Paolo Uccello: The Life and Work of an Italian Renaissance Artist (PhD dissertation)

Paolo Uccello: The Life and Work of an Italian Renaissance Artist Hugh Hudson S u b m i t t e d in total f u l f i l m...

Author: Hugh Hudson

38 downloads 933 Views 68MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!
Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

Paolo Uccello: The Life and Work of an Italian Renaissance Artist

Hugh Hudson

S u b m i t t e d in total f u l f i l m e n t of t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of t h e d e g r e e o f D o c t o r of P h i l o s o p h y

September 2005

T h e S c h o o l of A r t H i s t o r y , C i n e m a , C l a s s i c s a n d A r c h a e o l o g y T h e U n i v e r s i t y of M e l b o u r n e

produced on archival quality paper

Abstract This thesis is a c o m p r e h e n s i v e a s s e s s m e n t of the life and w o r k of the Italian Renaissance artist Paolo Uccello (c. 1397-1475). It e m p l o y s an interdisciplinary m e t h o d o l o g y combining the examination of archival e v i d e n c e of the artist's p e r s o n a l , social and professional lives, the scientific examination of his a r t w o r k s , the interpretation of his iconography based on the contexts his works were m a d e for, and an approach to attributions based on documentary, stylistic and technical e v i d e n c e rather than tradition. U n p u b l i s h e d d o c u m e n t s presented here shed new light on Uccello's family and early career, underlining t h e importance of his extended family as a point of contact between t h e artist and t h e networks of patronage in and around Florence. N e w scientific analyses of three works c o n d u c t e d for this study, including infrared

reflectography,

X - r a d i o g r a p h y and m i c r o s a m p l i n g , reveal t h e sophistication

of

U c c e l l o ' s technique and help to clarify the c h r o n o l o g y of his works. N e w interpretations of U c c e l l o ' s works proposed here, relating in particular to his use of perspective, address the significance of their contexts, highlighting the subtlety and specificity of U c c e l l o ' s imagery. T h e catalogue raisonne" is the most extensive survey of w o r k s attributed to Uccello to date, and presents unpublished d o c u m e n t s for the p r o v e n a n c e s of t w o works attributed to Uccello. Contrary to the image of Uccello as an isolated and eccentric figure c o m m o n l y encountered in the art historical literature since V a s a r i ' s sixteenth-century biography of the artist, Uccello e m e r g e s from a detailed study of the d o c u m e n t a r y and physical evidence as an artist of his time, involved in Florentine society, religion and c o m m e r c e , and an innovative artist, a creator of unforgettable images w h o w a s admired by his peers and s u b s e q u e n t generations of artists, ensuring his place as o n e of the protagonists in the field of early Renaissance art.

Declaration This is to certify that (i)

the thesis comprises only my original w o r k t o w a r d s the P h D except

where

indicated in the Preface, (ii) (iii)

d u e a c k n o w l e d g e m e n t has been made in t h e text to all o t h e r material used, t h e thesis is less than 100,000 words in l e n g t h , e x c l u s i v e of tables, m a p s , bibliographies and appendices.

Acknowledgments For three years of advice and assistance I a m grateful t o m y Supervisor Professor Jaynie A n d e r s o n , Herald Chair of Fine Arts. I thank also m y A s s o c i a t e Supervisor, Dr Christopher Marshall, Senior Lecturer. In t h e School of A r t History, C i n e m a , Classics and Archaeology at T h e University of M e l b o u r n e I am also indebted to Professor Nigel Morgan, Dr Ursula Betka, Dr A n d r e w T u r n e r , Dr Grantley M c D o n a l d , and S h a r o n H a r d i n g , Postgraduate Administrator, for their generous assistance. F u n d i n g from t h e University i n c l u d e d a M e l b o u r n e Research Scholarship, a Palladio Trust P e g g y G u g g e n h e i m C o l l e c t i o n Internship Grant, an A l m a Hansen Scholarship, and R A G S , T R I P S and M A T S g r a n t s . I a m grateful to Professor Dale , Kent, Visiting Scholar at T h e University of M e l b o u r n e , a n d Professor William Kent at Monash

University, for discussing

Florentine history

and

historiography

with me.

Dr

Nicholas Eckstein, C a s s a m a r c a Lecturer in Italian History at T h e University of S y d n e y , kindly arranged for m e to present a paper at t h e c o n f e r e n c e Sociability which h e convened

in S y d n e y in August 2 0 0 5 . At the

and its

National

Discontents,

Gallery of

Victoria,

M e l b o u r n e , I wish to thank Dr Gerard V a u g h a n , Director, D r T e d Gott, Senior Curator of International Art, John P a y n e , Senior Conservator of P a i n t i n g s , Carl Villis, Conservator European Paintings before Registrar,

Michelle

Photography

and

1900, Gary Sornmerfeld, S e n i o r Photographer, Janine

Rhodes,

Copyright

Personal Officer,

Assistant to the

Director, and Jennie

for their i n v a l u a b l e

Melbourne Saint George and the Dragon,

assistance

Bofill,

Moloney,

in researching

the

including the m a k i n g of new scientific i m a g e s .

In Italy I am grateful to: Dr Fabrizio Lollini, Lecturer, T h e University of Bologna; Corrinna Giudici, Archivist, t h e A r c h i v i o Fotografico, B o l o g n a ; Dr Ludovica S e b r e g o n d i ; Professor Giorgio Bonsanti, Universita degli Studi di Firenze; Dr Cecilia Frosinini, Art Historian, Opificio delle Pietre Dure e Laboratori di R e s t a u r o , Florence; Francesca Fiorelli, Soprintenclenza Beni Artistici

e Storici di Firenze, Pistoia e Prato; Dr Lorenza

Melli,

Research Fellow, Kunsthistorisches Institut Florenz; Dr A n n a Padoa Rizzo; Dr Margaret Haines, Research Fellow, Villa I Tatti, Florence; Dr A l a n a O ' B r i e n , Project Fellow, Medici Archive Project, Florence; Don Paolo Aglietti, P a r r o c o , t h e church of San Michele, Castello; Don

Gilberto

Aranci,

Archivista

della

Curia,

Florence;

Signora

Sabatini,

Amici

Tabernacoli, Florence; Rolf B a g e m i h l ; Pierluigi C a r n c s e c c h i , from the Florentine

clei

family

distinguished in the fifteenth century a m o n g o t h e r things by its patronage of Uccello; and t h e staff at the Archivio di Stato di Firenze and the M u s e o di San M a r c o , Florence. In the United K i n g d o m I wish to thank: Dr C a t h e r i n e Whistler, Assistant Keeper of Western

Art, Geraldine G l y n n , Registrar, and Clare F a r r a h , Assistant Registrar, at t h e

A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m in Oxford for their g e n e r o u s a s s i s t a n c e in researching the Oxford

Annunciation,

including m a k i n g new scientific analyses with t h e assistance of the National

Gallery, London, Conservation Department.

A t the National

Gallery, London,

I had

invaluable discussions with Ashok Roy a n d Rachel Billinge, Research Scientists, and received assistance from Isobel Siddons and M a t t i Watton, Archivists. Aidan W e s t o n - L e w i s , Curator of Italian Renaissance Painting, National

Gallery of Scotland and Dr

Sergio

Benedetti, Head Curator and Keeper of the Collection, National Gallery of Ireland, responded helpfully to my enquiries. T h e staff of the Prints and D r a w i n g s Department of the British Museum kindly provided access to their collection. A n n Massing, Senior Conservator, Hamilton Kerr Institute, Lynda McLeod,

Librarian, C h r i s t i e ' s , London and J a n e

E.H.

Hamilton, Librarian, A g n e w ' s , London, k i n d l y assisted m y research in their archives. In France I a m grateful to: Harriet O ' M a l l e y , Cultural Attache, Australian E m b a s s y ; Bruno Monnier, Directeur General, Culture E s p a c e s ; J e a n - P i e r r e Mohen, Directeur, and Dr Genevieve Aitken, Documentaliste, Centre d e R e c h e r c h e et de Restauration des Musees d e France; and Monsieur Saint Fare Garnot, C u r a t o r of P a i n t i n g s , Musee Jacquemart-Andre, Paris. In Germany, D r Dietmar Liidke, Senior Curator for Old Masters, and the Conservation Department at the Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe, m a d e m e welcome in their m u s e u m and provided access to unpublished

X - r a d i o g r a p h y , and

reflectography analyses of the Karlsruhe Adoration

arranged

ultraviolet and

infrared

during my visit. In Spain I thank Dolores

Delgado, Old Master Curator Assistant at t h e T h y s s e n - B o m e m i s z a Museum, Madrid, for helpfully responding to my enquiries. In B e l g i u m Professors Helene Verougstraete and Roger van Schoute at the Catholic University of L o u v a i n k i n d l y arranged the presentation of my paper at their Colloque XV Le Dessin

Sous-Jacent

et la Technologic

dans la Peinture

in

September 2003. In the United States I thank Dr Keith Christiansen at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, and Ronda Kasl, Curator of Painting and Sculpture before 1800 at the Museum of Art, Indianapolis, for information about w o r k s in their collections. Many thanks to Jane Brown, V a n e s s a Cloney and Ian Kendrick in the School's Slide Library and the staff of the following libraries: The C o u r t a u l d Institute Library, the Wilt Library, the National Art Library, the W a r b u r g Institute Library, and the British Library, all in London; the Bibliotheque Nationale de Paris; the Biblioleca Dipartimento di Storia e Critica delle Arti 'G. Mazzariol', of the Universita C a ' Foscari and the Biblioteca

Nazionale

Marciana, both in Venice; the Kunsthistorisches Institut Florenz and the Biblioteca degli Uffizi, Florence. Finally, thanks to my parenti,

amici

e vicini:

Elena Zoppi, Filippo Vecelli,

Camilla Seibezzi, Nikki and Sasha Milojovic, J o h a n n e L a l l e m a n d e , Anna Arkin-Gallagher, Lucas O'Brien and Sastra, Gina Roberts, L a u r e n Klesch, Nicole M c K a y , Elisabeth Pilgrim, Melanie Miller, Sebastian Aubert, Lisa Mansfield, T i m O u l d , Dominik Tsciitcher, Katrina Grant, Ryan Johnston and Astrid Krautschneider.

Editorial Conventions In t h e fifteenth

century the F l o r e n t i n e calendar began

on 2 5 M a r c h , t h e Feast of the

A n n u n c i a t i o n and the reputed d a t e of the founding of the city. T o avoid confusion dates are given in the m o d e r n calendar except w h e n quoted.

T r a n s l a t i o n s are by the author unless specified in the e n d n o t e s . Errors or a n o m a l o u s spellings are not modified in transcriptions of d o c u m e n t s .

Abbreviations AODF

A r c h i v i o d e l l ' O p e r a del D u o m o di F i r e n z e

ASF

A r c h i v i o di Stato di Firenze

ASMC

A r c h i v i o di San M i c h e l e a Castello

BPRO

British Public R e c o r d s Office

CRRMF

C e n t r e de R e c h e r c h e et de Restauration des M u s 6 e s de F r a n c e

CRSGF

Corporazioni R e l i g i o s e S o p p r e s s e dal G o v e r n o F r a n c e s e

CRSPL

Corporazioni R e l i g i o s e S o p p r e s s e da Pietro L e o p o l d o

IRR

Infrared Refl echography

KIF

Kunsthistorisches Institut Florenz

MPAP

Magistrato dei Pupilli Avanti il Principato

NGL

National Gallery, L o n d o n

NGV

National Gallery of Victoria

OPD

Opificio dellc Pietre Dure

VT

Villa I Tatti

Introduction

A r o u n d 1484 Lorenzo d e ' Medici ( 1 4 4 9 - 1 4 9 2 ) sent a g r o u p of his men to take by force U c c e l l o ' s three Battle paintings from the residence of D a m i a n o Bartolini, w h e n c e they were delivered to t h e Palazzo Medici on V i a Larga in F l o r e n c e .

1

P r o b a b l y at this time the arch

s h a p e d tops of the panels were cut and the g a p s in t h e top corners, which would have a c c o m m o d a t e d corbels w h e r e they had previously been installed, were filled to suit their new 2

s u r r o u n d i n g s . These events are testimony to t h e a c q u i s i t i v e zeal that U c c e l l o ' s works have occasionally inspired and an e x a m p l e of the physical t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s that many of his works have u n d e r g o n e . Uccello was f a m o u s in his lifetime and h i s w o r k s have been coveted since, even if they were not a l w a y s well looked after. T h e r e has p r o b a b l y been no m o r e important collector of U c c e l l o ' s works than L o r e n z o . He h a d five of U c c e l l o ' s paintings installed with his most valuable w o r k s in o n e of his rooms (the 'chamera di Lorenzo')

on the g r o u n d floor of the Palazzo M e d i c i .

grande

terrena

Painters

Pittori,

et Scultori

and Sculptors)

Italiani

{The Lives

chamera

3

W h e n in 1550 Giorgio Vasari c o m p l e t e d his f a m o u s Le Architetti,

delta la

of the Most

Vita de'

Excellent

Phi

Italian

Eccellenti Architects,

and dedicated them to L o r e n z o ' s great-grandson and heir to his

collection, Cosimo d e ' Medici ( 1 5 1 9 - 1 5 7 4 ) , he d e v o t e d a c h a p t e r to Uccello, and n a m e d him with Brunelleschi, D o n a t e l l o , Ghiberti and M a s a c c i o as o n e of t h e generation that revived the art of Florence in the R e n a i s s a n c e . In so doing Vasari flattered Medici taste and guaranteed Uccello's

reputation

for

posterity.

4

Vasari

U c c e l l o ' s career, such as the Equestrian and the Flood and the Recession

lauded

Monument

the for

most

Sir John

conspicuous IJawkwood

highlights

of

in the D u o m o

of the Flood in the C h i o s t r o V e r d e in Santa Maria Novella.

While referring to the fact that Uccello painted m a n y small w o r k s to be found in houses across Florence, he hardly mentioned the subjects of these w o r k s and it was only centuries later with the e m e r g e n c e of c o n n o i s s e u r art historians in the s e c o n d half of the nineteenth century such as James A r t h u r C r o w e , Giovanni Battista C a v a l c a s e l l e , Charles Loeser and Bernard Berenson, that the difficult task of reconstructing the entirety of U c c e l l o ' s oeuvre was begun. After a century and a half of study it m i g h t be t h o u g h t that little m o r e could be said about the career of a major Italian R e n a i s s a n c e artist such as Uccello. H o w e v e r , more so

2

INTRODUCTION

than for many of his contemporaries, the picture of U c c e l l o ' s life and work e v o l v e d considerably over the twentieth century as significant n e w e v i d e n c e came to light. The first scholarly book dedicated t o Uccello, W i l h e l m Boeck's Paolo Uccello: Florentiner

Meister

Der

und Sein Werk of 1939 (Berlin), a p p e a r e d late in comparison with t h e

monographs for the artist's peers, and it was not until J o h n Pope-Hennessy's monograph of 1950 that an account of Uccello's career emerged that achieved the status of a classic. However, changing scholarly opinions a b o u t Uccello's w o r k s left the distinguished English critic's views increasingly isolated. Even in its second e d i t i o n of 1969, his monograph did n o t adapt to the growing consensus over the course of the twentieth century concerning t h e attribution of works t o Uccello. It rejected n i n e works n o w c o m m o n l y accepted as being b y Uccello and was silent o n another two, the Oxford Annunciation

and the Melbourne

Saint

George (Figs 1-2). N o one could have foreseen the e m e r g e n c e of important works by Uccello that have changed our idea of his artistic personality, s u c h as the Del Beccuto Virgin

and

Child identified by Alessandro Parronchi in storage at the M u s e o di San Marco, Florence, in 1969 (Fig. 3). T h e luminous Profile Portrait

of a Young Man w e n t unnoticed by scholars in a

private collection in Paris until the early twentieth century, before passing through the hands of various dealers and then entering another private c o l l e c t i o n in the United States a r o u n d 1941. It is now housed in the Museum of Art, Indianapolis (Fig. 4). Carlo Volpe introduced the work into the mainstream literature in 1980 in his perspicacious article in the j o u r n a l Paragone,

which m o r e than any other recent study has redefined our understanding of

Uccello's career. Credit goes to Volpe for recognising the Adoration

of the Child, discovered

under a layer of whitewash in the sacristy of the church of S a n Martino Maggiore in Bologna in 1977, as a work of Uccello in the same article (Fig. 5 ) .

5

Vasari's biography of Uccello, valuable though

it is for information

about the

identification and locations of some of Uccello's works in the mid-sixteenth century, has proved to be unreliable for the details of his life, as has been shown by the discovery of archival evidence since the seventeenth century that contradicts Vasari.

f>

New

continues to be found in Florentine archives; two r e c e n t discoveries concern membership of, and patronage by, Florentine confraternities.

7

evidence Uccello's

While it is still the case that

only four surviving works by Uccello are identified in c o n t e m p o r a r y documents, and they are all in the Duomo in Florence, the steady a c c u m u l a t i o n

of historical data in Florentine

Renaissance studies allows an increasingly rich and i n t e g r a t e d study of the artist and the society in which he lived and worked. In particular, t h e importance of families

and

neighbours in the Florentine Renaissance has rightly been emphasised by social historians 8

such as Dale Kent and William Kent, and for art history t o o , t h e family and neighbourhood are important and under-researched influences on artists' careers,

9

although Anna P a d o a

INTRODUCTION

3

Rizzo has conducted important research into the links b e t w e e n U c c e l l o ' s family and his early patrons.

10

Chapter 1 provides a b i o g r a p h y of the artist, b a s e d on archival e v i d e n c e ,

including

an u n p u b l i s h e d seventeenth-century d o c u m e n t for the t o m b s t o n e of Uccello and his father, which confirms that their family w a s a r m i g e r o u s , a n d an unpublished

eighteenth-century

genealogy of t h e most p r o m i n e n t branch of U c c e l l o ' s m o t h e r ' s family, providing evidence for his relationship to t w o p r e s u m e d p a t r o n s . " Conservation c a m p a i g n s h a v e transformed the a p p e a r a n c e of a n u m b e r of U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s , such as the Virgin and Child in the National Gallery of Ireland in D u b l i n , which was cleaned by t h e Istituto Centrale del Restauro di R o m a in 1968, revealing even to the previously sceptical P o p e - H e n n e s s y that it is by Uccello (Figs 6 - 7 ) .

12

A d v a n c e s in the

scientific t e c h n o l o g y of conservation have transformed t h e investigation of

Renaissance

works of art. T h e d e v e l o p m e n t of infrared reflectography in t h e 1970s, as an i m p r o v e m e n t on the earlier method of infrared p h o t o g r a p h y , provided a m o r e powerful m e a n s of detecting u n d e r d r a w i n g and pentimenti

(changes m a d e to a c o m p o s i t i o n during its execution) under the

surfaces of Renaissance paintings and d r a w i n g s .

13

A r m e d with such e v i d e n c e the art historian

is in a better position to d e t e r m i n e h o w t h e physical m a k e - u p of artworks reveals the artist's creative processes and t h e c h r o n o l o g y of their w o r k s . In C h a p t e r 2 the creation of U c c e l l o ' s paintings is described on the basis of analyses of their materials and t e c h n i q u e .

14

New

scientific analyses of three w o r k s , including three new infrared reflectography s c a n s , two new X - r a d i o g r a p h s , m i c r o s a m p l i n g and m a c r o p h o t o g r a p h y w e r e u n d e r t a k e n for this study (for the Oxford

Annunciation,

the

Melbourne

Saint

George

and

the

Karlsruhe

Adoration).

Unpublished technical e x a m i n a t i o n s of Uccello's w o r k s were a l s o consulted in t h e Centre de Recherche et d e Restauration cles M u s e e s de F r a n c e in Paris, the Staatliche Kunsthalle in Karlsruhe, and the National Gallery, London. T h i s study is the first to survey U c c e l l o ' s materials

and

technique, s h o w i n g

the

hitherto

unsuspected

spontaneity,

subtlety

and

sophistication of Uccello's technique, even in his small w o r k s . Technical information also helps to date s o m e works and to clarify their physical transformations over time. U c c c l l o ' s name is s y n o n y m o u s with perspective and art historians have dedicated considerable efforts to establishing the formal characteristics of U c c e l l o ' s use of perspective through visual analysis of his works. T h e theoretical basis of U c c e l l o ' s perspective has also been investigated through c o m p a r i s o n s of his w o r k s with written s o u r c e s .

15

H o w e v e r , there

has been little investigation of the e v i d e n c e provided by the c o n t e x t s of U c c e l l o ' s works for the interpretation of his use of p e r s p e c t i v e . C h a p t e r 3 e x a m i n e s three of U c c e l l o ' s most famous demonstrations of perspective from the point of view of their original or early contexts: the Battle National

paintings from the Bartolini residence in Via Porta Rossa, now in the

Gallery, L o n d o n , the M u s e e du L o u v r e , Paris, and the Galleria degli

Uffizi,

4

INTRODUCTION

Florence; the Nativity

from t h e Spedale di San Martino alia Scala, now in t h e reserve

collection of the Uffizi; and the Flood and the Recession

of the Flood in the Chiostro V e r d e

of Santa Maria Novella. It is proposed that there are p r o b a b l y quite varied and specific intentions in Uccello's uses of perspective in these works. Since even fundamental aspects of t h e study of Uccello have remained controversial for much of the twentienth century, such as the identification of which works he created and when, a straightforward reconstruction of the artist's c a r e e r is needed. Chapter 4 e x a m i n e s Uccello's early career after leaving Ghiberti's w o r k s h o p up to and including his stay in Venice, beginning in 1425. This period remains m y s t e r i o u s , notwithstanding the recent attributions of two paintings to the y o u n g Uccello by B o s k o v i t s (1992) and Parronchi ( 1 9 9 8 ) . However, unpublished fifteenth-century d o c u m e n t s help t o illuminate t h e social context of Uccello's early activity in which he came into contact w i t h the networks of patronage from wealthy families and the ecclesiastical institutions they s u p p o r t e d in Castello, t o the northwest of Florence, and in t h e Santa Maria Novella quarter of F l o r e n c e where h e lived. S o m e new specific observations concerning mosaics and pavimenti

in S a n Marco in V e n i c e support their

attribution to Uccello, discussed previously in general t e r m s . Chapter 5 examines the series of mural and panel paintings that can be more securely attributed to Uccello from the period after his return to F l o r e n c e from Venice, including littlestudied works such as the Oxford Annunciation

and M e l b o u r n e Saint George

(information

from unpublished documents for the nineteenth-century p r o v e n a n c e of the latter is presented in the Catalogue). T h e next chapter reconstructs the e v o l u t i o n of Uccello's works in t h e Duomo in Florence by comparing the information about t h e m provided by the Opera del Duomo's documents with the physical and stylistic e v i d e n c e . Chapter 7 is devoted t o the Battle paintings, examining their iconography in the light of d o c u m e n t s for their early history, published between 1999 and 2 0 0 1 .

16

Chapter 8 discusses U c c e l l o ' s mid-to-late career, and the

nature of his workshop, proposing that Uccello had one or m o r e assistants in the late 1440s and 1450s responsible for painting a series of small d e v o t i o n a l panels based on Uccello's designs. The question of Uccello's furniture painting and his last works are addressed in Chapter 9. The literature on Uccello is nothing if not colourful. He has inspired the rivalry of the Italian art historians Roberto Longhi and Mario Salmi, t h e disturbing fascination of the French, avant-garde

writer and d r a u g h t s m a n

Antonin

A r t a u d , and

the

radical,

post-

structuralist criticism of Jean Louis Schefer, while the Italian futurist and metaphysical artist Carlo Carra expressed his admiration for Uccello in w o r d s and with his brush. Chapter 10 reviews Uccello's critical and cultural reception, while f o c u s s i n g on how art historians and connoisseurs have dealt with the problems of defining U c c e l l o ' s oeuvre. A conservative

INTRODUCTION

5

estimate o f the n u m b e r of surviving w o r k s by Uccello on paper, p a n e l , c a n v a s , and wall, and his designs for stained glass, mosaics and pavimenti,

n u m b e r s u n d e r forty. H o w e v e r , over a

h u n d r e d m o r e works h a v e been ascribed to h i m , a product of speculative attributions made before the d e v e l o p m e n t of m o d e r n c o n n o i s s e u r s h i p in the late nineteenth century, but also a reflection of t h e changing c o n c e p t i o n of U c c e l i o ' s style. A p p e n d i x A contains the most extensive catalogue raisonne for U c c e l l o to d a t e , c o m p i l e d o n the basis of documentary, stylistic a n d technical evidence.

6 INTRODUCTION

Nates for the Introduction

1

Caglioti, 2001, pp. 49-50.

2

Roy and Gordon, 2001, pp. 11-13.

3

Home, 1901, p. 137.

4

Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 266.

5

Volpe, 1980, pp. 3-28.

6

The critical revision of Vasari's biography of Uccello began with Filippo Baldinucci's Notizie del

Professori del Disegne, the first volume of which was published in 1686. It pointed out that Uccello could not have died in 1432 as Vasari wrote, since the documents for his commission for the Equestrian Monument in the Duomo were dated 1436 (Baldinucci, 1974, p. 450). 7

8

Sebregondi, 1991, p. 190; Bernacchioni, 2003, pp. 418-419; Polizzotto, 2004, pp. 50 n. 128. For a review of recent developments in the field of Florentine Renaissance art history, including a

discussion of the importance of contributions by social historians such as Dale Kent and William Kent, see: Wright and Narchand, 1998, pp. 1-12. 9

Margaret Haines (2000, pp. 163-175) has discussed the value of, and difficulties in, researching

artists' families in fifteenth-century Florence. 10

Anna Padoa Rizzo (1990, pp. 56-59; 1991, pp. 8-9) has discussed Uccello's relations with his

wealthy relative and presumed patron Deo di Deo del Beccuto. 11

Wilhelm Boeck (1933b, pp. 274-275) first published an extensive list of documents concerning

Uccello in his 1933 article on the artist, providing references for thirty-nine documents or series of documents, not all of which referred to Uccello directly. More documents were added to the list in his 1939 monograph (pp. 94-109). 12

13

Pope-Hennessy, 1991, p. 90. Infrared reflectography was first described by J.R.J, van Asperen de Boer in his 1970 PhD thesis

written at the University of Amsterdam. 14

Technical studies of individual works or small groups of works by Uccello have been published by

Baldini (on the Florence Battle: 1954a), Brommelle (on the London Saint George: 1959), Kemp, Massing, Christie and Groen (on the Hunt in a Forest: 1991), Dunkcrton and Roy (on the London Saint George: 1998), Melli (on three drawings in (he Gabinetlo Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi: 1998, 1999) and Roy and Gordon (on the London Battle: 2001). 15

Many discussions of Uccello's works refer to his legendary use of perspective. For sustained

analyses of the subject see: White (1987, Chapter 14), Parronchi (1957a, 1957b), Sindona, Rossi, Beccattini and Gherardi (1972), and Borsi and Borsi (1994, Chapter 4). lft

Merisalo, 1999, pp. xvi, 56; Caglioti, 2000, pp. 266-267; Caglioti, 2001, pp. 45-46.

Uccello's Biography: Archival Sources

Four adjectives chosen b y Vasari t o d e s c r i b e Uccello in his Vite h a v e h a u n t e d the literature on the artist ever since: 'solitary, strange, m e l a n c h o l y and p o o r ' {'solitario, ,

x

e povero ).

strano,

malinconico

It is not k n o w n on what basis V a s a r i r e c o n s t r u c t e d t h e personal details of

U c c e l l o ' s b i o g r a p h y , although he claimed to h a v e had s o m e information about the artist's d r a w i n g s from his relatives. Vasari k n e w that U c c e l l o w a s o n e of G h i b e r t i ' s w o r k s h o p assistants and that his d a u g h t e r A n t o n i a was also an artist, p e r h a p s from

documentary

sources. H e referred to a letter from G i r o l a m o C a m p a g n o l a t o the philosopher Leonico T o m e o describing U c c e l l o ' s lost Giants

in the Vitaliani h o u s e in Padua and quoted an

e p i g r a m written at t h e time of the artist's death. H o w e v e r , Vasari cannot h a v e studied much original documentation from

U c c e l l o ' s lifetime, as is s h o w n b y his n u m e r o u s mistakes.

Vasari w r o t e that Uccello died in 1432, when he actually died in 1 4 7 5 , Vasari gave his age at the time of his death as eighty-three, w h e n it was about s e v e n t y - e i g h t , and Vasari wrote that he was buried in Santa Maria Novella, when h e was in fact buried in Santo Spirito on the 2

other side of the Arno river (Fig. 8 ) . W h a t then is more reliably recorded about U c c e l l o ' s life? N o record of U c c e l l o ' s baptism has been f o u n d , and his exact date of birth is u n k n o w n . Neither can it be calculated precisely from other s o u r c e s , since, as with many T u s c a n s of his generation, he recorded his age inconsistently.

3

In six d o c u m e n t s written in his lifetime that 4

record his a g e , the point of central tendency for his birth date falls in 1397. T h e only direct evidence of Ucccllo's parentage c o m e s from two s o u r c e s . T h e first is U c c e l l o ' s patronymic, recorded in his matriculation in the D o c t o r s ' and S p e c i a l i s t s ' Guild as 'cli D o n o di P a o l o ' ,

5

from which his father's n a m e is k n o w n to b e D o n o , short for D o n a t o , and his grandfather's name is known to be Paolo. T h e s e c o n d is U c c e l l o ' s 1425 will w h e r e h e wrote that his father was buried in the church of Santo Spirito, and in which he expressed his desire to be buried there also. T h e record of U c c e l l o ' s death in t h e Registri Specialists' Guild ucello dipintore

di Morii

of the D o c t o r s ' and

(Arte Medici e Speziale) s h o w s that, this wish was granted Cpagolo

ri" in so

spirito')!'

di

8

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

Since Gaetano Milanesi's 1878 annotations to V a s a r i ' s Vite it has always

been

accepted that Uccello's father was Dono di Paolo, a barber a n d surgeon from Pratovecchio, a small town east of Florence, w h o gained his Florentine c i t i z e n s h i p in 1373, and who married Antonia di Giovanni Castello del Beccuto in 1387. Milanesi illustrated Uccello's chapter in the Vite with a coat of arms showing three lion heads disposed around an inverted V , alongside a diagram of six generations o f U c c e l l o ' s family tree, from his grandfather (first name only) to his great-grandson. Milanesi also discovered that Uccello's daughter A n t o n i a was a Carmelite nun, and found confirmation of V a s a r i ' s c l a i m that she was a painter in the description of her in the Florentine Libri de' Morti.

H o w e v e r , h e gave few references for his

sources, and none of them was precise. Still, t h e majority of his discoveries concerning 7

Uccello's family have since been accepted, and o c c a s i o n a l l y added to b y others. In 1939 Wilhelm Boeck published the date of Dono di P a o l o ' s entry i n t o the Doctors' and Specialists' 8

Guild as 1395. Only Milanesi's discovery o f U c c e l l o ' s c o a t of arms has passed without comment in the literature, perhaps because the image of Uccello provided by Vasari, as poor and isolated, seemed incompatible with Uccello having b e l o n g e d t o a distinguished family. Archival evidence for Uccello's coat of arms does e x i s t , however, provided by Stefano Rosselli (1598-1664), a Florentine noble and antiquarian w h o recorded tombstones and coats of arms in the churches of his city. An illustrated m a n u s c r i p t in the Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Sepoltuario

Fiorentino

Ovvero Descrizione

Armi et Inscrizione

della Cittd di Firenze

e Suoi

delle Chiese Contorni

Cappelle

e Sepolture

Fatta da Stefano

Loro

Rosselli,

was

produced from his notes following his death. It includes a record for a tombstone on the west u

side of the cloister of Santo Spirito with the inscription, Doni Descendentium\

Paolo,

et filiorum

suorum,

and the coat of arms published by M i l a n e s i . Rosselli consulted a book

belonging to the church that specified that the t o m b b e l o n g e d to, 'Dono di Paolo (Fig. 9)

9

et

Barbiere'

Although Milanesi did not refer t o Rosselli's b o o k , he did refer to U c c e l l o ' s

tombstone and reproduced the coat of a r m s . In all p r o b a b i l i t y , the tombstone prompted Milanesi's identification of the barber

D o n o di

Paolo a s

Uccello's

father, given

correspondence between its inscription and the two p i e c e s of information

the

known about

Uccello's father. Rosselli's record of the t o m b s t o n e was k n o w n to the modern compiler of Italian coats of arms Enrico Ceramelli-Papiani ( 1 8 9 6 - 1 9 7 6 ) , whose notes are also in the Archivio di Stato di Firenze,

10

but it seems not to have been published. Despite his coat of

arms, Uccello's father's profession, migration to Florence a n d lack of a family name in the known references to him d o not suggest a particularly h i g h social s t a n d i n g . " In the will written in the month before he died, Uccello is referred t o as "Paulus olim doni donati ,n

pictor

uccelli

Since no earlier document includes t h e s u r n a m e D o n a t i , Uccello may have adopted

it at the end of his life as a mark of social distinction, much a s Piero di Cosimo seems to have

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

9

adopted t h e s u r n a m e Ubaldini late in his life, a l t h o u g h t h e r e is n o e v i d e n c e that U c c e l l o ' s d e s c e n d e n t s followed h i m in the u s e of the n a m e .

1 3

A seventeenth-century g u i d e t o F l o r e n c e ' s n o b l e families recorded that U c c e l l o ' s m o t h e r w a s Antonia di Giovanni Castello del B e c c u t o .

14

A g a i n , it is not clear where the

information originated, although it can probably b e attributed to the research of Florentine archivists. Generations of Florentine families h a v e r e s e a r c h e d archival sources for proof of their nobility in the form of long and distinguished family t r e e s .

15

N o t least a m o n g them were

m e m b e r s of t h e del B e c c u t o family, by w h o m g e n e a l o g i c a l research s u r v i v e s from the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, although, b y the e i g h t e e n t h century d e s c e n d e n t s of t h e del B e c c u t o family had taken the n a m e of the Orlandini f a m i l y .

16

S u c h research might have

uncovered or preserved the m e m o r y of t h e relation b e t w e e n t h e del B e c c u t o family and U c c e l l o , and this might h a v e found its w a y into a genealogical p u b l i c a t i o n . Even if w o m e n from prosperous families tended to m a r r y b e l o w their social rank due to the s h o r t a g e of suitable h u s b a n d s in t h e fifteenth century, t h e h i g h social status of D o n o ' s wife's family indicates that his status c o u l d not h a v e been t o o l o w e i t h e r .

17

A n o t h e r Florentine

genealogical guide described the del B e c c u t o as an old family of the first rank antica del primo

Cerchio').™

{'Famiglia

T h e y w e r e l a n d o w n e r s , traders and b a n k e r s , w h o h a d a coat of

arms s h o w i n g a red field with a w h i t e band ('wn' Campo

roso entrovi

una Banda

bianco,').™

Originally from Perugia, their principal residence w a s on the c o r n e r of Via Vechietti and Via Teatina, on Piazza di Santa Maria M a g g i o r e , valuable real estate n e a r the centre of Florence (Figs 10-11). Like many well-to-do Florentine families, they i n v e s t e d in patronage at t h e local church to p r o v i d e a fitting place to bury and c o m m e m o r a t e their d e a d . A c c o r d i n g to Vasari, the del B e c c u t o family exercised p a t r o n a g e rights in the c h a p e l in S a n t a Maria Maggiore to the left of the main altar. He said it w a s painted in 1383 with scenes from the life of Saint John the Evangelist by an artist called L i p p o , in reality a c o m p o s i t e of a n u m b e r of artists, and nothing remains of the paintings that might help identify w h o the artist w a s .

20

More reliable

archival e v i d e n c e shows that Deo di Vanni del B e c c u t o ' s p a t r o n a g e of a chapel dedicated to Saint Biagio in the church was notarised in 1386.

21

This chapel has been identified with the

one on the right of the main altar, and a t o m b s t o n e for the del B e c c u t o family said to be dated 1383 was recorded there in the eighteenth century, but has s i n c e d i s a p p e a r e d .

22

T h e chapel

2

remained in the del Beccuto family until at least the seventeenth century. "' By 1423 they also had an altar in the right aisle of the c h u r c h .

24

A n u m b e r of the del Beccuto family held important offices in Florence from thirteenth century to the s i x t e e n t h . referred

25

the

Deo di V a n n i ' s son, D e o di D e o del Beccuto (henceforth

to as D e o Beccuti) was the Priore (essentially a t o w n councillor) for the San

Giovanni district for two m o n t h s in 1 4 2 7 ,

26

was G o n f a l o n i e r e di C o m p a g n i a in 1430 and was

10

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

among the Buonomini (an advisor body to the Signoria) in 1432. He held offices in the Doctors' and Specialists' Guild on six occasions between 1413 and 1431, and the M e r c a n t i l e Court (Mercanzia) in 1429 and 1430. Thanks t o the detailed analysis of Florentine tax returns by social historians at Brown University, P r o v i d e n c e , it has been established that he was head of the 137th wealthiest household in Florence i n 1 4 2 7 .

27

A n unpublished, eighteenth-century g e n e a l o g y of the del Beccuto family, compiled by a descendent, Anton Ranieri Orlandini, is housed i n the Archivio di Stato di Firenze. It s h o w s the male lineage of the most prominent branch of the family, including Deo, but does not make any reference to Uccello's mother Antonia, o r any woman born of the family for that matter. However, from her patronymic, ' d i G i o v a n n i di Castello' her grandfather's n a m e is known to be Castello, which was not a particularly common name. T h e r e is, however, one person with that n a m e in the genealogy, D e o ' s grandfather's brother. This suggests that Deo and Antonia may have been related through their grandfathers (Fig. 12), which is supported by the age difference between Uccello and Deo. In 1427 Deo was fifty, while Uccello was about thirty, making Uccello about one generation younger than D e o .

28

Castello di L i p p o del

Beccuto, tentatively identifiable in this way as U c c e l l o ' s great-grandfather, appears to have been a man of some social standing, w h o m t h e genealogy notes held the office of Priore in 1 3 4 8 , 1 3 5 1 and 1355. It is elsewhere recorded that h e helped fortify the castello against Visconti attack for the Signoria in 1 3 5 2 .

29

at C a l e n z a n o

Castello's own great-grandfather

was

Geremia del Beccuto, who had been employed by the Signoria to work o n the road outside the Baptistery in 1289, where Uccello would w o r k himself over a century later. Uccello's mother's family

had

held a not

insignificant

social status

in

30

Thus,

Florence

for

generations when Uccello was born. The g e n e a l o g y also shows how the men of the family maintained its high social position over the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries by marrying women from a number of important Florentine families, including the Carnesecchi, the Pitii and the Machiavelli.

31

Training

Nothing is known of Uccello's education, except that the tax documents written in his hand show that he was literate and numerate. Since children generally attended school from about the age of five or six, for a period of five y e a r s , until about 1407. A document confirming

32

Uccello's schooling might have continued

V a s a r i ' s claim that Uccello was trained in

Ghiberti's workshop was published by T h o m a s Patch in 1774 from t h e records of the seventeenth-century Senator and antiquarian C a r l o Strozzi.

33

Strozzi was the

provveditore

(responsible for day-to-day property business) of t h e Merchants' Guild (Arte dei Mercatanti

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

11

di Calimala). H e conscientiously m a d e annotated copies a n d c o m p i l a t i o n s of the guild's d o c u m e n t s , including accounts for L o r e n z o G h i b e r t i ' s w o r k s for the guild. S t r o z z i ' s records, known as the Spogli

Strozziani,

are h o u s e d in t h e A r c h i v i o di Stato di Firenze, including a

c o m p i l a t i o n of information c o n c e r n i n g p a y m e n t s m a d e to G h i b e r t i ' s a s s i s t a n t s . listed o n c e as a j u n i o r w o r k s h o p assistant

garzone

1

di Bottegd )

34

Uccello is

receiving t h e small sums of

5 and then 7 florins a year, and again, this time w i t h o u t a n y qualification, receiving 2 5 florins a year. Garzoni

were youths who c a m e daily to a m a s t e r ' s s h o p w i t h o u t paying t h e fees to the

p a i n t e r s ' guild required of a p p r e n t i c e s , a n d in principle they could not g o o n to become masters.

35

T h e increasing rates of U c c e l l o ' s salary s u g g e s t an increase in his status and

responsibilities, although his highest salary was still well b e l o w t h e highest s u m of 7 5 florins paid to a n u m b e r of the a s s i s t a n t s .

36

Strozzi did not p r o v i d e t h e dates for the p a y m e n t s ,

although t h e list in which Uccello first appears is related to t h e second convention for G h i b e r t i ' s first set of doors for the Baptistery, of 1407, w h i c h serves as an a p p r o x i m a t e terminus

post quern (Fig. 13).

By d i v i d i n g U c c e l l o ' s total w a g e s as a garzone

by the a n n u a l rates of his salary, James

Beck arrived at the a p p r o x i m a t e d u r a t i o n of his e m p l o y m e n t as a garzone

as three years, and

estimated that Uccello stayed on for a b o u t a n o t h e r fifteen m o n t h s , probably as a y o u n g master. By correlating the second, significant increase in his rate of pay with his entry into the D o c t o r s ' and Specialists' Guild in October 1415, Beck arrived at the dates of U c c e l l o ' s time in the s h o p as about 1412 to 1416, between the a g e s of a b o u t fifteen and n i n e t e e n .

37

It has,

h o w e v e r , also been argued that the m o d e s t increases in U c c e l l o ' s salary m a y simply reflect his growing experience in the s h o p and that U c c e l l o ' s m e m b e r s h i p of the guild would have required a m u c h higher rate of pay. T h u s , U c c e l l o ' s four or s o years in G h i b e r t i ' s w o r k s h o p may have c o m e to an end before O c t o b e r 1 4 1 5 .

38

A m o n g the o t h e r assistants w h o worked in

G h i b e r t i ' s w o r k s h o p at different times w e r e D o n a t e l l o , M i c h e l o z z o , B e n o z z o G o z z o l i , and perhaps Luca del la R o b b i a and Giovanni T o s c a n i . W h e t h e r M a s o l i n o was a m o n g G h i b e r t i ' s assistants as has long been believed is uncertain, and s o m e b e l i e v e it is u n l i k e l y .

39

Ghiberti

was a perfectionist and he maintained scrupulous quality control in his first set of d o o r s , so it is not possible t o identify contributions by individual a s s i s t a n t s ,

40

let alone any contribution

the y o u n g U c c e l l o might have made. T h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s in which Uccello learnt to paint are shrouded in mystery. In G h i b e r t i ' s a u t o b i o g r a p h y he claimed to have painted early in his career,

41

and in 1446 he accepted a c o m m i s s i o n for a fresco with another artist, which was

ultimately undertaken by o t h e r s . assistants that were

clearly

p o l y c h r o m i n g of sculpture.

42

H o w e v e r , no paintings by Ghiberti survive, nor any by his

executed

in

Ghiberti's

workshop,

except

perhaps for

the

12

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

Uccello matriculated as a painter with the D o c t o r s ' and Specialists' Guild o n 15 October 1415, at which t i m e he was living in the popolo

(the smallest administrative area in

the vicinity of a church) of Santa Maria Nepotecosa, j u s t south of the D u o m o .

43

Uccello's

relatively precocious entry into the guild at t h e age of about eighteen, and free of charge, was made possible by his father's membership of the guild, s i n c e barbers and painters belonged t o the same guild.

44

It was o n e of the major guilds in Florence and included a m o n g its m e m b e r s

some distinguished figures of Uccello's time, such as L e o n Battista Alberti, p h y s i c i a n , astronomer, architect and writer, and Marsilio Ficino, physician and man of Tommaso di Ser Giovanni, known as Masaccio, joined in 1 4 2 2 .

46

letters.

45

Other luminaries from the

history of the Guild included Dante Alighieri and Giotto d i B o n d o n e .

47

Uccello also j o i n e d

the Confraternity of Saint Luke, the painter's confraternity, but as the text recording his inscription is partly illegible, the date can only be narrowed t o between 1414 and 1 4 2 3 .

48

Enigmatic Early Career in Florence and Venice

In 1427 the Florentine commune introduced a new tax s y s t e m : the Catasto. Those individuals who were sufficiently wealthy to be liable for the tax w e r e required t o list their assets, their creditors and debtors and details of their immediate f a m i l y .

49

Ironic though it may seem, these

tax records have long been recognised as one of t h e key sources of information for the lives of Florentine artists in the fifteenth century, providing information concerning the ages, families, places of residence, property, travels and professional relationships of artists and their patrons. The Catasto was recorded in two parts. T h e portate

are statements provided by

the individual being assessed or someone acting for them. T h e campioni

were then d r a w n up

by tax officials or scribes duplicating the information p r o v i d e d in the portate

and assessing

the amount of tax owed. Occasionally, the tax officials interpolated information into their copy of the tax statements, so the information in the t w o versions needs to be used in tandem.

50

The amount of information the Catasto d o c u m e n t s provide about artworks can be

disappointingly

small, as it is in

Uccello's

case.

With

a few

exceptions,

Uccello's

commissions must have been paid for in a timely fashion a n d so his patrons were not often recorded as debtors. However, an old debt from the S p e d a l e di San Antonio in Castello mentioned in his 1433 portata

provides at least a clue to a location, if not the precise nature,

of Uccello's early activity, discussed in Chapter 4. The period between 1415 and 1425 is the least d o c u m e n t e d of Uccello's career. T h e list of debtors declared in his 1427 portata,

s o m e still owing m o n e y in 1431, gives little insight

into this period. There are references to a debt owed t o U c c e l l o in 1427 by a goldsmith, {'avere da g" horafo libri 7 ocircha'),

which was still o w i n g in 1431. It presumably arose in

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

13

the period before Uccello left F l o r e n c e in 1425. T h e r e w e r e m a n y g o l d s m i t h s with t h e n a m e Giovanni in Florence in the first half of the fifteenth c e n t u r y .

51

The 'Giovanni goldsmith' who

owed U c c e l l o m o n e y m a y be the s a m e ' G i o v a n n i g o l d s m i t h ' w h o did the s i l v e r w o r k on the covers of t h e Confraternity of the Purification's statutes in 1 4 3 9 ;

52

the confraternity had also

c o m m i s s i o n e d work from U c c e l l o a f e w years before, as will b e discussed below. Another possibility is t h e goldsmith G i o v a n n i di Chiaro Albizzelli w h o o w n e d p r o p e r t y adjacent to the del B e c c u t o family in Piazza di S a n t a M a r i a M a g g i o r e in t h e 1420s and w h o worked with Ghiberti at the B a p t i s t e r y .

53

H o w e v e r , even the reason for the d e b t is u n k n o w n . Uccello was

also owed m o n e y by a 'mazzo

daogniano\

which p r o b a b l y relates to U c c e l l o ' s activity as a

landlord in the area of U g n a n o ( ' d a o g n i a n o ' m e a n s 'from U g n a n o ' ) , a Vettorio di Giovanni w h o , as Uccello related, ran a w a y to N a p l e s without paying h i s d e b t , a n d a M a e s t r o Belaqua, 54

specified as A n d r e a Belaqua in U c c e l l o ' s 1431 campione.

T h e r e a s o n s for these debts are

also unspecified. O n 5 A u g u s t 1425 Uccello w r o t e his will, which for a y o u n g m a n w a s s o m e t h i n g that might b e d o n e o n the eve of a long j o u r n e y . At t h e t i m e h e w a s living in the popolo

of Santa

Maria Novella. He m a d e the S p e d a l e di Santa M a r i a N u o v a his principal beneficiary, and provided for small d o n a t i o n s to the O p e r a (board of works) of S a n t a Reparata (the former n a m e of the D u o m o , r e n a m e d S a n t a Maria del Fiore) and the O p e r a of t h e walls of F l o r e n c e .

55

It was c o m m o n practice for Florentines to leave at least a small a m o u n t in their wills to c o m m u n a l institutions such as the S p e d a l e di Santa M a r i a N u o v a a n d t h e opere of the D u o m o and the city w a l l s .

56

U c c e l l o ' s 1427 portata

was submitted in J u l y by D e o B e c c u t i , w h o described himself

as P a o l o ' s attorney, for a certain S e r B a r t o l o di Ser D o n a t o G i a n n i n i (Ustritta dio bechutj.

p[r]ochuratore

del deltapagholo...p[erj

ser bartolo

di ser donato

p[er] me dio dj gianinf).

Deo

Beccuti explained to the tax officials that Uccello left for V e n i c e m o r e than t w o years ago (in reality it had been less than t w o years) and declared on U c c e l l o ' s behalf a farm with a worker's

house at S a n t o Stefano, in the Ugnano area, u n r e m a r k a b l e agricultural

land

southwest of Florence. T h e farm was w o r k e d by a certain A n d r e a di Piero, p r o d u c i n g grain and w i n e .

57

Although only a distant relative, D e o was the m o s t prominent m e m b e r of

U c c e l l o ' s m o t h e r s ' family at the time and this may explain w h y he a s s u m e d responsibility for U c c e l l o ' s tax return. U c c e l l o ' s d e c e a s e d father had been a m i g r a n t to Florence and may have had fewer and less important relations in t h e city than U c c e l l o ' s m o t h e r . In fifteenth-century Florence the death of a y o u n g p e r s o n ' s father could lead to the i n v o l v e m e n t o f the Magistrato dei Pupilli, a c o m m u n a l

institution providing j u d g e s and notaries to administer

family

property for orphans. N o reference to Uccello has yet been f o u n d in the Pupilli records. Flowever, t h e fact that U c c e l l o left n o t h i n g to relatives in his will suggests that h e was

14

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

separated from, or had lost, his immediate family. This impression is strengthened by t h e fact that his tax return was submitted by a distant relative while h e was in Venice. Ser Bartolo was Notaio (Notary) of t h e Signoria on a number of occasions from 1416 to 1 4 3 8 .

58

It is not clear

whether he helped administer Uccello's affairs following t h e death of his father, or s i m p l y asked Deo Beccuti to submit U c c e l l o ' s p o r t a t a while Uccello was away from Florence. The introduction to William K e n t ' s Household

and Lineage

in Renaissance

Florence

(1977) argued persuasively for the importance of the e x t e n d e d family in fifteenth-century Florentine society.

59

Dale K e n t ' s The Rise of the Medici

(1978) also emphasised the importance of families

Faction

in Florence

1426-1434

in Florentine social, political

and

professional life in t h e period. One source of evidence that Dale Kent used to support this 60

view was Giovanni di Paolo Morelli's advice to his sons in h i s Ricordi.

Morelli, himself an

orphan, wrote: 'if you find yourself deprived of relatives a n d alone and without counsel in your adversity, try to make contact with relations and take a relation to be your (surrogate] father. And this is wished, if possible: firstly look in y o u r gonfalone,

and if therein you can

find a relation, try m o r e keenly than elsewhere; if you c a n n o t or there is no one you like o r who is satisfactory, look in your quarter...choose as a relation a merchant, rich, from a n old family of Florence, Guelf, in g o v e r n m e n t ' .

61

D e o Beccuti fulfilled all of Morelli's criteria for

a good mentor for Uccello, and by 1425 Uccello was living c l o s e to Deo, in the Santa M a r i a Novella quarter in the northwest of Florence. Beccnti's p o s i t i o n as an office-bearer in the Doctors' and Specialists' Guild, to which Uccello belonged, would have put him in a good position to assist his younger relative. D e o ' s o w n father m u s t have died by the time Deo was about eleven, since t h e estate was inventoried by the Pupilli in 1388, giving him good reason to sympathise with Uccello's circumstances.

62

Return to Florence

Uccello's portata

of January 1431 seems not t o be a u t o g r a p h , since it is written in the third

person ('sua incharichi).

Furthermore, the handwriting is similar to that of Deo Beccuti, and

so he may have submitted Uccello's 1431 portata

as he had the previous o n e .

63

Uccello was

presumably away from Florence at the time. Whether he h a d been in Venice continuously since leaving Florence or lived peripatetically is unclear. T h e portata was owed a little over 36 lire by Deo B e c c u t i .

64

declares that Uccello

Anna P a d o a Rizzo observed that this might

have been for work Uccello had done since h i s return from Venice, as t h e amount was not 65

recorded owing in Uccello's 1427 portata

F u r t h e r m o r e , U c c e l l o made an investment in the

66

Florentine monte on 9 March 1430. Though not c o n c l u s i v e , these facts suggest that Uccello may well have returned to Florence prior to January 1431.

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

15

On 2 3 March 1432 the Opera of the D u o m o in F l o r e n c e wrote t o Piero B e c c a n u g i , the Florentine Orator in Venice, seeking information c o n c e r n i n g U c c e l l o ' s work in Venice. T h e letter described Uccello as a master m o s a i c i s t and m e n t i o n e d a figure of Saint Peter h e m a d e in 1425 on the facade of San M a r c o in Venice, which h a s not s u r v i v e d .

67

W h i l e the Operai

were p r e s u m a b l y considering Uccello for work at the D u o m o , it is not k n o w n what they had in mind. Since they also took the o p p o r t u n i t y to ask a b o u t the p r i c e of glass, they might have been p l a n n i n g t h e installation of stained glass w i n d o w s in the D u o m o , which Uccello did later work o n , o r w o r k in m o s a i c , for which glass tessera can b e used. U c c e l l o ' s 1433 portata

is a u t o g r a p h . In it h e stated that h e was renting premises in

C a m p o Corbolini, an area northwest of the centre of F l o r e n c e i n the Santa M a r i a Novella quarter, not far from D e o Beccuti's property. D e o Beccuti n o w o w e d h i m the substantial s u m of 85 f l o r i n s .

68

Padoa Rizzo has associated B e c c u t o ' s debts to Uccello with the painting of the

Virgin and Child formerly in one of t h e del Beccuto family h o u s e s (Fig. 3), as well as other unknown works.

6 9

J u d g i n g by its arch s h a p e and d i m e n s i o n s , it w a s p r o b a b l y painted over a

door. T h e size of the debt is considerable, almost certainly t o o m u c h for the painting alone to account for, notwithstanding its precious gold g r o u n d and lapis lazuli pigment. Given that Uccello bought his h o u s e on 21 April 1434 for 110 florins, a c o m m i s s i o n from U c c e l l o ' s relative for the painting and other works may h a v e been i n t e n d e d to help s e c u r e his future. T h e house o n V i a della Scala, which terminates at its eastern end at Piazza di Santa Maria Novella (Figs 14-15), was in the popolo Lorenzo di Piero L e n z i ,

70

w h o was presumably the L o r e n z o di Piero Lenzi w h o lived in the

nearby P i a z z a d ' O g n i s s a n t i in 1 4 2 7 .

Paolo di D o n o B e c o m e s

of the church of Santa Lucia. It was bought from a

71

Uccello

In A u g u s t 1436 Uccello was paid by the Opera of the D u o m o for painting the Monument

for Sir John Hawkwood

which he signed:

Equestrian

(Fig. 16) on the north wall in the left aisle of the D u o m o ,

72

P A V L I • V G I E L L I • O P V S • ' . T h e entries in the O p e r a ' s account books

are the earliest occasion that the n a m e ' U c c e l l o ' a p p e a r s , at least with unequivocal reference to the a r t i s t .

73

In the surviving d o c u m e n t s the p a t r o n y m i c "di D o n o ' occurs m o r e frequently.

With the e x c e p t i o n of one of U c c e l l o ' s Catasto d o c u m e n t s , n o w lost, and his second will, the name Uccello was only used by the artist in his s i g n a t u r e s , by p a t r o n s or collectors, by his guild, and in the references to his artistic activity by Filarete and B e n e d e t t o D e i .

74

T h u s , there

may be a relationship between the adoption of the n a m e and his p u b l i c persona as an artist, making it a kind of n o m de p l u m e . Pietro R o c c a s e c c a rightly cast doubt o n

Vasari's

suggestion that t h e name reflected the a r t i s t ' s penchant for d e p i c t i n g birds, suggesting instead

16

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

that Paolo's adoption of t h e n a m e Uccello m i g h t have resulted from a link with a B o l o g n e s e family of that n a m e , based on the similarity of the colours of the shield on which Uccello painted his signature in t h e Florence Battle

and the colours of their a r m s .

Ghiberti variously used the surname of h i s mother's first

75

It is true that

husband (Ghiberti) and t h e

patronymic for her second (di Bartolo), w h i l e claiming to b e t h e legitimate child of t h e first marriage; h e seems t o have wanted the benefits of both.

76

H o w e v e r , there is n o d o c u m e n t a r y

evidence for any contact between Uccello and any other person by that name. A s i m p l e r hypothesis is that h e adopted the name for t h e s a m e reason that Battista Alberti adopted t h e name Leon: for the association with him of t h e qualities of a n animal. The lion is s y m b o l i c of courage and m a g n a n i m i t y ;

77

for Uccello the virtuous qualities of a bird might h a v e been

independence and elevation, qualities that a r e certainly c o m p a t i b l e with t h e singular and philosophical nature of his works. This interpretation finds Borghini's // Riposo Fenice'

(1584): 'Void tant'alto

support in the e p i g r a m in

che non pur a" uccello I Cognome

merito,

ma di

([he] flew so high that he deserved not j u s t the n a m e Uccello, but even P h o e n i x ) .

Adopted names of poetic meaning were not uncommon

in fifteenth-century

Antonio di Pietro Averlino took the name Filarete, meaning ' l o v e r of v i r t u e ' .

78

Florence;

79

Wordplay on names with animal associations is a longstanding habit of Florentine families. Uccello's mother's maiden name B e c c u t o is similar to the Italian noun meaning butcher, as well as the verb beccare,

beccaio,

meaning to peck. T h e del Beccuto family c h o s e

to emphasise the more poetic association by p l a y i n g on it in t h e design of a very large, carved pietra serena lintel that was removed from their palazzo, on the street of their name (Via del Beccuto), presumably at the time the building was demolished in the nineteenth century. T h e lintel is now housed in the Museo di San M a r c o , Florence. It s h o w s the family's coat of arms in the centre, inside a wreath with two undulating ribbons flowing to each side. At each end of the lintel is the head of a fantastic, bird-like creature with plumes splayed out at the back and a giant beak, a clear allusion to their family n a m e (Fig. 1 7 ) .

80

Religious, Social a n d Professional N e t w o r k s

Account books show that in December 1437 U c c e l l o was c o m m i s s i o n e d by the Confraternity of the Purification of the Virgin and Saint Z a n o b i to paint a Saint Zanobi

and a Pieta,

the

latter over the door of their sacristy, at the S p e d a l e di San M a t t e o (Hospital of Saint M a t t h e w ) on Piazza San Marco in Florence (Fig. 1 8 ) .

81

T h e s e works have not been found.

The

children's confraternity for whom Uccello w o r k e d came under the stewardship of the adult Confraternity of Santa Maria della Pieta from 1427 to 1444, w h i c h was based at the

2

spedale*

The iconography of Uccello's two c o m m i s s i o n s reflects t h e dedication of the c h i l d r e n ' s

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

17

confraternity and that of the adult confraternity on which it d e p e n d e d , respectively. Uccello subsequently joined the adult c o n f r a t e r n i t y and c h a r i t y .

84

83

whose m e m b e r s participated in acts of penitence

H e is recorded as p r e s e n t in the confraternity, n i c k n a m e d the ' H o l l o w ' (or

perhaps ' G r o t t o ' ) of Saint J e r o m e ('Biica' di San Girolamo) and was still registered, t h o u g h not present in M a y .

8 5

b e t w e e n January and April 1438,

A m o n g t h e other artists w h o belonged to

the confraternity was the sculptor L u c a di S i m o n e della R o b b i a . T h e confraternity's r o o m s w e r e on the east side of the buildings, at t h e back of the spedale

l o o k i n g from the piazza, with

an entrance from Via dell Sapienza, n o w called V i a C e s a r e B a t t i s t i . Uccello painted a Saint

Anthony

Abbot

and Saints

although n o t h i n g further of the w o r k is k n o w n . c o m m i s s i o n was related to the spedale

87

Cosmas

and

86

Vasari recorded that

Damian

in the

spedale,

F r o m its i c o n o g r a p h y it seems that the

rather than a confraternity, since t h e cults of Saints

A n t h o n y , C o s m a s and D a m i a n w e r e associated with h e a l i n g .

88

T h e d o c u m e n t s from the late 1430s and 1440s suggest that U c c e l l o ' s career was well established, and far from pursuing an isolated path as an artist as Vasari would h a v e it, he moved in the s a m e circles as his professional

c o l l e a g u e s . In a d o c u m e n t m a d e by the

Florentine n o t a r y Filippo di Cristofano in February 1439, U c c e l l o was recorded renting a house and land, although the location is not specified. F i l i p p o di Cristofano had a n u m b e r of artists a m o n g his clientele, including Neri di B i c c i .

89

A s U c c e l l o already o w n e d a house, h e

probably used t h e rented p r e m i s e s as a w o r k s h o p . Given F r a n c e s c o Caglioti's dating of the c o m m i s s i o n for the Battle paintings to a b o u t 1 4 3 8 ,

90

Uccello m a y h a v e rented the premises to

a c c o m m o d a t e t h e large panels of this major c o m m i s s i o n , s i n c e the size of the three paintings and compositional and stylistic differences

b e t w e e n t h e m s u g g e s t that the

commission

continued over a n u m b e r of years, as discussed in C h a p t e r 7 (Figs 19-21). In U c c e l l o ' s 1442 portata

he

stated

that h e was

renting

a workshop

from

the

Buondelmonti in the narrow l a n e w a y of Via delle T e r m e (Fig. 2 2 ) .

Parte G u e l p h 9 1

and

the

From 1429 t o 1434 t h e

premises had been occupied by the little known artist Scolaio di G i o v a n n i . F r o m 1467, after Uccello moved out, D o m e n i c o di M i c h e l i n o and D o m e n i c o di Z a n o b i di Piero shared t h e premises as their w o r k s h o p .

92

T h e area around Santi A p o s t o l i , just north of the

Ponte

Vecchio, contained the workshops of n u m e r o u s painters, i n c l u d i n g at o n e time, Giovanni di Ser Giovanni painters.

93

called

'Scheggia',

who

was M a s a c c i o ' s

brother, and n u m e r o u s

cassone

It was presumably in this w o r k s h o p that Uccello prepared his next works for t h e

Opera del D u o m o . A series of p a y m e n t s by the O p e r a is recorded from 1443 to 1445 for t h e painting of the Clockface survive: the Nativity

and for designing and painting stained glass w i n d o w s , of which t w o

and the Resurrection

(Figs 2 3 - 2 4 ) .

94

T h e d o c u m e n t s for Uccello from the 1450s describe a c o n s i s t e n t l y active professional life. Between 1450 and 1453 he was c o m m i s s i o n e d to paint a t a b e r n a c l e showing Saint John

18

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

with Christ or the Virgin, which if completed has not been identified.

95

There is a brief

reference to Uccello on 2 2 February 1451 in a record of a deliberation by the M e r c h a n t s ' Guild, the significance of which is not clear, although it probably relates to a d i s p u t e involving his activity as a landlord at U g n a n o .

96

On 13 M a r c h 1451 Uccello and the artist

Venturo di Moro valued a tabernacle painted by Stefano d ' A n t o n i o di Vanni in Santa Margherita a M o n t i c i .

97

Stefano d'Antonio was trained b y , a n d later became the partner in

business of, Bicci di Lorenzo, in whose w o r k s h o p S c h e g g i a a n d Andrea di Giusto a r e also documented. Uccello's involvement in the valuation of his w o r k may not have been entirely casual, since stylistic evidence shows that U c c e l l o h a d a w o r k i n g relationship with o n e o r more of the painters from that workshop in t h e 1430s, discussed in Chapter 5 .

98

From

December 1451 to February of the following y e a r , Uccello received three payments for a n unidentified panel painting made for the brothers J a c o p o and Giovanni d'Orsino L a n f r e d i n i . The Lanfredini were one of the most prominent a n d powerful families in the gonfalone of the Santo Spirito q u a r t e r ,

100

99

Drago

and Jacopo and Giovanni Lanfredini, in particular, were h i g h l y

respected members of the Medici inner-circle in t h e latter part of the fifteenth century. One o r both of them presumably commissioned A n t o n i o del P o l l a i u o l o ' s famous Dancing their Villa La Gallina in the Arcetri area of F l o r e n c e , near S a n Miniato al M o n t e . O n 24 February 1453 Uccello served a s o n e of the

Nudes

in

101

Capitani (captains) of

the

Confraternity of Saint Luke, an indication of the professional respect he had gained, and of his commitment to the social life of his p r o f e s s i o n .

102

In J u n e of t h e same year Uccello m a d e a

figure of the Blessed Andrea Corsini for the Library of the D u o m o , which has not s u r v i v e d .

103

The commission continued the martial i c o n o g r a p h y of U c c e l l o ' s career, since Corsini was a fourteenth-century Florentine Carmelite w h o was said to h a v e foretold Florence's victory over Milan at the battle of Anghiari in 1440 in an apparition at his sepulchre in Santa M a r i a del Carmine. In 1455 Uccello worked on a Crucifixion

a n d a kind of sprinkler for the

washbasin in the refectory of the Monastery of S a n M i n i a t o al Monte (Fig. 25). He w o r k e d there with the assistance of Antonio di Papi, an artist with n o known oeuvre, and no w o r k s corresponding to these commissions have been f o u n d .

104

In February 1457 Uccello recorded

in hisportata that he was owed money for s o m e w i n d o w s he had painted in the previous year for the glaziers Bernardo di Franceso and c o m p a n y , with w h o m he had already collaborated on making stained glass windows at the D u o m o . He also indicated that he had m o v e d his workshop to Piazza di San Giovanni, the principal s q u a r e in Florence.

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

19

R e w a r d s o f Work: F a m i l y , F o r t u n e a n d F a m e

T h e s a m e portata

provides the first information a b o u t U c c e l l o ' s f a m i l y . He n a m e d his wife,

T o m a s a di Benedetto Malefici, aged twenty-five ( c o m p a r e d with his s i x t y - t w o years!), his son Donato w h o w a s six, and his d a u g h t e r A n t o n i a w h o was o n e year and four m o n t h s . Uccello married immediately after his 1442 portata,

1 0 5

Even if

h e w o u l d h a v e been a b o u t forty-five,

much o l d e r than the estimated a v e r a g e a g e of a m a n ' s first m a r r i a g e in fifteenth-century Florence, w h i c h was between thirty a n d t h i r t y - t w o .

106

A t 2 0 0 florins, T o m a s a ' s dowry was

neither particularly small nor large for a Florentine artist's w i f e .

107

T h e r e w e r e at least t w o

Benedetto Maleficis in Florence in 1427, o n e of w h o m m i g h t h a v e b e c o m e U c c e l l o ' s fatherin-law. By c o i n c i d e n c e , both of them w e r e n a m e d B e n e d e t t o di Piero, while neither of them was particularly wealthy. O n e of t h e m resided o n V i a della Scala, w h e r e U c c e l l o was living when h e m a r r i e d .

108

Uccello followed a long tradition by giving his father's n a m e to his son

and his m o t h e r ' s name to his daughter. In the Libro clei Morti di Firenze a painter

1

pitoressa )

on her death in 1 4 9 0 ,

109

Antonia w a s listed as

and is one of the f e w recorded female painters

in Florence in t h e fifteenth century. It is unfortunate that there is n o k n o w n work by h e r .

110

Perhaps U c c e l l o ' s children played with another child living a few blocks further east on V i a della Scala from the m i d - 1 4 6 0 s : Piero di Lorenzo di Piero d ' A n t o n i o , the artist known as 1

Piero di C o s i m o . " Certainly, P i e r o ' s o w n fantastic i m a g e r y is i n d e b t e d to U c c e l l o ' s .

112

Piero

would surely h a v e k n o w n about his f a m o u s neighbour. M i g h t his curiosity have led him to visit U c c e l l o ' s house or w o r k s h o p ? Uccello also stated in his portata

that he reserved t h e h o u s e on his land at U g n a n o for

his own use, without specifying what that was. In 1455, 1458 and 1459 he added to his property at U g n a n o with successive purchases of l a n d .

113

Evidently, the second half of the

1450s were prosperous times for Uccello. Uccello o w n e d land from at least the age of t w e n t y eight until his old age. He seems only ever to have increased his land h o l d i n g s , never to have liquidated these investments. T h o u g h

apparently financially

secure throughout his life,

nothing suggests that Uccello was particularly rich. Land o w n e r s h i p , in addition to a house, was c o m m o n for successful Florentine artists in U c c e l l o ' s time. T h e sculptor A g o s t i n o di Duccio also owned vineyards near those belonging to Uccello. A l e s s o Baldovinetti, A n d r e a del C a s t a g n o , Andrea del V e r r o c c h i o , A n t o n i o del Pollaiuolo, B e n o z z o G o z z o l i , L o r e n z o and Neri di Bicci, D o m e n i c o Ghirlandaio, Francesco di Stefano (called Ghiberti and Piero di C o s i m o all o w n e d agricultural l a n d .

114

T w o c o n t e m p o r a r i e s of Uccello testify to his fame from Giovanni

Rucellai boasted in his zibaldone,

Pesellino), Lorenzo

the late 1450s. In

1457

a kind of m e m o i r c o m m o n in R e n a i s s a n c e

Florence, that he had w o r k s by the greatest Italian artists in his palazzo. A m o n g the f a m o u s

20

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

painters he listed Antonio del Pollaiuolo, A n d r e a del Verrocchio, A n d r e a del C a s t a g n o and Paolo Uccello, although he did not specify what works of theirs h e h a d .

115

Rucellai was a

successful businessman from an old, well-connected f a m i l y , and was o n e of the most important architectural patrons in Florence in his lifetime. H i s i m p r e s s i v e palazzo was on V i a della Vigna (Fig. 2 6 ) , not far from Via della Scala where Uccello l i v e d .

116

In his treatise on

architecture and allied arts written between 1460 and 1464, Filarete included a hypothetical project for a hall of civic justice, proposing that Uccello, 'outstanding master of p a i n t i n g ' Csolenne maestro 117

there.

di pitturd'),

painted figures of Truth and Falsehood, Justice and criminals

In 1470 the Florentine merchant (and inveterate list m a k e r ) Benedetto Dei recorded

Uccello in his list of thirty-five painters' workshops, ' a w o r k s h o p of master Paolo Uccello of Florence' {'Una bottegha di mastro Pagholo

Ucello da

m

Firenze').

Uccello was still active as an artist at an advanced a g e . In 1465 Lorenzo di Matteo Morelli paid for a painting by Uccello, a Saint George

and the Dragon,

perhaps t h e work of

that subject by Uccello in the Musee J a c q u e m a r t Andre in Paris (Fig. 2 7 ) .

1 1 9

The names of

Uccello and his son Donato appear in entries dated between February 1467 and October 1469 in an account book of the Confraternity of C o r p u s Christi in U r b i n o , although they were not in Urbino for the entire period, since Uccello submitted h i s portata 1 4 6 9 120 rpk

e

n a t u r e

0

f

t n e

j

r

w o r

k

j

s n

o

t

in Florence in A u g u s t

specified, although it is recorded that gesso and

pigments were brought from Florence, and t h e Miracle

of the Host (Figs 28-34), formerly o n

the altar of the confraternity's church, was u n d o u b t e d l y painted by Uccello during his stay. It is now housed in the Museo Civico in U r b i n o .

121

T h e altarpiece was subsequently painted by

Joos van Wassenhove ('Giusto da Guanto'). U c c e l l o ' s patrons were attentive to his needs, paying for his and his son's beds and material for their clothes. Uccello and his son may have undertaken other work in Urbino. If so, it has not yet been c o n v i n c i n g l y identified, despite attempts to do s o .

122

In any event, in his early seventies U c c e l l o worked for an important

patron, creating an animated and original work. Uccello wrote in his final portata

of A u g u s t 1469 that h e still owned his h o m e and

land. He referred to his wife and son, but not his daughter, w h o had apparently left the family home at a young age, perhaps to join a nunnery. U c c e l l o noted that h e was old and unable to work, and his wife was infirm.

123

This has often been cited a s t h o u g h it were confirmation of

Vasari's description of Uccello as a struggling artist at the end of his career. More recently, art historians have come to recognise that h e probably e x a g g e r a t e d the difficulty of his circumstances to minimise taxation, which

s e e m s to have been a common

strategy.

124

Scheggia described himself as infirm in his tax return of t h e s a m e year, despite the recent increase in the number of his c h i l d r e n , portata:

125

and Brunelleschi m a d e a similar claim in his 1442

'Also this finds me old and unable to earn my living a n y m o r e ' ('Anchor-a mi

truovo

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

vechio

e non poso phi

valermi

di mia

126

indusiria').

21

A n indication that Uccello was not

completely inactive is the fact that the year before h e died h e brought a suit against a carpenter, D o m e n i c o del T a s s o , in the Mercantile C o u r t for an o u t s t a n d i n g debt of 3 florins for paintings he had d o n e .

1 2 7

O n 11 N o v e m b e r 1475 U c c e l l o w r o t e a n e w w i l l ,

wife's d o w r y in tact, and on 12 D e c e m b e r U c c e l l o ' s death was r e g i s t e r e d .

129

128

returning his

22

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

Notes for Chapter 1

1

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. I l l , p. 6 1 : 1568 ed.

2

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. I l l , pp. 6 9 , 7 1 : 1550 and 1568 eds.

3

Herlihy and Klapisch-Zuber, 1985, pp. 159-182.

4

On 12 July 1427 Uccello's age was recorded by Deo Beccuti as 30 (ASF, Catasto, 55, San Giovanni

Drago, pp. 707-707v.), on 30 January 1431 Uccello's age was given as 33 by an anonymous writer, perhaps Deo Beccuti, (ASF, Catasto, 381, San Giovanni Drago, p. 779), on 31 May 1433 he gave his age as 36 (ASF, Catasto, 475, San Giovanni Drago, p. 483), on 21 January 1442 he gave his age as 4 0 (ASF, Catasto, 625, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1527, p. 224), on 15 February 1457 he gave his age as 62 (ASF, Catasto, 826, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 2063, pp. 56-57), on 8 August 1469 he gave his age as 73 (ASF, Catasto, 926, vol. II, San Giovanni Drago, p. 259 v.). For transcriptions of these documents, see Appendix B. 5

ASF, Arte Medici e Speziale, 21, p. 69v.: 'Paulus olim

6

ASF, Registri di Morti, Medici e Speciali 1475-1486, 246, p. 3v., in Boeck, 1939, p. 107. Uccello's

donipauljpitore'.

death was registered on 12 December 1475. 7

Milanesi (ed.), in Vasari, 1981, pp. 204 n. [cross!, 217 n. 3, 219. Padoa Rizzo (1991, p. 6) cited

Herbert Home's reference (Fondazione Home, Florence, Spogli, G.VI.I) to the source for Dono di Paolo's citizenship as: ASF, Consigli Maggiori, Provissioni, Rcgistri 1373, p. 109. Although ASF, Archivi della Repubblica, Provvisioni, Registri, 6 1 , microfilm reel 84, p. 109 is for the year 1373, it does not include the name of Dono di Paolo, nor do the nearby pages. Presumably, the archive has been re-ordered since Home's research. Boeck (1933b, p. 249) accepted Milanesi's identification of Uccello's father and gave the date of his entry into the Doctors' and Specialists' Guild as 1365, without specifying his sources. 8

Boeck, 1939, p. 94.

9

ASF, Manoscritti, 624, Sepoltuario Florentine) Ovvero Descrizione clelle Chiese Cappelle e Sepolture

Low Armi et Inscrizione della Citta di Firenze e Suoi Contorni Fattu da Stefanu Rosselli, 1657, vol. I, p. 32. 10

Ceramelli-Papiani copied the extract of Rosselli's book referring to Dono di Paolo's tombstone into a

file for the Doni family, recognising that it might have belonged to Uccello's father, although he did not explain why he believed Uccello belonged lo the Doni family (ASF, Ceramelli Papiani, 1792, T Doni'). Picro Marchi (1992) edited the heraldie contents of the Ceramelli-Papiani papers into a book, without mention of Dono di Paolo's tombstone. Roccasccca (1997, p. 128 n. 6) cited the CeramelliPapiani file in his biography of Ucccllo without mentioning the tombstone. Roccasecca (1997, p. 125) followed Ceramelli-Papiani in identifying Uccello's family as the di Dono or Doni, stating that it was divided into two branches, one based in the quarter of Santo Spirito and the other in Santa Maria Novella, and that members of the family held public office (Priori), citing the Papiani 1792 'fDoni' file and G.M. Mecatti, Storia Genealogica della Nobilita Cittadinanza 49, 288, 299, 306, 355.

di Firenze, Napoli, 1754, vol. I, pp.

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

23

" Kent, 1977, Chapter 5, especially pp. 245-254. In his discussion of the Capponi, Ginori and Rucellai families Kent underlined the importance of physical proximity in the maintenance of family alliances and power and the adoption of familial names as a status symbol in fifteenth-century Florence. Sec also: Herlihy and Klapisch-Zuber, 1985, pp. 347-352. 12

ASF, Pace di Bombello di Pace, 7, 1471-1476, p. 147, in Sindona, 1957, p. 44. Uccello's will is

dated 11 November 1475. 13

14

Waldman, 2000, p. 171. Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 6. The source is in the Biblioteca Nazionale di Firenze, Priorista Monaldi, II,

1, 29, Storia della Nobilitd di Firenze Scritta da Piero di Giovanni Monaldi, c. 1626, p. 287v. Morozzi (ed.), 1988, p. 196. The source was cited by Herbert H o m e from a copy in the Biblioteca Comunale, Siena. 15

Rubinstein, 2000, pp. 39-40.

16

ASF, Libri di Commercio e di Famiglia, 1693, 1694, Entrata e Uscita, Rcdita del Sig.(re) Ruberto di

Filicce del Becuto, 1620-1621. Camilla Buini del Beccuto, widow of Rubcrto di Felice del Beccuto, recorded that her son Felice was studying at the College of Nobility in Bologna. ASF, Manoscritti, 244, Del Sergente Magiore Giovanni Vincenzio Coresi del Bruno Governatore

S.A.R. della Citta Presidio e

Banda di Gross to 1720. Questo e V Originate del Priorista in Ristretto di Giuliano de Ricci del J596. La Rota delle Famiglie che Planno Riseduto di Collegia Mesa per Ordine di Alfabeto da Felice di Ruberto del Beccuto dal 1532 al 1606. II Catalogo de Rotari della Republica 1531. II Catalogo

delle Famiglie

Florentine

Fiorentina dal 1282 al

che Poi si Dissero de Grandi le Quail I'Anno

1215

Avevano il Governo della Citta cioe Godevano il Consolato R.A. This source includes Felice's research into noble Florentine families. ASF, Deputazione Sopra la Nobilita e Cittadinanza, 15, Section 2 1 , compiled by Anton Ranieri Orlandini, descendent of the del Beccuto family in 1752. 17

Hcrlihy and Klapisch-Zubcr, 1985, pp. 226-228.

IK

Mccntli, 1971, p. 30. ASF, Dcpulazione Sopra la Nobililae Cittadinanza, 15, no. 2 1 , part 1 [unpaginatcd].

2 0

The evidence for the patronage of the chapel on the left of the main altar is not entirely clear. Vasari

(1967, p. 298: 1568 eel.) claimed that this was the Beccuti Chapel. Paatz and Paatz, 1952-1955, vol. IV, p. 628. A tomb of a member of the Beccuti family, sometimes identified as Bruno Beccuti, is still in the chapel, bearing the family's coat of arms. Paatz and Paatz, 1952-1955, vol. IV, pp. 627-628, 632. Other evidence shows Carnesecchi patronage of the chapel. A tabernacle for the sacraments on the left wall of the chapel bears the date 1449 and the arms of the Carnesecchi family, and Bernardo Carnesecchi's tombstone, dated 1449, was recorded in the chapel in the eighteenth century. It is possible that the Beccuti and Carnesecchi families shared patronage rights to the chapel. 2 1

ASF, Catasto, 53, San Giovanni Drago, p. 718v. Deo Beccuti recorded in his 1427 portata a debt

relating to his family's chapel: "Una chappella insanta inaria maggiore di sanhiaggio debo do tare per lastro fatto per lo testameto dimio padre roghato per Ser nicholo mazzetti net 2 2

Paatz and Paatz, 1952-1955, vol. IV, pp. 630-631.

1386\

24

2 3

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

ASF, Libri di Commercio e di Famiglia, 1693, Entrata e Uscita, p. 52v. The account book of Camilla

Buini del Beccuto beginning in 1620 includes a reference to 'ma cappella d' san biagio cV s. maria mag™. 2 4

Paatz and Paatz, 1952-1955, vol. IV, p. 626.

2 5

Ciabani, with the collaboration of Elliker and Nistri, 1992, p. 102.

2 6

Petriboni and Rinaldi, 2001, p. 203.

2 7

For the offices held by Deo Beccuti, see: Herlihy, Burr Litchfield, Molho and Barducci (eds), 2002,

on-line source, search by Deo Beccuti. For Deo Beccuti's relative wealth see: the same on-line source, 'List of the wealthiest households arranged by wealth' link. 2 8

ASF, Catasto, 53, San Giovanni Drago, p. 718v: for Deo Beccuti's age.

2 9

Gaye, 1839, Vol. I, p. 504: a record of 3 Feb. 1353 from the Archivio delle Riformagioni di Firenze

states that Amerigo da Sommaia, Castello di Lippo del Beccuto and Benedetto di Giovanni Strozzi fortified the castello at Calenzano, which was on the western edge of Mount Morello, northwest of Florence. 3 0

Gaye, 1839, Vol. I, p. 419. The year of the document was transcribed by Gaye as MCCCLXXXIX,

erroneously for MCCLXXXIX, judging by the chronological order followed for the other transcriptions Gaye provided. 3 1

ASF, Deputazione Sopra la Nobilita e Cittadinanza, 15, section 2 1 , part 1, unpaginated.

3 2

Padoa Rizzo, 2002, p. 248.

3 3

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 101: 1568 ed. Patch's book he Forte di San Giovanni di Firenze

Incise e Illustrate, published in Florence in 1774, is cited in Milanesi (ed.) in Vasari, 198 1, p. 203 n. 1. 3 4

Krautheimer and Krautheimer-Hess, 1956, p. 362.

3 5

Padoa Rizzo and Frosinini, 1984, pp. 6-7; Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002a, pp. 29-30.

3 6

ASF, Libro della Seconda, e Terza Porta di Bronzo dalla Chiesa di San Giovanni Battista di Firenze.

1403. 23Novembre, in Miintz, 1890, pp. 15-18. 3 7

Beck, 1980, p. 837.

3 8

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 6-7.

3 9

Galli, 1998, p. 89. While Masolino was included by Galli in the list of possible assistants in

Ghiberti's shop, Bellucci and Frosinini (2002a, pp. 34-67) did not support this hypothesis in their study of the artist's career, suggesting instead that Masolino's apprenticeship was served with his father who was a house painter. Furthermore, they pointed out that Masolino's painting technique shows features that are not typical of Florentine painting, indicating a non-Florentine milieu for his formative period as an artist. Joannides (1993, p. 25) admitted that the 'Tommaso di Cristofano' in question could not be considered a certain reference to Masolino, but believed that it probably was, due to sixteenth-century sources supporting the identification, and Masolino's known associations, later in life, with former students of Ghiberti's shop. 4 0

Krautheimer and Krautheimer-Hess, 1956, p. 133.

4 1

Ghiberti, 1998, pp. 92-93.

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

4 2

25

Krautheimer and Krautheimer-Hess, 1956, p. 418, citing documentation in the ASF for the fresco

commission; and p. 404, citing documentation in the ASF referring to painting done for the niche of the statue of Saint John the Baptist at Or San Michele. 4 3

ASF, Arte Medici e Speziale, 21, p. 69v.

"Fiorilli, 1920, pp. 7 , 2 1 . 45

4 6

47

4 8

S t a l e y , 1906, p. 266. Boskovits, 2002a, p. 53. G a n d i , 1928, pp. 165, 189. ASF, Accademia del Disegno, 1, p. 14v., Roccasecca (1997, p. 126 n. 8) transcribed the text as

'Pagholo di dono dipintore MCCCCX[...]1IT,

describing the seventh numeral in the date as illegible,

and arguing that it could have been an I or an X. It might also have been a V. The document was missing in 2003. 4 9

Hcrlihy and Klapisch-Zuber, 1985, pp. 10-11.

5 0

Procacci, 1996, pp. 41-46.

5 1

Guidotti, 1994, vol. II, pp. 7-11, 20-22, 49-50. Goldsmiths called Giovanni included Giovanni di

Chiaro Albizzelli, who worked with Ghiberti, Giovanni di Giovanni, Giovanni di Jacopo Strozzi, Giovanni di Soldo and Giovanni di Ser Paolo Graziani. 5 2

Polizzotto, 2004, pp. 38, 51 n. 130.

5 3

Guidotti, 1994, vol. II, pp. 7-9.

5 4

ASF, Catasto, 55, San Giovanni Drago, pp. 707-707v (portata); ASF, Catasto, 408, San Giovanni

Drago, microfilm reel 1042, p. 467

(campione).

5 5

Gaye, 1839, vol. I, pp. 147-148. Uccello's will is dated 5 August 1425.

5 6

ASF, MPAP, 5, contains copies of numerous wills written in the late fourteenth and early fifteenth

centuries in which it is common for 1 florin to be left to the Opera of Santa Reparata, Santa Maria Nuova, and the Opera of the walls of Florence. 5 7

5 8

ASF, Calaslo, 55, San Giovanni, Drago, pp. 707-707v„ dated 12 July 1427. Hcrlihy, Burr Litchfield, Molho and Barducci (eds), 2002, on-line source, search by Giannini. Ser

Barlolo was elected Notaio of the Signoria in 1416, 1430 and 1438. 5,;

Kent, 1977, pp. 3-17.

,,

" Kent, 1978, p. 26. 61

Morelli, 1969, pp. 263-264: \se // vedi menepossente

nelle tue avversitd,

ingegnati d'imparentarti

essere, se puoi: primamente

di parcnti e non vedi essere citato e consigliato

e torre una parente

che ti sia padre. E questo vuolu

cerca nel tuo gonfalone, e se ivi puoi iinparentarti, fallo piu avaccio che

aitrove; se non puoi o non v'e c/uello ti hisogna o ti sodisfaccia, cerca nel quartiere.. fa che 7 parente tuo sia mercatente, sia ricco, sia antico a Firenze, sia guelfo, sia nello

istato\

6 2

Schiaparelli, 1983, vol. I, p. xvii.

63

The writing of the name 'Deo di Deo Becchuti' in Deo Beccuti's 1431 portata (ASF, Catasto, 380,

San Giovanni Drago, p. 552) is almost identical to the writing of the name in Uccello's 1431 portata, in which Deo Becculi appears as a debtor (ASF, Catasto, 381, San Giovanni Drago, p. 779).

26

6 4

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

ASF, Catasto, 381, San Giovanni, Drago, p. 779. Though undated, the entry is between others dated

30 January 1431 in the series of portate compiled in chronological order, e.g., those beginning on pp. 764 and 788. ASF, Catasto, 380, San Giovanni, Drago, p. 551: Beccuti's portata of 31 January 1431 shows the same amount owing to Uccello. 6 5


6 6

ASF, Catasto, 826, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 2063, p. 56v.

6 7

AODF, Delib. 1425-1436, p. 156v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 147, doc. 773.

6 8

ASF, Catasto, 475, San Giovanni, Drago, p. 483, dated 31 May 1433. Beccuti's 1433 Catasto

includes the corresponding listing of 85 florins owing to Uccello. Catasto, 498, p. 188, undated, but with others of 1433. 6 9


7 0

ASF, Catasto, 625, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1527, p. 224.

7 1

Ginori Lisci, 1985, vol. I, pp. 290-291.

72

Deliberazione, 1436-1442, p. 3, in Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p . 125, doc. 2060.

7 3

The on-line publication in 2004 of material from the archives of the Opera di Santa Maria del Fiore

brought to light a document unknown in the Uccello literature. On 14 August 1434 a 'Paulus Uccelli' was listed with a group of men from the countryside parish of San Michele in Lezano owing money to the Duomo for gabelles (indirect taxes). M. Haines (ed.), 2004, on-line source, doc. o02()2()01.22()g: [14 Aug. 1434J [Littera] generalis quibuscumque

[rjectoribus

comitatuslltem

deli.beraverunt

eorum parte scribatur una littera omnibus rectoribus comitatus quod gravent ad ipsorum

quod

instantiam

infrascriptos pro certis quantatibus pecunie debitores dicte Opere pro novis gabellis, prout apparet r(u)b(rica)m comit(atus) a c. 153, quilibet ipsorum suam ratam cum iustificatione, quod si quis

in

senserit

se gravatum compare at coram eorum offitio recepturus iustitiarn, nomina quorum sunt hec

videlicet:/

Paulus Uccelli/ Johannes Nutil Nannes Salvil Antonius Arrigi/ Antonius Gratiel Arrighus

Huonaiutil

omus populi Sancti Michaelis de Lezano comitatus Florentie. Brocchi, 1967, pp. 192-199. I lie church of San Michele in Lezano (or Lizzano or Legano) is near the commune of San Picro a Sieve in the mountainous Mugello area to the north of Florence, an area traditionally dominated by the Medici family. 1 am grateful to don Gilberto Aranci, Archivista, Florence, for assistance locating San Michele in Lezano. In the fifteenth century gabelles were liable on the movement of works of art through Florence's city gales, but there is no indication in the document from the Duomo of the reason for the gabelle. 7 4

Boeck (1939, p. 108) noted that Uccello's son was referred to as 'Donate Uccclli' in the Registri di

Morti of the Doctors' and Specialists' Guild on 16 July 1497. 7 5

Roccasecca, 1997, p. 126.

7 6

Krautheimer and Kraulheimer-Hcss, 1956, pp. 3-4.

7 7

Kemp, 1991, p. 11.

7 8

Borghini, 1967, p. 311. The full text is: Ben fu nel Ihuom Paolfelice;/

1

Ma nelfargli

pennellul Void tant'alto che non pur d'uccello/ Cognome merito, ma di Fenice: 7 y

Bellosi (ed.) in Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 334 n. 2.

animai col sua

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

8(1

27

Cecchi, 1989b, p. 110. The lintel was described by Carocci as a modern reproduction of a fifteenth-

century relief. 8 1

Bernacchioni, 2003, pp. 418-419.

8 2

Cole Ahl, 2000, pp. 46, 54. For more on the Confraternity of the Purification, see: Pollizzotto, 2004;

and Matchette, 2000, pp. 74-101. 8 3

84

Sebregondi, 1991, p. 3.

Sebregondi, 1991, pp. 10-16.

8 5

Rassegna, Classe D, 1432-1444, pp. 42v., 46, Archivi della Compagnia di San Girolamo, della

Compagnia di San Francesco Poverino dal 1790 e delle Compagnie Riunite, Florence, in Sebregondi, 1991, p. 190. 8 6

Sebregondi, 1991, p. 3 and Fig. 2.

8 7

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 63: 1550 and 1568 eds.

8 8

For a fascinating discussion of Saint Anthony's cult in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries and

Hicronymous Bosch's oeuvrc, see: Dixon, 2004, pp. 176-183. For a discussion of the iconography of Saints Cosmas and Damian, mainly in Florence in the fifteenth century, see: Sebregondi, 2002, pp. 75105. 8 9

ASF, Notarilc Antecosimiano, F 302, p. 108v., in Freemantle, 1977, p. 70.

9 0

Caglioti, 2001, pp. 50-51.

91

ASF, Catasto, 625, San Giovanni Drago, p. 224.

9 2


1,3

Haines, 1999, pp. 41-44.

9 4

Poggi, 1988, vol. I, pp. 143-145, vol. II, p. 162. For transcriptions of the documents, see Appendix B,

under the years 1443-1444. 9 5

9

Bocck, 1939, pp. 102-103. For a transcription of the document, see Appendix B.

'' ASF, Calimala, Dcliberazioni 1450-145 1, Gaye, 1839, vol. I, p. 147. The record mentions, 'a petition

for the gift of Paolo the painter' before mentioning properly of a 'Domenico and Paolo, sons of Piero Bcnvenuli from Ugnano'. The circumstances are not clear from the brief reference, although the gift may be of the kind traditionally given by tenant farmers to their landlord (Herlihy and Klapisch-Zubcr, 1985, p. 107). The Merchants' Guild might have had an interest in the gift if Domenico, Paolo or Piero Bcnvenuti, or anyone else, had given it to Uccello while a debtor of theirs or someone else. ASF, Catasto, 625, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1527, p. 224: in his 1442 portata Uccello recorded a Stefano di Benvenuti as a neighbour of his property at Ugnano. 7

'' Gaetano Milanesi published the information for the reference without citing its source, in Milanesi (eel.) in Vasari, 1981, p. 21 I, n |cross|. Padoa Rizzo and Frosinini (1984, p. 29) cited the source as AODF, Deliberazioni, II, I, 92, pp. 17v., 3 i,45v. 9 8

Frosinini (2003, pp. 29-3 I) observed that Uccello's co-worker on the Assunta Chapel paintings in the

Duomo in Prato was Andrea di Giusto, who is recorded working in Bieci di Lorenzo's workshop. Furthermore, Frosinini proposed that the second and third bays of the Old Testament cycle in the

28

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

Chiostro Verde might have been executed by two artists from Bicci's workshop, Francesco d'Antonio and Scheggia, under Uccello's guidance (Padoa Rizzo and Frosinini, 1984, pp. 6-12). 9 9

Corti and Hartt (1962, pp. 155-156, 161) described the brothers as unremarkable Florentine officials,

although they each rose to hold the office of Gonfaloniere. 1 0 0

Kent, 1977, p. 190.

101

For a recent discussion of the Lanfredini brothers and Pollaiuolo's mural cycle, see: Wright, 1998,

pp. 47-77. 1 0 2

ASF, Notarile Antecosimiano, B 214 ser Mariotto Baldesi, in Beck, 1979, pp. 4-5.

103

AODF, Deliberazioni 1450-1454, p. 113, in Poggi, 1933, p. 336.

1 0 4

ASF, Convento Soppresso, 168, 147, p. LV., in Saalman, 1964, p. 563.

1 0 5

ASF, Catasto, 826, San Giovanni, Drago, microfilm no. 2063, pp. 56-57. Opera di Santa Maria del

Fiore di Firenze, 2001-2005, on-line source: Registro, 1, fg 52, Masche e Femmine, 1451 Ottobre 261451 Novembre 2; and Registro: 1, fg 311, Maschi e Femmine, 1456 Ottobre 10-1456 Ottobre 17). Donato was baptised on 1 November 1451 and Antonia was baptised on 13 October 1456 106

Klapisch-Zuber, 1978, p. 87, based on data from 1427 to 1480.

107

ASF, Notarile Antecosimiano, ser Pace di Bombello, busta no. 7, p. 147, in Sindona, 1957, p. 44:

'Item reliqu.it et legavit domini Thomaxie eius uxori etfilie olim benedicti malifici dotes suas quas dixit et asseruit esse florenos ducentos auri de sigillo.'' In Hatfield's (2003, p. LXI) list of Florentine artists' wives' dowries, Uccello's wife's dowry is larger than the one for Giusto d'Andrea's wife (50 gold florins largi) and Cosimo Roselli's wife (100 gold florins largi) but less than the one for Neri di Bicci's wife (340 florins disuggello) and Domenico Ghirlandaio's wife (590 gold florins largi). 108

ASF, Catasto, 77, microfilm reel 142, p. 213v., for the Benedetto di Piero Malefici living on Via

della Scala; and ASF, Catasto, 65, microfilm reel 123, p. 298, for the Benedetto di Piero Malefici living in the Santo Spirito quarter. loy

Bellosi (ed.) in Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 241 n. 18.

110

Alessandro Parronchi (1974, pp. 64-68) suggested that the Ordination of One of the Vecchielti in the

Galleria degli Ulfizi, Florence, bears her signature. However, Anna Padoa Rizzo (1991, p. 132) has observed that the paint surface is damaged and the signature is not clearly legible. 111

Geronimus, 2000, p. 164. Piero di Cosimo was born in 1462 and his family seems to have moved to

a house on Via della Scala in the popolo of San Paolo between 1464 and 1466. m

F e r m o r , 1993, pp. 104-106.

113

ASF, Catasto, 826, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 2063, p. 56v. (7 October 1455). ASF,

Notarile Antecosimiano, F304, p. 225v., in Frccmantlc, 1977, p. 70 (28 October 1458). ASF, Catasto, 926, vol. II, San Giovanni, Drago, p. 259, in Mather, 1948, p. 63 (17 September 1459). 114

Mather, 1948, pp. 20-65.

115

Giovanni Rucellai, in Perosa (ed.) 1960, pp. 23-24.

116

Gilbert, 1988, p. 133.

UCCELLO'S BIOGRAPHY

117

29

Averlino, 1965, vol. I, p. 130. Filarete also referred to two Florentine artists who knew how to make

mosaics, possibly referring to Uccello and Andrea del Castagno (pp. 111-112 and Spencer (ed.) n. 7 on the same pages). 11K

1470, Memorie Istoriche, Ashburnham 644, Biblioteca Laurenziana di Firenze, in Gilbert 1988, p.

203. The list contained a number of artists who had been dead for many decades, such as Masaccio and Masolino, perhaps to make it appear more impressive. 1 , 9

120

ASF, Archivio Gherardi, 137, p. 13, in Beck, 1979, pp. 2-3, 5 n. 3. Moranti, 1990, pp. 206-214. For a discussion of the suggestion sometimes made that Uccello may

have been in Urbino as early as 1465, see the Catalogue. 121

122

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 111-112. The Portrait

of a Lady sometimes identified as Battista Sforza (private collection, location

unknown) has been attributed to Uccello during his stay in Urbino (e.g. Venturi, 1930, pp. 64, 69), with decreasing regularity in recent times. The work is now usually attributed to the Master of the Caslello Nativity. The Famous Men mural paintings in the Camera Picta of the Palazzo Ducale, Urbino, and a cassonc with portraits of Battista Sforza and Federico da Montefeltro (private collection, Urbino) have also been attributed to Uccello, during his stay in Urbino (Fontana, 1986, pp. 131-149), although neither of these attributions has found favour. For a discussion of the attribution of the Famous Men to Giovanni di Piermattco Boccati, see: De Marci, 2005, p. 76. 123

ASF, Catasto, 926, vol. II, San Giovanni, Drago, pp. 259-259 v., in Mather, 1948, pp. 63-64.

124

Kemp, 1994, p. 12.

125

Haines, 1999, p. 59.

I2

" Mather, 1948, p. 53.

127

ASF, Mercanzia, no. 1483, p. 781v., in Beck, 1979, p. 4.

12S

ASF, Notarile Antecosimiano, ser Pace di Bombello, busta no. 7, p. 147, in Sindona, 1957, p. 44.

PadoaRiz/.o, 1991, p. 13. ,2

" ASF, Registri di Morti, Medici e Speciali 1475-1486, 246, p. 3v., in Boeck, 1933b, p. 275. Gaye

quoted briefly from a 1446 Cataslo document for Uccello (Gaye, 1839, vol. I, p. 146), which was recorded as missing by Mather in 1948 (Mather, 1948, p. 64) and was not found by this author in 2003. There is also a brief, so far unexplained, reference to Ucccllo in 1458 in the Codice Magliabechiano

in

the Biblioteca Nazionale, Florence (CI. XXV. no. 392, p. 228), in Bocck, 1939, p. 104, which this author was not able to consult.

The Making of Uccello's Paintings: Scienzia and Poesia

At the beginning of Cennino Cennini's famous late fourteenth-century treatise on artists' techniques, // Libro dell'Arte,

the author justified the h i g h status of painting, a manual art, b y

its association with scienzia

(theory) and poesia

(poetry). A s evidence of the theoretical

nature of painting he cited its ability to find what is n o t seen, cloaked by natural appearances {'trovare

cose non vedute,

cacciandosi

sotto ombra di natural^).

This was qualified by the

artist's poetic licence to compose their pictures ultimately as they please ( " / poeta, con scienza prima che ha, Ufa cleg no e libera di potere gli place, seconda

1

sua voluntd.')

comporre

e legare insieme

si e no

la

come

T h e artist's theory lies in their study of the world, their

poetry lies in the freedom with which they depict it. This c o n c e p t i o n of painting is readily applicable to Uccello, whose work is highly analytical in its underlying approach and yet frequently poetic in its ultimate expression. The dual nature of Uccello's artistic personality w a s first addressed at length by Charles Loeser in his important article of 1898 in Repertorium

filr

Kunstwissenschaft,

in

which he recognised that the artist's contradictory i m p u l s e s t o o b s e r v e nature on the one hand and to arbitrarily negate it on the other were manifest in s u c h works as the Adoration,

the London Saint George

and the Paris Saint

2

George

Karlsruhe

Loeser was the first t o

associate these paintings with Uccello, and after d e c a d e s of controversy his opinion is now commonly accepted. Perhaps the reason for this critical demurral can be explained by the way that art historians since Vasari have given greater attention t o the rational aspect of Uccello's work and neglected or misunderstood the poetic side of his art. Misfortune has also played a part, since Uccello's Stories

of Saint Benedict

in Santa Maria degli Angeli that were highly

praised by Vasari more for their expressive and graceful figures than their perspective have been destroyed.

3

Modern scientific technologies that reveal U c c e l l o ' s t e c h n i q u e by showing the hidden layers and structures of his works, such as infrared reflectography (IRR) and X-radiography, would undoubtedly have fascinated the artist, w h o s e w o r k s d i s p l a y an abiding interest in the underlying structures of objects and in the principle o f an u n d e r l y i n g cosmological order.

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

31

Close analysis of Uccello's preparatory d r a w i n g s and incisions, e x e c u t e d on p a p e r , on the ground layer of paintings and the intonaco

or preparatory layer of m u r a l p a i n t i n g s , reveals a

greater c o n c e r n for the representation of s p a c e than is visible on the surfaces of his works. E x a m i n i n g t h e r a n g e of techniques Uccello used in the d e v e l o p m e n t of his p a i n t i n g s , from his initial d r a w i n g s to the application of the final glazes, it is clear t h a t h e was m o r e than technically c o m p e t e n t , he was an intelligent artist, a n d not rigid in h i s application

of

technique. H e occasionally drew architectural features b y hand r a t h e r than with a ruler, he estimated distances and angles and adjusted compositions,

moving

objects

around,

them w h e r e n e c e s s a r y , h e improvised

sometimes

adding

and

subtracting

his

details

spontaneously.

Painting on W o o d a n d Cloth

Uccello p r o b a b l y bought his small panels from carpenters with their frames already a t t a c h e d .

4

In 1465 the Florentine merchant and s o m e t i m e furniture dealer L o r e n z o d i Matteo Morelli bought a 'Saint G e o r g e with part of the story painted on a panel of w o o d with a frame carved by J a c o p o , carpenter, and painted by Paolo Uccello, painter, for s e v e n florins largi; and the 5

panel cost o n e florin largi'.

Despite the lower value of t h e w o o d w o r k , t h e craftsman was still

considered w o r t h y of mention a l o n g s i d e t h e m o r e f a m o u s painter. T h e Madrid

Crucifixion

( T h y s s e n - B o r n e m i s z a M u s e u m ) , the Dublin Virgin and Child ( N a t i o n a l Gallery of Ireland) and the N e w York Crucifixion

with

a Bridgettine

Nun

Donor,

Sister

Felicita

Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art) retain their original frames (Figs 3 5 , 7, 3 6 ) .

6

(triptych, F r o m these

e x a m p l e s it s e e m s that Uccello or his patrons preferred relatively s i m p l e moulding on the frames of small panels. T h e Madrid Crucifixion

frame is semi-integral with the panel; the

horizontal m e m b e r s of the frame are c a r v e d from the s a m e piece of w o o d as t h e support, while the vertical members have been attached, presumably with g l u e (there are no signs of dowels). It has been suggested that the p a n e l ' s size and the horizontal direction of the wood 7

grain imply that it was part of a predella for an unidentified a l t a r p i e c e . H o w e v e r , the grain of most panel supports runs in the direction of the longest d i m e n s i o n , reducing the likelihood of warping across the major axis. Indeed, the M a d r i d Crucifixion

has w a r p e d , c a u s i n g a crack in

the right vertical member of the frame. H o w e v e r , if the wood grain had been vertical the degree of w a r p i n g might have been even greater. The Hunt in a Forest Oxford)

(Ashmolean Museum,

is not a predella panel and its grain also runs h o r i z o n t a l l y , along its longest

dimension. U c c e l l o ' s small and m e d i u m - s i z e panel paintings h a v e a s u p p o r t m a d e of a s i n g l e piece of w o o d . T h e broadest single plank is the 4 8 . 5 cm support of the Karlsruhe

Adoration

32


(Staatliche Kunsthalle, Figs 37-38). Broader w o r k s are composed of several planks j o i n e d lengthways, numbering from two (the total width of the Hunt is 73.3 cm) to about eight (the 8

total width of the London Battle is 182cm). T h e w o o d is k n o w n to be poplar in the panels 9

that have been tested. Poplar has an uneven grain and a relatively high proportion of k n o t s , making it less than ideal as a support for painting, but it is common in Italy and g r o w s rapidly, making it economical. A disadvantage of p o p l a r for art historians is that, unlike the oak wood commonly used in early Netherlandish p a n e l s , and t h e woods from other t e m p e r a t e climate trees that have distinct seasonal growth r i n g s , p o p l a r grows more throughout

the

year,

dendrochronologically.

producing

insufficiently

distinct

growth

rings

continuously to

be

dated

10

Cennini recommended applying cloth strips over a panel in his treatise o n painting, t o cover any faults in the wood before the application of t h e ground layers." Uccello used cloth strips to cover knots and joins between panels of the Hunt and the London Battle, and covered almost the entire panels of the Paris Battle and the Paris Saint George with separate pieces of 12

cloth. The X-radiograph of the Oxford Annunciation

s h o w s that a single piece of fine-weave

cloth was laid over virtually the entire panel. S i m i l a r l y , the X-radiograph of the M e l b o u r n e Saint George shows a single piece of fine-weave cloth c o v e r i n g virtually the entire panel up to a point just below the top of God the Father's papal tiara (Figs 39-41). T h e extensive use of fine-weave

cloth

in

these two

works

suggests

commission(s), greater in this respect than the

a

particularly

high

K a r l s r u h e Adoration

value

for

their

in which the X-

radiograph shows torn pieces of coarser-weave cloth d i s p o s e d over the panel (Fig. 4 2 ) .

1 3

Cloth interlayers on panel paintings have been reported in m a n y fifteenth-century Florentine paintings, such as Fra Angelico's San Domenico p r e d e l l a in t h e National Gallery, London, to name just o n e .

14

For the ground, up to three layers o f g e s s o (calcium sulphate) could be

applied over the panel and cloth interlayer, with the initial layers composed of a coarser kind of gesso known as gesso grosso, and the last layer c o m p o s e d of a finer grade of gesso known 15

as gesso

sottile.

The study of X-radiography can occasionally reveal non-original carpentry, as in the Karlsruhe Ado rat ion, which has been sawn into two pieces a l o n g a line level with the edge of the plateau supporting the holy family, separating the three saints at the bottom of the picture.

16

The X-radiograph shows that the w o o d g r a i n , pieces of cloth interlayer and the

craquelure continue across the cut, demonstrating that t h e division of the panel must have been made some time after the work was painted, p e r h a p s to p r o d u c e two works from one and so increase its value for sale.

17

The two pieces h a v e s i n c e b e e n rejoined almost seamlessly

(Figs 43-44). The numerous physical interventions in t h e Battle

panels have given rise to a

great deal of speculation, as will be discussed at l e n g t h in C h a p t e r 7.


T w o s m a l l - t o - m e d i u m size works by U c c e l l o on canvas survive: the Saint George the Dragon

33

and

in the National Gallery, L o n d o n , and the Scenes from the Lives of Holy Fathers

in

the Galleria d e l l ' A c c a d e m i a , Florence (Figs 4 5 - 4 6 ) . T h e threads of t h e former h a v e been identified as f l a x .

18

Canvas has been used as a support for paintings s i n c e ancient times. Being

lighter than w o o d , it was c o m m o n l y used for large, portable w o r k s s u c h as procession banners. A n early surviving e x a m p l e is O t t a v i a n o Nelli's Crucifixion of Saint Francis 1424. from

19

with the

Stigmatisation

(171.5 by 132 c m , M u s e o M i s s i o n a r i o , R i m i n i ) , d a t a b l e to between 1413 and

D u e to their inherent delicacy, occasional e x p o s u r e to t h e e l e m e n t s , and wear and tear

h a n d l i n g , relatively few

works of this kind h a v e s u r v i v e d . V a s a r i recorded

that

U c c e l l o ' s paintings in the Palazzo Medici w e r e on c a n v a s , w h i c h w a s confirmed for the Battle

between

Lions and Dragons

were described as t o r n .

20

and t h e Story

of Paris (?) in a 1598 inventory w h e r e they

A l t h o u g h U c c e l l o ' s London Saint

George

is b y n o m e a n s an early

e x a m p l e of a painting on canvas, it is a relatively early surviving i n s t a n c e of the c o m b i n a t i o n of oil painting with a canvas support, which b e c a m e increasingly c o m m o n for easel paintings during the R e n a i s s a n c e .

Drawings

Before painting on a support, be it panel, c a n v a s or wall, R e n a i s s a n c e artists usually prepared their designs o n paper. Although Vasari w r o t e that U c c e l l o ' s d e s c e n d a n t s o w n e d chests full of his d r a w i n g s , the n u m b e r of certain d r a w i n g s by him that survives is s m a l l , and they suggest that he used p a p e r p a r s i m o n i o u s l y .

21

Lorenza

Melli has c o n d u c t e d

the most

thorough

examination of the three d r a w i n g s u n d o u b t e d l y by Uccello, all in the G a b i n e t t o Disegni e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, using a range of scientific analyses. S h e found that in e a c h c a s e Uccello had re-used his paper support. T h e Study Hawkwood,

for

the Equestrian

Monument

for

Sir

John

p r e s u m a b l y shown to the Operai of the D u o m o d u r i n g the c o m m i s s i o n for the

mural painting (Figs 47-48), is drawn on paper previously used for w r i t i n g financial accounts. Infrared p h o t o g r a p h y has made n u m b e r s legible under the priming layer, w h e r e the horse and rider were s u b s e q u e n t l y drawn. On the sheet with the Mounted

Knight,

the drawing of the

horse and rider on a green priming is s u p e r i m p o s e d o v e r an u n r e l a t e d design for a Father

and a Kneeling

Companion

Holy

(Figs 4 9 - 5 0 ) , as well as an unrelated design for part of a

nude infant. Uccello made t w o apparently unrelated d r a w i n g s on the sheet of paper for the Angel with a Sword; A Cup, as the title s u g g e s t s , and had previously used the same sheet for a definitely unrelated design of a Virgin and Child,

which was pricked to transfer the design

(Figs 51-52). Melli has shown that the pricked design relates to a series of paintings of the Virgin and Child attributed m o r e or less directly to Uccello, discussed here in Chapter 8 in

34


relation to Uccello's w o r k s h o p .

22

Other drawings in the Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe have

traditionally been attributed t o Uccello, most f a m o u s l y the Chalice, Hexagonal Portrait

Section

and Punte),

the Mazzocchio

(with

Octagonal

the Mazzocchio

Section)

(with

and the

Profile

of a Man (Figs 53-56). The attribution of these drawings to Uccello is by no m e a n s

certain, as is discussed in the Catalogue. The Angel with a Sword; A Cup came to the Gabinetto Disegni e S t a m p e from t h e Medici Collection.

23

Vasari claimed there w e r e drawings by Uccello a m o n g the d e s i g n s ,

cartoons and models by Donatello, Brunelleschi, M a s a c c i o , F i l i p p o Lippi and Fra Angelico i n t h e Medici Collection at the Giardino of San M a r c o . showing mazzocchi

24

H e also described drawings b y Uccello

(the polyhedral headdresses m a d e of a cloth-covered wicker frame that

features in the Battle and Flood paintings) and p o l y h e d r a w i t h seventy-two faces, punte sticks with ribbons interlaced around them. F o r Uccello to have painted the foreshortenings of t h e mazzocchi

and

difficult

and other p o l y h e d r a in h i s paintings h e must have m a d e

preparatory drawings like those Vasari described. W h e t h e r the examples that have been attributed to him in m o d e r n times are in fact his is o p e n to question because it is extremely difficult to attribute technical drawings lacking

Morellian idiosyncrasies

of execution.

Furthermore, none of the drawings that are k n o w n to have c o m e from V a s a r i ' s collection, attributed to Uccello b y Vasari or subsequent o w n e r s , is certainly by him, and few are even close to the style of his paintings. Vasari claimed to h a v e d r a w i n g s by Uccello in his // de' Disegni

(Book of Drawings)

drawings for the lost Battle

Libro

of perspective s t u d i e s , birds, animals, a mazzocchio,

between Dragons

and Lions formerly in the Palazzo M e d i c i .

and 25

He

mounted his collection of drawings in Active architectural f r a m e s , some labelled with artists' names. Three pages of drawings with Vasari's m o u n t i n g s bearing Uccello's name are housed in the Nationalmuseum, Stockholm (Fig. 57). T h e attributions to Uccello of all of these drawings have been doubted by critics.

26

In the opinion of this author only the drawing of a

child on a camel bears any real resemblance to U c c e l l o ' s style. Six small portrait drawings of men's h e a d s from V a s a r i ' s Libro de' Disegni

have

occasionally been attributed to Uccello. Four of these are now in t h e Albertina in Vienna. The two others, each with Uccello's name inscribed in a different hand than the artist's, are in the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, and the L o u v r e .

27

T w o larger portrait drawings, o n e of an

unidentified youth and one of the Florentine C h a n c e l l o r L e o n a r d o Bruni, are also in the Albertina. Two sheets of studies of men and a n i m a l s , originally comprising a single sheet belonging to Vasari, have been attributed to Uccello and are h o u s e d in the Musee des Beaux Arts, Dijon, and the A l b e r t i n a .

28

None of these d r a w i n g s is very close to Uccello's style.

Filippo Baldinucci owned the Polyhedron

with

Seventy-Two

Faces

and Punte

and the


Mazzocchio,

35

both n o w in the L o u v r e (Figs 5 8 - 5 9 ) , w h i c h he attributed to Uccello and his

opinion is still frequently a c c e p t e d .

29

Uccello m u s t have kept d r a w i n g s in his w o r k s h o p of textile p a t t e r n s . John O ' G r a d y has pointed out that the brocades of T o l e n t i n o ' s headdress in the L o n d o n Battle, robe in t h e Paris Saint

George

and the c o p e of o n e of t h e priests in t h e Miracle

the p r i n c e s s ' of the

Host

appear as flat patterns that d o not vary a c c o r d i n g to the c o n t o u r s of the fabrics depicted and are not foreshortened. patterns.

30

He suggested that Uccello m a y have used s t e n c i l s to trace the

It has not previously been noted that the pattern o n Saint E u s t a c e ' s robe in the

Karlsruhe Adoration

is identical to the pattern on the p r i n c e s s ' robe in t h e Paris Saint

(Figs 60-63). In the Karlsruhe Adoration

George

the vine a n d flower motifs w i t h circles at the

intersections of the vines are gold on a red b a c k g r o u n d , while in t h e Paris Saint

George

the

colours are reversed. Given that these w o r k s c a n be dated several d e c a d e s apart o n stylistic grounds, it s e e m s that Uccello preserved his w o r k s h o p d r a w i n g s carefully. T h e re-use a n d adaptation of figure studies seems to b e a recurring feature of U c c e l l o ' s practice. T h e figure of Joseph in the Karlsruhe Adoration

is so similar to the one in

the Quarate predella, where it is reversed, that they must b e based o n t h e s a m e d r a w i n g (Figs 64-65). T h e Mounted

Knight

drawing in the Gabinetto Disegni e S t a m p e m a y have been used

as the basis of o n e of t h e mounted k n i g h t s in the London Battle, George and the d r a g o n .

but a l s o perhaps for a Saint

31

Model b o o k drawings were valuable w o r k s h o p assets for early Renaissance artists, especially for the depiction of fantastic creatures such as the unicorn and the dragon. A design of a dragon fighting a lion was circulated widely in Florentine w o r k s h o p s , as is demonstrated by its appearance in the fifteenth-century Pattern

Plate

of Beasts

and

Birds

Hunting

Florentine e n g r a v i n g by an a n o n y m o u s and

Fighting

artist

(an e x a m p l e is in the British

M u s e u m , L o n d o n ) , a similar looking dragon painted by B e n o z z o G o z z o l i in the Infancy Moses

2

in the C a m p o Santo, P i s a , ' and the drawing Dragon

Fighting

a Lion

of

in a private

collection when it was published by Bernhard Degenhart and A n n e g r i t S c h m i l t in 1963 (the present w h e r e a b o u t s of the drawing are u n k n o w n ) . The design of the d r a g o n in the M e l b o u r n e Saint

George

is closely related to the d r a w i n g . The painted and d r a w n d r a g o n s have in

c o m m o n a l o n g , S shaped neck, horizontal bands of scales on the front of the neck, two rows of circular scales on the back of the neck, a large head surrounded by s h a g g y hair and a long snout. In the d r a w i n g there s e e m s to be a lock of light-coloured hair falling o v e r the d r a g o n ' s forehead, at the base of a longer, darker, spike-shaped feature that m a y be a lock of hair shown in silhouette. Alternatively, these features may be intended to represent a horn. In the Melbourne dragon there is what is clearly a horn emerging from the d r a g o n ' s

forehead.

Dragons d o not usually have a single horn in Italian Renaissance d e p i c t i o n s , s o these features

36


in the drawing and the painting suggest a c l o s e relationship (Figs 66-67). Degenhart a n d Schmitt attributed the drawing to an a n o n y m o u s fifteenth-century Florentine artist c o p y i n g the lost painting by Uccello of the Battle between

Dragons

and Lions in the Palazzo M e d i c i .

33

However, Uccello m a y have used the d r a w i n g , o r at least o n e very much like it, as the basis of his depiction of t h e dragon in the Melbourne painting. T h i s w o u l d explain why the saint is not depicted on horseback as is usually the case, if Uccello substituted the saint for the lion. Uccello used a number of techniques t o transfer designs from drawings to t h e supports of his paintings. He used pouncing, and probably incising, to transfer designs at t h e same scale as his drawings, and squaring to enlarge h i s d e s i g n s .

34

T h e Mounted

Knight

and

the Angel with a Sword; A Cup each contains a d e s i g n prepared for transfer by pouncing, a procedure in which charcoal powder is b r u s h e d t h r o u g h holes pricked along the m a i n contours of a drawing on paper. As Melli has s h o w n , t h e pricked design of a Virgin and Child on the sheet of the latter drawing probably s e r v e d as t h e basis for t h e panel painting o f that subject now in a private collection in P r a t o .

35

T h e cup in t h e s a m e drawing has been incised,

probably to transfer the design, although no c o r r e s p o n d i n g work has survived. Pouncing i s evident in a n u m b e r of Uccello's mural p a i n t i n g s , although no large-scale cartoon has survived. The decorative borders of the A s s u n t a Chapel paintings, comprised of s i n u o u s poppy stems in geometric panels, are outlined w i t h black dots called spolveri,

the results o f

using the pouncing method. Spolveri are also v i s i b l e in the spiral fluting of the columns in t h e temple of the Presentation

of the Virgin at P r a t o

36

a n d the G o t h i c tracery border of t h e

Nativity from the Spedale di San Martino alia Scala. The X-radiography of the Karlsruhe Adoration

shows an incised p l u m b line running

through its centre, along the full height of the panel (Fig. 6 8 ) . Uccello may have used this a s the basis for the vertical orientation of the c o m p o s i t i o n as h e drew it on the gesso, or as a guide for the transfer of a design from a d r a w i n g o n paper o n t o t h e panel. Raphael's pricked cartoon for the Saint George and the Dragon has a pricked p l u m b line through its centre (the cartoon is in the Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence; the painting is in the National Gall ery of Art, Washington).

37

Raphael p r o b a b l y aligned the pricked drawing with

the panel by looking for the corresponding p l u m b line on the ground through the pricked holes. An IRR examination of the Adoration

u n d e r t a k e n in 2 0 0 3 did not reveal clear signs of

underdrawing. That underdrawing is present, h o w e v e r , is shown in an area of loss on the hem of Saint Eustace's r o b e , where a few lines of b r o w n i s h - b l a c k underdrawing for the contours of the drapery are exposed (Fig. 69). That IRR did not reveal underdrawing under the paint layers may be because the drawing is in a m e d i u m n o t visible in IRR, such as iron-gall ink, or because there are few

pentimenti

between

the

underdrawing

and

the

paint

layers.

Underdrawing can be difficult to distinguish w h e n t h e painted composition follows

the


underdrawing closely. No major pentimenti

in the paint layers of the Adoration

37

are visible in

the X - r a d i o g r a p h y . Uccello probably fully established t h e c o m p o s i t i o n in a d r a w i n g o n paper. He may have transferred the d e s i g n with the pouncing m e t h o d , or b y lightly incising the design t h r o u g h t h e paper onto t h e ground. T h e Study for the Equestrian

Monument

is squared for the transfer of the design to

the wall in t h e D u o m o where the i m a g e was painted, a l t h o u g h the sinopia

for this work has

been lost, and with it the e v i d e n c e to s h o w whether or n o t U c c e l l o actually did transfer his design

using

a

correspondence

system between

of

proportional

the

drawing

and

enlargement.

Nevertheless,

the painting,

the

fairly

close

notwithstanding

some

minor

adjustments t o t h e contours of the h o r s e ' s body, suggests that he probably did. In the Presentation

of the Virgin and t h e Stoning

of Saint Stephen

scenes in the A s s u n t a Chapel the

walls were m a r k e d out with grids of s q u a r e s , m a d e by s n a p p i n g string rubbed with chalk against the d a m p arricci

(the preparatory layers of mural p a i n t i n g s ) . T h e lack of changes

m a d e to their c o m p o s i t i o n s during the painting stage suggests that these scenes

were

thoroughly prepared in drawings on paper and scaled up using grids on the d r a w i n g s and the proportionally enlarged grids on the

arricci™

U n d e r d r a w i n g a n d Incisions

For Uccello, the creative evolution of a c o m p o s i t i o n often did c o n t i n u e on t h e panel, canvas or wall. 1RR and X-radiography reveal c h a n g e s in the d r a w i n g stage, b e t w e e n the d r a w i n g and the painting stages, and in t h e paint layers of U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s . By c o m p a r i n g I R R and Xradiography images with the surface of a painting it is often p o s s i b l e to distinguish the underdrawing from incisions and painted lines on the surface, and by plotting the variations, to reconstruct Annunciation

the d e v e l o p m e n t

of

Uccello's

compositions.

The

IRR

of

the

Oxford

reveals a surprisingly elaborate and sophisticated u n d e r d r a w i n g with n u m e r o u s

changes, very revealing of U c c e l l o ' s approach to design, and it is of particular interest as the earliest e x a m p l e of Uccello's perspective d r a w i n g . In the Annunciation

there is a m p l e e v i d e n c e that the c o m p o s i t i o n was underdrawn.

As noted, u n d e r d r a w i n g is most easily identified in IRR when it differs from incisions or painting on the surface. For e x a m p l e , the Floly Spirit was d r a w n next to the t o p of the capital of the freestanding pillar, but was painted a fraction

lower (Figs 7 0 - 7 1 ) .

v ;

T h e lowest

depiction of Gabriel was drawn with his left hand holding a lily s t e m , appearing above his right sleeve, but this detail was painted out (Figs 72-73), and a d r a w n S shaped c u r v e for a contour of the drapery of the V i r g i n ' s robe appearing in the IRR j u s t b e l o w her book was neither incised nor painted (Figs 7 4 - 7 5 ) . It s e e m s that Uccello first drew much of the

38


architecture with a ruler and then drew the figures and their drapery freehand: the outlines of the portico were d r a w n like a ' w i r e frame' structure with a ruler, and the Virgin and the lowest Gabriel were then drawn by hand over the architecture, explaining why the principal 40

lines of construction for the portico pass through the figures (Fig. 7 2 ) . The medium or m e d i a of this underdrawing is difficult to determine, but m a y be a mixture of metalpoint for the straight lines of the architecture and brush drawing for t h e figures and drapery. There is little or no hatching for shadows and n o obvious m o n o c h r o m e wash drawing. The procedure of drawing figures over construction furniture is also found in Uccello's sinopia

lines for architecture

and

drawings for the Holy Fathers mural paintings in

at San Miniato al M o n t e in Florence, notably for a figure of a seated monk-saint o n the east wall.

41

Here, the principal lines of construction, in this case for a bench, extend right across

the figure. Similarly, in the IRR of the Hunt t h e ruled lines for t h e single-point perspective pass through figures, such as the standing man b l o w i n g a horn in the foreground (Figs 7 6 77).

42

The IRR of t h e Annunciation

shows n u m e r o u s adjustments to the drawing for the

architecture (Fig. 78). T h e opening of the portico facing the v i e w e r was drawn and incised as a round arch and the doorway leading inside was a l s o drawn a n d incised as an arch. The arch facing the viewer was then made into a pointed arch and the doorway was m a d e rectangular. These and numerous other changes to the s i m p l e building suggest that there was n o t a detailed auxiliary drawing for it; the composition w a s p r o b a b l y largely worked out on the panel. Neither does the design appear to have been m e a s u r e d . For example, t h e decorative frieze along the top of the building facing the viewer w a s d i v i d e d into approximately, not exactly, equal sized rectangles in the underdrawing as a guide for the repeated arabesque motif (Figs 79-80). Underdrawing and incisions are present, in v a r y i n g quantities, in the architecture, the figures and the landscape of the Annunciation.

T h e incisions in the drapery follow

the

underdrawing somewhat loosely. Similarly, the freely e x e c u t e d corkscrew curls of God the Father's hair in the Melbourne Saint

George,

s h o w an artist completely at ease with his

technique (Fig. 81). Incisions allow the design to remain visible after the first application of paint, when the underdrawing is covered. Where g e o m e t r i c precision was required tools were used. Compasses were used to draw the haloes for the c h e r u b i m in the Annunciation,

as

indicated by the points visible in the centres of the u n p a i n t e d o n e s (Fig. 82). The Annunciation

provides a fascinating i n s i g h t into Uccello's approach to the

planning of perspective, in particular his awareness of the relationship between t w o and threedimensional geometry. Uccello was evidently aware that t h e intersection of the diagonals o f a square locates the centre in a foreshortened s q u a r e , j u s t as it does in a two-dimensional


39

square. It s e e m s that h e drew an a p p r o x i m a t e square in perspective for the ceiling of the portico, drew diagonals between the corners of the ceiling to find its centre, and then, after many changes of m i n d , divided the square into a grid to p r o v i d e t h e basis of the

punte

decoration (Fig. 7 6 ) . T h e final grid is based on eight rows of foreshortened squares by eight rows, while only t h o s e visible t h r o u g h the arch were actually d r a w n and incised. T h e r e were many changes m a d e during the planning stage and the p u r p o s e of s o m e of t h e construction lines is not entirely clear, suggesting that U c c e l l o ' s perspective d r a w i n g w a s i m p r o v i s e d . In the u n d e r d r a w i n g for the Brunelleschian cornice a r o u n d the freestanding pillar, separated from the capital by a b l o c k ,

43

he first determined the p o s i t i o n of the four corners of

the pillar, including the corner which is n o t v i s i b l e , as t h o u g h h e w e r e d e p i c t i n g the structure as it would be seen in X-radiography. H e then drew t w o d i a g o n a l s b e t w e e n the opposite corners to establish the correct angle for t h e c o r n e r s of t h e cornice as they extend b e y o n d the pillar (Figs 83-85). Having established the final version of the c o r n i c e h e then extended the principal lines to t h e left so that the c o r n i c e of the far pillar would b e c o r r e c t l y aligned (Fig. 72). H e also extended construction lines to align their capitals. Of this fairly extensively underdrawn perspective construction, m a n y lines d o not a p p e a r in t h e X - r a d i o g r a p h y or as incisions on the paint surface. Evidently, U c c e l l o generally incised, o r incised more strongly, those lines that he intended to be visible in the final c o m p o s i t i o n .

44

A similar geometric a p p r o a c h to t h e p l a n n i n g of p e r s p e c t i v e is visible in the incisions of the Adoration

in San Martino, Bologna. A punta

on the inside e d g e of t h e right side of the

architectonic frame s h o w s that Uccello incised a n u m b e r of parallel, vertical lines into the arriccio,

then incised t w o diagonal lines to form a square in perspective. Fie then incised the

diagonals between the corners of the s q u a r e to find its centre, and then e x t e n d e d a horizontal line from this point t o the third vertical line to find the correct position for the top of the punta in relation to the base (Fig. 8 6 ) . IRR of the Hunt

revealed a minimal perspective p l a n n i n g in the u n d e r d r a w i n g and

incisions, consisting of a horizon line, four orthogonal lines leading t o w a r d s the vanishing point and a horizontal line to establish the rate of diminution (Fig. 87). It m a y be inferred, however, that Uccello used more lines to construct a paviinento,

w h i c h are not actually visible

in the IRR due to the black underpainting of the vegetation t h r o u g h o u t the forest. perspective construction of the city in the background of the Saint

George

45

The

is even less

developed (Figs 88-89), s h o w i n g that U c c e l l o ' s approach to perspective was not d o g m a t i c . Apart from a long, ruled incision for the battlements along the front of the city wall, the rest of the design seems to have been w o r k e d out freehand. IRR reveals freehand u n d e r d r a w i n g in the towers and battlements of the city wall and the buildings inside the wall. A n u m b e r of buildings were incised freehand. IRR and X - r a d i o g r a p h y show that n u m e r o u s changes were

40


made to the design of the city in each stage of t h e execution. The representation of architecture in the Saint George serves only as a b a c k g r o u n d to the narrative, rather than t o provide the mis-en-scene as it does in the Annunciation,

accounting for U c c e l l o ' s relaxed

approach to its design. The style of underdrawing revealed in infrared imaging can provide further evidence, sometimes decisive, for an assessment of a p a i n t i n g ' s attribution, when the evidence o n t h e surface is ambiguous. The Portrait

of a Young Man h o u s e d in the Musee des B e a u x - A r t s ,

Chambery, was first attributed to Uccello by R o b e r t o L o n g h i in 1927 (Fig. 90). This attribution initially received support from other art historians. However, the trend in m o r e recent scholarship h a s been towards an attribution to D o m e n i c o V e n e z i a n o .

46

T h e infrared

photograph of the work housed in the Centre d e R e c h e r c h e et de Restauration des M u s e e s d e France shows bold, thick underdrawing, unlike anything revealed so far by the infrared examination of Uccello's works, supporting the case that it w a s not painted by him.

Precious Metals

One technique guaranteed to give paintings an impressive appearance is the application of precious metals. Areas to be covered in gold or silver leaf were prepared with a layer of bole, a reddish-brown clay pigment, t o give the thinly-beaten metal a w a r m e r tone. In the London Battle the colour of t h e bole is slightly warmer (a lighter orange-red) under the gold leaf and slightly cooler (browner and including an a d m i x t u r e of black) under the silver leaf, which may have been intended to give the different metals a m o r e distinct tonality, or to serve as a guide for the subsequent application of the two k i n d s of metal leaf over the large and complex 47

composition. Metal leaf could be incised and p u n c h e d to create a variety of effects. T h e gold ground around God the Father in the Melbourne Saint George

is incised with ruled, radiating

lines, and hexa-prong punchwork is used to create the alternating areas of stippled texture (Fig. 8 1 ) .

48

Uccello used a similar, perhaps identical, punch in t h e pomegranate designs on 49

Tolentino's headdress in the London Battle.

In the Oxford Annunciation

similar punchwork

appears in the cherubim, although not with sufficient clarity t o determine the type of punch used. Small, circular punches were used to e m b e l l i s h t h e musical Angels' haloes, while the Virgin's and the lowest Gabriel's haloes were incised by hand with meandering motifs, in a manner distinct from the Saint

George.

A technique used by Uccello predominantly in t h e 1430s is the painting of coloured glazes over gold and silver leaf. A similar t e c h n i q u e h a s been recorded since the twelfth century, was used widely across Europe, and w a s particularly popular in Florence in the first half of the fifteenth c e n t u r y .

50

Technical e x a m i n a t i o n o f M a s o l i n o ' s Saint

Julian

(Museo

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS 41

d ' A r t e Sacra, Florence) has revealed that the red tunic w o r n by t h e saint w a s executed with red glaze over silver leaf that had been incised with a blunt instrument t o g i v e the impression of the texture of t h e fabric. This t e c h n i q u e of incising t h e silver leaf before applying glazes was apparently unusual in Florence, and m a y h a v e been introduced into the city by the Marchigian painters Gentile da Fabriano and A r c a n g e l o di Cola, b u t b e c a m e a feature of the technique of M a s a c c i o ' s and M a s o l i n o ' s w o r k s h o p and painters in their e n t o u r a g e , such as A n d r e a di Giusto and S c h e g g i a .

51

Uccello w o r k e d on a n o t h e r part of t h e c o m m i s s i o n for

which M a s o l i n o painted the Saint Julian, in t h e Carnesecchi Chapel in S a n t a M a r i a M a g g i o r e , Florence a r o u n d 1 4 2 3 .

52

He m a y have learnt or consolidated his k n o w l e d g e of the technique

through his contact with Masolino, a l t h o u g h precisely the s a m e t e c h n i q u e of first incising the metal leaf before painting over it has not yet been identified in a w o r k b y Uccello. Punched 5

gold leaf covered in glazes w a s , h o w e v e r , identified in the L o n d o n Battle. *

Furthermore,

apart from the depiction of a r m o u r , Uccello generally preferred to u s e gold leaf rather than silver as a base for painting o n , as he did in the Oxford Annunciation, George and Karlsruhe

Melbourne

Saint

Adoration.

In the M e l b o u r n e Saint George

a large part of the d r a g o n ' s w i n g s a n d b o d y are painted

with semi-transparent green glazes over gold leaf, reinforced with p a i n t e d black hatching in the s h a d o w s (Fig. 6 6 ) . T h e same technique of e m p l o y i n g green glazes o v e r gold leaf was used in the surcoat of T o l e n t i n o ' s page in t h e L o n d o n Battle.

In this w o r k , t h o u g h , t h e repertoire of

techniques is much larger. T h e adjacent b r o c a d e is executed with red glazes over gold leaf and the sallet in his right hand was executed with red glazes o v e r silver leaf. T h e p a g e ' s 54

armour, like Saint G e o r g e ' s , was executed with o p a q u e blackish glazes o v e r silver leaf. T h e gold bands of God the Father's papal tiara in t h e Annunciation, in the Saint George,

a n d the c o r r e s p o n d i n g feature

as well as the princess' gold girdle s h o w traces of red glazing (Fig. 9 1 ) .

In the Karlsruhe Adoration

the repertoire of techniques is similar t o that in the Battle

paintings. T h e figures of the Angels, except for the faces and h a n d s , a r e executed entirely with gold leaf covered with blackish and red glazes (Fig. 9 2 ) . T h e i r r o b e s are gold leaf with modelling of the s h a d o w s of the folds in thin, blackish glazes m a n i p u l a t e d with the artist's fingertips. T h e highlights of the folds have hatched incisions into the gold leaf that catch the light, creating an appearance like an engraving in negative. T h e hair of all of the figures in the painting is executed with gold leaf, incised to represent l o c k s , painted with glazes and m o r e opaque paint to further define the locks, and the paint layers scraped in a sgraffito

technique,

revealing the gold leaf to create highlights ( F i g . 9 3 ) . T h e borders of t h e V i r g i n ' s , J o s e p h ' s and Mary M a g d a l e n e ' s robes are gold leaf covered with blackish glazes for the shadows and incisions into t h e gold leaf for t h e highlights a n d to suggest the texture of t h e fabric. T h e brocade cloth on which the Christ Child lies a n d t h e brocade fabric of Saint Eustace's robe

42


are also gold leaf covered with glazes for the patterns and shadows. T h e s e works would have made a sumptuous impression when first painted, with large areas of s h i m m e r i n g exposed silver and gold leaf and areas of precious metals c o v e r e d in jewel-like coloured glazes. Like Van Eyck and Leonardo, Uccello w a s a tactile painter. He used his fingers to work his paintings while they were still fresh. Fingerprints appear in the Melbourne

Saint

George in the blue paint of the building behind t h e city gate and the h o r s e ' s saddle (Figs 9 4 95). In the London Battle Uccello used his thumb and fingers to thin or modulate t h e blackish glazes over a layer of silver leaf.

55

The Karlsruhe Adoration

also has extensive use of t h e

artist's fingertips to work blackish glazes over gold leaf in m o s t of the robes (Figs 96-97). However, the fingerprints in these three works are too smudged and partial to provide a m a t c h with each other. Changes in Uccello's use of precious metals in h i s paintings occurred over time. W h i l e gold grounds appear in his works from the early 1430s t o the A v a n e predella of 1452, there is a decrease in the use of gold leaf from the 1440s, combined with less elaborate surface treatments of it, probably reflecting a c h a n g e in taste among Uccello's clientele. In 1435 Alberti expressed his dislike of the excessive use of gold in paintings because of the way glare interfered with the perception of light and dark on the surface of a p a i n t i n g .

56

The

development and decline in the complexity of surface treatments of metal leaf can be traced over Uccello's career. There is a limited u s e of glazed metal leaf and punchwork in the Oxford Annunciation

(c. early 1430s), more appears in t h e Melbourne Saint George

1430s), they are used extensively in the Battle

(c. early

paintings (c. late 1430s), there is glazed gold

leaf but little punchwork in the Karlsruhe Adoration

(c. late 1430s) and from the 1440s both

techniques more or less disappear except for the tooling of haloes. Exceptions to this trend are the small, stylistically conservative, devotional panels made in Uccello's w o r k s h o p possibly in the late 1440s to 1450s, discussed in Chapter 8. It m a y be that those clients who preferred to buy replicas of existing compositions over c o m m i s s i o n i n g new compositions also preferred old fashioned, gold grounds to painted landscapes o r architectural settings.

Paint L a y e r S t r u c t u r e s

Uccello's complex

paint

layer structures

examination of the London Saint George

first

became

apparent

during

the

technical

following its acquisition in 1959 by the National

Gallery, London. At the time it was purchased the w o r k was kept in a bank in Zurich, having been recovered at the end of the Second World W a r f r o m the N a z i s , who had stolen it in 1939 from the Lanckoronski Collection in V i e n n a .

57

Q u e s t i o n s about the w o r k ' s authenticity had

been raised in 1959 and needed to be a n s w e r e d , s i n c e it had been acquired for an enormous


43

sum, reported in the American press as £ 1 2 5 , 0 0 0 of which the British G o v e r n m e n t had contributed a special grant of £ 6 0 , 0 0 0 .

58

Indeed, the w o r k ' s fantastic i m a g e r y was considered

so singular that it was difficult for the Director of the Gallery, Philip H e n d y , to hang the work suitably with the other fifteenth-century

paintings.

59

M o r e recently, T h o m a s H o v i n g , the

former Director of the Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art, proposed that t h e w o r k is either a fake or is so overpainted that an attribution to Uccello is q u e s t i o n a b l e .

60

F o l l o w i n g the w o r k ' s

acquisition, Martin Davies, Assistant Keeper, and N o r m a n B r o m m e l l e , Restorer, at the National

Gallery,

London,

each

promptly

published

articles

supporting

the

work's

authenticity, attribution and i m p o r t a n c e , citing a range of i c o n o g r a p h i c , stylistic and technical evidence. In 1959 Davies described the pentimenti work

as

characteristic

of

Uccello

in

the

revealed in the infrared p h o t o g r a p h y of the improvised

and

unresolved

compositional solutions reached, referring to similar changes in the Miracle

nature of

the

of the Host.

He

did admit, h o w e v e r , that some features revealed in the infrared i m a g e s , such as the sweeping mark passing through t h e p r i n c e s s ' b o d y , defied explanation.

61

In the s a m e year B r o m m e l l e

noted that doubts had been expressed about w h e t h e r a painting d a t a b l e to a b o u t 1460 could be expected to be on c a n v a s , as the Saint

George

is, and that it had been suggested the work

might be an imitation of a later date. B r o m m e l l e rallied substantial physical and documentary evidence to show that there was nothing u n u s u a l for a painting from the mid-fifteenth century to have a canvas support, since the t e c h n i q u e is found in much older w o r k s . Complicating B r o m m e l l e ' s a r g u m e n t was the fact that the work had an unusual paint layer structure. Of the paint samples t a k e n , many s h o w e d an initial red-brown layer, followed by o n e of black and another of lead white, before the straightforward paint layer structures c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the composition on the surface. While B r o m m e l l e hypothesised

that the black layer could

conceivably correspond to an early idea U c c e l l o had for a depiction of a night scene, he had no explanation for the underlying red-brown layer that seemed like t h e c o l o u r e d primings of paintings from much later periods, such as those of Veronese and C a n a l e t t o / '

2

Brommelle

illustrated his article with a macrophotograph of an area of loss from the paint surface revealed during cleaning that showed the w o r k ' s paint layer strata. Davies illustrated his article with an infrared photograph detail s h o w i n g pentimenti

in the p r i n c e s s

1

crown, hands

and girdle, and features of the landscape. T h e s e were the first scientific i m a g e s of a work by Uccello to be published. In 1998, Jill Dunkerton and Ashok Roy of the National Gallery, L o n d o n Conservation Department, clarified the nature of the paint layer structure by o b s e r v i n g that the red earth layer was present in all the s a m p l e s , while in s o m e it was covered by a black layer and in others a green layer, with a layer of lead w h i t e covering all of these layers. T h e y suggested

44


that this did not correspond to figurative techniques of the period, 'where colour areas tend to be carefully planned and reserved', proposing that the canvas might have served initially as the support for a non-figurative, decorative, heraldic or emblematic design, which Uccello painted out with a layer of lead white before painting the composition as it is seen on the surface. The lead white was brushed on freely, perhaps accounting for the s w e e p i n g mark Davies had observed in the infrared photograph of the princess. With this explanation, they 6

emphasised that the paint layer structure might be less unusual than had been thought. '* Their hypothesis still leaves unexplained why Uccello painted black a n d green over a layer of red. This is particularly relevant for the hypothesis that the initial c o m p o s i t i o n might have been heraldic in nature, since the colours and forms of heraldic designs are by definition pre-determined. However, a modified version of their hypothesis could account for the w o r k ' s complex paint layer structure. An initial composition might have been abandoned and painted out with the all-over lead white layer, as they suggested, but the first composition could have been a figurative or landscape composition, since Uccello's figurative

and

landscape

compositions do show complex paint layer structures, in which colours are not always left in reserve. The landscape of the technically similar Florence Accademia Holy

Fathers

composed of rather abstract, nearly geometric forms, corresponding s o m e w h a t

is

to the

underlying composition of the Saint George, at least as far as it can be seen in the IRR of the area around the princess. In the Holy Fathers there are indications of superimposed paint layers, such as the red paint for the church at t h e top, visible through losses in the black shadow of the doorway. In Uccello's Madrid Crucifixion a layer (or layers) of orange-buff paint extends across much of the landscape, over which a thin mauve wash was applied in places to model highlights of the barren terrain. At least some of the blackish-green grass and c l o v e r along the edges of the areas of turf was painted over the orange-buff layer and not left in reserve. This is not surprising, since it is unlikely that any artist would leave in reserve such tiny features as blades of grass. More surprisingly, the abrasion to the ridges of the craquelure in the sky, seems to show that an orange-buff coloured layer is present beneath the black for the night sky, rather than a whitish gesso ground. Thus, it seems that a large part of the gesso would have been covered by an initial layer of orange-buff colour, perhaps comparable to the initial red layer of the London Saint George. Similarly, it appears that the landscape in the Paris Saint George is painted with one or more layers of buff-brown paint over which lighter and darker strokes model form. Even some large areas of dark green paint for the fields under cultivation seem to lie over the brown layer, notably in the left background where Uccello has used a sgraffito technique in a resinous (?) green layer revealing the underlying brown layer to depict what seems to be a hunting scene with a lion attacking a deer. Uccello was a


45

sophisticated technician who handled paint in a way that w a s e c o n o m i c a l , t o t h e extent that it avoided planning every area to be left in r e s e r v e , and clever, to the e x t e n t that it allowed the overlying layers to b e manipulated for interesting effects, s u c h as

sgraffito.

Scientific analyses of t h e p i g m e n t s and m e d i a used b y U c c e l l o in his panel paintings have been published in only a few instances. T h e L o n d o n Battle tempera with some areas in tempera

grassa,

is e x e c u t e d mainly in egg

i n c l u d i n g w a l n u t oil. T h e p i g m e n t s have been

described as standard for the fifteenth century: lead white, u l t r a m a r i n e , s o m e t i m e s mixed with white, azurite, vermilion, verdigris, lead-tin yellow (type I), a variety o f red and yellow lakes, read lead, charcoal black and earth p i g m e n t s . predominantly in a m e d i u m of walnut o i l .

64

T h e L o n d o n Saint

George

is executed

65

Mural Painting T e c h n i q u e

Studying U c c e l l o ' s mural painting t e c h n i q u e is difficult b e c a u s e of the p o o r condition that most of these works are in and b e c a u s e most of t h e m are i n a c c e s s i b l e , h i g h u p on church walls. H o w e v e r , parts of the B o l o g n a Adoration painting and sinopia

are in r e a s o n a b l e c o n d i t i o n , and since the

have been detached and put on display near g r o u n d level it is possible to

study them at close r a n g e . T h e brick wall ( r e m o v e d with t h e sinopia)

w a s covered with a

greyish cement mix about 7 m m thick. Over this base, at least t w o thin layers of whitish preparation, of u n k n o w n c o m p o s i t i o n , were applied, the u p p e r m o s t layer a pale, pinkishwhite c o l o u r .

66

T h e architectonic features of the sinopia,

s u c h as the p a i n t e d frame and the

support for the shelter, were outlined with a dry, red m e d i u m , p r o b a b l y the pigment sinoper. Two heraldic shields were drawn in a dry, black substance, p r e s u m a b l y charcoal or black chalk, although they were not ultimately painted in the final c o m p o s i t i o n . T h e outlines of the figures, such as C h i l d ' s head and s o m e s i m p l e outlines of his limbs, w e r e a l s o drawn in black. Some dark brown lines appear to have been painted in t h e sinopia,

j u d g i n g by their fluid

contours and the colour that flows into the striations of the preparation. T h e s e brushstrokes seem to relate to the shapes of the figures and their drapery. S o m e parts of the paint surface are slightly glossy, s u g g e s t i n g that not all of the paint was applied in a buon fresco paint was applied a secco

technique (painted into the fresh plaster). Confirmation that

(painted in an organic m e d i u m on a dry layer) is provided by the

damaged condition of the red punte

in the frame. Close e x a m i n a t i o n reveals that a mid-tone

red layer extends over the entire area of the frame and that a further layer of dark red was applied over the surfaces of the punte over the surfaces of the punte

in shade and a further layer of light red was applied

in light. S o m e parts of these a secco

p a s s a g e s h a v e flaked off,

revealing the underlying mid-tone red layer (Fig. 98). T h u s , U c c e l l o w a s j u s t as economical

46


in his mural painting technique as he was in his panel painting technique, in as much as he did not always leave areas of colour in reserve. D ' A m i c o described t h e ass, its tether, the o x ' s horns, the area where t h e Child lies, his ball, J o s e p h ' s face, t h e Magi, the black sky, the red fields, and the Virgin's flesh tones and m a n t l e as painted in buon fresco,

except for the

finishing touches that a r e in tempera, in this case animal glue. D ' A m i c o identified as a secco passages the blue of t h e sky, the brown earth colours in t h e robes i n the foreground, the dark browns in the ox, the shadows of the punte,

the green, yellow and b r o w n colours of the

shelter, the fur lining of the d o n o r ' s sleeves, J o s e p h ' s h a l o and other small details.

67

Determining the m e d i a of mural paintings scientifically is exceptionally difficult, partly because of the changes that can occur to organic c o m p o u n d s after prolonged exposure to the elements. The medium of Uccello's Creation forte and the Stories of Noah as t e m p e r a , mixture of buon fresco

69

and a secco.

68

Scenes

has been described as a secco

tempera

while b o t h h a v e e l s e w h e r e been described as a

Documentary s o u r c e s indicate that Uccello's lost mural

painting in the refectory of San Miniato al M o n t e m a y h a v e been in mixed fresco and a secco technique, with the latter applied in an oil m e d i u m .

70

B e c a u s e of t h e variety of media used

and the occasional difficulty in determining the m e d i a u s e d in individual cases, the general description 'mural painting' is preferable to the indiscriminate u s e o f the word 'fresco' for all Renaissance wall paintings.


47

Notes for C h a p t e r 2

1

Cennini, 1971, p. 4. For a discussion of these passages in Cennini's book, see: Kemp, 1997, p. 86.

Bellucci and Frosinini (2002a, p. 30) described Cennini's book as a conservative codification of artists' practices in Florence probably made for the painters' guild at a time when the guild was seeking to enforce its control of the art in Florence in the face of rapid changes taking place in professional practices. 2

Loeser, 1898, pp. 83-94.

3

Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 239.

4

Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002a, p. 30. Some painters, such as Scheggia and Mariotto di Cristofano,

belonged to the carpenters' guild, and so might conceivably have made their own panels. 5

6

The document is transcribed in Beck, 1979, p. 3 . For the transcription in Italian, see Appendix B. For the Madrid Crucifixion

see: De Wateville, 1989, p. 369. My thanks to Dr Sergio Benedetti, Head

Curator and Keeper of the Collection, National Gallery of Ireland, for confirming that the Dublin Virgin and Child has its original frame, personal communication, 20 Jan. 2005. For the New York triptych sec: Christiansen, 1997, p. 26. 7

K

Boskovits, 1990, p. 172 including n. 2. For the measurements of the Hunt, see: Kemp, Massing, Christie and Groen, 1991, p . 175; for the

measurements of the Battle, sec: Roy and Gordon, 2001, p. 6. y

For example, for the Florence Battle, see: Alfio Del Serra, La Struttura Lignea della Battaglia di S.

Romano, di Paolo Uccello, degli Uffizi, Osservazioni,

Deduzioni,

e Note nell' Attuale Restauro, p. 1,

NGL, Curatorial Files, NG 583,1, unpublished material; and for the London Battle, see: Gordon, 2003, p. 378. 10

For an introduction to dendrochronology, see: Baillie, 1995.

"Cennini, 1971, pp. 119-120. 12

Kemp, Massing Christie and Groen, 1991, p. 176 n. 2; Gordon, 2003, p. 380, 386; CNRRMF,

conservation file 5616 [Saint George]. 13 r

fhe X-radiography was kindly provided by Dr Dietmar Liidke, Senior Curator for Old Masters, and

the Conservation Department, at the Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe. 14

Gordon, Wyld and Roy, 2002, p. 13.

" R o y and Gordon, 2001, pp. 6-7. "'As noted in Dresel, Liidke and Vey, 1992, p. 119. 17

Panel paintings have sometimes cut up and dispersed, presumably for profit. For a discussion of the

example of Zanobi Stro/./i's Annunciation

in the National Gallery, London, see: Gordon 2003, pp. 406-

407. '"Brommelle, 1959, p. 92. '"Parenti, 2001, p. 186. 2 0

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 65: 1550 and 1568 eds. For the 1598 inventory, see: Home,

1901, pp. 123-124.

48

21


Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 70: 1568 ed. The most comprehensive survey of Uccello's

drawings to date is Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vols I-IV, although they were more generous in their attributions than most authors. 22

Melli, 1998, pp. 1-39; Melli, 1999, pp. 261-272.

23

Melli, 2002a, p. 206. The origins of the other drawings in the Gabinetto associated with Uccello are

obscure, except for the Study for the Equestrian Monument,

which did not come to the Uffizi directly

from the Medici Collection (see the Catalogue for its eighteenth-century provenance). Petrioli Tofani, 1983, pp. 220-223. The earlier provenances of many of the drawings in the Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi are for the most part undocumented. The collection of Cardinal Leopoldo de' Medici (1617-1675), including the earliest collections of the Medici, was augmented by other members of the family, such as Giovan Carlo, Apollonio Bassetti, Ferdinando and Cosimo III. 24

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. IV, p. 125: 1568 ed.

25

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, pp. 62-63,65,70: 1550 and 1568 eds.

26

Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated-nos 1049-1054,1063, 1067-1071.

27

For the drawings in Vienna, see: Birke and Kertesz, 1992, vol. I, pp. 16-18, 26; for the drawing in

Oxford, see: Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 379; for the drawing in Paris, see: Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 381. 2 8

For the drawing in Dijon, see: Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 395; for the drawing in

Vienna, see: Birke and Kertesz, 1992, vol. I, p. 16. 2 9

M

Melli, 2002b, pp. 210-212.

0 ' G r a d y , 1985.

31

Melli, 1998, pp. 18-20.

3 2

Ames-Lewis, 1987, pp. 2-3,7-9.

3 3

Schmitt, 1963, p. 114 and Fig. 17.

3 4

It is also possible that the designs of the pricked drawings were transferred to paper, as part of the

development of a composition from workshop drawings. For a survey of preparatory drawing techniques in the Renaissance, see: Bambach, 1999, especially pp. 192-193, 197-204, 216-219, for Uccello. 3 5

36

Borsook, 1980, p. 82.

3 7

38

3 9

Melli, 1998, pp. 27-29,31-35.

For an illustration of Raphael's cartoon, see: Bambach, 1999, Fig. 56.

Borsook, 1980, pp. 81-83. I am grateful to Rachel Billinge for bringing this to my attention, personal communication, 25 Jul.

2003. 4 0

A horizontal line in the drawing for the corner where the floor meets the rear wall extends across the

area filled by the lower part of the Virgin's body, meeting a vertical line passing through her proper right sleeve, the book and the lower part of her robe, for the corner where the back wall meets the right wall. This line is joined at the bottom to a diagonal line for the corner of the floor and right wall which meets another vertical line passing through her left sleeve approximately below where the incision for


49

the inside edge of the arched door ends (ultimately painted as a rectangular opening in a slightly different position) for the inside edge of the doorway. There are other ruled lines in the area occupied by the Virgin's body, the significance of which is unclear. The vertical edges of the far pillar extend through the lowest Gabriel's sleeve and an incision passes through his halo. 41

An illustration of the Holy Fathers sinopia was published in: Berti, 1988, p. 258, Fig. 7.

4 2

An illustration of the IRR of the Hunt was published in: Kemp, Massing, Christie and Groen, 1991,

Fig. 13. 43

This architectural feature was not Brunelleschi's invention, but it is a feature of the churches he

designed. Battisti, 1981, p. 186. The rebuilding of San Lorenzo on the basis of Brunelleschi's designs was underway in 1431 and so it is possible that Uccello drew inspiration from the architect's designs at that time. 44

Only by studying the paint surface under a microscope would it be possible to distinguish in every

instance whether the incisions were made into the ground, an initial paint layer or a final paint layer. 4 5

Kemp, Massing, Christie and Groen, 1991, pp. 174-175.

4 6

Longhi, 1927, pp. 46-48 and Boskovits, 2003c, p. 240. For an overview of the work's attributions,

see the Catalogue. 4 7

4 8

Roy and Gordon, 2001, p. 9. Frinta, 1998, pp. 132-140. Hexa-prong punches were used in many Florentine workshops in the

fifteenth century. 4 9

For a macrophotograph showing the punchwork, see: Roccasecca, 1997, p. 47.

5 0

Max Doerncr (1969, p. 321) noted that the eighth century Lucca Manuscript

described the 'pictura

translucida' technique of applying resin and oil based colours over tin foil. Translucent green and red glazing over silver foil is present in the tiles in the three central panels in the upper tier of the Van Hycks' Ghent Altarpiecc completed in 1432 (Cathedral of Saint Bavo, Ghent, discussed in: Van Asperen de Boer, 1979, pp. 173-175). In Florentine painting of the early fifteenth century there are numerous variations of the technique, including painting in translucent and opaque paint over metal leaf and incising the leaf before and after painting. 51

Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002a, pp. 39-40.

5 2

For a discussion of this commission, see Chapter 4.

5 3

Gordon, 2003, p. 382.

54

Roy and Gordon, 2001, p. 10.

5 5

Roy and Gordon, 2001, p. 10.

5

"Albcrti,1972, pp. 92-93.

5 7

For a discussion of the history of the Lanckoronski Collection, including the London Saint

George,

see: Jerzy Miziolek, 1995, pp. 27-47. 5H

New

York Times, 1959, p. 10.

5 9

Brommelle, 1959, p. 87.

h 0

Floving, 1996a, p. 1: 'To me the small St George is either a cooked up fake or a picture that has been

repainted to such an extent that an attribution to the real Paolo Uccello is highly questionable.'

50


Hoving's views about the Saint George were expressed in more ambiguous terms in his book published in the same year (1996b, p. 330). 61

Davies, 1959, pp. 309-314.

62

Brommelle, 1959, pp. 87-90.

63

Dunkerton and Roy, 1998, pp. 26-30.

64

Gordon, 2003, pp. 378-382.

65

White, Pile and Kirby, 1998, p. 87.

66

Campani (1910, p. 204) claimed to have discovered a layer of whitewash and another whitish layer

below the paint layer of Uccello's Sacrifice and Drunkenness preparation would have made the use of a buon fresco medium of the paint layers was tempera. 57

D'Amico, 1981, pp. 58-59.

58

Bambach, 1999, pp. 198,218.

69

Frosinini, 2003, pp. 32-33.

70

Saalman, 1964, p. 560.

of Noah. He claimed that such a

technique impossible, concluding that the

3 Perspective: Florentine Conventions and Contexts

In 1889 the e m i n e n t Renaissance art historian represented

the

decisive

advance

of

Italian

Eugene Miintz s u g g e s t e d early

Renaissance

realism

that

Uccello

over

early

Netherlandish realism. This was due to the Italian artist's scientific a p p r o a c h to perspective rather than an empirical one, even if he took the approach to e x t r e m e s .

1

It has b e c o m e a

truism that early Netherlandish artists such as Jan van Eyck depicted s p a c e empirically, while their

Italian

contemporaries

such

as

Uccello

depicted

space

scientifically.

Even

if

Netherlandish artists before the late 1450s did not align t h e majority of t h e orthogonals of 2

their c o m p o s i t i o n s to a single point, they w e r e certainly able to create a sophisticated illusion of space. Indeed, it is difficult to think of a Florentine work of the early fifteenth century that can rival for c o m p l e x i t y of spatial conception Van E y c k ' s Giovanni

(?) Arnolfini

and his Wife

in the National Gallery, London, in which the layout of the rest of t h e r o o m beyond the picture plane can be reconstructed from the reflection in the mirror and the reflections of light on the objects depicted in the room as well as the s h a d o w s they cast. C o n v e r s e l y , the traditional belief in the scientific nature o f Florentine R e n a i s s a n c e painting is open to question. T o what extent is it scientific? T h e belief in the scientific n a t u r e of Florentine Renaissance perspective derives from the traditional understanding of h o w it developed there in the early 1400s, in the theories and practices of the architect-artists Brunelleschi and Alberti,

for

whom

a sophisticated

grasp

of

spatial

relationships

was

a

professional

requirement. H o w e v e r , the origins of Florentine single-point perspective are not as well documented as might be wished. M a n y accounts of the origins of p e r s p e c t i v e in fifteenth

c e n t u r y Florence have

focussed on the d e v e l o p m e n t of single-point perspective by B r u n e l l e s c h i , Masaccio and Alberti. From a technical point of view this a p p r o a c h is made p r o b l e m a t i c by the absence of 3

any surviving perspective depiction definitely by Brunelleschi. A l t h o u g h

fifteenth-century

accounts a c k n o w l e d g e that Brunelleschi made a fundamental contribution to t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of perspective, precisely what it was from a technical point of view c a n n o t b e clearly defined 4

in the absence of direct e v i d e n c e . Antonio M a n e t t i ' s account of B r u n e l l e s c h i ' s t w o legendary

52

PERSPECTIVE

panel paintings showing perspectival depictions of the Baptistery and the Piazza della Signoria are descriptive of the marvellously realistic effects h e achieved, rather than the method by which he achieved them. Manetti called Brunelleschi's approach t o perspective scientific because it involved a rule 'setting down properly and rationally the reductions and enlargements of near and distant objects in correct proportion to the distance in which they 5

are shown', but what that rule was Manetti did not s a y , and h o w m u c h faith can be put in this account by an apologist of Brunelleschi is open to q u e s t i o n . Masaccio's Trinity

(c. 1425-1427, Fig. 110) in Santa Maria Novella is the earliest

surviving painting in which the two key features of Florentine single-point perspective, converging orthogonals and proportionally diminishing transversal spatial v a l u e s , can be assumed, at least for t h e barrel vault if not for t h e entire c o m p o s i t i o n . It has been thought that Brunelleschi inspired

or designed the fictive architecture

in this work,

appearance of mathematical precision is part of its religious

meaning.

6

and

7

that the

However,

the

characterisation of a mural painting in terms of m a t h e m a t i c a l correctness is a matter of emphasis rather than exactness. There is probably n o R e n a i s s a n c e painting in which every line and shape conforms precisely to an overall p e r s p e c t i v e plan. In 1996 J.V. Field published a thorough review of Renaissance approaches t o p e r s p e c t i v e , including that of the concluding: 'Like other artists of t h e fifteenth

c e n t u r y , Masaccio and

Trinity,

Donatello were

interested in a form of truth that was essentially visual rather than mathematical, though mathematics might be used in attaining to it. T h a t a picture that is so impressively visually correct as the Trinity can turn out to be mathematically faulty is a warning against confusing artist with m a t h e m a t i c i a n . '

8

Further

confirmation

that

even t h e most

mathematically

proficient artists did not always aim for m a t h e m a t i c a l l y precise depictions of space in their paintings is provided by Piero della F r a n c e s c a ' s Virgin Federigo da Montefeltro

and Child

with Saints,

Angels

and

(Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan) in which the architectural space defies

9

precise reconstruction. Suffice to say that Brunelleschi, M a s a c c i o and Piero della Francesca were able to create the vivid impression of rationally depicted s p a c e s , even if it is known that the latter two sometimes used shorthand procedures to achieve these results. Alberti's treatise on painting De Pictura the vernacular as Delia Pittura constructing

perspective

written in Latin in 1435 (and translated into

in 1436) includes the w e l l - k n o w n description of a method for

providing

the

two

key

features

of

Florentine

Renaissance

perspective. The method exploits geometric relations rather than quantitative computation to depict a pavement of squares in perspective. Alberti f r a n k l y admitted at the outset of his text that: 'Mathematicians measure the shapes and forms of t h i n g s in the mind alone and divorced entirely from matter. W e , on the other h a n d , w h o w i s h to talk of things that are visible, will express ourselves in cruder t e r m s . '

10

Indeed, a m o d e r n m a t h e m a t i c a l analysis of Alberti's

PERSPECTIVE

53

perspective method has found it wanting, in t e r m s of determining the p r e c i s e relationship between horizontal, vertical and orthogonal p r o p o r t i o n s . " F u r t h e r m o r e , while single-point p e r s p e c t i v e created using the m e t h o d described by Alberti generates a consistent diminution of scale in forms as they recede into s p a c e in front of the viewer, this is at t h e expense of visual consistency a c r o s s the picture p l a n e . T h e further forms are laterally from the centre of this t y p e of perspective the greater their distortion. Piero della Francesca addressed the problem in t h e twelfth proposition of t h e s e c o n d book of De Prospectiva

Pingendi

distortion o c c u r r e d .

12

(On Perspective

for

Painting),

but could not a c c e p t that peripheral

Leonardo da Vinci, h o w e v e r , realised that it did and d e m o n s t r a t e d this

in Manuscript A of his Discorsi.

According t o t h e testimony of B e n v e n u t o Cellini concerning

a lost manuscript, L e o n a r d o developed a m e t h o d of depicting space in a curvilinear fashion, one that could h a v e eliminated lateral distortion b u t which would h a v e m a d e flat objects appear r o u n d .

13

T h a t uniform perspective is inherently incompatible w i t h a flat picture plane

becomes clear when it is considered that d i m i n u t i o n of forms in all directions precludes the depiction of parallel lines on the picture plane, even for a s h a p e with parallel sides, such as a square. In other w o r d s , the single-point perspective m e t h o d described by Alberti is neither an entirely m a t h e m a t i c a l l y precise method of depicting space in two d i m e n s i o n s n o r an entirely consistent approximation of it, but rather a s y s t e m for creating a d e g r e e of illusion of regularly constructed s p a c e , one that privileges t h e diminution of forms a w a y f r o m the picture plane. That this s y s t e m and others like it were widely a d o p t e d is u n d e n i a b l e . U c c e l l o , however, had already demonstrated a sophisticated grasp of p e r s p e c t i v e m o r e than a d e c a d e before Alberti wrote De Pictura, formulaic a p p r o a c h e s

as will b e discussed b e l o w , a n d w a s n o t o n e to repeat

in his art. For Uccello, the method described

by Alberti

was

a

convention that was not theoretically binding, it did not override other a i m s o f his art, such as formal, narrative and symbolic concerns. Much of the literature dealing with U c c e l l o ' s use of perspective h a s e x a m i n e d its formal qualities, through detailed studies of the linear constructions of his c o m p o s i t i o n s , or has examined its theoretical basis, through the c o m p a r i s o n of his w o r k s with written sources on p e r s p e c t i v e .

14

Parronchi surveyed the corpus of U c c e l l o ' s p a i n t i n g s , finding in them a

consistent refusal of the limits of Brunelleschian and Albertian single-point perspective. For Parronchi, evidence of this was found in U c c e l l o ' s diverse v a n i s h i n g points for separate parts 5

of his c o m p o s i t i o n s , such as the two vanishing points for the arks in the Flood}

Similarly,

Sindona e m p h a s i s e d t h e diversity, eccentricity and lack of formal unity in U c c e l l o ' s works as indications of his pluralistic philosophical a p p r o a c h to perspective. For S i n d o n a , Uccello had no single, ideal m e t h o d of perspective to b e attained, rather perspective w a s a means of

54

PERSPECTIVE

creating multiple and varied formal and symbolic relationships between subjects and objects within his pictures.

16

From the point of view of the Brunelleschi-Masaccio-Alberti genealogy of singlepoint perspective favoured by some art historians, Uccello represents, as it were, a n offshoot of the family descended from Ghiberti's branch of the family. Ghiberti's professional rivalry with Brunelleschi h a s coloured the accounts of his status a s o n e of the founders of Renaissance art, such that he is depicted as belonging to an opposing c a m p in his art as well as his professional politics. The problem with g e n e a l o g i e s is that a historical infelicity early in the lineage can render the lineage illegitimate. As far as the formal qualities of Ghiberti's perspective is concerned, a number of the architectural depictions in his Doors

of

Paradise

(Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, Florence, formerly San Giovanni, Florence) are constructed using the two principal features of Florentine perspective: converging orthogonals and proportionally diminishing transversal spatial v a l u e s . T h e fact that his figures are modelled using lyric, Gothic forms does not alter the single-point perspective orthodoxy underlying his compositional s c h e m e s , when he chose to use i t .

17

Uccello w a s certainly influenced by

Ghiberti's lyric figure style and may have learnt his perspective technique with Ghiberti also. This does not immediately put him at odds with the conventional usage, nor does it mean that Uccello did not contribute t o the development of the c o n v e n t i o n . Vasari leaves little room for doubt that U c c e l l o w a s a m o n g the leaders in the development of perspective in painting in Florence, in h i s description of a lost

Annunciation

by Uccello in Santa Maria Maggiore: 'the first that showed in a fine manner t o artists and with grace and proportion, [it] showed how to m a k e the lines escape (towards a vanishing point] and to show space on a plane, that is little a n d small, s o much s o that something that appears far seems l a r g e . '

18

It can easily be imagined that Uccello took great pains to make his

work impressive in the church where it would be seen regularly by members of his mother's extended family. T h e Annunciation

is known to h a v e been painted around 1423, before

Masaccio's Trinity and paintings in the Brancacci Chapel of Santa Maria del C a r m i n e , and it must have made an impression on Masaccio, as it did on Vasari, because Masaccio worked on the same c o m m i s s i o n . perspective in the Trinity

19

T h e widespread

belief

in

t h e mathematical

precision

of the

is testimony to the brilliant m a n n e r with which Masaccio composed

and painted it, with s y m m e t r y , pure geometric f o r m s , and strong definition of forms through contrasts of light and s h a d e . However, this e m p h a t i c sense of visual clarity and order represents a particular m o m e n t in the d e v e l o p m e n t of early Renaissance Florentine painting, and in many ways it is the exception rather than t h e rule. T o take its apparently rational depiction of space as an expression of the f u n d a m e n t a l character of Florentine Renaissance perspective would be to i g n o r e the specificity of its m e a n i n g s in its context and t h e plurality

PERSPECTIVE

55

of m e a n i n g s that perspective can partake of and generate in other w o r k s in other contexts. Perspective need not only be about creating the impression of a m a t h e m a t i c a l l y

correct

depiction of space. T h e diversity of U c c e l l o ' s subsequent uses of p e r s p e c t i v e , at times using single-point perspective in a m o r e or less c o n v e n t i o n a l m a n n e r , as in t h e architectural features of the Equestrian

Monument,

and at times departing from it, as in the Nativity

from the

Spedale di San M a r t i n o alia Scala, is s y m p t o m a t i c of the fluidity of his s t y l e a n d the subtlety of his approach t o his a r t .

20

A m e a s u r e of U c c e l l o ' s subtlety can be found (or looked for) in

the extent to which h e tailored his use of perspective to the intended c o n t e x t s of his works. To date, little attention has been given to this side of the equation, that is, the significance of the patrons' tastes, the functions of U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s in their original settings a n d t h e intellectual climates associated with these places.

The Battle P a i n t i n g s Belonging to the Bartolini F a m i l y

Uccello's representation of the detritus of war, the broken lances, shields a n d bodies on the ground of his Battle paintings now in the National Gallery, L o n d o n , t h e M u s 6 e d u Louvre in Paris and the Galleria degli Uffizi in Florence, invite explanation b e c a u s e of the curious way in which Uccello has arranged these haphazardly fallen objects for the m o s t part in a regular, perspectival grid (Figs 19-21). Even the grass and clover conspire to g r o w i n patches aligned with the perspectival grid. Had Uccello wanted to introduce a perspectival depiction of space into these c o m p o s i t i o n s in a realistic manner, he could simply h a v e s h o w n

the regular

diminution of the outlines of fields under cultivation, as he did in the Paris Saint

George.

what

might

Uccello's

intention

have

been

in creating

these

conspicuously

So

contrived

depictions of perspective? Fifteenth-century written sources on perspective d o not say m u c h a b o u t its potential for expressing s y m b o l i c meaning. T h e most detailed accounts from this period are didactic, such as A l b e r t i ' s and Filarete's instructions on perspectival m e t h o d s . S u c h technical texts can hardly account for the imagery of U c c e l l o ' s Battle

paintings. H o w e v e r , by e x a m i n i n g the

context of the earliest reference to the works, and contemporary e x a m p l e s of perspectival depictions in Florence, it is possible to link the Battle

paintings to a visual culture that

admired skill in artifice, not only of the dry, a c a d e m i c kind, but of wit and originality. In 2001 Francesco Caglioti published the earliest d o c u m e n t a r y reference to the works, which he found in the Bartolini-Salimbeni family's private a r c h i v e . A n d r e a Bartolini's zibaldone,

written between 1479 and 1493, refers to the Battle

paintings in the C a m e r a

Grande in his family's residence in Via Porta Rossa, a few blocks to t h e w e s t of the Piazza delta Signoria in t h e centre of Florence (Fig. 99). T h e building and its c o n t e n t s h a d belonged

56

PERSPECTIVE

t o his father, Lionardo Bartolini, w h o died in 1479. They w e r e displayed with another painting depicting caged lions, in a room furnished with various beds, chests, a large wooden bench decorated with a perspectival design, and large cupboards with scenes in perspective. Caglioti tentatively identified these scenes with the paintings in chiaroscuro b y Uccello that Vasari saw in the garden of the Bartolini p a l a z z o at Gualfonda (now Valfonda).

21

This

hypothesis has to recommend it the fact that Vasari described the paintings as belonging to the category of furniture painting.

22

In any case, m a n y of t h e objects in t h e r o o m included

some kind of perspectival representation. Although A n d r e a ' s zibaldone

does not prove that

the Battle paintings were commissioned for t h e C a m e r a Grande or, indeed, that they were commissioned by a m e m b e r of the Bartolini f a m i l y , it does show that they w e r e displayed early in their history in a domestic interior belonging to a man who had a taste for perspectival representations. Whether the prominence of perspective in the decorative scheme of the Bartolini Camera Grande was c o m m o n in Florentine domestic interiors is difficult to establish because of the scarcity of comparably detailed records for t h e contents of other houses. Furthermore, there are few instances in other paintings of such a contrived use of perspective as occurs in Uccello's Battle panels. O n e example is M a s o l i n o ' s Founding

of Santa

Maria

Maggiore

(Museo e Gallerie Nazionali di Capidimonte, Naples, Fig. 100), with its small

clouds

mysteriously aligned in diminishing perspective in the sky. T h e subject is the miraculous snowfall in Rome allowing the pope to trace the foundations of the church on the ground. Masolino's unnaturally arranged clouds emphasise t h e u n c a n n y nature of the events taking place beneath the i m a g e of Christ and the Virgin in the sky, where nature conspires with architecture to honour t h e Virgin with t h e founding of a church dedicated to her. A fifteenth-century interior decoration in which perspective is a prominent feature is found in the Sacrestia delle Messe in t h e D u o m o of Florence. Its brilliant intarsia work was begun in 1436, probably just a few years before the Battle

paintings, by two equipes:

Agnolo

di Lazzaro and company, including Scheggia; and A n t o n i o di Manetto and c o m p a n y (Figs 101-102).

23

The intarsia panels depict illusionistic still-lives with foreshortened, half-open

lattice shutters on cupboards containing multi-facetted candlesticks and b o o k s , chests of drawers, vases of flowers, garlands of fruit, and c h e r u b i m playfully climbing trellises and balancing vases on their heads. The representation of fictive drawers in a room with many real ones makes a typical trompe l'oeii visual pun. M a n y of the fictive objects a p p e a r to be casually arranged, creating opportunities for the artists to depict a variety of foreshortenings, such as the lattice shutters in various positions of o p e n n e s s , and d r a w e r s alternatively open and closed. The contrived casualness of the a r r a n g e m e n t of the objects depicted extends to the sculptures in the sacristy, providing t h e o p p o r t u n i t y for a m o r e explicit visual pun. The

PERSPECTIVE

57

cherubim with wicked grins on their faces sitting behind the taps of B u g g i a n o ' s marble handwashing basin are smiling because the position of the taps makes it s e e m as though they are passing water when t h e taps are running (Fig. 103). The m o s t o b v i o u s visual analogy

between the p e r s p e c t i v e in U c c e l l o ' s

Battle

paintings and the intarsia of the Sacrestia delle M e s s e is b e t w e e n t h e d e s i g n of U c c e l l o ' s mazzocchi

and the n u m e r o u s polyhedral objects in the intarsia, s u c h as the candlesticks,

chalice and books. In both t h e painted a n d carpentry depictions of objects, the dazzling quality of precision geometry is the only justification for t h e i n v e s t m e n t of such considerable effort in the e x e c u t i o n of these details. T h e optical effects of the intarsia rings designed by Scheggia on the s o u t h wall of the sacristy, in particular the wheels with d i a m o n d s that appear to spin, s h o w a d e l i g h t in sophisticated draftsmanship and craftsmanship. Evidence that fifteenth-century viewers appreciated t h e v i r t u o s o p e r s p e c t i v e skills of painting and intarsia in similar terms is provided by an a n o n y m o u s poet w h o described Piero de' M e d i c i ' s study in the Palazzo Medici on Via L a r g a in 1459, w h e r e he s a w :

an exit [door] done with such art that I take it for true relief - and it's flat intarsia Which gives into the triumphal and lovely study, that has such talent and order and measure that it represents angelic exultation, With complete art in inlays and painting, in perspective and carvings sublime, and in great mastery of architecture. There are great numbers of highly ornate books and vases of alabaster and chalcedony that are decorated with gold and silver. And all things there are beautiful and good, some by nature and others by human talent. made thus with whole perfection.

24

Relevant too is the p o e t ' s observation that the perfection of the interior resulted from the combination of nature and artifice, since the interplay between these p h e n o m e n a is what animates U c c e l l o ' s perspective in the Battle the Founding

of Santa

Maria

Maggiore,

paintings, M a s o l i n o ' s p e r s p e c t i v e in

and the perspective in the intarsia in the

Sacrestia delle Messe. If the depiction of the caged lions by an unidentified artist in the Bartolini C a m e r a Grande was a large-scale work like the Battle paintings, as s e e m s possible from the fact that it was considered worth recording by Andrea, it m a y a l s o be s u g g e s t i v e of a taste for ironic or

58

PERSPECTIVE

witty displays of pictorial illusionism. T h e potential in the depiction of lions for engendering fear increases with t h e skill of the artist. T h e c a g e m i g h t have served as an ironic reassurance to the viewer of their safety, an allusion to t h e artist's skill in imitating reality. In the 1550 edition of the Vite Vasari described works o n c a n v a s by Pesello in the Palazzo Medici, including one, 'of lions, looking out from a grate, that appear very l i f e l i k e ' .

25

In the 1568

edition Vasari also credited Uccello with canvases in t h e Palazzo Medici, perhaps the same ones, of, 'lions fighting among themselves, with m o v e m e n t s and ferocity s o terrible that they 26

appear alive.' Classical anecdotes concerning the skill o f artists i n counterfeiting nature, and the fear, or lack of it, that their works could c r e a t e w e r e k n o w n in Renaissance Florence. Ghiberti related in his / Commentarii

P l i n y ' s story o f the Greek painter Zeuxis w h o painted a

boy holding grapes. S e e i n g that birds came to p e c k the grapes, Zeuxis felt that t h e grapes were better painted than the boy, who, had he b e e n b e t t e r represented, would h a v e scared the birds away.

27

Even a patron with a taste for sober, classical architecture could c o m m i s s i o n more playful styles in painting. T h e Thebai'd and Stories

of Joseph

mural paintings in t h e altana

(covered terrace) of Giovanni Rucellai's p a l a z z o , n o t far from the Bartolini residence, have been attributed to Giovanni di Francesco and a r e d a t a b l e to t h e late 1450s (Fig. 1 0 4 ) .

28

They

are close enough to U c c e l l o ' s style to have o n c e b e e n attributed t o him and so they provide another, particularly pertinent, case of the p r o m i n e n t use of perspective in a large-scale 29

decoration for a domestic context. T h e context is a l s o pertinent because the paintings are in a building with an austere and regular facade d e s i g n e d for Rucellai by Alberti. Alberti also provided Rucellai with the sober, symmetrical and regular d e s i g n s for the facade of Santa Maria Novella and his t o m b in the church of San Pancrazio. T h e prominent and eccentric use of perspective in the mural paintings in this context architecture in the Stories

of Joseph

is significant. While the Active

reflects the m o n u m e n t a l i t y of the real

architecture

surrounding it, there are diverse vanishing points emphatically different from one scene to the next, and not symmetrical within each scene. T h e u s e of perspective is very similar in these respects to that in Uccello's Miracle of the Host in Urbino. The bold checkerboard patterns on the floors and the ceilings of Giovanni di F r a n c e s c o ' s fictive architecture represent a stylised use of perspective, giving it what in modern t e r m s c o u l d be described as a jazzy quality. Whether in the sober environment of a c h u r c h or t h e dignified palazzo of a patrician, perspective representations embellished architectural s p a c e s to inspire admiration of artists' skill not just through faithful imitations of reality o r a c a d e m i c displays of mathematical precision, but in witty plays on the distinction b e t w e e n the natural and artificial, and irreverent negations of convention. T h e contrived a r r a n g e m e n t of the broken lances and the turf in the Battle paintings can be understood as a playful a n d self-conscious subversion of the

PERSPECTIVE

59

illusionism achieved in Uccello's paintings. T h e y are a virtuoso display of linear perspective and a witty a c k n o w l e d g m e n t of the artifice of painting.

Nativity f r o m the Speclale di S a n M a r t i n o alia S c a l a

An example of a different approach to p e r s p e c t i v e by Uccello was o n c e found in the S p e d a l e di Santa Maria della Scala, subsequently n a m e d San Martino alia Scala, o n the street w h e r e Uccello lived: Via della Scala. T h e spedale

was founded in the early fourteenth century by a

local benefactor, Cione di Lapo Pollini, and took on the role of caring for children.

30

abandoned

Its administration was subsequently t a k e n over by the Silk G u i l d , w h i c h famously

built the Spedale degli Innocenti as an o r p h a n a g e in the first half of t h e fifteenth century. T h e smallish mural painting of the Nativity

(140 by 2 1 5 c m ) was previously in t h e arch a b o v e the

door leading from the cloister of the Spedale di San Martino alia Scala into t h e narthex of its chapel (Figs 105-108). It has been d e t a c h e d , and is n o w stored with its sinopia

in the reserve

collection of the Uffizi, d u e to its poor condition. While n o d o c u m e n t a r y evidence for the work's c o m m i s s i o n has been found, Bernacchioni has suggested that t h e c o m m i s s i o n might 1

be related to the presence of the Confraternity of the Archangel Raphael in t h e spedale? confraternity moved into the chapel and r o o m s in the spedale

The

between the present Via degli

Orti Oricellari and the courtyard by 1427, which they renovated at their o w n e x p e n s e . T h e confraternity

had prominent supporters, including

Pope Eugenius I V . H e approved

an

alternative name for it, the Confraternity of the Nativity of Our Lord, in recognition of the impressive nativity play it performed in 1430. He also issued bulls to o b t a i n a c c o m m o d a t i o n for the confraternity at the spedale,

not far from the entrance to his a p a r t m e n t at Santa Maria

Novella. The confraternity might well have k n o w n the paintings Uccello e x e c u t e d in 1437 for the Confraternity of the Purification at the Spedale di San Matteo, since that confraternity was a splinter group that had separated from t h e m in 1427. The groups m a i n t a i n e d good relations after the split, visiting each other every year on the feast days of their patron s a i n t s .

32

Thus,

Uccello was a local artist whose work the Confraternity of the Nativity w o u l d h a v e known. T h e sinopia

of Uccello's painting is probably unique in the history of Renaissance

mural painting in s h o w i n g only a grid in perspective, devoid of figures, buildings

or

landscape elements. It was probably drawn with the so-called ' d i s t a n c e p o i n t ' method, using the top corners of the grid as the distance points (Fig. 109). On the basis of the grid Uccello might have depicted a s c e n e in single-point perspective, with the major o r t h o g o n a l s leading to the centre of the top of the rectangle, or a s c e n e in two-point p e r s p e c t i v e , with the major orthogonals leading to the top c o r n e r s of the r e c t a n g l e , or both s i m u l t a n e o u s l y . Flowever, he chose n o n e of these o p t i o n s . Rather, Uccello depicted the front of the s h e l t e r for the ox and

60

PERSPECTIVE

the ass parallel to the picture plane, but diminishing in p e r s p e c t i v e to the right. A pavimento

is

visible in the landscape on the left, w h i c h , like the shelter, is parallel to the picture plane, but diminishes in a perspective to the left. T h e result is a very c u r i o u s depiction of space, which positions in the centre of the scene the kind of distorted f o r m s more often confined t o the lateral edges of a single-point perspective picture. T h e c o m p o s i t i o n is quite different in this respect from Uccello's design for the Nativity

w i n d o w in the D u o m o (Fig. 2 4 ) , with its m u c h

more conventional depiction of space, leading o n e t o suspect that Uccello had

specific

intentions in composing the-painting as he did. Parronchi interpreted the separate vanishing points i n the Nativity

as a critique o f the

Brunelleschian and Albertian conception of single-point p e r s p e c t i v e . H e related this approach specifically to Vitellione's observation in Book III of h i s Perspectiva

that an object is only

seen distinctly when it falls on the central axis between t h e v i e w e r ' s e y e s . interpretation of Uccello's imagery seems quite erudite f o r a spedale

33

If this theoretical

for abandoned children

housing a confraternity for children, it may be relevant that Brunelleschi had been o n e of the Operai of the Silk Guild that administered the spedale,

a l t h o u g h his duties related to the

construction of the Spedale degli Innocenti in the 1420s, b e f o r e U c c e l l o ' s work was p a i n t e d .

34

Even so, there seems to b e no definite imagery w i t h i n the composition, such as blurred images at the lateral edges, to support Parronchi's interpretation. Franco and Stefano Borsi interpreted the bi-focal perspective of the Nativity incarnation, divine and h u m a n .

as an allusion to the duality of Christ's

35

Alternatively, the divergence of the perspectival v i e w s towards the right and the left in Uccello's Nativity, with the view to the right d o m i n a t i n g , m a y have a moral and religious significance. The prominence of the sheep in the left f o r e g r o u n d , at the point where the t w o perspective views separate, recalls the passage in the Bible

in Matthew 25: 32-46 from

Christ's discourse on t h e Mount of Olives describing the allegorical separation of t h e sheep from the goats:

And before him shall be gathered all the nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd dividelh his sheep from the goats: And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: For I was an hungred, and yc gave me meat: 1 was thirsty and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in: Naked, and ye clothed me: I was sick, and ye visited me: 1 was in prison and ye came unto me.

PERSPECTIVE 61

Then shall the righteous answer him, saying Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee'l or thirsty, and gave thee drink? When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed theel Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee? And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me. Then shall he say unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous into life eternal.

36

Part of the s a m e text (the latter part of Matthew 2 5 : 34) p r o v i d e s the key inscription in the fourteenth-century

mural

painting Allegory

of

Mercy

in the Sala d e l l ' U d i e n z a of

the

Misericordia in the Piazza di San Giovanni in Florence, one of the m o s t i m p o r t a n t charitable institutions in Florence in the late Middle Ages and early R e n a i s s a n c e , which, like the Spedale di San M a r t i n o alia Scala, cared for foundlings, a m o n g its o t h e r charitable activities. The Allegory

of Mercy

has been described as the earliest instance of the representation of the

works of mercy in an Italian philanthropic institution, and as such the model for a n u m b e r of 1

mural painting cycles of similar subject matter in T u s c a n y , s o m e of them in spedali? iconography of the Nativity

If the

does relate to this text also it m a y be interpreted as an allusion to

the charitable work undertaken at the spedale,

especially for children. W h i l e the children

might be reassured that they will be cared for at the spedale

by the i m a g e of the Virgin

adoring the Christ Child, o r (metaphorically) by the image of the s h e p h e r d s watching over their flocks, the administrators of the spedale

w o u l d be assured that their charitable work

would not go unnoticed by Christ. The Nativity

also hints at the punishment Christ alluded to for those w h o did not act

mercifully. While the dominant view of the Christian story of the nativity leads to the vanishing point on the right, the subsidiary o n e leads to a tiny gallows in the distant landscape at the left (Fig. 111). T h a t the motif of the g a l l o w s might not j u s t be an

insignificant

landscape feature, but a s y m b o l , is suggested by the figure of Securitas in Lorenzetti's Effects

of Good and Bad Government

attribute is a hanged

man and gallows (Fig.

Ambrogio

in the Palazzo P u b b l i c o in Siena, w h o s e 112). T h e

iconography

of the

Nativity,

62

PERSPECTIVE

representing two paths, the Christian path leading to eternal life on the right and another leading to ignominy on the left, supports the idea that the composition contains a moral message on the rewards for good behaviour and the d a n g e r of straying from the Christian path. The idea of murals containing moral warnings of this kind is contained in Filarete's hypothetical project for painted figures of Truth a n d Falsehood, Justice and criminals, in his proposal for a hall o f civic justice, with, 'thieves, traitors a n d all the vices that merit death, together with their punishments and m a n n e r of death, which vary with the crimes committed. This [is done] to frighten anyone who enters, to g i v e a n e x a m p l e to those w h o wish to take i t . . T h e building was thus painted throughout with t h i n g s suited to it. Paolo Uccello and his companions painted [it]; h e is an outstanding master of p a i n t i n g .

38

The Flood

The compelling d r a m a of the Flood

(Fig. 113) is created through Uccello's

powerful

combination of perspective and narrative. Framed by t h e scene of the m a s s i v e ark in the floodwaters on the left and the scene of the ark c o m e t o rest on the right, t h e figures and landscape along the central axis are buffeted by the s t o r m . In the distance, haunting, cloaked figures lie paralysed o n the ground. A bolt from the sky blasts a tree, sending leaves flying in the gale rushing towards the viewer, along with rain d r o p s that splash and b o u n c e off the walls of the ark. Floating tables and barrels offer p r e c a r i o u s refuge to the victims of the flood, shown in varying states of desperation. T h e futility o f the fight for survival taking place at the left is shown by the bloated corpses lying on the g r o u n d at t h e right. The p r o m i n e n t use of perspective dramatises the whole composition by c r e a t i n g an impression of the enormity of the arks, and of the events unfolding around them. The complex and unusual imagery in the Stories

of Noah

suggest that it represents

more than an illustration of the events concerning the universal flood in Genesis Chapters 6 to 9. A widely accepted interpretation of the imagery is Eiko W a k a y a m a ' s proposal that it contains an allegory of the unification of the Latin and Greek churches at the Council of Florence. Pope Eugenius IV convened the Council in Florence in 1439, where he, Emperor John VIII Palaeologus, the Patriarch J o s e p h of C o n s t a n t i n o p l e and their entourages met at Santa Maria Novella. T h e decree unifying the Latin and Greek Churches was signed on 5 July. Wakayama described the success of the Council as the most important religious event for the Christian world in the first half of t h e fifteenth c e n t u r y , and so a commemoration of the event might well have been wished for in S a n t a M a r i a Novella. Uccello depicted t w o different arks in the composition, distinguished by t h e different positions of the nails and t h e proportions of other structural elements. Given t h a t Christian symbolism of the period

PERSPECTIVE

63

commonly identified the Church with an ark, W a k a y a m a proposed that t h e t w o different arks represent the Latin and Greek Churches. W a k a y a m a identified the figure of Noah e m e r g i n g from the ark on the right as a portrait of J o s e p h of Constantinople, t h e b l e s s i n g figure in the foreground as a portrait of Pope E u g e n i u s , and a number of the figures in t h e Sacrifice

of

Noah (Fig. 114) below were tentatively identified as other protagonists in t h e C o u n c i l .

39

Allegorical and m o r e explicit references to t h e C o u n c i l have been seen in a n u m b e r of artistic projects undertaken in Florence in the mid-fifteenth

century, i n c l u d i n g G o z z o l i ' s mural

paintings and L i p p i ' s altarpiece for the Palazzo M e d i c i C h a p e l .

40

If the literal and allegorical m e a n i n g s of the Stories of N o a h can b e interpreted satisfactorily, the formal qualities of the c o m p o s i t i o n remain s o m e w h a t m y s t e r i o u s . Unlike Masaccio's Trinity,

l i t e r a l l y , o n t h e other side of the wall of the c h u r c h , in which the

apparently rational perspective, s y m m e t r y and order serve to unify the c o m p o s i t i o n , to underline the m e s s a g e of the unity of the Trinity, and to clarify m a n ' s p o s i t i o n in the divine order, U c c e l l o ' s imagery is enigmatically inconsistent and disordered: the a r k s h a v e separate vanishing points; the ark o n the left stretches an i m m e a s u r a b l e distance to t h e vanishing point while only the short side of the ark on the right is s h o w n . T h e t e m p o r a l setting is as inconsistent as the spatial one. S o m e figures wear semi-classical robes a p p r o p r i a t e for Old Testament figures and others wear the m o s t fashionable m o d e r n h e a d w e a r . It is as though Uccello intended to m a k e a warning to his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s by s h o w i n g t h e m a m o n g the biblical figures, as potential victims of G o d ' s p u n i s h m e n t . T h e curious contrast of the infinitely large ark on the left and t h e smaller visible dimensions of the ark on the right and the p a r a d o x of the specificity of t h e biblical narrative and the universality

of its theological

meaning

may s e e m

enigmatically

inconsistent.

However, o n e does not need to look far for a written equivalent of U c c e l l o ' s themes of geometry, infinity and human uncertainty in the d i v i n e cosmos. It can be found in the writings of Nicholas of Cusa, called Cusanus, a h u m a n i s t ecclesiastic who assisted P o p e Eugenius in the negotiations for the unification of the Latin and Greek c h u r c h e s .

41

In 1437 he was o n e of

the papal delegates sent to Constantinople with an invitation to the leaders of the Greek Church to meet with the leaders of the Latin C h u r c h , and as a reward for his services he was made a cardinal in 1 4 4 8 .

42

According to W a k a y a m a , Uccello may have included a portrait of

Cusanus as the genuflecting figure at the far left of the Sacrifice famous work, De Docta postscript, he related

Ignorantia

(On Learned

how he experienced

Ignorance),

of Noah

scene.

43

His most

was written in 1440. In its

a kind of epiphany r e t u r n i n g by boat

from

Constantinople in 1437-1438. He realised h o w a person perceives their position to be the unmoving centre of the universe no matter w h e r e they might be, w h e t h e r on the earth, the moon, Mars or the sun. T h u s , the centre of the u n i v e r s e is perceived to be e v e r y w h e r e and yet

64

PERSPECTIVE

is nowhere, just as God is everywhere and nowhere. C u s a n u s ' metaphorical break with geocentrism was cited for centuries as a precedent for C o p e r n i c u s ' arguments that the earth turns around the sun. While hardly scientific, C u s a n u s '

arguments can b e considered

progressive in their abandonment of the Aristotelian view of m a n and earth being at the centre of the universe and their message that to approach an understanding of objective reality, one must take into account one's subjective point of v i e w , t h e principle of r e l a t i v i t y .

44

Of particular relevance to the interpretation of U c c e l l o ' s approach to perspective are Cusanus' geometric proofs of G o d ' s i n c o m m e n s u r a b i l i t y

with the knowable

universe.

Although Cusanus affirmed that God created the world using arithmetic, geometry, music and astronomy (the quadrivium Medieval university)

45

or four of t h e liberal arts comprising the basic courses of a

he used geometric proofs to d e m o n s t r a t e the incompatibility of

standard geometry and the concept of infinity, o r p u t another w a y , the incommensurability of rationality and the divine. In one such proof, he argued t h a t an infinitely large circle would be equivalent to an infinitely long straight line w h o s e circumference is e v e r y w h e r e and whose 46

centre is nowhere. If this sounds paradoxical, that was evidently C u s a n u s ' intention, to show that the logical tools available to the human m i n d are not sufficient to understand God's infinite reality. C u s a n u s ' demonstrations of the ambiguities of infinite geometry parallel to some extent Uccello's use of perspective, in as m u c h as both highlight the ambiguity of geometry, rather than its ability to represent a readily c o m p r e h e n s i b l e order. Curiously, Uccello depicted t h e mazzocchio

p r o m i n e n t l y facing the viewer in the

foreground of the Flood with two squares of the s a m e c o l o u r adjacent (Fig. 115). Since the depiction of the mazzocchio

seems to have been altered i n the course of its execution,

47

it is

not likely that this was a mistake, but rather a deliberate deviation from the usual alternating pattern. In itself this is typical of U c c e l l o ' s predilection for disrupting conventional visual patterns, but might it also have a symbolic m e a n i n g ? If o n e is allowed to speculate as to a possible meaning in light of the w o r k ' s iconography of t h e human experience of spatial and temporal disjuncture, one might note that circles are a c o m m o n symbol of eternity, while this circle has a beginning and an end. Perhaps Uccello is alluding to the question of how humans can understand history with a past, present and future, in relation to divinely infinite time. T h e flood represents not only the history of G o d ' s p u n i s h m e n t of early man, it is always pertinent to any person contemplating their relationship with Him. Despite G o d ' s covenant promising that there would never b e another universal retribution for human sin, it must have seemed that His punishment in t h e form of natural disasters w a s u n e n d i n g , particularly in the plagues that decimated the Florentine population t h r o u g h o u t the M i d d l e Ages and Renaissance and the floods that repeatedly inundated the city. Ironically, t h e work itself has been damaged b y floodwater, which destroyed the lower part of the p a i n t surface. T h e universal flood happened

PERSPECTIVE

65

once; the threat of divine punishment is always i m m i n e n t , on earth or at t h e Last Judgment. The association between the Flood and the Last J u d g m e n t is explicit in C h r i s t ' s discourse on the M o u n t of Olives (Matthew 2 4 : 37-42): ' B u t as the days of N o e w e r e , so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the clays that were before t h e flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in m a r r i a g e , until the day that N o e entered into the ark, And knew not until t h e flood c a m e , and t o o k t h e m all away; so shall also the c o m i n g of the Son of man b e | . . . ] W a t c h therefore: for ye k n o w not what h o u r y o u r L o r d d o t h c o m e . '

4 8

A s an important contributor to the C o u n c i l of Florence that r e a c h e d its triumphant resolution in Santa Maria Novella, C u s a n u s ' ideas can legitimately be c o n s i d e r e d part of the intellectual e n v i r o n m e n t in which U c c e l l o ' s Stories

of Noah w e r e created. C u s a n u s ' contacts

49

Since Rudolf W i t t k o w e r ' s 1949 study of

with Florentine h u m a n i s t s are well d o c u m e n t e d .

Alberti's design for the facade of Santa Maria N o v e l l a that was c o m p l e t e d in the d e c a d e s after U c c e l l o ' s Flood

was painted there, many authors have seen the i n f l u e n c e of C u s a n u s '

writings on A l b e r t i ' s theoretical and practical w o r k s .

5 0

C u s a n u s has b e e n credited with the

most thorough discussion of the philosophical and s y m b o l i c properties of g e o m e t r i c forms in the fifteenth century. Not only the views he e x p r e s s e d , but also the w a y h e expressed t h e m , make Cusanus a h u m a n i s t counterpart to U c c e l l o the painter. C u s a n u s ' e m p h a s i s on the importance of originality in creation is in s y m p a t h y with the novelty of U c c e l l o ' s imagery. Watts observed of C u s a n u s ' approach to writing that his:

...stress upon the active, creative nature of man causes Cusanus to resist systematic treatment of his subject. He does not employ any of the formal logical or rhetorical modes of reasoning or persuasion espoused by his contemporaries. He clearly finds it neither interesting nor fruitful to present his reader with foregone or facile conclusions, whether his own or others'. He chooses, instead, deliberately to confront his reader with all the awkwardness, ambiguity, and sudden pithy insight of his own thought processes.

51

66

PERSPECTIVE

N o t e s for Chapter 3

1

Miintz, 1889, pp. 328-346.

2

Maryan Ainsvvorth (1994, p. 43) described Petrus Christus' Virgin and Child Enthroned with Saints

Jerome

and Francis of 1457 (Stadelsches Kunstinstitut und Stadtische Galerie, Frankfurt a m Man) as

perhaps the first Netherlandish painting in single-point perspective. 3

The metal relief book cover Christ Healing the Man Possessed by a Demon (Musee du Louvre, Paris)

is sometimes attributed to Brunelleschi, for example, by Borsi and Borsi (1994, p. 145), but this view is not universally held. Ceriana (2005, p. 120) attributed it to an anonymous Florentine goldsmith probably following a design by Alberti. 4

Benigni, 1977, p. 97, citing A. Wesselofsky's appendix to his introduction to // Paradiso

Allberti

degli

by Giovanni da Prato (Bologna, 1867, part 2, pp. 330-337). Brunelleschi was referred to as a

perspectivist in a letter of 10 August 1413 from the poet Domenico da Prato to Alessandro di Michele l

di Ghino Rondinelli: prespettivo, virtudi e difama'.

ingegnoso uomo Filippo di ser Brunellescho,

ragguardevole

di

Averlino, 1965, vol. I, pp. 304-305. Filarete credited Brunelleschi with the invention

of the modern rules of perspective. 5

Manetti, 1970, pp. 42-47.

6

Cristiani Testi, 1985, p. 109. 'Masaccio understood the new and revolutionary ideology of visual

representation that Filippo initiated on the basis of the absolute and invariable rationality of reality' Cnuova e rivoluzionaria ideologia di visione-rappresentaz'wne, assoluta

e invariabile razionalista del reale').

che Filippo proponeva suite basi delta

Goffen, 1998a, p. 9: 'Filippo Brunelleschi...almost

certainly designed the architecture of Masaccio's Trinity'. 7

Goffen, 1998b, p. 53: 'it seems likely that Masaccio's architecture is intended as a mathematical

expression of God's perfection and harmony, worthy of the "real tabernacle" of the Lord'. 8

Field, 1997, p. 61. According to Field (1997, pp. 55-56) the abaci - the flat blocks surmounting the

capitals in the four corners of the vault - are not consistently measured, those at the front are too long to have been planned mathematically. 9

Daffra, 2005b, p. 268.

1(1

11

Alberti, 1972, pp. 36-37. For a critique of the mathematical precision of Italian Renaissance perspective methods, see: Tsjui,

1996, pp. 63-77. 12

Field, 1997, pp. 93-97.

13

White, 1987, pp. 207-215.

14

The bibliography on the subject of Renaissance perspective is enormous. Panofsky's seminal essay

on the development of Western perspective (1927), which mentioned Uccello only in passing (p. 66), set the template for the subsequent standard treatments of the topic. 15

16

17

Parronchi,, 1957a, pp. 3-32. Sindona, 1972, especially pp. 7-11, 17-18, 26-27. Bloom (1969, pp. 164-169) argued that Ghiberti sometimes used a traditional, modular form of

perspectival planning, based on a rule-of-thumb ratio for the heights of objects within compositions

PERSPECTIVE

67

according to their distance from the viewer, as well as the single-point perspective method, and that he adopted the latter, or not, depending on how suitable it was to the kind of composition he wished to create. IK

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, pp. 63-64, 1568 ed.:

una Nunziata in fresco, nella qualfece

un

casamento degno di consider-azione e cosa nuova e difficile in que' tempi, per essere stata la prima che si mostrasse con bella maniera agli artefici e con grazia e proporzione,

mostrando

il modo di fare

sfuggire le linee e fare che in un piano lo spazio, che e poco e piccolo, acquisti tanto che paia assai lontano e largo: e coloro che con giudizio sanno a questo con grazia aggiugnere luoghi e i lumi con colori, fanno senza dubbio che I'ocfcjhio

s'inganna,

Vombre a' suoi

chi pare che la pittura sia

viva e di rilievo. E nongli bastando questo, voile anco mostrare maggiore dijficulta in alcune che scdrtano per via di prospettiva, quattro Evangelisti:

le quali ripiegandosi

colonne

rompono il canto vivo della volta, dove sono i

la qual cosa fu tenuta bella e difficile; e invero Paulo in quella professione

fu

ingegnoso e valente.'' 19

For a discussion of the Carnesecchi Chapel commission, see Chapter 4. While Berti (1967, pp. 77-

78) acknowledged the primacy of Uccello's Annunciation

and its significance for Masaccio's Trinity,

he saw this relationship in adversarial terms, as representative of a fundamental opposition between Uccello as an upholder of Ghibertian and Medieval perspective and Masaccio as an upholder of Brunclleschian and, by implication, Renaissance perspective. 2 0

Paatz (1934, pp. 119-120) rejected the idea of dichotomy in Uccello's works between Gothic

figurative-irrationalism

1

Cfigurative-irrazionalista )

1

Ccostruttiva-razionalista ),

and

Renaissance

constructed-rationalism

emphasising instead the ultimate single root of these forms: Uccello's

desire to explore different means of expression in art. 2 1

Caglioti, 2001, pp. 49-50.

2 2

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 69: 1568 ed.

2 3

For the sacristy, see: Haines, 1983.

24

T h e translation is from: Hatfield, 1970, pp. 235-236.

2 5

2

Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 400.

" Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 65.

2 7

Ghiberti, 1998, pp. 69-70. Kemp (1997, p. 80) noted two things that Renaissance artists might have

realised from Pliny's stories of Classical art and artists: that major Classical artists were figures of some fame, and that virtuosic imitations of nature were considered a supreme achievement. 2

\Salvini, 1981, pp. 241-252.

2,;

(Jinori Lisci, 1985, vol. I, p. 217.

3(1

Paatz and Paatz, 1952-1955, vol. IV, pp. 133-134.

31


3 2

Hisenbichlcr, 1998, pp. 26, 30, 35-37.

3 3

Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 14-15.

34

SaaIman, 1993, pp. 38-39.

3 5

Borsi and Borsi, 1994, p. 313.

68

3 6

PERSPECTIVE

Bible, Authorised King James Version,

1998, Matthew, pp. 37-38. I am indebted to Astrid

Krautschneider for suggesting that this biblical passage might relate to the iconography of the Nativity, personal communication, 10 Jim. 2004. 3 7

Levin, 2004, pp. 41-50

3 8

The translation is by J.R. Spencer, in Averlino, 1965, vol. I, p. 130.

3 9

Wakayama, 1982, pp. 96-106. Previously, Ames-Lewis (1974, pp. 103-104) and Eisler (1974, pp.

529-530) had tentatively identified the standing figure as Leon Battista Alberti. Marino (1991, pp. 241, 243-244, 251-344) developed Wakayama's hypothesis, interpreting the Stories of Noah as a more complex allegory of the theological, political and historical context surrounding the Council. Marino interpreted the iconography to refer to such diverse events and people as the Council of Basel, the Council of Florence, Pope Eugenius IV, Anti-Pope Felice, and the threat of Turkish invaders. 4 0

Crum, 1996, pp. 403-417.

41

A number of authors have seen a relationship between Cusanus' writings and Uccello's approach to

perspective, but not in similar terms to those proposed here. Pudelko (1935b, p. 34) referred to Cusanus' Platonism as belonging to the same culture as Uccello's works, one that contemplates the universe through mathematics. Berti (1967, p. 11) saw in Cusanus' writings on the incommensurability of man's faculty for understanding and God's creation a warning against pride in human achievement in knowledge, of the kind that he thought Uccello was guilty of in his excessive use of perspective. Sindona (1972, pp. 17-18) saw the basis of Renaissance perspective in two phenomena: the freedom to focus on any point of view, analogous to Cusanus' conception of the universe as infinite with any place in it capable of being considered the centre; and the imposition of an artificial unity on the diversity and multiplicity of the world, analogous to Cusanus' theory that God is equivalent to the coincidence of opposites, interpreted by Sindona as the opposites of multiplicity and singularity. 42

Watts, 1982, pp. 1-6.

43

Wakayama, 1982, p. 105.

44

Harries, 2001, pp. 22-40; Watts, 1982, pp. 36-37.

45

Cusanus, 1981, p. 122; Hopkins (ed.) in Cusanus, 1981, p. 122 n. 143. The trivium, the other division

of the liberal arts, comprised logic, rhetoric and grammar. 46

Cusanus, 1981, pp. 63-66.

47

A number of curved incisions for the edges of the mazzocchio

visible on the surface of the painting

do not correspond to the final painted version, suggesting that Uccello altered its position. Campani (1910, p. 204) observed that the outlines of the figure wearing the mazzocchio times, as could be seen on the reverse of the paint layer when it was detached. 4S

Bible, Authorised King James Version, 1998, Matthew 24: 37-42, p. 36.

4y

Vasoli,2002,pp. 75-89.

30

Germ,2001,pp. 11-18.

51

Watts, 1982, p. 31.

had been altered three

Origins of a Career: From Castello to Venice

Studying the early careers of fifteenth-century Florentine artists can b e extremely difficult, even for the famous o n e s . M a s a c c i o ' s early career prior to his j o i n i n g t h e D o c t o r s ' and Specialists' Guild in 1422 is still obscure, even t h o u g h his entry w o u l d h a v e b e e n dependent on establishing a sound reputation.

1

In 2 0 0 2 it was proposed by one a u t h o r that M a s a c c i o

spent part of his early career with his brother Scheggia in Lorenzo di B i c c i ' s w o r k s h o p , based on

stylistic

relationships

between

their

works

and

documented,

although

indirect,

2

associations. In the s a m e year it was suggested by others that there was a possible early association with Fra A n g e l i c o , based on a technical similarity b e t w e e n their w o r k s ,

3

while

others emphasised the documentary links between Masaccio and t h e little k n o w n painter and miniaturist Niccold di Ser Lappo. As A n n a Bernacchioni noted, the d i v e r s e indications of Masaccio's formative influences are suggestive of the fluidity of y o u n g artists' professional associations during the early fifteenth c e n t u r y .

4

Even though more than four years of U c c e l l o ' s training in G h i b e r t i ' s w o r k s h o p arc documented, the identification

of his early works is even more o b s c u r e than it is for

Masaccio. T h e mystery has only deepened following recent studies s h o w i n g that two of his earliest paintings, s o m e t i m e s thought to predate his trip to V e n i c e in 1425 (the Stories

in Santa Maria Novella and the Del B e c c u t o Virgin

and

Child)

Creation

m o r e probably

postdate his return to Florence. A n n a Padoa R i z z o ' s research h a s , h o w e v e r , shed n e w light on 5

Uccello's early contact with networks of patronage through his family c o n n e c t i o n s . Each of these developments is advanced here. The Oxford Annunciation

has s o m e t i m e s been dated to

the 1420s. However, technical and stylistic evidence discussed in C h a p t e r s 2 and 5, suggest that is more likely to be from the early 1430s and so it is not discussed in relation t o Uccello's early career here. This chapter e x p a n d s on what is known of t h e c o n t e x t for U c c e l l o ' s early activity related to his extended family, and patronage received from their social

circle.

Nevertheless, there are only two small and very tentatively attributed panel paintings, part of a painted tabernacle and lost work from a d i s m e m b e r e d altarpiece to a c c o u n t for nearly ten years of U c c e l l o ' s activity, from around the time of his matriculation into t h e painter's guild

70

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

in 1415 until his departure for V e n i c e in 1425. Such limited evidence cannot p r o v i d e the basis f o r secure attributions and so no satisfying a c c o u n t of U c c e l l o ' s early w o r k is at present possible. Uccello's activity in Venice is not m u c h better d o c u m e n t e d , h o w e v e r , the stylistic a n d indirect documentary evidence for t h e attribution of certain mosaics and pavimenti

t o him

i s at least a little stronger.

I n the Tuscan Countryside: Uccello at Castello

I n Uccello's 1433 portata

he reported an o u t s t a n d i n g debt of 23 florins from more than

t w e n t y years before, owed to h i m by the Spedale di San A n t o n i o (Hospital of Saint Anthony) i n Castello. An arrangement had been reached for t h e d e b t t o be paid off in installments of 2 6

florins annually. In 1413 Uccello would have b e e n a b o u t sixteen years old. This clue to U c c e l l o ' s early activity has not previously been investigated successfully. Castello was then a rural settlement dominated by wealthy Florentine families, between four and five miles northwest of Florence on the old road to Prato (traditionally called the Strada Maestra di P r a t o , now called Via Reginaldo Giuliano). T h e n e i g h b o u r i n g villages were called Quarto and Q u i n t o , at the fourth and fifth R o m a n milestones from t h e centre of Florence, respectively, as their names indicate.

7

Castello is f a m o u s today for its R e n a i s s a n c e villas and gardens,

including Le Brache, La Petraia, La T o p a i a and II V i v a i o (Fig. 116). T h e terrain rises sharply on the north side of Via R e g i n a l d o Giuliano, t o t h e foothills of Mount Morello, offering a privileged view over t h e surrounding countryside. An unpublished

account

book

in

the

Archivio

di

Stato di

Firenze from

the

Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr, based in Santa M a r i a Novella in Florence, s h o w s that in July 1413 it reimbursed its provveditore

in part for the acquisition of the property with the

Spedale di San Giovanni Battista e di San A n t o n i o at Castello {'spedale sato antonio da chastello)

di sato giovanni

e di

o n the road to Prato (Fig. 117). T h e property with the spedale

was

8

called La Querciola. T h e provveditore of t h e spedale)

of the confraternity a n d its spedalingo

(administrator

was the painter M i c h e l e di Giovanni del T r i a , of w h o m very little is known, 9

except that he painted a crucifix and other minor w o r k s for t h e confraternity. Francesco and Niccolo di Simone Tornabuoni a r e mentioned in the d o c u m e n t , apparently as financiers for 10

the acquisition. The confraternity was established in F l o r e n c e in the mid-thirteenth century to rally orthodox lay Catholics in defence of t h e faith, a s part of the c h u r c h ' s widespread efforts to oppose heresy and sodomy. It first c a m e to p r o m i n e n c e in 1244-1245 at the time of Saint Peter Martyr's presence in the c i t y . " O n e of its m o s t notable activities was the hiring of professional singers to sing laude

at religious festivals a n d for t h e c o m m e m o r a t i o n of the

dead, but it is best k n o w n to art h i s t o r y as the p a t r o n of D u c c i o di B u o n i n s e g n a ' s imposing

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

Virgin and Child with Angels

painted in 1285 (formerly in Santa M a r i a N o v e l l a , now in the

Galleria degli Uffizi, Fig. 1 1 8 ) . The 1427 portata land

in

Castello

l

( lachonpagnia

12

of U c c e l l o ' s wealthy relative, Deo Beccuti, r e c o r d e d that he o w n e d

neighbouring

dllolalde

Giovanni del Tria ('Michele

the

di santa

'singing

maria

confraternity

novella')

of

Santa

Maria

Novella'

and that he h a d p r o v i d e d Michele di

di G" del tria spedalingho

danostro

l

the considerable s u m of 5 4 florins to fix it u p ( richop[r]ire his 1431 portata

71

spedale

e aconciare')

dachastello')

with

(Figs 1 1 9 - 1 2 0 ) .

D e o Beccuti specified that the debt originated m o r e than 2 0 years a g o ,

13

In

1 4

as

Uccello said of his debt in 1433. It can hardly be insignificant that Uccello and his relative were owed m o n e y by the same spedale

from around the same period, and neither was paid for

two decades. As it h a p p e n s , t h e Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr e x p e r i e n c e d financial difficulties in the early fifteenth century, leading to t h e intervention of the c o n v e n t in 1441 to secure its a s s e t s .

15

R e m n a n t s of the facade of the spedale

s u r v i v e on V i a R e g i n a l d o G i u l i a n o , n e a r the

corner of Via della Querciola. A stone d o o r w a y bears a carved cross and t w o inscriptions on the lintel: ' M D P M ' , as appears on the cover of o n e of the confraternity's a c c o u n t books from the fifteenth century, perhaps standing for ' M i s e r i c o r d i a di Pietro M a r t i r e ' .

16

A tabernacle on

the facade of the h o u s e on the corner of the streets, now three doors a w a y , formerly bore a representation of the Virgin (Figs 121-124). In 1906 Guido C a r o c c i , t h e a u t h o r of the wellknown guidebooks to Florence and its surrounding areas, saw the r e m a i n s of a painting in t h e tabernacle dating from the early fifteenth c e n t u r y . paintings except for s o m e stars under the a r c h .

18

fifteenth century in which o w n e r s h i p of the spedale

17

Sadly, nothing n o w survives of the

After a period in the s e c o n d half of the was transferred to S a n t a M a r i a Novella,

the confraternity regained possession, only to sell the property to the M e d i c i in 1 5 3 4 .

19

However, the buildings on the corner of the property, c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the current facade from the vestiges of the spedale

to the tabernacle, were s u b s e q u e n t l y acquired by the del

Beccuto family. They a d d e d their arms to the facade, which are still in situ over the d o o r of the spedale

and over the tabernacle (Figs 125-126). In 1574, Felice del B e c c u t o , possibly

Deo's great-grandson, sold the property to a Lucrezia R u c e l l a i .

20

T h e most telling circumstance of U c c e l l o ' s earliest k n o w n association outside of Ghiberti's w o r k s h o p is the appearance of his wealthy relative Deo Becculi as a n e i g h b o u r i n g landlord and supporter of the spedale

that owed Uccello m o n e y . A s A n n a P a d o a Rizzo has

shown, Deo appears repeatedly in the social context of U c c e l l o ' s early activities. Although the precise nature of U c c e l l o ' s relationship with the spedale

remains undefined, it is not far

fetched to imagine D e o ' s guiding hand behind U c c e l l o ' s receiving work there as a y o u t h , even if the nature of such work is a matter for speculation. S i n c e the spedale

was acquired by

72

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

the confraternity in 1413 or slightly before, U c c e l l o ' s e m p l o y e r might well have been the confraternity.

21

In light of the culture of reciprocal o b l i g a t i o n in fifteenth-century F l o r e n c e , of

which more will be said in the next chapter, a r e a s o n a b l e hypothesis might be that in return for Deo's support for the renovations to t h e spedale,

its spedalingo,

Giovanni del Tria, employed Deo's young relative on the p r o j e c t .

22

the painter M i c h e l e di

This may have been as an

assistant, although it need not be entirely excluded t h a t it was an independent

artistic

commission, since there are documented cases of artists i n Florence accepting c o m m i s s i o n s before becoming masters, sometimes while w o r k i n g in another master's s h o p .

23

Uccello

would presumably h a v e begun to a s s u m e increasing i n d e p e n d e n c e as an artist prior to matriculating into the Doctors' and Specialists' Guild i n 1 4 1 5 .

San Jacopo

Crucifixion

The earliest work yet attributed to Uccello is t h e Crucifixion

(Figs 127-128) published in

1998 by Parronchi, which he attempted to associate w i t h U c c e l l o ' s debt from the Spedale di San Antonio in Castello. Parronchi stated, incorrectly, t h a t the 'oratory' of San A n t o n i o belonged to the Order of the Knights of San Sepolcro ('Religioni Sepolcro')

dei Cavalieri

di

San

in the eighteenth century, of which the church o f San Jacopo in C a m p o Corbolini

in Florence was the principal seat, and noted, correctly, that Uccello rented premises in Campo Corbolini in 1433. Parronchi believed this i n d i c a t e d a long-standing between Uccello and the order. He attributed a Crucifixion

association

f r o m San J a c o p o to Uccello on the

basis of these supposed historical links, but also on stylistic evidence and the w o r k ' s date. O n the bottom of the Crucifixion

a damaged inscription t r a n s l a t e s as: '1413/ Ser B a r t o l . . . had this 24

crucifix m a d e . . . ' (Fig. 1 2 9 ) . The year 1413 corresponds approximately to the date Uccello indicated that the debt was incurred. The Crucifixion

could conceivably relate to the debt if its

ownership had been transferred from the S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o to the church of t h e S a n Jacopo. Parronchi believed the link between the S p e d a l e di San Antonio in Castello and S a n Jacopo in Campo Corbolini was demonstrated in the d o c u m e n t a t i o n of the 1763 pastoral tour of the Florentine patrician Pietro Guadagni, as t w o sites h e inventoried at this time (Fig. 23

nO). However, Parronchi confused the Oratorio di San A n t o n i o Abate in B a g n o l o , near Prato, which the church of San Jacopo did o w n , with t h e S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o in Castello, which it did not own, although it did own land nearby in 1 4 2 7 and in the eighteenth c e n t u r y . The Crucifixion

26

appears in a series of u n p u b l i s h e d i n v e n t o r i e s of San Jacopo. Between 1764

and 1766 it was listed in the sacristy: ' A crucifix painted o n wood in 1413 adapted into a l

tabernacle by Sig. C o m m e n d a t o r Galilei.' { Un crocifisso

dipinto

in legno fino

dal

1413

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

aclattato

in an tabernacolo

of t h e Crucifixion Baroque f r a m e .

fatto

in altr'uso

11

cial Sig. Commendator

Galilei.'')

73

A photograph

taken when it was still in t h e church s h o w s it s u r r o u n d e d b y an u n b e c o m i n g 28

T h e inventories of 1763, 1754 a n d 1722 provided similar d e s c r i p t i o n s .

29

H o w e v e r , the i n v e n t o r y of 1696 listed only: ' a crucifix a b o v e t h e sacristy bench painted o n w o o d '

l

( un

crocifisso

sopra

il banci

di sagrestia

0

dipinto

di legno')?

The

inventory did not provide any date, attribution o r any other information that m i g h t help to identify this as t h e work in question. H o w e v e r , its location in the sacristy m a k e s t h e identification plausible b e c a u s e the 1722 inventory n o l o n g e r listed a crucifix a b o v e t h e b e n c h . T h e only other cross listed in the sacristy was in a b o x , described as: ' a w o o d e n cross finished i n blue, a n d bordered i n gold with a Crucifixion painted in oil' ('una usata tocca d'azurro, not t h e Crucifixion down

e filettata

d'oro con Crocifisso

in q u e s t i o n .

and adapted to function

31

dipinto

a olio'),

P r e s u m a b l y , t h e Crucifixion as a t a b e r n a c l e b e t w e e n

Croce

di

legno

w h i c h s h o w s that it was

a b o v e the b e n c h was taken 1690 and

1722. T w o

earlier

i n v e n t o r i e s , o n e of 1657 and another t a k e n b e t w e e n 1651 a n d 1654, also listed a crucifix over t h e b e n c h in t h e s a c r i s t y .

32

T h e s e d o c u m e n t s suggest that t h e San J a c o p o Crucifixion

t h e c h u r c h by the m i d d l e of the seventeenth c e n t u r y .

was in

33

T h e clearest stylistic analogy between t h e Crucifixion

a n d U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s can b e

seen in t h e form of the d r a p e r y . In particular, an almost c o m p l e t e figure 8 s h a p e , disposed horizontally, in the Crucifixion Karlsruhe Adoration

also a p p e a r s in G a b r i e l ' s drapery in the Oxford

and, as alluded to by Parronchi, in t h e figure of Hope

Annunciation, in t h e A s s u n t a

C h a p e l , but there in a modified form (Figs 132-135). C h r i s t ' s m a s s i v e b o d y and small head are similar to the p r o p o r t i o n s Uccello gave A d a m in the lunette of the Creation

Stories

in the

C h i o s t r o V e r d e (Figs 136-137). At the age of around sixteen the characteristics of U c c e l l o ' s m a t u r e style m i g h t not have been fully formed. As Parronchi noted, t h e Crucifixion

is

indebted t o the style of Lorenzo M o n a c o , o n e of t h e l e a d i n g painters in F l o r e n c e at the time. Long before the Crucifixion earliest

surviving

works

came t o light, P u d e l k o observed a d e p e n d e n c e in on

t h e style

of

Lorenzo

Monaco.

3 4

Despite

the

s u r r o u n d i n g its patronage and early p r o v e n a n c e , the San J a c o p o Crucifixion

Uccello's uncertainty remains a

candidate for U c c e l l o ' s earliest surviving work.

Del L i p p i T a b e r n a c l e

T h e Villa di Macia on the c o r n e r of Via Fanfani and Via dei Perfetti R i c a s o l i , n o r t h w e s t of Florence, belonged to the Bartoli family until 1470, when it was acquired by t h e Lippi family. A t a b e r n a c l e on the site formerly bearing the mural p a i n t i n g Virgin and Child Father,

the Holy Spirit,

Angels

and Saints

with God

the

(Figs 138-142) has c o m e to be k n o w n as the Del

74

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

Lippi tabernacle. The paintings have been detached a n d a r e n o w housed in the nearby church of Santa Maria Mater Dei a Lippi. A label attached t o the tabernacle bears a Latin inscription indicating that, 'Paolo Uccello painted this tabernacle in t h e y e a r of Our Lord 1416 and Luca di Alberto di Lippo restored it on the 8th of October in the year of Our Lord 1 7 1 6 . '

35

The

paintings are in a conservative, late-Gothic style and if it w e r e not for the label it is unlikely that they would ever have been associated with U c c e l l o . S o w h a t faith can b e put in t h e label? Eighteenth-century attributions concerning fifteenth-century artists can b e unreliable, as in the case of a lost Virgin, Saint John the Evangelist,

Saint Jerome

and Mary Magdalene

painting

once on the wall behind the altar in the chapel of the Confraternity of Saint John the Baptist (known as the 'Scalzo') on the present day Via C a v o u r . Unpublished d o c u m e n t s show uncertainty about the authorship of the painting. In a d e s c r i p t i o n of the rooms of 1708 the work was attributed to a pupil of Uccello, while in an i n d e x to the confraternity's documents of 1745 the painting was referred to as by Uccello in o n e e n t r y and Salvadore di Giuliano in another.

36

However, Padoa Rizzo has noted that the Bartoli f a m i l y who owned t h e villa with the tabernacle until 1470 had dealings with U c c e l l o ' s r e l a t i v e D e o B e c c u t i .

37

Furthermore, the

location of the tabernacle a few streets south of t h e S p e d a l e di San Antonio, w h e r e Deo Beccuti owned land and where Uccello had s o m e i n v o l v e m e n t around 1413, but a number of kilometres outside of Florence, is probably significant (Fig.

143).

38

T h e coincidences of

Uccello's n a m e , the place, the time, and contact b e t w e e n t h e Bartoli and Deo Beccuti suggest that the tabernacle's label should not be entirely d i s r e g a r d e d . There has been n o consensus concerning the a u t h o r s h i p of the paintings o n t h e basis of their style. They were attributed by Boskovits in 1968 t o t h e Master of Santa V e r d i a n a ,

39

who has subsequently been identified with T o m m a s o del M a z z a . His career is now thought to have ended in the first years of the fifteenth century and t h e Del Lippi tabernacle paintings were not included in Deimling's entry for the artist in t h e Corpus

of Florentine

Painting™

In

1975 Boskovits re-attributed the work to Pietro Nelli, d a t i n g it to between 1395 and 1400, thereby excluding any contribution by Uccello.

41

P a r r o n c h i maintained that Uccello worked

on the tabernacle with the Master of Verdiana, attributing t o Uccello the sinopie,

the Angel at

the top right of the central scene and the figure of Saint J o s e p h ( a s he identified the saint), the two saints on the right side of the tabernacle, a n d Evangelists.

42

Padoa Rizzo described the sinopie 431

Creation Stories.

The sinopia

similar style to the sinopia

p o s s i b l y the vault with the four

as identical in style with those in Uccello's

for the central scene o f t h e tabernacle does indeed have a of the

Creation

Stories

with

emphatic, rough

outlines,

accompanied by webs of fine, more searching lines for c o n t o u r s of drapery (Figs 144-145). The sinopie for the saints on the sides of the tabernacle, h o w e v e r , seem m o r e economical and

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

controlled, n o t w i t h s t a n d i n g t h e pentimenti

75

in the positions of their h e a d s (Fig. 146). These

stylistic differences s u g g e s t they m a y b e by a different, m o r e e x p e r i e n c e d artist than those in the central scene. Uccello independent

probably

learnt mural

masters, s i n c e G h i b e r t i ' s

painting t e c h n i q u e

through

collaborations

with

w o r k s h o p did n o t u n d e r t a k e m a n y , if a n y , such

c o m m i s s i o n s during U c c e l l o ' s time there. In such collaborations U c c e l l o m i g h t h a v e a d o p t e d the style of those with w h o m h e worked. It is difficult to discern U c c e l l o ' s style in any part of the t a b e r n a c l e paintings o t h e r than t h e sinopia

of the central s c e n e , a n d it is p o s s i b l e that this

represents the extent of his involvement. H e may h a v e collaborated with a m o r e experienced artist w h o s e n a m e was forgotten in local sources, o v e r s h a d o w e d by U c c e l l o ' s

subsequent

f a m e , explaining why o n l y Uccello is m e n t i o n e d in the label. O n t h e basis of t h e available stylistic and historical e v i d e n c e Uccello's i n v o l v e m e n t in the c o m m i s s i o n for t h e tabernacle can b e described as a real possibility.

' M a r t e l l o ' Collection Virgin

and

Child

In 1992 Miklos B o s k o v i t s published the Virgin

and

Child

in the so-called

'Martello'

Collection (named after the building in Fiesole in w h i c h t h e collection is h o u s e d ) a s a work o f Uccello (Fig. 147). As with m a n y small R e n a i s s a n c e p a i n t i n g s , its original o w n e r is u n k n o w n and s o t h e attribution is based on stylistic evidence. T h e Virgin is s h o w n in a half-length format, wearing a dark m a n t l e with a d e e p - g r e e n lining, holding t h e Child in a dark pink cloth, against a gold g r o u n d with elaborate p u n c h w o r k . B o s k o v i t s argued that t h e work is probably Florentine and from

the first decades of the fifteenth

c e n t u r y , n o t i n g that the

V i r g i n ' s m a n t l e , lined with green, is similar in versions of the subject painted by Gentile d a Fabriano in Florence b e t w e e n 1420 and 1425. He also observed stylistic features related t o Donatello and M a s a c c i o , supporting the a r g u m e n t for a F l o r e n t i n e origin for the work. T h e lively, robust Child is c o m p a r a b l e with Uccello's Del B e c c u t o Virgin 4

Virgin and Child}

and Child and Dublin

and t h o u g h Boskovits did not m e n t i o n it, the motif of the C h i l d following

the flight of a tiny bird also occurs in the Prato Virgin Uccello by Berti in 1 9 6 1 ,

45

and Child

(Fig. 148), attributed to

but here attributed to an a n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of Uccello

(in Chapter 8). The d e c o r a t i v e details of the ' M a r t e l l o ' Collection Virgin

and Child, such as

t h e elaborate gold border of the mantle and the p u n c h w o r k around t h e e d g e of the panel are much

richer than in any o t h e r work attributed

to Uccello. T h e

c o m p a r i s o n with that in t h e halo of the San J a c o p o Crucifixion,

punchwork

does

bear

but given that w o r k ' s

uncertain claim to U c c e l l o ' s authorship, the c o r r e s p o n d e n c e does not greatly s u p p o r t the attribution of the Virgin and Child to him. N o t w i t h s t a n d i n g the l o o p i n g of the drapery of the

76

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

mantle under the Child, the drapery style is less geometric than in any other work attributed to Uccello. Thus, the attribution of the work to Uccello can o n l y b e described as tentative.

Uccello in Florence: The Carnesecchi Chapel

Indications of Uccello's rising fortunes in the early 1420s a r e provided by accounts of lost work from the church of Santa Maria Maggiore in F l o r e n c e . In 1510 Francesco Albertini, the author of a well-known guidebook to the m o n u m e n t s of Florence, attributed to Uccello the predella of an altarpiece in the church and t h e ' a r c h ' a b o v e it, while h e attributed the altarpiece to Masaccio. described an Annunciation

46

Vasari gave m o r e i n f o r m a t i o n in fresco and Four Evangelists

and different

He

in a vault above, which he g a v e to

Uccello, while the altarpiece and predella w e r e given to M a s a c c i o . Borghini thought the Annunciation

attributions.

47

In 1584 Raffaello

U c c e l l o ' s most c o m m e n d a b l e w o r k .

complete demolition of the chapel after 1653, a n Annunciation

48

Following the

by Uccello (the s a m e one?)

was recorded in guidebooks as fixed to a c o l u m n in t h e church until the early nineteenth century, after which there are no further notices of i t .

49

O f the three scenes in the altarpiece

described by Vasari, the panel depicting Saint C a t h e r i n e h a s been lost, the central panel showing the Virgin and Child has not been seen since it w a s stolen in the 1920s, a l t h o u g h its appearance is known from photographs, and the Saint

Julian

is now housed in the M u s e o

d ' A r t e Sacra in Florence. The two panels k n o w n to m o d e r n art historians are n o w attributed t o Masolino on stylistic grounds. Vasari also described t h r e e predella panels: a Scene from Life of Saint Catherine

and a Nativity,

which are lost, a n d a Scene from

the Life of

the Saint

Julian, which has been identified with the predella panel in t h e Museo H o m e , Florence, on the basis of scientific analysis of its support. It is attributed to Masaccio on stylistic g r o u n d s , despite its extremely damaged condition (Fig. 1 4 9 ) .

50

The decoration of the chapel, dedicated to S a i n t Catherine of Alexandria,

was

provided for in the will of Paolo di Berto di G r a z i n o d e ' C a r n e s e c c h i , who died on 4 February 1428.

51

He was a prominent citizen, holding

office

numerous

Gonfaloniere di Compagnia, Priore and Gonfaloniere di G i u s t i z i a .

52

times

as

Buonuomo,

Joannides argued that a

notice of the chapel by Paolo di Berto in J a n u a r y 1427 d e s c r i b i n g it as furnished

Cfornita')

meant that the decoration had been completed by that t i m e . T h e commission must have been completed before the end of 1425, by which time M a s o l i n o was in Hungary and Uccello w a s in

Venice. Joannides

dated

Masolino's

contribution,

and

so

presumably

the

whole

commission, to around 1423 on stylistic e v i d e n c e a n d t h e large workload M a s o l i n o h a d around 1424 and 1425.

53

ORIGINS O F A CAREER

77

Vasari m a d e r e m a r k a b l e c l a i m s for U c c e l l o ' s contribution to the project, quoted in part in t h e p r e v i o u s chapter, but here quoted in full. H e described:

...an Annunciation in fresco, in which he made a building worthy of consideration, a new and difficult thing for those times, being the first that showed in a fine manner to artists and with grace and proportion, lit] showed how to make the lines escape [towards a vanishing point] and to show space on a plane, that is little and small, so much so that something that appears far seems large: and they who colour with good judgment of this, with grace adding the shadows in their place and the highlights, with colours, deceive the eye, such that the picture appears real and in relief. And not satisfied with doing this, he wanted also to show the great difficulty of some columns foreshortened by means of perspective, which bend round and break the corner of the vault, where there are the four Evangelists: a thing considered fine and difficult; and truly Paolo was ingenious and skillful in his profession.

54

H o w Uccello b e c a m e involved in this c o m m i s s i o n is u n k n o w n . P a d o a R i z z o noted that U c c e l l o ' s i n v o l v e m e n t m a y have been facilitated through his m o t h e r ' s family. T h e del B e c c u t o a n d the C a r n e s e c c h i families e a c h o w n e d large properties adjacent to Piazza di Santa M a r i a M a g g i o r e , indicating that they w e r e a m o n g t h e l e a d i n g citizens of the parish (Fig. 55

1 5 0 ) . T h e church would h a v e been a focus for their religious a n d social a c t i v i t i e s .

56

Like t h e

C a r n e s e c c h i , the del B e c c u t o had p a t r o n a g e rights w i t h i n the church, i n c l u d i n g the chapel dedicated to Saint Biagio. T h e unpublished eighteenth-century g e n e a l o g y of the del B e c c u t o family discussed in Chapter 1 shows that D e o Beccuti was in fact married to o n e A n d r e o l a di Zanobi Carnesecchi. connection

between

57

T h i s adds s o m e d o c u m e n t a r y s u p p o r t t o the h y p o t h e s i s of a social Uccello

and

his

patron.

The

marriage

appears

to

have

characteristic matrimonial alliance b e t w e e n m e m b e r s of w e a l t h y and p r o m i n e n t

been

a

Florentine

patrician families. T h e evidence for U c c e l l o ' s Annunciation

in the Carnesecchi

Chapel s h o w s that

around 1423 h e was w o r k i n g with M a s o l i n o and M a s a c c i o , t w o of the leading painters o f the time. T h e c o m m i s s i o n

Florentine

is of great art historical interest as t h e possible

beginning of M a s o l i n o ' s and M a s a c c i o ' s collaboration, leading t o their w o r k in the Brancacci 8

C h a p e l / J u d g i n g from V a s a r i ' s c o m m e n t s , Uccello was at the l e a d i n g e d g e of d e v e l o p m e n t s in painting in Florence prior to his trip to Venice. C o n t r a r y to s o m e s u g g e s t i o n s , the letter written by the Operai of the D u o m o in 1432 s e e k i n g information on U c c e l l o ' s w o r k in V e n i c e does not i m p l y that there w a s n o evidence in F l o r e n c e of U c c e l l o ' s skill as an i n d e p e n d e n t artist.

59

U c c e l l o ' s Annunciation

in Santa M a r i a M a g g i o r e w a s only a five-minute walk from

78

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

t h e D u o m o . It is more likely that the Operai wanted a s s u r a n c e that Uccello was c a p a b l e of fulfilling work on an important public commission o n a g r a n d scale.

U c c e l l o and the Landed Patrician Families of C a s t e l l o and the Santa M a r i a Novella Quarter

E v e n if specific information is scarce, a partial picture c a n b e discerned from t h e documents a n d surviving works of the social circumstances

within

which Uccello's early

career

d e v e l o p e d . As a youth emerging from Ghiberti's w o r k s h o p , seeking to establish himself as an i n d e p e n d e n t artist, Uccello would have been alert to t h e possibilities for patronage in his local e n v i r o n m e n t from wealthy families a n d the institutions t h e y supported, such as spedali

and

c h u r c h e s . By 1425 Uccello was living in the Santa M a r i a Novella quarter of Florence a n d a f e w years after his return to Florence from V e n i c e , he s e t t l e d there permanently. It is not surprising that an early association w o u l d be with t h e Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr, s i n c e it was based in Santa Maria Novella, the m o s t i m p o r t a n t centre for artistic p a t r o n a g e in its quarter. Its members included a high proportion of artists, probably attracted by the possibility of winning commissions at the church and c o n v e n t .

60

That the actual site of

U c c e l l o ' s earliest known association outside of G h i b e r t i ' s w o r k s h o p was in Castello is also n o t difficult to explain, since, as will be s h o w n , a n u m b e r of the leading families in the q u a r t e r had associations with that area too. Although C a s t e l l o has been all but o v e r l o o k e d in t h e literature on Uccello, it is rich in associations with h i m during the early part of his career.

61

Uccello's wealthy relative D e o Beccuti o w n e d properties in Castello and properties

in t h e Santa Maria Novella quarter in Florence. It was p r o b a b l y through Deo Beccuti that U c c e l l o made a number of his early contacts with F l o r e n t i n e patrons, s o m e of w h o m were i m m e d i a t e or near neighbours of Beccuti's in Castello as w e l l as in Florence. It may simply have been because Deo Beccuti w a s a prominent neighbour of the S p e d a l e di San Antonio that the Confraternity of Saint P e t e r Martyr gained financial support f r o m him to renovate its buildings. Perhaps not s u r p r i s i n g l y , t h e geography of land ownership - w h o owned what property and where - was a factor i n d e t e r m i n i n g the patterns of patronage and

charity in fifteenth-century

Florence and

the s u r r o u n d i n g countryside. Rural

land

o w n e r s h i p was not the most profitable use of capital. A c c o r d i n g to Vasari, Ghiberti bought t h e Villa Lepriano at Mount Morello, north of Castello. A f t e r spending on it twice as m u c h as h e d e r i v e d from it, he sold it in disgust.

62

However, profit w a s not the only consideration for

the wealthy. Land ownership was a way to maintain a d i v e r s e portfolio of investments and it conferred less tangible benefits, such as social p r e s t i g e a n d t h e pleasures of life in county villas for which Tuscany is renowned.

63

In some w a y s C a s t e l l o has represented this ideal over

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

79

the centuries. T h e Medici Villa II V i v a i o (now also called the Villa di C a s t e l l o ) , j u s t a little further uphill from the S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o (Fig. 116), housed B o t t i c e l l i ' s Primavera Birth of Venus in the sixteenth century, while L e o n a r d o ' s Adoration

of the Magi

and

was housed

there in t h e eighteenth century (all three are now in the Galleria degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e ) . While these w o r l d - f a m o u s m a s t e r p i e c e s w e r e not c o m m i s s i o n e d for II V i v a i o , the Medici decision to m o v e to Castello in 1477 and t h e s u b s e q u e n t decisions to relocate t h e s e treasures there probably reflect an a p p r e c i a t i o n of Castello's physical c h a r m s , d i s t i n g u i s h e d social history and its tradition of architectural and artistic p a t r o n a g e .

64

C a s t e l l o ' s l a n d e d families that did

c o m m i s s i o n artworks t h e r e m a y have d o n e s o partly for similar r e a s o n s that t h e y b o u g h t land there: for social prestige a n d a refined lifestyle, as well as for r e a s o n s of piety a n d personal and f a m i l y c o m m e m o r a t i o n . Apart from the lost painting of t h e V i r g i n in t h e t a b e r n a c l e o n the c o r n e r of Via della Querciola, o n e of the most p r o m i n e n t a r t w o r k s in t h e a r e a was t h e Annunciation

with Saints

Julian,

Egidio,

Michael

and Anthony

Abbot

m u r a l p a i n t i n g dated

1437 (now detached and in the r e s e r v e collection of the Uffizi). A villa built by t h e Carnesecchi family at l ' O I m o a Castello in the fourteenth c e n t u r y was a c q u i r e d by t h e Guidacci family by the early fifteenth century, w h o c o m m i s s i o n e d P a o l o S c h i a v o to paint t h e street tabernacle which survives on Via R e g i n a l d o G i u l i a n o , w i t h i n sight of the Spedale di San A n t o n i o .

6 5

In the fifteenth century the social and business a s s o c i a t i o n s f o u n d in F l o r e n c e were often paralleled in the nearby c o u n t r y s i d e .

66

Castello is n o r t h w e s t of F l o r e n c e and s o is closest

to t h e Santa Maria N o v e l l a quarter of the city. P r o m i n e n t f a m i l i e s in C a s t e l l o w e r e also p r o m i n e n t in the Santa Maria Novella quarter, p r e d o m i n a n t l y in the part closest t o the centre of F l o r e n c e .

67

T h e s e families included t h e del B e c c u t o , the C a r n e s e c c h i , the T o m a b u o n i and

the S t r o z z i , all powerful and wealthy families, and i m p o r t a n t p a t r o n s .

68

U c c e l l o had reasons to

be familiar with all of t h e s e families, although the modest price of his h o u s e and its location further from the centre of Florence suggest that he could not afford to live a m o n g t h e m . Deo Beccuti married a w o m a n of t h e Carnesecchi family, w h o w e r e important patrons in the fifteenth century. Like Deo, branches of the Carnesecchi family o w n e d properties in Castello as well as the area around Santa Maria M a g g i o r e in F l o r e n c e . In C a s t e l l o they o w n e d the Casa Ridolfi (formerly ' F o s s i ' ) at l ' O I m o a C a s t e l l o , near t h e S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o .

69

T h e Villas II Pozzino and C o r s i , in and near Castello respectively, w e r e also o w n e d by the C a r n e s e c c h i in the early fifteenth c e n t u r y .

70

U c c e l l o w o r k e d with M a s a c c i o and M a s o l i n o o n

Paolo di Berto C a r n e s e c c h i ' s altarpiece in Santa Maria M a g g i o r e . T h e p a t r o n ' s heirs a l s o paid for services to be held at Santa Maria Novella following his d e a t h .

71

Berto's

commissioned

nephew,

Bernardo

V e n e z i a n o ' s Virgin and Child

di

Cristofano

Carnesecchi

with God the Father,

who

the Holy Spirit

It was p r o b a b l y Paolo di

and Saints

Domenico for a street

80

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

tabernacle in front of one of his houses on the Canto d e ' Carnesecchi. T h e t a b e r n a c l e was located at the point where the present day Via d e ' B a n c h i and Via de' Panzani m e e t , between Santa Maria Novella and Santa Maria Maggiore. T h e central scene and two fragments of saints' heads are all that survive of Veneziano's p a i n t i n g s , now housed in the National Gallery, London.

72

Dillian Gordon observed t h e c o m p o s i t i o n a l similarities between the Del

Lippi tabernacle paintings and those in Domenico V e n e z i a n o ' s t a b e r n a c l e .

73

In each, the

Virgin is seated holding the Child between Saints, w i t h G o d the Father sending the Holy Spirit from above. The Carnesecchi family also o w n e d p r o p e r t y adjacent to the street with the tabernacle in Castello. Is t h e similarity between the t w o street tabernacles an accident, o r did the Carnesecchi ask Veneziano to model his composition on the o n e in Castello? That t h e del Lippi tabernacle b e c a m e well known is s h o w n by t h e fact that the local parish c a m e t o be called 'Santa Stefano dalla Vergine del M a z z a ' , after t h e local church, Santa Stefano, the Virgin in the tabernacle, and Via del Mazza, c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the present-day Via Perfetti Ricasoli.

74

Francesco and Niccold di Simoni T o r n a b u o n i w e r e a m o n g the wealthiest citizens of Florence at the beginning of the fifteenth c e n t u r y .

75

In 1413 they apparently financed the

acquisition of the Spedale di San A n t o n i o for the Confraternity of Saint Peter M a r t y r , of which their brother Filippo was a m e m b e r .

76

In 1422 F r a n c e s c o was one of t h e Operai of

Santa Maria Novella, and so might well have b e e n i n v o l v e d in the first stages of the commission for the mural painting cycle in the C h i o s t r o Verde on which Uccello later worked,

77

and in 1427 his brother Niccolo was an i m m e d i a t e neighbour of Deo Beccuti at

78

Castello. Francesco purchased the Villa Le Brache a n d adjacent land on the same road as the spedale around 1427, only t o sell the villa in July 1432 to the Uffiziali della diminuizione del Monte del Comune. T h e C o m m u n e acquired it for t h e condottiere Cotignola, the principal subject of U c c e l l o ' s Battle

Micheletto A t t e n d o l o da

p a i n t i n g in Paris, the month after he

contributed to the Florentine victory at the battle of San R o m a n o .

7 9

Francesco continued to

own land around the villa, which passed to his son N i c c o l o , whose brother, Giovanni di Francesco, re-acquired the villa for the family in 1 4 8 8 .

80

The Tornaquinci family, of which the T o r n a b u o n i family was a branch, had long owned land in the Santa Maria Novella quarter and was a m o n g the founding donors of the church. They maintained a leading role as patron of t h e church throughout the fifteenth century. Since the fourteenth century m e m b e r s of the T o r n a q u i n c i and Tornabuoni families had made bequests to the Confraternity

of Saint Peter Martyr. Giovanni di

Francesco

Tornabuoni built the Palazzo Tornabuoni in t h e p r e c i n c t inhabited by the T o r n a q u i n c i , between, and a little south of, Santa Maria N o v e l l a a n d S a n t a Maria Maggiore, o n the street that now bears his family's name (Via dei T o r n a b u o n i ) . In 1 4 8 6 he was elected a C a p i t a n o of

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

81

the confraternity, and in t h e s a m e year h e b e c a m e its Provost. O n t h i s o c c a s i o n t h e friars gave him patronage rights o v e r t h e major chapel i n the church. He f a m o u s l y Ghirlandaio to paint t h e chapel with the Scenes from 1

the Baptist?

the Lives of the Virgin

commissioned and Saint

John

T o obtain patronage rights at Santa M a r i a N o v e l l a it e v i d e n t l y h e l p e d to have a

good relationship with the confraternity.

82

T h e Strozzi family had s o m e thirty-six h o u s e h o l d s in the S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a quarter in t h e last quarter of the fourteenth century and a chapel in S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a . I n 1 4 2 7 Palla di Nofri degli Strozzi declared his o w n e r s h i p of m o r e than thirty h o u s e s and s h o p s , m o s t near his o w n palazzo adjacent to t h e P a l a z z o T o r n a b u o n i . In 1 4 2 2 h e p u r c h a s e d t h e Villa Petraia at Castello from t h e Brunelleschi family, part of a series of l a n d p u r c h a s e s m a d e in t h e area to t h e west of F l o r e n c e , in a roughly triangular area b e t w e e n C a s t e l l o , P r a t o a n d E m p o l i . In t h e early fifteenth c e n t u r y t h e Strozzi also o w n e d the Villa I R i n i e r i , d o w n the hill from L a Petraia.

83

William Kent has analysed the complex land d e a l s in w h i c h Strozzi a b s o l v e d his tax

debts to t h e local gonfalone

by ceding to B e n e d e t t o T o s c h i , the a d m i n i s t r a t o r of Lion R o s s o ' s

affairs, ' c e r t a i n rights over part of his estate and i n c o m e , t h e r e b y in fact p r e s e r v i n g control of his town h o u s e and certain estates and acquiring a v i g o r o u s e s t a t e a d m i n i s t r a t o r a n d d e b t collector into the b a r g a i n . '

84

In this way Toschi took c o n t r o l of P e t r a i a and p r o c e e d s from this

deal w e n t towards the construction of the cloister of S a n t a Trinita. S i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y s o u r c e s also indicate that Uccello painted stories of Saint Francis in the church of S a n t a Trinita, of which only a fragment survives and the patron is u n k n o w n .

85

H o w e v e r , U c c e l l o had good

reason to be familiar with the commission for t h e Strozzi Chapel in t h e c h u r c h , since h i s master Ghiberti w a s involved in the project.

86

F u r t h e r m o r e , Palla Strozzi w a s o n e of three

executive c o m m i t t e e m e m b e r s elected by the M e r c h a n t s ' Guild to o v e r s e e t h e p r o d u c t i o n of G h i b e r t i ' s first set of b r o n z e doors for the Baptistery, o n w h i c h c o m m i s s i o n U c c e l l o p r o b a b l y also w o r k e d while he w a s in Ghiberti's s h o p .

87

Palla S t r o z z i ' s son-in-law was Giovanni Rucellai, the proud o w n e r of w o r k b y Uccello, as discussed in Chapter 1. He built his palazzo on the c o r n e r of V i a della V i g n a N u o v a and Via dei Palchetti in the Santa Maria Novella quarter, j u s t west of S t r o z z i ' s p a l a z z o . In 1427 most of t h e t w e n t y - t h r e e Rucellai households in Florence w e r e t o be found in the Lion R o s s o district of the Santa M a r i a Novella quarter and the family had a chapel on the right of the transept of the church. Rucellai were patrons of the church and a l s o m e m b e r s of its order. Fra A n d r e a Rucellai, a distant relative of G i o v a n n i , was at one t i m e the gubernator

of the

Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr and other m e m b e r s of the f a m i l y had d e a l i n g s with the confraternity, for e x a m p l e , in paying for masses for the d e a d .

88

G i o v a n n i Rucellai o w n e d the

Villa Q u a r a c c h i (or Villa Rucellai) near the road t o P i s t o i a , to the west of C a s t e l l o , a n d his family collectively o w n e d the spedale

in the c o u n t r y s i d e at O s m a n n o r o , d e d i c a t e d to Saint

82

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

Bernard.

89

Giovanni Ruceilai initially planned to build his t o m b in Santa Maria Novella, but

eventually decided in favour of the local church of San P a n c r a z i o .

90

Kent has also analysed

the complex land ownership arrangement between Ruceilai and Strozzi, which

allowed

Ruceilai to pay for the facade of Santa M a r i a Novella u s i n g the income from properties formerly owned by Strozzi. Ruceilai had t o w i n the p a t r o n a g e rights to t h e f a c a d e of the church from Turino di Baldese's heirs, since Turino had left a n e n d o w m e n t for the principal door in the facade in a codicil to his will in the fourteenth century. Ruceilai gave the Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr the rights to use the Strozzi-Rucellai land to this e n d .

91

In

such complex and potentially divisive arrangements the confraternity m a y h a v e served to keep the negotiation of patronage at arms-length from the c o n v e n t of Santa Maria Novella. As Wilson has observed, the confraternity w a s , perhaps a l s o 'helping t h e friars sidestep the delicate issue of material ownership by a mendicant o r d e r . '

92

Another chapel in Santa Trinita belonged to the Bartolini family, w h o o w n e d U c c e l l o ' s Battle paintings in the fifteenth century. Lionardo di B a r t o l o m e o Bartolini, t h e probable patron, kept the works in his palazzo just south of the Palazzo Strozzi. H e purchased t h e Villa Le Pergole at Quinto, on the same road as II Vivaio in Castello, in the mid-fifteenth c e n t u r y .

93

It was here that his son Damiano temporarily kept the p a i n t i n g s , which he inherited jointly with his brother Andrea, before they were seized on L o r e n z o de' M e d i c i ' s orders around 1484.

94

The patronage of a number of wealthy families in the Santa Maria Novella quarter developed

along geographic

lines.

Patronage

of

the

arts

began

at h o m e ,

with

the

commissioning of painted furniture, devotional and secular panel and mural paintings, and street tabernacles. It often extended to the local church w h e r e chapels provided space to commemorate the family's dead, and d e p e n d i n g on a f a m i l y ' s means they might acquire patronage rights at the principal church in the quarter to achieve greater visibility for the family. In addition, families owned or supported spedali

and street tabernacles in the

countryside, on or near their own properties there. Artistic patronage at sites such as these provided visual markers of an individual, family or corporate presence in the area. The bonds of patronage established in Florence were strengthened in t h e countryside by the fact that the same institutions, religious orders and confraternities that families supported in town were often active in the countryside also. T h e Confraternity

of Saint Peter Martyr played a

significant role in the facilitation and administration of p a t r o n a g e in the Santa Maria N o v e l l a quarter, with documented links to four prominent families of the quarter, and in all probability their network of influence extended m u c h further within the quarter and beyond. Uccello encountered this network early in his life, initially to his d i s a d v a n t a g e , since the Spedale di San Antonio did not pay him what it owed for twenty y e a r s . However, having established a

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

83

c o n n e c t i o n with the area of Castello, it s e e m s he maintained it, and later g a i n e d a c o m m i s s i o n in t o w n from t h e C a r n e s e c c h i family, w h o probably knew his work at C a s t e l l o , a n d m a y have k n o w n h i m personally t h r o u g h a bond of marriage b e t w e e n their f a m i l y and h i s . U c c e l l o ' s early career is still largely a mystery, notably for the y e a r s from 1417 to 1422. Did he work as an artist continuously through this period, a l o n e or w i t h a more e x p e r i e n c e d master or m a s t e r s ? It would s e e m that he did, if only b e c a u s e of the impressive standard h e is said to h a v e achieved in the lost Carnesecchi Annunciation

painted around

1423. In any event, U c c e l l o ' s career developed far b e y o n d t h e level of t h e S a n t a Maria N o v e l l a quarter, important t h o u g h it was for his early career. He e v e n t u a l l y w o r k e d for clients all o v e r Florence. S o u t h of the A r n o he worked for the Lanfredini, w h o l i v e d near Santo S p i r i t o , a n d the Pugliese, w h o s e chapel was in S a n t a M a r i a del C a r m i n e . In t h e east of F l o r e n c e h e w o r k e d for the Peruzzi, w h o lived in the S a n t a C r o c e area and in t h e north of F l o r e n c e h e worked for the Confraternity of the Purification at t h e Speclale di San M a t t e o . A n i m p o r t a n t step in the d e v e l o p m e n t of U c c e l l o ' s career was h i s trip to V e n i c e in 1 4 2 5 .

M o s a i c s a n d Pavimenti

at San M a r c o , Venice

In 1424 the mosaicist at San Marco in V e n i c e , J a c o p o della Chiesa, died leaving unfinished t h e refacement of the upper level of the church that had been d a m a g e d in a fire in 1419. After unsuccessful efforts to recall one of its former masters w h o had left the V e n e t o , t h e Venetian Senate looked to Florence for a r e p l a c e m e n t .

95

T h e c h o i c e of U c c e l l o m a y h a v e

been

s u g g e s t e d by Ghiberti, w h o travelled to Venice in late 1424 in the e n t o u r a g e of the Florentine a m b a s s a d o r Palla Strozzi. Ghiberti may have given advice on d e s i g n p r o b l e m s faced by the V e n e t i a n authorities and even provided designs for s c u l p t u r e during his stay, as a d i p l o m a t i c gift from t h e Florentine e m b a s s y .

96

Ghiberti was in a position to offer a d v i c e on mosaics,

since m o s a i c making was undertaken in relation to work by his s h o p .

97

A l t h o u g h there is no

e v i d e n c e that Uccello had experience in m a k i n g mosaics at this t i m e , it was not u n u s u a l for fifteenth-century Florentine artists to work in a n u m b e r of related media. A l e s s o Baldovinetti painted panels and mural paintings, m a d e designs for intarsia, m a d e and repaired m o s a i c s , and d e s i g n e d and painted stained glass w i n d o w s .

98

U c c e l l o ' s work as a mosaicist in Venice has been regarded as a t u r n i n g point in the d e v e l o p m e n t of that art form in the city, although only o n e d o c u m e n t e d w o r k is k n o w n and that has been lost.

99

It is p r o b a b l y Uccello's presence at San M a r c o that m a r k s a significant

m o m e n t in t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of the art in the city, as the first of a n u m b e r of f a m o u s Florentine and local artists who raised its profile, rather than the influence of U c c e l l o ' s w o r k on the mosaics subsequently m a d e there per se. T h e idea of a m e e t i n g of t h e Florentine R e n a i s s a n c e

84

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

style of Uccello's background, with its nascent perspectival developments, a n d the art of t h e northern Italian courts and Byzantine influences in Venice is tantalising, the m o r e so because no surviving work can be attributed to Uccello with certainty from his t i m e in Venice. In 1432 a letter from the Operai of the Duomo i n Florence, mentioned a figure o f Saint Peter b y Uccello on the facade of San M a r c o .

100

The work has since been replaced by a n o t h e r mosaic,

however, Salmi identified a depiction of it o n the far left of Gentile Bellini's painting of the facade of San Marco in his Procession

in San Marco

Piazza

(Galleria d e U ' A c c a d e m i a ,

Venice, Figs 151-153), showing a robed figure holding a book in his proper left hand and a key in the other.

101

The Saint Peter seems t o have been a relatively m o d e s t work, albeit

prominently located. The interior of San Marco is covered with mosaics of biblical figures and narratives against an extensive gold background in the Byzantine style. In the upper registers and vaults there are geometric figures of spirals and rectilinear patterns. Salmi noted, in general terms, that some spiral designs are close to details of Uccello's windows in the D u o m o in Florence and broadly comparable with details of his Battle paintings.

102

A m o r e specific analysis

reveals in clearer terms the basis for the attribution to Uccello of the designs for some mosaics andpavimenti in San Marco. The Wheel with Ribbon in the lunette of t h e fifth cupola in the atrium (Fig. 154) has in its centre a small design of two interlaced, star-shaped ribbons, very similar to motifs in the decorative border of Uccello's Resurrection

w i n d o w . The

principal form of the mosaic with ribbon interlaced around the spokes of a w h e e l , s h o w i n g the front and the back of the ribbon as it passes over the wheel, is strongly reminiscent of Vasari's description of drawings by Uccello showing 'shavings interlaced round sticks, which could be seen from behind and in front' Cbruccioli m

vedessi il di drento e 7 di fuorV).

in su i bastoni, die scortassero,

perdu

si

This correspondence is particularly significant because

Vasari seems not to have known about Uccello's work in Venice, since he did not mention it in the Vite. The correspondence between his description of drawings by Uccello and the mosaic, not noted by Salmi, seems too close to be an accident, lending credibility to the attribution of the mosaic to Uccello. Uccello may have taken drawings he m a d e in Venice back to Florence or made new ones there where Vasari was able to see them. The Stellated Dodecahedron

in the floor below the Door of Saint Peter is one of the

most impressive pieces of stonework in San Marco (Fig. 155). This pavimento

under the

current main exit from the interior is walked over by thousands of visitors daily. Its humble position does not necessarily reflect the status of its designer. As Salmi

noted,

representation of the polyhedron is reminiscent of the perspective drawing Sphere

the with

Seventy-Two Faces and Punte (Musee du Louvre, Paris, Fig. 58), attributed to Uccello on the basis of Vasari's description of drawings by Uccello showing, 'spheres of s e v e n t y - t w o faces

ORIGINS OF A CAREER 85

and punte'

Cpalle

a 72 facce

m

a punte di diamantV).

Unfortunately, Vasari did not mention

drawings by Uccello s h o w i n g clodecahedra, stellated (with punte)

o r otherwise. While the

earliest written description of a stellated dodecahedron may be K e p l e r ' s Harmonices of 1619, it is not particularly difficult to draw o n e .

105

Mundi

N o precise m e a s u r e m e n t or complex

geometry is required if t h e figure is s h o w n with one pentagram face on, as it is in the San Marco pavimento.

Uccello w a s certainly capable of designing the Stellated

Dodecahedron,

and the meandering vine motifs in the m o s a i c border around the stonework are sufficiently similar to t h e stained glass pattern in the border of his Resurrection

window (Figs 156-157) to

make the attribution to h i m plausible, and by extension an almost identical pavimento San Marco. F u r t h e r m o r e , the other pavimento surrounded

inside

of a stellated d o d e c a h e d r o n inside the church is

by a circle of arrowhead shapes very similar to U c c e l l o ' s design for the

decoration of the shield carried by the foot soldier at the far left of the Battle painting in Paris (Figs 158-159). Plato recognised that there are only five regular solids, which are, in order of complexity: the tetrahedron, the octahedron, the icosahedron, the cube and the dodecahedron. He equated G o d ' s invention of these figures with the creation of the universe, attributing the elements of fire, air, water and earth to the first four regular solids, r e s p e c t i v e l y .

106

The

stellated d o d e c a h e d r a at San M a r c o may thus refer to G o d ' s creation in its most developed form or totality. A n u m b e r of other figures and architectural designs in the mosaics inside San Marco, notably the sophisticated buildings in the Stories

of the Virgin in the Mascoli Chapel, have

been attributed to U c c e l l o or his influence, with decreasing regularity over the twentieth century.

107

In 1926 Longhi accepted U c c e l l o ' s authorship of the Mascoli Chapel

Visitation,

but doubted w h e t h e r U c c e l l o ' s stay in V e n i c e could have had a profound impact on local artists since M a s a c c i o ' s most important d e v e l o p m e n t of perspective occurred in Florence after Uccello had l e f t .

108

In 1961 Fiocco mused that while Uccello m a y have renewed the

school of mosaic making in Venice, his style was too abstract and in opposition to the prevailing culture to leave a mark on those w h o f o l l o w e d . suggested, U c c e l l o ' s

designs

for

mosaics

and

stonework

109

Be that as it may, as Salmi in Venice

followed

models 0

attributable, m o r e or less directly, to Brunelleschi in Or San Michele and San L o r e n z o . " The Florentine sources for the d e v e l o p m e n t of c o m p l e x g e o m e t r y and perspective are older than Masaccio's

Brancacci

Carnesecchi Annunciation

Chapel

and Trinity

paintings. T h e

importance of Uccello's

lost

lies in the evidence it provides that Uccello was already well

versed in perspective before he left Florence. T h u s , U c c e l l o ' s work in V e n i c e may have been geographically

but not conceptually

removed

Florence over the duration of his trip to V e n i c e .

from

the d e v e l o p m e n t of perspective in

86

ORIGINS OFA CAREER

Notes for Chapter 4

1

Boskovits, 2002a, p. 53.

2

Berti, 2002, pp. 46-50. Berti proposed that Masaccio and his brother Scheggia trained in Lorenzo di

Bicci's workshop, attributing to Masaccio a number of works that had previously been attributed to Lorenzo di Bicci. 3

Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002a, pp. 41-42.

4

Padoa Rizzo, 2002, pp. 247-261; Bernacchioni, 2002, pp. 264-265.

3

The most important recent research into Uccello's early career has been that of Padoa Rizzo (1990,

1991). 5

ASF, Catasto, 475, San Giovanni Drago, p. 483, in Mather, 1948, p. 62. For the transcription of the

document, see Appendix B. 7

8

Wright, 1976, vol. I, p. 8. Wright, 1976, vol. II, p. 472, citing ASF, CRSGF, 102, 4 9 8 , p . 84. An early sixteenth-century

reference to the property by the confraternity described it as 22.5 staiora including a house for the landlord, with its southern and eastern boundaries as the road leading to Prato and the road leading to the church of San Michele, respectively. Mannini, 1984, p. 142. A late sixteenth-century map of the area made by the Parte Guelph shows that these roads correspond closely to the present Via Reginaldo Giuliano and Via della Querciola. 9

Colnaghi (1986, p. 181) noted that Michele di Giovanni del Tria was born in 1369, lived near Santa

Maria Novella, and was inscribed in the Confraternity of Saint Luke in 1400, but was not able to attribute any work to him securely. Hueck (1984, p. 45 n. 14) noted that he painted black letters in the Chiostro de' Morti, and painted and gilded angels and a crucifix for the confraternity in the late fourteenth century. 10

ASF, CRSGF, 102, 295, Entrata e Uscita, 1402-1414, p. 212: 'mccccxiij [...] adi iij da agostol [left

columnj a michele dj giovannj djpintore e sp[e]dalingho antonio dachastello f[iorin]j

dello spe/dale di sa[n]to giovannj e dj sa[n]to

[crossed out]/ f[iorin]j dugiento d['or]o p[er]parte

diffiorinjj

treciento

quindjci iqalj d[enar]j/ il detto spedale debe avere della detta conpagnia p[er] VI podere

coperato

p[erj la detta conpagnia daldetto spedale/ con casa da signiore e dalavoratore eterra vigniata el lavorata posta nelpopolo di sa[nJto michele inchastello

sichomel sidjore daldetto michele

vendiente

pferjlo detto spedale e p[er]lol detto michele espedale sidcinno epaghano [crossed out] a bartola/meo di lucha banchetty ebe p[er] la co[n]pagnia epfer)

me da fra/nciescho

e nicholo di messer

simone

tomabuonj cioe idettyl ffiorinjj

dugiento posti ali[br]o a ca 175 q[u]esti sono delta soma di f[iorin]j

400 [right column) f[iorin]j

cc - d['orJot

sop[r]adetto detto dj/ f[iorin]j

cinqa[n]ta dl'orjo

[left columnj a michele iqalj d[enar]j

di giovannj

espedalingho

ebe cotatj e sugiello porto

edettol

p[erj parte deldetto podere conperato detto di sop[r]a posti ali[br]o a ca 175 (right column] f[iorin]j L - d['or]o [left column] soma qfujesta

/[iorinjj

cclvj [...?J xxxiiij s[oldi] xiiij

d[enar]j vj'. I am

grateful to Dr Lorenza Melli for help interpreting the document. Further references to the acquisition are found in ASF, CRSGF, 102, 321, Provisione, Deliberazione e Partiti, 1402-1414, pp. 101, 103.

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

11

87

Meersseman, 1951, pp. 51-196, especially pp. 62-66 for Florence. Meersseman, 1948, pp. 135-136.

Lay confraternities dedicated to the Virgin were also established, either by Saint Peter Martyr or under his influence, in numerous other Italian cities. On the confraternity at Santa Maria Novella, see: Wilson, 1992, pp. 109-118; Henderson, 1994, in many places, but especially pp. 170-175, 469-470; and Betka's 2001 PhD thesis, which discusses the confraternity at numerous points, particularly in relation to its Marian devotion. 12

Wilson, 1992, pp. 109-118,201-206.

13

ASF, Catasto, 53, San Giovanni Drago, p. 711 v.: 'Uno poclere a lolmo a chastello in sulla stracla.

popolo di sal michele lavora giovanni di domenicho..chasa

dalavo/ratore

che daprimo via dasechondo

chiassolino da 1/31 vrbano bartolini doll 14 il detto.l Uno pezzo di terra a stra della detto popolo via da sechondol lachonpagnia dellolalde di santa maria novella da terzol gharuccio dipagholo gherucci dal 1/4 sudi [?] g" horlandinil

e ser tomaso chalandrinf;

[..J Michele dj g" deltria spedalingho iqalj ebisigniato per richop[r]ire debitjl ali[br]o 60 f[iorin]j54\

p. 716: 'debitory didiserzione

danostro spedale dachastello

e a/chonciare

ildetto spedale

e debitori varil

delbe dare p[erJlo detto spedale

nove clicharianarchj pferjche

apiu

Deo Beccuti's 1431 portata specified that he owned land adjacent to

the 'confraternity of the spedale' in the popolo of San Michele in Castcllo: ASF, Catasto, 380, p. 549. 14

ASF, Catasto, 380, p. 550v.: '...

Paolo Uccello: The Life and Work of an Italian Renaissance Artist (PhD dissertation)

Deification in John of Damascus (phd dissertation)

The Italian Renaissance

The Intellectual Life of the Early Renaissance Artist

Paolo Sarpi: Between Renaissance and Enlightenment

Paolo Sarpi: Between Renaissance and Enlightenment

Historians and Historiography in the Italian Renaissance

Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance

Leonardo Da Vinci: Artist, Inventor, And Renaissance Man (Makers of the Middle Ages and Renaissance)

Create Dangerously: The Immigrant Artist at Work

An Artist Named Tomie

The Italian Renaissance (Bloom's Period Studies)

The life and work of Karl Marx

An Artist of the American Renaissance: The Letters of Kenyon Cox, 1883-1919

My Life and Work

Life and Work Express

My Life and Work

Create Dangerously: The Immigrant Artist at Work

Create Dangerously: The Immigrant Artist at Work

The Italian Way: Food and Social Life

The Art of the Woodcut in the Italian Renaissance Book

Sao Paolo

The Training and Work of an Initiate

Every Day in Tuscany: Seasons of an Italian Life

The Artist of Disappearance

Paolo Giovio

The Artist of Disappearance

Dictionary of the Middle Ages. Vol. 7. Italian Renaissance - Mabinogi

Every Day in Tuscany: Seasons of an Italian Life

The Complete Writings of an Italian Heretic

Paolo Uccello: The Life and Work of an Italian Renaissance Artist (PhD dissertation)

Deification in John of Damascus (phd dissertation)

The Italian Renaissance

The Intellectual Life of the Early Renaissance Artist

Paolo Sarpi: Between Renaissance and Enlightenment

Paolo Sarpi: Between Renaissance and Enlightenment

Historians and Historiography in the Italian Renaissance

Crisis of the Early Italian Renaissance

Leonardo Da Vinci: Artist, Inventor, And Renaissance Man (Makers of the Middle Ages and Renaissance)

Create Dangerously: The Immigrant Artist at Work

An Artist Named Tomie

The Italian Renaissance (Bloom's Period Studies)

The life and work of Karl Marx

An Artist of the American Renaissance: The Letters of Kenyon Cox, 1883-1919

My Life and Work

Life and Work Express

My Life and Work

Create Dangerously: The Immigrant Artist at Work

Create Dangerously: The Immigrant Artist at Work

The Italian Way: Food and Social Life

The Art of the Woodcut in the Italian Renaissance Book

Sao Paolo

The Training and Work of an Initiate

Every Day in Tuscany: Seasons of an Italian Life

The Artist of Disappearance

Paolo Giovio

The Artist of Disappearance

Dictionary of the Middle Ages. Vol. 7. Italian Renaissance - Mabinogi

Every Day in Tuscany: Seasons of an Italian Life

The Complete Writings of an Italian Heretic

Recommend Documents