Benedetto da Maiano

Il contributo intende presentare la figura del maestro carrarese Giovambattista Mazzolo, personalità di spicco della scultura a Messina nel corso della prima metà del XVI secolo. Giunto nella città dello Stretto in coincidenza con il trasferimento a Palermo di Antonello Gagini – protagonista della scena artistica messinese nel periodo a cavallo tra la fine del Quattrocento e l’inizio del secolo successivo –, il Mazzolo ha risposto alle esigenze della committenza pubblica e privata siciliana con una produzione statuaria cospicua, che ha largamente riproposto i fortunati modelli figurativi lasciati a Messina da Antonello Gagini, a sua volta emulo di Benedetto da Maiano. In particolare, si analizzano qui due serie di rappresentazioni marmoree, le Madonne col Bambino e le Sante Caterine richieste allo scultore carrarese dalla committenza privata – nobiliare e non – della provincia, significativamente raccolte nel territorio dei Monti Nebrodi. Attraverso l’esame dettagliato di questi gruppi statuari, la cui datazione si concentra entro il quarto decennio del Cinquecento, si propone una peculiare lettura dell’attività di Giovambattista Mazzolo, che si profila come “inseguitore” un po’ attardato delle innovative creazioni gaginiane, ed in definitiva incapace di aderire compiutamente alla stagione della “Maniera moderna” a Messina.

Michelangelo’s largely overlooked commission of April 1503 for twelve over life-sized Apostle statues for the cathedral of Florence was among the earliest important artistic ventures that were initiated in Florence following the expulsion of the Medici from the city in November 1494.  Significantly, the following clues suggest that either the Medici –who were the unofficial rulers of Florence from 1434 to 1494- or pro-Mediceans were behind this commission.
Firstly, Niccolo Michelozzi was present as chancellor of the Wool Guild (the guild in charge of the construction, embellishment and maintenance of the cathedral of Florence through its arm, the Cathedral Board of Works) when the Apostle contract was drawn up.  Niccolo had served as Lorenzo de’ Medici’s (the Magnificent’s) private secretary until the latter’s death in April of 1492.  Secondly, the contract was witnessed by Giuliano da Sangallo, Lorenzo de Medici’s favorite architect.  Thirdly, the commission for all twelve statues was allotted without any form of competition to Lorenzo de Medici’s protégé Michelangelo, a most unusual way of handling a project of this importance on the part of the Cathedral Board of Works.  In addition, the 16th century author and Medicean court artist Giorgio Vasari -who is quite obviously hiding something- fails to mention Michelangelo’s prestigious commission in the "Lives of the Artists" (first edition Florence, 1550; second revised and amplified edition Florence, 1568).  Instead, he claims that his hero Michelangelo carved an Apostle in competition with other sculptors –which is far less impressive than carving an entire cycle of over life-sized statuary on one's own- when: “Cardinal Giulio de’ Medici governed Florence” (thus, after the Medici return from exile in September 1512).  By doing so, Vasari draws the Apostle commission into the orbit of his patrons, the Medici.
The problem becomes more intriguing when we realize that Lorenzo de’ Medici (also known as Lorenzo the Magnificent) had longstanding ties to the Cathedral Board of Works and that his son Cardinal Giovanni de’ Medici –a former canon of Florence Cathedral, living in exile since late 1494- was the most high ranking Florentine clergyman at the time of the signing of the Apostle contract.  Was Cardinal Giovanni carrying on his father’s agenda? Renewed Medicean control over the ongoing construction and embellishment of the Cathedral would amount to a powerful blow to the Republican government of Florence.

Trotz der kaum zu verkennenden Bedeutung malerischer Fassungen für das Erscheinungsbild und die Wirkung von Bildwerken des Florentiner 15. Jahrhunderts konzentrierten sich die Kunstwissenschaften bislang überwiegend auf deren dreidimensionale Qualitäten - sogar wenn es sich um technisch anspruchslose Reproduktionen in stucco oder cartapesta handelte. Die oft aufwändigen und vergleichsweise teuren Fassungen waren hingegen nur selten Gegenstand wissenschaftlichen Interesses. Indem die Forschung der im 16. Jahrhundert im Zuge der Paragone-Diskussion konstruierten scharfen Abgrenzung der Gattungen Bildhauerei und Malerei folgte, verstellte sie sich den Zugang zur farbigen Fassung.
In Ergänzung zum restauratorisch-konservatorischen Schwerpunkt der Münchner VDR-Tagung soll der Beitrag das Verhältnis der Kunstgeschichte zu Fassungen von plastischen Bildwerken, die im 15. Jahrhundert in Mittelitalien und vor allem in Florenz entstanden, beleuchten. Der gerade bei Andachtsbildern übliche Gebrauch billiger Grundmaterialien und die Wiederholung erprobter kompositorischer Lösungen dürfen nicht zu dem Schluss verleiten, dass es sich hierbei ausschließlich um anspruchslose Massenkunst handelte: Gerade die Fassungen trugen entscheidend zur Individualisierung und Aufwertung der einzelnen Arbeiten bei und müssen daher als eigenständiger künstlerischer Beitrag zur Gesamtwirkung der Bildwerke gewürdigt werden.

Benedetto da Maiano’s terracotta bust of Filippo Strozzi (ca. 1475, Bode Museum Berlin, Inv. no. 102) is considered to be a model of the signed and dated marble portrait in the Louvre – and a rare testimony to the working practice of a quattrocento sculptor. Unfortunately, almost exactly 400 years later, the original polychromy of the terracotta bust fell victim to this assumption. Although Wilhelm von Bode after the purchase emphasized the “excellent preservation of the old painting“ and praised its high-quality execution, the curator of the collection in Berlin-Dahlem decided to remove it in 1977. However, hitherto unnoticed analyses of the binding agent and pigments as well as unpublished photographs of the removal of the painting (fig. 1) indicate that the polychromy of the Berlin portrait must have been part of the original design.

This is also supported by a comparison with other terracotta busts, some of which are little known. The portrait of an unknown woman in the Bode Museum in Berlin (Inv. no. 1575) and the bust of Bernardo Rucellai in the Bayrisches Nationalmuseum in Munich (Inv. no. 53/93, fig. 2) are good examples of what the painting of the Berlin Strozzi must have looked like. The two objects also show the relationship between terracotta and painting in quattrocento portrait busts: in contrast to the self-confident polychromy of the Madonna reliefs in stucco and clay, which competes with the sculptural values, the mostly only thinly applied painting of the busts seems to subordinate itself to the terracotta core. Nevertheless, it should be noted that in the eyes of contemporaries it was polychromy that made the terracotta works complete.

My contribution, which is sketched here in its main features, deals with the painted and modelled surface of Florentine terracotta busts. It is to be shown what significance the surface has for the evidence of the ‘face‘ and for the object as a whole.