ALT ARPIE CE S .

361

conceived it. The Magdalen grasps the foot of the cross ; and the Virgin and S. John Evangelist stand at each side. Above this also, a scene from the life of S. Nicolas of Bari is depicted, in which,1 as in its counterpart on the other side, individuality and animation are conspicuous. None, indeed, but a pupil of Giotto could have followed with such certainty his laws of composition. The Saints on the altarpiece,2 when closed, are inferior to the inner subjects; and, in the rudeness of their execution, recal more than the rest the rougher manner of the frescos in the Baroncelli chapel. But doubtless, much of this bad effect is caused by rubbing down.3 Another, and, if pos- sible, still more important example than the foregoing is an altarpiece in the sacristy of S. Pietro a Megognano near Poggibonsi inscribed:

"Taddeus Gaddi d Floretia me pTxit. M.CCCLV.

Questa tayola fece fare Giovanni di S.S. Segnia p remedio dl anima sua ed suoi passati." 4

This picture which is a Virgin and child enthroned amongst angels, confirms all that has been said as to the characteristics of the painter's manner, and shows what

1 The saint presents the child with the cup to its surprised pa- rents, who sit at a table.

2 S.S. Margaret, Catherine, and Christopher carrying the Saviour. Christ between the Virgin and Evangelist. These form No. 1081 of the Berlin catalogue. The three panels, forming originally an altarpiece, were in the Gallery of Mr. Solly.

3 In the Bigallo at Florence in the room of the "Commissario" is a small triptych which, with slight exception , corresponds exactly with the picture at Berlin (some saints here and there being dif- ferent). The subjects, the com- position, are similar. The painting too has the same character and beauty as that of Berlin and is by the same hand. The painter's

name is absent, but on the border of the central pinnacle are the words : "Anno Domini MCCCXXXIII". This is a very pretty and well preserved piece, showing how the painters of this period repeated themselves.

Another very pretty picture in the same character was preserved till quite lately in the convent of the Angeli at Florence. It repre- sented the crucifixion and saints — a triptych with gables.

4 The signature and date on the step of the throne , — the rest on the lower edge of the pic- ture. The arms of the donor are above the signature — 3 roses and bar on field azure, probably arms of the Segni.

5 The Virgin enthroned holds the infant on her lap. He has a

362 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

Giottesque art was twenty years after the death of Giotto.

Guided by the certainty which results from the con- templation of pictures actually signed by Taddeo Gaddi, the spectator may turn with some confidence to the small panels in the gallery of Berlin which represent the miracle of the fallen child of the Spini family,1 and the descent of the Holy Spirit;2 both of them forming part of a series, of old adorning the presses of the Sacristy in S. Croce at Florence. They were obtained from thence by Baron von Rumohr, and assigned by him, on the authority of Vasari, to Giotto.3 Taking the first of these panels in connection with the rest of the series, eleven in number, which are now in the Academy of arts at Florence.,4 it is evident that the compositions are Giotto's, and executed according to his maxims, — that the attitudes, the action are likewise his, — that the subjects are in fact, more or less, repetitions of the frescos of the upper church of Assisi; — but that the execution is sketchy, conventional and decorative; — that the feel- ing of the great master is absent, whilst the heads, features, and extremities are of the false and ever re- curring forms peculiar to Taddeo in the Madonnas of 1334

bird in his right. With the left hand he grasps one of the Vir- gins fingers. — Left and right, an angel erect holding an offering of unguent and of a crown. Lower at sides , kneel the four angels, 2 offering flowers, 2 with the in- cense and censer. Gold ground. Well preserved, with exception of abrasion on the left lower corner, the picture is a simple arched rectangle.

1 No. 1074. Berlin Catal.

2 No. 1073.

3 Vasari. Vol. I. p.p. 313. 314. and Rumohr, Forschungen, Vol. II. p.p. 63—4.

4 No. 4. S. Francis abandons his heritage. No. 5. Innocent sees

S. Francis in a dream, support- ing the falling church. No. 6. Innocent approves the order of S. Francis. No. 7. S. Francis ap- pears in a flaming car to some of his disciples. No. 8. Martyr- dom of sevenFranciscans atCeuta. No. 9. Honorius the IIId confirms the rules of the order of S. Fran- cis. No. 10. S. Francis holding the infant Christ at the Christmas Mass. No. 11. S. Francis appear- ing to Anthony at Aries. No. 12. S. Francis receiving the Stigmata. No. 13. The funeral of S. Francis. — No. 5 is so far different from the same composition at Assisi that the head of the Pope is turned in the opposite direction, ; and S. Peter is introduced near the Pope's bed. No. 12 is an

Chap. XIII.

PRESSES OF S. CROCE.

863

and 1355, and the frescos of the Baroncelli chapel. Nor are the further peculiarities of Taddeo, namely, gaiety of colour, depth of impasto and dash in the handling, less marked than in the certain examples of his hand. The panel at Berlin is undoubtedly the best preserved of the series; and precisely there, the style of Giotto's pupil is most positively developed.

The composition of the descent of the Holy Spirit1 at Berlin belongs to the second series preserved in the Academy of Arts at Florence , and is, like its companion representing the miracle of the fallen child, in good pre- servation; but of the thirteen panels, the finest is the transfiguration, which has the magnificence of the com- positions of Giotto carried out by Andrea Pisano in the bronze gates of the Baptistery of Florence. The Saviour is represented ascending from Mount Tabor with Enoch and Elias at his sides, whilst three apostles are prostrate on the ground in terror at the extraordinary light that shines in the heavens. Yet splendid as the composition undoubtedly is, the execution has the defects of Taddeo Gaddi.2

S. Croce could boast in the fourteenth century of more frescos by the pupil than by Giotto himself.3

exact counterpart of the fresco at Assisi and so is No. 9.

1 No. 1073. Berlin Catal. As- signed to Giotto.

2 The rest of the series at the Academy of Florence , comprises No. 18. The salutation. No. 19. The adoration of the shepherds. No. 20. The adoration of the Magi. No. 21. The presentation in the temple. No. 22. Christ amongst the doctors. No. 23. The Bap- tism of the Saviour. No. 24. The transfiguration. No. 25. The last supper. No. 26. The crucifixion. Here the form of the Saviour is less perfect in form, shorter and of worse proportions than in the pictures of Giotto. No. 27. The resurrection. No. 28. Noli me

tangere. No. 29. The incredulity of S. Thomas.

3 He adorned the walls of the chapel belonging to the Bellaci family, and executed two inci- dents from the life of S. Peter in the cappella di S. Andrea. (The drawing of one of these in- cidents, was in Vasari's album. Vas. Vol. II. p. 121.) At the lower side of the tomb of Carlo Mar- zuppini was a Pieta which he had produced ; and in the great screen of the church the miracle of the fallen child of the Spini family, with portraits in it of Giotto, Dante, and others. (Vas. Vol. II. p.p. 110—11, and Vol. III. p. 198.) Beneath this fresco was after- wards a crucifix by Donatello. Ibid.)

364 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

These have all perished, but there remains one which may well be assigned to him in the great refectory,1 where beneath a vast crucifixion and tree of Jesse and four side scenes from the life of S. Francis and S. Louis by some unknown Giottesque, a last supper is depicted. In the latter fresco, the Saviour sits behind a long table in the midst of his disciples, and S. John falls fainting on his bosom. Judas alone is seated in front of the table, and places his hand in the dish; S. Peter, from his place, at the side of S. John, looks sternly at the traitor, whilst the apostles generally are distinguished by animated mo- vement. Amongst the episodes depicted at the sides of the crucifixion, are S. Francis receiving the Stigmata, and the Noli me tangere.2 The wall so adorned has a fine and imposing aspect, though much of the background is damaged or repainted.3 The grandeur of the compo- sition in the last supper is, however, marred by the some- what weighty character of the figures, and the large size of the heads. The eyes are drawn with close horizontal lines, and without corners as was usual with Taddeo Gaddi; — the foreheads are low; — the necks broad, the hands short and coarse. Abruptness in the passage from light to shade, abuse of red in the shadows, a bold neglectful ease of hand in the drawing and colouring of the parts, draperies more arranged than natural, gay tones of vestment, are all peculiarities of Taddeo. The cruci- fixion, on the other hand, is composed of figures remark- able for exaggeration of length and without the just proportions which Giotto always succeeded in maintaining. Some of those in the foreground are, indeed, very feeble. This subject, with its attendant figures in the tree of

1 Now a carpet factory.

2 In the crucifixion S. Francis grasps the foot of the cross. To the left is a kneeling figure , be- hind which the group of the faint- ing Virgin is placed. To the right a bishop sits with three [saints at his side.

3 The backgrounds originally blue are now red, the underpre- paration having cropped up. Near S. Peter in the last supper, the intonaco has fallen and other parts threaten to drop. The cor- ner of the table to the right, and parts of single figures are re- painted.

Chap. XIII. REFECTORY OF S. CROCE.

365

Jesse and side frescos, is executed, however, with a certain ease of hand and betrays an artist of the middle of the fourteenth century confident in somewhat slender powers, and sacrificing the great principles of art to bold- ness and rapidity of execution. Should his name ever become known, it may appear that he is also the author of a crucifixion in the sacristy of S. Croce, surrounded by smaller frescos assigned to Taddeo Gaddi, but which must be restored to their real author Mccola di Pietro, better known as Gerini.1 The same hand will be found to have produced a crucifixion with four angels in various attitudes, hovering in the air, the Magdalen at the foot, the Virgin, S. John and two monks at the sides of the cross in the sacristy of Ognissanti,2 better perhaps in the proportion of the figures than those of Santa Croce, and especially interesting as showing that the author of them must have been the teacher or forerunner of the artist who executed the frescos of the patient Job at the Campo Santo at Pisa. It will not be necessary to revert to the works assigned to Taddeo Gaddi at S. Croce further than to state that the frescos in the Rinuccini chapel are obviously of a later date and productions of Taddeo's friend Giovanni da Milano.3 It is, indeed, re- markable that Vasari, who always pretends to recognize a master's work by his style, should have been in too much haste to discern the difference between the works of Taddeo and those of artists like Giovanni; — those of inferior men like the painter of the crucifixions in the

1 See later the Gerini. At the I sides of the cross the Virgin, S. John Evangelist, the Magda- len, S. Francis, S. Louis, and S. Helen; in the air about it, six angels complete a fresco exactly- similar in character to the cruci- fixion and tree of Jesse in the great refectory.

2 These paintings have suffered much from damp.

3 Above the false ceiling of the

I cappella Velluti in the Carmine, remains of paintings, particularly a profile of an apostle, perhaps S. Peter, were recently discovered. The character of this painting, Giottesque of the last half of the 14th century, is fine, the colour Avarm, and the handling bold. This head, removed by one of the monks, much altered by retouching of the outlines, and made opaque in colour, is now in possession of Mr. Layard.

366

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

sacristy and great refectory, or those of Niccola di Pietro Gerini, who is evidently the author of the entombment assigned to Gaddi in the Academy of Fine Arts at Flo- rence.1 Gerini was an artist who lived till late in the fifteenth century, — the painter of several frescos at Pisa and Prato, and one whose position amongst the followers of the declining Giottesque manner will require future consideration.

Amongst the pictures of Taddeo Gaddi, one in the church of S. Felicita at Florence stands on an altar be- neath and to the right of the organ loft, another, reminis- cent of his style is in the antichamber to the sacristy of S. Giovanni Evangelista at Pistoia, and a third in the Museum of Naples. The first, an altarpiece in the form of a five niched tabernacle is somewhat restored. It re- presents the Virgin and child enthroned amongst Saints and angels, with hope, faith, humility, and charity symbo- lically depicted on the pinnacles of the throne.2 It has quite the character of the frescos at the Baroncelli and the altarpiece of 1355. The second picture similar in subject to the last,3 but with the annunciation in the upper spaces may be noted for heads perhaps of a lower type than was usual with Taddeo, the foreheads being low and depressed; but the draperies are broad though conventionally arranged.

The third of the pictures is dated 1336 and is a triptych of hard but transparent surface-colour, painted without the usual preparation, but with rapidity, on a white ground in warm tones tending to yellow, high in surface in the lights. In bold handling it rivals the pa- nels of the S. Croce presses. The figures are square

1 Vasari. Vol. II. p. 111. This picture was in the church of Or- sanmichele, and is now No. 31 in the Acad, of Arts at Florence.

2 S.S. John the Baptist, James the Elder, Luke, and Philip. The infant holds a bird, and 4 angels kneel singing- and with offerings

of flowers at each side of the throne. Little prophets in pairs are in the spandrilsof the arches, under which the chief saints are painted.

3 Virgin and child between S.S. John Evangelist, James the Elder, Peter, and John the Bap- tist.

Chap. XIII. TADDEO GADDI AN ARCHITECT.

367

and short, but not inelegant.1 These and other pictures evidently proceeding directly from the school of Giotto, but bearing no names, and authenticated by no records, would alone prove to what conventionalism the art had already fallen.2

Taddeo like most of his cotemporaries, wras not merely a painter, but an architect. The inundation of the Arno at Florence, in 1333, had ruined a vast number of bridges and houses, the rebuilding of which no doubt required the skill and the services of all the professional men of the city. Gaddi, in 1336, during Giotto's absence at Milan, furnished the plans of the Ponte Vecchio and Ponte a Santa Trinita. 3 According to Vasari he was one of those employed in the works of Orsanmichele,4 and he con- ducted those of the campanile after Giotto's death.5 To the last he continued to execute works in both branches of his profession. Yet it was not till 1366, that he took the freedom of the painter's guild at Florence.6 In that year, too, we find him one of the council which usually met to deliberate on the progress of the works at S.

1 The centre is devoted to the Madonna enthroned between 4 saints (S.S. Paul, Peter, Anthony, and a bishop , the. head of S. Paul damaged) ; the wings, to the baptism of the Saviour and the deposition from the cross , with the annunciation in the upper spaces; — religious scenes car- ried out without much religious feeling.

2 Three parts of a predella (No. 199) in the Louvre , the dance of Salome, crucifixion, and Christ sur- rendering the soul of Judas to de- mons, have much of Taddeo Gaddi's style. Two pictures in the Natio- nal Gallery Nos. 215. 216, will be found in the notices of Don Lo- renzo Monaco. The baptism of Christ No. 579 in the same Gal- lery has the character of the close of the 14th century. It is a feeble picture, whose partially obliterated

signature must, we believe, read not 1337 but 1387. The figures in the cusps are by another hand, and have the character of Gio- vanni da Milano.

3 The Ponte Vecchio was taken down in 1339, rebuilt in 1345. Gaye, Carteggio. Vol. L p. 488. The Ponte alia Trinita was swept away in the 16th century, but a view of it may be seen in the fresco of Domenico Ghirlandaio in the church of S. Trinita.

4 In 1337, according to Richa (Vol. I. p. 16), when the first stone was laid, Taddeo being, it is said, the author of the design. Orsan- michele was burnt according to Villani in 1304.

5 Vasari. Vol. II. p.p. 113. 114. 115, and 121.

6 Gualandi's register of the guild, in Memorie di Belle Arti. Serie 6. 8°. Bologna 1845. p. 188.

368 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

Maria del Fiore. 1 His numerous paintings in various churches and edifices of Florence might testify to his un- tiring industry, had they not been destroyed more com- pletely than those of his master Giotto. The frescos of the tabernacle of the company del Tempio at the corner of the Via del Crocifisso2 fell with the tabernacle itself. The frescos in the cloisters and convent of San Spirito, — the altarpieces in S. Stefano del Ponte Vecchio,3 the wallpaintings and pictures in the church of the Servite brothers,4 all perished. Pisa, more fortunate than Flo- rence, still preserves a series executed in 1342 by Taddeo for Gherardo and Bonaccorso Gambacorte, in the choir of the church of S. Francesco; but even here, all that j remains is the ceiling, divided by diagonals, and the twelve apostles in the curve of the arch leading into the chapel. ! The latter are either repainted or in a great measure obliterated. The rest is much damaged.5 In one com- partment where S. Francis, in extasy, between Faith and Hope shows the Stigmata on the palms of his hands, the allegorical figures, as they hover in the air which distends their flying vestments, are elegant in form and movement, of good proportions and admirably draped, according to the simple Giottesque maxims. In the angles, two figures were placed, one of which having escaped the fate of its counterpart on the opposite side, represents ob-

1 Rumohr, ub. sup. For- schungen. Tom. II. p.p. 116. 117 — 66. Taddeo was of the coun- cil in 1359, 1363, and 1366. Del Migliore MSS. found notices of Taddeo as a purchaser of pro- perty at Florence in 1352 — as umpire in 1355 — as purchaser again in 1365. — Annot. toVas. Vol. II. note to p. 119.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 111.

3 When Richa wrote his Chiese, in 1755, an altarpiece by Taddeo still existed in S. Stefano. It had remained entire in the sacristy till 1728, been then divided, and was to be seen in scattered panels in the cells of the friars of the

place. Vide Chiese. Vol. II. p. 77.

4 Vas. Vol. II. p.p. 111. 112. Fra Prospero Bernardi in an apo- logy for the miraculous Virgin annunciate of the Servi, alludes

to Taddeo Gaddi's frescos and j says, the documents respecting them were in the records of the convent when he wrote at the close of the last century. See Richa, Chiese. Vol. VIII. p.p. 89 and following.

5 The saints represented are S.S. Basil, Benedict, Augustine, Dominick, Anthony of Padua, Louis Bishop, and Francis.

Chap. XIII.

TADDEO'S FRESCOS AT PISA.

369

edience wearing the yoke. In the next compartment, saints hover in couples fronting each other, — S. Dominick with S. Augustin, S. Francis with S. Louis of Thoulouse, S. Benedict with S. Basil. In the same order in the angles, are the allegorical figures of temperance, wisdom, humility, chastity, fortitude and penitence.1 The signa- ture and date, preserved in Vasari,2 have disappeared with the frescos of the walls, a portion of which represent- ing a youthful and an aged saint were quite lately white- washed. The distribution of the space in the ceilings is good and agreable to the just maxims of Giotto. Of the frescos executed in the cloisters of S. Francesco of Pisa, nothing remains; but if the gigantic head of the Virgin and part of the Saviour, preserved, in the Cappella Amma- nati of the Campo Santo, be a fragment of them, they cannot have been by Taddeo Gaddi, whose forms were not of the round character conspicuous in these remains.3 On his return to Florence, Taddeo painted the tribunal of the "Mercanzia'7 with allegories which have since perished. He was afterwards called to Arezzo and Ca- sentino, where he executed numerous works with the assistance of Giovanni da Milano and Jacopo di Casen- tino.*4 These have likewise disappeared, and after 1366, he is no longer known by records or pictures.5 The date of his death, erroneously recorded by Vasari as 1350, has

1 On the knees of S. Francis a book bears the words: "Tres ordines hie ordinat." Faith, draped even to the head, carries a cross and is veiled. Wisdom carries books; chastity bears a lily and vial; fortitude a pillar and shield; penitence an instrument of fla- gellation. The blue ground is gone.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 112. "Ma- gister Taddeus Gaddus de Flo- rentia pinxit hanc historiam S. Francisci et S. Andrei et S. Ni- colai A. D. 1342 d. mense Au- gusti." The side walls were white-

VOL. I.

washed in 1613. VideMorrona, Pis. Illust. Vol. III. p. 56.

3 This fragment is colourless; and the subject is only visible in outline. The surface has been altered by varnish.

4 He is said to have painted at the Sasso della Vernia, where he first met Jacopo. Vide Vasari. Vol. II. p. 178.

Richa, Chiese. Vol. III.

p. 31, speaks of certain frescos in the chapel of the family del Pa- lagio, church of the S.S. Annun- ziata at Florence painted in 1353, and removed to make place for others by Matteo Kosselli.

370 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

not been ascertained; but Baldinucci quotes a record of the year 1383 which gives the name of his widow as Madonna Francesca, daughter of quondam Albizzo Or- manni. 1 Taddeo was buried in the cloister of S. Croce.2 Serious doubts have been very justly raised by Ru- mohr as to the authorship of the frescos in the great Cappellone dei Spagnuoli in S. Maria Novella at Flo- rence, which Vasari assigns to Simone of Sienna and Taddeo Gaddi. This chapel was built between 1320 and 1350 by one of the numerous architects of the Dominicans, at the expense of Buonamico di Lapo Guidalotti, a rich Florentine merchant,3 who died in 1355, before the pain- tings of the walls were completed. Vasari states4 that Taddeo Gaddi received the subjects from the prior and commenced his labours about the time when the bridges were rebuilt, and when the frescos of Simone in the Chapter of S. Spirito were exhibited to public view. This would be between 1339 and 1346. The frescos of Simone created such a sensation in the city that the prior determined to ask the Siennese to join in Taddeo's labours. The paintings of the Cappellone were then half finished, but Taddeo who loved Simone, his fellow pupil under Giotto, far from objecting to the appointment/ ex- pressed great pleasure at the prospect of dividing his work with such a friend. So Taddeo painted the ceiling and one side, whilst Simone completed the remainder. This story induces the biographer to exclaim, aOh noble minds that loved each other so, that each could enjoy without rivalry, ambition or envy, the honour and reward of his friend." That Simone never was a pupil of Giotto, requires no comment. If Taddeo had half finished the

1 Baldinucci, ub. sup. Vol. IV. p. 330.

2 Albertini, (F.) memoria- le di molte statue &c. d e 1 1 a citta di Firenze; rippubli- cato nel 1863. 8°. Flor. p. 15. The same author mentions a stan- dard by Taddeo in S. Lorenzo at Florence, p. 11, and six panels

in the sacristy of S. Spirito, p. 16.

3 See the authorities in Mar- ch ese, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 124. Mecatti (Notizie) says 1320, and Marchese follows him. Fineschi and Borghigiani say 1350.

4 Vasari, ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 117.

Chap. XIII. CAPPELLONE DEI SPAGNUOLI.

371

painting of the ceiling and left side when the frescos in S. Spirito were exhibited, we should date the incident pre- vious to Simone's journey to Avignon in 1339. 1 Again; if the work had been completed previous to 1339; how could it have been left unfinished in 1355 at the time of Guidalotti's death? But the doubts which are thus raised by the record of a few facts, acquire consistency from a consideration of the frescos themselves, which the reader, if he pleases, will find described in the following lines:

The vast ceiling of the chapel is divided diagonally into four parts, as in most edifices of the time, and is devoted to the rescue of Peter from the waves , the resurrection of Christ, the descent of the Holy Spirit, and the ascension. Of these compositions, the finest is the rescue of Peter which, in the highest degree, combines the great laws of Giottesque composition. It may be said, indeed, to compensate for the loss of the mosaic of the Navicella executed by Giotto for S. Peter's of Rome.2 As the subject stands in the Cap- pellone dei Spagnuoli, so Giotto may have originally composed his. The apostles are visible in a tempest tossed vessel whose balloon sail is puffed out by the wind from the horns of two allegorical figures flying at its mouth. The painter here avoided the mistake prominent in the mosaic of Rome , where the symbolical figures of the winds are blowing from opposite sides of the compass, and ought al- legorically to mean that the ship is hove to, which it obviously is not. This is a truthful representation of a bark tossed by the winds. The figures on board express the various feelings which agitate them. Some are calm, others alarmed; more in an agony of fear. Some of those hauling at the ropes, are in appropriate motion. At the helm is a proud and more confident figure.3 One holds on to the sides of the bark with great force, and looks to- wards the Saviour who treads securely on the waves; — a second sheds tears; — a third prays with joined hands. Here is a composition of the first order, and action vigorously and truthfully expressed. To the right, the Saviour rescues Peter. To the left, a figure angles in the water.4

1 He then left Italy never to return.

2 That is, its loss by restoring.

3 Yet in a storm the tiller would

hardly remain straight without an exertion of great strength.

4 The foreground and sky are repainted, and throughout, the flesh tints are damaged by damp.

24*

372

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

The Saviour, in the next compartment, ascends from the tomb, bearing the cross and banner, in a flood of light, whilst the two angels sit on the sepulchre at whose base the guard lies sleeping. The three Marys approach to the left; and to the right, Christ appears to the Magdalen. Tolerable order marks the distribution and the groups; — grace and fair drapery may attract the spectator in the figures of the Marys , but how cold are the glance and ac- tion of the Magdalen compared with those which Giotto im- parted to her.1

In the third scene the apostles are gathered together on the terrace of a house around the Virgin. Prominent amongst them, S. Peter stands in the background with the keys. The dove of the Holy Ghost sheds its rays on the group, and the flame of the spirit rests on the heads of the elect. In front of the house, which has a porch supported on pil- lars, a crowd of figures is grouped. One is about to enter, others look up surprised. The composition is fair, the atti- tudes decided, and the whole interesting.2

The Saviour, in the fourth fresco, ascends to heaven surrounded by an elliptical halo and a glory of angels sounding instruments, or dancing in the heavens. Beneath him, the Virgin stands in the midst of the apostles, and the group is guarded by an angel at each extremity. These, as well as the celestial choir, are very weak in execution, and have nothing celestial about them. The Saviour is by no means majestic, and as a whole, the ascension is the weakest composition of the four. 3

The Westside of the chapel, assigned by Vasari to Taddeo, represents S. Thomas Aquinas enthroned between the pro- phets, foremost amongst whom, Daniel, S. Paul, Moses, and S. John Evangelist may be noticed, sitting on along hori- zontal bench at each side of the throne. At the saints' feet lie prostrate the heretic disputers, Arius, Sabellius, and Averrhoes, whilst the seven virtues, with their symbols, fly over the scene. Beneath this course of figures sit fourteen females personifying sciences and virtues, in which those may have excelled who are seated at their feet; whilst the action peculiar to each science or virtue is demonstrated in single figures or groups in the pinnacles of the throne de-

1 This fresco is in many parts damaged; and the figure of the Magdalen is repainted.

? The yellow ground of the up-

per scene is new, and the blues of some dresses are obliterated.

3 Many of the dresses have lost their colour and some are re- painted.

Chap. XIII. CAPPELLONE DEI SPAGNUOLI.

373

voted to each of them. One may see Grammar, enthroned with a globe in her hand, teaching three children; whilst, at her feet, Donatus, who excelled in that science, sits writing; and in the pinnacle, a female looks at the water gushing out of a fountain. Rhetoric, holding a scroll, is the symbol of the excellence of Cicero ; — and so as one proceeds, one finds Logic and Zeno, Music and Tubal Cain, Astronomy and Atlas, Geometry and Euclid, Arith- metic and Abraham, Charity and S. Augustin, Hope and John of Damascus, Faith and Diogenes the Areopagite, Practical theology and Boethius, Speculative theology and Peter Lombard, Canon law and Pope Clement the Fifth, Civil law and Justinian.1 No talent of composition is shown in a work so evidently dictated in its arrangement and dis- tribution, but the vastness of the fresco makes it imposing; and some of the figures of the lower course are not with- out animation and character. It must also be borne in mind that much damage has been caused by repainting.

1 The dress of the figure of Grammar is new, and half the face and right hand gone. The dress of Donatus is repainted. Rheto- ric holds a scroll inscribed: "Mul- ceo dum loquor, varios induta colores." The figure is entirely repainted. Cicero has been res- tored so that he has three hands instead of two, one holding a book, another pointing to heaven, and a third holding his chin. This last is old, the two others new. The head has been altered in form by the repainting of the allego- rical figure above it. In the pin- nacle a female looks into a mir- ror. Logic has a branch in its right; a scorpion, not a serpent, as Vasari says, in its left. Part of the dress is repainted, as well as a hat on the head of Zeno. In the pinnacle is a figure writ- ing. Music plays an organ. Part of its green dress is damaged. Tubal Cain, below, strikes with hammers on an anvil. Above, time is marked by one with an hour- glass. Astronomy holds an hemi- sphere and an arm raised , of which the hand is gone. The dra- peries which are here preserved, are fine and broadly treated. The

head of Atlas, below, in profile, is in a good original state. In the pinnacle is a figure with a sickle and a bow. Geometry carries a set square. The compass in its right is gone, — and the whole figure is much damaged by res- toring. Euclid holds a book; and in the pinnacle a warrior with helmet and shield carries a sword. Arithmetic has a multiplication table, yet counts on its fingers. Below, Abraham, with a book and a hand raised, is well preserved as regards the head, but the dress is repainted. In the pinnacle a king sits with the orb and sceptre. Charity holds a bow and arrow, and is a much damaged figure : the head only in part preserved, the dress repainted. In the pin- nacle is a soldier, with his hand on the hilt of his sword. Hope, much damaged, carries a falcon on his fist, of which only the claw remains. John of Damascus, beneath, mends a pen, and is a fine figure. In the pinnacle a female is about to grasp two heads in front of her. Faith points to heaven, whilst Diogenes, below, looks at his pen and holds an ink-bottle. This is a well pre-

374

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIII.

If the figures in the ceilings be considered attentively, it will be seen that they are marked by weakness of features', length and slenderness of shape, a peculiarly close fit of costume, and a certain affected bend of body. They lack the masculine force, the broad and decisive mass of light and shade which characterize the certain works of Taddeo Gaddi ; whilst in the study of extremities, and in details of outline, more care was bestowed by the painter than is common in the works of Giotto's first pupil. As regards colour, the boldness of hand which one might expect is less marked than a soft clear and careful manipulation. The compositions, which are Giot- tesque and may possibly have been those of Taddeo Gaddi, are evidently executed by another hand. Antonio Veniziano probably painted the Navicella, the resurrection and the descent of the Holy Spirit; — another pupil, the ascension, which is the lowest of the series in merit.1 There is, indeed, in the figure of the Redeemer in the ascension, some points of resemblance with that of the Saviour in limbo, in the crucifixion on the North wall of the chapel assigned by Vasari to Simone Martini. In the West face, assigned to Gaddi, the slender frames and close

served figure. In the pinnacle stands a figure with her hand on her breast. Boethius pensive, leans his head on his hand and his arm on his knee. In the pinnacle, a child is held up by a female. Speculative theology holds a disk in which a figure with two heads is depicted. Peter Lombard, beneath, rests his two hands on the edge of a book. In both figu- res the heads are preserved and the dress repainted. In the pin- nacle a female gives alms to an aged man. Canon law holds in one hand a model of a church, in the other a wand; the back- ground is repainted. In the pin- nacle, a man points with one hand to money which lies in the palm of the other. The Pope gives the benediction, and holds the keys

of S. Peter in his left. Civil law is a fine figure with the terrestrial globe in its left and a drawn sword held horizontally in its right. The head is preserved and the dress repainted. Justinian with a book and staff, in profile, is all repainted. In the pinnacle a woman, of grievous aspect, wrings her hands. Most of the nimbuses are removed by the repainting of the background. According to Richa (Chiese, &c. Vol. III. p. 88), these frescos were restored in his time by Agostini Veracini; but they had been retouched before, as the three hands of Cicero puzzle the ingenuity of the Abate Me- catti, who wrote in 1737.

1 See further the life of Antonio Veniziano.

Chap. XIII. CAPPELLONE DEI SPAGNUOLI.

375

fitting dresses are again remarkable, together with a care- ful and precise execution and a character less Floren- tine than Siennese. The three remaining frescos of the Cappellone may also be proved to have more a Siennese than a Florentine character. But it can also be shown that they are not by Simone Martini; though it is very possible that some of his compositions were used by the artist. As to the name of the painter, it is sufficient here to remark that, if it could be clearly proved that Andrea di Florentia painted the frescos of the Campo Santo as- signed to Simone, he also painted the four walls of the Cappellone dei Spagnuoli at S. Maria Novella of Florence, the two works being evidently by the same hand. These productions of the art of the fourteenth century are, in- deed, second class works, executed by pupils of the Siennese and Florentine school and unworthy of the high praise which has ever been given to them.

376

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIV.

CHAPTER XIV.

PUCCIO CAP ANNA AND OTHER GIOTTESQUES.

Time, which dealt but roughly with the remains and memorabilia of Taddeo Gaddi, has naturally been all but regardless of less important persons; and the student seeks in vain for the historical basis of Vasari's narrative as to Puccio Capanna, Guglielmo di Forli, Ottaviano and Pace di Faenza. That Puccio is not a mere phantasm would appear from his admission to the Florentine pain- ter's guild in 1350 (old style).1 Less tangible is the autho- rity which characterizes Puccio's manner,2 and assigns to him a friendly station at Giotto's side, similar to that occupied in Raphael's studio by Penni. — The creations of his talent, if he really possessed talent, are, however, either totally absent or of little value; whilst amongst the confused mass of works he is supposed to have exe- cuted, the student is perplexed to find the majority dif- fering from each other in style, and all beneath the stan- dard of one who should have inherited "the mode of execution of Giotto."3 We fail to discern in the crucifix at S. Maria Novella of Florence, which Puccio is supposed to have executed in Giotto's company, either the form or character of the great Florentine.4 S. Trinita5 and the

1 Gualandi, ub. sup. Ser. VI. p. 187. Baldinucci, ub. sup. Vol. IV. p. 358, gives the date of registry as 1349, no doubt mo- dernizing the old Florentine style.

2 Vasari says, "he was a good painter". Vol. I. p. 338.

3 Vasari. Vol. I. p. 337.

4 Ibid. Vol. I. p. 329.

5 In S. Trinita, he painted a chapel belonging to the Strozzi, the coronation of the Virgin, much in Giotto's manner, and scenes from the life of S. Lucy. Ibid, p. 337.

Chap. XIV.

PTJCCIO CAP ANN A.

377

Badia1 at Florence, S. Cataldo of Rimini , 2 Bologna/3 where it is hard to find frescos in a church which Vasari does not condescend to name, no longer yield any clue to Puccio1 s style. Scenes illustrative of the Passion in the Lower church of Assisi would do him honour, were it possible to forget that Giotto is the author of them;4 or did Vasari, in assigning them to Puccio, merely intend to suggest that he helped his master. Surely the Aretine did not intend to pass him off as the painter of frescos in the north transept. The critic might be forced to fall back at once upon the so called Puccios at Pistoia, were he not induced to pause before the wall paintings of the Maddalena chapel in the Lower church of Assisi, where, it is clear, none but a pupil of Giotto laid out the varied scenes of the lives of the Magdalen and S. Mary of Egypt.5 The chapel was devoted to the re- mains of Pontani, bishop of Assisi, whose days were finally numbered in 1329, — whose arms certify that he is represented receiving consecration from S. Rufinus in the spandrils of one of the feigned arches of the chapel. Amongst the thoroughly Giottesque compositions of a series clearly due to a pupil of the Florentine master,

1 Puccio painted the chapel of I the Covoni near the sacristy. Ibid, p. 337. An altarpiece in that 1 chapel is mentioned by Cinelli, ! in Richa, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 199. j

2 Here he painted a wreck in which his own likeness was intro- ( duced. Ibid. p. 336.

3 Ibid. Vol. I. p. 338.

4 Assigned to Puccio by Vasari. Vol. I. p. 337.

5 In a triple course of frescos, six scenes from the life of the Magdalen, and S. Mary of Egypt are depicted. Lunettes — (3) the communion , where 3 figures look on and four angels carry the saint to heaven; — the gift of his gar- 1 merit to Mary by Zosimus , the saint, being in her cave; — the) ascension of the Magdalen, car- i

ried to heaven in a mantle by two angels supported by two others. In the lower courses , Christ an- ointed by the Magdalen, the re- surrection of Lazarus, the Noli me tangere and Lazarus miracu- lously reaching the port of Mar- seilles. In the spandrils of painted arches, imitating recesses in the side walls of the chapel, the con- secration of bishop Pontani, the figure of a female saint, another female saint, raising a kneeling monk, and a half figure of Laza- rus, 12 figures of saints male and female in the entrance vaulting, amongst them S.S. Peter, Matthew, Chiara. Ceiling in diagonals, Sa- viour, Magdalen, S. Mary of Egypt, Lazarus in medallion. Pon- tani is buried in the chapel.

378

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIV.

though assigned, on no conceivable grounds, to Buffal- macco,1 the finest is one in which the Magdalen lies prostrate at the Saviour's feet, whilst he addresses his host and the apostles present. A " Raising of Lazarus" and a "Noli me tangere," are counterparts of the composi- tions at the Scrovegni in Padua. The technical execution and colouring of the series are similar to those of the allegorical ceiling by Giotto in the Lower church of As- sisi, — to the scenes of the Passion in the South transept. His designs are copied, his elegance of type, form, and bearing imitated; and the whole is coloured in clear bright keys. None but a painter who actually assisted Giotto could have done this ; and one may discern in the painter the helpmate who worked as a subordinate at the ceilings, — who was not ambitious of daring more than to reproduce his Master's creations without alteration, and whose secondary talent would suit the characteristics under which Puccio is presented to his readers by Va- sari.2 Yet it may be admitted that the frescos of the Maddalena chapel are not like the solitary remnant of those in the choir of S. Francesco of Pistoia. This frag- ment, in the altarplate press, represents S. Mary of Egypt taking the communion from Zosimus, rudely exe- cuted in the Giottesque manner by one whose ideal of type was vulgar enough.3 That Puccio at one time re- sided in Pistoia is affirmed by Ciampi and Tolomei,4 who give the authority, without quoting the text, of conventual records in S. Francesco. That a crucifix by him once

1 Note to Vas. Vol. II. p. 61.

2 These frescos are in part da- maged by time and dust and by partial dropping of the plaster, but generally in a fair state of preservation.

3 Vasari says, Puccio painted in the choir of S. Francesco sce- nes of the life of S. Francis, not scenes from the life of S. Mary of Egypt. Vol. I. p. 337. The walls are whitewashed with the exception of the part inclosed by

the press. S. Mary of Egypt kneels , with her arms crossed on her breast. Part of the head, arms, and breast of the saint re- main. The flesh tints damaged by rubbing are somewhat purple in shadow.

4 Tolomei, ub. sup. p. 138. Ciampi adds that, according to records in S. Francesco, Puccio began to labour there, but the work was interrupted by his death. Notiz. Ined. ub. sup. p. 103.

Chap. XIV.

PUCCIO CAP ANNA.

370

existed in S. Domenico of Pistoia is affirmed by Vasari, who quotes the inscription by which it was authenticated.1 In addition to the fragment in the choir of S. Fran- cesco the frescos in the chapel of S. Lodovico (S. Fran- cesco) are assigned to the master; but these are not unlike the productions of a local artist, Giovanni di Bar- tolommeo Christiano;2 whilst in the chapterhouse of the same convent, a crucifixion and root of Jesse, to which Puccio's name also clings, recal the same subjects in the great refectory (carpet factory) of S. Croce at Florence.3 Other works alluded to by Vasari, may be dismissed with- out comment.4

1 Vas. Vol. I. p. 337.

2 These frescos lately rescued from whitewash represent the cru- cifixion with the usual attendant groups and, in front, a lady kneel- ing supposed to be Donna Lippa di Lapo. This lady died in 1386, leaving1 a will in which she or- dered the chapterhouse of S. Fran- cesco to be painted and the ceil- ing of the sacristy to be "into- nacata". The communication of this will which mentions the name of no artist, is due to the kind- ness of the Superior Bernardino del Torto. It is Vasari who sta- tes that the chapel of S. Lodo- vico was painted by Puccio with subjects drawn from the life of S. Louis. No such subjects exist, and it is obvious that if Donna Lippa be really portrayed in the crucifixion, she can hardly have been limned by Puccio who was registered at Florence as early as 1349. The subjects in S. Lodo- vico (chapel in S. Francesco) are, besides the crucifixion, two scenes at its sides — the nativity and deposition from the cross. On an opposite wall, traces of S. Francis receiving the Stigmata. In the ceiling, more modern and rude, are figures of S.S. Peter, Paul, Louis and Lawrence, the 2 first restored; — scenes from the

life of S. Louis may be under whitewash.

3 In the chapterhouse the usual fainting Virgin, the Evangelist. Yet a bishop writing and other saints, a kneeling man and a nun in the foreground supposed to be Donna Lippa, form part of the crucifixion. In two side compart- ments, the transfiguration and an- other sacred incident seem the product of a painter of the close of the 14th century. The ceiling represents the Presepio reproduced at Greggio by S.Francis, the burial and ascension of S. Francis , the resurrection of Christ, and an- other subject, rude and in part re- painted works of the 14th or 15th centuries.

4 Vasari mentions paintings abo- ve the door of S. Maria Nuova at Pistoia (3 halffigures). The Virgin and child between S. Peter and S. Francis in S. Francesco of Pistoia, both absent. Vol. I. p. 337. The chapel of S. Martin in the Lower church of Assisi is by Simone Martini as may be seen hereafter. Vas. Vol. II. p. 337. In S. Maria degli Angeli near Assisi no paintings exist which can be assigned to a pupil of Giotto. Ibid, same page. The Vir- gin and child between S.S. Chiara, M. Magdalen, Catherine, Francis, Lawrence, Anthony the Abbot,

380

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIV.

As regards Guglielmo di Forli and the two artists of Faenza, Ottaviano and Pace, the student may spare him- self the trouble of search; for the frescos of the first in S. Domenico of Forli have disappeared/ and other Giottesque remains are insignificant.'2 Yet we may ex- cept a fragment in the Gymnasium at Forli , part of the series once adorning the church di Schiavonia. We may, indeed, regret that nothing remains of this series except a life size adoration of the Magi, SS. Peter, Jerom, Paul, Augustin, three figures and two horses, creations that do more honour to the school of Giotto in these parts than any assigned to the artists named by Vasari. The spectator will concede that a certain nobleness distin- guishes the slender figures and heads, the finely drawn hands and broad draperies.3 No name has yet been attached to this work, but history records that of Bal- dassare a painter of 1354, who is said to have laboured long at Forli, and this date would apply to the paintings now before us.4 In the absence of all traces of Otta- viano,5 an altarpiece in the Academy of Faenza is still

Stephen and another female, en- graved by D'Agincourt as by Puc- cio, is now in Press IV of the Museo Cristiano at the Vatican — a common product. The Saviour at the column mentioned by Va- sari, Vol. I. p. 338, as on a road near Assisi at a place called "Portica", is not to be found ; nor indeed do any pictures or frescos exist in or about Assisi that are worthy of attention. Above the portal of S. Crispino at Assisi a fresco of the Virgin between S.S. Roch, Blasius, Francis and other saints — partly damaged is a rude production of the close of the 14th century. Another rem- nant of the same time, reminiscent of the lowest class of Siennese pictures, the Madonna between angels and mutilated remains of saints, is in the ex-church of S. Bernardino, now the printing establishment of Signor Sgherilli

at Assisi. Similar feeble paintings may likewise be seen in S. Da- miano outside that town.

1 Vasari. Vol. I. p. 339.

2 A repainted fresco, Virgin and child, in the sacristy of the Servi, a Virgin and child and crucifix in the old chapterhouse, and a Ma- donna "delle Grazie" under glass in the cathedral of Forli are as- signed to Guglielmo degli Organi.

3 A head in the same manner is in the upper story of the same Gymnasium.

4 Bonoli. Storia di Forli. 4°. Forli 1661. p. 154, in Giov. Casali's Guida per la Citta di Forli. 12°. Forli 1838. p. 71.

5 Vasari mentions works at S. Giorgio of Ferrara by Ottaviano without giving the subject (Vol. I. p. 338.), a Virgin between S.S. Peter and Paul in S. Francesco of Faenza. Both have perished.

Chap. XIV.

PETER OF RIMINI.

381

assigned without sufficient warrant to Pace, 1 who is thus unwittingly classed amongst the followers of a low Giottesque style, the principal illustration of which is a hitherto unknown artist called Peter of Rimini. Living in the early part of the fourteenth century this local painter left his name on a crucifix at Urbania near Ur- bino, 2 whose peculiarities of manner may be traced in the frescos still preserved in the chapterhouse of Pom- posa, and in S. Maria Portofuori of Ravenna. Of these let the reader, if patient enough, take the following sum- mary.

He painted the Saviour of a thin and bony frame, with somewhat overhanging hip in the old style, but he drew the form with the utmost nicety and care; and proved that he had studied the anatomy of the nude. The hands and feet are thin but fairly accurate. The Virgin, on one side clasping her hands in grief, is of a Giottesque type and not without dramatic power. S. John, also full of force, is a little more vulgar in features. The Saviour blessing at the top of the cross is a good figure, noble in face, soft in expres- sion, in the character of the good Giottesque time. A fair definition of light and shade, and consequent relief, warm yellowish colour, add to the value of the work. Petrus no doubt lived in the early part of the fourteenth century.

1 To Pace Vasari assigns fres- cos in S. Giovanni decollato at Bologna — a tree of Jesse and an altarpiece with scenes from the life of the Saviour and of the Virgin at S. Francesco of Forli — gone — ; scenes from the life of S. Anthony in the chapel of that name in the Lower church at Assisi, now whitewashed. An- j other chapel of S. Antonio — I of Padua — is decorated at As- j sisi with frescos of the legend of B. Lawrence rudely executed and assigned by modern critics to Pace , perhaps because of some resemblance between them and the so-called Pace in the Aca- demy of Faenza. These fres- cos and those of the chapel of S. Catherine assigned to Buffal- macco have also a family like-

ness. The picture at Faenza is a Virgin and child between S.S. John Baptist, Peter, Mary Mag- dalen, and Paul, with the angel and Virgin annunciate in the up- per spaces. According to Lanzi (ub. sup. Vol. III. p. 31) , this is the picture by Pace formerly in S. Sigismondo fuori di Porta Mon- tanara. Yet it is a product of the beginning of the 15th century, coloured in raw and violently contrasted tones, unrelieved, and marked by figures short and de- fective in the extremities.

2 In the fraternity of S. Gio- vanni decollato, inscribed : "Petrus de Arimino fecit hoc . . ." Passa- vant, Raphael. Vol. I. p. 425, mentions this crucifix as signed " Julianus pictor da Arimino fecit hanno MCCCVI1".

382

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIV.

If the traveller follows the road which leads from Ra- venna to Ferrara, he will stumble near Commachio upon the old Benedictine Abbey of Pomposa, whose second consecration took place in 1027. 1 The pavement of the three aisles is in the old Alexandrine style; and it is highly probable that the apsis and tribune, and the whole of the spaces above the arches of the nave were filled with mosaics in early times. These, however, apparently shared the fate of many others in Italy, and were repla- ced by paintings, possibly on the same lines. Thus, one may still remark in the apsis a figure of the Redeemer, and on the arch of the tribune, an angel holding a scroll, with the four doctors of the church, and the four evan- gelists round him. In the courses of the nave, stories from the old testament, commencing with the creation, and almost obliterated; scenes of the new testament beginning with the annunciation; — and, in the birth of the arches, illustrations of the Revelations of John. In the, tribune, incidents from the life of S. Eustace seem not to have been copies like the rest from older works; but in the wall above the chief portal, the Sa- viour is represented in glory in a company of angels, — lower, as the Judge distributing blessings and curses to the elect, and the condemned beneath him. These feeble paintings may have been executed by Chegus (Cecco or Francesco) of Florence whose name was found in the records of the Abbey by Federici, and who la- boured at Pomposa in 1316. 2 Contiguous to the Abbey is the chapterhouse of Pomposa now the property of Count Guiccioli,3 in which numerous frescos are still preserved.

On one of the -walls of the old refectory three large and fairly composed subjects remain. In the central one whose figures are all marked by dignity, fair proportion, and natu-

1 As is proved by an inscription I 3 For whose kindness and cour- in the body of the building-. tesy public thanks must here be

2 Rerum Pomposiensium by Pla- tendered, cido Federici fol. 1781. p. 279. |

Chap. XIV.

PETER OF RIMINI.

383

ral attitudes, the Saviour sits in the act of benediction between the Virgin, S.S. Benedict, John the Baptist, and Guido , 1 while the others, parted from each other by feigned columns supporting a painted entablature, display similar qualities. The heads in the Last supper are deficient in drawing so that the back of the neck and cranium form but one straight line. The staring eyes, broken draperies and feeble red shadows,2 are disagreable, but the style is that of Petrus of Rimini, which though far below the perfection of Giotto, is evidently that of a student, perhaps that of an assistant, of the Florentine master.3 Of the same period and manner, but almost obliterated, are a crucifixion with attendant figures of S.S. Benedict, Guido and other saints, in dead colour in feigned niches on the walls of the old chap- terhouse. Petrus of Rimini did not labour in Urbania and Pom- posa only, but in Ravenna also, in the choir and lateral cha- pels of the church of S. Maria Portofuori. 4 In a niche in the choir, the Communion is represented; and the Redeemer has the type and character of that in the Pomposa refectory. In the chapel to the right of the choir, a fresco, of the ascent of a saint to heaven in a cloth held by an angel, is in the same manner, but, side by side with these, are frescos by an inferior hand. On the left wall of the choir the expulsion of Joachim, the birth of Mary and the presentation in the temple are composed of long lean figures in exaggerated movement. On the left wall, the massacre of the innocents, the death, assumption and coronation of the Virgin; — in the ceiling, the four doctors of the church and the four Evangelists. Various frescos in the lateral chapels, on the arches leading into the tribune, are painted in the feebler style of a follower of Petrus, who can be no other than Julian of Rimini.

1 The youthful and slightly bearded Saviour is reminiscent of that in the medallion of the crucifix of Petrus of Rimini. Si- milar qualities are to be found in the Last supper on one side, and in a scene, on the others representing- Guido, abbot and S. Gebeardo bishop of Ravenna, sitting behind a table in presence of six other persons. On the op- posite wall are remains of a "Christ on the mount" and on the third, a headless figure of a

monk seated, the mutilated part showing an under intonaco, al- ready covered with olderpaintings.

2 The shadows are of a purple red.

3 Federici does not hesitate to assign these paintings to Giotto himself. See Re rum Pomposien- sium ub. sup. p. 286.

4 All these paintings are stran- gely enough assigned by Rosini (Storia della Pittura. Vol. II. p. 63) to Giotto.

384

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIV.

{ Of this painter who reduced the second rate manner of Petrus to a third rate manner of his own, a very fair example may be seen in a Virgin and child, angels, and Saints in the sacristy of the cathedral of Urbania near Urbino inscribed:

Anno Dili mille ccc. settimo.

Julianus, pictor de Arimino fecit

hoc opus, tempore Dhi Clementis

P. P. quinti.

This is a picture not esentially different in appearance from those of most Italian productions of the same period at Tolentino , Fabriano , Gualdo or Camerino. 1 The male figures are not without character and animation, the fe- males not without grace in costume and head dress. The forms of the hands are regular; the drawing of the whole conscientious , and the draperies not ill lined. The light and transparent colour, though soft, is flat and unrelieved. Julian of Rimini thus had his own peculiar style which may be traced with certainty in the picture of the Aca- demy of Faenza attributed to Pace,2 — one of those taber- nacled and pinnacled altarpieces which are so common in the Umbrian school, inclosing no less than twelve subjects or figures, and six medallion half figures of saints or pro- phets. The centre represents the Virgin enthroned, above which the crucifixion is depicted, and here the Saviour is of a long attenuated form and some heads are remarkable for absence of all beauty. The saints, in the side niches, are in character like those of Urbania, the best of them a S. Chiara. 3 Inferior to these pictures perhaps because of

1 The Virgin, a feeble and de- fective figure, both as regards form and type, sits enthroned with the infant Saviour between four angels waving censers and hold- ing up the drapery of the throne. In front, eight figures kneel to the right and left, and in eight pa- nels in a double course at the sides, are an equal number of male and female saints , in the following order, beginning from the top to the left, S. Francis receiving the Stigmata, S.S. John the Baptist, John Evangelist, Mary Magdalen, Chiara, Catherine an- other female and Lucy.

2 In Pungileoni, Elogio Storico

di Giovanni Santi, 8°. Urbino 1822, the reader finds record (p. 47) of one "Giuliano depentore" at Urbino in 1366 and 7. It remains doubtful whether this be the same as the author of the crucifix of 1307.

3 The niches at each side of the centre are 6 in all, containing S.S. Christopher, Chiara, John the Baptist, Elizabeth, Francis, and Louis of France. In the pin- nacles, at each side of the cruci- fixion, are Christ on the mount, the kiss of Judas, the deposition from the cross and another sub- ject.

Chap. XIV.

JULIAN OF RIMINI.

385

extensive restoring , but by the same hand are the frescos in a chapel to the left of the choir in the convent of S. Antonio Abate of Ferrara,1 representing, in a series of feeble compositions, coloured with flat rosy tones, scenes from the passion of the Saviour. The date of 1407 may be seen beneath a figure of the Eedeemer on one of the walls; but this date seems to have been placed there after the frescos had been some time completed. The gradual de- cline of this manner may be traced in a colossal crucifix in the church of S. Paolo at Montefiore near Urbino, — in a cru- cifix in the chapel to the right as one enters the cathedral of Rimini, — and in a third relic of the same kind in the deadhouse of the hospital of Urbino. It might indeed be possible to give a long catalogue of similar works, differing only from those which preceded Giotto's time in this, that, whereas before him, an uniform model was derived from past ages, painters now sought to imitate that of which the type had been created by the great Florentine; and there is evidence enough in the stories of Sacchetti to prove that crucifixes were manufactured, so to say, by the gross.2

Thus, whilst the student may seek in vain for the works of men like Guglielmo di Forli, Ottaviano and Pace da Faenza, lie stumbles, even in the nineteenth cen- tury, on painters hitherto scarcely noticed, and evidently forming a second rate school, the chief of which may have known Giotto, and assisted him in his works at Rimini and Ravenna. In the course of two generations

1 A chapel not usually open to visitors.

2 An ex- chapel of S. Chiara at Ravenna (abandoned and close to a riding- school) is covered with frescos in which the manner of Petrus and Julianus of Rimini may be found. Christ on a rough hewn cross in convulsive movement is bewailed by angels in vehement action, in the air. (4 fly about in grief, 3 gather the blood from the wounds, one tears its dress from its breast.) The Virgin and S. John are at the sides and S. MaryMagdalen at the foot stretch- es out her arms to heaven. Be- neath this crucifixion is the Baptism

VOL. I.

of Christ with an ugly and partly repainted nude of the Redeemer. On other Avails, the annunciation, S.S. Francis, Chiara, Anthony the Abbot , and Louis ; the adoration ; and in the ceiling, the 4 doctors of the church, are all frescos, whose principal figures display the defects noticed at Pomposa and S. Maria Portofuori (note the long thick necks, protruding chins, massive hair, and heads without cranium) , and repeated in other parts of Italy in pictures and frescos assigned to Simone (No. 159 of the Academy of Arts at Bologna, No. 161 and No. 231 of the same Gallery) , or Jacobo at Bologna.

386

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIV.

the art of Giotto was thus brought to a very low and uninteresting standard. It would be difficult to say in what respect this poor Giottesque differs as to quality from the older art which was previously called Byzan- tine. The same class of painters who, before Giotto, existed every where is noticed in greater numbers after his death, but still at an uniform level of inferiority. The tendency of the last half century has been to im- part to inferior productions a value they do not possess, whilst, previous to that time, too little importance was given to them. At first every thing old was Greek; then it was assigned to Cimabue; now it is by Giotto. Nor is it the least painful deception which awaits the critic that, wherever he turns, he finds men who pretend to appreciate the great master, and yet attribute to him the feeble productions of second or third rate artists.

Chap. XV.

BUFFALMACCO.

387

CHAPTER XV. BUFFALMACCO. — THE CAMPO SANTO OF PISA.

It is usual to find amongst men who work in common and who form a company in any given society, one or two who are the merry -andrews of the community, and at least one who is the butt of all the rest. Such, amongst the painters of the fourteenth century at Florence, were Buonamico Christofani called Buffalmacco,1 Bruno Gio- vanni , 2 and Nozzo called Calandrino.3 Calandrino, the butt, was an older man than his tormentors, a bad hus- band, avaricious, credulous, and a fool. It is impossible not to laugh at the practical jokes successfully played off upon him; how he is induced to believe in and, then to search for, a stone which has the property of making the possessor invisible ; how Buffalmacco and Bruno having encouraged him to load his dress with all manner of rubble picked up on a road outside Florence, induce him to think that he has found the treasure of which he was in search by pretending suddenly to miss him; and, ha- ving loaded themselves with stones , curse his luck and pelt him mercilessly home. It is ludicrous to read how

1 The existence of Buffalmacco has been denied. See Rumohr, Forschungen. Vol. II. note to p. 14. But his name appears in the form given in the text in the register of the Florentine Com- pany of painters in 1351. Gua- landi. Ser. 6. ub. sup. p. 178.

2 This painter is inscribed on the register of Florentine painters as Bruno Giovanni pop. S. Si-

mon e dipintore , MCCCL. (Gua- landi. ub. sup. p. 177), and is found mentioned by Baldinucci in a contract of 1301. Op ere, ub. sup. Vol. IV. p. 29G.

3 His name appears in Floren- tine records: "1301. Nozzus voca- tus Calandrinus pictor quondam Perini pop. S. Laurentii testis." See Baldinucci. ub. sup. p. 200.

25*

388

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XV.

Buffalmacco and Bruno persuade him to believe that he is pregnant because his digestion has been affected by overeating, — ■ that he never possessed a pig which they had stolen. It is amusing to read the narrative of Buffal- macco's success in forcing Andrea Tan to rise late instead of early; his rivalry with the monkey of Guido, bishop of Arezzo,1 who repainted in the evening the frescos which had been completed during the day; — the trick which he played on the very same bishop, a fierce and haughty Ghibelline, by painting for him, instead of an eagle humbling the Florentine lion, a lion devouring the Imperial eagle; and the revenge he took on the impatient people of Perugia by painting their patron Saint Ercolano with a diadem of fishes. Wonderful was the cunning with which he deceived the nuns of Faenza into the belief that he was labouring assiduously at the frescos of their church, by substituting a lay figure for himself during a fortnight spent in idleness; and then persuaded them that the sacramental wine was the best for mixing colours. Equally jocose is the trick perpetrated on a peasant who, having ordered a S. Christopher of twelve braccie to be painted in a chapel that had only nine braccie in height, was obliged to content himself with a figure on the floor whose legs passed out of the entrance; — that too in which the painter took revenge for non- payment of the price of a Madonna by secretly painting a bear's cub in the arms of the Virgin. No wonder that such a man should die in an hospital; or that the fame of his adventures should have survived his pictures. It may be doubted, indeed, whether even Vasari, who gives a vast catalogue of his works, did not group together under his name a mass of inferior productions by various hands, being anxious to illustrate the life of so jolly an artist with something more than the stories of Sacchetti and Boccaccio. Yet Ghiberti affirms that Bonamico, or Buffalmacco, was an excellent master; that his colour

1 Guido, bishop of Arezzo, died in 1327.

Chap. XV.

BUFF ALM AC C O .

389

was fresh; and that, when he set his mind to a task, he surpassed every other painter. Vasari, who copies Ghi- berti, repeats after him, that:

at Pisa, Buffalmacco painted many pictures for the town and in the Campo Santo, and that he executed im- portant works; — at Florence, for S. Paolo Ripa d'Arno, and at Bologna, for at least one edifice.1 On his own responsi- bility he adds, that, at Florence, Buffalmacco worked in the Badia di Settimo, in the Certosa, in the Badia at Ognis- santi, and S. Giovanni fra FArcore; that, at Bologna, he painted the chapel of the Bolognini in S. Petronio ; at Assisi, in 1302, the chapel of S. Catherine and the chapel of Cardinal Egidio Alvaro;2 at Arezzo, the chapel of the Battesimo in the episcopal palace, and part of the church of S. Giustino ; at Pisa, the four frescos of the Genesis in the Campo Santo; at Cortona, a chapel and an altar- piece in the episcopal palace; and at Perugia, the cappella Buontempi in the church of S. Domenico.

Not a single picture, of all those he is said to have painted at Florence, Arezzo or Cortona remains. As for the rest:

The frescos of the Bolognini chapel in S. Petronio of Bologna were painted after the building of the church in 1300,3 and cannot have been executed by one who , accord- ing to Vasari, was a master in 1302.4 The chapel of S. Ca- terina in the Lower church of Assisi, and the chapel of Cardinal Alvaro, or more properly Albornoz, are one and

1 Ghiberti's second Com- mentary in Vas. Vol. I. p. XXI.

2 In 1304, according to Vasari, he arranged, on the Arno, a thea- trical representation of the in- fernal regions which had fatal con- sequences. The bridge was burnt and many people perished. Buf- falmacco, however, escaped. Vas. Vol. II. p. 56.

3 See the original record which certifies this fact in Gualandi, Memorie de Belle Arti. 8°. Bo- logna 1842. Series 3. p. 93. It appears from the will of Barto- lommeo della Seta, executed in 1408, that he ordered the paintings

in the Bolognini chapel, with sub- jects given by him, and carried out, as they may now be seen, to be produced at his expense. See note to Vas. Vol. II. p. 53, and the Graticola di Bologna of Lamo. ub. sup. notes to p. 39.

4 Hence a picture in the Bo- logna gallery (No. 229), assigned to Buffalmacco because it is a copy of a part of the frescos in S. Petronio, cannot be by him. The latter can be assigned, indeed, with some certainty to Antonio da Ferrara who may be worthy of special mention in a notice of the early Ferrarese school.

390

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XV.

the same, and so far from having been painted in 1302, was only erected after 1382, when Albornoz obtained the purple hat. That chapel is now called del Crocefisso and is covered, as Vasari truly says, with frescos representing incidents from the life of S. Catherine. One of the paint- ings, in the vaulting of the arch leading into the chapel, is devoted to the Cardinal's consecration by a Pope, at whose side S. Francis stands. The counterpart, on the vaulting at the other side, represents three bishops, amongst whom S. Louis is conspicuous. The compositions, as a whole, are the weak production of a third rate artist of the close of the fourteenth century, ill arranged, rudely executed, and patchy in colour; though as regards the latter defect, time may have helped to alter and darken the sur- face. Some figures, taken separately, may be called ani- mated and fair in movement; but the proportions are defective, and the outlines coarse. As to the chapel of the Maddalena in the same sanctuary of Assisi, it may be re- membered that the frescos there have been described as productions of an immediate pupil of Giotto; and if it were proved that Buffalmacco executed them, as some assert,1 then, instead of being the pupil of Tafi, he must have been the apprentice of a far greater master. The chapels of S. Caterina and of the Maddalena are by two different painters, one of whom flourished in the first, the other in the second half of the fourteenth century; one, formed on the manner of Giotto, the other, to be confounded in the ruck of common painters of which Italy might, at that time, boast a considerable number.

The frescos of the Cappella Buontempi at Perugia are of another order altogether. The subjects are taken from the life of S. Caterina of Sienna, a holy personage, who lived from 1347 to 1380, and whose life can hardly have become a subject for pictorial delineation before the very close of the century.2 Very few of the figures which adorned the chapel, now the bell room, remain; but remnants of a female in a white and black dress, of an elegant, and well pro- portioned form, surmounted by a fine oval head of aquiline features, may still be seen. A natural and easy attitude — the saint holds her dress with the right and a key in her left hand — a broad style of drapery, remind the

1 See notes to Vasari. Vol. II. p. 61.

2 Yet Rosini (Vol. II. p. 52)

does not hesitate to give these figu- res to Buffalmacco. Nay, he pre- sents them engraved as a speci- men of the painter's art.

Chap, XV.

BUFFALMACCO.

391

spectator of the fine figures painted by Orcagna in S. Maria Novella at Florence. Near this figure, which no doubt is that of S. Catherine of Sienna, is a magnificent life size head of S. Dominick, of regular shape, firmly drawn, well modelled and painted in warm light flesh tones. Vestiges may be found also of a head of S. Bartholomew — of the Saviour in glory — of soldiers wielding swords.1 Vasari, however, not content with assigning the frescos to Buffalmacco , 2 attributes them in another place, and quite as arbitrarily, to Stefano Fiorentino.3

At Florence a picture in the Academy of Arts,4 assigned to Buffalmacco, represents S. Humilita of Faenza, and scenes from her life. But the style is that of the Siennese school.

It would appear that the Pisans commenced , for the first time, to order paintings for the Campo Santo in 1299 and 1300, when one Datus, assumed by many to be identical with Deodati Orlandi of Lucca,5 executed certain works*, and Vincinus Vanni of Pistoia, with Jo- hannes Apparecchiali, painted a Virgin and child between the Baptist and Evangelist. 6 A painter of the name of Nuccarus was employed in 1301 to execute the Virgin and child above a gate of the Campo Santo. 7 After this the records give little or no notices of paintings till much later. Pisa, in truth, did not produce during the four- teenth century any painter above the most ordinary stamp, a fact which is the more incomprehensible if one considers that most important pictorial works were under- taken, not only in the churches and cathedral, but in the Campo Santo. It will be seen that the Pisan pain- ters of the fourteenth century formed themselves more or less upon the models of Sienna, but at so humble a distance from them that the masters of the great Pisan

1 Hardly visible without a lan- tern, on account of the darkness of the chapel.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 61.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 20.

4 No. 3.

5 See Forster in Kunstblatt 1833. No. 68.

6 Libr. Entr. e Uscita dell' Opera del Duomo di Pisa a. 1299. 1300. in Forster, Kunst- blatt 1833. No. 68, and Ciampi. Notizie. Doc. XXIII. ub. sup. p. 143.

7 Libro F. del Duomo di Pisa 1301. 1302. in Ciampi. ub. sup. p. 145.

392

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XV.

works employed strangers from Sienna rather than en- trust their commissions to native artists. Thus, in the early part of the fourteenth century, the Lorenzetti il- lustrated hermit life on the walls of the Campo Santo; and though Vasari affirms that Orcagna took a great part in the production of that series, there is little doubt, that he committed in this statement one of the blunders which are so frequent in his biographies. Whatever may have been the adornments of the walls in addition to the frescos of the Lorenzetti, and whoever may have been employed to execute them ; or whether such adornments ever existed, it is impossible now to say. But, towards the close of the century, the want of com- petent artists at Pisa was still sensibly felt, and many from distant parts of Italy were sent for in succes- sion. Yet in no instance were the persons engaged of high renown. As, in the earliest days, neither Giotto nor Simone could be secured by the Pisans, either because these artists were too much in demand elsewhere, or because the price they claimed was too high for Pisan purses: so, later, none of the great Florentines were employed. In 1370, the frescos of the trials of Job were produced, as it is now believed, by Francesco of Volterra, a painter who had long been settled at Pisa; who, as early as 1358, had been elected one of the great council of the people,1 and, in 1346, had already executed an altarpiece for the cathedral.'2 Had the records of the Campo Santo been searched with care previous to the destruction of their old bindings , 3 more certainty might exist as to the authorship of these frescos, which were long assigned to Giotto. Some of the bindings contained entries of payments to artists for work in the Campo Santo, and one, amongst others, to the following effect: "The story of Job in the Campo Santo was commenced

1 Bonaini. Memorie, ub.sup. I of the Duomo. The value of p. 94. the altarpiece is given at 67 florins

8 den.

2"Memoriale" of the opera I 3 Which took place in 1802—3.

Chap. XV. FRANCESCA DA VOLTERRA.

393

on the fourth of August 1371." 1 With the guide of this date, a further search in the books of 1372 resulted in the discovery of the following record: "Francesco da Volterra, of the Cappella S. Nicholai, received of the said operaio sixty lib. six sold, eight den. due to him for blue and other colours, size, eggs and other things bought for him, and used in painting and retouching paintings done by him and his companions, as more fully appears from a written parchment in the cover of a previous book."2 The name of Francesco da Volterra, in com- pany of one Neruccio and one Berto is, however, to be found in the records of 1370 as well as in those of 1372. That of one Cecco di Pietro, a Pisan painter who has„ left behind him some interesting works, remains in notices of the same year; and of Neruccio alone it is known that, in 1370, he furnished designs for the glass windows of the "opera".3 The only doubt which may assail the reader of these records is, that, whereas the paintings of Job are said to have been commenced in 1371, the pay- ments to Francesco da Volterra appear to have been made as early as 1370; and the following alternative must be put: either it is an error to assign the frescos of Job to Francesco, or the transcript from the book covers errs in the use of the word "commenced". Supposing however that Francesco did execute these interesting works, one may inquire of what school he is, and whence he came. His style is doubtless Giottesque, but so many painters went by the name of Francesco at Florence that it is not possible to determine which of them is Fran- cesco da Volterra. The following list [is extracted from the register of the painters' guild:

1 This record has been given fully by E. Forster in Beit rage, ub. sup. p. 114, and may still be seen in the hands of Signor Ciappei at Pisa.

2 This record was found by Dr. Heyse of Magdeburg. E. For-

ster in Beitrage ub. sup. p. 115.

3 See the records now in pos- session of Signor Ciappei, also Ciampi's notice of them, in Notizie ub. sup. p. 96, and Forster, Beitrage. ub. sup. p. 114.

394

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XV.

Years Names Surnames

1340 Francesco. Pardi.

— — Consigli.

— — Bertini.

— — Carsellini.

— — Vannini.

1341 — di Maestro

Giotto.

1342 — Cennamella.

Years Names Surnames

1344 Francesco. Cialli.

1348 — Bondanza.

— — del Maestro

Niccola.

1365 — Bartoli.

1368 — Neri.

1371 — Boni.

1387 — Pucci.1

Vasari mentions amongst the artists enrolled and re- gistered in the old company of painters, Francesco di Maestro Giotto, of whom he is unable to give any notice,2 and, as the foregoing list is extracted from the register, it would appear that he was a member of the painters' guild as early as 1341. 3 The first notices of Francesco da Volterra at Pisa date back only to 1346. Possibly he and Francesco di Maestro Giotto are one and the same person.

The frescos of Job, painted in a double course at the Western end of the South wall in the Campo Santo, and now cut down by the Algarotti monument, adapted to the middle of the space which they originally covered, are divided into six great compartments, beginning from the top near the Western gate, with the subject of the feast,4 and continuing with Satan , pleading before the Redeemer, the battle of the Sabeans, the destruction of Job's house, and below, a scene of which no vestige remains, then Job on the dunghill, the rebuke of Job's friends, and his return to prosperity. In the first composition, traces exist of Job feeding the poor, and feasting with his friends at a table, whilst a musician plays the viol, and herds, tended by shepherds, are grouped around. In the second, the Sa- viour, in an elliptical glory supported above the horizon of a landscape varied with seas and mountains, sits and listens to the pleading of Satan represented as a horned monster with bat's wings, and the legs of an ox. Separated from this incident by a high and bare rock is a massacre, over which a flying demon hovers; and, in the distance the dis-

1 Gualandi. ub. sup. Ser. VI. p.p. 180. 181.

2 Vas. Vol. I. p. 339.

3 Baldinucci assumes, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 167, that this Francesco

is Giotto's son, but without any proof.

4 This fresco was restored in 1623 by Stefano Maruscelli. Mor- rona, ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 205.

Chap. XV. FRANCESCO DA VOLTERRA.

395

persion of the flocks and the burning of Job's house. In the third compartment, Job is prostrate with his arms raised to heaven in front of two other kneeling figures. He is attended by a group of friends to the right, and seems to have descended from a throne beneath an arched building, to humble himself before God.1

No one who has not the engravings of Lasinio at hand can now take in, without incredible trouble, the whole of these ruined frescos. With their assistance, he may admit that . the compositions do not deviate much from the great maxims which Giotto carried out so perfectly. He will find animation and action in many groups , — an advanced study of the detail of form and a certain amount of pictorial feeling. Some types, indeed, are both grand and natural. The colours, judged from what re- mains, were evidently handled by the master with ease. The artist, whoever he may be, whether Francesco of Vol terra, as the evidence would almost prove him to be, or another, doubtless executed many works besides these of the Campo Santo. There is a common style between them and the four frescos representing scenes from the life of S. Francis by the side of the crucifix and tree of Jesse in the great refectory2 of S. Croce at Florence; nor is it improbable, from the resemblance between the latter works and those of the sacristy in the church of Ognissanti, that these are early works from the hand of the painter of the Job of the Campo Santo.3

In 1377, Andrea da Firenze commenced the series of frescos illustrating scenes from the life of S. Raineri, assigned by Vasari to Simone of Sienna; and Antonio Ve- niziano continued it in 1386, after Barnaba of Modena

1 This fresco was completed, says Cav. Totti, by Nello di Vanni of Pisa (a pupil of Orcagna) ; but, adds Morrona, he only repaired damage which had been caused by rain. Vide Morrona, ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 205. Yet Ro- sini,Storia dellaPittura. Vol. II. p. 7, and the annot. ofVas. Vol. II. p. 135, affirm that Nello

was "the author" of this fresco, which differs in no respect from the rest of the series.

2 Now carpet factory.

3 The frescos of the Ognissanti sacristy are more Giottesque and less modern in style then the Job of the Campo Santo, and may have been produced about 1350.

396

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XV.

had been called (1380) to Pisa by the master of the works. In 1391, Spinello Aretino laboured at the series illustrating the life of SS. Ephesus and Potitus. At the same time the frescos of the Genesis, assigned by Vasari to BufFalmacco, were executed by a painter and mosaist of Orvieto named Pietro di Puccio. Pietro had been employed under Ugolino di Prete Ilario1 to paint in the choir of the Cathedral of Orvieto in 1370 ,2 and, in 1387, to execute the mosaics of the front. Invited, in 1290, by a special letter from Parasone Grassi, who then di- rected the works of the Campo Santo, to visit Pisa, he came; and, after suffering from a sickness during which he seems to have received every kindness,3 he painted the frescos of the Genesis at the Western end of the Northern side and the coronation of the Virgin above the entrance of the Aulla chapel.4 Pietro, in the former, ex- hibited some merit, particularly in the fresco of the ark; but he was evidently a second or third rate artist of the Siennese rather than of the Florentine school;5 so much so that the coronation was assigned by Vasari to Taddeo Bartoli. 6 On the Eastern wall of the Campo Santo, Buf-

1 The author of feeble frescos which Vasari assigns to Pietro Cavallini.

2 Delia Valle. Stor. del Duomo d'Orvieto. p. 117 and 285. Puccio's pay was 18 soldi per diem. See the curious error of Delia Valle. ub. sup. p. 288, who makes the painter and mosaist of the same name two different artists.

3 His apothecary's bills , paid by the superintendent of the Cam- po Santo have been preserved. See Ciampi. Doc. XXXI. p. 150.

4 Ciampi, ub. sup. p. 151. In the first, Puccio represented the Eternal holding- the sphere of the universe with the earth in the centre, surrounded by the re- maining planetary spheres as ex- plained by the cosmographers of the middle ages. In the lower corners, — to the right, S. Thomas

Aquinas, to the left, S. Augustin; — next the creation of man and of woman, the temptation, the ex- pulsion from paradise, the death of Abel and of Cain, the arch of Noah, the deluge and the sacri- fice of Abraham.

5 In Casa Oddi at Perugia , an altarpiece in three parts repre- senting the Virgin and child en- throned between S.S. Jerom and Paul, with the Eternal between the angel and Virgin annunciate in the pinnacles, is inscribed: "Petri de Urbs opus". On the predella, the Ecce Homo is de- picted between two incidents from the lives of Paul and Jerom. It is a small third rate work possibly by Pietro di Puccio.

6 Vas. Vol. II. p. 221. The greater part of the intonaco of this fresco is gone.

Chap. XV.

BRUNO GIOVANNI.

397

falmacco is said to have painted scenes from the Passion/ the Crucifixion, the Resurrection, the appearance of the Saviour to the apostles, and the Ascension. The Cruci- fixion, a most common production of the close of the fourteenth century, is remarkable for figures of a long and exaggerated shape, ugly in character and features; and the Saviour on the cross is repulsive. The resurrection, apparition, and ascension, though much damaged, display, in short and stout figures, another hand and third rate talent, but seem likewise to have been executed at the close of the fourteenth century. The life of Buffalmacco thus necessarily leads the student to the comparison of pictures varying in style and in period, and precludes all chronological sequence. But the aim of the critic is attained if he succeeds in proving that the frescos as- signed to Buffalmacco all differ from each other, and that the life of this artist, as written by Vasari, is utterly untrustworthy.

Insofar as Bruno Giovanni is concerned, the reader may, if he pleases, skip the following:

The frescos which Bruno is said to have executed in company with Buffalmacco in the Abbey of Ripa d'Arno are obliterated, but the altarpiece of S. Ursula, produced for the same church, is described by Vasari2 in terms al- most completely applicable to a picture formerly in the Casa di Commenda,3 and now in the Academy, of Pisa. There the Virgin companions of the British Saint are represented with S. Ursula herself, holding in one hand the Pisan stan- dard, and supported by a symbolical figure of Pisa. This is a rough distemper picture split in four places, in great part repainted, of a feeble character and without relief.4 Nor will it be easy to discover any very sensible difference between it, and the neighbouring panels by Ghetto di Ja- copo, Jacopo detto Gera, or Turino Vanni.

1 Others assign these scenes 3 Near the canonry of the church to Antonio Vite of Pistoia , re- of S. Paolo Ripa d'Arno. specting whom see antea and

postea. 4 The picture has been engraved

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 56 — 7. in Rosini. ub. sup.

398

IEARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XVI.

CHAPTER XVI.

STEFANO FIOKENTTNO.

Stefano Fiorentino shares with Taddeo Gaddi the praises of Vasari, who forgets in exalting the latter that he has already exhausted almost all that can be said in favour of an artist in eulogy of the former. Stefano, indeed, must be considered one of the greatest artists of his time, if it were possible to prove "that he surpassed Giotto in drapery, that he sought to develop with the help of folds the nude of the figure;" — "that he brought perspective to such a height of improvement as might show he enjoyed a ray of the perfect manner of the mo- derns ; " — " that he foreshortened arms , torso and legs, much better than they had ever been before."1 He may have done all this; yet such progress would have left its mark upon the art of the time; and, if it did not, as is evi- dent enough, one may assume that the biographer lavished his encomiums on Stefano, that he might, as a Florentine, stand in a better light when compared with Ugolino of Sienna, a patriarch who sternly maintained the traditio- nal forms of past centuries. 2 Still, to affirm any thing

1 He is called by Albertini (Opusculum mirabilibus nove et Vetere Rome. 4°. Rome 1510. p. 56), the precursor of Vasari who used his books, Stefano "symia". Vasari enlarging upon this, says Stefano was the ape of nature. (Vas. Vol. II. p. 15 and following.) Christofano Landini, apology to his comment on Dante ap. Bot- tari. Rom. Ed. of Vasari, also

says: "Stefano da tutti e nomi- nato Scimmia della natura, tanto espresse qualunque cosa voile"; to which Lanzi adds: "An eulogy of a rude age". Hist, of painting ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 65.

2 Vasari wrote the lives of Ste- fano and Ugolino together, and says they were intimate friends. The truth of the latter statement may be doubted.

Chap. XVI. STEFANO FIORENTTNO.

399

of Stefano at the present time would be presumptuous, and it is best to admit at once that, of his works, no one can have the slightest knowledge. Baldinucci would lead his readers to believe that Stefano was not merely a pupil, but a nephew of Giotto, because, according to the records of the monastery of Cestello of Florence, Ca- therine, Giotto's daughter and the wife of a painter named Kicco di Lapo, had, in 1333, a son, a painter, called Ste- fano. The identity only exists, as yet, in the obvious similarity of names. That in the first half of the century a Stefano did exist at Florence is proved by Sacchetti1 who mentions him as cotemporary of Orcagna and Tad- deo Gaddi, and by his registry in 1369 as pupil of one Giotto; and the recurrence of the latter name could give some force to the assumption of Baldinucci.2 As to pictures, the difficulty of making any deductions from Vasari's or Ghiberti's statements will be evident from the following considerations: uStefano painted in fresco the Madonna of the Campo Santo of Pisa, which is better designed and coloured than the work of Giotto."3 Lanzi who repeats the foregoing from Vasari, substituting for the words "Nostra Donna" those of "our Saviour", 4 says: "the work has been retouched." It is difficult to ascer- tain, from statements so vague and contradictory, what may exactly be intended, but if Vasari meant to allude to the assumption on the inner lunette of the chief gate of the Campo Santo, he assigns it in another place to Simone Martini;5 and, no doubt, though much damaged it has the character of a Siennese rather than of a Flo- rentine painting.

Ghiberti, in his commentary,6 distinguishes amongst the works of Stefano "a S. Thomas Aquinas so capitally exe- cuted, at the side of a door in S. Maria Novella, leading

1 Sacchetti, ub. sup. Vol. II. Nov. CXXXVI. p. 221.

2 Baldinucci, ub. sup. Vol. IV. p.p. 171. 316.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 15.

4 L anz i, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 65.

5 Vas. Vol. II. p. 91. 92.

fi Ghiberti, in Vas. Vol. I. p. XX.

400

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XVI.

to the cemetery, that it seems to stand out from the wall in relief." Vasari repeats the words, adding, "that the figure was painted at the side of a door in the primo chiostro," where Stefano also drew a crucified Saviour!! In the primo chiostro of S. Maria Novella, a crucified Saviour with the root of Jesse, the sun and moon, and remnants of a head of S. Thomas, may now be seen at the side of a door leading to the cemetery. In the same cloister, a Christ crucified, between SS. Dominick and Thomas Aquinas, decorates the lunette of the door lea- ding into the Chiostro Grande. The latter has been so completely renewed as to defy all criticism. To which of these frescos does Vasari allude? Probably not to the latter. The former is injured, but may still be criticized. It is striking in no sense, but has the ap- pearance of a work of the close of the fourteenth cen- tury. In design and execution, indeed, it resembles a half figure of S. Thomas Aquinas with a pen in his right, and an open book in his left in the convent of S. Maria Novella. This figure cannot be the one alluded to by Vasari or Ghiberti, as it is placed in a lunette above a door which led of old to the chapel of S. Thomaso,1 but its character is that of a work such as a pupil of Giotto might have painted in the latter half of the fourteenth century, fair as regards movement, natural and regular as regards attitude and form. Yet here, the quality of relief cannot be said to exist. Nor, indeed, is any one of these frescos such as to contrast in a favorable sense with those of Giotto. Vasari calls by Stefano's name the frescos of the chapel of S. Jacopo in the cathedral of Pistoia, which Ciampi proves to have been completed by Alesso d'Andrea and Bonaccorso di Maestro Cino in 1347.2 Ciampi, however, adds that Stefano did, indeed, paint in the Duomo of Pistoia, but in the chapel of the Bellucci, not in the chapel of S. Jacopo. Yet even this fact is imma-

1 A chapel now suppressed.

2 See the doc. in Ciampi. p.p. 93. 145—7. These took the

place of earlier ones by Coppo di Marcovaldo. See postea.

Chap. XVI.

STEFANO FIORENTLNO.

401

terial to the present inquiry, as both chapels are white- washed.1 There are old paintings in the Palazzo del Comune at Pistoia which reveal the presence of Floren- tine artists, amongst others, a second rate Madonna between SS. James and Zeno, in the Salone, dated 1360 ; but though this fresco makes some approach to those already noted in S. Maria Novella at Florence, they are still insufficient to entitle the author to the name of a great artist.

The frescos of the Buontempi chapel in S. Domenico of Perugia, have been noticed as attributed without suf- ficient reason to BufFalmacco. Were they by Stefano, he would appear to the student as a painter of the fifteenth century, and therefore not a pupil of Giotto.2 At Rome, at Milan, at Assisi, Stefano is said to have painted, but the alleged fruits of his labour have all disappeared. 3

1 Ciampi, ub. sup. p. 95, also Toloraei. p.p. 16— 17, andTigri , p. 123.

2 Rosini has fallen into this error. See S tori a. ub. sup. Tom. II. p. 127. He gives , p. 125, an engraving of a picture at the Brera which is signed Stefanus, but dated 1435. Rosini also gives an engraving of a picture representing the Vir- gin with the infant sitting near her, having brought in a bird. This piece is exactly suited to the description of a lost fresco by Stefano in a tabernacle of old

near the Ponte alia Carraia at Florence.

3 Vasari (Vol. II. p. 15) describ- ing the subjects of frescos in S. Spirito at Florence repeats what Ghiberti (Vol. I. p. XIX) says of frescos at S. Agostino of Florence. S.S. Spirito and Agostino are one and the same church, in which, however, the frescos in question no longer exist. At Assisi , a painting by Solimena covers the niche of the choir in the lower church originally painted by Ste- fano. At S. Peters and Araceli, Rome , there is nothing.

VOL. I.

402

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XVII.

CHAPTER XVII.

GIOVANNI DA MILANO.

Taddeo Gaddi, on his death-bed, recommended his son Agnolo, — to Giovanni da Milano for the sake of his know- ledge in art, to Jacopo di Casentino for guidance in the path of the world.1 These were artists, interesting in more than one respect; — the first, as exhibiting a certain phase of the progress which aided the development of the great Florentine school ; the second, as laying the founda- tion of a line of bastard Giottesques which sunk to Parri Spinelli and the Bicci.

Giovanni Jacobi,2 born at Milan, was long an assistant to Taddeo Gaddi,3 and was probably educated far away from his native place, which, in the middle of the four- teenth century, was not remarkable for a high standard of education in painting. Gaddi's recommendation to Agnolo that he might take example from the skill of his guardian, displays some misgiving as to the course which the youth seemed bent on pursuing. In his earliest ef- forts, careful and steady, Agnolo soon imitated, and ulti- mately rivalled, the dash of handling peculiar to his father; and Giovanni da Milano, had his precepts been attended to, might have arrested and calmed the headlong nature of his style. Giovanni, indeed, though he left the art of his time stationary in regard to composition, contributed much to its progress in less essential and material parts.

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 119. an official record of which more

2 This is the real name of Gio- hereafter.

vanni da Milano, as is proved by 3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 115.

Chap. XVII.

GIOVANNI DA MILANO.

403

He strove earnestly to introduce a faithful imitation of the reality, where Taddeo had been most inclined to con- ventionalism and neglect. To the facility of the latter, he opposed careful minuteness of drawing and research of form; thus aiding the development of that grand line of progress which was likewise followed up by Giot- tino and Orcagna. But though skilled, he had not sim- plicity. Not content with Florentine, he studied Siennese examples. Whilst in types he affected the tenderness and formal grace of the latter, in colour, he com- bined Florentine lightness with Siennese warmth. Were the joint works of Taddeo and Giovanni, in the Company of the Spirito Santo at Arezzo, preserved, a more com- plete idea might be formed of the development of his manner than that which results from contemplating his pictures on panel. These, however, are of great interest, because they supply by their undoubted genuineness the place of records. The earliest of them is that of the Florence Academy of Arts,1 an altarpiece removed from the convent of S. Girolamo sulla Costa and inscribed:

"Io govani da melano depinsi questa tavola i M.CCCLXV."2

It represents the dead Saviour supported erect, but vi- sible only to the knees, by the Virgin, the Magdalen, and S. John Evangelist. A long rigid form, regular in its anatomy, with a face and hands contracted by suffering, a head with well proportioned features, betray the real- istic tendencies of the artist. In the aged features of the grieving Virgin a sort of Mantegnesque naturalism is apparent. The Magdalen, wailing as she holds the Redeemer's left arm, is youthful but vulgar in expres- sion. The careful drawing defines every form with ac- curacy, and reveals a habit of excessive conscientious- ness. There is a tendency to define the substance of various stuffs in drapery and embroidery, and a prying

No. 16 Gal. des gr. tableaux. 2 See the engraving in Roeini. Vol. II. p. 112.

26*

404

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XVII.

detail in the fold. The art of Giovanni is realistic , a step towards the more correct definition of natural forms, but undignified by grand or noble thought. As a colourist he is not to be judged by a work which has been darkened and rubbed down.

A more vast and important work by Giovanni is an altarpiece, now in the Municipal Gallery of Prato, re- presenting the Virgin enthroned1 between four saints, with prophets in medallions above, — an episode below. Thus, beneath the Virgin enthroned is the annunciation; — beneath S. Bernard,2 the Virgin approving his doctrine; — and so, the martyrdoms of S. Catherine by the sword, of S. Bartholomew by flaying, and of S. Barnabas at the stake. Divided from the foregoing, but really form- ing the base of the same altarpiece, are six compart- ments3 representing the birth of Christ,4 the adoration of the shepherds, the presentation in the temple, Christ on the mount, the kiss of Judas, and the procession to Cal- vary. 5 This picture, of which the upper parts have received serious damage, is inscribed at the base of the enthroned Virgin :

Ego Johannes de Mediolano pinxi hoc opus, and beneath the annunciation:

"Frate Francesco feci depingere questa tavola." Long and slender shape, an affected bend, and some- what forced tenderness of expression, eyes of the small closed kind which become familiar in the school of Sienna, mark the principal and most of the remaining figures of the altarpiece. There is vigour and bold action in some,

1 No. IV. Prato. Catal. The picture not long since (1857), was exposed to every vicissitude of weather in the hospital of that city. Half of the Virgin's face, part of the right hand, are gone ; the red dress is damaged and the blue mantle repainted. The head of the infant Saviour is new, and the nimbuses regilt.

2 The white dress of S. Bernard

is repainted, as well as those of the three other saints.

3 Assigned to a Siennese pain- ter of the 15th century, and num- bered VI. in Prato Catalogue.

4 Parts of this scene are obli- terated. S. Joseph, as usual, sits pensive on the foreground.

5 In the kiss of Judas, and the Calvary, the paint has in parts fallen out.

Chap. XVII. GIOVANNI DA MILANO.

405

grace in others;1 — in all, breadth of drapery. In the annunciation, the angel, though graceful, is somewhat af- fected in action. The head of the Virgin, with its prim bend, its small eyes, is reminiscent of Simone Martini's conceptions of the same kind. Very graceful are the small scenes of the pediment, whose groups combine the dra- matic action of a Giottesque with the soft resignation of ex- pression of a Siennese artist. The Saviour, carrying his cross and looking round at the Virgin in grief, is a reminis- cence of a similar scene in the Giottos of the Arena at Padua; but the wail of the mother of Christ is rendered with vulgar coarseness.

The painting as a whole may have been produced later than the Pieta at the Florentine Academy, the hands and nude, generally, being more studied from nature, more neat and precise. The artist betrays an evident intention of denning the different character of male and female hands, the latter being thin and pointed in the finger, the former coarse at the ends and knotty at the joints. In the heads of males great realism is ap- parent. The drawing is everywhere most precise and con- scientious, and the draperies broad. But the principal charm of the picture is the warmth and juicy nature of its colour, not only in flesh tints, but in the vestments.

Another work, evidently by Giovanni, and formerly in the church of Ognissanti, is now in the Uffizi at Florence, having been damaged and subjected to a necessary resto- ring. It consists of two fragments respectively compri- sing two and three painted niches, with saints in couples above which medallions contain scenes from the creation, partly effaced or damaged ; whilst below, are choirs of mar- tyred saints and virgins, apostles, patriarchs and prophets. Fine as this work undoubtedly is, because of its colour, pleasing as is the character and individuality of the male

1 The executioners in the 3 martyrdoms are all in bold and natural action, whilst in that of S. Catherine the bending form

of the saint is very graceful. The head of S. Bernard before the Virgin is fine.

406

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XVII.

heads, the carefulness of the modelling and breadth of draperies: yet is the realistic imitation of nature in it already carried too far for the state of Florentine art at that time, so that one may notice that want of subor- dination of parts to the whole which is a fault unknown to Giotto.

But these defects will be found more conspicuous in the frescos of the Rinuccini chapel at S. Croce, which, though assigned by Vasari to Taddeo Gaddi and his as- sistants, are evidently by Giovanni da Milano. On the walls are scenes from the lives of the Virgin and Sa- viour.1 In the centre of the ceiling a figure of the Saviour in a relief rosette, in the usual attitude of bene- diction, alone and at once reveals the hand of Giovanni. The careful style of drawing, the broad and somewhat round form of head, ending in a pointed beard, a peculiar mode of detailing the features, coarse, contracted and muscular hands; • — the mixture, in fact, of Florentine and Siennese styles, all point to the same conclusion. In the diagonals of the ceiling, the four prophets, with their scrolls,2 one of them with a small head affectedly bent, have all the character proper to the figures of the master, and this character is to be found, likewise, in all the frescos of the chapel. In the expulsion, where Joachim with his lamb is shoved out of the temple by the high priest in the presence of the more favoured Jews, there is much movement and great realism in the rendering of details. The features and dresses of the females are ex- actly rendered as they may be seen in other pictures of

1 Vaulting of entrance arch: S.S. Anthony and Francis , An- drew and Louis. Between them, 12 halflength apostles. Wall to the left of entrance, lunette: Joachim's expulsion. Two lower courses: Joachim's meeting- with Anna, Virgin's birth, presentation and marriage. Wall to the right, lunette: the Magdalen anointing the Saviour's feet. Two lower courses: Martha and Mary before

Christ , resurrection of Lazarus, Noli me tangere, Dream of the merchant of Marseilles. All these frescos, framed, as usual, in painted ornament, with cornices supported on pillars, have been damaged by time and restorers. Of the latter, Agostino Veracini and G.F. Giarre' are known to have worked in 1736.

2 Painted in niches like an altarpiece.

Chap. XVII. GIOVANNI DA MILANO.

407

Giovanni. In combination with a certain breadth of composition is a study of the details of drapery which afterwards becomes remarkable in Masolino and Masaccio. Relief by light and shade is in part attained, and only diminished in effect by too marked minuteness of study. This, the least damaged fresco of the series discloses, in fact, the hand of one more capable of imparting move- ment within the limits of nature, and more able in the delineation of the varied forms in the human frame than Taddeo Gaddi. In the meeting of Joachim and Anna, the action is natural and spontaneous, the distribution fair and the draperies graceful.1 The birth of the Vir- gin is also a good composition of eight figures, illustrating an affectionate and natural episode with realistic truth.2 The figures are long, slender, and elegantly draped. The Virgin going to the temple is not unlike the same subject painted by Taddeo in the Baroncelli chapel, but not an exact copy of it,3 the Sposalizio a confused composition. The Magdalen before Christ washes one of his feet, whilst he, pointing to her with his right hand, addresses Simon.4 There is something peculiarly natural in the attitudes of the latter, and of the two apostles who have suspended their eating to listen to the words of Christ; and the composition generally is well ordered and animated. An equally real scene is that in which, Mary being calmly seated at the feet of the Saviour, Martha scolding appears, and pointing with both hands to her kitchen, declares "that she is cumbered about much serving." The realism of the scene is increased by the view of the kitchen, the

1 The background, now yellow- ish has been repainted.

2 The infant affectionately held in the arms of the nurse, is tickled on the chin by a waiting woman, whilst another female, by the water pan , stretches her arms out for the babe. S. Anna rubs her hands , over which a maid pour water. An attendant stands by. The cover of the bed, the yellow dress of the nurse, the

basin, the dresses of the two ser- vants at the door, are all repainted, and the background damaged.

3 Like the next scene (Sposa- lizio) much damaged and repainted particularly in the backgrounds.

4 The blue mantle and red tu- nic of the Saviour are repainted. The background of the picture is damaged. Two attendants wait; and a third goes down the steps outside, to the left.

408

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XVII.

cook and the fire in the distance. Kealism in the next compartment takes the proportion of the trivial ; Lazarus is dragged out by two disciples ; and a smell, which assails the nostrils of the bystanders, is made patent to the spectator by the action of some holding their noses.1 Wherever the colour has been preserved in this series of frescos, it is lively, powerful, warm, and transparent. The flesh is finished with mellow transparent glazes, which serve to fuse the parts together. The art of colouring has evi- dently been technically improved by the painter, and this is a quality not visible in these frescos only, but in the pictures of Giovanni da Milano.

The impression which the paintings of this chapel creates is not that which results from the contemplation of a purely Florentine work such as that of Taddeo might be. There is something Siennese in the warm yet powerful colour, in the costumes and their ornamental accessories, in the careful drawing and minute details, in the types and movements of the persons represented. But amongst the pure Siennese, no painter possessed so much of Florentine composition, whilst at the same time, the principles and maxims of Giotto were better preserved by Taddeo.

That the Rinuccini chapel was built late in the four- teenth century seems to be admitted. The altarpiece which adorns it, is by an inferior hand, and has in common with the frescos the date of 1379. It is evident, indeed, that' the latter are of a later date than the authentic pictures of Giovanni da Milano. In 1366 he had finally settled with his family at Florence; and the record of his admission to the freedom of the city, on the twenty second of April of that year, is still preserved.2 To him

1 Martha and Mary in vehement action stretch forth their hands at the end of the grave , behind which the Saviour stands. The dresses of the Saviour and the women are repainted.

The Noli me tangere is com-

pletely repainted; and so is the dream of the merchant of Mar- seilles.

2 See the original document transcribed in Giornale Storico degli ArchiviToscani. Flor. Vieus- seux 1858. 8°. Vol. II. p. 65. He

Chap. XVII.

GIOVANNI DA MILANO.

409

may be assigned the recently discovered frescos of a nun and a knight with their patron saints at each side of the Virgin in the cloister of the Carmine at Florence. 1 With some grandeur and nobleness in the figure and attitude, the Virgin's face recals the Siennese type of Simone Martini. The kneeling nun is fine, and the saints full of dignity. The colour, where it remains, is warm and pleasing, the draperies broad and flowing.

Another painting which presents many of the charac- teristics of Giovanni da Milano is a lunette fresco above the portal of S. Niccolo of Prato, representing the Virgin and child enthroned between S. Dominick and S. Nicho- las of Tolentino. The movement of the Virgin is given with masterly ease, the colour generally is bright and vigorous.2

is there called Johannes Jacobi de Mediolano.

1 Subject: Virgin enthroned with the infant, the latter extend- ing its hand to an armed man kneeling in front and presented by S. James, near whom S. An- thony. To the right of the Vir- gin, a kneeling nun introduced by S. John Evangelist, near whom is a female saint with a palm and cup. The fresco is much damaged

by time. On the painted cornice are the arms, according to Pas- serini, one of the best heraldic scholars in Italy, of the Bovarelli, a Florentine family of the 14th century.

2 See antea, as to pinnacles of the altarpiece No. 579 in the Na- tional gallery. Other fragments or relics in other places are of in- sufficient importance and require no further comment.

410

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XVIII.

CHAPTER XVIII. GIOTTINO.

Cotemporary with Taddeo Gaddi in Florence, lived a vast number of artists whose labours have remained un- known to posterity. Of fourteen masters composing the council of painters at S. Maria del Fiore in 1366, two or three in addition to Taddeo and Orcagna have names connected with works. If, from the list of members of the council, one passes to that of painters allowed to compete for designs and models, the number of unknown names is surprising. Yet paintings without ascertained authors are not less numerous than masters without au- thenticated works. Half the difficulties of classifying the productions of Italian art arise from the precipitation with which early writers connected pictures with names and names with pictures, thus creating confusion of styles, of dates, and of men. These difficulties become insur- mountable when nicknames occur, and a new element of doubt is superadded to so many others previously exist- ing. Orcagna is known to be the nickname of Andrea Cioni, shortened from u Arcagnolo." No success has yet attended the effort to trace the real name of Giottino. Ghiberti in one of his commentaries1 affirms that Maso, the disciple of Giotto, painted a chapel in S. Agostino at Florence (later S. Spirito), — a space above the portal of the same church, and a tabernacle on the square before it. In the church of S. Croce, he decorated the chapel of S. Silvestro with scenes from the life of that Saint and

1 Ghiberti. Com. 2. in Vasari. Vol. I. p. XXI.

Chap. XVIII.

GIOTTINO.

411

from that of the Emperor Constantine. Vasari, writing many years later, assigns the whole of these works to "Tommaso di Stefano called Giottino, 1 born in 1324, and a pupil of his father Stefano." Having thus affirmed that Tommaso is the son of Stefano, he adds: "some be- lieved he was the son of Giotto, which is not true, it being certain, or rather generally believed (for in such matters who shall ever dare to affirm) that he was the son of the painter Stefano Fiorentino." Without, for the present, attempting to fathom the contradictions of Vasari, who a little further adds that Giottino "was more per- fect than his master Giotto it is best to pass at once to the consideration of the only work which remains of those assigned by Ghiberti to Maso and by Vasari to Tommaso called Giottino. This work is the series of frescos which decorates the chapel of S. Silvestro in S. Croce at Florence. They represent the miracles of S. Silvester as related in the Golden Legend. It is af- firmed there:

that, the Emperor Constantine being afflicted with a sore leprosy, three thousand boys were brought together for slaughter, that a bath of their warm blood might assist in curing him. Moved, however, by the wails of the mothers, and in this, of more tender frame than Herod, he declared himself ready to die rather than be cured by such means. In the night, S. Peter and S. Paul appeared to the Empe- ror, telling him that they were sent by the Lord Jesus Christ, to reward him for his holy horror of human blood, and to inform him that if he were bathed in water by Sylvester, bishop of Eome, he should be cured of his leprosy. Sylvester who had prudently retired from Rome for fear of persecution returned thither at Constantine's desire, and, being told by the Emperor that he had seen two Gods in a dream, replied that those he had seen must be the apostles Peter and Paul. Of this Constantine was convinced when Sylvester showed him portraits of the apostles, and he then consented to be baptized.2 Helen congratulated Constantine

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 140.

2 The bath in which Constan- tine was cured of his leprosy was

• of porphyry; and it was a charge

against Rienzi that he had sacri- legiously used it. The legend was believed till much later.

412

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XVIII.

on having surrendered idolatry, but regretted that he should have become a convert to the religion of Christ. Constan- tine agreed to allow that a dispute should take place be- tween Sylvester and one hundred and sixty one Jewish doctors, before himself and two judges, Craton and Zeno- philus. All were converted to Sylvester's opinion except Zambri, who, to prove the might of the God of the Jews, ordered a wild bull to be brought in, and killed him by whispering in his ear. Sylvester triumphed over the Jew by restoring the bull to life in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and finally ensured the triumph of Christianity by sealing the lips of a dragon who, with his breath had al- ready killed upwards of three hundred persons daily. Fur- ther he restored to life two magi who had perished in the vicinity of the monster."

The principal incidents of this legend were painted on the walls of the chapel, — the last, in which Sylvester seals the lips of the monster, being the finest of the series. All however are well arranged and explain their subject. The movements are animated and the heads not without individuality. The great laws of composition are admi- rably maintained in the final miracle, where the groups and incidents are bound together with a perfect sense of unity. The landscape of houses and ruins, suited to the scene, and to the distribution of the space, displays that freedom from conventionalism or artifice which is so pleasing a feature in Giotto's frescos. Nothing can be more for- cibly rendered than the action of Sylvester, who, with dignified repose and fearlessness, seals the mouth of the monster; nothing more natural than the expression in the eyes of the friar holding his nose to exclude the smell. The art is here, it is true, pushed on in the path of realism. Still the form and the action, if not conceived from a high and noble point of view, are true and de- corous. The draperies are broad in their sweep, the drawing firm. Form and detail are studied, without detri- ment to the mass, and in the draperies, in joints and arti- culations, and even in more minute particulars, the neglect common to so many Giottesques even at the end of the four- teenth century, is not too apparent. Naturalism is carried

Chap. XVIII.

GIOTTINO.

413

much further than it was by Giotto , quite as far as it was by Giovanni da Milano; but, by its side, the great laws of composition are preserved; and in this, the painter shows himself purely Florentine. He gave an impulse to Giot- tesque art without any .pedantry of imitation, and pos- sessed the motive principles which must regulate its pro- gress. He coloured his pictures with warm but still clear tones, using them with a full brush and broadly modelling the parts, yet giving their due share of import- ance and finish to details.1 If Vasari meant that this painter inherited the spirit of Giotto, he was right. The rest of the paintings in the chapel are much damaged.2 Similar character and style, technical execution, draw- ing and colour, reveal the same manner in the crypt chapel or funeral vault of the Strozzi beneath the Cappel- lone dei Spagnuoli in S. Maria Novella,3 where an in- scription, carved on a slab, runs as follows:

"Dom. Benedicti Petri et Benedicti Carrocii de Strozzis, et descendentium."

In the crucifixion ,4 the Saviour, in features like one in

1 The intonaco has in many places fallen out.

2 On the wall opposite the fore- going-, are traces in a lunette of the wailing mothers before Con- stantine who sits in a chariot. To the right, the vision of S.S. Paul and Peter, Constantine cry- ing out in his sleep, tended by two attendants at the bed foot (all but obliterated), whilst a ser- vant outside looks in inquiringly. Beneath this, in a recess, the Sa- viour on the tomb (repainted) with two saints in the vaulting and two prophets in side medallions. Beneath the fresco of the wail- ing mothers is a stone monument to Bettino de' Bardi, on the top of which is painted the kneeling figure of that person in prayer looking up to the Saviour, above him, in a red mantle carried to heaven by angels. This fresco has suffered much from damp. Of

the angels, two sound trumps and four bear the emblems of the pas- sion. They are weighty in form and proud in bearing. In the vaulting of the recess, in which the tomb and fresco are placed, are two prophets and medallions of saints. Above, two medallions with figures. In the third side of the chapel pierced by a window, are figures , to the right , of S. Zanobi and a bishop , much da- maged, to the left, of S. Romolus well preserved, and a bishop. The frescos of the last mentioned sides are damaged by time, damp, and repainting.

3 This crypt-chapel is not to be confounded with the chapel of the Strozzi in the same church, de- corated by Orcagna.

4 Lunette fresco facing the en- trance, where, as usual, the Mag- dalen grasps the foot of the cross, the Virgin faints in the arms of

414

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XVIII.

glory in the Cappella S. Silvestro is no longer grand and imposing like that of Giotto, but shows an effort at greater realism in the researeh of nude forms. Amongst the principal figures, one old and bearded, behind the Virgin, the second from the left, is full of character. On the wall to the left of the entrance is a powerful com- position representing the Virgin in adoration1 before the infant Saviour,2 where a curious realism may be noticed in the action of one of the shepherds who holds back a barking dog. The painter might, indeed, well deserve for this the nickname of "ape of nature n which Vasari applies to Stefano Fiorentino. This is no Giottesque composition, yet it is well ordered and distributed. The features of the Virgin are not without softness and feel- ing. A pensive gravity marks S. Joseph, whose head is Giottesque in type and powerfully rendered. The angels though graceful and slender, have still something more than usually masculine about them, and he who announces the advent of the Saviour to the shepherds, is somewhat in Taddeo Gaddi's manner. Here as at S. Sylvestro is the art of one combining Giottesque qualities with a tech- nical advance equal to that which marked the work of Giovanni da Milano, and therefore of one apparently living in the second half of the fourteenth century.3 Yet even this may not be affirmed with too great certainty, because it is possible to point out yet another work ha- ving the same characteristics, the subject of which would lead the student to believe that it must have been pro-

the Marys, soldiers and priests stand around and angels wail about the principal figure. Where the colour has fallen the origi- nal grey preparation of the angels appears. In the four sections of the ceiling, 4 prophets. Vault- ing of entrance, the 4 Evangelists between S. Benedict and another saint.

1 The Virgin's dress is scaled away.

2 In a shed with S. Joseph sitting to the right, the ox and the ass in a corner, and a choir of angels about. Three celestial messengers fly above the shed, one of whom announces to the shepherds in the distance to the left.

3 Amongst the painters of the time whose names present them- selves as capable of having exe- cuted the frescos of this chapel, we may mention Bernardo of Flo- rence respecting whom, see postea.

Chap. XVIII.

GIOTTINO.

415

duced before 1350. This work is a fresco on the stair- case of the present Accademia Filarmonica, in the Via del Diluvio at Florence, a building called the Stinche Vecchie, in olden times. Here is allegorically represented the ex- pulsion of Walter of Brienne Duke of Athens on the day of the feast of S. Anna.

"His empty throne stands on the right side of the picture. He has just been expelled from it by a figure hold- ing a column, hovering in the air, and threatening him with a dart. He flies away, treading on the prostrate symbols of justice and law, figured by a pair of scales, a book, a broken banner, and a sword on the ground; and he holds tenderly in his arms a monster emblematic of treason, with a human head hoary with age , and a tail like that of a lobster.1 In the centre of the fresco, S. Anna, enthroned under the guardianship of two angels, points to, or rather touches with her left, the towers of the old palace of the tyrant, 2 and presents to the new guardians of the security of Florence the banner of the city. These kneel in armour and sword in hand, and seem to do homage."

It may not be necessary to take for granted that this damaged fresco, was executed in 1343, the date of Walter de Brienne's expulsion, particularly as the character of the paintings would point to a later time. It is certainly not to be confounded with that which, according to Vasari, was commissioned of Giottino for the Palace of the Podesta, where shapeless vestiges still remain of portraits of the Duke of Athens, and his minions, Cerettieri Visdomini, Melia- dusse, and Ranieri di S. Gimignano, with the mitres of justice on their heads;3 nor is it easy to conceive how these portraits or the fresco at the Stinche should have been produced in 1343 by one who at that time, if Vasari's chronology be correct, was but nineteen years of age.4 But, setting aside again for a time the question of authorship, the same hand as that which seems to have produced

1 This symbol may be seen in the figure of treason in a fresco by Ambrogio Lorenzetti in the Palazzo of Sienna.

2 The fresco is, indeed, highly interesting as it gives an exact

representation of the Palazzo Vee- chio as it stood in the middle of the 14th century.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 142.

4 Being born, according to Va- sari, in 1324. Vas. Vol. II. p. 140.

416

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XVIII.

the frescos at the Cappella S. Sylvestro in S. Croce, and the Cappella Strozzi in the crypt of S. Maria Novella, executed the Pieta, formerly in S. Romeo, and now in the Uffizi at Florence.1

Here the Saviour lies on his winding sheet on the ground. In rear of the body the Virgin raises the head, whilst one of the Marys kisses the right hand, and, leaning over her, the Evangelist looks on in grief. A female saint, melancholy and pensive, sits on the right foreground near the Saviour's head, and another of the Marys kisses the left hand of the corpse. At the Redeemer's feet, the Magdalen kneels, with two females to her left, the first of whom is protected by the hand of S. Benedict placed on her head, the second by S. Zenobius with his crozier in similar action. On the gold ground is the cross.

Composed entirely in the Giottesque manner, the pic- ture is fine, the Saviour is youthful, well formed and simply rendered. It is a genuine piece of Giottesque nude. Great feeling and passion mark the attitude and action of the Marys. In the Virgin, however, intense grief is expressed with some realism. In the manner of introducing the patronesses and their guardian saints the artist ably overcame a great difficulty, and succeeded in satisfying at once the demands of his employers and the laws of composition. The forms, modelled and drawn as in the examples previously noticed, show the progress of one advanced in the study of nature, seeking to re- produce minute details in flesh, in draperies, in articula- tions and other minutiae. This tendency almost becomes trivial and vulgar in the figure of the Evangelist. The colour, though altered and deprived of its freshness, is still warm and powerful, and is handled with a profusion of vehicle. Here are many of the qualities of Giovanni da Milano, with greater force of expression than he pos- sessed, and more talent in composition. 2 The question which puzzles the inquirer is, how to reconcile the fact that all

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 144. This picture was in the sacristy of S. Romeo in the time of Richa. See Chiese Fiore. Vol I. p. 258.

2 Baron v. Rumohr assigns this picture to Piero Chelini a painter of the 15th century. See For- schungen. Vol. II. p. 172.

Chap. XVIII.

GIOTTINO.

417

these works at S. Croce, S. Maria Novella, the Stinche, and the Uffizi, are of the latter half of the century, with Vasari's statement, that Giottino, called Tommaso, was born in 1324 of Stefano Fiorentino and died in 1357. 1 Ghi- berti calls the painter of the Sylvester chapel Maso, and gives no statement as to his birth or age. Del Migliore, in his MS. comments to Vasari, notes the existence, in 1344, of one "Tomas pictor, films Dominici, populi Sancte Marie Novelle, afterwards (1379) in the guild of painters. 2 But Tomas, the son of Dominick, would be a different person from Tommaso the son of Stefano. In no record, however, can the latter name be found. The register of Florentine painters does contain that of one Giotto di Maestro Stefano under the date of 1368? 3 and it is evident that the artist so- called would be much better entitled to the by-name of Giottino than one who should have been baptized as Tom- maso. Of this Giotto, Bonaini very reasonably thinks he has found a trace in a record of 1369, wherein it is noted that "the painter Giotto receives seventy livres for two caskets presented to Margaret, the wife of the Doge dell' Agnello de' Conti at Pisa".4 It has been assumed that Giottino's real name was Giotto di Maestro Stefano; and as this painter lived in the latter half of the century he may be the author of the frescos described in the foregoing pages. But the difficulty which attends the history of Giottino does not end here. Amongst the works assigned by com- mon consent to him, are the frescos of the Cappella del Sacramento at the end of the South transept in the Lower church of Assisi. Vasari, it is true, does not mention them, but he says that Giottino painted in an arch above the pulpit, in the Lower church of Assisi, the coronation of the Virgin in the midst of a choir of angels, and, about the arch, scenes from the life of S. Nicholas, there being no room left to paint on in any other part of the

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 144.

2 Note to Vasari. Vol. II. p. 140, and Gualandi, ub. sup. Ser. VI. p. 188.

VOL. I.

3 Gualandi, ub. sup. p. 182.

4 Bonaini, ub. sup. Notiz. p. 63.

418

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XVIII.

church.1 The coronation of the Virgin may be seen in the place mentioned by Vasari, partly obliterated and partly damaged. The remains would justify the assertion that the fresco was finely and warmly coloured by a painter of the first half of the fourteenth century. At the sides of the arch, there are, however, no scenes from the life of S. Nicholas. The crucified Saviour is there, with the Virgin in grimacing grief, and S. John in a violent atti- tude at the sides of the cross. The Redeemer is a coarse figure, but still Giottesque in type and form. Two remain- ing scenes are taken from the martyrdom of S. Stanislas of Cracow; but, besides being of a different period from the Florentine works assigned to Giottino, and of a different hand, they are vastly inferior to the frescos of the cap- pella del Sacramento, which is really decorated with those scenes from the life of S. Nicholas which may be sought in vain where Vasari describes them.2 Many of these frescos are, however, gone altogether and the following is all that remains to be described:

S. Nicholas, hearing that a consul had been bribed to put three innocent youths to death, appears on the place of execution, where he finds the patients kneeling with their arms bound, and arrests the hand of the executioner, as he is about to strike off the head of one of them. Constan- tine, having sent out three generals, Nepotian, Ursus, and Apilio, to a distant expedition, causes them, on their return, to be arrested for treason. But S. Nicholas appears in a dream before Constantine, who sleeps by the side of his prisoners, inclosed in a cage, and calls upon him to release them. These are the first frescos on the left wall. In the lunette, on that side, is an episode relative to a posthumous miracle of the Saint.

Nicholas is at once the patron of thieves and the protector

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 143.

2 In the old ex-chapter, as one issues from the church, where a door leads to the room, celebrated as being- that in which S. Giu- seppe da Copertino died, are, on a wall, frescos, now restored, of a crucifixion with figures of S.S. Paul, Peter, Louis, and Anthony of Pa-

dua, and at the foot of the cross, S.Francis. Six angels hover about the cross. In the arch, traces of saints appear. These paintings, much damaged by restoring are like those above the pulpit in the body of the Lower church of Assisi.

Chap. XVIII.

GIOTTINO.

419

of property. A Jew hearing that no thieves ever robbed houses under S. Nicholas' protection, ordered a statue of him to be placed in his room, and was nevertheless plun- dered of every thing he possessed. In his rage, he took a large stick and, with it, administered a beating to the useless image. S. Nicholas so keenly felt this outrage that he appeared to the thieves and induced them to restore what they had stolen. The painter here represented the Jew thrashing the figure of S. Nicholas with a whip. S. Nicholas is also the protector of maiden virtue; and one of the first acts that brought him renown, was his secretly throwing gold into the room of a neighbour whose poverty would have induced him to sacrifice the honour of his three daughters.1 He was depicted in the wall of the chapel, to the right of the entrance, standing on the threshold of a room where three females and their father all lie in sleep, a curious and pro- bably real picture of humble life in the fourteenth century. Lower down, on the same wall, S. Nicholas may be seen pardoning the consul at the intercession of the three youths whose lives he had ordered to be taken. In the next lunette the Saint restores to life a child enticed from home and killed by an evil spirit. Beneath this, again, S. Nicholas snatches away from before a king a captive youth, and restores him to his parents. The saint flies downwards and catches the youth by the head. The latter is in the act of handing a cup to the king, seated on a throne. To the left, the child stands before two persons, seated at a table. Beneath this, again, a youth who had been drowned as he drew water in a cup originally intended as a present to the altar of S. Nicholas, is restored to his parents by the saint. In the side pierced by the arch of the entrance, above the lowest course in which nine out of twelve standing apostles are still visible,2 S. Mary Magdalen stands in prayer to the left; and S. John the Baptist, to the right, points to a figure of the Saviour in a niche in the lunette. At his sides S. Francis holds by the hand a kneeling cardinal in episcopal dress , beneath whom the arms of the Orsini are depicted, and S. Nicolas holds by the hand a monk in a white dress upon which the arms of the Orsini are embroidered. Beneath the first of these groups is the word " Cardinalis" and below the se- cond "Dns. Johes Gaetanus frater ejus.7'3

1 Dante (Purgatorio. Canto XX. v. 30) sings the praise of Nicholas for this.

2 Three on the wall to the left are obliterated.

3 All that remains of two long inscriptions.

27*

420

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XVIII.

Vasari declares,1 that Agnolo of Sienna erected a cha- pel and a tomb of marble at Assisi to the brother of Cardinal Napoleon Orsini, who, being a cardinal also and a Franciscan, died there. The latest record which has been preserved of Agnolo of Sienna is dated 1349. 2 Na- poleon Orsini was one of Boniface the Eighth's cardinals, and died in 1347 at Avignon. His brother Giovanni Orsini received the hat in 1321 from John the Twenty First, and died at Avignon in 1339. 3 The chapel del Sa- cramento was built for the mortal remains of members of the Orsini family; and it is obvious that the paintings which now adorn it were painted for, or in commemoration of, Napoleon and Gaetano, whose remains were no doubt transferred, as was usual, from Avignon to Italy. There is no certainty as to the date of the paintings of the chapel, but the style points to the first half of the cen- tury as the period of their execution. One may say generally, of them, that they are fine, well ordered and animated compositions, and that they exhibit considerable power in the rendering of movement and action. Artists of the earlier part of the fourteenth century seldom im- parted more life to their incidents than may be observed in the groups formed by the saint presenting to the de- lighted parents the child who had been drowned. Pater- nal affection overflows in the figure and face of the father who, as he sits at the table, embraces his son. A longing to grasp him to her bosom appears in that of the mother with outstretched arms, trust in that of the person who points with a finger to heaven. The dog barks and capers with joy at sight of the lost regained, and the Saint himself is admirable in repose as he presents the boy. Ease of movement may be found in the figure of

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 9.

2 Documenti dell' arte Sanese, by GaetanoMilane- si. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 206.

3 See Eggs, Purpura Docta. Vol. I. p.p. 248. 317. Eggs cor-

rects Ciacchoni who affirmed that Gaetano Orsini died at Avignon in 1355. Richa relates of the latter, that he caused the steeple of the Badia of the benedictines of Florence to be rebuilt in 1330. Vol. I. of Chiese Fior. p. 195.

Chap. XVIII. GIOTTINO. 421

! S. Nicholas, flying down to rescue the young captive, great energy in his action where he stops the arm of the ! executioner. Variety of expression, noble forms and fea- 1 tures mark the faces of the youths interceding for the I consul. The apostles of the lower course are, after those of Giotto in the ciborium of Rome, the most admirable that were produced in the early times of the revival, ex- hibiting that gravity, repose, and individuality of character which are essential to effect in such representations. In the vaulting of the arches are figures of male and female saints with fresh and attractive faces, noble in shape and 1 stature, finely and broadly draped, and executed with great

intelligence of form. Great feeling too is shown for the

rotundity resulting from the proper juxtaposition of light \ and shade. Hands, feet, carefully drawn, though not I more minutely detailed than was usual at this time, I reveal a pupil of Giotto ; but there is a tendency to dis- ' play the human features in comparatively small propor- tions, and to lavish minute care on embroideries. The colour is light and clear, rosy and well fused, and trans- ' parent in shadow.1 No painter ever showed himself at once a better or a closer imitator of Giotto. Not even

Taddeo Gaddi exhibited so completely his great laws of

composition, nor did any pupil of Giotto so thoroughly 1 preserve his great qualities ; yet, at the same time, display > symptoms of progress within the bounds of the truth and J of nature as they were defined by the great Florentine. - The frescos of the Cappella del Sacramento, at Assisi, do more honour to the school of Giotto than any that were produced at the same period , that is, in the first half of the fourteenth century. But the frescos inside the chapel are ' not more remarkable than those which decorate the outer face of the wall in which the entrance arch is pierced. These frescos are, indeed, close to those of Giotto and

1 One may point to the figure \ of the Saviour before S. John as

grand in the regularity of its

forms. The lights of some dra-

peries are touched in gold, as for instance in the figure of S. Peter.

422

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XVIII.

differ slightly from them; but they also differ slightly from those illustrating the life of S. Nicholas so that it is difficult to say whether they are by the same hand. They are , however , of a later date than the frescos by Giotto, and are executed in a style not dissimilar from those inside the chapel del Sacramento. They represent on one side of the arch, the death of a child by the fall of a house and his resurrection at the intercession of S. Francis.1 On the opposite side of the arch is the resur- rection of the child,2 a very fine composition, in part dama- ged and discoloured, but very animated. The medallion prophets in the painted ornament are different from those of the other frescos in the transept. Above these two scenes is a splendid annunciation, with a majestic figure of Gabriel, and a Virgin erect and shrinking back in surprise, but matronly and well folded in her blue mantle. The draperies have the breadth of those in the apostles of the chapel. The head of the announcing angel is round and pleasant. Puccio Capanna is, according to some writers, the painter of the annunciation; but who can pretend to affirm this with any certainty? A Ma- donna amongst saints,3 in style much resembling these frescos, perhaps feebler, adorns the Medici chapel in S. Croce at Florence. Of the saints, Bartholomew is espe- cially fine. In S. Chiara of Assisi, an edifice which

1 In the first of these scenes, the ruins of a house may be seen in the distance to the left, and on the foreground a man, almost turning his back to the spectator, holds the corpse of the child which the mother in an agony of grief stoops to kiss. Behind her, a fe- male wrings her hands, another tears her hair, a third lacerates her cheeks with her nails , and more to the right are other female spectators. On the extreme left, a man stands in profile, to whom tradition gives the name of Giotto, Vasari having stated in a general way, that in the sides of this por-

tion of the church a portrait of Giotto existed. Vasari. Vol. I. p. 317.

2 S. Francis in flight appears in the upper story of a house where he lay and may be ob- served to rise in bed. A youth runs down a flight of outer steps to make the miracle known, whilst in front of the house, a tressel lies ready for the body. The clergy has arrived and a crowd waits to follow the funeral.

3 S.S. Louis, John the Baptist, Bartholomew, Peter and other saints. In the medallions of the niches are prophets.

Chap. XVIII.

GIOTTINO.

423

owed much of its internal decoration to Giottino,1 some vestiges of the art of the fourteenth century are pre- served. The figures in the ceiling of the transept2 seem, however, to have been painted there by an artist of the fourteenth century, but of much lower powers than he who executed the chapel del Sacramento. Vasari only affirms that Giottino painted scenes from the life of S. Chiara in the church of that name. Traces of such subjects have lately been recovered from whitewash in the sides of the right transept, as well as remains of incidents from the life of the Saviour;3 but the remnant so recovered seems to have been originally of very small value. Besides these frescos or fragments of frescos in S. Chiara, a crucifixion (altarpiece) of the fourteenth cen- tury is also preserved, which, though some resemblance may be traced in it to other third rate paintings at Pis- toia, one may still hesitate to ascribe, as has been done, to Puccio Capanna. Even in the private church of the convent of S. Chiara, whose frescos have that species of renown which generally attaches to carefully guarded treasures, the scenes of the Passion, painted on the walls, are of a low order, the least defective of which, a depo- sition from the cross,4 is painted in a soft method of colour. 5 A diligent search throughout the convents of Assisi produces no further result ; their walls being in every instance carefully whitewashed. 6 That the works of two or

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 143.

2 S.S. Agnes, Monica, Cathe- rine, Mary, Chiara, Cecilia, Lucy guarded by angels, in the space diagonally divided.

3 The flight into Egypt and massacre of the innocents for in- stance, which had not been white- washed when Rumohr wrote at the beginning of this century. He notices them for the purpose of showing that in the 14th cen- tury no one objected to seeing . the acts of S. Chiara compared j

to those of the Virgin. This is truer than the artistic opinion that these frescos are like others assigned to Giottino. Forschun- gen. Vol. II. note to p. 213.

4 Above which are S. Chiara, a monk, the Virgin and child, S. Francis and another saint.

5 In the same chapel a mira- culous crucifix is preserved, which certainly dates as far back as the Xth century.

6 The following is a list of works mentioned by Vasari, which

424

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XVIII.

more painters are concealed under the name of Giottino has been shown; but, with the knowledge at present at- tainable, all that can be done is to classify the frescos and paintings according to style and technical execution. Time may bring some records to light and facilitate the studies of later historians. The clue which might be given by the works of Giottino's pupils is wanting ; of Giovanni dal Ponte and Lippo, whose lives are written by Vasari, not a single picture or fresco remains. Of Giovanni Tos- sicani d'Arezzo no works have been preserved; but it is characteristic of Vasari that he makes that artist, — a pupil of Giottino, born in 1324, — the author of an annunciation executed at Arezzo for the Countess Giovanna Tarlati about the year 1335. 1 If, however, Giovanni Tossicani mentioned by Vasari, be the same who appears in the register of Florentine painters under the name of Gio- vanni di Francesco Toschani, Vasari erred to the amount of a century in his dates. The painter of that name was registered in the corporation in 1424, and in 1427 — 30 made the usual returns of his income to the Catasto of Florence. He died May 2. 1430 and was buried in S. Maria del Fiore.2 As for Michelino it is not possible to say which of the painters of that name Vasari specially alludes to.

have since perished, — at S. Ste- fano al Ponte Vecchio, at the Frate Ermini, S.S. Spirito, Pan- erazio, Gallo, Lorenzo da Ginocchi, in S. Maria Novella, Ognissanti, Convent alle Campore, Ponte a Romiti in Valdarno, all in and about Florence, at Rome in the Lateran, in Casa Orsini (? which of them) at Araceli, at Assisi, above the gate leading to the Duomo. Vasari also assigns to

Giottino a marble statue on the campanile of S. Maria del Fiore which still exists and has the Giottesque character of a follower of Andrea Pisano. Vide Vas. Vol. II. p.p. 140 to 144.

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 145.

2 Giornale Storico degli Archivi Toscani. ub. sup. 1860. p. 15. and Gualandi. ub. sup. Ser. VI. p. 182.

Chap. XIX.

ANDREA ORCAGNA.

425

CHAPTER XIX. ANDREA ORCAGNA.

Not the least important or numerous class of artists in the fourteenth century were the goldsmiths , whose costly and beautiful works adorned alike the altars of churches, the treasure chambers of princes, and the plate chests of wealthy citizens. It is unfortunately in the nature of things that gold and silver carving or chasing should be difficult to preserve. An extensive system of credit made the Florentines bankers to the majority of European princes; but at Florence, as in every other part of the continent, the quantity of the precious metals in circula- tion was frequently out of proportion with the demand. It is characteristic, indeed, of all great enterprises in the fourteenth, as in later centuries, that they were under- taken with totally inadequate means ; and the pawning of jewellery and plate was one of the commonest resources of princes. An unsuccessful campaign, a battle lost, or an expedition in prospect, were frequently decisive as to the existence of valuable gold and silver work ; and whilst the knight, when inclined or forced to pay, exchanged the commodity which he required for a link wrenched from a costly chain, the sovereign or duke, the chiefs of a republic, melted cups and candelabra, statues and images, to satisfy their wants. Thus it is that so few specimens of the goldsmith's art have been preserved, and that nothing remains to represent the genius of the Florentine goldsmith Cione than the silver altar-table

426

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

(

of the Baptistery of S. Giovanni.1 Commenced, as is proved by the inscription, in 1366, it was finished at divers times by men of various talent and renown. 2 Cione, who had a share in it, was the father of a numerous family, whose members distinguished themselves as archi- tects, sculptors, and painters, being the progenitor of Ber- nardo, Andrea, Ristoro, Jacopo, and Matteo, the majority of whom have a claim to the admiration of posterity. Ber- nardo, of the grocers' corporation in 1358 and registered in the guild of Florentine painters in 1364, is said by Vasari to have been the oldest member of the family, and to have contributed in a great measure to the fame of his brother Andrea. 3 Ristoro is known as caput magister in the Uffizio del Fuoco at Florence during the great plague,4 as of the "Signori" in 1364, 70—76 and 88, 5 and as one of the Uffiziali della Guerra in 13 69. 6 Ja- copo was a sculptor who worked from the models of his brother Andrea*, and all that has been preserved regard- ing him is, that he erected the tower and gate of S. Piero Gattolini and executed a model of a horse which, after being gilt, was placed in S. Maria del Fiore above the gate leading to the Company of S. Zanobi.7 Jacopo took the freedom of the guild of Florentine painters in 1387. 8 Matteo, often companion to Andrea, as at Orvieto, was professionally an architect.9

The most eminent of the sons of Cione was, however, Andrea, known in his lifetime as L'Arcagnolo, and cele- brated later under the corrupted name of Orcagna.

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 11.

2 Cione is not, as Vasari affirms (Vol. II. p. 11), the author of the silver head of S. Zenobio in the cathedral of Florence. The artist was Andrea Arditi.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 123. He is registered as Nardo Cioni in the guild of painters at Florence in 1364. Gualandi. ub. sup. Serie VI. p. 186.

4 In 1350. See Gaye. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 500.

5 Note to Vasari. Vol. II. p. 122.

6 Gaye. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 523. In 1366 (Gaye. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 517) he values certain buildings purchased to erect the barbican of the gate of S. Frediano at Florence.

7 This horse is in a magazine of the cathedral. Annot. to Vas. Vol. II. p. 136.

8 Gualandi. ub. sup. Serie VI. p. 184.

9 See postea.

Chap. XIX.

ANDREA ORCAGNA.

427

Andrea had neither seen nor known Giotto, yet carried out his maxims better than any of the immediate fol- lowers of the great Florentine. At once a painter, a sculptor, and an architect, he was endowed with a genius of power and fibre similar to that which marked Giotto and Michael Angelo. His was a mind of wonderful scant- ling, of that tough and durable material which is rarely found more than once in a century, one which, by the very nature of its being, exercises a striking influence on its cotemporaries, and gives a bias to all that comes in contact with it. Orcagna not only understood and grasped the great maxims and laws of Giotto, but he combined, like that great master, all the essentials which unite to make an art progress. He lived at a time when the Gaddi and others had debased the standard which their master had raised. Placing himself on the vantage ground which Giotto had occupied, and keeping within those limits of truth and of nature which were necessary, Orcagna restored the art to its simplicity and grandeur, and corrected the errors into which so many of his co- temporaries had fallen. Giovanni da Milano and Giot- tino had remained insofar behind their time, that they sacrificed the laws of composition and design to the elaboration of parts. Details were by them frequently better carried out than the mass. Expression was sought out to the detriment of the general balance of the whole, or lively colour, in itself pleasing, seemed to crush the composition. Whilst these artists sacrificed the unity which alone produces a perfect picture, Orcagna like Giotto, gathered into his grasp the scattered reins loosely held by his cotemporaries, gave an impulse to art in all its branches, and placed it on a grand level of general progress. 1

Nature had evidently marked out Orcagna for an uni-

1 Rumohr feels and endeavours to explain Avhy Orcagna , who developed the qualities of Giotto and improved art in many respects,

should hitherto have received less attention than he deserves. For- schungen. Vol. II. p. 215.

428

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

versal genius;1 and, had he lived at the time when per- spective became a science, he might have been numbered amongst the greatest artists whom his country produced. Intuitively, he accomplished almost as much as was in the power of man without the aid of science. Vasari pretends, but does not convince us, that Stefano Fioren- tino and Giottino surpassed Giotto in the production of perspective effect and in the foreshortening of figures. Orcagna was better deserving of this praise ; and the stu- dent of his works will admit, that, insofar as one accus- tomed to scrutinize nature can fathom the difficulties of imitation, so far he penetrated with success. Figures may be found in his frescos, foreshortened with a certain daring and success; and his wall paintings generally are more strongly stamped with the characteristic features of his genius than his easel pictures. This was not the opi- nion of Vasari;2 but Orcagna was in this the true child of his country. His greatest works were frescos, as were the greatest works of Giotto, of Ghirlandaio, and of Ra- phael. His easel pictures were second to them and clearly entrusted, in a great measure, to pupils. It is to be de- plored, however, that the frescos of Orcagna should have shared the common fate of all artistic works of the four- teenth century. The greatest productions of that period in Italy are irretrievably damaged by time or by restor- ing; and it is not possible to recal a single instance of a fresco in which the merit of the author can be truly recognized. Sadly veiled is the beauty of the design and colour, except in small spaces which have escaped the general wreck. But, whilst enough remains for the satis- faction of a searching critic, too little is left to charm less determined observers; and it might be difficult to convince the superficial that, where, owing to the effects of time, harmony and colour are wanting, those qualities were once conspicuous. Colour is the language of art, appeals to our sense, and leads us to the analysis of

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 123. 2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 131.

Chap. XIX.

ANDREA ORCAGNA.

429

the other beauties of a picture. It blinds us indeed to other- wise obvious defects. Its absence may deter us from the admission of beauties which really exist, repels us when we are forced to reconstruct, mentally, the whole of that which is in a great measure altered by the effect of time. Yet in the case of Orcagna, such reconstruction is neces- sary. Then, however, it becomes possible to compare him with Giotto, the only painter that can stand com- parison with him; and the results of the process are equally important and interesting. Giotto is a dramatist, a thinker: he studies and reflects the expression of human passions. He is to the art, what Dante was to the poesy, of his country. In severe and simple, yet ele- gant, metre, he inculcates great and durable lessons. Or- cagna introduces a more yielding and sensitive religious feeling into art, the mild soft mysticism which finds its culminating point in Angelico. He is a link in the chain of Giotto, Masolino, Masaccio. From the school of Florence he derives his greatest qualities, from that of Sienna, from Simone and the Lorenzetti, the lesser ones. He tempered the sternness of the first with the softness of the second, combining in his figures tenderness and grace with severity of form, decorum, and nobleness of deportment. A Florentine, and therefore imbued with the best maxims, he takes from his Siennese rivals only that which suits his purpose; and though partial to the ex- pression of tenderness, he never sinks to affectation. Va- sari is evidently right when he says that Andrea Pisano was Orcagna' s first teacher,1 Orsanmichele still exists to confirm the statement; nor could any one be more clearly fitted to impart grandeur and severity to Orcagna' s style than he, who had so successfully and conscientiously car- ried out the conceptions of Giotto. One may almost rea- lize, even at this day, Andrea, moulding the youthful genius of his disciple on the model and with the precepts of his own master and friend; and one may say that,

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 123.

430

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

through him, Orcagna was the pupil of Giotto. It is less obvious who taught him to paint; perhaps his brother Bernardo, as Vasari states; but, evidently, he combined Florentine and Siennese qualities, and at S. Maria No- vella, he united the great maxims of Florentine compo- sition, its dramatic force, with the Siennese tenderness, and practise of colour. In this, he marks a new phase of art. It was admitted in his own time,1 that he was the greatest painter who had lived since Giotto; and though Taddeo Gaddi was inclined to believe that painting had declined after the^ death of his master, this was true only of himself and of those who, like him, were but humble imitators. Sacchetti has preserved the me- mory of a meeting of artists at S. Miniato, where, after a pleasant dinner and much drinking of wine, Orcagna, being at that time Capo Maestro of Orsanmichele , sug- gested as a subject for debate "who, setting aside Giotto, was the greatest master in painting". No one appears to have hinted that Orcagna was himself the person best entitled to election. Yet his name was no doubt at that time well known. He had painted the whole of the choir of S. Maria Novella for the family of the Ricci, a chapel and altarpiece in the same church for the Strozzi ; he had furnished, in 1357, the model of the pillars for S. Maria del Fiore; he had been, in 1358, to Orvieto to superin- tend the mosaics of the cathedral, and had already com- menced the carving of the statues and reliefs which were to ornament the tabernacle of Orsanmichele. He was an architect, a sculptor, a mosaist, and a painter, and even in those days, when artists were conspicuous for most varied acquirements, he might be considered as one gifted beyond the measure of his cotemporaries.

The records of S. Maria Novella are silent as to the period when Orcagna decorated the choir of that edifice,3 but Baldinucci authorizes us to believe that the frescos

in 1350, but supports his asser- tion with no proofs. Vide Vol. IV. p. 395.

1 feaechetti. ub. sup. Nov. CXXXVI. Vol II. p. 220.

2 Baldinucci says, this occurred

Chap. XIX.

THE STROZZI CHAPEL.

431

there were damaged by a storm in 1358. 1 Their dis- figured remains were preserved for upwards of a cen- tury; until Ghirlandaio was appointed to replace them by others. In doing so, he used many of the incidents which had already been set forth by his great prede- cessor.

Equal uncertainty exists , as to the date of the fres- cos in the Strozzi chapel, but they may have been exe- cuted previous to the altarpiece which bears the date of 1357.

Here Orcagna painted on the three principal walls, the Judgment, Paradise, and the final abyss.

The first of these subjects decorated the wall facing the entrance, and was distributed so as to suit the spaces above and about the sides of the high pointed window of the chapel. Instead of presenting the Saviour in the usual glory, held up by angels, Orcagna conceived him as if soar- ing in heaven, majestically wafted onward and half visible out of the clouds, distributing blessings and curses, wearing the diadem of celestial empire, announcing his coming by two heavenly heralds, whose horns sound the last call, and accompanied by angels, 2 bearing the symbols of his passion. Below him, to the left, kneels the Virgin, with reverence and inspiration in her glance, her arms folded on her bo- som, and clad in white; she heads a double kneeling row of six apostles, whilst a similar number, on the right side of the window, is presided by the kneeling Bap- tist, raising his arms and face in extasy to the Saviour. Beneath these tenants of the clouds forming the bases of the highest paradise, are patriarchs, 'prophets and prophetesses, Noah, holding the ark, Moses, Abraham, then Saints and Martyrs of the early church, a cardinal, kings and princes, whose joys are symbolized still lower in the space, by a group of female dancers, by whom stands a woman in prayer. In the corner of the foreground, an angel aids one of the elect out of the grave. The guilty and accursed tear their clothes, gnash their teeth, and exhibit the most various evi- dences of despair, on the side beneath the Baptist. Females, though in agony and torture, bear their suffering with femi- nine composure. In contrast with the dancing females on the left, stands a group of women on the right contemplat-

1 Bcildinucci. ub. sup. p. 396. 2 Four in number.

432

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

ing in silent grief the paradise they have lost, whilst in the corner of the foreground, a demon drags one of the accursed with a cord towards the Hades on the neighbour- ing wall."

A noble and serene youthfulness, dignity and decorum easy lightness of motion and a fine attitude are here given to the Saviour. 1 Repose and contemplation are well ren- dered in the face of the Virgin, the extasy of a dweller of the desert in the wild features of the Baptist. Grandeur and dignity mark the apostles, as they sit upon the clouds, majestically enveloped in their draperies, and holding their several symbols, as S. Peter with the keys behind the Virgin. The groups of crowned princes and dignitaries are much damaged, as well as that of the dancers beneath it, by restoring;2 but in the elegant form of the latter is evidently the original conception of the dances which charm in the pictures of the dominican of Fiesole. In the distribution of this subject, Orcagna perfectly ob- served the laws of composition, and symmetrically divided the space he had to fill. He gave an additional charm to the picture by making it, as it were, a moving vi- sion. Nature and individuality mark the faces, whose type and character are select. The angels, forcible in motion, are graceful in form and fine in proportions; and they seem truly to fly. Remarkable, however, above every thing is their foreshortened attitude. Orcagna dared much in this place. He intended to foreshorten; and, in the general movement, he realized that intention. His figures will not bear the test of scientific perspective, but they are evidently at the highest level which an artist can attain without mathematical rules; nor is it possible to conceive that more should have been, at this time, attained by Stefano or Giottino, even if we admit with

1 A red tunic covered by a blue mantle, the traditional dress of traditional colours girds the Saviour. The colour is, however, much damaged.

2 All the lower part is damaged ; and one can only speak of out- lines and general movement of figures.

Chap. XIX.

THE STROZZI CHAPEL.

433

Vasari , that these painters executed works in which per- spective was a conspicuous quality.1 In the choice of human proportion, Orcagna had a clear knowledge of the most favorable conditions, and in that of form, a deli- cate sense of the beautiful. Life, action, natural grace, slenderness and elasticity, mark the frames of his figu- res; and they stand on the necessary plane with the necessary firmness of tread. In this, and in the positive relation of his creations to nature, Orcagna was clearly Giottesque ; but he displayed the progress of his time by defining and more fully rendering form, without sacrifice of detail to mass. Hands, feet, articulations, in fit relation to the general parts, as in Giotto, were yet perfected with more study. Drapery preserved its old simplicity and breadth of form, clothed the frame beneath it judiciously, and yet was true and natural in the accessory folds. This, indeed, was one of Orcagna' s great qualities. His line was simple, but firm and decisive, and displayed the in- ward consciousness of every form that was to be repre- sented. In colour, Orcagna united brilliancy with soft- ness, vigour of light and shade with transparence. By a massive distribution of chiaroscuro, he imparted relief and rotundity in a measure which Giotto had not attained. His flesh tint was a natural and charming tone, well fused in the passages. His harmonies were true and pleasing. His idea of atmosphere was advanced for his age, and was in proportion to his power of giving rotun- dity to parts. He was thus preparing the way for the perfection of aerial, as intuitively, he had divined the re- sults of linear perspective. Such qualities as these justify the critic in affirming that Orcagna was the great repre- sentative of artistic progress in his time. \ To the right and left of the fresco which has given occasion to the foregoing observations are the Paradise and Infernal Regions, the first of which has suffered much from damp and from restoring.

1 Certainly no such works are now to be found.

vol. i. 28

434

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

"High up in the centre of the space, to the left of the entrance, the Saviour and the Virgin sit enthroned, the former, young, crowned, and wielding the sceptre, 1 the latter, in calm repose with her arms crossed upon her bosom. 2 About and beneath them, in rows, and tinged with the red and azure hues of the zones of celestial light, are red warrior seraphs and blue warrior cherubs , in prayer, turned towards the presence of the Kedeemer, parted on each side of the central heaven , on the clouds of which the throne re- poses.3 Lower down, and at each side of two central angels playing music,4 are the orders of the heavenly hierarchy, like- wise in rows, and comprising the apostles, prophets, saints and martyrs, the latter with their emblems, and each accom- panied by his guardian angel, playing instruments, singing or praying. Yet lower, a dance of males and females, on a ground of clouds, separates rows of female saints , whose emblems are accurately given, and who have not the protec- tion of guardian angels. On the corner of the foreground, to the right, an angel introduces a female into paradise."

What remains of this great work deserves the same praise as the Last Judgment. The tenants of the para- dise seem really in heavenly repose. The easy and grace- ful movement of the two angels playing music at the foot of the throne seems to accompany sounds of sweet music. Their forms , made out with graceful lines, are grand and beautiful , and, in their conception, one may ascribe, to Orcagna the possession of all those qualities which marked Giotto, enhanced by new features of pro- gress. A soft contemplative expression beams in the faces of the blessed and reveals that mystical spirit in Orcagna which descends afterwards to Angelico; but, in conjunction with it, is more of the manly beauty and force of the creations of Giotto. Here it is that one finds the alliance of Florentine grandeur with Siennese tender- ness. The spectator must, however, carefully study what time and restorers have left untouched before he can come to this conclusion.6

1 Dressed in the blue mantle which is much altered in colour.

2 The Virgin is in white.

3 The rows to the right have been seriously damaged.

4 Both of these angels have repainted mantles.

5 The upper parts of the rows of cherubs, to the right, have been best preserved. The rows of saints

Chap. XIX.

THE STROZZI CHAPEL.

435

The Inferno is completely repainted;1 and the student can only judge, by the Dantesque arrangement of "bofge", what Orcagna intended to represent. For the rest, he seems to have expended much fancy in the conception of the figures.2

The time when all these works were completed cannot, as has been said, be accurately defined, but they were probably produced previous to 1354, when Tommaso di Eossello Strozzi ordered of Orcagna the altarpiece of the chapel, on condition that it should be finished in a year and eight months. The knowledge of this fact has been preserved in a record of the family, wherein it is de- clared, that Orcagna failed to complete his contract in the given time;3 and, in truth, the altarpiece, as it now

immediately beneath these have been damaged by retouching of the most sweeping kind. On the right hand foreground not a dress of the numerous saints standing on the clouds has remained unre- paired. On the left side, many heads are discoloured, some re- touched and others new. The cen- tral foreground group has been so completely changed that, where of old possibly interesting cotem- porary likenesses were to be found, nothing remains but the outlines of some heads.

1 According to Ghiberti, Second Comment, in Vas. Vol. I. p. XXIII, this Inferno is by Bernardo. The modest Richa (Chiese. Vol. III. p. 71), is shocked at the represen- tation of so many waggeries (baie) and nudities, which, he says, ill suit the sanctity of the place and the terrible nature of the story.

2 The ceiling divided, as usual, by diagonals is adorned in the centre with the arms of the Strozzi around which the symbols of the four evangelists are distributed. In the ornaments are emblemati- cal figures of virtues, and in 4 medallions in the centres of the triangles are dominican monks, amongst which S. Thomas Aqui-

nas stands preeminent, with figu- res near them, of faith, hope, charity, fortitude, justice. The head of S. Thomas, the all but obliterated figure of S. Augustin above him, S.S. Jerom and Domi- nick (much damaged by restor- ing), a fine S. Ambrose and S. Gregory decorate the pilasters of the entrance arch, in the key of which is a painted root of the Strozzi family. The three princi- pal frescos of the interior rest on a painted cornice imitating white marble, supported by feigned pilasters , inclosing rectangular slabs, in the centre of which are heads in medallions in dead colour. In the painted glass of the window, is S. Thomas Aqui- nas, holding a head from which rays are projected on a model of a church in his hand. Time has deprived this figure of its co- lour, but the design is worthy of Orcagna, and was doubtless his. Afbove the figure and the arms of the Strozzi, is a represen- tation, on the glass, of the Virgin and child likewise probably by Orcagna.

3 See the original doc. in its mutilated state in Baldinucci. ub. sup. Vol. IV. p.p. 392. 393.

28*

436

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIX.

stands, bears an inscription, which Vasari correctly co- pied, as follows: "Aiii Dni MCCCLVII. Andreas Cionis de Florentia me pinxit."

In this altarpiece which consists of five niches rest- ing on a predella in three divisions, the Saviour may- be seen enthroned under a red and blue prism filled with seraphim and cherubim, giving with his right the gospel to S. Thomas Aquinas, with his left, the keys to S. Peter. Both these saints kneel at his sides with two angels sounding instruments. The first is presented by the Virgin, at whose right stand S. Catherine and S. Michael, the second by S. John Baptist, on whose left are S. Law- rence and S. Paul.1 In the predella are two scenes from the life of a saint at each side of one representing S. Pe- ter saved from the waters by the Saviour. 2 To the left is the celebration of the mass, to the right, a king dying amidst the wails of a crowd surrounding his bed, with a monk kneeling at one side of the foreground, and an angel at the other weighing the soul of the departed in a balance which two demons are vainly striving to weigh down.

Here Orcagna represented the Saviour youthful and not without majesty, with features reminiscent of the Giot- tesque type and as fine as any of the period. In the figure of S. Thomas, the noble and fine head shows an advanced study of form. S. Peter exhibits an eager de- sire to grasp the keys. The draperies are grand. In the predella scenes, much vivacity of action may be noted chiefly in the central one.3 A clear, light, yet powerful colour charms the eye, yet the execution is not, on the whole, so fine as that of the best preserved parts in the frescos of the surrounding walls where Orcagna, like most of his countrymen developed all his powers, and displayed all his skill. There is no doubt, however, that this is the finest of his panels.

1 At the bottom of the Saviour's dress is a hole. The blue mantle is retouched at the knees. The black portion of S.Thomas' dress is retouched and the white part new. The colour and part of the ground the breast of S. Paul are gone.

2 In this central predella com- partments some of the colour in the head of S. Peter is gone and a few of the apostles in the vessel are repainted.

3 Which, however, is damaged.

Chap. XIX. ALTARPIECES BY ORCAGNA. 437

Another combining all his qualities hangs to the first pilaster, on the left as one enters the northern front por- tal of S. Maria del Fiore at Florence, and represents S. Zanobius, the patron saint of the city, majestically sit- ting in cathedra with SS. Crescenzius and Eugenius kneeling at his sides.1 His feet rest in scorn upon the two allegorical vices of " pride " and "cruelty".2 In a medallion on the pinnacle of the throne, the Saviour gives the blessing; and, in the predella, are two episodes from the life of S. Zanobius. 3 Here, in spite of partial restoring, the colour is fine, clear, and luminous. The life size figure of the Florentine saint is imposing and majestic in deportment, of well chosen type, and lined out with severely simple contours. Animation is in his glance. Orcagna's manner is here revealed, and the spectator has no diffi- culty in finding the same hand as that which painted the Strozzi altarpiece. A picture, in the Medici chapel at S. Croce, inscribed 1363, is of the same class, and repre- sents in four pointed niches the following enthroned saints: S.S. Ambrose, Jerom, Gregory, and Augustin. Above the pinnacles are the four symbols of the Evan- gelists.4

Of less marked resemblance with the undoubted Or- cagna's but in the same chapel is a picture in three parts, devoted to the apotheosis of S. Giovanni Gualberto and four episodes of his legend.5 The saint in the garb of a monk, holding a staff and book, fills the central space, above which the Saviour gives a benediction. In one of the compartments the saint goes through the or- deal of fire. On the pediment six lozenges are filled with figures of male and female saints. Many of the

1 The former with a censer, the latter with a book; charity and humility as allegorical figures, sup- port a damask cloth behind S. Zanobius. The head of charity is much damaged. S. Zanobius in episcopals holds a crozier.

2 The first remarkable by the golden horns on his head, the

second sucking the blood of an infant.

3 In one, a youth is restored to life, in the other the withered elm blooms anew.

4 Numbered 33.

5 Marked No. 21, on the wall to the left of the entrance.

438

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

characteristic features of Orcagna's style mark this piece. In the same chapel, to the right of the door, is a Virgin and child between Pope Gregory and Job, inscribed: "Anno Dom. MCCCLXV Tellinus Dini fecit fieri hoc opus pro anima sua." 1 Three scenes in the pediment are almost obliterated. This picture has much the character of the one devoted to S. Giovanni Gualberto, but is slightly inferior to it. The Virgin and child are not un- graceful, and the forms of the draperies are fine. Very majestic likewise, and much in the style of Orcagna, is a life size S. Mathew, erect with the pen and book, the central figure of an altarpiece which, till 1860, hung high up in the church of S. Maria Nuova at Florence, and is now in the refectory of the Franciscan nuns of the Ho- spital of S. Matteo.2 Grandly posed and nobly grave in expression, the saint occupies a pointed niche,3 the com- panions to which on each side are divided into compart- ments, in which four scenes from the legend of S. Matthew are depicted.4 One of these, an encounter with two dragons, is a grand composition of four figures of tall propor- tions, full of life and character, and in the pure Giottesque style; whilst another in which the son of Egippus is restored, presents to us in the rising youth a form of the finest kind as to beauty and character. In these sce- nes, indeed, one finds the same power, and animation,

1 Numbered 36.

2 Falsely assigned by some to Lorenzo di Bicci, this altarpiece is noted by Richa (Vol. VII. p. 92), as in S. Matteo and in the man- ner of Giotto. Sign. Gaetano Mi- lanesi informs us, from records in the convent, that Mariotto di Nardo Cioni, Orcagna's nephew, laboured there.

3 In a blue tunic and red mantle. Beneath the saints feet is the in- scription "S. Mathseus apostolus et Evangelista".

4 In the first and lowest, to the left, Christ with four apostles calls

Mathew from his bank. An in- scription has the following words: " Quomodo Sanctus Mathseus re- cessit deckeloneo , et secutus est Cristum." In the second, the tam- ing of the dragons sent by the soothsayer to worry S. Mathew. Here again: "Quando miserunt super eum Sanctum Mathseum dre- cones." In the third S. Mathew restores to life the son of Egippus king of Ethiopia. In the last S. Mathew is decapitated by a sol- dier. The inscription on these two last are: "Quomodo Sanctus Ma- teus resuscitavit unum mortuum." "Quando S. Mateus fuit occisus."

Chap. XIX.

ALTARPIECS BY ORCAGNA.

439

as in the predella of the altarpiece signed by Orcagna at the Strozzi chapel.1 As regards execution, this pic- ture, with the exception of its predella, is finished with a bold rapidity of hand, and warmly tinged with vigo- rous colour. In the second chapel belonging to the company of the Misericordia, in the cloister of the Badia of Florence, an altarpiece in three parts may be seen, representing the "descent of the Holy Spirit". The Vir- gin occupies the middle of the space, and stands, with her arms crossed on her bosom, in the midst of the apostles. Above her are the dove and two angels. This picture inclosed in a modern frame, has been in part restored, 2 but the character and style are like those of Orcagna, whether one considers the forms and types, the indivi- duality impressed on each figure, the truthful action, or the breadth of the draperies. The colour has become a little brown, but the same hand may be traced in it as in the altarpiece at S. Matteo, and both resemble in style the Orcagna of the Strozzi chapel. Without absolutely assigning these works to the master's own hand, one may say that they combine the qualities which were conspi- cuous in him.3

The altarpiece which once adorned S. Piero Maggiore4 at Florence, and is now the property of the National Gallery,5 is much altered by restoring. The lightness of the tempera has been destroyed, and the beauty of the master's style cannot therefore be judged from it.

1 In two medallions, at each side of the central pinnacle, are angels holding severally a crown and a palm. On the medallions of the sides golden balls. The predella representing a crucifixion and 2 scenes from the life of S.Ni- colas of Bari are by a feebler pain- ter and in a more modern frame than the rest of the altarpiece.

2 The names of the apostles on the frame are new. The red mantle of S. Simon is damaged, and likewise the red dress of S. Philip. The restoration is of the

last century as may be gathered from the following inscription : "Tabulam hanc, vetustate fere deletam propria manu hanc in formam redegit Cav. Bonsus Pius Bonsi hujus sacellipatronus A.R.S. MDCCLXXI."

3 One may add to the list a vision of S. Bernard in the Aca- demy of Arts at Florence (No. 14 Gal. des gr. tableaux), a feeble example but soft in colour.

4 Vas. Vol. II. p. 124.

5 Nos. 569 to 578 inclus. Nat. Gal. represent the coronation of

440

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

Vasari says, that Orcagna painted the choir of S. Maria Novella and the Strozzi chapel, in company with his brother Bernardo. There is no trace of two hands in the latter, and as to the period when they were produced, it has been proved that their completion may date as far back as 1354. Orcagna must at that time have been an artist of acknowledged merit. In 1357, his model was taken for the columns of S. Maria del Fiore, 1 yet it does not appear that he was a citizen of Florence before 1358, when he took the freedom of the grocers company, and he did not join the guild of painters before 1369. 2 As early as 1355, he had received the appointment of capo- maestro to the oratory of Orsanmichele, one of the great monuments of mixed architecture, sculpture and mosaics of the time, the tabernacle of which was executed from his designs.3 Without entering into a minute description of this monument, which has been admired and descanted on, with not more fulness than it deserves, by the very best authorities in matters of art and of taste in most countries, it may be sufficient to remark that, in the bas- reliefs of the basement, the spectator will find the com- position and the figures characterized by the same severe style, the same grandeur, united to softness and elegance, which are peculiar to Orcagna' s painted Virgins and an- gels. In the handling of the chisel, Orcagna perhaps exhibited more force and energy, and was more imbued with the necessity of breadth than when handling the brush*, yet nothing can be more careful than the polish of his marble. These sculptures surpass those of Orcagna' s cotemporaries quite as much as the frescos cast in the shade

the Virgin andj choirs of saints, with nine small subjects attached. The No. 581 in the National Gal- lery representing three figures of saints assigned to Spinello , has some features of the school of Orcagna.

1 See the original record in Rumohr. Vol. II. p. 113.

2 See Baldinucci. Vol. IV. p. 395.

3 See the records in Gaye, Carteggio. Vol. I. p. 52 and following, which prove that An- drea was capo maestro of Orsan- michele, from Feb. 1355 till as late as 1359, at the salary of 8 florins a month. See Sacchet- ti's poem, describing Orsanmichele in Gualandi. ub. sup. Ser. 3. p. 133 and following.

Chap. XIX. ORSANMICHELE TABERNACLE.

441

all that were produced by his rivals ; and they are, with- out any doubt, the finest that were produced by an in- dependent artist in the fourteenth century. Amongst the bas-reliefs the best and that certainly entitled to the highest praise, is one representing the transit of the Vir- gin. Nothing can be better than the group in which she is carried to heaven by the angels. The lower scene, in which the mother of the Saviour lies dead, in presence of the apostles, is less perfect, because a certain stiffness and naturalism mar the chief figure ; still the passion, the fire of Orcagna are here, and the noble breadth of his drapery is conspicuous as in his frescos. One may ask, after contemplating these masterpieces, from whence Or- cagna could have derived the vigour and character of his style unless from Giotto through Andrea Pisano. Were it even proved that Orcagna had another master, it might still be affirmed with certainty, that he owed much to the great Pisan Giottesque, and that, in the reliefs of the bronze gates and campanile at Florence, he studied those lessons which yielded fruits of surpassing value in the tabernacle of Orsanmichele. Orcagna' s genius is proved by his painting and sculpture. His acquirements and taste in architecture may be judged from the elegant and light proportions of the stonework which surrounds the great monument of his skill. Even the iron rail which incloses the whole is a part of a grand unity. It is a pity only that the oratory should be closed, as it thus loses much of its beauty particularly from want of light.1 This great work was completed, as is shown by the in- scription, in 1359: "Andreas Cionis pictor Florentinus oratorii archimagister extitit hujus MCCCLIX."2 One may remark the affectation of the form in this inscription.

1 See in Rich a. Vol. I. p. I, a copy of the original sketch for this tabernacle preserved amongst the records of the Strozzi family.

2 Vasari assigns to Orcagna 7 figures of Virtues in the Loggia, which, according to Baldinucci,

are by Agnolo Gaddi and Jacopo di Piero (1368). See Baldinucci. ub. sup. Vol. IV. p. 344 and 402. Also the Zecca or mint erected in 1361. Vas. Vol. II. p. 130. See also Gaye, Car te ggio. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 512.

442

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

As a sculptor perfect , Orcagna calls himself "pictor". Vasari tells us that, in his pictures he called himself "sculptor", a statement not corroborated by the only inscribed picture that is known.1 Francia, at a later time, signed himself "aurifex", thus imitating the example of a great predecessor.

The course of this narrative now leads us to Orvieto, where we renew acquaintance with the cathedral, its great council, Maestro Andrea Senese its chief architect, and Andrea Pisano, Orcagna' s teacher. This great edifice was at last approaching completion, but its external mo- saics were incomplete, and its internal paintings unfinished. The Orvietans pressed the Florentines, accordingly, to grant them the services of Orcagna, and this having been unwillingly conceded, Andrea proceeded thither early in June 1358. It is on record that, on the fourteenth of that month, a contract was signed by him in presence of two vicars of Messer Egidio, the apostolic legate, the " seven " of the city and the authorities of the cathedral, in which he agreed to hold the office of Capo Maestro for a year with the option of a renewal for five years.2 Having exchanged signatures to this contract, Orcagna returned to Florence, where he continued to labour at Orsanmichele, and did not again visit Orvieto till Feb. 21. 1 3597 when he spent fourteen days there with his brother Matteo di Cione, and, having carefully examined and de- termined how the works were to be carried on in his absence, returned to Florence after a treat and dinner given to him, in the name of the authorities, by Andrea da Sienna the architect, who for the occasion invited Consiglio da Monteleone a glasspainter, Matteo Cioni, Andrea Pisano, Ugolino di Prete Ilario, Mattheo of Bo-

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 133.

2 With a right on the part of the authorities to give 4 months notice of the close of the contract before the expiration of each year. Andrea's salary to be 300 gold florins per annum in monthly pay-

ments of 25 florins. See the ori- ginal "condotta" in Gaetano Mi- lanesi's extracts from Orvietan records. Giornale Storico degli Archivi Toscani. Vol. III. p. 100 and following-.

Chap. XIX. ORCAGNA AT ORVIETO. 443

logna, and the Franciscan friar Johannes Leonardelli, to meet him. 1 At the end of two months, little remained to be done at Orsanmichele, and Orcagna reappeared (Oct. 18.

1359) with Matteo in Orvieto. 2 Having taken the oath of service and engaged his brother to work under him at a fixed monthly salary,3 he diligently conducted the erection of a window in the front of the cathedral.4 But the Florentines would not let him rest; and as early as February 1360, they recalled him to Orsanmichele, where he might have remained, but for the instances of the Orvietans. A letter is extant5 in which the Florentines, dispensing again with Orcagna in his official duties, re- commend him to the people of Orvieto, and excuse them- selves for delaying his coming (Aug. 3. 1360). But Orcagna speedily disagreed with the heads of the fabbrica and they released him (17. Sept. 1360) from his contract.6 He remained, however, for the time in Orvieto to com- plete a mosaic ordered of him immediately after (16. Sept.

1360) , for the front of the Cathedral,7 and then withdrew, leaving Matteo to fill his place, which that industrious artist seems to do still in Aug. 1367. 8 It had been ar- ranged that four masters named by the Orvietans and two chosen by Orcagna should value the mosaic on the front of the cathedral, after its completion. Petrnccio di Vanni came from Rome (Febr. 10. 1361), to perform this duty,9 but his verdict is not known. Much time elapsed be- fore it was settled what Orcagna was to claim for his work, and a year had already expired since its completion when, on

1 He was at Orvieto 14 days, and the expense, (1 flor.) for the parting dinner is recorded. Vide in Delia Valle, Stor.ub.su p. p.p. 115—16 and 284, and Mila- nesi, 1. c.

2 Delia Valle. ub. sup. and Milanesi.

3 8 florins per month. Ibid, ibid.

4 Milanesi. ub. sup.

5 In precis inGaye, Carte g- gio. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 512, in full in Milanesi. ub. sup.

6 Milanesi. ub. sup.

7 See the original contract in Milanesi. ub. sup.

8 Delia Valle, Stor. p. 284. At all events, the payments to Orcagna, cease to be recorded. The name ofMatteo Cioni appears as late as 1380 in a record of works executed at Orsanmichele. See Passerini (L.) Stabili- menti di Beneficenza. 8°. Flo- rence, p. 53.

9 Milanesi. u b. sup.

444

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

the part of Orcagna, Ugolino and Jacopo di Lotto, on the part of the cathedral authorities, Matteo di Cecco of Assisi and Maestro Paolo di Matteo, met and made a report (Sept. 10. 1362) to the effect that the colours of the stones and the paste had changed, that the plane of the mosaic was not level and the binding substance not good ; hence that the mosaic (in diameter eighty one hands) was not likely to last.1 In spite of this unfavorable report the authorities of Orvieto met on the Sept. 15. 1362, and or- dered sixty florins of gold to be paid to Orcagna.2

From this time forth no further record of the painter has been preserved except that we find him inscribed in the guild of S. Luke at Florence as a painter in 1369- 3

In 1376, an instrument was drawn up before a public notary at Florence in favour of Cristofano Ristori as tutor to Tessa and Romola, daughters of Orcagna by Francesca his widow.4 Vasari, who makes Orcagna live till 1389; is thus proved to have committed an error of some years in his computation. It will have been ob- served that no mention has been made of Andrea Orcag- na's birth. Before the discovery of the record which proves his death, it was customary to trust to Vasari's statement that he died in 1389, at the age of sixty, his birth being thus placed in the year 1329 — 30 ; but the date of death being false, who shall vouch for the truth of the assertion that Orcagna lived to the age of sixty? This, however, is not the only error into which Vasari has fallen. To him we owe the assertion that Orcagna painted, in the Campo Santo of Pisa, the great frescos of the triumph of death, the Last Judgment and the Inferno.5 It may be necessary to devote a little space to the consideration of this assertion.

1 The statement may be seen in G. Milanesi, ub. sup.

2 Ibid.

3 Gaye, Carteggio. Vol. II. p. 36 as follows: "Andrea Cioni Pop. S. Michele Bisdominis Or- gagnia M.CCCLXIII. Baldinucci copies the register and gives the |

date as 1369, but see Gualandi, ub. sup. Ser. VI. p. 176.

4 See the original record in Bonaini, Mem. Ined. ub. sup. p. 106.

5 Vasari. Vol.11, p.p. 125-7. Ghiberti says nothing of this. But for that reason Rosini. Vol. EE. p.p. 73 and 98, reproaches him.

Chap. XIX.

FRESCOS AT PISA.

445

At the Eastern extremity of tbe Southern wall in the Campo Santo of Pisa, a painter of considerable talent depicted with surprising power the advantages of con- templative over active life, suggesting that, whereas in the pursuit of pleasure, and in the enjoyment of wealth, death invariably takes the common mortal by surprise; on the contrary, the lowly hermit expects it without fear, and welcomes its approach. Various episodes illustrate the main idea:

In the foreground of a rocky and broken landscape form- ing the left of the fresco, a party of knights, going out hawking with ladies, and accompanied by servants and dogs, have been arrested by a spectacle of no pleasing interest. Before them stands the hermit Macarius and three open coffins whose contents are doubtless the subject of a sermon contained in the long scroll to which he points. In the first coffin lies a body in its shroud, in the second a body evidently decomposed, in the third a skeleton. A snake glides away at the approach of men. The sudden thought of death, thus presented in its most naked form before a company bent on pleasure, affects the various members of the hunt in divers ways. One of the riders sits on a horse who snorts at the sight of the corpses and looks astonished. To his right, and nearer the spectator, a second, holds his nose; and his hack, stretching its neck, looks with glaring eyes before it. This, we are told, is a portrait of Andrea Uguccione della Faggiuola. Between these, a dame, timidly pensive, revolves the past, or dwells on the future with ap- parent melancholy, whilst the knight at her side boldly points at the objects which cause her reverie. In rear are more riders and huntsmen. The group could hardly be more powerfully delineated whether one considers the hu- man or the brute creation. The track upon which the party is riding leads up a stony path edged with trees to an hermitage, near which a bearded and cowled inmate sits reading, whilst another stands by, leaning on a pole, a third under a tree to the left milks a goat, and a fourth stoops, looking down. The advantages of peaceful retirement and penitence are thus portrayed. To the right of this scene, and parted from it by a high and barren rock, a group of players, male and female, sits in an orchard, whilst cupids fly amongst the branches. Castruccio of Lucca1 sits with a

So according to Vasari.

446

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

falcon on his fist listening to a lute played by a buxom dame, and a fiddle played by a minstrel. A female, on Castruccio's right fondles a lap-dog as she listens to the compliment of a knight near her. But, close at hand in the centre of the fresco, death with her falchion comes sweeping through the air in the shape of an, aged female, with dishevelled hair and ferocious aspect, beating space with batlike wings, as one of the harpies of old. In vain a troup of beggars, tottering on crutches, call upon her to hasten the period of their earthly sufferings. Death has mown down kings and princes who lie pell mell at her feet, spares the beggar and rushes towards the groves where love and pleasure hold their sway. It is that wealth and crime appear in this age synonymous; for on a scroll held up by two angels, hovering above the figure of death, it is written :

"Ischermo di savere e di richezza,

Di nobiltate ancora e di prodezza,

Vale niente ai colpi de costei;

Ed ancor non si truova contra lei

O lettore, neuno argumento.

Eh! non avere lo 'ntelletto spento

Di stare sempre in apparecchiato,

Che non ti giunga in mortale peccato."

A beggar, on the other hand, seems to say: "Dacche prosperitade ci ha lasciati, 0 morte, medicina d' ogni pena, Deh vieni a dame omai V ultima cena."

Amongst the dead, however, some have been of virtuous lives; for an angel draws the soul of one from his mouth with intent to make it partake of heaven; whilst two devils perform their less pleasing office upon another of the de- parted. In the sky, a legion of angels and devils contend in the labour of transferring souls to heaven and hell. The abyss may be seen to the left in the distance, with flames issuing from it, and demons feeding its infernal gulph. The angels all carry the cross, the emblem of human redemption; and the groups which they and the demons form are full of fancy and energy.

Nothing remains to be desired in all this as regards order, symmetry, and distribution. Each part is bound to the other so as to form a grand unity. It is a tragedy in acts and scenes, the sequence of which is regulated

Chap. XIX.

FRESCOS OF PISA.

447

with successful art. The parts are everywhere well sustained, and each figure has its meaning in the group, as each group has its fit place in the drama. Extraor- dinary force, sometimes pushed to a vulgar realism, reigns everywhere. The beholder derives the best idea of the painter's style and power from the group of S. Macarius and the dead.1

By the side of this allegorical piece is the more usual Christian one of the Last Judgment.

In the centre of it the Saviour, of gloomy and threaten- ing aspect, sits enthroned in an almond shaped glory, raising his right arm aloft, and pointing with his left to the wound in his side. On his right, the Virgin tempers the menace of the Saviour, and looks down with pity at the condemned. She is likewise seated in an almond shaped glory. Above them, at each side, are the six angels who bear the symbols of the passion. Beneath these, and in a row on each hand, the apostles are seated on the clouds,2 S. Peter to the left, with disdainful glance, looks down, holding the keys. The attitude of the rest are various. Immediately beneath the Saviour and Virgin stands a group of four heavenly messengers majestic and terrible in aspect. The first erect in the midst, with the sword, and holding up a scroll in each hand, on which, no doubt of old were the words "Venite benedicti," and "Ite male- dicti," is presented with that primitive severity and gran- deur which mark the figures of the earlier mosaists and painters. At his feet, a second, seated, looks out in me- nace,3 and two others at his sides, blow brazen horns. It

1 The riders in the hunt are all repainted as to their dresses; and the same may be said of the cen- tral episode , many of the drape- ries being either new or oblite- rated. All but a part of the legs and wings of the figure of death is repainted. The dresses of the orchard group are all retouched and, in the sky above the trees, the first and third angels are altered with modern colour. The blue sky is damaged and the forms of angels or demons spooled orrubbed away. The painted frame sur- rounding the fresco has in great part disappeared; but in the up-

per corner to the left is a half figure, in a lozenge, of death as a skeleton with a scroll on which is written :

"Secundo natus Abel, primus mortuus",

whilst, in the next lozenge an- other figure of a man carries a scroll likewise inscribed with the words :

"Primus natus Kayn, primus homicida".

2 All the dresses of the apostles are repainted.

3 This figure bears a scroll the inscription upon which is oblite- rated.

448

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

is a group recalling the works of Michael Angelo by the terrible expressed in it, more reminiscent of the old style which strove to excite terror, than of that which Giotto had created; more in fact in the Siennese than the Florentine character. There is, indeed, a striking affinity between this group of angels and that in the same situation in the last judgment of S. Angelo in Formis at Capua, a picture which dates as far back as the year 1075. Below, and as usual on the Saviour's right, the army of the blessed is grouped behind S. John the Baptist,1 each of the happy souls look- ing up towards the Redeemer, and some in the foreground, helping others to rise out of the grave. An angel points out to one in this condition inscribed with the words "hy- pochrisy" the everlasting abyss to which he is consigned; whilst, more to the right, S. Michael points to Paradise as the reward of a soul led out by its guardian angel. This portion of the fresco is so damaged by restoring that it is no longer possible accurately to distinguish the figures is- suing from the tombs. On the same plane, but to the Sa- viour's left, angels drive back the condemned , the mass of whom is huddled together in bold and ever varied attitude.2

The inferno, which forms the right side of this fresco, is not in the least like that of the Strozzi chapel, but divided into stories like a three-decker, in each of which figures undergo torture, Lucifer presiding in the midst. Of the four rows which compose this portion of the Last Judgment, the upper seems most to present the character of the four- teenth century. The forms of the nude are reasonable, the intelligence of anatomy fair, and the colour not without relief. The next lower row is ruder in execution, reddish in tone, flat in modelling, and mechanical in outlines; and these characteristics extend to two figures to the spectator's left of the Lucifer. Satan, however, and all the rest of the picture, are modern, and probably due to Salazzino the restorer who, according to Vasari, laboured here in 1550.

These two last frescos, have evidently been much da- maged by weather and repainting. It is proved that one Cecco or Francesco di Pietro, a Pisan^ of whom there are notices at Pisa in 1370, was employed, in 1379, to restore the Inferno, which had been "spoiled by the ap- prentices".3 The portion due to him is probably the se-

1 This mass of figures is much damaged.

2 The angels are remarkable

for vulgarity of features.

3 Bonaini, ub. sup. p. 103, and Morrona, ub. sup. p 243.

Chap. XIX.

FRESCOS OF PISA.

449

cond circle and the two figures by Lucifer's side, already noticed as of inferior merit. The upper circle of all seems the only original one and that which most resem- bles the best preserved portion of the neighbouring fres- cos. From it and from the portion of the fresco which represents the hermit Macarius before the dead bodies, the primitive style of the work must be judged. Nothing, in the execution, recals the paintings of Orcagna in the Strozzi chapel at Florence, and it is evident that the Pis an pictures are by a totally different person. Neither he nor his numerous assistants were Florentines. His figures vary in type, in form, and expression from those of the Florentine school. In the faces of females, the pe- culiar model which Orcagna affected is not to be traced. Here is not the symmetrical oval to which he was par- tial, but a head broad at the forehead with swelling cheeks, and a small chin resting on a broad neck. The hands, feet, and articulations, are inferior to his, and dif- ferent in style. The costumes are not his, any more than the fashions of hair and head dress. The elegant out- lines of the figures in the Strozzi are quite a contrast to the heavy and somewhat vulgar ones of the Campo Santo ; and this is equally true of the action and attitudes, and of the draperies. If the Saviour and apostles at the Strozzi be compared with those in the fresco of Pisa, it will be found that the latter display energetic motion, not free from vulgarity, and that force prevails over dig- nity and decorum. The spectator need not go far, how- ever, to discover, in the Campo Santo itself, works of the very same character. He may take for instance the frescos next in order to those under consideration, which are devoted to hermit life, and are painted by the Siennese brothers, the Lorenzetti. In these and the two frescos assigned to Orcagna, he will find no difference whatever, and he will be unable to discern that they are by different hands. Yet Vasari would have one be- lieve that two masters, chiefs of two great but totally different schools laboured there. If the question of dis- vol. i. 29

450

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIX.

tribution and composition be set aside, for doubtless there is a difference in this respect, it will still be found that the manner in which each group is presented, each cha- racter is given, is the same in the frescos assigned to both masters. In Lorenzetti's anchorites, wild power, the austere aspect of the solitary, an excessive energy of movement, are characteristic. The same features exactly, the same style of drapery, the same technical execution, the same feeling, mark the Macarius and the hermits as- signed to Orcagna. Take as an example a hermit at the extreme right of Lorenzetti's fresco, bent over the dead body of a solitary, and covering it with a shroud, or two figures in similar attitudes in the extreme left of the same piece ; compare them with the Macarius assigned to Orcagna; the same peculiarities will be* found in both. Again, take the "happy" in the paradise, assigned to Orcagna; examine their profiles in contrast with those in the picture of the Lorenzetti, such as that of a woman on the extreme right tempting a monk, who holds his hands in the fire; the same character appears in both. Examine critically the mode of draping, the action, the articulations ; choose for a contrast the figure of the Saviour appearing to Anthony in Lorenzetti and the Saviour and S. Peter in the so-called Orcagnas: what is the difference? Are the landscape, the rocky path, the tree different? Are they not on the contrary everywhere the same? It may be asked, whether, a great amount of restoring having taken place, it might not be likely that such a man as Cecco di Pietro, for instance, should have changed the original style of the three frescos of Orcagna and Loren- zetti into one of his own; but, in reply, it may be af- firmed that the anchorites of Lorenzetti are in parts un- changed by restoring, and that these are the very por- tions which most resemble the best preserved figures of the so-called Orcagnas. Were it admitted, with Vasari, that Bernardo Orcagna painted the inferno, one might be entitled to claim for him the whole of the remaining part of these works; because the only portion of that

Chap. XIX.

FRESCOS OF PISA.

451

episode which has preserved its original character is exactly the same in style as the best of the "triumph of death Yet it is impossible to reconcile this assump- tion with the fact that here a Siennese, not a Florentine character; prevails. Equally difficult is it to admit that Orcagna's composition was used by a Siennese subordi- nate , the language, spirit, and education of the artist of the Campo Santo being in every sense Siennese rather than Florentine. Who then, it may be asked, is the author of these so-called frescos of Orcagna? In answer, it will be sufficient to recollect that, as regards compo- sition, the Lorenzetti were capable of this effort. It may therefore be safely supposed that the three frescos are by the same hand, that of a Siennese. The spectator may at the same time cast a glance at the neighbouring pictures on the East wall, assigned to BufFalmacco or Antonio Vite, and representing the crucifixion, the resurrection, and the ascension, and, damaged as these are , he will find the execution similar to that of the so-called Orcagnas, and composed evidently in the same Siennese style. A word, finally, as to less important points. The painted frames of the three frescos assigned severally to Orcagna and the Lorenzetti are executed by one person. 1

Modern research has been rewarded by the discovery that, amongst the works executed in the Campo Santo, some of the frescos illustrating the legend of S. Raineri were painted by one Andrea da Firenze. It is proved further that this Andrea was still living after the death of Andrea Orcagna at Florence. These facts are con-

1 The frescos are not painted on the wall , but on an intonaco daubed over a trellice work of canes, so that it is impossible to save the plaster in its fall by iron braces as has been done in other parts. The only means of saving these works is to detach the into- naco and, instead of fixing- it anew to the wall, place it on canvass and make the whole portable.

The air will then pass beneath and preserve the lower surface from damp, the upper, having- long ceased to suffer from the effects of weather. The method of fixing the colours, raising the intonaco and placing it again to the wall, has already been successfully practised in the case of the Goz- zoli frescos.

29*

452

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XIX.

elusive to show that Vasari, in his usual haste , having heard that one Andrea, a Florentine, had painted at Pisa, and not knowing which of the frescos he should assign to the person whom he confounded with Orcagna, chose the series of the triumph of death, and the Last Judg- ment, careless as to whether the style or execution of these works should justify him in his supposition. The world has long been deceived by his biography; but the clouds are slowly falling away from the art history of Italy, and the errors of Vasari require and receive cor- rection. If it be admitted that Pisa owes nothing to Orcagna, the statement that he painted in S. Croce fres- cos which were copies of those of the Campo Santo falls to the ground.1 The remaining works assigned to An- drea at Florence have disappeared in the progress of time.2

Orcagna, who, according to tradition, was a poet and whose name appears in certain sonnets by Burchielli,3 died at Florence in the Via de' Corazzai.

Bernardo Orcagna occupies a very large place, as has been remarked, in the life of Andrea. It would seem, at first, as if the latter had been but the assistant of his elder brother; yet it is strange, that no pictures have hitherto been noticed bearing Bernardo's name. Pictu- res exist, however, signed by "Bernardus de Florentia," but the question which still remains unanswered is, whether this Bernardus is identical with Bernardo the son of Cione the goldsmith, and brother of Andrea Orcagna. To decide this question, it would be useful to trace some frescos in which Bernardo laboured alone. Those of the Campo

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 128.

2 Those in the Cappella de' Cresci at S. Maria de' Servi are gone (Ibid. p. 123—4), and like- wise the picture of S. Romeo (Ibid, p. 124). It represented the annun- ciation and was known to Rich a, (Chiese. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 258), the paintings on the front of S. Apollinare (Ibid. p. 124), the pictu-

res said to have been sent to Avig- non (Ibid, p 131), and that which adorned the chapterhouse of the monastery of the Angioli (Ibid, p. 134). Gone also are the fres- cos noticed by Ghiberti in S. Croce and in S. Agostino. (Ghiberti. 2d comment, in Vas. Vol. I. p. XXIII.)

3 See annot. to Vasari. Vol.11, p. 134.

Chap. XIX. BERNARDO OF FLORENCE.

453

Santo were partly painted by him, says Vasari; but this is probably an error. Again Bernardo is said to have been his brother's companion in the frescos of the Strozzi chapel, yet, there, the student fails to discover more than one hand. Can it be that Bernardo was, as a painter, a mere subordinate? Be this as it may, the visi- tor to the Florence Academy of Arts will find a trip- tych representing the Virgin and child between Saints,1 signed :

"Nomine Bernardus de Floretia pinxit h. op. anno Dili. M.CCCXXXII "

Some of the numerals are gone. The figures are small, not inelegant, but without the grandeur which marks the panel works of Andrea. Another Virgin with saints,2 in the convent of Ognissanti at Florence, placed in a very dark spot, over the entrance to the door of the choir, and only visible with a lantern, bears the inscription:

"A. D. MCCC...XXIIIL Frater Nicolaus de Mazzinghis de Carpi me fieri fecit pro remedio animae matris, fratrum. Bernardus de Florentia pinxit."

A third picture of more interest and importance is that of the late Mr. Bromley's collection representing the cru- cifixion between eight saints inscribed:

"anno Dni MCCCXLVII. Bernardu pinxit me quern Flo- rence finsit."3

The crucifixion is the usual Giottesque dramatic com- position, the Saviour being quite Giottesque in type; and the work coloured in light and luminous tones seems to be that of a comrade of Taddeo Gaddi. It is a fine and well preserved work of the period, which has little affi- nity with those of Andrea Orcagna, and certainly would not reveal him as an assistant in any of the pictures of that master.

Another work in possession of Sir Charles Eastlake, a

1 No. 53. Salle ties petits ta- bleaux. S.S. Peter and Paul and 4 angels in adoration.

2 Half lengths of a saint with a book, and a saint in episcopals

are at each side of the Virgin and child.

3 The saints are S.S. Lawrence, Andrew, Paul and Peter, Bartho- lomew, George, James and Stephen.

454

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XIX.

crucifixion , 1 in the manner of the foregoing is a fine production of the Florentine school.

Amongst the painters on the council of S. Maria del Fiore, in 1366, are Bernardo Pieri and Bencius Cionis.2 The latter is probably Andrea's brother; and if the name Bencius be not meant for Bernardo, Cione had a sixth son besides Ristoro, Bernardo, Andrea, Jacopo and Mat- teo.3 It remains to be ascertained whether the paint- ings mentioned in the foregoing lines are by Bernardo Pieri, an artist doubtless of some talent, as he was of the council in the cathedral of Florence, or Bernardo, the alleged brother of Andrea Orcagna. As for the Loggia de' Lanzi, it is proved clearly that the provision for its erection was passed by the Florentine government on the 21. of November 1356, but that it was only commenced in 1376, 4 under the direction of Bencius Cionis. 5

1 With figures in pilasters at the sides originally in the Ottley collection, assignedby Dr.Waagen, Vol. U. p. 264, Treasures, to Spi- nello.

2 SeeRumohr, Forschungen. ub. sup. Vol. II. p. 166. Benci Cioni is recorded in a Siennese document of about 1356, where he gives an opinion as to the works of the new Duorao. Doc. dell' art. Sen. Vol. I. p.p. 249 — 51. He was also extensively employed as a sculptor at the Palazzo del Podesta of Florence,

with Neri Fioravanti, Maso Leo- nis, Lippo Cursi, Nicola Martelli, Rustico Cennis, Antonio Joannis, Paolo Maj. Johannis (1345). See Luigi Passe rini's lecture on the Pretorio ofFlorence. 8°. Flor. 1858. p. 21.

3 These facts are commented by Rumohr pretty much as they are in this text. See F ors chungen. Vol. II. p. 223.

4 VideGaye, Carteggio. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 526—8.

5 See Passerini, ub. sup.

Chap. XX.

TRAINI.

455

CHAPTER XX.

FRANCESCO TRAINI. — NICCOLA TOMMASI.

A genealogy of the family of Cione made out with labour and research by Del Migliore, whose MS. notes to Vasari are preserved in the Magliabecchiana at Flo- rence, connects Mariotto the son of Bernardo Orcagna1 with the family of the Traini ; and Del Migliore, in some observations which he appends to this genealogy, makes the following pertinent remarks:

It has struck me that the family of the Orcagna was of the Traini, and that Francesco Traini was of their kindred, albeit this fact was unknown to Vasari. My reason for holding this opinion is that Mariotto, the nephew of Andrea (Orcagna) and son of Bernardo di Cione bore the name of the Traini, an old family which has filled offices and enjoyed honours in the republic. This is not extraordinary. Many families were wont to call themselves by the names of their fathers or grandfathers, dropping that of their house, particularly when one of these, the father or grand- father had earned a reputation by some great action or the exercise of virtue. 2

Francesco Traini, whose relationship with the family of Andrea Orcagna is thus suggested by Del Migliore, was a painter of great merit. His talents did not escape the diligence of Vasari, who says of him "that he greatly improved upon his master Andrea (Orcagna) as regards the fusion of his colours and the fertility of his invention."

1 He is registered as Mariotto di Nardo in the guild of Floren- tine painters in 1408. Gualandi, lib. sup. Ser. VI. p. 186.

2j3ee the quotation in B o n a i n i ,

ub. sup. Mem. Ined. note 5 to p.p. 6 and 7. Yet the records speak of Francesco not as of the Traini but as the son of Traino.

456

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XX.

His name has not been discovered in any Florentine re- cords, and whilst some writers like Lanzi1 have stamped with the mark of their approval the sentence of the Are- tine biographer; others like Bonaini2 have argued that Orcagna could not have been his teacher. How, exclaims, this most critical of critics, could Traini, who painted in 1344, be the pupil of one who first appears as his bro- ther's apprentice in 1350? 3 It may be remarked, however, that the utmost obscurity overshadows the early period of Andrea's life, and that the date of 1350 is arbitrarily given by Baldinucci, who supports it by no records.4 Again Bonaini inquires, how could Orcagna be the master of Francesco Traini when he was only free of the grocers' guild at Florence in 1358? 5

In reply it might be urged that Orcagna was a painter of acknowledged reputation at least four years before he obtained the freedom of Florence, namely in 1354, when he received the commission for the altarpiece of the Strozzi chapel. These remarks are not intended, however, as a contradiction of Bonaini' s opinion, but merely to show that no very strong case is made out against Va- sari's assertion that Francesco Traini was Orcagna's pupil.

The earliest notice of this painter is given by Ciampi, who quotes a record in which Francesco del q. Traino paints (1341) a banner for the Brotherhood delle Landi in the church of S. Maria Maggiore (? the Cathedral of Pisa).6 The only pictures which have descended to us are the S. Thomas in S. Catherine of Pisa and the S. Dominick with its attendant episodes in the Academy of Arts and Seminary of the same city.

The S. Thomas by Traini is a gable altarpiece enlarged to a rectangle by modern hands, in which the Dominican

1 Lanzi, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 64. 4 Baldinucci, infra. Vol. IV.

2 Bonaini, ub. sup. p.p. 5 p. 395.

and following. 5 Bonaini, ub. sup. p. 14.

3 Bonaini, ub. sup. p. 14. 6 Ciampi, ub. sup. p. 117.

Chap. XX.

TRAINI.

457

inspired by the Saviour 3 Evangelists and Greek .philoso- phers, triumphs over the heretics.1

The whole picture is drawn with a careful hair outline within which the forms are accurately studied. Length and slenderness are characteristic in the figures. Softness rather than power, a certain sharpness of features withal, — small hands with long thin fingers, reveal in the artist a study of the Siennese rather than of the Florentine man- ner. Nor is this impression weakened by the peculiarity of the execution which is strikingly minute and careful, even to the smallest details of hair and beard, — by the broadly folded draperies which, whilst they develop the forms they cover, are carried out with patient accuracy, — by the gay harmonies of the vestments, or by the ab- sence of well defined masses of light and shade. Here, indeed, is a marked defect of Traini. His picture is flat and unrelieved, and in this he holds less to the grand style of Andrea Orcagna than to the softness, primness, and precision of the Siennese school. Yet at the same time Traini is not deficient in the art of composition. His space is well distributed and filled up, but the com- position is of the tender religious kind in which compo- sure and beatitude prevail; and generally the picture resembles a large miniature. No signature, no date au- thenticate this altarpiece, but Vasari is profuse in praise of it and finds a charm in its "capricious" arrange- ment.2 Nor does he fail to notice the second production of Traini, which he describes as having been executed for a gentleman of the Coscia family, Avhose remains re- pose in a vault of the chapel of S. Dominick in S. Ca- therine of Pisa. But here Vasari errs no doubt, because, as usual, he read the inscription on the altarpiece with too much haste. The words at the base of the sides are as follows:

"Hoc opus factum fuit tempore domini Johannis Coci . .

1 One of the foreground figures I sex pisanu" a modern addition, changed to represent Urban the VIth 2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 138. bears a scroll inscribed "Urbanus I

458

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

CriAP. XX.

. . . rii (operarii) opere majoris Ecclesie Sancte Marie pro comuni Pisano pro anima Domini Albisi de stateriis de pe . . . supradicte, Franciscus Traini pin."

Giovanni Coco, not Coscia, was a lawyer who filled the office of Anziano at Pisa five times at least, and whose will, dated 1346, is still preserved.1 Albizzo delle Stadere was one of those astute and wary diplomatists whom Pisa so frequently found herself obliged to employ at the time when she was threatened alike by the hostility of the Flo- rentines and of Castruccio of Lucca. His will dated the 25. of January 1336, betrays a close intimacy with the ablest Dominicans of his time, and one clause of it relates to the erection of an altar in S. Catherine of Pisa, for which a picture was commissioned of Traini.2 Original records discovered and printed by Signor Bonaini, refer to this altarpiece which, it seems, was partly finished in April 1345 and completed in the January following for the sum of 110 livres.3

The central panel (in the Academy of Pisa) is exclusi- vely devoted to the erect figure of S. Dominick grasping the book and the lily. The founder of the inquisition is grave in expression with features of a certain softness; and his head is drawn by Traini with a fine regular out- line. The draperies sweep broadly and gracefully round the form which may be classed without hesitation amongst the line ones of the fourteenth century. In the pinnacle as usual is the figure of the Redeemer in the act of benediction,4 with a round shaped head, broad across the cheekbone, supported on a long neck and enwreathed with hair in waving locks. The smiling type, though it has nobleness and dignity, is not so much Giottesque as of the older Christian character, and is certainly inferior to those of Andrea Orcagna. Traini in this respect is more of the kindred of the Siennese Simone Martini, than of that of Orcagna. The side panels of the altarpiece divided severally into four, and having double pinnacles in which are the prophets Daniel, Isaiah, J eremiah, and Ezekiel, are

1 Bonaini, ub. sup. p. 10.

2 Bonaini, ub. sup. p.p. 11. 12. and 10U and following.

3 Bonaini, ub. sup. p. 123. 124.

4 "Ego sum lux mundi" is in- scribed.

Chap. XX.

TRAINI.

459

devoted to the legend of S. Dominick, whose birth forms the subject of the first compartment. Giovanna Aza lies wearied with the pains of labour, and attended by two females. On the bed a lap-dog with a lighted taper sym- bolizes, in accordance with story, the mission of the newborn babe, whose tiny frame, already dignified with a halo, is in the hands of the nurses on the foreground. One of them holds him in the basin, whilst a second has the clothes ready for him in her hand, a truly natural familiar scene, in which human tenderness, affection and suffering are fitly delineated. A long interval has elapsed between this and the period of the next scene. S. Dominick supports with both hands the falling edifice of the church, whilst, to the left, Innocent the Third sleeps in pontificals, with his head on his hand, and dreams happily, under the guard of two drowsy persons who sleep on the step of the bed. Next, SS. Paul and Peter, at the gate of the Lateran, give to the kneeling S. Dominick the staff and the gospel; and in the fourth episode, the saint, amidst a concourse of people, burns the books of heretic teachers, whilst the gospel hangs harm- less in the fire. The joy of the Dominicans, the rage and despair of the heretics are equally well rendered. In the next series of four, the death and resurrection of the youth- ful Napoleon, nephew of Cardinal Fossanuova are depicted. The relatives and friends of the youth are grouped round his body which lies stretched on the ground. At his head a fe- male stooping over him, wails and tears her cheeks, whilst the rest are more or less affected by the painful nature of the scene, and some children peep forward more in curio- sity than grief. To the right, the youth revives at the prayer of S. Dominick and is restored to the Cardinal his uncle. This double composition, so full of lively action and expression, is essentially Siennese in the character of the faces, in the movement and shape of the slender figures. The next scene is a reminiscence of the life of S. Domi- nick who, whilst before Thoulouse, "that nest of Albigenses," as Bonaini calls it, saves from drowning a boat load of pil- grims, too pious to travel by land in the country of here- tics. They would all have found a watery grave, but that, at the moment of their peril, the Saint hurries with two of his brethren to the water side, and extending his arms towards them, spiritually attracts them to his side and to the safety of land. In the pilgrims one may remark that Traini successfully imitated the appearance of persons emerging from the water with clammy hair. At the same time, ter-

460

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XX.

ror in various degrees is depicted in the faces. The spec- tator may next notice S. Dominick extended horizontally in the foreground of the picture. On his body rest two ladders which are supported above by the Saviour and the Virgin, and two angels ascending carry between them the soul of the saint in the form of an infant to heaven. This is the dream of Guala prior of Brescia, a prosaic sub- ject rendered with sufficient religious sentiment and much simplicity by Traini. The last scene is that of S. Domi- nick's burial in a church, with a concourse of prelates and clergy in prayer around him.

The whole of the altarpiece, but particularly the pro- phets in the pinnacles of the sides are characterized by the same features as those which mark the representation of S. Thomas Aquinas. Francesco Traini, to sum up, shows the mixture of the Florentine and Siennese man- ner, the Siennese element overshadowing the Florentine. Tenderness and softness were more fully developed in him than in Orcagna. He had more religious feeling, but less science. He was without doubt a great painter. But Vasari is less than unjust towards him. It is a great pity that so little of Traini's life should be known.

Equally to be regretted is the obscurity which sur- rounds the name of Niccola Tommasi, of whose painting in S. Antonio Abate at Naples some notes have been made in the life of Giotto. This painter is probably the same whom Sacchetti mentions in his account of the de- bate at S. Miniato upon the vexed question of artistic superiority in the middle of the fourteenth century. He is recorded with Orcagna and others in the list of the council of S. Maria del Fiore in 1366, and is thus proved to have been at once the cotemporary and the acquain- tance of Andrea Orcagna. More than this, he was, as has been stated, of the first batch of artists, who formed the guild of painters in Florence. But, most interesting of all, his style has many of the qualities which distinguished that of Orcagna. This will be admitted on inspection of the picture at Naples, executed in 1371, to which reference has already been made. Originally a triptych, the altar-

Chap. XX.

NICCOLA TOMMASI.

461

piece represents in its central part S. Anthony the abbot enthroned between saints.1 The latter, at the sides ; are much damaged, the central part less so. The style is es- sentially Florentine. The type and character of the prin- cipal saint is fine and not without dignity. He wears a long white beard and is well draped in vestments which develop a good and manly form. The head of S. John Evangelist, at the right side, recals, like the rest, the man- ner of Orcagna. This work of Niccola Tommasi is indeed as nearly as possible akin to those representing S. Gio- vanni Gualberto (No. 21), S. Ambrose and other saints (No. 33) in the Medici Chapel at S. Croce in Florence, and the S. Bernard (No. 14) in the Academy of Florence, already described in foregoing pages as in the character and manner of Orcagna. It is pleasant to rescue an ar- tist of such talent from the total obscurity in which he has remained. One may conjecture that he was a pupil or at least a companion of Orcagna, and one might even ask, is it not possible that he should be descended from that Maso whose works are described with praise by Ghi- berti ? Amongst the disciples of Orcagna, Bernardo Nello di Giovanni Falconi is noted by Vasari as one whose "numerous pictures were executed for the cathedral of Pisa".2 None of these productions can now be traced; nor is the name of Nello connected with any fresco ex- cept one of the series of Job, in the Campo Santo. A single writer assigns to him the execution of the scene in which Job descends from the throne to humble him- self before God; 3 but Signor Morrona affirms that if Nello did any thing at all to that fresco, he only repaired some damage caused by rain.4

One picture, dated 1392, is said by Vasari to have il-

1 Holding the gospel in his left hand, and with the right giving the Messing. A dais above his head is supported by two angels, whilst at his feet two other celes- tial messengers play upon instru- ments. In the right wing stand

S.John the Evangelist and S.Louis, on the left S.S. Peter and Francis.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 135.

3 Cavaliere Totti. See Mor- rona. Vol. II. p. 205.

4 Morrona. Vol. II. p. 205.

462

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XX.

lustrated Tommaso di Marco another pupil of Orcagna;1 but this work, executed at the side of the screen in S. Antonio of Pisa, has disappeared.

A faint shadow of the teaching of the son of Cione may be noticed in the feeble works of a painter of Pis- toia called Giovanni di Bartolommeo Cristiani; but these may be dealt with summarily in a future notice of the artists of that city.

As regards Mariotto, the eldest son of Bernardo Or- cagna, none of the works mentioned by Vasari are pre- served.

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 135.

Chap. XXI.

AGNOLO GADDI.

463

CHAPTER XXI. AGNOLO GADDI AND CENNINO CENNINI.

Whilst Orcagna successfully raised the standard of Flo- rentine art in composition; in colour, and in form, and pre- sented to his countrymen the pleasing prospect of artistic qualities hardly alloyed with a single fault, the family of the Gaddi studied and practised the profession of their ancestors with fruit. They had, however, already diverted their attention to mercantile pursuits and it became evi- dent that the two occupations could scarcely be coexistent in one family. Taddeo had already established a branch of his business in Venice,1 where he kept open house; and Agnolo his son divided his time between the labours of the brush and those of the counting house. In his youth he had given promise of great things. Taddeo, at his death, had left him, as we have seen, under the joint tutorship of Giovanni da Milano and of Jacopo di Casen- tino, hoping, says Vasari, that amongst his many disciples this son would become the most excellent in painting, but Agnolo's mature age, far from yielding the expected fruit, was marked by a gradual decline..2 He inherited, however, many of his father's talents and developed others in a measure to which Taddeo had not attained. There is no record of his birth, but one may infer from his father s dying wish, as preserved in Vasari,3 that Agnolo was yet in the age of adolescence when he became master of his own actions. That Taddeo was still alive

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 155. 2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 150. 3 Ibid. Vol. II.

p. 150.

4(54

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXI.

in 1366 has been ascertained, and that he was the teacher and master of his son is rational to suppose ; 1 for Agnolo, although confided to the care of Giovanni da Milano, dis- played none of that painter's peculiarities; but, on the con- trary, preserved, to a great extent, a style evidently in- herited from his father. Vasari's error as to the date of Taddeo's death in 1350 naturally led to the belief that Agnolo was already then rising to manhood. But the proofs discovered and published by Rumohr, having es- tablished the fact that Taddeo lived much longer than his biographer states, serve to correct that assertion, at the same time that they cast doubts upon some of the facts alleged respecting Agnolo's life. Thus it may be doubted, whether Agnolo really executed, in 1346, the re- pairs of the mosaics in the Baptistery of S. Giovanni at Florence,2 and it is safer to believe either that these repairs were made later, or that they are due to Taddeo, who was at that time eminent as an architect.3 It may also be fair to doubt the assertion that Agnolo painted a coronation of the Virgin for Barone Cappelli in 1348, on the high altar of S. Maria Maggiore. It may be inquired also, whether he furnished the designs of the church of S. Romolo, which was in process of reconstruc- tion between 1349 and 1356. 4 His early labours were in the church of S. Jacopo tra' Fossi at Florence where, representing the resurrection of Lazarus, he fell into that sort of realism which has already been noticed as a pecu- liarity of Giovanni da Milano. Vasari finds something to say in favour of a Lazarus rising from the grave with

1 Cennini says distinctly that Agnolo was his father's pupil. Vide note to Vasari. Vol II. p. 158.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p.p. 152-3. Richa, Chiese. Vol. V. p. XLII.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 154. The sepulchral monument to Barone Cappelli is described by Richa, who states that it was erected after that nobleman's death, in 1348, by

order of his son. Agnolo may have painted for the son of Ba- rone Capelli. Richa notices as in S. Maria Maggiore a S. John the Baptist by Agnolo Gaddi. (Chiese, ub. sup. Vol. III. p. 281.)

4 (laye, Carteggio. ub. sup. Vol. I. p.p. 499. 502—508. Yet Matteo Villani. Lib. VII. Cap. 41 supports Vasari's statement of this j fact.

Chap. XXI.

AGNOLO GADDI.

all the marks of corruption about him, and with linen stained by the taint of putrid flesh; and he praises the mode in which the apostles express their sense of the bad odour by veiling their noses in the hems of their garments.1 One might be inclined to say of this mode of representation that it is realistic and unworthy of a great artist. Certainly Agnolo became convinced of this when he developed his manner; and in his best frescos there are no traces of a similar realism. In 1367 he was employed by the "provveditore" of S. M. del Fiore to furnish designs.2 His next work was the decoration of the choir of the Carmine at Florence with scenes from the life of the Virgin, painted for the Soderini, and since ob- literated.3

The best and probably earliest of his paintings that have been preserved are the frescos of the Pieve of Prato, in which the two legends of the Virgin and of the sacred girdle are depicted in a chapel called "del Sacro Cingolo".

The frescos fill the spaces at both ends of a long cen- tral aisle, the central ceilings of two transepts and the vault of the arch leading into the building. This arch, opening at one end of the aisle, is surmounted internally by a fresco which represents the expulsion of Joachim from the temple and the comforting visit of the angel. The ends of the transepts, to the spectator's left as he enters, are divided into three courses, each of which contains an episode of the Virgin's life ; — in the two lunettes , the meeting of Joachim and Anna and the birth of Mary; in the next course, the presentation in the temple and the marriage of Joseph and Mary. In the lowest course are the annunciation and the nativity. The end of the aisle opposite the entrance is de- corated, in the lunette, with the coronation of the Virgin, and below, in a double course, with the death of Mary, her ascension and the gift of her girdle to S. Thomas. According to the legend, this holy relic was entrusted by S. Thomas to one of his trustiest followers when he started on his apostolic mission. It remained in the Holy Land for cen-

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 151. 2 Bald in ucci, ub. sup. Vol. IV. p. 344. 3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 151—2.

VOL.

466

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXL

turies under the care of the descendants of that person. In the eleventh century one Michele dei Dagomari, pro- ceeding with a band of followers from Prato to the Holy Land, became enamoured of the daughter of the priest who possessed the relic, and obtained at once that sacred trea- sure and a bride. He shipped both on board of a vessel which happily reached the shores of Italy, and by a very bold geographical error of Agnolo's, he landed safely at Prato, where he lived for years, preserving with jealous care the holy girdle which had been the dowry of his wife. The relic was kept in a box beneath his bed, and it was frequently remarked by Michele1 s domestics that two angels invariably removed him from his bed in the night and left him prostrate on the floor. Yet such was Michele's reverence for the girdle and his anxiety lest it should be stolen, that he submitted to this nightly inconvenience patiently till the close of his days. Then, however, feeling his end approach, he sent for the priest of the church of Prato, gave him the girdle, on condition that it should be preserved in his na- tive city, and it was carried with all honour to a fit place in the cathedral. The relic was transferred to the chapel of the Sacro Cingolo in 1395. 1 The subjects derived by Agnolo from this legend are painted in the end of one of the transepts to the right of the principal entrance. In the lunette is the marriage of Michele dei Dagomari and the transfer to him of the girdle. In the next lower course, the happy pair has arrived and landed at Prato; and the miracle of the angels raising Michele out of bed is repre- sented. In the lowest course the death of Michele and the procession of the relic are depicted. In the last remain- ing lunette, Agnolo further depicted the Saviour in the act of benediction; in the vault of the entrance the twelve apostles in medallions ; in the diagonals of the first transept the four doctors of the church, and in that of the second transept the four evangelists.

Judgment, talent and originality were expended by Ag- nolo on this double series of paintings. The fresco of the expulsion is divided into three distinct groups each of which is well bound to the other, and cleverly arranged in the space. Giotto's maxims evidently guided Agnolo in this, and the composition is more perfect in balance and therefore more pleasing than any of Taddeo's. The

As appears from a modern inscription in the cathedral.

Chap. XXI. CHAPEL OF THE GIRDLE AT PRATO.

467

action of the figures is lively and natural and not exag- gerated as in the frescos of Taddeo, and the draperies are remarkable for breadth. 1 The meeting of Anna and Joa- chim is a very fine and simple composition, the barren wife being shown falling into the arms of her husband.2

The usual composition of the Virgin's birth is rendered more simply and perfectly and with less realism by Ag- nolo than by Giovanni da Milano in the Rinuccini chapel at Florence.3 A just harmony of distribution, — animation without exaggerated action, mark the figu- res in the presentation of Mary in the temple; and no trace is to be found of the confusion which marks the arrangement of the same subject by Taddeo in the Baron- celli chapel, or by Giovanni da Milano in the Rinuccini chapel at S. Croce of Florence. The composition simply Giottesque and of few figures 4 is, as such, more pleasing and effective than that of the same subject by Ghir- landaio in S. Maria Novella at Florence which has in one respect something reminiscent of the picture of Agnolo, especially in the figure of the Virgin.

The marriage of the Virgin one of the finest compo- sitions of the Giottesque school, is admirably conceived and arranged. It is one in which Agnolo replaced the art completely upon the basis of Giotto's laws and maxims, and rivalled the simplicity of the great regenerator of Italian art.5

1 The fresco is, however, much damaged by time and restoring-.

2 Anna receiving the angel is depicted in a tower in the dis- tance. Two females accompanying her in the principal scene are fine in proportion, action, and dra- pery.

3 The background and dress of the figure with the child are da- maged. The nurses playing with the infant are affectionate and pleasing.

4 The Virgin ascends the steps of the temple turning her look on her mother. Her green dress is

repainted. The dress of the at- tendant to the left of the high priest and the background gene- rally have been retouched also. Her mother extends a comforting hand. Joachim is close by near two kneeling females. In the porch is a band of players and singers.

r> The blue dress of the high priest is new. In the arrange- ment of the scene, the porch, under which the high priest stands to unite the pair, is placed with much judgment on the extreme right of the picture. Joseph and Mary join hands. Both are young,

30*

468

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXI.

Agnolo had thus depicted the Sposalizio in a more quiet and solemn manner than his father had conceived it. He represented the annunciation with great dignity and tender- ness.1 But he rendered the nativity with somewhat un- poetic simplicity.2 Close by, in the niche of a door to the right, is a figure of the Virgin giving suck to the infant. 3 Time and restorers have totally altered the character of the incidents depicted on the wall at the bottom of the cen- tral aisle. The death and ascension of the Virgin, the gift of the girdle, and the coronation, are almost all new. Enormously damaged likewise are the lunette fres- cos illustrating the legend of Michele dei Dagomari.

The type of the Saviour in the act of benediction in the lunette hard by is the favorite one adopted by Agnolo's cotemporary Spinello Aretino, a painter who occupies a prominent place in the history of Florentine art at the close of the fourteenth century, but who belongs to a se-

and the Virgin especially has an active contented look. Three by- standers, two male and one fe- male stand in the porch. To the left of S. Joseph is a noble figure near which the guests and suite are arranged in groups of three and four in composed attitudes, or animated movements, with rus- tling draperies. The procession is closed by a company of young girls and two trumpeters. In the centre of the foreground,two youths break the twigs ; and the flowering rod is carried by one on the left. In the background the houses are crowded with spectators. The greens of dresses and the yellows are all repainted; and in the dis- tance, part of the houses and sky is restored to the detriment of the general harmony.

1 He placed the Virgin on a high seat. She has dropped her book at the approach of the angel who bends before her, carrying the lily in one hand and pointing with the other. She receives a

ray and the dove of the Holy Ghost from the Eternal looking down from a glory of angels. The mantle and tunic of the Virgin, the background are new.

2 The Virgin sits in the centre with the infant Saviour on her knee. The ox and ass are at the bottom of the shed, two angels in the air at each side of the prin- cipal group. Above and outside is a choir of 4 dancing and 2 play- ing angels. Joseph sits pensive on the ass's saddle on the left foreground, whilst a shepherd entering at the same side with his flock, bends lowly. To the right, another pastor kneels. In the distance the angel brings the tidings to the shepherds.

3 The blue of the Virgin's mantle is new as well as the dresses of the angels and of S. Joseph. The heads of the shepherds and the sky are much damaged. All the gold ornament and nimbuses are new.

Chap. XXI. AGNOLO GADDI'S STYLE.

469

condary line of Giottesques who succeeded in preserving the mere letter of the great master's maxims without regard for the progress of the time or the rise of a new school.

In these frescos, it may have been noticed that Agnolo displayed better talents as a composer than his father Taddeo, and that he exhibited a spark of the true Giottesque feeling. It must be admitted also that he gave more repose and dignity and more nature and individuality to his figures. He did not exaggerate in the direction of slenderness, and his general outlines were at once more graceful, more true and grand than those of his father. Whilst Taddeo was conventional in composition, Agnolo created and imagined something more than the past had yielded. As a draughts- man he was free and bold, defining every thing equally. But though he did not exhibit habitual neglect of detail in the extremities and articulations of the human figure, he did not deserve praise for invariable correctness. He fre- quently failed to define form truly; and whilst the best of his figures are still below the standard of Giotto, certain forms are purposely and persistently false. The eyes are drawn according to a conventional model; the noses are straight and narrow and expanded flatly at the end; and the mouths generally droop at the corners. It is indeed surprising how totally a head with a fine exter- nal outline was spoilt by Agnolo's neglect of truth in the details of the features. In the drawing of hands and feet he bestowed more care, but he evidently never possessed the clear comprehension of the nature of the forms he depicted. His hands are defective and coarse; the fingers are short, broken and angular at the joints, and mechani- cally executed. The folds of the flesh are indicated by lines, and in this his faults are those prominent in Spi- nello. As a colourist Agnolo was bold. His tones are bright, clear, light and transparent, and he shows a feeling for the true nature of harmonies. His idea of relief was greater than that of Taddeo. On the whole, however, he was inferior to Orcagna; and the unity of

470

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXI.

talent which characterized the son of Cione was not con- spicuous in the last scion of the Gaddi. At a distance his frescos at Prato are imposing, but they bear no close analysis; and this is a proof that the art in his hands had in a certain sense degenerated and become decorative. Vasari very fairly characterizes the style of Agnolo; and it will be seen in the sequel that the frescos of Prato contain only in germ defects which were developed to a marked extent in the decorations of the choir of S. Croce at Florence where the boldness of a practised hand is allied to defective design.

Prato is at no great distance from Florence, and Agnolo Gaddi has left there traces of considerable labours.1 There are vestiges of paintings at the corners of many streets, the character of which cannot be safely defined; but in the Via dei Tintori, a tabernacle with shutters in which the Virgin is depicted amongst saints, presents all the character of a fresco by Agnolo. In his style also is a Virgin erect, with the infant Saviour between Saints and angels , 2 in a tabernacle at the corner of the Strada al Ceppo and Via della Pilota. Similar tabernacles, much damaged by time, are to be seen in the neighbourhood, and are hardly worthy the trouble of examination. But at Filline, three miles from the town, is one appended to a house, belonging to the Pini family, where the man- ner of Agnolo may be traced with certainty in a Con- ception between saints, 3 a Christ in the act of benediction, and an annunciation. The fresco of the Conception, 4 though much damaged by exposure, has not been retouched, and affords a favorable example of Agnolo's talent in pro- ducing clear and bright transparent colour. The type of the Virgin is peculiarly graceful, that of the angel full

1 Vasari says, he left works enough in churches of that land. (Vol. II. p. 154.)

2 The Magdalen and another saint with 4 angels above.

3 Right and left in niches, S.S. John the Baptist, Stephen and

Anthony the abbot, partly obli- terated.

4 The subject and arrangement of the figures may be found in a conception given to Masaccio at the Academy of Fine Arts at Flo- rence.

Chap. XXI. FRESCOS OF THE ALBERT! CHAPEL.

471

of softness. Both are preferable to those of the chapel at Prato. The heads of the saints at the sides of the taber- nacle are powerfully delineated, and the style generally indicates a contact with Spinello of Arezzo.

In the choir of S. Croce at Florence, Agnolo, at the request of Jacobo degli Alberti,1 painted in eight frescos the well known legend of the cross, from the moment when the Archangel Michael presents to Seth a branch of the tree of knowledge to that in which the Emperor Heraclius enters Jerusalem.

In the first compartment to the right of the entrance, the archangel presents to Seth a branch of the tree of know- ledge ; 2 whilst on the foreground Adam lies dead and Seth, in the presence of his relatives, plants the branch upon the tomb. Next appears the Queen of Sheba kneeling with her suite by the pool, at the opposite side of which car- penters are at work striving to fashion the wood of the tree. Further on , the wood is sunk in the pool by order of Solomon. In the fourth compartment the Empress Helen kneels with two dames behind her in the midst of her guard, whilst the cross is taken up by three persons, and a sick youth rises in bed healed by its virtue. On the right again, the cross is erected by a number of men in natural motion, before the Empress. On the left side of the choir the subject is continued, the angel appearing to Heraclius being represented in the third fresco. In the fourth, the decapitation of Chosroes is depicted; and Hera- clius enters Jerusalem carrying the cross on his shoulders.

In the right hand corner of this fresco, near a gate, says Vasari, is a portrait of Agnolo Gaddi painted by himself in a red hood and with a small painted beard, according to the fashion of the time.3 This figure still exists and may be seen near the Emperor Heraclius in the place mentioned by Vasari. Though a little younger than the likeness given by the Aretine in his lives , the features are the same in both , and the appearance of Agnolo is that of a man of fifty or fifty five. Between the windows of the choir are figures of saints, and above them angels and or- naments. In the painted frames of the frescos are lozenges containing personages. In six triangular compartments of

1 Vasari. Vol. II. p. 152, and I 2 The angel is newly repainted. Richa, Chiese. Vol. I. p. 295. | 3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 159.

472

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXI.

the ceiling are S. Francis erect in an almond shaped glory, S. John the Baptist erect with the cross in his left hand and giving a blessing, and the four Evangelists likewise erect with their symbols, all on a ground of blue studded with stars.

The impression made by the whole of these decorative paintings is that of an imposing work. Enough remains of a gay and lively colour to please the eye, and to satisfy the spectator that Agnolo was able with his brush. The compositions, surcharged at times, still do honour to the master. The figures, those in the ceiling particularly, are not deficient in grandeur, in beauty of character, choice of features, or movement. The draperies have a marked breadth of fold. Agnolo shows that he was a perfect decorator, that he knew the value of distance for the pro- duction of effect, and of choice of colour for charming the eye. He created here a great harmony, and was thus more captivating than his father. He displayed that breadth and certainty of hand which reveal the experien- ced artist. But in the words of Vasari, "he executed this work with a practised hand, but with poor design." The drawing may, indeed, be emphatically called bad; and in these frescos, Agnolo brought out into broad light the defects of which the germs are only noticeable in those of Prato; thus showing that he inherited some of the faults prominent already in the frescos which his father had executed in S. Croce. Still less than those of Prato will the frescos of the Alberti chapel bear close inspection. But, on the other hand, the colour will charm by its dash and clear brilliancy, and by the varied costumes which give interest to the figures.1 Neither better nor worse than these frescos is the Virgin and child between S. Augustin and S. Peter by Agnolo, in a lunette inside the door leading from the church to the convent of S. Spirito at Florence. Of equal value is the altarpiece of the church of S. Pancrazio now in the Academy of Arts at Florence,2 in which Agnolo represented the Virgin and child in a

1 The arms of the Alberti are in the chapel. 2 No. 33. Gal. des

gr. tableaux.

Chap. XXI.

ALTAEPIECES.

473

glory of graceful angels , between Saints,1 one of which, S. Reparata, is a square figure, as, indeed, are most of those in the altarpiece. The Virgin has a vulgar face, but a graceful action. As for the rest, the draperies are massive and fine. Above these figures are fourteen half saints in niches, and below, seven scenes from the life of the Madonna, or rather six; for that which occupied the space beneath the figure of the Baptist is gone. These compositions begin as usual with the expulsion of Joachim from the temple and, being small, display, as Vasari truly remarks, better qualities than usual. 2 They are tastefully arranged miniatures, soft, rosy and clear in colour,3 but still painted in with a bold hand.4 A Virgin and child between Saints in the Chiostro Verde of S. Maria No- vella is much in the character of that which of old hung in S. Pancrazio, but less interesting, because the surface has been flayed and the flesh tints are reduced to the primitive preparation. In the eighteenth chapel of the church of S. Spirito, where the author Piero Vittori is buried, is an altarpiece of four figures in the same style; and persons unable to visit Italy may notice a similar manner in a Virgin and child assigned to Giotto in the Gallery of Berlin.5 By Agnolo also is a Virgin and child with Saints in the Gallery of Prato. 6 Inferior to Agnolo's works in execution, but displaying evident efforts at imi- tation of his style is a coronation of the Virgin, assigned to Ugolino of Sienna, formerly in S. Maria Novella, now in the Academy of Arts at Florence. 7 One can hardly

sumed this rosy hue since the dis- appearance of colouring- glazes.

4 In the Cappella Castellani at S. Croce a double ceiling deco- rated with the four Evangelists and four doctors of the church displays much the style of Agnolo as it may be found in the frescos of the choir of the same church.

5 No. 1040. Berlin Catal.

6 No. 1. S.S. Francis, Bartho- lomew, Catherine of Alexandria and the Evangelist.

7 No. 1. Gal. des anciens tableaux.

1 The Evangelist whose mantle has lost its colour, S.S. Nereo, Pan- crazio and John the Baptist whose red mantle is also obliterated, Achilleo and Reparata. Both the S. Johns are turned towards the Virgin , and the Baptist has the character and draperies of that by Agnolo in the ceiling of the Alberti chapel. S. Reparata in a diadem holds a banner.

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 153-4.

3 The tones seem to have as-

474

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXI.

understand how Vasari should attribute to the patriarch of Siennese painters a picture so evidently by an imitator of Agnolo Gaddi, coloured in light tones and defective as regards the character of the heads. That Agnolo had many imitators is evident from another Virgin and Saints 1 in the same gallery , whither it was brought from the convent of S. Matteo in Arcetri of Florence , much damaged, and less valuable even than the foregoing, but still displaying the education of Agnolo's school. The signature "Puccius Simonis Flor. pinxit hoc opus" is the only clue to an obscure and not talented follower of Agnolo Gaddi. Equally obscure and only known from the signature of a Coronation of the Virgin, with S. John the Baptist and S. Martin at the sides, in the hands of Signor Cor- visieri at Rome, is one Matteo Pacini whose name is found in the inscription at the base of the triptych. "Anni Domini 1360 Mateus Pacini me pinxit adi 20 di Marzo." This picture is in the style of the Gaddi, ill- composed of ugly figures and heavily coloured. Matteo Pacini appears in the register of Florentine painters in 1374. 2 Frescos with no higher claim to attention than this work of Pacini, and though in the same manner still probably by another hand, may be seen in the church of S. Sisto Vecchio at Rome, where they have been recently discovered between the choir and the walls of the older portions of the edifice. One of the subjects is the descent of the Holy Spirit with Saints3 beneath it, under painted niches, of which only vestiges remain. These defective works may date as far back as the close of the four- teenth, or rise of the fifteenth century.

Amongst Agnolo Gaddi' s pupils, Vasari names Gio- vanni the second son of Taddeo, who lived but a short space, and who after painting certain frescos in S. Spi-

1 No. 4. Salle des petits tableaux. The picture represents the Virgin and child (all repainted) between S.S. Onofrio, Lorenzo, James and Bartholomew.

2 Vide Gualandi, Memorie Orig. Ser. 6. p. 186.

3 S.S. Dominick, Anthony, John the Baptist, Paul and others.

Chap. XXI.

AGNOLO'S BROTHERS.

475

rito which time has not spared, was removed by death from the practise of an art which he seemed destined to pursue with success.1 Fea, who described with more in- dustry than critical acumen the Basilica of Assisi, pretends to have discovered there a crucifixion with the usual figures of Mary and the Evangelist, by Giovanni. But in all the frescos or pictures of the sanctuary, not one presents the character of the time or of the manner of Agnolo Gaddi.2 The same authority vouches for the fact that the fresco of the massacre of the Innocents, in the South transept of the Lower Church of Assisi, was by one Giacomo Gaddi. It may be sufficient to remember and to repeat that the fresco in question, which is one of those assigned by Rumohr to Giovanni da Milano and in these pages to Giotto, could not possibly have been painted by any of the pupils of Taddeo Gaddi. In Venice and in the states of the republic where Taddeo had a branch of his mercantile house and where, according to Vasari, Agnolo spent some of his time, there are very few traces of their art, and it would appear that they devoted them- selves specially to trade. The only painting in Venice which displays the style of the Gaddi is a pediment now attached to an altarpiece by Antonio and Giovanni da Murano in the chapel of S. Terasio of S. Zaccaria. Here is a half figure of S. Stephen with three somewhat da- maged scenes from his life at each side. In the Venetian state, traces of a style derived from the school of the Gaddi may be found in the paintings of the Cappella Vecchia in the castle of S. Salvatore near Conegliano. In this chapel, erected and decorated by the family of Colalto, the walls are filled with scenes from the life of the Virgin, the passion of Christ «*nd the miracles of a sainted bishop. Though damaged in part and of a low order, these frescos are impressed with the stamp of the Florentine school of the close of the fourteenth century, and particularly of that of Agnolo.

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 156.

2 See quotation from Fea's Descrizione della Basilica

d1 Assisi in note 3 to Vasari. Vol. II. p. 156.

476 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXI.

They are paintings of less merit than the Giottesque works at Rimini, and those along the coast of the Adriatic, but of the same pictorial class. The artist was a bad com- poser and exhibits poverty in the choice of types and forms. In the technical detail of his work he had some- thing in common with such Paduan and Venetian painters as Guariento, Semitecolo, Stefano, and Lorenzo. He was probably a Venetian who had studied in the school of the Gaddi, but who preserved the old Byzantine habit of round gazing eyes, to be found in Guariento. Floren- tine art, it must be remembered, penetrated far into North Italy, through Justus Menabuoi who lived at Padua in 1397, and who bears the stamp of the Gaddi school. As usual, the historian has to register a number of works which have not survived to the present time, such as the scenes of the life of S. Louis in the Bardi chapel at S. Croce,1 the fres- cos in S. Romeo, and the dispute of the Doctors in Orsan- Michele. Agnolo was first registered as a painter at Flo- rence in 1387 year in which according to Vasari his death occurred. It is known, however, by records that in 1390, 3 he received a commission for the execution of a monu- ment to Piero Farnese, at S. Maria del Fiore;4 and the Strozzi records prove that he was employed during 1394 and 1395, on the production of an altarpiece in S. Miniato al Monte.5 At his death his brother and heir claimed and received fifty florins remaining due for this work. 6 He died in October 1396, and was buried in S. Croce at Florence on the sixteenth of that month. 7

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 152.

2 Noticed by Baldinucci. Vol. IV. p. 343, as still in existence, beneath the organ and near the sacristy.

3 Agnolo was married to Jo- hanna daughter of one Landozzi Loli. She was still living in 1404. VideBaldinucci.Vol.IV. p. 346.

4 Baldinucci, ub. sup. Vol. IV. p. 344. Richa (Chiese Fior. Vol. I. p. 297) assigns to Agnolo the design of the church of Orbatello at Florence, and

notes (Vol. II. p. 35) a Madonna by him in S. Romolo.

5 1394. Agnolo di Taddeo Gaddi j receives 20 flor. part payment for J the altarpiece he is painting at j S. Miniato.

1395. He receives further sums j on account. MSS. Strozzi in C enni J S t ori co - ar t isti ci , &c. di S. j Miniato by Aw. Gio. Felice I Berti. Florence 1850. p. 155.

6 lb id. same page.

7 See Gaetano and Carlo Mi-

Chap. XXI.

CENNINO CENNINI.

477

Chief amongst his pupils was Antonio of Ferrara, whose pictures shall be noticed amongst those of other artists of his native city; Stefano of Verona, Piero da Perugia, a miniaturist of whom no trace has been preserved, Michele or Michelino of Milan whose remaining works shall find a place in a short notice of Milanese art, and Cennino di Drea Cennini, born at Colle di Val d'Elsa, better known as the author of a manuscript work on the tech- nical process of painting in the fourteenth century than as a painter. We are indebted to himself for the states ment, 1 that for twelve years he was Agnolo Gaddi's dis- ciple; and the receipts which he gives for various pro- cesses of art were no doubt obtained from his master. His manuscript has been published by Tambroni, edited by the brothers Milanesi at Florence, and translated into English by Mrs. Merrifield, and it has received an admi- rable comment from Sir Charles Eastlake. It proves amongst other things the existence of painting in oil in Italy during the fourteenth century upon a system tedious, costly and seldom employed but for subordinate parts of pictures.2

The only fresco which Vasari could assign to him was one representing the Virgin and Saints in the portico of the Hospital of S. Giovanni Battista at Florence, an edifice not commenced till after 1376 by Bonifazio Lupi, Mar- quis of Soragna, to whom Padua owed some of her monu- ments. It was altered and restored in 1787, and the frescos have disappeared. That Bonifazio Lupi was a patron of Cennino seems likely from the fact that the painter spent the greater part of his life in Padua, where he married Donna Ricca della Ricca born in the neigh- bouring village of Citadella. There are records which prove the existence of Cennino and his wife in Padua-

lanesi's Ed. of Cennino Cennini. Florence 1859. Note to page X.

1 Published in the 1st chapter of the MS. in question.

2 See Sir Charles Eastlake's admirable deductions from this MSS. in Materials for a His- tory of oil painting. 8°. Lond. 1847. p. 71.

478

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXI.

in 1398; and his acquaintance with Francesco da Carrara, for whom he may have performed artistic labours. It is not improbable that he left Florence in 1396 after the death of Agnolo Gaddi, and remained in Lombardy till his death, his name being absent from the roll of Floren- tine painters. No pictorial creations of his are now known in Padua; but if his style should be sought anywhere in that cityt', one might suggest the Salone as a place where Giottesque character is traceable. 1 The only frescos which seem entitled to attention in connection with the name of Cennino are a series representing scenes from the life of the Redeemer and the finding of the cross, in the church of the Compagnia della Croce di Giorno at Volterra, — a church contiguous to that of S. Francesco, and built in 1315, as appears from an inscription on marble within it, by Mone Tidicigi for the repose of the soul of her bro- ther Marcuccio. Amongst the subjects represented on the walls is the massacre of the Innocents beneath which the following inscription may still be read:

"Nel MCCCCX alogherono questi della compagnia tutte queste storie a Cienni di Francesco di Ser Cienni da Fi- renze, eccieto quatro evangelisti: sono di Jacopo da Firenze."

It may be inquired whether the Cienni of this inscrip- tion and the Cennino of Vasari are the same person.2 The painter of these Volterran frescos is confessedly a Floren- tine', his manner is certainly derived from the school of Agnolo Gaddi. The frescos have the appearance of those at S. Croce, and resemble them in miniature. The same composition, features, head-dresses, and costumes, may be found repeated; but the Volterran frescos, though gay in colour and revealing a certain force, are by an inferior

1 See Gaetano and Carlo Mila- nesi's edition of Cennini ub. sup. where two records of 1398 are given in full, (Preface) and it is suggested that the Treatise was written at Padua, not in the Stin- che at Florence, inasmuch as the reference to the execution of one

of the MS. of the Trattato in the Stinche is probably due to a co- pyist and not to Cennino.

2 Rumohr seems to have no doubt that they are identical. See his note toLudwigSchorn's Vasari, ub. sup. Vol.1, p. 337.

Chap. XXI.

CENNINO CENNINT.

479

hand, imitating the manner of the last of the Gaddi. It would be curious, were it proved that two pupils of Agnolo existed at the same period in Florence who bore almost the same name. It is much more natural to believe that the author of the Volterran frescos is the Cennino of Vasari. Be the truth in this respect what it may, the Cienni of Volterra may be traced in other Italian cities. In the ex-church of S. Lorenzo at S. Gimignano,1 a vault now used as a cellar contains vestiges of paintings in the same style, and it is still possible to trace a Last Judg- ment in which figures of the Redeemer, the Virgin and the apostles are visible. A crucifixion in the same man- ner with four saints at the feet of the cross may be seen in the Oratorio di S. Lorenzo in the same city, and a Virgin and child in the Pretorio falsely assigned to Lippo Memmi. The list may be further swelled by a fresco of S. Francis with S. Chiara, angels and allegorical figures, in a niche within the first chapel to the right in the church of the ex-convent of S. Francesco at Castel Fio- rentino. The whole of these pieces are by the same au- thor, an artist who executed figures rivalling in slender- ness, and but slightly inferior to those, of the Bicci and Parri Spinelli.

Now a private house belonging to Signore Vittore Vecchi.

480

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXII.

CHAPTER XXII. ANTONIO VENIZIANO.

The merit of having maintained the impulse given to Giottesque art at Florence may be more justly assigned to Antonio Veniziano, than to Agnolo Gaddi. These painters were cotemporaries ; and though it might be in- ferred, from a passage of Vasari, that the former was a pupil of the latter, the test of style decides in favour of Taddeo as the real master of Antonio. Baldinucci, true to his aim of making all great painters in the fourteenth century Florentines, claims Antonio as a Tuscan and sup- ports himself on certain written records in the Strozzi collection;1 but he seems to have confounded two artists of the same name who lived at different periods.2 Our curiosity and surprise may be justly excited when we find that, in spite of Giotto's long stay at Padua in the rise of the century, and that of the Gaddi in Venice at its close, no trace of Florentine art is to be found in the provinces of Venice until Giusto di Giovanni Menabuoi

1 Which he does not print how- ever. See Vol. IV. p. 376.

2 There are indeed in the Aca- demy of the Fine Arts at Venice four figures of S.Philip of Florence, S. Peregrine of Forli, S. Augustin and a Pope executed by one who signs himself "Antonius de Flo- rentia pinxit", a painter of a later manner. Sala IVth. No. 16. 17. 18. 19. The Strozzi records may refer to this Antonio who lived half a century after Antonio Veniziano. Had Baldinucci merely supported his theory by a refe-

rence to the painter's style, and had not records been found to prove that Antonio was a Vene- tian, no one would have hesitated to believe him. The frescos of An- tonio are Florentine in every sense, in feeling, in arrangement and technical execution. Not a trace of the old Venetian manner is to be found in them. On the other hand, it might be asked, was a Florentine style to be obtained at the time of Agnolo Gaddi , in provinces where the influence of Giotto and that of his disciples had not extended?

Chap. XXII. ANTONIO VENIZIANO.

481

the cotemporary of Antonio Veniziano established himself. We may admit the grandeur and interest of the works of Altichiero of Verona, and of Jacopo; but it remains not the less true that Venetian art retained a local aspect during the greater part of the fourteenth century, and preserved the old Byzantine character. In the fifteenth century, strangers such as Gentile da Fabriano and Anto- nello da Messina introduced other elements ; yet up to the period of the Bellini and of Mantegna, the Oriental style prevailed in Venice and its provinces. Antonio Veniziano, being in manner a Tuscan, must therefore have been edu- cated far away from his native place. His baptismal name and that of his father are revealed in Siennese and Pisan records as Antonio Francisci de Venetiis. His family name was probably Longhi. A work of very little ar- tistic importance exists at Palermo, in the brotherhood of S. Mccolo Reale near the church of S. Francesco, which is of some value in its bearing on the history and name of Antonio. This picture is inscribed "An (A0.) nio Lon(shi) da Vinexia pinxit 1388". It has the same character as the frescos of the Campo Santo, executed in 1386 — 87 by Antonio Francisci di Venetiis. The earliest authentic re- cord of this painter is in the archives of Sienna. • It shows Antonio labouring, in October 1370, on the ceilings1 of the cathedral in company with Andrea Vanni.2 His life previous to that time is sketched by Vasari, and seems to have had its mishaps and heartburnings.

Having taken up his residence at Florence to learn paint- ing under Agnolo Gaddi,3 he mastered a good style, for which, as well as for other qualities and virtue, he was loved and esteemed by the Florentines. Willing to derive from his labours a grateful fruit in his native city he re- turned to Venice, where, thanks to the many productions of. his brush in tempera and in fresco, he formed a con- nection, and was commissioned by the government to paint one of the faces of the council hall. This work was exe-

1 Siennese style.

2 Doc. Sen. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 305.

VOL. I.

3 "Dietro a Agnolo Gaddi." Vas. Vol. II. p. 171.

482

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXII.

cuted with such excellence and conducted with such majesty that it deserved, and would doubtless have received, an ho- norable reward, had not the emulation, or rather the envy of artists, and the favour extended by certain gentlemen to foreign painters caused matters to take a different turn. The result was that the unfortunate Antonio returned hum- bled to Florence, and resolved not only to abandon Venice for ever, but to make Florence his home. Having thus taken his resolution and fixed his abode in the city, he painted on an arch of the cloisters in S. Spirito, Christ call- ing Peter and Andrew from their nets, and Zebedee and his sons, and, beneath the three arcades adorned by Ste- fano, the miracle of the loaves and fishes, in which he exhibited the greatest diligence and care, giving to the face of the Saviour features impressed with compassion for the crowd about him and an ardent charity in dispensing the bread. Admirable in the same picture was the gesture of an apostle, who with wonderful tenderness, wearied himself in the distribution of the bread in a basket. Artists might, indeed, learn from this work that figures should ever be painted as if conversing, failing which they cannot please. This Antonio again demonstrated in a fresco on the front of the same edifice, in which he executed the incident of the Manna with such diligence and such care of finish that it deserved truly to be called excellent. At a later period he painted in a predella for the high altar, in S. Stefano al Ponte Vecchio , scenes of the life of S. Ste- phen with such tenderness that it is not possible to find more graceful or finer figures even were they in miniatures. He also painted the arch above the entrance to S. An- tonio al Ponte alia Carraia. 1

This narrative written with Vasari's usual elegance and choice of expression can not be accepted with implicit confidence. It may be true that Antonio had to submit to humiliation and trouble "at Venice. Local historians are, however, silent with respect to him, and the frescos of the council hall are no longer in existence. Of the works mentioned in Florence not one remains. The dates of An- tonio's employment at Sienna and in Pisa reveal a co- temporary, hardly a pupil, of Agnolo Gaddi, and the truth of this theory is confirmed by the examination of

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 171 to 173.

Chap. XXII.

ANTONIO'S MANNER.

483

the frescos executed at Pisa in 1386 — 87, in which Antonio shows that he studied nature with industry , and suc- ceeded in reproducing form in all its details with con- siderable fidelity and realism. He emulated in this Gio- vanni da Milano and Giottino, whilst in composition; his tendency to reproduce attitudes and movements more natural than choice or noble , deprived him of the grandeur of the earlier Giottesques. The conventionalism, which they corrected only in part by deep religious sentiment and dignified severity of mien, was it is true avoided by Antonio, but, whilst their art was subordinate to a lofty idea, to an aim corresponding with the fervor of religion , that of Antonio had no better moving principle than imitation of nature. Yet Antonio could pursue that imitation in many moods, and he thus forms an im- portant link in the chain which unites Orcagna to Maso- lino, Angelico and Masaccio. Through him one may trace the passage from the art of the fourteenth century to that which, taking a newer garb, became in the fifteenth century that of form. Antonio excelled com- paratively, as Vasari truly says, in the sweet and tender mood. He had as a colourist the qualities of Giovanni da Milano and Giottino, much lightness and transparence united to gaiety and force. In technical execution he marked a period of progress. He used methods of gla- zing, such as may be found later in Masolino and Ange- lico, the same as those which Masaccio improved. His works are unfortunately scarce, though less so than those of Stamina his pupil, who almost fails in the great chain of progress in Florentine art.

In the records of the Campo Santo of Pisa it is written that Antonio, on the tenth of April 1386, received 135 florins of gold from the operario on account for three stories from the life of S. Raineri to be executed by him at the rate of seventy florins for each story. 1 This saint was in great honour at Pisa, where he had lived in the twelfth century, and the

1 Ciampi, ub. sup. p. 151, and Forster, Beitriige. p. 117. 118.

31*

484

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXII.

early scenes of his legend had been illustrated on the walls of the Campo Santo, by Andrea of Florence, before Antonio was called to Pisa.

That portion of the story which refers to his depar- ture from the Holy Land, his arrival, miracles and death at Pisa was represented by Antonio, and is described by Vasari as the finest and best work in the Campo Santo, but time has severely illtreated it, and many parts are almost entirely obliterated.

Of the embarcation, which is the first incident in the series, little remains.1 The landing is then imagined as having taken place. On the shore sits an angler fishing. The saint performs the miracle of the wine and water. The host, of slender and attenuated frame, 2 starts back surprised as he sees the water separating from the wine which he pours into the flap of Raineri' s dress; and the saint, pointing to the devil on a cask behind the host, seerns to threaten him with eter- nal flames for his dishonesty. 3 A dame kneels to the spec- tator's left of Raineri, an old man sits to the right pensive, whilst a group of divers persons stands around. The dame, of a graceful shape, is an accurate study of nature and reveals in the painter a careful search for truth of form even in details ; and we thus trace in Antonio the fore- runner of Masolino and Masaccio. The saint is gentle in action, and has regular and pleasing features; and the re- maining figures form a group full of interest. The aged man sitting pensive on the foreground is well preserved. He wears a sort of turban, and may remind the spectator of figures painted by Taddeo and Agnolo Gaddi. As the angler parts the group of the miracle from that of the em- barcation, so the pensive old man separates that of the mi- racle from a third scene in which the canons of Pisa give hospitality to Raineri. The scene is an elegant veranda

1 But the outline of the figure of Raineri, two camels and part of the buildings of a city. In the air may still be noticed the Redeemer in a circular glory pointing out to the saint the di- rection of his journey. On the sea beneath, a bark in full sail runs before the wind, and contains Raineri and five mariners in va- rious and lifelike attitudes. The

head of S. Raineri is, however, obliterated and, with the exception of a mariner near the saint, the remaining figures are repainted.

2 Vasari, who writes from me- mory, naturally conceives the host to be portly.

3 The devil is represented in the shape of a cat, but this figure is repainted.

Chap. XXII.

S. RAINERI FRESCOS.

485

supported by slender pillars in which a table is laid, at the head of which, to the right, sits Raineri in the act of bene- diction. Three guests are at the board which is served by- three or four monks, one of whom is seen coming down a flight of steps with a dish in his hand. Two fowls hang on a nail in the landing. The architecture of the veranda and of the convent on which it leans, is carefully executed; and the forms are made out with sharpness and precision. All the knowledge of perspective attained in Antonio's time is represented in the buildings of the foreground and in the distant edifices of Pisa. The science is not as yet ma- tured, the true horizon is unascertained, yet the converging lines make as near an approach to the truth as could be expected at a period still distant from that in which Paolo Uccelli strove to found the science upon a positive geome- trical basis. The embarcation, landing, miracle and enter- tainment of the saint are all episodes placed side by side within the compass of one painted frame. The next is devoted to the incidents of Raineri's death and his transfer to the cathedral of Pisa. The passion of grief is well rendered, as Vasari truly remarks,1 by Antonio in the group on the extreme left which surrounds the corpse of the Saint. He lies at length in his pilgrim's skin, completely visible to the spectator, except where a figure stoops over his right hand for the purpose of kissing it. On the opposite side, another of his followers applies his lips to the left hand, and about the head, a group of clergy and people is massed in natural attitudes and animated expression. A monk bending forward blows upon the coals of a censer, another holds the vase with holy water. Nearer the saint's feet an aged friar is helped forward with difficulty by one of fewer years, and seems beyond measure desirous of gazing at the features of the departed. A little in front of him, a drop- sical woman has been led by her mother to Raineri's feet. Her hands are raised and she looks up, grief and wonder commingled in her face. She evidently breathes with dif- ficulty. Her forms are handsome though swollen by disease, youthful, and in good contrast with the weatherbeaten and timeworn ones of her mother who stoops over her. The careful study and reproduction of nature in its singularity is excellent, and foreshadows the art of Masolino at Casti- glione and of Masaccio in the Brancacci chapel at Florence. Nor is Antonio's attention confined to the rendering of living

1 Vas. Vol. H. p. 174.

486

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXII.

forms. In the frame of Raineri he imitated the aspect of a dead man whose features, calm and tender in expression, are still relaxed by the absence of life blood, whose jaw and eye have sunk, and whose body, has not as yet be- come a cold and stiffened corpse. Here, indeed, the stu- dent sees the source which Stamina must have consulted, which Angelico and Masaccio drew upon. Here the key of their education is to be found.

Above the distance of houses and the steeple of the ca- thedral appears the vision of Raineri, carried to heaven by the angels. Next comes, on the centre foreground, the saint carried on a stretcher and accompanied by magistrates and clergy to his final resting place. Vestiges of players at the head of the procession may be discerned. Behind the body, to the left, three persons in grave converse proceed , and their faces as well as forms are amongst the best pro- ductions of the time. A group of children in rear, again, is less happily rendered, the idea of youth, being incompletely given. In a gallery forming the upper part of a house in the distance, the episode of Archbishop Villani's cure from sickness is depicted, and to the right leans the well known campanile. In the third fresco, Raineri is exposed to public worship under a dais in the Duomo. To the right a crowd kneels or sits; a female evidently possessed tears her dress and shrieks.1 Near her a woman holds a sick infant, and there are traces of other figures.2 The rest of the fresco which has almost perished is separated from the foregoing by the walls of the city of Pisa. A group of fishermen, humble worshippers of Raineri, angle in the foreground. In the distance are remains of a vessel tossed by the waves, whose crew are casting merchandize overboard, an episode related of a barque owned by one Uguccione who saved it by appealing to Raineri as his patron saint.3 The nude of the fishermen, their various age and action are given with some realistic truth. In the flesh and muscles as in the extremities, the painter reveals a conscientious study of na- ture, whilst in the choice of square and unnoble form An- tonio imitates, without attempting to idealize, nature.

1 Her name Galliena indemo- niata may still be traced in the inscription at her feet. This figure is by Vasari transferred into the first fresco , whilst he introduces here the dropsical maid of the second.

2 The names of these persons

may be seen inRosini'sDescri- zione delle Pitture del C a m - po Santo. 3d Ed. Pisa. 1829. p. 88—89, &c.

3 The figure of S. Raineri may be traced as an apparition near the mast of the vessel.

Chap. XXII.

S. RAINERI FRESCOS.

487

Throughout the whole of these frescos the draperies are of easy fold, but less grand or massive than those of the fine Giottesques, for instance, of Orcagna. More numerous folds, a greater study of their detail may be noticed, whilst at the same time it may be admitted that the under forms are fairly shown. The nature of the stuff which clothes the figures seems likewise to have been an object of attention, and the flexibility of the thinner sort of tex- tile fabrics worn by females is marked. It is a peculiarity of Antonio further, that his draperies cling and give to his forms more than usual slenderness. The feet and hands are accurately drawn and detailed.

As regards colour, it may be affirmed, judging from isolated portions which have escaped the hand of time and restorers, 1 that Antonio painted with light transparent and not tasteless combinations of tone. Originally pre- pared of a light greenish grey, the flesh tints were after- wards put in with a sufficient body of rosy yellow, the shadows being furnished with thin warm glazes, the masses of light left excessively broad, and the highest points laid on boldly with touches. Each preparation is gently fused into the other, so that no abruptness should mar the effect. A light gay key of colour marks the draperies, the reds tending to a soft rosy hue with lights resolutely touched in white, and shadows glazed of a deeper tinge, the outlines being strongly marked at last to complete the whole.2 The utmost care and minuteness seem to have presided over the mixture and application of the colours; and this would alone conlirm what Vasari says, namely that Antonio had deeply studied the medi- cine or chemistry of the time.3 Painters, indeed, were frequently members of the guild of Speziali in the four- teenth century, and it is obvious, from the study of the history of the period, that most painters had laboratories

1 The brothers Melani restored these frescos. See Rosini'sCam- po Santo, lib. sup.

2 The same process was used

in the blues, whilst at times shot dresses were painted rose in sha- dow, yellow in light. 3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 176.

488

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXII.

for the working up of chemical substances.1 The fore- going remarks will have prepared the reader, however, to notice one disadvantageous feature in the process and methods of Antonio. His gay and lucid tones leave upon the eye an impression of flatness. His lights and shadows are but feebly defined, and hence his pictures lack the great quality of relief. His shadows are light and transparent and too much confined in their surface, and these defects Masolino inherited, Masaccio alone avoiding them and mastering the perfect laws of chiaro- 'scuro.

A glance at the frescos of the ceiling in the Cappellone dei Spagnuoli in S. Croce may now be interesting. There, the slender forms , encased in clinging draperies, the vest- ments themselves, detailed in the fold, the soft type of the heads, recal to mind their counterparts in the Campo Santo of Pisa. That in the ceiling of the Capellone the Giottesque spirit of Taddeo Gaddi, without his masculine forms, prevails ; that the breadth of light and shade pecu- liar to the Florentine is absent; that the draperies betray a certain research in the definition of folds and are less firm than those of the first Giottesque, has already been remarked. Further, that softness of expression, light tender colour, and careful drawing of extremities are marked features, is certain. All these particularities reveal An- tonio as possibly the author of the ceiling of the Cap- pellone; and it is not too much to assume that he deco- rated it previous to his visit to Pisa. 2

The faults which Antonio displays by no means over- shadow qualities which mark him as a man of superior genius not only in his own, but for a subsequent age. Vasari truly said of the Pisan frescos that they were the finest in the Campo Santo. They justify the assertion that, as regards artistic talent, Antonio Veniziano sur-

1 See, for instance, Cennini's treatise.

2 It would be well to assign the section of the ceiling in the

Cappellone devoted to the subject of the ascension to another and less able hand.

Chap. XXII.

OTHER WORKS AT PISA.

489

passed Benozzo Gozzoli. He was, as Vasari says, an excellent fresct) painter;1 and a careful examination of his work will prove that he disdained retouching a secco; the damage done to his transparent colours arising from the damp which removed tones and intonaco, and from retouching.

Antonio himself was one of the restorers of the pain- tings in the Campo Santo. He appears in the records of 1386 — 87 as the painter of the borders of many frescos, amongst which are a purgatory, an inferno, and a para- dise.2 According to Vasari,3 he executed anew "the body of the "Beato" Oliverio with the abbot Panunzio, and many incidents of their life, in a "cassa" of feigned marble beneath the frescos of hermit life by the Sien- nese Pietro Laurato." It is quite easy to trace the por- tion of Lorenzetti's fresco repainted by Antonio, and beneath it the figure of the Beato Giovanni Gambacorti, (whose remains are said to be buried within the wall it- self4) between two flying angels.5 Above this, three hermits, two of whom sit at work, whilst the third is in a pensive attitude near a pool swarming with fish, are by Antonio, as well as the figure of S. Panunzio sitting in a palm tree. The latter figure is much damaged, but what remains of it and of the rest exhibits the tech- nical style, the character, peculiar to Antonio. Yet the Venetian having to restore the work of Lorenzetti which differed entirely from his own, repeated the original com- position, producing in consequence a certain energy, wild- ness and angularity of form, imitative of the Siennese manner. The drapery and extremities followed original lines different from those which he might have produced in a work of his own, and as regards colour, he strove to rival the warm vigour of the surrounding figures.

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 175.

2 Ciampi, Not. Ined. ub. sup. p. 151, andForster, Beitrage. p.p. 117. 118.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 175.

4 VideRosini, Descrizione. ub. sup. p. 57.

5 One of whom blows into a censer whilst the other waves a similar instrument.

490

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIT.

The technical method, however, was entirely Antonio's, the intonaco having been renewed for him after the re- moval of a wooden sepulchre which, for a time, covered the spot.1

In August of the same year, 1386 — 87, in which the frescos of S. Raineri were completed, Antonio painted an altarpiece for the chapel of the organ in the cathedral of Pisa.2 This unfortunately has disappeared, and nothing remains further to illustrate his manner or his stay in Pisa.

His picture at Palermo, the signature of which has al- ready been given, is, however, of interest as it was exe- cuted later than the works of Pisa, namely in 1388. The company for which it was painted was that of S. Niccolo and S. Francesco at Palermo, and the picture itself is a gabled square with two medallions at the gable sides con- taining the Virgin and Evangelist grieving. The square space beneath is adorned with medallions at the corners in each of which is an Evangelist. Three vertical pilasters stripe the square, each of which contains four apostles in medallions.3 In the gable, Christ receives the flagellation. The brethren kneel in groups at the sides with their heads concealed in their cowls. The figures generally remind the spectator of the style of Taddeo Gaddi, but exhibit the development of form which characterizes the frescos of the Campo Santo.

Two pictures in the style of this of S. Niccolo may be seen at Palermo in the palace of the Prince Trab- bia,4 but they are so damaged as almost to defy criticism.

1 See also in confirmation of this, Rosini, C arapo S anto.ub. sup. p. 57. This is the more obvious now, as it will be found, that Lorenzetti painted on into- naco upon a ground work of cane, Antonio on intonaco firmly fixed to the wall. As to the painter's portrait which Vasari mentions as existing in the Campo Santo, it is no longer preserved even by tradition, Vas. Vol. II. p. 176.

2 Forster, Beitrage. ub. sup. p.p. 117. 118.

3 In the corners the 4 Evan- gelists are depicted with their symbols in medallions. Between the pilasters the names of the de- ceased belonging to the company, are inscribed. The whole painted in tempera on panel. Ground, gesso , beaten upon parchment.

4 To whom as well as to the Conte Tasca public thanks are

Chap. XXII.

TABERNACLE OF NUOVOLI.

491

At Florence, a Deposition from the cross belonging to an American gentleman, Mr. Jervis, has altogether the character of the works of Antonio.

The last work of the painter that can be mentioned is a series of frescos decorating a tabernacle in the grounds of Nuovoli belonging to the Pianciatichi, a wealthy fa- mily of Florence. The tabernacle is at no great distance from the capital, outside the Porta a Prato. It has long been abandoned to the vicissitudes of weather, and is, indeed, so little known and cared for that the latest com- mentators of Vasari declare it to have perished.1 The Deposition from the cross was depicted at the bottom, the judgment, the death and transit of the Virgin at the sides, of the tabernacle, but a great part of the principal scene is now obliterated 5 and vestiges only of the others are preserved.

At the right side of the arch of the tabernacle are traces of nude figures rising from the earth, above which a female, partly naked, covers with the folds of a white mantle a multitude of small sinners.2 Insofar as one can judge from the imperfect preservation of this work, it is a careful study of form, less perfect in the extremities than others of Antonio, and somewhat feebly realistic; but the heads are fine, and are drawn with broad open brows; the details of hair are minutely rendered as they were later by Masolino and his school. The colour of these frescos seems to have been of a vigorous local tone, and the execution displays the care and boldness of a finished artist. Qualities akin to those of Giottino3 may

here tendered for their kindness and assistance.

1 Note to Vasari. Vol. II. p. 176.

2 In the upper space again, re- mains of heads of angels and apostles may be seen. The Vir- gin in a glory supported by six angels in the side to the left, is evidently part of a subject of

which traces may be found lower down, as a tomb round which figures stand, in whose faces one may still discern marks of grief. In the vault of the arch, the Sa- viour sits with the book, in the act of benediction between the 4 Evangelists.

3 That is, of the works assigna- ble to the last half of the cen- tury.

492

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXII.

be traced in this as in the choice of certain types; but the perfection of the Campo Santo frescos seems not as yet to have been attained. The tabernacle was painted by Antonio, says Vasari, for Giovanni degli Agli, of a Florentine family, which has either disappeared or lost its old possessions. Antonio was employed by the Ac- ciaiuoli in the Certosa of Florence to paint an altarpiece, and a fresco of the transfiguration, which have perished. Vasari errs as usual in affirming that he died in 1384, aged seventy four. Two years later he was still labour- ing in the Campo Santo.

Chap. XXIII.

GHERARDO STARN1NA.

493

CHAPTER XXIII. GHERARDO STARNINA AND ANTONIO VITE.

An artist of undoubted talent and conspicuous fame owed his education to Antonio Veniziano. Gherardo Stamina bequeathed to Masolino a style reminiscent of that which Antonio had developed, and so claims a place in the direct descent of the Giottesques to Angelico and Masaccio. Yet this at first sight would seem to be but a deduction from the assertions of Vasari, a historian prone to error as we all know, for of Stamina not a single authentic work remains. Gherardo was born at Florence in 1354,1 and spent a number of years under the tuition of Antonio Veneziano. Having mastered design and painting he settled in Florence where, in spite of rude manners and a hot temper, he found patrons. Not long after the completion of a series of frescos in the chapel of the Castellani at S. Croce, which he executed for Michele de' Vanni, the disturbances of the Ciompi (1378) occurred at Florence; and Stamina became involved in them. In danger of his life, he retired and journeyed under the protection of certain merchants to Spain. Here, says the historian, he lost the rudeness of his manners, took lessons of Castilian courtesy and acquired wealth in the exercise of his art. In 1387, he again resided in Florence and took the freedom of the painters' company.2 He decorated the chapel of S. Girolamo at the Carmine, in which he not only introduced Spanish costumes but displayed a

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 200.

2 He appears in the Libro de' Pittori in 1387, as Gherardo d' Ja-

copo Starna depintore. G u a 1 a n - di, ub. sup. Ser. VI. p. 182.

494

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIII.

certain versatility of humour. He executed, in 1406, at the top of the steps leading from S. Maria sopra Porta to the Palazzo della Parte, a fresco commemorative of the sale of Pisa to Florence, representing St. Dyonisius between two angels above a view of the city of Pisa. Many other works, says Vasari, were executed by him and in- creased his fame, and he might have gained a higher position, but that he died and was buried in S. Jacopo sopra Arno.1

A fact may, at once, be elicited from this narrative. The dates suffice to show that Stamina might have been a disciple of Antonio Veniziano. Masolino was the pupil of Stamina and inherited much of Antonio's manner. Hence Stamina must have painted in a style not dis- similar from that of the Venetian. Of all the paintings which may have once adorned the Cappella Castellani in Santa Croce, none remain but those of the ceilings and a figure of a prophet in a recess above the door. The former, divided by diagonals into sections containing the four evan- gelists and the four Doctors of the church, are painted so completely in the style of Agnolo Gaddi, that "they must be assigned to him.2 If not, Stamina can be neither the pupil of Antonio nor the teacher of Masolino. The figure of a pro- phet in the recess, represented in flight and holding a scroll on which Hebrew lines are inscribed, is of a later date than those of the ceiling, but being much damaged, no longer dis- plays much relationship with the works of Antonio. The S. Dyonisius, although in existence at the time of Baldinucci and described by Richa, is now obliterated.3 In Spain, no vestige of Stamina's works is to be seen.

A clue may perhaps be found to his manner, if we

1 He died at the age of 49, says Vasari (Vol. II. p. 203). But if he was born in 1354 and painted the S. Dyonisius in 1406, he must have been older.

2 The Evangelists are repre- sented with their symbols and, like the Doctors of the church,

emitting rays of light. The back- grounds are blue sprinkled with golden stars. Cinelli , Belezze di Firenze. p. 338 assigns the ceil- ings to Taddeo Gaddi.

3 Baldinucci, ub. sup. Vol. IV. p. 516. Richa, Chiese. Vol. III. p. 252.

Chap. XXIII.

JACOPO STARNINA.

495

examine critically the remains of one of his disciples, Antonio Vite of Pistoia, whom Stamina once sent in his stead to paint the chapterhouse of S. Niccolo at Pisa.1 Antonio Vite is known to have laboured at Prato, and though Vasari only mentions a series of frescos in the Palazzo al Ceppo which time has completely obli- terated,2 there are frescos in his manner in a chapel opening into the right transept of the cathedral. But before proceeding further, the reader may, if he pleases, read the following few facts respecting Antonio Vite and his style.

According to Ciampi,3 Vite "completed the chapterhouse of St. Francesco at Pistoia which Puccio Capanna had left- unfinished; for in some parts of the paintings which decorate it, a style may he found similar to that of Antonio's authentic frescos in the suppressed church of S. Antonio Abate." Ciampi is followed by Tolomei4 in the assertion that the frescos of S. Antonio Abate are by Vite; but the remains which are still visible in that edifice5 are not all by the same hand. In the ceiling, now divided into three parts by the reduction of the edifice to the form of a dwelling house, the Saviour is depicted in glory presiding over the delights of Paradise; and above him, the signs of the Zodiac are represented. This much damaged painting is by a feeble artist of the close of the fourteenth century educated under Orcagna. But in other parts of the edifice, the creation of Adam and Eve, scenes from the life of the Virgin and of the Saviour, and from the legend of S. Anthony, are also produced by one whose feeble style is repeated in the ceiling of the chapterhouse of S. Francesco. It has already been observed when treating of Puccio Capanna, that these are feeble productions; and cer- tainly the long lean figures are ill calculated to arrest attention.

Yet these feeble works are of interest, because others

1 Vas. Vol. II. p. 202. These paintings inS. Niccolo represented scenes from the Passion. They do not now exist. They were painted according to Manni. No- tes to Baldinucci. Vol. IV. p. 537 for Giov. dell' Agnello in

1103, and inscribed "Antonio Vite de Pistorio pinxit".

2 Vas. Vol. II. p. 215. Life of Lorenzo Monaco.

3 Not. Ined. ub. sup. p. 106.

4 Guida, ul). sup. p. 116.

5 It is now a private house

496

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIII.

somewhat similar may be seen in the chapel of the Cathe- dral at Prato to which reference has just been made. The two walls of this chapel are divided into three courses of single frescos. On the lunette at one side is the birth of the Virgin, and beneath, the presentation in the temple and the marriage of the Virgin; on the lunette of the other, the dispute of S. Stephen, and beneath it the stoning and the wail over the saint. In the diagonals of the ceiling, four figures symbolize fortitude, hope, faith and charity; and in the vault of the entrance, four busts of saints are placed.1 Of all these frescos, three, namely, the marriage of the Virgin , the stoning of Stephen and the wail over his body, the whole of the painted frames and medallions, are by a rude painter of the rise of the fifteeeth century, whose defective style is the same as that of the artist who painted the scenes from the old and new testament and from the life of S. Anthony in S. Antonio of Pistoia. Having thus ascertained that Antonio Vite is a fourth rate artist, it is of comparatively little interest to notice the few facts recorded of his life. It will suffice to remark:

That the works of the Campo Santo at Pisa i. e. scenes from the passion and the crucifixion, by some assigned to Buffalmacco, though feeble productions, are yet not by Vite. Vasari dates the frescos of the chapter of S. Niccolo at Pisa, 1403. Tolomei states that Antonio lived as early as 1347, that he was of a family established at Lamporecchio, and that he was of the council of Pistoia in 1378. Delia Valle supposes him to be the same who appears in 1428 under the name of Antonio di Filippo da Pistoia in the register of Siennese painters.2

The frescos of Vite in the chapel of the Duomo at Prato have an interest beyond their artistic value. They are the continuation of a series in part completed by another and abler painter. Without presuming to affirm that Stamina was originally employed to execute this

No. 355. Piazza S. Domenico at Pistoia.

1 One of them S. Paul. In the

painted frames are busts of pro- phets.

2 See also Milanesi, Doc. Sen. ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 48.

Chap. XXIII.

JACOPO STARNINA.

497

work, it might seem but natural that Vite should be asked to finish that which his master had left incomplete. The birth of the Virgin, the presentation in the temple and the sermon of S. Stephen are frescos which invite study. They are less attractive at a first glance than they become on a closer inspection. They are evidently the production of one of those artists, who devoted themselves to the analysis and study of form and its appearance in perspective; and who belonged to that important class which led up to Ghirlandaio. The artist was a student of the anatomy of form like Paolo Uccello, Piero della Fran- cesca, the Peselli, and others. In a composition of ten figures grandly distributed in the lunette, he represented the birth of the Virgin, and showed that he had inherited the classic Tuscan style. In four figures of females advancing with offerings the spectator may remark a certain realism in the profiles of the heads, but at the same time some of the characteristics which distinguish a similar incident in the Ghirlandaio frescos of S. Maria Novella at Florence. Whilst a certain affectation of bearing reminds him of the creations of Paolo Uccello or Piero della Fran- cesca, the costumes and character are those of the rise of the fifteenth century. The chief interest of the piece lies in fact in the composition, and its combination with types less remarkable for beauty, than for a realistic study of human form. Great elasticity and firmness of step may be found in a female figure, of slender and graceful stature, descending a flight of steps. S. Anna in bed washing, and attended by a maid pouring water over her hands, a female in the centre of the middle distance holding the new-born infant, are more in the feeling and habits of the fourteenth century. A grand and finely draped figure, kneeling in the right foreground of the fresco of the presentation in the temple, dis- plays all the intelligence of form that one might ex- pect from the later painters above mentioned. The colour- less head proves to have been prepared with the bluish grey common to their time; and a similar feature may vol. i. 32

498

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXIII.

be noticed in two figures standing to the right of the kneeling one on which the soft manner of Masolino is impressed. The painter's power in composition, his firmness in design, his relationship to the artists already named, may be further traced in the next lunette scene, where S. Stephen, with outstretched arms, preaches to an unruly crowd in front of a temple. The grandeur of certain figures, such as that of an old man in profile with- held by another from attacking the dauntless saint cannot be denied. The technical process is here again revealed in parts which have been deprived by time of their colour. The bluish grey preparation of rough texture has been laid bare; and where this has occurred the colour is some- what weak and flat. But in the parts which are pre- served the yellowish flesh tint, glazed with warm trans- parent tones is light and clear, though not more relieved than in the frescos of Masolino.

Combined with a certain originality, these frescos reveal, as has been seen, a relationship with those of other pain- ters of the early part of the fifteenth century whose con- nection with Antonio Veniziano through Stamina is as- serted. It may therefore be inferred that they are by Stamina, whose talent is celebrated by Vasari in terms of no common praise.

Chap. XXIV.

MASOLTNO.

499

CHAPTER XXIV. MASOLINO.

Two painters of the same name, but of different ages, were born in the neighbourhood of Florence and exercised their art in Italy in the first half of the fifteenth century. One was Tommaso di Cristoforo Fini, commonly called Masolino, the other Tommaso di S. Giovanni, better known as Masaccio. This coincidence of name in two painters who practised in the same city, and who both rose to a high rank amongst the artists of the Peninsula, was the cause of a pardonable confusion in the notices which were written respecting them in the sixteenth century. It is the object of the following sketch to replace the history of Masolino's life and works upon a securer foundation, and to give him the place to which he is entitled amongst the artists of his time. In attempting to perform this duty, many familiar theories will be destroyed, and facts sanctioned by the acquiescence of centuries will be denied ; but the reader will remember that hitherto no pictures of undoubted authenticity have been assigned to Masolino, and that his name had not been found in any record. The student now enjoys the faculty of seeing and examining not merely the frescos of the Brancacci chapel at Flo- rence, which Vasari assigns in part to him, but a ge- nuine series of wall paintings, signed with his name, of which it is justifiable to affirm that they were executed about the year 1428. These paintings, commissioned by Cardinal Branda Castiglione, were painted in the church

32*

500

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXIV.

of Castiglione di Olona,1 were unknown to Vasari, and have but recently been recovered from whitewash. Da- maged as they undoubtedly are, they afford a safe clue to Masolino's style. The time of their execution may be inferred from an inscription carved on the architrave of the chief portal, in the following lines abraded by time, but still legible.

Noster nrillenus quadringentenus atoz. vigen octavus. dm devo . . Laurentius , cum gradibus summis. Pater in Xro re- verendus dns Branda, dominus de Castileono.

Cardinea sede residet qui presbiter ipse perfecit ad laudes hoc templum virginis alme. Cum qu& primates Laurentius et prothomartir, Stef. ex digna superi impetrate salute.

Between the first and second paragraphs of the inscrip- tion are the symbols of the four evangelists.

In the lunette above the architrave a sculptor of no mean powers, whose figures were executed with the ease and breadth characteristic of Florentine art, represented the Virgin enthroned, with the infant Saviour in the act of giving the blessing to Cardinal Branda who kneels to the left supported, by a pope and S. Lawrence. To the right, S. Ambrose and S. Stephen are placed in atten- dance; and on the marble at the side of the latter, the date MCCCCXXVIII is carved.

The church was dedicated to the Virgin, S. Lawrence, and S. Stephen, and the choir was decorated by Maso- lino with incidents from the lives of all three. It is all but certain that the frescos were completed in 1428, as they adorn the space surrounding the high altar.

In the sides of the octogon which circumscribe the latter, Masolino represented, in a double course of fres- cos, scenes from the lives of the Virgin, S. Stephen, and S. Lawrence.2

1 Between Sarono and Varese and not far from Milan.

2 Proceeding1 from left to right as one enters the choir. S. Law- rence distributing alms, led before

martyred and mourned by his friends ; the trinity and the death of the Virgin, S. Stephen, preach- ing to the multitude, before the judges, the preparation for his

the judges, baptising his followers, ! martyrdom and his lapidation. In

Chap. XXIV. FRESCOS OF CASTIGLIONE.

501

The ablest composer would doubtless have found some difficulty in fitting his subjects to the triangular spaces of the ceiling, but Masolino might still have done better, had he possessed the great maxims of Giottesque distri- bution. The most striking feature in the scenes from the life of the Virgin is a somewhat languid though not inelegant repose, combined with tenderness of expression, and simple grace of lines. One might fancy that the spirit of Angelico, without his depth of religious senti- ment, lingered in the breast of Masolino. Assuredly both artists laboured, technically speaking, on the same prin- ciples; and hence they may be supposed to have been educated in a common school. As the Virgin bends for- ward with her arms meekly crossed upon her bosom to greet the angel who modestly presents himself to her, she hears the message with a simple reverence. Her person, slender forms and soft profile are essentially youthful. Her expression is modest. A thin and graceful neck supports a head whose locks fall back behind the shoul- ders in tasteful abundance. In the face of Gabriel, the spectator may trace the soft expression and feminine features which characterize similar representations in the pictures of the Dominican of Fiesole. Doubtless the im- pression conveyed by this fresco would be more favorable were not the colours of the dresses all but obliterated. Equal repose, a similar softness of action and tenderness of expression were bestowed on the Virgin, bending lowly to receive the crown from the Saviour at her side. In both figures as well as in those of two angels heading a glory now in a great measure departed, religious feeling, repose, and slenderness of shape, are recurring charac- teristics.1 The architecture of the throne and dais are

six triangular spaces into which the ceiling of the choir is di- vided he placed the annunciation, the coronation of the Virgin, the Sposalizio, the adoration of the Magi, the ascension of Mary, and the nativity. The Saviour in the

act of benediction is carved in a relief at the apex.

1 Here also the colours of dres- ses have in a great measure dis- appeared and the Saviou r's blue l tunic is now white .

502

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIV.

both elegant and appropriate to the space which the ar- tist had to fill. Slender pillars supporting well propor- tioned arches, also grace the next composition, in which the high priest unites Joseph and Mary in the presence of their friends. The youth breaking a bough, on the right, is as usual a characteristic feature, whilst, on the left, a female of elegant form , holding an infant, is Avorthy of particular attention. To the religious quiet and softness of expression noticed in the two foregoing frescos, symmetry is here superadded, yet the composition is far distant from the severity of simplicity, which the great Giottesques so eminently displayed. But little remains of the adoration and ascension. 1 The nativity, however, has peculiar claims to the interest of the spectator. In pre- sence of the Virgin who kneels in the centre of the space before the recumbent infant, and of S. Joseph who is also in prayer to the left, Cardinal Branda is on his knees with joined hands; and his head, covered with a white drapery is noble in form and features.2 A certain energy of spirit, recalling the Giottesque time, characterizes the features of S. Joseph.3 On a scroll in the angle to the left are the words: "Masolinus de Florentia pinxit."4 Masolino, however, did not merely

1 In the first a kneeling king, a part of the Virgin, S. Joseph, and a fragment of the suite in the distance have been preserved. In the second, the principal figure surrounded by angels is hardly to be distinguished.

2 Near him is another perso- nage. The Virgin's head is in part gone.

3 His yellow draperies are re- markable for breadth and the composition is the best arranged of the series, the best adapted to the inconvenient space allotted to the painter.

4 The absence of general har- mony of colour is obvious from the fact that large portions have

been damaged by whitewash and subsequent scraping; yet enough remains to satisfy the student as to the technical methods of the painter. Compared with the fres- cos of the ceiling, those of the sides of the choir are rudely worked in, and the hand of ap- prentices may be traced. The composition of the almsgiving by S. Lawrence and the arraign- ment before the judges is fair. The martyrdom is almost gone, but certain figures on horseback forming part of the escort appear to have been drawn with bold- ness and in good action. On the left, the executioner feeds the fire. Soldiers and a lame beggar on the right foreground are all that remain of the fresco in which S.

Chap. XXIV. FRESCOS OF CASTIGLIONE.

503

paint the church, he also decorated the whole of the adjoining baptistery of Castiglione with scenes from the Precursor's life:

Outside and above the entrance, the drawing or rather the engraved outlines of an annunciation with the Eternal in a lunette still exist and have a certain charm. The head of the angel, indeed, and that of the Virgin recal to me- mory the type and sweet expression which mark the An- nunciations of Angelico. The Baptistery is built in the form of a parallelogram with a tribune of the same shape, but smaller dimensions, attached to it. Moving to the right as he enters the baptistery, the spectator will notice on the entrance wall, traces of figures in a temple. On the next side is the daughter of Herodias before Herod with the usual attendant episodes; by the side of the arch leading into the tribune, the execution of S. John. The rest of the Baptistery is denuded of fresco except in that part which faces the dance of the daughter of Herodias, where Zacha- rias may be seen writing the name of his new born son. In the vaulting of the arch leading into the tribune are six saints, and in the key-stone, the date of 1435 painted of a smoke colour, and apparently modern. In the tri- bune, S. John, on the wall to the left, preaches to a multi- tude ; in the lunette and sides of the end wall, he baptises the Saviour, and is brought before Herod, whilst on the face to the right, he appears in prison. The ceiling of the Baptistery, divided as usual by diagonals, contains the four evangelists, that of the tribune the Saviour in a glory of angels.

Lawrence performs the rite of baptism. A foreshortened view of the dead body of the saint in the thickness of the arch of the window, reveals in Masolino a close study and no mean powers in the rendering of nude form. S. Stephen preaches from a pulpit and is surrounded by a multitude, which, however, is all but obli- terated. Where he appears in an open lodge surrounded by a crowd, the best preserved figures are those on the left of two fe- males sitting. Mere vestiges indi- cate the place about and beneath the rose window of the choir, where the Eternal and the Redeemer,

with the dove of the Holy Ghost between them represent the Tri- nity, and the burial of the Virgin were once depicted. The subjects everywhere cover, not merely the surface of the wall of the building, but the thickness of the openings of the windows. The drawing which is now visible seems to have been bold and decisive.

In a chapel to the right some rude figures on pilasters, including effigies of S.S. Roch and Sebas- tian, were painted in the same style as the walls of the choir; but these have been recently sub- jected to a renewed process of whitewash.

504

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIV.

One of the most striking features in the fresco of the daughter of Herodias is the daring with which Masolino courts the greatest difficulty of perspective. Whilst to the left Salome, followed by four men, makes her request to Herod, seated with his guests in a peristyle, Herodias to the right, receiving from her daughter the head of the Baptist, is seated at the opening of a colonnade the per- spective of which is carried to an elevated horizon and forms a court. The arches rest on slender pillars and support the cornice and parapet of a terrace. The style of the architecture is the same as that which Angelico introduced into the annunciation of S. Marco at Florence. It is Tuscan of the fifteenth century; but its proportions are small and out of keeping with the size of the figures ; and the height of the horizon as well as the absence of a common centre of vision reveal the insufficient skill of one unacquainted with the science of perspective. The most casual glance will convince the student of the great inferiority exhibited here in comparison with the per- spective in the frescos of the Brancacci chapel at Flo- rence. We shall have occasion presently to enter more closely into a comparison of these two series of works. In the meanwhile a few words may explain the character of Masolino's figures. Herod, as has been remarked, sits with three guests at a table, Salome, contrary to practise and tradition, presents herself modestly and makes her request with reverence, her arms being crossed on her bo- som.1 At her side are four men, the foremost of whom, in profile, wears a cap of large projection. His features are evidently imitated from life. His attitude like that of his companions is composed. Indeed, a cold repose and a formal action characterize the whole group. Two slender girls,' in affected attitudes of terror, stand with up- lifted arms at each side of Herodias on the right, as she receives from her kneeling daughter the head of the Baptist. The thin elegant profile of Herodias is marred

To the right of the table.

Chap. XXIV. FRESCOS OF CASTIGLIONE.

505

by a prodigious turban and diadem. There is a total want of fire and of energy in the whole scene, yet a certain order and quietness prevails ; and the painter has evi- dently bestowed great care on the heads.1 Neglecting the decapitation and the figures in the vaulting of the arch leading into the tribune,2 a glance may be given to the ceiling of the Baptistery, where a graceful angel kneeling by the figure of S. John, seems to inspire him as he writes.3 The well preserved figure of S. Luke, with pen in hand and in' deep thought, is much in the character of Angelico. 4 No one who has seen the chapel at S. Cle- mente of Rome decorated, it is said by Masaccio, with scenes from the life of S. Catherine, will fail to observe in them a character akin to that which marks the figures of this ceiling, — figures in general of a tall and lean character, draped in somewhat paltry vestments with folds affecting festooned forms.5

Many heads of the audience round S. John the Baptist in the desert are remarkable for the care with wnich youth, manhood, and old age are studied, yet the action is weak. In theBaptism of the Saviour, a deep stream, whose precipitous course is traced from a distance of hills, separates the Baptist, kneeling on the right and pouring water over the Saviour's bead, from three ministering angels on the left bank. The soft features of the Re- deemer who stands up to his knees in the current, the fair proportion of his naked and not unnoble frame, are evidence of Masolino's careful study of nature; but the

1 The burial of S. John is an episode in the distance.

2 The executioner is in com- plete armour. S. John, prostrate, awaits the blow, an angel hovering above. Amongst the figures in the vaulting is S. Jerom writing. His dress like others in the cha- pel is altered. Appropriate in attitude are the other doctors of the church and characteristic, a prophet with a scroll massively

draped in a green mantle shot with white.

3 The head of S. John is how- ever damaged.

4 S. Mathew writes pensively with the eagle at his side. S. Mark mends a pen with the lion by him. In the centre of the ceilings the Lamb.

5 The ceiling as a whole has been damaged. The blue back- ground is gone , and the golden nimbuses are blackened.

506

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIV.

type is still unchanged, and preserves its relationship with that of the fourteenth century. The angels which form the best group of the composition, again invite comparison with those of Angelico, whose purity and tenderness of expression are here to be found. S. John is a much da- maged figure, but behind him, four proselytes, one of whom waits for his turn to be baptized, whilst two are stripping and a fourth resumes his clothes, show in Ma- solino such a diligent and careful study of the nude model as appears to have been unknown to, and above the powers of, Antonio Veniziano or any others from his time till the rise of Masaccio. The figure nearest the Baptist, half covered by a cloth, looks with apparent interest at the solemn rite performed in his sight. The second, seen from behind drawing his garment from over his shoulders, has much elasticity of movement. The third, standing on his left leg, pulls off a species of stocking from his right. The fourth, seated, draws on an under-garment. These are all isolated studies of naked form, foreshadowing the greater perfection in the same line of Masaccio, but be- traying in Masolino realism and the absence of genius as a composer. Beneath these last figures the Baptist may be seen taken before Herod and Herodias, who are seated on a throne to the left. A soft and feminine expression mark the face of the latter.1

In every part of these frescos Masolino displayed the progress of one who devoted himself to the mere study of the detail of form, who neglected the great maxims of composition and sacrificed every thing to a study of nature. The general mass forgotten for the sake of detail, solitary figures unduly prominent, a general forgetfulness of the prin- ciples which guided the great Giottesques in the distribution of their figures and groups , an advance in the working out of the parts, — such were the peculiarities of Masolino. Minute, precise and correct in the design and shadowing

1 Close by on the right hand wall of the tribune, an executioner closes the door of the Baptist's

cell and John appears in prayer at the barred window.

Chap. XXIV.

MASOLINO'S STYLE.

507

of form, he was not gifted with the talent of variety, and the sameness which strikes the beholder's eye betrays another weak point in the artist's organization. As re- gards colour, a guarded opinion only can be given, owing to the damaged state of the frescos both here and in the church of Castiglione ; but it would appear from such por- tions as have escaped the general wreck, that a light clear rosy tone was prevalent throughout. The surface intended for the heads was rubbed down to a polished smoothness before a particle of colour was used. The shadows were then laid on in weak tints of greenish grey, touched over with fluid glazes, and united to the rosy yellow lights by a careful stippling which sought the di- rection of the curve to be represented. Some retouching with full body colour brought out the highest lights. The system resembles that which might be used in painting a miniature on vellum, the surface of which, with but slight tinting, should serve for the lights, whilst transpa- rent shadows receiving brilliancy from the white under- ground, might be considered sufficient to produce the effect of rotundity. Masolino employed exactly the same system as the painter of the frescos of S. Clemente at Rome, as Angelico used in his numerous works, — a system which, having the advantage of rapidity, enables us to understand the speed with which the Dominican laboured, and diminishes our surprise at the vast number of his works. It was a system pursued to a certain ex- tent in oil by John Van Eyck, as may be seen in his S. Barbara at Antwerp, by Rubens, by Fra Bartolommeo, and in some of his pictures by Raphael. But, whilst it enabled Masolino to paint rapidly, it deprived him of some considerable advantages. It explains his want of power, the flatness of his paintings, and the absence of mass in light or shadow. His careful drawing and study of form were nullified by lack of contrasts and chiaroscuro.1

1 Though some of the darker I at Castiglione have been repainted colours of dresses in the figures J with a smoke colour of an off en-

508

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIV.

The general key of harmonies resulting from the system was feeble, and did nothing to retrieve the coldness of character and action peculiar to the figures and groups. The draperies, though easy in fold, were far from massive; and there are traces, in certain female dresses, of profuse embroideries, executed in relief with a mixture of wax and other substances coloured up with subsequent tinting. Thus Masolino gave the example in the purely Florentine school of surcharging dresses with borders, and showed himself the willing slave of Lombard fashion in the middle of the fifteenth century. Fra Filippo Lippi and Benozzo Gozzoli inherited this defect, which Angelico and Masaccio sedulously avoided. Nor was this a solitary failing in Masolino. He was equally careless of the tra- ditional garb of time honoured scriptural figures ; and his personages are dressed in vast caps and turbans, coats and tight fitting clothes, spoiling by their overweight or inelegant cut, the effect of the finely studied heads, the delicate hands and feet, which he so carefully imitated from nature. In this study he had surpassed, and was more true to nature than, his predecessors, including An- tonio Veniziano; but as in composition, he knew not the laws of appropriate distribution, and forgot the great maxims of the Giottesques, so in single figures, the head frequently did not correspond with the proportions of the frame, the figure with the group into which it was intro- duced, the group with others in its vicinity, the whole with the architecture. Masolino in fact wanted the prin- ciple of unity, and had art continued in the track which he followed, it would speedily have sunk to a low stan- dard. But Masaccio, a man of higher genius, appeared and again replaced it upon a grand and secure basis.

sive tone , some greens and reds which have been preserved are obviously laid on in water colour. The green mantle of the prophet in the vaulting of the arch lead- ing into the tribune is a sufficient example, the white ground serv-

ing for lights, a superficial green for the shadows. The yellows in other figures are treated in a si- milar manner, and in some cases shot tissues with red shadows and green lights were introduced.

Chap. XXIV.

MASOLINO'S EDUCATION.

509

We have not, as has been remarked, authentic exam- ples of Stamina to compare either with the works of Antonio Veniziano or with those of Masolino, but the frescos of Castiglione as well as those of Masaccio at the Brancacci chapel in Florence, and the series of Angelico's works suffice to show that Antonio Veniziano was the master from whom their manner was originally derived. Nothing in the chronology of Antonio, Stamina, Maso- lino, Angelico and Masaccio is contrary to the belief that the painter of the Castiglione frescos might be the disciple of one who, like Stamina, learnt the art from Antonio. That belief arises from, and is confirmed by, the study of the works of all but Stamina. Whoever may have been Masolino's master, that master must of necessity have been a disciple of Antonio whose technical methods he inherited. Stamina was Antonio's pupil and Maso- lino's master, if we credit Vasari, and every thing com- bines to give his assertion the stamp of truth.

Assuming that Masolino executed the frescos of the church of Castiglione di Olona about 1428, which is the time when, according to the inscription above the portal, the edifice was completed, — considering at the same time the date of 1435, which now exists in the Baptistery, it might be supposed that seven years were spent in the decoration of the two buildings, or that they were painted at a considerable interval of time. But the date of 1435, which is not engraved, but painted on the key- stone of the arch between the baptistery and tribune, is suspicious; and it may be remarked that all the in- scriptions which originally declared the subjects on the walls are so damaged as to be illegible. The date of 1435 may therefore be an error , and it is safer in every respect to assume that the whole of the decorations of church and baptistery were executed about 1428.

Having now a secure basis to proceed upon, and being acquainted with a certain series of Masolino's works, the student may turn to the Brancacci chapel and satisfy himself at once that the frescos which adorn it were painted before

510

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIV.

those of Castiglione, and by a different hand. The series in S. Clemente at Rome has, it is clear, a certain resem- blance of character and technical execution with the paintings of Castiglione, but is so far different from those of the Carmine that many have doubted whether they were not of an earlier time than that of Masaccio. Still it can not be denied that the frescos of S. Clemente are executed in a method and character which may be found developed in the Brancacci chapel. The inference, however, cannot be that Masolino painted any one of the frescos at pre- sent in that chapel. Every thing on the contrary tends to prove that he did not paint them. If we take the statements of Vasari as to what Masolino actually did, we find that he is supposed to have painted the four evan- gelists in the ceiling, which have disappeared under whitewash, Christ taking Andrew and Peter from their nets and the denial of Peter, subjects which do not now exist in the chapel. S. Peter's sermon for the conversion of the nations, the tempestuous wreck of the apostles1 the cure of Petronilla, and S. John with S. Peter cur- ing the lame at the gate of the temple, are the remaining subjects which he assigns to Masolino. We shall see with what right. In the mean time, it is well to repeat that Vasari was unacquainted with the frescos of Casti- glione, and that he only alludes to very few of Masolino' s works, including those of the Casa Orsini on Monte Gior- dano at Rome, which do not exist and of which he does not say that he saw them, and a S. Peter at the Carmine which perished in 1675. It may be remarked at the same time that all who wrote before and after Vasari, including Albertini,2 Borghini, Thomas Patch, Lastri, Lanzi, D. Agincourt, Rumohr, Gaye, Tanzini, Rosini and the annotators of the latest edition of Vasari, not to mention countless others, all laboured under a similar dis-

1 This subject is also one which does not exist in the chapel. Yet Borghini (Riposo. 8°. Milan 1807. Vol. II. p. 84) pretends to have seen it there.

2 Memoriale di molte statue et picture sono nella inclyta cipta diFlorentia, impresso nel 1510. ub. sup. p. 16.

Chap. XXIV. THE BRANCACCI CHAPEL.

511

advantage, and revolved in the same vicious circle. The utmost that criticism attempted after accepting the tradition that Masolino painted at the Brancacci, was to define the variation between his style and that of Masaccio, a task of no small difficulty where all was probably executed by the latter. The frescos of the Brancacci display the same principle of execution , the same technic of colour, the same maxims and laws in every part, be it assigned to Masolino or to Masaccio. With as much reason as one might have affirmed that the Dispute of the Sacrament at Rome was not by the same hand as the liberation of S. Peter, because Raphael, in the latter, had matured and bestowed more breadth and grandeur on his style, those parts of the Brancacci chapel which were first finished by Masaccio were compared with those which received at a later time all the advantages of his previous experience and training. Qualities were more developed in some than in others, in proportion as Masaccio gained experience and confidence in the strength of his genius. If there be any difference between the Resurrection of Tabitha and the cure of the cripple at the temple gate, which all critics assign to Masolino, and that of the tribute money which all agree to be by Masaccio, the same variety may be traced between the tribute money and the resurrection of the boy1 which are both conceded to Masaccio. Compare Adam and Eve beneath the tree of knowledge, given to Masolino, with Adam and Eve expelled from Paradise, attributed to Masaccio, the nude of the latter is but a development of the style displayed in the nude of the former. Compare again the nude of the Expulsion with that of the Baptism, also an undoubted work by Masaccio ; the latter is as great an improvement on the Expulsion as the Expulsion was an improvement on that of Adam and Eve under the tree of knowledge. The study of naked form in these three frescos was developed with each successive spring which Masaccio, a young and ardent genius of twenty

Exclusive of course of that piece which Filippino painted.

512

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIV.

five undoubtedly took. Like Raphael at Rome he began timidly and ended triumphantly. His was indeed a wonderful development of genius. He possessed, as may be shown more fully hereafter, qualities that might have adorned a painter of the sixteenth century.

The church of the Carmine was completed and con- secrated in 1422,1 and a fresco in dead colour of the con- secration was painted by Masaccio in the cloisters, shortly after he had commenced his labours in the Cappella Brancacci. Though it is asserted that Antonio de? Bran- cacci gave Masaccio the commission for the latter,2 history does not confirm the statement. Two branches of the Brancacci family resided in Florence, one possessed of wealth in the Quartiere S. Spirito, the other poor, in- habiting the Quartiere di S. Maria Novella. To the first belonged Antonio di Pietro del Piuvichese. But Antonio had ceased to exist before Masaccio was born, and de- parted this life about the year 1391. 3 To the second belonged also one Antonio di Buonfigluolo, who was a cotemporary of Masaccio. But as this Antonio was of the poor branch of the family, to whom the patronage of the Brancacci chapel does not and never did belong, Dr. Passerini believes that Vasari was in error as to the name of the founder of the Brancacci chapel, who is really Felice Michele di Piuvichese Brancacci, of the Quartiere S. Spirito, a Florentine who, from 1418 to 1434, was successively envoy to Leonardo Malaspina in Luni- giana, to the soldan of Babylon, to Pope Eugenius and to the Bolognese, and in 1458, was found guilty of rebellion after the conspiracy of Girolamo Macchiavelli.4 Masaccio therefore painted in the chapel and probably for Felice di Piuvichese after 1422; but, according to Vasari, he undertook a work which Masolino had left unfinished at his death. The baselessness of this assertion is obvious

1 Rich a, Chiese. lib. sup. Vol. X. p. 18.

2 Vas. Vol. III. p. 159.

3 See the proofs in annot. to Vas. Vol. III. p. 160.

4 See notes of Passerini n Vas. Vol. III. p. 160.

Chap. XXIV.

MASOLINO'S CAREER.

513

from the fact that Masaccio died about 1429 and that Masolino survived him.1

Vasari, in a short narration thus deals with Masolino.

Born at Panicale di Valdelsa, he joined Lorenzo di Bar- toluccio Ghiberti, and being in his youth an excellent gold- smith, proved himself the best chiseller and cleaner that Lorenzo employed. At the age of nineteen he learnt the art of painting from Gherardo Stamina, and then visited Rome, where he painted the hall of the Casa Orsina Vecchia on the Monte Giordano. Finding the air unsuited to his health, he returned to Florence, and at the Carmine, by the side of the Cappella del Crocifisso, he executed a figure of S. Peter, so much admired by artists that he was com- missioned to decorate the Brancacci chapel. Death super- vened before Masolino could complete the series. He died at the age of 37, his "works being of about the year 1440."

The real facts are these. Tommaso, usually called Masolino, was the son of Cristoforo Fini of the quarter of S. Croce at Florence. He was born in 1383. 2 That he was not a pupil of Lorenzo Ghiberti is evident from his works, as well as because there was but two years difference in their respective ages. But Vasari probably owes this error to the knowledge that one Maso, a gold- smith lived and laboured in the early part of the fif- teenth century, and he confounded again two different persons of the same name. Maso di Cristoforo Braccii, "Aurifex" was born in 1383, the year of Masolino's birth; — was free of the Arte della Seta in 1409, and died in 1430, leaving behind a wife and four little children. He is proved by records to have been employed by Ghiberti in 1407, on the bronze gate of S. Giovanni at Florence.3

1 See the proofs postea. | sius films olim Xtofani Braccii

2 See the record to that effect | aurifex, populi S. Jacobi ultra

note to page 515.

3 Vide Baldinucci, nb. sup. Vol. V. p. 66. The following- from the Archiv. centrale di Stato, Ar- chiv. delle Arti, Libro delle ma- tricole dell' Arte della Seta from 1328 to 1433. Carta 187, is published in the Giornale Storico degli Ar- chivi Toscani for 1860. "Thoma-

Arnum de Florentia, quia juravit pro magistro secundum form am statutorum et ordinum dicte artis, die XXX mensis Augusti anni Domini MCCCCVIII, et quia solvit dicte arti pro suo introitu ad ar- tem flor. sex auri. Tdeo matricu- latus fuit in presenti matricula die XXX mens3 Septs dicti anni

vol. i. 33

514

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIV.

The master to whom Masolino owed his artistic education was probably Stamina, as has been shown. He qualified for and was admitted into the guild of the "Medici and Speziali" at Florence in 1423, being then settled in the quarter of S. Felicita;1 and shortly after, he entered the service of Philippo Scolari, Obergespann of Temeswar in Hungary. History has seldom recorded a more startling example of the height to which fortune may bring a penniless youth than that of Philippo, better known in the annals of his country under the name of Pippo Spano.2 Pippo belonged to a Ghibeline family of Florence which, though reduced to poverty, had survived in exile the per- secution of a century and a half. Educated by his mother at Tizzano for the mercantile profession, he accepted service under some Florentine merchants trading habitually with Germany. At Treves, he attracted by chance the attention of the archbishop, before whom he had the good fortune to solve an arithmetical problem with the speed and certainty of one used to accounts. After staying some time in a subordinate capacity at Treves, he was taken to Buda where he entered the service of Sigismund, King of Hun- gary; and rising rapidly in the favour of that prince, he soon acquired wealth, possessions and a noble wife. During Sigismund's difficulties with his rebellious barons, Pippo abandoned the desk for the sword, distinguished himself as a captain and a statesman, became Obergespann of Temeswar, led a campaign into Italy, routed the Turks in more than one encounter, and died full of honours in 1427. The most exaggerated accounts are given by historians of

MCCCCVIII." That Maso had a wife and children , which is not known of Masolino , is proved in the "Portata al Catasto" of 1427. Quartiere S. Spirito. Gonf. Nicchio. No. 1658. Vol. 19. "Tommaso di Cristoforo ha 46 anni; Margareta sua moglie 25; ha quattro figliu- oli, tutti piccolini." In 1430, No. 608 is the "portata" of the heirs of Tommaso di Cristoforo, Orafo.

1 As follows: vide Archiv. ub. sup. "Tommasius , filius Cristofori Fini, pictor popul. S. Felicitatis de Florentia." All the records re- lative to Masolino and Masaccio have been recently discovered by the indefatigable industry of Carlo Milanesi.

2 Spano is evidently the Ita- lian contraction of the word "Ge- spann".

Chap. XXIV.

PIPPO SPANO.

515

the fifteenth century, of his wealth and of the wonders which he created. He erected churches and edifices of the most sumptuous kind in his adopted country, and employed, it is clear, the best artists that could be found in Florence.1 It has not been possible to ascertain what Masolino did for him during the time which he spent in Hungary, but it is on record that he had earned and was to receive from the heirs of Pippo Spano no less than 360 florins of the common Florentine currency.2 The trade of Hun- gary in the middle ages was in the hands of the Florentines and Genoese. Many of the wealthiest families of Tuscany had branches in the chief cities, and the exchanges were made by way of Ragusa on the Adriatic, or by the Danube through the Straits and Black Sea. The communications were for the time comparatively rapid and secure; and Masolino returned to Italy very shortly after the death of Pippo. But instead of settling again at Florence, he accepted from Cardinal Branda Castiglione the commission to paint the choir of the church which that prelate had just brought to completion at Castiglione di Olona. Thus if Masolino painted at all in the Brancacci chapel, he must have done so previous to 1427 and therefore previous to the time when the Castiglione frescos were completed. But any one who can compare the two series of pain- tings will doubt the possibility of this. The charac- teristic features of Masolino's style at Castiglione are not to be found in the Brancacci, and it may well be

1 See for particulars of Pippo Spano , (in Archivio Storico Ital. ub. sup. Vol. IV. Vite, I), a life by an anonymous cotemporary, another by Jacopo di Messer Poggio, with the notes of C. Ca- nestrini and F. L. Polidori.

2 The following documents (pu- blished in Giornale Storico, ub. sup. 3rd quarter 1860, p.p. 16. 17. 18) refer to Masolino: "Portata al Ca- tasto, quartiere S. Croce, Gon- falone Bue, by Cristoforo di Fino 1427:"

"Tommaso mio figliuolo sta in Ungheria; dicesi dovere avere certa quantita di danari da le rede di Messer Filippo Scholari. Non e chiarito il che ; e pero non vi si da. Sono fiorini 360 di mo- neta comune ch' erano iscritti in Simone Milanesi, e Simone e Tom- maso Corsi." Cristoforo Fini in the same document states that his son Tommaso is 43 years of age. Cristoforo himself is an "imbiancatore".

33*

516

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXIV.

affirmed that none of the paintings now in the Brancacci are by him. He may have been Masaccio's master, as Vasari affirms. The age of the two painters, Masolino's manner, which Masaccio inherited only to improve it, would confirm that theory. It is possible that he may have painted the evangelists of the ceiling which have perished.1 He may even have commenced the distribution of space and subjects in the side walls and, for some reason, he may have thrown up the commission ; but he was certainly not prevented by death, for in 1427 he journeyed into Hungary and in 1428 he executed frescos at Castiglione.

The paintings at the Brancacci, insofar as they are not by Filippino, only show that the same style and principles of labour were in Masaccio as in Masolino. But there is a wide difference between the two in the development and manifestation of their art.

It may be inquired again whether the converse of Va- sari's facts might have been possible and whether Masolino might not have finished what Masaccio left incomplete. Masaccio at his death was twenty five years of age, Maso- lino was, in 1427, forty five. Could Masolino at that date have changed his artistic nature, so as to transform a style like that of Castiglione, into that of Masaccio him- self? The answer is not that this is impossible, but that it is highly improbable. In a lunette of the convent of S. Severo at Perugia, Raphael painted a fresco in 1505 or 1507. Beneath it is a painting by Perugino of 1521. No one will confound the two works together. Perugino and Raphael remain true to themselves, and such very probably was the case as regards Masolino and Masaccio.

Finally it may not be unimportant to remark that, if

1 The ceiling and lunettes as well as the vaulting of the arch leading into the Brancacci chapel are now completely modernized. They were no doubt originally adorned with paintings, as indeed Richa, ub. sup. (Vol. X. p. 40) states, at least insofar as the ceil-

ing is concerned. Albertini (Me- moriale ub. sup. p. 16) says further " the Cappella Brancacci is half by Masaccio, half by Masolino except, &c." It is possible that the part now no longer in exis- tence may have been "the half" by Masolino.

Chap. XXIV. MASOLINO IN LOMBARDY.

517

Masolino had reappeared at Florence after his stay in Lombardy, his name would again have been found in the records of Florence. Yet the search of those who have already discovered so much respecting him, has in this respect been totally unsuccessful.

Having thus endeavoured to show that the paintings now in the Brancacci chapel cannot be by Masolino, it may be interesting to follow such traces as remain of him and of his manner in Lombardy.

There are vestiges of a painting representing the bene- volence of S. Martin in a part of the ex-Palazzo Branda at Castiglione, said to have been once the Cardinal's private chapel, and these vestiges are like those of Masolino.1

At Milan in the palace of the Marquis Trivulzio, is a small Coronation of the Virgin of the school of Masolino. It is not of much interest and was lately in the Rinuccini gallery.

A S. Francis receiving the stigmata in the gallery at Modena,2 assigned to Masolino, is so rude in execution and so different in style from the master's originals that but for its existence in a public collection it need not be noticed.

The Virgin and child assigned to Masolino in the Liver- pool gallery3 is not by him.

A much damaged annnunciation in the gallery of Munich bears the name of Masolino,4 but is more probably an early production of Fra Filippo Lippi in the spirit of Masolino.

According to Vasari,5 one of Masolino's disciples was Paolo Schiavo, who in a Virgin and child, executed at Florence on the "Canto de; Gorr", foreshortened his figures, so that the feet appeared from below to stand on the cornice, and who strove much to follow the manner

1 On the wall of No. 13, in the high street of Castiglione is an annunciation which discloses a common painter taught from the models of the same master. The same influence may be traced in a wall painting1 on the front of a house in the Piazza S. Sco- lastica at Castiglione, represent- ing the Virgin and child between a bishop and S. Scolastica with a palm and a dragon. An in- scription which may have been

that of the painter is now illegi- ble. Above the door of the same building, which seems to have been a mint, are three medallion por- traits with the date of 1504, show- ing that for nearly 80 years, the example of Masolino left unmis- takeable traces in a single town of an unimportant class.

2 No. 27.

3 No. 11.

4 Cab. No. 563.

5 Vas. Vol. III. p. 137.

518

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXIV.

of Masolino. The manner of Masolino as understood by Vasari is that of Masaccio; and his remarks regarding foreshortening might indicate that Paolo Schiavo was a pupil of the latter rather than of the former. A Madonna between S. John the Baptist and another saint1 still decorates the corner described by Vasari which now goes by the common appellation of Cantonelle ;2 but none of the figures are entire. They are seen to the knee only, a modern cornice possibly covering the lower extremities; and the painting itself is so damaged as to disclose little respecting its age or the style of the artist. Of Schiavo we must therefore be content to remain in ignorance.

1 The infant on the Virgin's I on the Virgin's right reads, arm carries a book, and the saint | 2 For Canto di Nelli.

Chap. XXV.

MASACCIO.

519

CHAPTER XXV. MASACCIO.

A noble array of talents of the first order illustrated Florence in the fifteenth century. Their spirited rivalry in a field which, like the lists of chivalry, had been more than once expressly opened to all comers, yielded results of unparalleled importance. Art was enriched with new and great advantages, and gained something even from the faults of its votaries. Lorenzo Ghiberti, by introdu- cing into the sculpture of reliefs the purely pictorial ele- ment of perspective and of distance,1 did as much prac- tically for the development of general truth as Paolo Uccelli by the study of pure science. His example might have proved to Donatello that there were other roads to fame than that of naturalism. Brunelleschi2 revealed to an incredulous and self sufficient public that an artist's time might with advantage be devoted to the exclusive study of architecture. To him and to Paolo Uccelli linear perspective was indebted for some great improvements.

Masaccio, whilst he introduced into painting the plastic boldness of Donatello, deserves the credit of having suc- cessfully carried out, not merely the laws which Uccelli and Brunelleschi were beginning to codify and base upon mathematical rules, but that other perspective which deals with atmosphere, which places objects on their planes by force of relief and rounding, and by the increase or decrease of the density of the medium in

Reynold's objections in Lectures.

2 Born 1377. Vide Gaye, Car- teggio. Vol. I. p. 114.

520 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXV.

which the figures stand. But, whilst doing so, he grasped at the same time the maxims which Giotto had laid down, and remembered that progress in art is sum- med up in the experience of the past as well as in the emulation of the present. The artistic eye of Vasari once attributed to him a picture which hung in the studio of Uccelli, and was intended to remind the spectator how much the greatness of cotemporary art owed to bygone times. Giotto, Brunelleschi, Donatello, Paolo himself, and Giovanni Manetti were grouped together,1 the first as the guide and prime cause of the grandeur of Italian art, the second as the genius of architecture, the third as presiding over sculpture, the fourth as the creator of perspective, the last as the mathematician who had ap- plied the laws of Euclid to the improvement of design. The absence of Masaccio from the group might have been explained by supposing that modesty forbade him to introduce his own person amongst the cotemporaries to whom he had been no unworthy competitor. But Va- sari was induced, after a time, to correct his opinion as to the authorship of this work, which had wandered in the sixteenth century into the study of Giuliano di S. Gallo; and he afterwards assigned it to Paolo Uccelli himself. 2 Paolo might forget or ignore the genius of a youth, who struggled for fame in poverty and debt, but Brunelleschi, to whom Masaccio owed some of his acqui- rements in perspective, exhibited towards him the interest of a friend, and at his death lamented his untimely loss.3 Masaccio was the son of a notary, Ser Giovanni di Si- mone Guidi, of the family of the Scheggia which had its possessions, if not its residence, in Castel S. Giovanni di

1 A picture with portraits of these persons is in the Louvre under the name of Uccelli and is said to be that mentioned by Vasari, No. 184 of Catalogue, but see postea.

2 In his first edition Vasari gives the authorship to Masaccio,

in the last to Uccelli. See Va- sari, ub. sup. Vol. III. p. 97.

3 Vas. Vol. III. p.p. 197 and 163. Leon Batista Alberti also knew and admired the talents of Ma- saccio. See Elementi, vulgarized by Cosimo Bartoli. The passage is in Vasari, comment, on L. B. Alberti. Vol. IV. p. 64,

Chap. XXV. HIS BIRTH. 521

Val d'Arno. 1 He was born in 1402, and according to a tradition which in the sixteenth century still assigned to him certain infantine productions in his native place, he displayed from childhood an inclination for the study of design. In 1421, at the precocious age of nineteen, he was enrolled in the guild of the Speziali at Florence.2 His apprenticeship had no doubt already closed at that time, and if it should hereafter be confirmed by records, as it is supposed from a conformity of technical processes and feeling, that he studied under Masolino,3 it will ap- pear that he entered the guild of the Speziali before his master. A year after Masolino was enrolled in that cor- poration, Masaccio was balloted into the guild of pain- ters^4 Vasari, after a notice of several frescos executed in Florence, the greater part of which have perished, describes Masaccio's journey to Rome and a commission from Cardinal S. Clemente to him to paint a chapel5 in the church which bears his name. There, he completed a crucifixion and scenes from the lives of the Cardinal's patron saint and S. Catherine, a work which may be considered as one of his most youthful efforts.

On the wall facing the entrance, the Saviour may be seen in the centre, crucified between the two thieves. The Mag- dalen grasps the foot of the cross. Soldiers in armour and on horseback are scattered in a line across the picture in various attitudes as they wind along a serpentine path about the cross. On the foreground to the left, four persons are grouped, and converse as they look at the execution. One of them, evidently Judas with a purse, has a menacing ex- pression. In the same line, and nearer the centre of the foreground, the Virgin in a swoon is held erect by the three Marys, 6 S. John Evangelist standing by.

1 Baldinucci,ub.sup. Vol. V. p. 291. Vas. Vol. III. p. 154.

2 So in Baldinucci. But some have read 1423. Vide Baldi- nucci, ub. sup. Vol. V. p. 293.

3 "Masolino da Panicale stato suo maestro." Vas. Vol. III. p. 159.

4 He is registered there in 1424 as "Maso di Ser Giovanni di Chas- tello S. Giovanni".

5 The first chapel to ) the right as you enter the church of S. Clemente at Rome is that assigned by Vasari to Masaccio.Vas.Vol.HI. p. 158.

6 This damaged group reveals a fixed intention, carried out with such power that Perugino did not disdain to copy it.

522

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

Disunited in composition and betraying the absence of those severe laws of distribution which prevailed in the fourteenth century, this scene displays, in spite of exten- sive damage and restoring, beauty in the groups, study of the foreshortening of form, and some realism. The figure of the Saviour, in an attitude which still re- minds the spectator of the Giottesque time, is fairly pro- portioned, and shows a certain mastery of the nude. The pendent and lissom body of the penitent thief, with the legs crossed over each other, though imperfectly fore- shortened, is still remarkable for research of anatomy, and for a boldness only equalled or surpassed at that period in the works of Masaccio himself.

The four scenes about the window of the wall to the right are devoted to the life of some unknown saint.1

The opposite wall illustrates the legend of S. Catherine of Alexandria, her defeat of the doctors before Maxentius, her rejection of the pagan idol, her conversion of the Queen from the window of her cell, the vanity of her torture by the wheel, the decapitation of the Queen, and her own. In the first of these episodes, S. Catherine, standing in the centre of a hall, at whose sides eight doctors, are seated, propounds and enforces her arguments by the action of one hand on the other. Her reasoning seems chiefly di- rected to one on the foreseat to the left, who looks up, whilst his arms are crossed on a book resting on his knee. Maxentius sits on a throne at the bottom of the room in an attitude of majestic repose, and his face is affected by surprise.

In this, the finest composition of the series, and that which has suffered the least damage, the grandeur and simplicity, the spirit and gravity which strike the behol-

1 His birth, his appearance in- the midst of a crowd of soldiers and pointed out by a child, one of his miracles during an inun- dation, and his death. In one of these, an aged person lies in bed and accompanies his speech with a gesture of the right arm ; whilst at the side of the couch, a priest in red with his head resting on his|[right arm, is seated on the

ground, recalling to the student's memory a similar figure in the dream of the archbishop of Assisi represented by Giotto in the Bardi chapel at S. Croce. Most writers describe these scenes as taken from the life of S. Catherine, others as from that of S. Clemente. They are not to be traced, however, in the legends of those saints.;

Vol. 1 P- 522

ST. CATHERINE ; a fresco by Masaccio, in S. Clemente at Rome

Chap. XXV. FRESCOS OF S. CLEMENTE. ROME.

523

der in the Brancacci chapel, are revealed. The equilibrium and harmony of the distribution, the proportions of the figures, not only in themselves, but with reference to the architecture, are an advance upon the art of Masolino as it appears in Castiglione di Olona. The simplest atti- tude, action, and expression, may be remarked in S. Ca- therine, and her earnestness appears convincing to the doctors, in whom varied emotion is betrayed and delineated, by play of limb of frame and of features.

The sequel of the dispute is told in a picture on the wall, where the converted philosophers are burning, — martyrs to the new faith which they have confessed.

Above-the dispute, S. Catherine points at, and derides, the idol on a pillar in the temple before a crowd led by one whose forms have the fine character of those in the Brancacci chapel. Her own shape and outline are fine, and that of a youth on the left foreground, who firmly treads on the floor of the temple, pleases by its nobleness. Nothing can be more graceful, natural, or tender, than the action of the Queen, seated before the prison window, and of S. Catherine leaning out of it, nothing more earnest than the expression of the heads, more fresh and beautiful than the profiles which surpass anything of the same kind in the figures of Masolino at Castiglione. Outside to the right, an executioner of slender shape, in an affected attitude, restores his sword to the scabbard after the Queen's execution, whilst her soul is taken by an angel to heaven. Beneath and by the side of the dispute, S. Catherine stands unhurt be- tween the two revolving wheels which break at the touch of an angel, and bruise the heads of the executioners. Her figure, damaged by time and repair, still possesses some of the purity and simple youthfulness which are so agreeable in the works of Angelieo, and recals the manner of Fra Gio- vanni. The last scene to the right is that in which S. Catherine, kneeling and with joined hands, awaits the exe- cutioner's blow in the presence of a guard whose frames are concealed to the shoulders by large shields. A fine type of head, coloured in a bright rosy flesh tone, charac- terizes the saint. In the distant landscape, angels perform the rite of burial; and in the centre heaven, an angel carries the maiden soul to paradise.

The evangelists and the doctors of the church in the ceiling are in a bad state. They have long slender forms

524

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

and draperies similar to those on the ceilings of Maso- lino in the Baptistery at Castiglione. Half busts of apostles and saints in the vaulting of the entrance arch are da- maged like the rest. Outside and above the arch, the Virgin receives the visit of the announcing angel, and to the left, S. Christopher carries the Saviour across the stream.1

The general appearance of the paintings in the chapel reveals the genius of a youth in the rise of his career, wavering in the midst of those contradictions and im- perfections which naturally mark a first effort. By the side of fine and well conceived figures stand others of an affected character, of slender or otherwise feeble frame. Indecision is mingled with energy, fire, and passion, the result of an imperfect mastery over self, and of a cer- tain hesitation as regards the course to pursue. Com- pared with Masolino's works at Castiglione these exhibit a less complete study and rendering of form, a less natu- ral delineation of the human features. They have some of the character of Masolino and reveal his comrade or pupil, youthful, promising, but as yet below the level of even the earliest frescos of the Brancacci chapel. As regards technical execution, no more appropriate re- mark can be made than that it is the same pursued by the successive artists who trace their educational descent from Antonio Veniziano to Masolino.2 Some heads may be said to exhibit intelligence of form, but the shadows are generally more powerful than those of Masolino. The general tone, however, insofar as one can judge from a greatly repainted series, is rosy, light, and perhaps a little feeble. Greater simplicity in the draperies and less festooning place the painter in contrast with Masolino. A truer harmony between the architecture and the figures,

1 This is all much damaged. In the key of the arch is a scutcheon surmounted by a cardinal's hat.

2 The ground at S. Clemente is prepared smooth and light, exact- ly as it was by Masolino. The

first painting was a slight water colour verging to grey in shadow, a yellowish tone in light, the for- mer strengthened with warm fluid glazes, the passages stippled, and the high lights laid thickly on.

Chap. XXV. FRESCOS OF S. CLEMENTE. ROME.

525

particularly in the fresco of the dispute, some perspective, a certain sense of atmosphere, as in the mode of de- taching the form of S. Catherine from that of Maxentius behind her, disclose the dawn of Masaccio's greatness. It is evident from these frescos that his powers were yet undeveloped, but that he had already studied with favor- able results perspective and the nude. The latter, indeed, appears to have been forced powerfully on his attention, perhaps by Masolino, who obviously attached much impor- tance to it; and the admirers of his genius, who contem- plate the flesh forms of the Baptism and of our first parents expelled from Paradise at the Brancacci, may regret the loss of a life size study of male and female nude which has disappeared from the Casa Palla Rucellai at Florence.1 Besides the frescos of the chapel of S. Cle- mente, Masaccio produced at Rome several pictures, one of which represented Martin the Fifth and the Emperor Sigismund and the Virgin Mary between four saints. Examining this piece one day with Vasari, Michael An- gelo descanted upon its beauties and observed very truly that the Pope and Emperor, Martin and Sigismund, lived in the time of Masaccio. This and other facts might afford a clue to the time when the latter visited Rome. Vasari pretends that, not finding himself quite according to his wish in Florence, he went there to learn, and with the determination to excel; and adds that he left Rome on the news that Cosmo de' Medici, his patron, had re- turned from exile.2 Martin the Fifth was elected by the college of Cardinals in Nov. 1417. That very year was remarkable at Florence for the reappearance of the plague, and the consequent migration of many families. 3 Anxiety might induce Masaccio then to visit Rome. His departure from thence must have occurred previous to 1421 when he joined the guild of the Speziali at Florence. It was therefore not the return from exile of Cosmo de' Medici,

1 Vas. Vol. III. p. 157.

2 Vas. Vol. in. p. 158.

3 In Sept. 1417 numbers of Flo-

rentine families took refuge from the plague in S. Gimignano. An- nals, in Pecori, ub. sup. p. 207.

526

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

which occurred in 1434, but possibly the return to power of Giovanni di Bicci de' Medici (1420), which induced him to revisit his native state. Certain it is, that he twice painted the portrait of Giovanni di Bicci, in the fresco of the consecration of the Carmine and in a picture which Vasari had seen in the Casa Simon Corsi.1

Amongst the acts which have made Giovanni famous, is one which originated in 1427 and caused much ill blood in the community. He created the office of the Catasto, invented income tax schedules, and thus brought together an invaluable store of information as to the lives and property of every individual in the state. Even Ma- saccio was obliged to make a return of his income and property, and from this document which shows that he possessed nothing but debts, history has gained not only the date of his birth, but the exact condition in which he lived, and the place where he kept his shop. His mother had lost her first husband, and was now the wi- dow of a second called Tedesco di Castel S. Giovanni. Her prospects in life were not brilliant; of her dowry 100 florins still remained due. Mona d'Andreuccio di Castel S. Giovanni owed her forty florins, and the executors of her second husband, sixty florins as well as the rent of a vineyard in Castel S. Giovanni. Beyond these sums in expectancy she possessed not a farthing. On the other hand, Masaccio who lived with his brother Giovanni, born in 1407, and his mother, born in 1382, though he earned six soldi per diem, owed one hundred and two livres, four soldi, to Niccolo di Ser Lapo, a painter, six florins to one Piero Battiloro, and had various articles of property in pledge at the pawn shops of the "lion" and the "cow".2 His assistant Andrea di Giusto received but irregular

1 Vas. Vol. III. p. 160.

2 To understand the painful condition of persons obliged to pawn at Florence in the 15th cen- tury, read the records of Oderigo di Credi. Archiv. Storico, ub. I sup. Vol. IV, where Oderigo him- I

self declares that for 20 livres, borrowed for six months at the Presto del Ponte alia Carraia, on a coat, lined with green taffety, he pays 4 livres 13 soldi or above 50 p. c. interest per annum.

Chap. XXV.

MASACCIO'S POVERTY.

527

pay, and claimed in 1427, for salary in arrear, six florins. The family lived in a house of the quarter S. Croce, for which they paid ten florins a year, and Tommaso kept one of the shops annexed to the old Badia, built, it is said, by Arnolfo near the Palazzo del Podesta, for which he paid two florins a year. 1 The condition of Masaccio was more favorable according to his own account than the reality. Niccolo di Ser Lapo, in his schedule of the year 1427 declares, that Thommaso di Ser Giovanni owes him 200 livres, and, in a later declaration of 1430, that sixty eight livres were still due which he had no hope of ever receiving, as Thommaso had gone to Rome, had died there, and his brother Giovanni pretended that he was not the heir.2

Yet Masaccio did not allow the unfavorable condition of his daily existence to affect his mind or spirits; and were we not assured by Vasari, "that he loved solitude and the confinement of his room, and cared as little for himself as for the world in general,"3 the peculiar cha- racter of his artistic creations would have suggested that he lived for his art solely, and that a fire burnt within him, incompatible with aught but the pursuit of those great problems of perfection in art which he had appa- rently determined to search to their innermost depth, and which, in truth, were through him as nearly solved as was possible for a genius of the fifteenth century. Ac- cording to the admission of the Aretine biographer, the frescos of the Brancacci chapel were not all executed at one time, and Masaccio interrupted his labours on one occasion at least when he consented to perpetuate the memory of the consecration of the Carmine by a fresco representing that event. It will be remembered that that ceremony took place on the nineteenth of April 1422. The probability is therefore that the date of the

1 See the original "Denunzie" in Gaye, Carteggio. Vol. I. p. 115.

2 See the "Denunzie" of Nic-

colo di Ser Lapo, for 1427 and 1430 in Gior. Stor. d. Archiv. Tosc. 3d quarter 1860. 3 Vas. Vol. III. p. 154.

528

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXV.

Brancacci frescos is to be found in an interval extending ^from 1423 to 1428, at which time Masaccio ceased to exist. The reader will bear in mind the reasons which favour the opinion that Masolino did not paint any of the frescos at present in the chapel. This being premi- sed, it would appear that after Masaccio had painted a figure of S. Paul in the bell room, in order to prove his ability,1 he adorned the chapel with the following series of subjects numbered according to their sequence in the annexed plan.

I. On the right pilaster of the entrance, Adam and Eve under the tree of knowledge, hitherto assigned to Masolino.2

II. Upper course of the wall to the right of the entrance, comprising: «. S. Peter healing Tabitha; b. S. Peter curing the cripple at the gate- of the temple, assigned by Vasari to Masolino.3

III. The upper course of the wall to the left: c. the Sa- viour orders S. Peter to seek the tribute in the mouth of a fish ; d. S. Peter;s payment of the tribute. 4

IV. On the pilaster to the left of entrance, the expulsion from Paradise.5

V. Upper course of end wall, left of altar, S. Peter's sermon, assigned by Vasari to Masolino.6

VI. Upper course of end wall, right of altar, S. Peter administering the rite of baptism. 7

VII. Immediately below the foregoing, S. Peter distri- buting alms to the poor.8

VIII. S. Peter and S. John curing the sick. 9

IX. e. The resurrection of the child, f. and S. Peter in cathedra, partly executed by Filippino Lippi.10

1 A figure which has since pe- rished.

2 Not noticed by Vasari, but assigned by G aye to Masolino. Carteggio. Vol. II. p. 472.

3 Vas. Vol. III. p. 136, and Gaye, Carteggio. Vol.II. p. 472.

4 Given by Vasari to Masaccio. Vol. III. p. 161, but strangely enough by D'Agincourt to Masolino.

5 Not noticed by Vasari, but properly assigned to Masaccio by Gaye, Carteggio. Vol. II. p. 471.

6 Vas. Vol. III. p. 136. Also by Gaye assigned to Masolino,

Carteggio, Vol. II. p. 472, but obviously by Masaccio.Dr. Waagen, Treasures. 8°. Lond. Murray. 1854. Vol. II. p. 387, does not hesitate in the opinion that it is by Ma- saccio. The latest annotators of Vas. give the fresco to Masolino, vide Vol. III. p. 190.

7 Given by Vasari to Masaccio. Vol. III. p. 161.

8 Given by Vasari to Masaccio. Vol. III. p. 161.

9 Given by Vasari to Masaccio. Vol. III. p. 161.

10 Vas. Vol. III. p. 161. Thomas

Vol. I.

p. 528.

PERSPECTIVE OF THE BRANCACU CHAPEL AT THE CARMINE OF FLORENCE.

Vol. I. p. 529

THE FALL, by Masaccio. THE EXPULSION OF ADAM AND EVE, by Masaccio.

Frescoes in the Church of S. M. del Carmine at Florence.

Chap. XXV. THE BRANCACCI CHAPEL.

529

The fresco of Adam and Eve under the tree of know- ledge was probably the first of the foregoing series exe- cuted in the Brancacci chapel. The figures at once chal- lenge comparison with the nudes of Castiglione di Olona by Masolino ; and though it may be admitted that a freer and bolder action mark the opposite fresco of the ex- pulsion; yet no one will deny, that there is greater re- semblance between it and the temptation, than between the temptation and the figures of Masolino. In this first effort of the Brancacci chapel, Masaccio reveals the study of classic statuary. He gives to Adam and Eve fair proportions, a long, but not unnatural figure; yet the lines are not so modulated as to produce supreme elegance; and the heads seem small in contrast with the frames. The style in which the figures are drawn, the forms of the nude, are not essentially dif- ferent from those which mark later productions of the series.

Nothing can be finer than the group of men and wo- men by the sick-bed in which Tabitha revives at the bidding of S. Peter. Life and energy mark the group of the cripple and apostles at the gate of the temple and that of the youths walking behind in converse. No doubt, the latter are reminiscent of the art of Masolino, whether they be considered with reference to the manner in which they move, the character of the draperies or the soft rotundity of outline in the faces. But Ma- saccio recals Masolino, as Raphael in certain works re- minds us of Perugino. Those very parts which revive in the beholder's memory the figures of Masolino are rendered in a manner which cannot be found at Casti-

Patch. D'Agincourt, Hugford in theEtruriaPittrice,Lasinio,Rosini assign to Masaccio the S. Paul before the proconsul. But it is as Rumohr, on sufficient grounds, (Fors chunge n. Vol.11, p. 250), and the style , prove , by Filip- pino. Gaye (Carteggio. Vol. II. p. 469) very confidently as-

VOL. I.

serts this against Rosini, whose defence (Storia della Pittura Ital. Vol. II. p. 281) is inconclusive and baseless.

Francesco Bocchi was the first to assign all the frescos of the Brancacci to Masaccio. Vide Boc- chi in Rich a. Vol. X. p. 38.

530

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXV.

glione; and, whilst it may be granted that they do not altogether exhibit the nobleness and grandeur of others in the chapel, they still harmonize with the remainder of the series, and show more unity and better laws of proportion than were possessed by Masolino. None of the frescos of Castiglione can boast of a background of houses, a square in such a severe style of architecture, with such subordination of the buildings to the per- sons before them. Could Masolino have done this, who almost at the same period or later, used architecture as a symbol, who painted houses and arcades into which none of the human beings he represents could enter? Here at last the eye meets something which is the semblance of the reality, new and hitherto un- known progress in art. Architecture, which at the time of Giotto and up to the dawn of the fifteenth century, had been but a subordinate part of ornamentation, was pardonably neglected because second to composition and the development of subject and form. It gained more importance and a more reasonable shape every day after the death of Giotto. Giottino and Antonio Veniziano im- proved it, but its proper form and place were disco- vered by Masaccio. Is it necessary to point out that these were acquirements quite beyond those of Masolino? Ma- saccio alone could have executed this fresco of the resur- rection of Tabitha and its perspective distances; and to him, as a painter, Ghirlandaio, who also inherited the laws of chiaroscuro and relief, owed that perfection which reveals itself in the miracle of the child of the Spini family, so admirably depicted in the Sassetti chapel of S. Trinita at Florence. To him, in part, and to Ghir- landaio, we owe what Vasari called the modern art that culminated in Raphael.

A masterpiece of composition, and in this respect grand above all others in the chapel, is the fresco of the tribute, were Christ, at the demand of the tribute - taker who stands before him, orders Peter to seek it in the mouth of the fish. The disciples stand by in front of a house,

Chap. XXV. THE BRANCACCI CHAPEL.

531

and the country of Capernaum is a hilly landscape inter- spersed with trees and bushes.1 By the sea-shore to the left, Peter has cast his cloak on the ground and draws the piece from the fish's jaws, whilst to the right, by the porch of the house, he pays it to "him that receives tri- bute-money".2 Masaccio here reveals in the fullest mea- sure his grasp of the maxims which Giotto had immutably declared. But, whilst he thus worthily closes a great period, he opens a new one. One hand unites him to Giotto; the other is extended to Raphael. The distri- bution of the subjects made exactly on the principle which guided the first of Florentine artists in the resur- rection of S. John Evangelist at S. Croce. No more grand or majestic air was ever simulated by a painter than that given to the youthful Redeemer, whose elastic movement as he addresses Peter is nature itself. What character, readiness of action, and intelligence of expres- sion; what firmness of tread and gravity of form, what massive breadth of drapery can be imparted in the best and most varied manner to a series of figures, is hero demonstrated. Nor are these the proportions or frames of humble mortals so much as of men conscious of a mission. The mind of the painter seems to have been abstracted, at the time of production, from all sublunary concerns, like that of Michael Angelo who forgot the world, its cares and its pleasures, when, with one hand, he wielded the chisel , and with the other the hammer. The same spirit and feeling which, in spite of the mutation of time, are to be found in the apostles and prophets of the Baptistery of Ravenna and in those of Giotto, are visible in those of Masaccio and re-appear afterwards in Ra- phael. They have all a common principle; because though the sublime and beautiful may vary as regards the mode in which they are produced, in the essentials they are ever alike. In S. Peter, who stoops for the money in

This distance, painted as usual in tempera and not in buon fresco, has suffered. 2 Mathew. Cap. XVII. v. 24.

34*

532

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

the mouth of the fish, a less noble but still forcible action is noticeable, but the attitude and movement of the tribute -taker, who looks at Peter as he prepares to obey the command, is as masterly and natural as is the expression of his face which seems to indicate perfect confidence in the superhuman power of the Saviour. One might indeed conceive, as one looks at the shape and motion of this figure, that it issues from a bas-relief by Ghiberti, or that Donatello inspired those all but plastic forms. As the biographer truly says, Masaccio "trod in the steps of Filippo and Donato." 1 Like all great artists, like Giotto and Orcagna, like Raphael and Michel Angelo, Masaccio studied the three sister -arts of sculpture, ar- chitecture, and painting, taking the first for his guide as regards form and relief by light and shade, the second to assist the production of effect by due proportion of edifices. The figure of the tribute -taker, further, re- presents intelligence of the perspective of form allied to bold talent for design, and in its motion, embodies the laws laid down by Leonardo da Vinci in the six- teenth century. It indicates a double action, that which is in course of execution and its consequence. It is the bond of union between that part of the composition in which Peter starts to obey the divine command, and the other part in which that command is carried out.

Amongst the apostles on the extreme right of the central group is one with a square head, full locks and a pointed beard, powerfully built, draped in the grand and massive folds of a red mantle which displays to full ad- vantage a muscular frame. This apostle is aged about thirty, his features have the individuality of a portrait; and we have here evidently the likeness of Masaccio him- self such as Vasari engraved it, although in the transcript the draughtsman seems to have aged him a little. In ex- pression and weight the figure may be said to exhibit the power and vigour dwelling in the face and frame of one

Vas. Vol. III. p. 155.

Chap. XXV. THE BRANCACCI CHAPEL.

533

capable of executing the grand works of the Brancacci chapel.

In the expulsion again, Masaccio foreshadowed the art of the sixteenth century, and gave such an impulse to that of his time that Raphael found little to change in the spirit and conception of the subject, when he repre- sented it in the Loggie of the Vatican. In both frescos, Adam is exactly the same, Eve slightly altered at Rome by the reversal of the position of the arms, and therefore producing better lines of composition. Grief and shame, admirably expressed in the faces, — a most natural play of limb and excellent definition of naked form, in accordance with the laws of relief, charm the eye; and it is evident that Raphael was so strongly impressed with the beauty of the group, and satisfied with its propriety, that, as far as the figure of Adam is concerned, he could not find one better or fitter. The angel in the Brancacci indicates, from a cloud above the group, the exit from Paradise, and wields the sword in his right hand, whilst that of Raphael drives Adam out by laying a hand on his shoulder. But Masaccio here again divined all the A great rules obeyed in the sixteenth century, exhibiting know- ledge of the laws of motion, foreshortening the body, and bathing it in atmosphere, so that it appears to fly. The form of the heavenly messenger, which in its grace and beauty of contour had been left imperfect by Giotto as regards detail, which had been improved and fore- shortened by the intuitive sagacity of Orcagna, was brought nearly to perfection by Masaccio, who introduced into it beauty and nobleness of shape, and, to a given amount of perspective which enabled him to improve the truth of the lines, added as much atmosphere as might satisfy the most fastidious eye. It is true he lost some of the severe gravity of the fourteenth century, but he fore- shadowed the grace and elegance of modern art, the per- fection of plastic form and linear perspective attained by Ghirlandaio, and the supremely fine conceptions of that perfect master in every branch, Raphael.

534

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXV.

The sermon of S. Peter combines, more than any other fresco in the Brancacci, the grandeur of style which marks the group of philosophers in the school of Athens at Rome, and the high principle which presided over the creation of the Vision of Ezekiel in the Pitti gallery at Florence. S. Peter in profile, preaching with his right arm aloft, is as fine and characteristic as the crowd of listeners sitting and standing in front of him. The com- bination of thought and age on a face of a noble cast is wonderfully rendered in the open wrinkled brow of the nearest spectator close to a female in the foreground, who contrasts with him by the soft character of her regular features. Varied movement and attitudes in the rest of the congregation as well as varied forms of head, a powerful naturalism and imitation of truth similar to that in the figures of the crowd who surround the Baptist in the desert at Castiglione, recal to the spectator's memory the creations of Masolino. Yet the superiority of Masaccio in every essential, his power in the expression of the passions, may be admitted at once by those who have studied at the Brancacci and in the Lombard Baptistery. Again, if the listeners are reminiscent of Masolino, the figure of S. Peter is equally so of Raphael. Whilst to complete the proof that we have here to deal with Masaccio and with no other, one may advantageously compare the sermon of Peter with the "Conception" in the Academy of Arts at Florence.1

Many of the figures and particularly that of the shivering proselyte in the Baptism, who stands in the right foreground with arms crossed, have suffered from the eruption of salt from the lime of the "intonaco". But the nudes are fine. S. Peter, in profile and grave in features, pours water over the naked form of one kneeling in front of him. Muscular developments are more strongly defined here than elsewhere; and, in this

The distance in this fresco of the Brancacci is a massive and simple landscape of hills.

Vol. L p. 534.

Chap. XXV. THE BRANCACCI CHAPEL.

535

respect, the fresco is the culminating point of the art which found its first expression in the Temptation, its second in the Expulsion. The difference between the nudes of the Temptation and those of the Expulsion is greater than that between those of the Expulsion and Baptism; still they have the same character, the same stature, and they only show how the artist progressed in his studies and labour. None resemble the nudes of Masolino. "Here, as Vasari remarks, is indeed modern art, and a grand easy style.1

Passing onwards to the next fresco, we see S. Peter advancing, with S. John accompanied by a crowd and giving alms, a scene full of truth. Grand in another sense, and remarkable for beautiful freedom of action, is a youthful female with a child in her arms and stretching out her hand to receive alms. Her features, which are of noble lines, have lost their freshness in poverty and privation. Her dress is drabbled, and a white cloth covers her head.2 To the left is the crowd of beggars, one of whom lies inanimate in the centre of the picture and at Peter's feet.3

Earnestness and truth are combined in the fresco of S. Peter and S. John curing the infirm with their shadows.4 The former in the centre seems to move forward, accom- panied by the latter and followed by the poor and sick, in attitude of prayer or expressing hope and faith in their countenances. Peter is grave and dignified, the apostle, as Giotto knew so well how to paint him. A cripple on the ground rests his hands on crutches and looks up with anxious desire for restoration to a happier con- dition. A realistic form and expression, the marks of

1 The distance again is a land- scape of hills, as in the great Florentines, spacious and of sim- ple lines.

2 The lower half of this dress has been repainted.

3 This figure has also been da- maged. According toTanzini, it

is that of Ananias, and the alms of Peter are given from the money which has been taken from him.

4 Contrast this idea with that of the high caste Hindoo who assumes that the shadow of the Paria, projected over him, makes him unclean.

536

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXV.

suffering and pain are inevitable and appropriate; and Masaccio reproduces nature in its ailments, and poverty in its repulsive features, without marring the general effect of his picture.1 S. Peter has the gravity and thought which the first Florentine painter knew how to render, and which Masaccio develops almost to the level of the standard upheld by the greatest of Italian artists.2

The last fresco upon which Masaccio laboured in the Brancacci, is devoted to S. Peter in cathedra and the resuscitation of a youth supposed by Father Tanzini to be Eutychus,3 who fell asleep during a sermon preached by S. Paul, and, dropping from a window sill, lost his life. The subject, according to Vasari, is the "resurrection of the son of the king by S. Peter and S. Paul",4 but seems to have been taken from the forty fourth chapter of the Golden legend entitled "De cathedra sancti Petri."

S. Peter, says this authority, sits on the regal throne, because he was the prince of all kings ; on the sacerdotal throne, because he was the pastor of all the clergy; on the magisterial throne, because he was the teacher of all Christians. The throne of S. Peter is festively celebrated by the church for four reasons, the first of which is this: When Peter preached at Antioch, Theophilus, prince of that city, asked him why he subverted the reason of the people. Peter continued to preach, and Theophilus caused him to be imprisoned without food or water. Paul hearing of his confinement introduced himself to the prince as a workman in carving and painting, abode with him, and succeeded in secretly visiting Peter in prison. Food and wine revived the spirits of the prisoner, and Paul interceded with Theo- philus saying that Peter, who could cure the infirm and restore the dead to life, might be more useful as a free man than in chains. Theophilus replied that he did not believe

1 This is the quality of a great genius. It was in Giotto as in Raphael.

2 In the background to the left is a man corresponding exactly to Vasari's portrait of Masolino. He wears a red barret, is dressed in a mantle, and appears to have

reached the age of 35 or 40. The portrait of Masolino given by Va- sari is older than that which he reprints of Masaccio.

3 Acts of the apostles, Cap. XX. v. 9. The miracle here occurs at Troas. In the golden legend it takes place at Rome.

4 Vas. Vol. III. p. 161.

Chap. XXV. THE BRANCACCI CHAPEL.

537

in Peter's miraculous power; for one who could revive the dead could liberate himself. "Tell him however, he added, to restore to me my son who has been dead fourteen years, and I shall then give him life and liberty". "Thou hast promised much, said Peter to Paul, yet is it very easy of accomplishment. And Peter, being led out of prison, prayed for the boy, who at once returned to life. Then Theophilus and all the people of Antioch believed; and they built a glorious church in the midst of which they reared a splendid throne. Upon this they seated S. Peter.

In the fresco of the Brancacci, Theophilus sits in the opening of a porch to the left in a court whose screen is adorned with vases of flowers. With sceptre in hand and numbers of spectators sitting and standing about him, he looks on, whilst Peter restores to life the naked boy before him,1 a decorous and attentive multitude contemplating the miracle. To the right, the throne has been erected; and S. Peter sits on it, adored by three kneeling figures in front and others standing to his right and left.2 The central group of this fresco, including the naked boy and the nine spectators behind and to the right, half of the arm and foot of S. Peter, and all but the head of a figure kneeling in wonder at the miracle is by Filippino Lippi.3 His style is easily recognized in these parts as well as in a group of five standing on the extreme left of the fresco, although one of the heads, that of the fourth from the picture's side, shows much of Masaccio's style in the muscular flexi- bility of the aged features.4

Whilst Masaccio thus exhausted all the knowledge he possessed in a scene which required truth of action and individuality of features, he surpassed himself in the pro- duction of colour. Nature itself seems reflected on the eye of the spectator as he sees a number of heads on the

1 At the child's feet a white winding sheet, 2 death's heads and bones.

2 A piece of the foreground is here damaged.

3 These parts are marked in the plan with arabic numbers.

4 This figure , with a head in profile, wears a black cap and shows part of a white garment at the neck.

538

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

same plane preserving their proper relative position and surrounded by atmosphere produced on those principles which found their perfection in the works of Correggio. The first years of the fifteenth century thus witnessed the successful production of that harmony of colour, relief, and sense of distance which entitled the painters of the so- called golden age to the admiration of the world.1 The rest of the chapel was completed by Filippino Lippi.

That Masaccio left the work unfinished is evident, as one of the frescos was in part entrusted to a later artist. That the date of Masaccio's last production is 1428 is certain, since records prove that he left Florence and died at Rome about 1429. That Masolino did not paint there in 1427 is shown by this, that he was then in Hungary. That he did not before that time paint any of the pre- sent frescos is apparent, since in 1 428 he executed works at Castiglione which reveal a weaker style. The student may inquire whether he might not have worked at the Brancacci after Masaccio ; but this is contrary to tradition and experience.

All that remains to be noticed respecting these frescos, is that they were painted on surfaces of excessive smoothness, with incomparable speed, as may be judged from the size and small numbers of the joints, and according to technical methods easy to define. Masaccio used transparent colours, through which the white intonaco is visible, particularly in the pictures of the upper courses. In the lower series his facility is more apparent than elsewhere, the flesh lights having more body, the shadows being more powerfully glazed, and the execution generally more careful. Being nearer the spectator, they are less massively and broadly treated as regards the distribution of light and shade, more finished in the detail than the upper, and this* for the

1 Pity, that such a splendid example of Masaccio's art should be obscured by the injudicious removal of the architectural orna- ments that once enclosed it, and that , instead of the painted pi-

lasters which framed it, the ceil- ing1 and sides should be white- washed. The Brancacci chapel is illustrated in the series of the Arundel Society's publications.

Chap. XXV. THE BRANCACCI CHAPEL.

539

obvious reason, that those parts which are nearer the eye require greater minuteness. The whole was evidently prepared in spacious masses on the white ground. Colours of a fluid texture were swept over the surface with great speed and dexterity. The broad shadows were glazed with warm and transparent^ tones and fused through the semitones into equally broad lights. The flesh tints thus gained a bright though soft and golden tinge, and relief was obtained by the perfect juxtaposition of tints rather than by careful % minuteness of stippling. Strong harmonious colour and atmosphere supplied the defi- ciencies which still existed in linear perspective, added to the severe grandeur of the composition, and gave to figures which trod the ground firmily and boldly an ad- ditional charm. The cast of Masacccio'^ drapery corre- sponds with the grandeur of the figures and the beauty of their colour. Whilst the play of light and shade in them is correct and massive, the folds are simple and easy. Their colours are in the proper keys for securing harmony, substantial and showing stuff, subordinate to each other, and full of that uniting vapour which is so admirable in Titian, Andrea del Sarto, and Correggio.

As a colourist in fresco, Masaccio maintained the superiority of his countrymen. Whilst he rivalled Giotto in soft lightness and transparency of massive tones, he advanced far beyond him in the combination of strong lights and shadows. Harmonious and powerful colour is to painting what harmonious lines are to composition. Colour first arrests the student's attention and leads him insensibly to admire the arrangement and distribution of the lines. Both qualities are necessary to the complete satisfaction of the beholder; and both were possessed by the Florentines, who thus possessed at once the laws of composition and the language by which its beauties are conveyed to the senses. In Masaccio, who improved upon Antonio Veniziano and Masolino, we have the full development of these powers, which to a less extent existed in Giotto and Orcagna. At a later time, Andrea

540

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

del Sarto showed in the frescos of the S.S. Annunziata and the Cenacolo outside Florence, that he had brought colouring in fresco to perfect vigour, transparency, and harmony. The utmost that could be attained in giving air and relief together, was achieved by Correggio who followed the same process in his fresco as that employed by Masaccio at the Brancacci. He sketched out his figures with the same breadth of modelling on a white ground, he increased the vigour of his tints by glazing the shadows with warm colours and laying on the high lights with broad touches; and he covered the whole with the golden tone which produces so much charm. Yet if the paintings of Masaccio are at so high a standard as to place him above the level of his cotemporaries and demonstrate the abundance of life and strength in his artistic organization, it cannot be denied that in certain respects he might have read pernicious lessons to his followers, who might have for- gotten to respect severe scientific laws in the attempt to imitate his boldness. Masaccio's art, had it been continued by others where he left it, might have lost all control, as the art of Michael Angelo's followers overstepped all sensible bounds. As regards design, independently of other branches of the craft, Masaccio was as bold as he was great in the production of every part. The movement of his figures was as ready as it was significant;1 but, like Giotto, he neglected the detail of outline in the feet or articulations of the human figure. The intention was always apparent, but the plastic definition was often absent. Masaccio had not the perfect intelligence of the detail of form. He possessed all the perspective know- ledge of his time, but the science was still imperfect, and though he used it such as it was, and intuitively added much that had not been scientifically ascertained, it was not his destiny so far to surpass his age, as to embody all the art of a later period. It was fortunate in the

1 Choose as an example the I fish. The hand has a Giottesque Saviour ordering Peter to take contour in intention and the de- the tribute from the mouth of the | tail is wanting.

Chap. XXV.

MASACCIO'S MANNER.

541

meantime that men of inferior genius like Paolo Uccelli lived by his side, whose love of science led them to give up every thing to the study of mathematical problems. Following in that path, Andrea Mantegna and Piero della Francesca achieved all that mortal genius could accomplish. The art was kept by men of this stamp within the bounds which Masaccio might have swept away or cleared by a spring. As it was, he almost went beyond the limits of sound principles. He seduces by atmosphere and colour, whilst his lines do not resist the test of the compass and rule. Paolo Uccelli and Mantegna do not put the same spell on the feelings of those who contemplate their works. They have no atmosphere and no colour. They form the obverse of the medal as compared with Masaccio; but they also contributed their great and undeniable share to the perfection of later years. The former indeed so pre- pared the ground that Ghirlandaio was enabled at once to grasp the laws of perspective and apply them on grand and general principles. 1 As a colourist inferior to Masaccio, Ghirlandaio helped Fra Bartolommeo and Raphael to give rotundity and perfect linear perspective to the human frame. A sculptor in painting, he chiselled out form, and gave it classic perfection.2 The qualities which were those of modern art in Masaccio and which made him worthy of so high a place in the fifteenth century, were more inherent in the genius of the man than a natural consequence of the state of the pictorial knowledge of his time. But we may be justified in saying that art from Giotto to Masaccio developed itself within the limits of the truth, breathing the same elements, having equal depth and force, the same laws and the same imperfections.

Amongst the commissions undertaken and finished, whilst the Brancacci frescos were still on hand, one was in the Carmine, and represented the consecration of that

1 That he diligently studied Masaccio is asserted by Vasari. Vol. III. p. 162.

2 See for an example his "ap-

pearance of the angel to Zacha- riah at S. Maria Novella in Flo- rence which is only surpassed by Raphael.

542

EAELY CHRISTIAN ART. . Chap. XXV.

monastery. It was painted, says the biographer, in terra verde above the door leading from the cloister into the inner parts of the building and reproduced the pro- cession exactly as it went forth,1 comprising Brunel- leschi, Donatello, Masolino, Antonio (? Michele) Bran- cacci, Niccolo da Uzzano, Giovanni di Bicci de' Medici, Bartolommeo Valori and Lorenzo Ridolfi. 2 The gate, the hall porter with the keys in his hand, the perspec- tive of, the procession with the diminishing proportion of the figures, the care with which the stature of the various persons delineated was distinguished, had pleased the fastidious eye of Vasari. Unfortunately for succeeding generations the picture was whitewashed. Since then a fresco apparently by Masaccio has been recently recovered in the cloister. But the piece, thus restored to public view, is executed not in terra verde, but in colours. It represents part of a procession.

On the right stands a monk in profile holding aloft a cross in front of an altar. Behind and to the spectator's left of that figure, two friars face each other in converse, and, further on in the same direction, are vestiges of a group comprising one in a red cap and yellow mantle. Above these vestiges is the outline of a block of houses in good perspective, in front of which a monk, of obese cha- racter with a laughing face, seems to have just confessed a younger brother friar. To the left of this, again, is a headless figure. Concealed behind an elevation of the ground, in rear of the confessing group, are half figures of two friars, one of whom in profile looks on, whilst a second gesticulates and points with both hands downward. In the distance a church and a landscape of hills are massively depicted in tempera.

This is a fine relic, untouched by restorers, and replete with the qualities which have already been fully described

1 Vas. Vol. III. p. 159.

2 The annotators of Vasari, (Vol. III. note 2 to p. 160) say, that Lorenzo Ridolfi a Venetian was in Florence but twice , namely as ambassador in 1402 and 1425. Yet if he was present at the con-

secration which took place in 1422, they must be in error, or else Masaccio , painting in 1425, may have introduced him into the pro- cession although he had not been there.

Chap. XXV.

FRESCOS AT THE CARMINE.

543

as characteristic of Masaccio. It illustrates the broad manner in which he laid in his masses , and presents to the eye fluid shadows, simple and easy draperies, per- fectly decorous action and fine architecture. This work alone might be a sufficient key to the mode in which Masaccio proceeded.

Vasari describes Fra Filippo Lippi as having painted in terra verde a fresco of a pope confirming the rules of the Carmelites near the consecration by Masaccio in the cloister of the Carmine.1 Fra Filippo, however, can hardly be the author of this painting, which is too much in accordance with the great style of Masaccio and besi- des, is not in terra verde. One of the finest remnants of Ma- saccio, however, has been recovered in the present century. It represents the Trinity, and was executed by him within the screen of the great nave of S. Maria Novella at Flo- rence over an adoration of the Magi finished at an earlier period.2 Vasari, after he had given Masaccio appropriate commendation for the talent displayed in this capital piece, was not generous enough to refuse a commission for covering it over with a picture of his own,3 and it was only brought to light again recently. Placed in the hands of restorers immediately afterwards, it was sawed away from the wall, and carried to an empty space on the side of the church to the right of the entrance, where it may now be seen so changed that it can hardly be re- cognized as a work of the master. 4

In front of a flight of steps leading up into an arched passage, whose vault is ornamented with a panelling in good perspective, the Eternal appears, supporting on his hands a crucifix, upon which the Redeemer hangs with

1 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 116.

2 In the 14,h century, as appears from a remnant of the angel an- nouncing1 to the shepherds, to the right of the pilaster supporting

served with the exception of some parts in the painted architecture on the foreground occupied by the portraits, and the blue dress of the Eternal. The remarks in the

the architrave beneath which the text apply to its condition when perspective arch opens. | first discovered. Its present aspect

3 Vas. Vol. III. p. 156. j is that of a wall darkened with

4 The fresco was fairly pre- | a coat of grease.

544

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXV.

both feet superposed, and peaceful in death. The dove hovers over the Saviour's head. The Virgin and S. John Evangelist stand at each side in front of the steps, the former closing her veil with her right hand and indicating the Saviour, the latter looking up and wringing his hands. In front of these again kneel the donors, a man of middle age in profile and a female in a similar position.

Vasari exhausts the usual sentences of panegyric in a notice of the beauties that distinguished the perspective distance of an annunciation by Masaccio in S. Niccolo di la d'Arno.1 He is almost equally enthusiastic in de- scribing the perspective of the arch in the Trinity at S. Maria Novella, where it is clear that the painter, taking a high centre of vision, exhibited a knowledge of the science almost equal to that of the sixteenth century. The damaged figure of the Eternal, with its blue dress, originally painted in tempera and now almost colourless, is remarkable for a head of muscular development and of regular plastic forms. His feet, resting on the steps, are foreshortened with consummate art. The Redeemer's narrow head, crowned with thorns, bends slightly, and is somewhat small for the frame. Its type is Giottesque. Copious hair and a long straight beard encircle features impressed with realistic marks of pain, and the muscles of the face are developed in the plastic style of those which distinguish Donatello and Ghiberti's sculpture. The forms, in their natural appearance, disclose the effort to imitate nature rather than present an ideal of the Saviour; and thus, whilst Masaccio pursued the reality, he lost the noble harmony of outline and proportion, the sacred type which Giotto preserved.2 Striving to add what the great Florentine neglected, he lost the quality for which the latter was remarkable. So in Giotto the idea pre- vailed over form. In Masaccio form prevailed over the idea, and that is the grand difference between the artists who mark the birth of two great periods.

1 Which has perished. Vasari. Vol. III. p. 156.

2 See the remarks infra on the

crucified Saviour of Giotto and the crucified Peter in the sacristy of S. Pietro at Rome.

Chap. XXV. TRINITY AT S. M. NOVELLA.

545

Powerful and energetic forms are combined in the figure and face of the Virgin, who is represented as a matron of fifty with the remains of fine features clouded by suf- fering, but tinged with no softness or tenderness. A depth of sentiment almost akin to that of Raphael marks, on the other hand, the upraised head of the youthful S. John, whose movement and expression reveal intense calmness of passion. The kneeling patron to the left, in a red cap and mantle, prays in quiet repose, and like the female opposite to him, seems to have reached the age of fifty. The face of the latter is masculine and healthy, and her features strongly marked.1 As in the nude of the Saviour the anatomical study conspicuous in the frame is not carried out in the extremities, and these only keep their place by the natural truth of their movement, so in the portraits of the donors a bold neglect is allied to a realism equal to that of Michael Angelo. In the face of the female, a fulness of life, a striking boldness of outline and of glance prevail, which recal the best efforts of Donatello.2

1 An under cap painted in black is partly covered by the blue drapery of a mantle veiling" the head.

2 As usual Masaccio painted on a surface of the utmost smooth- ness; and having- carried his de- sign upon it, he prepared the whole of a light transparent and fluid grey verging on green, using for this purpose a flat and broad tool. He modelled the masses of shadow as a sculptor would his prepara- tory clay, seconding the rounding of the various flesh forms and planes by the direction of the sweep given to his brush, and making use of the white ground for the light. He then covered the whole of the parts in light with a warm transparent glaze, and thus produced the local flesh I tone, beneath which the ground never altogether disappeared. A j

VOL. I.

few touches of body colour served to bring out the highest lights. The shadows were strengthened with warm yellowish transparent glazes, the tinge of lips and cheeks with a ruddy flush of colour. Stippling he seldom or ever used except in small and very secondary parts. An instance of the rapi- dity and ease of hand which he possessed may be shown by the lolloAving example. The hair of S. John's and the Redeemer's head was broken in with great breadth and with brushes of various size, in sweeps following the form pre- viously determined on. A few lines defined the direction of the locks as in the S. John. In the Saviour a flat brush, parted so as to give a quadruple stroke, was used to define the waves.

"La Trinita e per mano di Tho. Masacci;" says Albertini. Mem. ub. sup. ]). i.'J.

546

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

Technically Masaccio introduced into painting the same tools almost as the sculptor. His drawing was here more than usually rapid ; for it seems to have been traced with the speed of lightning on the wall, appearing to be rather an instant creation of the will than the deliberate work of the hand. He concentrated his attention prin- cipally on the development of the movement of the figure, and hence no doubt, was led like Giotto to neglect the more minute detail that was of little use for significance. Having given the general movement he searched out the forms of the head, in order that it might be imbued with life, character and expression. The care with which he chose the instruments of his trade is a proof that his skill as a manipulator did not disdain every facility that might minister to success. By these means, by relief in mo- delling the form determined by the drawing, with the life created by the just value of tints, and with the trans- parency caused by never totally concealing the under- ground, he produced the works which we admire.

A less perfect and probably earlier example of Ma- saccio's manner than those hitherto noticed is the "Con- ception" painted originally for the church of S. Ambrogio and now in the Academy of Arts at Florence.1 In arrange- ment exactly similar to one by Agnolo Gaddi outside Prato , its colour is altered to a sad red tone in the flesh, and it is generally flat from the superabundance of var- nish laid on in past times or from restoring, but it recals the style of the Temptation, of the healing of Tabitha, or of the least advanced portions of the Sermon of S. Peter at the Brancacci chapel. It. is therefore a picture reminiscent of the manner of Masolino, being composed of figures, of regular forms, but of soft features, and marked by draperies in a slight degree festooned. The nude of the infant Saviour, the angels, are not as finely drawn as the figures in the frescos at the Brancacci

Vas. Vol. III. p. 155. The altarpiece is now catalogued under

No. 36.

Chap. XXV.

MASACCIO'S DEATH.

547

usually assigned to Masolino. The proportions and out- lines of the long and slender forms are yet distinctly those of Masaccio; and this altarpiece alone suffices to illustrate the remarks which have already been made as to the authorship of the Brancacci frescos. The gallery of the Uffizi boasts of two pictures by Masaccio. One is supposed to be his own portrait in full front, wearing a cap, life size, and youthful.1 It is not like the alleged portrait at the Brancacci, and has not so much the cha- racter of a work by Masaccio as of one by Filippino Lippi. It is painted with much skill and ease and with slight colour on a tile. The second picture of the Uffizi2 is also on tile and represents an aged man, at three quarters with a brown barret and dress. The size is that of nature. Though a fine portrait it has not the breadth and ease of hand of Masaccio, and is possibly by Sandro Botticelli.3

An inexplicable mystery overhangs the last days of Masaccio. His disappearance from Florence gave rise to whispered rumours of poison,4 which still vibrated in the atmosphere of the sixteenth century ; yet the truth was, nobody knew what had become of him. He had left the finest fresco of the Brancacci chapel incom- plete, and abandoned Florence, his mother and brother. They had to answer for debts which he had been unable to pay. His creditor Niccolo de Ser Lapo still claimed sixty eight lire. The office of the Catasto again presented its income tax paper; but in vain. That paper still exists filled up in part from Masaccio's form of 1427, but sent back with the words in a strange

1 No. 286 of the Uffizi Cut.

2 No. 1119 of the Cat.

3 In the Corsini gallery (3G) a half length portrait of a man , full face, with a ring in his hand , in red cap and dress, is assigned to Masaccio, but is by Botticelli. In the Torrigiani gallery at Florence an injured portrait, said to be of Masaccio himself, 3/i in a red cap

and black dress, life size bust, is ascribed to Masaccio, but displays the character of Filippino in the frescos of the Brancacci. If this be the portrait noted by Cinclli (Vid. Com. to Vas. Vol. V. p. 259), it has no likeness to that of the Uffizi.

4 Vas. Vol. III. p. 1G5.

5 Vide Gior. Stor. d. Arch. Tosc. ub. sup. ."> quarter 18G0.

35*

548

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

hand, "Dicesi e morto in Roma."5 Niccolo di Ser Lapo in his return for 1430 adds, that Masaccio still owes him money, "but he died in Rome, and I don't know whether I shall ever get any part of my debt, as his brother says, he is not the heir."1 The following relates to pictures either absent or not genuine:

Of Masaccio's remaining works noticed by Vasari at Flo- rence none have been preserved.2

A life size Virgin enthroned with the infant Saviour in the act of benediction, hangs in the chapel to the right of the choir in the church of S. Giovanni, Masaccio's native place, and is shown as one of the productions of his youth. It is, however, a feeble work by one of his imitators.

A male portrait of a member of the Panichi family at Florence is exhibited under Masaccio's name in the gallery of Modena,3 but is clearly not by the master. Common and poor likewise are the so-called Masaccios at Munich. A portrait of a man,4 is by a third rate Siennese of the fifteenth century. A miracle of S. Anthony of Padua5 is by a weak imitator of Pesellino. Masaccio's own portrait, half figure in a red cap, is not like that of the Carmine, and is a bad picture by one who studied the works of Ghirlandaio.0 "Faith and devotion"7 has more a German than an Italian character.

S. Bernard in the Berlin Gallery8 is not in the style of Masaccio, but is by some weak Florentine painter of his time. A good portrait in the National Gallery called that of Masaccio himself (No. 626 bust seen in front) , in a red cap and brownish dress, has the character of Botticelli and

1 Ibid. "Rede di Tommaso di Ser Giovanni dipintore den dare lire sessanta otto. Qnesto Tom- maso mori a Roma non so se mai n'aro alcuna cosa, poiche dice il fratello non essere rede."

2 The student will seek in vain* for his picture of "Christ casting out a devil" once in the house of Ridolfo Ghirlandaio (Vasari. Vol. III. p. 155), of S. Ivo of Britain, once on a pilaster of the Badia (Ibid. p. 156), of the nati- vity between S.S. Catherine and Julian with scenes from the lives of these saints in the predella,

formerly in S. Maria Maggiore (Ibid. p.p. 157 and 90). None of the pictures in the Carmine of Pisa are in existence (Ibid. p. 157), but a S. Paul with the sword and book is preserved in the Academy of Pisa whose character is as it were that of Masaccio in minia- ture (the figure is seen to the knees), yet on the whole the work seems more like that of a pupil.

3 No. 26 of Cat.

4 Cabinets No. 542.

5 Cabinets No. 538.

6 Cabinets No. 558.

7 Cabinet XIX.

8 No. 1066.

Chap. XXV. WORKS ASSIGNED TO MASACCIO.

549

Filippino Lippi. The execution and a certain peculiarity of colour and air might lead the student to prefer Botticelli.

At Manchester, a female portrait in possession of W. D. Lowe Esq. of Locko Park Derbyshire (No. 66) was assigned to Masaccio, but displays the style of Sebastian Mainardi. No. 67 in the same hands a portrait (male) has the same character, but is more in the manner of D. Ghirlandaio.

In this class we note a head at Oxford university, as- signed to Masaccio, and two profiles, not in the style of the Florentine school.

The Liverpool gallery has also two pictures, a S. Lorenzo and an adoration of the Magi falsely assigned to the master. Other works without a claim to his name abound in various galleries and may be passed over.

It is enough to have traced from Giotto to Masaccio a direct line of art, in which the progress made by succes- sive painters is marked, each in his littleness adding a stone to the great edifice which was brought to comple- tion in the sixteenth century. Three great names rise out of the crowd and overlook it. Giotto, Orcagna and Masaccio, preserved art at the height requisite for its further progress. Ghirlandaio, who followed them, com- bined all that his predecessors wanted, and, after him, Fra Bartolommeo, Raphael and Michael- Angelo , Correggio, Titian and Leonardo da Vinci closed the greatest of all periods in pictorial history.

Masaccio's brother Giovanni survived him a long time. After years spent at Florence in a struggle for daily bread, he appeared at last in the income tax office (1467), and described himself as married. In 1470 he adds: "Giovanni, aged sixty three is infirm. Mona Tita , my wife, is aged forty. Tommaso , my son , who left me seventeen years ago, is, if alive, thirty two years of age, Antonio Fran- cesco aged twenty eight, lives with me, likewise his wife, La Nanina, aged twenty. With me also are La Tancia, my daughter, aged sixteen, Benedetto, my son, aged thir- teen, Leonardo, my son, aged ten, La Francischa, my daughter, aged six, Lalesandra, my daughter, aged four.1'

A return for 1480 exists, but in one of 1498, Giovanni's wife describes herself as Mona Titta donna fu di Giovanni. 1

Gayc, Carteggio. Vol. I. p. 115.

550

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXV.

Giovanni left no name as an artist. Masaccio's ill paid assistant Andrea di Giusto is recorded as the painter of an altarpiece at S. Lucia of Florence in 1436. His son Giusto di Andrea di Giusto laboured as a painter with Neri di Bicci and Benozzo Gozzoli. 1

Vide Gaye, Carteggio. ub. sup. Vol. I. p.p. 211. 212. and

postea.

Chap. XXVI. LORENZO MONACO.

551

CHAPTER XXVI.

LORENZO AND OTHER FRIARS OF THE ORDER OF THE CAMALDOLES.

Before devoting special attention to Angelico, the cotemporary and rival in greatness of Masaccio, before endeavouring to explain or to illustrate the characteristic features of his style, the reader shall be requested to cast a preliminary glance at the productions of a monk who inherited some of the manner of Agnolo Gaddi, and who, transferring into the fifteenth century the character of the fourteenth, may be said to have worthily continued the line of the Giottesques. It would be needless here to collect authorities for the admitted fact that art was cultivated from early times in monasteries. The reader may bear in mind the examples set by the Benedictines of Montecassino in the eleventh century, who were coura- geous enough to attempt the revival of a school of mosaists. He may recollect what the Dominicans of Florence and Pisa did for sculpture and for architecture, and he may have had occasion to convince himself that the art of miniature at least was practised in most, and particularly in the Italian, convents of the middle ages. Don Lorenzo of the Oamaldoles of Florence produced works displaying in an eminent degree the qualities which might fit him for the direction of a monkish school of miniature. He undoubtedly belongs to the class of first rate ' artists. Older than Angelico, he did not disdain at one time to act as his assistant; but, independently of the Dominican, he also executed large and important works, more prized

552

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVI.

by the brethren of his order at the period of their execution than by their pious successors.

The only picture which bears the name of Lorenzo is pre- served in the abbey of the Camaldoles of Ceretto between Florence and Sienna. It was executed in 1413. for the great convent of the Angeli at Florence, and removed in the sixteenth century to the branch establishment of Ceretto, when the monks obtained for their high altar a picture by Alexander Allori. Lorenzo exhibits in this great work certain peculiarities of manner and of style, which enable the student to classify others that do not bear his sig- nature. In the church of Monte Oliveto at Florence, a Madonna and saints by him is dated 1410. 1 At Empoli, between Pisa and Florence, a Virgin and child with saints is dated 1404. 2 • Lorenzo shows himself in the last of these works an artist in the strength of manhood. Hence the conviction may be entertained that he was born to- wards the end of the fourteenth century. His style discloses a disciple of Agnolo Gaddi, and has something in common with that of Spinello Aretino, whose force of character in heads and neglect of drawing in the extremities Lorenzo emulates. He so completely carried the manner of the fourteenth century into the fifteenth, that a picture evidently by him at the Academy of Arts at Florence was assigned by Vasari to Giotto ; and two of his panels at the National Gallery are considered to be by Taddeo Gaddi.

1 The Virgin enthroned holds the child in a standing attitude. Two angels support the tapestry behind her, on the left are S. John the Baptist and S. Bartho- lomew, on the right S.S. Thaddeus and Benedict, on the angles of the niches are medallions of pro- phets, in the apex the Eternal in the centre and the angel and Vir- gin of the annunciation. This perfectly preserved altarpiece is inscribed "Ave gratia plena Doms. tecum, an. D. MCCCCX. It is in tempera on gold ground.

2 Here the Virgin enthroned

holds the infant Saviour grasping her neck, a book in hand. To her left is S. John the Baptist and a youthful saint, with a sword, to the right, S.S. Peter and An- thony the abbot. The central pinnacle is gone. In the side ones are the angel and the Virgin annunciate. The figures are half size of life, on the basement is the date 1404. In the collection of the Hotel Cluny at Paris is a small gable panel, in two vertical parts, representing Christ on the mount and the Holy Women at the sepulchre, dated anno Domini

Chap. XXVI. LORENZO MONACO.

553

The form of Lorenzo's altarpieces is that of the fourteenth century, and that of the abbey or Badia of Ceretto, which is fifteen feet high, without the three pinnacles, and twelve feet long, is a triple gable on pilasters resting on a pediment. In the latter portion of the piece the adoration of the Magi and the adoration of the shepherds are side by side in the centre with two scenes from the life of S. Bernard on each hand. The pilasters, in three courses, are decorated with six prophets; the three pinnacles, with the Eternal in the centre, the angel, and the Virgin annunciate; the great central panel with the coronation of the Virgin. Sixteen angels form a choir round the throne , which rests on a starred rainbow. In front, three angels wave censers; and at each side are the apostles and prophets amongst whom are S.S. Benedict, Peter and John the Baptist on the left and S. Romoaldo on the right.

Without genius for composition Lorenzo had many other faults. His long and slender figures with their affectedly bowing form tread the ground without firmness; but his drawing is careful and minute, his general tone is the gay, soft, and transparent one of a miniature, and his flesh tints are carefully fused. Draperies of breadth and mass have peculiar loops at the eye of the fold. His technical method of working is in fact less Giottesque than his forms or feeling. The keys of harmony in his altarpiece at Ceretto, and indeed in all those which he produced, is that of a miniaturist of the fifteenth century. In the small compositions of the pediment he seems at his ease, and reveals something of the religious feeling of Traini, a peculiarity fitting him at a later period to assist Angelico.1

MCCCCVIII, and falsely assigned to Gentile da Fabriano. It is an exquisite work of Don Lorenzo Monaco , of his finest time.

1 The altarpiece of Ceretto is inscribed as follows:

"Haec tabula facta est pro ani- ma Zenobii Cecchi, frasche et suorum in recompensatione minis alterius tabule per eum in hoc. . . (L.a.u)rentii Johannis et suorum, monaci hujus ordinis qui earn de-

pinxit anno domini MCCCCXIII mense Februarii, tempore domini Mathei prioris hujus monasterii."

Of the three angels in front of the throne the central one is re- painted. The saints at each side of the coronation are ten in num- ber, in all 20. The saint's head nearest the Virgin on the right is repainted. A choir of red seraphs surrounds the Eternal in the pin- nacle. The pediment panels are partly damaged.

554

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXVI.

A smaller coronation of the Virgin which evidently once formed the centre of an altarpiece is now in a private church belonging to Signor Landi near Certaldo, at no great distance from Ceretto. Three angels are in front of the throne.1 The side panels of this undoubted work of Lorenzo's are probably those representing saints in the National Gallery under the name of Taddeo Gaddi.2 They have the same relation to the central piece in pos- session of the Signor Landi, as the sides of the Ceretto altar- piece to its centre. Possibly the picture before its dismem- berment and the loss of its pediment and pilasters, was in the Camaldole monastery of S. Benedetto outside the Porta a Pinti in Florence, an edifice ruined during the siege of 1529. Vasari states that this represented the coronation of the Virgin; that it was similar to that of the monastery of the Angeli (now at Ceretto), and that it was exhibited in his time in the cloister of the latter monastery in a chapel to the right belonging to the Alberti.3 If restored to its original shape by the junction of the centre to the wings in the National Gallery, the altarpiece would differ in nothing from that of Ceretto, except in being smaller and in having eight saints in each of the sides instead of ten.

The picture of the Academy of Arts at Florence is that which represents the Virgin shrinking with terror in her attitude from the visiting angel, a piece assigned by Va- sari to Giotto4 and praised by him because of the fear expressed in the action and features of Mary.5

One of the finest and best preserved altarpieces of

1 The panel is mutilated, with a hole at the centre of the base. The Virgin's red dress has lost its colour; and the ashen pre- paration, retouched in lights, is now to be seen. The green dress of the central angel is repainted.

2 No. 215—216. Nat. Gal. Cata- logue ; restored.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 211.

4 Vas. Vol. I. p. 311. See also ante a.

b At each side of the principal

scene are two saints. Three pin- nacles of an altarpiece (No. 34 galerie des grands tableaux in the Florence Academy of Arts) are by Lorenzo Monaco and form part of a deposition from the cross by Angelico. In the same collec- tion (No. 51 , Salle des petits ta- bleaux) is a predella by Don Lo- renzo representing the nativity, scenes from the lives of S. Ono- frio and S. Martin, the whole in- jured.

Chap. XXVI.

LORENZO MONACO.

555

Lorenzo Monaco is, however, that of the Bartolini chapel at S. Trinita of Florence, in which the annunciation is not depicted in the manner of that which hangs in the Academy of arts. The angel kneels whilst the Virgin, of a long and slender form, presses her right hand to her breast and raises her head to listen. The draperies, though trailing, have breadth in the round sweep of their folds, and seem elastic. A soft expression, an air of questioning in the open mouth, are peculiar to this figure of the Virgin; whilst the character of the angel recals that of Agnolo Gaddi at Prato, not only as regards type but as regards the drawing and the thick forms of the fingers. Lorenzo displays perhaps a little more religious sentiment, but drawing quite as defective as that of Agnolo. In this and particularly in the mode of defining the outlines of eyes, the last of the Gaddi evidently exer- cised a marked influence on Lorenzo. If his peculiar gaiety of tones and relationship in style to Spinello be considered in addition, Agnolo may well be described as the master of both. The pediment scenes of the altar- piece in the S. Trinita are most carefully executed; and this is particularly the case with the adoration of the Magi which combines all the artist's religious feeling and warm harmonious colour, with little to compensate for total flatness or for absence of relief by shadow.1

1 In S. Jacopo sopra Arno, where an altarpiece by Lorenzo was preserved, all that remains is a series of three pinnacles in the sacrist)', in one of which the Saviour appears crucified with two angels gathering the blood from the wounds of the hands , and in the two others are S. John and the Virgin in grief. The frag- ments lately sold by the fathers of S. Michele of Pisa and now in the hands of Signor Toscanelli in that city are in Lorenzo's manner, but of less talent than he usually exhibited.

In a passage of the Uffizi gal- lery, an adoration of the wise

men, of old assigned to Angelico, may still be seen. It is a pretty picture by Lorenzo, gay and soft in colour and flat in general tone. The annunciation, the prophets and central figure of the Eternal forming part of the altarpiece are, however, by Cosimo Rosselli. Uffizi, No. 17. First corridor.

The company of S. Luke at Florence (near the chiostro dell' Annunziata) also owns a work of Lorenzo being the central com- position of a series of three, in the pediment of an altarpiece. This central scene represents the birth of the Saviour, whilst the side scenes taken from the lives

556

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVI.

Two pictures in the rectory of the Collegio Cicognini at Prato deserve attention.

One represents the Virgin and child between Saints1 and has all the character of the master. The second is in the manner of one of his pupils, of whom we shall speak presently.

Lorenzo died as Vasari states at the age of fifty five, but we are not informed of time or place.

That numerous painters laboured in the Camaldole con- vents of Italy is evident from numerous records. The annotators of the last edition of Vasari2 notice miniatures by a friar of the order in the choral books of S-. Croce, signed "Don Simon ordinis Camaldulensis". Vasari mentions as a forerunner of Lorenzo Monaco3 one Don Jacopo who had executed numerous miniatures at Florence, Rome, and Venice, and a pupil of Lorenzo,4 one Francesco, who in the fifteenth century painted a tabernacle at the corner of S. Maria Novella. Vestiges of the frescos of this taber- nacle remain,5 apparently at its origin tastily coloured. 6

One Andrea da Firenze existed at the latter period, whose style might lead to the belief that Vasari intended

of S.S. Cosmo and Damian are by Angelico.

1 S.S. Benedict, Catherine (left), Giov. Gualberto, Agatha (right). Two angels in rear. The annun- ciation in side gable, centre gable, gone. In the Berlin Gallery an annunciation (No. 1135) is truly by Lorenzo. Inferior to it, in the same collection, is an altarpiece (No. 1123). Of the style of the latter, is a so-called TaddeoGaddi in the late Campana collection now at the Louvre, representing S.S. Lawrence, Agnes and Margaret. Lorenzo, says Vasari, painted the Cappella Fioravanti in S. Piero Maggiore (Vas. Vol. II. p. 211), the altarpiece of the chapel of the Sangaletti in S. Piero Sche- raggio, representing the Virgin and child between saints (Ibid, p. 211), and the frescos of the Ardinghelli and Bartolini chapels in S. Trinita (Ibid. p.p. 211. 212), frescos in the Certosa (Ibid. p. 212) and a crucifixion at the Ro- miti. All these have perished.

2 Note 1 to p. 213. Vol. II.

3 Vas. Vol. II. p. 213.

4 Ibid. p. 214.

5 The Virgin and child is still represented by the head of the former, and at the sides, a figure of S. John the Baptist may be distinguished.

6 Two. panels, with numerous angels, much restored, in this man- ner , are in the Ugo Baldi collec- tion at Florence. In Pisa, Signor Toscanelli possesses a picture signed by Francesco, and dated, (we have momentarily lost the date) representing four saints showing a decline from the style of Don Lorenzo Monaco. By Francesco, because of the certainty arising from the foregoing, are doubt- less inferior panels in the man- ner of Don Lorenzo. We may thus assign to him a Virgin and child between saints, with legend- ary scenes in the predella, ori- ginally in S. Girolamo outside Gubbio now in possession of the Marquis Ranghiacci of that place.

Chap. XXVI. ANDREA DA FIRENZE.

557

to speak of him when alluding to a pupil of Lorenzo Monaco. A large altarpiece, signed "Andreas de Floren- tia 1437, may still be seen in an ex-chapel contiguous] to the church of S. Margareta of Cortona. It is a large com- posite work by an imitator of Masolino and Angelico. 1 The weak, slender and mechanically executed figures with their features and long necks, are reminiscent of Masolino, angels taking a Virgin to heaven peculiarly so. The outlines are minute and of a hair line like those of Angelico, but the draperies are circular and poor, though carefully detailed. The light warm and rosy colour is grey in shadow and gene- rally flat, the dresses being in light keys of colour. The finest parts are the pediment scenes, one of Avhich, repre- senting the death of the Virgin, is almost a copy of the same composition by Angelico. The artist, who reminds the spectator so much of less able portions of Masolino's work or of Masaccio's at S. Clemente, was of Lorenzo Monaco's time, and may have been an assistant to Angelico. It is very likely indeed, that many feebly executed or con- ceived pictures assigned to the latter are by this Andrea. 2 The conversion of Constantine, in which the Emperor kneels at the feet of S. Sylvester between S. Peter, S. Paul and two angels, a picture in the Casa Ramelli at Gubbio is inscribed "Conversio Constantini. Hoc opus fecit Andreas de Florentia", and is by the artist who executed the altar- piece of Cortona. The conversion is however comparatively rude in execution.3

1 In the centre, the Virgin, in ah elliptical glory, is taken to Paradise by six angels, S. Tho- mas kneeling beneath receives the Virgin's girdle, and S. Francis and S. Catherine pray at his sides. In the upper ornament the annun- ciation and Moses and Daniel are represented. The pilasters in four courses contain (left) S.S. Anthony the Abbot, Benedict, Fabian and Peter, (right) S.S. Sebastian, Ni- colas, Jerom and Paul. Peter and Paul are in the uppermost divi- sion at each side. On the pedi- ment, immediately beneath the pilasters are two kneeling fe- males, probably the donors; and 3 scenes representing the death of the Virgin (centre), the martyr- dom of S. Catherine (left), and

S. Francis receiving the Stigmata (right).

2 The whole of this altarpiece is preserved in its original frame with an overhanging entablature.

3 In the rectory of the Collegio Cicognini at Prato is a picture already referred to, representing the Virgin and child enthroned between saints, and subordinate episodes in pinnacles, pilasters and predella, which has the cha- racter of Andrea's altarpiece at Cortona. At Florence, in an upper cloister of the Badia are scenes of the life of S. Benedict in the style of Andrea. The same man- ner is displayed in the pictures of the late Campana collection now in Paris, falsely assigned to An- gelico.

558

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVI.

A small picture of the same class by a Camaldole friar may complete this series. It is in the choir of the church of the Camaldole convent, two miles from Naples, and is in- scribed: Petrus Dominici de Montepulciano pinxit MCCCCXX. Here the Virgin sits on a piece of gold brocade with the infant Saviour on her lap and throwing back with one hand the veil from his shoulder. 1 Four angels playing music at the sides, two above, suspend a crown over the Virgin's head. The work is low as that of a miniaturist whose technical art it shows. It has something in colour ap- proaching to the pictures of Lorenzo Monaco, the tone being rosy, flat, light and greatly fused. The slender figures are beneath even those of Lorenzo, the draperies circular in fold, like some in the Siennese school. The execution is beyond description minute, and reveals the greatest patience in the artist. The form of the infant is by no means pleasing. This Petrus was a monk at Naples, but a Tuscan by birth, Montepulciano being at no great distance from Sienna.

Her blue mantle is adorned with angels' heads.

Chap. XXVII. FRATE GIOVANNI DA FIESOLE.

559

CHAPTER XXVII.

FKATE GIOVANNI DA FIESOLE OR THE ANGELICO.

Vicchio, a village nestling under the walls of a castle in the province of Mugello,1 witnessed the birth of two brothers who, in the same year 1407, were admitted no- vices into the convent of S. Domenico of Fiesole. One of them was christened Guido.2 Both were the sons of one Peter, respecting whom all other particulars are unknown, and they had doubtless been sent, like most youths, to find sustenance and choose an occupation in the capital. The period when this occurred is not certain; but Guido entered the world in 1387, 3 and being twenty years of age when he joined the Dominican order, may be sup- posed to have already struck the path which he was to follow in after life. In religion he took the name of Giovanni, and is so called in the following passage of the chronicle of S. Domenico of Fiesole.

"1407. Brother Joannes Petri de Mugello of Vicchio, who excelled as a painter, and adorned many tables and walls in divers places, accepts the habit of a clerk in this convent . . . and in the following year professed." 4

1 Marchese upbraids the great Montalembert for saying that Fra Giovanni was born in Mugello, a small village near Flo- rence. (Vol. I. p. 201.) See Mon- talembert ' s ID u V a n d a 1 i s m e e t (1 u C a t h o 1 i c i s m e d a n s l'a r t. Vicchio is between Dicomano and Borgo S.Lorenzo, not far from Ves- pignano, the birth place of Giotto.

2 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 25. See also a record in Baldinucci. ub.

sup. Vol. V. p. 160. Vasari says in error, that Guido was born at Fiesole. Vol. IV. p. 25.

3 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 39. G. M. Brocchi, Descriz. della Provincia del Mugello, Flor. 1748. p. II says, Fra Giovanni was born in 1390. Vide Marches e, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 201.

4 Cronica conv. S. Dominici de Fesulis. Fol. 97 a tergo, in Mar- chese (ub. snp. Vol. I. p. 207).

560 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

A passage to the same effect, immediately after the foregoing, records the admission of Guido's brother into the order as "Frater Benedictus, 1 and justifies the belief that he was not, as Vasari asserts, the elder, but the younger of the two.2

It has been doubted whether, previous to entering the order at Fiesole, Guido, or as he may hereafter be more fitly called, Fra Giovanni, had learnt the rudiments of his art. Vasari seemed to be of opinion that he began in the monkish school of miniature,3 like Benedetto, adding nevertheless that he might with the utmost con- venience have chosen the career of a lay-man, and have earned whatever he pleased in a profession which as a youth he practised with consummate skill.4 It must be remembered that Fiesole is close to Florence; that youths were apprenticed in their tenderest years, and, above all, that Fra Giovanni, from the first, revealed his connection with the school of Masolino. His earliest works are, how- ever, to be found at Cortona, not in Florence or at Fiesole. But this only corroborates, does not contradict other facts known respecting the convent of S. Domenico of Fiesole.

That edifice was founded in 1406 by the Beato Gio- vanni di Domenico Bacchini, with the avowed intention of restoring the strictest observance of cloister life at a time when it had lost much of its rigidity.5 There, in

To father Marchese the thanks of scholars and lovers of art are due for the care with which he has gathered all facts referring to the lives of Dominican artists.

1 Marchese, ub. sup.

2 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 26.

3 Ibid. Vol. IV. p. 25. This opinion is shared by Marchese. Vol. I. p. 203. Lanzi, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 77, and Rosini. Vol. II. part II. p. 254. But Marchese admits that no miniatures of Fra Giovanni exist. Vol. I. p. 159.

4 According to Vasari also, the first works of Fra Giov. were in

the Certosa at Florence , where he painted in the choir an altar- piece of the Virgin and child be- tween S.S. Lawrence, Mary Mag- dalen, Zanobi and Benedict, with a predella containing scenes from the lives of those saints. This picture and two others in the transept; the coronation of the Virgin and a Madonna between two saints , are not known to exist. Vas. Vol. IV. p.p. 25. 26.

5 Richa, Chiese. ub. sup. Vol. VII. p. 118. Marchese. Vol. I. p. 206. The founders of the convent of Fiesole came from Cortona.

Chap. XXVII. THE DOMINICANS OF FIESOLE.

561

1407, a year after the foundation, the two sons of Peter of Vicchio presented themselves to the superior, Father Marco di Venezia, and were admitted into the order.1 But the convent was unfinished. It contained but four- teen monks and had as yet no novitiate, so that Fra Giovanni and Fra Benedetto were sent to Cortona under the care of the master of the novices, the Beato Lo- renzo di Ripafratta. 2 In 1408, the two clerks made profession, though it is not said where. If they pronoun- ced their vows at Cortona, they may have remained there for upwards of ten years.3 If they came to Fiesole they must have shared the vicissitudes of those who had their abode there. A schism broke out in 1409, and the brethren of S. Domenico of Fiesole became involved in a struggle with the archbishop of Florence. Rather than acknowledge Pope Alexander the Fifth4 who had been elected by the council of Pisa (1409), they abandoned their convent and fled to Foligno, where they found a refuge and received support from Colino de' Trinci, who owned the town, and from the Bishop Federico de' Franzi.5 Here they spent five years in lodgings and were at last driven out by the plague in 1414. 6 They retired then to Cor- tona, where the united communities resided till 1418. 7 It is obvious that during their novitiate neither Fra Giovanni nor Fra Benedetto had leisure to cultivate painting, and that, if they followed the wanderings of the Fesulan friars, they must have encountered serious difficulties in the pur- suit of art, difficulties of no common order for learners, if it be assumed that the two brothers were learners after

1 Ibid.

2 Ibid. p. 207.

3 Marchese thinks they came to Fiesole, but does not say whether before or after the vows (Vol. I. p. 207). He admits the possibility, however, that they may have re- mained at Cortona. (Note to Vol.1, p. 209.)

4 Fra Tommaso di Fermo , the general of the Dominicans had

VOL. I.

sworn obedience to Alexander the Vth, but the monks of Fiesole would not follow his example. Marchese, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 208.

5 Rich a, Chiese, &c.Vol. VII. p. 119. Marchese (Vol. I. p. 209) calls the bishop of Foligno Frezzi. He was a Dominican.

6 Marchese. Vol. I. p. 218.

7 II) id. p. 225.

5G2

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

their vows. It might, however, be natural to expect two things at Foligno, if Fra Giovanni had been there: first that his master or masters should have left some trace of his or their labours, next, that some works of Giovanni himself should exist there. In reply to the first question it may be said that miniaturists need not of necessity leave traces of their works. The sequel may show whe- ther it was possible for Giovanni to have been taught by miniaturists. As for the second question, it is speedily answered. Not a single work by Fra Giovanni either on panel or on the wall is to be found in Foligno or its neighbourhood. The influence of his school is evident in the neighbouring place of Montefalco, where Benozzo Gozzoli left a great example of his powers, and in the works of Fietro Antonio da Foligno better known as Mesastris, who left a name at the close of the fifteenth century by following Benozzo's manner.1 But all this is independent of Giovanni's early career; and it may be safer to assume that his first years of monastic life were spent at Cortona. 2 Here miniaturists may have existed, although, as before remarked, Fra Giovanni could have learnt but little from them; but, otherwise, no painters and no school capable of giving instruction. Every thing therefore tends to confirm the belief that Fra Giovanni was already an artist when he joined the Dominicans. His works at Cortona which are numerous, and were still more so, have the freshness of youth, insofar as can be judged from the masterpieces of one who [preserved freshness to the last; and but one fresco remains there which appears to have been executed at a late period. This is in a lunette outside the portal of the church of

1 S. Thomas receiving the girdle from the Virgin (not, as Marchese supposes, an annunciation), a pic- ture from S. Francesco of Monte- falco, now in the Museum of S. Giov. Laterano at Rome, was long assigned to Angelico, but is now admitted to be by Benozzo Gozzoli.

2 Yet Padre Marchese insists

(Vol. I. p. 212) that Fra Giovanni painted at Foligno. He can only mention as of that time an altar- piece in S. Domenico of Perugia, see postea and says, he cannot state that Angelico painted any thing for the convent at Foligno, or for others of Umbria. Vol. I. p. 217.

Chap. XXVII. VASARFS CHARACTER OF ANGELICO.

563

S. Domenico, where the painter represented the Virgin and child between S. Doniinick and S. Peter in adora- tion, with the four Evangelists in the vaulting.1 It ap- pears from a bull of Eugenius the Fourth, dated the 13Ul of February 1438, that the church of S. Domenico of Cor- tona was then in course of construction. Fra Giovanni therefore must have painted the lunette in question long after the return of the community to Fiesole. The only absence of the artist from that place, or from Florence, was made when he proceeded to Rome,2 and it may be assumed that this particular fresco which is rapidly exe- cuted and might have taken Giovanni a day, was painted as he journeyed to that capital. All other works at Cortona obviously bear the stamp of an earlier time.

In considering these and, indeed, all the works of the master, it is apparent that a fixed and immutable prin- ciple guided him from the first to the last years of his life. An unwonted religious ardor, an intensity of feel- ing hitherto unknown possessed him. His character has been sketched with such rare felicity in this respect by Vasari that the picture deserves repetition.

The life of this really angelic father was devoted to the service of God, the benefit of the world and duty towards his neighbour. Virtue so great and remarkable should not and could not descend on any one of a life less holy than that of Fra Giovanni; for those who labour at things ec- clesiastical and holy must needs be ecclesiastics and saints.

 He  was  of  simple  and  pious  manners;  and  it  is

an example of his goodness that, when Pope Nicolas the Fifth asked him to breakfast, he had scruples against tast- ing meat without the prior's permission, forgetting the au- thority of the pontiff in such matters. He shunned the worldly in all things and, during his pure and simple life, was such a friend to the poor that 1 think his soul umst now be in heaven. He painted incessantly; but never would lay his hand to any subject not saintly. He might have had wealth, but he scorned it, and used to say that

1 This fresco is almost rained Marchese, that from 1418 to 1430 by exposure. Fra Giovanni remained at Fie-

| sole, that in 143G he came to S.

2 It is satisfactorily shown, vide Marco at Florence.

36 *

564

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

true riches are to be found in contentment. He might have ruled over many, but would not, saying that obedience was easier and less liable to error. He might have enjoyed dignities amongst his brethren and beyond. He disdained them , affirming that he sought for none other than might be consistent with a successful avoidance of hell, and the attainment of Paradise. And, in truth, what dignity can compare with that which all religious, nay, all men in ge- neral, are bound to seek, and which consists in God and a virtuous life? Humane and sober, he lived chastely, avoid- ing the snares of the world, and he was wont to say that the pursuit of art required rest and a life of holy thoughts; that he who illustrates the acts of Christ should be with Christ. He was never known to indulge in anger with his brethren, a great and in my opinion all but unattainable quality; and he never admonished but with a smile. With incredible kindness he would tell those who sought his works that, if they settled with the prior, he should not fail. In fact, this father, whom no one can too much praise, was in all his dealings and arguments modest and humble, and in his works easy and pious. The saints whom he depicted had more of the air and semblance of saints than any produced by others. He never retouched or altered anything he had once finished, but left it as it had turned out, the will of God being that it should be so. Some go so far as to say, that Era Giovanni never w^ould have touched a brush, had he not first humbled himself in prayer. He never represented the crucified Saviour without having his cheeks bathed in tears; and hence one may judge from the features and attitudes of his figures the perfection of his grand and sincere belief in the Christian faith.1' 1

The art of Fra Giovanni or, as he may now be called, Angelico, was inspired and inborn, and he adapted to his religious feeling the means best suited to its expres- sion. But there is a material and practical part in the frame of every painter whether priest or layman; and this, in Angelico, was not derived essentially from the technic of a mere miniaturist. Exquisite care and

1 Vas. Vol. IV. p.p. 37-9. Mar- chese (Vol. I. p. 199) wonders where Vasari found all the facts he narrates respecting the Ange- lico and concludes that he had

them from Fra Eustachio a minia- ture painter of S. Marco at Flo- rence, who is known to have assisted the Aretine in the notices for his first edition.

Chap. XXVII.

ANGELICO'S STYLE.

565

finish were invariably lavished on his work, and this is a feature usual in miniaturists ; but it was one of the least talents which he possessed, and an accessory by the side of greater qualities. His language in art, being the best suited to the development of religious feeling, was beyond measure simple, and in this he verges on the defects of the miniaturist; but, though he neglected many of the mechanical advantages of his profession, his execu- tion was never out of harmony with the grandeur of his composition. In his peculiar path he was an extraordi- nary genius and great in one way as Masaccio was in another. Without denying that he pursued like most be- ginners of his time the study of miniature, one may affirm that he was not an exclusive follower of that art in his youth. Between him and Lorenzo Monaco there was that connection which might arise from a community of thought and of condition. Religious sentiment, and what modern critics call the mystic, was common to Lorenzo and to Traini, more marked in Angelico. Two monks like the Camaldole and the Dominican might work in common and exhibit the same bent of mind without necessarily standing in the relation of master and pupil to each other. Greater, indeed, and far more likely to exist was that relation between Angelico and Masolino. The latter, at Castiglione, displayed the same spirit as that of Angelico, not merely in composition, but in tenderness and a bird- like softness and slenderness of form ; not merely in light and liquid colour, but in technical methods of execution. In both one may trace the mode of painting on smooth surfaces with faint shadows and fluid tints. In both the architecture was light and pretty, but defective in per- spective and out of proportion with the figures. The draperies were cast in the same form, though improved to grandeur and breadth by Angelico. The same type and mould were given to the angels; and those of the Baptism of Castiglione rival in calm religious expression and features, in slenderness and graceful bend, in femi- nine softness, those of the Dominican. To sum up, there

566

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

was a common system of distribution, form, thought and expression, in Masolino and in Angelico, similar defects in similar methods; though in Angelico superior genius and talent were remarkable. The dates of their birth show that they were all but cotemporaries. If Maso- lino issued from the school which arose under Antonio Veniziano, Angelico did the same. If Masolino is the pupil of Stamina, Angelico may not only have learnt something from the former, but from the latter also.1 But Angelico did not confine himself to the study of a master; he observed and meditated the examples of the past. We may consider a man of his stamp, born to live the life of a virtuous monk, and making every thing subordinate to the religious fire which fed his soul, to have had a mind open not merely to impressions conveyed by precept, but to impressions arising from the study of great models produced in bygone times. As such the frescos of Orcagna in the Strozzi Chapel at Florence may be considered to have exercised an influence on his mind greater than those of Giotto himself.2 The works of Or- cagna are, indeed, of that soft, elegant and yet grave, style which might win approval from Angelico, and one may trace in the development of his genius the forms, types and character of the earlier Florentine. As the bee hovers over the flowers and carries the honey to his hive, so Angelico drew from Orcagna some of the sweets of his .pencil, those parts in fact which were suited to his

1 Baldinueci, indeed, affirms (Vol. V. p. 158) that Fra Giovanni's paint- ing in fresco clearly shows him to be a pupil of Gherardo Stamina. Baldinucci might have seen some frescos of the latter, which is not given to any one in the present century.

2 Padre Domenico da Corella prior of S. Maria Novella in 1183 wrote a poem in heroic verse, in which the following occur : "Angelicus pictor quam tinxerat

ante, Johannes

Nomine, non Jotto, non Cimabove minor."

So Fra Giovanni was already the Angelico 30 years after his death. Vide note A in March e se. Vol. I. p. 199. Giovanni Santi calls him:

"Giovan da Fiesole frate al bene ardente." See his chronicle in rhyme in Passavant's Ra- phael. Leipzig 1839. Vol. I. p. 472, or Pungilconi's Elogio Sto- rico. Urbino 1822.

Chap. XXVII.

ANGELICO'S STYLE.

567

artistic nutriment. He used Orcagna's types after purifying and idealizing them. In truth, the slender and graceful proportion of the Strozzi figures, their decorous attitudes, their noble draperies, find their counterpart in Angelico, who expends on them an additional amount of exquisite taste, though he hardly rivals their grandeur or severity. Precision in the definition of form, design, is in both artists. Orcagna's clear and luminous colour is in the works of Angelico, but a little flatter and less relieved by light and shade. Orcagna was more vigorously Giot- tesque, Angelico more sentimental, but nearer to an exquisite celestial ideal; and in this dreamy paradise, to which his art was subordinate, he revelled and was great. Not that he was without faults, but his feeling and in- spiration supplied the absence of other things, and made that absence difficult to realize, except by diligent search. One might, indeed, almost suppose that his very defects were necessary to produce enjoyment of the qualities, so well do the means appear suited to the peculiar end in view. Fra Giovanni's education is therefore clear. Ma- solino gave him the artistical and practical, Orcagna's works acted on the peculiar bent of his mind; and, in his own genius, he found the inspiration which helped him to the result by the simplest and straightest path.

In technical modes of proceeding, Angelico may be said to close the Giottesque period more properly than Masaccio. The reason is to be found in the education of the two great men. The education of Angelico was such that he remained equal during the whole of his career. In one point alone he altered, and that is in the subor- dinate part of architectural distances. At Rome, where Angelico displayed all his powers, as Masaccio exhibited them at the Carmine, as Raphael at the Vatican, and Michel Angelo in the Sixtine chapel, the architecture is better than elsewhere. Fra Giovanni did not despise this branch of artistic delineation as the Giottesques did. In a fresco at the Vatican, in which S. Peter gives the com- munion to S. Stephen, he produced a distance of buildings

568

Chap. XXVII.

proportioned to the size of the figures in the foreground. It is probable that Masaccio's example was of influence in this change. In other respects this would be less true. Masaccio was more an artist than Angelico, his forms were more sculptural, his colour more powerful, his idea of relief complete. His figures have that grandeur which the Italians call " terrible His draperies are massive. His is a character related to that of Donatello and Michael Angelo. His representation is true, his perspective bold, his atmosphere almost perfect; but muscular form over- weighs the idea of dignity and religious decorum. Ange- lico is the reverse of all this, all 'softness of character and resignation. He has the religious calm and confi- dence which failed in Masaccio. In him, grace and ele- gance supply the place of force and muscular anatomy. But he is not the less admirable, because a supreme har- mony and repose rest over his work. Yet Angelico does not want any of the great maxims of art. The harmony of his lines in composition is equal to that of the greatest composers, equal to that of Giotto, superior to that of Masaccio. No one, indeed, after Giotto and Orcagna, was equal in this to Fra Giovanni. Ghirlandaio was more perfect in this branch than any other of his time. Fra Bartolommeo studied and developed it, and it was carried to perfection by Raphael and Michael Angelo, always, however in harmony with the character and sentiment of those masters, the chiefs of the great school before whom all are ready to bow.

Harmony of composition in Angelico is coexistent with harmony of colour, although light and shade are not strongly defined; and in this, he is inferior to Giotto and Masaccio only because they united to harmony of colour vigour of chiaroscuro. If in Giotto or Masaccio, colour or massive drapery gave character, dignity, and force to their work, the same occurred to Angelico. Every part contributed to that unity of tenderness, inspiration, reli- gious feeling, which mark his pictures and which are such as no one man had ever succeeded in accomplishing. A

Chap. XXVII. S. DOMENICO OF CORTONA.

569

sublime idea, and the means by which it was made ma- nifest, were the gift of the friar of Fiesole.

Here again one may recapitulate, Giotto is the head, Orcagna the bond between Giotto, Angelico and Masaccio. Giotto embraced all art, being an universal genius ca- pable of raising it to a common height in all its parts; Orcagna tempered the severity of Giotto with the soft- ness and elegance which opened the road to Angelico. Angelico and Masaccio together had the qualities which, combined, formed the sum of those of Giotto. Masaccio perfected the language of art. Angelico took up its reli- gious side. Masaccio treated the art in general, perfect- ing that of Giotto, modernizing it, and holding out his hand to Raphael and Michael Angelo, but losing some- thing of the sentiment and decorous grandeur of the early Florentine. Angelico seized the religious side of Giotto's character without his severity. In the Saviour whom Angelico depicted we find the finest and most suitable exposition of the ideal of one who, bleeding for the sins of the world, pardons and prays for his enemies. An in- tense depth of feeling animates the face if not the frame of the God-Man.

The frescos of the convent of S. Domenico at Cortona which were probably the first executed by Fra Giovanni, perished when the convent was destroyed;1 but, besides the lunette above the portal of the church of S. Dome- nico already described, a Virgin and child between angels and Saints decorated the high altar of that edifice, and is still preserved there, whilst an altarpiece representing the annunciation resting on a pediment adorned with scenes from the Virgin's life, once the ornament of some chapel, has been since transferred into the Chiesa del Gesu also at Cortona. At the same time the pedi- ment of the altarpiece still in S. Domenico, with scenes from the life of S. Dominick, has also been taken

Marchese, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 219. It was destroyed by the

French.

570

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

to the Chiesa del Gesu. 1 Both the altarpieces of Cor- tona, fresh as they are, and combining within them all the talents of Angelico, may of themselves convince the observer that the painter had been taught in the Floren- tine school, from whence he had already received most of the impressions which affected his general style. In the altarpiece of S. Domenico, the Virgin, enthroned be- tween SS. John the Baptist2 and John the Evangelist (right), SS. Mary Magdalen and Mark (left), holds the infant Saviour standing on her knee. The four guardian angels stand in pairs behind, grasping their tri- bute of flowers. The pinnacles are adorned with a cru- cified Saviour and the figures of the grieving Virgin and S. John, whilst in medallions at the base of the central one, the angel and Virgin annunciate are depicted. In the pediment of this altarpiece,3 which combines all the freshness of feeling and religious sentiment peculiar to the master, the scenes from S. Dominick's life are finely given, and still preserve their original beauty. With all the power which he could gather, Angelico repeated in suc- cession many of the scenes which Traini had already depicted in the altarpiece of Pisa, and Fra Guglielmo had carved on the designs of Mccolo Pisano in the ark of Bologna.4 The Annunciation, a familiar theme of Ange- lico's is one of those panels which charm the eye by the birdlike simplicity and grace of the figures, the fresh- ness of the types, and the playful innocence of the action and attitudes. The Virgin in a portico sitting on a chair, has dropped the book on her knee and acknowledges the

1 The predella of the annun- ciation contains one compartment illustrating- a scene from the life of S. Dominick. This piece may have been originally in some other predella.

2 This, as usual in Angelico, is the finest of all his types.

3 Now in the Chiesa del Gesu.

4 The death of Peter Martyr, the vision of Innocent the IIId

and the crumbling- Lateran saved from falling by S. Dominick , the meeting of S.S. Dominick and Francis, the vision of Peter and Paul, the Archangel Michael, the dispute with the Albigenses , and miracle of the books, the resur- rection of the youth Napoleon, the martyrdom of some unknown saint (possibly belonging to another predella), the brethren fed by angels, and S. Thomas Aquinas.

Chap. XXVII.

ANNUNCIATIONS.

571

presence of the angel and of the dove which hovers over her, by gracefully bending forward on her seat and cross- ing her hands on her bosom. Her action is not essen- tially different from that of the annunciate Virgins painted later for S. Marco1 and S. Maria Novella2 at Florence; but her face and form are more youthful and original. In that of S. Maria Novella religious sentiment is more felt, whilst in that of S. Marco, where the hair falls back on the shoulders, a heavenly inspiration beams over the face, and the simplicity of candour is conveyed. Gabriel runs into the portico eager and graceful, pointing 'with a finger of the right hand towards the Virgin,3 and with the left, which is extended in the same direction, indicates heaven. This simple action, which is that of a candid angelic nature, admirably tells the tale of the message from heaven addressed to the child of earth. One might almost fancy that the monk still heard ringing in his ears those beautiful lines of Dante:

"L' Angel, eke venne in terra col decreto

Delia molt' anni lagrimata pace,

Cli' aperse '1 ciel dal suo lungo divieto,

Dinanzi a noi pareva si verace,

Quivi intagliato in un atto soave,

Che non sembrava immagine che tace.

And the spectator might add with the poet: "Giurato si saria ch' el dicesse Ave."4

The perfect type of an angel, the fittest form and con- tour, an unity of thought and conception in the figure, the attitude, the action, and expression, illustrate the genius of Angelico. In the distance "and because the Incarnation is essentially bound to the story of our pro- genitors 5 the angel expels Adam and Eve from Paradise, which is a garden of palms in a flowery meadow. In the two annunciations of S. Maria Novella and S. 'Marco,

1 Fresco.

2 Table.

3 The wings of the angel have a profusion of gold in them.

4 Purgatorio Canto X. v. 35 to 40.

5 Marches e, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 22:5.

572

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

the angels are quite as beautiful 5 but in the latter, Gabriel bends respectfully before the Virgin and holds his arms reverently crossed on his breast as he advances, whilst, in the former, he pauses ere he alights, and is still supported in the most ideal attitude by his wings as a tenant of paradise. This is perhaps the most noble ever produced by Fra Giovanni.

The pediment of the annunciation at S. Maria del Gesu of Cortona, with its scenes from the life of the Virgin, is well preserved and fresh beyond measure; but it would be waste of space to examine the numerous subjects separately; and it may be sufficient to say that their charms are of a high order and that they are most ex- quisite examples of the master.

Of the same period and equally fine is the Madonna and Saints of S. Domenico at Perugia.1 The four figu- res of S.S. John the Baptist, Catherine, Dominick and Nicholas are admirable, and the first as usual of sur- passing beauty. Time has been most destructive, how- ever, in dealing with the altarpiece, of which the Ma- donna formed the centre, and the saints the sides. A number of figures forming the courses of the pilas- ters are still at Perugia, and are all more or less da- maged. 2

1 Executed for the chapel of S. Niccolo of the Guidalotti, now in Cappella S. Orsola. It repre- sents the Virgin enthroned hold- ing the naked infant Saviour erect, between S. John the Baptist and S. Catherine (right), S.S. Domi- nick and Nicholas (left). Two angels with flowers stand at the Virgin's side , and three vases of roses stand at the foot of the throne. Part of the Virgin's head and neck and her blue mantle are damaged and repainted, as well as part along the left side of the throne. The dress "of S. Dominick and S. Catherine" are likewise damaged.

2 S.S. Peter Martyr (damaged),

Buonaventura , Mary Magdalen, Thomas Aquinas, Romoaldo (co- lour in part fallen off), Gregory (fine and well preserved), Law- rence (almost colourless), Cathe- rine , are entire figures. The rest are seen to the knee only, and are : S.S. John Evangelist, Stephen, Peter (almost colourless). Two central medallions with the angel and Virgin annuntiate were no doubt once at the angles of the base of the central triangular pinnacle. With the exception of the dress of the Virgin from which the tone has fallen, these figures are in fair condition. Of the pe- diment two parts containing the birth, the sermon, and a miracle

Chap. XXVII. RETURN TO FIESOLE.

573

So far Angelico's labours at Cortona may by traced, and no further; for, though it is clear that a man of his power and gifted with a talent for rapid execution must have done much more than now remains in a city which was apparently his residence during many of his earlier years, records of his stay or journals of his avo- cations have not been discovered. His departure from Cortona was determined by the successful negotiations of the Dominicans for the resumption of their old residence at Fiesole;1 and it is believed that Fra Giovanni was among those who joined the community shortly after its re- establishment near Florence in 1418- 2 "There, as a brother of his order poetically relates, he gathered in abundance the flowers of art which he seemed to have plucked from Paradise, reserving for the pleasant hill of Fiesole the gayest and best scented that ever issued from his hands. There, in a period of corruption, of pagan doctrine, of infamous policy, of schisms and of heresies, he shut him- self up within a world of his own, which he peopled with heroes and saints, with whom he conversed, prayed, and wept by turns."3 Eighteen years were spent by him at Fiesole, yet of these eighteen years how little is known and how little can be told! But there perhaps, in the vicinity of Florence, he might renew acquaintance with the masterpieces of Florentine art, greet Masolino and hail the rising greatness of Masaccio. That he followed the example of all the best Italian painters of that and future times, and that he studied the frescos of the Brancacci is affirmed by Vasari, and may be easily believed.4 Of his works at this period one at least is known with certainty. After painting in 1432 an annun-

of S. Nicholas are in the Vatican at Rome (second room, No. 17). One remaining part containing- the rescue of the three youths , and the funeral of S. Nicholas is still above the door of the sacristy at S. Domenico in Perugia. 1 The bishop of Fiesole claimed |

and got 100 ducats for the grant of the convent to the Dominicans in 1418. Marchese. Vol. I. p. 224.

2 Marchese, ub. sup. Vol.1, p. 226.

3 Ibid. Vol. I. p.p. 22G. 227.

4 Vas. Vol. III. p. 162.

574

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

ciation for S. Alessandro of Brescia, 1 he executed for the corporation of the Linaiuoli in 1433 a tabernacle repre- senting the life-size Virgin, enthroned, holding the infant, with twelve angels in the cornice, which are of surpassing beauty,2 displaying, with the perfection of the master, that analogy with those of Orcagna which might alone justify some of the remarks already made in foregoing pages as to the study of the works of that great Florentine.3 The original record of the commission from the Linaiuoli has been preserved and is one of the authorities, besides the assertion of Vasari, which proves that Fra Giovanni was called Guido before he entered the Dominican order.4 The altarpiece is now in the gallery of the Uffizi.5

It is generally supposed also that he sent from Fiesole the thirty five panels which ornamented the plate cup- boards of the S.S. Annunziata at Florence0 now in the Academy of Fine Arts.7 These had been commissioned of Angelico by Piero di Cosimo de' Medici, and repre- sented scenes from the life of the Saviour closing with the Last Judgment. Many of them are worthy of special attention, particularly the flight into Egypt which is a simple Giottesque composition, and a burial of the Saviour in the spirit of Giotto but weaker. A resurrection of Lazarus however is feebler, though still Giottesqe; and three panels of the first series (under No. 11): the Last Supper, the Baptism, and the Transfiguration are not by the master. The poorest of all those by Angelico is the

1 See postea.

2 A note of the expenses for the woodwork &c. of this altar- piece dated Oct. 29 1432, was published by Gualandi in Me- morie Italiane risguardanti le belle Arti. Bologna 1843. Ser. IV. No. 139. p. 109. Vide also Marchese. Vol. I. p. 235.

3 Those with the cymbals on the right hand curve particularly illustrate the remarks in the text. On the wings, Angelico represented S.S. John the Baptist and Mark, and on their obverse S.S. Peter

and Mark. The predella is de- corated with an adoration of the kings , the sermon of S. Peter in presence of S. Mark, and the martyrdom of the latter; and these are three of the finest and most exquisite works which Angelico ever produced.

4 The other is a record in the opera of Orvieto.

5 No. 19 is the central part and wings. No. 16 the predella.

6 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 31.

7 Under No. 11—24. Acad. Cat.

Vol. I, p. .074.

Chap. XXVII. ALTARPIECE OF S. MARCO.

575

Massacre of the Innocents. Frescos and altarpieces were also produced not only in S. Domenico, but in other churches of Fiesole. As these, however, have been in part much damaged, and there is no certainty as to the period of their execution, more interest attaches to the works which were finished at S. Marco of Florence whither the reader shall accordingly be asked to follow.1

Cosmo de7 Medici had returned from exile to Florence. Through his influence, Martin the Fifth had been induced to grant a petition in which the Florentines prayed that the Dominicans should be made possessors of a convent hitherto belonging to the friars of S. Sylvester*,2 and in 1436, Pope Eugenius the Fourth, being at Florence, pre- sided the festival of installation in the monastery of S. Marco.3 Cosmo caused the edifice to be rebuilt by Michelozzo Michelozzi,4 a library to be constructed and the church to be renewed. The works of the convent were partly finished in 1437, the choir in 1439, and the whole of the church in 1441. It was consecrated in 1442,5 and in 1443, the convent was finished.6 Whilst the architects and masons were busy, Angelico (1438) under- took to paint the altarpiece intended for the choir7 repre- senting in the central table the Virgin enthroned with the infant Saviour and adored by the kneeling figures of S.S. Cosmo and Damian. At her sides were (left) S.S. Dominick, Francis and Peter (right), S.S. Mark, John Evangelist and Stephen. The introduction of S.S. Cosmo and Damian was intended as a graceful

1 When Angelico came to Flo- rence in 1436, Masaccio was dead. Brunelleschi was raising the cu- pola of S. Maria del Fiore , Ghi- berti was still at work at the gates, and Donatello flourished as a sculptor.

2 S. Mark was occupied by the Silvestrines as early as 1299. See Rich a. Vol. VII. p. 111. The petition and its causes are com- mented by Richa, ub. sup. Vol. VII. p.p. 116. 117.

3 Annal. conv. S. Marci de Flor. MSS. Fol. 1—2, in Mar- ch ese. Vol. I. p. 244. Richa. Vol. VII. p. 117.

4 Richa. Vol. VII. p. 122. Vas. Vol. III. p.p. 277—8,

5 Richa, ub. sup. Vol. VII. p. 123.

c Cron. of S.Marco in Mar- ches e, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 245. Vasari says 1452. Vol. III. p. 279.

7 Annals in Mar dies e, ub. sup. Vol. I. p. 247.

576

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

tribute of flattery to the family of the Medici who had been profuse in their gifts to the order; and the pediment of the altarpiece was devoted to the lives of those martyrs. But altarpiece and pediment have long been parted. 1 The former , rubbed down and deprived of colour, is in the Academy of Arts and serves at best to illustrate the method pursued by Angelico, whose original preparation is everywhere visible. The pediment was dislocated and scattered, so that it would be difficult to restore its original form. Not indeed but that the pieces might be found, but the subject was repeated so frequently in pre- dellas by Angelico, that there are many duplicates of the same subject. 2

1 Already in Richa's time , the altarpiece had been taken from the high altar and hung in the passage to the sacristy. Vide Rich a. Vol. VII. p. 143.

2 For instance two scenes from the life of S.S. Cosmo and Da- mian, once belonging to the altar- piece of S. Marco form part of a predella in the S.S. Annunziata at Florence , the centre of which is a birth of the Saviour already noticed as by Lorenzo Monaco. In [the Academy of Arts at Flo- rence, the Nos. 8 and 16 are parts of a pediment, in the first of which S.S. Cosmo and Damian cut off the leg of a sick man and sub- stitute for it that of a healthy negro, whilst in the second the martyrdom of the two saints and their three brothers is presented. Signor Valentini at Rome lately owned a portion of a pediment somewhat damaged by retouching in which this martyrdom is again represented, and the testimony of professor Benvenuti goes to show that this panel bnce had a place in the church of S. Marco at Flo- rence, that from thence it had passed to the Academy of Arts and been exchanged for a design by another master. Thence it fell into the hands of Signor Nic- cola Tacchinardi and from his

into those of Signor Valentini. The same martyrdom, again, in the same shape was to be found in the gallery Ugo Baldi at Flo- rence. In the gallery of Munich three predella scenes represent 1st (No. 612 Cabinets) S.S. Cosmo and Damian, and the three brothers bound and thrown from a rock but saved by angels; whilst in the foreground Lysias is saved by two messengers from heaven by the intercession of the saints. 2d (No. 613 Cabinets) S.S. Cosmo and Damian crucified and the three brothers about to be stoned. 3d (No. 616 Cabinets) S.S. Cosmo and Damian with their three bro- thers before the judge Lysias. Professor Luigi Scotti testifies that these three panels by Ange- lico were in S. Marco of Florence, and that he restored them in 1817. It is difficult, indeed, to choose amidst them all which belonged to the pediment of the great altar- piece 'of S. Marco. Father Mar- chese says (Vol. I. p.p. 248 — 50): that a part of it was placed on the altar of S. Luca of the cap- pella de' Pittori in the cloisters of the S.S. Annunziata: this, as may be remembered, still exists; that Nos. 8 and 16 of the Aca- demy of Arts are of the series. He adds that in S. Marco before

Chap. XXVII. S. MARCO OF FLORENCE.

577

After the completion of the altarpiece and probably before the convent had been finished, Fra Giovanni began to adorn its walls with frescos.

So much has been written respecting these works, and their character has been so frequently described, that nothing more can be required than some general re- marks, for the purpose of pointing out the principal features in the paintings of the firs? cloister usually called "primo di S. Antonino."

The crucifixion which covers the principal wall has already been noticed more than once in these pages, especially in the attempt to draw a parallel between the ideal of the Redeemer as conceived by Giotto, and that imagined by Angelico. The figure of the Saviour repre- sented in this first cloister of S. Marco is that in which Fra Giovanni most perfectly gave expression to the re- signation and sacrifice of Christ. The soft character of the features, the slight bend of the head convey without alloy the sense of pleasure which might be felt by one who, taking upon himself the human shape , should in the midst of acute suffering, display placid contentment at being permitted to die for the sins of the world. The attitude, the position of the God-man on the cross is more nobly erect and more simple than that of Giotto, — the ideal of human form in that condition. Less lifeless and less abandoned to its own weight, it may be less powerful than that of Giotto, but it expresses certainly a

the abolition of the convents of Florence there were seven small panels in the Farmacia adorned with scenes from the lives of S.S. Cosmo, Damian, and their brethren, and one representing- the Depo- sition of Christ. The annals of the convent only notice one altar- piece by him , but the pictures of Munich and a fourth there also, representing- the Deposition (No. G15 Cabinets) are doubtless those which were formerly in the Far- macia. (A 5th picture, falsely as- signed to Angelico, at Munich No.

VOL. I.

611 Cabinets, represents Christ in a glory of angels.) In addition to all these pictures, the Academy of Arts possesses an entire pediment (No. 19. Acad. Cat.), representing six scenes from the lives of S.S. Cosmo and Damian undoubtedly by Angelico, and once in the chapel of S. Luke of the convent of the S.S. Annunziata. Two small panels with scenes of these saints' life are in the collection of Count Portales in Paris. No. 1 and 3, the latter much damaged.

578

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

sublime sacrifice. The correspondence of the parts with each other, the development of the nude, are more grace- ful than in Giotto. It may be difficult to analyze the two creations, but the characteristic difference is, that force and energy were peculiarly marked in the one, and soft religious resignation in the other; that Giotto had more nature, Angelico more idealized form; the language of the first being in harmony with the power of his genius, that of the second in accord with the soft resignation and kindliness of his nature. Artistically the proportions are equally good in both. Giotto created his type in the full consciousness of feelings excited to an extraordinary degree by the revival of religion and art. Angelico took the type of Giotto and gave it an intense religious sentiment and a more perfect form as matter. Giotto first, Angelico last, gave to the crucified Saviour his proper forms; and the friar found the truest ideal of a figure whose significance had been developed by the founder of Italian art. These two painters are thus the poles which support the edifice of Christian delineation. If analyzed in reference to mere nude, a part such as the thorax, or an articulation, will be found to have been rendered by Angelico in its true form, with muscles, flesh, and bones in their proper places. The figure will be pronounced human, fleshy, true, but noble. Without in- tense search after details the hands and feet are exqui- sitely indicated and rendered. The draperies on the hips are perfect, and possess the same principle of choiceness as the rest.

At the foot of this noble effigy, S. Dominick grasps the cross and, kneeling, looks up with the most truthful and deepest expression of grief to the Saviour. It is a creation whose outlines, geometrical figure, proportion, and action, are so good and so well adapted together as to form in unity a perfect representation. Harmonizing as it does with the figure of the Saviour, its beauties almost baffle description, but the truth, feeling, and passion, which are so simply expressed, reveal a moment of deep in-

Chap. XXVII. S. MARCO OF FLORENCE.

579

spiration in Angelico. His execution rises to the height of his inspiration and combines the faculties of Giotto and Orcagna. The clear, bright, and warm colour is fused and relieved, so that the whole appears a vision of the reality. Who, after contemplating this, can still pretend that Angelico was a miniaturist?

Silence has ever been enforced in the solitude of the cloister, and the friar is allowed but one companion, with whom he paces the galleries of his elected home. In the lunette of the door leading to the Sacristy of S. Marco, S. Peter Martyr stands, and with a threatening glance im- poses silence with his forefinger on his mouth. The knife imbedded in his right shoulder conveys the story of his martyrdom. It is difficult to say whether Angelico did not express the obligation of silence more by the glance than by the gesture. His aim, which was evidently force of expression, could not have been better attained 5 and he quietly succeeds where perhaps Masaccio would have studied to convey the idea by muscular action. Different methods might have produced the same result; but Ange- lico had his path and kept within it.

In the lunette of another door, S. Dominick with' a book, wields the discipline of the order, the physical reality of the nine tailed whip representing the moral as well as the real truth, and inculcating a stern necessity in a religious community. The reward is expressed in a third lunette, where the Saviour issues from the sepulchre. On a fourth, a half figure of S. Thomas Aquinas illus- trated some other phase of monkish life, but the painting is much damaged.

Above the entrance to the "foresteria" or hospital for wayfarers, two Dominicans welcome the Saviour's arrival in the skin dress of a pilgrim, holding a staff, and his hat hanging over his shoulders. One of them touches the Redeemer's hand, and grasps his right arm as he greets his coming.1 No scene more true, more noble or more

1 Fra Bartolommeo almost re- ! in the refectory of this very con- peated this subject in a lunette | vent of S. Marco, and it is

37*

580

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

exquisitely rendered than this, can be imagined. The brethren truly rejoice to meet the pilgrim, and their looks breathe hospitality; whilst the soft features and glance of the Saviour and his engaging movement display the truest sense of gratitude. Handsome, youthful, noble, with a slight beard on the chin, and long locks flowing over the shoulders, this is the perfection of a type created by Giotto, the exact semblance of one without human dross, and all divine.

The frescos of the first cloister of S. Marco thus exhibit Angelico, not as a mere painter of Madonnas or of the joys of Paradise, but as one who could delineate passion in various forms and degrees; who could reveal in each action its peculiar motive, and who fitly presents his meaning with repose, propriety, grace and truth.

In the chapter house of the convent, Fra Giovanni repeated the crucifixion, but with its attendant incidents, the thieves, and a crowd of twenty life size figures. 1 The Saviour, a repetition of that in the first cloister, the repentant thief, are fine, but in the unrepentant sinner, we come upon a form of delineation evidently repulsive to the nature of the kindly and religious friar. Not that the outlines, proportion, or character are absent, but the material development of the inner forms is as much want- ing as in the painters of the fourteenth century. Here it is that he peculiarly accuses a divergence of feeling from that of Masaccio. He had to depict a convulsive movement, one requiring that species of skill which Ma- saccio possessed. He shows himself unequal to the task, and proves, that when he issues from his peaceful paradise of thought, he has left his home and lost his way. Otherwise the incidents of this great crucifixion are full of the usual beauties and excellence, much individuality and movement, much gentleness in the figures and faces. The Virgin in a swoon, attended by the Marys, is good

one of the finest works of the I by restorers for the original blue, master. spoils the general effect.

1 A red background, substituted |

Chap. XXVII.

S. MARCO OF FLORENCE.

581

though somewhat arranged, and S. John the Baptist, as before, is a splendid creation.1 In the painted frame are numerous lozenges and medallions with busts of saints, sybils and Dominican friars.2

Of all the frescos in the upper rooms of the convent that most worthy of immediate attention is the Annun- ciation in the dormitory, to which reference has already been made. The figures are less than life size.3 The Virgin's figure is slender, gentle, and graceful; but the face has not the freshness or youth of that of Cortona, or the angelic candour of that of S. Maria Novella. The proportions of the head, the chin, are small ; and the critic may note the germ of those defects which Benozzo Gozzoli inherited and matured. In colour, great lightness, warmth and harmony are however attained. On the opposite wall to this, the Saviour again appears crucified, with S. Dominick at the foot of the cross as in the first cloister; and in the passage, the Virgin may be seen enthroned between four saints.

A magnificent Coronation of the Virgin decorates the wall of one of the cells. It is a vision on the clouds of the Virgin and Saviour, with a perfectly ideal repre- sentation of the latter sending as it were with both hands the crown destined for his mother, who bends forward with her arms crossed and looks supremely happy. Noth- ing can be finer than this group, — than the type of the Saviour, which is one of the most suitable to the idea of the divinity that Angelico ever produced, simpler in lines, more religiously soft in expression than those of Giotto, yet regular in proportion and perfect in shape. Harmony and unity are not merely in the features, but in the attitude, and in the elegant sweep of the draperies; and here again Angelico transformed the Giottesque creation so as to suit his own intense religious feeling. If we revert to an antique type of the Christian time, that of Ravenna, whose form and proportion, though

1 The dress of the Magdalen I 2 These names are all inscribed, seen from behind is repainted. 3 About three quarters.

582

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXVII.

noble, reveal the pagan source from which they were derived, we find a creation more suitable to the develop- ment of Christian feeling than those of immediately suc- ceeding times. Giotto was the first to grasp anew this antique simplicity, which he transformed, whilst he restored it. Angelico completed the type by modelling it into that of the Redeemer who, in a sublime and pathetic manner, expresses the resignation of sacrifice: he did this not so much because he perfected form, but because he infused into it a more religious pathos; and here, in the repre- sentation of the Saviour crowning the Virgin, is the last phase of the comparison between the Redeemer of Ravenna and that of Giotto. For it must ever be borne in mind that Angelico was, as regards art, less of the fifteenth than of the fourteenth century, that he disdained, or purposely neglected, all the developments of the time in which the study of form and classicism was in full swing. A proof of his contempt for means is distinctly to be found in this one example of the Coronation. On a wall smooth as vellum he drew in the subject, pro- ducing by the simplest lines such perfection as cannot fail to astonish every beholder. He laid in the shadows easily with a light grey tone, allowing the white ground to pierce through and give transparency; and so the picture was finished, with what a contrast of simplicity as compared with the dash of the fifteenth century. S. S. Paul, Thomas Aquinas, Benedict, Dominick, Francis, Peter Martvr, in threes at each side beneath the Redeemer and Virgin, form a garland of a devotional character, each looking up and stretching his arms towards the joys of Paradise.

Magnificent, likewise in the cells of S. Marco, is the adoration of the Magi, and here, it is believed, was the room which Cosmo de> Medici ordered to be built for his own* use and in which he enjoyed the converse of the superior Antonio and of Angelico.1 Here Pope Eugenius

1 36000 ducats were spent by I He little dreamt what Savonarola Cosmo on the convent of S. Marco. | was to move against his familyfrom

Chap. XXVII.

FRESCOS AT FIESOLE.

583

the Fourth slept when, in 1442, he visited Florence for the purpose of consecrating the church of S. Marco, and Fra Giovanni produced a fresco Giottesque in composition and harmony of lines, and equal to anything that he had ever done for tenderness and freshness of types, grace of form, and softness of colours.

Again, the Marys at the sepulchre in the cells strike the spectator as a splendid effort; whilst the rest hardly yield to the foregoing, being all more or less beautifully executed, but something less than usual marked by his depth of religious feeling. In the number, however, no doubt his pupils and helpers had a share.

In comparison with these, the few wall frescos in S. Do- menico of Fiesole appear to a certain disadvantage. In the ex-refectory, Angelico painted the Saviour on the cross, the Virgin and S. John at the sides, and S. Do- minick grasping the instrument of death,1 but the latter has been completely repainted , 2 and the rest is much da- maged, the best preserved parts being the figures of the Saviour and of the Virgin and the head of S. John.

In the chapterhouse, the Virgin and child between four saints is a fresco impaired by repainting.

Lorenzo di Credi, in 1501, damaged by repairing one of the altarpieces which Angelico executed for the church of Fiesole.3 It represented the Virgin and child between S. S. Peter, Thomas Aquinas, Dominick and Peter Martyr. Originally built with a triangular pinnacle it was moder- nized into a square, and the old figures of the pilasters were replaced by modern ones : the predella, which is one of the best of the master, and which appeared so ad- mirable to Vasari that he declared he could never tire to look at it,4 represents a celestial glory, the resurrection

this same place. See Rich a. Vol. VII, and Marchese. Vol.1, p. 245.

1 See the original record in Marchese. Vol.1, note top. 232.

2 Francesco Mariani who res-

tored here in 1556. See Mar- chese. Vol. I. p. 233.

3 See the record to that effect in Chron. con v. S. D. di Fesu- lis, in Marchejse. Vol. I. note to p. 229.

Vas. Vol. IV. p. 29.

584

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

of the Saviour with the Virgin on one side, and Paradise on the other, and is one of the best purchases of the National Gallery.1

The best altarpiece in the church of Fiesole, however, was in Vasari's eyes that of the Coronation of the Virgin, of which he says that Fra Giovanni surpassed himself in its execution.2 Considerable damage has been done to this picture which is now in the Louvre, but the paradise is truly beautiful; and the delicacy and gentleness of the faces is undeniable. The magnificent predella contains the same subjects as that of the pediment from S. Domenico in S. Maria del Gesu at Cortona, with the addition of one representing the resurrection of the Saviour. The panels have all more or less suffered abrasion,3 but the altar- piece as a whole is a good one of the master, and one whose subject was suited to his genius.4

The church of S. Trinita at Florence obtained from the master one of his finest works, the Deposition from the cross now in the Academy of arts at Florence.5 Nothing can be better than the nude in its fleshy flexibile forms, which show the scars of the previous flagellation, nothing truer than the movement. The group to the right is remarkable, the heads revealing a point of contact between Angelico and the works of Masolino at Castiglione, as regards character and drawing; and the landscape be- traying the usual defects of perspective. Yet composition,

1 Two small pictures of S.S. Mark and Mathew, originally in the pilasters of this altarpiece are now in the hands of Mr. Reiset of Paris. A second picture in our National collection by Ange- lico, the wise men's offering (No. 582. Nat. Gal. Cat.), originally in the Rosini gallery at Pisa, and purchased from that of Messer Ugo Baldi at Florence , may be noticed here. The Virgin sits with the infant on her knee in a rocky landscape, and displays the cha- racter of the master; but has not

the exquisite finish of other pro- ductions executed in his prime.

2 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 30.

3 No. 214. The restoring of this panel has been well carried out, the damaged part alone having been taken up.

4 The Virgin enthroned in S. Girolamo of Fiesole, although composed in his manner is not executed by Angelico.

5 No. 34 of Cat. Vide Vasari. Vol. IV. p. 32. The altarpiece was in Richa's time in the sacristy. C h i e s e , &c. ub. sup . Vol. III. p . 157.

Vol. I. p. 581.

CORONATION OF THE VIRGIN, AMD MIRACLES OF ST. DOM EN EC A picture by Angelico da Fiesole. now in the Louvre.

Chap. XXVII. ALTARPIECES. 585

design, and colour, combine to create the harmony which was the great gift of Fra Giovanni.1

The convent del Bosco a Frati di Mugello also had a madonna by Angelico, which has found its way into the Academy of Arts.2 The Virgin and child, with the two angels at her sides, is enthroned between saints.3

For the Annalena monastery at Florence Angelico also executed an altarpiece replete with his usual qualities and feeling. The Virgin again appears enthroned with the infant between saints.4 Another which has unfor- tunately disappeared from Fiesole since the time of Vasari, is the annunciation with a predella containing five scenes from the life of the Virgin, sold in 1611 to the Duke Mario Farnese for 1500 ducats.5 Angelico painted a fresco in the lunette of the portal of S. Domenico of Florence which has also disappeared,6 and an annunciation for S. Francesco fuor della Porta a S. Miniato, which has likewise been lost.7

Not very remarkable for superior beauty are the remaining panels at the Academy of arts of Florence.8

1 Cleaning- has cooled the tones and done some damage. The pin- nacles have already been men- tioned as by Lorenzo Monaco.

2 No. 19 of Cat.

3 S.S. Francis, Peter Martyr, Anthony, Cosmo, Damian, and Louis. Pediment : Pieta, S.S. Peter, Paul, Bernardino and 3 others.

4 S.S. Peter Martyr, Francis, Cosmo, Damian, John Evangelist, and Lawrence. Picture now in the Academy of Arts at Florence.

5 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 30, and the record of sale in Marchese, ub. sup. Vol. I. Doc. VI. p. 400. We are told that an annunciation resting on a predella representing five scenes from the Virgin's life is in the church of the convent (now Franciscan) of Montecarlo near S. Giovanni di Valdarno di sopra; and that it has the cha- racter of Angelico. It remains to

be ascertained whether the piece be original or a copy; and whether it be the original sold to the Duke Mario Farnese, or the copy cited by Marchese. Vol. I. p. 230.

6 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 32.

7 lb. Vol. IV. p. 32.

8 A coronation of the Virgin of a small size almost entirely re- painted and damaged by restoring (No. 36 of Cat.), a crucifixion res- tored and damaged (No. 37 of Cat.) a Pieta and adoration of the Magi superposed in one panel and possibly by a pupil, at all events damaged (No. 38 of Cat.). The dead Saviour carried by the apostles to the sepulchre, a pic- ture, originally in the brotherhood della Croce al Tempio (No. 40 of Cat. Noticed by Vas. Vol. IV. p. 34.). S. Thomas Aquinas dis- puting Avitli the Doctors (No. 49 of Cat.), and the dispute of S. Al- bert (No. 50 of Cat.).

580

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

Three reliquaries by Angelico are preserved in S. Maria Novella:1 one is adorned with the Virgin and child, the second with the annunciation and adoration of the Magi/2 the third with a coronation of the Virgin and saints. The annunciation in the second of these reliquaries is that which has already been compared with those of Cortona and of S. Marco.3

For the church of S. Maria Nuova, Angelico again repeated the coronation of the Virgin, a masterpiece now at the Uffizi,4 magnificently composed, and in which the purest ideal is maintained. In the predella,5 the marriage of the Virgin is one of the greatest com- positions of the master, uniting to all the Giottesque qualities the perfect softness and feeling of Fra Giovanni. Twenty two figures are there beautifully grouped together with animated action, and without any of that coarseness of custom peculiar to the subject in the hands of earlier painters. Equally fine are the two remaining parts of the predella.6

That Angelico studied Orcagna has already been re- marked. The composition, in which that study is most evident, is the Last Judgment which Fra Giovanni frequently repeated, and a noble example of which he executed for the church of the Angeli at Florence. 7 Without altering the traditional form of this subject, Angelico placed the Saviour on high, surrounded by Seraphim and Cherubim and presiding over the judgment to which the souls are

1 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 32.

2 Executed for Fra Giovanni Masi. Richa, ub. sup. Vol. III. p. 49.

3 Vasari notes as in S. Felice in Piazza a Virgin between saints; (Vas. Vol. IV. p. 34. The saints are S.S. John the Baptist, Dominick, Thomas and Peter Martyr.) and a picture of that subject is now in the Pitti (Pitti Gallery No. 373). It is either a copy from the master, or so totally repainted that An- gelico's hand can no longer be recognized.

4 No. 1136 of Cat. See also Vas. Vol. IV. p. 35.

5 Uffizi No. 1176.

6 Uffizi No. 1170, the death of the Virgin. Uffizi No. 1017. Birth of S. John the Baptist. In the church of the Hospital of S. Matteo at Florence is a fine Vir- gin and child adored by 4 angels, with a grey distance. This is a splendid example of Angelico's manner, recalling his frescos.

7 It is now No. 41 in the Acad, of Arts.

Chap. XXVII.

THE LAST JUDGMENT.

587

called by the trump of the angels beneath him. Below his right is the paradise in which the elect kneel in prayer, amongst whom a friar may be seen, embraced by an angel; and aproaching it, a dance of angels in a flowery meadow leading the blessed through a gate to a state of eternal happiness. This angelic dance, suggesting and expressing excessive joy and celestial repose, is the dance of Orcagna at the Strozzi, imitated and improved not only in the conception but in the types, the character, the movements, and the draperies, by Angelico, who finds in a great predecessor not only a pictorial but a religious inspiration.

On the Saviour's left are the condemned and the de- mons struggling with souls doomed to perdition. Copying the seven "bolge" of Dante, he impartially commits a host of monks and popes to the flames. Bu^ his kindly tem- per does not know how to deal with such scenes as these. Again , in the glory of the upper Paradise, the action and its delineation in the figure of the Saviour are cold. Majestic grandeur and repose may be found in the elect. Soft angelic tenderness is expressed in their faces; but having exhausted his powers in them, Angelico had none in store to infuse into the eyes or form of the Redeemer. The Judgment is purely a conception of the fourteenth century carried out by Angelico in the fifteenth. Com- pared with the earlier effort of Orcagna, that of the Do- minican lacks power and unity.1 This subject, repeated and conceived in the same spirit in a panel belonging to Lord Ward's collection , 2 formerly in the Gallery of Cardi- nal Fesch, is best again in that portion which is devoted to the elect; but the figures generally are executed with more than usual boldness, and have less character of re- pose than in previous examples.3,

A third Judgment in the Corsini Gallery at Rome, is re- markable because the Saviour, sitting with a book in his

1 Varnishes have deprived this I 2 Dudley House, altarpiece of its freshness, the ' 3 This piece is altered in form tempera being sullied by them. | and impaired by some retouching.

588

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART.

Chap. XXVII.

left and cursing with his right hand, imitates the attitude of the Saviour in the Last Judgment at the Campo Santo at Pisa.1

A small, weak and repainted ascension by Angelico, a much restored descent of the Holy Spirit, are also in the Corsini Gallery; and a Virgin and child with saints from the gallery of Count Bisenzio at Rome now adorns the collection of Lord Ward.2 In the Turin Gallery two very graceful angels, each on a small panel kneeling on clouds, are genuine works of Angelico.3

1 A thick coat of varnishes of various periods disfigures the pa- nel. The picture is small and like the last, altered in shape. The subject, treated as has been seen in the panels of the S.S. Annunziata atFlorence,may again be found in a sfffall panel at Leonforte in Sicily in the church of the Cappuccini, a donation to that church of the Branciforti Trabbia family. The composition is almost a repetition of that of Lord Ward. The Saviour menaces with his right and left. The picture is repainted, and copious retouch- ing in oil all but obliterates the style of the master, so that it is difficult to judge whether origi- nally the picture wasby the master, or an old copy.

2 Mr. Barker's collection has a very fine Madonna with a female saint kneeling. In front on one side is an angel, three others holding the drapery behind. In the spandrils are two angels with censers. The picture is in good preservation.

3 No. 553 Cat. A Virgin and child, does not combine the ex- quisite feeling of Angelico's best works. In the style of the latter is a picture in the magazine of the public gallery of Parma re- presenting the Virgin and child enthroned, with seven angels about her, between S.S. Francis and Dominick, who embrace each other as they kneel, and the erect S.S.

Paul and John the Baptist. This also is executed in the spirit, but without the refinement of Angelico, and presents the character of cer- tain frescos in S. Marco, which are assigned for this reason to Fra Benedetto. A record on the back of the panel says it was bought at Florence in 1786, and considered to be by Benozzo Goz- zoli.

A Madonna between S.S. Domi- nick and Peter Martyr in the Berlin Gallery (No. 60), though repainted in old times, is evidently by Angelico. The greeting of S.S. Dominick and Francis, and the apparition of S. Francis at Aries (No. 61 and 62 in the same gal- lery) , are both by Angelico but are more or less retouched.

A pretty Virgin with six angels in perfect preservation is in the Frankfort Gallery (No. 13).

A pretended Angelico, lately in the Campana collection and now in Paris, is certainly not by him but by some pupil, and recals to mind the manner of Andrea da Firenze. The predella subjects are copies from Angelico.

"S. Ambrose refusing the en- trance of the temple to Theodo- sius" is a well preserved panel of the master in the Antwerp Gallery.

A Last Judgment, again, at Berlin (No. 57) with an inscrip- tion purporting that the picture was executed in 1456 a year after

Chap. XXVII.

DEPARTURE TO ROME.

589

Mr. Fuller Maitland is the owner of an entombment of the Virgin by Fra Giovanni which has been engraved as a creation of Giotto.1 Vasari no doubt was correct in stating that Giotto executed a picture with that subject, but he probably did not confound his work with one by Angelico. The panel at Stanstead House represents the Virgin in an elliptical glory, carried to Heaven by an- gels, whilst below, at the side of her tomb, kneel S. Fran- cis and another saint.2

Angelico had had occasion to meet in the convent of S. Marco at Florence the pontiff Eugenius the Fourth. The friar had no doubt performed his part in the cere- monies of the consecration in 1442, and Eugenius was

Angelico's death, is assigned to him and to his disciple Cosimo Rosselli. It is by some feeble pupil and imitator of Angelico's man- ner, and the upper part which is the best, makes an approach to the style of Rosselli, but the lower is really of a common character.

Marchese quotes this picture on the authority of Fortoul's "de Part en Allemagne". The Bammeville collection sold at Christie's in 1854 had a picture assigned to Angelico and much in the style of the Last Judgment of Berlin.

In 1432, as has already been stated, Angelico painted for the convent of S. Alessandro of Bres- cia a Virgin annunciate of which the record has been preserved. Vide Marchese. Vol. I. p. 401. A picture representing that sub- ject seems still to exist there, having, on the predella, five scenes from the life of the Vir- gin. It is now but a daub of modern colour; but where the original painting can be traced, the manner is akin to that of an imitator of the Umbrian school of Gentile da Fabriano. That Angelico executed an annuncia- tion for S. Alexander of Brescia is certain, but that he painted the present daub is impossible.

Amongst the pictures in the

magazine of the Turin Museum, one represents the Virgin enthroned with a sleeping infant between S.S. Lawrence , Aurelius, Amicus and Albinus. This is a very com- mon production, abraded in the flesh tints, so that the panel ap- pears through the preparation. The figure of S. Albinus , little cupids painted as relief orna- ments to the throne , and angels at the back of the seat, are less damaged than the rest, and the flesh tints of the latter are of a light rosy colour. The painter whose second rate style reminds one of Gentile da Fabriano and his followers, or such artists of the Venetian state as for instance Antonio da Negroponte , is Paolo of Brescia, as is proved by the following inscription: "Paulus Brisiensis pinxit. 1458." It is not possible to say whether the annunciation at S. Alessandro and the Madonna at Turin are by the same hand, but there is a common style in both.

1 At Stanstead House, formerly in the Ottley collection and en- graved in the Etruria Pittrice as a work of Giotto. See antea.

2 A small head in fresco by Angelico in the hands of the Revd Dr. Gillis was exhibited at Man- chester in 1858.

590

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

not unacquainted with the merits of one who had already achieved so much for art. Vasari relates, how Angelico proceeded to Rome to paint in the Vatican for Pope Ni- colas the Fifth.1 He tells how, the archbishoprick of Flo- rence being vacant, the Pope offered the mitre to Angelico, who refused it, saying he was not fitted for the cares of government.2 But Angelico recommended to his Holi- ness Antonino his brother friar, a friend of the poor, erudite, able, and fearing God; and his wish was acceded to. There is in this story, if it be true, not only where- withal to correct an error of Vasari, but enough to de- termine the time when Angelico first visited Rome. Bar- tolommeo Zabarella, Archbishop of Florence, died in 1445, and was succeeded by Fra Antonino, during the pontificate not of Nicolas the Fifth, but of Eugenius the Fourth. Vasari therefore errs in the name of the Pope who offered the mitre to Fra Giovanni; and it is prob- able that the invitation which took the painter to Rome was given by Eugenius who knew him, and had had occasion to witness his ability.3 This is the more likely as it appears from the minutes of a meeting of the coun- cil of Orvieto cathedral held on the 10th of May 1447, 4 that Angelico, then in Rome, had written to offer his ser- vices for work at Orvieto , and this offer appears to have been made upon the death, on the previous February, of Eugenius. For this pontiff therefore Angelico painted in the Vatican the Cappella del Sacramento which was af- terwards demolished by Paul the. Third. 5 Eugenius died shortly afterwards in Feb. 1447; and Nicholas the Fifth was elected by the conclave on the 6th of March. During the first months after his accession, the pope had doubt-

1 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 35.

2 Ibid. p. 36.

3 Francesco Albertino the Flo- rentine in "Opusculum ub. sup. says, Capella Nicolai. V. et alia secreta Eugenii MI. quas frater Joan. flor. ord. pdi perpulchre de- pinxit in palatio " p. 49 verso.

4 Delia Valle, Storia del Duorao di Orvieto, ub. sup. p.p. 125 and 305. Signor Gaetano Milanesi (Vide Com. to the life of Ange- lico in Vas. Vol. IV.) corrects the date to May 10 instead of 13 as in Delia Valle.

5 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 35.

Chap. XXVII.

DUOMO OF ORVIETO.

591

less little leisure to devote to the patronage of art. In the meanwhile Francesco di Barone of Perugia, a Bene- dictine mosaist, then residing in Rome and no doubt ac- quainted with Angelico, knowing that he was not busy, wrote to the "operai" at Orvieto, saying that a brother of the Predicants, celebrated as a painter, was desirous of visiting their city. The council met, Angelico came, and the result was a contract, drawn up1 on the 14th of June 1447, in which the friar engaged to paint in the cap- pella Nuova of the Duomo,2 for the four months of June, July, August, and September, at the rate of 200 golden ducats per annum, not including lodging, or the expenses of colours or scaffolding. 3 He stipulated further for his pupil Benozzo Gozzoli and Giacomo his aid, respectively, the sum of seven and three ducats per month.

Angelico performed his contract as to time, but could not finish the work. All that he had been able to exe- cute, up to the 28th of September, was three triangu- lar divisions of the ceiling in which he painted 1. the Sa- viour in the midst of a glory of angels;4 2. sixteen splendid figures of saints and prophets seated on clouds, and 3. the Virgin amongst the apostles. The spectator may regret as he looks at this work, which was com- pleted by Signorelli, to find the Saviour totally repainted, the angels much restored, and the rest not a little da- maged by time.

At Rome Nicholas the Fifth had now leisure; and he employed Angelico to decorate the chapel of the Vatican, which bears his name, with scenes from the lives of two saints.

1 See the original record in Delia Valle, ub. sup. p. 306.

2 Afterwards decorated by Luca Signorelli.

3 A minute of the proceedings of the council , drawn up at the end of June 1447, describes how Antonius Giovanelli fell whilst engaged in erecting the scaffold- ing for Fra Giovanni. Funds are

voted for his support and possible burial. Delia Valle, ub. sup. p. 307.

4 Intended to stand above the Final Judgment to be painted on the walls. It is an enlarged edi- tion of the Saviour in the Last Judgment of the S.S. Annunziata at Florence, his arms being out- stretched and raised on high.

592

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

As one enters that chapel, the lunettes, divided severally into two, illustrate the life and martyrdom of S. Stephen, the first to the right of the entrance being devoted to the ordination, and the distribution of alms; the second above the entrance , to the Sermon and the examination before the council of Jerusalem, the third, left of the entrance, to preparations for the martyrdom and the stoning. On the lower course of the wall to the left of the door is the ordination of S. Lawrence; on the side in which the door is pierced, S. Lawrence receiving from Sixtus the Second treasures for distribution in alms, and the almsgiving; — and on the lower course of the wall to the left of the door, S. Law- rence before Decius, and the martyrdom. On the pilasters, at each side of the lower course of frescos, Angelico painted saints erect in niches, SS. Anastasius (transferred to can- vass and almost obliterated) , Leo (restored) , Thomas Aqui- nas, Ambrose, Buonaventura, Augustin, John Chrysostom (transferred to canvass and almost gone), and Pope Gre- gory the great. In the ceiling the four Evangelists are majestically represented with their symbols.1

In the execution of this series, Fra Giovanni, though nearly threescore years of age not only displayed a vi- gour equal, but superior, to that of his youth. As scene after scene fell complete from his pencil, he seemed to gather from the previous effort new strength for the next. In the ordination of S. Stephen he represented S. Peter turning from the high altar and stooping towards the kneeling S. Stephen to administer the communion to him in the presence of six disciples. In these, not the stern gravity of Giotto nor the masculine force of Masaccio were depicted, but a gentle feeling of brotherly affection, mingled with religious fervor. But grave and noble above all the rest is Peter, grand in attitude, superior in dig- nity and rank. Nothing more reverent had been imagined than the expression and attitude of Stephen. In the distance the transept and nave of the church are not merely in harmony with the figures, but in good propor- tion and of a fine style; and thus Angelico who had seen the efforts of Masaccio and other Florentines to improve

S. John, however, daubed with colour, and S. Mark damaged.

Chap. XXVII. FRESCOS AT THE VATICAN.

593

perspective distance, and who had imitated hitherto the incapacity of Masolino in this respect, began at last to feel the advantage of progress in a subordinate part of pictorial art. As a scene of charity and love of human kind, Angelico had never done anything more pathetic than S. Stephen almsgiving. With religious devotion in his youthful face the saint on the steps of his church slips a piece into the hand of a young mother, of gentle aspect and soft features, draped in flowing vestments and expressing in her face and attitude a noble feminine mo- desty. A clerk behind him seems to call the list of those to be relieved. An older female near the first stands by entranced in prayer. Other poor eagerly move for- ward for their share, whilst, to the right, two women content, depart and commune with each other. To de- lineate poverty without squalidity, and express the mo- desty which is ashamed to beg, is a gift which Angelico shows that he possessed, and in this scene he poured out the full measure of those kindly and gentle feelings which filled his own breast. Masaccio, in depicting the poor around S. Peter, had not forgotten that the spectator does not pardon a vulgar picture. Noble features and frames are clad in humble garments. But the exquisite gentleness of motion and grace of demeanour, the sensi- bility which Angelico could delineate, prove him to have lived in a sort of ideal atmosphere, hardly attainable by any but an honest and pious monk.

In contrast again with Masaccio's S. Peter preaching at the Carmine, yet how fine, S. Stephen speaks, enfor- cing his arguments with the play of his hands, as S. Ca- therine does in S. Clemente. The listeners, who seem to be moved in their deepest depths by his images and ar- guments, are admirable. The means are simple and the result beautiful. To say that the remaining subjects of the series are equal to the three first is sufficient, but time and restoring have injured the frescos in which the saint is led to martyrdom and stoned. So again the picture of Sixtus the Second, conferring ordination on

vol. i. 38

594

EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVII.

S. Lawrence , 1 and giving him the treasure to distribute, are damaged, and the profile of the saint's face in the latter is daubed with colour.

In the distribution of alms by S. Lawrence the specta- tor cannot but be moved, so great is the joy apparent in the poor receiving alms. The saint, in the dress of a subdeacon, holds a purse in his left hand, and gives a piece to a beggar on hand -crutches. Right and left the poor bend forward with reverent glance and longing mo- tion. A blind man on the right feels his way to the spot where the saint stands. Women move forward with their children. The distance again is a church in perspective, of simple architecture and as good as that in the alms- giving of S. Stephen. Less realistic or severely true than Masaccio, Angelico is here again more gentle and grace- ful. Masaccio real, Angelico mystic: such might be the sentence of a critic of our time.2

After visiting the Sixtine chapel, and retiring over- whelmed and humbled from the contemplation of the terrible grandeur and the splendid violence done to nature by the great Michael Angelo, after passing through the Stanze of the Vatican where the most perfect of painters has left his master-pieces, the soul of the beholder, convulsed by the first, restored to a more natural equilibrium by the second, finds repose and comfort in the chapel of Nicolas the Fifth. Here, as elsewhere, the paintings of Angelico speak to the heart and inspire love and kindliness. In one edifice, divided by a few walls, one sees in close proximity the works of three artists. In Michael Angelo we find power, in Raphael form, in Angelico the religious ideal.

1 Two feigned windows flank the ! is painted with the features of fresco and on a card on that to I Nicolas the V. the right is the following ins crip- j

tion: "Greg. XIII. Pont. Max.' 2 This fresco is well preserved.

egregiam hanc picturam. f. Joanne Angelico Fesulano ord. pr?e. Ni- colai Papa V. jussu elaboratam ac vetustate paene consumptam instaurari mandavit." Sixtusthe II.

The bases are adorned with fes- toons and medallions, all much repainted; but in some heads on the wall to the right, the style of Benozzo may still be recognized

Chap. XXVII.

ANGELICAS DEATH.

595

If then Angelico's creations sustain comparison with those of the best Italian painters, they cannot but have been of their kind great , as those of Michael Angelo and Raphael were great in theirs. The practical means, the artistic language, used by Angelico were therefore the most fitted to render and realize his idea. Hence idea and means in him corresponded, as they did in Raphael and Michael Angelo. The painter of the Sixtine chapel and the painter of the chapel of Nicholas the Fifth were at two opposite poles of art. In the first, nature was vio- lently forced for the creation of a mighty representation, of- ten for this reason unreal. In the last a sweet self-denying spirit exaggerated the contrary defect, yet still succeeded in imparting a grand idea.

Fra Giovanni died in Rome at the age of sixty eight. 1 He was buried in the church of the Minerva where the following inscription was placed over his remains:

Hie jacet ven. pictor Fr. Jo. de Flor. ord. P. M.

cccc

L V

Non mihi sit laudi, quod eram velut alter Apelles,

Sed quod lucra tuis (? pauperisms) omnia, Christe, dab am:

Altera nam terris opera extant , altera coelo ;

Urbs me Johannem flos tulit Etruriae.

1 The pictures executed by An- gelico at Rome are not known now. The crucifixion at the Vati- can of which Vasari speaks is gone, likewise the altarpiece and an annunciation at the Minerva. But as regards the altarpiece, some critics still believe that the panel on which it is painted is only covered by the canvass of a newer picture by Rosario. Albertini,opusc. ub. sup. p. 50, verso, says, an en- tire chapel at the Minerva was painted by Fra Giovanni. Vide also comment. Vas. Vol. IV. p. 49. Vasari also mentions miniatures

executed at Rome, but none such exist. Ib. p. 35. At Florence pe- rished also, frescos of S.S. Domi- nick, Catherine of Sienna, and Peter Martyr in and about the screen of S. Maria Novella, fres- cos in the screen chapel and an annunciation on canvass on the door of the organ (Vas. Vol. IV. p. 26), a Madonna once belong- ing to Don Vincenzio Borghini ; 2 D°. and a crucifix in the old Gondi (Barto0) collection. Stories of the Pascal taper in S. Maria No- vella (Ib. p. 32), and S. Benedict imposing silence in the Badia.

596 EARLY CHRISTIAN ART. Chap. XXVIT.

Fra Benedetto, brother of the Angelico, died in 1448, either in S. Marco of Florence, or at S. Domenico of Fiesole, having been for three years previous superior of the latter convent. He was industrious as a miniaturist and adorned at the request of Cosmo de' Medici all the choral books of the church and sacristy with pictures and ornaments, a labour which lasted five years. He il- luminated some of the books of the convent of Fiesole, and various missals and psalters. 1 As to the point whe- ther he assisted his brother in the frescos of 8. Marco,2 all that can be said is, that his manner must have been so similar to that of Angelico that modern criticism can- not distinguish between them. Some parts of the frescos of S. Marco are doubtless inferior to the rest, and these may be the work of Benedetto. |V)

As for Angelico's pupils, they must be left for future chapters on the development of the Umbrian school.

Ib. p. 33. There are no minia- tures of Angelico at S. Marco, but many by his brother Bene- detto. The choral books of S. Dominick of Fiesole are most of them gone, but what remain have no miniatures. Father Marchese, however (Vol. I. p. 159) , thinks Angelico painted miniatures and

mentions a missal executed for Cosmo de1 Medici with admirable paintings in it. He seems, how- ever, not certain that these may not be by Benedetto.

1 Marchese, ub. sup. Vol. I. p.p. 162 and following.

2 Vas. Vol. IV. p. 26.

END OF VOL. I. {{GFDL}}

Retrieved from "http://artandpopularculture.com/History_of_Painting_in_Italy"

History of Painting in Italy

From The Art and Popular Culture Encyclopedia

Full text of vol. 1[1]

Views

Personal tools

Search

Metas

Navigation