Florence – Page 2

Orsanmichele

The Florentine building known as Orsanmichele was one of the most important places for sculpture in the early Renaissance years. Built in 1337, it was used to store grain and was owned by the city. Its name was derived from an oratory dedicated to St. Michael that had previously occupied the site as early as the ninth century. The oratory was located within a garden, and its full name was San Michele in Orto, which was eventually condensed to Orsanmichele.

The fourteenth-century Orsanmichele granary became an important artistic battleground where the guilds would compete. Each guild, which formed around a particular trade or profession, adopted its own patron saint and was therefore a quasi-religious body. The city of Florence gave the guilds the rights to install statues of their patron saints in the niches which were around the outside of the building near street-level. These would have been highly-visible places for public viewing of the guild statues.

The guilds were responsible for commissioning the works (and paying for them) that would be placed in the Orsanmichele niches. For whatever reason, however, they were slow to hire sculptors and the niches remained unfilled for some time. Because of this, around 1407 the government of Florence passed a law stating that if the guilds did not install a statue in their respective niches within ten years from that date, they would lose the right to their niche.

It is after this point in time that we see a flurry of activity by the guilds to commission works for the Orsanmichele niches. Some of the artists who were commissioned were Donatello, who carved a marble statue of St. Mark and one of St. George; Nanni di Banco, who carved the Four Crowned Saints (otherwise known as the Quattro Santi Coronati); and Lorenzo Ghiberti, who cast bronze works of St. Matthew and St. John the Baptist.

Donatello’s Saint Mark

Early Renaissance, Sculpture

Donatello-Saint-Mark-Orsanmichele — Donatello, Saint Mark, c. 1411-1413, marble (copy)

The statue of St. Mark was commissioned by the linen guild, one of the poorer guilds in Florence whose patron was St. Mark. They decided to hire the sculptor Donatello for the commission, who created a larger than life-size work (it is 7’9” tall). The work itself was placed into a niche that was already in existence in the building called Orsanmichele, and probably because this meant only the front would be visible, the back side of the statue was not completely carved.

The result of Donatello’s work was profound, to say the least, as he revived the use of the contrapposto stance in freestanding sculpture. Contrapposto had been employed by many ancient Greek and Roman sculptors, dating back to the Classical period of Greek art beginning around 480 B.C. After the fall of the Roman empire, however, it was largely forgotten by Europeans in the Middle Ages. When medieval sculptors depicted the human figure in reliefs (and less frequently, in free-standing works), the figures would often times be given stylized body parts and rigid postures. Donatello starts to change this in large-scale freestanding sculpture by giving St. Mark a much more natural look through the use of contrapposto. He would have known about this sculptural device through the trip to Rome that he probably took with Brunelleschi early on in his career. In Rome, the remains of reliefs and freestanding works would most certainly have been more prevalent than in any other part of Italy (or Europe for that matter), giving artists an opportunity to study them first-hand.

In addition to the use of contrapposto, another ingenious aspect of the St. Mark is the way Donatello anticipated the way the statue would be seen from below. The niche in Orsanmichele in which the work was originally placed was along the street, a bit above eye-level. Donatello made St. Mark’s head and hands and torso over-sized or elongated a bit so that they compensated for the angle that people viewed this from. Donatello was thus taking the viewing angles of the statue into account in his approach, and this is something that other artists would pick up on in the Renaissance.

Because the guild for which St. Mark was made was the linen guild, Donatello emphasized the garments on the figure. Here, the cloth covering his body falls over him like it would fall over an actual body with clothing on it. This way of modeling a body with garments is quite different from the way it had been done at times during the Middle Ages, when artists would depict a body hidden inside a mass of garments. Here, we can see how St. Mark’s right leg carries the weight and is made column-like for emphasis, but his left knee and leg are clearly detectable under his robe. Meanwhile, as his left hand holds the Gospel book, his right hand grasps at his side as if he is receiving divine inspiration to write the Gospel. He stands atop a pillow, which is typically a symbol of holiness; here, however, it also puts some emphasis on his weight and conveys to us the idea that he is a real person because the physical world around him reacts to his body.

This is the first time in the Renaissance that a statue like this is made where garments echo the body’s form like this. It signals a break from the International Gothic style that preceded it, and helps to usher in a new era of increasingly natural figures carved and cast in life size or larger.

Masaccio’s Holy Trinity

Early Renaissance, Painting

Masaccio-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.

Donatello’s David

Early Renaissance, Sculpture

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.

Botticelli’s Primavera

Early Renaissance, Painting

Sandro Botticelli, La Primavera, c. 1482, tempera on wood

Sandro Botticelli was one of the most well-known of the Medici employees. He studied under Fra Filippo Lippi and had a technique which focused on line, and his forms were lightly shaded. While art historians consider Botticelli to have been an expert at using line, he was also adept at using color.

The Primavera, the title of which means “Spring”, is among the greatest works at the Uffizi Museum in Florence. The precise meaning of the painting is unknown, but it was probably created for the marriage of Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco (a cousin of the powerful Lorenzo the Magnificent Medici) in May, 1482.

The scene shows us a group of figures in an orange grove. One of the first things we should note is that little is used in terms of perspective; while some atmospheric perspective is visible through the trees to the right and to the left, we do not see the one-point linear perspective here which some of the early Renaissance masters had used so effectively in the fifteenth century. Also, note how most of the figures have limbs which are long and slender and appear rather elegant. Botticelli produced art at a time when there was a demand in the court of Florence for this type of work.

While the exact meaning of the painting eludes us, we do know the identities of many of the figures who are shown in it. In the center is the Roman goddess, Venus. Her presence is a reflection of the humanist interest in the classical world which was popular in Florence at this time. She is depicted as an idealized woman, slightly off-center, with her head tilted and gesturing to her right. Above her is a blindfolded cupid (her son), and behind him the tree limbs form an arch which conveniently frame Venus and provide her with a privileged position in the painting.

To the far left, Mercury, the god of the month of May, has a staff which he may be using to usher away the winter clouds. He is readily identifiable by his prominent winged sandals.

To the right of Mercury is an important group called the Three Graces. These women, who appear to be involved in some type of dance, were modeled by Botticelli after an ancient depiction of the Three Graces. These figures are important because they represent the feminine virtues of Chastity, Beauty, Love, all of which point to romance and provide us with some context in terms of what is going on in the painting. The Roman writer Seneca refers to them as “pure and undefiled and holy in the eyes of all”, and we can see the pearls on their heads which symbolize this type of purity. Their clothing is like lace, very light, and see-through, which demonstrates Botticelli’s virtuosity in depicting such kinds of fabric. It is interesting to see that they are being targeted by Cupid’s arrow, which reinforce the idea of marriage.

On the right side, we see another group of figures which includes that of Zephyrus, the west wind, about to take a nymph named Chloris. After he succeeds in taking her for his own, they are married and Chloris transforms into Flora, the Spring goddess. Here, Flora is depicted throwing flowers that have been gathered in her dress. This is a means of symbolizing both springtime and fertility.

Taking the scene as a whole, it is probably best understood in light of an allegorical meaning. The allusions to Spring and the month of May, the scene of a suitor’s pursuit, the Three Graces – all of these point to the idea of a springtime marriage. The setting in an orange grove is also noteworthy, since the Medici had adopted the orange tree as its family symbol. The painting would have been placed in Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco’s bedroom and his wife would have seen it for the first time after their wedding, so the idea of Cupid targeting the pure Three Graces with his arrow takes on a particular meaning in light of conjugal love. In any case, the painting is a testament to humanist interests in classical subject matter in the Renaissance, as well as the courtly desire for lavish themes and graceful figures.

« Previous Page

Orsanmichele

Further Reading

Donatello’s Saint Mark

Masaccio’s Holy Trinity

Donatello’s David

Further reading

Botticelli’s Primavera