SLIDE 1

Why is Florence Cathedral Important to the Renaissance?

The Renaissance in Florence is inextricably linked with the dome of its new cathedral, whose
construction was a particularly inspirational element in Early Renaissance art and did much
to confirm Florentine preeminence during the quattrocento rinascimento. The basilican
Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore in Florence ("Cathedral of Saint Mary of the Flower") was
begun in 1296 in a style of Gothic architecture, designed by Arnolfo di Cambio (c.1240–
1310) and ornamented with the characteristic inlaid marble panelling of Tuscan-style
Romanesque architecture. Civic rivalry between the Ducal States led to the construction of
an ambitious dome, raised to a height above the central nave to exceed that of any church
in Tuscany. By 1418, the construction of the nave had already predetermined the octagonal
plan arrangement of supporting piers capped by an elevated drum, but the technical means
by which to construct the dome had not yet been established. In short, the project was
stalled. The successful solution - inspired by both the Gothic tradition of stone vaulting and
the principles of Roman architecture - was found and implemented by the leading
Renaissance architect Filippo Brunelleschi (1377-1446), whose studies of Roman buildings
gave him an insight into Classical methods of proportion and structure. His proposal for the
cathedral's dome employed an inner and outer dome, with the inner shell being self-
supportive thanks to concentric rings of masonry blocks, herringbone brickwork and
embedded chain supports. All this dispensed with the need for temporary wooden
scaffolding - which in any case would have been unmanageable at the height and span in
question. Brunelleschi's solution exemplified the transition between the Gothic world and the
new spirit of scientific and aesthetic enquiry. Indeed, his achievement set the course of
Italian Renaissance art, placing Florence at the heart of a new cultural age. Since
Brunelleschi's death, a number of additions have been made to the building. For example, in
1568-79, an enormous mural painting of The Last Judgment was painted on the underside
of the dome by Giorgio Vasari and Federico Zuccari, paid for by the Medici family in
Florence; an elaborate Gothic Revival facade, for instance, was added to its western side
during the 19th century, by Emilio De Fabris (1808-83); while three huge bronze doors
were added 1899-1903. However, the real significance of Florence's Cathedral lies in its
dome and the Renaissance thinking that inspired it.

Architectural Facts About Florence Cathedral

The cathedral complex, situated in the Piazza del Duomo ("Cathedral Square"), comprises
three buildings: the Cathedral itself, the Baptistery and Giotto's Campanile (bell-tower). All
three buildings are included within the area of central Florence which is designated as a
UNESCO World Heritage Site. The Cathedral remains one of Italy's largest churches: it is
roughly 153 metres (502 ft) in length; and 38 metres (124 ft) wide, while the arches in the
aisles are 23 metres (75 ft) high. The cathedral's dome is about 115 metres (372 ft) in
height and 45 metres (147 ft) in width. It was - for centuries - the largest dome in the
world, and is still the largest brick dome ever made.

The cathedral of Florence is built as a basilica, in keeping with Roman and Byzantine styles,
which were then adapted to the forms of Classical Antiquity, which so inspired Renaissance
architects. It has a wide central nave comprising four square bays, with an aisle to either
side. The chancel and transepts follow an identical polygonal plan, separated by two smaller
polygonal chapels. The overall plan forms a Latin cross, while the aisles and nave are
separated by wide pointed Gothic arches supported by composite piers.

Across from the Cathedral stands the Baptistery ("Battistero di San Giovanni"), an octagonal
building built between 1059 and 1128 in the style of Romanesque architecture - the style
upon which Renaissance architecture is largely based. The Baptistery is itself an icon
of Renaissance sculpture, due to its three sets of bronze doors created by two of the
great Renaissance sculptors. Two sets were created by Lorenzo Ghiberti (1378-1455), a
major rival of Brunelleschi, and one set by Andrea Pisano (1290-1348). The Cathedral's
campanile (bell-tower), built between 1334 and 1359, was designed by Giotto (1267-1337),
and completed by Andrea Pisano and Francesco Talenti (1300-69). It is 14 metres (45 ft)
square and 84 metres (275 ft) high, rising in four successive tiers, and supported without
buttresses.

History

The Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore was erected on the site of an earlier cathedral, built
in the early 5th century. By the last decade of the 13th century it was crumbling with age,
and no longer able to compete with the new or renovated Gothic cathedrals in rival cities
across Tuscany. The new structure of Santa Maria del Fiore was designed by Arnolfo di
Cambio (his other designs included the Franciscan church of Santa Croce and the
crenellated fortress palace-cum-town hall, known as Palazzo Vecchio) and was expected to
take 140 years to build. As it was the project proceeded in fits and starts, with a succession
of different architects, including Andrea Pisano, Giotto, Francesco Talenti, Giovanni di Lapo
Ghini, Alberto Arnoldi, Giovanni d'Ambrogio, Neri di Fioravante and Andrea Orcagna. By
1418 the only part of the structure that had not been completed was the dome, because no
one could figure out how to engineer a dome to cap the huge octagonal cathedral tower
without it collapsing during construction. A competition was held to find a solution, which
 was won by Brunelleschi. Work began in 1420 and was finished in 1436. The dome of Santa
Maria del Fiore was the first octagonal dome in history to be erected without a temporary
wooden support, and it became the visible symbol of the Florentine Renaissance culture.

Architecture

The root cause of the architectural difficulty with the dome, was the decision - made in 1367
- to reject the Medieval Gothic style (which used buttresses to support the upper tiers of a
cathedral) in favour of a more classical-looking Mediterranean dome (which had to be self-
supportive). The dome itself had been designed already by Neri di Fioravante who had
proposed a large inner dome enclosed in a thinner outer dome (partly supported by the
inner shell), as protection against the weather. The inner dome was to sit unsupported by
any buttress on the octagonal drum. That was the plan, but no one knew how to engineer it.
The point was, the width and height of the dome was so great that it was almost certain to
spread and fall under its own weight, buckling the octagonal drum in the process.

Brunelleschi's solution was based on three main elements. First, he embedded four sets of
embedded iron chains - which acted like barrel-hoops - to prevent the inner shell from
spreading. Second, this system of support was further reinforced by eight vertical ribs,
supplemented by 16 concealed ribs, radiating from the centre. Third, the brickwork of the
inner dome was laid in herringbone patterns which helped to transfer weight and stress to
the vertical ribs. The outer dome was crowned by a type of cupola, known as a lantern -
which was also designed by Brunelleschi - but completed in 1461 after his death by his
friend Michelozzo. The lantern closed the central oculus of the dome and exerted additional
downward force, thus reducing the outward thrust at the base. The roof of the lantern was
topped with a copper ball and cross, made in 1469 by Andrea del Verrocchio (1435-88),
containing a set of holy relics. The ball was dislodged by lightning in July 1600 and replaced
by an even larger one two years later.

Memorials to Brunelleschi

Brunelleschi, the engineer of Santa Maria del Fiore, trained first as a sculptor and goldsmith,
before turning to architecture in 1401. His understanding of Roman art and engineering
underpinned a huge part of his Renaissance success, which was to turn the unnecessary
complexity of Gothic design into something simpler and brighter. A large statue of
Brunelleschi now stands in the Piazza del Duomo looking up at his magnificent dome, the
classical silhouette that continues to dominate the skyline of the city. He himself is buried
inside the Cathedral: his tomb lies in the part of the crypt which is open to the public. The
fact that he was accorded such a prestigious burial place inside Florence's most important
building, is clear evidence of his reputation among the leaders and citizens of his native city.

The names of artists who contributed to the Duomo reads like a who's who of
Renaissance artists:

 Giotto designed the campanile (bell tower).

 Donatello and Nanni di Banco assisted Brunelleschi in modeling the dome.

 Lorenzo Ghiberti crafted the bronze doors of the baptistery.

 Ghiberti's baptistery doors were later nicknamed the "Gates of Paradise" by
Michelangelo.

 The copper ball and cross at the top of the dome were engineered and designed by
Andrea del Verrocchio and his assistant—Leonardo da Vinci.

The Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore was the major church in Florence in the Renaissance period,
but it was a building which was largely built in the fourteenth century (thus pre-dating the
Renaissance).  The origins go back to the Middle Ages, when Italian cities competed to build larger
and greater cathedrals.  Pisa began its cathedral in 1063, and Siena built its cathedral by around 1260
(Giovanni Pisano later designed the facade).  In the late thirteenth century, Florence began work on
its own, new cathedral to replace the smaller church of Santa Reparata which had stood in the city
center in front of the Baptistery of San Giovanni.

Florence was a wealthy medieval city on account of its

textile trade, and Florentines of this time thought of themselves as a city similar to that of ancient
Rome.  They therefore decided that in order to compete with other Tuscan cities, they would build
the grandest church in the regions.  They wanted it to be able to fit all 100,000 people who lived in
the city, which would have been an enormous structure in any period of history.  Although they fell
short of this goal (they were only able to fit about 30,000 people in the final church), they managed
to create an extraordinary building for their great city.  Arnolfo di Cambio was hired as the first
architect of the church, construction of which began in or around 1296.

The exterior is notable for the geometric patterning of its revetment (face), made
from encrusted marble.  It mimics the Tuscan Romanesque style of the revetment on the baptistery,
which can also be seen on the Florentine church of San Miniato.  It should be noted that the facade of
the cathedral does not date to the Renaissance, but instead to the nineteenth century.  Unlike in
countries to the north, facades in Italy were considered to be lesser in importance and were put on at
the end – and in this case, several centuries after the rest of the church was already built.  We can
also see how the revetment was carried over into the campanile (bell tower) which stands next to the
cathedral.  The campanile, which was designed by Giotto in 1334, was built to look like it came in
sections.  It is altogether separate from the rest of the church, which was typical in Italy at the time
but which was different from the integrated tower-in-facade approach in countries to the north.

Interior of Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence.

Inside, the original plan originally called for a timber truss roof, but in the mid-1300s this was
changed to a ribbed groin vault.  Flying buttresses were also called for in the original plan, but they
were later scrapped.  One of the notable features here is the size of the bays, which are quite a bit
larger than the size of those found in Gothic churches being build in the thirteenth century to the
north.  The large arches used to create these bays meant that the church was much more open
between its nave and side aisles, and visually the side aisles appear to be somewhat shallow. 
Together with the long, prominent molding above the arches, there was an emphasis in this church on
horizontal elements.  This is something that was typical of Italian tastes, and it differs from the tastes
of those in places such as Germany and France where the great Gothic cathedrals were built with so
much emphasis on their vertical elements.

Another difference between Santa Maria del Fiore and the Gothic churches to the north was the size
of windows.  Here, the windows are smaller.  The desire to disintegrate walls in favor of “sheets of
glass”, such as found in the Chapel of Sainte Chappelle in Paris, was clearly not present in Florence. 
There is also willingness in Florence to leave blank spaces on the walls of the cathedral.
 Plan of the Florence Cathedral. Note the large crossing which would be covered by Brunelleschi’s
dome in the fifteenth century.
Perhaps the most important part of this church, however, was the part that was not built with the rest
of the church.  This was the enormous dome which covers the crossing, a dome so large and notable
that after it was built, its name came to be synonymous with the church itself (“Il Duomo”).  When
the church was designed, it was done so by builders who did not know how they could surmount the
space of the crossing with a covering.  They assumed that it would be covered at a later date as
technology or human ingenuity rose to the challenge, but until that happened it remained uncovered
for many years.  It was not until Filippo Brunelleschi, one of the greatest Renaissance minds, devised
a plan to build the dome around 1425 that the crossing was finally covered.
SLIDE 2

The Dome of Santa Maria del Fiore

One of the most significant architectural achievements of the entire Renaissance was
undoubtedly the construction, by Filippo Brunelleschi, of the dome over the Florence Cathedral.
This work, begun in the summer 1420, was completed (except for the lantern) in 1436.

From the architectural viewpoint, the construction of the Dome of Santa Maria del Fiore
represented the event that marked the beginning of the Renaissance, that is, the rediscovery of
building models from the classical age and the contemporary changes in the organisation of
construction sites, with separation of the roles of designer and builder, a system still in use
today. It was the new figure of the designer, exemplified by Brunelleschi, that conferred on
architecture the status of an artistic-scientific discipline, from this time on fully entitled to claim
its place in the cultural system.
The dome was built without employing centring (a wooden or iron structure) to support the
masonry. To achieve this, overcoming the scepticism of his fellow citizens, Brunelleschi devised
some extraordinary solutions to lighten the imposing structure and to efficiently organise a
worksite capable of fulfilling the requirements of the various stages of construction and
guaranteeing the stability of the planes on which the bricks were laid, marked by progressive
inclination from the base to the oculus in the dome. To build the dome, Brunelleschi employed
innovative machines that he designed himself. The organisation of the worksite and the
availability of machines that could move enormous weights and lift them to considerable heights
played a decisive role in the construction of the dome. Brunelleschi left neither drawings nor
verbal descriptions of the various machines he designed and utilised. However, their
exceptionally innovative nature attracted the attention of the greatest engineers of the 15th
century (Taccola, Francesco di Giorgio, Bonaccorso Ghiberti, and Giuliano da Sangallo), whose
eloquent testimony has survived. Even Leonardo da Vinci drew in his notebooks, with extreme
precision, the most important machines used by Brunelleschi to build the dome.

It was only in 1471, with the positioning of the lantern, for which the machines designed by
Brunelleschi were used, that the dome could be considered finished. In the spring of 1601 the
lantern was struck by lightening that damaged its structure, but was promptly restored.

The structure of the dome is truly imposing. The impost, rising to a height of 35.50 meters above
the tambour, is about 54 meters above ground level. The distance between the two opposite
edges of the octagonal base is around 35 meters. The height of the lantern that tops it, including
the copper sphere, is a little over 22 meters. The inner vaulting cell of the dome has a curve
whose radius is 4/5 the diameter of the base, while the outer dome has an inclination whose
radius is 3/4 of the diameter. The weight of the dome is estimated as 37,000 tons. It has been
calculated that over four million bricks were used in its construction. It is the biggest dome ever
built without using centring to support the masonry

Around 1475 Paolo Dal Pozzo Toscanelli constructed a gnomon in the dome, the highest one ever
built up to then, which showed the moment when the sun passed through the summer solstice.
Toward the middle of the 18th century the gnomon was restored by Leonardo Ximenes, who
utilised it to conduct a number of astronomiConsisting of two interconnected ogival shells,
the cathedral's octagonal dome was erected between 1418 and 1434 to a design
which Filippo Brunelleschi entered in a competition in 1418 but which was only
accepted, after much controversy, in 1420.

A masterpiece capable of withstanding lightning, earthquakes and the passage of

time, it continues to enchant all those who observe it from afar. The dome has a
diameter of 45.5 metres.
The competition that the Opera di Santa Maria del Fiore ran in 1418 was won by
Brunelleschi, but work did not get under way until two years later and was not
completed until 1434.

The cathedral of Florence was consecrated by Pope Eugene IV on 25 March 1436.

Brunelleschi's astonishingly innovative approach involved vaulting the dome space

without any scaffolding by using a double shell with a space in between. The inner
shell (with a thickness of more than two metres) is made of light bricks set in a
herringbone pattern and is the self-supporting structural element while the outer
dome simply serves as a heavier, wind-resistant covering. The dome is crowned by
a lantern with a conical roof, designed by Brunelleschi but only built after his death in
1446, while the gilt copper sphere and cross on top of the lantern, containing holy
relics, was designed by Andrea del Verrocchio and installed in 1466.

The inner shell of the dome was frescoed by Giorgio Vasari and Federico Zuccari
from 1572 to 1579, the subject matter chosen, namely the Last Judgement,
reflecting the iconography adopted in the baptistry. The frescoes on the inner shell
of the dome were the object of a thorough restoration between 1978 and 1994.

cal and physical observations.

14 FACTS:

1. The Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore took over 140 years to complete

A committee had come up with the ambitious plans and ideas to build the entire grand
cathedral had been conceived in 1293, before the Renaissance period, including the
domed rooftop even though no technology to complete the dome existed at the time.
They started building the cathedral anyway, but had left the part of the dome’s roof
exposed for years which is why, from conception to completion, the process took over
140 years.

2. The cathedral has the largest masonry dome in the world

With over 4 million bricks, weighing over 40,000 tons, almost the size of half a
football field across at the base, and standing over 10 stories high, it is the
largest masonry structure in the world. If it’s still a big deal today, imagine
what it must have been like to see back then, before the technology even
existed.
3.Santa Maria del Fiore was built on top of a small church
There is still remains of the original church that was built on the same ground,
now under Santa Maria del Fiore, called Santa Reparata. This church was a
much smaller and more modest church built between the 4th-6th centuries,
well before the Middle Ages and Renaissance period. There is now an
underground museum where you can see the artefacts and important cultural
and religious history.

4. The famous bronze doors known as The Gates of Paradise on the Baptistery in front of the cathedral
were made by a winner of a citywide competition in 1401
Years before the dome itself was constructed, a committee in Florence held a
competition to decorate the east doors of the baptistery. They gave each
contestant the same materials and amount of bronze and allowed them to
submit their ideas within the guidelines. The two finalists were young 23-year-
olds Fillippo Brunelleschi and Lorenzo Ghiberti, who were both trained
metalworkers and goldsmiths. In the end, after submitting the same biblical
scene of Abraham killing his son, Ghiberti won due to the judges favouring his
classical style over Brunelleschi’s forward and humanist depiction. Many
years after the doors had been on display, Michelangelo had commented that
the doors seemed like the gates of paradise, thereby giving them the name
we call them now. It has been said that Brunelleschi’s depiction was ahead of
its time, using humanism in his depiction, and showing the early blooming of
the Renaissance period.

5. The man who designed and built the domed rooftop of Santa Maria del Fiore had no previous
architectural training
Fillipo Brunelleschi was a trained goldsmith and had never built anything in his
life before building the masterpiece that astonishingly still stands today.
Although that may sound crazy, gold smithery does marry aesthetics and
practicality, which Brunelleschi used, among his other studies, to find the
solution for the construction of the dome.
6. By the time Brunelleschi was born, the cathedral had been under construction for 80 years with no
solution.
As the building of the cathedral continued and had grown larger and grander
than the original plans, the question still remained how they would build the
dome-shaped roof. No one had any idea how it would or could be done,
including the artists who conceptualised it, but Florentines were determined to
outdo the other cities in Tuscany, no matter how long it took.

7. The famous Pantheon in Rome was the inspiration for the domed cathedral in Florence
Although no architectural plans had been discovered for the building of The
Pantheon, the Florentines were determined to have something similar even if
they didn’t know how to do it. They did not like the Gothic style of all the major
monuments around Europe at the time with the distraction of the flying
buttresses surrounding them, and the similar look they all had, so they looked
to the ancient Romans for inspiration. They idolised their innovative building
and technology and wanted to be held in the same esteem by their competing
surrounding cities in Tuscany who were also erecting grand monuments for
prestige. Ironically, after losing the baptistery door competition, Brunelleschi
went to study ancient Roman structures, not to be heard of in history again
before returning to Florence years later.

The dome project was offered as a competition for the public after years without a solution for a sound
design
After being under construction for over 100 years, the city of Florence was
risking looking like fools to their competitors in surrounding areas with an
unfinished cathedral and a seemingly insane and impossible task of building
the largest dome structure Europe had ever seen. They finally offered the
challenge to the public seeking someone to find a solution that would be cost
effective and possible. Of course, there was the possibility of building the
dome with a wooden structure to support it, but that would end up being costly
requiring over 4oo trees, lots of manpower and time. When Brunelleschi
entered the competition, he was the only one with an idea that did not involve
wood, which caught the attention of the judges.
Brunelleschi won the competition using a simple egg
Florence was so desperate for a solution, Brunelleschi won the competition
without ever showing his plans. Although his forward thinking lost him the
competition years before with the baptistery doors, it was exactly what
Florence needed in this time of panic. He had to persuade the judges, of
course, and did so after concealing his plans for so long, that a simple egg
was what finally convinced the judges. He told them that he would reveal his
plans if any one of them could make the egg stand upright on the table. After
they all failed, he took the egg and smashed the bottom of it on the table’s
surface, causing the egg to stand upright. Although the judges protested that
they themselves could have done the same, he slyly responded saying that if
they knew what he knew, they could also build the dome. Essentially, they
hired the guy with a secret plan and no experience. Using his wit and secret
design of the dome, which he himself was unsure of since he would need to
build it to be certain that a few potential flaws could work, he won the
competition and was allowed to move forward, being appointed two other
designers, including his past rival, Ghiberti. They started April 1420.

Santa Maria del Fiore is the third largest cathedral in the world
The larger ones being St. Peter’s in Rome and St. Paul’s in London of today.
In the 15th century, when it was completed, it was the largest cathedral in
Europe. It is 153 metres (502 ft) long, 90 metres (295 ft) wide at the crossing,
and 90 metres high from the floor to the bottom of the dome.

Brunelleschi invented the technology he needed to assist in building the dome

Not only did he come up with an ingenious masonry idea for how to build a
freestanding brick structure with curved walls without the use of a wooden
frame, he also invented the tools he needed to do so. The technology at the
time for lifting heavy objects was similar to a wooden gerbil exercise wheel,
powered by a human, but only reached a limited height. Brunelleschi used
oxen walking in a circle for the first time and created a type of mechanism that
precedented anything they had seen at the time using a three cogged wheel
system to control the lifting or lowering of heavy objects without moving the
walking direction of the oxen, now known as the Reverse Gear.

Unlike Da Vinci, Brunelleschi left no notebooks or documents behind for others to learn from
Always known as a secretive person, he didn’t leave a single building plan,
drawing, or even a letter behind on how he managed to come up with such an
amazing design. For years, the structure was a huge mystery to scholars who
needed to find the missing pieces to their theories on how the dome was built.

The unprecedented secret to the successful building of the dome was the herringbone brick pattern and,
ironically, a flower used to guide them
It was something never tried before. Brunelleschi had nothing but critics and
had to convince even his building team to trust him, who were putting their
lives in his hands working at 51 meters (170 feet) in the air on a structure
seemingly doomed to cave in. After years of scholars studying his methods,
one man from the University of Florence finally found the secret hidden in a
critic’s extremely detailed drawing meant to discredit Brunelleschi. The secret
was the rope patterns he used during building to guide the structure’s brick
layout. Remember, there were no lasers or levels during this time, so the
ingenious rope system was all they had. At the base of the interior of the
dome was the shape of a flower, which was the base to guide the ropes
themselves, forcing the bricks to create a series of inverted arches as the
walls grew higher. The inverted arches were the key reason that the structure
has lasted all these years. Instead of gravity pulling the heavy bricks down
causing them to cave in from the top as everyone had assumed, the
herringbone layout of the bricks and the inverted arches actually use gravity to
reinforce the structure. Absolutely genius. The name of the cathedral
translates to Saint Mary of the flower, which ironically has no connection to
the flower used by Brunelleschi in his design, but is completely serendipitous.
The cathedral gets its name from the lily flower, the symbol of Florence.

The dome was completed in only sixteen years

In the age when designers almost never got to see their work completed since
it took many years to build anything, Brunelleschi finished his project and was
able to see his amazing work and the reactions of the people. Started in 1420
and finished in 1436, sixteen years was shockingly fast for such a feat.

The outside of Santa Maria del Fiore did not look like it does now when it was first built
The cathedral was originally designed by Arnolfo di Cambio in 1294, including
the facade. The design and outer facade went through many drafts of
changes and drawings over the years as you can see in the Grande Museo
del Duomo, which is dedicated to the entire history of the construction of the
cathedral. By 1418 the cathedral was built; only the dome remained
incomplete. The facade, however, would not be complete until 1887 to what
we see today. It was a collective design from many architects and artists over
many years. The facade of the cathedral has a long history of dismantling,
redesigning, and even a competition to finish it, which turned into a huge
corruption scandal during that time and was never followed through with. The
facade had been left bare until the 19th century. Emilio de Fabris designed the
neo-gothic facade we see now, which was also decided by competition in
1871. He worked on it from 1876 to its completion in 1887 and sourced
different coloured marble from all over Tuscany and parts of Italy.

There are actually two domes

What you see on the outside is just the roof tiles, the shell of the internal
structure. Between the shell and the ingenious brick structure is the staircase
that allows you to climb all 436 stairs to the top. On your journey as you
ascend the dome, you can catch glimpses of the original brick layout and see
the actual herringbone pattern of the bricks, just as Brunelleschi had done it
so many centuries ago.

The dome on top of Santa Maria del Fiore remains the largest brick dome ever constructed
It is still considered one of the greatest architectural masonry feats that still
stands for us to see in awe today.
SLIDE 3
he construction of the cupola of the Cathedral was one of the most imposing tasks of the Renaissance,
it kept the Florentines engaged in debates and competitions for years but, once it was completed,
thanks to the genius of Filippo Brunelleschi, it became the symbol of the city itself and the new,
revolutionary Renaissance architecture. Arnolfo's project for Santa Maria del Fiore, which became even
more imposing with Francesco Talenti's modifications, had left the basilica with an enormous problem,
that of closing the chancel with a roof. Arnolfo's project certainly included a cupola, but a low one,
similar to some of the Byzantine-type spherical coverings that can still be seen today in southern Italy: a
virtual portrayal of it is shown in the fresco in the Spanish Chapel in Santa Maria Novella, carried out in
1365-67, where the Cathedral is shown with a strange cupola which never actually existed. In the end,
the cathedral was so enormous that the usual methods of fixed scaffolding from the ground could not
be used. After all, it seemed quite impossible to roof over a space of 45,5 metres in diameter without
some sort of reinforcement.

Axonometric drawing and section of the Cupola

The challenge was resolved by Brunelleschi, expert in the rules of perspective and mathematics, as well
as being a real enthusiast for the construction techniques used by the ancient Romans. He got his final
inspiration from an attentive study of the cupola of the Pantheon, which had also been carried out
without scaffolding and with a double wall. When he returned to Florence, the artist suggested that a
drum be built above the chancel and then, when this structure was complete (in actual fact making it
even more complicated to construct the cupola), he returned to Rome, chased by desperate messages
from the Opera del Duomo. Eventually he suggested announcing a competition for the project of a
cupola with the following requisites: it had to be octagonal, measure 46 metres in diameter at the base,
be built without scaffolding and appear to be at least double in size: he was quite sure that he would
win.

The drum of the

Cupola without marble
The competition was held in 1418 and Brunelleschi won it outright, but the directors of the Opera del
Duomo stipulated that Lorenzo Ghiberti (who had already managed to snatch the commission from him
for the north door of the Baptistery) should collaborate as overseer for the work. The artist was so
offended that he nearly destroyed his model (the same one that we can see today in the Museum of the
Opera del Duomo); his friends Donatello and Luca della Robbia instead advised him to pretend he was
ill and leave all the responsibility to Ghiberti. He followed their advice and Ghiberti soon came to a
standstill and had to admit that he was incapable of understanding the project and going ahead with the
work.

Side view of the Cathedral

Having won a victory over his rival, Brunelleschi started the construction in 1420 and spent the rest of
his life working on it, although in the meantime he did design other monuments that were to be a basic
part of the profile of Renaissance Florence. The final structure that he elaborated and completed
consisted in a double cupola of brick, laid herring-bone fashion, 91 metres high, completely self-
supporting and based on an unusual system of flying rather than fixed centerings (which would of course
have been impossible because of the size). The exterior of the cupola, with domical vaults and stone ribs
at the corners, appeared much larger and "blown up" than the interior, however it reproduced the same
pointed arch profile to perfection.
The Lantern on top of the Cupola
The "Cupolone" or great cupola (as the Florentines have called it ever since) was completed in 1434.
Two years later the lantern was placed in position (taking it from 91 to 114,5 metres in total height),
while the four tribunes occupying the spaces created by the projections in the octagon of the apse were
carried out in 1438. The decorations in the lantern were finished by 1446, when the great architect was
on his deathbed. The finishing touches included the application of the decorations in the lantern (1461)
and the positioning of the great copper sphere on the top (1474). Cast in Verrocchio's workshop and
raised up thanks to a machine that was built with the help of Leonardo da Vinci, the ball fell off after
being struck by lightning on July 17th 1600 and was replaced two years later by a larger one. A marble
plaque commemorating the event is still visible on the paving in the square behind the Cathedral.

Baccio d'Agnolo's
unfinished balustrade
The decoration of the gallery around the drum was never finished: the balustrade designed by Baccio
d'Agnolo and carried out on only one side of the octagon, did not meet with the approval
of Michelangelo who, defining it "a cage for crickets", decreed its final condemnation. Brunelleschi's
model was later to be copied by Michelangelo for the cupola of St. Peter's in Rome. Tourists will find the
visit to the cupola really spectacular: although the climb up is somewhat tiring (463 steps), it is
extremely interesting for understanding the method the architect used to build it while also giving a
wonderful view over the city. It is also possible to stop in the interior of the dome on the way up to see
the frescoes of the Last Judgement by Giorgio Vasari and Federico Zucchari from closer at hand.

As a structural engineer, my principal interest in reading about the cupola of Santa

Maria del Fiore is how exactly does it stand up. The masonry dome is still the largest of
its kind. With a span of over 45 meters, it held the overall record until 1881, when the
iron framed Devonshire Royal Hospital captured the title. A design like Brunelleschi’s
will not be seen again, since the radical use of unreinforced masonry would likely not
meet modern building codes. Nevertheless, the Cupola has stood for seven centuries
and offers many lessons to today’s structural engineers
Even with the knowledge of Newtonian physics and computer modeling the behavior of
Brunelleschi’s dome is difficult for modern engineers to understand. At the time of
construction, Brunelleschi would have relied on his personal experience constructing
similar masonry structures and the use of physical modeling. It’s also said that he
traveled to Rome to observe the techniques of the ancient masters before completing
his design of the Cupola.

SLIDE 4
The dome that was added to the top of the Santa Maria del Fiore cathedral in Florence in 1446-1461
is rich in history and interesting detail. Two of the more touted features of the dome are the
structural design and the novel method of construction which allowed the dome to be constructed
without the usual temporary internal bracing.

The web and literature is rich with great overviews of all the features and historical events of the
dome's construction. However while reading about this remarkable engineering feat, I was
frustrated by the lack of mechanistic explanations about how the dome was actually assembled and
exactly how its touted features combine to make it work. In this posting I present what I have
inferred from combing through many articles and making educated guesses from an engineer's
point of view.

1. The Dome and its structural features

 The geometry: This dome was a massive undertaking. It was to be the largest in the world at
the time, 144 feet across and with a base 171 feet above the cathedral floor and rising to 375
feet. The dome would weigh about 37,000 tons with over 4 million bricks.

 The geometry of the dome was not a simple hemisphere but rather an eight sided shape,
similar to the shape of an eight sided felt hat, each side made of a bendable flat piece, with
the pieces laced together at their edges. At each level, the shape of this dome is octagonal.
The vertical curve is circular with its center of curvature at the base of the dome, one-fifth the
dome's span from the edge (see the figure at the right) as prescribed by its designer. While
the designer Arnolfo di Cambio 124 years earlier had laid out the shape of the dome, most of
the engineering details to make it possible were left up to the builder, i.e. to Brunelleschi.
 Exaggerated potential deformation caused by the weight of the upper
dome. In reality with a stone or brick structure vertical cracks would
appear on the lower sidewalls and the dome would collapse. The
chains are designed to act like strong belts, resisting the lower
deformation and holding the structure together.

Chain made of 80 sandstone beams placed end to end and

interconnected with galvanized iron links to form an octagon. Each

sandstone beam was approximately 17inch by 17 inch in cross section

by 7.5 feet long and weighed about 1700 lbs. Chains for the upper part

of the dome were progressively shorter in circumference. Below each

chain was a series of shorter stone beams laid perpendicular to the

chain to connect the chain to both inner and outer domes.

Some writers say that two of these stone chains were used at each

level with the perpendicular ties interconnecting them and the

assembly resembling railroad tracks. Two parallel chains at each level

would better resist the stresses in the middle of the flat octagonal

sides. The ribs and double dome construction (covered next) also help

resist these forces.

 The chains: Of central importance was the lack of internal or external bracing, such as tie
beams and flying buttresses. The key to making the structure stable without bracing was the
novel use of massive sandstone and wooden tension rings, called "chains", embedded in the
dome at regular intervals. One sandstone chain was at the base of the dome, the wooden
chain was next, followed by three more sandstone chains. The sandstone chains were at 35
foot intervals with the wood chain between the first and second stone chains. The original
design called for complete iron chains on top of each sandstone chain for added strength;
however, it's not clear that these were ever added. Today, builders would use rebar to
provide strength in tension.
 Drawing showing the ribs that separated the inner and
outer domes.

Brunelleschi's sketch showing ribs and brick

orientation on inner and outer domes. This sketch
greatly exaggerates the size of the bricks.

 Double dome construction: Also adding to the strength-to-weight ratio was the design
which used two nested domes, and inner one and outer one, interconnected with a lattice of
brick ribs. The drawing and sketch at the right show the ribs. This design of two shells with
spacers between them is used extensively today whenever a large strength to weight ratio is
desired, e.g. modern aircraft design.
 The outer dome was 2 feet thick at the base and tapered to 1 foot thickness at the top. The
inner shell was 7 feet thick at the base and tapered to 5 feet thick at the top.

The ribs also transfer the weight of the outer dome onto the inner dome. The inner dome was
designed to be very strong being thicker and with its bricks oriented for strength. The outer
dome could then be optimized for resistance to the weather. A nicely done cutaway drawing
of the dome and its parts is at the National Geographic website.

 Lightweight bricks: Also important was the use of bricks for most of the construction of the
dome in place of the heavy stone which was usually used for construction of cathedrals. In
fact except for the dome, this cathedral (Santa Maria del Fiore) was otherwise made of stone.
To further cut the weight of the dome, the bricks used for the inner dome were special low
weight bricks, while those used for the outer dome were the more normal weight brick (still
lighter than stone) for better resistance to the weather.

As shown in Brunelleschi's sketch at the right, the bricks in the inner dome were inclined at
steeper and steeper angles sloping inwards as one progresses up the dome, to best resist the
weight of the structure above. The bricks of the outer dome were laid at a fixed angle to
slope away from the interior to best shed rain water.

 No centering: The ceilings and arches of most cathedrals were built using temporary
wooden structures called "centering" that would support the stone work until the complete
arch and supporting structures were completed. It was a huge event to remove this
temporary structure and hope the completed arch or vaulted ceiling would not collapse
killing all the workmen doing the removal. In the case of Brunelleshi's dome there was no
obvious way to provide the massive amount of timber required for the centering, at least at a
reasonable cost. Furthermore, the danger of removing the centering on such a massive
structure was close to unthinkable. Brunelleshi won the contract to build the dome by
convincing the town fathers that he could do the job without centering.
 Brunelleschi's sketch of the herringbone pattern looking
down at the dome from above. The brick size is greatly
Photo of the herringbone brick work
exaggerated. This sketch also falsely suggests that the dome
visible in the space between the domes.
is curved all the way around, when in fact it was octagonal
with eight straight sides.

Top edge of bricks being laid in a

herringbone pattern. The upright bricks
from the previous course stick up and
provide secure points for the new course of
bricks (shown in white). This upright bricks
also breaks up the circumference so that
each section could be laid and stabilized
independently. This illustration does not
show the other layers of bricks required for
the 5 to 7 foot thick wall. These other layers
would be laid along with the inner layer
(shown here), with perhaps the inner layer
being several courses ahead of the other
layers (which perhaps were also staggered
as per the masons' convenience).
  Herringbone brick pattern: Brunelleschi's novel herringbone brick pattern made possible
the laying of the upper level bricks without centering or temporary bracing. At these higher
levels the dome curved inwards making it hard to keep the newly laid bricks with their wet
mortar from slipping off and falling to the cathedral floor 300 feet below. At each level the
vertical bricks in the herringbone pattern stuck up and provided secure points between
which to set the new bricks. The workers, perhaps with wooden clamps, could hold the
bricks between each set of vertical bricks until the mortar began to set up. The mortar was
allowed to thoroughly dry for about a week to secure the newly laid bricks before the next
course of brick was laid. The upright bricks also separated the circumference into short 3 foot
sections allowing bricklayers at different parts of the circumference to progress at slightly
different rates. These breaks made the whole, layer-by-layer laying much more forgiving.

This herringbone pattern also bonded the layers of bricks together making a more stable
interior plastering surface.

SLIDE 5 N 6
Filippo Brunelleschi Biography
(1377–1446)

Filippo Brunelleschi was one of the leading architects and engineers

of the Italian Renaissance and is best known for his work on the
Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore (the Duomo) in Florence.
Who Was Filippo Brunelleschi?
Filippo Brunelleschi was an architect and engineer, and one of the pioneers of early Renaissance
architecture in Italy. He was the first modern engineer and an innovative problem solver,
building his major work, the dome of the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore (the Duomo) in
Florence, with the aid of machines that he invented specifically for the project.

Early Years
Born in 1377 in Florence, Italy, Filippo Brunelleschi's early life is mostly a
mystery. It is known that he was the second of three sons and that his father
was a distinguished notary in Florence. Brunelleschi initially trained as a
goldsmith and sculptor and enrolled in the Arte della Seta, the silk merchants'
guild, which also included goldsmiths, metalworkers and bronze workers.
Around the turn of the century, he was designated a master goldsmith.

In 1401, Brunelleschi competed against Lorenzo Ghiberti, a young rival, and

five other sculptors for the commission to make the bronze reliefs for the door
of the Florence baptistery. Brunelleschi's entry, "The Sacrifice of Isaac," was
the high point of his short career as a sculptor, but Ghiberti won the
commission. Ghiberti went on to complete another set of bronze doors for the
baptistery with the help of Renaissance giant Donatello. A hundred years
later, Michelangelo said about the doors, "Surely these must be the ‘Gates of
Paradise.'"

The Reinvention of Linear Perspective

Early, crude ideas of perspective were known to ancient Greeks, such as
Polygnotus of Thasos, as well as ancient Roman artists in their frescos, but
were lost during the Middle Ages. Additionally, Arab scientist Alhazen (b. c965
- d. 1040), in his Book of Optics, described his theory about the optical basis
of perspective. His book was translated into Latin during the 14th century.
Early in his architectural career (c. 1410-1415), Brunelleschi "rediscovered"
the principles of linear perspective. With the foundation of these principles,
one can paint or draw using a single vanishing point, toward which all lines on
the same plane appear to converge, and objects appear smaller as they
recede into the distance.

Brunelleschi displayed his findings with two painted panels (since lost) of
Florentine streets and buildings. By using Brunelleschi's perspective
principles, artists of his generation were able to use two-dimensional
canvases to create illusions of three-dimensional space, crafting a realism not
seen previously.

Linear perspective as an artistic tool soon spread throughout the whole of Italy
and then through Western Europe, and has remained a staple in artistic
creation since.

Florence, Italy, Filippo Brunelleschi appeared at the gate of the not-yet-completed cathedral, holding

a little painting and a little mirror. Already considered a magician by half of Florence because of the
dome he was building without any scaffolding, Master Filippo gathered a sizable crowd for his
demonstration.
Brunelleschi led the crowd to the gate of the cathedral so that they would look in the direction of the
Baptistery outside the building. He gave a painting with a hole in the middle to somebody in the
crowd and asked him to keep the unpainted backside of the painting towards himself and to look
through the hole with one eye into the direction of the Baptizing Chapel. Then the master suddenly
lifted a mirror in front of the painting, covering the chapel from the viewer’s sight, and asking loudly
enough so that people further away in the crowd could hear: “What can you see, Sir?” “Oh, the
Baptistery, Sir Filippo!” the man replied.
The audience was amazed. On the other side of the painting, the chapel was depicted perfectly and
the hole was right on the horizon, just at the vanishing point. So the mirror showed just the same as
the reality it covered
SLIDE 7 ,8,9,10
 Architect Filippo Brunelleschi
Location Florence, Italy   map
Date 1424 to 1445   timeline
Building Type children's hospital
 Construction System bearing masonry, stone
Climate mediterranean
Context urban
Style Renaissance
The portico of the Hospital of the Innocents is the first organic creation of
Brunelleschi (1421-240) and it marks the birth of Renaissance architecture
in Florence.

In spite of the fact that Brunelleschi knew of and much admired Roman building
techniques, and even though the dome of Florence Cathedral is his most outstanding
engineering achievement, his solution to this most critical structural problem was
arrived at through what were essentially Gothic building principles Thus, the dome,
which also had to harmonize in formal terms with the century-old building, does not
really express Brunelleschi's own architectural style, which is shown for the first time
in a project that he began shortly before he accepted the commission of the dome - the
Hospital of the Innocents.

The universal fascination of antiquity was evidently both aesthetic and social,
aesthetic in so far as the forms of Roman architecture and decoration appealed to
artists and patrons of the fifteenth century, social in so far as the study of the Roman
past was accessible to the educated only. So the artist and architect who until then had
been satisfied with learning their craft from their masters and developing it according
to tradition and their powers of imagination, now devoted their attention to the art of
Antiquity, not only because it enchanted them but also because it conferred social
distinction on them.

So strongly had this revival impressed the scholars from the sixteenth to the
nineteenth century that they called the whole period that of rebirth, "rinascita" or
Renaissance. Early writers by using this term meant the rebirth of art and letters in
quite a general sense. But in the nineteenth century - a century of unlimited period
revival - the emphasis was laid on the imitation of Roman forms and motifs. In re-
examining the works of the Renaissance today, one must, however, ask oneself
whether the new attitude towards Antiquity is really their essential innovation.

The very first building in Renaissance forms is Filippo Brunelleschi's Foundling

Hospital, begun in 1421. The Foundling facade consists of a colonnade on the ground
floor with delicate Corinthian columns and wide semicircular arches letting enough
sun and warmt penetrate into the loggia, and a first floor with generously spaced
moderately sized rectangular windows under shallow pediments corresponding
exactly to the arches beneath.

Ten medallions in coloured terra cotta by Andrea della Robbia - the famous babes in
swaddling clothes - are placed into the spandrels of the arcade. A subtly
scaled architrave divides ground floor from first floor.

These arches appear to have been inspired either by the Baptistery of Florence

Cathedral or by the church of San Miniato al Monte, both Romanesque buildings. In
Brunelleschi's time, the Baptistery mistakenly was believed to be a Roman temple, but
even if he had known that it was not Roman, Brunelleschi may well have mistaken it
for an Early Christian building of the fourth or fifth century, constructed in a style that
he associated closely with Classical Roman architecture and that had just as much
authority for him.

He modified, however his probable Romanesque models in important ways - for

example, by framing the round arches of the last bay at each end of the hospital's
facade with pilasters, a venerable Roman motif that Brunelleschi would certainly have
encountered often on his visits to Rome in such ancient monuments as the Colosseum.

The hospital also expresses quite a different style from that of the Florence Baptistery
and San Miniato. The stress on horizontals, the clarity of the articulation (the height of
each column is the same as the distance between the columns and also equal to the
depth of each bay), and the symmetry of the design, combined with the use
of Corinthian capitals and fluted pilasters, as well as second-story windows topped by
Classically inspired pediments, create an impression of rationality and logic that, in
spirit at least, relates the Ospedale degili Innocenti more to the architecture of
Imperial Rome than to that of Romanesque Florence.

The whole building is arranged horizontally without in any way overstressing its
stability. The arrangement of the slender delicate members is almost linear, forming a
single apparently weightless plane

By the door in the center of the portico we enter the hospital courtyard.

SLIDE 11

Architect Filippo Brunelleschi

Location Florence, Italy   map
Date 1429 to 1461   timeline
Building Type church
 Construction System bearing masonry
Climate mediterranean
 Context urban
Style Italian Renaissance

Filippo Brunelleschi built the Pazzi chapel as a perfect space with harmonious proportions. He
could achieve this result by including in his project-plan the knowledge gained during his stay in
Rome when he focused primarily on measuring ancient buildings, for instance the Pantheon.

The chapel was commissioned to Brunelleschi by Andrea de’ Pazzi in 1429 but the works went on
also after the death of the architect in 1446 and were never finished because the family suffered
the consequences of the conspiracy organized by Jacopo and Francesco de’ Pazzi, together with
the archbishop of Pisa Francesco Salviati, against the Medici family. Lorenzo The Magnificent fell
in the ambush on April 26th 1478 while he was attending Mass inside the Cathedral together with
the brother Giuliano who was killed.

The chapel, used as the chapter house by Santa

Croce friars, is proceeded by an atrium, a sort of entrance hall, supported by six
Corinthian columns placed next to the central arch. It is a rectangular layout containing one
square room, covered by an umbrella-shaped dome, and two sides of the remaining space, each
covered by a barrel vault with round windows.

The wall opens on a small square apse called scarsella covered by a dome decorated with a
fresco painting reproducing the sky over Florence on July 4th 1442. A similar work still open to
interpretation adorns the inside of the Old Sacristy in San Lorenzo church.
The attribution to Brunelleschi of this part of the structure is still a subject of discussion among
the scholars, some attributing the chapel to Michelozzo, Rossellino or Giuliano da Maiano.

The central dome is decorated with round sculptures and the coat of arms of Pazzi Family (two
paired dolphins) made of glazed terracotta, works by Luca della Robbia.

Numerous artists contributed to

the conclusion of the decoration works of the Pazzi chapel: Giuliano da Maiano made the frame
and the door; Luca della Robbia made the relief representing Saint Andrews on the throne above
the portal and glazed terracotta rounds with Apostles.
The four Evangelists have been attributed to Brunelleschi, the cherubs on the medals of the
external frieze to Desiderio da Settignano and his brother Geri. Alesso Baldovinetti drew the
pattern of the stained glass window with the figure of Saint Andrew.

Architect Filippo Brunelleschi

Location Florence, Italy   map
Date 1421 to 1440   timeline
Building Type church
 Construction System bearing masonry
Subscribers - login to skip ads
Climate mediterranean
Context urban
Style Italian Renaissance
Notes "Church of San Lorenzo". Domed. The New Sacristy, or
Medici Chapel, was done starting 1520 by Michelangelo.

The Basilica di San Lorenzo (Basilica of St Lawrence) is one of the largest churches

of Florence, Italy, situated at the centre of the city’s main market district, and the burial place of all
the principal members of the Medici family from Cosimo il Vecchio to Cosimo III. It is one of several
churches that claim to be the oldest in Florence, having been consecrated in 393, [1] at which time it
stood outside the city walls. For three hundred years it was the city's cathedral before the official
seat of the bishop was transferred to Santa Reparata.

The Basilica of San Lorenzo demonstrates many innovative features of the developing style of
Renaissance Architecture.

 a simple mathematical proportional relationship using the sqare aisle bay as a module and the
nave bays in a 2x1 ratio.
 the use of an integrated system of column, arches, and entablatures, based on Roman Classical
models
 the use of Classical proportions for the height of the columns
 a clear relationship between column and pilaster, the latter meant to be read as a type of
embedded pier.
 the use of spherical segments in the vaults of the side aisles.
 the articulation of the structure in pietra serena (Italian: “dark stone”).

The design of San Lorenzo has at times met with criticism, particularly when compared with Santo
Spirito, also in Florence and which is considered to have been constructed more or less in
conformity with Brunelleschi's ideas, even though he died before most of it was built. By the 16th
century, Giorgio Vasari commented that the columns along the nave should have been elevated on
plinths.[3] The steps along the aisles, supporting the pilasters, have also been considered to deviate
from Classical ideals.
SLIDE 12

Abstract

In 1860 John Charles Robinson purchased the 15th-century high altar chapel from the Florentine
convent church of Santa Chiara for the South Kensington Museum (now the V&A). Rebuilt piece by piece
in London, the chapel’s Florentine context was gradually forgotten. New research for the Medieval &
Renaissance Galleries reveals Santa Chiara’s complex history, artistic significance, and original
Renaissance arrangement.

Introduction
Figure 1 - ‘The Chancel’, Gallery 50B, Medieval & Renaissance Galleries, V&A, 2013.
Photograph: Donal Cooper

The Santa Chiara Chapel in the Victoria and Albert Museum (V&A 7720&A-1861) is a
unique example of Italian Renaissance architecture transposed to a museum context.
Removed from its original setting as the apse of the convent church of Santa Chiara in
Florence, the Chapel allows the London public to experience at first hand the aesthetic
and spatial qualities of an Italian church interior. (1) Sometimes attributed to the architect
Giuliano da Sangallo (c. 1443 - 1516) and demonstrating the influence of Filippo
Brunelleschi (1377 - 1446), the Chapel was commissioned in the 1490s by the
Florentine merchant Iacopo Bongianni (d. 1508), as part of a comprehensive rebuilding
of Santa Chiara begun in the late 1480s when his sisters were nuns in the convent.
Iacopo was a follower of Girolamo Savonarola (1452 - 1498), the Dominican preacher
whose stirring sermons led Florentines to reform their churches and government, and to
burn their luxury goods in the Bonfire of the Vanities. It is tempting to read these
sympathies into the design and decoration of Iacopo’s church, an issue to which we will
return below.
The Chapel came to the Museum in 1861, having been purchased in Florence the
previous year by John Charles Robinson, the first curator of the art collections at the
South Kensington Museum (now the V&A). Santa Chiara was the most audacious of
Robinson’s many Florentine acquisitions: he paid £386 for the High Altar Chapel and
High Altarpiece of the convent church, including ‘the right to remove anything and
everything we like’.(2) Despite Florentine protest, the Chapel was carefully dismantled
and the fragments numbered, recorded and shipped to London for reassembly.
(3)
 Robinson noted in his 1862 catalogue of Italian sculpture at the Museum that its
‘importance […] to a collection like the present, as a complete specimen of Florentine
architecture of most characteristic style, could scarcely be overrated’. (4) As Robinson
foresaw, the Santa Chiara Chapel dominated the display of monumental sculpture in the
North Court, and its scale has ensured the Chapel’s cardinal position in succeeding
displays of the Museum’s sculpture collections.(5) In the new Medieval & Renaissance
Galleries it provides the centrepiece for the display of ecclesiastical art, Gallery 50b (fig.
1), and marks the climax of the long vista through the top-lit galleries available to visitors
from the Museum’s main entrance.
The Santa Chiara Chapel has generally been overlooked by scholars of the Italian
Renaissance, largely due to its presence in London for the past 150 years. (6) With the
opening of the Medieval & Renaissance Galleries in December 2009, interest in its art-
historical significance has started to revive. (7) The renewed presentation of the Santa
Chiara Chapel raises, in turn, a number of museological issues around the authenticity
of display and the reconstruction of historical contexts. This article presents original
research undertaken in London and Florence that underpinned the reinterpretation of
the Chapel in the Medieval & Renaissance Galleries and the design of the digital
reconstruction that accompanies the new display. We reassess the Chapel’s original
setting in Florence and disentangle the various reconfigurations of the monument after
its arrival in London in 1861. We also consider the practical and methodological issues
that arose when applying our academic research to a museum display.

SLIDE 13,14

opularity of the Holy Virgin, depicts an enthroned Mary holding an infant Jesus encircled by
various angels and saints. The work, which was commissioned by a religious order in Florence
known as the Humiliati, was intended to arouse sentimental devotion among the people and
encourage church attendance and support.

It is possible and even likely that di Bondone took cues from similar Maestà paintings by both
Cimabue, his master, and Duccio, a contemporary and already-established artist when di
Bondone commenced his career as a painter (se Related Paintings below). Both were solidly
Medieval painters.

Di Bondone's Maestà rendering, on the other hand, clearly shows what he is famous for: moving
away from the stylized Byzantine method. The Ognissanti Madonna demonstrates his
revolutionary naturalism and commitment to realism while simultaneously incorporating both
Medieval and Gothic elements. The pointed throne, for example, is a classically Gothic touch.
Ognissanti Madonna Analysis

 Ognissanti Madonna
Giotto di Bondone

 Ognissanti Madonna
Giotto di Bondone

 Ognissanti Madonna
Giotto di Bondone

 Ognissanti Madonna
Giotto di Bondone
Composition:
While the Ognissanti Madonna was clearly influenced by the work of di Bondone's
contemporary Byzantine devotees, the overwhelming impression of the painting is one of
striking realism and utter humanity.

Di Bondone chose and arranged his subjects carefully. The oversized, imposing Madonna, the
solemn, dignified baby Jesus, and the attentive, pious angels and saints at their feet are all
equally crucial parts of the painting and, individually, seem to have a life of their own.

Color palette:
Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of the Ognissanti Madonna is di Bondone's masterful use of
color. With a traditional gold background, the gold of the angels' halos and gold lines along the
throne, the painting seems to shimmer in a regal, holy light. The warm greens and reds,
contrasted with the light pinks and purples, serve to humanize and lighten the otherwise weighty,
ethereal painting.

Texture:
Texture plays a key role in the Ognissanti Madonna, especially in the faces of di Bondone's
subjects. A scrutinizing look at the painting reveals the remarkably human-like texture of the
flesh and the carefully nuanced facial expressions of awe, joy and respect. The clothing, too,
demonstrates di Bondone's meticulous attention to detail. The thick, luxuriant robes of the
Madonna fall realistically between her legs, the loose folds seeming to occupy real space.

Brush stroke:
As he would do throughout his career, di Bondone sticks to naturalism in the Ognissanti
Madonna. Eschewing the loose, flowing brushstrokes of the Medieval period, di Bondone paints
his subjects and their surroundings exactly as they would appear in reality. The face of the
Madonna features shadows and planes as though she were a real person sitting for a portrait.

Gone, too, were the typically ambiguous or vacant expressions on the faces of the supporting
characters. They gaze upward at the Madonna and child with faces of wonder and admiration
(and a faint touch of fear).
Ognissanti Madonna Analysis
Ognissanti Madonna Critical Reception
 

Madonna Enthroned with Saint Matthew

Annibale Carracci

Madonna Enthroned with Four Saints

Rosso Fiorentino

Little information exists on the immediate reception of the Ognissanti Madonna. It was
commissioned by a group of poor monk-like men who wanted a powerfully moving altarpiece
for their church in Florence, and few will doubt di Bondone's success in this endeavor.

During life:
No evidence exists to suggest that the Ognissanti Madonna was not well-received by any part of
society. Having already catapulted to fame for his work on the Church of St. Francis in Assisi, di
Bondone was much in demand by both the papacy and lay community.

Furthermore, by the time of the Ognissanti Madonna, di Bondone's revolutionary naturalism was
highly prized and beginning to be imitated by many artists throughout Italy.

After death:
The Ognissanti Madonna, originally designed as an altarpiece for the Church of the Ognissanti
(All Saints) in Florence, is one of very few remaining di Bondone works. Housed at the Galleria
degli Uffizi (also in Florence) since 1919, it underwent a full restoration in 1991 and is currently
displayed, appropriately, between two other Maestà paintings - one by Medieval painter Duccio
and another by di Bondone's master, Cimabue.

Though strikingly similar in some ways to both works, the Ognissanti Madonna is celebrated
primarily for the ways in which it is different. It has stood for centuries and continues to stand
today as evidence of di Bondone's invaluable contribution to the birth of the Renaissance.

Giotto di Bondone, Madonna Enthroned, from the church of Ognissanti,

Florence, Italy, ca. 1310. Tempera and gold leaf on wood, 14th century Italy.

Giotto di Bondone (ca. 1266-1337) is regarded as one of the first Renaissance

painter. He is moreover regarded as a pioneer in painting based on
observation. Some scholars even call him the “father of Western Pictorial Art.”
He contributed largely in the establishment of painting as major art form for
the upcoming centuries. His focus on observation and preeminence of sight
showed his generation a new way of thinking.

The Madonna enthroned is dated to c. 1310. Madonna is depicted with a lack

of motion, appropriate to an icon. The painting has a traditional Christian
subject, representing the Virgin Mary and the Christ Child seated on her lap,
with saints surrounding the two. Giotto shows a strong, weighty, queenly
mother. The panel still uses the traditional Byzanthine gold background but
the depiction almost excludes emotional interrelations between figures and
adds to the effect of dominating weight. By this and unlike the Byzanthine
depiction, Giotto wanted to show Madonna as a figure that has substance.
Giotto retained the hierarchy of scale, making the centralized Madonna and
the Christ Child much larger in size than the surrounding saints and religious
figures. Although still influenced by the Italo-Byzanthine style,  revolutionized
painting by introducing sculpturesque figures.He succeeds by projecting light
and shadows. Giotto focuses on human, rather than supernatural qualities. It
was one painting that could be counted to Renaissance due to its naturalism
and escape from the constraints of Gothic art.

The visibility of figures through the arcaded sides of the throne, a device
inspired by Duccio, emphasizes the human figures and the secondary role of
the architecture, and also looks forward to the use of space developed in later
works.

Giotto’s naturalism was contrasted with the Byzantine style. Main differences
occur in the drawing of the figures, where Byzantine conventions are rejected.
In contrast Giotto introduces a more naturalistic style, much influenced by
French Gothic sculpture and Classical Roman work. Especially Giotto’s soft
modelling of figures is new for his era. His Madonna Enthroned marks the end
of medieval painting in Italy and the beginning of a new naturalistic approach
to art.
Virgin and Child enthroned, surrounded by angels and saints (Ognissanti Maestà)
Author
Giotto (Vespignano, Vicchio di Mugello 1267 – Firenze 1337)
Date
1300-1305 ca.
Museum
The Uffizi
Collection
Painting
Location
Room 2
Technique
Tempera on wood, gold background
Size
325 x 204 cm
Inventory
Inv. 1890 no. 8344
Mary, holding Jesus in her arms, is seated on a throne, like a queen. This is the
iconography that gives rise to the title “Maestà” or “Majesty”, used to refer to this
and other paintings with similar subjects.

The Virgin is holding the Child, who is giving a blessing with his right hand, while
in his left, he holds a rolled scroll, symbolizing knowledge. Around the throne is a
pointed tabernacle, inlaid with different-coloured marble, reminiscent of the
Gothic architecture that was fashionable in the 1300s. Inside this tabernacle is a
group of saints and angels. The angels, who are kneeling at the foot of the
throne, offer vases of roses and lilies, a reference to purity and charity, while the
ones to the side of the throne are holding out a crown and a pyx, a religious item
that likely refers to the Passion of Christ. The saints are partly covered by the
architecture and halos, which as well as suggesting the existence of a solid
space in which the figures have been placed, serve also to evoke the name of
the church for which the painting was created: Ognissanti in Florence.

The original position of the painting inside the church is unknown, but it is
possible that it was hung over a side altar or on a partition dividing the secular
space from the choir of the Humiliati monks who officiated in the church. Giotto
continued to work for Ognissanti during his career, painting at least two more
works.

Painted when the artist was already extremely well known and greatly in demand
all over Italy, the masterpiece stands out for the naturalism with which it develops
this traditional subject. The decorative elements on the clothing are reduced to a
minimum to bring out the full plastic nature of the bodies, which are shaped by
light and shade. For over a century, this composition was a model of inspiration
for Florentine painters.
SLIDE 15

Francesco Petrarca, an Italian scholar is considered as “the father of Renaissance” and

“father of humanism”. Italian Renaissance originated from the works of Petrarch and Dante
Alighieri and the paintings of Giotto di Bondone.

He rediscovered Cicero’s letters. This prompted searches for ancient Greek and Latin
writings throughout European monasteries. The rediscovery of these writings and works of
cultural art. The rediscovery led to the rise of Renaissance.
Art appreciators of Ontario listen up! The Art Gallery of Ontario is hosting a
unique collection of Early Renaissance art which influenced the later masters
of the Florentine reign like Botticelli and Michelangelo.

Beginning March 16th, the Art Gallery of Ontario will host the exhibition
“Revealing the Early Renaissance: Stories and Secrets in Florentine Art” which
provides viewers a chance to see ancient artworks and transcripts that have
never yet left the city of Florence.

Some of Giotto’s the most notable pieces that will be including in this exhibit
include:

Peruzzi Altarpiece

Madonna San Giorgio Alla Costa

As seen with some of Giotto’s works above, this era was heavily influenced by
the bedazzlement of artworks including gold leaf and crushed gemstones.
Most often the majority of these embellished works were commissioned to
represent the most dominant religion of Europe, Christianity.

More importantly, the rendering of three dimensional bodies as seen in

Giotto’s Madonna Enthroned alludes to the experimental of the rendering of
three dimensional bodies, along with realistic representations of perspective
and depth.

These important developments would contribute to the success of major

artists like Michelangelo and Botticelli in later years during the peak of the
Renaissance era.

The “Revealing Early Renaissance” exhibit is bringing together works from

corners of the globe allowing Canadians to experience these early Renaissance
pieces and learn more about the gradual shifts between movements. A fellow
blogger describes his interest in the exhibit here, recounting his visit to a press
conference / early reveal before the allotted opening date of March 16th.

While dobbernation provides a detailed description of his visit and provides

countless images of the featured art works I hoped for a blurb about the
interactive map which allows visitors to visualize and engage with a simulated
version of how the Renaissance streets of Florence intertwine with the city as
it is today.

While I intend to visit such an extraordinary exhibit of early Renaissance art, I

must confess I am most intrigued by this combination of technological
applications within the confines of the early Renaissance era.

For more short lesson on early Renaissance art visit this

educational website which provides a brief description of the era along with
major artists and their most famous pieces of the time.

In the Renaissance the Art was transformed. Artists gave their work more depth and made more use
of space, filling negative spaces and adding new developments.
They experimented with light and colour. Artists found anew and more proportionate point of
perspective.They used the theme of nature in their artwork and artists also found better styles of
painting portraits. In the medieval times artwork was flat and unrealistic. 
Plants especially were drawn out of proportion and were very unrealistically drawn. They were
drawn at least ten times bigger than their actual sizes in the real world.

The Renaissance changed the perspective and colour of people.

Paintings showed depth and had realistic and natural colours in the background.
Before the Renaissance artists would draw the children like adults. 
They portrayed young children as shrunken down to size men. The Renaissance gave painters new
views and ideas of how to draw people. They drew people with more emotion and more perspective
as well as many other new styles in other categories of Art. 

This new perspective and emotion in painting came from many different things that happened in the
Renaissance.
A major one was that the Renaissance portrayed Baby Jesus differently than the Medieval period
before hand. He was shown as an actual baby contrary to a very small man. Since art was becoming
more important in the Renaissance more people were interested in it and new innovations and styles
of painting were found. 
Artists were also able to make a better living out of their work. This also brought up new and better
possibilities of creating better quality work and equipment.

Now they could finance new artists and the art world expanded
dramatically. 
Below is a comparison of "The Medieval Art Period" and "The Renaissance Art Period" (the
information below, in the comparison is from no particular website, we came up with the
comparisons ourselves):

Giotto (1267 - 1337) lived in Florence, the “Father of the Renaissance”, this was what he was
considered as. Giotto produced many innovations showed the use of approximate perspective, the
increased volume of figures and a depth of emotion in his work. Two of his innovative pieces are
“Lamentation of the Death of Christ” and “Cleansing of the Temple”.

Giotto de Bondone, The Mourning of Christ The so-called Florentine school of painting began in the
Middle Ages and reached its height during the Renaissance. Giotto de Bondone (1266–1337) was one of
the great early innovators of the Florentine school. He pioneered the technique of fresco painting (i.e.,
painting directly onto wet plaster), which was used often for Renaissance murals. He was also one of the
first to try for a more realistic look to the figures in his paintings, giving them a feel of three-
dimensionality and authenticity that made them appear much more human and lifelike than figures in
medieval paintings. In The Mourning of Christ, Giotto makes each figure a distinct individual whose face
displays a different expression of grief. Though the painting does not show the mathematical three-
dimensional perspective later Renaissance art would, it does seem much less flat than the medieval
painting we viewed in the previous slide.
SLIDE 16

Masaccio, byname of Tommaso di Giovanni di Simone Cassai,

(born December 21, 1401, Castel San Giovanni [now San Giovanni
Valdarno, near Florence, Italy]—died autumn 1428, Rome), important
Florentine painter of the early Renaissance whose frescoes in the
Brancacci Chapel of the Church of Santa Maria del Carmine
in Florence (c. 1427) remained influential throughout the Renaissance.
In the span of only six years, Masaccio radically transformed
Florentine painting. His art eventually helped create many of the
major conceptual and stylistic foundations of Western painting.
Seldom has such a brief life been so important to the history of art.

The Trinity, a fresco in the Church of Santa Maria Novella, also

presents important pictorial innovations that embody contemporary
concerns and influences. Painted about 1427, it was probably
Masaccio’s last work in Florence. It represents the Trinity (Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit) set in a barrel-vaulted hall before which kneel
two donors. The deep coffered vault is depicted using a nearly perfect
one-point system of linear perspective, in which all
the orthogonals recede to a central vanishing point. This way of
depicting space may have been devised in Florence about 1410 by the
architect Filippo Brunelleschi. Masaccio’s Trinity is the
first extant example of the systematic use of one-point perspective in a
painting. One-point perspective fixes the spectator’s viewpoint and
determines his relation with the painted space. The architectural
setting of The Trinity is derived from contemporary buildings by
Brunelleschi which, in turn, were much influenced by classical Roman
structures. Masaccio and Brunelleschi shared a common artistic vision
that was rational, human-scaled and human-centred, and inspired by
the ancient world.
 Left: Masaccio, Holy Trinity, c. 1427, fresco, 667 x 317 cm, Santa Maria
Novella, Florence; right: Masaccio's Holy Trinity with the figures labeled
Left: Masaccio, Holy Trinity, c. 1427, fresco, 667 x 317 cm, Santa Maria Novella, Florence; right:
Masaccio's Holy Trinity with the figures labeled

Masaccio was the first painter in the Renaissance to incorporate

Brunelleschi's discovery in his art. He did this in his fresco the Holy Trinity,
in Santa Maria Novella, in Florence.
Masaccio, Perspective diagram of Holy Trinity, c. 1427, Fresco, 667 x 317 cm, Santa Maria Novella, Florence

Have a close look at the painting and at this perspective diagram. The
orthogonals can be seen in the edges of the coffers in the ceiling (look for
diagonal lines that appear to recede into the distance). Because Masaccio
painted from a low viewpoint, as though we were looking up at Christ, we
see the orthogonals in the ceiling, and if we traced all of the orthogonals, we
would see that the vanishing point is on the ledge that the donors kneel on.
God's feet

My favorite part of this fresco is God's feet. Actually, you can only really see
one of them. Think about this for a moment. God is standing in this painting.
Doesn't that strike you as odd just a little bit? This may not strike you all that
much when you first think about it because our idea of God, our picture of
God in our minds eye—as an old man with a beard—is very much based on
Renaissance images of God. So, here Masaccio imagines God as a man. Not
a force or a power, or something abstract, but as a man. A man who stands --
his feet are foreshortened, and he weighs something and is capable of
walking! In medieval art, God was often represented by a hand, just a hand,
as though God was an abstract force or power in our lives, but here he seems
so much like a flesh and blood man. This is a good indication of Humanism
in the Renaissance.

View of nave of Santa Maria Novella, Florence with Masaccio's fresco on the
left wall, photo: Trevor Huxham (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
View of nave of Santa Maria Novella, Florence with Masaccio's fresco on the left wall, photo: Trevor
Huxham (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Masaccio's contemporaries were struck by the palpable realism of this fresco,

as was Vasari who lived over one hundred years later. Vasari wrote that "the
most beautiful thing, apart from the figures, is a barrel-shaped vaulting,
drawn in perspective and divided into squares filled with rosettes, which are
foreshortened and made to diminish so well that the wall appears to be
pierced."*
The Architecture

One of the other remarkable things about this fresco is the use of the forms of
classical architecture (from ancient Greece and Rome). Masaccio borrowed
much of what we see from ancient Roman architecture, and may have been
helped by the great Renaissance architect Brunelleschi.

Coffers - the indented squares on the ceiling

Column - a round, supporting element in architecture. In this fresco by

Masaccio we see an attached column

Pilasters - a shallow, flattened out column attached to a wall—it is only

decorative, and has no supporting function

Barrel Vault - vault means ceiling, and a barrel vault is a ceiling in the shape
of a round arch

Ionic and Corinthian Capitals - a capital is the decorated top of a column or

pilaster. An ionic capital has a scroll shape (like the ones on the attached
columns in the painting), and a Corinthian capital has leaf shapes.

Fluting - the vertical, indented lines or grooves that decorated the pilasters in
the painting—fluting can also be applied to a column
Masaccio, detail ofHoly Trinity with architectural elements labeled,
c. 1427, fresco, 667 x 317 cm, Santa Maria Novella, Florence

*Vasari, "Masaccio" in Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and

Architects the Artists(first published in 1550 in Italian)
Masaccio’s Holy Trinity
 Masaccio, Holy Trinity, 1424, fresco
In the church of Santa Maria Novella in Florence is one of the best examples of the early
Renaissance scientific approach to creating the convincing illusion of space within a painting.  It is
here, on one of the walls inside the church, that Masaccio painted his fresco of the Holy Trinity in
1424.  The title of the painting comes from the three key figures: Christ on the cross, God the Father
standing on a ledge behind Christ, and the Holy Spirit.  Interestingly, God the Father is shown
standing on a platform in the back, which is not an “otherworldly” place (where he would be
traditionally depicted), but instead a realistic space which follows the laws of physics.  Mary and St.
John are also present at the Crucifixion at the foot of the cross, and one step down from them are
Masaccio’s donors to either side.  Unlike the biblical and divine figures, the donors are meant to
appear to be in our space (the space of the viewer), and not in the recessed space in which the cross is
located.
If we look at the composition of the figures, we see that they are in a kind of

pyramidal  shape.  This is similar to composition of

many other Renaissance works, such as Brunelleschi’s competition panel for the bronze doors of the
Florence baptistery.
The architecture in which the Crucifixion takes place is also significant.  We see what looks like a
Roman triumphal arch, with a coffered ceiling, barrel vault, pilasters, and columns.  This type of
structure hearkens back to Roman architecture, and indicates the type of interest that Masaccio (and
others at this time) had in antique buildings.

Perhaps the most significant aspect of this fresco is the way Masaccio makes use of one-point linear
perspective to convey the sense that the images recedes back in space.  The coffers on the ceiling
create the orthogonal lines, and the vanishing point is at base of cross, which happens to be at the eye
level of the viewer.  This creates the sense that the space we are looking at in the fresco is actually a
continuation of the chapel space in which the fresco is painted.  Masaccio paid extremely close
attention to the dimensions of the objects and spaces that he painted, so much so that you can actually
determine the dimensions of the room we are looking at in the fresco.
 Moving our eyes down the fresco, we see a skeleton
in a tomb at the bottom.  This part of the fresco had been covered over for many years, and it was not
until recently that it was uncovered.  The tomb is meant to appear as an outward projection, but it
also has its own recess near the area where the skeleton lay.  Above the skeleton is an inscription,
which states (translated), “What you are I once was; what I am, you will be”.  This message tells us
of our own (the viewer’s) mortality and future death.  In the end, we will end up like the skeleton as
well.  This morbid message projects out into the viewer’s space, but when we look above we see a
message of hope in the Crucifixion, which means freedom from death for believers.  Note how the
vanishing point, at a level between the tomb below and the cross above, unites the two different
spaces.  Masaccio approached this fresco in a very rational way to masterfully create a convincing
illusion of space, and he has done so in a way which elevates the important Christian meaning at the
core of the scene.

SLIDE 17
The Tribute Money is one of many frescoes painted by Masaccio (and
another artist named Masolino) in the Brancacci chapel in Santa Maria del
Carmine in Florence—when you walk into the chapel, the fresco is on your
upper left. All of the frescos in the chapel tell the story of the life of St. Peter.
The story of the Tribute Money is told in three separate scenes within the
same fresco. This way of telling an entire story in one painting is called a
continuous narrative.
A story unfolds and a miracle is performed

Masaccio,Tribute Money, 1427, fresco (Brancacci Chapel, Santa Maria del Carmine, Florence)

 Christ and apostles (detail), Masaccio, Tribute Money, c. 1427, fresco
(Brancacci Chapel, Santa Maria del Carmine, Florence)
Christ and apostles (detail), Masaccio, Tribute Money, c. 1427, fresco (Brancacci Chapel, Santa Maria del
Carmine, Florence)

In the Tribute Money, a Roman tax collector (the figure in the foreground in a

short orange tunic and no halo) demands tax money from Christ and the
twelve apostles who don't have the money to pay.

Christ (in the center, wearing a pinkish robe gathered in at the waist, with a
blue toga-like wrap) points to the left, and says to Peter "so that we may not
offend them, go to the lake and throw out your line. Take the first fish you
catch; open its mouth and you will find a four-drachma coin. Take it and give
it to them for my tax and yours" (Matthew 17:27). Christ performed a miracle
—and the apostles have the money to pay the tax collector. In the center of
the fresco (scene 1), we see the tax collector demanding the money, and
Christ instructing Peter. On the far left (scene 2), we see Peter kneeling down
and retreiving the money from the mouth of a fish, and on the far right (scene
3), St. Peter pays the tax collector. In the fresco, the tax collector appears
twice, and St. Peter appears three times (you can find them easily if you look
for their clothing).

We are so used to one moment appearing in one frame (think of a comic

book, for example) that the unfolding of the story within one image (and out
of order!) seems very strange to us. But with this technique (a continuous
narrative)—which was also used by the ancient Romans—Masaccio is able to
make an entire drama unfold on the wall of the Brancacci chapel.

Peter (detail), Masaccio, Tribute Money, 1427, fresco (Brancacci Chapel, Santa Maria del Carmine, Florence)

In the central, first scene, the tax collector points down with his right hand,
and holds his left palm open, impatiently insisting on the money from Christ
and the apostles. He stands with his back to us, which helps to create an
illusion of three dimensional space in the image (a goal which was clearly
important to Masaccio as he also employed both linear and atmospheric
perspective to create an illusion of space). Like Donatello's St. Mark from
Orsanmichele in Florence, he stands naturally, in contrapposto, with his
weight on his left leg, and his right knee bent. The apostles (Christ's
followers) look worried and anxiously watch to see what will happen. St.
Peter (wearing a large deep orange colored toga draped over a blue shirt) is
confused, as he seems to be questioning Christ and pointing over to the river,
but he also looks like he is willing to believe Christ.

Perspective diagram, Masaccio, Tribute Money, c.1427, fresco, (Brancacci

Chapel, Santa Maria del Carmine, Florence)
Linear perspective diagram, Masaccio, Tribute Money, c.1427, fresco, (Brancacci Chapel, Santa Maria del
Carmine, Florence). Christ is the vanishing point. Note too, the use of atmospheric (aerial) perspective in the
mountains in the distance.

The gestures and expressions help to tell the story. Peter seems confused and
points to the lake—mirroring Christ's gesture; the tax collector looks upset,
and has his hand out insistently asking for the money—he stands in
contrapposto with his back turned to us (contrapposto is a standing position,
where the figure's weight is shifted to one leg). Only Christ is completely
calm because he is performing a miracle.

(detail), Masaccio, Tribute Money, c. 1427, fresco (Brancacci Chapel, Santa

Maria del Carmine, Florence)
Feet (detail), Masaccio, Tribute Money, c. 1427, fresco (Brancacci Chapel, Santa Maria del Carmine, Florence)

Look down at the feet—how the light travels through the figures, and is
stopped when it encounters the figures. The figures cast shadows—Masaccio
is perhaps the first artist since classical antiquity to paint cast shadows. What
this does is make the fresco so much more real—it is as if the figures are
truly standing out in a landscape, with the light coming from one direction,
and the sun in the sky, hitting all the figures from the same side and casting
shadows on the ground. For the first time since antiquity, there is almost a
sense of weather.
SLIDE 18

Masaccio’s Expulsion of Adam and Eve from Eden

 Masaccio, Expulsion of Adam and Eve from Eden, c. 1424-27, fresco
Masaccio’s fresco depicting Adam and Eve being expelled from the Garden of Eden by an angel is
located in the Brancacci Chapel inside the church of Santa Maria del Carmine in Florence.  The
fresco is part of a larger cycle he painted for part of the chapel, while another painter, Masolino,
worked on another fresco on the opposite wall of the chapel.

The Expulsion shows the scene from the book of Genesis after the Fall; after Adam and Eve have
eaten from the fruit which God has forbidden them to eat, they are cast out of the Garden of Eden and
into the world where they are forced to labor and suffer the consequences of their sin.  It is a scene of
remarkable emotion, as Eve cries out and Adam cannot bear to show his face.  The Expulsion is next
to another of Masaccio’s paintings in the chapel called the Tribute Money, in which St. Peter plays a
prominent role.  By placing these two scenes next to one another, Masaccio (or the theologian
responsible for designing the program) seems to draw a connection between the Fall of Man and
subsequent salvation via the Catholic Church, symbolized by St. Peter.
Brancacci Chapel, Santa Maria del Carmine, Florence. Masaccio’s fresco of Adam and Eve is on the
upper left wall, visible in this photo.
We see that this fresco carries over some of the same features of the Tribute Money fresco, such as
the presence of an off-picture light source which causes shadows to be cast to the left.  Interestingly,
the pictorial light source comes from the same direction that the actual light source in the chapel
comes from (see photo).  Masaccio has therefore planned out his painted figures to respond to the
physical surroundings of the painting.

Masaccio has also made strides in the structuring of the bodies of the figures here.  They are quite
accurate as they show Adam’s muscularity and the bending of his torso.  Eve, who covers herself in
her shame, does so in a way which resembles classical statues of the Venus Pudica, which suggests
that Masaccio was looking at ancient works for inspiration before or during his work on this fresco.
 Masolino, Temptation (from the Brancacci Chapel), 1425-1427, fresco
One of the best ways of understanding Masaccio’s contributions to Renaissance painting is by
comparing the Expulsion to Masolino’s fresco on the opposite wall in the chapel showing the
temptation of Adam and Eve.  Masolino painted two expressionless figures who appear to be
suspended in air against a dark-colored background.  These figures appear static and more in keeping
with medieval figural depictions.  Masaccio, however, has given Adam and Eve an incredible amount
of expression as they grieve over the consequences of their sins.  They appear to be firmly planted on
the ground and they are placed against a simple landscape setting.  Masolino’s fresco may have been
in keeping with traditional expectations, but Masaccio’s was one which would push Renaissance
artists forward.
The  Brancacci Chapel
Shortly after completing the Pisa Altarpiece, Masaccio began working
on what was to be his masterpiece and what was to inspire future
generations of artists: the frescoes of the Brancacci Chapel (c. 1427) in
the Florentine Church of Santa Maria del Carmine. He was
commissioned to finish painting the chapel’s scenes of the stories of
St. Peter after Masolino (1383–1447) had abandoned the job, leaving
only the vaults and several frescoes in the upper registers finished.
Previously, Masaccio and Masolino were engaged in some sort of loose
working relationship. They had already collaborated on a Madonna
and Child with St. Anne in which the style of Masaccio, who was the
younger of the two, had a profound influence on that of Masolino. It
has been suggested, but never proven, that both artists were jointly
commissioned to paint the Brancacci Chapel. The question of which
painter executed which frescoes in the chapel posed one of the most
discussed artistic problems of the 19th and 20th centuries. It is now
generally thought that Masaccio was responsible for the following
sections: the Expulsion of Adam and Eve (or Expulsion from
Paradise), Baptism of the Neophytes, The Tribute Money, St. Peter
Enthroned, St. Peter Healing the Sick with His Shadow, St. Peter
Distributing Alms, and part of the Resurrection of the Son of
Theophilus. (A cleaning and restoration of the Brancacci Chapel
frescoes in 1985–89 removed centuries of accumulated grime and
revealed the frescoes’ vivid original colours.)
The radical differences between the two painters are seen clearly in the
pendant frescoes of the Temptation of Adam and Eve by Masolino and
Masaccio’s Expulsion of Adam and Eve, which preface the St. Peter
stories. Masolino’s figures are dainty, wiry, and elegant, while
Masaccio’s are highly dramatic, volumetric, and expansive. The shapes
of Masaccio’s Adam and Eve are constructed not with line but with
strongly differentiated areas of light and dark that give them a
pronounced three-dimensional sense of relief. Masolino’s figures
appear fantastic, while Masaccio’s seem to exist within the world of the
spectator illuminated by natural light. The expressive movements and
gestures that Masaccio gives to Adam and Eve powerfully convey their
anguish at being expelled from the Garden of Eden and add a
psychological dimension to the impressive physical realism of these
figures.

Detail from Expulsion of Adam and Eve, fresco by Masaccio, c. 1427; in the Brancacci Chapel, Church of
Santa Maria del Carmine, Florence, Italy.Scala/Art Resource, New York

The boldness of conception and execution—the paint is applied in

sweeping, form-creating bold slashes—of the Expulsion of Adam and
Eve marks all of Masaccio’s frescoes in the Brancacci Chapel. The most
famous of these is The Tribute Money, which rivals
Michelangelo’s David as an icon of Renaissance art. The Tribute
Money, which depicts the debate between Christ and his followers
about the rightness of paying tribute to earthly authorities, is
populated by figures remarkable for their weight and gravity. Recalling
both Donatello’s sculptures and antique Roman reliefs that Masaccio
saw in Florence, the figures of Christ and his apostles attain a
monumentality and seriousness hitherto unknown. Massive and
solemn, they are the very embodiments of human dignity and virtue so
valued by Renaissance philosophers and humanists.
The figures of The Tribute Money and the other frescoes in the
Brancacci Chapel are placed in settings of remarkable realism. For the
first time in Florentine painting, religious drama unfolds not in some
imaginary place in the past but in the countryside of Tuscany or the
city streets of Florence, with St. Peter and his followers treading the
palace-lined streets of an early 15th-century city. By setting his figures
in scenes of such specificity, Masaccio sanctified and elevated the
observer’s world. His depiction of the heroic individual in a fixed and
certain place in time and space perfectly reflects humanistic thought in
contemporary Florence.
The scene depicted in The Tribute Money is consistently lit from the
upper right and thus harmonizes with the actual lighting of the chapel,
which comes from a window on the wall to the right of the fresco. The
mountain background of the fresco is convincingly rendered using
atmospheric perspective; an illusion of depth is created by successively
lightening the tones of the more distant mountains, thereby
simulating the changes effected by the atmosphere on the colours of
distant objects. In The Tribute Money, with its solid, anatomically
convincing figures set in a clear, controlled space lit by a consistent fall
of light, Masaccio decisively broke with the medieval conception of a
picture as a world governed by different and arbitrary physical laws.
Instead, he embraced the concept of a painting as a window behind
which a continuation of the real world is to be found, with the same
laws of space, light, form, and perspective that obtain in reality. This
concept was to remain the basic idiom of Western painting for the next
450 years.
 SLIDE 19

Zuccone (Statue of the Prophet Habakkuk)

Donatello
 Date: 1425
 Style: Early Renaissance

 Genre: sculpture

Lo Zuccone is a marble statue that depicts the Biblical prophet Habakkuk. It

was a commissioned work for the Duomo in Florence and was completed
between 1423-1425.

The name Zuccone originated from the long and angular shape of the figure's
head and translates in Italian as "pumpkin." The spectacularly life-like statue
is fraught with tension and clad in the flowing robes that are typical of most of
Donatello's prophets. His face is tilted slightly down which gives the figure a
humble expression upon his gaunt face.

The legend of Habakkuk appears in the Hebrew bible. Very little information
is revealed about the prophet. This allowed Donatello more artistic freedom
then was typical with other statues that had more clearly defined histories.
Habakkuk's legacy in text was slightly unusual in that he was one of the only
prophets to question God and the injustices God allowed. Donatello must have
been inspired by this information when he created his statue's melancholy and
questioning eyes.

Lo Zuccone was reportedly one of Donatello's favorite pieces. Vasari would

later recount Donatello's affection for the statue, stating that while he was
working Donatello would stare at Zuccone's face muttering, "Speak, damn you,
speak!"

The Prophet Habakkuk (Zuccone)

Donatello created �The Prophet Habakkuk� upon commission by the

Florence Cathedral for its bell tower. It is also commonly known as Zuccone,
or Lo Zuccone; which translates from Italian to �pumpkin� (figuratively, bald-
head or pumpkin head). Habakkuk is a historical and religious figure, though
very little is known of him other than a few facts found within a Hebrew bible
titled the �Book of Habakkuk�.

Donatello�s rendition of this character is that of a thin man, draped in what

resembles a toga. �The Prophet Habakkuk� is somewhat similar, in stance
and expression, to the artist�s other sculpture titled �The Prophet
Jeremiah�, both so very impressive in character. Habakkuk�s whole
persona, but most specifically the inclination of his head, bears the manner of
a humble man. His right hand clutches onto his robes, as well as a rolled
scroll, while the left hand points downward. His gaunt facial expression is
perhaps most telling of all. The eyes are sad and vacant; nevertheless, they
impart a subtle message, and acknowledge the viewer. The figure�s bony
bald head and slightly gaping mouth are reminders of Donatello�s love of
human nature, be it graceful or awkward.

�The Prophet Habakkuk� is reported to have been Donatello�s preferred

piece. In matters of uncertainty, he would swear by the sculpture, stating �By
the faith I place in my Zuccone�!

About the Artist

Donatello, or Donato di Niccol� di Betto Bardi, was a sculptor during the early
renaissance period. He created many famous works of art in Florence, Italy,
where he was born, and is widely considered to be the original patriarch of
early renaissance sculpting, superior to many other artists in various mediums
such as bronze, marble, terracotta, and wood.  His influence on countless
artists of his time is compelling, and his works continue to inspire artists
worldwide today.  �The Prophet Habakkuk� embodies Donatello�s unique
vision of realism and naturalism, as he is known to have rebelled against the
traditional art scholar�s conventions.

�The Prophet Habakkuk� or �Zuccone� is currently located at the Museo

dell'Opera del Duomo in Florence, Italy.

SLIDE 20,21
Donatello, David, bronze, late 1420s to the 1460s, likely the 1440s (Museo Nazionale del
Bargello, Florence)

The subject of this sculpture is David and Goliath, from the Old Testament.
According to the story, Israel (the descendents of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob)
is threatened by Goliath, a "giant of a man, measuring over nine feet tall. He
wore a bronze helmet and a coat of mail that weighed 125 pounds." Goliath
threatened the Israelites and demanded that they send someone brave enough
to fight him. But the entire Israelite army is frightened of him. David, a
young shepherd boy, asserts that he is going to fight the giant, but his father
says, "There is no way you can go against this Philistine. You are only a boy,
and he has been in the army since he was a boy!" But David insists that he
can face Goliath and claims he has killed many wild animals who have tried
to attack his flock, "The LORD who saved me from the claws of the lion and
the bear will save me from this Philistine!" They try to put armor on David
for the fight, but he takes it off. David faces Goliath and says to him,"You
come to me with sword, spear, and javelin, but I come to you in the name of
the LORD Almighty—the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have
defied." David kills Goliath with one stone thrown from his sling into
Goliath's forehead. Then he beheads Goliath.

The people of Florence identified themselves with David—they believed that

(like him) they defeated their enemy (the Duke of Milan) with the help of
God.
Donatello’s David

Donatello, David, c. 1440-1460, bronze

Perhaps Donatello’s landmark work – and one of the greatest sculptural works of the early
Renaissance – was his bronze statue of David.  This work signals the return of the nude sculpture in
the round figure, and because it was the first such work like this in over a thousand years, it is one of
the most important works in the history of western art.

The work was commissioned by Cosimo de’Medici for the Palazzo Medici, but we do not know
when during the mid-fifteenth century Donatello cast it.  It was originally placed on top of a pedestal
in the center of the courtyard in the Palazzo Medici, so the viewer would be looking up at it from
below (unlike the view we typically get of it in photographs).

David is shown at a triumphal moment within the biblical storyline of his battle with the Philistine,
Goliath.  According to the account, after David struck Goliath with the stone from his slingshot, he
cut off his head with Goliath’s sword.  Here, we see the aftermath of this event as David stands in a
contemplative pose with one foot atop his enemy’s severed head.  David wears nothing but boots and
a shepherd’s hat with laurel leaves on top of it, which may allude to his victory or to his role as a poet
and musician.

Before Donatello’s work, David was typically depicted as a king, given his status in the Old
Testament.  Here, however, we have a stark change in the way David is depicted.  Not only is he
shown in the nude, but he’s also a youth.  In Middle Ages, nudity was not used in art except in
certain moral contexts, such as the depiction of Adam and Eve, or the sending of souls off to hell.  In
the classical world, nudity was often used in a different, majestic context, such as with figures who
were gods, heroes, or athletes.  Here, Donatello seems to be calling to mind the type of heroic nudity
of antiquity, since David is depicted at triumphal point in the biblical narrative of his victory over
Goliath.

As for David’s youthfulness, Donatello has gone back to the early life of the biblical David to depict
him, rather than to his later life as a king.  It seems that Donatello is trying to associate David’s youth
with an innocent and virtuous life.  David looks young here – so young, in fact, that his muscles have
barely developed enough to hold the large sword – that his victory over his foe is all the more
improbable.  Could David’s victory have been gained without divine intervention?  Donatello’s work
seems to imply that the answer is “no” – the victory was God’s rather than man’s.

In any case, Donatello’s David is a classic work of Renaissance sculpture, given its Judaeo-Christian
subject matter modeled on a classical sculptural type.  It was revolutionary for its day – so much so
that it did not get copied right away.  The idea of the life-sized nude sculpture-in-the-round evidently
took some time to sink in and become an acceptable statue type.
SLIDE 22

Donatello, Mary Magdalene, c. 1455, wood, 188 cm (Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, Florence)

Nearly all works by Donatello elicit praise for their realism. In no work is his
skill more evident than in his sculpture of the Penitent Magdalene. It was
carved from white poplar wood between 1453-1455 and records indicate
Donatello was commissioned by the Baptistery of Florence.

Mary Magdalene is one of the most universally well-known Biblical figures.

Donatello produced a stunningly realistic interpretation of her character that
differed from any other artist before him. It was common knowledge that
Mary Magdalene had committed sin and lived a non-virtuous lifestyle. In
Donatello's sculpture she appears penitent for her sins with an expression that
pleads forgiveness.
Donatello's Mary is also shockingly haggard. Idealized portraits in history
paint her as being fed by angels and protected from the ravages of age, yet
Donatello leads viewers to the assumption that her life of adultery and
prostitution has stolen her beauty. She is deeply wrinkled and clothed in rags
while her slightly open mouth reveals missing teeth.

The Penitent Magdalene is a piece that seems intent on creating a visceral

reaction in the viewer. The statue was carved after Donatello himself suffered
a long bout of illness in Padua. It seems likely that Donatello's own reckoning
with his mortality informed his piece portraying Mary.

Donatello's interpretation of Mary is a staggering achievement that

encapsulates the best of Renaissance naturalism. The Penitent Magdalene is
housed at the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo in Florence.
SLIDE 23

Masaccio, The Virgin and Child (Pisa polyptych), 1426, tempera on poplar, 134.8 x 73.5 cm
(The National Gallery, London)

Masaccio’s most famous works are undoubtedly those found in the

Brancacci Chapel, in the church of Santa Maria del Carmine, in Florence,
and his Holy Trinity, found in the church of Santa Maria Novella, also in
Florence.  Alongside The Holy Trinity, The Tribute Money, and The
Expulsion, have become poster-works for the Italian Renaissance,
endlessly discussed (or at least cited), and burned into the memory of
anyone who has studied European art history.  But for those who can’t
make it all the way to Florence, London too holds Masaccio-based
delights, in the form of the subject of today’s post, Masaccio’s The Virgin
and Child, of 1426.

The large painting (it measures an impressive 135 x 74 cm), would

originally have functioned as the central part of an altarpiece. 
Commissioned for the Chapel of Santa Maria del Carmine, in Pisa, by the
Pisan notary Ser Giuliano degli Scarsi, the painting explores the desire to
make the Mother and Child both supernatural, and real, human.  This
leads to a mix of elements that may seem something at odds with one
another to the modern viewer, but which express this central Christian
belief in the humanity of the Virgin and Child.  The figures are on a
monumental scale, far larger than the instrument playing and singing
angels who surround them.  This presents a hierarchy of importance, the
larger figures of the Virgin and Child present their far high status.  This
scale is emphasised by the composition of the painting, with the Virgin
and Child raised above us on a throne, making us look up at them
reverentially, something that would have been further highlighted by its
being mounted in the altarpiece.  The use of a gilded background also
creates a sense of them being in a special, removed space.  There is no
attempt to position the throne and its support in a realistically
represented space, which may seem to create an odd contrast with the
cleverly articulated and perspectivally treated architecture of the throne
itself.
However, Masaccio cleverly contrasts these ‘unrealistic’ elements with
more naturalistic modes of representation.  One aspect of this is his
interest in perspective and lighting.  The painting has a central vanishing
point, with the other elements in the painting arranged according to this
single- viewpoint perspective.  He has even attempted to present Christ’s
halo, a supernatural aspect the nature of which was cause of some
debate, in a foreshortened fashion, to accord with this sense of
perspective.  He uses a strong sense of directional light to model the
figures, and draw attention to the gentle folds of the Virgin’s mantle and
dress.  His understanding of how to use this light is demonstrated by the
fact that the shadows are consistent with the direction of the light.  The
impressive foreshortening of the instruments of the front two angels
gives the painting a clearly defined sense of depth, a
 nd again adds to
the sense of reverence, placing the Virgin and Child just beyond our
reach.  The architectural elements such as the throne both follow the
perspective, and offer a sense of realistic familiarity.  The use of
Corinthian and composite capitals recreates recognisable architectural
details from the city of Pisa itself, giving the viewers a sense that the
Virgin and Child are somehow in an Italian setting.

This sense of appealing to the everyday experiences of the painting’s

viewers is also carried through to the realistic treatment of the figures
themselves.  Rather than remaining distant, aloof, or sombre, Masaccio’s
Virgin and Christ appear as a real mother and child.  Christ, often
depicted in Virgin and Child images as blessing, or with a general sense
of awareness of his own divine nature, here clutches at the grapes offered
him by his mother, and sucks at his fingers (those usually used for
blessing), just like a real child.  While he is rather large, his plump body
and tousled hair recall the features of real babies.  This is mirrored by his
mother, who carefully cups her hand around him to hold him on her lap,
and gently offered his the fruit.  But, with the serene but perhaps slightly
sad expression, we are shown that she understands the significance of
her infant child.  We are led to contemplate the undeniable humanity of
Christ, an aid to the contemplative religious meditation of the viewer. 
This awareness of his human nature only serves to make his later self-
sacrifice and the events of the Passi0n all the more profound and
moving.  This human aspect of Christ was increasingly emphasised in
religious movements of this period, in the preaching of the Mendicant
friars for instance, and in the growth of confraternities, and in the
numerous festivals and ceremonies commemorating the Passion across
Italy.  The angels in this painting almost act as stand-ins for the viewers,
they are highly individualized, with different hairstyles for example, and
their facial expressions emphasise their individual responses to their
religious experiences.  They are much like the human worshippers
gathered before the altarpiece itself.

This level of human signification is used in tandem, and in some senses

responds to, a layer of symbolic meaning.  The most obviously symbolic
element in the painting is the bunch of grapes.  This symbolically recalls
the wine of the Eucharist, and thus Christ’s blood, and the Passion itself. 
This is particularly touching given the childlike behaviour

of  the Infant, it brings a sense of

dramatic irony to the painting, with the viewing seeing the baby
foreshadowing the sacrifice of the adult.  The emphasis placed on
Christ’s fingers, particularly those he playfully chews or sucks, brings to
mind the blessing gesture, and with it Christ’s teaching and works prior
to the Passion.  Thus the child prefigures or foreshadows the life and
works of the grown Christ.  The words of Mary’s halo are from the Ave
Maria, the Hail Mary hymn, thus emphasising the Virgin’s spiritual
significance, and connecting her with this image of Christ.  Not only is
she pictured as the mother of Christ, but the reference to this hymn
highlights her intercessional role – the painting’s viewers would be
reminded to pray to her to intervene on their behalf in the Court of
Heaven.  This was one of the main reasons the Cult of the Virgin became
so popular, because Mary was thought to have this intercessional power,
potentially reducing the time the individual human soul would have to
spend in Purgatory, so it is interesting to see how Masaccio has linked
these two developing religious tendencies, the humanity of Christ, and
the power of the Virgin.  To further highlight the Virgin’s importance,
Masaccio has used the by then accepted move of using rich blue, made
from lapis lazuli, for her mantle.  This stone, found in Afghanistan, was
hugely expensive, due to its relative rarity and the distance it had to
travel, so came to be seen as the appropriate colour for a figure of such
high spiritual significance as the Virgin Mary.

So we see in this painting Masaccio bringing together many different

elements and contemporary concerns and religious ideas of the society
he lived in, tapping into deeply help religious beliefs as well as exploiting
new artistic techniques, and tying them together to create a work which
appeals to both the human, and the spiritual, in its viewers.

There is an interesting side story to this painting.  The payments for it

were collected on Masaccio’s behalf by none other than Donatello.  He
was also working in Pisa at the time, and was friends with Masaccio.  It is
interesting to be reminded of the extent to which artists were friends,
new one another, and even collaborated.  It can be tempting to be drawn
into the post-Romantic idea of the artist as lone genius, and it is
refreshing to be reminded that artistic networks were more fertile, active,
and indeed frequent, than we might now imagine.
SLIDE 24

Leonardo da Vinci, (Italian: “Leonardo from Vinci”) (born April 15,

1452, Anchiano, near Vinci, Republic of Florence [Italy]—died May 2,
1519, Cloux [now Clos-Lucé], France), Italian painter, draftsman,
sculptor, architect, and engineer whose genius, perhaps more than
that of any other figure, epitomized the Renaissance humanist ideal.
His Last Supper (1495–98) and Mona Lisa (c. 1503–19) are among
the most widely popular and influential paintings of the Renaissance.
His notebooks reveal a spirit of scientific inquiry and a mechanical
inventiveness that were centuries ahead of their time.
SLIDE 25

This is is the earliest known drawing by Leonardo. It is dated August 5, 1473,

and now hangs in the Uffizi Gallery in Florence. The landscape, drawn in great
detail, shows the valley of the Arno and Montelupo Castle. These were his
childhood haunts, lovingly explored during long rambles in the hills, when
Leonardo was still living with his ther's family: his stepmother, his paternal
grandparents and his uncle Francesco, his first playmate.From his childhood
Leonardo showed a passionate interest in things; he collected everything, from
small animals to flowers, from leaves to oddly shaped pieces of wood.

Before Leonardo, a drawing of landscape without human figures and

symbolism would have been unthinkable. The first complete painted
landscape is credited to Peter Paul Rubens, almost two hundred years after da
Vinci's drawing was made. Leonardo's fluent technique is ahead of its time in
the handling of rocks, rivers and vegetation. The pen-and-ink lines over a
partially erased pencil sketch are simply drawn as horizontal strokes to
suggest tree branches and leaves; lines following the contours of the land
forms suggest the solidity of the earth. Closely drawn horizontal lines
efficiently suggest reflections on the surface of the water, and Leonardo's
understanding of perspective means that he makes the tonal effects of the pen
lines less prominent as they recede into the distant landscape. With multiple
lines of hatching, he builds up the large, closer rocky shapes and convinces the
eye of the solidity of the terrain. Where he has drawn many lines converging to
represent swiftly flowing water, the eye perceives substance and movement.
The delicacy of the smaller objects in the landscape - the fortified buildings
and the dark shapes of floating boats - brings them into prominence.
Leonardo Da Vinci's Landscape Drawing for Santa Maria Della Neve is the earliest known drawing by the
artist and the earliest known work by Da Vinci that has survived and remains on public display
This unique status makes the drawing one of the few early pieces that art historians have
concrete details on and it has therefore become a popular piece for study as well as a
fascinating example of the Renaissance artist's early work.

The drawing depicts Montelupo Castle and the heart of the Arno Valley, an area where
Da Vinci spent a great deal of time during his formative years and may have played a
great role in his personal development into an artist. The landscape is detailed and
beautiful depicted, with a particular emphasis on flora and fauna.

Unlike some of Da Vinci's other works, particularly those which were painted directly
onto walls and other surfaces, the drawing is dated. The timestamp shows that it was
completed on 5 August 1473. Da Vinci would have been 21 years old at this time and
coming to the end of his apprenticeship with the Florentine artist Andrea di Cione, also
known as Verrocchio.

The drawing was produced in the final days of an apprenticeship which had run for over
7 years. Within months of completing this drawing, Da Vinci had left Verrocchio's
employment and struck out on his own.

The pen and ink lines of the drawing sit on top of an erased pencil sketch. The most
immediately striking thing about the drawing, compared to those by other artists of the
same time period, is the total absence of people or activity. The landscape is bare and still
yet still entrancing.

Almost all known paintings, sketches and other artworks produced up until this point
were either portraits or still life scenes. It would be another 200 years before the first
known landscape painting was produced in the 17th Century.

The ink strokes of the drawing are confident and relatively fluid, showing Da Vinci had a
skilled and experienced hand at his relatively young age of 21.
Leonardo's understanding of perspective is also clear, the ink lines become fainter and the
detail sketchier as detail recedes into the background of the drawing. This combination of
techniques mean that the drawing sits comfortably along much more recent works by
other artists - truly showing Da Vinci to be an artist who was significantly ahead of its
time.

Landscape Drawing for Santa Maria Della Neve remains on public display to this day at
Florence's Uffizi gallery as part of the permanent collection.

It's status as one of Leonardo Da Vinci's earliest known works has made it one of the
most popular and valued items in the gallery's collection. While it doesn't draw the same
crowds as the Mona Lisa in Paris, it remains a draw for visitors to the collection.
SLIDE 26

Painting: Virgin of the Rocks

Date: (c.1483-5)
Artist: Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519)
Medium: Oil painting
Genre: Religious art
Movement: Early Renaissance painting
Location: Louvre, Paris; and National Gallery, London.

For explanations of other pictures, see: Famous Paintings Analyzed.

Interpretation of Virgin of the Rocks

One of the greatest Renaissance paintings, this work by

Leonardo da Vinci exists in two versions: an earlier one,
sometimes called Madonna of the Rocks, now in the Louvre;
and a later one in the National Gallery, London. The original
picture was undertaken by Leonardo not long after entering
the service of Ludovico Sforza, the Duke of Milan. The
commission was for several panel paintings to decorate
the ancona (a carved wooden altar designed to accomodate
pictures) in the chapel of the Immacolata, in the church of San
Francesco Grande in Milan. In April 1483, the members of the
Confraternity of the Immaculate Conception divided the
project between Leonardo (responsible for a central Virgin and
Child), and the brothers Ambrogio De Predis (responsible for
eight musical angels on the two side panels) and Evangelista
De Predis (responsible for redecorating the ancona). The
Virgin of the Rocks was duly completed by about 1484, and
may have been installed in the chapel of the Immaculate
Conception, as intended. However, within a short time it was
sold for 100 ducats to King Louis XII of France (1462-1515)
who may have then presented it to the Holy Roman Emperor
Maximilian I (1459-1519). The second, London version
(c.1495-1508) was then commissioned as a replacement for
the church of San Francesco Grande, painted by Leonardo and
his assistants, and installed as planned. Both of these religious
paintings are masterpieces of Renaissance art, not least
because they are among only a handful of known works
painted by the hand of Da Vinci.
 
  Composition

The commission for this altarpiece art was awarded to

Leonardo on the basis that he portrayed the Virgin in honour
of the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception - the dogma
proclaiming Mary was conceived without original sin. As the
name indicates, the iconographical setting is a rocky grotto,
where four figures are sitting together on the stone floor in a
pyramid-like arrangement which seemingly holds all four
figures in a tight exchange of looks and gestures. To the right
the Archangel Gabriel welcomes us to the scene with an
enigmatic gaze, whilst pointing to the child-figure of Saint
John. With his other hand he supports the Christ Child sitting
next to him. At the apex of the pyramid sits the Virgin or
Madonna whose hand is raised, palm-down, over the head of
the infant Christ, as if giving him a blessing. Gabriel's hand,
which is pointing to the infant John, forms a horizontal line in
the space between the Virgin's hand and the head of Christ, as
if completing an invisible cross. Meanwhile the Christ Child tiny
right arm is raised in a gesture of benediction, aimed at the
infant Saint John, who clasps his hands in prayer. The circle is
completed by the Madonna who extends her arm to encircle
the head of the infant John.

Light and Shadow

Leonardo's handling of light and shade - arguably his greatest

single contribution to High Renaissance painting - is almost
faultless. The figures project out of the darkness of the grotto,
illuminated by light falling from the top-left of the picture. The
resulting chiaroscuro enhances the solidity and three-
dimensionality of the figures, whilst Leonardo's mastery
of sfumato ensures that the edges between the illuminated
and shadowy areas of the figures' faces and bodies are
rendered with the greatest possible reality.
This naturalism marks a highpoint in Leonardo's painting, but
signals his abandonment of the style of Renaissance art in
Florence - that is, the expressionist method championed
by Botticelli (see La Primavera (c.1482-3) or the Birth of
Venus (1484-6), both in the Uffizi), in which anatomical
accuracy is sacrificed for artistic effect.

Perspective and Depth

The raised linear perspective, by which the illusion of depth is

given to the painting, is created by means of a contrast
between the jagged black rocks in the grotto and the hazy
profiles of the mountain tops in the far distance - a not
inconsiderable feat, given the narrow tonal range of the
monochrome background.

This work of Biblical art, which - unlike the London Virgin of

the Rocks - was painted entirely by Leonardo, and for which
he made numerous studies, had a considerable impact on High
Renaissance art in both Lombardy and Rome, (see, for
instance, The Sistine Madonna by Raphael) - not least for the
painterly way in which the artist succeeds in unifying the
images of water and rock with the Holy Virgin and the dogma
of the Immaculate Conception. The setting of a rocky den is a
perfect image by which to evoke the notion of natural
motherhood. In the candlelit church of San Francesco Grande,
the glittering frame together with the dark rocks of the
picture, from whose shadows the holy figures emerge, would
 have combined to suggest a primordial cave, an ideal setting
for the mystery of the Immaculate Conception.

The London Version

The Virgin of the Rocks in the National Gallery contains some

details generally overlooked by the artist in the Louvre
version, including the haloes of the figures, the child Saint
John's cross of reeds. Other differences include: Archangel
Gabriel no longer points towards the infant John, and is turned
inward instead of partly towards the viewer; the drapery is
lighter and more revealing; there is greater illumination in the
cave, it is more diffused and comes from a variety of sources;
and so on. Sadly, the intervention of assistants has made the
portrayal altogether more banal than the peerless version in
the Louvre.

Leonardo Da Vinci

A sculptor, architect and engineer, as well as one of the

greatest ever masters of drawing (see in particular his
outstanding chalk drawings and pen and ink drawings),
Leonardo was a master of portrait art (see his Portrait of a
Lady with an Ermine and his immortal Mona Lisa), as well
as history painting (see his Last Supper).

The Virgin of the Rocks in its first version (1483–86) is the work that
reveals Leonardo’s painting at its purest. It depicts
the apocryphal legend of the meeting in the wilderness between the
young John the Baptist and Jesus returning home from Egypt. The
secret of the picture’s effect lies in Leonardo’s use of every means at
his disposal to emphasize the visionary nature of the scene: the soft
colour tones (through sfumato), the dim light of the cave from which
the figures emerge bathed in light, their quiet attitude, the meaningful
gesture with which the angel (the only figure facing the viewer) points
to John as the intercessor between the Son of God and humanity—all
this combines, in a patterned and formal way, to create a moving and
highly expressive work of art.
 Leonardo da Vinci: The Virgin of the RocksThe Virgin of the Rocks, oil painting by Leonardo da Vinci,
1483–86; in the Louvre, Paris.Giraudon/Art Resource, New York

SLIDE 27

Leonardo da Vinci: The Virgin and Child with Saint AnneThe Virgin and Child with Saint Anne, oil on wood
panel by Leonardo da Vinci, c. 1503–19; in the Louvre, Paris.
Some scholars believe that The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne was
Leonardo’s last painting, and in this work he used many of the
conventions that he had established throughout his career to depict
three generations of the Holy Family—Saint Anne, her daughter, the
Virgin Mary, and the Christ Child. Anne, at the apex of the pyramidal
composition, watches Mary, who sits on her lap, as the Virgin tenderly
restrains the Christ Child from mounting a lamb. Contrasting with the
knowing infant Leonardo depicted in The Virgin of the Rocks, the
Christ figure in the The Virgin and Child with Saint Anne appears
innocent, demonstrating playful juvenile behavior and showing a
trusting expression as he returns his mother’s gaze. The interactions
between the figures feels intimate and reveals Leonardo’s ability to
represent convincing human relationships.
The painting also shows Leonardo’s lifelong interest in believably
representing three-dimensional space on a two-dimensional surface.
As in many of Leonardo’s paintings, the figures sit amid a fantastical
landscape. Using aerial perspective, a technique that he wrote about in
his Treatise on Painting, Leonardo created the illusion of distance by
painting the rocky formations in the background so that they appear
blue-gray and less detailed than the landscape of the foreground. He
used this technique in many of the landscapes of his earlier works,
including the Mona Lisa and The Virgin of the Rocks.

The Virgin and Child with St Anne was painted by Leonardo Da Vinci on

1510. It is Oil on wood and measures 168 x 130 cm (5 1/2 x 4 1/2 ft.). The
original one is now located at Musée du Louvre, Paris.
This painting depicted St. Anne, her daughter the Virgin Mary and the infant
Jesus. Christ is shown grappling with a sacrificial lamb symbolising his
Passion whilst the Virgin tries to restrain him. The painting was
commissioned as the high altarpiece for the Church of Santissima Annunziata
in Florence and its theme had long preoccupied Leonardo.
Leonardo first explored the topic of the Virgin and Child with Saint Anne
around about 1498. His original sketch is now lost to us, but in the one
illustrated below, commonly termed the Burlington House Cartoon, the infant
Christ is shown blessing a young St. John during a meeting in the desert. This
is only one of many sketches on the theme that was never translated into a
painting; Leonardo was to entirely abandon these earlier ideas. Cartoons are
preparatory large-scale drawings intended to be transferred to a wall or canvas
during the final painting; this one was named after the British collection which
once owned it. Many scholars prefer the Burlington House Cartoon to
Leonardo's completed oil painting, pointing out how the face of the Madonna
is much more natural and less wooden looking.
Here, he has arranged the figures as a pyramid set in a landscape. While the
theme of the Virgin Mary, her mother (Anne), and Jesus was common, it is
unusual for Mary to be portrayed in her mother's lap. The background
landscape, whose crags are seemingly replicated in Anne's veil, virtually melts
in its sfumato haze. The baby lamb is both a symbol of innocence and of Jesus'
sacrifice for humanity, memorialized in John the Baptist's reference to Jesus
as the "Lamb of God".
SLIDE 28

The Head of the Virgin in Three-

Quarter View Facing Right 1510–1513
 Head of
the
Virgin
in
Three-
This is a preparatory figure drawing study or figure sketch for the Quarter
painting Virgin and Child With Saint Anne. The drawing is somewhat View
blurred, probably because of the abrasion of one sheet over another, Facing
but it's nonetheless a beautiful example of the sfumato or smoky, to the
technique. Leonardo used red and black chalk, bringing them Right
by
together in an attempt to eliminate any evidence of a line. He worked Leonard
the black with the red chalk mainly in the face and neck but also in o da
the hair, dissolving and obliterating the individual lines or strokes to Vinci,
achieve a continuous blending of tones. All the edges were created ca.
by juxtaposing one value with another; Leonardo created a tone and 1510,
then separated it from another area by erasing the edge using a soft
dense ball of bread, as was the custom at the time. black
and red
chalk
This two-chalk technique was only just coming into use at the time, drawing,
but Leonardo was able to utilize it innovatively and intricately. The 8 x 6.
softness he achieves, and his ability to infuse the piece with the Collectio
tenderness of a mother's gaze, along with a loving and gentle half n The
smile, are what project this beautiful drawing into a sublime statement Metropol
on motherhood. itan
Museum
of Art,
New
York,
New
York.

SLIDE 29
Artist Leonardo da Vinci

Year c. 1499–1500 or c. 1506–1508
 Medium charcoal, black and white chalk on tinted paper
mounted on canvas

Dimensions 141.5 cm × 104.6 cm (55.7 in × 41.2 in)

Location National Gallery, London

The Burlington House Cartoon, sometimes called The Virgin and

Child with St Anne and St John the Baptist is a drawing by Leonardo da
Vinci. The drawing is in charcoal and black and white chalk, on eight sheets of
paper glued together. Because of its large size and format the drawing is
presumed to be a cartoon for a painting. No painting by Leonardo exists that is
based directly on this cartoon.

The drawing depicts the Virgin Mary seated on the knees of her mother St
Anne and holding the Child Jesus while St. John the Baptist, the cousin of
Jesus, stands to the right. It currently hangs in the National Gallery in
London. It was either executed in around 1499-1500, when the artist was in
Milan, or around 1506-08, when he was shuttling between Florence and
Milan; the majority of scholars prefer the latter date, although the National
Gallery and others prefer the former.
The subject of the cartoon is a combination of two themes popular in
Florentine painting of the 15th century: The Virgin and Child with John the
Baptist and The Virgin and Child with St Anne.

The drawing is notable for its complex composition, demonstrating the

alternation in the positioning of figures that is first apparent in Leonardo's
paintings in the Benois Madonna. The knees of the two women point different
directions, with Mary's knees turning out of the painting to the left, while her
body turns sharply to the right, creating a sinuous movement. The knees and
the feet of the figures establish a strong up-and-down rhythm at a point in the
composition where a firm foundation comprising firmly planted feet, widely
spread knees and broad spread of enclosing garment would normally be
found. While the lower halves of their bodies turn away, the faces of the two
women turn towards each other, mirroring each other's features. The
delineation between the upper bodies has lost clarity, suggesting that the
heads are part of the same body.
The twisting movement of the Virgin is echoed in the Christ Child, whose
body, held almost horizontal by his mother, rotates axially, with the lower
body turned upward and the upper body turned downward. This turning
posture is first indicated in Leonardo's painting in the Adoration of the Magi
and is explored in a number of drawings, in particular the various studies of
the Virgin and Child with a cat that are in the British Museum.

The juxtaposition of two sets of heads is an important compositional element.

The angle, lighting and gaze of the Christ Child reproduces that of his mother,
while John the Baptist reproduces these same elements in the face of St Anne.
The lighting indicates that there are two protagonists, and two supporting cast
in the scene that the viewer is witnessing. There is a subtle interplay between
the gazes of the four figures. St Anne smiles adoringly at her daughter Mary,
perhaps indicating not only maternal pride but also the veneration due to the
one who "all generations will call...blessed". Mary's eyes are fixed on the Christ
Child who raises his hand in a gesture of benediction over the cousin who
thirty years later would carry out his appointed task of baptising Jesus.
Although the older of the two children, John the Baptist humbly accepts the
blessing, as one who would later say of his cousin "I am not worthy even to
unloose his sandals." St Anne's hand, her index finger pointing towards the
Heaven, is positioned near the heads of the children, perhaps to indicate the
original source of the blessing. This enigmatic gesture is regarded as
quintessentially Leonardesque, occurring in the Last Supper and St John the
Baptist.
SLIDE 30,31,32
Painting: Mona Lisa
Date: 1503-06
Artist: Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519)
Medium: Oil on wood
Genre: Renaissance portrait art
Movement: High Renaissance
Museum: Louvre, Paris.
Interpretation of Mona Lisa

Valued in excess of $1 billion, the Mona Lisa, perhaps the greatest treasure

of Renaissance art, is one of many masterpieces of High Renaissance painting housed
in the Louvre. The painting is known to Italians as La Gioconda, the French call her La
Joconde. The work is arguably the finest ever example of portrait art, and one of
the greatest Renaissance paintings of the 15th and 16th centuries.

Despite being the most famous painting in the world, the Mona Lisa is - like all of
Leonardo's works - neither signed nor dated. Its title comes from the biography of
Leonardo written by the 16th century Mannerist painter and biographer Giorgio
Vasari (1511-74), and published around 1550, which reported his agreement to paint
the portrait of Lisa Gherardini, wife of Francesco del Giocondo, a Florentine dignitary
and wealthy silk merchant. Vasari also mentioned that Leonardo employed musicians
and troubadours to keep her amused, which might explain her enigmatic smile. As
usual, Leonardo procrastinated endlessly over the painting - notably the position of the
subject's hands - and continued working on it for another 20 years. Sadly, La
Gioconda has become so famous and so valuable that it is almost impossible to catch
more than a quick glimpse of her, as she sits inscrutably in the Louvre behind the non-
reflective glass of her temperature-controlled security box.
 
  More Analysis of Mona Lisa

The portrait shows the subject sitting upright and sideways in

a chair, with her face and chest turned slightly towards the
viewer: a posture derived from the 'pyramid' image used to
depict a sitting Madonna. Her left arm sits comfortably on the
armrest of the chair and is clasped by the hand of her right
arm which crosses her front. The slightly protective position of
her arms, as well as the armrest, creates a sense of distance
between sitter and spectator.

The background landscape behind the sitter was created using

aerial perspective, with its smoky blues and no clearly defined
vanishing point. It gives the composition significant depth,
although its details reveal a clear imbalance between the
(higher) rocky horizon to the right, compared to the (lower)
flatlands stretching away on the left. This imbalance adds to
the slightly surreal atmosphere of the picture.

Another slightly surreal feature of the Mona Lisa is her lack of

eyebrows and eyelashes. This was not a deliberate act of the
artist, as scans indicate that originally she was given both. It
 is possible that the colour pigment used for these facial
features has since faded or been inadvertently removed during
cleaning.

The Mona Lisa exemplifies Leonardo's contribution to the art

of oil painting, namely his mastery of sfumato. This painterly
technique involves the smooth, almost imperceptible,
transition from one colour to another, by means of ultra-subtle
tonal gradations. Evident throughout the painting, Leonardo's
use of sfumato is particularly visible in the soft contouring of
Lisa Gherardini's face, around the eyes and mouth. It was a
technique of oil painting that he had already demonstrated
with great success in The Virgin of the Rocks (1483-5).

The general impression created by the Mona Lisa portrait is

one of great serenity, enriched by a definite air of mystery.
The serenity comes from the muted colour scheme, the
soothing sfumato tonality, and the harmony created by the
sitter's pyramid-shaped pose and understated drapery. The
mystery stems from a number of factors: first, her enigmatic
half-smile; second, her gaze, which is directed to the right of
the viewer; her hands which have a slightly unreal, lifeless
quality - almost as if they belonged to a different body.

The painting is a portrait and depicts a seated woman, Lisa del Giocondo, (Mona is Italian for “my
lady”) the wife of a wealthy Florentine merchant, whose facial expression is mysterious. Others believe
that the slight smile means that the subject is hiding a secret. The ambiguity of the subject’s expression,
the monumentality of the composition, and the subtle modeling of forms and atmospheric illusionism were
novel qualities that have contributed to the continuing fascination and study of the work. It is arguably the
most famous portrait of all time.

Images of the Mona Lisa are ubiquitous so most people have seen it many times. Yet a viewer who seeks
to understand the painting should try to see it with new eyes. What jumps out at the viewer is the uncanny
way that the painting seems alive. Her eyes seem to follow our eyes. Also notice the wafer-thin veil that
covers her head, suggesting a demure personality. See how the winding curves in the natural yet surreal
landscape pair with the curves of Mona Lisa’s body and dress.

Leonardo used a pyramid design to place the woman simply in the space of the painting. Her folded
hands form one corner of the pyramid. Her breast, neck and face glow in the same light that models her
hands. The light gives the variety of living surfaces an underlying geometry of spheres and circles.
Leonardo referred to a basic formula for seated female figure: the images of seated Madonna, which were
widespread during the Renaissance. He modified this formula in order to create an impression of distance
between the sitter and the observer. The armrest of the chair functions as a dividing element
between Mona Lisa and the viewer.
Da Vinci used the technique of sfumato to create shadowy areas where one shape blends into another.
Some critics attribute the seeming abilty of the painting to change to sfumato.

As mentioned before, da Vinci depicted Mona Lisa much like the Madonna, i.e. the Virgin Mary (Hadhrat
Maryam). Some contend that he was also inspired by the memory of his own mother, Caterina.

If you have the time and the interest, you can find many theories about the Mona Lisa online. There are
also many parody pieces.

The Mona Lisa set the standard for all future portraits.

The painting presents a woman revealed in the 21st century to likely
have been Lisa del Giocondo, the wife of the Florentine merchant
Francesco del Giocondo—hence, the alternative title to the work, La
Gioconda. The picture presents a half-body portrait of the subject,
with a distant landscape visible as a backdrop. Although utilizing a
seemingly simple formula for portraiture, the expressive synthesis that
Leonardo achieved between sitter and landscape has placed this work
in the canon of the most-popular and most-analyzed paintings of all
time. The sensuous curves of the woman’s hair and clothing, created
through sfumato, are echoed in the undulating valleys and rivers
behind her. The sense of overall harmony achieved in the painting—
especially apparent in the sitter’s faint smile—reflects Leonardo’s idea
of the cosmic link connecting humanity and nature, making this
painting an enduring record of Leonardo’s vision and genius. The
young Raphael sketched the work in progress, and it served as a model
for his Portrait of Maddalena Doni (c. 1506).
Leonardo da Vinci: Mona LisaMona Lisa, oil on wood panel by Leonardo da Vinci, c. 1503–19; in the
Louvre, Paris.© Everett-Art/Shutterstock.com
SLIDE 33

Leonardo's Horse (also known as Gran Cavallo) is a sculpture that was commissioned

of Leonardo da Vinci in 1482 by Duke of Milan Ludovico il Moro, but not completed. It was intended
to be the largest equestrian statue in the world, a monument to the duke's father Francesco Sforza.
Leonardo did extensive preparatory work for it but produced only a clay model, which was later
destroyed.
Slide 34

Leonardo da Vinci: pen-and-ink studies of human fetusHuman fetus, pen-and-ink studies by Leonardo da
Vinci, c. 1510.

Artist Leonardo da Vinci

Year c.1511

Type Black chalk, sanguine, pen, ink wash on paper

Location Royal Collection, United Kingdom

Studies of the Fetus in the Womb are two colored annotated sketches by Leonardo da Vinci made
in around 1511.[1] The studies correctly depict the human fetus in its proper position inside a
dissected uterus.[2] Da Vinci depicted the uterus with one chamber, in contrast to theories that the
uterus had multiple chambers which many believed divided fetuses into separate compartments in
the case of twins.[2] Da Vinci also correctly drew the uterine artery and the vascular system of
the cervix and vagina.[2]

Slide 35

Slide 36
Leonardo imagined, and has succeeded in expressing, the desire that
has entered the minds of the apostles to know who is betraying their
Master. So in the face of each one may be seen love, fear,
indignation, or grief at not being able to understand the meaning of
Christ; and this excites no less astonishment than the obstinate hatred
and treachery to be seen in Judas."  (Georgio Vasari, Lives of the
Artists, 1568; translated by George Bull)
Subject

The subject of the Last Supper is Christ’s final meal with his apostles before
Judas identifies Christ to the authorities who arrest him. The Last Supper (a
Passover Seder), is remembered for two events:
 Philip (detail), Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on
plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie, Milan)
Philip (detail), Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie,
Milan)

Christ says to his apostles “One of you will betray me,” and the apostles
react, each according to his own personality.  Referring to the Gospels,
Leonardo depicts Philip asking “Lord, is it I?”  Christ replies, “He that
dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me” (Matthew
26).  We see Christ and Judas simultaneously reaching toward a plate that lies
between them, even as Judas defensively backs away.

Leonardo also simultaneously depicts Christ blessing the bread and saying to

the apostles “Take, eat; this is my body” and blessing the wine and
saying “Drink from it all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which
is poured out for the forgiveness of sins” (Matthew 26).  These words are the
founding moment of the sacrament of the Eucharist (the miraculous
transformation of the bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ).

Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on plaster (Santa
Maria della Grazie, Milan)
Detail, Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie, Milan)

Apostles Identified

Leonardo’s Last Supper is dense with symbolic references.  Attributes

identify each apostle. For example, Judas Iscariot is recognized both as he
reaches to toward a plate beside Christ (Matthew 26) and because he clutches
a purse containing his reward for identifying Christ to the authorities the
following day. Peter, who sits beside Judas, holds a knife in his right
hand, foreshadowing that Peter will sever the ear of a soldier as he attempts
to protect Christ from arrest.

Christ (detail), Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on
plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie, Milan)
Christ (detail), Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie,
Milan)

Suggestions of the heavenly

The balanced composition is anchored by an equilateral triangle formed by

Christ’s body. He sits below an arching pediment that if completed, traces a
circle. These ideal geometric forms refer to the renaissance interest in Neo-
Platonism (an element of the humanist revival that reconciles aspects of
Greek philosophy with Christian theology). In his allegory, “The Cave,” the
Ancient Greek philosopher Plato emphasized the imperfection of the earthly
realm. Geometry, used by the Greeks to express heavenly perfection, has
been used by Leonardo to celebrate Christ as the embodiment of heaven on
earth.

Leonardo rendered a verdant landscape beyond the windows. Often

interpreted as paradise, it has been suggested that this heavenly sanctuary can
only be reached through Christ.

The twelve apostles are arranged as four groups of three and there are also
three windows. The number three is often a reference to the Holy Trinity in
Catholic art. In contrast, the number four is important in the classical
tradition (e.g. Plato’s four virtues).

This line is spoken by Jesus of Nazareth in Matthew 26:20-22.

This verse takes place during Jesus' Last Supper. It's a pretty famous
moment in the Bible, so we're gonna guess you've heard of it. Or at least
seen the painting. But did you know that in the scene right before this,
Judas Iscariot was plotting with the religious authorities to turn Jesus
over to be killed? He gets thirty pieces of silver for his trouble. And, later,
a lifetime in Hell. Well, at least according to Dante.
So it's pretty fitting that one of the first things Jesus says during the meal
with his disciples is that someone sitting at the table with him is gonna
betray him. How does Jesus know? Well, it's possible that he's heard it
through the rumor mill in Jerusalem. It's no shock that the religious
authorities have it in for him. But the other disciples do seem pretty darn
surprised. Surely, not one of their inner circle would turn in J.C.?
Everyone is blind to Judas' true intentions. Everyone except Jesus that
is. This verse just goes to emphasize his direct connection to God. Jesus
knows exactly what is about to go down. He understands that he's going
to die and that one of his friends will be the one to turn on him. It's a
bitter pill to swallow, but Jesus never strays from God's plan for him. This
guy is super loyal. Unlike some people we could name—cough! Judas!
cough!

SLIDE 37,38

In 1495, Leonardo da Vinci began what would become one of history's most
influential works of art - The Last Supper

The Last Supper is Leonardo's visual interpretation of an event chronicled

in all four of the Gospels (books in the Christian New Testament). The evening
before Christ was betrayed by one of his disciples, he gathered them together
to eat, tell them he knew what was coming and wash their feet (a gesture
symbolizing that all were equal under the eyes of the Lord). As they ate and
drank together, Christ gave the disciples explicit instructions on how to eat
and drink in the future, in remembrance of him. It was the first celebration of
the Eucharist, a ritual still performed.

Specifically, The Last Supper depicts the next few seconds in this story after
Christ dropped the bomb shell that one disciple would betray him before
sunrise, and all twelve have reacted to the news with different degrees of
horror, anger and shock.
Leonardo hadn't worked on such a large painting and had no experience in the
standard mural medium of fresco. The painting was made using experimental
pigments directly on the dry plaster wall and unlike frescos, where the
pigments are mixed with the wet plaster, it has not stood the test of time well.
Even before it was finished there were problems with the paint flaking from
the wall and Leonardo had to repair it. Over the years it has crumbled, been
vandalized bombed and restored. Today we are probably looking at very little
of the original.

Photo of The Last Supper at Santa Maria delle Grazie Church (Milan, Italy)
Much of the recent interest in the painting has centred on the details hidden
within the painting, but in directing attention to these 'hidden' details, most
people miss the incredible sense of perspective the work displays. The sharp
angling of the walls within the picture, which lead back to the seemingly
distant back wall of the room and the windows that show the hills and sky
beyond. The type of day shown through these windows adds to the feeling of
serenity that rests in the centre of the piece, around the figure of Christ.
The Layout of The Last Supper

Courtesy of LeonardoDaVinci.net
Leonardo balanced the perspective construction of the Last Supper so that
its vanighing point is immediately behind Christ's right temple, pointing to the
physical location of the centre, or sensus communis, of his brain. By pulling a
string in radial directions from this point, he marked the table ends, floor
lines, and orthogonal edges of six ceiling coffer column. From the right and/or
left edge of the horizon line, he drew diagonal lines up to the coffer corners,
locating points for the horizonal lines of the 12 coffer rows.
Leonardo was well known for his love of symmetry. In his Last Supper the
layout is largely horizontal. The large table is seen in the foreground of the
image with all of the figures behind it. The painting is largely symmetrical with
the same number of figures on either side of Jesus. The above diagram shows
how the perspective the Last Super was worked out with a series of marks at
key points highlighting the architectural aspects of the composition and
positioning of the figures.

Last Supper
Leonardo’s Last Supper (1495–98) is among the most famous
paintings in the world. In its monumental simplicity,
the composition of the scene is masterful; the power of its effect comes
from the striking contrast in the attitudes of the 12 disciples as
counterposed to Christ. Leonardo portrayed a moment of high tension
when, surrounded by the Apostles as they share Passover, Jesus says,
“One of you will betray me.” All the Apostles—as human beings who
do not understand what is about to occur—are agitated, whereas
Christ alone, conscious of his divine mission, sits in lonely,
transfigured serenity. Only one other being shares the secret
knowledge: Judas, who is both part of and yet excluded from the
movement of his companions. In this isolation he becomes the second
lonely figure—the guilty one—of the company.


Leonardo da Vinci: Last SupperLast Supper, wall painting by Leonardo da Vinci, c. 1495–98, after the
restoration completed in 1999; in Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan. Images Group/REX/Shutterstock.com
Leonardo da Vinci: Last SupperLast Supper, wall painting by Leonardo da Vinci, c. 1495–98, before the
restoration completed in 1999; in Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan. SuperStock

Slide 39
The Last Supper is in terrible condition. Soon after the painting was
completed on February 9, 1498 it began to deteriorate. By the second half of
the sixteenth century Giovan Paulo Lomazzo stated that, “…the painting is
all ruined.” Over the past five hundred years the painting’s condition has
been seriously compromised by its location, the materials and techniques
used, humidity, dust, and poor restoration efforts. Modern problems have
included a bomb that hit the monastery destroying a large section of the
refectory on August 16, 1943, severe air pollution in postwar Milan, and
finally, the effects of crowding tourists.
 Bartholomew, James Minor, and Andrew (detail), Leonardo da Vinci, Last
Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie, Milan)
Bartholomew, James Minor, and Andrew (detail), Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on
plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie, Milan)

Because Leonardo sought a greater detail and luminosity than could be

achieved with traditional fresco, he covered the wall with a double layer of
dried plaster. Then, borrowing from panel painting, he added an undercoat of
lead white to enhance the brightness of the oil and tempera that was applied
on top. This experimental technique allowed for chromatic brilliance and
extraordinary precision but because the painting is on a thin exterior wall, the
effects of humidity were felt more keenly, and the paint failed to properly
adhere to the wall.
There have been seven documented attempts to repair the Last Supper. The
first restoration effort took place in 1726, the last and most extensive was
completed in 1999. Instead of attempting to restore the image, the last
conservation effort sought to arrest further deterioration and where possible,
uncover Leonardo’s original painting. Begun in 1977 and comprising more
than 12,000 hours of structural work and 38,000 hours of work on the
painting itself, this effort has resulted in an image where approximately
42.5% of the surface is Leonardo’s work, 17.5% is lost, and the remaining
40% are the additions of previous restorers. Most of this repainting is found
in the wall hangings and the ceiling.

During World War II, in August of 1943, the 

Allies
 launched a massive bombing campaign on Milan and its outskirts. The
explosions and the ensuing fires killed over 700 people and destroyed many
of the city’s most important buildings and monuments, including a significant
portion of Santa Maria delle Grazie. Miraculously, the wall with the painting
survived, probably because it had been shored up with sandbags and
mattresses, but the roof of the refectory was blown off and the other walls
were decimated. The Last Supper remained exposed to the elements, covered
only with a tarp, for several months, until the refectory (the dining room of
the monastery where the Last Supper was painted), was rebuilt and a team of
restorers began working to preserve and restore the painting.

But Leonardo’s work was already in sad condition well before the bombs
threatened to destroy it completely. Soon after it was completed on February
9, 1498, it began to deteriorate. Because Leonardo sought greater detail and
luminosity than could be achieved with traditional fresco, he covered the wall
with a double layer of dried plaster. Then, borrowing from panel painting, he
added an undercoat of lead white to enhance the brightness of the oil and
tempera that was applied on top. This experimental technique allowed for
chromatic brilliance and extraordinary precision but because the painting is
on a thin exterior wall, the effects of humidity were felt more keenly, and the
paint failed to properly adhere to the wall. Mold grew between the paint and
the surface, and the presence of moisture caused constant peeling. By the
second half of the sixteenth century, Giovanni Paulo Lomazzo stated that
“the painting is all ruined.” The first restoration efforts took place beginning
in 1726, and over the centuries they were followed by several more.

Over the past five hundred years the painting’s condition has been seriously
compromised by these early restoration efforts, as well as its location (the
church is in an area prone to severe flooding), the materials and techniques
Leonardo used, occupation by Napoleon’s army (who stabled their horses in
the refectory and reportedly lobbed bricks at the apostles’ heads), humidity,
dust, air pollution and, most recently, the effects of crowding tourists.
 Bartholomew, James Minor, and Andrew (detail), Leonardo da Vinci, Last
Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie, Milan)
Bartholomew, James Minor, and Andrew (detail), Leonardo da Vinci, Last Supper, 1498, tempera and oil on
plaster (Santa Maria della Grazie, Milan)

After the destruction wrought by the bombing in World War II, restorers
covered the painting with a thick layer of shellac (a kind of resin) in order to
combat the moisture problems and keep the paint from peeling. They then
began scraping away some of the layers of paint that had been applied over
the years, uncovering what they believed to be Leonardo’s original
brushstrokes. Finally, in 1977, the Italian government and private
corporations cooperated to fund a massive project to fully uncover the
original painting. It took head restorer Pinin Brambilla Barcilon over twenty
years to complete the effort, meticulously scraping away at the painting’s
surface centimeter by centimeter with surgical tools and microscope. In 1999,
when the fully restored painting—in its new, climate-controlled environment
—was officially unveiled, critics around the globe argued as to whether it is
now true to the original, or irrevocably deformed, as only about 42.5% of the
surface is Leonardo’s work, 17.5% is lost, and the remaining 40% are the
additions of previous restorers. (Most of this repainting is found in the wall
hangings and the ceiling of the painting).

The Last Supper is a prime example of how public and professional attitudes

toward restoration efforts are not only often contentious, but change over
time. Whereas in the nineteenth century and earlier, restorations focused on
overpainting in order to present the illusion of a perfectly finished work,
modern approaches tend to favor the exposure of missing pieces, and to make
all additions visible and explicit. The current version of the Last
Supper resembles little of what Leonardo created in 1498, but it makes
visible the painting’s miraculous and tortured history.
Slide 40
Slide 41

Artist
Giotto di Bondone  (–1337)       

Title Last Supper

Object type painting 
Genre religious art 
Date between 1320 and 1325
Medium tempera on wood
Dimensions Height: 42.5 cm (16.7 in); Width: 43 cm (16.9 in)
The picture was painted by the artist in the period from 1304 to 1305. Giotto depicts a special event

in Christianity – the Eucharist (Communion), the moment of the establishment of the New

Testament. Because of the threat from the High Priesthood, the meeting was secret. The Last

Supper is described in all the sources of the Gospel. With high craftsmanship, Di Bondone conveyed

the atmosphere of the evening and space. The artist in detail and very subtly traced the interior,

canopy.

Participants in the Sacrament lead a leisurely conversation, sitting at the table. The apostles are

depicted on both sides of the table, so that the composition becomes compact, there is an emotional

relationship between the participants in the fraternal meal. There is neither food nor wine for

communion on the table. Rhythmically complex, but at the same time quite balanced picture is

written in warm tones of yellow-orange and purple. The picture conveys an ideal ratio of proportions

and subtle color gradation. The plot of the image is discreet, sophisticated, inherent in religious

painting, which is one of the hallmarks of Di Bondone style.

The image of the Savior is observed on the left, unlike other paintings, where the artist depicts Christ

in the center of the plot. Above the head of Jesus stands a nimbus of golden color.

Together with Jesus at the table are his disciples. Over their heads are depicted black haloes. Each

character in the picture is endowed with individual traits.

Giotto clearly understands human anatomy, so each fold is realistically drawn. Realistically modeled

forms, the volume of which is formed by lightening the main shade. Thus, with the help of light and

shade, Giotto conveyed the illusion of a three-dimensional image. For brighter expressiveness, De

Bondone applies brown shading around the eyes.

Slide 42

The Last Supper in the Early Renaissance

Andrea del Castagno, Last Supper, 1447, tempera on plaster (Sant'Apollonia, Florence)

Andrea del Castagno’s Last Supper (1447) is typical of the Early

Renaissance. The use of linear perspective in combination with ornate forms
such as the sphinxes on the ends of the bench and the marble paneling tend to
detract from the spirituality of the event. In contrast, Leonardo simplified the
architecture, eliminating unnecessary and distracting details so that the
architecture can instead amplify the spirituality. The window and arching
pediment even suggest a halo.  By crowding all of the figures together,
Leonardo uses the table as a barrier to separate the spiritual realm from the
viewer’s earthly world. Paradoxically, Leonardo’s emphasis on spirituality
results in a painting that is more naturalistic than Castagno’s.
Slide 43

The Last Supper (1542) is a painting by Jacopo Bassano, which is an

alternative approach to artworks of his contemporaries. The artist was
inspired from the older and more famous masterpiece, The Last Supper by
Leonardo Da Vinci. Today, the painting is in the Borghese Collection in Rome.
History

In the 16th century, especially in Venice, many images of the Last Supper
departed from the horizontal formality, illustrated by the Da Vinci version,
making the characters more active and putting them into modern types of the
working class with bare feet. Bassano was an early follower of this
iconography.

This painting is to be identified with the painting that the Venetian nobleman
Battista Erizzo commissioned from Jacopo in 1546, paying for the work in
these instalments at the beginning of 1548. In 1650 the artwork was in the
Galleria Borghese and, after being included in the inventory of 1700 under the
name of Titian, it was attributed to Andrea Schiavone.

It has been suggested that Tintoretto’s Last Supper, intended for the church of
San Marcuola in Venice and finished in August 1547, is the model for this
painting. However, it is more likely that it was Tintoretto who was inspired
by Jacopo’s artwork, which, according to the dates of the commission
and payments, was the first to be created.
Description

The Last Supper was executed as a typical oil painting with use of the
same materials as the rest of the Venetian artists of the 1800s. There are
many details about this artw0rk, especially in the light of the painting that
inspired Leonardo’s version of this moment in the life of Christ. Unlike the
linear, smooth lining and organization of the twelve apostles present in the Da
Vinci masterpiece, the work of art by Bassano expresses a more unorganized
scene. This is a scene that can be argued in many aspects to more closely
match the realistic approach of the fishermen. However, as regards the unity
of this painting, it was not the slightest degree to be the complete purpose of
this work.
Analysis

Bassano’s Last Supper shows his new interest in Mannerism in Italian

art. As part of the work, he expressed the influence associated with the
modern engravings of Dürer and paintings by Raphael. This is especially
expressed in the highly charged emotions of the subjects and the dynamic
and highly stylized pose of the figures.
To analyze the disciples and Jesus from left to right, you can see that two of
the disciples in the upper left corner of the painting are talking to each other,
where the one, which is further to the left wearing a kind of iridescent pink and
the other is emerald green. These two colors are commonly used throughout
this artwork. The two disciples under them are separated from each other.
The bottom one, who wears a pink top, similar to one of the above-mentioned
characters, does not talk with the disciple in black over him, but talks with a
person in a slightly dark green top right across the table. The looks and
gestures of the hands of the man in a pink shirt are serious and in some
sense bewildered – a topic that is characteristic of most people in this
scene.
The man in black is above him is not talking to anyone. He sips from a cup of
red wine, not looking at anything other than the table. Almost certainly this
man in the dark dress, who looks into his drink, is himself a traitor, the disciple
of Judas Iscariot. An old man in brown clothes can be grouped in the same
proximity as these two, although in some respects he is distinguished by a
special strange pose and a knife in his right hand. The next two, it seems,
Jesus and the redheaded disciple form the center of the artwork. However,
the way Jacopo Bassano portrays this is different from the image of his
contemporaries in that Jesus lags behind someone and almost in the
background, but at the same time is of great importance and is part of
the central point of the picture.
Further to the right, the three next disciples are looking older. The other two
seem to speak minimally, looking sadly at contemplative looks. One looks
down at the ground and the other look in the direction of the viewer with the
same sad eyes. The other two, the furthest to the right of the artwork, are
depicted in similar poses. On the front and in the center there is a glass of
wine on the table, the red color of which is shaded on the tablecloth,
resembles blood that will be shed tomorrow and will mix with the water
that flows from Jesus. This water itself is symbolized by a jug on the floor,
the shape of which repeats the shape of a glass.

Slide 44

The Sacrament of the Last Supper was painted using oil on canvas, in

1955. An art collector called Chester Dale commissioned the painting . Whilst
he was enormously pleased with the painting, some critics viewed it as a
mediocre rendering of a much-used subject. The subject is Christ's Last
Supper, which has been painted by many artists over the centuries.

Twelve pentagons and twelve apostles, as Dali said: Communion must be

symmetric.

Amongst these renditions is a version by one of Dali's favorite

artists, Leonardo da Vinci. Like The Last Supper by Da Vinci, Dali's The
Sacrament of the Last Supper shows Christ sitting centrally at a table with the
disciples around him and in the background, windows look on to a landscape,
in Dali's case it is that of a bay near his home of Port Lligat. The figure of
Christ is transparent, and above him the arms and chest of a man appear in
the sky, suggesting that he is already ascending to heaven. An aspect of the
painting that caused controversy was the fact that Christ was given Gala's
features. Dali had already portrayed Gala as the Madonna in several earlier
paintings, and in 1958 he was to show the image of Gala looking down on
Christ as he ascends to Heaven, in the painting "The Ascension of Christ."

Slide 45

Cappella dei Principi (Chapel of the Princes)

The group of the so-called Medici Chapels is annexed to the basilica of San
Lorenzo, the Medici family’s private church. Its vast collection of rooms is of
enormous historical and artistic interest, and holds the tombs of 50 members of
the famous family.

The Basilica di San Lorenzo (Basilica of St Lawrence) is one of the largest churches

of Florence, Italy, situated at the centre of the city’s main market district, and the burial place of
all the principal members of the Medici family from Cosimo il Vecchio to Cosimo III. It is one
of several churches that claim to be the oldest in Florence, having been consecrated in 393,  at
[1]

which time it stood outside the city walls. For three hundred years it was the
city's cathedral before the official seat of the bishop was transferred to Santa Reparata.
San Lorenzo was the parish church of the Medici family. In 1419, Giovanni di Bicci de'
Medici offered to finance a new church to replace the 11th-
century Romanesque rebuilding. Filippo Brunelleschi, the leading Renaissance architect of the
first half of the 15th century, was commissioned to design it, but the building, with alterations,
was not completed until after his death. The church is part of a larger monastic complex that
contains other important architectural and artistic works: the Old Sacristy by Brunelleschi, with
interior decoration and sculpture by Donatello; the Laurentian Library by Michelangelo; the New
Sacristy based on Michelangelo's designs; and the Medici Chapels by Matteo Nigetti.
History
The Basilica of San Lorenzo is considered a milestone in the development of Renaissance
architecture. The basilca has a complicated building history. The project was begun around 1419,
under direction of Filippo Brunelleschi, Lack of funding slowed the construction and forced
changes to the original design. By the early 1440s, only the sacristy (now called the Old Sacristy)
had been worked on as it was being paid for by the Medici. In 1442, the Medici stepped in to
take over financial responsibility of the church as well. Brunelleschi died in 1446, however, and
the job was handed either to Antonio Manetti or to Michelozzo; scholars are not certain. Though
the building was “completed” in 1459 in time for a visit to Florence by Pius II, the chapels along
the right-hand aisles were still being built in the 1480s and 1490s.
By the time the building was done, aspects of its layout and detailing no longer corresponded to
the original plan. The principal difference is that Brunelleschi had envisioned the chapels along
the side aisles to be deeper, and to be much like the chapels in the transept, the only part of the
building that is known to have been completed to Brunelleschi's design. [2]

The Medici Chapels (Cappelle medicee) are two structures at the Basilica of San Lorenzo,

Florence, Italy, dating from the 16th and 17th centuries, and built as extensions to Brunelleschi's
15th-century church, with the purpose of celebrating the Medici family, patrons of the church
and Grand Dukes of Tuscany. The Sagrestia Nuova ("New Sacristy") was designed
by Michelangelo. The larger Cappella dei Principi ("Chapel of the Princes"), though proposed in the
16th century, was not begun until the early 17th century, its design being a collaboration between
the family and architects
Slide 46,47,48,49

2. The Medicea Laurenziana Library

It is not always possible to visit the Library, however it is open to the general public
when an exhibit is on display (there is an extra 3 Euro fee to visit the library and of
course, the special event or exhibit). The Biblioteca Laurenziana is an extraordinary
example of Mannerist architecture by Michelangelo. Approached by a curvaceous
staircase in pietra serena it enters into a naturally luminous room.
The long room features two aisles with rows of desks and benches (also known
as plutei, reminiscent of a wooden structure used by the Romans for protection). They
are an original Michelangelo design! The benches served a double purpose: space to sit
and study as well as home to the core collection of over 3,000 manuscripts gathered
by the Medici family. The benches, acting as a storage area, had panels on the end of
each row detailing the contents within.

It is curious, Cosimo and Lorenzo Medici both contributed much to the library
collection, perhaps to establish that they were so much more than men of commerce —
their goal was to show themselves as men of scholarly pursuits, which was seen as a
much higher calling than (just) making money.
3. Main Body of the Church
In order to enter the church, you must buy your ticket in the cloister next door. It is
possible to go back and forth between the cloister and church - visiting them in
whichever order you prefer.
The San Lorenzo church that you see before you today was rebuilt by Filippo
Brunelleschi in 1419, his first project in Florence. It features a rough-hewn exterior
which was supposed to be covered by a spectacular façade by Michelangelo, but due
to lack of funds and other complications, the decorative covering was never added. If
you are curious as to what it might have looked like if it were completed, a model of the
exterior can be seen in Casa Buonarroti.

If you have already visited a few churches in Florence, you will notice a stark difference
as soon as you walk inside.
But what are you actually looking at? Proportioned spaces and a return to the classics.
The simple lines of the aisles converge to create an appealing space with light and a
sensation of spaciousness. Instead of the pillar supports used in earlier architecture,
there is a return to gray stone columns with beautiful capitals, with arches stretching
from column to column reach towards the ceiling. The white coffered ceiling and simple
lines are all part of the design.
Brunelleschi's design, with grey pietra serena columns, gives a cool, airy quality to the
interior. The bronze pulpits (circa 1460) are Donatello's last work and depict the
Resurrection and scenes from the life of Christ; from these pulpits, Savonarola used to
preach his hellfire-and-brimstone sermons.
Of great artistic value is the fresco by Bronzino depicting the Martyrdom of St.
Lawrence (1569) is a Mannerist study of the human body.

Slide 50
Michelangelo’s defiant David statue has captivated the world for centuries.
Considered one of art history’s major masterpieces, the marble sculpture showcases
both the artist’s skill and the fine art focus that defines the Renaissance.

Since its debut in the early 16th century, artists and art connoisseurs alike have
admired the piece. Esteemed artist, writer, and historian Giorgio Vasari noted that “no
other artwork is equal to it in any respect, with such just proportion, beauty and
excellence did Michelangelo finish it.” To understand why the sculpture has garnered
such praise, one must first understand the context in which it was created.

History

Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni, a key artist of the Italian High

Renaissance, created the towering statue from a single block of marble between 1501
and 1504.

A prominent figure in Florence, Michelangelo—who was only 26 years old at the time
—was commissioned to carve the sculpture as one in a series that would line the roof
of the Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore (“Cathedral of Saint Mary of the Flower”).
Once the 6-ton piece was completed, however, it was clear that it would be nearly
impossible to lift. Thus, it was decided that David would instead be placed in
the Palazzo della Signoria, where it stood as a symbol of strength and defiance from
1504 until its permanent relocation to the Galleria dell’Accademia in 1873.
‘David’ in the Galleria dell’Accademia
Photo: Uffizi.org
Symbolism
The sculpture portrays David, a biblical figure. In a particularly well-known narrative
(1 Samuel 17), David battles Goliath, a colossal Philistine. Against all odds, an
unarmored David knocks down his enemy using a sling and then beheads him with his
own sword. Given David’s esteemed reputation, it is not surprising that the Office of
Works would choose to feature the figure as a subject in their sculptural series of
historic greats.

Additionally, as an independent city-state, the Republic of Florence was aware of the

threats that surrounded them. Therefore, they viewed David as a perfect symbol of
Florence, as he captured the unwavering courage, unexpected strength, and
historic perseverance that they saw in themselves.

Lifelike Anatomy 
During the High Renaissance, Michelangelo created figurative works that focused on
balance, harmony, and the ideal form. David showcases these artistic sensibilities
through his lifelike, asymmetrical posture—known as contrapposto or
“counterpose”—and his realistic and highly detailed anatomy.

Slide 51

David is one of Michelangelo’s most-recognizable works, and has become one of the most
recognizable statues in the entire world of art.  Standing 13’5″ tall, the double life-sized David is
depicted patiently waiting for battle, prepped with slingshot in one hand and stone in the other.  The
twentysomething-Michelangelo carved the David after he had already carved the Pieta in Rome in
the late 1490s and returned to Florence in 1501.  Knowledge of his talent as a sculptor, therefore, was
growing, and his career was accelerating when he was commissioned to carve the biblical David for
the outside of the Florence Cathedral.  Because the statue was intended to be placed in a high
location on the church, it had to be large enough to be seen from below.  Today, it resides not outside
the cathedral, but inside the comfortable confines of the Accademia Museum in Florence.
The marble block used by Michelangelo was originally excavated for a statue to be carved by another
sculptor in 1464, but the block was not fully carved.  When Michelangelo received his commission in
1501, he was presented with the challenge of using the block which had already been worked upon to
some degree.  He had to work with what he was given, and in this case it meant that the figure he
carved would not project outward beyond the preset block of marble.

The David we are presented with here is a nude man with a very muscular physique.  His veins are
visible in his arms and hands as he clutches the stones with one hand and the slingshot in the other. 
His hands and his head appear to be disproportionally large for his body, possibly because they were
deemed more visually important for viewers who would see the statue high up on the exterior of the
cathedral.  Also, his left leg, which straddles the rocky base upon which he stands, appears a big too
long for his body.  It accentuates the line of this leg as it forms an essential component in David’s
contrapposto stance.  Like the ancient Hellenistic and Roman sculptures who were masters at
convincingly depicting the human anatomy, Michelangelo has depicted David so that his body
responds to the stance he is in.  David’s weight has been placed on his right leg while his left leg is at
rest.  Because of this, his hips have shifted with one side being higher than the other.  In turn, this has
caused David’s spine and midsection to curve slightly, and his right shoulder drops slightly below his
left one.

Donatello, David, c. 1440-1460, bronze

Compared to Donatello’s bronze David, also created in Florence – though a half century earlier – we
see several tantalizing similarities and differences.  Both are heroic nudes standing in contrapposto,
though Donatello dressed his figure in boots and a hat.  Unlike the semi-effeminate boy that
Donatello created, Michelangelo presented David as a strong and assured man stripped of all the
other objects associated with the biblical narrative, such as the head of Goliath or the sword.  Instead,
David stands alone with only his slingshot and stones almost hidden on his person.  Scale is also an
important consideration, since Donatello’s David is less than half the height of Michelangelo’s.  In
fact, Michelangelo presents us with David in giant form, which is ironic since his enemy is a giant. 
The colossal size is significant because it was the first time that a large scale nude statue was made in
the Renaissance since antiquity.  But perhaps even more striking is the timing in the narrative at
which we are seeing David as depicted by Donatello and Michelangelo.  The earlier sculptor shows
us David after the fight has already occurred and after he is victorious in battle.  Not so with the
latter.  Instead, Michelangelo shows us David before he is engaged in battle, and before victory has
been attained.  This anticipation of action is manifested in the face of Michelangelo’s David, which
conveys intense concentration and a furrowed brow as he stares into the distance.  This is a figure
who is focused on the future rather than one who is contemplating the past.
 Detail of the face of Michelangelo’s David.
After it was completed, Michelangelo’s David became a civic symbol for Florence, even though it
was ultimately a religious sculpture.  The early 1500s was a time of turbulence between the city and
its former ruling family, the Medici.  Now, the Medici were seen as aggressors or tyrants and had
been kicked out of Florence.  Florentines adopted the David as a symbol of their own struggle against
the Medici, and in 1504 they decided that Michelangelo’s creation was too good to place high up on
the cathedral.  Instead, they put it in a much more accessible place near the Palazzo della Signoria,
the main square of the city.
Slide 52,53

Michelangelo, Pieta, c. 1498-1500, marble

Michelangelo carved a number of works in Florence during his time with the Medici, but in the
1490s he left Florence and briefly went to Venice, Bologna, and then to Rome, where he lived from
1496-1501.  In 1497, a cardinal named Jean de Billheres commissioned Michelangelo to create a
work of sculpture to go into a side chapel at Old St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.  The resulting work –
the Pieta – would be so successful that it helped launch Michelangelo’s career unlike any previous
work he had done.
Michelangelo claimed that the block of Carrara marble he used to work on this was the most
“perfect” block he ever used, and he would go on to polish and refine this work more than any other
statue he created.

The scene of the Pieta shows the Virgin Mary holding the dead body of Christ after his crucifixion,
death, and removal from the cross, but before he was placed in the tomb.  This is one of the key
events from the life of the Virgin, known as the Seven Sorrows of Mary, which were the subject of
Catholic devotional prayers.  The subject matter was one which would have probably been known by
many people, but in the late fifteenth century it was depicted in artworks more commonly in France
and Germany than in Italy.
This was a special work of art even in the Renaissance because at the time, multi-figured sculptures
were rare.  These two figures are carved so as to appear in a unified composition which forms the
shape of a pyramid, something that other Renaissance artists (e.g. Leonardo) also favored.

An examination of each figure reveals that their proportions are not entirely natural in relation to the

other.  Although their heads are proportional, 

the Virgin’s body is larger than Christ’s body.  She appears so large that if she stood up, she would
likely tower over her son.  The reason Michelangelo did this was probably because it was necessary
so that the Virgin could support her son on her lap; had her body been smaller, it might have been
very difficult or awkward for her to have held an adult male as gracefully as she does.  To assist in
this matter, Michelangelo has amassed the garments on her lap into a sea of folded drapery to make
her look larger.  While this drapery serves this practical purpose, it also allowed Michelangelo to
display his virtuosity and superb technique when using a drill to cut deeply into the marble.  After his
work on the marble was complete, the marble looked less like stone and more like actual cloth
because of its multiplicity of natural-looking folds, curves, and deep recesses.
In her utter sadness and devastation, she seems resigned to what has happened, and becomes
enveloped in graceful acceptance. Michelangelo’s talent in carving drapery is matched by his
handling of the human forms in the Christ and the Virgin, both of whom retain a sweet tenderness
despite the very tragic nature of this scene.  This is, of course, the moment when the Virgin is
confronted with the reality of the death of her son.  In her utter sadness and devastation, she seems
resigned to what has happened, and becomes enveloped in graceful acceptance.  Christ, too, is
depicted almost as if he is in a peaceful slumber, and not one who has been bloodied and bruised
after hours of torture and suffering.  In supporting Christ, the Virgin’s right hand does not come into
direct contact with his flesh, but instead it is covered with a cloth which then touches Christ’s side. 
This signifies the sacredness of Christ’s body.  Overall, these two figures are beautiful and idealized,
despite their suffering.  This reflects the High Renaissance belief in Neo-Platonic ideals in that
beauty on earth reflected God’s beauty, so these beautiful figures were echoing the beauty of the
divine.

Around the time the work was finished, there was

a complaint against Michelangelo because of the way he depicted the Virgin.  She appears rather
young – so young, in fact, that she could scarcely be the mother of a thirty-three-year-old son. 
Michelangelo’s answer to this criticism was simply that women who are chaste retain their beauty
longer, which meant that the Virgin would not have aged like other women usually do.
Another noteworthy incident after the carving was complete involves the inscription on the diagonal
band running over the Virgin’s torso.  Vasari tells us about the reason for this inscription in one of
his passages about the life of Michelangelo:

Here is perfect sweetness in the expression of the head, harmony in the joints and
attachments of the arms, legs, and trunk, and the pulses and veins so wrought, that in truth
Wonder herself must marvel that the hand of a craftsman should have been able to execute
so divinely and so perfectly, in so short a time, a work so admirable; and it is certainly a
miracle that a stone without any shape at the beginning should ever have been reduced to
such perfection as Nature is scarcely able to create in the flesh. Such were Michelagnolo’s
love and zeal together in this work, that he left his name a thing that he never did again in
any other work written across a girdle that encircles the bosom of Our Lady. And the reason
was that one day Michelagnolo, entering the place where it was set up, found there a great
number of strangers from Lombardy, who were praising it highly, and one of them asked one
of the others who had done it, and he answered, “Our Gobbo from Milan.” Michelagnolo
stood silent, but thought it something strange that his labors should be attributed to another;
and one night he shut himself in there, and, having brought a little light and his chisels,
carved his name upon it.
Vasari’s Lives of the Artists
This was the only work of Michelangelo to which he signed his name.

The Pieta became famous right after it was carved.  Other artists started looking at it because of its
greatness, and Michelangelo’s fame spread.  Since the artist lived another six decades after carving
the Pieta, he witnessed the reception of the work by generations of artists and patrons through much
of the sixteenth century.

In more modern times, the Pieta has experienced some colorful events.  In 1964, it was lent to the
New York World’s Fair; afterwards, Pope Paul VI said it wouldn’t be lent out again and would
remain at the Vatican.  In 1972, a Hungarian-born man (later found to be mentally disturbed) rushed
the statue with a hammer and started hitting it, including the left arm of the Virgin, which came off,
and her head, breaking her nose and some of her left eye.  Today, you can visit the statue in New St.
Peter’s Basilica in Rome.

Slide 54

The Moses by Michelangelo can be dated from 1513-1515 and was to be part of the tomb of Pope
Julius II. The posture is that of a prophet, posed on a marble chair, between two decorated marble
columns. His long beard descends to his lap and is set aside by his right hand, which also leans on
the plates. This posture of the seated prophet also appears in Michelangelo's Sistine Chapel
frescoes from a year earlier. In fact here we have a rare example of Michelangelo as the painter of
the Sistine Chapel influencing Michelangelo the sculptor! Moses found his people worshipping the
Golden Calf - the false idol they had made. His anger, profoundly sculptured by Michelangelo, defies
the prison of stone, the limits of the sculptor's art. The world is drawn to the church of San Pietro in
Vincoli in Rome to gaze upon the range of human emotions captured in this Moses by
Michelangelo, whose own personal turmoil is represented by the tomb he was never allowed to
complete! What we see today is the troubled compromise, forced upon Michelangelo when it
became clear that the money to finish it, that in theory was to have 40 statues as grand in scale
(Michelangelo's Moses is 8' 4" or 254 cm high) and presence as the Moses, was never to
materialise. Moses was originally meant for the upper part of the much larger monument where it
would have been seen from below. This explains the figure's unusually long torso and overly
dramatic expression. Notice the swollen veins in his left arm and his massive shoulders, which seem
too large in proportion to the neck.
Michelangelo’s Moses is depicted with horns on his head. He, like so many artists before him, were
laboring under a misconception? This is believed to be because of the mistranslation of the Hebrew
Scriptures into Latin by St Jerome. Moses is actually described as having "rays of the skin of his
face", which Jerome in the Vulgate had translated as "horns". The mistake in translation is possible
because the word "keren" in the Hebrew language can mean either "radiated (light)" or "grew horns".

Michelangelo once wrote, “that a true and pure work of sculpture, by definition, one that is cut, not
cast or modeled should retain so much of the original form of the stone block and should so avoid
projections and separation of parts that it would roll downhill of its own weight.” These words reflect
Michelangelo's love of quarried marble and his reverence for the very stone that lies at the heart of
his chosen art form of sculpture. In the Moses sculpture a respect and total understanding of his
materials and his own abilities combine to create the masterpiece hewn from marble by a 38 year
old, at the height of his genius!

It is said that Michelangelo created a new world of art, a colossal planet in which his Moses was high
priest. Certainly in his daring energy, he produced stupendous results, which those who followed him
could never imitate without becoming ridiculous or grotesque. The Moses encapsulates
Michelangelo's own courage and passion at a time when he was fighting to be able to complete the
tomb of Pope Julius II. The continual battles waged with ‘lesser’ mortals was a constant companion
in the life of Michelangelo. Fighting to create the work he envisaged, in the manner and style he felt
was given to him by God. It is true he never completed the Popes tomb, but in Moses we can see
once again his restless genius at play. He considered it his most important work.

Moses is an imposing figure—he is nearly eight feet high sitting down! He

has enormous muscular arms and an angry, intense look in his eyes. Under
his arms he carries the tablets of the law—the stones inscribed with the Ten
Commandments that he has just received from God on Mt. Sinai. You might
marvel at Moses' horns. This comes from a mistranslation of a Hebrew word
that described Moses as having rays of light coming from his head.
Michelangelo, Moses from the Tomb of Pope Julius II, c. 1513-1515, marble, 235 cm (San Pietro in Vincoli,
Rome)
Michelangelo, Moses from the Tomb of Pope Julius II, c. 1513-1515, marble, 235 cm (San Pietro in Vincoli,
Rome)

In this story from the Old Testament book of Exodus, Moses leaves the
Israelites, who he has just delivered from slavery in Egypt, to go to the top of
Mt. Sinai. When he returns, he finds that the Israelites have constructed a
golden calf to worship and make sacrifices to. They have, in other words,
been acting like the Egyptians and worshipping a pagan idol.

One of the commandments Moses received is “Thou shalt not make any
graven images,” so when Moses sees the Israelites worshipping this idol and
betraying the one and only God who has just delivered them from slavery, he
throws down the tablets and breaks them. Here is the passage from the
Hebrew Bible:
Then Moses turned and went down the mountain. He held in his hands the
two stone tablets inscribed with the terms of the covenant. They were
inscribed on both sides, front and back. These stone tablets were God's work;
the words on them were written by God himself. When Joshua heard the
noise of the people shouting below them, he exclaimed to Moses, "It sounds
as if there is a war in the camp!" But Moses replied, "No, it's neither a cry of
victory nor a cry of defeat. It is the sound of a celebration." When they came
near the camp, Moses saw the calf and the dancing. In terrible anger, he
threw the stone tablets to the ground, smashing them at the foot of the
mountain. (Exodus 32: 15-19)

We can see the figure's pent-up energy. The entire figure is charged with
thought and energy. It is not entirely clear what moment of the story
Michelangelo shows us. Moses sits with the tables of the ten commandments
under his right arm. Is he about to rise in anger after seeing the Israelites
worshiping the golden calf?

Michelangelo, Moses from the Tomb of Pope Julius II, c. 1513-1515, marble, 235 cm (San Pietro in Vincoli,
Rome)
Moses is not simply sitting down; his left leg is pulled back to the side of his
chair as though he is about to rise. And because this leg is pulled back, his
hips also face left. Michelangelo, to create an interesting, energetic figure—
where the forces of life are pulsing throughout the body—pulls the torso in
the opposite direction. And so his torso faces to his right. And because the
torso faces to the right, Moses turns his head to the left, and then pulls his
beard to the right.

Michelangelo managed to create an intense, energetic figure even though

Moses is seated. While the marble itself is still, it seems as though his beard
is moving and flowing and that his muscular arms and torso are about to shift.

Donatello, St. John, c. 1408-15, marble (Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, Florence)

In comparing Michelangelo's Moses to an Early Renaissance sculpture by

Donatello, it is easy to see the difference between the Early and High
Renaissance ideals. Donatello's relaxed figure St. John really lacks the power
and life of Michelangelo's sculpture. Think about how you’re sitting right
now at the computer. Perhaps your legs are crossed, as mine are as I write
this. What about if you were not at the computer? And what to do with the
hands? You can see that this could be a rather uninteresting position. Yet
Michelangelo has given the entire figure energy and movement, even in a
sitting position.

In Michelangelo's dynamic figure of Moses we have a clear sense of the

prophet and his duty to fulfill God's wishes. Moses is not a passive figure
from the distant biblical past, but a living, breathing, present figure that
reflects the will and might of God.
Slide 55, 56

The Sistine Chapel is one of the most famous painted interior spaces in the world, and virtually all of
this fame comes from the breathtaking painting of its ceiling from about 1508-1512.  The chapel was
built in 1479 under the direction of Pope Sixtus IV, who gave it his name (“Sistine” derives from
“Sixtus”).  The location of the building is very close to St. Peter’s Basilica and the Belvedere
Courtyard in the Vatican.  One of the functions of the space was to serve as the gathering place for
cardinals of the Catholic Church to gather in order to elect a new pope.  Even today, it is used for this
purpose, including in the recent election of Pope Francis in March 2013.
 Sistine Chapel as it appeared before Michelangelo’s ceiling fresco
Originally, the Sistine Chapel’s vaulted ceiling was painted blue and covered with golden stars.  The
walls were adorned with frescoes by different artists, such as Pietro Perugino, who painted Christ
delivering the keys to St. Peter there in 1482.
In 1508, Pope Julius II (reigned 1503-1513) hired Michelangelo to paint the ceiling of the chapel,
rather than leaving it appear as it had.  Before this time, Michelangelo had gained fame through his
work as a sculptor, working on such great works as the Pieta and David.  He was not, however,
highly esteemed for his work with the brush.  According to Vasari, the reason why Julius gave such a
lofty task to Michelangelo was because of the instigation of two artistic rivals of his, the painter
Raphael and the architect Bramante.  Vasari says that the two hoped that Michelangelo would fall
flat, since he was less accustomed to painting than he was to sculpting, or alternatively he would
grow so aggravated with the Julius that he would want to depart from Rome altogether.

Michelangelo, Noah and the Flood, Sistine Chapel Ceiling

Rather than falling on his face, however, Michelangelo rose to the task to create one of the
masterpieces of Western art.  The ceiling program, which was probably formulated with the help of a
theologian from the Vatican, is centered around several scenes from the Old Testament beginning
with the Creation of the World and ending at the story of Noah and the Flood.  The paintings are
oriented so that to view them right-side-up, the viewer must be facing the altar on the far side of the
altar wall.  The sequence begins with Creation, above the altar, and progresses toward the entrance-
side of the chapel on the other side of the room.

Michelangelo began painting in 1508 and he continued until 1512.  He started out by painting the
Noah fresco (entrance side of chapel), but once he completed this scene he removed the scaffolding
and took in what he had completed.  Realizing that the figures were too small to serve their purpose
on the ceiling, he decided to adopt larger figures in his subsequent frescoed scenes.  Thus, as the
paintings moved toward the altar side of the chapel, the figures are larger as well as more expressive
of movement.  Two of the most important scenes on the ceiling are his frescoes of the Creation of
Adam and the Fall of Adam and Eve/Expulsion from the Garden.

In order to frame the central Old Testament scenes, Michelangelo painted a fictive architectural
molding and supporting statues down the length of the chapel.  These were painted
in grisaille (greyish/monochromatic coloring), which gave them the appearance of concrete fixtures.
Beneath the fictive architecture are more key sets of figures painted as part of the ceiling program. 
These figures are located in the triangles above the arched windows, the the larger seated figures
between the triangles.  The first group include Old Testament people such as David, Josiah, and Jesse
– all of whom were believed to be part of Christ’s human ancestry.  They complemented the portraits
of the popes that were painted further down on the walls, since the popes served as the Vicar of
Christ.  Thus, connections to Christ – both before and after – are embodied in these paintings which
begin on the ceiling and continue to the walls.
The figures between the triangles include two different types of figures – Old Testament prophets
and pagan sibyls.  Humanists of the Renaissance would have been familiar with the role of sibyls in
the ancient world, who foretold the coming of a savior.  For Christians of the sixteenth century, this
pagan prophesy was interpreted as being fulfilled in the arrival of Christ on earth.  Both prophets
from the Old Testament and classical culture therefore prophesied the same coming Messiah and are
depicted here.  One of these sibyls, the Libyan Sibyl, is particularly notable for her sculpturesque
form.  She sits on a garment placed atop a seat and twists her body to close the book.  Her weight is
placed on her toes and she looks over her shoulder to below her, toward the direction of the altar in
the chapel.  Michelangelo has made the sibyl respond to the environment in which she was placed.

It has been said that when Michelangelo painted, he was essentially painting sculpture on his
surfaces.  This is clearly the case in the Sistine Chapel ceiling, where he painted monumental figures
that embody both strength and beauty.

Slide 57
Michelangelo, Creation of Adam, from the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican, Rome, 1508-
1512, fresco
The most famous section of the Sistine Chapel ceiling is Michelangelo’s Creation of Adam.  This
scene is located next to the Creation of Eve, which is the panel at the center of the room, and
the Congregation of the Waters, which is closer to the altar.
The Creation of Adam differs from typical Creation scenes painted up until that time.  Here, two
figures dominate the scene: God on the right,
and  Adam on the left.  God is
shown inside a floating nebulous form made up of  drapery and other figures.  The form is supported
on angels who fly without wings, but whose flight is made clear by the drapery which whips out from
underneath them. God is depicted as an elderly, yet muscular, man with grey hair and a long beard
which react to the forward movement of flight.  This is a far cry from imperial images of God that
had otherwise been created in the West dating back to the time of late antiquity.  Rather than wearing
royal garments and depicted as an all-powerful ruler, he wears only a light tunic which leaves much
of his arms and legs exposed.  One might say this is a much more intimate portrait of God because he
is shown in a state that is not untouchable and remote from Man, but one which is accessible to him.
Unlike the figure of God, who is outstretched and aloft, Adam is depicted as a lounging figure who
rather lackadaisically responds to God’s imminent touch.  This touch will not only give life to Adam,
but will give life to all mankind.  It is, therefore, the birth of the human race.  Adam’s body forms a
concave shape which echoes the form of God’s body, which is in a convex posture inside the
nebulous, floating form.  This correspondence of one form to the other seems to underscore the larger
idea of Man corresponding to God; that is, it seems to reflect the idea that Man has been created in
the image and likeness of God – an idea with which Michelangelo had to have been familiar.
 One of the questions that has been raised about this
scene is the identity of the figures next to God.  Given her privileged placement under the arm of
God, the female figure is presumably an important one.  Traditionally, she has been thought to be
Eve, the future wife of Adam, who waits to the side until she is created out of Adam’s rib.  More
recently, however, a theory has been floated that this is actually the Virgin Mary, who takes this
place of honor next to God and the child next to her, who would therefore be the Christ Child.  This
view is supported by the placement of God’s fingers on the child – the same fingers that the priest
would use to raise the Eucharist during the Mass.  Since Catholic theology holds that the Eucharist is
the Body of Christ, this theological understanding would be embodied in this painting.  If this latter
interpretation is correct, the Creation of Adam would be intrinsically linked to the future coming of
Christ, who comes to reconcile man after the sin of Adam.
In all, the painting shows several hallmarks of Michelangelo’s painting style: the

lounging  position of both Adam and God, the use of

bodies which are both muscular and twisting, and the painting of figures who come across as works
of sculpture. It is good to remember that Michelangelo was, after all, a sculptor.  Painting was not his
primary area.
The Creation of Adam is one of the great jewels of Western art, though it and the rest of the Sistine
Chapel ceiling suffered the ill effects of centuries of smoke that had caused the ceiling to darken
considerably.  It was not until 1977 that the cleaning of the ceiling was begun.  The result of the
cleaning was astonishing after its completion in 1989; what was once dark and drab became vivid. 
The change from pre-cleaning to post-cleaning was so great that some initially refused to believe that
this is the way Michelangelo actually painted.  Today, we have a much better understanding of
Michelangelo’s palette and the world he painted, beautifully captured across the ceiling of the Sistine
Chapel.

Slide 58

The Temptation and Expulsion of Adam and Eve – interpretation

0

Michelangelo:
Pope Julius II in 1508 asked Michelangelo to paint a fresco upon the ceiling of the Sistine
chapel. The painting was painted along the spine of the ceiling in order of biblical events from
Genesis. It was a reminder to people that they were all sinners and they needed the church to
redeem them.
This Fresco is actually a double image divided by the tree in the middle, but both tell the same
story of Adam and Eve’s fall from grace and expulsion from the Garden of Eden. Satan is
depicted as a serpent tempting Eve with the fruit. On the other side and angel is directing Adam
and Eve away from the tree with a sword. Directing them away from more temptation but also
directing them away from Eden as punishment. On the right side Eve is showed cowered behind
Adams shadow; both of them are of smaller build, older and paler than what they appear on the
left side. Adams shadow is the only one that appears in the picture, it covers Eve as she was
tempted by Satan and brought darkness among human beings.

The Expulsion from Paradise painted by Michelangelo

Buonarroti (1475-1654) can be found in the central ceiling vault
of the Sistine Chapel at the Vatican in Rome.
This vault consists of nine scenes from Genesis beginning, at the south end, with The
Separation of Light and Darkness and ending with The Drunkenness of Noah.

The Expulsion from Paradise is the second part of the sixth scene known as The Fall of
Man and the Expulsion from Paradise.

The style of this painting was one initiated by Michelangelo near the beginning of the
Renaissance period. He conceived art, unlike some of his contempories who felt
compelled to follow classical ideals, as needing to convey a sense of human drama.

Unlike his predecessors, he uses, in this scene, intensely physical nude figures for Adam
and Eve, the mastery of which shows his intense early study of anatomy. This style is
particularly effective when he contrasts the smooth, young bodies of Adam and Eve at
the point of Eve's temptation to their older and unattractive bodies when they are
banished from Eden.

Michelangelo does not use more details than are necessary for the symbolism he wants to
convey and so does not crowd the scene thereby giving clarity to his message.

Michelangelo united the Fall and the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the garden in the
form of an uncial letter m (perhaps to signify his name)by using three pillars and two
arches to unite them.

The central pillar consists of the Tree of Life wound round by a veiny serpent with a
woman's head. To the left is another pillar made up of Adam and Eve in a mostly
luxuriant setting (apart from rocks and a dead tree stump)with Eve holding the apple
offered her by the female tempter in the tree.
The other branch of this tree extends into an airborne avenging angel with a sword that
points to the expelled ugly, veiny, aged figures of Adam and Eve who make up the right
hand column. This side of the scene is desolate.

Unlike Genesis 3:24 from which the story is taken the figures are nude and not covered in
skins and there is only one cherub rather than the plural cherubim in the biblical account.

The whole scene is meant to be read from left to right showing the consequence of Eve
eating the apple from the Tree of Knowledge leading to Adam and Eve's banishment
from the garden of Eden. Michelangelo links this story to another biblical story. The dead
stump represents the withered vine recalled in Joel's prophecy of the destruction of the fig
tree and the vine.

According to Isaiah the vineyard of the beloved brought forth only wild grapes. God
destroyed the vineyard's fence of stones as punishment. The stones, however, remain on
the left-hand side of Michelangelo's scene as rocks.

The connection is made between Eve and the vineyard and has been reinforced by
Michelangelo by giving her the same crouching pose as the woman crouching over the
wine keg in The Deluge. This depiction of the Fall and expulsion from Paradise was a
major influence in Masaccio's later painting The Expulsion from the Garden of
Eden which added an evocation of Eve's howling.
Slide 59

Michelangelo's Deluge sits at the heart of the masterwork

which is the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
Artist: Michelangelo
Created: 1512
Period: High Renaissance
Genre: Christian art
Comprising thirty three different panels in all, it is the central section of nine panels,
depicting the story of Genesis which lie at the heart of the ceiling; and which could be
considered Michelangelo's masterwork.

The Deluge is the second of these panels, and tells the story of the Great Flood, when
God drowned the Earth, save the occupants of Noah's Ark; which is visible here in the
background, floating away on the rising waters.

The Old Testament is a rawer, more violent text than the New, and Michelangelo here
doesn't shy away from the notion of a vengeful God. The painting is a writhing mass of
energy, as naked figures seek to escape the rising waters; the painting effectively conveys
the sense of panic with muscular brushstrokes detailing the contorted forms of the
doomed people.
Everywhere one looks in this painting there is desperation, a knot of figures in the left
foreground climbing a barren rock (and in one case a blasted, bare-limbed tree, surely the
tree's lack of leaves being a nod as to how life is leaving the world) is mirrored in on the
right by another group clustering under a rudimentary shelter.

In the centre of the picture is the most hopeless scene of all, a group in a boat which is
visibly in the middle of capsizing - surely a metaphor for man's powerlessness in the face
of almighty God.

The only ones to be saved are those on the Ark, which can be seen here still being
frantically worked upon, God's retribution perhaps coming a little earlier than Noah
expected.

But is he doing something else here? The scene is so despairing, and the destruction so
obviously imminent, that the viewer is bound to question the rightness of such
vengeance.

Certainly the life-loving Michelangelo's relationship with the Church was at times
difficult to reconcile with his hedonistic tendencies (in later years El Greco was to
consider him insufficiently Christian), he didn't want to paint the Sistine Chapel ceiling,
being busy at the time on the tomb of Pope Julius II's tomb, and considering himself to be
more of a sculptor than a painter. Elements of this work can lead us to the French
Romanticists of several centuries later such as Eugene Delacroix and Theodore Gericault.

He even wrote a poem detailing what an unpleasant experience it was. Set in this context,
is it possible that the visceral nature of this painting is intended to invite criticism? To
make the viewer question the justness of God's actions?

Whatever Michelangelo's motivation, what is unquestionable is the power of this

painting. Its energy is almost as overwhelming as the water. The use of colour is
masterly, the waters are an unforgiving white and grey rather than picture perfect blues.

This furious, stormy blankness is the perfect backdrop for the vivid flesh tones of his
people as they attempt fruitlessly to escape. Bodies are depicted with Michelangelo's
usual anatomical precision, and his eye for the beauty particularly of the male form. The
human parts of the painting are full of action, bodies packed densely together, the level of
detail is incredible.

But perhaps the most touching aspect of the Deluge is the image of a man tenderly
holding the drowned body of another, presumably his son. Thus we have an act of love in
the midst of a painting about retribution. As to whether that stands for divine love or the
more human kind is up to the viewer to judge.

Slide 60
The Last Judgement.

The Last Judgement by Michelangelo covers the wall behind the altar
in the Sistine Chapel. The work depicts the second coming of Christ
and, although the artist is clearly inspired by the Bible, it is his own
imaginative vision that prevails in this painting.

The picture radiates out from the centre figure of Christ, and
Michelangelo has chosen to depict the various saints included in the
work holding the instruments of their martyrdom rather than the
actual scenes of torture.

When executing his "Last Judgement" it would seem that Michelangelo

had been given artistic licence to paint scenes, not only from the Bible
but also from mythology. This shows great faith in the artist by his
patron, Pope Paul III.

Unfortunately, it was decided that works of art in sacred places had to

be modest and a pupil of Michelangelo, Daniele da Volterra, was
commissioned to cover the figures nakedness with loincloths and veils.
Originally all the figures were naked but da Volterra's intervention
earned him the nickname of the maker of breeches.

Other overpainting was added in the next two centuries and for the
same reason.

With the restoration of the chapel in the 1980s and 1990s only Daniele
da Volterra's additions have been saved as part of the history of the
painting, all other additions have now been removed. 
The Last Judgement" 48x44 feet, 1536-1541 Fresco, (s)

The fresco angles out at the top of the painting preventing dust from
settling on it and also improving the perspective of the work. At the
top of the painting the cross, the crown of thorns, and other symbols
of the passion of Christ can be seen. 
The centre figure is Christ deciding the destiny of the human race.
With a gesture of his arms, he damns a large part of humanity
plunging them into hell, but some are saved rising to heaven. Even the
Madonna at his side seems to cower in fear at the scene
Slide 61

The flayed skin of the Saint (s)

Just below the figure of Christ, are St Lawrence holding a ladder (this
symbolises the saint's martyrdom on a grate over hot coals). St
Bartholomew holds a sheet of his own skin in his left hand and in his
right hand is a knife. This symbolises the terrible fate of Bartholomew
who was flayed alive. The face on the skin is reputed to be a self-
portrait of the artist.

Slide 62,63

Architect Donato Bramante

Subscribers - login to skip ads
Location Montorio, Rome, Italy   map
Date 1502   timeline
Building Type martyrium
 Construction System bearing masonry
Climate mediterranean
Context urban
Style Italian Renaissance
Notes Round, domed, colonnaded.

THIS SMALL, ROUND TEMPLE FEATURES a mix of classical references

and elegant ratios and it is also considered to be the prototype of the
basilica of San Pietro in the Vatican.

On the spot where it was said St. Peter was crucified, the church of San
Pietro in Montorio sits overlooking the eastern slope of Gianicolo hill.
Built in the 15th century, the gorgeous church holds copious amounts of
renaissance art including frescoes from Italian masters and a chapel
entirely designed by Gian Lorenzo Bernini, but the true gem sits in the
outer cloister. A smaller, circular temple, the “tempietto” sits in the
middle of the larger church’s rectangular plaza, a hidden but influential
piece of architectural history designed by one of the most visionary
architects of the Italian renaissance.

Commissioned by the King Ferdinand, the construction of the small

temple probably started around 1510 under the design and direction of
Donato Bramante. Taking inspiration from ancient buildings such as the
Temple of Vesta (or what was thought to be the Temple of Vesta at the
time) and the Roman Pantheon, the building is a single chamber temple
with a hemispherical, concrete dome at the top and a perfectly-spaced
series of niches and pilasters on the main body. The exterior is
completed by a ring of columns built in Tuscanic (an offshoot of Doric)
Form.
The temple features so many well-mixed architectural references from
Roman and Greek culture that word of its beauty and harmony quickly
inspired praise from contemporary critics and artists such as Giorgio
Vasari. 

In addition to the accolades lauded on the building at the time of its

construction, modern critics also see the tempietto as the prototype for
the greater Basilica of Saint Pietro in the Vatican. Given the temple’s
small size it does not seem to serve a great deal of functional purpose,
but as a show of architectural precision and the multi-cultural influences
of the burgeoning renaissance, the little temple stands above all the rest.

Slide 64,65
 1566 – 1571

Villa Capra "La Rotonda" is a Renaissance villa just outside Vicenza, northern Italy, designed by Andrea
Palladio. The correct name is Villa Almerico-Capra. It is also known as La Rotonda, Villa Rotunda, Villa La Rotonda,
and Villa Almerico. The name "Capra" derives from the Capra brothers, who completed the building after it was ceded
to them in 1591. Like other works by Palladio in Vicenza and the surrounding area, the building is conserved as part
of the World Heritage Site "City of Vicenza and the Palladian Villas of the Veneto".

In 1565 a priest, Paolo Almerico, on his retirement from the Vatican (as referendario apostolico of Pope Pius IV and
afterwards Pius V), decided to return to his home town of Vicenza in the Venetian countryside and build a country
house. This house, later known as 'La Rotonda', was to be one of Palladio's best-known legacies to the architectural
world. Villa Capra may have inspired a thousand subsequent buildings, but the villa was itself inspired by the
Pantheon in Rome.

The site selected was a hilltop just outside the city of Vicenza. Unlike some other Palladian villas, the building was not
designed from the start to accommodate a working farm. This sophisticated building was designed for a site which
was, in modern terminology, "suburban". Palladio classed the building as a "palazzo" rather than a villa.
The design is for a completely symmetrical building having a square plan with four facades, each of which has a
projecting portico. The whole is contained within an imaginary circle which touches each corner of the building and
centres of the porticos. (illustration, left). The name La Rotonda refers to the central circular hall with its dome. To
describe the villa, as a whole, as a 'rotonda' is technically incorrect, as the building is not circular but rather the
intersection of a square with a cross. Each portico has steps leading up, and opens via a small cabinet or corridor to
the circular domed central hall. This and all other rooms were proportioned with mathematical precision according to
Palladio's own rules of architecture which he published in the Quattro Libri dell'Architettura.

The design reflected the humanist values of Renaissance architecture. In order for each room to have some sun, the
design was rotated 45 degrees from each cardinal point of the compass. Each of the four porticos has pediments
graced by statues of classical deities. The pediments were each supported by six Ionic columns. Each portico was
flanked by a single window. All principal rooms were on the second floor or piano nobile.

Building began in 1567. Palladio, and the owner, Paolo Almerico, were not to see the completion of the villa. Palladio
died in 1580 and a second architect, Vincenzo Scamozzi, was employed by the new owners to oversee the
completion. One of the major changes he made to the original plan was to modify the two-storey centre hall. Palladio
had intended it to be covered by a high semi-circular dome but Scamozzi designed a lower dome with an oculus
(intended to be open to the sky) inspired by the Pantheon in Rome. The dome was ultimately completed with a
cupola.

The interior design of the Villa was to be as wonderful, if not more so, than the exterior. Alessandro and Giovanni
Battista Maganzia and Anselmo Canera were commissioned to paint frescoes in the principal salons. Among the four
principal salons on the piano nobile are the West Salon (also called the Holy Room, because of the religious nature of
its frescoes and ceiling), and the East Salon, which contains an allegorical life story of the first owner Paolo Almerico,
his many admirable qualities portrayed in fresco.

The highlight of the interior is the central, circular hall, surrounded by a balcony and covered by the domed ceiling; it
soars the full height of the main house up to the cupola, with walls decorated in trompe l'oeil. Abundant frescoes
create an atmosphere that is more reminiscent of a cathedral than the principal salon of a country house. From the
porticos wonderful views of the surrounding countryside can be seen; this is no coincidence as the Villa was designed
to be in perfect harmony with the landscape. This was in complete contrast to such buildings as Villa Farnese of just
16 years earlier. Thus, while the house appears to be completely symmetrical, it actually has certain deviations,
designed to allow each facade to complement the surrounding landscape and topography. Hence there are variations
in the facades, in the width of steps, retaining walls, etc. In this way, the symmetry of the architecture allows for the
asymmetry of the landscape, and creates a seemingly symmetrical whole. The landscape is a panoramic vision of
trees and meadows and woods, with the distant Vicenza on the horizon.

The northwest portico is set onto the hill as the termination of a straight carriage drive from the principal gates. This
carriageway is an avenue between the service blocks, built by the Capra brothers who acquired the villa in 1591; they
commissioned Vincenzo Scamozzi to complete the villa and construct the range of staff and agricultural buildings. As
one approaches the villa from this angle one is deliberately made to feel one is ascending from some less worthy
place to a temple on high. This same view in reverse, from the villa, highlights a classical chapel on the edge of
Vicenza, thus villa and town are united.
Slide 66

Sketch of roaring lion by da vinci

Slide 67 empty
Slide 68, 69, 70
 Andrea Palladio (with scenographic modifications by Vicenzo Scamozzi),
Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza, Italy, 1580-85 (photo: philip-brown, CC BY-ND
2.0)
Andrea Palladio (with scenographic modifications by Vicenzo Scamozzi), Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza, Italy,
1580-85 (photo: philip-brown, CC BY-ND 2.0)

A spectacular space
In Vicenza, a town near Venice, a unique Renaissance theater has
miraculously survived for over four centuries. A hidden gem built inside an
abandoned fortress and prison, Teatro Olimpico gives form to the period’s
knowledge of classical Roman architecture and puts into practice
contemporary artistic developments like linear perspective.

The humanist theater and the new Renaissance stage

Italy of the sixteenth century witnessed the rising popularity of the theater as
a cultural form and as a mode of entertainment. Theatrical productions had
existed throughout the Middle Ages, but consisted mostly of religious
enactments staged on temporary platforms in outdoor spaces, like town
squares.
 Cover page, Marcus Pollio Vitruvius, Ten Books on Architecture, translated
and commentary, illustrations designed in part by Andrea Palladio (published
in Venice by Francesco Marconi da Forli, 1556)
Cover page, Marcus Pollio Vitruvius, Ten Books on Architecture, translated and commentary, illustrations
designed in part by Andrea Palladio (published in Venice by Francesco Marconi da Forli, 1556)

With the emergence of humanist culture in fifteenth-century Italy,

developments in theatrical architecture and design went hand-in-hand with
literary models that sought to reinstate the comedies and tragedies of ancient
Rome. But architects interested in studying Roman art faced a problem: the
celebrated theaters of ancient Rome had been dismantled or transformed into
utilitarian spaces throughout the Middle Ages. Luckily, Renaissance
architects were able to study the writings of the ancient Roman architect
Vitruvius, whose Ten Books on Architecture explained how to construct a
theater and described set decoration. A widely influential text, Andrea
Palladio himself illustrated the first Italian translation of Vitruvius’
architectural treatise. From these books and the study of ancient ruins,
Renaissance architects were able to form an image of classical Roman
theaters. These theaters had a semicircular seating section, or auditorium, and
an elaborate stage background called a scaenae frons.

At the same time that Renaissance artists were studying classical architecture,
pictorial developments like linear perspective made their way into the
theatrical stage of the sixteenth century—often in the form of painted
backdrops displaying a city view. This innovation introduced a departure
from the medieval stage, which had featured a row of scenographic houses
representing Biblical locations. Whereas classical and medieval theatrical
productions were free, popular events, the Italian Renaissance theater was a
sheltered space of enclosure constructed for courtly elites and associations of
erudite intellectuals.

A classically-inspired auditorium
Palladio was the most influential Renaissance architect. He was also a
founding member of the Academia Olimpica—a group of scholars in Vicenza
who sought to recreate the theatrical productions of classical antiquity.
Though the Teatro Olimpico is the oldest surviving Renaissance theater, it
was not the first permanent theater of the period. It was also not the first built
by Palladio, who had previously designed theaters in Venice and Vicenza.
The Olimpico was, nonetheless, his most ambitious theatrical project, and
one that would put into practice his knowledge of classical architecture and
contemporary art.
 Columnated portico with classically-inspired sculptures, Andrea Palladio
(with scenographic modifications by Vicenzo Scamozzi), Teatro Olimpico,
Vicenza, Italy, 1580-85 (photo: Neil, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
Columnated portico with classically-inspired sculptures, Andrea Palladio (with scenographic modifications by
Vicenzo Scamozzi), Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza, Italy, 1580-85 (photo: Neil, CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

The Olimpico was not a theater built anew. Palladio designed his Roman-
inspired auditorium inside an abandoned fortress. Refashioning an existing
building forced the architect to adjust his plans. As a result, and unlike
Roman theaters, Palladio’s seating area forms an elliptical curve rather than a
semicircle. A highly decorated space, the curved auditorium is crowned by a
columnated portico that is adorned with classically-inspired sculptures.

The scenographic city

Andrea Palladio (with scenographic modifications by Vicenzo Scamozzi),

Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza, Italy, 1580-85 (photo: philip-brown, CC BY-ND
2.0)
Andrea Palladio (with scenographic modifications by Vicenzo Scamozzi), Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza, Italy,
1580-85 (photo: Terry Clinton, CC BY-NC 2.0)

The Teatro Olimpico’s stage features a magnificent three-tier façade

or scaenae frons. Profusely decorated with classical columns, pediments,
sculptures, and reliefs, the façade has five openings, of which the central one
evokes a triumphal arch. Palladio and Vicenzo Scamozzi worked with limited
materials—using wood, plaster, and stucco to create the effect of white,
polished marble. The openings grant visual access to projected avenues,
conveying the appearance of a city. Constructed using linear perspective, the
passageways heighten the illusion by using forced perspective, which
increases a fictional sense of depth—so an actor walking into the receding
scenography would look like a giant in relationship to the buildings.

Perspectival passageway, Andrea Palladio (with scenographic modifications

by Vicenzo Scamozzi), Teatro Olimpico, Vicenza, Italy, 1580-85
(photo: Patrick Denker, CC BY 2.0)
Perspectival passageway, Andrea Palladio (with scenographic modifications by Vicenzo Scamozzi), Teatro
Olimpico, Vicenza, Italy, 1580-85 (photo: Patrick Denker, CC BY 2.0)

The perspectival passageways are a hallmark of the Olimpico, but their

origins are unclear. Palladio died years before the grand opening of the
theater, at a time when the inaugural performance was expected to be a
pastoral comedy written by Fabio Pace. It was not until 1583, three years
after Palladio’s death, that the Academia made the decision to perform the
tragedy Oedipus King instead. This change required scenography depicting a
cityscape instead of a landscape, and it is at this time that the Academia
purchased the additional real estate required for the projected avenues.
Scamozzi completed the construction of the auditorium and added the stage
design, though perhaps following drawings produced by Silla, Palladio’s son
and assistant. Whether they were the product of Palladio’s designs or simply
inspired by him, Scamozzi’s stage constructions are extremely innovative—
actually constructing in three-dimensions what had traditionally been a
painted backdrop.

After the Olimpico

The result of Palladio and Scamozzi’s antiquarian knowledge and artistic
innovation is a splendid and alluring space. Yet despite its enthralling
qualities, the Teatro Olimpico quickly fell into disuse after its first
production. Its influence is palpable, nonetheless, in two northern Italian
theaters built shortly after the Olimpico: the 1590 Teatro all’antica in
Sabbioneta, also built by Scamozzi, and the 1618 Teatro Farnese in Parma