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 1041 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

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 26.

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

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 26.

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

Bernacchioni, 1990, pp. 5-6.

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

(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.

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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.

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S 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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

THE MAKING OF UCCELLO'S PAINTINGS

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

Bernacchioni, 2003, pp. 419-420.

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.: '...
1 5

Henderson, 1994, pp. 171-175.

1 6

ASF, CRSGF, 102, 298, Entrata e Uscita, 1455-1463. I am grateful to Dr Ursula Betka for

suggesting this interpretation of the acronym. l7

Carocci, 1906, p. 277.

1H

Mannini, 1984, p. 140. I am grateful to Francesca Fiorelli of the Soprintendenza Beni Artistici e

Storici di Firenze, Pistoia e Prato, for confirming that no detached painting from the tabernacle is in storage at the Soprintendenza. 14

According to Orlandi (1955, vol. II, p. 343 n. 31), the confraternity already owned the spedale by

1410, although he did not specify on what evidence this was based; (vol. II, p. 583) it transferred ownership of the spedale to Santa Maria Novella in 1452; (vol. II, pp. 342-343) and Fra Gabriele di Domenico di Niccolo Narucci conceded the spedale back to the confraternity in 1491. A 1675 copy of a 1525 record of the confraternity's property made for tax purposes (ASF, CRSGF, 102, 323, Hntratto dclle Case, pp. 25v.-26v.) includes the spedale as an asset of the confraternity. In 1534 the spedale was sold with its farm by the confraternity to Cosimo I de' Medici, who had rented it from them since 1516. From 1486 it had been rented to a Bernardo di Stoldo Rinieri and from 1494, to a Cristofano di Bernardo Rinieri (Wright, 1976, vol. II, pp. 472-473). The Medici paid the local church of San Michele the decima (wine tax) due on the property from the middle of the sixteenth century until the nineteenth (ASMC, Decimario della Chiesa di San Michele a Castello, p. 33). 211

Carocci (1906, p. 277) named a Felice di Deo del Beccuto as the vendor in 1574. However, it is more

likely to be Felice di Ruberto, who appears in the del Beccuto genealogy described in Chapter 1, with the dates 1537-1620.

88

2 1

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

It is not possible to trace any payments made to Uccello by the Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr

after 1433, since the account books (entrata - uscita) are missing from 1428 to 1453, in the sources at ASF, CRSGF, 102. 2 2

ASF, CRSGF, 102, 295, p. 214. Another link between Uccello and the confraternity may be provided

by Ser Bartolo Giannini, for whom Deo Beccuti submitted Uccello's 1427 portata. Giannini was a Capitano of the confraternity in 1413. 2 3

2 4

Hueck, 1972, p. 117. Parronchi, 1998, pp. 44-47. The inscription reads: 'MCCCCXIII/ QUESTO • CROCIFISO •

AFATO • FAR • S[ER] BARTOL...'. The ex-church of San Jacopo and the Crucifixion are now privately owned. From 1998 until 2004 the Crucifixion was housed in the Director's office of the Museo di San Marco, Florence, while the ex-church was being restored. 2 5

Parronchi, 1998, pp. 44,47 n. 2.

2 6

The oratory at Bagnolo is mentioned as belonging to the order based at the Church of San Jacopo in

ASF, CRSGF, 132, 95, Visita Priorale, vol. II, p. 186: '...Oratorio

dedicate a S. Antonio/

distante da l" Citta di Prato, e dalla Stradal Maestra in Riva difiume

Abatepoco

Bagnolo posto nel popolol delta

V. chiesa prevania di S. Giovanni decollate comune dil Monte Murlo, Potesteria di Campi...'.

I am

grateful to Dr Ludovica Sebregondi (personal communication, 6 Nov. 2004) for pointing out to me that the Oratorio di Sant'Antonio a Bagnolo was located in the potesteria

of Campi, in the popolo of San

Giovanni Decollato di Monte Murlo, and belonged to the order based at San Jacopo in Campo Corbolini, as also recorded in: ASF, CRSGF, 132, 164, p. 550. The Church of San Jacopo is mentioned as a neighbouring landlord of Deo Beccuti at Castello in 1427, in: ASF, Catasto, 53, San Giovanni Drago, p. 71.2. The Church's archives record that it owned land in Castello in 1763-1764: ASF, CRSGF, 132, 95, Visita Priorale, vol. II, p. 193. 27

ASF, CRSGF, 132, 161, vol. II, pp. 133-133v. The documents for the provenance of the Crucifixion

presented here were found and transcribed by this author in late 2003, following the lead published by Parronchi. Subsequently, Dr Ludovica Sebregondi's research on the same topic was brought to my attention. I am grateful to Dr Sebregondi for discussing her work on this subject (personal communication, 5 Nov. 2004), due for publication in the near future. 2 8

2 9

1 am grateful to Dr Ludovica Sebregondi for showing me this photo. For the 1763 inventory: ASF, CRSGF, 132, 95, Visita Priorale, vol. II, pp. 98, 93; for the 1754

inventory: ASF, CRSGF, 132, 161, vol. Ill, p. 530; and for the 1722 inventory: ASF, CRSGF, 132, 298 (one bundle) [p. 2 v.]. 30

ASF, CRSGF, 132, 161, vol. I, p. 22v.

31

ASF, CRSGF, 132, 298 (one bundle) [p. 3].

32

For the 1657 inventory: ASF, CRSGF, 132, 161, vol. II (p. 27v.); and for the 1651-1654 inventory:

KIF, Biblioteca, Cabrero delta Commenda in S. Jacopo in Campo Corbolini fatta dall. III.{mo) Sig.(r) Commendatore f Bartolomeo Galilei, 1651-1654, p. 54. The 'Crocifisso

molto miracoloso, et antico'

mentioned in a seventeenth-century reference to the Confraternity

of Saint John the Baptist

CCongregazione di S Gio Batista") active in San Jacopo in Campo Corbolini could conceivably be the

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

89

San Jacopo Crucifixion, although the reference is not sufficiently detailed to confirm the identification: Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale di Firenze, MS I I I 262, Priorista di Luca Chiari (datable to 1630-1640), p. 485. This document was kindly brought to my attention by Dr Alana O'Brien, personal communication, 20 Mar. 2004. 3 3

Parronchi (1998, p. 46) noted two fragmentary labels attached to the ends of the arms of the

Crucifixion, which he thought showed the date 1531 and the emblem of the little known Confraternity of the Nail (Compagnia del Chiodo). Parronchi misread the 'numbers' 1531 upside-down. Read right side up the letters actually spell: ' . . . I E S V . . . ' (Fig. 130). 34

P u d e l k o , 1934, pp. 250-253.

3 5

Guarnieri, 1987, p. 136-137. For the inscription in the original Latin see the Catalogue. For further

discussion of the tabernacle, see: Mannini, 1984, p. 150. 3 6

For the 1708 reference: ASF, CRSPL, Moreniana Misc. 99-4, p. 47; for the 1745 reference: ASF,

C.R.S.P.L, 1189:1, pp. 11, 64. These references were kindly brought to my attention by Dr Alana O'Brien, personal communication, 20 Mar. 2004. 3 7

Padoa Rizzo, 1990, pp. 57-58.

3 8

For the locations of Spedale di San Antonio and the Del Lippi tabernacle, see also: Mannini, 1984,

pp. 142, 146, 150. 3

;

' Boskovits (1968, p. 59) included the paintings as an addendum to a list of works by the Master of

Santa Verdiana. 4 0

Deimling, 2000, pp. 111-143, especially p. 143.

41

Boskovits, 1975, pp. 417-419.

4 2

Parronchi (1998, pp. 44-46) also noted differences in the handling of perspective between the sinopie

and the paint layers suggestive of the work of different artists. 4 3

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 22.

44

Boskovits, 1990, pp. 140-143.

4 5

Berti, 1961, p. 298. The bird is difficult to see in the reproduction Berti published.

4

" Albertini, 1972, |p. 6|.

4 7

4S

Vasari, 1966-1987, lesto, vol. Ill, pp. 63-64: 1568 ed. Borghini, 1967, p. 309.

|t;

' Parronchi, 1964a, pp. 182-192. The Annunciation

described by Vasari as a fresco may actually have

been painted on panel and saved during the demolition of the chapel, or perhaps this is an early instance of the relocation of a fresco. Other possibilities include that writers after the demolition of the chapel mistook an Annunciation

in the church by another artist for Uccello's version, or indeed, that

another version by Uccello was in the church. Parronchi identified Uccello's Annunciation

with the

painting from the Goldmann Collection in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, usually attributed to Masolino. While Uccello's Original Sin scene in the Chiostro Verde shows that his style was sometimes very close to Masolino's, there is no feature of the Goldmann Annunciation that is distinctly Uccelloesquc and Parronchi's suggestion has not been accepted. 50

Joannides, 1993, p. 351; Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002b, pp. 81-86.

90

51

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

The date of Paolo di Berto's death is recorded as 4 February 1428 (when converted to the modern

calendar) in a fifteenth-century document at ASF, CRSGF, 102 Appendice, 67 p. 43: 'Rede d[i] paolo d[i] berto carnesechi dono dare f[iorin]j 5 lanno p[er] i finoJ i dieci annj p[er] uno rinovali

[...et?]

pietaza p[...]ldecto paolo mori ad[i] 4 d[i] febraio 1427.' Parronchi, 1964a, p. 182, gave the date of Paolo Carnesecchi's death as 6 February 1427 without specifying the precise source, although he described most of the archival material from Santa Maria Maggiore referring to the Carnesecchi chapel as dating from the seventeenth century. 5 2

53

Joannides, 1993, p. 350.

5 4

55

Herlihy, Burr Litchfield, Molho and Barducci (eds), 2002, on-line source, search by Carnesecchi.

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, pp. 63-64: 1568 ed.

Weissman, 1982, p. 9.

5 6

5 7

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 8. The reference to D e o Beccuti's wife is in: A S F , Deputazione Sopra la N o b i l i t a e

Cittadinanza, 15, section 2 1 , part 1, unpaginated. The Tratte (Herlihy, Burr Litchfield, Molho and Barducci (eds), 2002, on-line source, search by Carnesecchi) record three members of the Carnesecchi family with the name Zanobi: Zanobi di Berto, Zanobi di Simone, and Zanobi di Francesco. Further evidence of contact between Deo Beccuti and the Carnesecchi family is the debt of four florins recorded owing by Deo Beccuti to 'bertto carnesechi' in Deo's 1433 campione, at: ASF, Catasto, 498, • San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1234, p. 188. 58

Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002b, p. 86.

59

For this suggestion, see: Roccasecca, 1997, p. 126.

60

Wilson, 1992, p. 110.

61

Only Parronchi (1974, p. 1) has mentioned Castello specifically, in his monograph:

evidente dell'inizio precocissima

della sua attivita' and in his article on the San Jacopo

"conferma Crucifixion

(1998, pp. 44-47). 62

63

Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 307. Belle (1971, pp. 92-96) discussed the issue in relation to the reasons for the Strozzi family's

investments in property. 64

Wright, 1976, vol. I, p. 14. The Villa was acquired by Lorenzo and Giovanni di Pierfrancesco de'

Medici in 1477 on the advice of Lorenzo II Magnifico. Amanda Lillie (2000, pp. 195-214) has discussed the practice of wealthy Florentine families acquiring rural properties distinguished by their previous owners or historic associations. For the provenances of Botticelli's paintings, see: Lightbown, 1978, vol. II, pp. 51-52, 64. For the provenance of Leonardo's Adoration of the Magi, see: Pomilio and Ottino della Chiesa, 1967, p. 92, where it is stated that the work was transferred from the Medici gallery at the Uffizi to the villa at Castello after 1753, before being returned to the Uffizi in 1794. 65

Guarnieri, 1987, pp. 156-157. The Guidacci and Da Verrazzano family coats of arms are still over

the entrance to the tabernacle. 6fi

Weissman, 1982, pp. 7-8. Contributing to the phenomenon of the mirroring of social links in the city

and the country was the practice of thirteenth-century immigrants to Florence from the countryside

ORIGINS OF A CAREER

91

settling in the area of the city closest to their place of origin, and the difficulty of finding housing and employment in the city, which encouraged the choice of places to live based on pre-existing friendship or kinship ties. 6 7

For the ownership histories of the principal palazzi in the Santa Maria Novella quarter, see: Ginori

Lisci, 1972 (1985), vol. II, pp. 115-322. 6 8

For details of Tornabuoni, Strozzi and Carnesecchi families' land ownership in Castello in the

fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, see: Carocci, 1907, vol. I, pp. 277-289; and Wright, 1976, vol. II, pp. 474-480. 6 9

70

Carocci, 1907, vol. II, p. 278. L e n s i Orlandi, 1978, pp. 22, 26.

7 1

ASF, CRSGF, 102 Appendice, 67 p. 4 3 .

7 2

Gordon, 2003, p. 64.

7 3

Gordon, 2003, pp. 64-65.

7 4

Mannini, 1984, p. 150. Perhaps Bernardo Carnesecchi also commissioned the Crucifixion

by

Giovanni di Francesco del Cervelliera da Rovenzzano in the chapel on the left of the main altar in Santa Maria Maggiorc. For a brief discussion of the work, see: Ferro, 1990, p. 54. Paatz and Paatz, 1952-1955, vol. IV, pp. 627-628, 632. The painting may be contemporary with the tabernacle for the sacraments on the left wall of the chapel made in 1449, which bears the arms of the Carnesecchi family, and Bernardo Carncsecchi's tombstone, dated 1449, recorded in the chapel in the eighteenth century, but since lost. A dale of 1449 for the Crucifixion is in keeping with the dates of Giovanni di Francesco's activity, as his securely attributed works date from the 1450s. For a recent summary of Giovanni di Francesco's career, see: Christiansen and Ceriana, 2005, pp. 283-284. Either the Carnesecchi or Boni families commissioned Masolino's Virgin and Child (Kunsthalle, Bremen) in 1423, which bears the arms of the two families, presumably commissioned for a wedding. 7 5

Herlihy, Klapisch-Zuber, Burr Litchfield and Molho (eds), 2002, on-line source, 'List of the

wealthiest households arranged by wealth' link. 7 6

ASF, CRSGF, 102 Appendice, 65, Fnlrata e Uscita, 1419-1427, p. I8v.

7 7

Orlandi, 1955, vol. II, pp. 499-501.

7K

ASF, Calasto, 53, San Giovanni Drago, p. 712.

7 9

Lensi Orlandini, 1978, p. 25.

m

Simons, 1985, vol. I, pp. 173-174.

Hl

Simons (1985, vol. 1, Chapter 5, pp. 190-233) provided a detailed study of the associations between

the Tornaquinci and Tornabuoni families, Santa Maria Novella and the Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr. 8 2

Henderson (1994, pp. 171-175) described the growing importance thai the confraternity's role

accepting bequests had on the nature of its activities over the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries and its relationship with the convent. Up to 93 per cent of the confraternity's income went to the convent for masses and other commemorative services for the dead. m

Lcnsi Orlandi, 1978, p. 19.

92

ORIGINS OFA CAREER

8 4

Kent, 1981, p. 48.

8 5

Albertini, 1972, [p. 8]; Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 63:1550and 1568 eds.

8 6

Belle, 1972, pp. 34,92-96, 183-226.

8 7

Belle, 1972, pp. 189-190.

8 8

Kent, 1977, p. 282 n. 210.

8 9

Kent, 1977, pp. 232-237; Kent, 1981, p . 62.

9 0

Kent, 1981, pp. 57-61.

9 1

Kent, 1981, p. 49, 60-61 n. 7.

9 2

Wilson, 1992, p. 110.

9 3

Lensi Orlandi, 1978, p. 24.

9 4

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

9 3

Saccardo, 1896, pp. 32-33; Merkel, 1994, p. 313.

9 6

Haines, 2001, pp. 57-63.

9 7

Krautheimer and Krautheimer-Hess (1956, p. 404) cited a document in the ASF referring to mosaics

in the niche for the sculpture of Saint John the Baptist at Or San Michele. 9 8

Wedgwood Kennedy, 1938, pp. 60-64, and pp. 236-238 for the transcription of Baldovinetti's

Ricordi. 9 9

Merkel, 1994, p. 313.

1 0 0

Poggi, 1988, vol. 1, p. 147, doc. 773.

101

Salmi, 1950, pp. 22-23.

1 0 2

Salmi, 1977, p. 373.

103

Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 237.

104

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 62: 1568 ed.

105

Emmer, 1982, pp. 280-281.

105

107

Emmer, 1982, pp. 277-278. For the bibliography on the subject of Uccello's possible involvement in designing the Mascoli

Chapel mosaics, see the Catalogue. "*Longhi, 1926, p. 129. m

Fiocco, 1961, pp. 153-154.

""Salmi, 1977, pp. 373-374.

5 Uccello in the 1430s: 'Buono Componitore e Vario'

Precisely w h e n Uccello returned to Florence is u n k n o w n . N o r is it known w h e r e he settled, 1

whether h e lived alone or with others, or even w h y h e returned. T h e original l o c a t i o n s of his paintings datable to the 1430s, where they are k n o w n , s u g g e s t he w o r k e d m a i n l y in Florence, 2

with brief sojourns in Prato and B o l o g n a . Since there is n o m e n t i o n of w o r k s h o p premises in his portate

of the early 1430s, h e might h a v e worked on small c o m m i s s i o n s from h o m e and

c o m m i s s i o n s for mural paintings on his p a t r o n s ' p r e m i s e s or in their c h a p e l s , c h u r c h e s and cloisters. U c c e l l o ' s earlier collaborators M a s a c c i o and M a s o l i n o were n o l o n g e r in Florence; Masaccio died in R o m e in 1428 and M a s o l i n o is not d o c u m e n t e d in the city after 1429. In other respects the artistic situation in Florence had not changed radically. S t y l i s t i c e v i d e n c e suggests Uccello resumed c o n t a c t with G h i b e r t i ' s s h o p , t h o u g h in what c a p a c i t y is uncertain, and other artists carried on the d e v e l o p m e n t of M a s a c c i o ' s and M a s o l i n o ' s i n n o v a t i v e styles. In 1433 Ghiberti m a d e the marble frame for Fra A n g e l i c o ' s Linaiuoli A l t a r p i e c e ( M u s e o di San M a r c o , Florence), in which the painter was clearly influenced by M a s o l i n o ' s elegant linear style. Fra Filippo Lippi's earliest works date from this period, such as the Rules Carmelite

Order

of the

( M u s e o di Santa Maria del C a r m i n e , Florence) s h o w i n g the influence of

M a s a c c i o ' s sculptural style. D o m e n i c o V e n e z i a n o e m e r g e d as a prominent artist in Florence in the 1430s, inspired at first by Uccello, and in 1439 Piero della Francesca, attracted to the flourishing artistic scene in Florence, worked as D o m e n i c o ' s assistant on mural paintings in the church of S a n t ' E g i d i o (now lost). T h i s chapter investigates U c c e l l o ' s activity in the 1430s on the basis of the evidence provided by the panel and mural paintings d a t a b l e to this period, not including the Equestrian

Monument

which is discussed in the following c h a p t e r in the

context of U c c e l l o ' s work in the D u o m o , and t h e Battle

paintings w h i c h are discussed

separately in the s u b s e q u e n t chapter. In 1481 Cristoforo Landino described U c c e l l o as a 'buon

componitore

e vario'

('good c o m p o s e r of pictures a n d v a r i e d ' ) , an apt description of

the h e t e r o g e n e o u s nature of Uccello's works from t h e 1 4 3 0 s .

3

94

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

Propagating the Faith and Social H a r m o n y : T h e Creation

Stories

The Creation Stories in the first bay of t h e Chiostro V e r d e of the Dominican c o n v e n t of Santa Maria Novella in Florence can be placed a m o n g t h e first w o r k s painted by Uccello following his return to the city from Venice (Figs 160-163). In the lunette with t h e Creation Animals and Creation

of the

of Adam the figures a r e m o d e l l e d in a pale green c o l o u r with whitish

highlights and brownish shadows, the animals a n d l a n d s c a p e are predominantly beige, t h e trees, grass and flowers are coloured m o r e or less n a t u r a l l y , while the sky is d e e p red. T h e black and white striped stringcourse around the lunette m i m i c s the style of t h e p o l y c h r o m e masonry in the cloister. O n the left of the Creation

of the Animals

and Creation

of Adam

God

the Father stands magisterially, blessing an assortment of natural and mythical a n i m a l s . Among the latter is a female face with ' L A M I A ' written on its forehead.

4

The painting has suffered a loss of legibility e v e n since the advent of p h o t o g r a p h y . Old photographs show fish jumping out of t h e water at the feet of God the Father, typical o f 5

Uccello's lively imagination. Sadly, these can hardly be seen n o w . On the right G o d t h e Father raises Adam from the ground. In the l o w e r register with the Creation Original

of Eve and

the

Sin the extensive foliage in t h e top half of the scene gives the painting a rich

appearance like a tapestry. However, m u c h of the l o w e r half of the scene in which t h e monochrome landscape would have been has been lost, presumably to flood d a m a g e . O n t h e left God the Father blesses Eve, who kneels before H i m with her hands joined in worship. O n the right, Adam and Eve stand on either side of the T r e e o f Knowledge of G o o d and Evil, around which the serpent with a w o m a n ' s head is coiled. The Chiostro Verde (Green Cloister) takes its n a m e from the colour of the green earth pigment (terra verde)

dominating the palette of the c y c l e . T h e practice of painting in a n

almost monochrome palette may be associated with e c o n o m y on the part of patrons.

Terra

verde was a cheap pigment, readily available from Italian deposits, unlike s o m e e x p e n s i v e pigments such as lapis lazuli, which had to be imported at great cost. M o n o c h r o m e painting i s found on the reverses of some double-sided altarpieces, s u c h as the Pieta on the reverse o f Giovanni Toscani's Virgin

and Child with Saints

Jerome

and Catherine

(triptych, M u s e o

dello Spedale degli Innocenti, Florence), w h e r e it can be assumed that the patron did not wish to lavish expense on costly pigments and the artist's l a b o u r for a subsidiary aspect of t h e work. However, a m o n o c h r o m e palette also gives painting something of the a p p e a r a n c e o f bronze or marble relief sculpture, especially in an architectural context such as the C h i o s t r o Verde, with the associations of timelessness that b e l o n g to those materials. M a s a c c i o ' s lost Sagra,

painted in terra

verde

in the cloister of the c h u r c h of Santa Maria del 6

Carmine

sometime after the early 1420s, may h a v e inspired t h e choice of that style in Santa M a r i a

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s 95

Novella. Furthermore, green and white marble is traditionally used on the exteriors of Florentine churches. The cloister was used by the friars of the convent, providing them with protection from the elements when m o v i n g between their buildings and the church. The entrance to the convent was originally in the north wall of the cloister, until it was blocked off to allow worship of a m i r a c u l o u s p a i n t i n g of the Virgin above the door. A door in the northwest corner of t h e cloister leads to the old refectory, n o w a m u s e u m , a n d the Chiostro Grande. The door to the chapter h o u s e is in the middle of the north wall, the entrance to the Chiostrino dei Morti (the cemetery of the friars and privileged lay people) is a little further along the same wall, and access to the church is in t h e northeast corner of t h e cloister. The only k n o w n d o c u m e n t for the mural painting cycle in the Chiostro Verde is the 1348 will of the wealthy wool merchant, T u r i n o di Baldese, leaving the enormous sum of 7

1000 florins t o paint the Old T e s t a m e n t in the church of Santa Maria Novella. It is not known why there was such a long delay in fulfilling the terms of his will, why the cycle was painted in t h e cloister rather than i n s i d e the church, why only scenes from the Book of Genesis were illustrated from t h e Old T e s t a m e n t , or w h y artists of indifferent quality were employed for the bulk of the work given the large amount of m o n e y originally available. Nor is it clear why an especially talented artist in Uccello was c o m m i s s i o n e d o n l y for the first and fourth bays of the east wall.

8

While T u r i n o has l o n g been acknowledged as an important donor to Santa Maria Novella, his connection

with the Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr, whose probable

involvement with Uccello early in his career was described in the previous chapter, has not been discussed in relation to the Chiostro Verde cycle. In 1340, prior to writing his will, Turino served as a C a p i t a n o of the confraternity.

9

In 1458 Turino's heirs were effectively

living rent-free in a h o u s e belonging to the confraternity because of a dispute over the family's patronage rights at t h e church, an indication of t h e longstanding involvement of the 10

confraternity in the administration of T u r i n o ' s l e g a c y . T h e cloister was of some significance to t h e confraternity, since its members processed from the Chiostrino dei Morti, where the friars allowed the confraternity to bury its dead, through the cloister and into the church on the second Sunday of every m o n t h , as well as on major feasts and for special commemorative ceremonies for the dead. D u r i n g these processions m e m b e r s of the confraternity filed in pairs, every member carrying a lit c a n d l e , with an image of the Virgin, to whom the confraternity was officially dedicated, carried at the head of the p r o c e s s i o n . " The intimate relationship between the confraternity and the convent is indicated by the encouragement

given

to the confraternity's

activities, such as the hundred

indulgence granted to t h e m by Cardinal Nicola da Prato in 1304 for their processions.

days' 12

The

96

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

reciprocal nature of the relationship is shown b y the financial support rendered by members of the confraternity for the building, decoration and

maintenance of t h e c h u r c h , some

examples of which were discussed in the previous c h a p t e r .

13

Boccaccio gently mocked the

confraternity's relations with its patrons in the First Story of the Seventh D a y of the Decameron:

There was once in Florence, in the quarter of San Brancazio, a wool comber called Gianni Lotteringhi, a man more fortunate in his craft than wise in other things, for, savoring of the simpleton, he was very often made captain of the Laudsingers of Santa Maria Novella and had the governance of their confraternity, and he many a time had other little offices of the same kind, much swelling his sense of self-importance. These were assigned him because, being a man of substance, h e gave many good victuals to the friars, and they, getting of him often, this one a pair of hose, that one a gown and another a scapulary, taught him in return many goodly orisons and gave him the paternoster in the vulgar tongue, the Song of Saint Alexis, the Lamentation of Saint Bernard, the Canticle of Madam Matilda and suchlike trumpery, all which he held very dear and kept very diligently for his soul's health.

14

When the friars eventually commissioned the cycle T u r i n o had wanted, they might well have considered the project in relation to t h e confraternity to w h i c h he and many of their donors belonged, in such matters as its i c o n o g r a p h y , its location, and perhaps even t h e artists employed, given that the confraternity traditionally h a d a high proportion of painters as members. The D o m i n i c a n s reached out to the urban p o p u l a t i o n of Florence t h r o u g h preaching and teaching, and the Chiostro Verde and chapter h o u s e w e r e the parts of the c o n v e n t most accessible to lay p e o p l e . T h e chapter h o u s e contains m u r a l paintings from the s e c o n d half of the fourteenth century by A n d r e a di B o n a i u t o and o t h e r s , comprising images of Dominican propaganda, including images of Saint D o m i n i c , the f o u n d e r of the order, the D o m i n i c a n s ' salvation of heretics, and

their famous

p r e a c h e r S a i n t Peter M a r t y r .

15

The

Dominican

iconography extends outside the chapter h o u s e into the cloister, where on the north wall a Dominican

'tree'

was

painted

by

an

anonymous

artist,

showing

busts

of

important

Dominicans in roundels on the Tree of Life o n which C h r i s t is crucified. T h e vaults in the cloister are also painted with roundels c o n t a i n i n g busts of Dominicans. The narrative cycle on the walls of the c l o i s t e r is divided between six bays on each of the east, south and west walls, m a k i n g eighteen bays altogether, of which t h e fifth and sixth bays on the east wall are n o w all but c o m p l e t e l y d e s t r o y e d . T h e scenes depict e p i s o d e s from Genesis Chapters 1 to 34. It does not n e c e s s a r i l y f o l l o w that since Uccello painted the

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s 97

Creation of A d a m and E v e , the earliest e p i s o d e s from G e n e s i s depicted, that h e w a s t h e first artist to work on the cycle. T h e more archaic style of the paintings on t h e s o u t h a n d west w a l l s , depicting scenes f r o m the stories of A b r a h a m t o S i m e o n a n d Levi, s u g g e s t s they are earlier than U c c e l l o ' s p a i n t i n g s , dating to a b o u t the early 1420s. Identifying the other artists w h o worked o n the c y c l e has been m a d e difficult b y the a b s e n c e of d o c u m e n t s , the poor condition of the paintings and their c o n s e r v a t i v e style. In 2 0 0 3 Cecilia Frosinini re-assessed the authorship of the c y c l e , attributing t h e paintings in the first f o u r bays on t h e south wall to M a r i o t t o di Cristofano, t h e fifth bay to his w o r k s h o p , and t h e sixth bay and t h e first b a y o f the west wall tentatively t o D e l l o Delli, b a s e d o n V a s a r i ' s t e s t i m o n y , and the rest of t h e west wall t o an a n o n y m o u s artist. Frosinini p r o p o s e d that the east wall w a s t h e last to be painted, in the 1430 and 1440s, attributing the first a n d fourth bays t o U c c e l l o . T h e second and third bays she gave to U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s h o p , s u g g e s t i n g F r a n c e s c o d'Antonio

and S c h e g g i a were possibly the assistants r e s p o n s i b l e , a n d t h e

fragmentary

p a i n t i n g s i n the fifth and sixth bays she gave t o an a n o n y m o u s Florentine artist. F o r Frosinini, t h e cycle was b e g u n on the south and west walls as a depiction of scenes from t h e lives of patriarchs, and completed on the east wall as a m o r e c o m p r e h e n s i v e a c c o u n t of Genesis, starting with t h e creation of A d a m and Eve and the a n i m a l s . S h e noted in particular the c u r i o u s a b s e n c e of scenes dedicated t o the story of J o s e p h , w h o is traditionally interpreted as prefiguring Christ, an indication that the cycle may h a v e b e e n t r u n c a t e d .

16

T h e a b s e n c e of the

final stories of Genesis c o n c e r n i n g Joseph is c u r i o u s , s i n c e t h e popularity of t h e J o s e p h story is evident in t h e mural cycle of that subject in t h e altana

of Giovanni R u c e l l a i ' s palazzo

p a i n t e d in the mid-fifteenth century. Be that as it m a y , it is not likely that the original plans for t h e i c o n o g r a p h y of the cycle and the changes they u n d e r w e n t will ever be clear in the a b s e n c e of m o r e concrete i n f o r m a t i o n .

17

T h e i c o n o g r a p h y of the cycle as it was painted s h o w s the u n b r o k e n l i n e a g e of G o d ' s c h o s e n people continuing o v e r many generations, s o m e t i m e s experiencing d e l i v e r a n c e from adversity, prosperity, h a p p y marriages and m i r a c u l o u s c o n c e p t i o n s , but also threatened by extinction through infertility, murderous sibling rivalry a n d m a r r i a g e out of the extended family. T h e tenacity of G o d ' s chosen people through trials and tribulations is perhaps to be interpreted as a lesson on the importance of maintaining the integrity of the family and social c o h e s i o n by keeping faith with G o d ' s injunctions. G e n e s i s contains two of G o d ' s c o v e n a n t s with m a n , first, that after the flood He would n e v e r again send a n o t h e r to d e s t r o y the earth, s y m b o l i s e d by the rainbow (Chapter 9: 8-17), a n d s e c o n d , that God w o u l d g u a r a n t e e the survival of A b r a h a m ' s lineage, to be m a r k e d by the c i r c u m c i s i o n of e i g h t - d a y - o l d

boys

( C h a p t e r 17: 1-21). T h e second covenant was not actually depicted in the c y c l e , probably b e c a u s e c i r c u m c i s i o n is not practiced by Christians. A s an extension of the i c o n o g r a p h y of

98

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

Dominican propaganda in the chapter house, t h e i c o n o g r a p h y of the Chiostro V e r d e cycle is perhaps a declaration of their interest in maintaining good r e l a t i o n s in Florence, within and between families, a cause to which they h a d long dedicated g r e a t efforts.

18

T h e prosperity of

the convent depended on the prosperity and peaceful c o - e x i s t e n c e of Florentine families. The lay members of the Confraternity of Saint Peter Martyr w h o regularly processed t h r o u g h the cloister, coming from some of Florence's most p r o m i n e n t families, m i g h t well have been intended as a key audience for such a lesson. The overall style of Uccello's Creation

Stories

is s o m e w h a t conservative, with the

disposition of the figures mostly in a single plane across t h e f o r e g r o u n d , the Ghibertian u s e of rocky backdrops for t h e figures, and the tapestry-like flat a r r a n g e m e n t of t h e trees across the picture plane. However, some aspects of the composition s e e m rather advanced t o date before 1425, as is sometimes suggested. T h e view into a distant l a n d s c a p e with hills and trees between God the Father and the animals o n the left is c l o s e t o M a s a c c i o ' s landscapes in the Brancacci Chapel of around 1425-1427. T h e elegantly c u r v e d profiles of A d a m and E v e in the Original Sin are close to Masolino's figures in the B r a n c a c c i Chapel. The sophisticated style of God the Father's drapery, especially the figure o n t h e left, with its

gracefully

modelled contours and subtle chiaroscuro, though related t o t h e modelling of drapery in Ghiberti's sculpture of Saint John the Baptist at Or San M i c h e l e executed between 1412 and 1416,

19

seems very accomplished in a painting for t h e p e r i o d p r i o r to M a s a c c i o ' s Brancacci

Chapel paintings. However, such observations go t h e heart o f t h e questions c o n c e r n i n g the relationship between Uccello, Masolino a n d M a s a c c i o : w h o influenced w h o m , w h e n a n d to what extent? Given the scarcity of evidence c o n c e r n i n g U c c e l l o ' s work during the crucial early years of the 1420s when they worked together, and t h e uncertainty of the e v i d e n c e there is, these questions are very difficult to answer. Most important for assessing the date of U c c e l l o ' s Creation

Stories is the observation

that the depiction of God the Father raising A d a m from t h e g r o u n d is almost identical, though reversed, to Ghiberti's depiction of the subject in the Doors exact dates of production for the panels of the Doors

of Paradise

of Paradise

(Figs 1 6 4 - 1 6 5 ) .

20

The

are unknown but must fall

between 1425, when Ghiberti received the c o m m i s s i o n , a n d A p r i l 1437, when all the panels were cast, while they were not installed until July 1452 at t h e earliest.

21

Krautheimer and

Krautheimer-Hess concluded that it is likely Uccello had a c c e s s t o Ghiberti's d r a w i n g s after his return to Florence from V e n i c e .

22

R o c c a s e c c a i m p l i e d t h a t Uccello may have r e s u m e d a

role in Ghiberti's workshop after his return to Florence, b a s e d o n the number of his works from this period that are stylistically related to G h i b e r t i ' s ,

23

a n d Borsi and Borsi went so far as

to suggest that Ghiberti might have been a w a r d e d t h e c o m m i s s i o n for the Creation with Uccello as his assistant.

24

Scenes,

If the conception of t h e figural composition of G o d t h e Father

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s 99

and A d a m is credited to Ghiberti as it probably should be, then the Creation

Stories should be

dated to the period after U c c e l l o ' s return to Florence. The Operai of Santa M a r i a Novella could hardly h a v e been oblivious to Masaccio's Trinity

inside Santa Maria N o v e l l a as an indication of the quality that could be achieved in

mural painting in t h e second half of the 1 4 2 0 s .

25

W h e n it c a m e to commissioning the scenes

o n the east wall of the C h i o s t r o V e r d e , quality would h a v e been more of an issue than for the south and west walls. T h e east wall runs alongside the external wall of the church and its proximity to the church, particularly the door in the northeast corner of the cloister providing access to the interior, increases its visual importance. If t h e Operai were looking for a mural painter of M a s a c c i o ' s s t a n d i n g at the end of the 1420s, U c c e l l o would seem to have been the only available candidate, w h o is known to have worked with Masaccio on equal terms. U c c e l l o ' s much praised c o n t r i b u t i o n to the Carnesecchi C h a p e l , w h e r e he worked with M a s o l i n o and M a s a c c i o around 1 4 2 3 , was in the nearby c h u r c h of Santa Maria Maggiore. There is a gap of a r o u n d seventeen years between Uccello's involvement with the S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o and his painting of the Creation

Scenes.

Is it possible that the young

artist was remembered at S a n t a Maria Novella from the earlier episode? Uccello did not forget the spedale

o w n e d by the confraternity at Santa M a r i a Novella, which owed him

m o n e y until 1433. Similarly, D e o Beccuti did not forget t h e confraternity to which he had given money, when he claimed the a m o u n t as a tax e x e m p t i o n in 1427 and 1431. Francesco T o r n a b u o n i , who apparently helped fund the acquisition of t h e spedale in 1413 was one of the Operai of Santa Maria N o v e l l a in 1422 and so he m i g h t well have been involved in the c o m m i s s i o n for the cycle in the Chiostro V e r d e .

26

Having secured Uccello's services, it seems

strange that he initially only finished one bay. The authorities might have allowed Uccello to delegate the second and third bays to an assistant or assistants if he had an important c o m m i s s i o n elsewhere. T h a t Uccello supervised the p l a n n i n g of the subsequent scenes very closely is open to question, s i n c e the second bay departs from the layout of Uccello's bay in the division of the upper and lower scenes below the level of the top of the corbels on the sides of the bays and the quality of the paintings is markedly inferior to the ones he painted.

Domestic Devotion: T h e Del B e c c u t o Virgin and Child, t h e Oxford Annunciation M e l b o u r n e Saint

and the

George

A commission probably dating shortly after the Creation

Stories

is the detached mural

painting of the Virgin and Child now in the M u s e o di San M a r c o , Florence. A note attached to the work indicates that it was removed from one of t h e h o u s e s of the del Beccuto family.

27

T h e most likely original location would be the Palazzo Del Beccuto opposite Santa Maria

100

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

Maggiore, destroyed during the nineteenth-century r e m o d e l l i n g of central F l o r e n c e . Judging by its pointed-arch shape and modest dimensions, the painting was probably o r i g i n a l l y o v e r a door. Deo Beccuti owned property opposite Santa M a r i a Maggiore in the first half of the fifteenth century, in the area subsequently occupied b y the Palazzo Del B e c c u t o , and Uccelio's portate for 1431 and 1433 indicate that D e o owed him 3 6 lire a n d 8 5 florins, respectively. Padoa Rizzo has associated these debts with the Virgin

and Child,

and has

observed that since no amount was declared owing by Deo in Uccello's 1427 portata

the

painting should probably b e dated to the early 1430s, rather than 1425 or b e f o r e as has sometimes been proposed.

28

A precedent for the depiction of t h e Virgin and Child can be found in a p o l y c h r o m e stucco Virgin and Child in the Victoria and Albert M u s e u m , London. T h e M u s e u m attributes the work in its current label to Ghiberti's workshop, s u g g e s t i n g that it is based o n a l o s t mode] by Ghiberti dateable to between 1425 and

1450 (Figs 1 6 6 - 1 6 7 ) .

29

Similar

high-relief

sculptures were also made in large n u m b e r s by D o n a t e l l o and, possibly, B r u n e l l e s c h i .

30

The

Victoria and Albert Museum stucco shows the Virgin carrying the Child in a life-size, halflength format, with the Virgin wearing a blue mantle lined with red. T h e a r r a n g e m e n t o f the figures and the shape and colouring of the drapery a r e very close to t h o s e in U c c e l l o ' s painting. In both works the Child's sleeve is red, a l t h o u g h the sleeve in U c c e l l o ' s w o r k i s cut with an elegant, tailored slit along the side, with a white border. Uccello adapted

the

composition to fill the arch format by extending the drapery flowing in a b r e e z e to the right and by showing the Virgin holding flowers to the left. While virtually n o t h i n g is k n o w n of Uccello's activity in Ghiberti's workshop, it is possible that as a junior assistant he may have been involved in such undemanding tasks as the painting of workshop p r o d u c t i o n s l i k e the Victoria and Albert Museum's sculpture. Although, it w a s not necessarily this version o f the many made in the shop, that was the source for U c c e l l o ' s painting. Inventories show that panel paintings of the Virgin were u b i q u i t o u s in century Florentine houses, with some houses containing more than o n e .

31

fifteenth-

M o r e durable

representations of the Virgin and Child in a half-length format, either as m u r a l p a i n t i n g s or relief sculptures, looking down benevolently from a tabernacle on the outside o f a b u i l d i n g or in the arch above a doorway must have been extremely common also, j u d g i n g b y the numerous examples that have survived. Ghiberti, Donatello and possibly B r u n e l l e s c h i , and their workshops, made small-scale works in terracotta and stucco and p a i n t e d m u r a l s that served a simple devotional and talismanic function for t h e everyday life of F l o r e n t i n e citizens as the del Beccuto family's Virgin and Child would have done for them. T h e precious gold ground and lapis lazuli pigment used to depict t h e Virgin and communicated to the viewer their piety and their prosperity.

Child

simultaneously

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

101

T w o other w o r k s with small dimensions and similar precious materials datable to this period are the Annunciation

in t h e Ashmolean M u s e u m , Oxford, and t h e Saint George in the

National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne. Nothing is k n o w n about their provenances before they emerged in British collections in the mid-nineteenth century. T h e earliest known owner of the Annunciation,

the H o n o u r a b l e W.T.H. F o x - S t r a n g w a y s ( 1 7 9 5 - 1 8 6 5 ) , is believed to

have formed his collection largely in Florence, where h e w a s the British Secretary of Legation from 1825 to 1828. He donated the Annunciation,

U c c e l l o ' s Hunt and many other

Italian Renaissance p a i n t i n g s to t h e Ashmolean M u s e u m , Oxford in 1 8 5 0 .

32

The A n n u n c i a t i o n is o n e of the most popular and important subjects in religious painting of the F l o r e n t i n e R e n a i s s a n c e , j u d g i n g by its frequency and t h e special veneration of certain famous images in Florentine churches, such as t h e mural painting in Santissima Annunziata that a c c o r d i n g to legend was completed

by an A n g e l .

33

The Feast of the

Annunciation was celebrated on 25 March, reputed to b e t h e f o u n d i n g date of the city. Until 1416 it was the principal feast of the D u o m o , supplanted in that y e a r b y the Feast of the Purification.

34

T h e A n n u n c i a t i o n held special significance for w o m e n , d u e to the miraculous

power of certain i m a g e s , such as the one in Santissima A n n u n z i a t a , to i m p r o v e fecundity, and n o doubt because the Virgin, a w o m a n , is the principal h u m a n s u b j e c t . In the Oxford Annunciation

35

the Virgin sits in a p o r t i c o with a b o o k in her lap, looking

ahead in meditation (Fig. 1). S h e seems unaware that a procession of Angels is playing musical instruments a b o v e . In front of the procession G o d t h e Father places a mazzocchio

(a

circular headdress) o n G a b r i e l ' s head and gives him three lilies t o present t o the Virgin, while Gabriel leans forward to kiss Flis hand. In a second m o m e n t of the narrative Gabriel flies clown towards the V i r g i n , and in a third m o m e n t he a p p e a r s before the Virgin and the Holy Spirit flies under the portico t o w a r d s her. Giovanni da C a l v o l i ' s Meditationes {Meditations

on the Life of Christ)

Vitae

Christi

describes the dispatch of Gabriel:

And Gabriel, with glad and joyful face, kneeled with bowed head, respectful and reverent, received attentively the embassy of his Lord. Then he arose cheerfully and gaily and flew down from heaven and in a minute stood before the Virgin, who was in a room of her little house. But his flight was not so swift that God did not enter before him, and thus the Holy Trinity was present, entering before the messenger.

36

Uccello's e m p h a t i c depiction of the narrative, with three representations of Gabriel, calls to mind the d e s c r i p t i o n s of sacra rappresentazione

performed in Florence throughout

the fifteenth century for which there were mechanical d e v i c e s allowing the performers to appear to fly up and d o w n . T h e s e were impressive p r o d u c t i o n s ; M a s o l i n o painted the props for the sacra rappresentazione

of the Ascension at the c h u r c h of Santa Maria del Carmine in

102

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

37

1425, and Brunelleschi is thought to have designed m e c h a n i s m s for sacra

rappresentazione

such as the one at Santissima Annunziata, recorded by A b r a h a m of Suzdal:

Above, on the tribune, one saw God the Father surrounded by more than five hundred burning lamps that revolved continually while moving up and down. Boys dressed in white representing angels were around Him, some with cymbals lcembalo'1, others with flute or harp, making a joyful spectacle of inexpressible beauty. After some time an angel dispatched by God descended on two hempen ropes...to announce the Conception. The angel was a handsome youth dressed in a garment white as snow and decorated in gold, 38

exactly as one sees the angels of Heaven in paintings.

The procession of Angels playing horns, drums a n d pipes, and the figure of Gabriel descending from the sky in Uccello's Annunciation

certainly make a theatrical impression.

The bed glimpsed through the open door of t h e portico is a c o m m o n feature of fourteenth and fifteenth-century Annunciation scenes. H e r e t o o , it seems to be significant, as a reference to the divine, semi-conjugal nature of the Annunciation. In the landscape a l o w , rectangular structure extends beyond the left edge of the picture. It seems to b e filled w i t h water and so might represent a well or water trough, p e r h a p s as a symbol of the V i r g i n ' s purity. However, the form of the structure is also similar t o Christ's t o m b in U c c e l l o ' s Resurrection

window in the Duomo in Florence. A s an open tomb it might refer to t h e

ultimate purpose of the Annunciation: Christ's redemption of humanity through his death a n d resurrection. It is interesting to consider to what extent the Oxford Annunciation composition of Uccello's important lost Annunciation,

might reflect t h e

formerly in Santa Maria M a g g i o r e ,

probably painted less than a decade earlier. Vasari's description of the work emphasised its precocious use of perspective and relief: '|it) showed h o w to make the lines escape ( t o w a r d s a vanishing point] and t o show space on a plane, that is little and small, so much so that something that appears far seems large: and they who c o l o u r with good j u d g m e n t of this, w i t h grace adding the shadows in their place and the highlights, with colours, deceive the e y e , s u c h that the picture appears real and in relief'. architecture of the Oxford Annunciation

30

T h e recession of the orthogonals in the

more or less precisely to a vanishing point at the left

of the composition could be said to correspond to V a s a r i ' s description of the lost work. T h e conscious planning of this is revealed by IRR, which s h o w s the lines of construction aligning the capitals and the cornices. The.tiny buildings in the landscape might correspond to w h a t Vasari said of the lost painting, that small things far a w a y were made to look large through the use of perspective. Vasari's praise of Uccello's use of colour and light and shade in the lost work giving a sense of relief, is analogous t o the gradations of blue used for the different

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

facets of the architecture in the Oxford Annunciation.

103

Of c o u r s e , such effects m i g h t well h a v e

been c o n s i d e r a b l y stronger in t h e lost w o r k , which w o u l d have been m u c h larger than t h e small panel in Oxford, s p a n n i n g the top of M a s o l i n o ' s three-panel altarpiece. T h e architecture of the V i r g i n ' s loggia is G o t h i c , with a decorative frieze of s i n u o u s foliage a n d flowers along the top. T h e frieze is r e m i n i s c e n t of the o n e in F r a A n g e l i c o ' s Annunciation

( P r a d o , M a d r i d ) from the late 1420s or e a r l y 1430s. T h e pillars, h o w e v e r , h a v e

cornices separated from the capitals by b l o c k s , r e m i n i s c e n t of the c o l u m n s in the basilicas of San L o r e n z o and S a n t o Spirito, built on t h e basis of B r u n e l l e s c h i ' s designs. T h e r e b u i l d i n g of San L o r e n z o was u n d e r w a y in 1 4 3 1 , around the t i m e t h e Annuncation architecture o f the Annunciation,

was painted.

40

The

in the underlying, l o g i c a l construction of s p a c e based on

geometry as revealed by I R R , and the outward f o r m of t h e pillars, p r o v i d e s s o m e e v i d e n c e that U c c e l l o was influenced

by Brunelleschi, as M a n e t t i wrote, e v e n if U c c e l l o

recast

B r u n e l l e s c h i ' s austere, classical style in a decorative G o t h i c one. A s with the Creation Annunciation.

Scenes,

G h i b e r t i ' s i n f l u e n c e is strongly felt in the

Oxford

T h e s c e n e is d o m i n a t e d by the perspectival representation of the p o r t i c o with

simplified, Corinthian-like capitals, and God the F a t h e r relegated to the top left Similarly, in G h i b e r t i ' s Isaac and Jacob

panel from t h e Doors

of Paradise

corner.

the perspectival

representation of the portico, with its Corinthian-like c a p i t a l s , d o m i n a t e s the s c e n e , w h i l e G o d the F a t h e r is relegated to the top right corner (Figs 1 6 8 - 1 6 9 ) . T h e u n d e r d r a w i n g a n d incisions in the Annunciation

indicate that the arch facing t h e v i e w e r and t h e top of t h e d o o r w a y

leading inside were originally r o u n d , while the f o r m e r w a s painted as a pointed G o t h i c arch and the latter was painted as a rectangular aperture. T h e repetition of round a r c h e s in the earlier stage of the c o m p o s i t i o n would h a v e been c l o s e r t o the architecture of the Isaac Jacob

and

panel, s u g g e s t i n g that Uccello adapted G h i b e r t i ' s d e s i g n for the panel for his painting.

Like Ghiberti, Uccello included a curtain hanging o n t h e bed draped up over a horizontal support, to soften the hard lines of the architecture. A s in Ghiberti's relief, the narrative in U c c e l l o ' s painting unfolds a r o u n d the architectural s e t t i n g . T h e pastel colours of the A n g e l s ' robes are, h o w e v e r , reminiscent of Fra A n g e l i c o ' s palette. T h e

delicacy

and

precision of the s m a l l - s c a l e

A n g e l i c o ' s style, as it is in t h e M e l b o u r n e Saint observe that the Annunciation doubted s i n c e .

41

George.

painting is also similar to

Fra

Georg P u d e l k o was the first to

is by the s a m e artist as t h e Saint

George,

which has n e v e r been

Not only are they closely related stylistically, scientific analysis s h o w s they

are technically similar. N o t a b l y , each has a single p i e c e of f i n e - w e a v e cloth as an interlayer covering m o s t of the panel. T h e y also share unusual i c o n o g r a p h y : the papal tiara worn by God the Father in both p a i n t i n g s is relatively u n c o m m o n in Florence in the first third of the fifteenth century, although the absence of information a b o u t the patron or patrons of these

104

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

works, and the complexity of the relationship between Florence and the papacy in the early fifteenth century make it difficult to d e t e r m i n e what specific meaning, if a n y , t h e papal tiara might h a v e .

42

The small size of t h e Saint George

suggests, as it does for the Oxford

Annunciation,

that it was made for a domestic context. T h e precious g o l d and silver leaf and lapis lazuli in the works suggest specifically that they w e r e m a d e for t h e home(s) of a merchant or patrician patron or patrons. T h o u g h the Saint George

lacks its o r i g i n a l frame, j u d g i n g by the way the

composition fits comfortably within the current format o f the panel, it does not s e e m to have been cut down significantly (Fig. 172). T h e round t o p of the panel is probably original, as is the case with the Karlsruhe Adoration

w h e r e traces of t h e original arch-shaped frame remain.

In the Saint George the cloth interlayer stops at a point b e l o w the arch, presumably b e c a u s e it was easier not to cut the cloth to follow the r o u n d part of the panel. Furthermore, the sunburst behind God the Father fits perfectly with t h e arch f o r m a t . Given its different d i m e n s i o n s and shape, the Saint George Annunciation,

was probably n o t part of an integral ensemble with t h e Oxford

as has been suggested might be t h e c a s e .

43

T h e Saint George may have been set

within a tabernacle-style frame to hang on a wall or it m i g h t have been the central panel of a freestanding triptych with wings. Two small areas of restoration on the vertical edges of the painting at the springing of the arch suggest that the original frame had pillars, w h o s e capitals impinged slightly onto the surface of the painting. In Martin D a v i e s ' somewhat a m b i v a l e n t c o m m e n t s on the quality of the -London Saint George he described its fantastic i m a g e r y as fit for a n u r s e r y .

44

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

George the prominent and reassuring presence of God t h e Father, the glorification of military combat, the fantastic imagery and witty, t h o u g h straightforward, iconography suggest that it may indeed have been intended for a y o u n g m a n ' s r o o m , or was made for a family h o m e with a male child. There is s o m e evidence that y o u n g men of distinguished Florentine Renaissance families had religious paintings in their r o o m s . A t t h e a g e of twenty-two or three L o r e n z o de' Medici had a painting of the Virgin in his r o o m , which m a y have been c o m m i s s i o n e d for him rather than by h i m .

45

Giovanni Dominici ( 1 3 5 6 - 1 4 2 0 ) , a Dominican preacher at Santa Maria

Novella, wrote the Treatise

on Family

Rule

(Trattato

del Governo

Familiare)

in w h i c h he

listed five means to instruct children h o w to love God, m u c h quoted by modern art historians. The first means was to h a v e paintings and sculptures a r o u n d the house showing child saints or the Virgin with the Child, ' i n which your child, before t h e m , may delight in s o m e t h i n g similar and be rapt in something similar, with acts and signs p l e a s i n g to a child' Cnelle quali figliuolo,

ancor nelle fasce, 46

infanzia.'').

While the Saint

si diletti come simile

e dal simile

rapito, con atti e segni grati

il tuo alia

George does not s h o w a c h i l d saint or the infant Christ, it does

have a subject likely t o appeal to a y o u n g viewer. L e s s often quoted by art historians is

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

105

D o m i n i c i ' s warning against exposing children t o p a g a n influences, the ' p o i s o n o u s c u n n i n g of the old serpent' {'velenosa from the f a i t h .

47

malizia

dell'antico

T h e d r a g o n in the Saint

serpente')

George

threatening Christians w h o stray

is a delightful e m b o d i m e n t of the pagan

threat that Dominici w a r n e d of, as the following d i s c u s s i o n of t h e w o r k ' s iconography will show. Iacopo da V a r a z z e ' s popular thirteenth-century book on the lives of t h e saints, the Legenda

Aurea

{Golden

Legend),

George story. In t h e Legenda

provides a likely s o u r c e for U c c e l l o ' s version of the Saint Aurea

the saint w o u n d s t h e dragon with his spear before

tethering it with the p r i n c e s s ' girdle and leading it i n t o t h e town of S i l e n e .

48

In Uccello's

painting t h o u g h , the princess is shown bearing a l e n g t h of chain with a collar to use as the d r a g o n ' s tether, rather than immodestly r e m o v i n g h e r girdle. T h e Legenda

Aurea

also

provides clues to t h e w o r k ' s symbolic content. T h e story of the s a i n t ' s life begins with the first of three e t y m o l o g i e s for the name Giorgio, d e r i v i n g from the w o r d s geos, m e a n i n g earth, and orge, meaning to cultivate. T h u s , the saint is o n e w h o s y m b o l i c a l l y tills the earth, and so is associated with agriculture. This etymology has r e s o n a n c e in the latter part of t h e saint's story. After his victory o v e r the dragon, which was led c a p t i v e into the town it h a d previously terrorised, Saint George refused to w o r s h i p pagan g o d s as t h e provost of the t o w n demanded. Consequently, the saint was subjected to a series of t o r t u r e s , each o n e usually fatal in itself. He was beaten to p i e c e s , branded with hot irons until his insides c a m e out, which were then doused in salt, he was p o i s o n e d , and then severely p o i s o n e d , he was cut by blade-bearing wheels until the wheels w e r e broken, and he was b a t h e d in molten lead. M i r a c u l o u s l y , the saint recovered from each of these ordeals, only to be finally dragged through the streets and beheaded, which proved too much even for h i m ! N e v e r t h e l e s s , the s a i n t ' s m i r a c u l o u s powers of resurrection are a n a l o g o u s to the rebirth of crops e a c h s p r i n g . Another significant feature of the Saint

George

49

associated with resurrection is the

sun. The association of God the Father with the i m a g e of the sun is extremely c o m m o n in Renaissance i c o n o g r a p h y , for example it is recorded in Filarete's architectural t r e a t i s e .

50

The

saint's halo of gold rays is a minor version of God the F a t h e r ' s n i m b u s and the crescent shapes on the d r a g o n s ' w i n g s may be e m b l e m s of the m o o n . The n a m e of the town in which Saint George's m a r t y r d o m o c c u r s in the Legenda

Aurea,

Silena, is similar to the n a m e of the

Greek moon g o d d e s s , S e l e n e , who was also the g o d d e s s of m a g i c .

51

T h e pagan

town,

terrorised by the d r a g o n , is rescued by the Christian warrior, or at a d e e p e r level, the town is terrorised by pagan w o r s h i p , embodied by the d r a g o n , and is liberated from its pagan state by the Christian warrior. T h e victory of the saint o v e r the d r a g o n represents, then, the victory of Christianity over p a g a n i s m , day over night, and life o v e r death. This s y m b o l i s m is also present in U c c e l l o ' s painting of the subject in Paris, w h i c h has the crescent m o o n in the top

106

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

right comer and s o m e golden rays (of sunlight) in the top left corner.

V i e w e d at close range,

the Paris version h a s honey-coloured crescent shapes inside t h e dark circles on the d r a g o n ' s wings, corresponding to the gold crescents in t h e M e l b o u r n e version, reinforcing

the

solar/lunar imagery (Figs 173-176). Like the Oxford Annunciation,

the Saint

George

compositional and narrative formulae i n Ghiberti's Doors and Goliath

s h o w s a clear r e s e m b l a n c e to the of Paradise,

in particular t h e David

scene (Figs 170-171). A s in G h i b e r t i ' s relief, the composition of t h e

Saint

George positions t h e fighting across the front of t h e picture field with discarded w e a p o n s scattered on the ground, surrounded by a rocky b a c k d r o p , and a walled town filling almost t h e entire width of the picture field above. In both w o r k s , t h e foreground figures are seen from above while the cities are seen di sotto represented within the compositions.

in su, t h e r e b y increasing the sense o f

space

Other influences s e e m m o r e exotic, such as t h e

Byzantine-looking entrance to the dragon's cave in t h e lower left of the l a n d s c a p e , s o m e t h i n g Uccello might have seen in Greek icons of Saint G e o r g e in Venice.

Paintings for a M e r c h a n t ' s Chapel: T h e P r a t o Stories

of the Virgin and Saint

Stephen

The Stories of the Virgin and Saint Stephen in the A s s u n t a Chapel, the first chapel on t h e right of the main altar in t h e D u o m o in Prato, was a major c o m m i s s i o n for Uccello. It was the o n l y time, as far as is k n o w n , that he assumed responsibility for the painting of a chapel (Fig. 177). The cycle is also significant as the only one attributed to Uccello in overall good condition. Ironically, it has caused some of the greatest attributional controversies concerning U c c e l l o . Although its Uccelloesque characteristics were recognised by Longhi as early as 1928, it w a s not regularly accepted as by Uccello until V o l p e ' s r e - a s s e s s m e n t of the artist's early career in 53

1980. The most extensive research on the chapel was published by Padoa Rizzo in 1997, in which the delicate task of disentangling individual h a n d s in the paintings and their

sinopie

was given the most detailed and considered a s s e s s m e n t to date. The realisation that U c c e l l o almost certainly worked with an assistant or assistants over the entire cycle helps to explain the doubts of those critics who have hesitated to attribute it to h i m .

54

All critics are in

agreement, however, that Andrea di Giusto c o m p l e t e d the cycle from mid-way through t h e Stoning of Saint Stephen.

Andrea finished that scene a n d is responsible for each of the b o t t o m

scenes in their entirety. The slightly crude, a n g u l a r m a n n e r of his style reflects his training in Lorenzo di Bicci's w o r k s h o p .

55

On the right wall of the chapel are t h e Stories bottom: the Birth

of the Virgin;

the Presentation

Marriage of the Virgin. On the left wall are the Stories

of the Virgin, of the

Virgin

comprising, from top to at the Temple;

of Saint Stephen,

and

the

from top to b o t t o m :

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

the Disputation

of Saint Stephen;

of Saints Stephen

and Lorenzo.

the Stoning

of Saint Stephen;

and the Recovery

of the

107

Bodies

In the vault are d e p i c t i o n s of four virtues: faith, h o p e , charity

and fortitude. O n the underside of the arch leading into the chapel are depictions of Saints Francis, Paul, D o m e n i c and J e r o m e . T h e decoration o n t h e rear wall was m u c h affected by the installation of an altar in 1665, including an altarpiece by Carlo D o l c e , since r e m o v e d . An image of the Blessed

Jacopone

da Todi previously b e h i n d the altar w a s d e t a c h e d in 1871 and

has also been r e m o v e d from t h e chapel. Apart from later paintings of Saints Peter and Paul in niches and a repainted coat of arms of the M a r c o v a l d i family, n o w detached and removed from t h e chapel, no other paintings have survived f r o m the back w a l l .

56

T h e only remaining

representation of the A s s u m p t i o n to which the c h a p e l w a s dedicated, is in the stained glass w i n d o w , which is later than t h e fifteenth century. Padoa R i z z o discussed a number of d o c u m e n t s describing the dedication of the chapel t o the A s s u m p t i o n in 1435, although n o n e refers t o its decoration. In N o v e m b e r of that year t h e Spogli

del

Diplomatico

mention

that,

'Michele

di

Giovanninio

di

Sandro

manufacturer of wool and merchant of Prato k n o w i n g o l d age and w i s h i n g to p r o v i d e for his soul, founds a chapel Assumption...' conoscendosi

in t h e pieve

(fMichele

in eta senile

di

the chapel was mentioned

Giovannino

e volendo

pieve di Prato sotto Vinvocazione

of Prato d e d i c a t e d di

Sandro

provvedere

della Beata

all'anima

Vergine

to t h e Blessed lanaiolo

e

sua, fonda

delVAssunzione...'').

Virgin

mercante

of

di

Prato

una cappella

nella

In t h e s a m e year

in Michele di G i o v a n n i n o di Sandro M a r c o v a l d i ' s

Catasto,

specifying that t h e f a m o u s relic of the V i r g i n ' s girdle w a s exhibited there: Ha chappella si mostra

la cintola

di nostra

donna

51

di Prato'.

the

A c c o r d i n g to the Legenda

T h o m a s took the V i r g i n ' s girdle to prove that s h e a s c e n d e d bodily into H e a v e n .

Aurea 58

ove Saint

T h e period

in which the relic was housed in the chapel during w o r k s affecting its usual location on the left wall of the main chapel accounts for M a r c o v a l d i ' s c h o i c e of dedication for his chapel. A third piece of e v i d e n c e linking Michele Marcovaldi to t h e chapel is his f a m i l y ' s coat of arms formerly on the back wall, mentioned a b o v e , s h o w i n g a lion r a m p a n t .

59

The cycle represents Uccello's most d e v e l o p e d expression of the relationship of figures to architecture. This is not a reflection of his interest in architectural styles so much as a means to e x p l o r e the relationship of objects to s p a c e . T h e architecture is neither G o t h i c nor Classical, but m o r e or less geometric, elaborated

from circles, s q u a r e s , rectangles

and

triangles. Even the decorative borders are e m p h a t i c a l l y in relief, s h o w i n g p o p p y stems with leaves curled into volutes as t h o u g h made of metal. T h e c o m p o s i t i o n of the Birth of the

Virgin

(Fig. 178) f o l l o w s a traditional model in use s i n c e at least the fourteenth century, as seen in Bernardo D a d d i ' s depiction of the subject in t h e P a n c r a z i o polyptych (Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence), although the spatial configuration of U c c e l l o ' s c o m p o s i t i o n is m o r e regular. The

108

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

decorative punte on the ceiling are similar to those on t h e ceiling of the loggia in t h e Oxford Annunciation, Monument,

and those that appear on the underside o f the sarcophagus of the

Equestrian

evidence of Uccello's abiding interest in p u r e geometrical figures. However,

certain details of the painting are quite sensual, such as t h e gleaming, transparent w i n e and water-filled

carafes carried on the tray

by

a young

woman

in the b a c k g r o u n d ,

an

uncharacteristic hint of Flemishness in U c c e l l o ' s oeuvre. T h e curvaceous w o m a n descending the stairs at the left is rather sensuous for a period not especially k n o w n for such treatments of the female form.

60

The flowing drapery of the w o m a n ' s headdress is c o m p a r a b l e to Gabriel's

drapery in the Oxford Annunciation, Angels in the Karlsruhe Adoration.

the Child in the D e l Beccuto Virgin and Child and the T h e Birth

of the Virgin

shows U c c e l l o ' s interest in the

formal elements of composition, especially t h e interplay between organic and geometric forms. The Presentation

of the Virgin (Fig. 179) takes p l a c e in an open-air temple, against a

mountainous landscape. T h e rusticated wall in steep perspective at the left was evidently inspired by Masaccio's Healing

ofTabetha

in the B r a n c a c c i Chapel. T h e Virgin c l i m b s the

fifteen steps to the Temple described in the Legenda of Degrees. The Legenda

Aurea

Aurea

as analogous to the fifteen Psalms

also says that the T e m p l e was built o n raised ground s o that

the stairs were the only way to approach the altar, a n d that the Virgin was placed at the bottom of the stairs, climbing them on her o w n , just as U c c e l l o shows the scene. Furthermore, in the Legenda

Aurea

the priest of the T e m p l e is described as the pontiff

explaining why he wears a papal tiara in t h e painting. Presentation

61

('pontefice''),

T h e kneeling figure at the right of the

must be the patron, Michele di G i o v a n n i n o , flatteringly depicted m u c h y o u n g e r 62

than his sixty-four years of age in 1435. T h e standing f i g u r e to his right, looking out towards the viewer has been thought to be the artist's self-portrait, a self-deprecating representation if the identification is correct, although h e has also been identified as the patron's son, P i e r o . The Disputation

of Saint Stephen

63

(Fig. 180) s h o w s affinities with M a s a c c i o ' s lost

Sagra in the cloister of Santa Maria del C a r m i n e , as it is known from copy d r a w i n g s , in the grouping of massive, heavily-draped and t u r b a n - w e a r i n g f i g u r e s . light in the Disputation

Curiously, the depiction of

is anomalous, since t h e other five scenes are painted as lit from the

direction of the c h a p e l ' s w i n d o w , whereas the Disputation of the church interior.

64

65

is painted as lit from the direction

Was Uccello rushing to finish t h e commission, which he a b a n d o n e d

mid-way through the following scene? T h e figures in t h e Stoning are identical in style to Andrea di G i u s t o ' s in the Marriage

of Saint Stephen of the

Virgin,

(Fig. 181) w h i l e the

architecture is closer to that in the scenes p a i n t e d by U c c e l l o . The execution of this s c e n e was evidently divided between the two artists. T h e Recovery

of the Bodies

of Saints Stephen

and

Lorenzo at the bottom of the left wall is entirely by A n d r e a di Giusto. The fact that his w o r k is

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

109

confined t o the two lowest s c e n e s and the l o w e r half of o n e of the m i d d l e s c e n e s h o w s that he took over the completion of the cycle. T h e l o n g history of uncertainty as to

Uccello's

authorship of the majority of t h e cycle is u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , given the a p p e a r a n c e of atypical passages of execution. A n u m b e r of the faces are r a t h e r banal, p a i n t e d with b r o a d , rounded features n o t seen e l s e w h e r e in U c c e l l o ' s o e u v r e . N e v e r t h e l e s s , the c o n c e p t i o n of all the scenes is certainly attributable t o Uccello. T h e p r o j e c t m a y h a v e been rushed b y Uccello, accounting for uncharacteristically broad e x e c u t i o n in certain p a s s a g e s , but it is j u s t as likely that U c c e l l o w o r k e d with assistants, as yet u n i d e n t i f i e d .

66

T h e tentative attribution of the

second and third bays o f the Chiostro Verde t o F r a n c e s c o d ' A n t o n i o and S c h e g g i a , and the presence o f A n d r e a di G i u s t o in Prato suggests the e x i s t e n c e in t h e early 1430s of a coterie of artists with connections to U c c e l l o , Masolino, M a s a c c i o and Lorenzo di Bicci, willing to form temporary professional alliances as c o m m i s s i o n s a r o s e . U c c e l l o ' s w o r k o n the Carnesecchi altarpiece w o u l d have given him connections t o s u c h a g r o u p .

A S u r p r i s e D i s c o v e r y : T h e B o l o g n a Adoration

The Adoration

of the

67

Child

in the C h u r c h of San Martino M a g g i o r e , B o l o g n a , was d i s c o v e r e d beneath

whitewash on the east wall of the sacristy in 1977 (Fig. 5 ) .

6 8

T h e discovery w a s exceptional

not only b e c a u s e there had been n o prior k n o w l e d g e that Uccello w o r k e d in B o l o g n a , but also because there is no other surviving mural painting b y a famous F l o r e n t i n e , early Renaissance artist in the city. Nevertheless, there have a l w a y s been important links between the t w o cities. In January 1431 the celebrated b i s h o p of B o l o g n a , N i c o l b A l b e r g a t i , stayed at Santa Maria Novella in Florence as the papal ambassador to t h e S i g n o r i a ,

69

w h e r e Uccello m i g h t already

have c o m p l e t e d his first scenes in the Chiostro V e r d e . O n e of A l b e r g a t i ' s responsibilities in Bologna was to conduct pastoral visits to churches e n s u r i n g their m a i n t e n a n c e , including the visit h e made to the church of San Martino M a g g i o r e on 2 9 A u g u s t 1 4 3 7 .

70

Fie o v e r s a w a

program of devotional revival in Bologna during his b i s h o p r i c , from 1417 to 1443, relying heavily on confraternities to produce new shrines, sacra

rappresentazjone

and processions. In

these endeavours the B o l o g n e s e sometimes l o o k e d t o Florence for m o d e l s of devotional practice. Albergati was also a supporter of leading h u m a n i s t s and so his taste m a y have run to avant-garde artists such as U c c e l l o .

71

Most art h i s t o r i a n s believe that Van E y c k ' s portrait of

an ecclesiastic in the Kunsthistorisches M u s e u m in V i e n n a is a portrait of A l b e r g a t i , as it was identified in the seventeenth c e n t u r y ,

72

and P a n o f s k y b e l i e v e d Van Eyck depicted Albergati as

Saint J e r o m e in the small painting at the Detroit Institute of A r t s , s o m e t i m e s n o w attributed to Van E y c k ' s w o r k s h o p .

73

T h r o u g h a figure such as A l b e r g a t i the talented Uccello could have

been r e c o m m e n d e d to a patron at San Martino.

110

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

Uccello incised a date into the Adoration

in an area of drapery in the foreground that

has given rise to a great deal of discussion (Fig. 182). T h a t the date is original is indicated by the nature of its incisions, in which a fine i n s t r u m e n t m u s t have been used, creating slight ridges along the length of some strokes where t h e still wet material (intonaca was pushed to one s i d e .

74

or

arricciol)

The partial legibility of the date, due to t h e d a m a g e d condition of

the paint surface, and issues concerning U c c e l l o ' s stylistic development, have led t o different readings: 1431, or more commonly 1437, while s o m e authors have dated the w o r k to around 1435 or possibly 1436, without reference to h o w t h e last digit a p p e a r s .

75

V o l p e t h o u g h t 1431

improbable on the grounds that the work would h a v e b e e n too precocious for U c c e l l o , and decided in favour of the similar looking 1437. H o w e v e r , it is possible to discern a horizontal mark (incision?) at the b a s e of the last n u m e r a l , s u g g e s t i n g that the figure may be a Z s h a p e d 2 , making the date 1432. Uccello's autograph portata

of 1433 has a n u m b e r of Z shaped 2 s .

Nevertheless, since the last digit is very small and t h e surface is very d a m a g e d , t h e reading o f the date is far from clear; any one of the dates 1 4 3 1 , 1 4 3 2 o r 1437 is possible, based only o n the appearance of the inscription. The discovery of the painting c a m e too late to save it being d a m a g e d from t h e installation of wiring and a window into t h e w a l l , h o w e v e r , remnants of an

enchanting

composition survive. It shows a robust Christ s u p p o r t i n g himself on one arm on the g r o u n d , the Virgin kneeling in adoration at the left, a f r a g m e n t of a standing J o s e p h further to t h e left, and two kneeling figures, and one standing, o n the right. T h e composition is artfully a r r a n g e d in large areas of contrasting colours, surrounded b y an impressive, red, architectonic f r a m e . The naturalism of the painting has led to its being d e s c r i b e d as t h e first true nocturnal scene i n Italian painting.

76

T h e Christ Child does n o t h a v e a halo, an u n c o m m o n c o n c e s s i o n

to

naturalism it the early Italian Renaissance, t h o u g h it is c o m m o n enough in N e t h e r l a n d i s h a r t of the period. In the background, behind t w o large s h e l t e r s , the Magi stand in a n o c t u r n a l landscape looking into the sky where a crescent m o o n bathes the scene in an e e r i e light. T h e ox and the ass stand behind the Child, beautifully foreshortened, the ass looking up with a delightfully timid expression. The massive frame defines the pictorial field in a w a y t h a t prefigures or follows, depending on what date the p a i n t i n g is given, Alberti's d e s c r i p t i o n i n De Pictura (1435) of painting as providing a view t h r o u g h a w i n d o w .

77

The figure of the Christ Child confidently reclining on one arm is paralleled in a number of polychrome stucco reliefs of t h e Nativity from the circle of Donatello (Figs 1 8 3 185), examples are housed in the M u s e o Bardini, F l o r e n c e , the Staatliche M u s e u m , B e r l i n , and the Museum of Art, Chicago. There is n o k n o w n m o d e l by Donatello and the a u t h o r s h i p of the reliefs remains uncertain.

78

T h e Adoration

s h o w s Uccello's admiration of M a s a c c i o ' s

paintings in the Brancacci Chapel and the Trinity i n S a n t a Maria N o v e l l a .

79

The large, h e a v i l y

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

draped, kneeling figures in the foreground of the Adoration the Trinity.

T h e foreshortened punte

foreshortened punte

resemble M a s a c c i o ' s d o n o r s in

on the i n s i d e e d g e of the fictive frame are like the

on the underside of the arch in t h e Trinity

lozenge b e t w e e n t w o d i a m o n d s b e h i n d the punte Trinity.

111

and the b e a d i n g pattern of one

is the s a m e as the o n e below t h e lintel in the

T h e clarity and depth of the spatial c o n s t r u c t i o n of the entire c o m p o s i t i o n of the

Adoration

is analogous to M a s a c c i o ' s style. T h e u n d e n i a b l e influence of M a s a c c i o s h o w s that

Uccello m u s t have returned t o Florence from V e n i c e before painting t h e B o l o g n a

Adoration.

T h e identity of the three fragmentary figures at the right as saints or d o n o r s is uncertain. T h e foremost figure, w h o s e sex is i m p o s s i b l e to d e t e r m i n e , is kneeling in front of the Child with their hands crossed over their c h e s t in adoration; t h e second figure has a w o m a n ' s face and is kneeling behind the first, p r a y i n g with a rosary in her h a n d s ; and the third is standing and, a g a i n , their sex is unclear. It h a s been s u g g e s t e d that they m i g h t be m e m b e r s of a lay confraternity linked to the C a r m e l i t e s w h o administered t h e c h u r c h in the fifteenth c e n t u r y ,

80

which could be supported by the fact that two of the figures a r e wearing

red r o b e s , perhaps the c o s t u m e of an organisation or o r d e r . they m a y be a secular family of d o n o r s .

82

T h e sinopia

81

It has also been s u g g e s t e d that

s h o w s that initially two coats of arms

(surmounted by crosses?) w e r e to feature p r o m i n e n t l y in the c o m p o s i t i o n but were not painted (Fig. 186). W a s there a c h a n g e in the n a t u r e of t h e p a t r o n a g e during t h e c o m m i s s i o n ? The e v i d e n c e is far from clear. T h e green, cruciform support of the f o r e m o s t shelter directly o v e r the Child is probably a reference to the crucifix as the T r e e of L i f e .

83

The s y m b o l i s m of the crucified

Christ as the T r e e of Life was recorded by t h e F r a n c i s c a n B o n a v e n t u r a di B a g n o r e g i o and was c o m m o n l y depicted in paintings, such as P a c i n o di B u o n a g u i d a ' s Tree of Life

(Galleria

d e l l ' A c c a d e m i a , Florence) from around 1310.

Courtly R e f i n e m e n t for t h e King of K i n g s : T h e K a r l s r u h e Adoration

a n d the Q u a r a t e

Prcdella

The Karlsruhe Adoration

(Fig. 188) is one of o n l y t w o surviving w o r k s with a representation

of Saint J e r o m e by Uccello (the other being the F l o r e n c e A c c a d e m i a Holy Fathers) Annamarie

Bernacchioni

has

suggested, its

iconography

may

be related

to

and as Uccello's

m e m b e r s h i p of the Confraternity of Saint J e r o m e in 1438. Bernacchioni drew attention to the particular importance that the Nativity held for S a i n t J e r o m e , w h o visited the grotto in Bethlehem where it was believed the holy family f o u n d refuge, and w h o , a c c o r d i n g t o one account, was buried in a t o m b excavated below the g r o t t o .

84

T h e e x t e n s i v e use of glazing over

gold leaf in the work, similar to that in the Battle p a i n t i n g s , suggests that it p r o b a b l y does date

112

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

to the late 1430s, as discussed in Chapter 2. There c a n be, however, n o certainty of a connection between the imagery of the Adoration

and

confraternity as long as its original owner r e m a i n s u n k n o w n ,

Uccello's 85

membership

of

the

and the w o r k ' s p r o v e n a n c e is

unknown before 1837 when it was purchased for the collection of the Grand D u k e of Baden. In 1856 it was transferred to the Staatliche Kunsthalle, K a r l s r u h e , where it is still h o u s e d .

86

The subject is an Adoration rather than a N a t i v i t y , since Saints J e r o m e , Mary Magdalene and Eustace are included anachronistically. Saint Jerome is identified by his attributes of a lion and a cardinal's hat, M a r y Magdalene b y her long hair, and Eustace by his expensive garments, soldier's sword, and h u n t e r ' s h o u n d and deer.

87

W h i l e elements of the

composition such as the despondent J o s e p h (unhappy b e c a u s e h e is not the father of his wife's child) are probably drawn from c o m m o n l y a v a i l a b l e sources such as Giovanni da Calvoli's Meditationes

8,8

Vitae Christi,

Uccello created a novel treatment of t h e subject in

Florentine art, which influenced Filippo Lippi and the M a s t e r of the Castello Nativity. T h e nocturnal landscape setting creates a m o o d of mystery, w h i l e the rich, ornamental patterns of the brocade cloths, the Angel's wings with their exotic l o o k i n g feathers (ostrich or parrot?) and the tapestry-like texture of the lawn and the oak trees m a r k a waning in the influence of Masaccio's pared-down realism and a r e n e w e d taste f o r courtly richness, refinement and poetic fantasy. Filippo Lippi's Adoration Magdalene

and Angels

of the

Child

with

Saints

llarione,

Jerome

and

(from the A n n a l e n a C o n v e n t , n o w in the Galleria degli

Florence, Fig. 187) shows formal affinities with the Karlsruhe Adoration.

Mary Uffizi,

Apart from the

similar subject matter, with two of the s a m e saints, the c u r i o u s way in which Lippi depicted Saint Ilarione up t o his shoulders in a h o l e beside the h o l y family and the way that M a r y Magdalene is positioned behind a wall to o n e side, are reminiscent of the isolated position of the saints in Uccello's work. The effect in each case is to create a figurative distance between the adorer (saint or viewer) and the adored (the holy family), heightening the visionary quality of the image. As Megan Holmes has observed, two other similar versions of the subject by Lippi, o n e from the Palazzo Medici C h a p e l (now in the Staatliche

Museen

Preussischer Kulturbesitz, Gemaldegalerie, Berlin) and a n o t h e r said to have c o m e from a cell in the hermitage at the Camaldoli (now in the Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence), were Medici commissions.

89

The taste for rich and poetic i m a g e r y that t h e Karlsruhe Adoration

represents m a y

have been revived in Florence by some of t h e c i t y ' s l e a d i n g citizens who attended the Council of Ferrara in 1438, bringing it to Florence t h e following year. Frances A m e s - L e w i s s u g g e s t e d that Piero di Cosimo de' Medici probably c o m m i s s i o n e d D o m e n i c o V e n e z i a n o ' s Adoration

of

the Magi tondo (Staatliche Museen, G e m a l d e g a l e r i e , B e r l i n ) , a work generally dated c. 1 4 3 9 -

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

113

1441 and replete with courtly refinement influenced by Gentile da F a b r i a n o and Pisanello, following his experiences with the Florentine d e l e g a t i o n of the court of L e o n e l l o d ' E s t e .

90

Indeed, Pisanello was in Ferrara at the time of t h e C o u n c i l , where he d r e w E m p e r o r J o h n VIII Palaeologus.

91

Pisanello and h i s w o r k s h o p also d r e w the elaborate c o s t u m e s of t h e Este court

influenced by French fashions. M e n ' s overgarments w e r e objects of particular splendour, made of metres of gold b r o c a d e and f u r . Karlsruhe Adoration,

92

T h e similarity of E u s t a c e ' s c o s t u m e in the

with its neatly pleated skirt of gold brocade a n d ermine trim, to the

costumes in the Berlin tondo confirms that they b e l o n g to a similar m o m e n t in Florentine art. If the Karlsruhe Adoration

is an early expression of the revival in Florence of the taste of the

north Italian courts, s o m e features of its composition s u g g e s t that the transformation

of

Florentine traditions was not complete. Christ and the A n g e l s have foreshortened haloes, while the Virgin, Joseph, J e r o m e , Mary M a g d a l e n e and E u s t a c e do not. T h e p a l m tree directly above Christ is depicted as a perfectly symmetrical, c o n s p i c u o u s l y regular form, in contrast to the organic forms of the oak trees. Are the m o r e three-dimensional and g e o m e t r i c features indicative of C h r i s t ' s divine status, an association of d i v i n i t y with perspective and order? Whatever its m e a n i n g , the c o n s p i c u o u s presence of perspective m a y h a v e , it shows that Uccello did not abandon his earlier preoccupations w h e n e m b r a c i n g the new fashion in imagery. Similarly, in the Battle paintings Uccello c o m b i n e d decorative surface refinements of the northern courtly style with an armature of p e r s p e c t i v e a n d sculptural modelling. Another smallish work in a hybrid courtly style is the Q u a r a t e predella (Museo Diocesano, Florence), a single panel with three painted scenes: Saint Adoration

of the Magi; and Saints

James and Ansano,

John

at Patmos;

the

s e t against a gold g r o u n d (Figs 189-

93

192). The elaborate c o s t u m e of the Magus furthest to t h e right is particularly close to those in the Berlin tondo, in the design of the o v e r g a r m e n t ' s sleeve with the o p t i o n of a cuff for the hand or a slit for the arm. T h i s concession to practicality o n l y emphasises the impracticality of the enormous gathered sleeves that served as markers of nobility. T h e bouffant hairstyle of the page holding the h o r s e ' s reins is reminiscent of the w a y Leonello d ' E s t e wore his hair in the medal made of him by Pisanello around 1441 (an e x a m p l e is in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, Inv. 6 7 8 - 1 8 6 5 ) . Furthermore, the unforeshortened h a l o e s like those in the Karlsruhe Adoration,

suggest a revival in the taste for the surface-oriented

Gentile da Fabriano. T h e Karlsruhe Adoration

o r n a m e n t of

and the Q u a r a t e predella w e r e often attributed

to artists other than Uccello in the past, due to an underestimation of t h e degree to which taste in painting changed in Florence over the course of t h e 1430s and of U c c e l l o ' s ability to change his style accordingly.

114

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

Notes for Chapter 5

1

Frosinini (1995, p. 207) suggested that Uccello may have been sought out by the Opera del Duomo in

Florence for a project discussed in 1431 for the decoration of the chapel of Saint Zanobi, possibly involving the making of mosaics on the basis of Uccello's designs. 2

Mode (1972, pp. 369-377) suggested that Uccello might have worked with Masolino on mural

paintings in Rome, after leaving Venice and before returning to settle in Florence. H e attributed to Uccello the first figures in the lost Famous Men cycle in the sala theatri of the Palazzo Orsini at Monte Giordano, Rome, known from copies and derivative manuscripts, with a date of c. 1430. He also suggested tentatively that Uccello might have assisted Masolino with part of the Crucifixion scene in the mural painting cycle in the chapel of Saint Catherine in San Clemente, Rome, of c. 1428-1430. For a discussion of this hypothesis, see the Catalogue. 3

Landino, 1974, p. 124.

4

Edward Topsell's seventeenth-century bestiary described the lamia as a creature capable of changing

shape and of appearing and disappearing at will, who in classical mythology terrorised children in revenge for the murder of the children she bore Jupiter, by his wife Juno. In addition, Topsell paraphrased Plutarch's commentary that the lamia put in its eyes when it left home, prying into the affairs around it with uncanny perception, but removed them when it returned home. Topsell quoted Plutarch's satirical suggestion that the lamia stalked the streets of Florence, so criticising the Florentines' habit of prying into the affairs of others while remaining ignorant of their own (1658, p. 353). 5

VT Fototeca, Paolo Uccello, Florence.

6

Berti, 1990a, p. 154.

7

The relevant part of the will, dated 22 July 1348, is as follows (the transcription is from Orlandi

(1955, vol. II, pp. 436-437): 'Item pro rernedio anime sue legavit de bonis suis libras mille de quibus libris mille disposuit voluit et mandavit pingi in ecclesia sancta ornnipotentis del et virginis gloriose

et totius celestis

curie

marie novelle de flor. ad honor em in dicto loco quo magis

placuerit

infrascripto suo executuri storiam (sic) totius testamenti veteris sad (? forse sell.) a principio usque ad finem. Et fecit et reliquit ad hec executorem

et fidei comissarium

religiosum

et honestum

virum

fratrem Jacobum passavantis ord. fratrum pred. de Flor. si tune viveret et si tunc nan viveret fecit et reliquit executorem ad predicta

loco dicti fratris

Jacobi religiosum

virum fratrem

Miccaelem

Bakli dicti ord. fratrum pred. de Flor.... (se cinche questi fosse venuto a mancare lasciava priorem fratrum predicatorum

florentini

pingi voluit et mandavit utprofertur

conventus pro tempore

existentem ...Et predictam

Buti

esecutore) storiam

a die ohitus dicti testatoris ad unum annum.

* Frosinini, 2003, pp. 27-31. y

Orlandi, 1955, vol. 1, pp. 457-459, 529 n. 24, 538. Following an outbreak of the plague in 1349,

Turino added a codicil to his will to give a further 300 florins for the construction of the principal door to the church, leaving the execution of the testament to Fra Jacopo Passavanti. '"Kent, 1981, pp. 69-70 n.7.

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

115

11

Betka, 2001, p. 38-39, 300, 3 5 5 , 4 6 8 .

12

Wilson, 1992, p. 111.

13

Further to the examples discussed in Chapter 4, Orlandi compiled records of numerous donations and

bequests to the confraternity that would have aided the operation of Santa Maria Novella as a whole (for example, 1955, vol. I, pp. 246, 314-315, 322-323, 334, 342-343, 363, 407, 457-459, 529 n. 24, 538,552, 612). See also: Betka, 2001, pp. 31-32. 14

Boccaccio, 1982, vol. II, pp. 489-490. This translation is by J. Payne.

15

Welch, 2000, pp. 173-174.

16

Frosinini, 2003, pp. 27-37.

17

The cycle might originally have been intended to show only scenes from the four generations of

God's chosen family from Abraham to Simeon and Levi, however, it cannot be excluded that the cycle was always intended to begin with the creation scenes, even if the painting actually began with the stories of Abraham. 18

Verdon (2002, especially pp. 174-175) argued that the iconography of Masaccio's Trinity in Santa

Maria Novella can be interpreted within the context of the Dominicans' activities dating from the thirteenth century aimed at maintaining social cohesion within and between Florentine families. For a detailed discussion of the Dominicans' relations with Florentine families and their efforts to maintain peace between them, primarly in the thirteenth century, see: Lesnick, 1989, pp. 63-95. 19

2l,

Bellosi, 2002, p. 18. Paatz, 1934, p. 142.

21

Krautheimer and Krautheimer-Hess, 1956, pp. 167, 191-192.

2 2

Krautheimer and Krautheimer-Hess, 1956, pp. 208-210.

2 3

Roccasecca, 1997, p. 126, 128 n. I I .

2 4

Borsi and Borsi, 1994, p. 287.

2 5

Orlandi, 1955, vol. II, pp. 499-501. In 1422, 'Franciscum domini Simonis de Tornabuonis,

Andree Minerbetti, Blaxium Jacobi domini Blaxii de Guasconibus

de Florentia et Johannem

Johannetn Silvestri

carradorem etc.' were listed as the Operai of Santa Maria Novella. Later members of the opera are not known. 2(>

Orlandi, 1955, vol. II, pp. 499-501.

2 7

Parronchi, 1969, p. 104.

2 8

Padoa Riz/.o, 1991, p. 26. Authors who have dated the Virgin and Child earlier include: Volpe, 1980,

p. 18 (1420); Cecchi, 1989a, p. 110 (1420s-1430s); and Angelini, 1990a, p. 73 (before 1425). ~' I'ope-IIenncssy (1964, pp. 59-61) attributed the work to an anonymous Florentine artist of the first half of the fifteenth century, with the admission that it might be based on a superior original by Ghiberti. Neri Lusanna and Faedo, 1986, p. 245, cat. nos 170-171. Two polychrome stucco works of similar design are housed in the Museo Bardini in Florence. Lusanna and Faedo catalogued them in 1986 as by the workshop of Ghiberti, explaining that the attribution derives from Wilhelm von Bode's observation of the stylistic proximity of a similar work in the Berlin Gallery with the style of Ghiberti's east doors for the Florence Baptistery. The hypothetical lost prototype by Ghiberti was dated by

116

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

Lusanna and Faedo to before 1427, based on the supposition that a similar Venetian version of the subject, by Bartolomeo Buon and dated 1427 might have been influenced by works Ghiberti took to Venice in 1424 or 1425. 3 0

Anna Jolly identified many hundreds of Renaissance reliefs of the Virgin and Child, many by

Donatello and his followers, in her book Madonnas

by Donatello

and His Circle (1998). Luciano

Bellosi (2002, pp. 25-30) suggested that a group of more than 80 half-length representations of the Virgin and Child in terracotta in collections around the world might be associated with the Master of the Or San Michele Saint Peter, whom he identified tentatively as Filippo Brunelleschi. 31

Numerous household inventories are included in ASF, MPAP, 27, Libro di Deliberazione, 1417-

1418. The inventory of Arrigi Bandini Falconeri's goods on pp. 198v.-202 included four panel paintings described as showing the Virgin. 3 2

Whistler, 2001, p. 2. For the hypothesis that Fox-Strangways acquired many of his Italian

Renaissance paintings from a Florentine artist and restorer called Gotti, see: Lloyd, 1977, p. xxiii. 33

Jolly (P.H.), 1998, p. 369.

34

Cole Ahl, 2000, p. 56.

3 5

Jolly (P.H.), 1998, pp. 369-370.

3 6

[Da Calvoli], 1961, p. 16, trans. I. Ragusa.

37

Pochat, 1978, p. 232.

3 8

Battisti, 1981, p. 300, 382 n. 2.

3 9

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, pp. 63-64: 1568 ed.

40

Battisti, 1981, p. 186.

41

4 2

Pudelko, 1935a, p. 32 n. 8. For a discussion of the relations between Florence and the papacy in the early fifteenth century, see:

Partner, 1968, pp. 381-402. 43

Borsi and Borsi, 1994, p. 346.

"Davies, 1959, p. 314. 4 5

4 6

Paoletti, 1992, p. 198 n. 11. Dominici, 1955, pp. 25-26. The gold and silver in the Melbourne Saint George would not have

pleased Dominici who warned against their use in religious paintings, lest the viewer become more idolatrous that faithful. 4 7

Dominici, 1955, pp. 28-29.

4H

Hoff (1995, p. 165) believed that the Melbourne painting actually depicts another version of the story

by Petrus de Natafibus in which the saint first wounds the dragon with his lance and then cuts off its head with his sword in a single blow. However, the composition of the Saint George cannot depict that version of the story since the saint's sword is shown on the ground. Given that the dragon is holding the saint with his claws and tail, that the saint is using his left hand to hold the dragon, and seems to be holding at most a dagger in his right hand, it is not likely that he is in a position to cut off the dragon's head with a single blow. Furthermore, the princess is shown with a length of chain, with a collar attached, ready to tether the dragon.

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

4 9

117

Iacopo da Varazze, 1995, pp. 325-331. For a discussion of this iconography, mainly in relation to

Uccello's London Saint George, see: Foster, 1986, pp. 13-14; and Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986, pp. 25-39. 5l)

Averlino, 1965, vol. I, p. 111.

51

Iacopo da Varazze, 1995, p. 325.

5 2

Davies (1959, p. 310) wondered whether the rays in the sky of the Paris Saint George were original.

Although they are sketchy in their execution, this should not necessarily be considered grounds for considering them later additions since a number of details in the painting are sketchy in their execution, such as the jumping deer near the top of the left edge of the painting. 53

Longhi (1928, pp. 40-46) attributed the paintings to Giovanni di Francesco, with a dating to c. 1445-

1455.Volpe, 1980, pp. 10, 12-14, 15-17. 5 4

Padoa Rizzo, La Cappella dell'Assunta

5 5

Berti, 2002, p. 48.

56

nelDuomo

di Prato, Prato, 1997.

1'Marchini], 1969, p. 51. The coat of arms was repainted by Pietro Pezzati in 1871, and subsequently

detached. It is now displayed in the Museo di Pittura Murale in Prato. 5 7

Padoa Rizzo, 1997, pp. 35-36. The only other early reference to the chapel is the complaint recorded

in 1448 that the window, having been removed for around two years, made the church cold and humid QMarchini], 1969, p. 52; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, pp. 35-38). 5K

5y

Iacopo da Varazze, 1995, p. 637. [Marchini], 1969, pp. 51-52. The arms above the arch outside the chapel, showing a yellow

horizontal bar against a red background and two birds on either side of a plant, have not been identified. Marchini identified the plant as sugar cane and suggested the family might have been named Zuccheri. 6 0

Gombrich (2003, p. 266) referred to figure at the far left of the Birth of the Virgin as a kind of nymph

of the kind that Warburg had considered a trope of Florentine Renaissance painting, particularly among late fifteenth-century artists such as Botticelli. 61

Iacopo da Varazze, 1995, pp. 729-730, referring to Psalms 120-134.

M

Padoa Rizzo, 1997, p. 37.

63

Borsi and Borsi (1994, p. 299) suggested the figure might be Uccello's self-portrait; Padoa Rizzo

(1997, p. 44) proposed the patron's son. 64

Berti (1990, p. 154) attributed a drawing of part of the Sagra in the collection of Ugo Procacci to II

Commodi, working in the sixteenth century. 6 5

Borsook (1980, p. 81) believed that the left and right walls were painted in tandem from scaffolding

crossing the entire chapel, based on the uniformity of technique of the scenes at the same height. f,f>

Padoa Rizzo (1997, pp. 83-98) suggested that the execution of the giornate

was probably divided

between Uccello and an assistant or assistants, working on two scenes on each level concurrently, with Uccello responsible for the execution of the more important parts, such as portraits.

118

6 7

UCCELLO I N THE 1430s

A s noted in: Frosinini, 2003, p. 30. Laura Cavazzini (1999, p. 23) has also noted affinities between

Uccello's Assunta Chapel paintings and Scheggia's Mystic Marriage of Saint Catherine in the church of San Francesco, Arezzo. 6 8

D ' A m i c o , 1981, p. 5 1 .

6 9

A s recorded in the account of the fifteenth-century diarist Bartolomeo del Corazza (Corazza, 1991, p.

71.) 7 0

71

Piana, 1986, pp. 26-54, especially p. 47.

T e r p s t r a , 1995, pp. 19-37.

7 2

Borchert et al, 2002, p. 235. The work's owner in the seventeenth century, the Antwerp dealer Peter

Steven, described it as a portrait of Albergati in an annotation to Van Mander's

Schilder-boeck.

7 3

Panofsky, 1954, pp. 102-108. For a more recent assessment of the work, see: Hall, 1998, pp. 11-33.

7 4

D ' A m i c o (1981, p. 59) stated that the date was executed in the intonaco, before the painting of the

fresco. 7 5

Lollini, 1994, p . 120 (1431); Volpe, 1980, pp. 8-9 (1437); Angelini, 1990a, p. 73 and Angelini and

Ragionieri, 1991, pp. 927-928 (c. 1435); Eisler, 1982, p. 71 (possibly 1436). 7 6

77

Sicari, 2002, pp. 377-388. A l b e r t i , 1972, pp. 54-55.

7 8

Herzner (1986, p. 158) dated one example in the Museo Bardini to c. 1465. Jolly (A., 1998, pp. 133-

134) identified two variants of the composition in a number of stuccoes by followers of Donatello. The first variant is exemplified by Inv. no. 1200 in the Museo Bardini, the second variant is exemplified by Inv. no. 1201 in the same museum. The latter is closer to the Bologna Adoration

in the Child's

nakedness and reclining position, while the former is closer in the ball held by the Child. Jolly attributed the design of the first variant to Donatello and the second variant to an anonymous follower of Donatello w h o had worked in his Paduan workshop. The question remains open whether the anonymous artist or artists responsible for the Donatelloesque Nativities borrowed the motif of the Christ Child from Uccello's Bologna Adoration

or whether Uccello borrowed the motif from a lost

work by Donatello. 7>>

Curiously, Uccello is absent from Vasari's list of artist admirers of the Brancacci Chapel paintings

(Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 272). However, Vasari did not mention the Bologna Adoration

or Prato

paintings in the Vite and may not have known them. More recently, Berti (2002, pp. 40-43) left Uccello out of the list of artists schooled in the Brancacci Chapel. 8,1

D'Amico, 1981, p. 5 3 .

8 1

D ' A m i c o ( 1 9 8 1 , p. 53) suggested that the worshippers might belong to a lay confraternity associated

with the Carmelites who owned the church. H2

R i z z o , 1991, p. 64.

8 3

D'Amico, 1981, p. 5 1 ; Eisler, 1982, p. 73.

8 4

Iacopo da Varazze, 1995, p. 876.

8 5

Bernacchiont (2003, pp. 416-418, 420-421 n. 15) provided fewer iconographic grounds for the

inclusion of the other two saints, except that Magdalene was, like Jerome, a penitent, and Eustace w a s ,

UCCELLO IN THE 1430s

119

like Jerome, a saint who saw visions, the latter feature in iconographic sympathy with the surreal, vision-like composition of the work. In a footnote she noted that Eustace's feast day was celebrated by the Confraternity of the Purification, for which Uccello had worked, and which came under the supervision of the Confraternity of Saint Jerome during Uccello's membership of it. Sebregondi, 1991, p. 4. In 1488, Antonio di Bartolomeo was paid by the Confraternity of Saint Jerome for the execution in fresco of stories of Saint Jerome and Saint Mary Magdalene in its courtyard

(corticino).

8 6

Dresel, Liidke and Vey, 1992, p. 119.

8 7

Dresel, Ltidke and Vey (1992, p. 118) identified the saint on the right as Julian, although he is more

usually identified as Eustace. In Florentine painting of the late fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, Saint Julian is often depicted as a middle-aged man with a beard, wearing a long, blue, miniver-lined robe, a long red surcoat and carrying a sword in its sheath. This is the case in Giovanni dal Ponte's Saint Julian (c. 1430), Lorenzo di Bicci's Saints Julian and Zanobius

(late 1300s or early 1400s), and

Niccolo di Pietro Gerini's Saint Julian (before 1415), all in the Galleria dell'Accademia, Florence. Saint Eustace is depicted in Piero and Antonio Pollaiuolo's Saints James between Saints Vincent and Eustace (Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence) as a young man with a robe that falls above the knees, red hose, an ermine-lined cape and a sword in its sheath. Thus, the third saint in the Adoration corresponds more closely to depictions of Eustace than Julian. 8 8

Dresel, Liidke and Vey, 1992, pp. 114-115.

8 9

Holmes, 1999, p. 176.

9 0

Ames-Lewis, 1987, p. 5. For the date of the work, see: Wohl, 1980, pp. 120-122.

y i

Syson, Gordon and Avery-Quash, 2001, pp. 32-34. Pisanello's drawings of the Emperor John VIII

Palaeologus are in the Musee du Louvre, Paris, and the Art Institute of Chicago. 9 2

Syson, Gordon and Avery-Quash, 2001, pp. 70-74.

y3

For a summary of the little that is known about this work, see the Catalogue.

Santa Maria del Fiore

For an artist whose personality and career have s o m e t i m e s been difficult for art historians to define, it is ironic that Uccello created his most e x t e n s i v e a n d readily c o m p r e h e n s i b l e works in the very heart of Florence, the Duomo called Santa Maria del Fiore. In size, his paintings in the Duomo rival those of his contemporaries, and his signature on the Equestrian

Monument

is probably the most conspicuous in the church. T h e Operai of the D u o m o must h a v e allowed this, and granted him successive commissions because of t h e esteem in which t h e y held him, even if Uccello's relationship with them was not without its difficulties, as the following discussion of the progress of his commissions s h o w s . T h e ultimate success of Uccello's works in the D u o m o is demonstrated by their influence over artists w o r k i n g inside and outside the church. Castagno used Uccello's Equestrian Equestrian

Monument

for Niccolb

da Tolentino

Monument

in 1455-1556.

inspired the composition of Filippo Lippi's Adoration

1

U c c e l l o ' s Nativity

of the Christ

2

Annalena nunnery (Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence). Flis Resurrection reflected in Luca della Robbia's Resurrection

and Ascension

in the Duomo, and Verrocchio's Resurrection

of Christ

Florence), and the Clockface

Heads

with Four

Male

Francesco's Virgin and Child with the Four Evangelists Construction of the Duomo c o m m e n c e d

as his model for his

Child,

window

painted for the

w i n d o w s e e m s to be

reliefs a b o v e the sacristy doors (Museo Nazionale del Bargello,

inspired the format of Giovanni di (?) (Federigo M u s e u m , B e r l i n ) .

3

in the late thirteenth c e n t u r y , with the

supervision of the building work given to the wealthy and powerful Wool M e r c h a n t s ' Guild in 1331. The guild's records in the Archivio di Stato di Firenze include a v o l u m e listing the members

who

served

as the D u o m o ' s

Operai

(building

supervisors)

and

Camerarii

(treasurers). Their staggered individual tenures w e r e generally limited to four-month terms and six-month terms, respectively (recorded in the Codice Registro

per le Diverse

Magistrature

dell Arte).

Membranaceo

Conlenente

un

During the period around the date of

Uccello's first appearance in the D u o m o ' s records, the letter written in 1432 by t h e Operai to enquire into his work at San Marco in Venice, n o n e of the Operai listed in the Codice

appears

to have a connection to Uccello. Thus, Uccello's e m p l o y m e n t by the D u o m o seems t o have

SANTA MARIA DEL FIORE

121

c o m e about by m e a n s other than a prior association with them. H o w e v e r , Ghiberti had been involved in work at the D u o m o since Uccello w a s a b o y , was m a d e a capomaestro cupola in 1420, and r e m a i n e d a provveditore

of the

4

at the D u o m o until 1 4 3 6 . T h u s , h e would h a v e

been in a g o o d position t o assist his former student to s e c u r e work there. B e that as it m a y , U c c e l l o ' s paintings at Santa M a r i a M a g g i o r e and S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a w o u l d h a v e placed h i m a m o n g the leading m u r a l painters in F l o r e n c e in the early 1430s, m a k i n g h i m an obvious candidate for c o m m i s s i o n s in the D u o m o , and his e x p e r i e n c e at San M a r c o in V e n i c e was also a distinction that w o u l d h a v e elevated h i m a b o v e the level of m a n y local artists as a prospective e m p l o y e e .

Equestrian

Monument

for Sir John

Hawkwood

While m e r c e n a r i e s had l o n g been a feature of Italian w a r f a r e , by t h e late fourteenth century condottieri

such as Sir J o h n H a w k w o o d had b e c o m e s o important that they d e m a n d e d and

were given e n o r m o u s financial and property r e w a r d s and h o n o u r s . A s m e n t i o n e d in Chapter 4, the F l o r e n t i n e C o m m u n e acquired a property for t h e condottiere

Micheletto A t t e n d o l o da

C o t i g n o l a in the choice area of Castello following his c o n t r i b u t i o n to t h e victory at t h e battle of San R o m a n o in 1432. T w o of the honours b e s t o w e d o n condottieri

were sculpted or

painted portraits and state funerals. In 1328 S i m o n e Martini painted a portrait of Guidoriccio da Fogliano on h o r s e b a c k in a landscape with the c a s t l e s captured for his e m p l o y e r s , in the P a l a z z o Pubblico in Siena. Around 1363 a papier-mache* equestrian m o n u m e n t for Pietro 5

F a m e s e was placed on an a d a p t e d Roman s a r c o p h a g u s in the D u o m o in F l o r e n c e . After his death in March 1394, a depiction of H a w k w o o d was p a i n t e d in the C a m e r a del C o m u n e in Florence, as Giovanni di Paolo Morelli noted in his Ricordi:

' H e was very loyal and faithful

to our C o m m u n e and, when h e died, h e was painted for posterity in the C a m e r a del C o m u n e ' C Fit noma molto leale efedele Camera

b

del Comune'')

al nostra Comune

In the early fifteenth

e, come fit morto, fu dipinto

per fama

nella

century a m o n u m e n t to Paolo Savelli was

erected with a horse and rider made of p o l y c h r o m e d

wood on a p o l y c h r o m e d

marble

7

s a r c o p h a g u s in the Basilica dei Frari in V e n i c e . Not surprisingly given the subject matter, there was an element of rivalry between Italian cities in the c o m m i s s i o n i n g of such portraits. In Florence a portrait of the enemy condottiere

N i c c o l o Piccinino h a n g i n g u p s i d e - d o w n in

chains was painted on t h e walls of the Palazzo della S i g n o r i a in 1428. A p r e s u m a b l y more flattering painting of Piccinino was made on a wall in L u c c a , in gratitude for h a v i n g saved it 8

from t h e Florentines in 1 4 3 0 . In 1433 Florence u p p e d the ante by renewing plans for a depiction o f H a w k w o o d in t h e D u o m o , symbolically the m o s t important site it had.

122

SANTA MARIA DEL FIORE

Under the influence of humanist chancellors from Coluccio Salutati to Leonardo Bruni, the cult of exemplary individuals was e n c o u r a g e d in Florence. A project t o honour eight Florentine worthies with m a r b l e monuments was initiated at t h e end of the fourteenth century when the Signoria discussed the idea during S a l u t a t i ' s chancellorship. In the end, the project was realised in the D u o m o in a greatly modified form. Monument

Uccello's

Equestrian

(Fig. 48) belongs to a series of four fictive t o m b s painted in pairs on either side of

the Duomo, for t w o condottiere,

Sir J o h n H a w k w o o d a n d Niccolo da T o l e n t i n o (the latter was

painted by Castagno in 1455-1456), and two ecclesiastics, Cardinal Corsini (painted b y an unrecorded artist, perhaps Giovanni dal Ponte, in 1422) a n d Fra Luigi d e ' Marsili (painted by Bicci di Lorenzo in 1439). Others to be c o m m e m o r a t e d i n the Duomo in t h e fifteenth century included the poet Dante, the artist Giotto and t h e architect-engineer Brunelleschi.

9

The principal events surrounding the c o m m i s s i o n and execution of the Monument

Equestrian

are documented. A m o n u m e n t to H a w k w o o d in marble was agreed to b y the

Opera in 1393, while the English condottiere

was still a l i v e .

10

However, a painted version was

made in 1395, the year after he died, by A g n o l o Gaddi and Giuliano d ' A r r i g i o , possibly as a model for how the final version would look in s t o n e . " O n 13 July 1433 t h e O p e r a agreed to place notices at the D u o m o , the Baptistery and O r s a n m i c h e l e , announcing a competition for a model or design to replace the existing o n e .

12

W o r k did not proceed o n t h e project until after

the consecration of the D u o m o by Pope Eugenius IV in March 1436. A t the end of May Uccello was given the commission, which specified that it was to be a painting in terra 1.

verde}

The choice of terra

verde

may have been intended as an allusion to a bronze

monument, inspired by Lapo da Castiglionchio the Y o u n g e r ' s translation from Greek of Plutarch's biography of the Roman general Fabius M a x i m u s , completed between 1 March and 30 May of that year. Plutarch related that an equestrian monument in bronze was erected in Maximus' honour in R o m e .

14

For the design of the sarcophagus Uccello looked no further

than Donatello's and Michelozzo's Tomb of Baldassare Baptistery.

15

Cossa of around 1421-1428 in the

In particular, Uccello followed the forms of the volute consoles, the disposition

of the coats of arms between them and the Latin inscription in large, humanist lettering. On 28 June the Operai ordered that the part of the painting showing the horse and rider be erased, as it did not meet their requirements, a l t h o u g h the records do not specify what was found unsatisfactory. On 6 July a new horse and rider were ordered and Uccello was paid for both versions on 31 August. Following a penetrating analysis of the Study for Equestrian

Monument

the

in the Gabinetto Disegni e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, Melli has s h o w n that

the drawing shows numerous modifications m a d e in a second stage of t h e execution, which may correspond to changes made by Uccello to the initial design at the request of the Operai. Where Hawkwood was initially depicted in the d r a w i n g in armour from head to foot, in the

SANTA MARIA DEL FIORE

123

revised version of the d r a w i n g he wears a r m o u r only on the lower half of his body, e x p o s i n g his head and s h o w i n g h i m w e a r i n g a giornea

and m a n t l e . In the final version his b o d y is

shorter and his legs are p l a c e d less far forward. T h e position of t h e h o r s e ' s right, rear hoof was modified, as was the perspective of the s a r c o p h a g u s . Overall, the revised v e r s i o n shows the rider in a less m e d i e v a l and more h u m a n i s t m a n n e r , as an identifiable figure, and the upper part of the m o n u m e n t on t h e whole is in a m o r e di sotto in su perspective, in greater accordance with the l o w e r part, which the Operai e v i d e n t l y found satisfactory, s i n c e they chose to keep i t .

16

If as Melli argued, the d r a w i n g i n t h e Gabinetto D i s e g n i e S t a m p e degli

Uffizi was s h o w n by Uccello to the Operai at the b e g i n n i n g of the c o m m i s s i o n , or at least what remains of it (Fig. 4 7 ) , why were they dissatisfied with the first painted version, when the quadrature o n the d r a w i n g s h o w s that Uccello took p a i n s t o transfer the design to t h e wall faithfully? Perhaps t h e reason for the c h a n g e in taste lies in t h e corporate nature of t h e Opera, since the Wool G u i l d ' s records show that the t e r m s o f t w o Operai finished at the end of June 17

and two new m e m b e r s j o i n e d on 1 J u l y . T h e d e p a r t u r e f r o m office of t w o Operai m a y h a v e given those who stayed on the chance to change the c o m m i s s i o n on 2 8 J u n e . In any event, U c c e l l o ' s painting would h a v e b e e n finished, for the most part, in time for the consecration of t h e c u p o l a on 30 A u g u s t 1436. O n 17 D e c e m b e r , h o w e v e r , Uccello was made to replace the inscription with o n e taken f r o m a Classical panegyric for t h e Roman general Fabius M a x i m u s . T h e inscription was d e r i v e d from a stone tablet k n o w n to fifteenthcentury scholars, which is n o w housed in the M u s e o A r c h e o l o g i c o in Florence. T h e new inscription further e m p h a s i s e d that the Equestrian

Monument

is an allegorical

portrait,

depicting H a w k w o o d as heir to the Roman tradition of generals, epitomised b y Maximus.

Clockface

Fabius

18

with Four

Male

Heads

Inside the facade of the D u o m o , over the principal d o o r , is the Coronation

of the Virgin

in

mosaic, traditionally attributed to Gaddo G a d d i , and a b o v e that a large clock, with four male heads with haloes painted in the corners (Figs 1 9 3 - 1 9 4 ) . An entry in the Opera del D u o m o ' s accounts dated 2 2 February 1443 records a p a y m e n t of 4 0 lire to Uccello for the

Clockface.

Another entry on 2 April records a payment of 10 lire for o n e hundred and twenty-five pieces of gold leaf used to gild a star, presumably the hand of the clock, and for painting the blue field around i t .

19

Conservation

of the Clockface

by

the Gabinetto dei Restauri

della

Soprintendenza alle Gallerie was directed by D i n o D i n i , and conducted with the assistance of Guido Botticelli and Sabino Giovannoni, b e t w e e n 1963 and 1 9 6 8 . overpainting were r e m o v e d , revealing the Clockface

20

A n u m b e r of layers of

as it n o w appears. However, beneath the

124

SANTA MARIA DEL HORE

layer with the blue field in the centre of the clock, corresponding t o t h e description of Uccello's work in t h e document for the second p a y m e n t , y e t another layer was f o u n d with a green centre and a fictive frame around t h e circumference. The fictive frame is partially visible in some photographs, due to losses in t h e blue layer. Similarly, losses to t h e dark (blue?) background behind the heads in the corners reveal the presence of a light b l u e layer, especially around the head in the bottom right corner. The two payments made to Uccello h a v e been interpreted as either reflecting t w o phases of the c o m m i s s i o n for the Clockface,

c o r r e s p o n d i n g to the c h a n g e s in colour a n d

design, or two kinds of reimbursement, the first for labour and the s e c o n d for m o r e e x p e n s i v e materials.

21

Whether the payments correspond to a c o m m i s s i o n with t w o s e p a r a t e phases or

one phase with m i n o r modifications paid for in two i n s t a l m e n t s is a difference of e m p h a s i s whose significance m i g h t well have eluded the O p e r a i , w h o were used to c o n s t a n t revisions of their projects, sometimes of major i m p o r t a n c e and s o m e t i m e s of only minor d e t a i l s . It w a s perhaps of greater significance to Uccello if only b e c a u s e he might have been annoyed to paint over the frame in the centre of the clock. The hand of the clock is an excellent modern r e s t o r a t i o n in the s h a p e of a star with an orb at the tip of the longest ray, based o n the reference to a star in the O p e r a ' s d o c u m e n t . T h e star-shaped hand of the clock may allude t o t h e Star of Bethlehem, and s o to the birth of Christ, from which point the recording of time begins in the Christian calendar. T h e fictive frame shown in perspective reinforces the pure g e o m e t r y of the circle of t h e clock face a n d the square of the c l o c k ' s mounting. M a s o l i n o ' s Pieta ( M u s e o della Collegiata, Empoli) of 1424 provides a precedent for the simple, architectural f r a m e seen in perspective, with torsos instead of heads in the circles. The heads in t h e Clockface

have been identified either as

prophets or, more c o m m o n l y in recent times, t h e E v a n g e l i s t s , and as t h e latter m a y refer to the end of t i m e .

22

T h e Book of Ezekiel describes four creatures, each with four faces in the

likeness of a man, a lion, an ox and an eagle, which a p p e a r e d to Ezekiel in a series of visions of the destruction and restoration of J e r u s a l e m . " T h e

animals' faces were

interpreted by Christian writers as s y m b o l s of the four Evangelists.

24

traditionally

At the b e g i n n i n g of

Saint John's description of his vision of the A p o c a l y p s e in Revelation 4: 7 - 8 , h e described four beasts: 'And the first beast was like a lion, and t h e s e c o n d beast like a calf, and the third beast had a face of a man and the fourth beast was like a flying e a g l e ' saying ' H o l y , h o l y , holy, Lord God A l m i g h t y , which was, and is, a n d is to c o m e . '

2 5

Perhaps the four Evangelists

around the Star of Bethlehem allude to the infinite time o f God the Father on o n e hand, and the finite time between Christ's birth a n d his i m m i n e n t return at the A p o c a l y p s e , o n t h e other.

SANTA MARIA DEL FIORE

Annunciation,

Nativity

a n d Resurrection

125

Windows

In 1434, after the c o m p l e t i o n of much of the cupola, t h e first of the stained-glass w i n d o w s in the drum to b e created was the Coronation

of the Virgin a b o v e the chapel of Saint Z a n o b i .

26

Perhaps after a c o m p a r i s o n b e t w e e n full-size c a r t o o n s b y Ghiberti and Donatello placed in 27

situ, Donatello's design was c h o s e n . Only in 1443 did w o r k r e s u m e on the cycle of w i n d o w s showing scenes from the lives of Christ and the V i r g i n . U c c e l l o ' s d e s i g n s were e m p l o y e d for the Annunciation, Ascension

the Nativity

of Christ,

and the Resurrection

the Agony

Castagno, the Deposition

from

in the Garden

and the Presentation

in the Temple,

and

the Cross. T h e O p e r a ' s a c c o u n t s suggest that Uccello was also

paid for a design for the Ascension.

However, Ghiberti's design was used, and it h a s been

argued that the association of the Ascension Resurrection

(Figs 2 3 - 2 4 ) ; Ghiberti designed the

with U c c e l l o was a scribe's e r r o r .

28

In the

Christ's elegant b o d y rises in a reversed S c u r v e from the t o m b , b a c k e d b y a

sunburst in a deep blue sky, with dozing soldiers on either side of the t o m b . T h e c o m p o s i t i o n of the Nativity

is a variation of the composition created by Uccello for the Spedale di San

Martino alia Scala. Unfortunately, Uccello's Annunciation

w i n d o w w a s destroyed in a storm

29

and removed in 1 8 2 8 , and no record of its a p p e a r a n c e is k n o w n . The Resurrection

and Nativity

show the influence or intervention of another artist in

the banal design of the floral motifs on C h r i s t ' s r o b e s , and the V i r g i n ' s robes and the border, respectively. Similar floral motifs appear in G h i b e r t i ' s d e s i g n s for w i n d o w s in t h e f a c a d e of the Duomo, the tribune and in the drum. W h e t h e r the o r i g i n of the motif and the reason for its continued use may be attributed t o Ghiberti or his influence or to w o r k e r s w h o m a d e the windows is u n c l e a r .

30

A n o t h e r feature of U c c e l l o ' s Resurrection

w i n d o w related to G h i b e r t i ' s

window designs is the circular arrangement of the lead f r a m e w o r k in the sky, also seen in Ghiberti's Ascension Coronation

and Presentation,

and C a s t a g n o ' s Deposition,

but not in D o n a t e l l o ' s

of the Virgin. T h e influence of U c c e l l o ' s former master continued long after the

student had left the w o r k s h o p . Directly below the c u p o l a is the e n t r a n c e to t h e Sacrestia delle Messe. M a r g a r e t Haines has suggested that Uccello might have been r e s p o n s i b l e for the design of s o m e of the intarsia on the north side of the sacristy, work that w a s undertaken by A n t o n i o di Manetti and one or more assistants between 1436 and 1 4 4 5 .

31

Vasari described Uccello and Brunelleschi

as models for the perspective woodwork of B e n e d e t t o da M a i a n o , including that in the sacristy of the D u o m o , a l t h o u g h it was actually G i u l i a n o d a M a i a n o w h o w o r k e d there in the 1460s.

32

pavimento

As Haines n o t e d , given the nature of U c c e l l o ' s work in m o s a i c and, possibly, at San Marco in V e n i c e , his designs for stained glass in t h e D u o m o in Florence,

and his presence in t h e D u o m o in 1436 when work on the sacristy intarsia began, he is a

126

SANTA MARIA DEL FIORE

plausible candidate as a contributor to the project, a l t h o u g h there is no u n m i s t a k e a b l e sign of Uccello's style to be found in the sacristy. Uccello appears o n e last time in t h e account b o o k s of the O p e r a del D u o m o in J u n e 1453, making a figure of the Blessed Andrea Corsini for the Library of t h e D u o m o , in the Church of Saint Pier C e l o r o .

33

Corsini was a fourteenth-century Florentine C a r m e l i t e said to

have foretold the Florentine victory over Milan at t h e battle of Anghiari in 1440 in an apparition at his sepulchre i n Santa Maria del C a r m i n e . H i s cult almost immediately received papal sanction and in 1441 Filippo Lippi was involved in making a casket related to Corsini, possibly used to house his body during public v i e w i n g s . In 1464 six Florentine citizens petitioned the p o p e for his beatification, which w a s not realised until the 34

seventeenth

century. Uccello's long relationship with the Opera del D u o m o and t h e scale of the works it commissioned make it the most important patron of h i s career.

SANTA MARIA DEL FIORE

127

Notes for Chapter 6

1

As a record of the proposed monument of 19 October 1440 indicated it should: '...ordinaverunt

operariis See. Marie del Fiore quod, quamprium sit possibile, cum diligentia et solertia per bonum pictorem pingere faciant

in ecclesia predicta penes picturam

quendam

domini loannis Auto, in eadam

facie muri ex latere posterior e, figur am Nicolai de Tolentino, modo et forma et prout fuit et est picta figura

dicti domini

loannis....'

(in Gaye, 1839, Vol. I, pp. 562-563, from the Archivio delle

Riformagioni di Firenze). 2

Holmes, 1999, p. 174.

3

Giovannozzi, 1934, p. 344.

4

Saalman, 1980, pp. 56-57, 69, 133.

5

Borsook, 2001, pp. 62-63.

6

Morelh, 1969, p. 316.

7

8

Augusti, [1994]. Mallctt, 1974, pp. 94-95.

y

On the monuments in the Duomo, see: Frosinini, 1995, pp. 194-201; and Borsook, 2001, pp. 59-78.

Frosinini (1995, pp. 195-196) identified the painter of the Corsini monument as Giovanni di Marco, called Giovanni dal Ponte. 10

Poggi, 1988, vol. II, pp. 123-124, doc. 2052.

"Poggi, 1933, pp. 322-323. 12

Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 124, doc. 2054.

13

Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 124, doc. 2057.

14

Borsook, 1982, p. 46.

15

Borsook, 2001, p. 73.

"'Mclli, 1999, pp. 262-272. 17

ASF, Arte della Lana, 39, Codice Membranaceo Contenente un Registro per le Diverse Magistrature

dell'Arte, 1 April 1388 - 31 December 1612, p. 41 v.: 'Bertus francisci

de filirariaz

[?]l

Gronimius

Antonij de medicis [?] [left column] per iiij mslj Inceptis die pmo martij 1435 11436 in the standard calendar, right column]'; p. 42: 'Franciscus

benedti

carocci

strozlDonatus

miccaelis

velluti J left

column] p iiij(or) msilj Inciptis die p(i)mo Julij 1436 [right column]' 1H

Borsook, 1982, pp. 44-47; Borsook, 2001, p. 73.

'"Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 162, docs 2238, 2240. 2 0

Baldini, 2000, p. 38 n. 2.

21

Frosinini, 1995, p. 205; Baldini, 2000, pp. 37-38. Where Frosinini saw the second payment as above

all a reimbursement for Uccello's expenses, Baldini interpreted the second payment as relating to the revised version of the commission 22

Baldini (2000, pp. 47-48) identified

the subjects as the four Evangelists on the basis of

correspondences between their physiognomies and those of the Evangelists' attributes: man, eagle, lion and bull. 23

Bible, Authorised King James Version, 1998, Ezekiel 1:10, p. 904.

128

2 4

SANTA MARIA DEL FIORE

For example, in Iacopo da Varazze's Legenda Aurea, 1995, pp. 852-853.

25

Bible, Authorised King James Version, 1998, Revelation 4: 7, p. 303.

2 6

2 7

Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 137, doc. 719. Martin, 2001, pp. 552-565. For a discussion of suggestions that Uccello was involved in painting

Donatello's window, see the Catalogue. 2 8

For a discussion of Poggi's hypothesis that the reference to Uccello being paid for a design of the

Ascension was a scribe's error, see the Catalogue. 2 9

3 0

Acidini Luchinat, 1995, p. 279. Martin, 2001, pp. 566-567. Martin argued that the designs for all the windows in the drum were

modified by the makers of the windows, with the addition of banal borders and flowers on the robes, except in the case of Donatello's Coronation

of the Virgin.

However, the border of Uccello's

Resurrection is considerably more sophisticated than many of the others in the series, and is probably mostly or entirely Uccello's own design. 31

Haines, 1983, pp. 107-111.

3 2

Vasari, 1991, vol. II, pp. 487-488.

3 3

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

3 4

Holmes, 1999, pp. 102-103.

The Battle Paintings: Conflicts and Contradictions

F a m o u s works of art frequently attract v a r y i n g and s o m e t i m e s incompatible interpretations. U c c e l l o ' s Niccold The Unhorsing

da Tolentino

of Sienese

F l o r e n c e , and Michelotto

at the Battle of San Romano

Troops Attendolo

at the Battle

of San Romano

at the Head of Florentine

Paris, known collectively as t h e Battle

in the National Gallery, L o n d o n , in the Galleria degli Uffizi,

Troops in the M u s e e du L o u v r e ,

paintings, have generated lively and l o n g - r u n n i n g

d e b a t e s a m o n g art historians (Figs 19-21). F o r a c h a n g e t h e s e disagreements h a v e not been a b o u t their attribution. T h e Florence panel is signed ' • P A V L I • V G I E L I • O P V S • ' and U c c e l l o ' s authorship of the three panels has never been d o u b t e d . However, art historians have disagreed with each other and occasionally changed their o w n minds about a l m o s t everything else to d o with the paintings: w h o commissioned t h e m , w h e n and w h e r e for, w h o they represent, which battle is depicted, whether it is o n e battle or two, when the shapes of the p a n e l s were altered and by w h o m , who overpainted t h e m , and many other related questions. R e c e n t lengthy re-appraisals of the paintings published by Caglioti (2000, 2 0 0 1 ) and G o r d o n ( 2 0 0 3 ) have resolved m a n y uncertainties through the presentation of new d o c u m e n t a r y and scientific evidence, and they have narrowed the p a r a m e t e r s for defining the quantities that remain unknown. Still, there a r e a n u m b e r of important q u e s t i o n s that merit discussion. Can the three panels have been c o m m i s s i o n e d as part of an integral ensemble, even over a period of time, given the distinct differences of scale and c o m p o s i t i o n between t h e m ? Apart from the use of perspective discussed in Chapter 3, what might they have meant to their fifteenthcentury audience?

Provenances

In the nineteenth century the Battle

paintings in L o n d o n , F l o r e n c e and Paris w e r e s o m e t i m e s

believed to comprise three of the four works by U c c e l l o seen by Vasari in the sixteenth century in the Bartolini palazzo military c o m m a n d e r s .

1

at Gualfonda in F l o r e n c e , w h i c h he said included portraits of

T h e paintings at Gualfonda

w e r e t h e only military paintings by

130

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

Uccello that Vasari described as painted on w o o d , as t h e surviving w o r k s are. While Vasari described the subjects of some other paintings by Uccello in the Palazzo Medici as 'horses and other animals' (1550) or 'mounted m e n at a r m s ' ( 1 5 6 8 ) , he described these as c a n v a s e s .

2

In 1901 Herbert H o m e , the distinguished English collector, connoisseur and art historian, published a stinging criticism of the current m i s a p p r e h e n s i o n in the British Monthly

Review

journal, pointing out that the description of the works b y U c c e l l o in the 1492 inventory of t h e Palazzo Medici was a m o r e reliable account than V a s a r i ' s , and that its description of three battle paintings by Uccello on wood corresponded better w i t h the works in L o n d o n , Florence and Paris, than the ones formerly at Gualfonda. F u r t h e r m o r e , he noted that the inventory specified that the subject represented was the battle of S a n R o m a n o of 1432, n o t the Battle o f San Egidio of 1416, as had been supposed f r o m V a s a r i ' s description of the works a t Gualfonda. Having demolished two myths about t h e p a i n t i n g s in London, Florence and Paris, he then created another three. Home a s s u m e d that b e c a u s e the Battle paintings belonged t o the Medici in the late fifteenth century, they m u s t have b e e n commissioned by t h e Medici, specifically, Cosimo d e ' Medici. He assumed that b e c a u s e they were recorded in the Palazzo Medici on Via Larga, they must have b e e n c o m m i s s i o n e d for its decoration in the m i d - 1 4 5 0 s , and he assumed that because the three w o r k s were called t h e Rout of San Romano of the fifteenth century that was indeed what all three r e p r e s e n t e d .

at the e n d

3

While Cosimo was generally believed to be t h e w o r k s ' patron until the end of t h e twentieth century, it became increasingly apparent over the second half of the century that t h e sizes and shapes of the panels did not fit precisely with t h e room they were believed t o h a v e 4

been in at the time of the 1492 inventory. This led t o a questioning of the tie between t h e commission for the panels and the building of the p a l a z z o o n Via Larga, and it was suggested 5

they might have been painted for the old Palazzo M e d i c i , earlier than the m i d - 1 4 5 0 s . T h a n k s to the publication of documents by Outi Merisalo and F r a n c e s c o Caglioti from 1999 to 2 0 0 1 , it is now known that the Medici acquired rather than commissioned the works. T h e y h a d previously belonged to Damiano and A n d r e a Bartolini, w h o inherited them jointly from their father Lionardo, who is now considered the most likely person to have c o m m i s s i o n e d t h e m .

6

As discussed in Chapter 3, the Battle paintings a p p e a r in an account of 1480 describing Lionardo Bartolini's Camera Grande in his palazzo

in Florence on the corner of Via di Porta

Rossa and the Corso degli Strozzi, when the paintings were referred to as the Rout Nicchold

Piccinino.

7

of

Lionardo was a rich and important citizen, he was a m e m b e r of t h e 8

Signoria in January 1435, and was Gonfaloniere di G i u s t i z i a in 1459. As a banker, L i o n a r d o seems to have acted as a Medici agent from the 1 4 5 0 s , a n d he expressed his loyalty to t h e m by naming two sons after their patron saints, C o s m a s a n d Damian. Like the Medici he w a s patron to Filippo Lippi, commissioning a tondo, believed t o be the Virgin and Child with

the

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

131

9

Birth of the Virgin n o w in t h e Galleria Palatina, P a l a z z o Pitti, Florence. H e was o n e of the Operai for the M e r c a n t i l e Court, along with Piero d e ' M e d i c i , w h o was followed in the role b y his son Lorenzo. A n d r e w Butterfield has suggested that all of the Operai w e r e m e m b e r s of t h e inner circle of the Medici f a c t i o n .

10

He was also a m e m b e r of the Dieci di Balla,

F l o r e n c e ' s war c o m m i t t e e m a d e up of ten of its wealthiest citizens. Being a wealthy and powerful family, it is not surprising that the Bartolini w e r e important patrons of the arts. In 1407 Bartolomeo and S a l i m b e n e di Lionardo Bartolini Salimbeni, L i o n a r d o ' s father and uncle, respectively, provided for the maintenance of their family chapel in t h e church of Santa Trinita, in which L o r e n z o M o n a c o executed the altarpiece and mural paintings in the early 1420s.

11

In his will of 1477, L i o n a r d o left all his b e l o n g i n g s jointly to his y o u n g e s t s o n s , M a r c o , D a m i a n o and A n d r e a . T h e elder brothers contested t h e will a n d t h e matter w a s arbitrated by a c o m m i t t e e of three prominent citizens, including L o r e n z o d e ' Medici. T h e matter

was

resolved in favour of D a m i a n o and Andrea, M a r c o h a v i n g died in 1480. In 1483 D a m i a n o took possession of the Battle

paintings, for himself a n d A n d r e a , as A n d r e a had m o v e d to

Milan. T h e following year A n d r e a wrote to N i c c o l 6 Michelozzi, L o r e n z o d e ' secretary, regarding the c e d i n g o f an important work of art, evidently the Battle

Medici's

paintings. In

1486 Andrea returned t o Florence and in the next year the division of the inheritance was recorded, with n o m e n t i o n of the Battle paintings, p r e s u m a b l y because they had already been seized

by L o r e n z o .

12

Caglioti, w h o uncovered m u c h

of the works' pre-Medici

history,

proposed that the Battle paintings were probably c o m m i s s i o n e d by Lionardo Bartolini in 1438 when he married for the second t i m e , and that they w e r e appropriated by Lorenzo in 1484, following the c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between A n d r e a a n d L o r e n z o ' s secretary in February and M a r c h of that y e a r .

13

The three paintings were referred to as the Rout

of San Romano

in the inventory of

Lorenzo d e ' M e d i c i ' s b e l o n g i n g s taken in 1492 following his death, known from a copy m a d e in 1512. They were displayed o v e r wainscoting with a Battle a Story

of Paris

(?) by Uccello, and a Hunt

between

Dragons

by F r a n c e s c o di P e s e l l o .

14

and Lions

and

L o r e n z o ' s room

contained an eclectic mix of paintings, including a large and extremely valuable Adoration

of

the Magi tondo listed as a work of Fra Angelico ( n o w often described as by Fra A n g e l i c o and Filippo Lippi or Lippi a l o n e

15

and housed in the National Gallery of Art, W a s h i n g t o n ) , a

tabernacle with the head of Saint

Bastiano, figures

and coats of a r m s by

Squarcione,

unattributed paintings of Saint Jerome and the D u k e of U r b i n o , and a Portrait Ghaleazo

by Piero P o l l a i u o l o .

of

Duke

16

The Battle paintings next appear in a 1495 d o c u m e n t recording a deliberation of the Sindaci, responding to a request by Damiano Bartolini for the restitution of his half-share of

132

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

the 'Rout of the Tower at San Romano Torre a San Romano'

or the Rout of Nicchold

siue 'La rotta de Nicolo

Picino').

Piccinino'

('La rotta

della

D a m i a n o testified that the works had

been in his and his brother Andrea's h o u s e in Q u i n t o , n o r t h w e s t of Florence, and that they were seized by force from his residence (presumably in Florence) on L o r e n z o d e ' M e d i c i ' s orders by a group of men including Francione, a carpenter. This version of e v e n t s w a s confirmed by the witnesses Mariotto d ' A n t o n i o C a r n e s e c c h i and Galeotto M a r t e l l i .

17

The

paintings were later recorded in a 1598 Medici i n v e n t o r y , so whatever the o u t c o m e o f Damiano's claim, they ultimately remained in Medici o w n e r s h i p .

18

T h e L o n d o n panel left t h e

Medici Collection after 1787, passing t h r o u g h the Giraldi Collection to the Lombardi Baldi Collection, from which it was acquired by the National Gallery, London, in 1857. T h e Paris panel left the Medici Collection, presumably at the s a m e time as the London panel, a l s o passing through the Lombardi Baldi Collection to the C a m p a n a Collection, from which it w a s acquired for the M u s e e Napoleon III in the early 1 8 6 0 s , w h i c h became the M u s e e du L o u v r e . The Florence panel was transferred to the Galleria degli Uffizi by 1796.

19

A Single C o m m i s s i o n ?

To state the obvious, for three paintings of similar subject matter by the s a m e artist, that a r e documented as being in common ownership from 1 4 8 0 to 1787, and that have been referred to jointly (by various titles) on numerous occasions s i n c e the fifteenth century, the

Battle

paintings are distinctly different in appearance. S o m e of these differences are clue to U c c e l l o and some are due to how they have been treated s u b s e q u e n t l y . However, even allowing f o r the considerable d a m a g e to the paint surfaces of the t h r e e panels, described in detail in t h e Catalogue in A p p e n d i x A, the three paintings d o n o t form a continuous or even

highly

consistent composition, and there are distinct differences between the scale of the figures in the London and Florence panels, compared with the Paris panel, and distinct

differences

between the landscapes of all three panels, m o r e p r o n o u n c e d between the London a n d Florence panels and the Paris panel. T h e s e differences raise a doubt as to whether t h e three panels could have formed a single commission. In many respects the London and Florence p a n e l s form a natural pair, while t h e panel in Paris is different and may not have been displayed w i t h the other two originally. T h e m o s t significant discrepancy between the panels is the size of t h e figures and horses in the L o n d o n and Florence panels, which are smaller than those in t h e Paris panel. T h e viewing position is also higher in the first two than in the last and t h e r e a r e differences between the type of armour and the h o r s e s ' paraphernalia in the first t w o a n d the last.

20

T h e differences in t h e

landscapes are considerable between all three, s u g g e s t i n g that the painting of the panels m a y

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

133

have taken so long that U c c e l l o ' s style actually developed in t h e time it took to paint t h e m . However, the first two still s h o w visible landscapes, while t h e last has only a b a c k g r o u n d of a dark screen of trees. T h e L o n d o n Battle takes place on an unnatural p i n k ground, paralleled t o an extent in the pinkish-beige g r o u n d in the London Saint white ground in S c h e g g i a ' s Triumph

of Fame

George,

and the similar p i n k i s h -

(Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art, New Y o r k ) .

Presumably, this colour was chosen for aesthetic reasons. It gives the s c e n e a lively feel, and throws the figures in strong relief. The Florence panel h a s a m i d - b r o w n ground, while t h e Paris panel has a g r e y i s h - b r o w n ground. T h e landscape in the b a c k g r o u n d of the L o n d o n panel is predominantly grey-brown with a few trees a n d a little grass, that in the F l o r e n c e panel is more evenly b r o w n with more greenery in the trees and tussocks of grass, while t h e landscape in the Paris panel is a l m o s t entirely black, s a v e for t h e tips of s o m e faintly-visible leaves. From the visual e v i d e n c e it seems that either U c c e l l o w a s granted c o n s i d e r a b l e latitude in developing the c o m p o s i t i o n of the panels as he w o r k e d on t h e m , or t h e c o m m i s s i o n itself was not unified, but consisted of t w o or even three individual c o m m i s s i o n s that h a v e subsequently been grouped together as though they b e l o n g e d to a single c o m m i s s i o n . Having seen that t h e works experienced at least t w o c h a n g e s of o w n e r s h i p and t h r e e relocations in the fifteenth century, resulting in c h a n g i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s of installation or storage, it is not surprising that the works were altered to suit their different s u r r o u n d i n g s . Baldini's investigation of the Florence Battle

in the early 1950s b r o u g h t to light the w o r k ' s

complex physical history. Examination of the panel r e v e a l e d that t h e t o p corners are filled with separate pieces of wood, w h o s e grain runs in a different direction from the m a i n planks of the panel. F u r t h e r m o r e , the right hand corner addition has a piece of canvas interlayer covering the w h o l e surface of the added wood, while the rest of t h e panel has c a n v a s interlayers only over the j o i n s between the planks. T h e g a p s that t h e additions filled w e r e , judging by their size, s h a p e and location, intended to a l l o w the painting t o fit between corbels in a vaulted room. T h e angle of the original edges in the u p p e r corners led Baldini to s u p p o s e that the top of the panel had originally been arch-shaped. P r e s u m a b l y , at an early stage of its history the panel had been significantly reconfigured to give it a rectangular shape, by removing the arch-shaped top of the panel, filling the g a p s in the c o r n e r s and painting the corner additions to match the c o m p o s i t i o n of the rest of the p a n e l . At the time of B a l d i n i ' s examination, investigations at the National Gallery, L o n d o n , and the Musee du Louvre confirmed that similar c h a n g e s had occurred to the other panels. The fact that the corner gaps at the top of the London and Florence panels were of different sizes, but in m i r r o r - i m a g e format, led Baldini to suppose that the London and Florence panels were pendants, while the different disposition of the gaps in t h e Paris panel suggested to h i m that it had been placed at a right angle to these, on an a d j a c e n t wall to the right.

21

134

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

The results of the most recent comparative technical analyses of the three works, published by Dillian Gordon in 2003, suggest that the c u t t i n g of the tops of t h e panels and t h e adding of the corner inserts date to the late fifteenth c e n t u r y , m o s t probably w h e n they were seized by Lorenzo d e ' Medici around 1 4 8 4 .

22

O n e feature of t h e top right c o r n e r addition in

the Paris panel, however, merits further technical i n v e s t i g a t i o n . E. R a v a u d ' s d i a g r a m of t h e panel construction and the disposition of the cloth interlayers published in 2 0 0 3 , s h o w s that it has a more complex make-up than those in the L o n d o n p a i n t i n g .

23

Strangely, it is composed

of four unevenly shaped pieces of wood. X-radiographs h o u s e d in the Centre de Recherche et de Restauration des Musees de France s h o w that the left-most of the four additions has a pronounced craquelure similar to that of the m a i n part of the painting, and the e d g e s of t h e lances are incised, as they are in the main part of t h e p a n e l , suggesting that it may b e original.

24

In the three additions on the right there is a v e r y different, much finer, craquelure

and the edges of the lances are not incised, confirming o t h e r evidence s h o w i n g that they are later additions.

25

If the piece of canvas continues f r o m t h e main panel o n t o t h e left-most

addition as the diagram suggests (although there are q u e s t i o n s marks drawn in this area of t h e diagram expressing uncertainty), then it must have b e e n a d d e d by Uccello, perhaps because of a change to the desired shape of the panel while it w a s being m a d e , and s o perhaps a change to its intended location. Microscopic e x a m i n a t i o n of the left-most a d d i t i o n , or an enlargement of the X-radiograph might help d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r the cloth interlayer does in fact continue from the main part of the panel onto the l e f t - m o s t addition.

O n e Battle o r T w o ?

Confusion about the subject of the three paintings is e v i d e n t as early as the fifteenth century. In 1480 they were described as the "Rout of Niccold as the 'Rout of San Romano',

Piccinino',

in 1492 they w e r e described

and in 1495, as both. T h e battle of San R o m a n o took place o n 1

June 1432, while Piccinino was defeated at the battle o f Anghiari on 29 J u n e 1440. T h e problem is that Piccinino does not appear in the a c c o u n t s o f the battle of San R o m a n o . Either the earliest description of the subject is incorrect or the subject is not one battle but t w o .

26

Identifying many of the protagonists in the three paintings is also problematic. T h e symbol of the knot on the standard of the London painting identifies t h e captain as Niccold d a T o l e n t i n o , since the knot also appears in Andrea del C a s t a g n o ' s Equestrian Tolentino

Monument

for

Niccold

da

in the D u o m o in Florence. T h e captain in t h e Paris painting has been identified as

Micheletto Attendolo da Catignola, s i n c e his standard b e a r s , in heraldic terms: ' 2 and 3 barry undee, argent and s a b l e ' , similar to t h e a r m s on t h e m o n u m e n t of his relative Cardinal Ascanio Sforza in the church of Santa M a r i a del P o p o l o in R o m e , and Micheletto is known

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

from written accounts to have been the other principal Florentine condottiere San R o m a n o .

27

135

at the battle of

It has been proposed that the figure b e h i n d Tolentino in t h e London painting

is also Micheletto, since he bears Attendolo arms on his s u r c o a t .

28

N o n e of t h e S i e n e s e can b e

identified securely. T h e knight being unhorsed in the centre of the Florence panel

is

traditionally identified as B e r n a d i n o della Ciarda. H e was o n e of t h e c o m m a n d e r s of t h e Sienese troops during the war of which the battle of S a n R o m a n o was a p a r t ;

29

h o w e v e r , there

is no evidence to confirm that it is he w h o is represented and written a c c o u n t s do n o t relate that he fell at the battle of San R o m a n o , but rather that h e fled.

30

T h e a r m s of o n e of the

Sienese are close in form, if not colour, to those of the Petrucci family, w h o were represented at the battle of San R o m a n o by Antonio Petrucci, and it has been suggested that the u n h o r s e d knight in the Florence panel m i g h t be him or an allusion to h i m .

31

Significantly, P i c c i n i n o

cannot be identified a n y w h e r e . Even before the descriptions of the paintings as the rout of N i c c o l 6 Piccinino c a m e to light in 1999 and 2 0 0 1 , the differences in scale, c o m p o s i t i o n and style of the Paris painting had led some scholars to believe that it was not c o n t e m p o r a r y with t h o s e in L o n d o n and Florence. Furthermore, the prominence in the Paris panel of Micheletto, w h o was not feted as a hero of the battle of San R o m a n o , led Julia Maria Lessanutti to suggest that the Paris panel represented a depiction of the battle of Anghiari of 1440, in which Micheletto was the h e r o , and in which Niccholo Piccinino was defeated. T h e fact that the three panels c a m e to be referred to jointly as the rout of Niccol6 Piccinino m a y be because the i m p o r t a n c e of that victory far exceeded that of the battle of San R o m a n o , in terms of territory gained for Florence and for the final d e m i s e of the anti-Medici Albizzi f a c t i o n .

32

T h e Paris panel m a y

well be of a different subject and a different date than t h e o t h e r two. It c a n n o t be said w h e t h e r it was commissioned to be installed next to the other t w o works, w h e t h e r it e v e r had a pendant, now lost, or whether it was an entirely a u t o n o m o u s work of art. It is worth remembering that the Bartolini family probably c o m m i s s i o n e d other depictions of military leaders from Uccello. Vasari identified the paintings in chiaroscuro in the Bartolini palazzo at Gualfonda in the sixteenth century as, T a u l o Orsino, O t t o b u o n o da P a r m a , Luca da C a n a l e , and Carlo Malatesti Lord of R i m i n i ' , w h o m he described as 'all captains general of those times'.

33

Perhaps then, the glorious tradition of Florentine condottieri

was more important

than the specific details of their individual a c h i e v e m e n t s .

O r d e r of E x e c u t i o n

It is, though, possible to reconstruct the order in w h i c h the London, Florence and Paris paintings were executed. T h e differences

between the b a c k g r o u n d s in the London

and

136

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

Florence panels show a significant d e v e l o p m e n t in U c c e l l o ' s representation of landscape. The action in the foreground of the former is completely separated from the background by a screen of orange trees, rose bushes and p o m e g r a n a t e trees, growing higher at the sides. This compositional format is fundamentally t h e s a m e as that for the Melbourne Saint

George

of

the early 1430s, in which the rock formation plays the s a m e role as the trees in the London painting, rising at the sides to form a backdrop for the figures in the foreground, and forming an enclosed, stage-like space in the foreground. A similar compositional device was used again by Uccello in t h e Resurrection

window in the D u o m o . Another similarity between t h e

Melbourne and L o n d o n works is the way the b a c k g r o u n d landscapes are painted in broad, flat areas of light tonality contrasted with dark, sinuous b a n d s like sand dunes, suggesting t h e undulations of the landscape. In the much larger L o n d o n painting Uccello introduced a much greater deal of incident, including foot soldiers r u n n i n g , others arming t h e m s e l v e s , and mounted soldiers riding into the distance. The landscape of the Florence Battle

shows a m o r e complex representation of space,

and so is probably slightly later. Uccello used a screen of greenery only on the sides, for a repoussoir

effect. T h i s allows the landscape to extend i n t o the background more gradually,

even if he still placed the principal action in the foreground to maintain a degree o f consistency with the composition of the London panel. In the Florence panel the detailed representation of subdivided fields, some u n d e r cultivation, the varied lighting over the fields, as though there are shadows cast by c l o u d s passing overhead, and the interweaving o f narrative and landscape, for example the foot soldiers appearing over the hill in the m i d d l e distance, provide a visually rich setting for the action in the foreground. T h e dark foliage a n d twisted boughs of the pine trees are familiar features of the Tuscan countryside. T h e incident in the landscape is richer too, with a hound chasing rabbits and a tiny group of figures at t h e upper left holding j u g s around a half-barrel, possibly making w i n e . Ambrogio Lorenzetti in his Effects of Good and Bad Government

34

No painter since

in the Palazzo Pubblico in

Siena had done more to capture the beauty of the T u s c a n landscape. T h e Florence panel explains why Uccello was remembered by Landino as a specialist in the depiction of a n i m a l s , landscape and p e r s p e c t i v e . T h e background of the Paris Battle consists of a screen of d a r k foliage, in which little detail is discernable. The sense of developing sophistication in t h e representation of landscape between the London and the Florence paintings suggests t h a t while the works were probably conceived at the s a m e time as an e n s e m b l e , they w e r e executed in succession, with the London panel painted first and the Florence panel s e c o n d . The reason for placing the Paris panel third in the chronology is not to d o with the l a n d s c a p e , but its principal subject: Micheletto, who became a hero after Tolentino.

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

137

' N o w consider, m y L o r d s , the position I h a v e e n j o y e d ' : T h e S y m b o l i c S i g n i f i c a n c e of t h e Paintings

B e t w e e n 1429 and 1433 F l o r e n c e was at war with t h e city of Lucca and its allies G e n o a , M i l a n and Siena. T h e r e are differing accounts of t h e battle of San R o m a n o , h o w e v e r , they d o n o t contradict each other on the following basic details. On 1 J u n e 1432, in t h e valley of the A r n o river, m i d - w a y between F l o r e n c e and Pisa, N i c c o l 6 d a T o l e n t i n o was leading Florentine t r o o p s when he engaged the Sienese enemy n e a r t h e t o w e r of S a n R o m a n o and t h e t o w n of M o n t o p o l i . Micheletto A t t e n d o l o , who was leading another group of Florentine t r o o p s e l s e w h e r e , subsequently j o i n e d the battle. T h e e n e m y w i t h d r e w , leaving n u m e r o u s troops t o b e taken prisoner. A c c o u n t s vary as to w h o m , out of T o l e n t i n o and A t t e n d o l o , d e s e r v e d the m o s t credit, although in Florence t h e battle was celebrated as a victory for T o l e n t i n o , t h e official leader of the Florentine t r o o p s .

36

It is difficult to m a k e firm connections b e t w e e n m a n y of the details in t h e L o n d o n and Florence paintings and w h a t is k n o w n to h a v e taken place historically at the battle of San Romano.

Despite the wealth

of detail

in the p a i n t i n g s , they lack any

unmistakeable

topographical references, such as the tower of San R o m a n o or the t o w n of Montopoli in the b a c k g r o u n d . Their purpose is n o t so much to p r o v i d e a literal depiction of t h e events as they h a p p e n e d , as to celebrate t h e glorious o u t c o m e . P e r h a p s this is why there is n o c o n s e n s u s as t o which of the n u m e r o u s sources available t o Uccello he actually used for his depiction of 37

t h e b a t t l e . A likely source is t h e diary of the Florentine L u c a di M a s o degli Albizzi w h o was entrusted by the Dieci di Balia with the task of o r g a n i s i n g with T o l e n t i n o the c a m p a i g n that led t o the battle,

38

since it s e e m s that the paintings w e r e c o m m i s s i o n e d by o n e of the Dieci,

Lionardo Bartolini. Nevertheless, the account of t h e battle m a y have been filtered through the patron or put together from a variety of sources. Modern historians agree that the battle of San R o m a n o was a brief triumph for the Florentines in the war with Lucca that achieved little o v e r a l l .

39

S o w h y the lavish depiction of

it in Uccello's e n o r m o u s paintings? Perhaps m o r e i m p o r t a n t for an interpretation of the subject matter of the Battle paintings than the battle's significance for the Florentine struggle for regional d o m i n a n c e is its significance for the h o n o u r of Florentine leaders. T h e s y m b o l i c significance of the war for the Florentine political situation is poignantly expressed in s o m e of the missives from the battlefields. Rinaldo degli Albizzi was a prominent representative of t h e anti-Medici, conservative, o l d e r families in the Florentine oligarchy, w h o led the Florentine administration of the war in t h e field. He pleaded r e p e a t e d l y from the battlefield for t h e mostly pro-Medici Dieci di Balia to respect his h o n o u r in their dealings with h i m , their m a n a g e m e n t of the war and their response to attacks on his c o m p e t e n c e in Florence: ' N o w

138

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

consider, my Lords, the position I have enjoyed in the p a s t , and how I h a v e been a c c u s t o m e d to conduct myself, and may it please you therefore a b o v e all to have s o m e regard for m y honour, that since you keep m e here for form's sake, s o that I may not b e disgraced, that i n the meantime I should b e in charge, taking account o f m y rank and a g e . ' T h e war did n o t always go well for the Florentines, and so sensitive w a s R i n a l d o to criticism in Florence t h a t he complained even when the Dieci di B a l k defended h i m there: i d o not believe that I h a v e done anything for which I need to be defended, and i n a n y case 1 trust I a m able to defend myself.'

40

While Rinaldo is not represented in the Battle

paintings, his attitude helps t o

explain the extreme p o m p and pageantry of U c c e l l o ' s representation of t h e battle of S a n Romano: it is a manifestation of political narcissism, j e a l o u s y and rivalry, reflecting t h e anxiety of those w h o waged the war to be seen as t r i u m p h a n t , naturally for the sake of t h e outcome of the war and its effects o n Florentine s e c u r i t y and p o w e r , but perhaps m o r e importantly for what people would say about their p e r f o r m a n c e in Florence. The economic historian A n t h o n y M o l h o r e c o u n t e d a similarly revealing e p i s o d e f r o m 1432 concerning the two principal subjects of U c c e l l o ' s paintings:

It seems that the Florentine city fathers, pleased with the performance of one of their great captains, Michele degli Attendoli, presented to him, as a token of their appreciation, a golden helmet costing the respectable sum of 2,000 florins. No sooner had news of this event spread in the domain than Niccolo da Tolentino, another of Florence's mercenaries, claimed an equal measure of recognition, so that the Commune was forced to present him a helmet similar to that given Michele degli Atlendoli. Four thousand florins in a budget of some three quarters of a million was no doubt a small sum. But only a decade and a half before, in 1419, it had represented 4 percent of the annual expenditures for military affairs, and even in the 1420's many

thoughtful

Florentines would have felt that such a sum paid to please fickle and insatiable mercenaries was an extravagant waste of money.

41

Dale Kent demonstrated how t h e w a r acted as a catalyst for the latent divisions a n d resentments in Florentine society, by casting a spotlight on the abilities of its leaders

to

defend the c o m m u n e , in particular, C o s i m o d e ' M e d i c i ' s ability to fund the e x t r e m e l y expensive endeavour and Rinaldo's inability to achieve a decisive victory on the field

of

battle. These tensions m a y only have been contributing factors to the political upheaval

in

Florence following the war: the expulsion o f C o s i m o from Florence in 1433, his s u b s e q u e n t return, and Rinaldo's expulsion in 1434, nevertheless, t h e y were clearly i m p o r t a n t .

42

As one of the Dieci di Balia that conducted the war, Lionardo had good c a u s e t o promote any victory in the long and often inglorious conflict.

43

T h e condottieri

Niccolo d a

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

139

T o l e n t i n o and Michele degli Attendoli and their retinues h a d cost t h e Dieci astronomical a m o u n t s in wages during the war with L u c c a ,

44

and L i o n a r d o m i g h t well h a v e w a n t e d to s h o w

that they had been worth the investment b y d e p i c t i n g t h e m prominently in his paintings. The Bartolini arms are not discernible in the Battle

Battle

paintings, but then it is not

k n o w n that any Bartolini were present at the battle or b a t t l e s depicted. T h e y e l l o w d i a m o n d s h a p e s on a red b a c k g r o u n d on the shield carried b y a foot s o l d i e r at the far left of the Paris p a i n t i n g may, h o w e v e r , be a discrete allusion t o the B a r t o l i n i a r m s , which s h o w t h r e e yellow d i a m o n d s on a red field in t w o of its quarters, as c a n be s e e n in t h e a r m s o n the floor of their f a m i l y chapel in the church of Santa Trinita.

U c c e l l o a n d the Medici

W h i l e the Battle paintings are most probably not M e d i c i c o m m i s s i o n s , this is n o t to say that they d o not c o m m u n i c a t e pro-Medici m e s s a g e s . A t t e n d o l o ' s headdress in t h e Paris panel s h o w s a cluster of seven circles at the front highly r e m i n i s c e n t of the Medici palle

(the balls

of the Medici coat of a r m s ) . T h e c o m m i s s i o n was p r o b a b l y partly intended to flatter the M e d i c i role in the war. W h i l e the nature of U c c e l l o ' s o w n r e l a t i o n s h i p with the Medici is n o w unclear, it remains possible that the Medici were U c c e l l o ' s p a t r o n s for the Incredulity Thomas

of Saint

formerly on the facade of the church of S a n T o m a s s o A p o s t o l o in the M e r c a t o

V e c c h i o , now destroyed. T h e painting was attributed to U c c e l l o by t h e authors of // Libra Antonio

Billi and // Codice

45

Magliabechiano.

there is no corroborating e v i d e n c e for t h i s .

di

Vasari d e s c r i b e d it as a late work, although 46

By 1755 it s e e m s t o have d i s a p p e a r e d , j u d g i n g

b y R i c h a ' s c o m m e n t s on the renovated facade of t h e c h u r c h : ' L o n g ago, a b o v e the e n t r a n c e , Paolo Uccello, celebrated master of perspective, painted a Saint T h o m a s ' ('In antico Porta

al di fuori 41

Tommafo').

Paolo

Uccello

celebre

Maeftro

di profpettiva

vi avea

dipinto

fulla un

S.

T h e Medici first settled in Florence in t h e northeast corner of the M e r c a t o

V e c c h i o , opposite the church, before expanding north into the parish of San Lorenzo in the mid-fourteenth c e n t u r y .

48

Butterfield noted that the Medici w e r e the principal patrons for the

church and proposed that C o s i m o was probably r e s p o n s i b l e for the c o m m i s s i o n . In 1435, C o s i m o , as Gonfaloniere cli Giustizia, made the Feast of S a i n t T h o m a s a c o m m u n a l holiday, and in

1460 he provided a new high altar for the c h u r c h .

Butterfield argued that the

iconography of the subject was related to good g o v e r n m e n t since it s h o w s c l e m e n c y (on C h r i s t ' s part) and the desire for truth (on Saint T h o m a s ' p a r t ) , a powerful a n a l o g y for the Medici to proclaim the legitimacy of their h e g e m o n y . Dragons

4 9

T h e patronage of the Battle

between

and Lions and the Story of Paris (?) p a i n t i n g s in t h e Medici Collection until 1598 is

u n k n o w n , although it is also possible they were Medici c o m m i s s i o n s .

5 0

140

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

Notes for Chapter 7

1

For example: Wornum, 1864, pp. 258-259; and Milanesi (ed. in Vasari, 1981, p. 214 n. 1) who

identified the Florence Battle as one of the four works by Uccello on wood from the Bartolini palazzo in Gualfonda; two others were said to have been recently acquired by the Lombardi-Baldi Collection, and one was said to have gone to England. 2

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 65: 1550 and 1568 eds.

3

Home, 1901, pp. 119-121.

4

As discussed in: Joannides, 1989, pp. 214-216. Davies (1961, pp. 526-529) noted that Baldini's

reconstruction of the works' installation left considerable space around the paintings. Gebhardt (1991, pp. 179-180) pointed out that until Joannides' article, published discussions of the relationship of the paintings to the architectural context of Lorenzo de' Medici's room were compromised by the confusiont of the 'chamera delle dua letta' with the 'chamera

grande terrena' in which the paintings

were installed. 5

Gebhardt, 1991, pp. 184-185.

6

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

7

Caglioti, 2001, pp, 49-50.

8

Butterfield, 1997, p. 61. Petriboni's and Rinaldi's Priorista

(2001, pp. 262, 319) recorded that

Lionardo worked with Cosimo di Giovanni di Bicci de' Medici, and Piero di Cosimo d e ' Medici (pp. 451-452), and served as Gonfaloniere di Giustizia (p. 471). "Holmes, 1999, pp. 117, 155. 10

n

Butterfield, 1997, p. 60.

Eisenberg, 1989, pp. 134-136,216.

12

Caglioti, 2001, pp, 49-50.

13

Caglioti, 2001, pp. 50-51.

14

Home, 1901, p. 137: 'Nella chanter"grande terrena, detta Lachamera di

Sej quadri chornichitj atomo & messj dor" sop" ladetta spalliera

Lorenzo...

et sopra edict tuccio dj braccia 42

lunghj et altj braccia iijl/2 dipintj Cioe tre della rotta di son Romano & una dj haftaglie draghj et lionj ct vno della storia diparis dimano di pagholo entrovj vna caccia.

vcello & vno dinmno drfranc" dipesello

Fiorinj300.'

15

Kent, 2000, pp. 252-255.

16

Gilbert, 1988, p. 160, citing Miintz, 1888, pp. 58-67.

57

Mcrisalo, 1999, pp. XVI, 56; Caglioti, 2000, pp. 266-267; Caglioti, 2001, pp. 45-46.

18

Home, 1901, p. 138: ' J quadri grandi di giostre antichi tutti in un" pez.z.o, con lor corniciette

apicchati almuro aid sopra alia porta del prima salone, nellandito iy

2(>

21

& [di?]

dorate,

della capella.'

For the references for the provenances of the Battle paintings, see the Catalogue. Boecia, 1970, pp. 64, 68. Baldini, 1954 a, pp. 227-231. Baldini's hypotheses explaining when these changes were made and

why have been partly superseded by recent research. Baldini believed that the works had been designed to fit between the vaults of Lorenzo de' Medici's room in the Palazzo Medici where they were

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

141

inventoried in 1492, with the London and Florence panels on one wall and the Paris panel on an adjacent wall to the right. This arrangement would account for the smaller corner gaps on the right of the Florence panel and the left of the Paris one, since corner corbels could be smaller in width than ones in the middle of a wall. Baldini believed that they were subsequently adapted to be installed in another room where they were inventoried in 1598 as all in one piece. He dated the corner additions to the sixteenth century. Gebhardt (1991, pp. 184-185) pointed out that Baldini had misidentified the room in which the paintings were installed, and that, in any case, no room on the ground floor of the Palazzo Medici would have required the gaps left in the panels. T h e panels, therefore, might well have been designed for another building. Gebhardt still assumed that the patron was Cosimo de' Medici and supposed that the original commission had been for the old Palazzo Medici, and so dated the works to before 1444 when construction of the new palazzo commenced. Gebhardt dated the commission to about 1435, shortly after the battle of San Romano. He hypothesised that a carpenter prepared the panels to fit a space in the old Palazzo Medici, that Uccello painted the Paris panel immediately, but postponed the painting of the other two panels until they had been reshaped to fit their installation in the new palazzo. He believed that Uccello was responsible for the wooden infills and their painting. Much of this hypothesis is undermined by more recent investigations, as is discussed in the body of this text. 2 2

Gordon (2003, pp. 383-387) noted that while the technique of the corner additions in the London

panel is consistent with fifteenth-century materials and technique, it differs from that of the main parts of the panels in the following ways: first, the gesso of the main part of the panel is composed of a layer of gesso grosso (gypsum and anhydrite) followed by a layer of gesso sottile (gypsum), while that on the additions is only gypsum; second, the medium of the main part of the panel is egg tempera with some walnut oil, while that of the additions is egg tempera with some linseed oil; third, the green pigment of the vegetation in the main part of the panel is a composed of a layer of black followed by a layer of verdigris mixed with lead-tin yellow, followed by a copper green glaze, while that of the additions is composed of a layer of black followed by a layer of artificial malachite. Gordon suggested that the additions probably date to the fifteenth century because the use of artificial malachite is restricted to that period and the oranges in the additions are painted with a red lead pigment microscopically similar to that in the main part of the panel. Gordon also noted (2003, p. 392) that the technique of applying a single layer of gypsum for the gesso was used by carpenters and so the corner additions may be attributable to Francionc, the carpenter Lorenzo sent to seize the works in c. 1484. 2 3

Gordon, 2003, p. 186, published courtesy of E. Ravaud.

2 4

CRRMF, conservation file, 5612 [Battle\.

2 5

Gordon, 2003, p. 387. Gordon noted that the red lances in the main part of the Paris panel are painted

with a layer of black followed by a layer of vermilion, while those in the top right corner addition have only a layer of vermilion. 2 6

Caglioti, 2001, pp. 37-38,45, 49.

2 7

Identified in Home, 1901, pp. 128-129, 131-132.

2H

Roccasecca, 1997, pp. 22-27.

142

29

3 0

3 1

THE BATTLE PAINTINGS

MaIlett, 1974, p. 183. Roccasecca, 1997, p. 68; Pertici, 1999, p. 5 4 1 . Roccasecca (1997, p. 22) proposed the identification tentatively. Pertici (1999, pp. 544-545, 548)

agreed with the identification. 3 2

Lessanutti, 1996, pp. 66-67. Pertici (1999, pp. 549-550) also thought that the Paris panel might

represent the Battle of Anghiari, or a non-narrative depiction of Micheletto simply as a victorious commander. 3 3

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 69: 1550 and 1568 eds. It cannot be determined whether

Vasari's identifications were correct, since the pictures have not survived. 3 4

Inglis, 1995, [marked p. 11]. The month of October in the Calendar of the Hours of Mary of

Burgundy is illustrated with a miniature showing a man crushing grapes with his feet in a large, halfbarrel like the one in the Florence Battle. 35

Landino, 1974, p. 124.

3 5

Accounts of the battle of San Romano were written by Giovanni Cavalcanti, Neri di Gino Capponi,

Matteo Palmieri and Lucadi Maso degli Albizzi. For discussions of the historical accounts of the battle of San Romano, see: Griffiths, 1978, pp. 313-316; Pertici, 1999, pp. 537-562; and Gordon, 2003, p p . 388-389. 3 7

Starn and Partridge, 1984, pp. 36-37.

3 8

Pertici, 1.999, p. 538. See also: Mallett, 1974, pp. 181-186.

3 9

Pertici, 1999, pp. 537, 541.

4 0

Kent, 1978, pp. 253-288; 263-264, and pp. 268-269 for the quotes.

4 1

Molho, 1971, p. 19.

42

Mohlo, 1971, pp. 184-192.

4 3

Caglioti, 2001, p. 47.

4 4

Molho, 1971, pp. 17-18.

45

Billi, 1991, p. 86; Anon. (Magliabechiano), 1892, p. 100.

4 6

47

4 8

4 9

Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 240.

Richa, 1755, pp. 231-232. Kent, 1978, p. 64. Butterfield, 1997, pp. 61, 63. For further discussion of Medici patronage at San Tomasso s e e :

Paolctti, 2000, pp. 54-72. 5 0

Home, 1901, pp. 121-125.

8 The Master of a Workshop

W i t h a substantial b o d y of work behind him, the period from the mid-1440s t o t h e end of the 1450s was a relatively p r o s p e r o u s time for Uccello, as can b e deduced from the growth of his family, his purchases of land and t h e relocation of his w o r k s h o p to the m a i n square of Florence. That U c c e l l o ' s professional reputation w a s well established is indicated by his service as a Capitano of the painters' confraternity in 1453 a n d Giovanni R u c e l l a i ' s inclusion of his n a m e in t h e list of the great Italian artists w h o s e w o r k s he o w n e d , written in 1457. T h e impression gained from the surviving works from this period is that after the m o n u m e n t a l style of the Spedale di San M a r t i n o alia Scala Nativity

and t h e Stories

of Noah

of the 1440s

discussed in Chapter 3, Uccello worked on smaller, subtler w o r k s from the 1450s o n w a r d s , since n o large-scale w o r k s survive from after that date. T h i s m a y be partly an accident of fate since w o r k s from this period that have been lost i n c l u d e t h e figure of the Blessed A n d r e a Corsini for the Library o f the D u o m o in Florence ( 1 4 5 3 ) and a Crucifixion

and t h e decoration

of a kind of sprinkler for the washbasin in the refectory of the Monastery of San Miniato al Monte

(1454), and

Crucifixion

virtually nothing is known

about

their appearance. H o w e v e r ,

the

for which Uccello and his assistant A n t o n i o di Pappi were paid was a mural

painting, suggesting that it was a large-scale work, in which he may have continued his m o n u m e n t a l style of the 1440s. Uccello's lost Giants in Padua do not help to resolve the question of how late U c c e l l o ' s m o n u m e n t a l m a n n e r of painting continued. M a r c a n t o n i o painted the Giants

Michiel recorded that

Uccello

in the courtyard of the h o u s e of Vitali i Vitaliani in Padua.

reiterated Michiel's account, but added that Donatello had taken Uccello to P a d u a .

2

1

Vasari

Donatello

left Florence for Padua in 1443. Since Uccello received p a y m e n t s from the O p e r a del D u o m o in Florence throughout that year, Vasari seems to h a v e been mistaken about the circumstances 3

in which Uccello went to P a d u a . Modern art historians d o n o t agree whether U c c e l l o ' s was a model for, or a derivation of, Donatello's Miracle

of the Repentant

Flood

Son relief panel for

the altar of the S a n t o in P a d u a made in 1447, with its similarly monumental u s e of

144

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

perspective. Thus, n o firm date for U c c e l l o ' s trip to Padua can b e established from the available evidence. The references to Antonio di Pappi at San M i n i a t o al Monte are intriguing, as they are the only unequivocal documented instances of Uccello working with an assistant. A number of similar-looking, small-scale devotional works d a t a b l e to the 1440s or 1450s suggest that Uccello was creating paintings speculatively for the o p e n market or had patrons choose from a selection of m o d e l s in his studio when they ordered such paintings. T h e unsophisticated style and variable quality of these paintings indicate that Uccello was delegating to an assistant or assistants the routine execution of such w o r k s , discussed as a g r o u p at the end of this chapter, leaving him free to develop the more subtle, polished and innovative content of his own works, discussed first.

Depicting Virtue: T h e Indianapolis Profile Portrait

of a Young

Man

More than a dozen portraits of individuals, o n e double portrait and a g r o u p portrait have been attributed to U c c e l l o .

4

However, only o n e of these, t h e Portrait

of a Young

Man

in the

Museum of Art in Indianapolis, exhibits Uccello's style unmistakably (Fig. 4). Studies of fifteenth-century

Florentine portrait paintings are v e x e d by the a b s e n c e of documented

commissions and long provenances. The identities of t h e subjects are rarely k n o w n , and even when they are, the circumstances in which the paintings were made a r e usually obscure. Attributions can be difficult to make because these works often pictorial format, especially for male portraits, of a

follow a conventional

strict profile against a plain, dark

background, providing artists with little opportunity t o express their artistic personality in individual ways. Many of the portraits that have been attributed to Uccello have also been attributed to Masaccio, Domenico Veneziano, Filippo Lippi, Scheggia, Alesso Baldovinetti or the Master of the Casteilo Nativity.

5

The only documented portrait

by

Uccello is the Equestrian

Monument,

made

posthumously, and the basis for Uccello's depiction of H a w k w o o d ' s features is unknown. Vasari described the supremely confident Drunkenness

looking figure of Ham in the Sacrifice

and

of Noah as a portrait of the artist Dello Delli, whom he also claimed painted part 6

of the Chiostro V e r d e cycle (Fig. 195). Given that Delli was either forty-three or forty-four years old when he returned to Florence in 1446, and that he returned in s o m e style (the 7

Signoria recognised the knighthood conferred on him b y King Juan II of Castilla), the mature and confident l o o k i n g figure of Ham is not i n c o m p a t i b l e with V a s a r i ' s identification, but it cannot be confirmed, as there is no certain image of Delli with which to c o m p a r e it. It was probably on the basis of the figure of Ham that B e r e n s o n attributed to Uccello the similar-

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

looking drawing Profile

Portrait

145

of a Man in the G a b i n e t t o Disegni e S t a m p e degli Uffizi

8

(Fig. 5 8 ) . T h e figure standing alone in t h e Flood has given rise to a great deal of speculation as to his identity: for A m e s - L e w i s and Eisler h e m a y be Alberti; for W a k a y a m a and Marino, 9

Pope Eugenius IV; and for Gebhardt, C o s i m o d e ' M e d i c i , while the figure of Noah leaning out of the ark has been interpreted as a self-portrait. T h e Portraits

of Five Men (Giotto,

Uccello,

10

Donatello,

Manetti

and

Brunelleschi?)

in the M u s e e du Louvre was attributed to U c c e l l o b y Vasari in the s e c o n d edition of the Vite. A c c o r d i n g to its inscription and Vasari's t e s t i m o n y it depicts G i o t t o , U c c e l l o , Donatello, A n t o n i o Manetti and Brunelleschi (Fig. 1 9 8 ) .

11

H o w e v e r , t h e attribution is i m p r o b a b l e and the

veracity of the inscription is open to doubt. T h e c o m p o s i t i o n a l inconsistencies within the work a n d in relation to t h e typical portrait formats of U c c e l l o ' s time, as well as its execution, have led many t o reject his authorship of it. O n e figure is depicted in profile, three figures are depicted in three-quarter profile, and one is in a near full-frontal p o s e . Notwithstanding the w o r k ' s abraded and repainted condition, t h e b r u s h w o r k is thinner a n d less controlled than is usual for Uccello. Having said that, the depiction of M a n e t t i is reminiscent of Uccello's figure types from the mid- 1440s, such as the Dublin Virgin and Child. So it c a n n o t be excluded that t h e work is derived from a lost Uccelloesque s o u r c e o r s o u r c e s . T h e identity of t h e sitter in the Indianapolis portrait a n d the w o r k ' s original o w n e r are u n k n o w n . T h e work can only be traced as far b a c k a s t h e Lmiile G r a v e t Collection in Paris in 1897.

12

A n old black and white photograph ( u n d a t e d ) of t h e portrait in the Villa I Tatti

fototeca s h o w s extensive abrasion to the b a c k g r o u n d surrounding the head and smaller areas of abrasion on the head that have since been repainted. T h e rest of t h e paint surface appears to be in reasonably good c o n d i t i o n .

13

It has been s u g g e s t e d that the panel was transformed from

the usual rectangular format of Renaissance portraits painted on panel into its current polygonal format in a nineteenth-century r e s t o r a t i o n .

14

T h e panel is certainly not in its

original condition. T h e right and left edges have been cut and strips of w o o d h a v e been added to the circumference. However, it is difficult to establish the precise relationship of the original panel to the later additions. Since the back of the panel has been painted it is difficult to know w h e t h e r the original panel has been set into a new panel ( m a r o u f l a g e d ) , or whether the additions are confined to the e d g e s .

15

A circular ridge is visible around t h e e d g e of the surface, inside the polygonal edges, suggesting that the original format might have been a t o n d o . The devotional tondo became popular in Florence in the late fifteenth c e n t u r y .

16

Portrait tondi are extremely c o m m o n in

mural paintings (for e x a m p l e , the portraits of D o m i n i c a n friars in the vaults of the Chiostro Verde at Santa Maria Novella), in sculpture (for e x a m p l e , G h i b e r t i ' s self-portrait in the Doors of Paradise and Brunelleschi's memorial in the D u o m o ) , in glazed c e r a m i c s , glassware and,

146

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

of course, in portrait medals. If there are few (or n o ? ) recognised examples of fifteenthcentury portraits on panel in a tondo format, archival e v i d e n c e suggests that they might have existed. An inventory of the household goods of T o m m a s o Spinelli m a d e in 1445 recorded a panel painting of a w o m a n on a 'plate' ('7 tavola di donna

suvi la piata

11

dipinta').

The polygonal and tondo formats have strong associations with t h e commemoration of children. Renaissance birth trays, traditionally presented t o a new m o t h e r , a r e polygonal or round. The birth of a male child was a significant e v e n t in a family as a vital step in the continuation of the dynasty and, potentially, the family

business. It was celebrated in

depictions of a male infant on birth trays, such as the Desco

da Parto: A Birth Scene (recto);

A Putto (verso) (The N e w York Historical Society, o n loan to Metropolitan M u s e u m , New York, Fig. 197). In this amusing work, the child is s h o w n urinating, which draws attention to his sex, and the profession of the father as a goldsmith is alluded to b y the fact that the urine is silver and gold. It is known that the p a t r o n ' s son did indeed follow his father to become a 18

goldsmith. A rare wedding tray {desco da nozze) is h o u s e d in the Galleria Giorgio Franchetti in Ca d'Oro, V e n i c e . T h e seventeen-sided panel p a i n t e d by G e r o l a m o di Giovanni di Benvenuto shows a naked Hercules standing between Virtues on the recto, and t h e arms of the Tancredi and Vied families on the verso, b e t w e e n w h o m a wedding was held in 1500. Thus, the polygonal or tondo format is found in w o r k s for a domestic context, celebrating family relationships. If Renaissance portraiture was concerned with presenting the subject as an exemplar of virtue as has been reasonably a r g u e d , The Profile

Portrait

of Matteo

Olivieri

19

what virtue m i g h t a youth be expected t o possess? and the Profile

Portrait

of Michele

Olivieri

once

attributed to Uccello are now generally attributed to an a n o n y m o u s Florentine artist, or sometimes Domenico V e n e z i a n o .

20

On panels of the s a m e size, the subjects are depicted

facing in opposite directions and were probably i n t e n d e d to be displayed as pendants facing each other. The panels carry the inscriptions, ' M A T H E V S OLIVIERI DNI IOANNI FILL and ' M I C H A E L OLIVIERI M A T H EI F I L I V S ' , respectively, demonstrating that father and son were depicted within a family context. Michael Olivieri seems to be about the same age as the subject of the Indianapolis portrait. Michael's virtue may be framed within a familial context, as a son w h o dutifully reciprocates his f a t h e r ' s gaze, but his depiction gives little away about his particular personal attributes, as is the case with the majority of independent early Renaissance male portraits. Later portraits offer more clues. T h e Portrait

of a Young Man in the National Gallery

of Victoria, Melbourne, attributed to an a n o n y m o u s , north Italian artist working around 1520, depicts a male in his teens before a myrtle tree, with m y r t l e flowers tucked into his clothes, and before him a cartellino bearing the inscription: ' C L A R I O R H O C P V L C R O REG NANS

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

147

IN C O R P O R E V I R T U S ' ( ' B r i g h t e r [than b e a u t y ] is the virtue residing in this beautiful b o d y ' , Fig. 198).

21

Myrtle is an attribute of V e n u s , t h e g o d d e s s of l o v e .

22

T h e inscription of the

Melbourne portrait d r a w s attention to the y o u t h ' s beauty, but emphasises his virtue, while his virtue and beauty are associated, through t h e s y m b o l i s m of the m y r t l e , with his status as an object or reciprocator of love. T h e y o u t h in the Indianapolis portrait does not return the viewer's gaze, but t h e delicacy with w h i c h U c c e l l o has defined his features emphasises his beauty, and the l u m i n o u s tones used by U c c e l l o e m p h a s i s e h i s virtuous purity ('brighter than beauty'), qualities attractive t o a loving gaze. H e is surely t o o y o u n g to b e of marriageable age, which for a man in Florence in the fifteenth c e n t u r y w a s on a v e r a g e between thirty and 23

thirty-two. T h e Indianapolis portrait m a y h a v e b e e n c o m m i s s i o n e d to preserve the m e m o r y of the youth's beauty and purity b y a family m e m b e r or admirer. If the original format of the panel was a t o n d o , the context for the portrait m i g h t be imagined m o r e particularly as a feminine one, such as a portrait c o m m i s s i o n e d b y or for a mother to r e m e m b e r her son. Dating the Indianapolis Portrait

of a Young Man is difficult. T h e profile is similar in

style to a n u m b e r of h e a d s in Uccello's A s s u n t a Chapel p a i n t i n g s , of around 1 4 3 5 - 1 4 3 6 .

24

The

refinement and h a r m o n i o u s geometry of t h e depiction o f t h e subject is comparable with the design of the Equestrian

Monument,

also s u g g e s t i n g a d a t i n g to the mid-1430s. However, the

assured drawing of the y o u t h ' s features, in particular the foreshortening of his eye, is close to the profile of H a m , usually dated to the late 1440s. Furthermore, the schematic execution of the hair, painted with fine strands of light y e l l o w over a layer of dark b r o w n is close to Uccello's economical execution of hair in the small figures in his mid-to-late works, all in all suggesting a date for the Indianapolis portrait a r o u n d the middle of these periods, in the early or mid-1440s.

Religious W o r k s of t h e 1 4 4 0 s : T h e D u b l i n Virgin Children

a n d Holy Fathers

and Child, t h e Female

Saint with

Two

a t S a n M i n i a t o al M o n t e

The Dublin Virgin and Child (Fig. 7) was first attributed to Uccello by Pudelko in 1936, who asked: 'Is it possible to consider any other painter except Uccello as the author of such an incredibly bold w o r k ? ' and answered himself: ' N o o t h e r artist of the epoch has ever insisted so strongly on the metallic solidity of the h a l o e s . '

25

U c c e l l o painted the Virgin as a robust,

modern woman without a veil, which led S i n d o n a to d e s c r i b e her as ' a rare and magnificent 'profane' Virgin of the early Tuscan R e n a i s s a n c e . ' 'profana'

del prima

Rinascimento

26

toscano')

('una

rara

e magnifica

Madonna

T h i s w a s thought so i m m o d e s t that her head

was duly covered in a h e a v y , dark veil in a later r e p a i n t i n g (Fig. 6). T h e veil was r e m o v e d in 1968 during conservation by the Istituto C e n t r a l e del R e s t a u r o di R o m a .

27

148

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

The cleaning also revealed evidence of the w o r k ' s spatial adventurousness. T h e r e are differences between the incised lines for the scallop shell niche and the painted version. The red cornice and some of the lines of the niche were originally incised so a s to b e seen less di sotto in su, more in keeping with the angle at which the Virgin's head is seen, which is virtually at the same level as the viewer. B y painting the n i c h e as seen from below, behind the Virgin seen from in front, Uccello created t h e i m p r e s s i o n that the niche is actually some distance behind the Virgin and considerably larger than her. With the Christ C h i l d ' s toes and knee overlapping the ledge on which h e kneels, it a p p e a r s as t h o u g h h e is a b o u t to lunge forward towards the viewer. Thus, a telescopic depiction of space is achieved, between Christ in the foreground moving, as it were, towards the v i e w e r and the background, receding into depth behind the Virgin. Sindona recognised the strong influence of D o n a t e l l o ' s sculptures in t h e Dublin Virgin and Child, such as the lively putti around t h e p u l p i t of the D u o m o in Prato. T h a t the format of the Dublin Virgin and Child has a D o n a t e l l o e s q u e origin is without doubt, given the numerous sculpted versions of the c o m p o s i t i o n attributed to artists in his circle, including the Virgin and Child in t h e Bargello in Florence, and a n o t h e r in the Szepmtiveszeti Muzeum, .Budapest from the circle of Donatello, and t h e Virgin Madonna,

and Child k n o w n as the

in the Bargello, by a follower of M i c h e l o z z o .

28

Torrigiani

The Tomb of Baldassare

which Uccello had already quoted from in the design of his Equestrian

Monument,

Cossa,

includes a

depiction of the Virgin and Child in half-length format b e f o r e a scallop shell niche (Fig. 199). Keith Christiansen has noted that U c c e l l o ' s painting may derive from a lost relief by Donatello, reflected in a gilt bronze relief by a follower of Donatello in the National Gallery of Art, Washington, in which the architecture is s i m i l a r l y shown di sotto Virgin and Child who are seen from m o r e directly in front. although the pentimenti

29

in su, behind the

This may well be the case,

between the incised version of the niche and the painted version in

the Dublin Virgin and Child may also indicate that the telescopic effect was Uccello's own invention. The lively, almost risque, character of the Dublin Virgin and Child may help explain the absence of an altarpiece in Uccello's o e u v r e . T h e o n l y indication that Uccello might have painted one is the Female Saint in the Galleria degli Uffizi, conceivably a fragment of a sacra conversazione

(Fig. 200). Judging by the cropped c o m p o s i t i o n , the panel has been cut around

the top, left and bottom edges. What remains is an unidentified female s a i n t

10

standing in the

corner of an architectural setting with her hands j o i n e d in adoration, like the two children appearing from behind her. The object of their v e n e r a t i o n is beyond t h e left edge of the picture, perhaps an enthroned Virgin and Child, past a n o t h e r standing figure, the only remains of which are the edge of black robes at the bottom left o f the picture and the mysterious object

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

149

o n the left edge, level with the female s a i n t ' s chest. It has been s u g g e s t e d that t h e object might b e the end of a knife, the attribute of Saint Peter Martyr w h e n sticking out from his head or chest, although it is n o t clear what t h e object i s .

31

The absence of an altarpiece from U c c e l l o ' s o e u v r e is p r o b a b l y indicative of the nature of his career, rather than the c h a n c e d i s a p p e a r a n c e of all such works. While the ecclesiastical contacts of Lorenzo M o n a c o , Fra A n g e l i c o and Filippo Lippi would h a v e given them a n advantage in securing c o m m i s s i o n s for altarpieces during U c c e l l o ' s lifetime, this can only b e part of the reason that Uccello d i d not, given that M a s a c c i o and M a s o l i n o painted altarpieces. T h e serene, ordered and d e c o r a t i v e character of Fra A n g e l i c o ' s altarpieces, easy o n the eye s o to speak, is remote from t h e u n c o m p r o m i s i n g character of U c c e l l o ' s religious works, whether s h o w i n g irrepressible e n e r g y and m o v e m e n t o r severe a n d forceful aspects of his style. Uccello's reputation for his wit o r for his a u d a c i o u s style m a y h a v e preceded him, inhibiting his receiving c o m m i s s i o n s to p r o v i d e a visual setting for the m a s s . Three predellas by Uccello survive: the Miracle

of the Host, t h e Q u a r a t e predella a n d the A v a n e predella, but

n o altarpiece. W a s U c c e l l o ' s artistic personality considered unsuitable for such work o r did he never h a v e a chance to d e v e l o p as a painter of altarpieces because of other c o m m i s s i o n s ? He w a s , nevertheless, t h o u g h t suitable for the representation of religious subjects in other settings including nativities, adorations and the lives of the holy fathers. An e x a m p l e of t h e last kind of subject is in the O l i v e t a n m o n a s t e r y at San M i n i a t o al M o n t e , overlooking the south of Florence from an e s c a r p m e n t with picturesque cypress groves. Its massive walls e n c l o s e the cloister (Fig. 2 5 ) w h e r e U c c e l l o , almost certainly w o r k i n g with an u n k n o w n assistant, painted t h e enigmatic mural cycle Holy Fathers

(Figs

2 0 1 - 2 0 2 ) on the east and south walls of the u p p e r story o f t h e loggia. In the fifteenth century t h e fabric of the monastery and its church was administered by t h e M e r c h a n t s '

Guild.

A l t h o u g h the c o m m i s s i o n is u n d o c u m e n t e d , S a a l m a n d r e w attention to d o c u m e n t s describing construction work on the u p p e r level of the cloister, f r o m which he d e d u c e d that the paintings must d a t e to the second half of 1447 at the e a r l i e s t .

32

A r o u n d this time Piero d e ' Medici,

acting through the M e r c h a n t s ' Guild, is t h o u g h t to h a v e c o m m i s s i o n e d Michelozzo and Luca della R o b b i a to build the tabernacle in t h e m i d d l e of t h e church h o u s i n g the cross of San Giovanni Gualberto, the founder of the V a l l o m b r o s a n order. It m a y not be an accident that U c c e l l o ' s rotated Ionic orders over the fictive corbels of his paintings in the cloister are similar to architectural details of M i c h e l o z z o ' s tabernacle. In 1447 Bernardo

Rossellino

repaired the steps leading from the church d o w n into the crypt, also indicating that this was an important period of renewal for the church and m o n a s t e r y .

33

The cycle shows the extremity of U c c e l l o ' s dry a n d abstract style. Most of t h e figures are isolated in their landscape settings, either in prayer o r meditation. Vasari was puzzled by

150

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

the colouring of the 'blue fields, the red city and the buildings mixed according to his whim' (campi azzurri,

le cittd di color rosso,

e gli edifici mescold

secondo

3

che gli parve). *

The

paintings are in terra verde, in as much as certain figures, such as the Angel o n t h e east wall are green. However, Uccello used a variety of colours t h r o u g h o u t the cycle, sometimes in an apparently capricious way, as alluded to by Vasari. T h e rocks behind the kneeling figure at the far right of the south wall suddenly change from brown to b l u e w i t h o u t a n y obvious explanation. The door in the rock face to t h e left of the figure perhaps indicates that the kneeling figure is in a cave, to which the viewer has privileged visual access, with the blue representing the dark interior. The p o o r condition of the paintings precludes any close reading of Uccello's intention in this respect. T h e minimalist imagery of t h e cycle is n o doubt a response to the subject matter, the pursuit of holiness through the m o n a s t i c renunciation of earthly pleasures, as advocated by Saint Benedict: the ' P E R F E T T A A B S T I N E N T I A ' referred to in one of the inscriptions on the east wall. That the paintings were not found pleasing by later commentators (the author of II Codice

Magliabechiano 5

valued' 'sono cose non molto teniae in pregio 'f

noted that 'they are not much

may b e because Uccello was faithful to the

principles of the Olivetans, even m o r e austere than the Benedictine rule that formed the basis of their lives. Unlike the sweetness of Fra A n g e l i c o ' s mural paintings in the Dominican monastery of San Marco, Florence, completed with the assistance of his w o r k s h o p around the 1440s, Uccello's cycle offers few visual pleasures.

Religious W o r k s of the 1450s: T h e A v a n e Predella, M a d r i d Crucifixion Saint

a n d London

George

A subtler approach to religious imagery a p p e a r s in U c c e l l o ' s works from t h e 1450s. The Man of Sorrows

between

the Virgin and Saint John the Evangelist

(Fig. 2 0 3 ) is known as the

Avane predella because it was formerly in the oratory of the Confraternity of the Most Holy Annunciation (Compagnia della Santissima A n n u n z i a t a ) in Avane. Since 1983 it has been in the Museo di San Marco, Florence. Its inscription relates that: ' A n t o n i o di Piero di Giovanni Del Golia had this panel made for the salvation of his soul and (those] of his (family! on 23 September 1452.'"^ Nothing else is known about the commission and the name Del Golia does not appear in the index of names in the Florentine Catasto of 1 4 2 7 .

37

There was,

however, a prominent Sienese family with the name Del Golia in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries.

38

Inventories of the seventeenth

Annunciation

and

eighteenth

centuries

record

a

painted

on the altar, attributed by Carocci to Neri di Bicci in 1892. Five years later it

was stolen and there has been no notice of it since, so it is impossible to confirm the attribution.

39

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

151

The format of t h e predella s h o w i n g t h e Virgin, the M a n of S o r r o w s and Saint John the Baptist in three m e d a l l i o n s disposed across the predella is traditional in Florentine art, as seen in the Master of the Docent Christ's Virgin and Child with Saints

in t h e Mus6e des Arts

Decoratifs, Paris, of around 1390, and n u m e r o u s other w o r k s from that period. Apart from the inscription, only the small figures are painted, the rest of t h e surface is gold leaf, and the figures have been badly d a m a g e d . T h u s , t h e w o r k gives little insight into the style of Uccello's painting at the time. Its figures a r e , h o w e v e r , sufficiently similar to those in the Madrid Crucifixion

to s u g g e s t a similar date for that w o r k .

In the Madrid Crucifixion

Christ is depicted crucified with the Virgin and Saint John

the Baptist to the left and Saints John t h e E v a n g e l i s t a n d Francis to t h e right (Fig. 35). T h e figures are arranged in a line before a barren, hilly l a n d s c a p e with only a f e w patches of grass and clover, under a night sky. T h e simplicity of the i c o n o g r a p h y is paralleled by the e c o n o m y of the execution. T h e haloes are painted in a g o l d - c o l o u r e d (ochre?) paint rather than gold leaf. The w o r k ' s original o w n e r is unknown. It has b e e n suggested that its composition, size and the horizontal direction of t h e wood grain of t h e panel imply that it was probably the central panel of a predella for an unidentified a l t a r p i e c e .

40

H o w e v e r , t h e horizontal f o r m a t in

itself does not imply that it w a s a predella p a n e l , as is s h o w n b y the Paris Saint George,

which

is probably not a predella panel and which is o n l y 6 cm higher, even if it has been cut down slightly. As mentioned in Chapter 2, m o s t panel paintings with a horizontal format h a v e a horizontal grain, to m i n i m i s e the possibility of w a r p i n g a c r o s s the major axis. T h e horizontal format may have been considered the most suitable for t h e c o m p o s i t i o n , showing t w o figures on either side of Christ on the cross. As an i n d e p e n d e n t panel, the work m a y h a v e been intended for a private d o m e s t i c or ecclesiastical c o n t e x t . T h e dark rectangles of turf in perspective, disposed arbitrarily o n the ground, found also in the L o n d o n Saint George,

serve

t o create a sense of s p a c e behind the figures, but p e r h a p s m o r e importantly, they contribute to the abstract, pattern-making

established

by the f i g u r e s '

frozen

gestures, their

ordered

alignment across the picture p l a n e , and the a l m o s t lunar l a n d s c a p e in t h e background. Uccello's surreal style is stronger in t h e L o n d o n Saint storm cloud, a brooding manifestation

of i m m i n e n t

George

supernatural

(Fig. 4 5 ) . T h e spiral power, is a veritable

signature of Uccello's extraordinary i m a g i n a t i o n , like the m o o n that appears repeatedly in his works, including in the London Saint George.

In n a t u r e the tornado, the whirlpool and the

whirlwind are d a n g e r o u s p h e n o m e n a , o b e y i n g u n s e e n , y e t potent, natural laws. In art, vortexes, storms and floods appear most f a m o u s l y in t h e w o r k s of visionary artists, such as Lorenzo M o n a c o ' s Miracle

of Saint Nicola

of Bari

Florence) and many of L e o n a r d o ' s d r a w i n g s .

41

p r e d e l l a panel ( M u s e o di San Marco,

T h e s e a r e works in which a highly charged

atmosphere plays as important a role as n a r r a t i v e a n d s y m b o l i s m . Vortexes also a p p e a r in

152

THE MA STER OF A WORKSHOP

Uccello's Florence Accaderaia Holy Fathers,

fainter e c h o e s of the motif appear in the scene

of the Quarate predella showing Saint John t h e Evangelist o n Patmos and in t h e Los Angeles Virgin and Child, while the moon appears in the B o l o g n a Adoration,

t h e Hunt, t h e London

Saint George and Paris Saint George. T h e vortex and the m o o n posses hidden power, each exercises its influence through invisible and yet irresistible means, the vortex sweeping up everything around it, the moon moving the seas. In U c c e l l o ' s i m a g e s t h e behaviour of men and animals is subject t o subtle influences from afar. T h e vortex a n d t h e moon a r e perhaps emblematic also of Uccello's desire to captivate the viewer. The dragon in the London Saint George captivates with its virtuoso, if n o t perfectly correct, foreshortening. It seems to have inspired the marble waterspout in the shape of a dragon from the Villa Busdraghi, attributed to the sixteenth-century sculptor Bartolomeo Ammannati, n o w in the Museo di Santo Spirito (Figs 2 0 4 - 2 0 5 ) .

42

Less conspicuous, but

equally revealing of Uccello's approach to the work, is the foreshortening of t h e h o r s e ' s body as a series of undulating curves, starting at the head, travelling along the p r o n o u n c e d curve of the neck, the hollow of t h e saddle, over t h e r u m p and e n d i n g in the flourish of the S curve tail. In contrast to the curved geometry of t h e figures, t h e turf forms a grid of rectangles. The emphasis on geometry in the composition intrigues b e c a u s e of the suggestion that the artist is revealing some hidden order in what he depicts. T h e p i c t u r e gives the impression that behind the infinite variety of forms in nature lies a plan based on pure geometry: the circle, the triangle and the square. The dating of the work has been controversial. T h e idea that it must be later than the Paris Saint George because its use of perspective is m o r e sophisticated c a n n o t be sustained. The architectural base of the Equestrian

Monument

43

s h o w s that Uccello was already adept at

sophisticated foreshortenings by 1436. As discussed below, the Paris version is probably close in date to the Miracle Annunciation

of the Host of 1467-1468. T h e scientific analyses of the Oxford

and the Melbourne Saint

George

s h o w that Uccello's use of perspective was

not consistent, even in nearly contemporary w o r k s . While

the evidence is

ambiguous, the pinks and greens in the palette of the London Saint

George

admittedly

suggest a date

before the late 1460s when more s o m b r e , autumnal tones predominate. T h e extremely refined execution of details such as the clover in the turf is also not characteristic of the late works in which Uccello's execution becomes more e c o n o m i c a l . T h e grid-like pattern of the turf is similar to that in the Madrid Crucifixion,

which in turn is close in its figure style t o the A vane

predella, dated 1452. Perhaps, therefore, the London Saint not earlier.

George may date to t h e 1450s, if

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

A Definitive M a s t e r p i e c e : T h e Hunt

in a

153

Forest

A n o t h e r work often dated to the end of U c c e l l o ' s life, b u t which, j u d g i n g by t h e rich palette and the precise and detailed execution, m a y b e nearly contemporary with the L o n d o n George is the Hunt in a Forest,

Saint

perhaps t h e m o s t m a g i c a l depiction of a h u n t in the history of

W e s t e r n art (Fig. 2 0 6 ) . In t h e originality and quality of its conception a n d t h e skill of its execution it exemplifies w h a t a masterpiece is: the inspired work of a master demonstrating an exceptional u n d e r s t a n d i n g and control of their materials a n d technique, qualities l a c k i n g in t h e works attributable to U c c e l l o ' s assistants, discussed b e l o w . In a moonlit forest of oak trees, sixteen m o u n t e d h u n t s m e n and twelve o n foot follow a pack of h o u n d s c h a s i n g six roebuck into t h e d i s t a n c e of a l a n d s c a p e stretching to the horizon. Roe are a small species of deer admired for their grace m o r e than their sport as game. T h e c a n o p y of the trees above and t h e luxuriant carpet of grasses, bull-rushes, clover and flowers below e n c l o s e t h e brightly clothed hunters in a rich green setting. In his

Ricordi

Giovanni Morelli described j u s t such places in the c o u n t r y s i d e a r o u n d the M u g e l l o area, to t h e north of Florence, in which there were hunting g r o u n d s , ' N e a r e r to the habitations there is a great quantity of groves of beautiful oak trees, many h a v e improved t h e m for pleasure, clear underneath, that is the ground is like a field, so you m a y go barefoot without fear of anything to injure t h e foot.' querciuoli,

('Piu

di presso

e molti ve n'ha acconci

da 'ndarvi iscalzo

all'abitazioni

per diletto,

v'e

gran

netti di sotto,

sanza temere di niente che offendesse

quantita

di boschetti

cio£ il terreno

di

a modo di

be'

prato,

44

il

pie'.')

Hunts w e r e a c o m m o n form of e n t e r t a i n m e n t a m o n g the Florentine patriciate in the R e n a i s s a n c e , staged in particular for h o n o u r e d guests. In specially tended gardens with ponds and fountains, s o m e provided with viewing platforms a n d seating for a u d i e n c e s , g a m e o f all kinds w e r e kept for hunting. W h i l e efforts w e r e m a d e to k e e p the animals away from humans s o they did not b e c o m e tame, contemporary accounts indicate that the animals were not always afraid of their hunters. On occasion, the hunt could b e more of a performance than a blood sport. A late instance is the 'hunt' held in the palazzo at G u a l f o n d a in 1600 as part of the celebrations for the w e d d i n g of Maria d e ' Medici. A triumphal cart was constructed with a figure of Diana hunting animals, which w e r e released and chased t h r o u g h the gardens by dogs.

45

The poetic tone of the Hunt

has led to v a r i o u s interpretations of the work as an

allegory. Edgar Wind suggested the work might h a v e been o n e of a series

depicting

mythological representations of t h e m o n t h s , interpreting the painting as an allusion t o Diana's hunt b e c a u s e of the appearance of her attribute the m o o n .

4 6

Jacques Darriulat interpreted the

work a s an allegory of optical theories in pictorial art of t h e R e n a i s s a n c e , citing a text by L e o n a r d o d a Vinci describing the inability of t h e h u m a n eye to register objects on the

154

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

periphery of the visual field even though the light rays from these objects entered the eye. This phenomenon Da Vinci compared to d o g s at a h u n t that open their m o u t h s without catching anything. Darriulat regarded this as the key to interpreting the

4,1

Hunt.

Although the dogs are not s h o w n catching their p r e y , two deer h a v e been killed. One • carcass is shown carried on the horse of the m o u n t e d h u n t e r in the left m i d d l e distance and the other is carried on his shoulder. T h e s e deer do n o t h a v e antlers and s o might b e does or kids, and judging by their relatively large size, they s e e m to b e does. In Lucas C r a n a c h ' s two paintings comprising the Hunt in Honour

of Charles

V ( P r a d o , Madrid) b u c k s and does are

pursued by hounds and hunters, while only bucks a r e k i l l e d . That o n l y does have been killed in Uccello's painting is unusual, although R e n a i s s a n c e accounts confirm that does were hunted, but in fewer numbers than b u c k s .

48

T h e reason f o r t h e gender i m b a l a n c e in Uccello's

painting is not clear. Uccello may simply not have t h o u g h t to paint the antlers o n the slain deer, which are rather small in the picture, although, all t h e live deer, even the smallest ones do seem to have antlers. Indeed, the tiny antlers of o n e f l e e i n g animal protrude from behind a tree, even though the head itself cannot be seen Petrarch and Boccaccio described the hunt for a d o e as a m e t a p h o r for the male experience of love, and some fourteenth and fifteenth-century marriage caskets a n d cassoni show hunting s c e n e s .

49

Roe were noted for their m a t e r n a l devotion and for their habit of

forming monogamous pairs each season. W h e n a c o u p l e was separated in a hunt they sought 50

to reunite. An interesting aspect of the spatial c o n s t r u c t i o n of the Hunt is the fact that most of the riders' heads are aligned with the horizon, w h i l e the heads of those o n foot are all lower. This implies that the viewer is on the same level as the riders, and given the flat terrain, might be on a horse, and so virtually a part of t h e hunt. Any interpretation Of the work divorced from its original context must be speculative, and nothing is known of t h e work's provenance prior to its donation to the A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m by W.T.H. Fox-Strangways in 1850.

51

However, it may not be an accident that all of t h e figures depicted are y o u n g men of

marriageable age. Perhaps Uccello's painting was i n t e n d e d as an allegorical encouragement for, or a commemoration of, a young patrician m a n ' s s e a r c h for a faithful wife and devoted mother for his children.

T h e M a s t e r ' s W o r k s h o p : T h e New Y o r k T r i p t y c h a n d Six P a i n t i n g s of t h e V i r g i n and Child

Efforts to distinguish Uccello's hand from those of his w o r k s h o p assistants in the past led to the invention of the Karlsruhe Master, the Prato M a s t e r and the Quarate Master, named after the locations where Uccelloesque works (but insufficiently so) were f o u n d .

52

T h e s e 'masters'

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

155

should perhaps have been called ' s t u d e n t s ' since it w a s usually s u g g e s t e d that they w e r e workshop assistants or direct followers of Uccello, rather than i n d e p e n d e n t masters. In any case, there was n e v e r any consensus as to which w o r k s b e l o n g e d to which p s e u d o n y m o u s artist, a n indication that there was not sufficient g r o u n d s t o justify their distinct identities. With t h e absorption of their w o r k s into U c c e l l o ' s o e u v r e o v e r the course of t h e twentieth century the nature of U c c e l l o ' s workshop b e c a m e o b s c u r e . The

documents

from

Uccello's

lifetime

provide

scant

information

about

his

workshops and assistants. T h e y say that A n t o n i o di P a p p i collaborated with h i m in the refectory at San Miniato al M o n t e . However, as their w o r k s a r e lost a n d n o i n d e p e n d e n t work by A n t o n i o is k n o w n , it is impossible to say whether h e m i g h t have collaborated with U c c e l l o elsewhere. U c c e l l o ' s Although

probably

assisted

his

elderly

father

with

their

travel

Urbino.

and

living

arrangements, there is n o t h i n g to suggest he contributed t o t h e execution of the Miracle

of the

Host.

Donato

son D o n a t o (1453-1497) c e r t a i n l y travelled with h i m to

In the absence of specific documentation and a n y signed work, nothing can

attributed convincingly to D o n a t o , despite attempts t o d o s o .

5 3

be

Uccello's daughter Antonia

(1456-1490) is recorded as a painter. Parronchi h y p o t h e s i s e d that she m i g h t h a v e w o r k e d in a manner close to that of her father's late style and m i g h t b e responsible for w o r k s of an intimate character that he considered difficult t o i n t e g r a t e i n t o U c c e l l o ' s o e u v r e , such as the Florence A c c a d e m i a Holy 54

Adoration.

Fathers,

the Los A n g e l e s Virgin

and Child

and t h e Karlsruhe

H o w e v e r , the last of these works m o r e p r o b a b l y predates her birth, on stylistic

and technical grounds, as has been shown in Chapters 2 a n d 5 . The fact that A n t o n i a was not referred to in Uccello's 1469 portata age of t h i r t e e n ,

55

may indicate that s h e h a d left t h e family h o m e by the

posing a problem for the h y p o t h e s i s of h e r i n v o l v e m e n t in the creation of

works in Uccello's w o r k s h o p during his lifetime. A s P a d o a Rizzo has noted, Uccello did not declare separate w o r k s h o p premises in his 1469 portata, at the end

of

his career

he

worked

on small

as h e had previously, s u g g e s t i n g that

commissions

from

home.

5 6

With

no

documentation of A n t o n i a ' s career and no work clearly s i g n e d work by her, it is i m p o s s i b l e to attribute anything to her securely. A n u m b e r of artists w i t h established oeuvres h a v e been proposed as pupils of Uccello on stylistic g r o u n d s , i n c l u d i n g B e n o z z o Gozzoli,

Alesso

Baldovinetti, Andrea del C a s t a g n o and Giovanni di F r a n c e s c o , but again, no c o m p e l l i n g evidence has been found to support these h y p o t h e s e s .

57

However, there are indications that Uccello d e l e g a t e d painting to assistants, in works such as the small New York triptych, even if its a r t i s t ' s n a m e remains elusive (Fig. 3 6 ) . T h e central panel reprises the essential elements of the c o m p o s i t i o n of the Madrid

Crucifixion,

with the Virgin on the left and Saint John the Baptist on t h e right of the cross. T h e N e w York triptych differs in the addition of Saint Mary M a g d a l e n e , t w o A n g e l s , the donor, and the gold

156

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

ground. In the left wing Saint Bridget stands dripping wax on her arm in a n a c t of selfmortification, in the right wing the Virgin stands holding the Child, and in the u p p e r sections of the wings the Annunciation is shown. This small triptych, a bequest of Lore H e i n e m a n n t o the Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art, emerged in the literature at the end of the t w e n t i e t h century with an attribution to Uccello, although it has not been written about at l e n g t h .

58

In Keith C h r i s t i a n s e n ' s notice of

the work following its acquisition by the Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art, he accepted the attribution to Uccello, and proposed a date for it in the 1430s. H e also noted the inscription identifying the donor figure in the central panel as * S [ O U R ] . F E L I C I T A ' , and suggested that the work might h a v e been painted for the Bridgettine c o n v e n t of Santa M a r i a del Paradiso, near Florence.

59

A frontispiece illuminated by Lippo d ' A n d r e a di Lippo, The

Saint Bridget and a Choir of Bridgettine

Annunciation;

Nuns (Bernard H. Breslauer Collection, N e w York)

from a gradual of the convent confirms C h r i s t i a n s e n ' s hypothesis a b o u t the origin of the triptych. Datable t o the 1420s or 1430s, it s h o w s nine n u n s wearing the same grey habit a s the donor figure of t h e New York triptych, including the h e a d p i e c e with red dots symbolising Christ's wounds. In the illumination Saint Bridget c a r r i e s a processional cross similar t o the red cross with a white circle at its centre held by Saint B r i d g e t in the left wing of t h e triptych (Figs 207-208). This style of cross has been identified as the s y m b o l of the convent Santa Maria del Paradiso,

60

which was founded in 1367 by the Alberti family with the dedication to

Saint Bridget of Sweden, in the area southeast of F l o r e n c e known as 'del Paradiso' because of its idyllic landscape.

61

Even if t h e triptych's gold ground is c o m p a r a b l e to Uccello's works from the 1430s, the style of the figures is closer to those in his later w o r k s , with the central figures being very close to those in the Madrid Crucifixion,

datable to the 1450s. The Virgin in the central panel

is similar to that in the Madrid Crucifixion,

with her p r o p e r left hand raised and her proper

right hand lowered, the drapery drawn over her head a n d swept up between her arms. Saint John the Evangelist is close to that in the Madrid Crucifixion,

notably in the red robe that

reveals its yellow lining in a series of folds in the l o w e r area of the figure (compare Figs 35 and 36). The broad border of Gabriel's robe is similar to those of the Virgin and Joseph in the Nativity

window and Christ's robe in the Resurrection

window, also suggesting a date later

than the 1430s. The paint surface seems generally well p r e s e r v e d , although t h e uneven surface of the Virgin's robes in the central panel may indicate that t h e y are a little rubbed and repainted. The figure of Saint Mary Magdalene is close to that in t h e Karlsruhe Adoration,

notably in the

technique of rendering her hair over a layer of gold leaf, with yellow glazes and series of wavy incised lines, although her hair is less finely e x e c u t e d than in t h e Karlsruhe

Adoration.

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

157

Other aspects of the execution are not a s precise as i s generally the case in U c c e l l o ' s smallscale works from the 1430s. Notably, the hair for Christ, t h e A n g e l s and Saint J o h n is executed

in

a roughly-applied

brown

scumble, rather

than t h e fine,

clearly

defined

brushstrokes for individual curls and tresses found i n s u c h works as the M e l b o u r n e George. Miracle

Economically executed hair is found i n the Madrid Crucifixion,

t h e Hunt

Saint

and the

of the Host; s o a r e d u c e d attention t o s u c h details is a characteristic of U c c e l l o ' s late

style. Nevertheless, t h e triptych cannot b e b y the s a m e artist as the M a d r i d Crucifixion. of the faces

Most

show p r o m i n e n t modelling o f t h e h i g h l i g h t s in a white paint that is not

characteristic of U c c e l l o ' s technique at any s t a g e of his c a r e e r . I n d e e d , the majority of the faces a r e too c l u m s y to be by Uccello (Figs 2 0 8 - 2 0 9 ) . T h e c o m b i n a t i o n of a clearly Uccelloesque

design

and

familiarity

with

Uccello's

painting

technique,

with

some

uncharacteristic execution probably indicates that the w o r k was made from U c c e l l o ' s designs by a w o r k s h o p assistant

in the late

1440s o r

1450s. Interestingly, Rolf B a g e m i h l

has

discovered that a Felicita d i Francesco C a s a v e c c h i a m a d e profession at t h e c o n v e n t in January 1455.

62

Of t h e paintings depicting the Virgin and C h i l d that h a v e b e e n associated with Uccello in t h e literature, i n t h e opinion of this a u t h o r o n l y t h e Dublin Virgin

and Child

is

wholly consistent with U c c e l l o ' s style. Nevertheless, a n u m b e r of others s h o w e l e m e n t s of Uccelloesque design, offering likely evidence of U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s h o p production. A s Lorenza Melli h a s shown, the support o f Uccello's d r a w i n g Angel

with a Sword; A Cup contains part

of a pricked design of a V i r g i n and Child ( w i t h o u t their h e a d s that were c r o p p e d w h e n the sheet w a s cut) close in form and size to the Virgin and Child painting in a private collection in Prato. T h i s painting was first attributed t o Uccello by attributed to the school o f Uccello by o t h e r s .

63

Berti, but has been

subsequently

T h e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e in form b e t w e e n the

pricked drawing and t h e painting shows that the d e s i g n of the Prato Virgin and Child at least is very probably by Uccello. Melli also observed that t h e L o s A n g e l e s Virgin

and

Child

(Getty M u s e u m ) is based on t h e same d e s i g n as the p r i c k e d d r a w i n g , with variations in the position of t h e C h i l d ' s arms and the V i r g i n ' s c o s t u m e , and that the Hamilton Collection Virgin and Child with Angels (Paris?) s h o w s one element of t h e pricked design not followed in the other paintings: the C h i l d holding a round o b j e c t in front of t h e V i r g i n ' s chest, w h i c h is seen to b e a piece of fruit i n the painting (Figs 2 1 0 - 2 1 3 ) . S o m e features of the Raleigh Virgin

and Child

M

( M u s e u m of Art) are close to the

design o f the pricked drawing, notably the similar w a y C h r i s t is held in the V i r g i n ' s arms. The Berlin Virgin and Child (Bode Museum) has a l m o s t t h e s a m e c o m p o s i t i o n as the Raleigh Virgin and Child in reverse, with differences in t h e p o s i t i o n of the C h i l d ' s arms and legs, and the features

of the V i r g i n ' s

face. T h e R a l e i g h a n d

B e r l i n panels

are also of

similar

158

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

dimensions: 58 by 41 cm and 60 by 42 c m r e s p e c t i v e l y , supporting the idea that they were made speculatively for the open market. Either the c a r p e n t e r made panels of standard sizes knowing that painters could use them for certain kinds of works or the painter ordered them to size in numbers. The Allentown Virgin and Child, with Saint Francis

and Two Angels

(Art

Museum) derives a smaller number of features from the pricked d r a w i n g , notably t h e Virgin's robe clasped by a broach of similar d e s i g n , and the s i m i l a r contours of the Child's b o d y , with His arms raised t o hold an object (a b o o k in t h e p a i n t i n g ) . T h e A n g e l s ' costumes are similar to that in Uccello's drawing of an A n g e l , the circle of c l o v e r in the b o t t o m right c o r n e r is a recurring feature of Uccello's works, as is the unidentified plant on t h e left side o f the painting with circles of dots around its leaves (Figs 2 1 4 - 2 1 6 ) . Melli emphasised the quality of e x e c u t i o n of t h e Prato Virgin and Child despite its mediocre state of preservation and accepted t h e attribution of the work to Uccello himself. However, there is a woodenness about t h e figures that i s difficult to reconcile with Uccello's own execution. T h e Los Angeles Virgin and Child

exhibits Uccello's characteristic idealised

design in the rounded contours of the figures, but s o m e passages of painting within the figures lack the same sharp definition, notably the indistinct modelling of the Child's chest and stomach. The Hamilton Virgin and Child with Angels

is Uccelloesque in its overall design,

while certain features such as the Angels, and in p a r t i c u l a r their bizarre hands, are n o t close to Uccello's usual style. Despite variations of style a n d quality, the Prato, Los Angeles, Hamilton Collection, Raleigh, Berlin and A l l e n t o w n p a i n t i n g s are sufficiently similar to each other to have come from the same w o r k s h o p , and it s e e m s that the d e s i g n of the Virgin and Child in the Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe sheet w a s a model for a number of them. Furthermore, some of them show independent a s s o c i a t i o n s in details of their compositions with Uccello's w o r k s , supporting the a r g u m e n t that t h e workshop w h e r e they were created was Uccello's. In the Hamilton Collection Virgin and Child t h e Virgin delicately holds a transparent veil across the C h i l d ' s genitals, between a t h u m b and finger. This motif was known in Italy since at least the middle of the fourteenth century, and was taken up in numerous paintings of the Virgin and Child by the Roman artist A n t o n i a z z o R o m a n o in the 1470s and 1480s, as well as by other artists. It has been associated with the passage in the Meditationcs

Vitae

Christi,

based on Saint A u g u s t i n e , in which the Virgin is said t o have wrapped Christ in her headscarf 5

at birth and to have used the same scarf to w r a p his loins at his C r u c i f i x i o n / ' T h e motif is, then, a subtle reference to his ultimate fate. Interestingly, in the Los Angeles Virgin

and

Child, it is the Infant w h o holds the scarf between a t h u m b and finger, a sign that h e is taking his destiny into his own hands. The difference in the iconography of the Los A n g e l e s and

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

159

Hamilton Collection versions underlines that t h e p r o d u c t i o n of variants was n o t an entirely unthinking one. It seems that U c c e l l o ' s

workshop was i n v o l v e d in a kind of

semi-mechanical

reproduction of small devotional images, stylistically d a t a b l e to the late 1440s or 1450s, a period when Uccello had sufficient financial resources to e m p l o y assistants in t h e production of works for patrons or speculatively for t h e open m a r k e t . If there is n o real evidence for the identity of Uccello's w o r k s h o p assistants, Giovanni di F r a n c e s c o is at least a possibility, for the reason of the stylistic closeness of his Virgin

and Child

1934 by Giovannozzi in the Weisbech Collection in B e r l i n ) ,

with Two Saints 66

(published in

to the L o s A n g e l e s Virgin

Child. Bellosi described the equally l u m i n o u s Child in G i o v a n n i di F r a n c e s c o ' s

and

Nativity

(Berea College C o l l e c t i o n , Berea, Kentucky) as U c c e l l o e s q u e , dating G i o v a n n i ' s period of association with Uccello t o the 1440s. Christ

Carrying

the Cross

67

T h e fact that the attribution of the Stuard Collection

h a s oscillated between U c c e l l o and G i o v a n n i di Francesco is

indicative of the closeness of their s t y l e s .

68

H a v i n g said that, the m o s t distinctive trait of

Giovanni's style, the unruly curls of his f i g u r e s ' hair is m i s s i n g from the Virgin and Child paintings, and their p h y s i o g n o m i e s are m o r e refined a n d attenuated than in his works. T h e motif of two Angels on either side of the Virgin and C h i l d in the H a m i l t o n Collection and Child occurs repeatedly in S c h e g g i a ' s o e u v r e .

69

Virgin

T h e poor quality of the Angels is

comparable with S c h e g g i a ' s occasional lapses in a n a t o m i c a l c o r r e c t n e s s , although none of his particular traits are present in the works under d i s c u s s i o n . T h e identity of U c c e l l o ' s assistant or assistants remains u n k n o w n , probably b e c a u s e t h e y

w e r e estsblishecl n o

significant

independent reputation. The records kept by the customs officers of the g a t e s of R o m e give an indication of the movement of a large n u m b e r of a r t w o r k s around t h e period in which s o m e of these Uccelloesque Virgin and Child paintings were p r o b a b l y p r o d u c e d . In particular, numerous paintings of the Virgin were recorded: thirty small p a i n t i n g s in N o v e m b e r 1453, forty-one images in March 1456 and thirty small panels in M a r c h 1 4 5 8 .

7 0

T h e speculative production of

large numbers of paintings inevitably leads to s o m e d i m i n u t i o n of quality, in the originality of conception if not quality of the execution, a n d t h e i n v o l v e m e n t of w o r k s h o p assistants is very probably linked to this p h e n o m e n o n .

160

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

Notes for Chapter 8

1

Michiel, 2000, p. 32.

2

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 69: 1568 ed.

3

Mode (1972, p. 377) argued that Uccello could not have gone to Padua in 1443-1444 due to his

documented payments by the Opera del Duomo in Florence in those years. 4

For individual discussions of the portraits attributed to Uccello, see the Catalogue.

5

For a recent study of the male Florentine portrait in two parts, see: Boskovits, 1997 a, pp. 255-260

and 1997b, pp. 335-339. 6

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 67: 1568 ed.

7

Bambach, 2005, pp. 76-79; for a summary of documents for Delli and his brothers Niccol6 and

Sansone, who were also painters, see also: pp. 82-83. 8

Berenson, 1954, tavola 1.

9

Ames-Lewis, 1974, pp. 103-104; Eisler, 1974, pp. 529-530; Wakayama, 1982, p. 98; Marino, 1991,

pp. 295-304; Gebhardt, 1990, pp. 28-35. 10

Joost-Gaugier, 1974a, pp. 233-238.

" Vasari, 1991, vol. I, pp. 273-274; Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 70: 1568 ed. 12

Boskovits, 2002b, p. 194.

13

VT Fototeca, Paolo Uccello, except Florence.

14

Boskovits, 2002b, p. 194.

1 5

1 am grateful to Ronda Kasl, Curator of Painting and Sculpture before 1800, at the Museum of Art,

Indianapolis, for providing the following extract of the conservation report for the work by David Miller, Senior Conservator of Paintings (personal communication, 28 Apr. 2005): 'The panel itself may have begun life as a tondo but is now a polygonal shape due to subtraction and addition. The right and left sides were cut vertically and strips of wood were added all around (or the entire panel has been inset into an auxiliary support this shape - the x-rays are unclear) to give the painting its current dimensions.' 16

For a discussion of the tondo format, see: Holmes, 1999, pp. 141-145.

17

Jacks and Caferro, 2001, pp. 59, 293.

IX

Ranter, 1994b, pp. 311-314.

'"As argued in Wright, 2000, p. 88. 2,)

For a review of the bibliography for these works, see the Catalogue.

21

Hoff and Devapriam, 1995, p. 170.

22

De Tervarent, 1997, pp. 332-333. According to Ovid, while washing her hair in a river one day,

Venus hid in myrtle from the unwanted attentions of satyrs. Other reasons for the association of myrtle with Venus are its sweet perfume, the fact that it grows near the sea from which Venus emerged, the fact that its leaves grow in pairs, like lovers, and because it is evergreen, like love. 23

Klapisch-Zuber, 1978, p. 87.

24

Boskovits, 2002b, p. 196.

25

Pudelko, 1936, pp. 127-134. The quotes are from pp. 128, 133

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

26

161

Sindona, 1970, p. 67.

2 7

Sindona, 1970, pp. 67, 103 n. 1.

2 8

Jolly (A.), 1998, Figs 134, 135, 124.

2 9

Christiansen, 2005d, p. 168.

3 0

There is no agreement as to the saint's identity. For a summary of the proposals, see the Catalogue.

3 1

Borsi and Borsi, 1994, p. 301.

32

Gurrieri, 1988, p. 252.

3 3

Kent, 2000, p. 202.

3 4

Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 237.

35

Anon.(Magliabechiano), 1892, p. 100.

3 6

See the Catalogue for the inscription in Italian.

3 7

As surmised by Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 106.

3 8

A document of c. 1432, published by the R. Deputazione Sugli Studi di Storia Patria, (1873, p. 574,

doc. 1397) lists an Antonio di Iacopo del Golia among the Sienese Priori. For a reference to the Sienese Del Golia family in the sixteenth century, see: Hughes, 1997, p. 2 9 . 3 9

40

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 106-107.

Boskovits, 1990, pp. 172-3.

4 1

Brigit Blass-Simmen (1991, pp. 115-134) provided an interesting discussion of the spiral motif and

its relation to representations of the Saint George and the dragon story in the works of High Renaissance artists, including Leonardo. 42

Beccherucci, 1983, p. 284.

4 3

Kanter (2004, p. 108) rejected Beck's dating of the London version after the Paris version, which had

been accepted by Gordon (2003, p. 401). ^'Morelli, 1969, p. 92. 4 5

4 6

Wright, 1976, vol. I, pp. 66-76. Lloyd, 1977, pp. 174-175. In a letter of t June 1969 to the Ashmolean Museum, Edgar Wind

suggested that the subject matter might be associated with the Augustan poet Manilius, whose work was rediscovered in the early Renaissance, inspiring the program for the mural cycle in the late fifteenth-century Schifanoia al Ferrara. Wind suggested that the Hunt might have belonged to a series of mythological representations of the months, representing November, the month for hunting. 4 7

Darriulat, 1997, p. 69. Darriulat wrote: 'La metaphore est remarkable,

et nous fournit comme la cle

clu panneau d'Oxford. Est-elle de 1'invention de Leonard, ou bien l'a-t'il emprunteV

('The metaphore

is remarkable, and provides us with the key to the Oxford panel. Is it Leonardo's invention, or did he borrow it?') 4 8

Cummins, 1988, pp. 260-265. For example, the English Framlingham Park Game Roll for the years

1515 to 1519 show that does were hunted, but in much fewer numbers than bucks. 4

"Seidel, 2003, pp. 430-437.

50

Cummins, 1988, pp. 87-91.

162

51

THE MASTER OF A WORKSHOP

Kemp, Massing, Christie and Groen, 1991, pp. 166-167. The hypothesis that the work might be

identified with one recorded in a seventeenth-century

inventory associated with Federico da

Montefeltro court at Urbino has been disproved. 5 2

For the Karlsruhe Master, see: Pudelko, 1935c, pp. 123-130; for the Prato Master, see: Pope-

Hennessy, 1950, p. 161; and for the Quarate Master, see Salmi, 1934, pp. 1-27, especially 20-21 and Salmi, 1950, p. 26. 53

Parronchi (1974, pp. 63-64) suggested, for example, that Uccello's son may have painted the

Hamilton collection Virgin and Child with Two Angels. 5 4

Parronchi, 1974, pp. 64-68.

5 5

Herlihy and Klapisch-Zuber (1985, pp. 135-136) observed an under-reporting of female children in

the 1427 Catasto and suggested that this might reflect the lack of significance attributed to them in Tuscan society at the time..It cannot be excluded that Uccello had some other reason for leaving his daughter out of his portata. 5 6

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 13.

5 7

For Gozzoli, see: Cole Ahl, 1996, p. 6; for Baldovinetti, see: Colnaghi, 1986, p. 264; Spencer (1991,

p. 3) rejected the hypothesis that Andea del Castagno trained in Uccello's workshop on the basis that Vasari would probably have noted such a famous master. For Giovanni cli Francesco, see: Boeck, 1933a, p. 2. 58

Boskovits, 1990, pp. 178-179.

5 9

[Christiansen J, 1997, p. 26.

6fl

Kanter, 1994a, pp. 319-321.

61

6 2

MignaniGalli, 1976, p. 32. R. Bagemihl, pers. comm. to K. Christiansen, 4 Jan. 1980. 1 am indebted to Keith Christiansen for

sharing this information with me, and to Rolf Bagemihl for answering my enquiry regarding his discovery, pers. comm., 27 Jul. 2004. 63

Berti, 1961, pp. 298-309. Borsi and Borsi (1994, p. 348) attributed the work to an anonymous artist

from the school of Uccello. 6 4

Melli, 1998, pp. 27-29,31-35.

6 5

Wilson, 1996, p. 244-254.

(>6

Giovannozzi, 1934, p. 343.

6 7

Bellosi, 1990, p. 24.

M

Giovannozzi (1934, p. 346) preferred to see a link between Giovanni and Baldovinetti, rather than

Uccello, although he did not discuss the stylistic relationship between their depictions of the Virgin and Child. 6 9

70

Bellosi, 1999b, pp. 74,75, 77, 85, 87, 91, 94. Gilbert, 1988, p. 55, citing Romisches Jahrbiichfiir

Kunstgeschichte,

vol. XVII, 1978, pp. 211 ss.

Splendid Isolation: Late Works

If there is any truth in V a s a r i ' s description of U c c e l l o as an i s o l a t e d figure, it is in his works from t h e 1460s that c o n t i n u e in t h e style of earlier decades, u n m o v e d by developments in Florentine painting of the time. As far as is k n o w n , U c c e l l o did n o t collaborate directly with a major artist on a project after his work in the D u o m o . W h e t h e r c a u s e o r effect,

his

professional isolation from t h e leading artists m a y relate to his increasing isolation from d e v e l o p m e n t s in Florentine painting. Unlike his c o n t e m p o r a r y , F i l i p p o Lippi, Uccello did not adopt t h e refined drapery style that became a signature style of Florentine painting from the last third of the fifteenth century, seen also in t h e works of V e r r o c c h i o , Leonardo and Botticelli. L i p p i ' s Virgin and Child Enthroned

with Saints

in t h e Galleria degli Uffizi, shows

this style of drapery in the Virgin's robe, which falls to the ground in soft curves, splaying out in a c o m p l e x a r r a n g e m e n t of flat, angular folds, reminiscent of the Netherlandish style p i o n e e r e d by Van Eyck. U n l i k e a n o t h e r contemporary, A l e s s o Baldovinetti, U c c e l l o did not a d o p t the realistic depiction of sedimentary rock strata that b e c a m e u b i q u i t o u s in Florentine and Venetian art in the second half of the fifteenth century under the influence of Van E y c k ' s Saint Receiving

the Stigmata

Francis

(one version is in the Galleria S a b a u d a , Turin, another is in t h e

P h i l a d e l p h i a M u s e u m of Art). Baldovinetti's Adoration

of the Child

of 1460 in t h e cloister of

S a n t i s s i m a A n n u n z i a t a in Florence shows the d e c o r a t i v e depiction of grasses in a stylised, c r o s s h a t c h e d pattern, also used by Uccello in the Karlsruhe Adoration. U c c e l l o ' s work has been described as unnaturalistic

1

This feature of

and t h e s a m e can be said of it in

B a l d o v i n e t t i ' s work. H o w e v e r , the sub-strata of rock on which t h e Holy Family are resting in B a l d o v i n e t t i ' s work are depicted with realistic s e d i m e n t a r y layers of a kind that Uccello never adopted. T h e Paris Saint

George

shows t h e same kind of fanciful rock formation for the

d r a g o n ' s c a v e as he had used in the Creation

Scenes

in the C h i o s t r o V e r d e decades earlier.

During the last d e c a d e and a half of his life Uccello witnessed the e m e r g e n c e of a new generation of Florentine artists: Antonio and Piero del P o l l a i u o l o , A n d r e a Verrocchio and his student L e o n a r d o da V i n c i , Filippo Lippi's son F i l i p p i n o Lippi a n d student Sandro Botticelli

164

SPLENDID ISOLATION

and others who pursued the study of nature a n d refined decorative details. However, while working in an outwardly naive style in this period, Uccello developed the sophisticated content of his iconography.

Mystical Vision: Scenes from

the Lives of Holy Fathers

in the Galleria dell'Accademia,

Florence

T h e intriguing Holy Fathers

in the A c c a d e m i a in Florence has a labyrinthine composition

(Fig. 46) showing the Virgin appearing to Saint B e r n a r d (bottom left), a monk-saint preaching to monks (bottom right), monks self-flagellating a r o u n d a crucifix (upper left), a Franciscan monk in front of a church with two laymen ( t o p , centre-left), Saint J e r o m e giving penance 2

before a crucifix in a cave (centre), and Saint Francis- receiving the stigmata (top). The work was often imprecisely described in the past as a thebai'd: a depiction of scenes from the lives of early Christian monks and nuns living in t h e desert around Thebes. Strictly speaking, this 3

is not correct, since Saints Bernard and Francis did n o t belong to this tradition of devotion. Longhi, avoiding the issue of the work's precise s u b j e c t matter, famously described it as a 4

'Luna Park for m o n k s ' . Parronchi proposed that t h e subject might be an illustration of Pierre 5

Lacepierre de Limoges' Latin treatise De Oculo Morali,

a popular late thirteenth-century text

by the Dean of the Faculty of Medicine at the U n i v e r s i t y of Paris, repeatedly published in the last quarter of the fifteenth century. T h e text interpreted the optical theories of the Arab 6

scholar Alhazen in moral terms for the training of p r e a c h e r s . As Parronchi admitted, the text is by no means a serious discussion of optics a n d it m i g h t also be wondered whether it really relates to the asceticism of Uccello's imagery. Uncertainty about the source of Uccello's iconography has led to it being referred to s i m p l y a s 'the way to perfection' or, more generically, 'scenes from the lives of holy fathers'. T h e work's provenance does not clarify the context of the iconography; it has been traced as far back as the suppression of the Vallombrosan monastery of Spirito Santo alia Costa in Florence in 1810. There is no clear correspondence between the saints depicted and the orders active there in the fifteenth century, which included Silvestrans and D o m i n i c a n s , Jerome, called "della Notte' appearance of Saint J e r o m e .

7

although the Confraternity of Saint

(of the night) met there a n d so might account, in part, for the 8

The painting contains ominous signs. T h e s t o r m clouds gathering in the sky at the right, the sinuous forms creeping up the wall on w h i c h the monks are sitting seem to be snakes, and the dog on the left of the stream s t a l k i n g birds, all probably symbolise the transience of life. Furthermore, the two o p e n i n g s in the rock at the left are reminiscent of the eye sockets of a skull, Saint Bernard's cave is like an exposed skull cavity, and the edge of

SPLENDID ISOLATION

165

the path near the river is like an u p p e r j a w . Thus, a large part of the rocky a r e a at the left 9

bears s o m e r e s e m b l a n c e t o a s k u l l . It is probably significant then that t h e m i d d l e m o n k in t h e left opening in t h e rock h a s a skull in his lap. In imagery of penitent monks and n u n s , corpses, and the skull in particular, frequently appear as objects of religious c o n t e m p l a t i o n in t h e Renaissance.

10

B e r n h a r d Ridderbos discussed the i c o n o g r a p h y of death in t h e context of

penitent saints in S i e n e s e and Florentine art, noting a n u m b e r of mural p a i n t i n g s in which death is alluded t o as a memento

mori, a warning to laity of the transience of life a n d an object

of m e d i t a t i o n for m o n k s and nuns to r e m i n d them that serenity and eternal life c o m e from r e n o u n c i n g earthly l i f e . century Saint

Jerome

11

An image central to R i d d e r b o s ' discussion is the late fourteenth-

in Penitence

mural painting in t h e V a l l o m b r o s a n n u n n e r y of Santa

Marta, S i e n a , in which a stern looking Saint J e r o m e points to a grisly pile of d e c a y i n g corpses. If P a r r o n c h i ' s tentative proposal to identify the subject with the De Oculo Morali difficult

to confirm,

at least one p a s s a g e from

that text referring to Saint

is

Bernard's

c o m m e n t a r y on the second verse of the Canticles is quite revealing o f t h e p a i n t i n g ' s i c o n o g r a p h y . T h e i m a g e r y of the rock with its m a n y caves calls to mind t h e p a s s a g e from Canticles 2 : 1 4 , albeit in a particular way: ' M y d o v e in t h e clefts of the rock/ in t h e hollow o f thee wall/ s h o w m e y o u r face/ let your voice sound in m y ears/ for your voice is sweet/ a n d y o u r face is b e a u t i f u l ' .

12

T h e Canticles ( S o n g of Songs) w a s the subject of

numerous

allegorical interpretations since Origen (third century A D ) , in which the B r i d e g r o o m w a s c o m m o n l y identified with Christ and the Bride with t h e C h u r c h . Gregory the Great (sixth a n d early s e v e n t h century A D ) proposed an influential interpretation that used t h e ideal described in the Canticles as a standard by which t o criticise the worldly corruption of the C h u r c h , identifying a specifically monastic ideal within the text. For later exegetes, such as Saint Bernard of Clairvaux (twelfth century), the e m p h a s i s shifted a w a y from seeing the Bride as the Church t o the individual soul in its quest for a mystical union with God t h r o u g h selfdenial.

13

Saint B e r n a r d ' s c o m m e n t a r y on the Canticles w a s sufficiently important to warrant a

mention in his biography in the Legenda Medilationes

Vitae

]4

Aurea

and parts were incorporated into the popular

Christi.

A p p r o p r i a t e l y , since h e appears most p r o m i n e n t l y in the work, it is Saint B e r n a r d ' s exegesis of Canticles 2 : 1 4 that is particularly relevant to the interpretation of U c c e l l o ' s i m a g e r y , and it may b e from this source, rather than t h e De Oculo Morali

that briefly refers t o

it, from w h i c h U c c e l l o ' s iconography is drawn. H a v i n g invited the reader or listener t o think of the B r i d e g r o o m as Christ and the Bride as the C h u r c h , Saint Bernard goes on to say:

Another writer [Gregory the Great] glosses this passage differently, seeing in the clefts of the rock the wounds of Christ. And quite correctly, for Christ is the rock [....] The wise

166

SPLENDID ISOLATION

man builds his house upon a rock, because there he will fear the violence neither of storms nor of floods. Is on the rock not good? Set high on the rock, secure on the rock, I stand on the rock firmly. I am secure from the enemy, buttressed against a fall, all because I am raised up from the earth. For everything earthly is uncertain and perishable. Our homeland is in heaven, and we are not afraid of falling or being thrown down. The rock, with its durability and security, is in heaven. 'The rock is a refuge for the hedgehog.' And really where is there safe sure rest for the weak except in the Saviour's wounds? There the security of my dwelling depends on the greatness of his saving power. The world rages, the body oppresses, the devil lays his snares: I do not fall because I am founded on a rock.

15

Saint Bernard goes on to explain how the m a r t y r d r a w s courage to face suffering from this image:

While gazing at the Lord's wounds he will indeed not feel his own. The martyr remains jubilant and triumphant though his whole body is mangled; even while the steel is gashing his sides he looks around with courage and elation at the holy blood pouring from his flesh. Where then is the soul of the martyr? In a safe place, of course; in the rock, of course, in the heart of Jesus, of course; in wounds open for it to enter... From the rock therefore comes the courage of the martyr, from it obviously his power to drink the Lord's cup. And this intoxicating cup - how wonderful it i s !

16

Uccello's painting shows a number of c o r r e s p o n d e n c e s with the imagery of the Canticles

viewed

through

Saint

Bernard's

ascetic

and

mystical

interpretations.

The

composition unfolds from the bottom left, with the Virgin appearing to Saint Bernard. In the corner a horned devil sneaks out of a hole with a grin on his face, next to a length of chain, perhaps laying a snare as Saint Bernard described (or is the devil bound by the chain?). The saint and his fellow monks take refuge in the 'clefts in the rock' and the church and buildings are constructed on the same rock ('The wise man builds his house upon a r o c k ' ) , providing shelter from the coming storm. Imaginatively, U c c e l l o interpreted the imagery in a semiliteral way. Where the Bride in the Canticles implores the Bridegroom, in the form of a clove, to appear in the clefts of the rock, Uccello s h o w s the clefts in the rock as the face,

albeit the

face of a skull. Perhaps the three deer (does or f a w n s ? ) are references to the Bridegroom in the same chapter of the Canticles (2:17). Saint Bernard interpreted the reference to the Bridegroom as a gazelle or fawn in this passage as an allusion to the swiftness of God's Word 17

and the keenness of His sight. The saints' and m o n k s ' barren rock is remote from the city in the distant landscape, which is surrounded by c u l t i v a t e d fields and olive groves, illustrating the saints'

and

monks'

withdrawal

from

worldly

life

to a place

where,

by study,

SPLENDID ISOLATION

167

c o n t e m p l a t i o n , self-denial and mortification, they m a y ascend to the heights of a mystical union with God, represented b y Saint F r a n c i s ' stigmatisation on a ledge at the s u m m i t of their enclave. T h e presumably m o n a s t i c viewer of the painting was invited to meditate on C h r i s t ' s w o u n d s symbolised by the clefts in the rock. F r o m this t h e y might h a v e d r a w n c o u r a g e for t h e tribulations they suffered or penance they served, and through this suffering m i g h t have hoped t o be brought into a mystical union with God. I m a g e r y based on m o n a s t i c allegories of the Canticles appeared across Europe in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in works by Hieronymous Bosch

18

and Filippino L i p p i .

19

A s David L. Clark h a s s h o w n , Saint B e r n a r d held a special place in M e d i e v a l a n d R e n a i s s a n c e Florentine devotion, as the apparent patron of the C o m m u n e . Piero di Francesco del Pugliese c o m m i s s i o n e d Filippino L i p p i ' s masterpiece, The Virgin Inspiring

Saint

Bernard

(Badia, Florence, c. 1 4 8 1 - 1 4 8 6 ) , in which Clark a r g u e d t h e imagery is partly derived from t h e saint's c o m m e n t a r y of t h e Canticles. F u r t h e r m o r e , as Clark noted, the Pugliese commissioned Stamina's

Thebaid

mural painting in their chapel in Santa M a r i a

family della

C a r m i n e , a l s o s h o w i n g saints in caves, s t e m m i n g f r o m the s a m e Platonic tradition meditative imagery. Cosmas

and

20

Damian

of

Vasari recorded that Uccello p a i n t e d the dossal (altar front) with Saints in the same c h a p e l .

21

Might Uccello's

Holy

Fathers

have

been

c o m m i s s i o n e d by a patron from the circle of the Pugliese family w h o shared their interest in monk-saints? All the indications are that this is a late work. T h e figure of the m o n k behind t h e d o n k e y is almost a twin to Saint Francis in the M a d r i d Crucifixion. close to t h o s e in the L o n d o n Saint George.

T h e storm clouds a r e

T h e view of a p a t c h w o r k of fields in the t o p right

corner is reminiscent of the same feature in t h e Paris Saint

George.

Perhaps the overall

a u t u m n a l t o n e of the palette suggests that this dates m o r e specifically from the mid-to-late 1460s, a r o u n d the time of the Paris Saint

George

and t h e Miracle

of the Host.

While t h e

i c o n o g r a p h y is sophisticated, the execution is less i m p r e s s i v e . T h e abbreviated execution of the o l i v e groves in the distant landscape recall those in the Los Angeles Virgin and Child by a w o r k s h o p assistant of Uccello, and the Holy

Fathers

m a y well have been finished by an

assistant in Uccello's w o r k s h o p .

P a r i s Saint

George

and the

Since t h e Saint

George

Loeser in 1 8 9 8 ,

22

Dragon

in the Musee J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e , Paris, was ascribed to Uccello b y

the attribution has only occasionally b e e n doubted (Fig. 27). In t h e mid-

19305 P u d e l k o gave it to the Karlsruhe Master, w h o m h e identified as a collaborator with Uccello on

the Holy

Fathers

at San Miniato al M o n t e ,

23

and in

1950

Pope-Hennessy

168

SPLENDID ISOLATION

attributed the Paris Saint George to a w o r k s h o p assistant of Uccello.

However, since then

Uccello's authorship has been universally accepted. T h e most significant question concerning the Paris Saint George

is whether it can be identified with a description of a painting by

Uccello in an account book entry of 1465 by t h e Florentine merchant and s o m e t i m e furniture dealer Lorenzo di Matteo Morelli (quoted in part in Chapter 2):

And for a large Saint George with part of the story painted on a panel of wood with a frame carved by Jacopo, carpenter, and painted by Paolo Uccello, painter, for seven florins largi; and the panel cost one florin largi which in total makes eight [florinsj largi; and the panel is one and a half braccio long and one and an eighth wide.

25

James Beck, who published the d o c u m e n t in 1 9 7 9 , believed that the correspondences of the dimensions, support and composition b e t w e e n t h e work described in the document and the painting in Paris were sufficiently close t o m a k e t h e identification probable. The Paris Saint George is on panel, like the one in the d o c u m e n t , and its measurements as given by Beck, 52 by 90 cm, are close to those in the d o c u m e n t , measuring 65.67 by 87.56 cm (with a braccio

equal to 58.37 cm). Beck accounted for the slightly different dimensions with the

explanation that the panel had been cut at the top and, t o a lesser extent, the bottom, quoting the opinion of Nicole Bondel that the composition appeared to have been cut at the top and the s i d e s .

26

While the presence of golden rays e m a n a t i n g from the top left corner and the

moon in the top right corner makes it unlikely that t h e top edge has been cut, it remains possible that the other edges have been trimmed, perhaps when the original frame was removed. Since Morelli knew the names of the painter and the carpenter who made the painting, it seems that it was a recently m a d e work and this is supported by the stylistic evidence, given the proximity of the work's style to the Miracle

of the Host datable to 1467-

1468, notably the autumnal tones of the landscapes a n d the similar fan-like structure of the dragon's wings in the Saint George and the devils' w i n g s in the Miracle of the

Miracle

of the

The Miracle

Host.

Host

of the

Host

was formerly on the h i g h altar of the church built by the

Confraternity of Corpus Domini in the Piazza di Pi an di Mercato (now the Piazza della Repubblica) in the centre of Urbino (Figs 28-34). B u i l d i n g commenced on the church around the beginning of the fifteenth century with the h e l p of Federico da Montefeltro. It was eventually destroyed in 1705 to make way for the Palazzo del Convitto d e ' Nobili.

27

The

richness and quality of its art made it one of the most important Renaissance churches in the

SPLENDID ISOLATION

169

M a r c h e . In J u n e 1456 F r a Carnevale ( B a r t o l o m e o di Giovanni Corradini) withdrew from a contract to paint an altarpiece for the confraternity for unknown r e a s o n s .

28

T h e names of

Uccello and his son D o n a t o then appear in an account book of the confraternity between F e b r u a r y 1467 and O c t o b e r 1469, although they w e r e not in Urbino for the entire period, since U c c e l l o was in Florence by A u g u s t of 1 4 6 9 .

29

A l t h o u g h the d o c u m e n t s do not describe

the nature of U c c e l l o ' s w o r k precisely, it u n d o u b t e d l y included painting t h e Miracle

of the

Host p r e d e l l a formerly o n the altar of the church. In April 1469 a p a y m e n t was recorded in relation to t h e visit of Piero della Francesca, possibly to consider the c o m m i s s i o n for t h e altarpiece, a l t h o u g h

the

Communion

of the Apostles

was subsequently

painted

by t h e

N e t h e r l a n d i s h artist ' G i u s t o d a G u a n t o ' (Joos van W a s s e n h o v e ) , d o c u m e n t e d in U r b i n o from 12 February 1 4 7 3 .

30

T h e altarpiece and the predella are n o w h o u s e d in the Galleria Nazionale

delle M a r c h e , U r b i n o . A n enduring myth is that U c c e l l o received the c o m m i s s i o n for t h e altarpiece b u t was dismissed in favour of J u s t u s , p r o b a b l y based o n the assumption that t h e contract for the predella and altarpiece w o u l d h a v e been a w a r d e d to a single artist at t h e outset.

31

S i n c e there is no explicit mention of the altarpiece, or indeed t h e predella, in relation

to U c c e l l o in the confraternity's d o c u m e n t s , the reason for assigning parts of the work to different

artists is a matter for speculation. U c c e l l o may n e v e r h a v e been offered

the

c o m m i s s i o n for the altarpiece, he may h a v e asked t o o much for it, or at the a g e of about s e v e n t y , he m a y h a v e been unable to c o m p l e t e t h e e n o r m o u s project (the altarpiece is 238 by 3 2 0 c m ) . T h e fact that Fra Carnevale withdrew f r o m t h e c o m m i s s i o n and that Piero della F r a n c e s c a did not take it up suggests that there was s o m e t h i n g d i s a d v a n t a g e o u s for t h e artist in the c o m m i s s i o n . The significantly

cult of the eucharist to which the confraternity

was dedicated

developed

from the m i d d l e of the thirteenth century. A feast of the eucharist was

established in Liege in 1246. Pope Urban IV issued the bull Transiturus

to establish a

universal feast of Corpus Christi in 1264 and this initiative was reinforced by the inclusion of the bull in a new collection of canon law issued in 1317 by John X X I I .

32

T h e liturgy of

Corpus Christi proclaims the doctrine of transubstantiation, that bread and w i n e become t h e b o d y a n d blood of Christ during the M a s s . C e l e b r a t i o n s of the body of Christ took many forms,

including

s e r m o n s , processions and

theatrical

performances, and

a number

of

confraternities dedicated t o Corpus Christi w e r e f o u n d e d in the second half of t h e fourteenth century. A c c o u n t s proliferated of miracles that d e m o n s t r a t e d Christ's real presence in t h e host, in t e r m s readily comprehensible to a mass a u d i e n c e . T h e s e stories included visions of a baby or a bleeding child on t h e altar at the c o n s e c r a t i o n . Stories of mistreatment of the host described t h e m i r a c u l o u s recognition of its d i v i n e status o r the p u n i s h m e n t of the perpetrator. One story related that a host was stolen from a c h u r c h and buried in a field w h e r e oxen

170

SPLENDID ISOLATION

refused to plough over the spot, instead kneeling down before it. J e w s , in particular, were cast as the malefactors in such stories. In one, a Jew stole a host and offered it t o h i s d o g . The dog refused the host and attacked the Jew instead. The story depicted in Uccello's predella originated in events in the R u e des Billettes in Paris in 1290, in which a Jew was said to have obtained a host from a Christian woman. The Jew attacked the host with knives, axes and fire, whereupon it bled. T h e J e w was caught and executed, and the miraculous host celebrated processions, and h y m n s .

33

with the construction

of a chapel,

Aronberg-Lavin has s h o w n that the version of t h e story in the

predella reflects mystery plays performed in Florence, b u t includes variations in the story that are probably Uccello's own i n v e n t i o n s .

34

The miraculously bleeding host in t h e predella

demonstrates the divine presence in unmistakable t e r m s . The congregation in t h e church would have seen this message in miniature below

W a s s e n h o v e ' s representation of the

communion of the Apostles, as the host was raised before the altar during the mass. The ambiguous fate of the Christian woman might also h a v e served as a warning to respect the host. Although saved from hanging by an Angel, h e r b o d y is later attacked b y t w o devils in the final scene. T h e iconographic program of the c h u r c h was not subtle, and further images of miracles of the host were painted on the ceiling in the late sixteenth century t o reinforce the message of the predella.

35

The construction of the narrative within space in the predella is innovative. The story unfolds in successive scenes from left to right against a background of interior spaces and a continuous landscape over six compartments separated by fictive balusters. This is not t o say that Uccello attempted to give the story the power of realism, but rather that h e depicted the story in a particularly engaging way to underscore t h e narrative. T h e outwardly consistent narrative construction is complicated by one iconographic inconsistency: the anachronistic inclusion of the R o m a n acronym 'S.P.Q.R.' on the soldiers' banners and shields. In the scene of the burning of the Jewish family this takes on a curious significance, as an inversion of the events surrounding Christ's crucifixion. Where R o m a n soldiers, spurred on by Jews, put Christ to death at the crucifixion, in the predella Christians in the guise of Roman soldiers put the Jews to death, perhaps as a double revenge motif: revenge for the desecration of the host and revenge for the crucifixion of Christ.

36

T h e Q u e s t i o n of Uccello's F u r n i t u r e P a i n t i n g

In 1474, the year before he died, Uccello sued the carpenter Domenico di Francesco del Tasso for two paintings he had done but not been paid for. T h e document recording the event stales that the sum owed

was 3 florins largi

Cfiorini

tre

larghi per

quandri

did

1

dipintV)?

SPLENDID ISOLATION

171

According t o Laurence K a n t e r these were ' u n m i s t a k e a b l y references to a pair of cassoni'. H e took this as a starting point for reassessing U c c e l l o ' s activity as a furniture painter, attributing to Uccello and his w o r k s h o p a series of cassone p a n e l s in c o l l e c t i o n s a r o u n d the world, mostly dating to the period around 1 4 6 5 - 1 4 7 0 . Miracle

of the Host,

38

T h e style of U c c e l l o ' s late w o r k s such as t h e

with its clusters of small f i g u r e ^ o n foot a n d others on horseback in

tightly w o v e n narrative s c e n e s , is certainly c o m p a r a b l e to the c a s s o n e panels of artists such as A p o l l o n i o di Giovanni. In 1442 Uccello rented a w o r k s h o p in V i a delle T e r m e in an area in which n u m e r o u s furniture painters worked, including A p o l l o n i o di G i o v a n n i , no longer declared

separate

39

b u t by 1469 he

workshop premises in his tax return. If Uccello

worked

p r e d o m i n a n t l y from h o m e at an advanced age, apart from his l o n g trip t o Urbino, then a reduced output of works on a smaller scale might be expected. W i t h o u t studying at first hand all of t h e many panels Kanter discussed it is difficult to assess t h e i r authorship. However, t h e panels in the Musee des Arts Decoratifs in Paris, attributed to U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s h o p by Kanter, are undoubtedly the w o r k of Scheggia, as is evident in the h o r s e s ' c o m i c bulging eyes, t h e m e n ' s caricaturish faces, and the particularly e m p h a t i c m a n n e r in which the brickwork is shown in relief, all distinctive features of S c h e g g i a ' s style. Intriguing t h o u g h the possibility of S c h e g g i a w o r k i n g with U c c e l l o is, there is as yet no substantial e v i d e n c e for i t In a n y case, it is not clear that the works U c c e l l o p a i n t e d for D o m e n i c o del Tasso w e r e for cassoni. T h e Saint

George

by Uccello that Lorenzo cli Matteo Morelli bought in

1465 w a s a small-scale painting (the equivalent of 6 5 . 6 7 b y 8 7 . 5 6 c m ) costing 8 florins Morelli noted that U c c e l l o ' s contribution accounted for 7 florins largi, frame m a d e by J a c o p o the carpenter accounted for 1 f l o r i n .

40

largi.

while t h e panel and

U s i n g this price as a guide,

U c c e l l o ' s paintings for D o m e n i c o del T a s s o , worth o n l y 3 florins largi, would probably have been quite small items, probably too small to be c a s s o n e p a n e l s . T h e fact that the works mentioned in the suit were made for a carpenter d o e s not i m p l y that they were furniture paintings either, as U c c e l l o ' s work on a panel m a d e by J a c o p o t h e carpenter demonstrates. T h e objects of the suit m a y simply have been small, i n d e p e n d e n t panels in carved frames. Nevertheless, Vasari did record that Uccello painted s c e n e s in perspective for t h e sides of couches, beds and other pieces of furniture, w h i c h could b e found in many houses in Florence.

41

T h e Hunt

d i m e n s i o n s for spalliere

is larger than most cassone fronts, b u t falls within the range of paintings, works that could b e integrated into the rear of the top of a

cassone or displayed independently on a wall above w a i n s c o t i n g at shoulder h e i g h t .

42

Still,

there is insufficient e v i d e n c e to show what the original context o f the Hunt might have been, and no w o r k by Uccello can be described with certainty as furniture painting, even if it is quite likely that he did m a k e such works.

172

SPLENDID ISOLATION

Notes for Chapter 9

1

2

Davies (1959, p. 3 1 3 ) did not accept the attribution of the Karlsruhe Adoration to Uccello. Russo (1987, p. 218) identified the scene at the lower right as Saint Romuald preaching to

Camaldolites. Falletti (2001, p. 73) identified it as Saint Benedict teaching the Regola (Rule) to monks. Since the monks' robes are not significantly different from Saint Bernard's, they may be Cistercians, as he was. Borsi and Borsi (1994, p. 248) suggested that the Franciscan monk in front of the church might be Saint Bernardino. 3

4

As pointed out by Pope-Hennessy (1950, p. 166). Longhi, 1928, p. 4 6 .

5

Parronchi, 1957b, pp. 21-25:

6

Clark, 1977, pp. 329-343.

7

Malquori, 1990, p. 128.

8

Bernacchioni (2003, p. 418) argued that despite the apparent lack of immediate associations between

the work's iconography and the monastery, the work probably did originate there and not the adjacent Monastery of Saint Jerome and Saint Francis, as Malquori had previously suggested (1990, p. 128). Bernacchioni noted that the Confraternity

of Saint Jerome

1

della Notte'

had

links with the

l

Confraternity of the Buca' of Saint Jerome to which Uccello belonged. 9

Berra (1999, pp. 359, 379) discussed other examples of hidden skulls in fifteenth century paintings.

An illuminated manuscript of c. 1440 which belonged to Catherine of Clevcs includes an illumination with a butterfly on whose wings a skull appears in a spotted pattern. The rocks behind the Angels in Mantegna's Adoration of the Magi (Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence, c. 1462-1464) include the image of a skull. 10

Russo, 1987, p. 236. Russo discussed the iconography of the skull as an accessory of images of Saint

Jerome in the desert, with reference to paintings by Fra Angelico, Marco Zoppo, Carpaccio and Botticelli. Russo described this type of representation as the penitent in his classic role, analogous to a memento mori. 11

Ridderbos, 1984, pp. 63-73.

12

The translation of the Vulgate text is by Matter (1990, p. xxi).

13

Matter, 1990, pp. 20-41 (on Origen), 92-97 (on Gregory the Great), 123-133 (on Saint Bernard).

14

lacopo da Vara/.ze, 1995, p. 662.

15

Bernard of Clairvaux, 1979, vol. Ill, pp. 142-143: Sermon Sixty-One. The translation is by K. Walsh

and I.M. Edmonds. 16

Bernard of Clairvaux, 1979, vol. Ill, pp. 147-148: Sermon Sixty-One. The translation is by K. Walsh

and I.M. Edmonds. 17

18

Bernard of Clairvaux, 1979, vol. Ill, pp. 82-86: Sermon Fifty-Five. Ruppel (1988, pp. 9-11) discussed the imagery in Bosch's Saint Jerome in the Wilderness (Musee

des Beaux-Arts, Ghent). 19

Clark, 1981-1982, pp. 181-183.

2 0

Clark, 1981-1982, pp. 175, 181-183.

SPLENDID ISOLATION

21

22

23

173

Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 238. Loeser, 1898, pp. 88-89. For the Saint George, see: Pudelko, 1934, p. 250 n. 4 1 ; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 125. For the Holy

Fathers, see: Pudelko, 1934, pp. 242-243, 245-254,258. 24

2 5

Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 152. The document is transcribed in Beck, 1979, p. 3. For the transcription of the text in Italian, see

Appendix B. 2 6

Beck, 1979, pp. 1-5. Gordon (2003, p. 402 n. 19) noted inconsistencies in other documented

measurements of the Paris Saint George, which, however, may have included the frame. 2 7

Scatassa, 1902, p. 438; Katz, 2003, p. 655 n. 38.

2 8

Daffra, 2005a, pp. 33-34; Mazzalupi, 2005, p. 300.

2y

Moranti, 1990, pp. 206-214. For a discussion of the suggestion commonly made that Uccello was in

Urbino from as early as 1465, see the Catalogue. For Uccello's 1469 portata (ASF, Catasto, 926, vol. II, San Giovanni, Drago, pp. 259-259v., in Mather, 1948, pp. 63-64), see Appendix B. 3 0

31

Scatassa, 1902, p. 440. Hendy (1964, p. 39) stated that the Corpus Domini rejected Uccello's design for the altarpiece for

unknown reasons. Belozerskaya (2002, p. 215) made a similar claim, citing Aronberg-Lavin, 1967. Aronberg-Lavin (1967, p. 2), however, is equivocal about this hypothesis, noting on the one hand that Uccello claimed shortly afterwards to have been without work or means of support, but noting, on the other hand, that his predella was evidently considered successful since it was accepted by the patron. 32

Rubin, 1991, pp. 164-185.

3 3

Rubin, 1991, pp. 108-129.

34

Aronberg-Lavin, 1967, pp. 1-10.

3 5

Scalassa, 1902, p. 439. An undated description of the church of the confraternity of the Corpus

Domini mentioned two figures, two miracles of the host, four Evangelists and four prophets in the upper part of the church painted by Filippo Bellini, who was paid for his work in 1582 and 1583. 3f

' For a discussion of the anti-Jewish rhetoric in the altarpiece and predella, see: Katz, 2003, pp. 646-

661. 37

Beck, 1979, p. 4. In 1433 the Florentine Commune introduced the fiorino largo, 10% purer than the

previous fiorino di suggello and more valuable than it. M

3,;

Kanler, 2000, pp. I 1-17. ASF, Catasto, 625, San Giovanni Drago, p. 224; Haines, 1999, pp. 41-44.

•"'Beck, 1979, p. 3. 41

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, p. 69: 1568 ed.

42

Kemp, Massing, Christie and Groen, 1991, pp. 164-165.

10 Uccello's Critical Reception

Uccello was a late addition to the catalogue of artists to be the subject of a monograph, as Bernard Berenson observed in 1931: Tt is strange that u p to date we have no monograph that attempts to treat exhaustively the artistic personality a n d career of Paolo Uccello. Perhaps the problem is too complicated and too perplexing, and neither rash youngsters nor still rasher 1

oldsters dare to tackle it.' The difficulty of studying Uccello is not simply d u e to the scarce documentary evidence, the poor condition of many of his works and the loss of many others, it is inherent to the complex nature of his artistic personality. Unlike s o m e of his contemporaries, s u c h as Giovanni di Francesco, w h o disappeared from

the historical

record until the twentieth

century,

Uccello

was not forgotten by

subsequent generations. This was no doubt d u e to the prominence of his w o r k s , some signed, in Florence's most important cultural sites, such as the Equestrian and the Nativity, Creation

Resurrection

and Annunciation

Monument,

the

Clockface

stained glass windows in the Duomo, the

Stories and the Stories of Noah in the Chiostro Verde at Santa Maria Novella, and

the three Battle paintings in the Medici Collection from the end of the fifteenth century. It is interesting to imagine the young Leonardo cla Vinci, having arrived in Florence in 1469, studying its artistic monuments in the last years of U c c e l l o ' s life. Leonardo would certainly have seen Uccello's works in the Duomo, possibly those in the Chiostro Verde and in churches, convents, spedali

and private houses around

the city.

2

L e o n a r d o ' s master,

3

Verrocchio, seems to have been inspired by Uccello's w o r k , and there are analogies between Uccello's and Leonardo's visionary styles and distinctive subject matter. Uccello's swirling storm clouds, whiplash dragon tails, mysterious, gloomy landscapes and perspective scenes haunted by dark, enigmatic figures and wild animals provide precedents for some of Leonardo's more imaginative early paintings and drawings. The subjects in which Uccello excelled, battles and storms, are those on which Leonardo lavished greatest attention in his writing on the art of painting.

4

In particular, parts of Leonardo's instructions o n how to represent a tempest read like a description of Uccello's Flood, with, 'clouds riven and torn and flying with the wind...

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

175

boughs and leaves s w e p t up by the strength and fury of the gale' and, ' m e n . . . f a l l e n and w r a p p e d in their garments and almost i n d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e ' .

5

In a n o t h e r p a s s a g e Leonardo

described, 'different k i n d s of animals h u d d l e d together, terrified and s u b d u e d into tameness in c o m p a n y with men and w o m e n w h o h a d fled there w i t h their children. A n d t h e waters which cover t h e fields with their waves are in great part strewn with tables, b e d s t e a d s , boats and various other contrivances i m p r o v i s e d ' t h r o u g h necessity and fear of d e a t h . . . ' a n d further, h e wrote, ' Y o u might see g r o u p s of m e n with w e a p o n s in their h a n d s defending t h e small spots that r e m a i n e d to t h e m from t h e lions, wolves and b e a s t s of prey w h i c h s o u g h t safety there. A h ! w h a t dreadful s c r e a m s were heard in t h e dark air rent by t h e fury of the thunder and t h e lightning it flashed f o r t h . . .And the birds had already b e g u n to settle on m e n . . .the dead bodies n o w inflated began to rise from the bottom of the d e e p waters to the s u r f a c e .

6

Posthumous Reputation

U c c e l l o ' s f a m e grew in t h e late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. A n t o n i o di Tuccio d e ' M a n e t t i ' s Vita di Filippo

di Ser Brunelleschi

(Life of Filippo

di Ser Brunelleschi,

c. 1480s)

o b s e r v e d that Uccello w a s a m o n g the artists w h o followed B r u n e l l e s c h i ' s innovations in 7

p e r s p e c t i v e , and his Uomini from

1400,

in

Florence

c. 1494-1497) devoted a paragraph to t h e artist m e n t i o n i n g t h e Flood

and the

scene b e l o w (Sacrifice

Singolari

in Firenze

dal MCCCC

(Singular

Men

of Noah) and the first two scenes in the Chiostro V e r d e (the

Creation

8

Stories),

as well as unspecified work in Santa Trinita and other p l a c e s . G i o v a n n i Santi's La

Vita e le Gesta di Federico Montefeltro, mostly

Duke

di Montefelt.ro

of Urbino,

Florentine, artists of

Cristoforo

Landino

(Commentary Florentine

by Poet,

(The Life and Deeds of Federico

di

c. 1480) included U c c e l l o in his verses describing f a m o u s , the fifteenth

Fiorentino Cristoforo

Duca d'Urbino

sopra

century.

la Comedia

Landino,

Florentine,

9

Cristoforo

di Dante on

the

Landino's

Alighieri

Comedia

Comento

Poeta

di

Fiorentino

by Dante

Alighieri,

1481) remembered Uccello as a specialist in the depiction of animals,

l a n d s c a p e and p e r s p e c t i v e .

10

T h e m e m o r y of Uccello was also perpetuated in inventories of

Florentine collections. T h e inventory taken in 1492 of Lorenzo d e ' M e d i c i ' s belongings listed U c c e l l o ' s three Battle

paintings, as well as the n o w lost Battle between

and Story of Paris

u

Francesco Creation

Stories

and

Lions

(?).

Albertini's

Memoriale

and the Stories

(1510)

of Noah,

painting in Santa Trinita and the Holy

recorded

Uccello's

authorship

work in Santa M a r i a M a g g i o r e ,

Fathers

M i c h i e l ' s n o t e b o o k , w h i c h he called Pittori U c c e l l o ' s Giants

Dragons

in San Miniato al M o n t e .

e Pitture

in Diverse

Luoghi

12

of

the

unidentified Marcantonio

( 1 5 2 5 - 1 5 4 3 ) , noted

in the courtyard of the C a s a Vitaliani in Padua, which are n o w lost.

13

The

176

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

author of // Libro di Antonio Billi (c. early sixteenth century), added to what had previously 14

been written about Uccello only a brief reference to unspecified c a n v a s e s , a n d similarly, the anonymous author of II Codice

Magliabechiano

unidentified canvases and p a n e l s .

15

(c.

1537-1542) referred to numerous

Thus, t h e fundamentals of Uccello's reputation were

established: one of t h e first painters to follow Brunelleschi in the development of perspective, memorable for his depiction of animals and l a n d s c a p e s , renowned principally as a mural painter, who also executed numerous works for private patrons. The two editions of Vasari's Vite (1550 a n d 1568) comprise the most extensive compilations of information on Uccello's life and w o r k s prior to the nineteenth century, but they also contain some of the most gossipy and (it m u s t be said) inane anecdotes in the history of western art. Thus, the earliest account of U c c e l l o ' s artistic personality is also the most problematic. According to Vasari an abbot at San Miniato al M o n t e where Uccello was working fed him so much cheese that he dared not p a s s a carpenter's shop (cheese was used by carpenters to m a k e glue), and he feared that if his diet did not i m p r o v e h e would end up being more cheese than man. Undoubtedly t h e most f a m o u s of Vasari's anecdotes is the one that has Uccello's wife calling him to bed at night, to which he responds, ' O h what a sweet thing this perspective i s ! ' ('Oh

che dolce

cosa

e questa

r u

prospettiva. ) '

It is usually

understood from this story that Uccello preferred to w o r k on his beloved perspective than sleep with his wife, although the words Vasari puts in Uccello's mouth are ambiguous, probably intentionally so, and it may also be inferred that the prospect of going to bed with his wife was a sweet thing (prospettiva Rather

than

the jokey

meaning p e r s p e c t i v e and prospect).

account

of

Uccello's

life,

it

is

Vasari's

romantic

characterisation of Uccello as a strange, lonely artist w h o died more poor than famous that has proved most memorable. Vasari claimed Uccello w a s so poor that he filled his house with drawings of animals because he could not afford live ones. This colourful caricature is still invoked by non-art historical authors and art historians alike. However, it is at odds with the documentary evidence that shows that Uccello was a successful and sociable artist, active in the artistic, business and religious communities in Florence throughout his life. What has been lost sight of is Vasari's literary strategy of contrasting types in his Vite. In Uccello's case the strongest contrast is made between U c c e l l o ' s solitude and specialisation and the amiability and adaptability of his colleague Donalello. Vasari was wrong about important biographical details of Uccello's life (see the b e g i n n i n g of Chapter 1), suggesting he did not have reliable information about the artist's life, so what might have inspired Vasari to construct Uccello's personality in the way that he d i d ? Perhaps the smallness of Uccello's output, as it can be judged from the Vite and from o t h e r sources, is a factor. T h e relatively small quantity of works Uccello made over his long life and their visual complexity might

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

177

well create the impression that he was specialised, precious and not particularly prolific, especially w h e n c o m p a r e d with D o n a t e l l o ' s vast production, n o t to mention V a s a r i ' s own e n o r m o u s o e u v r e . It is fair to say that Vasari e q u a t e d productivity with artistic s u c c e s s .

17

V a s a r i ' s Vite formed the basis of historical accounts of R e n a i s s a n c e art for centuries. This included accounts of Uccello's career t o o , as Enrico S o m a r e observed in 1946:

The annotators and historians of art who followed, until the nineteenth century, added little or nothing of relevance to Vasari's sixteenth century pages: not Borghini with "II Riposo" (1584), not Baldinucci in his "Notizie dei professori del disegno" (1728), not Lanzi in "Storia della pittura" (1795), not Burckhardt in his "Der Cicerone" (1840), not Mtintz in "Histoire de l'art pendant la Renaissance" (1889).

18

W h i l e the attribution of works to U c c e l l o in the art-historical literature did not change significantly during the period Somare referred to, the process of tracing works described by Vasari and of p r o p o s i n g attributions for u n d o c u m e n t e d works had b e g u n b y the time of Crowe

and

Cavalcaselle's

A New

History

of Painting

in Italy,

published

in

1864.

19

F u r t h e r m o r e , the process of sorting fact from i n v e n t i o n in V a s a r i ' s biography of Uccello, and filling in t h e gaps through comparison with i n d e p e n d e n t documentation had progressed from the end of the seventeenth century. Filippo B a l d i n u c c i ' s 1686 publication on Italian artists transcribed d o c u m e n t s for the c o m m i s s i o n of U c c e l l o ' s Equestrian

20

Monument.

In 1774

T h o m a s Patch published the account of p a y m e n t s for Ghiberti's w o r k s h o p assistants, which mentioned U c c e l l o .

21

Giovanni G a y e ' s Carteggio

Inedito

d'Artisti

dei Secoli XIV.XV.

XVI. of

1839, included one of Uccello's Catasto d o c u m e n t s , the notice of a deliberation by the M e r c h a n t s ' Guild involving Uccello, and his 1425 will.

N i n e t e e n t h - C e n t u r y Collectors and C o n n o i s s e u r s

In the nineteenth century the acquisitions of private collectors and large public galleries generated interest in U c c e l l o ' s works, even if they w e r e not often recognised as his at the time. In Florence the Bardini Collection included the Dublin Virgin and Child (sold in 1899 with an attribution to Lorentino d ' A r e z z o ) and t h e Paris Saint Bonacossi Collection included the Female Two Angels

and the Raleigh Virgin

and

Saint,

and the Contini-

the Virgin and Child with Saint Francis 23

Child.

W . T . H . F o x - S t r a n g w a y s , acquired the Hunt

22

George,

T h e English diplomat, the

and t h e Annunciation,

and

Honourable

probably in Florence

during the first third of t h e nineteenth century. Both w e r e donated to the A s h m o l e a n Museum in Oxford in 1850, the former attributed to B e n o z z o Gozzoli and the latter to 'Pesello Peselli', according t o notes on t h e backs of the p a i n t i n g s . In 1854 Gustav Friedrich Waagen, the

178

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEFflON

Director of the Gemaldegalerie in Berlin, recorded the Annunciation attribution to Benozzo Gozzoli.

24

at Oxford with an

W a a g e n ' s survey of t h e most important English collections

was probably made with an eye for potential acquisitions. By 1847 the London art dealer Samuel Woodburn had offered a large group of early Italian paintings to t h e National Gallery, London, including the Melbourne Saint George

then attributed to O r c a g n a .

25

In 1856 Otto

Mtindler, the National Gallery, L o n d o n ' s travelling a g e n t , recorded the Battle painting now in Paris in the C a m p a n a Collection, R o m e , noting t h a t it was very much restored. following year the National Gallery acquired the Battle in Florence.

27

26

The

from the Lombardi Baldi Collection

The Battle paintings n o w in L o n d o n a n d Paris were the only works o n the

market in the nineteenth century that could be securely attributed to Uccello, on the basis of the signature on the Florence panel. From 1896 B e m h a r d Berenson's assessment of U c c e l l o ' s oeuvre was among the first to add significantly to it through connoisseurship, even if some of his attributions have not been generally accepted. Berenson's list of Uccello's works included the traditional attributions of the Battle

paintings in London, Florence and P a r i s , the Clockface

and the

Equestrian

Monument,

both in the Duomo in Florence, as well the following attributions based on

connoisseurship: the Portrait of a Lady in the National Gallery, London (now attributed to Baldovinetti), a Portrait

of a Lady in the Marquand Collection at the Metropolitan Museum,

New York (tentatively attributed to Uccello by Berenson, but now attributed to Filippo Lippi), the Hunt, Brunelleschi?)

the Portraits

of Five

Men

(Giotto,

Uccello,

in the Musee du Louvre and the Miracle

Donatella,

Manetti

and

of the Host in Urbino (following

Crowe's and Cavalcaselle's identifications for the last two). In the second edition of 1900 he added to the list the designs for the Resurrection, windows in the D u o m o in Florence, the Stories

Nativity,

of Noah

Ascension

and

Annunciation

in the Chioslro Verde, the Paris Saint

George and London Saint George, and removed the Marquand Collection portrait. In the third edition of 1909 he reinstated the Marquand Collection work, renamed by him the 'Profiles of Woman and Man of Portinari Family Charles

Loeser

also

and added the Creation

extended

the

boundaries

Stories in the Chiostro Verde. of

Uccello's

ocuvre

28

through

connoisseurship, and was the first to discuss the polarity of Uccello's style. Looser had been Berenson's classmate at Harvard and w a s , like B e r e n s o n , a Jewish-American art historian and collector who lived in Florence (after 1 8 8 8 ) .

29

Of the four undocumented works that Loeser

attributed to Uccello or his school, the Hunt, the L o n d o n Saint George, the Paris Saint and the Karlsruhe Adoration,

George

the first had been attributed to Uccello by Berenson, although

this has always been overlooked.

30

T h u s , L o e s e r ' s contribution as a connoisseur was to

suggest the other three could be by Uccello. Given their predominantly Gothic rather than

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

179

R e n a i s s a n c e style, they w o u l d prove to be controversial attributions, but o n e s that stood the test of t i m e .

31

R e d e f i n i n g Uccello in t h e T w e n t i e t h C e n t u r y

T h e a b s e n c e of original d o c u m e n t s for m o s t of the works in B e r e n s o n ' s lists and L o e s e r ' s article and other works close to U c c e l l o ' s style led t o differences of o p i n i o n about what constituted the m a s t e r ' s o e u v r e and those of artists in his workshop, his circle a n d followers. S u b - g r o u p s of U c c e l l o e s q u e paintings were p r o p o s e d as the oeuvres of artists working in Uccello's

workshop,

including

Uccello's

son

Donato

and

daughter

Antonia,

32

and

h y p o t h e t i c a l artists s u c h as the Karlsruhe M a s t e r (as n a m e d by P u d e l k o ) , the Prato Master (as named

by

doppelgdngern

Pope-Hennessy)

and the Quarate

Master

(as n a m e d

by S a l m i ) .

Numerous

have been invented by sceptical art historians to a c c o u n t for disputed works

stylistically close to t h o s e by eminent Renaissance painters: for J a n van Eyck there i s ' H a n d G ' , for L e o n a r d o there is 'Pupil A ' , although few artists have had as m a n y doppelgdngern Uccello.

as

33

R o b e r t o L o n g h i ' s 1928 article on Giovanni di Francesco in the journal

Pinacotheca

d r e w a t t e n t i o n to the research that had been d o n e o n t h e problematic identification of lateG o t h i c artists active in t h e first half of the fifteenth century and their w o r k s . In particular, he noted U c c e l l o ' s influence on these artists, identifying the M e l b o u r n e Saint

George

as an

e x a m p l e of a work by an a n o n y m o u s , i m m e d i a t e f o l l o w e r of Uccello. Longhi noted a group of w o r k s , including the paintings in the Assunta Chapel, the Florence A c c a d e m i a Fathers

the Karlsruhe Adoration

and the Female

Saint,

Holy

which s h o w e d close affinities with

U c c e l l o ' s style. Rather than attribute these w o r k s , s o m e of which h e considered slightly e c c e n t r i c , t o Uccello himself, he gave t h e m t o G i o v a n n i di Francesco, w h o s e n a m e had recently been rediscovered, on the basis that s o m e of the w o r k s already attributed to him showed

U c c e l l o ' s influence. Longhi argued that Uccello was o n e of t h e grande

fifteenth-century stile nuovo

of the

while Giovanni di Francesco was a conservative artist of the

second o r d e r , to w h o m these slightly eccentric w o r k s , although close to U c c e l l o ' s style, could m o r e p r o p e r l y be a t t r i b u t e d .

34

T h e difficulties in reconstructing U c c e l l o ' s o e u v r e were reflected in t h e continued a b s e n c e of a scholarly m o n o g r a p h for the artist until the end of the 1930s and the continued debate r e g a r d i n g whether to include in his o e u v r e the Assunta Chapel paintings a n d a number of s m a l l - s c a l e works. T h i s question formed the principal topic of discussion about Uccello during the 1930s, a period in which m o r e articles w e r e written about h i m than any other. L o n g h i ' s p r o p o s e d attribution of the group of w o r k s listed a b o v e to Giovanni di Francesco

180

UCCELLO* S CRITICAL RECEPTION

did not find acceptance a m o n g his peers. M a r i o Salmi, in particular, rejected

Longhi's

attribution of the Assunta Chapel paintings to Giovanni di Francesco, giving them and the Quarate predella to a student of Uccello, although h e agreed t h e Karlsruhe Adoration close to Giovanni di Francesco.

35

was

In 1932 Matteo Marangoni noted the timidity of art

historians who found it difficult to recognise Uccello authorship of works unless they agreed with Vasari's description of the artist as a devoted disciple of perspective, ignoring the possibility that Uccello's style encompassed the international Gothic as well. T o demonstrate that he was not o n e of those art historians M a r a n g o n i accepted the Quarate predella as a youthful work of U c c e l l o .

36

In 1933 Wilhelm B o e c k p u b l i s h e d an article outlining a basis for

constructing Uccello's oeuvre, which included, in addition to works in Berenson's list, the Florence Accademia Holy Fathers, Matteo

Olivieri

the T h y s s e n - B o r n e m i s z a Crucifixion,

the Portrait

then with the dealer Duveen in N e w York, and the Portrait

Oivieri, then in the John D. Rockerfeller Collection in t h e same c i t y .

of

of

Michele

37

In the following year Georg Pudelko complained:

Instead of keeping solely to the authenticated works and those guaranteed by the older literature and to Vasari's excellent biographical sketch, the estimate of Uccello has been falsified by the unauthorised attribution to him of certain pictures of a romantic and lyric character, and thus the figure of this grand and lonely spirit has been diminished.

In a footnote Pudelko explained that the unauthorised attributions were the Paris and London versions of the Saint George, the Thyssen-Bornemisza Crucifixion,

the Virgin and Child with

Angels (Hamilton Collection), the Quarate predella, the Florence A c c a d e m i a Holy Fathers, as well as the female profile portraits in the Metropolitan Museum of Art and the Gardner Collection. Pudelko attributed all of these works to the Master of the Karlsruhe

Adoration™

A significant development in Uccello's critical reception, much discussed in the Uccello literature since, is Longhi's changing view of t h e artist over the course of his career.

39

In 1927 Longhi cited Uccello's use of perspective as an important influence on Piero della Francesca, and by extrapolation on the course of the whole Italian Renaissance, given Longhi's belief in Piero's central role in it. For Piero, w h o is documented in Florence in 1439, to have been so impressed it follows that Ucccllo m u s t have achieved his powerful use of perspective by that d a t e .

40

In the 1940s, however, L o n g h i ' s view of Uccello had changed in

two ways. First, h e accepted the consensus among art historians that the commission for the Battle paintings in which Uccello's powerful use of perspective is famously demonstrated was associated with the decoration of the Palazzo M e d i c i , and so was datable to the 1450s. Second, he accepted that his attribution of the A s s u n t a Chapel paintings and a number of small-scale, Gothic influenced, Uccelloesque works t o minor followers of Uccello, such as

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

181

Giovanni di Francesco, was not correct. Fie re-attributed them to U c c e l l o ' s late career, thereby dispensing with Uccello's doppelgdngern,

even though it s e e m e d t o Longhi t o

diminish t h e artist's standing in relation to his p e e r s .

41

Longhi then referred to Uccello as a

follower w h o reached his peak long after his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s ' major a c h i e v e m e n t s , whose late works w e r e increasingly bizarre, and w h o s e influence on Piero was i n c o n s e q u e n t i a l .

42

T h e s o m e w h a t forced nature of L o n g h i ' s revised opinion of U c c e l l o ' s d e v e l o p m e n t is evident in h i s unfounded belief that Uccello m u s t h a v e repainted the Equestrian about 1 4 5 5 .

43

date of 1 4 3 6

Monument

in

T h e w o r k ' s unquestionable maturity a n d a c c o m p l i s h m e n t and its d o c u m e n t e d 44

contradicted L o n g h i ' s idea of U c c e l l o ' s late development, and s o h a d to b e

explained a w a y by t h e invention of a m u c h later r e p a i n t i n g by the artist for which there is n o evidence. A s L a u r e n c e B . Kanter suggested, L o n g h i ' s negative reappraisal of Uccello seems to have b e e n bound u p with a personal a n i m o s i t y t o w a r d s Mario Salmi, w h o s e a p p o i n t m e n t to the prestigious displeasure.

45

Chair of Art History in

Salmi placed

Rome

w o u l d have been

cause for

Longhi's

Uccello first a m o n g t h e generation of artists that followed

Masaccio, i n time and importance. Salmi a n d L o n g h i crossed s w o r d s in articles that appeared in the early 1950s, over t h e issue of U c c e l l o ' s s t a n d i n g among the Florentine artists following Masaccio's d e a t h .

46

M o r e playful was L o n g h i ' s d e s c r i p t i o n of P o p e - H e n n e s s y ' s unchanging

view of U c c e l l o ' s o e u v r e in the first edition of his m o n o g r a p h as ' a n t e d i l u v i a n ' .

47

Pope-

Hennessy continued to e x c l u d e the A s s u n t a C h a p e l paintings and many other controversial attributions. T h e exhibition that included the greatest n u m b e r of Uccello's works to date, Mostra Quattro Maestri

del Prima

Rinascimento,

di

was held in 1954 at the Palazzo Strozzi in Florence.

As well as w o r k s then considered to be securely attributed to Uccello, it included a n u m b e r of tentatively attributed w o r k s such as the Karlsruhe Adoration, the Quarate predella, and others from A m e r i c a n c o l l e c t i o n s .

the Dublin Virgin and Child a n d 48

Baldini noted of the exhibition

that it s h o w e d the high quality that Uccello a c h i e v e d , while leaving unresolved t h e p r o b l e m s of attribution posed by his varied stylistic f o r m a t i o n .

49

If L o n g h i ' s incorporation of n o n - c a n o n i c a l , U c c e l l o e s q u e works into the m a s t e r ' s oeuvre e v e n t u a l l y proved influential, his c h r o n o l o g y of U c c e l l o ' s career and re-assessment of the artist's

significance

was less s o .

50

Enio S i n d o n a ' s monograph on Uccello o f

1957

followed L o n g h i ' s e x p a n s i v e approach to a t t r i b u t i o n s , but dated works such as the Karlsruhe Adoration

t o the early phase of Uccello's career rather than the end because of their strongly

Gothic c h a r a c t e r .

51

In 1967 Luciano Berti flatly rejected L o n g h i ' s re-assessment of U c c e l l o ' s

status a m o n g his peers, drawing attention to t h e e v i d e n c e for Uccello's lost Saint mosaic and Annunciation

Peter

in Santa Maria M a g g i o r e as indications that he was a m o n g the

leading e x p o n e n t s of the new style.

52

In 1970 L i o n e l l o Boccia, a specialist in armour, pointed

182

UCCELLG'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

out that the type of armour represented in the Battle paintings was datable to 1435 or shortly thereafter, rather than the date of 1455 generally a s s u m e d for the w o r k s .

53

In a contemporary

article, though published later, Boccia noted there w e r e only a small n u m b e r o f surviving pieces of armour. Boccia's chronology for the c h a n g i n g styles of a r m o u r w a s supplemented from representations in artworks that sometimes m i x styles from different periods and places, and were not always accurate.

54

Thus, the precise dating of armour in an artwork can be

difficult. Nevertheless, Boccia's 1970 observations indicated to him that the Battle

paintings

should be dated significantly earlier than they generally had been. A turning point in the literature o n Uccello, particularly concerning the issue of his works from the 1430s, was Carlo Volpe's 1980 article ' P a o l o Uccello a B o l o g n a ' in the journal Paragone,

written following the discovery of the fragmentary Adoration

in the

sacristy of San Martino Maggiore. As well as attributing the work t o Uccello, he dated it to 1437, arguing that the work confirmed that Uccello reached his artistic maturity by the 1430s, considerably earlier than the late development in t h e 1450s proposed by L o n g h i . While Volpe largely accepted Longhi's revised approach t o the attribution of works to U c c e l l o , he argued contrary to Longhi that these works were of high quality and a number could be dated relatively early, to the 1420s and 1430s, on stylistic g r o u n d s .

55

V o l p e ' s article led to the

current consensus among art historians concerning the attribution to Uccello of such works as t h e Del Beccuto Virgin and Child, the Oxford Annunciation notwithstanding the occassional dissenter.

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

George,

56

Another o u t c o m e of the discovery of the Adoration,

not addressed by V o l p e , was that it

provided further evidence for the incorporation into the master's o e u v r e of the Karlsruhe Adoration

and works stylistically close to it.

57

T h e composition of the painting in Bologna,

showing a nocturnal Adoration with the ox and the ass greatly foreshortened, is closely related to the composition of the Karlsruhe Adoration,

and so tends to support the case that it

and, by extension, those works stylistically close to it that had once been attributed to the Karlsruhe Master are by Uccello himself.

A v a n t - G a r d e Avant

la Lettre

From the first decades of the twentieth century there w a s a renewed interest a m o n g European avant-garde artists and writers in early Renaissance painters, and Uccello in particular. In 1919 the Italian futurist and metaphysical artist Carlo Carra (1881-1966) wrote: T looked at L

Paolo's work as others would look in a mirror' ( io guardai guarderebbe

in uno

5

specchw) *

nell opera

di Paolo

com altri

Carra admired t h e sculptural, abstract and

analytical

qualities of Uccello's work and was attracted to V a s a r i ' s romantic description of Uccello as a

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

poor genius, misunderstood identified. Rosso,

59

by his c o n t e m p o r a r i e s ,

with which

Carra

at least

T h e influence of Uccello on C a r r a ' s work is clear in The Red Rider {II

183

partly

Cavaliere

Civiche Raccolta d ' A r t e , T u c k o r Collection, Milan) of 1912, in w h i c h the subject

matter of a rider m o u n t e d o n a horse in m o t i o n , and the style, with its e m p h a s i s on the r h y t h m i c repetition of geometric forms to create a s e n s e of m o v e m e n t , are c o m p a r a b l e with U c c e l l o ' s Battle

paintings.

60

In Italy t h e interest of contemporary artists in their Renaissance

predecessors has been interpreted as a reassertion of nationalist v a l u e s .

61

However, the

affinities b e t w e e n U c c e l l o and m o d e r n i s m crossed national boundaries. In 1929 the French avant-garde writer A n t o n i n Artaud wrote a p o e m Uccello, le Poll {Uccello

the Hair) in which

it has been said that the writer attempted t o erase t h e boundaries b e t w e e n his o w n personality a n d U c c e l l o ' s , and b e t w e e n his own writing and U c c e l l o ' s painting. W h i c h , if any, of U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s the text alludes to has not identified with certainty; h o w e v e r , t h e concern of A r t a u d ' s text for the contrast between t h e definitive and the ephemeral finds parallels in 612

U c c e l l o ' s Flood. structuralist

T h e Flood

text Le

Deluge,

occupies a central position in Jean Louis S c h e f e r ' s postla Peste.

Paolo

Uccello

as a site for interrogating

the

relationships between words and i m a g e s , t h e h u m a n b o d y and ideas. T h e difficulty, apparent arbitrariness and incongruousness of U c c e l l o ' s f a m o u s painting have a particular resonance for post-modern criticism. This undying interest in U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s throughout t h e twentieth century recalls t h e e p i g r a m for him published by Raffaello Borghini in the sixteenth century: 1

Void tant'alto

che nonpur

d'uccello/

Cognome

meritd, ma di

63

Fenice'.

184

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

Notes for Chapter 1 0

1

Berenson, 1969, p. 161.

2

Whether the young Leonardo might have seen Uccello's works subsequently recorded in the Medici

Palazzo in 1492 including the lost Battle between Dragons and Lions and Story of Paris (?) is unclear, because it is not known whether these works were commissioned by the Medici or acquired by them, as the Battle paintings now in London, Florence and Paris were. Brown (1998, p. 123) discussed evidence suggesting that Lorenzo de' Medici was Leonardo's patron. Furthermore, Brown (1998, p. 110) argued that Leonardo's Portrait of Ginevra de' Benci (National Gallery of Art, Washington) was influenced by a portrait by Petrus Christus in Lorenzo de' Medici's collection, whether or not that work can be identified with the Portrait of a Lady in the Gemaldegalerie, Berlin. 3

Borsi and Borsi (1994, p. 291) described the palm in Verrocchio's and Leonardo's Baptism in the

Uffizi as inspired by the one in Uccello's Karlsruhe Adoration.

Brown (1998, p. 136) attributed this

part of the painting to Verrocchio. 4

Clark, 1961, pp. 80-81.

5

Richter, 1966, pp. 186-187: translation of manuscript B.N., formerly Bibliothequc Nationale, Institut

de France, N. 2038, p. 2 1 . 6

Richter, 1966, pp. 190-192: translation of manuscript W., Royal Library, Windsor, 12665.

7

Manetti, 1970, pp. 44-45.

s

Manetti, 1957, p. 335.

9

Santi, 1985, vol. II, p. 674.

10

Landino, 1974, p. 124.

11

Home, 1901, p. 137.

12

Albertini, 1972, pp. 5 , 8 , 11.

13

Michiel, 2000, p. 32. The work has been published with the title Notizia d'Opere

del Disegno or

Notizia dei Pittori. On Michiel's original title, see: Anderson, 1997, pp. 53-54. 14

Billi, 1991, pp. 86-87.

15

Anon. (Magliabechiano), 1892, pp. 99-100.

16

Vasari, 1966-1987, testo, vol. Ill, pp. 64-65, 72: 1550 and 1 568 eds.

17

Rubin (1995, pp. 347-348) described Vasari's characterisation of Uccello's anti-social behaviour,

such as his sensitivity in the face of Donatcllo's criticism of his work, as a foil to Vasari's characterisation of Donatello as a successful and happy artist. Rubin (1995, pp. 333-334) also noted that Donalello's enormous productivity would have had a special significance to Vasari, whose own struggles to find work are expressed implicitly at many points in the Vite. 18

l

Somarc, 1946, p. 22: Gli annatatori

del'Ottocento,

deU'arte

che seguirono,

non aggiunsero se non poco o niente di rilevante alle pagine

Vasari: ne il Borghini con "IlRiposo" disegno"

e gli storici

(1584), ne il Baldinucci

(1728), ne il Lanzi nella "Storia delta pittura"

Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1980, pp. 283-299 (for Uccello).

alia fine

cinquecentesche

del

nelle sue "Notizie dei prqfessori del

(1795), ne il Burckhardt

Cicerone" (1840), ne il Miintz nella "Histoire de V art pendant la Renaissance" 19

fino

(1889).'

nel sua "Der

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

2 0

Baldinucci, 1974, pp. 339-441.

21

Milanesi (ed.) in Vasari, 1981, p. 203 n. 1.

2 2

Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 60; Loeser, 1898, p. 89.

23

Cole Ahl, 2000, p. 303; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 136.

24

W a a g e n , 1854, vol. Ill, p. 53.

2 5

26

2 7

28

185

For a discussion of the work's nineteenth-century provenance and attribution, see the Catalogue. D o w d , 1985, p. 121. Carli, 1954, p. 6 1 .

Berenson, 1896, pp. 129-130; Berenson, 1900, pp. 139-140; Berenson, 1909, pp. 185-186.

2 9

Secrest, 1980, pp. 93, 198-200. Lensi, 1934, pp. 7-9. It is possible that Loeser initially helped

Berenson establish himself in Europe, and had visited sites in Italy with Berenson. However, by the early 1890s their relationship had soured and they became rivals. Loeser left his collection of Old Master drawings to Harvard University, eight C6zanne paintings to the White House, and thirty Old Master works of Italian origin in various media to the Florentine Commune. 3 0

Berenson (1896, p. 129) listed a Midnight Hunt in the 'Taylorian' at Oxford among Uccello's works.

Loeser is usually given credit for attributing the Hunt in the Ashmolean Museum at Oxford to Uccello (e.g. Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 154), however, it is hard to believe that there could have been another Uccelloesque Renaissance painting of a hunt by moonlight in Oxford. 31

Loeser, 1898, pp. 83-94.

3 2

Parronchi, 1974, pp. 63-68.

33

For 'Hand G \ see: Reynolds, 2000, pp. 6-12; for 'Pupil A ' , see: Brown, 1998, p. 171.

34

35

3f,

L o n g h i , 1928. Salmi, 1934, pp. 1-27. Marangoni, 1932, p. 329.

" B o c c k , 1933b, p. 274. 3K

w

Pudelko, 1934, p. 259. For example Kanter, 2000, pp. 11-12.

""Longhi, 2002a, pp. 10-11. 11

,2

Longhi, 2002a, p. 7. Longhi, 1940, pp. 179-180; Longhi, 2002b, p. 93; and Longhi, 1952, pp. 32 n. 8, 32-33 n. 1 1.

Schlosser, 1938, pp. 79-89. Longhi's reassessment of Uccello may have been influenced by Julius von Schlosser's unfavorable comparison of Uccello with Piero in an essay published in 1933. 13

1,4

Longhi, 2002b, p. 119. Crowe and Cavalcaselle recognised the Equestrian

master of his craft' in 1864 (p. 291). 45

Ranter, 2000, p. 12.

46

A s described in Salmi, 1954, pp. 65-78.

Monument

as evidence for Uccello as an 'early

186

4 7

UCCELLO'S CRITICAL RECEPTION

An example of Longhi's sly wit, the adjective 'antediluvian' describes something that is extremely

old fashioned, referring to the pre-flood period in the Bible, and is a pun on the subject of one of Uccello's most famous works, the Flood. 4 8

49

Micheletti, 1954, pp. 19-75.

Baldini, 1954b, pp. 17-18.

5 0

Zeri, 1985, pp. 48-54. Longhi's late-career view of Uccello's status is reflected in Federico Zeri's

description of Uccello as a 'pseudo-Renaissance' artist. 5 1

Sindona, 1957, p. 22.

52

Berti, 1967, pp. 77-78.

53

Boccia, 1970, pp. 70-85.

5 4

55

Boccia, 1987, pp. 4 2 , 4 5 , 4 6 . V o l p e , 1980, pp. 3-28.

5 6

Christopher Lloyd (1996, pp. 512-518) has rejected Volpe's reconstruction of Uccello's early career.

5 7

Angelini, 1990a, p. 73; Dillian Gordon (2003, p. xi) noted the discovery of the Bologna Adoration

tended to confirm that Uccello was also the author of the Karlsruhe Adoration, although she stated that the Bologna Adoration had been attributed to the Master of the Karlsruhe Adoration, an attribution which does not appear in the mainstream literature. 5 8

Carra, 1919, p. 189.

5 9

Carra, 1919, pp. 192-198; Fergonzi, 2001, p. 24, Fcrgonzi noted that Carra praised Uccello as one of

the predecessors of the modern painters' re-conquest of volume, in his 1916 essay 'Paolo Uccello: costruttore'. 6 0

For a discussion of Carra's Inseguimento

(Mattioli Collection, on loan to the Peggy Guggenheim

Collection, Venice), a depiction of a cavalry horse in wartime showing analogies with Uccello's Battle paintings, see: Fergonzi, 2001, pp. 11-14. 61

Armellini, 1972, pp. 39-44.

6 2

Artaud's texts Uccello le Poil and Paul les Oiseaux were discussed by Leslie Boldl-Irons (2003, pp.

119-134). 63

Borghini, 1967, p. 311.

Conclusion

T h e r e is a d a n g e r in stripping away anecdotes and m y t h s from an early Renaissance artist's b i o g r a p h y that there m a y be virtually nothing left at the end of t h e process. A famous case is Hubert van Eyck, c o m m o n l y described as o n e of the founders of early Netherlandish painting, for w h o m it is i m p o s s i b l e t o identify with a b s o l u t e certainty a single painting or even a specific part of the great Ghent Altarpiece in t h e C a t h e d r a l of Saint Bavo as his work. W i t h U c c e l l o this is not t h e case. If there remains a sense of mystery a b o u t the artist, it is much less than for m a n y of his contemporaries. Even if the o r i g i n s of his career are partly o b s c u r e , d o c u m e n t a r y sources p r o v i d e the essential facts of h i s distinguished family

background,

training in a leading w o r k s h o p , and the patrician social e n v i r o n m e n t in which his early career d e v e l o p e d . Despite w h a t e v e r setbacks he m a y h a v e experienced following the death of his father a t an early a g e , his extended family, in the p e r s o n of t h e wealthy and powerful D e o B e c c u t i , forms a consistent context for his early career. F r o m U c c e l l o ' s activities at t h e S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o in Castello, probable i n v o l v e m e n t at t h e nearby Del Lippi tabernacle, certain i n v o l v e m e n t in t h e Carnesecchi Chapel in S a n t a Maria M a g g i o r e and his work for t h e del B e c c u t o family itself, it appears the impetus that D e o Beccuti gave to his relative's career had lasting effects, such as Uccello's c o m m i s s i o n s in the C h i o s t r o V e r d e in Santa Maria N o v e l l a , w h e r e the convent and its Confraternity of Saint P e t e r Martyr had ties with t h e S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o and Deo Beccuti. T h e s o m e w h a t elevated social status of U c c e l l o and his family may be reflected in t h e v a l u a b l e works he m a d e for private patrons, such as t h e precious gold ground and lapis lazuli of the Del Beccuto Virgin

and Child and the lavish use of gold and silver leaf in the

Battle

p a i n t i n g s , probably c o m m i s s i o n e d by Lionardo Bartolini. U c c e l l o ' s paintings for religious or c o m m u n a l institutions are more austere, but p e r h a p s m o r e intellectual, such as the h u m a n i s t allegory of the Equestrian

Monument

in the D u o m o and the c o m p l e x composition of t h e

Flood at Santa Maria Novella, which invites allegorical and philosophical interpretation. T h e scientific e x a m i n a t i o n of Uccello's works reveals a technically minded artist, but not an o b s e s s i v e o n e . He certainly had a sophisticated u n d e r s t a n d i n g of how to depict space in t w o d i m e n s i o n s , but the e x t e n t to which he planned p e r s p e c t i v e was determined by its importance in his c o m p o s i t i o n s . Generally, he did not m a k e

u n d u e efforts

where they would

go

188

CONCLUSION

unnoticed, in his paintings at least. Furthermore, l o o k i n g at his use of perspective in context, it seems that he was happy to go beyond the rational depiction of space when symbolic or allegorical meanings were more significant. In the nineteenth century when Renaissance art historians formulated categories to distinguish the characteristics of artists and their schools, Uccello was considered to be part scientist and part artist. During t h e early Renaissance the t w o were inseparable. What use would Brunelleschi's engineering feats have been if the solutions he created for building the cupola of the D u o m o had not been visually as well as technically elegant?

When Uccello's patrons c o m m i s s i o n e d work from him they received

something that was well crafted, innovative, and aesthetically and intellectually elegant.

Appendix A Catalogue Raisonne

190 CATALOGUE RAISONNE

Introduction

This catalogue is supplementary to the discussion of Uccello's works in the main text, focussing on issues of condition, attribution and provenance. It is divided into six parts. In Part 1 accepted works are arranged chronologically, as seems plausible to the author, including a number in which a degree of workshop assistance is possibly or probably present. Uccello's preparatory drawings are included separately at the end of this section. The entries in the subsequent sections of the catalogue are arranged alphabetically by the city of their location, regardless of medium. It is a characteristic of many early fifteenth-century artists, including Uccello, that they worked in numerous media, and a catalogue of finished works separating mural paintings from panel paintings or mosaics from pavimenti would be unhelpfully complex. Drawings however, which are often preparatory for works in other media, are included separately at the end of the section. Part 2 contains works attributable to Uccello's anonymous workshop assistant(s). Part 3 contains works whose attributions to Uccello are considered debatable. Part 4 contains rejected works, arranged first by subject matter (female portraits, group portraits, male portraits, and then various subjects), then in alphabetical order of their city of location. In Part 5 lost and destroyed works are arranged in alphabetical order of their titles, while Part 6 provides a checklist of isolated or uncorroborated attributions, for which it would be fruitless to provide extended catalogue entries in the opinion of this author. All monographs draw a' line between rejected works worthy of discussion and those, such as speculative nineteenth-century attributions or attributions based on misleading inscriptions, which are not. In this section a large number of isolated or manifestly erroneous attributions are noted, arranged first by medium (drawings, cassone panels, and various media) and then in chronological order of the most recent citation associating the work with Uccello. The extensive, though by no means comprehensive, bibliographic references throughout the catalogue are provided to show changing scholarly opinions about the attributions and datings of works over time. Where two dates are given for a text, the first is the date it was written (for a manuscript) or originally published, and the second is the date of the edition consulted, according to which the text is cited in the bibliography.

CATALOGUE RAISONNfe ACCEPTED WORKS

191

P a r t l a : Accepted Paintings

Cat. 1. Creation of the Animals and Creation of Adam (above); Creation of Eve and the Original Sin (below)

c. early 1430s Museo di Santa Maria Novella, Florence (in the first bay of the east wall of the Chiostro Verde) 210 x 452 cm (above), 244 x c. 478 cm (below, the bottom of the painting is destroyed), detached mural painting

The Creation Stories have suffered greatly and been restored on a number of occasions, although their early conservation history is not well documented. Unspecified conservation was undertaken in the Chiostro Verde in 1851, 1903 and 1950-1953 (Lunardi, 1983, pp. 64-65). The Creation Stories were detached and restored in 1940 by the Istituto Centrale del Restauro di Roma. The sinopie have also been detached and are presently on display inside the museum adjacent to the cloister. The paintings were conserved again by Leonetto Tin tori prior to the exhibition Mostra di Affreschi Staccati held in the Forte di Belvedere in Florence in 1957 (Baldini and Berti, 1957, pp. 58-59). Photograph no. 498185 in the K I F Fototeca shows the detached painting after the 1966 floods with water damage up to the knees of Adam and Eve, and pre-existing losses to the paint surface at the bottom of the scene, presumably from earlier flood damage. While the condition of the paintings is far from ideal, the overall composition and some details are well preserved, such as the flowers in the grass under the reclining figure of Adam. T h e Creation Stories exhibit traits for which Uccello became famous from the end of the fifteenth century: the depiction of animals, landscapes and perspective. They have been attributed to Uccello by an overwhelming majority of authors, although Van Marie (1928a, pp. 224, 226) attributed them to a pupil of Uccello and Marangoni, (1930, pp. 414-416) attributed them to Uccello with hesitation. Angelini recently proposed Dello Delli (1990a, pp. 75-77) as their possible author suggesting that their style is somewhat different to that of the panel paintings Uccello is now believed to have executed in the early 1430s. Such differences as there are may be explained by the differences of medium and scale, and because the mural paintings could conceivably be slightly earlier than 1430. The strong influence of Ghiberti and similar spark of originality present in the mural paintings and the pane! paintings from the early 1430s, such as the Oxford Annunciation

and the Melbourne Saint

George, are greater than their differences, suggesting that the mural paintings are indeed Uccello's. Furthermore, the bold design of the sinopie shows Uccello's characteristic freedom, notably the distinctive backwards-looping hemline in the figure of God the Father in front of Adam, which is paralleled in the backward-looping hemline in Uccello's drawing Angel with a Sword; A Cup in the Gabinello Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi. The long-running debate concerning whether the Creation Stories date to c. 1425, before Uccello left for Venice, or c. 1431, when he had returned to Florence, has been made unnecessarily polemical by the common, but unfounded belief that Uccello was in Venice for about five years, when he may have returned as early as the second half of 1427. The use of

192 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

Ghibertian compositional formulae from the Doors of Paradise,

which were only commissioned in

1425, suggests that Uccello did not start work on the paintings until after m i d - 1 4 2 7 .

Bibliography, n.b. all authors agree that Uccello painted the Creation Stories, except where indicated, opinions have varied more as to their dating: Billi, c. 1481-1530 (1991), p . 86; Manetti, c. 1494-1497 (1957), p. 335; Albertini, 1510 (1972), [p. 8]; Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 99; Vasari, 1550 and 1568(1971), pp. 65-66; Borghini, 1584 (1967), p. 309; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), pp. 447-448; Lanzi, 1795 (1968), p. 58: referred to the 'stories of Adam'; Burckhardt, 1855 (1979), p. 2 6 : Uccello and Dello Delli, referred to the 'history of Genesis'; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p p . 291-296: 1446-1468; Wornum, 1864, p. 258; Berenson, 1909, p. 186; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 265: 1446-1448 (referred to 'Old Testament frescoes' collectively); Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 224, 226: a pupil of Uccello; Marangoni, 1930, pp. 414-416: Uccello (?); Venturi, 1930, pp. 63, 72. 77; Marangoni, 1932, p. 330; Paatz, 1934, pp. 118, 142, 147; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 233, 237-243, 246-249: c. 1436; Pudelko, 1935a, p. 7 1 : first half of the 1430s; Pudelko, 1935b, p. 34: referred to the stories of Genesis, among the earliest works; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 125: first half of the 1430s; Pudelko, 1936, p. 133: c. 1425; Ragghianti, 1937, p. 239: referred to the lower scene; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 14-16,26, 31,38, 50, 118: c. 1431; Boeck, 1939, p. 118: not Uccello; Longhi, 1940, p . 179: referred to the lower scene; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 141-142: mid-1430s; Salmi, 1950, p. 30; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 26-28: probably 1431 or after; Baldini, 1954b, p.18: referred generally to Uccello's works in the Chiostro Verde; Carli, 1954, p. 53; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56; Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 8-9; Parronchi, 1957b, p. 15: early 1420s; Salmi, 1957, pp. 56-58: between 1430 and 1436; D'Ancona, 1960, pp. 6-9: 'the first graphic expression of Uccello's work'; Berli, 1961, p. 103: 1431; Parronchi, 1962 (1964a), pp. 204-205: before 1425; Sindona, 1970, p. 8 3 ; Mode, 1972, p. 373: c. 1425-1435; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 86: c. 1430; Sindona, 1972, pp. 8, 4 2 ; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 12-13: [c. 1425|; Volpe, 1980, pp. 12, 18: 1424-1425; Cristiani Testi, 1981, p . 11; Parronchi, 1981, pp. 138-139: c. 1425; Wakayama, 1982, pp. 93-95: c. 1424-1425; Lunardi, 1983, p . 39: possibly c. 1425; Beguin, 1984, pp. 69-71; Ames-Lewis, 1987, pp. 6-7: early 1430s; Angelini, 1990a, p p . 75-77: Dello Delli (?), [c. 1446|; Padoa Rizzo, 1990, p. 58: c. early 1430s; Marino, 1991, pp. 2 5 1 , 254, 259: c. 1424-1425; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 28-34: after 1431; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 287-290: c. 1424-1425; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: 1425; Bcrtelli, 1994, p. 390; Bambach, 1999, pp. 197-203: c. 1431; Kanter, 2000, p. 17: early-to-mid 1430s, referred to the 'first scenes in the Chiostro Verde'; De Simone, 2002, pp. 48-49, 79-80 n. 72: Uccello, sometimes attributed to Dcllo Delli; Melli, 2002a, p. 208: early 1430s; Boskovits, 2003g, p. 464 n. 27.

Cat. 2. Virgin and Child

c. 1431-1433 Museo di San Marco, Florence 90 x 102 cm, detached mural painting

Provenance: formerly in a house of the del Becculo family, Florence (Parronchi, 1969, p. 104); transferred to the Museo di San Marco, Florence at an unrecorded date.

l

Inscription: gia in una casa dei Del Beccuto' (on the reverse).

The credit for identifying this small painting in the r e s e r v e collection of the M u s e o di San Marco as a work of Uccello goes to Parronchi, even if h e m o d e s t l y d e s c r i b e d his attribution as only a 'piccolo

CATALOGUE RAI SONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS 193

contribute'

(Parronchi, 1969, p. 104). A note attached to the work indicates that it was 'formerly in a

house of the del Beccuto', although precisely which house is not specified. The Palazzo Del Beccuto opposite Santa Maria Maggiore was destroyed in the nineteenth-century remodelling of central Florence, and this is a likely original location of the work. A large, carved pietra serena lintel bearing the family's coat of arms was removed from the palazzo and is also housed in the Museo di San Marco (Cecchi, 1989b, p. 110). Judging by the painting's size and pointed-arch shape it was probably located over a doorway. Parronchi recognised the familial and stylistic links with Uccello. Uccello's mother was a del Beccuto, and the lyrical style of the work, in particular the wind-swept arabesques of the drapery, is close to Uccello's Assunta Chapel paintings (Parronchi, 1969, p. 104). Although much of the surface is damaged, the charming depiction of the Virgin and Child remains legible, and all authors have been in agreement about Uccello's authorship of it. Padoa Rizzo's hypothesis (1990, p. 58; 1991, p. 26) that this work may relate to the debts declared owing to Uccello by his relative Deo Beccuti in 1431 and 1433 is compatible with the stylistic evidence, showing the same strong influence of Ghiberti and the use of a gold ground and lapis lazuli as the Oxford Annunciation

and the Melbourne Saint

George, also datable to the early 1430s.

Bibliography n.b. all authors have agreed that Uccello painted the Virgin and Child, opinions have varied more as to the dating: Parronchi, 1969, p. 104; Parronchi, 1974, p. 22: [c. 14351; Volpe, 1980, p. 18: 1420; Cecchi, 1989a, p. 110: 1420s-1430s; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: before 1425; Padoa Rizzo, 1990, p. 58: c. early 1430s; Sframelli, 1990a, p. 94: probably a work of his early career; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 26: early 1430s; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 284: c. 1415-1420; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: [before 1425]; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, p. 116: [before mid1435).

Cat. 3.

Annunciation

c. early 1430s Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, Inv. A. 80 64.6 x 47.5 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly in the Honourable W.T.H. Fox-Strangways Collection; 1850, donated to the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford (Whistler, 200 1, p. 2).

Inscriptions: 'Madonna con Angioli di Maniera Antica di Pesello Peselli ... |illegible)', 'Oxford U Panel 22 26/1 1/89', '82 [crossed o u t | \ ' 2 2 ' (all on the reverse).

The Annunciation

was donated to the Ashmolean Museum by the fourth Earl of Ilchester, the

Honourable W.T.H. Fox-Slrangways (1795-1865), with an attribution to 'Pesello Peselli.' (The Ashmolean Museum Curatorial File for the work records the following reference: 'Univ. Gall. Donation Book, p. 18, no. V as by 'Pesello Peselli"), no doubt following the name appearing on an old label on the reverse of the panel. It was among forty-one paintings donated by Fox-Slrangways to the Museum in 1850, including Uccello's Hunt. Fox-Strangways had been the British Secretary of Legation in Florence from 1825 to 1828, and he is thought to have formed most of his collection

194 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

between 1827 and 1833. Christopher Lloyd (1977, pp. xxii-xxiii) speculated that he may have acquired many of his paintings from the Florentine artist and restorer Vincenzo Gotti, since at least one of FoxStrangway's paintings certainly belonged to Gotti and many of Fox-Strangway's Tuscan paintings have labels with numbers in an eighteenth-century hand on their backs, suggesting that Fox-Strangways may have acquired them as a group from the same collection. T h e painting was cleaned in 1951 (Lloyd, 1977, p. 61) and is in remarkably good condition overall. Although the work's Uccelloesque style was recognised as early as 1935 (Pudelko, 1935a, p. 32 n. 8), it was only in 1980 that Volpe (1980, p. 18) attributed it to Uccello directly, and this opinion has been upheld fairly consistently since, with good reason. The painting shares numerous characteristics with other works attributed to Uccello. The sideways-foreshortened apparition of God the Father in a seraphim-surrounded mandorla is reminiscent of the similar apparition of the Virgin in the Florence Accademia Holy Fathers. The crystalline punte on the ceiling of the portico are similar to those on the underside of the base of Uccello's Equestrian Monument. Gabriel's windswept drapery is comparable to the drapery in the Creation Stories, the Del Beccuto Virgin and Child and the Virtues in the Assunta Chapel at Prato. As with the Creation Stories, the stylistic influences include Ghiberti and Masaccio. However, this work also shows the influence of Fra Angelico, particularly in the pastel colours of the Angels' robes and the refined treatment of details such as the decorative frieze around the loggia.

Bibliography: Waagen, 1854, vol. Ill, p. 53: Benozzo Gozzoli; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1892 (1914), p. 121: an Umbrian follower of Gentile da Fabriano; Berenson, 1932b, p. 458: Pielro di Giovanni Ambrosi; Pudelko, 1935a, pp. 72-73 n. 8: an anon, follower of Fra Angelico, influenced by Uccello; Pope-Henncssy, 1939, pp. 202, 203 n. 133: a Florentine student of Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 60-61: attributed to Alesso Baldovinetti, c. 1445-1452; Lloyd, 1977, pp. 61-62: anon. Florentine artist, c. 1420-1430; Volpe, 1980, p. 18: Uccello, c. 1420; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: Uccello, probably before 1425; Ncri Lusanna, 1990, p. 15 n. 45: noted Zeri's attribution to the Master of 1419; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 345-346: Uccello (?), c. 1420-1425 (?); Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: Uccello [before 1425]; Piper, 1995, p. 53: Uccello, 'very early'; Padoa Riz/o, 1997, p. 17: Uccello; Kantcr, 2000, p. 17: Uccello, c. 1425; Whistler, 2001, p. 4: Ucccllo, early 1420s; Boskovits, 20()3i, pp. 470-471 n. 29: attributable to Uccello.

Cat. 4. Saint George and the Dragon

c. early 1430s National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Inv. 2124/4 62.2 x 38.8 cm, panel

Provenance: c. 1847, offered by the dealer Samuel Woodburn to the National Gallery, London; 9-1 1 June 1860, Christie's, London, Samuel Woodburn sale, lot 59, bought by Campanari; 12 June 1863, Christie's, London, Reverend Walter Davenport Bromley sale, lot 135, bought by 'Burton'; 1867, acquired from Mrs. F.W. Burton for the James Carnegie Collection, Kinnaird Caslle; after 1922, on loan to the National Gallery of Scotland from Sir Charles Alexander Carnegie; 1949, Ellis and Smith, London (dealer); 1949, acquired by Agnews, London; 1949, acquired by the Felton Bequest for the National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne (see below for the references).

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: A C C E F f E D WORKS

195

Inscriptions: 'Attributed to Domenico di Bartolo', 'St George & Drfagon] Orfcagna?]', 'James Bourlet and Sons Ltd [...]% '6', '43', 'Thomas Agnew & Sons [...)', '2124/4 24 1/2" x 15 1/4" 62.2 cm x 38.8 cm' (all on the reverse).

As with the Annunciation,

th'e provenance of the Saint George is indicative of the growing taste for

Italian early Renaissance paintings in Britain during the nineteenth century, revealed by a series of unpublished documents. In 1847 the Saint George was among a large number of paintings offered by the London art dealer Samuel Woodburn (1786-1853) to the National Gallery, London, including the important Virgin and Child with Angels from Masaccio's Pisa Altarpiece, then attributed to Gentile da Fabriano. Item 5 in the List of Woodburn's Collection of Early Italian Pictures housed in the Gallery's archives is the Saint George, attributed to Andrea Orcagna (National Gallery, London, Archive. Kindly confirmed by Isobel Siddons, Archivist, pers. com., 24 Feb. 2004). Samuel Woodburn and Sons were dealers in Old Master paintings and drawings during the first half of the nineteenth century. Their premises were in St. Martin's Lane, London. The Gallery rejected the deal on Woodburn's terms (Avery-Quash, 2003, pp. xxvi-xxviii). However, Masaccio's panel was acquired by the Gallery in 1916, and it purchased Uccello's famous Saint George

and the Dragon

from the Lanckoronski

•Collection in 1959 (Gordon, 2003, pp. 219, 403). Following Woodburn's death, the Melbourne Saint George was sold in 1860 to a buyer by the name of Campanari. It was lot 59, attributed to Andrea Orcagna and described as: 'St. George subduing the dragon, St Catherine kneeling near him, and a white horse behind; above is the Almighty, crowned with a triple tiara, the city of Jerusalem seen in the background. An exquisite work, of the highest rarity and interest' (Christie's Archives, London, CATALOGUE

OF THE VERY CELEBRATED

The greatest

early

Connoisseur,

Italian

Masters,

& VALUABLE

Formed

under

SERIES OF CAPITAL PICTURES,

singular

advantages,

by that

BY

distinguished

THE LATE SAMUEL WOODBURN, ESQ. [... J, (9-11 Jun. 1860).

The Saint George then appeared as lot 135 in the 1863 sale of the Reverend Walter Davenport Bromley's collection: 'ST. GEORGE AND THE DRAGON, the princess kneeling near; above is the Almighty; the city of Jerusalem in the background. From Mr. Woodburn's

Collection'.

Davenport

Bromley (1787-1865) formed one of the earliest collections of Italian early Renaissance paintings in England, which included such important works as Giovanni Bellini's Agony in the Garden now in the National Gallery, London, and Giotto's Dormition

of the Virgin now in the Staalliche Gemiilde

Sammlung, Berlin (Sutton, 1985, pp. 86, 88). The Saint George was bought by a 'Burton' (Christie's Archives, London, CATALOGUE REV.

WALTER

DAVENPORT

MESSRS.

CHRISTIE,

JAMES'S

SQUARE,

MANSON

OF THE CELEBRATED BROMLEY,

DECEASED:

& WOODS, AT THEIR

COLLECTION WHICH

OF THE

Will be Sold by Auction,

GREAT ROOMS,

On FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1863, And following

OF PICTURES,

Day. \ ...\).

8, KING STREET,

BY ST.

This may have been the

Mrs F.W. Burton who sold it to James Carnegie, the ninth Earl of Southesk, in 1867, according to an inventory of 1904 from Kinnaird Castle (an extract from the Catalogue of Pictures at Kinnaird

Castle,

1904, was included in the letter from Hugh Brigstocke, Assistant Keeper, National Gallery of Scotland, to Christopher Lloyd 23 Jan. 1969, in The Ashmolean Museum Curatorial File for the and a copy of the complete inventory is in the National Gallery of Scotland curatorial files).

Annunciation

196 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

From 1922 the Saint George was loaned to the National Gallery of Scotland, following a fire at the Castle (information kindly provided by Aidan Weston-Lewis, Curator of Italian and Spanish Art, National Gallery of Scotland, pers. com., 24 Apr. 2002). The Saint George was sold, presumably by the eleventh Earl of Southesk, Sir Charles Alexander Carnegie, to the London dealers Ellis and Smith, who in turn sold it to Agnew's on 9 February 1949 (Agnew's, London Archive, Stock no. 11 in Stockbook no. 12). On 11 July it was acquired by the Felton Bequest as a work of Domenico di Bartolo, on the enthusiastic recommendation of the Felton Bequest Advisors A.J.L. McDonnell and Kenneth Clark for £4,600, and was accessioned by the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne in the same year. The work was acquired with the name Saint George Slaying the Dragon (A.J.L. McDonnell, Letter to The Secretary, The Felton Bequests Committee, 26 Apr. 1949. p. 2 IcopyJ, including Report on Work of Art, Felton Bequest Correspondence, 2/20, National Gallery of Victoria Library, Melbourne). However, as the saint has discarded his sword, has only a dagger in his hand, and as the princess bears a chain with what seems to be a collar attached, this depiction of the subject implies that the dragon will be tethered rather than slain. Thus, the general title Saint George and the Dragon is more appropriate. The paint surface is, for the most part, well preserved, except at the edges where there are small areas of damage and restoration. The photograph of the work published by Van Marie (1927, figure 342, p. 546) shows losses to the dragon's wings that have since been restored, possibly when the work was with Agnew's. Horace Buttery was paid £18 to conserve the painting at this time (Stock no. 11 in Stockbook no. 12, Agnew's archive, London), although, there is no record of what his treatment entailed, and Buttery's record books (Hamilton Kerr Institute, Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, MS. 1112-1993, Buttery Record Books, book C) do not contain a reference to the Saint George. The appearance of the work has changed over time, with the oxidation of the silver leaf in the saint's armour and perhaps also a browning of the thin (copper resinate?) glaze in the area of the ground around the figures. The red, blue and white flowers disposed in this area suggest that Uccello intended to represent a verdant field. Stylistically, the work is closely related to the Del Becculo Virgin and Child, the Oxford Annunciation (Pudelko, 1935a, pp. 72-73 n. 8) and the Quarate predella (Volpe, 1980, p. 17).

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1927, p. 544: Domenico di Bartolo; Longhi, 1928, p. 38: direct follower of Uccello; Berenson, 1932b, p. 194: 'between Carrand and Castello Masters'; Fudelko, 1935a, pp. 72-73 n. 8: an anon, follower of Fra Angelico, influenced by Uccello; Pope-1lennessy, 1939, pp. 202, 203 n. 133: a Florentine student of Uccello also responsible for the Oxford Annunciation;

[Melbourne], 1950, Sienese school, fifteenth century;

Davies, 1959, p. 310 n. 14: no attribution; Hoff, 1961, pp. I 1-12; Domenico di Bartolo, c. 1438; Longhi, 1968, p. 25: Uccello; Hoff, 1973, pp. 84-86: Florentine, c. 1440-1450; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 60-61: attributed to Alesso Baldovinelti, c. 1445-1452; Volpe, 1980, pp. 17-18: Uccello, early 1430s; Strchlke 1986, pp. 224-225: perhaps an anon. Tuscan artist active in the middle of the fifteenth century; Galbally, 1987, pp. 103-105: Domenico di Michelino; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: Uccello, perhaps 1430-143 1; Angelini 1990b, 78: Uccello, before 1433; Neri Lusanna, 1990, p. 15 n. 45: noted Zeri's attribution to the Master of 1419; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: Uccello [before 1425); Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 346-347: attributed to Uccello, c. 1431; Didi-Huberman, Garbelta and

CATALOGUE RAI SONNE: ACCEFI'ED WORKS

197

Morgaine, 1994, p. 65, caption to illustration: anon. Italian (Florence), c. 1440-1450; Hoff and Devapriam, 1995, pp. 165-166: Italian (Florentine), fifteenth century; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, p. 17: Uccello, 1430-1435; Kanter, 2000, p. 17: Uccello; Gordon, 2003, p. 401: Uccello, early work (although Gordon's discussion confuses the Melbourne version for the Paris version at times); Gott, 2003, p. 23: attributed to Uccello, c. 1431.

Cat. 5. Stories of the Virgin and Saint Stephen, Saints and Virtues

c. 1435-1436 Duomo, Prato. (The Stories of the Virgin and Saint Stephen (left and right walls of the Assunta Chapel, respectively. The Saints on the underside of the arch separating the chapel from the transept of the church, and the Virtues are in the vault. The Blessed Jacopone da Todi was formerly on the back wall, but has been detached and is housed in the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, Prato). Birth of the Virgin, 302 x 361 cm, Presentation of the Virgin, 335 x 420 cm, Disputation of Saint Stephen, 300 x 360 cm, Stoning of Saint Stephen, 310 x 420 cm (top half), Blessed Jacopone da Todi, 180 x 59 cm, Saints Paul, Francis, Jerome and Domenic, 120 x 46 cm each; Four Virtues, 170 x 340 cm each, detached mural paintings, save for the lowest scenes on the lateral walls, which have not been detached.

Although the surviving mural paintings are in fairly good condition, the decoration of the chapel as a whole has undergone significant changes over time. Unspecified conservation work relating to the chapel took place in 1835. In 1871 the baroque altar in the chapel was removed and the paintings were cleaned. There were significant interventions on the back wall: the Blessed Jacopone was detached; the Marcovaldi coat of arms were repainted; and the Saint Peter and Saint Paul were painted in fictive niches by Sarato Varni and Pietro Pazzati. Pezzati also designed the stained glass window, which was made by Ulisse De Matteis. The paintings were restored again in 1932 by Amadeo Benini (Borsook, 1980, p. 83). Having been damaged in the Second World War, the window was largely remade by Tollcri in 1964. In that year Giuseppe Rosi, working for the Florentine Soprintcndenza, detached all the remaining paintings on the back wall, as well as the rest of the paintings above the bottom scenes on the side walls and transferred them to masonite and plastic supports. The paintings were cleaned again by the Soprintendenza ai Beni Archilcttonici e Ambientali di Fircnze prior to 1997 (Padoa Rizzo, 1997, pp. 115-1 16). The long prevarication in the literature concerning Uccello's authorship of the Assunta Chapel paintings has been made understandable by the gradual recognition that the upper scenes are probably the work of an equipe of which Uccello was the master. Datable to 1435-1436 on documentary evidence concerning the patronage of the chapel, the paintings show the waning influence of Ghiberti's style in Ucccllo's work and the growing influence of Masaccio. The iconography depicts scenes from the life of the Virgin, to whom the chapel is dedicated, and Saint Stephen, the patron saint of the Duomo. In a chapel dedicated to the Assumption of the Virgin a depiction of the subject would be expected. Angelini suggested that it was probably originally represented on the back wall, but was subsequently destroyed (Angelini, 1991, p. 50). Padoa Rizzo proposed that the drawing Virgin and Child in a Mandorla

Surrounded

by Angels (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence) may

be Uccello's plan for an altarpiece for the chapel, undertaken in his absence by the artist known as the

198 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

Pseudo Domenico di Michelino, whom she tentatively identified as Giovanni di Consalvo. Padoa Rizzo tentatively identified the original altarpiece and predella as the Assumption

of the Virgin with Saints

Jerome

from

and Francis

(National

Gallery

of

Ireland, Dublin), possibly

Misericordia of which Marcovaldi was Spedalingo, and the Dormition

the

Spedale delle

of the Virgin; Saint Jerome

Penitent; Saint Francis Receiving the Stigmata predella in the Museo Civico in Prato, attributed to Domenicho di Michelino (Padoa Rizzo, 1997, pp. 101-103).

Bibliography: Burckhardt, 1855 (1979), p. 29: 'insignificant productions of the fourteenth century'; Longhi, 1928, pp. 40-46: Giovanni di Francesco, c. 1445-1455; Giovannozzi, 1934, pp. 353-354: circle of Uccello, c. 1446; Pudelko, 1934, p. 237 n. 13: Karlsruhe Master; Salmi, 1934, pp. 1-27: Quarate Master (a student of Uccello), c. 1445-1446; Pudelko, 1935c, pp. 125-126: Karlsruhe Master, c. 1445; Pudelko, 1936, p. 133: Karlsruhe Master, c. 1445; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 32-33, 88-91: Quarate Master, 1445-1446; Longhi, 1940, p. 179: Uccello, c. 1445; Ragghianti, 1946, p. 74: Uccello, long before 1445; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 157-160: Prato Master (an anon, student of Uccello), c. 1443-1448; Salmi, 1950, p. 26: Quarate Master, a workshop assistant of Uccello, c. after 1445; Longhi, 1952, p. 32 n. 8: the Prato Master is Uccello, late work; Carli, 1954, pp. 56-57: Uccello - with the exception of the weakest parts such as the Virtues, shortly after 1436; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 56-57: catalogued as attributed to Uccello - referred to Blessed Jacapone da Todi; Parronchi, 1957b, pp. 18-21: Uccello, before Stories of Noah [c. mid-1440sl; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 12: unknown follower of Uccello; Sindona, 1960, p. 186: Uccello and/or another artist influenced by Uccello who painted the Berlin Adoration of the Magi; Berti, 1961, pp. 300302: probably Uccello, between 1436 and 1443; Parronchi, 1962 (1.964a), p. 203: Ucccllo, referred to the Disputation; Parronchi, 1966, pp. 52-54: Uccello; Berli, 1967, p . 68 n. 174, p. 126 n. 285: Ucccllo; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p . 413: follower of Uccello; Parronchi, 1969, p p . 104-105: Uccello, [early work, after 1431], Robinson, 1969, pp. 134-138: Prato Master, c. 1445; Sindona, 1970, p p . 67-73, 83: Ucccllo, with assistance (Piero della Francesca ?), c. 1436-1440; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1 9 7 1 , pp. 87-90: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1435-1440; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 17-21: attributed to Uccello with some slight reservations, early 1430s; Borsook, 1980, pp. 79-84: Prato Master, c. 1443-1450; Yolpe, 1980, pp. 10, 12-14, 15-17: Ucccllo, early 1430s; Wohl, 1980, pp. 170-172: Master of the Karlsruhe Adoration and the Master of the Quarate predella, c. 1445-1447; Wakayama, 1982, p. 9 5 : Uccello, c. 1445-1446 - according to Salmi's interpretation of documents; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: Uccello, c. 1433-1434; Angelini, 1990b, p. 78: Uccello, c. 1433-1434; Bcllosi, 1990, p. 21: Uccello, c. 1430-1437; Fabbri, 1990b, p. 218: Uccello or Prato Master, c. between 1435-1445; Padoa Rizzo, 1990, p. 58: Uccello, 1435-1436; Angelini, 1991, pp. 49-53: Uccello, c. 1433; Bcllosi. Angelini and Ragionieri, 1991, pp. 927931: Ucccllo, 1433-1434; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 43-46: Ucccllo, 1435-1436; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 297-300: Uccello, c. 1434-1435; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: Uceello; Bertelli, 1994, p. 391: Uccello; Hughes, 1997, pp. 21 1, 228: Uccello; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, all (monograph): Uccello working with an assistant or assistants, c. 1435-1436; Bambach, 1999, pp. 181, 192-193, 197: often attributed to Uccello, or less convincingly a close follower, c. 1433-1440, and p. 197: probably Ucccllo; Kanter, 2000, pp. 17, 19: Ucccllo, early-to-mid-1430s; Sebrcgondi, 200 1, pp. 386-387: Uccello, between 1435-1436; referred to the Messed Javopone da Todi; Angelini, 2002a, p. 200 and 2002b, p. 202: Uccello, 1433-1434; Boskovits, 20031', p. 456 n. 20: Uccello, first half of the 1430s; Gordon, 2003, p. 378: probably Uccello, c. 1435-1436; Ceriana, 2005, p. 120: Uccello.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

Cat. 6. Equestrian Monument, for Sir John

199

Hawkwood

1436 Duomo, Florence (on the north wall) 820 x 515 cm, detached mural painting

Inscriptions: 'IOANNES . ACTVS . EQVES . BRITANNICVS . D V X . AETATIS . S/VAECAVITISSIMVS • ET . REI . MILITARIS . PERITISSIMVS . HABITVS . EST' (on the sarcophagus); OPVS

PAVLI . VGIELLI .

(on the base).

Four entries from 30 May to 31 August 1436 in the account books of the Opera del Duomo refer to Uccello's commission for the Equestrian Monument

(Poggi, 1988, vol. II, pp. 124-125, docs 2057-

2060). T h e work's monumental size, visual clarity and sophisticated perspective mark Uccello's return to a leading position in the development of mural painting in Florence, some nine years after he executed the lost Annunciation

in the Carnesecchi Chapel in Santa Maria Maggiore. Even if the diverse

vanishing points for the different parts of the composition reflect a compromise between unified perspective and legibility of the image (the horse's feet would appear cut off by the base if the horse was shown as di sotto in su as the base is), the subtle, asymmetrical perspective of the base of the monument is unparalleled in works of the time. Rather than using a centralised perspective for a viewer standing directly in front of the image, Uccello made the orthogonals of the base converge to a point on the left side, to be seen by a viewer moving down the nave of the Duomo. Lorenzo di Credi added the decorative fictive frame in 1524. In 1688 the work was treated by an unknown restorer, and in 1842 it was transferred to canvas by Antonio Marini, at which time a dentilled frame was added (Borsook, 2 0 0 1 , p. 7 4 ; Carli, 1 9 5 4 , p. 65). An old photograph (undated) shows the paint layer raised in many places, and repainting, now removed, on the wreath on the sarcophagus ( K I F Fototeca image no. 113086). Dino Dini, of the Gabinetto dei Restauri dclla Soprintendenza alio Gallerie di Firenze, restored the painting in 1953-1954 (Meiss, 1 9 7 0 , p. 231). Close examination of the surface from a scaffold would be valuable to determine the likelihood of Mclli's hypothesis ( 1 9 9 8 , p p . 1-14; 1999, pp. 2 6 1 - 2 7 2 ) that the changes to the horse and rider requested by the Operai were painted a secco over the original version, or whether Uccello erased the earlier version and started over in buon fresco.

Bibliography, n.b. virtually every author after Baldinucci (1868) is in agreement that the work was painted by Uccello in 1436, exceptions are noted: Billi, c. 1481 -1530 (1991), p. 86: Uccello; Albertini, 1510 (1972), |p. 5): Masaccio; Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 99: Uccello; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 68: Uccello; Borghini, 1584 (1967), p. 310: UcceMo; Bocchi, 1591 (2004), pp. 5, 15, 50-51: Uccello; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), pp. 339-446: Uccello, 1436; Lanzi, 1795 (1968), p. 58; Burckhardt, 1855 (1979), pp. 65-66; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, pp. 290-291: about 1436; Wornum, 1864, p. 258; Berenson, 1896, p. 129: 1437; Loeser, 1898, p p . 85-86; Berenson, 1900, p. 140: 1437; Berenson, 1909, p. 186: 1437; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 264; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 205, 214; Soupault, 1929, pp. 10, 13 , 23-25: 1437; Longhi, 1927 (2002a), p. 4 1 ; Veiuuri, 1930, pp. 63, 77; Boeck, 1933a, p. 1; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 2 6 3 - 2 6 6 , 2 7 4 ; Poggi, 1933, p. 330; Paatz, 1934, p. 145; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 232-234, 243, 249; Pudelko, 1936, p. 134; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 18-21, 26, 42, 118;

200 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

Boeck, 1939, p. 112; Somare, 1946, pp. 28-29, 37; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 142; Carli, 1954, p. 54; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 22-23; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56; Parronchi, 1957a, p. 16; Parronchi, 1957b, p. 16; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 9; Berti, 1961, pp. 301-302; Berti, 1967, pp. 77, 121; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 382; Boccia, 1970, pp. 55-58; Meiss, 1970, p. 231; Sindona, 1970, pp. 69, 73, 83; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 87; Sindona, 1972, pp. 28-29, 31, 41-42, 62-67; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 31-32; Griffiths, 1978, p. 315; Volpe, 1980, pp. 14-15; Cristiani Testi, 1981, pp. 9-10; Parronchi, 1981, p. 140; Borsook, 1982, pp. 44-51: Uccello, summer 1436; Eisler, 1982, pp. 71,74; Wakayama, 1982, p. 93; Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986, pp. 36-37; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73; Boskovits, 1990, p. 175; PadoaRizzo, 1991, p. 62; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 302-305; Boskovits, 1992, p, 140; Frosinini, 1995, pp. 197-199; Lachi, 1995, p. 71; Del Bravo, 1996, p. 257; Moving, 1996b, p. 59, extensively overpainted by Guido Reni; Lessanutti, 1996, p. 59; Butterfield, 1997, p. 163; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, p. 96; Melli, 1998, pp. 1-14; Bambach, 1999, pp. 130, 192, 194, 197, 199, 202,230; Holmes, 1999, p. 271 n. 149; Melli, 1999, pp. 261-272; Kent, 2000, pp. 30,91,272-274; Angelini, 2002b, p. 204; Gordon, 2003, p. 378.

Cat. 7. Adoration of the Child

1437 (or 1432?) San Martino Maggiore, Bologna (originally on the east wall of the sacristy; detached and transferred to the Marescotti Chapel, the first chapel on the left of the main door) 350 x 237 cm, detached mural painting

Inscription: '1431', '1432' or '1437'; there are fragmentary painted inscriptions on the fictive frame and numerous graffiti.

This mural painting was discovered, detached and restored after 1977, by the Soprintenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, Bologna (D'Amico, 1981, p. 51). Only a minority of the paint surface and only a small fragment of the lower part of the sinopia survive. Nevertheless, the essentials of a powerful composition remain. The first three digits of the incised date arc clearly '143' leaving only uncertainty as to the exact year in which it was executed. If the last digit appears to be a ' 2 ' this is slightly, but significantly, earlier than the 1437 generally accepted since Volpe's discussion of the work (1980, pp. 3-28). Is it possible that Uccello could have achieved such a sophisticated depiction of space in 1432? It is possible, but difficult to prove. If he returned to Florence in the second half of 1427 or shortly after, somewhat earlier than is generally thought, he would have had a few years to absorb the influence of Masaccio's monumental style and use of perspective before painting the Adoration in 1432. No documents for the commission of the work have been found, nor any references to it. The church dates from 1217, was taken over by Carmelites from Mantua in the fourteenth century, and was expanded in the fifteenth century (Ricci and Zucchini, 1930, p. 136). Since the fourteenth century the convent attached to the church of San Martino had a faculty of theological study (Delbianco, 1995, p. 249). The church was decorated with works by important artists, including Jacopo della Quercia (13741438, life size terracotta statue of the Virgin and Child), Francesco Francia (1450-1518, Virgin and Child with Saints altarpicce) and Amico Aspertini (1475-1552, Virgin and Saints altarpiece and the Adoration of the Child with Saints or donors). Piclro Lamo's account of the artworks in San Martino of

CATALOGUERAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS 201

1560 does not refer to any mural paintings, but does refer to the Virgin and Child with Saints by Girolamo da Sermoneta, the Adoration of the Magi by Girolamo da Carpi, the Virgin and Child with Saints by Francia and a bas-relief of San Martino by Francesco Manzini (Lamo, 1996, p. 92-93). Carlo Cesare Malvasia's account of the artworks in the church of 1686, while describing the contents of the sacristy in detail, does not refer to the Adoration,

which, had it been visible, would surely have been

noted due to its size (Malvasia, 1686 (1969), pp. 69-70). Thus, the painting was probably covered over by the late seventeenth century. Little is known of the history of the sacristy except that building works were undertaken in 1511, 1624, 1656 and 1713-1717. In the early 1960s the installation of wiring into the wall and previously the insertion of a window (D'Amico, 1981, pp. 53-56) inadvertently damaged large areas of the painting then still under whitewash. Nevertheless, the scale and relatively good condition of the surviving areas make it an important reference point for any assessment of Uccello's work.

Bibliography, n.b. most authors have agreed that Uccello painted the Adoration, opinions have varied as to the dating: Vergani, 1980, p. 324: 1437; Volpe, 1980, pp. 3-28: 1437; D'Amico 1981, pp. 51-61: 1437; Eisler, 1982, pp. 71-74: possibly 1436; Padoa Rizzo, 1983, p. 79; Angelini 1990a, p . 73: c. 1435; Bellosi, 1990, p. 21; Bellosi, Angelini and Ragionieri, 1991, pp. 927-928: c. 1435; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 64: 1437 or 1431; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 306-307: c. 1435-1437; Boskovits, 1992, p . 140; Lollini, 1994, p. 120: 1431; Angelini, 2002b, p. 204; Gordon, 2003, pp. xi, 378, 401: 1431 or 1437(7).

Cat. 8. Stories of Saint

Francis

c. 1430s-1440s (?) Santa Trinita, Florence (on the east wall) irregular, small fragment; mural painting

Inscription: ' . . . G I F . LA HIES A

Vasari described scenes by Uccello in the church of Santa Trinila, over the left door of the church, showing Saint Francis receiving the stigmata, Saint Francis supporting the church on his shoulders and Saint Francis' encounter with Saint Dominic (Vasari, 1971, p. 63: 1568 ed.). All that remains of the paintings is a fragment with the seraphim from the lop right of the Saint Francis Stigmata,

Receiving

the

which presumably extended across the niche of the northernmost door in the facade of the

church. The present door extends into the area where the bottom of the scene would have been. As Padoa Rizzo has noted (1991, p. 130), the apparition of the seraphim seems to have been repainted, probably in the sixteenth century. The golden sunburst in the sky behind the seraphim is also more characteristic of the sixteenth century than the fifteenth. Thus, of Uccello's original painting the only visible parts are the sharply-lit capital framing the scene on the right and part of a banderole with a fragmentary inscription at the top. The clear, regular, humanist script suggests, perhaps, a date not earlier than the 1430s.

202

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

Bibliography, n.b, all modern authors have agreed that Uccello painted the fragment, many following Vasari: Manetti, c. 1494-1497 (1957), p. 335: the subject is not specified; Albertini, 1510 (1972), [p. 8.]: the subject is not specified; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 63; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), p. 447: described as having been over the middle door, since lost; Biadi, 1824, p. 145: the subject is not specified; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 297 n. 1; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, p . 245 (incorrectly gave the location as Santa Maria Maggiore); Soupault, 1929, p. 13; Pudelko, 1935a, p. 87; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 120; Boeck, 1939, p . 122; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 157; Carli, 1954, p. 66; Micheletti, 1954, p . 23; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Angelini, 1990a, p. 7 3 : after 1430; Bellosi, 1990, p p . 21-24; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 130; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 292-293: c. 1431-1434.

Cat. 9. Niccold da Tolentino at the Battle of San Romano

c. late 1430s National Gallery, London, Inv. NG 583 182 x 3 2 0 cm, panel

Provenance: 1480, in the Camera Grande of the recently deceased Lionardo Bartolini Salimbeni, Florence; 1483, jointly owned by Damiano and Andrea Bartolini; c. 1484, appropriated by Lorenzo de' Medici (Caglioti, 2001, pp. 7

49-50); 1492, in Lorenzo de' Medici's 'chamera delle dua letta

on the ground floor of the Palazzo Medici,

Florence; 1598, Palazzo Medici; 1666, in the guardaroba of Cardinal Carlo de' Medici; 1784 one of the panels, probably the Florence panel, was exhibited in the Galleria and two were with the restorer Carlo Magni until 1787 when they were returned to the guardaroba; after 1787 the London panel left the Medici Collection (Meloni Trkulja, 1975, pp. 108-110); possibly in 1844, acquired for the Giraldi Collection; by 1848, acquired for the Lorn bard i Baldi Collection, Florence; 1857, acquired for the National Gallery, London (Gordon, 2003, p. 394).

Cat. 10. The Unhorsing ofSienese Troops at the Battle of San Romano

c. late 1430s Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence, Inv. 1890 n 479 181 x 322 cm, panel

Provenance: as for the London panel until 1769, when the Florence panel was in the Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence (Carli. 1954, p. 61).

Cat. 11. Michelotto Attendolo at the Head of Florentine

Troops

c. early 1440s Musec du Louvre, Paris, Inv. Ml 469 180 x 3 16 cm, panel

Provenance: as for the London panel; after 1787, the Paris panel left the Medici Collection (Meloni Trkulja, 1975, pp. 109-110); from c. 1844-1848, Lombardi Baldi Collection, Florence; Campana Collection (Carli, 1954, p. 61); from 1861, Musee Napoleon III (Carli, 1954, p. 61).

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEFFED WORKS

Inscription: '• PAVLI • VGIELI . OPVS

203

(on a banderole depicted on a shield in the left foreground).

See Chapter 7 for a discussion of the works' provenance and iconography; here their conservation histories are discussed in greater depth. Two panels, probably the London and Paris panels, were restored by Carlo Magni in 1784 (Meloni Trkulja, 1975, p. 109). The London panel was cleaned in the mid-nineteenth century while in the Lombardi-Baldi Collection. It was repaired at the National Gallery, London, in 1931, and again in 1960. In 1962-1965 the paint surface was cleaned and repainted (Gordon, 2003, pp. 378, 383, 385, 394). The Paris panel was cleaned and restored in 1940 (Musfie du Louvre, Centre de Documentation, Dossier MI.469, Uccello (P), La Bataille). The Florence panel was examined and cleaned by Lionetto Tintori before the 1954 Quattro Maestri exhibition held in the Palazzo Strozzi in Florence (Baldini, 1954a, pp. 226-234). Opinion is divided on the relative state of conservation of the three panels. In 1901 Home described the London panel as overcleaned, the Florence panel as even more so, and the Paris panel as in the worst condition, on account of its cracks and the darkening of its pigments (Plorne, 1901, pp. 183-185). In 1960 D'Ancona claimed that only the London panel retained its original clear colours, with those in Paris and Florence obscured by restoration and revarnishing (D'Ancona, 1960, p. 18). Baldini thought that a nineteenth-century restorer of the Florence panel had been unable to distinguish between the original varnish and later ones, removing both in the areas of the foreground, the horses and the warriors. He believed that the restorer may have used caustic soda to clean the majority of the surface, but alcohol and turpentine for the more delicate area of the large, white horse in the centre of the painting (Baldini, 1954 a, pp. 226-227). A note written following an analysis of the dark background of the Paris painting in 1946, recorded that all the damages were found in areas of darkgreen paint, which was attributed to Uccello's poor preparation of pigments. (Musee du Louvre, Centre de Documentation, Dossier MI.469, Uccello (P), La Bataille, L. Aubert, 'Paolo Uccello, La Bataille, Restauration,

Toute la decoration

de feuillages formant

le fond, fut reconnue[?] jaune et enlevde: la

peinture ancienne aussi decouverte etait tres olivier, il n'en demeurait guere que quelques

fragments,

ansie que les contours

cedes qui

du ciel [?J. II semble bien que toutes les parties ddtruites furent

etaient executees dans un ton verddtre fonce, dont la couleur etait sans doute malprepare". Je cherche a inventer un fond de feuillage qui aurait ete aussi faux que le precedent.

L. Aubert,

n'aipas Janvier-

Avril 1946'). However, knowing Uccello's use of a black underlayer in an aqueous medium in areas of dark green in the Hunt, it may be that an earlier cleaning of the surface of the Paris panel dissolved parts of a similar underlayer, disrupting the surface layers of green, as is thought may have happened to a limited extent in the Hunt (Kemp, Massing, Christie and Groen, 1991, p. 178). Regardless of differences of emphasis, numerous commentators are in agreement that the three Battle paintings are overall the worse for wear. During Baldini's treatment of the Florence panel in 1954, large areas of overpainting were discovered covering the upper part of the landscape. These were removed, revealing what are obviously Uccello's original, delightful vignettes of country life, including tiny figures with jugs around an open cask, perhaps making wine (Baldini, 1954a, pp. 231-237). At the National Gallery, London, it was also discovered that the cloudy sky in the upper area of its painting was not original. In

204 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

the 1960s this was removed, similarly revealing small figures in the landscape (Gordon, 2003, p. 385). However, the results of that cleaning have been controversial, for three reasons. First, the late Alessandro Conti criticised the removal of the repainting in the landscape. He believed it was by Uccello, because the technique of the corner additions appeared similar to him to that of the original parts, and he assumed that the corner additions and the overpainting were contemporary. Conti suggested that Uccello might have been called in to transform the paintings into a rectangular format during a transferral of the works from the old Palazzo Medici to the new one, at which time he might also have repainted parts of the original paintings (Conti, 2002, pp. 74-92). This assertion has proved to be unlikely, since the corner additions probably post-date Uccello's death, as explained in Chapter 7 in relation to the London panel, and since the overpainting covered a layer of varnish and discoloured copper-resinate green, suggesting that the overpainting was added a considerable period of time after the original painting. Furthermore, the overpainting was executed in an oil and resin medium, rather than the egg and oil medium of the underlying, original layers (Gordon, 2003, p. 385). In any case, the author or authors of the corner additions need not have been the same as the author of the repainting in the landscape, as Conti supposed. Second, Conti criticised the quality of some repainting undertaken after cleaning of the London painting. Assessing the quality of restored losses is to a significant extent a subjective exercise. In one instance though, the inpainting of a loss is arguably inconsistent with the composition of the original painting. A long crack in the panel passing through Tolentino's head is visible in prerestoration photographs (e.g. Davies, 1953, vol. H, pp. 418-419). This crack was filled and the paint layer was extended over the filling to disguise the restoration. However, where the crack passed through areas of gold brocade in Tolentino's headdress the repainting was executed in red rather than gold, contrary to the clearly visible original pattern. Third, comparing photos of the work taken before cleaning and the work's condition after restoration, Conti drew attention to the removal of the modelling for shadows on Tolentino's headdress and face. It does seem that areas of modelling were reduced, even allowing for the different conditions under which pre-cleaning photographs might have been made. For example, Tolentino's shoulder armour, directly beneath his chin, previously had a contrast between the lit side on the left and the right side that was in shadow. There is currently no disccrnable shadow on the right side. Admitting that it was not possible to know whether these areas had previously been abraded and repainted, Conti nevertheless questioned the removal of the modelling, since it made these areas appear flat and formless. The question of whether Renaissance paintings should be displayed in their condition after centuries of wear and tear and sometimes numerous restorations, or stripped of previous interventions, or restored to what they might have looked like when they were first painted, is a matter of individual taste and institutional convention, as well as being dependent on the condition of the original paint layers. Certainly, it would have been a brave restorer who tried to restore the quality of Ucccllo's original execution consistently in the extensive areas of abrasion over the London Battle, particularly the large areas of abrasion over the white horses.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEDED WORKS 205

Bibliography, n.b. all authors have agreed that Uccello painted the Battles in London, Paris and Florence, although there have been differing opinions as to their dates: Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 100: referred to paintings of jousts in the Palazzo Medici; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 65: in 1550 referred to canvases (sic) showing horses and other animals by Uccello in the Medici Palazzo, and in 1568 he referred to canvases (sic) by Uccello showing mounted men at arms in the Palazzo Medici; Baldinucci, 1681-1728 (1845), p. 447: mentioned many works with animals painted for the Palazzo Medici; Lanzi, 1782 (1982), p. 7 1 : presumably referred to the Florence panel; Burckhardt, 1855 (1979), p. 6 6 : referred to the Florence panel; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, pp. 286-289; Wornum, 1864, pp. 258-259: referred to the London painting, as one of four painted for the Bartolini family; Berenson, 1896, pp. 129-130; Loeser, 1898, p. 84; Berenson, 1900, pp. 139-140; Home, 1901, pp. 119-121: before 1457; [Gronau], 1902, p. 318; Berenson, 1909, p. 186; Gamba, 1909, pp. 22, 2 8 ; Longhi, 1927, p. 4 8 : |c. 1440]; Longhi, 1927 (2002a), pp. 10-11; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 265: c. 1456-1460; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 216-223: c. 1445; Soupault, 1929, pp. 6-8, 30-39, 55; Venturi, 1930, pp. 6 3 , 69-72. 78-80; Gronau, 1932, p. 176: before 1457; [Malkiel-Jirmounsky], 1932, p. 64: 1432; Marangoni, 1932, p. 346: 1432; Van Marie, 1932, pp. 78-79; Boeck, 1933a, p. 1: c. 1457; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 266-267, 274: c. 1457; Paatz, 1934, pp. 121, 125, 144; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 233-234, 2 3 7 , 2 4 2 , 249, 253-258; Pudelko, 1935b, p . 34: c. 1456-1458; Lipman, 1936a, p. 100: c. 1450, referred to the London panel; Pudelko, 1936, p. 133: c. 1445, referred to the Paris panel; Wedgwood Kennedy, 1936, p. 132; Ragghianti, 1937, p. 2 4 1 ; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 24, 3945, 50, 118: 1456-1457; Boeck, 1939, p. 115; Faison, 1940, p. 2 8 3 : about 1456; Longhi, 1940, p. 179: 1455-1460; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 150-152: mid-1450s; Salmi, 1950, pp. 2 7 , 2 9 , 31: c. 1456; Baldini, 1954a, pp. 226-234; Baldini, 1954b, pp. 17-18; Carli, 1954, pp. 61-62: 1456-1460; Caviggioli, 1954, pp. 28-29; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 23-24, 38-40: c. 1456 o r e . 1456-1460; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56: c. 1456; Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 7, 10, 14,2023; Parronchi, 1957b, pp. 6, 9 , 2 8 ; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 18; Berti, 1 9 6 1 , p. 303: c. 1456; Davies, 1961, pp. 525-531: c. 1450s; Parronchi, 1962 (1964a), p. 203: referred to the London panel; Berti, 1967, p. 126; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 396; Boccia, 1970, pp. 58-70: c. 1435; Sindona, 1970, pp. 67-69, 83: 'mature' work; Fiaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 97-98: 1456; Sindona, 1972, pp. 8, 11, 30-31, 4 3 ; Griffiths, 1974, pp. 313-316: usually dated 1450s; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 33-37: [perhaps late 1430s]; Melon! Trkulja, 1975, pp. 108111; Salmi, 1977, vol. I, pp. 373, 376, referred to the Florence panel; Griffiths, 1978, pp. 313-316; Borsook, 1980, p. 8 0 ; Volpe, 1980, pp. 19-20: c. 1440; Crisliani Testi, 1981, pp. 3-47; Parronchi, 1981, p. 141; Eisler, 1982, p. 7 4 ; Alpatov, 1984, p. 327; Starn and Partridge, 1984, pp. 33-65: c. 1435 (?); Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986, pp. 27, 3638: c. 1450s; Ames-Lewis, 1987, p. 7: referred to the Uffizi panel; Boccia, 1987, pp. 41-42,47: c. 1435; Joannides, 1989, pp. 214-216: a dating of c. 1430s is more coherent than c. 1450s; Angelini, 1990a, p. 75: a little before 1440; Boskovils, 1990, p. 178: [c. 1430s]; Gebhardt, 1990, pp. 33-34: Paris panel c. 1442, London and Florence panels c. early 1450s; Gebhardt, 1991, pp. 179-185: Paris panel c. 1435, the London and Florence panels c. early 1450s; Padoa Riz/.o, 1991, pp. 66-67; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 307-312: 1435-1436 for the London and Florence panels, 1440 for the Paris panel; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140; Bloede, 1996, pp. 49-50: before the commencement of the new Palazzo Medici in 1444; Lessanutli, 1996, pp. 59-71: just after 1434 for Lhe London and Florence panels, possibly c. early 1440s for the Paris panel; Hughes, 1997, pp. 4 5 , 107, 189, 2 2 3 , 227, 239: c. 1440; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, p. 3 8 : 1430s; Roccasccca, 1997, pp. 9-29: c. 1436 for the L o n d o n and Florence panels, c. 1456 for the Paris panel; Mclli, 1998, pp 14, 2 1 , 24, 27 , 33; Bambach, 1999, pp. 2 3 1 , 335; Merisalo, 1999, pp. XVI, 56; Caglioti, 200O, pp. 2 6 5 - 2 8 1 ; Kanler, 2000, pp. 12, 14, 19; Kent, 2000, pp. 13, 20, 53, 245, 264-270, 275-279, 374, 382; Angelini, 2 0 0 2 b , p. 204: 1430s; Boskovils, 2003j, p. 27 n. 2; Gordon, 2003, pp. xi, 260, 378-397: c. 1438-1440 (?).

206 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

Cat. 12. Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace

c. late 1430s

Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe, Inv. 404 111 x 48.5 cm, panel Provenance: 1837, purchased for the collection of the Grand Duke Von Baden; 1856, transferred to the Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe (Dresel, Ludkeand Vey, 1992, p. 119).

Inscriptions: 'D (?) F.B.', 'DOGANA/ I DAZIO GRANDE/COLLI', (red wax Italian customs seal), 'HASPIZOLLAMT KARLSRUHE [N]r 6' (Karlsruhe customs stamp), (all on the reverse).

The Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace (Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe), known as the Karlsruhe Adoration,

has been one of the

most disputed paintings as far as Uccello's authorship is concerned. Nothing is known of the work prior to the nineteenth century. Early guidebooks to the Kunsthalle attributed the work tentatively to Piero della Francesca (Liibke, 1887, pp. 107-108). In 1898 Loeser (pp. 89-90) was the first to suggest Uccello as the author, a view that did not find favour immediately. In 1935 Pudelko could not accept that the work was by Uccello and attributed it to a hypothetical anonymous artist, whom he dubbed the Karlsruhe Master, together with a number of other Uccellocsque works in a Gothic style (1935c, pp. 123-130). However, numerous motifs in the composition of the Karlsruhe Adoration link the work to Uccello, such as the naked Child lying on the ground sucking his index finger and holding his other hand out towards the Virgin, as appears reversed in Ucccllo's Nativity window. The figure of Joseph sitting on a saddle placed on the ground, dozing with his head in one hand and one leg crossed over the other, appears reversed in the Quarate predella. The conspicuous, solitary palm tree with a crosshatched trunk is comparable to the remains of one in the Holy Fathers at San Miniato al Monte, and the dense, dark foliage of the oak thicket is comparable to the foliage in the Hunt. Circular growths of clover between the Virgin and the Christ Child and on the patch of grass at the bottom right are comparable to those in the Hunt. The work's technique should dispel any lingering doubts about its origins. The use of the same pattern for the brocade of Saint Eustace's robes as for the princess' robes in the Paris Saint George is strong evidence for the work's origin in Ucccllo's workshop, and the refined technique evident in the extensive use of glazing over gold leaf manipulated with the artist's fingertips in the Angels' robes, the hair of all the figures', and the brocades, points to Uccello's authorship around the same time as the Battle paintings, in which he used the same techniques extensively.

Bibliography: Liibke, 1887, pp. 107-108: Piero delia Francesca ('?); Loeser, 1898, pp. 89-90: attributable to Uccello; Gamba, 1909, pp. 28-29: anon, student of Uccello; Longhi, 1928, pp. 42-46: Giovanni di Francesco; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 250 n. 1: school of Baldovinetti; Marangoni, 1932, pp. 345-346: Giovanni di Francesco;

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: A C C E P f E D WORKS

207

Giovannozzi, 1934, p. 356: influenced by Uccello; Salmi, 1934, p. 21: 'closer than not' to Giovanni di Francesca; Pudelko, 1935c, pp. 123-130: Karlsruhe Master, early 1440s; Pudelko, 1936, p. 133: Karlsruhe Master; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 122: perhaps by the Quarate Master; Boeck, 1939, p. 119: not Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 162-164: Karlsruhe Master, c. 1460; Salmi, 1950, p. 26: Quarate Master, a workshop assistant of Uccello, c. after 1445; Longhi, 1952, p. 32 n. 8: the Karlsruhe Master is Uccello, late work; Baldini, 1954b, p. 18: Uccello (?); Carli, 1954, p. 70: attributed by most authors to a follower of Uccello; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 51-52: catalogued as attributed to Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 10: unknown imitator of Uccello - the Karlsruhe Master; Berti, 1961, pp. 300-303: probably Uccello; Lauts, 1966, pp. 187-188: Karlsruhe Master, c. 1440-1450; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 413: follower of Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 96: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1443-1456 (?); Sindona, 1972, p. 43: Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 65-67: perhaps by Antonia di Paolo di Dono, c. 1475-1490; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: Uccello, a little after 1431; Angelini, 1990b, p. 78: Uccello, a little after 1434; Boskovits, 1990, p. 178: Uccello, c. 1440s; Bellosi, Angelini and Ragionieri, 1991, p. 930; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 132: Antonia di Paolo di Dono, c. 1470; Uccello; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 290292: Uccello, c. 1431-1432; Dresel, Ltidke and Vey, 1992, Karlsruhe Master, c. 1450; Kanter, 2000, p. 19: Uccello, early 1430s; Angelini, 2002a, p. 200: Uccello, 1440s; Melli, 2002a, p. 208: attributed to Uccello, 'mature' work.

Cat. 13. Saint John at Patmos, the Adoration of the Magi and the Saints James and Ansano (known as the Quarate prcdella)

c. early 1440s Museo Diocesano, Florence 20.5 x 178 cm, panel

Provenance: until 1908 at least, San Bartolomeo, Quarate, Bagno a Ripoli; transferred to the Museo Diocesano, Florence (Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 109).

Nothing is known about the early history of this small predella. Until 1908 it was above a table at the first altar dedicated to the Crucifixion, to the right of the entrance of the church of San Bartolomeo, in Quarale, near Bagno a Ripoli, on the southeast fringes of Florence. The church was supported by the wealthy Quaratesi family, but there is no evidence for the patronage of the prcdella (Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 109). It was conserved prior to the exhibition Mostra d'Arte Sacra held in the Museo di San Marco in Florence in 1933 (according to a note on KIF Fototeca image no. 96979). Photographs taken before the conservation treatment show wormholes in the paint layer, other small losses and abrasion (For example, KIF Fototeca image no. 139102). It was conserved again in May 1969 by A. Grazzini, and in 1984 (OPD, Florence, Box 3966/3994/137, doc. No 3980). There is no known altarpiece associated with the predella. A photograph of the top surface of the predella taken during conservation in 1984 shows grooves forming three sides of a rectangle and a round hole, perhaps for a dowel, in the centre of the prcdella, on the rear edge. (OPD, Florence, Box 3966/3994/137, doc. 3980, images from 1968/9: Foto n(o) 146866, Foto n(o) 146868, Foto n(o) 146867; image from 1984: Negativo N. 9427). Padoa Rizzo (1991, p. 109) suggested the predella may have served to support a ciborium or a reliquary but admitted that there was insufficient evidence to form a conclusion about its original

208 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

purpose. Borsi and Borsi (1994, p. 252) suggested the predella might have formed part of a reliquary of the True Cross. The predella was attributed to Uccello by Marangoni in 1932 (pp. 340-347) with a dating to the late 1420s or early 1430s. Longhi proposed an unspecified late dating, then the pendulum swung back to around the 1440s, and most recently the dating has reverted to the 1430s. The horse is similar to the one in the Melbourne Saint George, but this detail may have been derived from a workshop drawing and does not necessarily indicate that the works are contemporary. While there are a number of points of comparison with the Karlsruhe Adoration,

the colouring of the costumes is closer to

Uccello's late works. The strong contrasts of yellow, red, blue and green in the drapery of Saints John, James and Ansano are close to the colouring of the robes in the Madrid Crucifixion. The dating of the predella probably falls somewhere after the late 1430s (like the Karlsruhe Adoration)

and before the

1450s (like the Madrid Crucifixion). The brooding clouds in the sky in the Saint John at Patmos are similar to those in works such as the London Saint George and the Florence Accademia Holy Fathers. This, and the symmetrical single-point perspective of the shelter like the perspective in the Hunt, suggest that the work belongs to a transitional stage between the two halves of Uccello's career.

Bibliography: [Malkiel-Jirmounsky], 1932, p. 64: Uccello, c. 1426-1432; Marangoni, 1932, pp. 340-347: Uccello, c. 1426-1432; Boeck, 1933a, p. 2: produced in Uccello's studio after a design by the master possibly by Giovanni di Francesco; Boeck, 1933b, p. 270: Uccello, early work; Gamba, 1933, pp. 155-156: not Uccello, close to the Karlsruhe Adoration attributed to an anon, follower of Uccello; Offner, 1933, p. 177: imitator of Uccello; Poggi, 1933, p. 324 n. 2: 'well deserving of study'; Serra, 1933, p. 45: Uccello; Giovannozzi, 1934, p. 360: an artist influenced by Fra Angelico; Paatz, 1934, p. 124: attributed to Uccello; Pudelko, 1934, p. 250 n. 4 1 : Karlsruhe Master; Salmi, 1934, pp. 20-21: Quarate Master (a pupil of Uccello); Pudelko, 1935c, pp. 126-127: Karlsruhe Master; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 48-49, 122: Quarate Master; Boeck, 1939, p. 1 16: listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Faison, 1940, p. 238: not Uccello; Longhi, 1940, p. 179: Uecello; Ragghianti, 1946, p. 74: Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 162: plausibly by the Prato Master, c. 1440-1450; Longhi, 1952, p. 32 n. 8: the Quarate Master is Uccello, late work; Carli, 1954, p. 58: Uccello, a little after 1440; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 4950: catalogued as attributed to Uccello, more often dated to c. 1440; Parronchi, 1957b, p. 12: |Ucccllo|; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 10: unknown disciple of Uccello - the Quarate Master; Sindona, 1960, p. 187: Uccello; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello, c 1436-1443; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 413: follower of Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 90: usually attributed to Ucccllo, c. 1435-1440; Sindona, 1972, p. 40: Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 24-25: Uccello; Cristiani Testi, 1981, p. 25: Uccello, 1435-1440; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: Uccello, after 1434; Angelini, 1990b, p. 78: Ucccllo, c. 1433-1434; Fabbri, 1990a, p. 216: Uccello or Pralo Master, Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 109: Ucccllo; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 295-296: Uccello, c. 1433; Morolli, 1996, p. 71 Fig. 36: Uccello, c. 1435.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS 2 0 9

Cat. 14. Clockface with Four Male Heads

1443 Duomo, Florence (on the west wall, above the central door) 677 x 670 cm, mural painting

The account books of the Opera del Duomo leave no doubt about the attribution and the date of the Clockface

- it was painted by Uccello in 1443. Less clear is the correspondence between the

documentary evidence and the conservation evidence, for a reconstruction of the evolution of the commission, as discussed in Chapter 6. Another aspect of the work that is difficult to understand fully is the arrangement of the preparatory incisions visible on the surface at close range (for a photograph of a detail taken in raking light, see: Baldini, 2000, p. 62). Botticelli and Giovanninio (1979, pp. 177-181) were able to account for the incisions relating to the major diagonals of the square, they help to locate the centre of the square from which point Uccello would have described the circumferences of the clock's circles. The incised triangular shapes in the areas of the four heads may well be guidelines for their foreshortening, but precisely how this worked remains a mystery. Furthermore, the number of incisions visible is greater than is necessary for the construction of these triangles, and not always related to the triangular configurations. Interestingly, Melli found on the sheet with Uccello's drawing Mounted Knight in the Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, an unrelated design for a Holy Father and a Kneeling

Companion on a grid with a similar triangular construction (Melli, 1998, p p . 17-20 and

Fig. 16). One of the lines of the triangle passes through the head of the standing figure, corresponding to his line of sight. Another line of the triangle corresponds approximately to the line of sight of his kneeling companion, while the third line of the triangle does not correspond to any figure directly. Perhaps these triangular configurations of lines, in the drawing and the painting, do not relate solely to the foreshortening of the figures, but also to their arrangement within the composition, acting as a guide for the harmonious relationship between the figures, particularly of their gazes.

Bibliography, n.b. no author has doubted that Uccello painted the work in 1443 since Poggi published the documentary evidence for this in 1933: Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), pp. 446-447: Uccello; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 291 n. 1: Uccello, citing Vasari for the attribution; Berenson, 1896, p. 129, Uccello; Kercnson, 1900, p. 139: Uccello; Berenson, 1909, p. 186: Uccello; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 264: Uccello; Van Marie, 1928a, p . 244: possibly Uccello; Venturi, 1930, p. 63: Uccello; Boeck, 1933b, p. 274: Uccello, 1436; Poggi, 1933, pp. 324-326, 334; Paalz, 1934, pp. 114, 134-136, 147; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 233-237, 294; Pudelko, 1936, p. 128; Ragghianti, 1937, pp. 239, 248 n. 27, 249; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 30-31, 33, 118; Bocck, 1939, p. 113; Longhi, 1940, p . 179; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 144-145; Salmi, 1950, p. 26; Carli, 1954, p. 5 7 ; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 22-23: referred to the Clockface and three windows; Baldini and Berli, 1957, p. 56; Parronchi, 1957a, p. 10; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14; Berti, 1961, p. 303; Sindona, 1970, pp. 7 3 , 8 3 ; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 92-93; Mode, 1972, p. 374; Botticelli and Giovannoni, 1979, pp. 177-181; Volpe, 1980, p. 19; Rossi, 1981, pp. 6970, 72-74; Wakayama, 1982, p. 95; Angelini, 1990a, p. 7 5 ; Bellosi, 1990, p. 2 1 ; Boskovits, 1990, p. 175; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 85-86; Borsi and Borsi, 1992(1994), pp. 3 17-319; Frosinini, 1995, pp. 204-205; Baldini, 2000, p. 37; Angelini, 2002b, p. 204; Gordon, 2003, p. 378: referred Lo the Clockface and Uccello's two windows in the Duomo; Ceriana, 2005, p. 110.

210 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

Cat. 15.

Resurrection

1443 a design for a window in the drum of the cupola of the Duomo, Florence the window has a diameter of 468 cm, stained glass

An entry in the Opera del Duomo's account books, dated 8 July 1443, records a payment of 40 lire to Uccello for the design of the Resurrection window (Poggi, 1 9 8 8 , vol. I, p. 1 4 3 , doc. 7 5 0 ) . Poggi ( 1 9 3 3 , p. 336) argued that Uccello was required to do the design twice and was paid each time (see the catalogue entry for the Ascension window below for a discussion). No drawing or cartoon has survived for the design. The window was restored by Giovanni Tolled in c. 1954 (Micheletti, 1954, p. 30). Even if the colouring has lost some of its clarity, the design makes it is one of the most beautiful Renaissance windows, combining lyrical Gothic curves and pure Renaissance geometry.

Bibliography, n.b. most authors have agreed that Uccello designed the work in 1443, although some have seen in addition the intervention of another artist, as specified: Marquand, 1900, pp. 197-203: Ghiberti or Uccello; Berenson, 1909, p. 186; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), pp. 264-265; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 205, 216; Venturi, 1930, p. 63: referred to 'the windows'; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 2 6 6 , 2 7 4 ; Poggi, 1933, pp. 326, 334-336; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 237, 250; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 29, 118; Boeck, 1939, p. 113; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 145; Salmi, 1950, p. 26: referred to Uccello's windows in the Duomo; Baldini, 1954b, p. 18; Carli, 1954, p. 58; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 22-23, 30-31; Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 9, 14; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14; Berti, 1961, p. 303: the series of windows dates between 1443 and 1445; Parronchi, 1962 (1964a), p. 2 0 3 ; Boccia, 1970, p. 70; Sindona, 1970, p. 73: referred to 'the windows'; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 9 2 ; Marchini, 1987, p. 12; Angelini, 1990a, p. 75; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 82; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 319-320; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: referred to stained glass windows; Acidini Luchinat, 1995, vol. II, p. 279; Bambach, 1999, p. 219; Martin, 2001, pp. 562-567: Uccello designed the window, probably with assistance from the window maker in the border and in aspects of the overall design, such as the flowers on the costumes; Angelini, 2002b, p. 204: referred to Uccello's windows; Gordon, 2003, p. 378: referred to the Clockface and Uccello's two windows in the Duomo.

Cat. 16. Nativity

1443 a design for a window in the drum of the cupola of the Duomo, Florence the window has a diameter of 473 cm, stained glass

An entry in the Opera del D u o m o ' s account b o o k s , dated 5 N o v e m b e r 14-13, records a payment of 4 0 lire to Uccello for the design of the Nativity w i n d o w (Poggi, 1 9 8 8 , vol. I, p. 144, d o c . 7 5 4 ) . T h e design is lost, though the w i n d o w survives. T h e w i n d o w w a s restored by Giovanni Tolleri in about 1954 (Micheletti, 1954, p. 3 2 ) , although the clarity of the design still suffers from the poor condition o f the colouring in J o s e p h ' s face, Christ's body and e l s e w h e r e .

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS 211

Bibliography, n.b. most authors have agreed that Uccello designed the work in 1443, although some have seen in addition the intervention of another artist, as specified: Marquand, 1900, p. 193; Berenson, 1909, p. 186; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), pp. 264-265; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 205 , 216; Venturi, 1930, p. 63: referred to 'the windows'; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 266, 274; Poggi, 1933, pp. 326, 334-336; Pudelko, 1934, p. 250; Ragghianti, 1937, p. 239; Salmi, 1938(1939), pp. 29-30, 118: 1444; Boeck, 1939, p. 113; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 145; Salmi, 1950, p. 26: referred to Uccello's windows; Baldini, 1954b, p.18; Carli, 1954, p. 58; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 22-23, 32; Parronchi, 1957a, p. 12; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14; Berti, 1961, p. 303: referred to Uccello's series of windows; Parronchi, 1966, p. 52; Sindona, 1970, p. 73: referred to 'the windows'; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 92; Angelini, 1990a, p. 75; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 82; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 319-320; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: referred to stained glass windows; Acidini Luchinat, 1995, p. 279; Barabach, 1999, p. 219; Holmes, 1999, p. 174; Martin, 2001, pp. 562-567: Uccello designed the window, probably with assistance from the window maker in the border and in aspects of the overall design, such as the flowers on the costumes; Angelini, 2002b, p. 204: referred to the windows; Gordon, 2003, p. 378: referred to the Clockface and Uccello's two windows in the Duomo.

Cat. 17. Profile Portrait of a Young Man

c. early to mid-1440s Museum of Art, Indianapolis, IMA-CL 10077 diameter 61.6 cm, panel

Provenance: by 1897, Emile Gravet Collection, Paris; Duveen Brothers Gallery; Silbcrmann Galleries, New York; c. 1941, acquired for the G.H.A. Clowes Collection; Museum of Art, Indianapolis (Boskovits, 2002b, p. 194).

From the late nineteenth century the Indianapolis Portrait

of a Young Man was in the Flmile Garet

Collection, Paris, from which it was acquired by the Duveen Brothers Gallery, from where it subsequently acquired by the Silbermann Galleries, New York. Around 1941 it was acquired for the G.H.A. Clowes Collection, now a part of the Museum of Art in Indianapolis. At the time of its acquisition a perspicacious letter of authentication was provided by Lionello Venturi, who wrote: 'It is the most authentic portrait by Paolo Uccello I know of in this country |the United States]...' (A copy of Venturi\s letter dated 20 June 1940 is housed in: V T Fototeca, solancler box Paolo Uccello, except Florence). Nevertheless, doubt has subsequently been expressed about the painting's authenticity. In a long tradition, connoisseurs have commented on the attributions of drawings by making notes on their mounts. For paintings, notes may be made on the reverse of photos in study collections, such as the famous collection established by Bernard Berenson at Villa I Tatti near Florence. On the reverse of a photo of the work in the Villa I Tatti fototeca is a comment by an anonymous author that the work is 'probably false' (VT Fototeca, solander box Paolo Uccello, except Florence). These suspicions were voiced by Angelo Tartufcri in his review of the exhibition Masaccio e le Origini del Rinascimento held at the Casa Masaccio in San Giovanni Valdarni in 2002: '...in the disquieting Portrait of a youth (Cat. 32) of the Indianapolis Museum; a work, this last, which in some ways 'compels' a perception of incredible modernity, such as to not exorcise completely the suspicions of inauthenticity in a manner more or less dormant that have always accompanied it.' ('nelV"inquietante Ritratto di giovane (cat. 32) del Museo

di Indianapolis;

un'opera,

quest'ultima,

che per alcuni

aspetti

'costringe'

ad una

212

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

percezione

di incredibile

modernitd,

tale da non esorcizzare

completamente

i sospetti di non

autenticitd che in maniera piu o meno larvata Vhanno da sempre accompagnata." Tartuferi, 2002, p. 39). The quality of the painting is too high to be attributed to a modern imitator. Furthermore, it seems unlikely that a forger active before the late nineteenth century would choose to imitate the light, refined, Gothic style of such works as the Assunta Chapel Stories of the Virgin and Saint Stephen and the Karlsruhe Adoration, which it resembles, rather than the more typically Renaissance, sculptural style of works then finding favour on the market, such as the Profde Portrait of a Man bought by Isabella Stewart Gardner in 1898, now in the Museum she founded in Boston (Joannides, 1993, p. 45). Most of the independent portraits commonly attributed to the Uccello until the 1940s, such as the Profile Portrait of Matteo Olivieri (National Gallery of Art, Washington), the Profde Portrait of Michele Olivieri (Chrysler Museum, Norfolk) and the Profile Portrait of a Young Man (Musee des Beaux-Arts, Chambery), are in the typical Renaissance sculptural style. Volpe (1980, p. 16) introduced the Indianapolis portrait into the mainstream literature when he accepted it as an authentic work of Uccello in 1980. Despite being ignored by some authors since, it has been accepted as a work of Uccello by Angelini, Boskovits and Kanter.

Bibliography, n.b. all authors agree that Uccello painted the work except where indicated: Volpe, 1980, p. 16: Uccello [early 1430s]; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: after 1434; Boskovits, 1997a, pp. 255, 260 n. 3 n. 4; Kanter, 2000, p. 17: 1440s to early 1450s; Boskovits, 2002b, pp. 194-196: c. 1430-1435; Taituferi, 20002, p. 39: Uccello (or modern?); Boskovits, 2003f, p. 456 n. 20.

Cat. 18. Virgin and Child

c. early to mid-1440s National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin 57 x 33 cm, panel

Provenance: 1899, Bardini Collection sale, London; Butler Collection, London; Langton Douglas; from 1909, National Gallery of Ireland (Sindona, 1970, p. 103 n. 4).

This is another work probably made for a domestic context whose early history is unknown. It was cleaned in 1968 by the Istituto Centrale del Rcstauro di Roma (Sindona, 1970, pp. 67, 103 n. 1), at which time the Virgin's veil was removed, revealing her fashionable headdress. Angelini (2002b, p. 202) suggested that the veil might have been added by Uccello himself, perhaps at a patron's request. The extract of the report from the cleaning treatment published by Sindona (1970, p. 103 n. 1) described areas of damage underneath the veil. Thus, whoever was responsible for adding the veil, it was probably some time after the original execution of the painting. The half-length format of the Virgin and Child in front of a scallop shell niche was extremely common in relief sculptures and paintings from the 1430s. Filippo Lippi painted a number of versions of the Virgin and Child in this

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: A C C E F f E D WORKS 213

manner from the early 1430s, such as the Virgin and Child in the Turia Collection, Pavia (Holmes, 1999, p. 146).

Bibliography: Pudelko, 1936, pp. 127-134: Uccello, second half of the 1440s; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 34-35,118: Uccello or workshop; Boeck, 1939, p. 120: not Uccello; Ragghianti, 1946, pp. 74-75: Uccello, youthful work; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 160-161: Prato Master, after 1440; Carli, 1954, p. 58: Uccello, a little before 1450; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 44-45: catalogued as attributed to Uecello, generally thought to be contemporary with the San Miniato Holy Fathers, dated by her to c. 1439-1440; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 13: Uccello; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello, between 1436 and 1443; Dublin, 1964, p. 15: attributed to Uccello; Sindona, 1970, pp. 67-107: Uccello, c. 1435-1445; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 93: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1445; Sindona, 1972, pp. 41-42: Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, p. 21: Uccello, [early 1430s]; Zeri, 1974, pp. 91-92: generally attributed to Uccello, c. 1440-1445; Wohl, 1980, pp. 186-187: Uccello workshop (?), c. 1440; Kecks, 1988, pp. 38,93 and Fig. 64: Uccello (?); Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: Uccello, after 1434; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 60: Uccello, c. 1435-1440; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 314-315: Uccello, c. 1437-1440; Kanter, 2000, p. 17: Uccello; Angelini, 2002b, pp. 202-204: Uccello, c. 1431-1435; Tartuferi, 20002, pp. 38-39: Uccello; Christiansen, 2005c, p. 166: Uccello, c. 1435-1440; Christiansen, 2005d, p. 168: Uccello.

Cat. 19. Female Saint with Two Children

c. early to mid-1440s Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence 79 x 35 cm, panel

Provenance: 1928, private collection, Rome (Longhi, 1928, p. 44); Conlini-Bonacossi Collection, Florence; 20 Nov. 2001, Finarle Casa d'Aste S.p.A., lot 18, Milan, (Finarte Casa d'Aste S.p.A., 2001, p. 1); bought by the Italian State; from 2002, in the Galleria degli Uffizi.

Despite its lack of a long provenance and fragmentary condition, this panel was recently acquired by the Italian State for the Galleria degli Uffizi, such is its importance and the scarcity of Uccello's work. The monumental forms give the impression that originally the panel was of substantial size, perhaps an altarpiece. The identity of the saint cannot be established conclusively, for lack of a distinctive attribute, although Saint Scolastica (Longhi, 1928, p. 44), the Blessed Villana delle Botti (Borsi and Borsi, 1994, p. 301), Saint Felicitas (Strehlke, 1996, p. 134) and Saint Monica (Angelini, 2002a, pp. 198-200) have been suggested. The mature style of the work, visible in the saint's fully rounded face like some faces in the Battle paintings, combined with the minimal ornamentation of the architectural setting like that in the San Miniato mural paintings, suggest a date about 1440-1445.

Bibliography: Longhi, 1928, p. 44: Giovanni di Francesco; Giovannozzi, 1934, pp. 356-358: circle of Uccello, possibly Uccello himself; Pudelko, 1936, p. 133: Uccello; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 27-28, 34, 1 18: Uccello, c. 1440; Boeck, 1939, pp. 1 19-120: not Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 161-162: Prato Master, c. 1445-1455; Carli, 1954, p. 57: Uccello, c. 1440; Micheletti, 1954, p. 46: catalogued as attributed to Uccello, c. 1440; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 13: Uccello; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello, c. 1436-1443; Sindona, 1970, p. 67: Uccello, 'mature' work; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 91: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1440-1445; Parronchi,

214 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

1974, pp. 21-22: Uccello, [early 1430s]; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: Uccello, after 1434; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 58: Uccello, 1440s; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 301-302: Uccello, c. 1434-1435; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, p. 115: Uccello; Angelini, 2002a, pp. 198-200: Uccello, c. 1431-1435; Christiansen, 2005b, p. 178: Uccello.

Cat. 20. Nativity

c. mid-1440s Uffizi, Florence (reserve collection) 140 x 215 cm, detached mural painting Provenance: formerly in the cloister of the Spedale di Santa Maria della Scala, subsequently known as the Spedale di San Martino alia Scala, in Via della Scala, Florence; transferred to the Uffizi, Florence with the sinopia (reserve collection).

The Nativity was originally in the northwest corner of the cloister of the Spedale di San Martino alia Scala on Via della Scala in Florence, over the door leading to the narthex of the church. It is painted in terra verde with limited areas of colour, and was apparently unknown to scholars prior to the twentieth century, when it was first published by Walter Paatz in 1934. Paatz drew attention to the similarity of the deep perspective in the Nativity to the Flood, usually dated c. 1446, and dated it to the same period. The delicate, Gothic tracery pattern of the border is similar to the fragmentary borders of Domenico Veneziano's, Baldovinetti's and Castagno's mural paintings from San Egidio in Florence, painted between 1439 and the early 1450s (for an illustration, see: Wohl, 1980, Pis 164, 165, 167), and Uccello's painting may date from the same period. For Paatz (1934, pp. 111-148) the work exemplified Uccello's style in its contrasting influences of the Florentine school of perspective practiced by Masaccio, and the north Italian, Gothic courtly fantasy of Gentile di Fabbriano and Pisanello. He cited the foreshortening of the stable as evidence of the former and the incongruous detail of the tiny figure of the hanged man in the left background as evidence of the latter. Dino Dini of the Gabinetto dei Reslatiri della Soprintendenza allc Gallerie di Firenze detached and restored the painting in c. 1954 (Mieheletti, 1954, p. 33). The remarkable, geometric sinopia

was initially covered over after the

painting was detached, but was fortunately later uncovered and detached, and published by Parronchi in 1957 (1957a, Fig. 7b). T h e painting and its sinopia are n o w in the reserve collection of the Uffizi,

Florence, due to the poor condition of the painting.

Bibliography, n.b. few have doubted Uccello's authorship of the work since Paatz. first published the work, exceptions are noted, there has been more uncertainty about the date: Paatz, 1934, pp. I I 1-148: Uccello, c. 1446; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 38-39, 118: Uccello and assistant, c. after mid 1440s; Popc-Hennessy, 1944, p. 116: 1 before c. 1440s]; Pope-Henncssy, 1950, pp. 152-153: c. 1450s; Baldini, 1954b, p. 18; C'arli, 1954, p. 60: Uccello (?); Miehcletti, 1954, p. 33: c. 1446; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56; Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 14-15; D'Ancona, 1960, pp. 17-18; Sindona, 1960, p. 189; Berti, 1961, p. 303; Parronchi, 1966, p. 54; Procacci, 1969, p. 140: 1446; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 94: 1446 (?); Sindona, 1972, pp. 26, 4 1 , 44, 58-59; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 30-31; Cristiani Testi, 1981, pp. 25; Angelini, 1990a, p. 75: [c. 14451; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 90-91: c. early

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEFfED WORKS 215

1440s; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 312-314: c. 1435-1443; Bambach, 1999, p. 218: c. 1440-1450; Bellosi, 1999a, p. 12; Bernacchioni, 2003, pp. 419-420: perhaps after c. 1442; Christiansen, 2005a, pp. 61-62.

Cat. 21. Flood and die Recession of the Flood (above); Sacrifice and Drunkenness

of Noah (below)

c. mid-to-late 1440s

Museo di Santa Maria Novella, Florence (the fourth bay of the east wall of the Chiostro Verde) 215 x 510 cm (above), 277 x 540 cm (below, the bottom of the painting is lost) detached mural paintings

These paintings were restored in 1903 (Lunardi, 1983, p. 65), and detached and transferred to a metal support in 1909 by Domenico Fiscali of the Istituto Centrale di Restauri di Roma. Unfortunately, the sinopie were lost during the detachment of the paintings, although Campani published a photograph of part of the sinopia of the Drunkenness

of Noah (Campani, 1910, p. 203 and Fig. 4). The most serious

loss is of the sinopia for the Flood, with its revolutionary use of perspective. Was the perspective preconceived or did Uccello arrive at the arrangement through improvisation? The paintings were conserved again by Lionetto Tintori prior to the Mostra di Affreschi

Staccati of 1957 (Baldini and

Berti, 1957, p. 61), and in 1969 (OPD, Box 3966/3994/137). There has never been any doubt about Uccello's authorship of the Stories of Noah, although when he painted them is open to question. Vasari wrote that the figure of Ham is a portrait of Dello Delli, and since Delli returned to Florence from an extended period living in Spain in 1446, most authors have dated the work to 1446 or shortly after. As Pope-FIennessy noted, however, it is not clear that much faith can be put in Vasari's testimony, more than a hundred years after the events. PopeHennessy suggested that the painting post-dated Uccello's windows in the Duomo of 1443 and Donatello's Miracle

of the Penitent Son in the church of Sant'Antonio in Padua, of 1447 (Pope-

Henncssy, 1969, p p . 14, 147). There is, though, no real evidence for the primacy of the window design or relief sculpture. Perhaps all that can said is that the Stories of Noah show a sophistication of perspective that might b e expected of Uccello's maturity, and Wakayama's plausible hypothesis (1982, pp. 93-106) that the composition commemorates the Council of Florence suggests a dating after 1439.

Bibliography, n.b. this work, has always been attributed to Uccello: Billi, c. 1481-1530 (1991), p. 86; Manetti, c. 1494-1497 (1957), p. 335; Albcrtini, 1510 (1972), [p. 8|; Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 99: referred to 'the story of the flood'; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), pp. 66-68; Borghini, 1584 (1967), pp. 309-310; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), pp. 447-449: Uccello; Lanzi, 1795 (1968), p. 58; Burckhardt, 1855 (1979), p. 6 5 ; Crowe and Cavalcasclle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, pp. 291-296: 1446-1468; Wornum, 1864, p. 258; Berenson, 1896, p. 129; Loeser, 1898, p. 86; Berenson, 1900, p. 140; Berenson, 1909, p. 186; Gamba, 1909, p. 28; Campani, 1910, p. 2 0 3 , 1447; Longhi,

1927 (2002a), p. 1 1; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 265: referred to 'Old Testament frescoes'

collectively, c. 1446-1448; Longhi, 1928, p. 41: referred to Uccello's frescoes in the Chioslro Verde of c. 1446; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 205-206, 224, 226: c. 1446-1448; Soupault, 1929, pp. 9-10, 28-30; Marangoni, 1930, pp. 414-416; Venturi, 1930, pp. 63-64, 72, 79-80; Marangoni, 1932, p. 330; Boeck, 1933a, p. 1: c. 1446; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 263-266, 274: 1446 (?); Paatz, 1934, pp. 114, 121-122, 131, 140, 147: c. 1446; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 234, 237, 242, 245, 249-250, 257, 259: c. 1446; Salmi, 1934, p. 22: 1445-1446; Pudelko, 1935a, p. 71: c. 1446-1447; Pudelko, 1935b, pp. 3 3 , 36; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 125: 1446; Pudelko, 1936, p. 133; Ragghianti, 1937, p. 248; Salmi,

216 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

1938 (1939), pp. 23, 35-38,46, 118: c. mid 1440s; Boeck, 1939, pp. 113-114; Longhi, 1940, p. 179: 1455-1460; Pope-Hennessy, 1944, p. 116: [before 1442 is implicit]; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 146-147: after 1450; Salmi, 1950, pp. 27, 30-31: c. 1444-1446; Baldini, 1954b, p. 18: referred to Uccello's works in the Chiostro Verde; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 23, 34-37: possibly c. 1443-1445 or c. 1446-1448; Carli, 1954, pp. 58-59: c. 1450; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56: c. 1446; Carli, 1957, pp. 59-61: c. 1446-1448; Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 7, 10, 12, 14, 17-20; Parronchi, 1957b, pp. 9, 14, 16-17, 20; D'Ancona, 1960, pp. 14-17: [c. 1447 or after]; Berti, 1961, p. 303: c. 14461448; Degenhart and Schmitt, vol. II, 1968, p. 392; Sindona, 1970, pp. 67-69, 83: 'mature' work; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 94-95: c. 1446-1448; Sindona, 1972, pp. 8-10, 26-31, 42-43, 71-79: mature work; Ames-Lewis, 1974, pp. 103-104: probably 1445-1450; Eisler, 1974, pp. 529-530: possibly c. 1450; Joost-Gaugier, 1974a, pp. 233-234: c. mid-1400s; Volpe, 1980, p. 21: after 1440; Parronchi, 1981, pp. 139-141; c. mid-1400s; Wakayarna, 1982, pp. 93-106: 1447; Lunardi, 1983, p. 42: c. 1450; Alpatov, 1984, p. 327; Beguin, 1984, pp. 6971: c. 1450, after 1447; Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986, pp. 29, 34; Angelini, 1990a, pp. 75-77: probably 1446; Boskovits, 1990, p. 178: shortly after 1440; Gebhardt, 1990, pp. 28-24: c. 1445-1450; Marin, 1990, p. 116: 14451450; Marino, 1991, pp. 241, 243-244, 251-344: c. 1445-1450; PadoaRizzo, 1991, pp. 28-34: c. 1446; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 323-325: c. 1447; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: c. 1440; Melli, 1998, pp. 20-21,26: referred to the Flood; Bambach, 1999, pp. 216-219: c. 1440-1450; De Simone, 2002, pp. 48-49, 79-80 n. 72 and n. 77: late 1440s; Kanter, 2000, pp. 14, 17: c. 1440s; Angelini, 2002b, p. 204: probably before 1439; Christiansen, 20O5a, p. 61; Christiansen, 2005b, p. 178.

Cat. 22. Scenes from Lives of Holy Fathers

c. after the middle of 1447 San Miniato al Monte, Florence (the east and south walls in the loggia of the upper storey of the cloister) lunette 240 x c. 340 cm, 130 x c. 1850 cm, lunette 240 x c. 340 cm, (east wall), 130 x c. 350 cm, 130 x c. 230 cm (south wall) not including the fictive architectural framing, mural painting

l

Inscriptions: |APAREN?]DOGLI

.

L'ANGELO

.

ORANDO .

E . LAVORANIX) . V1NSE .

PE[R]FETAMENTE . L'A[C|CIDIA .', 'QUARTA GENERATIONE DEI CENOBITI ORATORP, 'PERFETTA ABST1NENTIA' and other fragmentary inscriptions (Borsi and Borsi, 1994, p. 328).

The commission for this mural painting cycle is undocumented, although it must have been executed after mid-1447 when the construction of the loggia walls was completed (Saalman, 1964, pp. 558-559). They paintings were attributed to Uccello by Alberlini in 1510 (1972, [p. 11 |), the author of HLihro di Antonio Billi in c. 1481-1530 (1991, p. 87), the anonymous author of // Coclice Magliahcchkmo

in c.

1537-1542 (1892, p. 100) and by Vasari in 1550 and 1568 (1971, p. 64). Vasari described the painting as partly terra verde and partly coloured, noting Uccello's arbitrary choice of colours for the city, the fields and the buildings. Subsequently, the paintings were partly covered by a sixteenth-century mural painting and the rest by whitewash, not to be revealed again until 1925. Marangoni published part of the cycle in 1930 (pp. 403-417). More of the cycle was revealed in 1942 and published by Salmi in 1950 (p. 26). From 1969 to 1971 yet more of the paintings were uncovered, and the paintings were detached, revealing their sinopie (Berti, 1988, p. 252). The paintings are in an almost ruinous condition. From what survives it has been judged that the east wall is mostly the work of Uccello,

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS 217

while the banal style of the painting on the south wall betrays the execution of an unidentified assistant or assistants.

Bibliography: Billi, c. 1481-1530 (1991), p. 87: Uccello; Albertini, 1510 (1972), [p. 11]: Uccello; Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 100: Uccello; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 64; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), p . 447: Uccello; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 297 n. 1: Uccello; Colnaghi, 1928(1968), p. 265: Uccello; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 245: Uccello; Soupault, 1929, p. 13: Uccello; Marangoni, 1930, pp. 4 0 3 417: Uccello; Venturi, 1930, p . 77: Uccello; Boeck, 1931a, p . 2 7 6 : Uccello; Boeck, 1933a, pp. 1-2: Uccello, probably before 1425; Boeck, 1933b, p. 274: Uccello [before 1436]; Poggi, 1933, p. 234 n. 1: [implied at least a partial acceptance of an attribution to Uccello]; Paatz, 1934, pp. 118, 147: Uccello, at least the invention; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 242-243, 2 4 5 - 2 5 4 , 2 5 8 : Uccello and Karlsruhe Master, c. 1440; Pudelko, 1935b, p. 34: Uccello, c. 1440; Pudelko, 1935c, pp. 125-126: Uccello and Karlsruhe Master; Pudelko, 1936, pp. 133-134: Uccello, probably before 1440; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 22-25, 33, 118: Uccello and assistant (Domenico Veneziano?), before 1439; SomanS, 1946, p. 37: Uccello [caption on plates 79-84 says Uccello and others]; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 143144: Uccello, variously dated by others to c. 1425 to c. 1440; Salmi, 1950, pp. 23-26: Uccello, the east wall, c. before 1440; an anon, workshop assistant called the Quarate Master, the south wall, c. 1440-1445; Carli, 1954, pp. 54-55: Uccello, 1439; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 22-23: Uccello, probably c. 1439-1440; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56: Uccello, c. 1440; Parronchi, 1957a, p . 9: [Uccello]; D'Ancona, 1960, pp. 9-10: Uccello, mid-1430s, 'particularly' the east wall; Berti, 1961, p. 302: Uccello, after 1436; Saalman, 1964, pp. 558-559: variously attributed to Uccello, Giovanni cli Francesco or the Karlsruhe Master, after mid-1447; Parronchi, 1966, p. 54: [Uccello]; Sindona, 1970, p. 8 3 : Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p p . 90-91: the east wall is usually attributed to Uccello, 1439, the south wall is usually attributed to a follower of Uccello, 1439 (?); Sindona, 1972, p. 54: Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 25-26: Ucccllo; Borsook, 1980, p. 80: attributable to the Prato Master, late 1440s; Angelini, 1990a, p. 77: Uccello, after 1447; Boskovits, 1990, p. 178: Uccello, c. 1450s; Fabbri, 1990a, p. 216: Uccello and/or Prato Master, n o t before 1447; Marino, 1991, p. 256: Uccello; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 92-93: Uccello, date is uncertain; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 325-329: Uccello on the east wall, with an unidentified assistant on the south wall, 1447-1454; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: Uccello; Melli, 1998, pp. 18-20, 27, 3 1 : Uccello; Bambach, 1999, pp. 165-166: usually attributed to Uccello o r a close follower; pp. 197, 218: probably Uccello, c. 1442-1447; Baldini, 2000, p. 40: Uccello, possibly a few years before 1443; Ceriana, 2005, p. 120: Uccello.

Cat. 2 3 . Man of Sorrows between the Virgin and Saint John the Evangelist

(referred to as the Avane

predella)

1452 Museo di San Marco, Florence 22 x 177 c m , panel

Provenance: by 1672-1679, in the oratory of the Confraternity of the Sanlissima Annunziata, belonging to the church of Santa Cristina a Meloto, Avane, in the commune of Cavriglia; until 1906, sub-economato dei Benefici Vacanti della Diocesi di Fiesole; Gallcrie Florentine; Fortezza da Basso; from 1983, Museo di San Marco, Florence (Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 106).

218 CATALOGUE RAIS0NN& ACCEPTED WORKS

Inscription:

QESTA . TAVOLA . AFAT[...]A . FARE . ANTONIO DIPIE/ O . DIGIOVANNI .

DELG[0]...LEA . PER RIMED 10 . DE/LANIMA . SVA . ET DESV...OI ADI XXIIII . DI SETE/ NBRE . 1452(recto)

An old photograph shows the painted parts of the predella (the figures) in an extremely damaged condition (Carli, 1954, p. 60). The Confraternity of Santissima Annunziata remains mysterious, as does the patron Antonio del Golia. In view of the work's small size, damaged condition and the scant evidence of its early historical context, the work provides little evidence of Uccello's career in the 1450s, even if it is the only precisely datable work from the 1450s.

Bibliography: n.b. no author has disputed the date of 1452 in the inscription. Longhi, 1940, p. 179: Uccello; PopeHennessy, 1950, p. 167: related to the works of the Prato Master; Carli, 1954, p. 60: Uccello; Micheletti, 1954, p. 55: catalogued as attributed to Uccello; Berti, 1961, p. 300: probably Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 96-97: usually attributed to Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 22, 61: Uccello or Baldovinetti; Angelini, 1990a, p. 77: Uccello; Berti, 1990b, pp. 220-221: Uccello; Boskovits, 1990, pp. 175-178: [Uccello]; Padoa Rizzo, 1990, p. 58: Uccello; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 106-107: Uccello; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 329-330: Uccello; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: Uccello, referred to an Annunciation; Gordon, 2003, p. 402: |Uccello|.

Cat. 24. Christ Crucified with the Virgin and Saints John the Evangelist, John the Baptist and Francis

c. 1450s Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum, Madrid, Inv. 1930.11.8 46 x 67.5 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly on the art market in Florence; by 1927, in the G.B. Gnecco Collection in Genoa; 1928, with Goudstikker, Amsterdam; by 1930, acquired for the Thyssen-Bornemisza Collection (Boskovits, 1990, p. 170).

Inscriptions: 'I N R I' (on the banderole at the top of the crucifix); 'Goudstikker, Amsterdam' (wax seal on the reverse), 'Colleclie Goudstikker, Amsterdam N. 2006', 'g.u.s.g. 824', 'N.I\ '431' (all labels on the reverse) (Boskovits, 1990, p. 170).

Nothing is known of the work's early history. It was treated in 1927 by an unknown conservator, and in 1959 by William Suhr (Boskovits, 1990, pp. 172-174), and despite abrasion and repainted losses in the figure of Christ, it is in reasonable overall condition. The attribution to Uccello was proposed by Van Marie (1928a pp. 210-214; 1928b, p. 242) and remained controversial until the last decades of the twentieth century. Pope Hennessy rejected the attribution on the grounds of quality (1950, pp. 164-166; 1969, p. 170). Padoa Rizzo (1991, p. 128), while accepting a direct association with Uccello, nevertheless saw the intervention of an assistant or assistants. The degree of collaboration between a master and his assistants in the execution of small, independent panels in the early Renaissance is an issue that art historians are yet to investigate thoroughly. While Renaissance patrons were certainly aware of the issue of consistency of style in large works, it also seems that the use of workshop assistants in smaller aspects of a commission was acceptable (O'Malley, 1998, pp. 155-156, 168-169).

CATALOGUE RAISONN&: A C C E F f E D WORKS

219

Still, the extent to which a master might collaborate with an assistant on a small work is uncertain. If the overall composition seems unspectacular in conception, the elegance of the pattern making in the patches of grass and clover behind the figures must be the work of an experienced artist, probably Uccello. Pope-Hennesssy stated that the work was the central panel of a predella. Though a possibility, there is no certainty of this, and no other panel can be associated with the Madrid Crucifixion as part of such an ensemble. Padoa Rizzo has cast doubt on the hypothesis because of the panel's dimensions, which are slightly larger than most predella panels.

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1928a pp. 210-214: Uccello, [before 1436]; Van Marie, 1928b, p. 242: Uccello, c. 14251430; Mayer, 1930, p. 314: Uccello; Venturi, 1930, p. 63: Uccello; Boeck, 1931a, p. 276: Uccello; Van Marie, 1931, p. 1372: Uccello; Marangoni, 1932, pp. 334-336: Uccello; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 258-261, 274: Uccello, c. 1420, before 1436; Pudelko, 1934, p. 250 n. 41: Karlsruhe Master; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 127: Karlsrahe Master; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 46, 118: Uccello [c. 1460s]; Boeck, 1939, p. 110: listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Faison, 1940, pp. 283-284: not Uccello, c. 1450; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 164-166: close in style to the Karlsruhe Master, c. 1450s; Carli, 1954, pp. 64-65: Uccello, late; Micheletti, 1954, p. 58: catalogued as attributed to Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 20: Uccello, mature work; Berti, 1961, p. 304: Uccello, c. 1465-1469; Hendy, 1964, pp. 39-40: Uccello; Saalman, 1964, p. 560: Uccello; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 413: follower of Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 98: usually attributed to Uecello, c. 1460; Sindona, 1972, p. 43: Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, p. 22: Uccello; Borghero, 1986, p. 324: Uccello; Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986, p. 32: follower of Uccello; De Watteville, 1989, p. 369: Uccello; Angelini, 1990a, p. 77: Uccello, [c. 14521; Boskovits, 1990, pp. 170-178: Uccello, c. 1460; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 128: Uccello and assistant(s), after the Miracle of the Host [of 1467-1468]; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 333-334: Uccello, c. 1457-1458; Kanter, 2000, p. 19: Uccello, c. 1460.

Cat. 25. Saint George and the Dragon

c. 1450s National Gallery, London, Inv. NG 6294 58.5 x 75.7 cm, including the original painted borders now wrapped around the stretcher; canvas

Provenance: by 1898, Count Karol Lanckoronski Collection, Vienna; 1939, stolen by the Nazis and kept in the salt mine at Alt Aussee or in the Immendorf Castle; recovered by American forces and transferred to the Munich Collecting Point; transferred to Hohenems Castle; between 1946-1959, in a Zurich bank; 1959, acquired for the National Gallery, London (Gordon, 2003, p. 403).

The painting was conserved by Sebastian Isepp in Vienna in 1934, and by Norman Brommelle at the National Gallery, London, in 1959 (Brommelle, 1959, pp. 87-95). The work is in good condition despite areas of abrasion, and colour changes in the pigments, particularly the greens that have darkened. Looser (1898, pp. 88-89) was the first to suggest the attribution to Uccello. Even PopeHennessy, who was generally sceptical of the more fantastic or Gothic works associated with Uccello, accepted the attribution (1950, p. 152; 1969, p. 154). Objectors have been in the minority, such as

220 CATALOGUE RAISONNFd: ACCEFfED WORKS

Pudelko (1934, p. 250 n. 4 1 ; 1935c, pp. 126-127), Faison (1940, p. 283), and Borsook (1980, p. 80), for whom the work is by a workshop assistant or follower of Uccello. Hoving's doubts about the work's authenticity are unfounded (1996a, p. 1; 1996b, p. 3 3 0 ) . For a discussion of the work's dating see the entry for the Paris Saint George below.

Bibliography: Loeser, 1898, pp. 88-89: Uccello; Berenson, 1900, p. 140: Uccello; Berenson, 1909, p. 186: Uccello; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265: Uceello; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 207-208: Uccello, 'youthful work'; Soupault, 1929, pp. 25-28: Uccello; Venturi, 1930, p. 6 3 : Uccello; Boeck, 1931a, p. 278: [Uccello}; Marangoni, 1932, pp. 336, 339: Uccello; Van Marie, 1932, pp. 78, 80: Uccello; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 255-258, 274: Uccello, c. 1457; Giovannozzi, 1934, p. 360: Uccello; Pudelko, 1934, p. 250 n. 41: Karlsruhe Master; Pudelko, 1935c, pp. 126-127: Karlsruhe Master; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 25-27, 118: Uccello and assistant (Domenico Veneziano?), c. 1440; Boeck, 1939, p. 116: listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Faison, 1940, p. 283: not Uccello, datable to about 1450; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 152: Uccello, probably a late work; Salmi, 1950, pp. 27, 29, 31: Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 61: Uccello, c. 1456; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56: Uccello; Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 10, 21-22: Uccello; Parronchi, 1957b, pp. 9, 17, 19: [Uccelloi; Brommelle, 1959, pp. 87-95: Uccello, possibly c. 1460; Davies, 1959, pp. 309-314: Uccello, c. 1460; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 13: Uccello, later than the Paris version; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello, close to 1456; Davies, 1961, pp. 532-533: Uccello, c. 1460; Parronchi, 1966, p. 54: [Uccello]; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 382. 396-397, 4 0 6 , 4 1 2 : Ucccllo, c. 1460; Boccia, 1970, p. 70: Uccello, the armour is datable to c. 1435-1440; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 98: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1456; Sindona, 1972, pp. 27, 29-32, 43-47: Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, p. 24: Uccello; Beck, 1979, pp. 1-4: Uccello (?), the colouring is 'not particularly consistent with other known paintings by Uccello', c. 1470s or later; Borsook, 1980, p. 80: Prato Master; Volpe, 1980, p. 21: Uccello, after 1440; Crisliani Testi, 1981, pp. 10-11: Uccello; Alpatov, 1984, p. 327: Uccello; Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986, pp. 25-39: Uccello, late work; Angelini, 1990a, p. 75: Uccello, just before 1440; Bellosi, 1990, p. 17: Uccello; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 122: Uccello, after 1470; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 331-333: Uccello, c. 1455-1460; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: Uccello [c. 1452-1465]; Moving, 1996a, p. 1: either a fake or so overpainled that an attribution to Uccello is questionable; Moving, 1996b, p. 330: Uccello [although he implied that it might b e a forgery 1; Gordon, 2003, pp. 378, 398-405: Uccello, c. 1468 ore. 1470; Kanter, 2004, p. 108: Uccello, probably c. 1440s.

C a t 26. Hunt in a Forest

c. 1450s Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, Inv. A79 73.3 x 177 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly the Hon. W.T.hl. Fox-Slrangways Collection; 1850, donated to the Ashmolcan Museum, Oxford.

Inscriptions: 'Una caccia nelli Boschi di Pisa di Benozzo Gozzoti', 'The Hon. ble W m Fox Strangvvays, No. 2 ' , 'ASH MUS' (all on the reverse).

The Hunt w a s conserved by Anne Massing and Nicola Christie at T h e Hamilton Kerr Institute in 1987 (Massing and Christie, [1988], p. 30) and is in very good condition overall. Uccello's authorship has

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

221

been all but universally accepted since it was recognised by Berenson in the University of Oxford Collection in 1896, even if Berenson never gets the credit for the discovery (1896, p. 129). Since Loeser pointed out the similarities with the Miracle of the Host (1898, pp. 87-88) most authors have dated the work to the late 1460s or later still. Certainly, both works have similar groups of figures and horses in landscapes with a sprightly energy about them, yet the two works are quite different in significant ways. The Hunt has a richer, gem-like palette and a much more polished and minute execution than the Miracle of the Host. So which really represents Uccello's late style? The Miracle of the Host of 1467-1468 is the last securely datable work. If the stylistically similar Paris Saint George is dated to around this period (it may indeed be the version bought by Morelli in 1465 - see the catalogue entry below) and the similar looking Florence Accademia Holy Fathers is grouped with these two, then an impression of Uccello's late style emerges that has an autumnal palette, uncomplicated spatial relationships between the figures, a more whimsical than virtuoso display of foreshortening and perspective, and less attention to minutiae in the execution. It is difficult to reconcile this view of Uccello's late style with the late datings often given to the Hunt and the London Saint George. It is possible that Uccello's style changed at the very end of his career, but it seems unlikely that his execution would become more painstaking after the age of 71 (his approximate age in 1468). Furthermore, details of the hunters' costumes are close to those in the Quarate predella, datable to the end of the 1430s or the 1440s, notably the leopard fur cuff and collar lining worn by Saint Ansanus in the predella. It seems preferable then to date the Hunt and the London Saint George earlier than they often are, somewhere between the rich colours of the Duomo windows of 1443-1445 and the dryer abstraction of the Madrid Crucifixion of the 1450s.

Bibliography, n.b. this work is almost always attributed to Uccello, although different dates have been proposed: Berenson, 1896, p. 129; Loeser, 1898, pp. 87-88; Berenson, 1900, p. 140; Berenson, 1909, p. 186; Gamba, 1909, pp. 22-27; Phillips, 1919, p. 215: 'fullest maturity'; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 209-210: Uccello (with slight reservations); Soupault, 1929, pp. 11, 39-40; Venturi, 1930, p. 63-70; Berenson, 1932a, p. 527; Marangoni, 1932, pp. 334-335, 346: [implied an early dating, before 1432); Van Marie, 1932, p. 79; Boeck, 1933a, p. 1: late work; Bocck, 1933b, pp. 267-269, 274: c. 1457; Paatz, 1934, p. 148: c. 1460; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 242, 249, 253-254, c. early 1460s; Pudelko, 1935b, pp. 36-37: c. 1460; Lipman, 1936a, p. 6 3 ; Salmi, 1938 ( 1 9 3 9 ) , pp. 4 5 - 4 8 , 118: after 1 4 6 0 ; Boeck, 1939, p. 116; Longhi, 1940, p. 179: 1455-1460; Svvarzenski, 1947, p. 58; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 154: after 1460; Salmi, 1950, pp. 29-30; Carli, 1954, p. 63: after 1460; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 5 6 ; Parronchi, 1957a, p. 10; Parronchi, 1957b, p. 18; Brommelle, 1959, p. 87; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 18; Sindona, 1960, p. 186; Berti, 1961, p. 304: possibly after c. 1456 and before 1465-1469; Parronchi, 1966, pp. 46, 52; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 382, 396-397, 412; Sindona, 1970, p. 8 3 ; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 99: c. 1460; Sindona, 1972, pp. 31-32,43-44; Lloyd, 1977, pp. 172-175: c. 1460s; Borsook, 1980, p. 80; Cristiani Testi, 1981, pp. 10, 25-26; Padoa Rizzo, 1983, p. 7 9 ; Rossi, 1984, pp. 86-89: generally dated c. 1465; AmesLewis, 1987, pp. 4, 6-7; Cummins, 1988, p. 90; Angelini, 1990a, p. 7 7 : c. 1470; Boskovits, 1990, p. 175; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 124: c. 1467-1468; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 340-342: c. 1470; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140; Darriulat, 1997 (monograph); Hughes, 1997, pp. 48-49, 79, 189, 2 1 1 , 221; Melli, 1998, p. 29; Bambach, 1999, p. 245: c. late 1460s; Kanter, 2000, pp. 12-15, 19: 'usually dated to 1468 or shortly thereafter'; Melli, 2002b, p. 210: 'mature' work; Gordon, 2003, pp. 378,402: 1468 or later.

222 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

Cat. 27. Scenes from the Lives of Holy Fathers

c. 1460s Galleria deH'Accademia, Florence, Inv. 1890, n. 5381 81 x 111 cm, canvas Provenance: formerly in the Vallombrosan Convent of San Giorgio dello Spirito Santo (also known as San Giorgio sulla Costa), Florence (suppressed in 1810); Galleria dell'Accademia, Florence; 1853, transferred to the Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence; returned to the Galleria dell'Accademia, Florence (Micheletti, 1954, p. 53).

An old photograph shows wrinkling at the edge of the canvas that has been repaired (KIF Fototeca, image no. 31553). The canvas has been reduced on all four edges (Aranci, 1992, p. 145). An image taken in raking light of the bottom left area of the painting shows long, sweeping brushstrokes in impasto (KIF Fototeca, image no. 139116), suggestive of an oil medium. Though somewhat abraded, the problems posed by this work to art historians result from its singular style, rather than its condition or technique. There are numerous affinities with Uccello's works, such as the autumnal palette (as in the Miracle of the Host), and in details such as the spiral storm clouds in the sky (as in the London Saint George), and the sudden transition from the edge of the cave to a view of a distant landscape with patchwork fields at the right (as in the Paris Saint George).

Yet the overall arrangement of the

compositional elements is disturbingly irregular, and the sharply rising rock ledge at the top is altogether surreal. Numerous authors have therefore doubted that Uccello was the author of the painting. Perhaps the subject matter (discussed in Chapter 9), concerned with ecstatic religious experience, explains the radical departure from naturalism. Yet the abbreviated execution of the olive groves (?) in the distant landscape is similar to the same feature in the Los Angeles Virgin and Child, here attributed to an anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello. On the basis of all of the evidence, it seems that the work came from Uccello's late workshop, was probably designed by and to some extent painted by him, with the possible help of an assistant, although the assistant's share in the execution is difficult to determine precisely.

Bibliography: Gamba, 1909, pp. 19-27: anon, student of Uccello, c. mid-1400s; Longhi, 1928, pp. 42-43, 46: Giovanni di Francesco; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 249-250: pupil of Uccello; Boeck, 1931a, pp. 276-281: Uccello, 1420s; Marangoni, 1932, pp. 337-338: Uccello and assistant; Bocck, 1933a, p. 1: Uccello, early; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 259-261, 274: Uccello, before 1436; Poggi, 1933, p. 324 n. 2: 'well deserving of study'; Giovannozzi, 1934, p. 356: Uccello or a direct follower, c. 1468; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 246 n. 26, 250 n. 4 1 : Karlsruhe Master; Pudelko, 1935c, pp. 124-125: Karlsruhe Master, early 1440s; Bocck, 1939, p. 1 10: listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 49, 122: student of Uccello; Popc-Henncssy, 1950, pp. 166-167: Karlsruhe Master, after 1450; Salmi, 1950, pp. 27-29: attributed to the Quarale Master; Carli, 1954, p. 69: Karlsruhe Master; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 53-54: catalogued as attributed to Uccello, probably c. 1450; Parronchi, 1957b, pp. 22-25: Uccello or Quarate Master; Brommelle, 1959, p. 90: sometimes attributed to the Karlsruhe Master; D'Ancona, 1960, pp. 10-12: unknown follower of Uccello; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 98-99: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1460; Sindona, 1972, pp. 4 0 , 42, 48: Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 65-66: perhaps by Antonia di Paolo cli Dono, c. 1475-1490; Russo, 1987, p. 218: Uccello,

CATALOGUE RAISONNfc ACCEPTED WORKS

223

around 1460; Angelini, 1990a, p. 77: Uccello, perhaps not long after the end of the 1440s; Boskovits, 1990, p. 175: [Uccello]; Malquori, 1990, pp. 128-129: Uccello, 1460s; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 128, 132, 134: Uccello (possibly with an assistant, probably Donato or Antonia di Dono), late work; Aranci, 1992, p. 145: attributed to Uccello, 1460s; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 336-338: Uccello, c. 1460-1465; Hughes, 1997, p. 70, illustration caption: Uccello, c. 1460, and p. 226: perhaps by Uccello; Kanter, 2000, p. 19: Uccello, around or just after 1460; Gordon, 2003, p. 402: Dunkerton and Roy noted its close affinities to Uccello.

Cat. 28. Saint George and the Dragon

c. 1465 Mus<Se Jacquemart-AndnS, Paris, Inv. MJAP-P2248 52 x 90 cm, panel

Provenance: 1899, Bardini Collection sale, London, lot 488 (Pope-Hennessy, 1969, p. 153); Jacquernart-Andre" Collection.

The panel's early history is unknown. Loeser (1898, p. 89) was the first to suggest that the work was attributable to Uccello, and this opinion was accepted by Berenson two years later (1900, p. 140), This high-powered endorsement did not preclude the intermittent raising of doubts as to Uccello's authorship, by Gamba (1909, p. 22), Pudelko (1934, p. 250 n. 41) and Pope-Hennessy (1950, p. 152), who considered that it might be by a workshop assistant or a close follower of Uccello. The significant stylistic differences between the Paris and London version of the subject created problems in integrating them both into Uccello's oeuvre. The relatively greater spatial sophistication of the London version, with its dramatic foreshortening of the dragon's wings, seemed to give that version a greater claim to being by Uccello's own hand (Davies, 1959, pp. 309-314). As fate would have it, however, Beck published a reference from 1465 in the accounts of Lorenzo di Matteo Morelli to a painting by Uccello of Saint George that was on panel. Since the Paris version is on panel while the London version is on canvas the document matches the former more closely. Even if the work in the document was slightly larger than the panel in Paris, it is possible that the panel was reduced and so may well be the documented work (Beck, 1979, pp. 1-5). Many art historians have come to accept that Uccello's style varied considerably, admitting the possibility that the London and Paris versions date to the last decades of Uccello's activity. However, there is still debate as to which version came first. If it is tempting to see the greater sophistication in the compositional and dramatic construction of the London version as evidence that it was a later work (because Uccello's ability improved), this is invalidated by the mastery of perspective demonstrated in the architectural base of the Equestrian Monument

in 1436. The Paris version, like the

last securely datable work of Uccello, the Miracle of the Host of 1467-1468, is painted in an autumnal palette, with a simple narrative construction arranged across the picture plane, and the dragon's fan-like wings in the Paris Saint George are similar to the devils' wings in the Miracle of the Host. Thus, the Paris Saint George probably dates to the mid-1460s, and may well be the painting Lorenzo di Matteo Morelli bought in 1465.

224 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEFfED WORKS

Bibliography: Loeser, 1898, p. 89: attributable to Uccello; Berenson, 1900, p. 140: Uccello; Berenson, 1909, p. 186: Uccello; Gamba, 1909, p. 22: Uccello or workshop; Fry, 1914, pp. 79-80: Uccello; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265: Uccello; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 208: attributed to Uccello [before 1436); Soupault, 1929, pp. 25-28: Ucceilo; Venturi, 1930, pp. 63-64: Uccello; Boeck, 1931a, p. 278: [Uccello); Marangoni, 1932, p. 336: Uccello; Van Marie, 1932, pp. 78-80: Uccello; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 255-258, 274: Uccello, before 1436; Pudelko, 1934, p. 250 n. 41: Karlsruhe Master; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 125: Karlsruhe Master; Lipman, 1936a, p. 63: Uccello; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 25-27, 118: Uccello, c. 1440; Boeck, 1939, p. 112: listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Faison, 1940, p. 238: [Uccello], around 1450; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 152: Uccello's workshop; Salmi, 1950, pp. 23, 27, 29, 31: Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 55: Uccello, c. 1437-1440; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56: Uccello; Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 16, 22: Uccello; Davies, 1959, pp. 313-314: 'sometimes ascribed to Uccello and sometimes not'; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 13: Uccello, earlier than the London version; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello; Parronchi, 1962 (1964a), p. 203: Uccello; Parronchi, 1966, p. 54: [Uccello]; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 382, 396, 399: Uccello; Boccia, 1970, p. 70: Uccello, the armour is datable to c. 1435; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 98: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1456-1560; Sindona, 1972, pp. 40, 42-47: Uccello; Parronchi, 1974, p. 25: Uccello, [late work]; Beck, 1979, pp. 1-5: Uccello, 1465; Volpe, 1980, p. 21: Uccello, after 1440; Cristiani Testi, 1981, pp. 10-11: Uccello; Alpatov, 1984, p. 327: Uccello; Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986, pp. 25-26, 34, 3637: attributed either to Uccello or his school, c. mid-1400s; Ames-Lewis, 1987, p. 3: Uccello; Angelini, 1990a, p. 75: Uccello, just before 1440; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 120-121: Uccello, 1465; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 315-317: Uccello, c. 1439-1440; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: Uccello [c. 1452-1465]; Didi-FIuberman, Garbetta and Morgaine, 1994, p. 64, caption to illustration: Uccello, c. 1439-1440; Flughes, 1997, p. 225: Uccello; Kanter, 2000, pp. 14, 19: Uccello, 1465; Gordon, 2003, pp. 401-402: [Uccello, before c. 1470]; Kanter, 2004, p. 108: Uccello, c. 1460s, probably 1465.

Cat. 29. Miracle of the Host

c. 1467-1468 Galleria Nazionale delle Marche, Urbino 42 x 361 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly on the altar of the church of the Confraternity of Corpus Domini, Urbino; after 1703, transferred to the church of Sanl'Agata, Urbino; transferred to the Collegio dci R.P. Scolopi; 1861, transferred to the Palazzo Ducale, Urbino; Galleria Nazionale delle Marche (Aronbcrg Lavin, 1967, p. 1).

In the late 1460s the names of Uccello and his son Donate were entered into the pages of Libra B, an account book of the Confraternity of Corpus Domini in Urbino, mainly in relation to payments by the confraternity for their living arrangements, such as the purchase of straw and silk for their beds and material for their clothes. The entries do not explain precisely what Uccello and his son were doing there, although there are references to gesso and pigments having been brought from Florence, indicating that painting was involved (see Appendix B for a transcription of the relevant entries). While the Miracle of the Host predella was still on the confraternity's altar in its church, it would have been easy to point to it, on stylistic grounds (in the absence of a signature), as the product of Uccello's work for the confraternity. However, the link was broken after 1703 when the predella was transferred to the

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

225

church of Sant'Agata in the same city (Aronberg Lavin, 1967, p. 1) and the confraternity's church was destroyed. Historians then had to reconstruct the nature of Uccello's activity in Urbino. A section of Libro B relating to Uccello dating from 1468 was referred to in P. Pungileoni's 1822 commentary on the Elogio Storico di Giovanni Santi (pp. 17-18) in which Santi had included Uccello in a list of famous Florentine artists. In 1864 Crowe and Cavalcaselle (1980, vol. II, pp. 297298) attributed the predella to Uccello when it was in the church of Sant'Agatha. They noted that Uccello had worked for the confraternity of Corpus Christi, but thought that Uccello had painted an altarpiece, and did not associate the predella with the confraternity. By 1878 even the great archivist and art historian Milanesi had not yet made a connection between the Libro B references and the predella, then in the Palazzo Ducale (Milanesi (ed.) in Vasari, 1981, p. 214 n. 2). Extracts of the Libro B documents were then published by August Schmarsow in 1886 (pp. 359-360). By 1896 Berenson must have made the connection since he dated Uccello's predella to 1468 when the artist's name appears in the confraternity's documents (Berenson, 1896, p. 130), and in 1902 Scatassa published an undated description of the confraternity's church, lending support to the identification, with its reference to a predella on the high altar with scenes showing miracles of the host (Scatassa, 1902, pp. 439-442). The entries in Libro B are not in strict chronological order and Schmarsow interpreted a reference to Uccello on p. 5, among others dated 1465, to mean that Uccello was in Urbino as early as that year. Pope-Hennessy found that the Libro B was missing when he attempted to verify this (1950, p. 154; 1969, p. 156). Moranti (1990, pp. 206-214) has since published an extensive transcription of Libro B, which shows that the reference to Uccello on p. 5 is from 1468. According to Moranti, the references to Uccello date from 1467 to 1469. The predella was restored by Achille Mazzotti in 1861. It was cleaned by the Gabinetto dci Restauri della Soprintendenza alle Gallerie di Firenze around 1954 (Micheletti, 1954, p. 41), at which time large areas of overpainting, especially in the landscape, were removed, nevertheless, the paint surface appears to be in relatively good condition overall.

Bibliography, n.b. this work is almost always attributed to Uccello in the modern literature, exceptions are noted: Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, pp. 297-298; Milanesi (ed.), 1878 in Vasari, (1981), p. 214 n. 2: Uccello painted 'a work', 1468 citing Pungileoni; Berenson, 1896, p. 130: 1468; Looser, 1898, p. 86; Berenson, 1900, p. 140: 1468; Scatassa, 1902, pp. 439-442: |c. 1466-1469]; Berenson, 1909, p. 186: 1468; Gamba, 1909, p. 22; Longhi 1927 (2002a), p. 184: Uccello or pupil, 1467; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265: 1468; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 206,240-244: 1468; Soupault, 1929, pp. 10-11, 14,40-44: 1468; Venturi, 1930, pp. 63-64: 1468; Marangoni, 1932, pp. 330-332; Van Marie, 1932, pp. 76-78, 80: 1468; Boeck, 1933a, p. 1: late work; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 269270, 274: 1468; Paatz, 1934, pp. 121-122, 124; Pudelko, 1934, p. 240: c. 1468; Lipman, 1936a, p. 6 3 ; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. -14-48, 118: 1467-1468; Boeck, 1939, pp. 116-117; Longhi, 1940, p. 179: 1455-1460; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 153-154: 1467-1468; Baldini, 1954a, pp. 234-237; Baldini, 1954b, pp. 17-18; Carli, 1954, p. 64: c. 14671469; Caviggioli, 1954, p. 28; Micheletli, 1954, pp. 21-23, 41-43: c. 1465-1469; Baldini and Berti, 1957, p. 56: 1467-1468; Parronchi, 1957a, pp. 10, 14; Parronchi, 1957b, p. 18; While, 1957 (1987), pp. 203-204, especially n. 10: Uccello with the possible intervention of another artist from his school, late work; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 20: between 1465-1468; Parronchi, 1966, p. 52; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 399, 406, 412: 1465-1469; Sindona, 1970, p. 83; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 99: 1465-1469; Sindona, 1972, pp. 8-9, 40-41; Borsook, 1980, p. 80; Cristiani Testi, 1981, pp. 9-10; Neerman, 1983, p. 86: 1467-1468; Padoa Rizzo, 1983, pp.

226 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

78-82: c. 1465-1468; Alpatov, 1984, pp. 325-328; Bernini, 1984, p. 127: 1467-1468; Angelini, 1990a, p. 77: 14651469; Boskovits, 1990, pp. 175-178; Moranti, 1990, pp. 206-214; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 111-112: 1467-1468; Rubin, 1991, p. 287: 1475-8 (sic, probably for 1465-1468); Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 338-340: 1467-1468; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140: Uccello, c. 1465; Hughes, 1997, pp. 34 illustration caption, 36, 38 illustration caption, 71, 228, 239; Ranter, 2000, pp. 14-15; Gordon, 2003, p. 378: [c. 1465-1468]; Katz, 2003, 646-661: most likely completed by 1468.

Part lb: Accepted Drawings

C a t 30. Study for the Equestrian Monument for Sir John

Hawkwood

1436 Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence; Inv. 3 IF 46.1 x 33.3 cm, paper Provenance: 1722, a drawing matching the Study was recorded in the collection of Francesco Maria Nicold Gabburri, 'Luogotenente dell'Accademia fiorentina del disegno' (Lieutenant of the Accademia del Disegno) in Florence: 'compagno con uomo armato sopra un cavallo; opera diligentissimamente fatta da Paolo Uccelli, e da esso dipinta nel Duomo di Firenze, disegno rarissimo' (Campori, 1975, pp. 521-522, 524); much of the collection was acquired in 1758 following Gabburri's death by the dealer William Kent, although it is not known if the drawing in question was among those acquired by Kent; at an unknown date the drawing was acquired by the Uffizi.

Lorenza Mclli's analysis (1998, pp. 1-14; 1999, pp. 261-272) of this coloured drawing (pen and ink (?), green and red wash with white highlights) using a range of scientific imaging techniques revealed numerous and major changes made by Uccello to the initial design. Melli argued persuasively that this drawing was the one shown by Ucccllo to the Operai of the Duomo at the beginning of the commission, that he made changes to the drawing following their dissatisfaction with the first painted version, and then transferred the changes to the painting. Recognised as the first uncontested instance of squaring on a drawing for the enlargement of a design (Borsook, 1982, p. 4), it demonstrates Uccello's precociously technical approach to his art.

Bibliography, n.b. the drawing is universally attributed to Ucccllo, usually with an implicit or explicit dating of 1436: Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 215-216; Boeck, 1933a, p. 3; Pudelko, 1934, p. 233; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 19; Boeck, 1939, p. 125; Somare, 1946, p. 37; Pope-Hcnnessy, 1950, pp. 142-143; Carli, 1954, p. 65; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 64-65; D'Ancona, 1960, caption to illustration on p. 11; Degenhart and Schmilt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 383386; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 100; Parronchi, 1974, p. 32; Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 48; Borsook, 1982, p. 49; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 141; Borsi and Borsi 1992(1994), p. 7; Monaci Moran, 1992, p. 170; Melli, 1998, pp. 1-15, 33-35; Bambach, 1999, pp. 130, 192, 197,202, 230; Melli, 1999, pp. 261-272.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS 227

Cat. 31- Mounted

Knight

c. late 1430s-1440s Gabinetto Disegni e Starnpe degli Uffizi, Florence, Inv. 14502F 30.2 x 34 cm, paper

Provenance: unrecorded prior to the Uffizi.

This drawing of a mounted knight is executed in metalpoint, pen and brown ink, and white highlights, and has been pricked to transfer the design. No known painting corresponds precisely to this design, although Melli (1998, pp 24-26) has suggested that one of the mounted knights in the London Battle is an enlarged variant of the design, and that the lowest of the three drawn positions of the knight's lance could have corresponded to a design for a Saint. George and the Dragon. The design of the horse's tail in the drawing is close to the same feature in the London Saint George, although no other feature matches closely. Melli (1998, pp. 18-20) has shown that underneath the layer of preparation for the Mounted

Knight there is a design for a Holy Father and a Kneeling Companion, perhaps showing a

Benedictine monk-saint related to Uccello's lost mural paintings at the monastery of Santa Maria degli Angeli. There is also a part of a nude, childlike figure on the same support. Melli suggested that the irregularly spaced vertical lines across the sheet may have acted as guides for the projection of torsion onto the nude figure. Still, the precise manner in which Uccello used these guides remains mysterious.

Bibliography, n.b. the drawing has always attributed to Uccello in the modern literature: Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 223-234; Boeck, 1933a, p. 3; Pudelko, 1934, p. 257; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 27: Uccello, c. after 1440; Boeck, 1939, p. 127; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 143; Carli, 1954, p. 65; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 62-63; Dcgenhart and Sehmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 395; Boccia, 1970, p. 70: the armour is datable to about 1435; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 100; Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 4 8 : attributed to Uccello; Cristiani Testi, 1981, p . 37 Fig. 54; Boccia, 1987, p. 4 1 ; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 140-141; Bartoli, 1992, p. 7 0 ; Bambach Cappel, 1992, p. 145 n. 3; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p . 226: c. 1460-1465; Melli, 1998, pp 14, 16-3 1: probably mid-1430s to early 1440s; Bambach, 1999, pp. 55, 204, 218, 230-231, 2 4 4 : often dated c. 1440-1460.

Cat. 3 2 . Angel with a Sword; A Cup

c. 1440-1450s for the drawings on top of the priming Gabinetto Disegni e Slampe degli Uffizi, Florence, Inv. 1302F 23.9 x 26.6 cm (largest dimensions), paper

Provenance: formerly in the Medici Collection (Melli, 2002a, p. 206); transferred to the Uffizi.

This metalpoinl and pen drawing with white highlights shows an Angel carrying the sheath of a sword in its left hand a n d , presumably, the hilt of a sword in its right hand (the sheet has been cropped at this point), a n d so has been interpreted as a study for an Expulsion scene (Pudelko, 1935c, p. 128). The grace of the Angel's forward movement and windswept drapery call to mind Vasari's description of a

228 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: ACCEPTED WORKS

figure, now lost, painted by Uccello at the monastery of Santa Maria degli Angeli of a 'monk fleeing with [his] clothes twisting around his nude body, swept by the wind, with much grace' (Vasari, 1971, p. 6 9 : 1568 ed.). In the area of the lower half of the Angel's body is a multi-facetted cup. Melli (1998, pp. 27-28) has shown that the support also carries part of a pricked design for an unrelated Virgin and Child, discussed here in Chapter 8. Given Uccello's habit of re-using his paper supports for various unrelated designs, it may be that there is no meaningful relationship between the designs for the Angel and the cup. Yet, the cup's central, vertical axis runs through the middle of the Angel's body and the sweep of the Angel's drapery follows the contours of the cup's twisting facets, even though the legs extend over the edge of the cup. Is this Uccello's opportunistic use of the earlier drawing of the cup (Melli, 2002a, p. 208) to give a twisting form to his drawing of the Angel, or might this be an exploratory drawing for the design of a theatrical prop allowing an Angel to appear from the 'cup', perhaps for a sacra rappresentazione']

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1928a, p. 230: pupil of Uccello; Marangoni, 1930, pp. 404-405: attributed to Uccello; Boeck, 1933a, p. 3: Uccello, late career; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 163: Uccello; Boeck, 1939, p. 128: Uccello; PopeHennessy, 1950, p. 168: perhaps the Karlsruhe Master; Micheletti, 1954, p. 71: catalogued as attributed to Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 21 caption to illustration: attributed to Uccello; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 405406: Uccello, 1460s; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p . 100: Uccello; Borsook, 1980, p. 80: Prato Master; PadoaRizzo, 1991, p. 141: Uccello, c. 1450; Bambach Cappel, 1992, p. 145 n. 3: Uccello; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 176: Uccello; Melli, 1998, pp. 27-29, 31-35: Uccello, c. 1460s; Bambach, 1999, pp. 203-204: attributed to Uccello, c. 1440-1460; Melli, 2002a, pp. 206-208: Uccello, dating the three designs on the sheet is difficult, although the design for the Virgin and Child could plausibly dale to around the before that.

1440s, and the other designs

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: WORKSHOP

229

P a r t 2: W o r k s h o p

Cat. 33- Virgin and Child, Saint Francis and Two Angels

c. late 1440s-1450s Art Museum, Allentown, Inv. K320/1960.018.000 KB 60.1 x 47 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly Contini-Bonacossi Collection, Florence (Berti, 1961, p. 303); Art Museum, Allentown.

This is another small devotional panel whose early history is unknown. The work's relationship to Uccello's style is strongest in the refined contours of the Christ Child's body and small details such as the ring of clover at the bottom right side (as in the Hunt) and the plant with leaves surrounded by dots at the lower left (as in the Birth of the Virgin at Prato). However, the porcelain-doll face of the Virgin and her overly long fingers are not features of Uccello's style, suggesting that this work may have been made by an anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello, following a design by the master (see Chapter 8 for further discussion of Uccello's workshop).

Bibliography: Ragghianti, 1946, pp. 74-75: Uccello, first half of the fifteenth century; Salmi, 1950, p. 26: Quarate Master, a workshop assistant of Uccello, c. after 1445; Carli, 1954, p. 70: probably Karlsruhe Master; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello, middle of the fifteenth century; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 95-96: not usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1443-1456; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 60-61: attributed to Alesso Baldovinetti, c. 1445-1452; Angelini, 1990a, p. 73: Uccello, c. 1430-1431; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 108: Uccello, [close to works dated 1452 and datable to 1470-1475]; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 348: not Uccello, c. 1445-1455; Kanter, 2000, p. 17: Uccello; Boskovits, 2003h, p. 572 n. 4: Uccello.

C a t . 34. Virgin and Child

c. late 1440s-1450s Bode Museum, Berlin; lnv. 1470 60 x 42 cm, panel

Provenance: unrecorded prior to the Bode Museum.

Judging from reproductions, the gold ground seems to be new. This work appears to be by the same artist responsible for the Raleigh Virgin and Child, works sharing the ovoid face of the Virgin with a long, thin nose and a thin, straight mouth. The two works are also of similar dimensions and compositions. While the design seems to be Uccello's, signs of his own execution are absent, and the artist responsible was probably an anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello's.

Bibliography: Ragghianti, 1946, pp. 74-75: Uccello, first half of the fifteenth century; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 164: Karlsruhe Master; Carli, 1954, p. 69: only a close examination of the original could lead to a correct

230 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: WORKSHOP

attribution; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello, c. 1443-1456; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 91: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1436-1443; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 60-61: attributed to Alesso Baldovinetti, c. 1445-1452; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 137: no attribution or date; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 348: anon, follower of Uccello, c. 1450 (?); Bambach, 1999, p. 204 n. 72: attributed to Uccello or a close follower.

Cat. 35. Virgin and Child before a Landscape

c. late 1440s-1450s Getty Museum, Los Angeles, Inv. 70.PB.44 47 x 34 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly Shine Collection, Dublin; Sestieri Collection, Rome (Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 351); Hyland Collection, Greenwich; 1970, acquired by the Getty Museum (Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 135).

As Melli has shown ( 1 9 9 8 , p. 28), the composition of the Virgin and Child in this small, elegant painting derives from a design by Uccello on the sheet with the Angel with a Sword; A Cup in the Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi. The smoke-ring clouds in the night sky are also a signature feature of Uccello's works, as in the scene of Saint J o h n the Evangelist at Patmos in the Quarate predella. However, the execution of the Los Angeles Virgin and Child is not consistently comparable with Uccello's style - at least that of his panel paintings - notably in the indistinct modelling of the Christ Child's anatomy. This work is probably by an anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello, following a design by the master.

Bibliography: Baldini, 1954b, pp. 17-18: Uccello (?); Micheletti, 1954, p. 60: catalogued as attributed to Uccello; Berti, 1961, pp. 300, 304: Uccello, before 1465; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 96: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1450; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 65-66: perhaps by Antonia di Paolo di Dono, c. 1475-1490; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 132, 135: attributed to Anlonia or Donato di Paolo di Dono, after 1470; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 351: follower of Uccello, early 1460s; Melli, 1998, p. 28: school of Uccello (attributed to Uccello or a direct follower), c. 1460-1475 or later; Kanter, 2000, p. 15: workshop of I Jcccllo, Donato di Paolo (?).

Cat. 36. Crucifixion with a Bridgettine Nun Donor, Sister Fclicito

(triptych)

c. late 1440s to 1450s Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Inv. 1997.117.9 central panel, 45.7 x 27.9 cm with frame and 41.9 x 24.7 cm without, right wing, 45.7 x 13.3 with frame and 41.9 x 9.5 cm without, left wing, 45.7 x 14.3 with frame and 41.9 x 10.8 cm without, panel

Provenance: formerly Knocdlcr's, New York (Boskovits, 1990, p. 178); 1996, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, Lore Heinemann Bequest.

l

Inscription: S [ O U R | . FELICITA' (recto).

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: WORKSHOP 231

This triptych was painted for a Sister Felicita of the Bridgettine convent of Santa Maria del Paracliso, southeast of Florence, as can be determined from the inscription, the nun's costume and the cross held by Saint Bridget (see Chapter 8 for further discussion). T h e design is clearly Uccelloesque, while the execution is not closely comparable with Uccello's style. In particular, the faces are less refined and the white highlights on the faces are stronger and less smoothly blended than is usually the case with Uccello's works. The quality is, however, broadly comparable with the Allentown Virgin and Child, here attributed to Uccello's workshop, even if they are not necessarily by the same artist. This charming, minor work might well have been within the scope of a workshop assistant of Uccello, perhaps working in the late 1440s to 1450s.

Bibliography: Parronchi, 1974, p. 66: perhaps by Antonia di Paolo di Dono, c. 1475-1490; Boskovits, 1990, p. 178: Uccello, [after 1467-1468); Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 128, 132: attributed to Antonia or Donate di Paolo di Dono, after 1470; Christiansen, 1997, p. 26, Uccello, 1430s.

C a t . 37. Virgin and Child with Two Angels

c. late 1440s-1450s Hamilton Collection, Paris (?) dimensions not recorded, panel

Provenance: 1927, Harm Collection, Paris (According to the note on KIF Fototeca image no. 177447); 1939, acquired by Carl Hamilton, New York; 1969, private collection, Florence (According to the note on KIF Fototeca image no. 392658); Hamilton Collection, Paris (?) (Melli, 1998, p . 33).

An old p h o t o of the work in the KIF Fototeca shows the condition of the painting prior to conservation, with o v e r p a i n t i n g in t h e Child's face, the Virgin's headdress, the Angels' robes and the cloth covering the C h i l d ' s genitals (KIF Fototeca image no. 177447). This overpainting has been removed revealing a w o r k of m i x e d quality. The extreme refinement of the Virgin's face is not equalled in the Angels' faces and h a n d s . Bven t h o u g h it is not by Uccello, it most probably came from his workshop (see Chapter 8 for further d i s c u s s i o n ) .

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1932, pp. 76-80: Uccello, late work; Pudelko, 1934, p. 250 n. 4 1 : Karlsruhe Master; Ragghianli, 1946, pp. 74-75: reserved his opinion regarding the attribution, first half of the fifteenth century; Popellenncssy, 1950, p. 167: perhaps by the Karlsruhe Master; Carli, 1954, p. 69: not Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 13: Uccello, (referred to the work as in the collection of Dr Carlo Presenti in Bergamo); Berti, 1961, p. 304: Uccello, c. 1470; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 99: usually attributed to Ucccllo, 1470; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 64, 66: perhaps by Donato di Paolo; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, pp. 136, 138: attributed to Donato di Paolo di Dono, possibly after 1475; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 351-352: follower of Uccello, c. 1470; Melli, 1998, p. 27: school of Uecello (attributed to Uccello or a direct follower), c. 1460-1475 or later.

232 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: WORKSHOP

Cat. 38. Virgin and Child

c. late 1440s-1450s private collection, Prato 64 x 43 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly in a private collection in Florence (Berti, 1961, p. 298); 1997, Farsetti Arte sale, Prato, no. 254; private collection, Prato (Melli, 2002a, p. 208 n. 79).

Luciano Berti attributed the Virgin and Child to Uccello following its appearance in the exhibition Mostra dei Tesori Segreti delle Case Florentine of works from private collections, held by a Florentine conservator in 1961 (Berti, 1961, p. 298). Berti noted stylistic affinities with Sassetta and Fra Angelico and a suggestion of perspective in the relationship between the gazes and arrangement of the bodies. He considered its combination of stylistic features evidence for the integration of the works sometimes attributed to the Prato Master and the Karlsruhe Master into Uccello's oeuvre. The work shows the Virgin in half-length holding the Child against a gold ground in which are incised sparsely decorated haloes. Judging from Berti's reproductions, the design of the Child's body is reminiscent of the simplified, rounded body of the Child in the Karlsruhe Adoration

and the modelling of the Virgin's

hands is reminiscent of the page's hands in the London Battle. Nevertheless, the heavy eyebrows and the dark shading in the Virgin's and the Child's faces are not directly comparable with any work generally attributed to Uccello. The combination of Uccelloesque design and

un-Uccelloesque

execution suggest that this work may have been produced in Uccello's workshop from a drawing by the master, around the mid-1440s to 1450s, not excluding the possibility that a work by Uccello has been maladroitly restored.

Bibliography: Berti, 1961, pp. 298-309: Uccello, c. 1452-1456; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 95: recently attributed to Uccello, c. 1443-1456; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 60-61: attributed to Alesso Baldovinetti, c. 14451452; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 349: school of Uccello, c. 1452-1456 and c. 1450s-1460s; Melli, 1998, p. 27: Uccello, c. 1460-1475; Melli, 2002a, p. 208: Uccello (heavily restored in the flesh tones), c. 1452-1456.

Cat. 39. Virgin and Child

c. late 1440s-1450s North Carolina Museum of Art, Raleigh; Inv. K5 18 58 x 41 cm, pane!

Provenance: formerly Achillilo Chiesa Collection, Milan; Contini-Bonacossi Collection, Florence (Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 136); National Gallery of Art, Washington, Kress Collection; transferred to the North Carolina Museum of Art, Raleigh.

See the entry for the Berlin Virgin and Child above.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: WORKSHOP 233

Bibliography: Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 164: Karlsruhe Master; Micheletti, 1954, p. 60: catalogued as attributed to Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 70: probably Karlsruhe Master; Berti, 1961, pp. 300: Uccello, c. 1452-1456, later than the Berlin Virgin and Child; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 9 3 : usually attributed to an anon, artist from Uccello's circle, c. 1443; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 60-61: attributed to Alesso Baldovinetti, c. 1445-1452; Padoa Rizzo, 1 9 9 1 , p. 136: workshop of Uccello, c. 1470-1475; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 348-349: anon, follower of Uccello, c. 1450 (?); Kanter, 2000, p. 17: Uccello.

234 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

Part 3a: Uncertain Attributions, Various Media

Cat. 40. Crucifixion

1413 private collection, Florence (housed in the ex-church of San Jacopo) 120 x 82 cm, panel Provenance: since 1722, possibly as early as 1651, in the church of San Jacopo in Campo Corbolini (see Chapter 4 for details); c. 1998-2004, private collection, Florence, temporarily on deposit in the Museo di San Marco, Florence.

,

Inscription: M°CCCC"...XIlf */ QUESTO . CROCIFISO . A F A T O . FAR . S[ER] BARTOL,..' (on the base), '...IESV...' (on a fragmentary label on the right side of the cross bar).

This Crucifixion from the church of San Jacopo in Campo Corbolini in Florence was introduced to the Uccello literature by Parronchi in 1998 (pp. 44-47). It is abraded over much of its surface and there are significant losses to the inscription at the bottom, including most of the third line of text. Nevertheless, the figure of Christ shows a compact power and solemnity, and rough-hewn style worthy of an artist of character from the early fifteenth century. If the format of the work follows examples by Lorenzo Monaco, as Parronchi observed, the style is much less Gothic than its models. As there remains no certain work from Uccello's formative years, it is impossible to confirm or deny Parronchi's attribution. Nevertheless, Christ's body does bear some resemblance to Uccello's Adam in the lunette of the Creation Stories in the Chiostro Verde and the quality is about what would be expected from an artist in their mid teens as Uccello was in 1413.

Bibliography: Parronchi, 1998, pp. 44-47: Uccello, 1413; Kanter, 2000, p. 20 n. 27: the attribution of the work to Uccello needs to be treated with caution.

Cat. 41. Virgin and Child with God the Father, the Holy Spirit, Angels and S(unts

1416 (?) Santa Maria Mater Dei a Lippi, Florence 309 x 176.5 cm (central section), detached mural painting

Provenance: formerly in the Del Lippi tabernacle on the corner of Via Fanfani and Via dei Perfetli Ricasoli, Florence; the paintings have been detached and transferred to the church of Santa Maria Mater Dei a Lippi, Florence, (Gordon, 2003, p. 65) while the sinupie are housed by Lhe Sovrinlendenza ai Beni Artistici e Slorici.

Inscription: 'ANNO DOMINI MCCCCXVI TABERNACULUM A PAULU UCCELLO DEPICTUM DINOTIUS ET LUCAS ALBERTUS DE LIPPIS RESTAUU R A V E R U N T ANNO DOMINI OCTOBRIS' (Guamieri, 1987, p. 136-137).

MDCCXVI DIE VIII

CATALOGUE RAISONNE; UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

235

The eighteenth-century restoration mentioned in the inscription (above) complicates an analysis of the style of the paintings, as the extent of any overpainting remains uncertain. Judging by the current appearance of the paintings, the style is conservatively Gothic for the date of 1416 given in the inscription. The Virgin has the unnaturally large head found in the works of Agnolo Gaddi and his followers. Saint Lawrence's face is sweet and refined, the other saints are undistinguished. However, the sinopia of the central scene has the lively, free spirit of Uccello's sinopie for the Creation Stories in the Chiostro Verde. The links between the owners of the tabernacle and Uccello's relative Deo Beccuti noted by Padoa Rizzo (1990, pp. 57-58) and the physical proximity of the tabernacle to the Spedale di San Antonio, where Uccello had some involvement in 1413 may not be mere coincidences. Uccello may have learnt or developed his mural painting technique outside of Florence with an older artist, perhaps Pietro Nelli, as some have suggested. The circumstances of the commission are highly conjectural. The majority of the work may have been executed by a more experienced artist, the drawing of the sinopia for the central scene may have been delegated to his young assistant, who may even have been allowed to execute some parts of the painting. As Parronchi showed, the figure of Saint James is similar to the San Jacopo Crucifixion (Parronchi, 1998, Figs 4-5).

Bibliography: Berti, 1967, p. 77: 'the eighteenth-century attribution to Uccello...is an indication not to be ignored', 1416; Boskovits, 1968, p. 59: included as an addendum to a list of works by the Master of Santa Verdiana, 1416; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 85: recently attributed to Uccello, 1416; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 7-8: Uccello and another artist, possibly the Master of Santa Verdiana, 1416; Reggioli, 1978, pp. 101-104: attributed to Pietro Nelli and Uccello, 1416; Guamieri, 1987, pp. 136-137: a fourteenth-century artist, the young Uccello (?); Padoa Rizzo, 1990, pp. 57-58: Uccello, 1416; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 343-344: not Uccello, 1416; Kanter, 2000, p. 20 n. 27: the attribution of the work to Uccello needs to be treated with caution, 1416; Gordon, 2003, pp. 64-65: possibly by Pietro Nelli, possibly 1416.

C a t . 42. Christ Carrying the Cross

c. 1450s Pinacoteca Stuard, Parma 53 x 34 cm, panel Provenance: probably among the works 'incettate dot 1786 in poi, dal Marchese Tacoli-Canacci, residente a Firenze, gentiluomo di camera e colonnelo al servizio di Don Ferdinando duca di Parma'; Congregazione di Carila (Michcletti, 1954, p. 59); Pinacoteca Stuard, Parma.

L

Inscription: On the scroll is the motto of Saint Mathew the Evangelist: Si cpiis vult venire post me abiugat semetipsum et tollat crecum suain et sequatur me' (Micheletti, 1954, p. 59).

Angelini (1990c, p. 82) was right to point out the Uccelloesque nature of certain details of this work, such as the curled ends of the scroll and the geometric pine trees at the left. However, other details appear slightly uncharacteristic of Uccello, such as the uneven application of dark red (oil?) paint in the drapery. Christ's head has a sweetness and compactness of style close to Giovanni di Francesco's

236 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

works, such as the (admittedly much larger) figure of the Angel at the left in the mural painting in the loggia of the Spedale degli Innocenti in Florence. The painting might be an early work by him under Uccello's influence. However, uncertainty as to the originality or otherwise of all of the paint surface makes any conclusion difficult.

Bibliography: Giovannozzi, 1934, p. 360: Prato Master; Salmi, 1950, p. 26: Quarate Master, a workshop assistant of Uccello, c. after 1445; Carli, 1954, p. 69: Karlsruhe Master; Micheletti, 1954, p. 59: catalogued as attributed to Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 95: recently attributed to Uccello, c. 1443-1456; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 60-61: attributed to Alesso Baldovinetti, between 1445 and 1452; Cirillo and Godi, 1987, pp. 34-35: Giovanni di Francesco del Cervelliera, although an ideal reading of the attribution would be after conservation of the work, if by Giovanni, then late career, as an Uccello it has been dated c. 1443-1456; Angelini, 1990c, p. 82: Uccello, before c. 1435; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 350-351: circle of Uccello, c. 1450; Barocelli, 1996, p. 38: Uccello (?) and assistant; Barocelli, 1998, pp. 15-16: Uccello.

C a t 43. Stellated Dodecahedron and Geometric

Designs

c. 1425 (?) under the door of Saint Peter, San Marco, Venice diameter 88 cm (central circle), cut stone with mosaic border

The conception of this geometric pavimento is of exceptional quality, and has rightly become famous, although a stellated dodecahedron is not particularly difficult to draw if one pentagram is facing the viewer. The simplicity of the procedure puts it well within the capabilities of an artist working in the first half of the fifteenth century. The meandering vine motif in the mosaic surrounding the stellated dodecahedron bears resemblances to the motifs in the border of Uccello's Resurrection window in the Duomo in Florence. The arrowhead geometric motifs around the other stellated dodecahedron inside San Marco (in the catalogue entry below) are similar to the design around the shield carried by a foot soldier in Uccello's Paris Battle painting. The two stellated dodecahedra in San Marco and the surrounding mosaics and pavimenti can be tentatively attributed to Uccello, during his stay in Venice from the latter part of 1425.

Bibliography: D'Ancona, 1960, p. 6: described a 'lithostrolum' attributed to Uccello by modern authors, c. 14251430; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 85: recently atlribulcd lo Ucccllo, c. 1425-1430; Merkcl, 1989, p. 226: Uccello; Berardi, 1992, p. 496: no attribution given; Melli, 2002b, p. 212: dales from Uccello's time in Venice.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

Cat. 44. Stellated Dodecahedron

237

and Geometric Designs; Two Roundels with Geometric Motifs (one

on either side)

c. 1425 (?) San Marco, Venice (in the floor inside the church) dimensions not recorded; cut stone

See the entry for the Stellated Dodecahedron and Geometric Designs above.

Bibliography: Salmi, 1977, p. 373: Uccello, [c. 1425-14301;

Cat. 45. Stories of the Virgin

c. after 1430 San Marco, Venice (in the Mascoli Chapel) covering two walls and the vault of the chapel, mosaic

A carved inscription on the altar in the Mascoli Chapel in San Marco, Venice, reads: 'MCCCCXXX DVCANTE I N C U T O DOMINO FRANCESCO F O S C A R F . Merkel (1989, pp. 227-228) described the altar as a votive offering by the doge, which can be associated with an injury he sustained in February 1431 (1430 in the Venetian calendar). Merkel gave a terminus post quern for the mosaics in the chapel as 1432, since Giambono, whose signature appears in the mosaics, completed the mural paintings for the monument for Serego in Verona in that year. Thus the execution of the mosaics probably postdates Uccello's return to Florence. Despite the signature, 'Michael Cambono venetus fecit', it has often been supposed that Uccello might have contributed to the design of some of the mosaics. Another signature in the mosaics is destroyed except for the word 'fecit' and Giambono's authorship of the design of all of the mosaics has been rejected because of the disparity between their strongly Renaissance slylc(s) and that of his securely attributed works, which are predominantly Gothic. Furthermore, it is difficult to account for the Venetian Republic having sent for a master mosaicist from outside the city if Giambono, its official painter, was fully competent in the art. Although Uccello figures less and less often in discussions of the mosaics over the course of the twentieth century, minor parts of the design are still attributed to him occasionally (e.g. Bertelli, 1994, p. 386). The Ionic capitals in the arch of the Death of the Virgin are not very different to the surviving capital in Uccello's Stories of Saint Francis in Santa Trinita in Florence, and the female heads in medallions above the capitals in the Death of the Virgin have a certain Uccelloesque quality. However, the overall design of the Stories of the Virgin cannot be attributed to Uccello, because of the uncharacteristically prominent and fastidious treatment of architecture. At most, some drawings he left behind in Venice might have been incorporated into the overall design. Other artists who more likely contributed to the designs are Castagno, Jacopo Bellini, and Vecchietta.

238 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

Bibliography: Longhi, 1926, pp. 129-130, 133: Visitation by Uccello, at the end of his first trip to Venice or during his second trip, Death of the Virgin by Andrea del Castagno and students; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 253-254: Giambono with the co-operation of Uccello, c. 1430; Ragghianti, 1937, p. 248 n. 27: Uccello was responsible for the architecture in the Visitation; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 33-34, 58: Jacopo Bellini or others, influenced by Uccello, for the Visitation and Mantegna for the Death of the Virgin; Longhi, 1940, p. 179: design of the architecture by Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 156-157: not Uccello, at least partly by Giambono, c. 1440; Carli, 1954, p. 70: very difficult to determine whether Uccello contributed to the design; Micheletti, 1954, p. 22: some have seen Uccello's presence in the chapel; Fiocco, 1961, pp. 152-156: designed by Mantegna; Parronchi, 1966, p. 54: no attribution; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 85: doubtfully by Uccello, 1425; Parronchi, 1974, p. 14: the architecture in the Birth of the Virgin and the Presentation of the Virgin was perhaps designed by Uccello; Wohl, 1980, pp. 173-174: the upper part of the architecture of the Visitation was designed by Jacopo Bellini, c. 1451; Merkel, 1989, pp. 227-263, not Uccello, the Visitation is by Michele Giambono, the Birth of the Virgin is by Giambono and Jacopo Bellini, and the Death of the Virgin is by Giambono, Andrea del Castagno and Jacopo Bellini; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 150: doubtfully by Uccello, c. 1445; Bertelli, 1994, pp. 386-391: the three tondi in the vault, showing the Virgin and Child, Daniel, and Isaiah, respectively, and perhaps some features of the Death of the Virgin were designed by Uccello before 1430, the rest is by Vecchietta, Giambono and Andrea del Castagno.

Cat. 46. Wheel with Ribbon

c. 1425 (?) San Marco, Venice (in the lunette of the fifth cupola of the atrium) diameter 100 cm, mosaic The underlying design of the mosaic in San Marco, Venice, appears to be a ship's wheel, perhaps a reference to Venice's maritime tradition. Around the wheel a continuous ribbon (or ribbons?) is threaded, with the side of the ribbon facing out in light and the underside in shadow. The overall composition resembles the abstract, decorative knot patterns beloved of Leonardo and Dtirer, whose only purpose is to delight the viewer with their complexity and the artist's diligence. Doubtless, these motifs could also be interpreted as symbols of eternity or the interconnecledncss of all things. The strongest evidence for the attribution of the design of the mosais to Uccello comes from Vasari's description of drawings by Uccello showing 'shavings interlaced round sticks, which could be seen from behind and in front' ('bmccioli in su i bastoni, die scortassero, perche si vedessi il di drento e 'I di fuori\

Vasari, 1991, vol. II, p. 237). It is difficult to think of any other Renaissance artist whose

works include precisely the same motif of ribbons interlaced around sticks.

Bibliography: Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 85: recently attributed to Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 13-14: attributed to Uccello; Salmi, 1977, p. 373, vol. I: Uecello, |c. 1425-1430]; Cristiani Testi, 1981, p. 22 caption to Fig. 35: Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Merkel, 1989, pp. 226-227: not Uccello, although perhaps influenced by him; Berardi, 1992, p. 496 and caption to an unnumbered Fig: Uccello.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

239

Cat. 47. Virgin and Child

c. early 1420s 'Martello' Collection, Fiesole 67 x 46 cm, panel Provenance: by c. 1960, Mario Crespi Collection; 24 Oct. 1989, Finarte, Milan, lot 80; 'Martello' Collection, Fiesole (Boskovits, 1992, p. 140).

The attribution of this work to the youthful Uccello was proposed by Boskovits in 1992. As with the other works attributed to Uccello's early career, it is difficult to take a definitive position. Certainly, the lively character of the Christ Child bears comparison with the one in Uccello's Dublin Virgin and Child. However, the lack of geometrical forms in the drapery is uncharacteristic, leaving Uccello's authorship open to question.

Bibliography: Boskovits, 1992, pp. 140-3: attributed to Uccello; Kanter, 2000, p. 20 n. 27: Uccello, shortly before 1425;Tartuferi, 2002, p. 38: Uccello [c. early 1420s); Boskovits, 2003e, p. 291 n. 12: attributed to Uccello.

Part 3b: Uncertain Attributions, Drawings

Cat. 48. Profile Portrait of a Man

c. mid-to-late 1440s Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence; Inv. 28E 28.7 x 20.3 cm, paper Provenance: unrecorded prior to the Uffizi.

Berenson's rhapsodic description of this drawing has left its mark: 'We may look anywhere, within the field of Italian Renaissance painting, without finding a portrait superior to this profile in the essential quality of a masterpiece.' ('Possiamo esplorare ovunque, rinascitnento,

entro i confini della pittura

italiana del

senza trovare un'effige che superi questo profile) nella qualita essenziali al capolavoro.'

Berenson, 1954, tavola 1). Nevertheless, Berenson's attribution of the work to Uccello was asserted rather than argued, and no other wash drawing can be securely attributed to htm. Perhaps a Morellian criterion weighs in favour of the attribution: the squashed ear occurs repeatedly in Uccello's oeuvre, as in the portrait of Micheletto da Cotignola in the Paris Battle, and in the Dublin Virgin and Child. Interestingly, the portrait is drawn on a sheet that had previously been used for writing (Flartt p. 162 n. 1), as with Uccello's Study for the Equestrian Monument for Sir John Hawkwood,

although it is not

clear how infrequent this practice was among fifteenth-centurt Florentine artists.

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1928a, p. 240: Uccello; Boeck, 1933a, p. 3: Uccello; Lipman, 1936a, pp.79,101: Uccello, c. 1425-1450; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 38: Uccello, c. mid 1440s; Boeck, 1939, pp. 126-127: Uccello;

240 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 150: Uccello; Berenson, 1954, unpaginated, tavola 1: Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 65: Uccello; Micheletti, 1954, p 66: Uccello, close to the Stories of Noah, [generally dated to the late 1440s]; Hartt, 1956, pp. 162-173: attributed to Andrea del Castagno; D'Ancona, 1960, caption to illustration on p. 7: Uccello; Degenhartand Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 392-394: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 100: Uccello; Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. l,p. 48: Uccello; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 145: Uccello (?).

Cat. 49. Mazzocchio (with Octagonal Section)

fifteenth century (?) Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence, Inv. I756A 9 x 24 cm, paper

Provenance: unrecorded prior to the Uffizi.

See the entry for the Mazzocchio (with Hexagonal Section and Punte) below.

Bibliography: Boeck, 1933a, p. 3: Uccello; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 44: Uccello; Bocck, 1939, p. 127: Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 153: Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 65: Uccello, the last years of his life; Micheletli, 1954, pp. 67-68: Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, caption to illustration on p. 8: Uccello; Parronchi, 1961 (1964b), p. 546 and Fig. 202b: Uccello (?), or perhaps Piero della Franccsca; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 402-405: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 100: Uccello; Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, pp. 47-48: Uccello; Salmi, 1977, p. 373: Uccello, probably before 1425; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 144: Uccello; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 161: probably Uccello; Roccasecca, 1998, pp. 134-138: no attribution, close to Antonio da Sangallo the Younger; Bambach, 1999, p. 204 n. 74: always attributed to Uccello.

Cat. 50. Mazzocchio (with Hexagonal Section and Punte)

fifteenth century (?) Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence, Inv. 1757A 10 x 27 cm, paper

Provenance: unrecorded prior to the IJITizi.

Vasari described drawings by Uccello of polyhedra, such as muzzocchi and spheres with seventy-two faces (Vasari, 1991, vol. I, p. 237). Uccello's skilful depictions of mazzocchi in the Battle paintings and the Flood presuppose careful preparatory drawings like those in the Musee du Louvre (Inv. 1970) and the Gabinetlo Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi (Inv. nos 1756A and I757A), explaining their traditional attribution to him. Doubt has occasionally been cast on these attributions. Parronchi found the attribution of the mazzocchi to Uccello just plausible, while he found the rigid ccntrality of the Chalice in the Uffizi as uncharacteristic of Uccello, in whose works perspective is often skewed and asymmetrical (Parronchi, 1964b, pp. 533-548). Roccasecca was equivocal about the attribution to Uccello of the two Uffizi mazzocchi. While he admitted that instruments may have existed during Uccello's time to construct irregular curves, such as the ellipses contained within the mazzocchi, he

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

241

found the technique of the drawings similar to that of Antonio da Sangallo the Younger in the following century. He believed the correspondence is probably not an accident. (Roccasecca, 1998, pp. 133-144). An ellipse can be constructed using only compasses and a ruler, as accurately as the draughtsman is prepared to be thorough in laying out the lines of construction. So technical difficulty is not a criterion for dating the drawings of mazzocchi. There is though, no specific evidence to confirm or deny the attribution of the three mazzocchi to Uccello.

Bibliography: Boeck, 1933a, p. 3: Uccello; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 44: Uccello; Boeck, 1939, p. 127: Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 153: Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 65: Uccello, the last years of his life; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 67-68: Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, caption to illustration on p. 8: Uccello; Parronchi, 1961 (1964b), p. 546 and Fig. 202a: no specific attribution given in text, although the argument was broadly against the attribution to Uccello, even though the caption for the illustration said 'Uccello'; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 402-405: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 100: Uccello; Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, pp. 47-48: Uccello; Salmi, 1977, p. 373: Uccello, probably before 1425; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 145: Uccello; Berardi, 1992, pp. 492-493: Uccello, not specifically mentioned in the text although the drawing was illustrated with the caption 'Uccello'; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 161: probably Uccello; Roccasecca, 1998, pp. 134-138: no attribution, close to Antonio da Sangallo the Younger; Bambach, 1999, p. 204 n. 74: always attributed to Uccello.

Cat. 5 1 . Chalice

fifteenth century (?) Gabinctto Disegni e Stampedegli Uffizi, Florence, Inv. 1758A. 26 x 24 cm, paper

Provenance: unrecorded prior to the Uffizi.

While this drawing has long been an icon of Renaissance perspective, it has also been realised that the chalice is not depicted in overall perspective, the projection of the top surface is the same as that for the bottom (Rossi, 1979, pp. 35, 40-42). In 2000 Roccasecca conducted a thorough physical examination of the Chalice.

He observed differences in the conception and execution of parts of the drawing,

leading him to suspect that the cup, the stem and the lowest mazzocchio represent an initial phase of the drawing that was extended with the addition of the mazzocchi

at the lop and the splayed foot, probably

by a different hand. He interpreted the theoretical underpinnings of the drawing as related to the design culture of the seventeenth century, in particular the writings of Evangelista Torricelli, who taught at the Accademia del Disegno in Florence. Roccasecca excluded Parronchi's tentative attribution of the drawing to Piero della Francesca on the basis that the technique was different from the techniques described in his treatises, and too advanced (Roccasecca, 2000, pp. 65-78). The image was constructed on the basis of a network of incised lines (see Ragghianti, 1986, Fig. 3 for a photograph of a detail in raking light). The incisions are arranged as spokes radiating from points on the chalice's central, vertical axis, acting as a guide for the lines of the chalice radiating from the central axis. However, there do not appear to be incised lines to determine the correct disposition of these spokes in the foreshortened disks (further apart at the front and closer together at the back) or for

242 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

determining the points on the spokes where the polygonal 'circumferences' are to be placed. A preprepared template may have been used, in which the disposition of the spokes and the 'circumferences' had already been worked out, which was incised onto the support of the Chalice at a number of points along the vertical axis. There is nothing inherently difficult about such a procedure, even if it required considerable patience of the artist, and it would have been within the capabilities of an early Renaissance artist. There is evidence that Uccello probably made such studies or templates in the numerous haloes he created showing radiating spokes in foreshortened disks, such as the haloes in the Dublin Virgin and Child. The cup in Uccello's Angel with a Sword; A Cup drawing, also in the Uffizi, shares two features with the Chalice in its first phase as identified by Roccasecca, the facetted sides and a flat rim, even if the former is far less sophisticated and regular in construction than the latter. While there is no specific evidence linking the Chalice to the fifteenth century, neither is there any conclusive evidence that it is not from that period. The possibility that Uccello was the author of the Chalice can neither be confirmed nor denied.

Bibliography: Boeck, 1935, p. 3: Uccello; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 44: Uccello; Boeck, 1939, p. 127: Uccello; PopeHennessy, 1950, p. 153: Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 65: Uccello, the last years of his life; Micheletti, 1954, p. 69: Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 19 caption to illustration: Uccello; Parronchi, 1961 (1964b), pp. 533-548: Piero della Francesca; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 402-405, 525: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 100: Uccello; Salmi, 1977, p. 373: Uccello, probably before 1425; Rossi, 1979, pp. 35-46: Uccello; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 145: generally attributed to Uccello; Berardi, 1992, p. 495: Ucccllo (?); Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 158-159: Uccello; Galluzzi, 1992, p. 205: Uccello (?), c. 1450-1470; Roccasecca, 1998, pp. 134-135: no attribution; Bambach, 1999, p. 204 n. 74: always attributed to Uccello; Roccasecca, 2000, pp. 65-78: n o attribution, though conceptually close to Evangelista Torricelli's design treatises of the seventeenth century; Roccasecca, 2001, p. 118: anon, artist.

Cat. 52. Mazzocchio

fifteenth century (?) Cabinet des Dessins, Musee du Louvre, Paris, Inv. 1970 16 x 23.3 cm, paper

Provenance: Filippo Baldinucci Collection (Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. 11, p. 406); Cabinet des Dessins, Musec dti Louvre, Paris.

See the entry for the Mazzocchio (with Hexagonal Section and Punte) a b o v e .

Inscription: 'Di Paolo Vccello Pitt(o)r(e) Florentine, il p(ri)mo che incomineiasse a valersi nolle pitlure delle buone regole di Prospeltiua.' (on the mount, written by Baldinucci, Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 406).

Bibliography: Bocck, 1933a, p. 3: a copy, because there are no lines of construction; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 402-406, 633, 647: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 100: Ucccllo; Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, pp. 47-48 and vol. II, p. 39: Uccello; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 161: probably Uccello;

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS 243

Roccasecca, 1998, pp. 133-134: no attribution, though technically similar to a m e t h o d of construction described by Piero della Francesca; Melli, 2002b, pp. 210-212: attributed to Uccello.

Cat. 5 3 . Polyhedron with Seventy-Two

Faces and Punte

fifteenth century (?) Cabinet des Dessins, M u s e e d u Louvre, Paris, Inv. 1969 27 x 24.8 cm, paper

Provenance: formerly Filippo Baldinucci Collection; Pandolfini collection; Strozzi Collection; 1806, acquired by Vivant Denon for the Cabinet des Dessins, M u s 6 e du Louvre, Paris (Melli, 2002b, p. 210).

Inscription: 'Paolo Vccello' (on a label attached to the mount written by Baldinucci, vol. I, p. 17, Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 406)

The polyhedron was drawn with pen and ink, with watercolour for the shadows, over a corresponding incised design. On the reverse of the sheet geometric figures are visible in transmitted light (Melli, 2 0 0 2 b , p. 2 1 0 ) . Its attribution to Uccello dates from at least the eighteenth century, judging by the inscription with Uccello's name on the mount, apparently written by Baldinucci. The attribution is probably based on Vasari's description of drawings by Uccello showing: 'spheres of seventy-two faces and punte' Cpalle a 72 facce a punte di diamantV, Vasari, 1 9 7 1 , p. 6 2 : 1 5 6 8 ed.). Whether Vasari was right about Uccello's authorship of the drawings he saw cannot be confirmed. Uccello's paintings leave no room for doubt that he must have made sophisticated perspective drawings like the Polyhedron, the mazzocchi

for

in the Battle paintings and the Flood. The drawing in the Louvre, however, is not likely

to have been a preparatory drawing for a narrative painting, since the object has no obvious function, other than to display the artist's virtuoso draughtsmanship. Although, such an abstract design may have been used for intarsia, a pavimento or for painted decoration on a piece of furniture.

Bibliography: Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), p. 450: referred to spheres with seventy-two faces and punte, with shavings around a stick on each side by Uccello, paraphrasing Vasari; Degenhart and Schmitl, 1968, vol. II, p. 406, 647: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 100: Ucccllo; Salmi, 1977, p. 373, vol. 1: Uccello, probably before 1425; Cristiani Testi, 1981, p. 11: attributed to Uccello; Berardi, 1992, p. 496: Uccello; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 138: attributed to Uccello; Roccasecea, 1998, pp. 133-134, 137: no attribution, though technically similar to a method of construction described by Piero della Francesca; Melli, 2002b, pp. 210-212: attributed to Uccello.

C a t . 54. ChildRiding

a Camel; A 'Castoro' (recto), Unicorn Attacking a Doe; A Basilisk (verso)

c. mid-fifteenth century Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. NM 45a/1863 (recto), N M 466/1863 (verso) 25.8 x 17.5 cm, paper

244 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: UNCERTAIN ATTRIBUTIONS

Provenance: formerly Giorgio Vasari Collection; Pietro Vasari; Niccolo Gaddi and descendents; Lord Arundel; Abbe Quesnel; Crozat; C.G. Tessin; Kongl. Biblioteket; Kongl. Museum; National museum, Stockholm (Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1069).

Inscriptions: 'CASTORO'; 'j piedj dj dreto uglono essere come quellj del locha' (recto); 'bavalisco' (verso); 'PAVLO VCCIELLO PIT: FIORENT:' on mount.

The drawing of the child is reminiscent of Christ in the Karlsruhe Adoration

and the camel's shaggy

hair recalls the dragon's shaggy hair in the Melbourne Saint George. Thus, it is not inconceivable that they were drawn by Uccello or were copied from drawings by him, by a workshop assistant or by a follower. The other drawings on the recto and verso are less fine and show no clearly Uccelloesque features.

Bibliography: Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 3 8 8 - 3 9 1 : Uccello, first half of the fifteenth century; Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 46 and vol. II, p. 39: attributed to Uccello; Ames-Lewis, 1987, pp. 2-3: Uccello (?); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1069: attributed to Uccello and his workshop.

CATALOGUE RAISONN& REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS 245

Part 4 a : Rejected Attributions, Female Portraits

Cat. 5 5 . Profile Portrait of a Woman

c. 1460s Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston, Inv. B-945 44.1 x 32.5 cm, panel

Provenance: unidentified Italian dealer; Bohler, Munich; Steinmayer, Paris; 1914, acquired for the Gardner Museum (Wohl, 1980, p. 179).

This work is close in style to the Profile Portrait of a Woman in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (Inv. 49.7.6 - see catalogue entry below), particularly in the decorative details of the headdress, the very long neck, the morphology of the eye and the small, pursed mouth. The painting in New York can be attributed to the Master of the Castello Nativity, and this painting may be by the same artist.

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1928a, p. 236: Uccello (?); Venturi, 1930, pp. 64-69: Uccello; Marangoni, 1932, p. 336: Uccello; Offner, 1933, p. 178: Master of the Castello Nativity; Pudelko, 1934, p. 294 n. 26, 250 n. 41: Karlsruhe Master; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 128: Karlsruhe Master; Lipman, 1936a, pp. 72, 76, 7 9 , 95, 96, 98, 101: Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1450-1475; Wedgwood Kennedy, 1936, p. 131: Master of the Castello Nativity; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 121: attributed to Domeinco Veneziano; Boeck, 1939, p. 120: not Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 150: Master of the Castello Nativity; Carli, 1954, p. 69: probably Domenico Veneziano; Berti, 1961, p. 304: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 98: doubtfully attributed to Uccello; Wohl, 1980, pp. 178-179: Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1460; Lachi, 1995, pp. 71-75: Master of the Castello Nativity, 1460s; Kanter, 2000, caption to Fig. 15, pp. 17-19: Uccello, c. 1460-1470; Brown, 2001b, pp. 112-114: attributed to Uccello, c 1460-1465.

Cat. 56. Profile Portrait of a Woman

c. third quarter of the fifteenth century National Gallery, London, Inv. 585 42.5 x 34.9 cm, panel

Provenance: 1857, acquired by the National Gallery, London.

T h i s portrait lacks any p o e t i c quality and manifestly h a s no relation to the work of U c c e l l o .

Bibliography: Berenson, 1896, p. 129: Uccello; Loeser, 1898, p. 8 8 : Uccello; Rossi, 1933, p. 5 0 : Uccello (?); Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 122: school of Antonio Pollaiuolo; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102: listed among the works sometimes attributed to Uccello; Wohl, 1980, p. 182: Pollaiuolo workshop, third quarter of the fifteenth century; Pagliai, 1996, p. 545 and Fig. 1: anon. Florentine artist, fifteenth century.

246 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

Cat. 57. Profile Portrait of a Woman

c. 1460s-1470s National Gallery, London; Inv. 758 62.9 x 40.6 cm, panel Provenance: previously with the dealer Egidi, Florence (Carli, 1954, p. 69) or the Pancrazi di Ascoli Piceno Collection (Flaiano andTongiorgiTomasi, 1971, p. 102); 1866, acquired by the National Gallery, London.

This elegant portrait was identified as a work of Baldovinetti by Roger Fry ( 1 9 1 1 , pp. 311-312) and most authors have agreed with his opinion since.

Bibliography: Berenson, 1900, p. 140: Uccello; Berenson, 1909, p. 186: Uccello (?); Fry, 1911, pp. 311-312: Baldovinetti; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 232,236: Uccello, 1450 o r later; Soupault, 1929, pp. 21-23: Uccello; Venturi, 1930, pp. 64-69: Domenico Veneziano; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 271, 274: Uccello; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 128: Baldovinetti; Lipman, 1936a, pp. 79, 95, 101: Baldovinetti, c. 1450-1475; Wedgwood Kennedy, 1936, pp. 1 3 1 133: Baldovinetti; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 122: Domenico Veneziano; Boeck, 1939, p. 113: listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Faison, 1940, p. 283: not Uccello, generally attributed to Baldovinetti; PopeHennessy, 1950, pp. 148-149: Baldovinetti; Longhi, 1952, p . 33 n. 11: Uccello or Baldovinetti; Carli, 1954, p p . 69-70, attributed by many authors to Baldovinetti; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102: listed among the works sometimes attributed to Uccello; Wohl, 1980, pp. 181-182: Baldovinetti, c. 1460-1470; Lachi, 1995, p. 7 3 : Baldovinetti; Pagliai, 1996, p. 545-546: Baldovinetti; Kantor, 2000, p. 20 n. 32: Baldovinetti.

Cat. 58. Profile Portrait of a Woman

c. third quarter of the fifteenth century National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, Inv. 1541/4 42.9 x 29.6 cm, panel

Provenance: 1858, Alexander Barker Collection; 1873, Francis Cook Collection, Richmond; 1902, Sir Frederick Cook Collection, Richmond; 1946, acquired by the Fellon Bequest for the National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne (Hoff and Devapriam, 1995, pp. 167).

In 1825 Piero della F r a n e c s c a ' s famous Diptych of Battista Sforza and Federigo da Montefeltro in the Galleria degli Uffizi w a s thought to depict ' P a n d o l f o Malalcsla Lord of Rimini a n d his wife Isotta' CPandolfo

Malatesta signore di Rimini e Isotta sua Moglie)

and w a s attributed to an anonymous

Tuscan artist. .Shortly thereafter the w o r k ' s real s u b j e c t s and artist were identified. Following this art historical breakthrough many of the surviving R e n a i s s a n c e profile portraits of w o m e n were also attributed to Picro, at least t w o of which were said to d e p i c t Isotta: the Profile Portrait of a Woman in the National Gallery of Victoria and the Profile Portrait of a Woman in the National Gallery, London (Inv. 5 8 5 ) . Daniela Pagliai (1996, pp. 543-553) s u g g e s t e d that these identifications were proposed to make the attribution of the works to Piero seem more c r e d i b l e . It is ironic that t w o of the least gracious profile portraits of the fifteenth century should have been identified a s an icon of Italian Renaissance

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS 247

romantic lore, although, the portraits may have been Tsottafied', as it were, in the nineteenth century precisely to make them appear more attractive to buyers. Just as the capable but undistinguished artist of the Melbourne portrait cannot have been Piero, so too the matronly and not very aristocratic woman depicted cannot be Isotta degli Atti. Curiously though, the woman's headdress in the Melbourne portrait, alone of Renaissance profile portraits of women, has false hair dangling from two horns, as in Matteo de' Pasti's medal portrait of Isotta, dated 1446 but made somewhat later ( d e ' Pasti made two medals of Isotta, an example of the second one showing false hair dangling from the headdress is in the MusCe du Louvre, Paris, Inv. OA 2880). There are other points of comparison between the Melbourne portrait and Isotta's medal: the slightly hunched back and double chin in the medal, which appear more prominently in the painting. However, other details of the costume, jewellery and headdress in the Melbourne painting differ from the image of Isotta in the medal. Might the subject of the Melbourne portrait have been Tsottafied' already in the fifteenth century, or are the correspondences a coincidence? It has been suggested that the Melbourne painting may be a posthumous portrait, based on perceived discrepancies between the style of the headdress (datable to the mid~1400s) and the style of the jewellery (datable to the late 1400s; Simons, 1987, pp. 39-44, 50). An artist working at the end of the 1400s looking for a model of feminine style from the mid-1400s might well have used a medal, particularly of a famous woman such as Isotta. T h e inscription of de' Pasti's first medal of Isotta described her as 'the ornament of Italy for beauty and virtue.' De' Pasti's second medal of Isotta was circulated widely, judging by the numerous surviving examples, making it a plausible model for the artist of the Melbourne painting. Van Marie tentatively attributed the work to Uccello, and this suggestion was accepted in the National Gallery of Victoria's catalogues following the work's acquisition until 1961, when the work was re-assigned to an anonymous Florentine artist, which attribution remains current (Hoff and Dcvapriam, 1995, p. 167).

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1928a, p. 236: Uccello (?); Lipman, 1936a, p. 95, 101: anon. Florentine Master, c. 14501475; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 149: Lippesque; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102: listed among the works sometimes attributed to Uccello; Simons, 1987, pp. 35-50: circle of Verrocchio, 1470-1490; Hoff and Devapriam, 1995, pp. 167-168: Italian (Florentine), late fifteenth century; Pagliai, 1996, pp. 546-547: anon. Florentine artist (citing Hoff, 1 973); Beaven, 2000, p. 26: Florentine; Beaven, 2003, Florentine, c. 1475.

Cat. 59. Profile Portrait of a Woman

c. 1460s

Metropolitan Museum, New York, Inv. 49.7.6 40 x 27.3 cm, canvas (transferred from wood)

Provenance: previously Holford Collection, London; Bache Collection (Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 98); Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

248 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

The paint surface seems worn and repainted, especially in the background, where, to the naked eye, the blue paint seems to fill the craquelure. While what is visible of the style of the original painting is broadly similar to the poetic idealisation of Uccello's style, there are no clear signs of Uccello's execution. Furthermore, the pastiglia technique in the headdress and necklace is not found in any of Uccello's panel paintings. The attribution of the work to the Master of the Castello Nativity is, however, justifiable. In particular, the subtly blended pink of the flesh tones and the shape of the eye are very close to the Angel on the left of the Master of the Castello Nativity's Virgin and Child with Angels in the Musee du Louvre.

Bibliography: Venturi, 1930, pp. 64-69: Uccello; Marangoni, 1932, p. 336: Uccello; Offner, 1933, p. 178: Master of the Castello Nativity; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 294 n. 2 6 , 250 n. 4 1 : Karlsruhe Master; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 128: Karlsruhe Master; Lipman, 1936a, pp. 72, 76, 7 9 , 96, 98, 101: Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1450-1475; Wedgwood Kennedy, 1936, p. 131: Master of the Castello Nativity; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 28-29, 118: Uccello, c. 1440; Boeck, 1939, p. 121: not Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 150: Master of the Castello Nativity; Carli, 1954, pp. 55-56: Uccello, close in date to the Assunta Chapel paintings, datable to a little after 1436; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 47-48: catalogued as attributed to Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 13: Uccello, but referred to the work in the Bache Collection as a portrait of Battista Sforza, so it may be confused with the work from the Lehman Collection; Berti, 1961, p. 304: Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 98: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1456; Wohl, 1980, p. 184: anon. Florentine artist, c. 1460; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 352-353: n o t Uccello, c. 1470-1475; Lachi, 1995, pp. 71-75: Master of the Castello Nativity, 1460s; Kanter, 2000, pp. 17-19: circle of Fra Filippo Lippi, possibly Master of the Castello Nativity; Brown, 2001b, p. 112 n. 2: anon. Florentine artist.

Cat. 60. Profile Portrait of a Woman

c. 1460s John G. Johnson Collection, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Inv. JC Cat 34 42.3 x 35 cm, previously panel - transferred to canvas

Provenance: by 1905, John G. Johnson Collection; 1917, bequeathed to the Philadelphia Museum of Art.

F. Mason Perkins attributed the Profile Portrait of a Woman to Ucccllo in 1905 (cited in Strehlke, 2 0 0 4 , pp. 379-382) although no o n e h a s ever fully accepted the attribution. Of all the female profile portraits associated with Uccello this is the crudest in style, without any of Ucccllo's lyrical geometricisalion of his human figures. The quality is comparable with Scheggia's, even if it is not absolutely typical of his works. Perhaps this painting shows Scheggia under the influence of the Master of the Castello Nativity, seen in the elongated neck a n d the emphasis on the decorative details of the costume and headdress.

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 236, 240: not Uccello; Wedgwood Kennedy, 1936, p. 131: probably Neri di Bicci; Lipman, 1936a, pp. 72, 79,96, 101: follower of Piero della Francesca, c. 1450-1475; Salmi, 1938(1939), p . 123: anonymous artist showing affinities with Uccello and Domenico Veneziano; Boeck, 1939, p. 121: not

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

249

Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 150: plausibly by Neri di Bicci; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102: listed among the works sometimes attributed to Uccello; Wohl, 1980, p, 185: Giovanni di Ser Giovanni, c. 1460; Pagliai, 1996, p. 550: Giovanni di Ser Giovanni; Bellosi, 1999b, p. 9 1 : Scheggia, 1460s; Brown, 2001b, p. 112 n. 3: Scheggia; Strehlke, 2004, pp. 379-382: Scheggia, c. 1460.

Cat. 6 1 . Profile Portrait of a Woman (sometimes identified as Battista Sforza)

c. 1460s private collection, location unknown 57.5 x 3 8 cm, panel

Provenance: prior to 1883, Toscanelli Collection, Florence; Aynard Collection, Paris (Wohl, 1980, pp. 184-185); Lehman Collection, New York; 1991, art market (Lachi, 1995, p. 71); Sard Gallery, Paris; private collection (Brown, 2001b, p. 112 n. 1).

Inscription: 'Portrait of Battista Sforza, wife of Federigo, Duke of Urbino, died 1473, by the hand of Piero della

Francesca' {' RITRATTO DI BATTISTA SFORZA, MOGLIE DI FEDERIGO, DUCA D'URBINO, MORI 1473. DALLA MANO DI PIERO DELLA FRANCESCA:, on the reverse, Wohl, 1980, p. 185).

Since the woman is depicted facing right, contrary to the majority of independent female profile portraits that face left, the work is probably missing a pendant showing her husband facing left. The inscription on the reverse of the work identifies it as a portrait of Battista Sforza by Piero della Francesca, but neither the attribution nor the identification of the subject need be accepted. The Diptych of Battista Sforza and Federigo da Montefeltro

in the Galleria degli Uffizi was identified as a

work of Piero della Francesca shortly after 1825 and subsequently a number of Renaissance profile portraits of women were indiscriminately identified as by Piero also (Pagliai, 1996, pp. 5 4 3 - 5 5 3 ) . In this instance, the anonymous author of the inscription followed the identification of the subject as well. The surface appears rather abraded, judging from photographs. The essential forms of the painting are still legible and these are in some ways comparable with Uccello's style, particularly in the geometricised shapes of the hands. However, the slightly pinched morphology and delicate pink colouring in the face is closer to the style of the Master of the Castello Nativity, in particular the Angel's head at the left of the Virgin and Child with Angels in the Musee clu Louvre.

Bibliography: Venturi, 1930, pp. 64-69: Uccello; Marangoni, 1932, p. 336: Uccello; Offner, 1933, p. 178: Master of the Castello Nativity; Pudelko, 1934, p. 249: Uccello; Pudelko, 1935c, p. 128: Uccello; Lipman, 1936a, pp. 68 n. 2 3 , 7 2 , 76, 79, 96, 98, 101: Master of the Caslello Nativity, c. 1450-1475; Wedgwood Kennedy, 1936, p. 131: possibly Domenico Veneziano; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 122: perhaps by Domenico Veneziano; Boeck, 1939, p. 121: not Uccello; Pope-FIennessy, 1950, p. 150: Master of the Castello Nativity; Berti, 1954, p. 9 1 : attributed to Domenico Veneziano; Carli, 1954, p. 69: probably not Uccello; Sterling, Raggio, Laclotte and B6guin, 1957, p. 45: catalogued as attributed to Uccello. The discussion stated that the attribution to the Master of the Castello Nativity seems the most probable, although the work's poor condition makes the attribution particularly difficult; Sterling, 1957, p. 4: close to Uccello; Cincinnati, 1959, p. 17: Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14 n. 5: not Uccello, referred to the Lehman Collection portrait, but incorrectly described the Bache Collection Portrait of a Woman as

250 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

Battista Sforza; Berti, 1961, p. 303: Uccello, c. 1465-1469; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102: listed among the works sometimes attributed to Uccello; Wohl, 1980, pp. 184-185: Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1460; Padoa Rizzo, 1983, pp. 79, 82: Uccello, c. 1465-1468; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 118: Uccello, c. 1467-1468; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 352: Domenico Veneziano (?), c. 1470-1475; Lachi, 1995, pp. 54, 71-75: Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1460s; Pagliai, 1996, p. 551 and Fig. 11: Master of the Castello Nativity (?); Kanter, 2000, pp. 17-19: there are correspondences to the Master of the Castello Nativity; Brown, 2001b, p. 112 n. 1: Master of the Castello Nativity.

Part 4b: Rejected Attributions, Group Portraits

Cat. 62. Profile Portraits of a Woman and a Man

c. early 1440s Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York; Inv. 89.15.19 64.1 x 41.9 cm, panel

Provenance: c. 1829, bought in Florence by Rev. John Sanford, Wellington, Somerset and London; Frederick 1

1

Henry Paul, bequeathed to 2 " Baron Methuen, Chippenham, Wiltshire; c. 1855-1883, sold to Henry G Marquand; 1889, donated to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York.

Few have seriously considered that this work might b e by Uccello. The gently rounded profile of the woman's face is almost identical to Lippi's Profile Portrait

of a Woman (Gemaldegalerie, Berlin) and

there is now a consensus that the painting in New York is also by him.

Bibliography: Berenson, 1896, p. 129: Uccello (?); Berenson, 1909, p. 186: Uccello; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 236237, 240: Uccello (?); Soupault, 1929, pp. 21-23: Uccello; Venturi, 1930, p. 69 n. 1, school of Filippo Lippi; Lipman, 1936a, pp. 7 2 , 8 3 , 88, 96, 101: workshop of Filippo Lippi, c. 1450-1475; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 122: n o attribution; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102: listed among the works sometimes attributed to Uccello; Holmes, 1999, pp. 129-135: Filippo Lippi, early 1440s; Brown, 200 la, pp. 106-108: Filippo Lippi, c. 1438-1444.

C a t . 6 3 . Portraits of Five Men (Giotto,

Uccello, Donatella,

Portrait of Five Florentines or Founders of Florentine

Manetti and Urunelleschi?)

(known as

Art)

c. late fifteenth century Musee du Louvre, Paris; Inv. 267 42 x 210 cm, panel

Location: 1550 and 1568, recorded by Vasari in the house of Giuliano da Sangallo, Florence; Louis Philippe Collection (Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 155); 1847, sale of the Stevens Collection (Carli, 1954, p. 60); Musee d u Louvre, Paris.

Inscriptions:

'GIOTTO', 0

'PAOLO

VCCELLO',

BRVNELLES ' (on the bottom of the fictive frame).

'DONATELLO',

'ANTONIO

MANETTI',

'FLIPPO

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

251

Vasari saw the painting in the house of the architect Giuliano da Sangallo in Florence, whose own portrait by Piero di Cosimo is in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam. In the 1550 edition of the Vite Vasari attributed the work to Masaccio and in the 1568 edition, to Uccello (see below for references), although neither attribution is acceptable. Indeed, virtually every aspect of the work has defied convincing interpretation: the date of the painting, the originality or otherwise of the inscriptions identifying the figures, the condition of the paint surface, and the artist or artists responsible. Recognising the pastiche like quality of the conception evident in the inconsistencies of lighting and portrait formats, Lanyi (1944, pp. 87-95) attributed the work to an anonymous artist copying portraits from Masaccio's Sagra in Santa Maria della Carmine, now lost. However, Pope-Hennessy (1950, pp. 154-156) was right to point out that the work's style is closer to Uccello than Masaccio., The portrait of Manetti is in some respects close to Uccello's Dublin Virgin and Child: the rounded shapes of the eyes and the way light falls on the lower eyelids and reflected light illuminates the upper eye sockets. However, the gormless portrait of Brunelleschi seems very far from Uccello's usually idealised style. Nor do the features of the face bears any resemblance to the deep-set eyes and thick nose of Brunelleschi's death mask in the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo or Buggiano's sculpted portrait of Brunelleschi in the Duomo. This casts doubt on the accuracy of the inscriptions identifying the figures. The thin, wash-like quality of the brushstrokes in some of the execution is not characteristic of Uccello, although the restored condition of the paint surface makes it difficult to be certain about the nature of the original execution (for a prerestoration photograph of the work showing extensive abrasion and paint losses along numerous horizontal cracks, see Carli, 1954, plate 63). The origin of the work remains a mystery, although it could conceivably have been produced by a follower of Uccello using his drawings as a model.

Bibliography: Vasari, 1550 (1991), vol. I, pp. 273-274: Masaccio; Vasari 1568 (1971) p. 70: Uccello; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 296: Uccello; Wornum, 1864, p. 258: Uccello; Berenson, 1896, p. 130: Uccello; Loescr, 1898, p. 87: ovcrpainung makes it difficult to form a conclusion as to the attribution; Berenson, 1900, p. 140: Uccello; Berenson, 1909, p. 186: Uccello; Longhi, 1927, p. 4 8 : Uccello; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265: Uccello; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 244: feasibly by Uccello; Soupault, 1929, pp. 6, 20-21: Uccello; Longhi, 1927 (2002a), p. 66: Ucccllo; Venturi, 1930, p. 63: Uccello; Boeck, 1931b, pp. 145-147: Uccello and Masaccio, c. 1425; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 271, 274: Uccello and Masaccio, 1436; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 233-234, 242, 249: Uccello; Lipman, 1936a, p. 101: workshop of Uccello, c. 1450-1475; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 39-40, 1 18: Uccello, c. 1450; Boeck, 1 939, pp. 111-112: listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Longhi, 1942 (2002b), p. 126: anon., late fifteenth century; Lanyi, 1944, pp. 87-95: anon, (after Masaccio's Sagra);

Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp.

154-156: more closely associable with Uccello than any other artist; Carli, 1954, pp. 60-61: probably Uccello, 1450-1460, reproduction shows the work in a fairly damaged condition, Parronchi, 1957a, p. 10: [Uccello]; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14 n. 5: not Uccello, possibly sixteenth-century disciple or imitator; Sterling, Hulftegger, Adhemar, Baticle and Beguin, 1960, p. 27: attributed to Uccello; Berti, 1961, p. 304; Uccello, c. 1450; Berti, 1967, p. 4 7 n. 134: 'given to Uccello', but a 'pastiche of Masaccio done in the late Quattrocento'; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 96: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1450; Joost-Gaugier, 1974a, pp. 233-238: closely associated with Uccello if not by him; Wakayama, 1982, p. 99 and Fig. 6: Uccello (?); Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 129: Uccello; c. 1470; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 353-355: not Uccello, c. 1500-1565; Joannides, 1993, pp. 465-466, Uccello (?), c. 1450, was probably not commissioned by Giuliano (d. 1516), whose proposed completion of Santo

252 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

Spirito was criticised by Manetti in his biography of Brunelleschi; Collareta, 1996, pp. 50-51: attributed to Uccello; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, pp. 46-47 (including caption to illus.): attributed to Uccello; Kent, 2000, p. 3 4 3 : Uccello.

Part 4c: Rejected Attributions, Male Portraits

Cat. 64. Profile Portrait of a Young Man

c. first third of the fifteenth century Isabella Stewart Gardner Museum, Boston 41 x 30 cm, panel

Provenance: Costantini (dealer), Florence; from 1898, Isabella Stewart Gardner Collection, then the Gardner Museum in Boston (Joannides, 1993, p. 45).

T h e morphology of the eyes, the nose and the lips in t h e B o s t o n portrait is close t o that in t h e W a s h i n g t o n Profile Portrait of a Young Man, with a similar hard-edged definition o f forms, unlike t h e lightness of touch in U c c e l l o ' s Profile Portrait of a Young Man in Indianapolis. It m a y b e attributable to Masaccio.

Bibliography: Van Marie, 1928a, p. 268: Masaccio; Lipman, 1936a, pp. 64, 83, 101: follower of Masaccio, c. 1430-1435; Berti, 1961, p. 304: Masaccioesque; Berti, 1967, pp. 8 3 , 166: attributed to Uccello; Joannides, 1993, p . 45: Florentine school, c. 1430; Del Bravo, 1996, p. 255: Masaccio; Boskovils, 1997a, pp. 259-260: Masaccio.

Cat. 65. Profile Portrait of a Young Man

c. 1440s Musee des Beaux-Arts, Chambery, Inv. 930 46.3 x 36.4 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly Garrod Collection; 1850, donated to the Musee des Beaux-Arts, Chambery (Joannides, 1993, p. 458).

Inscription: 'ELFIN • FATVTTO

(on the parapet)

T h e w o r k ' s provenance prior to the nineteenth century is u n k n o w n . It was cleaned around 1956, revealing, in Pope-Henncssy's opinion, a less U c c c l l o e s q u c style than previously

(Pope-Hennessy,

1969, introduction and p. 148), although he maintained his earlier attribution to Uccello. The style o f this work as it now appears is close to, though n o t identical with, that of t h e Profile Portrait of Matteo Olivieri and the Profile Portrait of Michele Olivieri, and can b e disassociated with Uccello for t h e s a m e reasons that these works can be (see their catalogue entries b e l o w ) . F u r t h e r m o r e , the infrared photograph of the C h a m b e r y portrait in the conservation file for the work at the C e n t r e de Recherche e t

CATALOGUE RAISONNE-: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS 253

de Restauration des Musees de France shows bold, thick underdrawing unlike anything revealed so far by the infrared examinations of Uccello's works. Boskovits (1997a, p. 2 6 0 , Figs 10-11) has shown that the head is very close to one by Domenico Veneziano in the Adoration of the Magi (Staatliche Museen, Gemaldegalerie, Berlin), and so Veneziano may well be the artist responsible for the Chambery portrait.

Bibliography: Longhi, 1927, pp. 46-48: Uccello, 1430-1440; Longhi, 1927 (2002a), p. 66: Uccello; Van Marie, 1928a, p . 240: attributed to Uccello; Venturi, 1930, p. 6 3 : Uccello; Marangoni, 1932, p. 336: Uccello; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 242, 249-250: Uccello, c. first half of the 1440s: Lipman, 1936a, pp. 64, 92, 101: follower of Masaccio, c. 1430-1435, inscription added later; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 30-31, 118: Uccello (?), c. 1443; Boeck, 1939, p. 120: not Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 147-148: Uccello, c. 1430-1435; Baldini, 1954b, p.18: Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 69: Domenico Veneziano or circle; Micheletti, 1954, p. 29: catalogued as Uccello, generally date c. 14401443; Parronchi, 1957a, p. 10: Uccello; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14 a 5: not Uccello; Berti, 1961, p. 304: Uccello, before 1436; Berti, 1967, p. 8 3 : attributed to Uccello; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 382: Uccello; PopeHenncssy, 1969, intro. and p. 148: Uccello, c. 1430-1435; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 87: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 1430-1445; Wohl, 1980, pp. 138-139: 'given to Uccello'; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 347: doubtfully by Uccello, c. 1435-1440; Joannides, 1993, p. 458: Uccello (?), c. 1430; Del Bravo, 1996, p. 2 5 6 : Domenico di Bartolo; c. 1440; Boskovits, 1997a, p. 260: Domenico Veneziano, c. 1440; Boskovits, 2003c, p. 240: Domenico Veneziano, around 1435.

Cat. 66. Profile Portrait of Michele

Olivieri

c. 1440 Chrysler Museum, Norfolk (Boskovits, 2003d, p. 266), Inv. 83.584 45 x 32.4 cm, panel

Provenance: Rockerfeller Collection, New York; Walter P. Chrysler; Chrysler Museum, Norfolk (Boskovits, 2003d, p. 266).

Inscription: 'MICHAEL OLIVIERI MATHEI FILIVS'.

S e e e n t r y for the Profile Portrait oj'Matteo Olivieri b e l o w .

Bibliography: Venturi, 1930, p. 63: Uccello; Marangoni, 1932, p. 336: Uccello; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 270-271 274: Uccello, c. 1420s; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 242, 249: Uccello, c. 1430s; Lipman, 1936a, pp. 75, 92, 95, 101 and Fig. 30: follower of Uccello, c. 1425-1450, inscription added later; Wedgwood Kennedy, 1936, p. 132: Uccello, late work; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 122: Domenico Veneziano; Boeck, 1939, p. 1 10: listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 148: Domenico Veneziano (?), shortly after 1440; Longhi, 1952, p. 33 n. 1 1: after Domenico Veneziano; Carli, 1954, p. 69: Domenico Veneziano or circle; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14 n. 5: not Uccello, orbit of Masaccio; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 87: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 14331434; Wohl, 1980, pp. 138-140: workshop of Domenico Veneziano, c. 1440-1450; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 347: attributed to Domenico Veneziano, c. 1435-1445; Boskovits, 1997a, pp. 256-257: anon. Florentine artist, probably an artist from the circle of Filippo Lippi, not far removed from the Master of the Castello Nativity, c.

254 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

1425-1450; Holmes, 1999, pp. 128-129: attributed to Domenico Veneziano, c. 1440; Boskovits, 2003d, pp. 2 6 6 270: just possibly by the Master of the Castello Nativity.

Cat. 67. Profile Portrait of a Man

fifteenth century (?) Vittorio Gecchinelli Collection, Turin, in 1962-1963 37 x 23 cm, support unrecorded

Provenance: unrecorded

The work is a fairly crudely painted version of the drawing Profile Portrait of a Man (Inv. 28E) in the Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi. Judging by the photograph of the painting in the KIFFototeca (Uccello Italien Ausser Florenz box, image no. 241781), there is no clear indication of Uccello's execution. On the reverse of the photograph of the work in the KIF Fototeca are copies of certificates of authenticity by S. Tenani (1962) and Longhi (1963).

Bibliography: unpublished

Cat. 68. Profile Portrait of Matteo Olivieri

c. 1440 National Gallery of Art, Washington, Inv. 1937.1.15 47.9 x 34.1 cm, panel (transferred to canvas)

Provenance: Stefano Bardini Collection, Florence; probably Luigi Bellini; 1924, sold to Duveen Brothers Inc., London and New York; 1936, purchased for the A.W. Mellon Educational and Charitable Trust, Pittsburgh; National Gallery of Art, Washington (Boskovits, 2003d, p. 266).

Inscription: 'MATHEVS OLIVIERI DNI 10ANNI FILL (on parapet on the obverse); 'ASPOIL...OTES' (on the reverse).

The Profile Portrait of Matteo Olivieri and the Profile Portrait of Michele Olivieri arc pendants of similar dimensions and formal, depicting a father and son, and arc evidently by the same hand. The artist was highly competent, defining the faces with precise, angular, hard edges, even if the ears are set rather far back. The soft, restless contours of Mattco's turban suggest-the influence of Pisanello, while the hard-edged style of the faces suggests an artist active in Florence, although who that was remains unclear. Uccello's presumed portrait of Dello Dclli in the guise of Ham in the Stories of Noah in Santa Maria Novella, with its profile format, turban and sober expression, is probably what led to Uccello's association with these panel paintings, although there the ear is set much further forward. The Profile Portrait of a Young Man in the Museum of Art, Indianapolis, is very similar to the head of Ham, as seen in the succession of rounded contours that define the entire bead. Using the work in Indianapolis

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS 255

as a standard of Uccello's portrait style on panel, with its luminous treatment of the flesh tones, lightly defined contours and geometric stylisation of shapes, his authorship of the Olivieri portraits can be safely discounted.

Bibliography: Venturi, 1930, p. 63-64: Uccello; Marangoni, 1932, p. 336: Uccello; Boeck, 1933b, pp. 270-271, 274: Uccello, c. 1420s; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 242, 249: Uccello, c. 1430s; Lipman, 1936a, p. 101: follower of Uccello, c. 1425-1450, inscription added later; Wedgwood Kennedy, 1936, p. 132: Uccello, late work; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 123: Domenico Veneziano; Boeck, 1939, p. I l l : listed in the category of works fully or partly by Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 148: Domenico Veneziano (?), shortly after 1440; Longhi, 1952, p. 33 n. 11: after Domenico Veneziano; Carli, 1954, p. 69: Domenico Veneziano or circle; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14 n. 5: not Uccello, orbit of Masaccio; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p . 87: usually attributed to Uccello, c. 14331434; Wohl, 1980, pp. 138-140: workshop of Domenico Veneziano, c. 1440-1450; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 347: attributed to Domenico Veneziano, c. 1435-1445; Boskovits, 1997a, pp. 256-257: anon. Florentine artist, probably an artist from the circle of Filippo Lippi, not far removed from the Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1425-1450; Plolmes, 1999, p p . 128-129: attributed to Domenico Veneziano, c. 1440; Boskovits, 2003d, pp. 2 6 8 270: anon. Florentine artist, just possibly the Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1430-1440.

C a t . 69- Profile Portrait of a Young Man

c. first third of the fifteenth century National Gallery of Art, Washington; Inv. 1937.1.14 42.4 x 32.5 cm, panel

Provenance: probably by 1808-1811, Alexis-Francois Artaud de Montor Collection, Paris; 1851, sold to John Hahn, Paris; Jules Feral, Paris; June 1936, bought by Duveen Brothers Inc., London and New York; Dec. 1936, bought by Andrew W. Mellon Collection (Boskovits, 2003f, p. 4 5 3 ) , National Gallery of Art, Washington.

The identity of the painter of the portrait is not clear, but the hard-edged style of the execution in the face excludes Uccello's authorship.

Bibliography: De Montor, 1843, plate 49: Masaccio; Pudelko, 1934, p. 294 n. 26: Uccello; Lipman, 1936a, p. 101: follower of Uccello, 1425-1450; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 147-148: anon. Florentine artist; Berti, 1967, pp. 83, 166: circle of Uccello; Joannides, 1993, pp. 460-461: Florentine School, c. 1430; Boskovits, 1997a, pp. 257-259: Masaccio; Boskovits, 20031", p . 453-454: Masaccio, c. 1422-1423.

P a r t 4 d : Rejected A t t r i b u t i o n s , Various Subjects

C a t . 70. A Saint

c. fifteenth century San Gottardo, Asolo a small fragment of uneven dimensions; mural painting

256 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

Uccello's stay in Venice is so intriguing that there have been understandable attempts to find evidence of his work there, other than the few remaining mosaics and pavimenti

in San Marco. Fiocco and

Longhi are the only authors to have seen the possibility of Uccello's authorship of this fragmentary mural painting (see below for the references), of which only the head, halo and the top of the fictive architectural niche survive. There is no substantial stylistic evidence to associate the work with Uccello.

Bibliography: Fiocco, 1923-1924, pp. 192-196: Uccello (?), [after 1425]; Longhi, 1926, p. 132: Uccello; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 250: school of Uccello; Pudelko, 1934, p. 253: not Uccello; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 32, 122,154155: anon. Venetian artist; Boeck, 1939, p. 119: not Uccello; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 168: not Uccello; Carli, 1954, p. 70: not Uccello; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102: listed among the works sometimes attributed to Uccello; Wohl, 1980, p. 141: anon, artist associated with or influenced by Antonio Vivarini, c. 1450; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 349: not Uccello, c. 1450 (?).

C a t . 7 1 . Coronation of the Virgin (?)

1434 putative painting of a cartoon or window in the Duomo in Florence

Milanesi (ed., in Vasari, 1981, p. 211 n. [cross]) asserted that in 1434 Uccello painted a cartoon for a window in the chapel of Saint Zenobi in the Duomo in Florence, without providing a source for his information. Marquand (1900, p. 192) recorded that Uccello helped Bernardo di Francesco execute Donatello's design for the Coronation of the Virgin window in the drum of the cupola above the chapel of Saint Zenobi, giving 14 April 1434 as the date for the (payment for the?) design, and 4 October 1434 for the (payment for the?) execution, but also did not provide references for his sources. No other author has followed either of these suggestions.

Bibliography: Milanesi (ed.) 1878 in Vasari, (1981), p. 21 I n. |cross]: Uccello painted a cartoon for a window, in the chapel of Saint Zenobi, 1434; Marquand, 1900, p. 192: the execution of the window, designed by Donatello, was by Bernardo di Francesco and Paolo Uccello, 1434; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 264: Uccello, 1434, referred to a cartoon for a window in the chapel of Saint Zanobi; Pope-Ucnnessy, 1950, p. 145: not Uccello, referred to the Coronation; Martin, 2001, pp. 558-567: Donatello, referred to the

Coronation.

Cat. 72. Nativity

c. third quarter of the fifteenth century National Gallery, London, Inv. 3648 21.9 x 65.8 cm, panel

Provenance: by 1907-1922, Sir Henry Howorth Collection; 1922, given to the National Gallery, London (Strehlke, 2005, p. 160).

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

257

The Nativity is one of three predella panels from the altarpiece formerly in the church of Santi Giusto e Clemente in Faltugnano, north of Prato. The altarpiece is on deposit at the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, Prato. The two other predella panels are in the Philadelphia Museum of Art, John G. Johnson Collection (Strehlke, 2005, p. 160). Parronchi proposed the attribution of the London panel to Uccello, suggesting that it came from the Carnesecchi Chapel in Santa Maria Maggiore (Parronchi, 1964a, pp. 214-219). While the minimalist treatment of the mis-en-scene

and the charming naturalism of the ox

and the ass are Uccelloesque, the similarities are only superficial. Viewed in relation to the other panels of the predella, which have nothing to do with Uccello stylistically, there is no question of Uccello's involvement.

Bibliography: Parronchi, 1962 (1964a), pp. 214-219: Uccello, c. 1425; Berti, 1967, p. 77: 'there is much to say for Parronchi's recent attribution to Uccello'; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 85: commonly rejected as a work of Uccello, c. 1425; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 9 , 1 1 : Uccello, c. 1425; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 345-346: probably not Uccello, c. 1424-1425; Joannides, 1993, p. 351: follower of Masaccio, dating to a decade after Masaccio's death; Gordon, 2003, pp. 248-253: Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1457; Strehlke, 2004, pp. 276280: Master'of the Castello Nativity, before 1469; Strehlke, 2005, p. 160: Master of the Castello Nativity, c. 1460.

C a t . 73. Crucifixion (a part thereof)

c. 1429-1431 San Clemente (Capelladel Sacrmento), Rome not measured, detached mural painting and sinopia

T h e style of the sinopia in the left area of the Crucifixion

scene on the back wall of the Capella del

Sacrmento in San Clemente in Rome is different from Masolino's sinopie elsewhere in the chapel. Consequently, there h a s been speculation that Masolino worked in the chapel with an assistant, but w h o ? Masaccio, Domenico Veneziano (Berti, 1 9 6 7 , pp. 127-132), and Uccello (tentatively, Mode, 1972, p. 3 7 7 ) have all been suggested. However, the style of the sinopia in Rome is not close to Uccello's sinopie in the Creation Scenes at Santa Maria Novella, datable a few years after the San Clemenle mural paintings. In the sinopia in Rome the figures are precisely and thoroughly drawn a n d softly shaded, with few revisions; in Uccello's sinopie in Florence, the figures are very freely drawn, with emphatic contours, minimal modeling of light a n d shade, and many of the contours left unresolved.

Bibliography: Berti, 1967, p p . 127-132: probably Masaccio; Mode, 1972, p. 377: very tentative attribution of part of the execution to Uccello, in collaboration with Masolino; Wohl, 1980, pp. 172-173: probably Masolino, 14291431; Joannides, 1993, pp. 402-403: no conclusion as to Uccello's possible collaboration with Masolino on the Crucifixion.

258 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

Cat. 74. Virgin and Child Enthroned

c. mid-1430s-1440s location unknown 80.7 x 53.3 cm, panel

Provenance: formerly with Malmedy, Cologne; Dr Pickardt Collection; private collection; 11 July 2001, Christie's sale, London, no. 69 (Christie's, 2001, pp. 174475).

T h i s small devotional panel was unknown to t h e U c c e l l o literature until it c a m e up for auction a t Christie's in L o n d o n in 2001 with an attribution t o Uccello provided by Everett Fahy (see below). T h e influence of Lorenzo M o n a c o in the style a n d colours o f t h e V i r g i n ' s drapery is m u c h stronger than i n any work by Uccello. However, Fahy w a s right t o c o m p a r e the features o f the Virgin and Child w i t h those in U c c e l l o ' s P r a t o Birth of the Virgin a n d t h e Del B e c c u t o Virgin and Child, and c l o s e examination reveals s o m e adventurous effects, s u c h a s the cornice of the throne visible through t h e semi-transparent cloth of honour. Uccello probably w o r k e d on the A s s u n t a Chapel paintings w i t h assistants and it is possible that this panel is by a n a n o n y m o u s c o l l a b o r a t o r of U c c e l l o ' s . The abraded faces m a k e a more precise j u d g m e n t difficult.

Bibliography: Christie's, 2001, pp. 174-175: Paolo Uccello, 'early', based on an opinion provided by Everett Fahy.

Cat. 75. Anticlockwise Spired

c. second quarter of the fifteenth century (?) San Marco, Venice (in the cupola of San Leonardo on the right of the transept) diameter 100 cm, mosaic

W h i l e the Wheel with Ribbons in the lunette of the fifth cupola of the atrium of San Marco, h e r e attributed to Uccello, also contains a spiral motif, it is based on a much m o r e regular geometry than t h e Anticlockwise

Spiral.

Unless the mosaic maker w h o executed this d e s i g n strayed very far from a n

original design by Uccello, it seems that this work w a s not designed by Ucccllo, although it may h a v e been inspired by his work.

Bibliography: Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 8 5 : recently attributed to Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 13-14: attributed to Uecello; Cristiani Testi, 1981, p. I 1 Fig. 15: Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Merkel, 1989, pp. 226-227: not Ucccllo, although perhaps influenced by him.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS 259

Cat. 76. Clockwise

Spiral

c. second quarter of the fifteenth century (?) San Marco, Venice (in the cupola of San Giovanni on the left of the transept) diameter 100 cm, mosaic

Like the Anticlockwise

Spiral, the Clockwise Spiral is too irregular to compare with Uccello's work.

Bibliography: Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 85: recently attributed to Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Merkel, 1989, pp. 226-227: not Uccello, although perhaps influenced by him.

Cat. 77. Heads of Two Dignitaries from the Meeting of the Magi and Herod; Upper Bodies of Two Soldiers from the Massacre of the Innocents

c. fourteenth century Museo di San Marco, Venice c. 25 x 20, c. 25 x 20, c. 80 x 81 and c. 55 x 52 cm, detached mosaic fragments

Provenance: formerly on the west and east walls of the ante-baptistery of San Marco, transferred to the Museo di San Marco, Venice.

The Heads of Two Dignitaries from the Meeting of the Magi and Herod were detached from the mosaics in a vault on the east wall of the ante-baptistery of San Marco in Venice, between 1865 and 1875 (Merkel, 1989, pp.225-226), and the Upper Bodies of Two Soldiers from the Massacre of the Innocents

were detached from the west wall probably at the same time. The compositions of the

original mosaics were recorded in oil paintings by Leonardo Gavagnin in 1865, the mosaics were then mostly destroyed to allow essential stabilisation of the walls of the basilica, and the mosaics were replaced by modern copies (M. Da Villa Urbani, 2003, p. 6 1 ; E. Vio, 2003, pp. 66-69). The original mosaics from the baptistery show scenes from the life of Saint John the Baptist and the childhood of Christ and arc believed to date from the time of Doge Andrea Dandolo (1343-1354, Spier and Morrison, 1997, pp. 73-75, based on notes by R. Barison, G. Mariacher and E. Merkel). The Heads of Two Dignitaries from the Meeting of the Magi and Herod share with these fourteenth-century mosaics one stylistic feature: the shaded areas between the eyelid and eyebrow, and they probably date from the same period, thereby excluding Uccello's authorship. This dating is entirely consistent with the archaic style of the original mosaics as they are recorded in Gavagnin's paintings.

Bibliography: D'Ancona, 1960, p. 6: referred to 'heads of warriors and figures of soldiers' attributed to Uccello by modern authors, c. 1425-1430; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 86: recently attributed to Uccello, c. 14251430; Merkel, 1989, pp. 225-226: Uccello, referred to the Heads of Two Men; Vio, 2003, captions to Figs 39-47: anon, fourteenth-century artist.

260 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: REJECTED ATTRIBUTIONS

Cat. 78. Saint Bernardino

c. first half of the fifteenth century San Marco, Venice (in the cupola of San Leonardo) 280 x 90 cm, mosaic

The desire to find surviving evidence of Uccello's mosaic work in San Marco has led to the speculative attribution of a number of mosaics signed by other artists, including this work signed by 'Antonio' [di Jacopo]. There is no clear reason, stylistic or otherwise, to attribute the design of this figure to Uccello.

Bibliography: Fiocco, 1925-1926, pp. 114-116: Maestro Antonio [di Jacopo], 1458; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 32: Maestro Antonio; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 6: attributed to Uccello by modern authors, c. 1425-1430; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 85-86: commonly attributed to Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Mode, 1972, p. 373: doubtfully by Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Merkel, 1989, pp. 226-227,236-241: Antonio di Jacopo.

C a t 79. Saint Paul, the First Hermit

c. first half of the fifteenth century San Marco, Venice (in the cupola of San Leonardo) 280 x 90 cm, mosaic

This work is signed 'ANTfONIO DI JACOPO] . F E C I T . ' , and there is no real reason to doubt that it entirely his design.

Bibliography: Fiocco, 1925-1926, pp. 114-116: Maestro Antonio [di Jacopo|, 1458; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 32: Maestro Antonio; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 6: attributed to Uccello by modern authors, c. 1425-1430; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 85-86: commonly attributed to Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Mode, 1972, p. 373: Uccello, c. 1425-1430; Merkel, 1989, p. 226-227, 236-241: Antonio di Jacopo.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS 261

P a r t 5: Lost W o r k s

Cat. 80.

Annunciation

1443 a design for the window formerly in the drum of the cupola of the Duomo in Florence; the design is lost and the window destroyed

A n e n t r y in the a c c o u n t b o o k s o f the O p e r a d e l D u o m o in F l o r e n c e , d a t e d 18 F e b r u a r y 1 4 4 4 , r e c o r d s a p a y m e n t of 4 0 lire to U c c e l l o f o r the d e s i g n of the Annunciation

w i n d o w ( P o g g i , 1 9 8 8 , v o l . I, p . 1 4 5 ,

d o c . 7 6 1 ) , w h i c h w a s m a d e by B e r n a r d o di F r a n c e s c o ( P o g g i , 1 9 8 8 , v o l . I, p. 1 4 6 , d o c s 7 6 8 , 7 6 9 ) . T h e w i n d o w w a s d e s t r o y e d by lightening a n d r e m o v e d i n 1 8 2 8 ( A c i d i n i L u c h i n a t , 1 9 9 5 , p . 2 7 9 ) . T h e r e is n o k n o w n record of its a p p e a r a n c e .

Bibliography: Marquand, 1899, p. 193; Berenson, 1909, p . 186; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), pp. 264-265; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 205, 2 1 6 ; Venturi, 1930, p. 6 3 ; Poggi, 1933, pp. 326, 334-336; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 119; PopeHennessy, 1950, p. 145; Salmi, 1950, p. 26; Carli, 1954, pp. 58, 67; Michelctti, 1954, pp. 22-23; D ' A n c o n a , 1960, p. 14: Uccello; Berti, 1961, p. 303; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 92; Marchini, 1987, p . 12; Angelini, 1990a, p. 7 5 ; Padoa Rizzo, 1991, p. 82, 1444; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 319-320; Acidini Luchinat, 1995, p. 279; Bambach, 1999, p. 219; Martin, 2001, pp. 562-567; Angelini, 2002b, p. 204.

Cat. 8 1 . Annunciation

and Four

Evangelists

c. 1423 mural painting or panel; lost or destroyed

Of U c c e l l o ' s lost w o r k s t h e Annunciation

and Four Evangelists

f o r m e r l y in t h e c h u r c h o f S a n t a M a r i a

M a g g i o r e in F l o r e n c e is t h e m o s t important in a r t historical t e r m s . B a s e d on V a s a r i ' s t e s t i m o n y and t h e historical e v i d e n c e indicating a date of c. 1423 d i s c u s s e d in C h a p t e r 4 , it a p p e a r s to h a v e b e e n a m o n g the earliest fifteenth-century paintings in F l o r e n c e to d e m o n s t r a t e in an i m p r e s s i v e m a n n e r the n e w a c c o m p l i s h m e n t s in p e r s p e c t i v e . T h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s of the c o m m i s s i o n b r o u g h t U c c e l l o and M a s a c c i o t o g e t h e r in the k e y early y e a r s of the fifteenth c e n t u r y that s a w t h e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of t h e use of p e r s p e c t i v e and every a s p e c t of the arts. L u c i a n o Berti r e c o g n i s e d t h e i m p o r t a n c e of this m o m e n t , w h e n h e w r o t e : ' T h e r e c a n be n o doubt: M a s a c c i o and P a o l o m u s t h a v e met, a n d it w a s p e r h a p s the m o s t difficult of all M a s a c c i o ' s e n c o u n t e r s b e c a u s e c o n v e r s a t i o n b e t w e e n t h e m m u s t h a v e b e e n like t w o s w o r d - b l a d e s that c l a s h ' (Berti, 1967, p. 7 8 ) .

Bibliography, n.b. most authors accept that Uccello painted the Annunciation and Four Evangelists, opinions differ more as to their date: Albertini, 1510 (1972), [p. 6]: Uccello painted the predella and the vault; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), pp. 63-64; Borghini, 1584 (1967), p. 309; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), p. 447: Biadi, 1824, p. 139: referred to an Annunciation by Uccello on the first pillar on the right after the entrance to the church; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 297 n. 1: Uccello; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 2 4 5 ;

262 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS

Soupault, 1929, p. 13; Pudelko, 1934, pp. 243-245, 250: after 1430; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 18, 119: 1430s; Boeck, 1939, p. 123; Micheletti, 1954, p. 2 3 ; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 171; Carli, 1954, pp. 66-67; Bcrti, 1961, p . 301: prior to 1425; Parronchi, 1962 (1964a), pp. 182-225: c. 1425; Panonchi, 1966, pp. 5 2 , 5 5 : before 1425; Berti, 1967, pp. 77-78: 1425; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Parronchi, 1974, p p . 8-12: c. 1425; Marino, 1991, p. 247; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 284-286: c. 1424-1425 (?); Saalman, 1993, pp. 96, 102-103: perhaps after 1430; Padoa Rizzo, 1997, p. 38: before Aug. 1425; Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002b, pp. 81-86: c. 1423.

Cat. 82. Ascension of Christ

a putative lost design for a window in drum of the cupola of the Duomo in Florence

The Opera del Duomo's accounts record a payment to Uccello on 2 May 1443 of 40 lire for the design of the Ascension window. Poggi (1933, pp. 3 3 4 - 3 3 6 ) argued this was a scribe's error, who should have written 'Resurrection' when he wrote 'Ascension', because the existing Ascension window was in fact designed by Ghiberti as other payments record, as the style of the window demonstrates, and as Ghiberti testified in his / Commentarii. Poggi interpreted the amount of 4 0 lire declared owing to Uccello on 8 July for the Resurrection as evidence of a revision of the same commission.

Bibliography: Milanesi (ed.) 1878 in Vasari, (1981), p . 211 n. [cross]: Uccello, 1443; Bcrenson, 1909, p. 186: Uccelio, 1443; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), pp. 264-265: Uccello, 1443; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 205, 216: Uccello, 1443; Venturi, 1930, p. 63: [Uccello - referred to Uccello's windows collectively]; Poggi, 1933, pp. 334-336: Ghiberti, 1443; Carli, 1954, p. 58: on 2 May 1443 Uccello was paid for a design that was overlooked in favour of one by Ghiberti; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 92: Uccello, 1443; Marchini, 1987, p. 12: Ghiberti; Acidini Luchinat, 1995, p. 279: Ghiberti designed the Ascension; Martin, 2001, pp. 562, 565-567: Ghiberti and an anon, assistant designed the Ascension.

Cat. 83. Battles, with 'Paolo Orsino, Ottobuono da Parma, Luca da Canale, and Carlo Malatesti Lord of Rimini' (four works)

date unknown panels (?)

Provenance: 1550 and 1568, in the garden of the Bailolini palazzo, Gualfonda (Vasari, 1971, p. 69: 1550 and 1568 eds); subsequently lost.

These works were described by Vasari in the 1568 edition of the Vite: 'In many houses in Florence are numerous pictures in perspective for the sides of couches, beds and other small things, by the hand of the same [Uccello]; and in Gualfonda particularly, in the garden that belonged to the Bartolini, are on a terrace 4 stories on panel by his hand full of battles, that is horses and men at arms with the beautiful costumes of those times; and among the men are depicted Paolo Orsino, Ottobuono da Parma, Luca da Canale, and Carlo Malatesti Lord of Rimini, all captains general of those times. And the said works were in our time - because they had deteriorated and suffered - restored by Giuliano Bugiardini, who

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS

has ruined them rather than fixed them.' (7n molte case di Firenze sono assai quadri in prospettiva vani di lettucci, letti et altre cose piccole, di mano del medissimo;

et in Gualfonda

263

per

particolarmente,

nell'orto che era de' Bartolini, e in un terrazzo di sua mano 4 storie in legname plena di guerre, cioe cavalli et uomini armati con portature di que' tempi bellissime;

efra gl'uomini e ritratto Paulo

Orsino,

Ottobuono da Parma, Luca da Canale, e Carlo Malatesti signor di Rimini, tutti capitani generali di que' tempi. E i detti quadri furono a' nostri tempi - perchi racconciare

da Giuliano Bugiardini,

erano guasti et avevon patito - fatti

che piu tosto ha loro nociuto che giovato.' Vasari, 1971, p. 69:

1568 ed.) Caglioti has tentatively identified the paintings with some large cupboards with scenes in perspective described in Andrea Bartolini's zihaldone as in the Camera Grande of his family's house in Via Porta Rossa. The house and its contents had belonged to his father, Lionardo, until his death in 1479. The house of one of Lionardo's heirs, Cosimo di Lionardo Bartolini, passed to Bartolomeo Bartolini's five sons, who built and owned, in turn, the property at Gualfonda, explaining how the paintings might have got there (Caglioti, 2001, pp. 49-50). Subsequently, Giovanni Vitelli acquired the house and gardens in 1598, and the paintings may have been lost at the time of the 1638 renovation of the gardens by Ricardo Riccardi (Home, 1901, pp. 116-119).

Bibliography: Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 69; Home, 1901, pp. 116-119; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 246; Soupault, 1929, p. 14: referred to the works as the Battle of San Romano; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 120; Boeck, 1939, p. 124; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 23-24; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 151, 172; Carli, 1954, p. 67; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 317: painted after 1440 (?).

C a t 84. Battle between Dragons and Lions and Story of Paris (?)

date(s) unknown Provenance: 1492 and 1598, in the Palazzo Medici, Florence; lost.

Information about a number of paintings by Uccello in the Medici Collection by the end of the fifteenth century, in addition to the Battle paintings taken from the Bartolini, comes from a 1492 inventory, Vasari, and a 1598 inventory, although the descriptions do not coincide precisely from one source to the next. The 1492 inventory of Lorenzo de' Medici's property described a Battle between

Dragons

and Lions and a Story of Paris by Uccello in one of Lorenzo's rooms on the ground floor, along with Uccello's Battle paintings and a Hunt by Francesco Pesello (Home, 1901, p. 123). The first two works seem to relate, albeit very imprecisely, with Vasari's 1568 commentary on Uccello: 'In the house of the Medici | h c | painted on canvas in tempera some stories with animals, which were always dear to his heart, and which he studied intensely in order to depict well...And in said house, among the other stones with animals, [he] made some lions fighting among themselves, with movements and ferocity so terrible they appeared to be alive. But a rare thing was, a m o n g the other stories, one where there is a serpent, fighting with a lion, whose ferocity he showed with vigorous movement and its venom that it squirted from its mouth and eyes, while a country girl present watches an ox, beautifully foreshortened, for which there is in my book of drawings the drawing by the hand of Paolo, and likewise a peasant girl

264 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS

full of fear and in the act of running, fleeing in front of these animals. There are likewise some shepherds, very natural, and a landscape held to be a very beautiful thing in its time...' (7n casa de' Medici dipinse in tela a tempera alcune storie di animali, de' quali sempre si diletto, e per fargli bene vi mise grandissimo

studio...Et

in detta casa, fra Valtre

combattevano fra loro, con movenze efierezze

storie d'animali,

tanto terribili che parevono

fece

alcuni

leoni che

vivi. Ma cosa rara era fra

Valtre una storia dove un serpente, combattendo con un leone, mostrava con movimento gagliardo la sua fierreza et il veleno che gli schizzava per bocca e per gli occhi, mentre una contadinella ch'e presente guarda un bue,fatto

in iscorto bellissimo, del quale n'e il disegno proprio di mano di Paulo

nel nostro libro de' disegni, e similmente fuggendo

della villanella

tutta plena di paura

e in atto di correre,

dinanzi a queli animali. Sonovi similmente certi pastori molto naturali, et un paese

tenuto cosa molto bella nelsuo

tempo...',

chefu

Vasari, 1971, p. 65: 1568 ed.).

Where the 1492 inventory described a Battle between Dragons and Lions and a Story of Paris, Vasari described a work showing lions fighting and another showing a lion fighting with a serpent or dragon in a pastoral setting with at least two women. To further complicate matters, Vasari also recorded in the Palazzo Medici canvases with lions behind a grate and others escaping, a serpent fighting, and an ox and a fox with other animals, all by Pesello, although he attributed works to Pesello that were by his son Pesellino (Vasari, 1991, vol. I, pp. 399-400). Did Vasari confuse the subjects of Uccello's and 'Pesello's' works in the description quoted above? In the 1598 inventory of the Medici Collection the Battle between Dragons and Lions and another canvas showing a hunting scene with a girl were described as torn, and may have been discarded soon after, since there are no references to works of these subjects in later Medici inventories. Home identified the latter as the 'Story of Paris' (Home, 1901, pp. 124-125). It is probably safest to assume that there were at least two canvases by Uccello, as the last inventory stated, the Battle between Dragons and Lions and another that may have been a. Story of Paris or another subject with animals and a woman or women that was once believed to be about Paris.

Bibliography: Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 6 5 ; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), p. 447: mentioned many works by Uccello in tempera with animals painted for the Medici house; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 297 n. 1; Home, 1901, pp. 123-125; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 265: c. 1456-1460; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 246; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 27, 120-121; Boeck, 1939, p. 123; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, pp. 150, 172; Salmi, 1950, pp. 29-31: c. 1456; Carli, 1954, p. 67: Uccello; Brommclle, 1959, p . 88; Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 398400; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986, pp. 26-27; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 330-33 1: c. 1452-1459 (?); Kent, 2000, p. 245.

Cat. 85. Blessed Andrea Corsini

1453 formerly in the library of the Duomo in the church of Saint Pier Celoro, Florence; lost.

An entry in the account books of the Opera del Duomo in Florence record a payment on 30 June 1453 to Uccello for a depiction of the Blessed Andrea Corsini (Poggi, 1933, p. 336).

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS

265

Bibliography: Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 205-206; Poggi, 1933, p. 336; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p . 120; Micheletti, 1954, p. 22, Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 97.

Cat. 86. Crucifixion and Sprinkler

Decoration

1455 formerly in the refectory of San Miniato al Monte, Florence; lost

In 1455 Uccello and his assistant Antonio di Pappi received payments for a Crucifixion and a kind of sprinkler in the refectory of San Miniato al Monte that have not been found (Saalman, 1964, pp. 559560).

Bibliography: Saalman, 1964, pp. 559-560; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 38.

Cat. 87. Giants

c. 1440s (?) formerly in the courtyard of the house of Vitali i Vitaliani, Padua; lost.

In the first half of the sixteenth century Marcantonio Michiel recorded: 'In the Eremitani in the house of the Vitelliani. The Giants in chiaroscuro were by the hand of the Florentine, Paolo Uccello, which were made one per day for the price of one ducat each.' CAM Heremitani Giganti de chiaro et scuro furono de mano de Paulo Ucello Fiorentino, precio de ducato una I'uno.'

in casa delli Vitelliani. La che li fece un al giorno per

Michiel, 2 0 0 0 , p. 3 2 ) . In the second edition of the Vite Vasari referred to a

letter in Latin he had found from Girolamo Campagnola to the philosopher Leonico Tomeo, saying that Uccello's lost Giants had greatly impressed Andrea Mantegna (Vasari, 1971, p. 69). The possible influence of Uccello's Giants on Mantegna's mural paintings in the Ovetari Chapel in the Chiesa degli Eremitani (mostly destroyed in the Second World War), has been noted by art historians (e.g. Borsi and Borsi, 1994, p. 322). Certainly, some of the solidly-modelled faces of Mantegna's figures, seen disotto in su, a r e reminiscent of Uccello's heads in the Clockface in the Duomo of Florence, that can perhaps be taken as a n indication of the style of Uccello's lost mural paintings in Padua, due to their scale and medium.

Bibliography: Michicl, c. 1525-1543 (2000), p. 32; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 69; Lanzi, 1795 (1968), p. 58; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 290; Wornum, 1864, p. 258; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, pp. 205, 246: 1444; Soupault, 1929, pp. 13-14: Uccello; Poggi, 1933, p. 326; Pudelko, 1934, p. 246; Fiocco, 1935, pp. 385-404: after 1443; Ragghianti, 1937, p. 236-250; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 31-34, 121: probably 1445; Boeck, 1939, p. 124; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 173; Carli, 1954, p. 68: probably 1445; Micheletti, 1954, p. 2 2 : 1445; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 14: c. 1446-1447; Berti, 1961, p. 303: 1445; Berti, 1967, p. 126; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, pp. 93-94: 1445; Volpe, 1980, p. 2 3 ; Angelini, 1990a, p. 75: 1445; Lucco, 1990, p. 400: c. 1444; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 321-322: 1445; Boskovits, 1992, p. 140.

266 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS

Cat. 88. Incredulity of Saint Thomas

date unknown formerly on the facade of the church of San Tommaso, Florence; destroyed.

Antonio Billi's manuscript (c. 1481-1530 (1991), p. 86) is the earliest source on the work: 'above the door of San Tomasso in Florence [Uccello painted] Christ and Saint Thomas.' ('sopra la porta di San Tomasso di Firenze Cristo e san Tomasso.,'). Vasari referred to the work in an unflattering anecdote in which Donatello mocked Uccello's secrecy in covering up the work during its execution in order to surprise viewers at the time of its unveiling. According to Vasari, Donatello told Uccello: 'Hey, Paolo, now that you should be covering it up, you are uncovering it.' {'Eh, Paulo, ora che sarebbe tempo di coprire, e tu scuoprf, Vasari, 1971, p. 71: 1568 ed.). By 1755, despite restoration of the church facade, the work was gradually being lost to time as Giuseppe Richa recorded: 'Despite Donatello's cutting riposte, the picture has its merit, and still today one may have the pleasure of admiring it; but it has lost its top, that defended it from the injuries of the seasons, lashed by bad weather, by water, by sun, and by dust, making the figures disappear, apart from the words, that under Saint Thomas one read, saying, INDIA TIBI CESSIT. 1 India yielded to you]' ('Non oftante perd tal mordace rifpofta di Donatello, la pittura uvea ilfuo merito, ed anche oggidifi avrebbe ilpiacere

di ammirarla; ma caduto il tetto, che la

difendeva dalle ingiurie delle ftagioni, sferzata dal diaccio, dall'acqua,

dal fole, e dalla polvere, fi

dileguarono le figure, ed altresi le parole, che fotto S. Tommafo leggevanfi, che dicevano: INDIA TIBI CESSIT? (Richa, 1755, pp. 231-232) The inscription referred to Saint Thomas' missionary work in India. Parronchi observed that Uccello's Incredulity may be shown in the Codex Rustici, beneath the drawing of the church of San Tomasso (Parronchi, 1974, p. 45 n. 91). If this is the case, Uccello's painting followed a traditional compositional format, with the apostles disposed in a semi-circle around Thomas and Christ, as used by Taddeo Gaddi in the Incredulity

of Saint Thomas

painting on the

armadio in the sacristy of Santa Crocc, datable to the 1330s (now in the Galleria dell'Accademia, Florence).

Bibliography: Billi, c. 1 4 8 1 - 1 5 3 0 ( 1 9 9 1 ) , p. 8 6 ; A n o n . ( M a g l i a b e c h i a n o ) , c. 1 5 3 7 - 1 5 4 2 ( 1 8 9 2 ) , p. 100: described the subject simply as ' C h r i s t and Saint T h o m a s ' ; V a s a r i , 1 5 5 0 and 1568 ( 1 9 7 1 ) pp. 7 0 - 7 1 ; Borghini, 1584(1967), pp. 3 1 0 - 3 1 1 ; Richa, 1 7 5 5 , p p . 2 3 1 - 2 3 2 ; C r o w e and C a v a l c a s e l l o , 1 8 6 4 ( 1 9 8 0 ) , vol. II, p. 2 9 7 n. l ; C o l n a g h i , 1928 ( 1 9 6 8 ) , p . 2 6 5 : Mast w o r k ' ; Van M a r i e , 1928a, p. 2 4 5 ; S o u p a u l l , 1 9 2 9 , p . 14 n. I ; S a l m i , 1 9 3 8 (1 939), pp. 4 8 , 119120: late work, before 1 4 6 4 ; Boeck, 1 9 3 9 , p . 125; M i c h e l e t t i , 1 9 5 4 , p p . 2 3 - 2 4 ; Popc-1 l e n n e s s y , 1950, p . 1 7 1 ; Carli, 1954, p. 6 8 ; Borsi a n d Borsi. 1992 ( 1 9 9 4 ) , p p . 3 3 4 - 3 3 6 : c. 1 4 5 3 - 1 4 6 6 ; BuUciTield, 1997, p. 6 1 , 6 3 ; Kent, 2000, p. 12, 199-200; Paolctti, 2 0 0 0 , p p . 5 4 , 5 9 .

CATALOGUE RAISONNfi: LOST WORKS 2 6 7

Cat. 89. Saint Anthony Abbot and Saints Cosmos and Damian

date unknown formerly in the Spedale di Lelmo, later called the Spedale di San Matteo; presumed destroyed

In the first edition of the Vite Vasari specified that t h e Saint Anthony Abbot and Saints Cosmas and Damian

was in t h e women's part of the Spedale di San Matteo C infra le donne') on the south side of

the building, but in the second edition he did not give its location (Vasari, 1971, vol. Ill, p. 63: 1550 and 1568 eds). In both editions he claimed it was an early work of Uccello, although he did not say why he thought so. Intriguingly, seventeenth and eighteenth-century sources described a mural painting in terra verde by a follower of Uccello in the rooms of the Confraternity of Saint Jerome on the east side of the spedale (Paatz and Paatz, 1952-1955, vol. IV, p. 153). Were their attributions of the work to a follower rather than to Uccello correct? Might Uccello have worked for the confraternity to which he briefly belonged, or did these sources describe the Saint

Zanobi

or Pieta

he painted for the

Confraternity of the Purification, also in the spedalel

Bibliography: Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 6 3 ; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), p. 447; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 297 n. I; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 245; Soupault, 1929, p. 13; Salmi, 1934, p . 22; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 18, 121; Boeck, 1939, p. 122; Carli, 1954, p. 66; Micheletti, 1954, p . 23; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 171; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 329: c. 1448-1450 (?).

Cat. 90. Saints Cosmas and Damian

date unknown provenance: 1568, in the Pugliese family chapel dedicated to Saint Jerome, in the church of Santa Maria del Carmine, Florence (Vasari, 1971, p. 65: 1568 ed.); subsequently lost.

Vasari recorded that Uccello 'painted in t h e Carmine [churchJ, in the chapel of Saint Jerome of t h e Pugliesi [family], the dossal of Saints Cosmas and Damian.' Cdipinse net Carmine nella cappella di

San Girolamo de' Pugliesi, il dossale di San Cosimo e Damiano.'

Vasari, 1971, p. 6 5 : 1568 ed.). T h e

dossal h a s n o t been convincingly identified with a surviving work. Parronchi, following U g o Procacci, ignored Vasari's identification of the subject as Saints Cosmas and Damian to identify the work with a Thebaid

panel in the Galleria degli Uffizi. According to Procacci the work had found its way from

Santa Maria d e l Carmine into the possession of a maggiordomo

of the Corsini household, from whom

il passed to t h e collection of Ignazio Hugford, then to Lamberto Cristiano Gori and finally to t h e Uffizi in 1780 (Parronchi, 1966, pp. 4 5 - 5 7 ) . T h e work is, however, often attributed to Gherardo Stamina.

Bibliography: Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 65; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), p. 447; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 297 n. 1; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 245; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 11, 119; Boeck, 1939, p. 123; Micheletti, 1954, p. 2 3 ; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 171; Parronchi, 1966, pp. 45-57:

268 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS

not of Saints Cosmas and Damian; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 1546: identifiable with a Thebaid in the Uffizi; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 344-345: Uccello (?), c. 1420 (?).

Cat. 91. Saint Peter

1425 formerly on the facade of San Marco, Venice, destroyed

Salmi (1950, p p . 22-23) identified a depiction of t h e lost m o s a i c of Saint Peter formerly on the facade of S a n M a r c o , Venice, in Gentile Bellini's painting Procession

of the Reliquary

of the Cross in the

Piazza San Marco. (Galleria dell'Accademia, V e n i c e ) . H o w e v e r , d u e to the smallness of the detail very little can b e deduced from it concerning U c c e l l o ' s style in 1 4 2 5 , the y e a r that it w a s created according to the letter from the O p e r a del D u o m o in Florence to t h e Florentine O r a t o r in V e n i c e enquiring into Uccello's w o r k in V e n i c e (Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 147).

Bibliography: Milanesi (ed.) 1878 in Vasari (1981), p. 204 n. [cross]; Colnaghi, 1928 (1986), p. 264; Poggi, 1933, p. 326; Pudelko, 1934, p. 231; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 12-13, 121; Carli, 1954, p. 66; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 21-22; D'Ancona, 1960, p. 6; Berti, 1961, p. 103; Berti, 1967, p. 77; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 85; Parronchi, 1974, pp. 13-14; Merkel, 1989, p. 225; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 286-287; Bambach, 1999, p. 219; Berti, 2002, p. 25.

Cat. 92. Saint Zanobi and Pieta

1437 formerly in the Speclale di Lelmo, later called the Spedale di San Matteo; presumed destroyed

Records of payments to Uccello in 1437 for t w o i m a g e s w e r e discovered and published independently by Bernacchioni in 2 0 0 3 and Polizzotlo in 2 0 0 4 , a l t h o u g h little is said about t h e works in the documents (see below for the references. See A p p e n d i x B for transcriptions of the relevant parts of the document).

Bibliography: Bernacchioni, 2003, pp. 418-419; Polizzotto, 2004, p. 50 n. 128.

C a t . 93. Stories of Saint Benedict

date unknown formerly in a cloister of the monastery of Santa Maria degli Angcli, Florence; destroyed

1

Vasari recorded that: 1Uccello] worked also in terra verde the loggia on the west side next to the garden of the monastery ]of Santa Maria] degli A n g e l i , that is, under each arch a story of the works of Saint Benedict A b b o t and of the most notable aspects o f h i s life until his d e a t h ; where, among other subjects that h e did that are beautiful, he did one w h e r e a monastery is destroyed by the work of a

CATALOGUE RAISONNiS: LOST WORKS 269

demon, and under the stones and timbers remains a dead friar; and no less notable is the fear of another monk fleeing with (his] clothes twisting around his nude body, swept by the wind, with much grace; w h a t is skillful is the manner of the spirit and the artifice, that artists have always imitated. Beautiful too, the figure of Saint Benedict where with solemnity and devotion in the presence of his monks he recovers the body of the dead brother. Finally in all these stories of worthy subjects, is above all in certain places where perspective is carried out even the slates and tiles on the roof. And in the death of Saint Benedict, while his monks perform the last rites and are weeping, there are some sick and decrepit come to see him, very well done; and worthy also that, among the many lovers and devotees of that Saint, he did an old monk with crutches under his arms, in which one sees admirable feeling and, maybe, hope of regaining his health. In this work there are no landscapes in colour with many buildings or difficult perspectives, but great [is the] large design and [there is] much that is good.' "Lavorb anco di colore di verde-terra la loggia che e vdlta a ponente sopra Vorto del munistero degli Angeli, cioesotto ciascuno arco uno storia de' fatti di S. Benedetto abbate e delle piu notabili cose della sua vita insin alia morte; dove, fra mold tratte che vi sono bellissimi, ve n'ha uno dove un monasterio per opera del demonio rovina, e sotto i sassi e ' legni rimane unfrate morto; n& e manco notabile

la paura

svolazzano

d'un altro monaco, che fuggendo

con bellissima

ha i panni che, girando intorno

grazia; nel che destd in modo Vanimo agl'artefici,

seguitato sempre questa maniera. E bellissima ancora lafigura

all'igmtdo,

che eglino hanno poi

di San Benedetto dove egli con gravitd

e divozione nel conspetto de' suoi monaci risuscita ilfrate morto. Finalmente in tutte quelle storie sono tratti da essere considerati, agVembrici

e massimamente

in. certi luoghi dove sono tirati in prospettiva

e ' tegoli del tetto. E nella morte di San Benedetto,

infino

mentre i suoi monaci gli fanno

I'essequie e lo piangono, sono alcuni infermi e decrepiti a vederlo, mold belli; d da considerare ancora che, fra mold amorevoli. e divoti di quel Santo, vi e un monaco vecfejhio

con dua grucce sotto le

braccia, nel qual. si vede un ajfetto mirabile e forse speranza di riaver la sanita. In questa opera non sono paesi di colore ne mold casamenti o prospettive assai:

dijficili, ma si bene gran disegno e del buon

(Vasari, 1971, pp. 68-69: 1568 ed.) The Camaldolese monastery of Santa Maria degli Angeli has been described as one of the

m o s t important religious institutions in Florence at the start of the fifteenth century (Bent, 1993, vol. I, p. 21). Numerous building projects and artworks were commissioned for it during the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, from major Florentine architects and artists such as Brunelleschi, Lorenzo Monaco ( w h o was one of their order), Lorenzo Ghiberti, Bicci di Lorenzo, Andrea del Castagno and Luca della Robbia (Bent, 1993, vol. II, pp. 541-543) and Uccello. The Camaldolese Order was founded by Saint Romauld to re-establish a faithful adherence to Benedictine principles prescribed in the sixth-century treatise Regula Benedict!. Even if the strict adherence to these principles in the order had waned by the thirteenth century (Bent, 1993, vol. I, pp. 20-29, 32-33), the subject of Uccello's cycle was central to the ideology of Santa Maria degli Angeli.

Bibliography: Billi, c. 1481-1530 (1991), p. 86; Albertini, 1510 (1972), [p. 7]: unidentified work in the second cloister was attributed to Masaccio; Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 100: described the subject simply as 'many figures'; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), pp. 68-69; Borghini, 1584 (1967), p. 310; Baldinucci,

270 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS

1686 (1974), p. 450; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 297 n. 1; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 245; Pudelko, 1934, p. 246 n. 2 3 ; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 2 1 , 120; Boeck, 1939, pp. 123-124; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 171; Salmi, 1950, pp. 27-29: c. 1440-1450; Carli, 1954, pp. 67-68; Berti, 1961, p. 301; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 294-295: c. 1431-1437; Melli, 1998, pp. 18,26.

C a t 94. Saint John the Baptist and Christ or the Virgin (tabernacle)

c. 1450 Provenance: possibly in San Giovanni, Florence; unidentified.

In 1933 Boeck published a reference to a d o c u m e n t from the archives of S a n G i o v a n n i housed in the Biblioteca Marucelliana in Florence, which records a promise m a d e in c. 1450 to p a y Uccello for a tabernacle showing Saint J o h n the Baptist and Christ or the Virgin, upon its c o m p l e t i o n . In 1939 Boeck published an extract from the document. T h e work, if it w a s completed, r e m a i n s unidentified.

Bibliography: Boeck, 1933b, p. 275; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 119; Boeck, 1939, p. 102; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 96; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 35.

Cat. 95. The Four Elements

date unknown formerly on the arch belonging to the Peruzzi family, Florence; destroyed.

In the 1568 edition of t h e Vite Vasari recorded that: ' P a o l o worked in fresco in the arch of the Peruzzi [showing] triangles in perspective, and in each corner he painted in the squaring the four elements and for each he made an appropriate animal: for earth a m o l e , for water a fish, for fire a salamander and for air the chameleon that lives o n it and takes o n every colour, and because he had never seen one, he made a camel opening its mouth and by swallowing air filling its stomach: s h o w i n g certainly a great simple-mindedness, by alluding with the name of the c a m e l , to an animal that is similar to a lizard, shrivelled and small, making (instead | a large and a w k w a r d beast.' ('Lavord Paulo infresco la vol fade' Peruzzi a triangoli in prospettiva,

et in su' canloni dipinse nelte quadrature' i quattro Elementi e a

ciascuno fece un animule a proposito: alia terra una talpa, all'acqua un pesce, al fuoco la salainandra et all'aria

il camaleonte

che ne vive e piglia ogni colore; e pcrche non ne aveva inai veduti, fece un

camello che aprc la hocca et inghiottisce aria empiendosene

il venire: simplicita

certo

grandissbna,

alludendo per lo name del carnello a un animale che e simile a un ramarro, secco e piccolo, col fare una bestiaccia disadatta e graiule.' Vasari, 1971, p p . 69-70: 1568 ed.). The camel is, nevertheless, an appropriate symbol of the element of air, because of its ability to g o for long periods without eating or drinking, thus appearing to be able to live on air alone. Mode (1972, p. 374) noted the same use of a camel to represent the e l e m e n t of air was once found in a depiction of the elements in the lost Famous Men c y c l e in the sola theatri of the Orsini palace at Monte

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS 271

Giordano in Rome, datable to c. 1430. The cycle is known from manuscript copies and derivations. Mode proposed that Uccello collaborated with Masolino on this cycle, based on the evidence of this iconographic coincidence and the indirect stylistic evidence of the manuscript copies. While this is in principle possible, it is also possible that Uccello based the iconography of The Four Elements in Florence on a manuscript copy of the Orsini Palace cycle that might have been brought to Florence, or the iconography may simply have been more current in the fifteenth century than the available evidence suggests. It is not known for which member of the Peruzzi family The Four Elements

was painted.

Borsi and Borsi proposed Bartolomeo Peruzzi as a likely patron, based on his wealth and increasing political power in the early 1430s, as a member of the Dieci di Balla at the time of the Battle of San Romano. Thus, the painting of the arch in a public space might have intended as a visual expression of his and his family's increased visibility in Florentine communal life (Borsi and Borsi, 1994, pp. 293294). This hypothesis has taken on greater significance since it was discovered that the Battle paintings were probably commissioned by Lionardo Bartolini, another member of the Dieci di Balla. Writing in the second half of the seventeenth century, Baldinucci (1974, pp. 450-451) noted that Uccello's paintings in the Peruzzi arch had all but disintegrated from water damage in his lifetime. No trace of the work now survives.

Bibliography: Borghini, 1584 (1967), p. 310; Bocchi, 1591 (2004), p. 5; Baldinucci, 1686 (1974), pp. 450-451; Biadi, 1824, p. 246; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 264; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 246; Salmi, 1938 (1939), pp. 27, 121; Boeck, 1939, pp. 124-125; Pope-Hennessy, 1950, p. 172; Salmi, 1950, p. 29; Carli, 1954, p. 68; Micheletti, 1954, pp. 23-24; Parronchi, 1957b, pp. 14-15: early 1420s; Parronchi, 1962, pp. 64-67: possibly before 1448, the date of the Rustici codice in the Biblioteca del Seminario di Cestello in which a similar composition is depicted; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Mode, 1972, p. 374: Uccello or an assistant; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), pp. 293-294: c. 1432.

Cat. 96. Two Figures

date unknown formerly in the Convent called Annalena, Florence; destroyed

According to the Libra of Antonio Billi of c. 1481-1530 (1991, p. 86) Uccello made two figures on the facade of the convent of Annalena ('Fecie duafiure

nella faccia

del munistero di Annalena"). This was

reiterated in the Codice Magliabechiano of c. 1537-1542 (1892, p. 100): 'On the facade of the convent of the sisters of Baldaccio or rather Annalena [Uccello] made two figures' ('Nella faccia del munistero y

delle fuore di Baldaccio overo Annalena fece dua fiure ).

In 1886 a journalist by the name of Angiolo

de Witt published a pamphlet on the subject of a Pieta painted in a niche in the privately owned house at number 24, between Via Romana and Via Santa Maria, near Santa Felice in Florence. He argued that the house formerly belonged to the convent of Annalena and that the mural painting was by Uccello. He did not identify the Pieta with one of the Two Figures, because it was inside a room in the house, not on the facade. Flis pamphlet has been ignored by most authors, probably because the archaic style

272 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS

of the Pieta in the sepia photograph he published is not very close to even the earliest works attributed to Uccello. However, De Witt's pamphlet is of some interest for the dating of Uccello's Two Figures. De Witt included an extract of a 1438 contract in the Archivio di Stato di Firenze for the marriage of the condottiere Baldaccio d'Anghiari to Annalena Malatesta, which indicated that a house at the beginning of Via Santa Maria in the popolo of Santa Felice was cited as part of a guarantee of Annalena's dowry. According to De Witt's research, the house had been acquired by the Commune for Baldaccio not long before 1438. Following the death of Balduccio it was inherited by Annalena's son, and following his early death from the plague in 1450 it passed to Annalena, who transferred it to an order of Dominican nuns in 1454. The convent, established the next year, came to be referred to by the name of its founding donor, Annalena. De Witt identified the house in the 1438 document with the one with the Pieta on the basis of their both being located on Via Santa Maria in the popolo of San Felice and the traditional name given to the existing house, 'Annalena'. He seems to have presented the evidence of the house's early history to support his attribution of the Pieta to Uccello, on the basis that the work's archaic style could only be compatible with an attribution to Uccello if the work predated 1455 when the convent was founded (De Witt, 1886, pp. 5-29). De Witt's attribution is not readily believable, although his historical evidence may show that the foundation of the convent is not necessarily a terminus post quern for Uccello's Two Figures as has been thought likely (e.g. Bencdettucci (ed.) in Billi, 1991, p. 86 n. 5). If, as he suggested, a building on the site existed before the convent was established and at least one work of art, the Pieta, was inherited by the nuns with the building, then the Two Figures might have been also. The convent was destroyed by 1878 (Milanesi (ed.) in Vasari, 1981, p. 206 n. 2). The fate of the Two Figures and the Pietd is unknown.

Bibliography: Billi, c. 1481-1530 (1991), p. 86; Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 100; Vasari, 1550 and 1568 (1971), p. 6 3 ; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864(1980), vol. I I , p . 2 9 7 n. 1; Colnaghi, 1928 (1968), p. 265; Van Marie, 1928a, p. 245; Soupault, 1929, p. 13; Salmi, 1934, p. 22; Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 120; Boeck, 1939, p. 122; Pope-Hcnnessy, 1950, p. 171; Carli, 1954, p. 66; MicheleUi, 1954, p. 23; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 333: c. 1450-1460 (7).

Cat. 97. Unspecified painting

1451-1452 Provenance: c. 1452, presumably owned by Jacopo and Giovanni Lanl'redini, Florence; lost or unidentified.

Ill 1962 Gino Corli and Frederick Hartt published a series of extracts from the fifteenth-century account books of the Cambini brothers' bank documenting payments to numerous artists, which they found in the Archivio dell'Ospedale degli Innocenti in Florence. One series of entries referred to payments totalling 8 florins, 10 soldi and 6 denari, made by the bank to Uccello for a painting in late 1451 and early 1452 on behalf of Jacopo and Giovanni Lanfredini (Corti and Hartt, 1962, pp. 156, 161). It is not possible to identify the work from its description, which does not mention whether it was on panel or canvas, its subject matter or its size. In 1465 the Saint George bought by Lorenzo di Matteo

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: LOST WORKS 273

Morelli cost 7 florins largi for the painting and 1 florin largi for the panel and frame, a work that measured the equivalent of 65.67 x 87.56 cm (Beck, .1979, p. 3). The similar price suggests that this may have been about the same size as the work commissioned by the Lanfredini, although numerous unknown quantities in these two cases, such as the value of the materials used and the amount of work involved, make it impossible to be certain.

Bibliography: Corti and Hartt, 1962, p. 161; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 35.

Cat. 98. Unspecified paintings

c, 1474 Provenance: c. 1474, Domenico del Tasso, Florence; presumed lost

In 1979 James Beck published an extract from the archives of the Merchants' Tribunal, housed in the Archivio di Stato di Firenze, recording a deliberation on 2 4 August 1474. It concerned an outstanding debt of 3 florins largi for two paintings by Uccello made for a certain Domenico del Tasso (Beck, 1 9 7 9 p. 4 ) , who was subsequently identified by Kanter as the woodcarver Domenico di Francesco del Tasso (Kanter, 2 0 0 0 , p. 12). Judging from the small sum involved, they were probably works of modest size, which have not survived.

Bibliography: Beck, 1979, p. 4; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 4 3 ; Kanter, 2000, p. 12.

Cat. 99. Unspecified vvork(s)

date unknown Provenance: possibly in the Palazzo Rucellai, Florence, in the fifteenth century.

Giovanni Rucellai mentioned works he owned by the greatest Italian artists, including Uccello, in his zibaklone,

without any indication of their number, subject matter or medium. Uccello's work has not

been identified. S e c Appendix B for a transcription of the relevant section of Rucellai's text.

Bibliography: Salmi, 1938 (1939), p. 121; Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101; Borsi and Borsi, 1992 (1994), p. 35; Kanter, 2000, pp. 12, 15.

274 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: CHECKLIST

Part 6: Checklist of Other Works Occasionally Associated with Uccello

Drawings

Drawings marked with an asterisk were formerly in Giorgio Vasari's collection.

a. Misleading Inscriptions

Four Seated Figures (recto); Four Seated Female Figures (verso) (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence; Inv. 30E); Degenhart and Schrnitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 419-420, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name on the work.

A Man Sitting and a Man Carrying Another Man on His Back (recto); A Woman Kneeling, a Woman Resting on a Stool and Other Figure Studies (verso) (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence; Inv. 1108E); Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 419-420, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name on the work.

Three Studies of a Youth Kneeling, Sitting and Lying (recto); A Youth Standing (verso) (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence; Inv. I109E); Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 419, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name on the work.

A Man Sitting (Corcoran Gallery, Washington, Inv. 26196); Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, p. 618, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name.

A Horse's Head Viewed from the Front and the Side (formerly Giovanni Morelli Collection; current location unknown); Bora, 1988, p. 52, referred to an inscription on the verso of the work with Uccello's name.

Saint Jerome in the Wilderness (Gabinctto Disegni e Stampe dcgli Uffizi, Florence; Inv. 27F); Angelini, I99()d, p. 32, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name on the work.

A Man Sitting on a Stool, Resting his Head on One Hand* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. NM 47a/1863); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1049 A, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name on the mount.

A Man Standing with a Sling* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. 47b/1863); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1049 B, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name on the mount.

A Man Standing with One Arm Akimbo* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. 47c/1863); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1049 C, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name on the mount.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: CHECKLIST

275

Two Men with Poles* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. 48/1863); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated no. 1052, referred to an inscription with Uccello's name on the mount.

b. Isolated Attributions

Saint Jerome (Alte Pinakotheka, Munich, Inv. 557; Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 299 n. 3 , referred to the work's attribution by the Gallery.

Two Nude Young Men near a Fountain (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm); Van Marie, 1928a, p. 578, referred to O. Siren's attribution of the drawing to Uccello.

Nude Man with a Cornucopia; Virgin and

Two Angels

A Kneeling Angel, the Head of the Virgin; A Bearded Man (recto);

Adoring

the Child, and Associated

Studies

(verso)* (Nationalmuseum,

Stockholm; Inv. NM 42/1863 (recto), NM 44/1863 (verso); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1053, referred to an old attribution to Uccello.

Christ Giving

His Blessing* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. NM 43/1863); Stockholm, 2001,

unpaginated - no. 1054, referred to an old attribution to Uccello.

Saint Benedict

(?) and Three Monks (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence; Inv. 97E);

Degenhart and Schmitt, 1968, vol. II, pp. 412-413.

Kneeling

and Seated Female Figures; A Kneeling

Shepherd

(?) (Kupferstichkabinett, Berlin, Inv.

5047); Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102.

Nude Figures of a Man Standing and Sitting (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence, Inv. 1107E); Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102.

A Nude Man with Arms Raised (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence, Inv. 14508F); Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102.

A Partially

Dressed

Man Sitting, Seen from

Behind

(Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi,

Florence); Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102.

Nude Men Standing on a Podium with a Dog and a Bear* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. NM 11/1863); Mode, 1972, pp. 374-376.

Profile Portrait of a Man* (Ashmolcan Museum, Oxford; Inv. Nr. 1); Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 4 7 and vol. II, p. 45.

276 CATALOGUE RAISONNE: CHECKLIST

Profile Portrait of a Man in a Pointed Hat* (Musee du Louvre, Paris; R.F. 730); Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 47 and vol. II, p. 45.

Profile Portrait of Fra Andrea* (Albertina, Vienna; Inv. 28); Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 47 and vol. II, p. 45.

Profile Portrait of the Prior of San Michele Berteldi* (Albertina, Vienna; Inv. 30); Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 47 and vol. II, p. 45.

Profile Portrait of a Man Wearing a Crown of Laurels'

(Albertina, Vienna; Inv. 31); Ragghianti

Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 47 and vol. II, p. 45.

Profile Portrait of a Monk* (Albertina, Vienna; Inv. 29); Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 47 and vol. II, p. 45.

Profile Portrait of a Man Wearing a Turban (Albertina, Vienna; Inv. 47); Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 47 and vol. II, p. 44.

Two Eagle Heads; Two Foot Soldiers (recto), A Lion Attacking a Horse; A Panther Attacking a Bull (verso)* (Musee des Beaux Arts, Dijon; Inv. 1745); Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 47 and vol. II, pp. 43-44.

Four Eagle Heads; A Mounted Knight (recto), A Lynx Attacking a Hare; A Monkey; A Leopard Attacking a Deer; A Monkey with a Mirror (?) (verso)* (Albertina, Vienna; Inv. 27); Ragghianti Collobi, 1974, vol. I, p. 47 and vol. II, pp. 43-44.

Profile Portrait of Leonardo Bruni * (Albertina, Vienna; Inv. 46); Birke and Kerlesz, 1992, vol. I, p. 26.

Virgin and Child in a Mandorla Surrounded

by Angels (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi,

Florence, Inv. 102H); Padoa Riz/o, 1997, p. 101.

Cupid (?) with a Bow and a Putto Holding Garlands (recto); Two Monkeys and a 'Castoro' (verso)* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. NM 45c/l 863); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1070.

Two Hunting Dogs; A Unicorn; A Panther; A Lioness and a Lion (recto), A Panther; A Lynx; A Monkey; A Porcupine; A Unicom; An Elephant; Two Deer (verso)* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. NM 45b (recto), NM 46a (verso); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1068.

CATALOGUE RAISONNE: CHECKLIST

277

A Deer; A Child Holding a Fruit; Two Deer Heads* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. N M 19/1863); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated (no. 1067).

A 'Castoro';

A Monkey Walking and a Monkey with a Mirror

(recto), A Unicorn Attacking

a Doe

(verso)* (Nationalmuseum, Stockholm; Inv. NM 45d/1863); Stockholm, 2001, unpaginated - no. 1071.

A Nude Couple, Adam and Eve (?) (Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence; Inv. 30F); Berti, 2002, pp. 24-25.

Cassone Panels

Battle of Pharsolus and the Beheading of Pomp ey (Museum of Fine Arts, Boston; Inv. 15.910); M.C., 1915, p. 62.

Siege of a City (formerly Bellini Collection, Florence, current location unknown); Caviggioli, 1954, pp. 28-29.

Cassone with Portraits of Battista Sforza and Federico da Montefeltro

(private collection, Urbino);

Fontana, 1986, pp. 131-149.

The Battle of Anghiari (National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin); Hughes, 1997, pp. 220, 229.

The Taking of Pisa (National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin); Hughes, 1997, p. 220.

Susannah and the Elders (Musce du Petit Palais, Avignon); Kanter, 2000, pp. 16-17, caption to Fig. 9.

Scenes from the Aeneid (Nicdersachsisches Landmuseum, Hannover, Inv. KM 308); Kanter, 2000, pp. 14-15, caption to Fig. 4.

Scenes from the Aeneid (Niedcrsachsisches Landmuseum, Hannover, Inv. KM 309); Kanter, 2000, p. 14, caption to Fig. 5.

A Battle Scene (Musec des Arts Dccoratifs, Paris, Inv. Pe 87 or 88); Kanter, 2000, p. 15, caption to Fig. 6.

A Scene of Triumph (Musee des Arts Decoratifs, Paris, Inv. Pe 87 or 88); Kanter, 2000, p. 15, caption to Fig. 7.

Scenes from the Aeneid (Seattle Art Museum); Kanter, 2000, pp. 13-14, 19, caption to Fig. 3.

278 CATALOGUE RAISONN& CHECKLIST

Scenes from the Aeneid (Musee des Beaux-Arts, Tours); Kanter, 2000, pp. 13-14, 19, caption to Fig. 2.

Battle between Roman and Oriental Armies (in the early 1920s, in a private collection in Paris (Berenson, 1932a, p. 527); current location unknown); Kanter, 2000, p. 15.

Other Media

Expulsion from Paradise (in the lunette of the second bay of the Chiostro Verde of Santa Maria Novella, Florence); Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 99.

Sagra (formerly in the cloister of the church of Santa Marie del Carmine, Florence; lost, presumed destroyed); Anon. (Magliabechiano), c. 1537-1542 (1892), p. 100.

Crucifixion Scene (1843, in the De Montor Collection, Paris; current location unknown); Montor, 1843, plate 44.

Judgment Scene (1843, in the De Montor Collection, Paris; current location unknown); Dc Montor, 1843, Plate 47.

Birth of the Virgin (?) (1843, in the De Montor Collection, Paris; current location unknown); De Montor, 1843, Plate 48.

Carnesecchi predella (formerly Santa Maria Maggiore, Florence; one panel in the Museo Home, Florence, Scene from

the Life of Saint Julian,

Inv. 60, the other panels are lost); Crowe and

Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, pp. 296-297.

Virgin and Child with Two Angels (formerly Dukes of Vcrdura Collection, Palermo, current location unknown); Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1864 (1980), vol. II, p. 298.

Pieta (in 1886 in the house of BaiToiommca di Guitera de Boz/.i at 24 Via Romana and the corner of Strada di Santa Maria, Florence; apparently not published subsequently); Witt, 1886, pp. 5-29.

Birth Tray: The Triumph of Love (National Gallery, London; Inv. NG 3898 (Gordon, 2003, p. 41); Gordon, 2003, pp. 37-42, referred to its nineteenth-century attribution to Uccello.

Saint Jerome in a Landscape (Montreal Museum of Fine Arts); Montreal, 1960, p. 36, referred to its nineteenth-century attribution to Uccello.

Profanation of the Host (State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersburg, Inv. 7657); Goukovskj, 1969, pp. 170-173.

CATALOGUE RAISONN& CHECKLIST

279

Saint Cosmas; Saint Damiano (Gemadegalerie, Berlin-Dahlem, Inv. 1141C and 1141D); Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 101.

Crucifixion (Pinacoteca, Ravenna); Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971, p. 102.

Thebaic! and Stories of Joseph (in the altana, Palazzo Rucellai, Florence); Ginori Lisci, 1972 (1985), vol. I, p. 217.

Famous

Men (the first figures in the series, formerly in the sala theatri, Orsini Palace, Monte

Giordano, Rome; lost); Mode, 1972, pp. 369-377.

Embroidered

Silk Chasuble (Duomo, Pistoia); Salmi 1977, pp. 375-376.

Annunciation

(National Gallery of Art, Washington, Inv. 16); Parronchi, 1981, p. 139.

Famous Men (Camera Picta, Palazzo Ducale, Urbino); Fontana, 1986, pp. 131-149.

Virgin and Child with Saints John the Evangelist and Benedict (Saint Jacopo, Avane); Cirri, 1993, p. 221, referred to the work as sometimes being attributed to Uccello.

Portrait of Giuliano de' Medici (National Gallery of Art, Washington; Inv. 1952.5.56); Boskovits, 2003, p. 170, referred to a label on the reverse attributing the work to Uccello.

Appendix B Documents

282

DOCUMENTS

1 Merchants' Guild Records for Ghiberti's First Baptistery Doors

23 Novembre.

Si da a fare la seconda Porta di San Giovanni a Lorenzo di Bartolo, e a Bartolo di Michele suo Padre Orafi, con che Lorenzo debba lavorare in su Compassi di sua mano le figure, alberi e simili cose da Compassi, con che possa torre in suo ajuto Bartolo suo Padre, e altri sufficienti maestri, che gli parra.

Deva ogni anno dar compiuti tre compassi, ed il tempo cominci il primo di Dicembre.

Non devono mettere, se non le loro fatica, a tutte le altre cose deve pensare l'Arte. Devino avere per fattura di detta porta quello sara giudicato da'Consoli, e Offiziali di MasaYco, et a buon conto se gli possa dare fino in scudi dugento Panno.

Furono eletti a sollecitare la detta Opera Matteo di Giovanni Villani, Palla di Nofri delli Strozzi, e Niccolo di Luca di Feo.

1407.1 Giugno. Non osservando Lorenzo di Bartolo di dare compiuto ogni anno i tre Compassi, come di sopra era convenuto, si fa di nuovo 1' infrascritta Convenzione con Lorenzo di Barlolo solo senza nominare il Padre. (...]

Lavoranti alia detta porta dopo la seconda Convenzionc furono con il detto Lorenzo: Bandino di Stefano a 75. l'anno. Ebbe in lullo 87. 12. 0. Giuliano di Ser Andrea a 75. 1'anno. Ebbe in tutto 179. 13. 10. item 120. in circa. Donato di Niccolo di b[ser?] Bctlo Bardi a 75. l'anno. Ebbc in tutto 8. 4. 0. Maso di Cristofano in prima a 55., e dipoi a 75. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 1 13.6. 2. item 87. 1.4. item 131.7.8. Domenico di Giovanni 38. 1'anno. Ebbe in ttilto 38. Bernardo di Piero a 26. l'anno. Ebbe in tutu.) 6. 5. 4. Nanni di Francesco a 24. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 1 1. Francesco di Giovanni detto Bruscaccioa 25. l'anno. Ebbe in tutlo 3. 18. 2. Cola di Liello di Pictro da Roma ebbe in tutto 13. 19. 2.a 4 8 . l'anno. Francesco di Marchetto da Verona a 4. il mcse ebbe in tutto 13. 4. d'oro. Giuliano di Gio, da Poggibonsi per fanciullo per 6. 1'anno, ebbe in tulto 6. M. Antonio di Domenico di Cicilia a 5. il mcse. Ebbe in tutto 3. 13. 6. Bartolo di Michele a 75. I'anno. Ebbe in lullo 197. 1 . 1 . Bernardo di Piero Ciuffagni a 45. I'anno. Ebbe in tutto 14. 13.

DOCUMENTS 283

Domenico di Gio. A 48. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 147. 16. 6. item 67. 1. 1. Zanobi di Piero a 16. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 66. 15. 11. Niccolo di Lorenzo a 25. l'anno Ebbe in tutto 2 1 . Jacopo di Bartolommeo fanciullo a 6 l'anno, e dipoi a 9. Ebbe in tutto 16. Giuliano di Monaldo a 18. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 16. 14. 3. Pagolo di Dono garzone di Bottega a 5. l'anno, e di poi a 7 . Ebbe in tutto 20. 10. Matteo di Donato a 60. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 190. in circa, e dipoi a 75. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 190. in circa. Bartolo di Niccolo a 75. Ebbe in tutto 64. 13. 11. Bartolo di Michele a 50. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 48. 19. 9. Niccol6 di Baldovino a 8 l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 7. 12. 5. Pagolo di Dono a 25. l'anno. Ebbe in tutto 31. 1.7. La detta porta fu compiuta del mese d'Aprile 1424. a di 19. del detto mese si pose, e rizzo alle porte di S. Giovanni.

Dorossi il Compasso della storia d'Abramo del Testamento vecchio per fare prova di diversi Maestri, e pigliare chi meglio facessi. Deliberossi poi mettere nella Porta sopradetta il Testamento nuovo e si riserbo la detta storia per metterla ncll'altra porta se Testamento vecchio vi si facessc, vi si messe d'oro in dorare della Storia 12. 3.

Michelozzo di Bartolommeo lavor6 piu tempo alia detta seconda porta a 75. I'anno. La detta seconda porta fu messa alia Porta di San Giovanni, che risguarda verso Santa Maria del Fiore. (ASF, Libro Della Seconda, e Terza Porta di Bronzo dalla Chiesa di San Giovanni Battista di Firenze. 1403, in Miintz, 1890, pp. 15-18)

2 Uccello's Inscription with the Confraternity of Saint L u k e

Pagholo di dono dipintore MCCCCX|...|IIJ (ASF, Accademia del Disegno, 1, p. 14v., in Roccasecca, 1997, p. 126 n. 8. The document was missing in 2003)

284

DOCUMENTS

3 Uccello's Matriculation in the Doctors' and Specialists' Guild

di xv ottobris [1415] Paulus olim doni paulj pitore ppli st maria nepotum (ASF, Arte Medici e Speziale, 21, p. 69v.)

4 Uccello's 1425 Will

5 Augusti 1425. Paulus olim doni pictor, populi S. marie Novelle de florentia, sanus mente corpore et intellectu, considerans se mortal em esse etc., cupiens de suis bonis disponerc etc. in presens nuncupativum testamentum in hunc modum facere procuravit et fecit; videlicit:

Imprimis quidem animam suam recommendavit deo, corporis vero sui sepolturam eligit in ecclesia sancti spiritus de florentia, in sepolcro in quo sepultus fuit dictus eius pater.

Item reliquitnove sacrestie et operi sancte reparate et muris civitatis florent. in totum soldos xxx.

In omnibus autem et singulis bonis sibi heredes universales instituit hospitalc sec. Marie Nove dc florentia, et hoc si et in quantum contingat ipsum testatorem decedcre sine filiis et descendentibus legiptimis et naturalibus, cum gravedine faciendi in dicta ecclcsia sancti spiritus quolibct anno in perpetuum unum annuale pro anima dicti testaloris ct suorum defunctorum, in quo expendi voluit lir. 20. f. p. (ASF, in Gayc, 1839, vol. 1, pp. 147-148)

5 Uccello's 1427 Portata

|p. 7071 dina[n|zi davoj signiorj uficiale epore ilehatasto. p|er| pagholo dj clono dipintore visarricha ilsino valsente eincharichi

lino poderc posto nclpopol|o| di santo stefano aogniano. pivierc di sa|n]martino. chonchasa. dalavoratorc che. daplrjimo via scchondo. stefano benvenutj dal 1/3 mo[nal fioredonafu dantonio branchinj 1/4 ilmunislero. dllochovertite

uno pezzo di terra evignia posto i[nj detto popolo dap[r]imo viottolo usato dasechondo domenicho dj dino chanaccj. dal 1/3 marcho di rnartino chanaccj dal l/4nanni. dj giovanni. la chiesa dj santo stefano. e Jacopo di barto. chanaccj

Lavora andre dj piero. Rende staia 25 dj grano. Rende staia 8 dipanicho ecivaia vino barilj 10.

abattine lespese dj stianarso edichane

adip[r]estanzone ffiorinjj 1 s[oldi] 3 d[eiiar]j 7

adincharicho a paghare lapigione chenon achasa fj. a pagholo detto annj 30 a paghare tuttj p|r|estanzonj alplrjesante sono 36 motanof[iorin]j 14 a perdere a paghare da 1/8 p|r] estanzone Inqua nellamuta dj nazi montano f[iorin]j 8 a perdere andossi chondio piu di ii ani fa e di a vinegia.

aavere dalbelaqa maestro l[ibre| 4 ocircha avere da g°horafo I[ibre | 7 ocircha avere dalmazzo daogniano l|ibre| 9 ocircha adavcrc dalchomune di firenze isrilti dimo te chomunc f|iorin]j 47 averc davettorio dj giovannj fugguosi anapolj parccchi anj fa circha a 1 [ ibre J 20 Istrilla p | e r | me dio dj dio bechutj. p|r|ochuratore del delto pagholo. ..p[er| s|er| barlolo di s[er| donate) gianinj.

|7()7v.| A dragho di giovannj Adi 12di luolio

Pauolodidono dipintorc — f|iorin jj 1 s|oldi] 3 d[enari] n° flibrol 44 |...?J [libro] 540 Rj" (ASF, Catasto, 55, San Giovanni Drago, pp. 707-707v.).

286

DOCUMENTS

6 Uccello's 1427 Campione

Sustanze e incharichi dj Pagholo di dono dipintore

uno podere posto nelpopolo di santo stefano angano chon caxa dallalavoratore e cho[n) uno pezzo di terra apartenenti a detto podere...lavoralo andrea di piero rende

Grano staia venticinque pei sol. 17 lo staio monta lib. 2 1 . 5 . 1 0

Panicho e civaie staia otto per sol. sol. 14 lostaio monta lib. 5 . 12. 12

vino barili dieci per sol. 2 0 lobarile

li. 10

Soma la rendita lib. 36 sol. 17 dj. - a sol. 50 il fiorino

Da belaqua maestro lib. IIIJ piccioli

ljibrej 1

Da giovannj orafo lib. VII piccioli

llibre] 1 soldo 15

Dal mazzo danigniano lib. Villi piccioli

llibre) 2 sol. 5

Da vettorio di giovannj fugi a napol lib. XX piccioli

f[iorin]j 23 sol. 10

f|iorin]j 4 7 di monte commune vogliono a 50 percento f[ iorin )j 23 sol. 10

Teste Pagholo sopradetlo deta dannj XXX

f| iorin ]j 2 0 0

Al chomunc per presanze e prcstanzioni

l'| iorin [j XXX doro f[ iorin y. 8

Composto in sol. 5 (ASF, Catasto, 79, San Giovanni Drago, p. 539 v., in Mather, 1948, p. 6 2 )

7

Uccello's 1431 Portata

| p. 466v.] sangiovannj ghonfalone dragho s|oldi| v

valsente dipagholo didono dipintore e sua Incharichi uno podere posto ne[l]popo!o di santo stefano aogniano pivicre di seltimo. sl[aiora| 22 o circha chasa clalavoralore dap|r|imo via sechondo stefano bcnvenutj 1/3 sia mo|na| fiore fudanlonio. bran chinj 1/4 Iministaro dellochovertite

DOCUMENTS 287

1° pezzo di terra in detto popolo dap[r]imo viaottola ausata sechondo domenicho didino chanaccj 1/3 marcho dimartino chanaccj 1/4 Nannj di g° elachiesa disanto stefano eJa copo di barto chanaccj a vigniata

Lavora andre di piero adip[rjestanza f[orin]j 3 o circha Rende stfaiora] 25 di grano lano Rende stfaiaora] 8 dipanicho ecivare vino barilj 10 lano abattine p[er]lespese dichane estranarso [?J

adincharicho apaghare lapigione dellachasa f[iorin]j 4 f[iorinjj pagholo detto dannj 33 f[iorinJj

Incharicho duno chatasto sipaghaogniano apardone v almo[njtef[iorin]j sloldij v

avere dalbelaqua 1[ ibre] 4 dagiovannj horafo 1[ ibre] 7 dalmazza daigniano l|ibre| 9 dalchomune di firenze di mo[n]te chomune fj 47 istrittj f[iorin|j paghe sostenute dal 1423 al 1427 f[iorin|j. 2 s[oldij 7 d[enar]j di detti d[enarlj. ffiorin'lj deo di deo becchuti dedare 1 [ibre] 36 s[oldi| 5 d|enar]j 6 (ASF, Catasto, 381, San Giovanni Drago, p. 779. The corresponding campione is at ASF, Catasto, San Giovanni Drago, 408, microfilm reel 1042, pp. 466v.-467)

8 Deo Beccuti's 1431 Portata

|p. 547) Valsente ccharichi di deo di deo becchutj |...]

|p. 551 v.] Crcdilori debono avcrc [...] Pagholo didono dipintore p(er]resto [a libro 1 184 f[iorin]j - I|ibre] 36 s|oldi] 5 dfenarlj 6 (ASF, Catasto, 380, San Giovanni Drago, pp. 547-552v.)

288

DOCUMENTS

9 Letter from the Opera del Duomo Concerning Uccello's Work in Venice

[23 Mar. 1432] Item deliberaverunt quod scribatur una lictera domino Piero de Bechanugiis, qui est Venetiis pro oratore communis Florentie, ex parte ipsorum offitii quatenus se informet de quodam Paulo Doni de Florentia, magistro musayci, qui Venetiis laboravit in facie s. Marci a parte exteriore unam figuram s. Petri in quodam angulo faciei s. Petri suttus orilogium de anno domini 1425, tempore cuius erant operarii dominus Leonardus Mozanighi et dominus Marinus, utrum bene laboravit prefatam figuram et cuius est in civitate Venetiarum extimationis et pretii et an de vitreis potest haberi et reperiri et cuius pretii sunt, de quibus omnibus placeat eorum offitium reddere advisatum. (AODF, Deliberazioni e gli Stanziamenti degli Operai, 1425-1436, p. 156v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 147, doc. 773)

10 Uccello's 1433 Portata

[p. 4831 adi 31 di magio 1433

a di chatasto s|oldi) 3

dinanzi avoi sigliorj uficialj delchatasto p[er| mepagolo didono dipintore vido lemie sustanzie e[i]ncharichi

uno podere posto nel popolo di santo istefano angnjano Inpiupezzi ditera istaiora 42 o circha chon sua vogabolj e chonfinj chome p[er| altua istritta vodata

lavoralo afilto andrea di piero damene lano Istaia 36 digrano al|ibre| 35 lire uno paio dichaponi pele ispesse sifano in detlo podere

il

licne a pigione l chasa inchanpo chorbolinj damona chiara diachopo da pistoia danelano lj iorin |j 9 dipigione labocha deldetto pagolo dannj 36

fl iorin Jj 200 s|oldi] _

a pagare chalasti da marzo in qua

fj iorin ] j

debitori deo dideo bcchutti

IT iorin Ij 85 s[oldi|

DOCUMENTS 289

Ilchomune di firenze dimonte diprestanzonj

f[iorin]j 100

Ilchomune di fireze dimonte chomune

f[iorin]j 47

dipaghe sostenute non so quelo mabi avere e chosi sepagati alchuno danato p[er] riavere quando sono istato fuorj determj nj in pero chetutti gli vendea

debo avere dalo ispedale di santo antonio achastello giafa degliannj piu 20 Ilquale o fatto chonpezitione mene dia ognjano f[iorin]j 2 chomjcio ora p[er|che prjma non sepi maj chio gliavessi avere p[erj nonavere leghiarege sono f[iorin]j 23 II chi arito (ASF, Catasto, 475, San Giovanni Drago, p. 483)

11 Deo Beccuti's 1433

Campione

[p. 185v. part 2| sustantiedi deo di deo dellbechutto [... ]

[p. 188] chreditorj [...) pagholo di dono dipintore [...] f[iorin]j 85 (ASF, Catasto, 498, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1234, pp. 185v. part 2-189)

12 Commission by the Opera del Duomo for the Equestrian

Monument

|3() May 1436] Item conduxerunt Paulo Ucccllo ad pingcndum dominum Johannem Hauto in facie ecclesie maioris ubi erat pitlus prius dictus dominus Johannes de terra viridi et pro salario alias per eorum offilium ordinando. (AODF, Dcliberazioni e gli Stanziamenti degli Operai, 1425-1436, p. 254, in Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 124, d o c . 2057)

290

DOCUMENTS

13 Instruction by the Opera del Duomo Concerning the Equestrian

Monument

[28 Jun. 1436] Item deliberaverunt quod caputmagister opere destrui faciat quemdam equum et personam domini Johannis Hauto factum per Paulum Uccello, quia non est pictus ut decet. (AODF, Deliberazioni e gli Stanziamenti degli Operai, 1425-1436, p. 255v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 124, doc. 2058)

14 Further Instruction by the Opera del Duomo Concerning the Equestrian

Monument

[6 Jul. 1436] Item deliberaverunt quod Paulus Uccello de novo pingat et figuret in viridi terra figuram domini Johannis Hauto et equi dicti domini Johannis pro salario et pretio alias statuendo. (AODF, Deliberazioni e gli Stanziamenti degli Operai, 1425-1436, p. 255v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 125, doc. 2059)

15 Inspection by the Opera del Duomo of the Equestrian

Monument

|31 Aug. 1436) Prefati operarii commiserunt Francischo Benedecti Caroccii de Strozis et Simoni Nofrii Bonacursii ponendi pretium pitture equi et persone domini Johannis Hauto per cum facte in ecclesia maiori florentina. (AODF, Dcliberazioni e gli Stanziamenti degli Opcrai, 1436-1442, p. 3, in Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 125, doc. 2060)

16 Payment by the Opera del Duomo for the Equestrian

Monument

131 Aug. 1436| A Pagholo di Dino...degli uccegli, dipintore, 1. LXIV p. per suo faticha e prezzo di dipigniere due volte la persona e chavallo di messer Giovani Aghuto pello adreto chapitano generale del chomune di Fire[n|ze nella chiesa magiore di Fire[n]ze.

DOCUMENTS 291

(AODF, Stanziamento CC, p. 135, in Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 125, doc. 2060)

17 Payments by the Confraternity of the Purification for Painting a Saint Zanobi and a Pieta

[1437] A Pagholo di Dono di Pagholo dipintore deto Ucielo, a dl XIII di dicienbre 1. otto portd e deto conti in g(rossi), furono per facitura d'una fighura di San Zenobi fecie nella nostra isquola 1. 8.

A Pagholo detto, a di detto, 1. sei portd deto contanti, furono per una piata ci fecie sopra l'uscio dclla sagrestia 1. sei (ASF, CRSPL, 1654, file 29, Entrata ed Uscita 1434-1444, p. 170v., in Bernacchioni, 2003, pp. 418-419) 18 Uccello's Membership of the Confraternity of Saint Jerome

Uan.-May 1438] Pagholo di Dono, dipintore (Archivi della Compagnia di San Girolamo, della Compagnia di San Francesco Poverino dal 1790 c delle Compagnie Riunite, Florence, Rassegna, Classc D, 1432-1444, pp. 42v., 46, in Sebregondi, 1991, p. 190)

19 Uccello's 1442 Portata

1

|p. 224] Q' e G° G" dragho sangiovannj

|in the left margin | pagholo didono dipintore

Sustan/a dj pagholo dj dono djpintore adj cinquina f[iorin]j uno una chasa p|cr| mia abitare posta nelpopo|lo] disa nta lucia dongnj santi nella via della schala dap|rim]° via s|ecbon|do 1/3 tofano di ghabriello vaiaio 1/4 cristofano chuo|c|inaio conpera adj 21 daprile 1434

292 DOCUMENTS

dalorenzo djpiero lenzi ffiorinjj 110

uno pezo di terra chonchasa dalavoratore posta nelpopolo dj santo stefano aungnano p° di settimo di staiora 20 da p[rimj°s[echon]do via 1/3 il munistero dlla chonvertite 1/4 stefano dibenvenuti

uno pezo djterra posta indetto popolo di staiora 22 parte vingniana e lavoratj dap[rim]° viottolo usato slechonjdo pichonello filatoioro 1/4 marcho di martino chana ccj lavora dettj 2 pezi afitto doma stefano djbenvenuto damena lanno di fitto

grano staia 36 di grano

Jfibrc] 36

e piu mida llibre] 35 djd[enar]i contt

l|ibrc]35

1° paio di chaponj

l|ibrc| 1

f|iorin|j 18

djenarji di monte

f[iorin[j 47 dj monte comune

f (iorin U 1 s|o!di] 15d|enar]i9

f[iorin]j 100 di monte djprestanzonj

f|iorin]j 6

f[iorin)j 21 di monte comune

f|iorin]j - s[oldi] 15 d[enar]i 9

f[iorinlj di paghe sostenute

bocche

pagholo djdono detta danni 40

11

tengho apigione l botlegha interma daprimo la cciaino s|echon|do buondelmontj e della parte ghuelfa donne lanno f) iorin |j 6

adi 21 G|cnnail" |7] s|oldi) 5 (ASF, Catasto, 625, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1527, p. 224)

f|iorin|j 8 s|oldi] 11 d[enarji 6

f|ioriny 26 11 6

DOCUMENTS 293

20 Uccello is Present for Discussions with the Opera del Duomo Concerning Windows

[21 Feb. 1443 J Operarii locaverunt Carolo Francisci Zati ad faciendum duos oculos in tribuna magna cum figuris et designo sibi dando expensis opere... [Lacuna. In margine: Rete; dando sibi filum. - Prout ilia Angeli de quatuor mensibus in quatuor menses a die sibi dati designi. - [In fine] Presentibus Ridolfo Lotti et Paulo Ucelli. (AODF, Bastardello di ser Niccol6 cli ser Diedi notaio dell'Opera, III, p. 84v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 142, doc. 746)

21 Opera del Duomo Agreement Concerning Designs for Windows

[22 Feb. 1443] Operarii deliberaverunt quod Paul us Ucccllo facial duos designos unum de locatione facta Angelo et alium de locatione facta Carolo cum designis et figuris sibi dandis. Et Paulus promixit ipsos facere pro pretio fiendo tarn per presentes operarios quam Futuros et dare perfectum per totum mensem Martii. Presentibus testibus Angelo Lippi et Ridolfo Lotti. (AODF, Bastardello cli ser Niccolo di ser Diedi notaio dell'Opera, III, p. 85, in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 142,doc. 747)

22 Payment from the Opera del Duomo for the

Clockface

[22 Feb. 14431 Paulo Doni Pauli Ucelli, pictori, 1. XL pro suo magisterio rerum factarum pro oriulo. (AODF, Bastardcllo di ser Niccolo di ser Diedi notaio dell'Opera, p. 85, in Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p. 162, doc. 2238)

294

DOCUMENTS

23 Further Payment from the Opera del Duomo for the

Clockface

[2 Apr. 1443] Paulo Doni Ucelli, pictori, 1. X fp. sunt pro petiis 125 auri pro dorando stellam oriuoli et pro dorando unam pallam in punta razi et pro remuneratione sui laboris in mictendo d'azuro campum ubi manet Stella. (AODF, Stanziamento G, p. 3v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. II, p . 162, doc. 2240)

24 Payment from the Opera del Duomo 1

for the Design of the Ascension'

Window

[2 May 1443] Paulo Doni Ucelli, pictori, 1. XL fp. sunt pro suo labore unius designi facti de uno oculorum tribune magne, videlicet Ascensionis domini nostri Jcsu Christ. (AODF, Stanziamento G, p. 7, in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 143, doc. 749)

25 Promise of Payment from the Opera del Duomo for the Resurrection

Window

[8 Jul. 1443) Paulo Doni Ucello, pictori, 1. XL fp. quas habere debet pro suo magislerio ad faciendum itcrum unum designum Resurressionis domini pro uno ex oculis tribune magne facto ylerum. (AODF, Stanziamento G, p. 15v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 143, doc. 750)

26 Payment from the Opera del Duomo for the Design of the Nativity

Window

|5 Nov. 14431 Paulo Doni Uccelli, pictori, 1. XL fp., pro magisterio unius oculi de tribuna per cum designali, in quo est Nativitas domini, locati Angclo Lippi. (AODF, Stanziamento G, p. 24v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 144, doc. 754)

DOCUMENTS 295

27 Payment from the Opera del Duomo for Painting an Unspecified Window

[7 Jan. 1444] Bernardo Francisci, qui facit fenestras di vetro, 1. L, que dari debent Paulo Ucello pro suo labore in pingendo unum oculum factum per dictum Bernardum. (AODF, Stanziamento G, p. 30, Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 144, doc. 757)

28 Payment from the Opera del Duomo for the Design of the Annunciation

Window

[18 Feb. 1444] Paulo Doni Ucello I. X L fp., pro solutione unius designi facti in quo est ymago Anuntiationis virginis Marie. (AODF, Stanziamento G, p. 36, in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 145, doc. 761)

29 Payment from the Opera del D u o m o for Work on Two Unspecified Windows

[28 Jan. 1445] Paulo Doni Uccello, 1. XVI s. X fp., sunt pro ristoro et additione quod fit sibi pro suo labore picture duorum oculorum pro s. V, ultra s. XXV quos habet a magistro oculorum. (AODF, Stanziamento G, p. 71v., in Poggi, 1988, vol. I, p. 146, doc. 770)

30 Uccello's 1446 Catasto

[1446] pagholo di dono dipintore ovcro ucielli... (in Gaye, 1839, vol. 1, p. 146, this transcription has never been verified)

296

DOCUMENTS

31 Commission for a Tabernacle for San Giovanni

[c. 1450] Pagolo Ucielli per dipingere il Tabernacolo di S. G i o . e di NS. se gli da in tutto q u a n d o Para compito f. 22. 1 3 1 . (Bibioteca Marucelliana, Florence, Quaderno di Ricordi Seg(nat)o o C o m m i n c ( i a t ) o dal 1450 al 1453, Codex A 1 9 , p. 2 3 0 v., in Boeck, 1939, p. 102)

32 Deliberation of the Merchants' Tribunal

[22 Feb. 1451] - Comisit fieri letteram - official! castelline, quod a d petitionempauli donis pictoris gravet personaliter et in bonis dominichum et paulum pieri benvenuti d e ugniaino in s o l i d u m - 1. 8 7 . (A.S.F, Calimala, Deliberazioni 1450-1451, in G a y e , 1839, vol I, p . 147)

33 Uccello's Son's Baptism

adi p [ r i m | o d i novenbrc 1451 [...[ donato cli paolo di d o n o di p° sea lucia dongnj santi (Opera di Santa Maria del Fiore di Firenze, 2 0 0 1 - 2 0 0 5 , on-line s o u r c e , Regislro, 1, fg 5 2 , Masche e F e m m i n e , 1451 Ottobre 26-1451 Novembre 2)

34 Payments from Jacopo and Giovanni Lanfredini for a Painting

+MCCCCLI Iachopo c Giovanni d ' O r s i n o Landredini dcono dare | . . . |

E adi 2 4 di dicenbre f.dua d ' o r o , per lui a maestro Pagholo cli Dono dipinltore, porto contanti: sono per parte di lavoro gli fa _ f. ii

E adi 19 detto | D e c e m b e r ] f. dua per loro a P a g h o l o di D o n o dipintore, porto e'delto chontanti: sono per parte di lavoro gli fa _ f. ii

DOCUMENTS 297

E adi 19 di febraio f.quatro d'oro e f.una s.X piccioli, per loro a Pagholo di Dono dipintore, porto contanti: sono per una tavola gli dipinse_ f. iiii s. x d. vi (Archivio dello Spedale degli Inncoenti di Firenze, Estranei, 264, Cambini Bank accounts book, p. 100, in Corti and Hartt, 1962, p. 161)

35 TJccello's Captaincy of the Confraternity of Saint Luke

24 Februarij 1452 [= 1453 modern] Item eisdem anno et indictione, et die XXIIII mensis Februarii. Actum Florentie in Cappeila magna hospitalis S. Marie Nove, sub titulo et vocabulo S. Luce Evangeliste denominata, presentibus testibus etc. Francischo Laurentii pictore populi S. [blank] et lesue Santis pictore populi S. [blank! Pateat omnibus evidenter quod existentibus convocatis et congregatis infrascriptis prudentibus viris

Piero Laurenti

pictoribus, capitaneis et presentibus Societatis

Paulo Doni et

seu fraternitatis pictorum et sculptorum sub

Iohanne Francisci

titulo et vocabulo S. Luce Evangeliste et una cum

eis

pictoribus

et

consiliariis

Marcho Filippi

societatis; ac etiam

arrotis seu

Francisco Stefani et

electis

per

Iohanne Ghuccii

secundum

formam

constitutionum

societatis,

videlicet

pictoribus

et deputatis

ipsos

dicte

adiunctis, capitaneos,

et

dicte arrotis

Iohanne ser Iohannis

predictis. Que omnes existentes ubi supra,

Bartolomco Donati

congregati pro factis et negotiis dicte societatis

Stcfano Francesci el

utiliter pertractandis, ipsi quindem

Lauren tio Puccii

capilanei consiliarii et arroti exislcntes tales quales superius proponuntur ct habentes ut dixerunt plenum

ct

plenissinam

baliam, auctoritatem

et

mandatum

infrascripta

et quccunque

ctiam

quanlumciinquc ordinis | ? | ct cuiuscumque importantie pro dicta societate faciendi. Igitur predicti omnes, prcmisso primo et ante omnia inter eos solepni et secrcto scruptinio ad fabas nigras et albas secundum formam eorum constitutionum, ac etiam viva voce, omni mcliori modo etc., fecerunt constituerunt ct ordinaverunt eorum et dicte societatis verum et lcgitimum sindicum, procuratorem, aclorem, factorem et cerium numptium specialem etquicquid melius dici potest, prudentem virum

Slefanum

Antonii

Vannis,

pictorem, ibidem

presentem

et presens

mandatum

in

se spontc,

suscipientem, specialiter et nominatim [?] ad pratichandum et concludendo [?] cum venerabili viro lacobo Picri [hospitalario] hospitalis S. Marie Nove et cum quolibet alio cum quo esset expecliens, de habendo locum in quo hedifiatur sen hedificari faciant, eorum expensis, habitaculum seu habitationem

298

DOCUMENTS

pro eorum congregatione et receptaculo, pro exercendis devotionibus et santimoniis et aliis negotiis dicte societatis. Et propterea pacta et compositiones quelibet faciendum et iniendum, ac etiam de bonis dicte societatis dandum, donandum seu tradendum dicto hospitali eo modo et forma et sub illis conditionibus et pactis de quibus dicto sindico et procuratori videbitur.

Et pro predictis et

depondentibus et connexis ac etiam prossus [?] extaneis, bona quelibet dicte societatis et ...[?] dicte societatis universaliter et singularieter obligandum etc. Et propterea et singularieter obligandum etc. Et propterea instrumentum unum vel plura etc. rogandum etc. cum clausuli etc. Item ad substituendum etc. Et generaliter etc. Dantes etc. promictentes etc. (ASF, Notarile Antecosimiano, B 214 ser Mariotto Baldesi, in Beck, 1979, pp. 4-5)

36 Payment by the Opera del Duomo for a Blessed Andrea

Corsini

|30Jun. 1453J pro parte sui magisterii unius figure bead Andree picte in libreria (AODF, Deliberazioni dal 1450 al 1454, p. 113, in Poggi, 1933, p. 336)

37 Payments for Painting a Crucifixion

and a Sprinkler

at San Miniato al Monte

M C C C L I I D |sicj

Pagholo didono di pagholo ucciellj e ant(oni)o di papi dipintorj contrascriptj (refers to payments on p. 55, cf. VII, 2] cleono avere adj xij difcbraio 1454 11455 st. com.) IT. ventuno disug(cll)o (ogn)u(n)o a lb. iiij s. v per IT. lb. ottanlanove s. v. sono p(er) dipintura duna faceiala i(n) rifeltorio nuovo conuno crocifisso (et) conuno fregio i(n)lorno (et) uno fregio dapie adetta faeciala co(n) cicrtc figure dacordo

lb. Ixxxviiij s. v d. E deono avcre adj detlo ff. dua disug(ell)o son p(er) loro faticha delIc sop(ra)detle dipinturc an(n)o fatto aolio chenoncrano obrigatj lb. viij s. x d. E deono avcre adj cletto lb. cinq(ue) sono p(cr) facitura duno spruccllo feciono nclavaloio derifeltorio nuovo claco(r)do co(n) loro lb.

102. 15. 0 MCCCCLIIIJ

v s. - d. -

DOCUMENTS 299

Pagholo didono dipagholo ucciellj e ant(oni)o dipapi dipintorj deono dare adj xxxj dottob(r)e 1454 ff. uno la(rgo) p(or)to pagholo sop(ra)detto p(er) parte didipinture fano nerifettorio nuovo mesi uscita a pagholo didono sop(ra)detto s(egnato) h a. c. 159 lb. v s. ij d. — E deono dare adj vj dinove(n)b(r)e ff. uno lar(go) e bono dallabate no(st)ro lb. v s. iij d. E deo(no) dare adj viiij dinove(n)bre ff. uno lar(go) e bono dalabbate no(st)ro lb. v s. iij d. E deo(no) dare adj adj [sic] xxij dinove(n)b(r)e ff. uno lar(go) ebbe ant(oni)o dipapi sop(ra)detto i(n)sino adj xx dottob(r)e comapare a uno quadernuccio dichassa a. c. II mesi a usciata s(egnato) h a. c. 161 lb. v s.iij d. E deo(no) dare adi p(rim)o didice(n)b(r)e ff. uno lar(go) p(or)lo ant(oni)o sop(ra)detto p(er) parte didipinture mesi auscita s(egnato) h c. 162 - lb. v s. iij d. E deo(no) dare adj xj didicen(n)b(r)e p(er) uno barile dolio vendemo alsop(ra)detto pagolo didono anostra ghabella (e) (vettu(ura) posto i(n) firenze lb. otto p(or)to b(ar)tolo dinanello ista co(n)noj lb. viij s. - d. E deono dare adj xxiiij didice(n)b(r)e ff. quatro lar(ghi) (e)g(rosso) dua ebono co(n)tantj esop(ra)dettj pagholo e (ant(oni)o dalabbate no(st)ro lb. xx s. xviij d. E deono dare adj xiiij digen(n)aio lb. cinq(ue) s. viij sono p(er) sej staia dig(rano) co(n)pero danoj elsop(radetto ant(onio) dipapi lb. v s. viij d. E deono dare adj p(rimo) difeb(raio) lb. sette e bona cont(antj) dalabbate no(st)ro lb. vij s. - d. E deono dare adj xij difeb(r)aio lb. sej p(or)to pagholo sop(ra)detto (con)t(antj) mesi auscita s(egnato) h c. 168 lb. vj s. - d. E deono dare adj xviij dimarzo lb. otto s. x p(or)to pagholo so(ra)detto (con)t(antj) mesi auscita s(egnalo) h e . 171 lb. viij s. x d. B dcono dare i(n)sino adj xvij dimarzo lb. otto s. viiij sono p(er) resto della parte della dipintura delsop(ra)dctlo ant(oni)o (e)cosi rimasono daco(r)do posto clebj avere i(n) questo a.c. 54 lb. viij s. viiij d. E dcono dare adj xxviiij dimarzo 1455 lb. sej p(or)to elpagholo detto (con)t(antj) mesi auscita s(egnato) h.c. 172 lb- vj s. - d. E deono dare adj xij dap(ri)le lb. sej s. xvj p(or)to pagholo detto (con)t(antj) p(er) resto didipinture fatte i(n) rifettorio nuovo messj auscita s(egnato) h c. 174

300

DOCUMENTS

lb. vj s.

XVJ

d. -

102.15.0 (ASF, Corporazioni Religiose Soppresse, 168, 147, p. 55, in Saalman 1964, p. 563)

38 Uccello's D a u g h t e r ' s Baptism [13 Oct. 1456] antonja [et] benedetta dipagholo didono dipintore (Opera di Santa Maria del Fiore di Firenze, 2001-2005, on-line source, Registro: 1, fg: 311, Maschi e Femmine, 1456 Ottobre 1 0 - 1456 Ottobre 17)

39 Uccello's 1457 Portata

fp. 56] Quartiere sangiovannj gonfalone drago

dinanzi davoi oficialj delchatasto data pier] me pagolo didono dipintore

Nela prjma istrjbutione delchatasto 1427 ebj s[oldi| 5 O di valsentte f[iorin]j 3 s[oldi] 3 dlcnarji 4 e di cinqujna sfoldi] 10

sustantie Una chasa posta nelavja della schala popolo santta lucia dognj santli da prjmo via s[cchon|do ct lerzo crjstofano di gabriello vaiaio quartto ciennj di crislofano quainaio la quale chomperaj da lorcn/.o di piero lenzi f|iorin]j cicnlto dicci amja gabcla rogato s(er) franciescho dipiero ista alia merchatantia adi 21 daprjle 1434 nela quale abito cholamja famiglja

Uno podere posto nclpopolo di santto islefano angniano pivjerc di setimo chonchasa dalavoratorc istaiora 20. daprjmo ct s[echon|do via ler/.o lc chonvertite quartto lerede danlonjo didino chanaoi ein parttc fran ciescho dipagolo chanaoi

Unpezo di terra di staiora. 22. partte vjgnjata indelto

popolo luogo vochato cietinj claprjmo viotolo usato s[echon]do paganelo filatoiaio terzo nannj digiovannj del detto popolo quartto marcho dimartino chanaoi ein partte lachiesa // lavoranolo 1427 andrea di piero del detto popolo

Ogi lolavora pasqujno di mateo didetto popolo ein partte tadeo dagostino del detto popolo lavorano amezo eio mjrjs[er]bo lachasa pferj mjo usso

Rende grano

istaia 23

fane

istaia 20

fagina

istaia 18

lespese di detto podere

orzo

istaia 5

inchane ecioversso lfibre] 4

spelda

istaia 11

vino

barilj 10

lengnje

some 2

Ip. 56v.J Anchora dieci staiora velcircha ditera inpartte vigniata posta indetto popolo daprjmo via s[echon]do lachiesa terzo rede dantonjo didino chanacj quartto lechonverttite einpartte rede di mes[er)ie giovannj grasso laquale chonperaj dapiero diachopo choregiaio delpopolo distantto piero magiore di firenze p[er] f[ iorinlj 70 di sugiello amja gabella et chossi chon peraj dasantta maria nuova pier] che isopradetto piero mj mette insuo luogo et santta marja nuova menefa charitta rogato si er I giovanni gin j notaio asantta marja nuova adi .7. dotobre 1455 delta tera 1427 era di santta marja nuova |in right margin] c prima dimona simona pinzochera figliuola fu dinjcho laio dimone ghuidi

Lavoralo tadco dagostino deldetto popolo et cietto lanjgnia laso amjamanj lavoralo amezo Rende grano

staia 8,

lespese sisa indetta tera in cio

panicho

staia 12

versso et lavoratura delavignia

vino

barilj 6

et in chane I]ibre] 3

302

DOCUMENTS

Credito di montte in tutto sono f[iorin{j 294dequali chomperaj adi . 9 . dimarzo 1430f[iorin]j cientto di prestanzoni detto pier] cientto choloro page sostenute chonperaglj f[iorinjj 41 del gredito di piero binj

0 avere lepaghe di setenbre et di gienaio 1457 sono f[iorinjj 5 ano poche sostenute dal [14]23 al [14]27 a montte chomune f[iorin]j 2 s[oldi] 7 sono ale D/141

0 avere dabaldese digiovannj delpopolo disantto istefano anngnjano f[iorinVj 24 equali sono di fitto dj mjaterer tene insjno nel 1452 chome nerogato s[er] crjstofanodanjtulino et povero nona nulla

0 avere da bernardo di franciesscho et conpagnj che fanno le finestre delvetro ala piaza di santto giovannj popo

lo santta marja delfiore f[iorin]j 17 s[oldi) 14 sono p[er] dipintura di finestre glj dipinssi nelano 1456.

[p. 57] boche pagoio didono sopradetto deta danj

62

Mona tomasa dibenedetto mali fici mia donna deta dannj ventti cinque

25

donato mjo figliuolo el figliuolo di sopra detta mona tomasa deta dannj

6

Antonja mja figliuola et figliuola diso pradetta mona lomasa deta danj 0

uno emesi quatro

1 mesi 4

incharicho

Tengo 1" botega posta in sulapiaza di sanllo giovannj daprimo via s(echon|do ischolaiodi lorenzo vidianj quarlto giovanni lorjnj laquale tengo dal sodo di lorenzo san ;|

sale pachanc lanno 1] iorin [j qualro et 1 ocha nela qua le mjriparo adi pingnjere.

dea adi 15 difebraio 1457 ncl quartiere di sangiovannj gonfalone del drago (ASF, Calasto, 826, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 2063, pp. 56-57)

DOCUMENTS

303

40 Uccello Purchases Land [28 Oct 1458] Johannes olim alterius Johannis Pauli Contri, populi S. Stefani de Orgnano comitati Florentiae, iure proprio et in perpetuum dedit fetj vendidit Paulo Doni pictori populi S. Lucie Omnium Sanctorum de Florentia, presenti etc., unum petium terre vineate... (ASF, Notarile Antecosimiano, F 304, p. 225 v., in Freemantle, 1977, p. 70)

41 Giovanni Rucellai's Artworks

[1457] Memoria che noi abiamo in chasa nostra piu chose di scholtura e di pitura di tarsie e comessi, di mano de' miglori maestri che siano stati da buono tenpo in qua, non tan to in Firenze ma in Italia; e' nomi de quali sono questi, cioe: maestro Domenicho da Vinegia, pittore; frate Filippo de l'ordine..., pittore; Giuliano da Maiano, legnaiuolo, maestro di tarsie e comessi; Antonio dTacopo del Polaiuolo, maestro di disegno; Andrea del Verochio, scultore e pittore; Vettorio di Lorenzo Bartolucci, intaglatore; Andreino dal Chastagno, detto degl'inpichati, pittore; Paolo Ucello, pittore; Disidero da Settignano Giovanni di Bertino - maestri de scharpello. (Giovanni di Pagholo di messere Pagolo Rucellai, in Rucellai, 1960, pp. 23-24)

42 An Isolated Reference to Uccello

109. 8 1 . - Paul us Doni pictor S. Luciae omnium SS. emit 1458. (Bibliotcca Nazionale, Florence, Codice Magliabechiano CI. XXV. no. 392, p. 228, in Boeck, 1939, p. 104)

43 Filarete's Treatise on Architecture |c. 1460-1464] E su nella sala prima voile che si dipignessi giudici che stessino in disaminare alcuni mali fattori, e uno presidente a udire le ragioni dell'una parte e de l'altra; e di sopra al suo tribunale dove sedera sara

304

DOCUMENTS

scritto: " N o n giudicare in furia e odi l'altra parte p r i m a che giudichi"; e cos! ci fece dipignere per tutto cose convenient* s e c o n d o l'edificio. Pagolo Uccello con altri c o m p a g n i dipinse, il quale e solenne maestro di pittura. (Averlino, Trattato di Architettura,

1972, p. 2 8 5 )

44 Lorenzo Morelli's Purchase of a Painting by Uccello

[1465] E per u n o San Giorgio grande chon parte della storia dipinto in sur un q u a d r o di legnio chon chornicie intagliate per Iachopo, legniaiuolo, ed dipinto per P a g h o l o Uccello, dipintore, per fiorini sette larghi; e il q u a d r o chosto fiorino uno largo che in tutto fa fiorini viii larghi; e il q u a d r o e l u n g h o braccio uno e mezzo e largho uno e ottavo. (ASF, Archivio Gherardi, Giornale-ricordi 1464-1479 of Lorenzo di Matteo Morelli, 137, p. 13, i n Beck, 1979, p. 3)

45 Payments by the Confraternity of Corpus Domini, Urbino

Libra B, 1

[p. 5r.] Giovanne di Lucacontrascritlode avere adi vii d e febraro 1468 fiorini tredici bolognini doi d e bolognini contanle a Batisto d e mastro Evangelism c o n t o bolognini vinti datli per lui a Paulo Ucellj a suo conto, in questo a c. 3 1 . 11 or. 13 bol. 2 den.-

|p. 12r.] Kadcm 13 dc d e c c m b r e 1467 bolognini cinquantadoi a Paulo Ucellj cioc bolognini 40 a d Agustino de V c d u l o l e per una catassa d c legne (legna) e bolognini dodicc a m u l i n a r o Cesaro per doi tracossi a conto de P a o l o , in queslo a c. 4 5 . fior. 2 bol. 12 dcn.-

|p. 32r. | Had cm ditto (17 dotlobrc 1469 J bolognini cinquantasellc s o n n o per pane detti piti a Paulo Ucellj depintorc c o m m e fa lode per Batista de mastro A g u s t i n o a conto de Paulo, in queslo a c. 3 8 . fior. 2 bol. 17 den.-

| p . 34r.) Eadem ditto (10 augusli 1467] ducati doj d o r o delti contante a Paulo Ucellj a luj, in questo a c . 38.

DOCUMENTS

305

fior. 4 bol. 18 den.-

[p. 34r.J Eadem ditto [adi 10 agusto 1467] bolognini trenta quattro detti a Paulo Ucellj et per luj a Nicolo de la Stella per frutti 21 datti a luj, in questo a c. 38. fior 1 bol. 14 den.-

[p. 36v.j Eadem 22 ditto [setembre 1468] bolognini quattro per aguti compro Batisto de mastro Agustino per fare conciare cert cose a la fraternita per Paulo Ucellj a conto de Batisto, in questo a c. 39. fior. - bol. 4 den.-

[p. 36v.] Eadem ditto [ottobre 1468] bolognini cinque a Dionigie de mastro Antonio per una stora compro Batisto de mastro Agustino per fare acunciare in la fraternita per Paulo Ucellj a lui, in questo a c. 40. fior. - bol. 5 den.-

lp. 37v.] Paulo Ucellj depintore da Fiorenze de dare adi X d'agosto 1467 ducati doi doro ebbe contante da Batista de mastro Agustino a suo conto, in questo a c. 34. fior. 4 bol. 18 den.-

[p. 37v.] Eadem ditto [ 10 agosto 1467] bolognini trentaquattro di contante Batista de mastro Agustino a Nicolo de la Stella per frutti 21 de suo conto, in questo a c. 34. fior. 1 bol. 14 den.-

|p. 37v.] E in sino adi 30 dagosto 1467 bolognini venticinque de contante per lui Batisto de mastro Agustino a Furlino dal Ponte a Sieve per vettura 125 de gesso vulterano e altri colori li porto da Fiorenza a luj, in questo a c. 39. fior. 1 bol. 15 dcn.-

[p. 37v.[ Eadem 18 de setembre 1467 bolognini doi spese Batisto de mastro Agustino per un mazo de ccrchi per botarello li detli li quali dovuti al Batista, in questo a c. 38. fior. - bol. 2 den. -

|p. 37v.| Eadem 22 detto [setembre 1467] bolognini sei per luj dette Batisto de mastro Agustino a Batisto de CI alio da Palino per uno bigonzo de uva li dette a suo conto, in questo a c. 39. fior. - bol. 6 den. -

|p. 37v.J Eadem ditto [22 selembre 1467J bolognini cinquasette sonno per pano ebbe da mastro Antonio da Primicilio a suo conto, in questo a c. 32. fior. 2 bol. 17 den. -

306 DOCUMENTS

[p. 37v.J E in sino adi 17 dotobre 1467 bolognini ventuno ebbi da Batiste- de mastro Agustino conto in essi bolognini 9 per un fascio de paglia per lo letto a lui, in questo a c. 40. fior. 1 bol. 1 den. -

[p. 37v.j Eadem detto 117 dottobre 1467J bolognini quattro contanti da Batista de mastro Agustino quali per lui dette a Geronimo de mastro Marco libre 17 de grazzo che li dette per fare canadoli (?) a lui, in questo a c. 40. fior. - bol. 4 den. -

[p. 37v.] Eadem ditto 20 [dottobre 1467] bolognini vinti ebbe contante da Batista ditto, in questo a c. 40. fior. 1 bol. - den. -

[p. 37v.j Eadem 5 de decembre [1467] bolognini vinti dal detto Batisto quale li mando per Donato suo a conto de Batista, in questo a c. 40. fior. 1 bol. - den. -

[p. 37 v.] Eadem 19 ditto [decembre 1467] bolognini dicianove per luj pago Batislo ditto a catortio per fatura e fornimento duno giupone de Donato da suo figliuolo a conto de Batisto, in questo a c. 40. fior. - bol. 19 den. -

|p. 37v.| Eadem 23 ditto [decembre 1467] bolognini sette dette conlante per luj Batisto di mastro Agustino a catortio per pan no de lino li dette per calze de Donato de li suoi a conto de Batista, in questo a c. 40. fior. - bol. 7 den. -

|p. 37v.) Eadem 25 ditto [decembre I467J dette contante Batislo ditto a Bastiano bolognini quattro per fattura duno paro de calze per Donato in questo a c. 4 0 . fior. - bol. 4 den. -

|p. 37v.| Eadem 26 de genaro 1468 bolognini vinti ebbe da Batisto dc mastro Agustino li mando per Donato suo a conto de Balisto, in queslo a c. 4 2 . fior. I bol. - den. -

lp. 37v.| Eadem ditto |26 genaro 1468] bolognini dicienove per scarpe li I'e dare Balisto cli mastro Agustino a Nicolo de Ghignaldo abate, in qucsto a c. 42. fior. - bol. 19 den. -

lp. 37v.| E in fino adi 28 de genaro 1468 bolognini vinti ebbe da Batisto de mastro Agustino a luj, in questo a c. 42.

DOCUMENTS 307

fior. 1 bol.. - den. -

[p. 38r.] Paulo Ucellj contrascritto de avere adi VI de febraro 1467 florini diciotto bolognini sedici di bolognini per altretanti posti, in questo a c. 45. fior. 18 bol. 16 den. -

[p. 39r.j Batisto de mastro Agustino de avere fino de 30 dagosto 1467 bolognini venticinque pago contante a Furlino da Ponte a Sieve per Paulo Ucellj a lui, in questo a c. 38. fior. 1 bol. 5 den. -

[p. 39r.J Eadem 18 de setembre [1467] bolognini doi per un mazo de archi compro per un caratello de Paulo Ucellj a lui, in questo a c. 38. fior. - bol. 1 den. -

[p. 39r.J Eadem 22 ditto Isetembre 1467] bolognini sei per uno bigonzo duva compro da Batisto de Gallo per Paulo Ucellj a lui, in questo a c. 38. fior. - bol. 6 den. -

[p. 39r.] Eadem 24 ditto Isetembre 1467] bolognini quattro per aguti tolsi da mastro Giuliano per conciare la fraternita che Paulo Ucellj potesse abitare et per una corda per la sechia a conto de la fraternita, in questo a c. 37. fior. - bol. 4 den. -

|p. 40r. 1 Eadem 17 ditto [ottobre 1467] bolognini vintuno dati a Paulo Ucellj contanti in essi bolognini uno per un fascio de paglia per lo letto a lui, in questo a c. 38. fior. 1 bol. 1 den. -

| p . 40r. 1 Eadem ditto (17 dottobre 1467) bolongini quattro a Girolamo de mastro Marco per libre dicesette da canandoli (?) per fare colla per la taula a conto de Paulo Ucellj, in questo a c. 36. fior. - b o l . 4 den. -

|p. 4()r. | Eadem 20 ditto |ottobre 14671 bolognini cinque a Dionige de mastro Antonio per una stora per aconciarc el lotto a Paulo Ucellj in la fraternita a suo conto, in questo a c. 37. fior. - bol. 5 den. -

|p. 40r.] Eadem ditto |2() dottobre 1467) bolognini vinti contante a Paulo Ucellj a suo conto, in questo a c. 38. fior. 1 b o l . d e n . -

308 DOCUMENTS

[p. 40r.J Eadem 5 de decembre [1467] bolognini vinti de contante a Paulo Ucellj portolli Donato suo a luj, in questo a c. 38. fior. 1 bol. - den. -

[p. 40r.J Eadem 19 de decembre [1467] bolognini dicenove a Paulo Ucellj et per lui a Catortio per fatura e fornimento duno giupone de Donato, in questo a c. 38. fior. - bol. 19 den. -

[p. 40r.j Eadem 23 ditto [decembre 1467J bolognini sette contante a Paulo Ucellj et per lui a Catortio per panno de lino per le calze de Paulo et de Donato e per fatura de quello de Paolo a lui, in questo a c. 38. fior. - bol. 7 den. -

[p. 40r.] Eadem 25 ditto [decembre 1467] bolognini quattro a Bastiano Onugni (?) per fatura duno paro de calze de Donato de Paulo Ucellj a conto de Paulo, in questo a c. 38. fior. - bol. 4 den. -

[p. 40v. ] Eadem 8 ditto [genaro 1468) bolognini uno per carte reale compro Batisto de mastro Agustino per impanare una fenestra per Paulo Ucellj a conto de Batisto, in questo a c. 42. fior. - bol. 1. den. -

[p. 42r.] Eadem 8 ditto jde genaro 1468] bolognini vinticontane a Paulo Ucellj, in questo a c. 39. fior. 1 bol. - den. -

|p. 42r.] Eadem 26 ditto [de genaro 1468] bolognini vinti conlante a Paulo Ueellj portolli Donato suo a luj, in q lies to a c. 38. fior. 1 bol. - den. -

[p. 42r. | Eadem 28 ditto [de genaro 14681 bolognini uno a Paulo Ucellj per contante vale per impanare una fenestra de la fratemila, in questo a c. 41. fior. - bol. I den. -

[p. 42r. 1 Eadem ditto 12.8 de genaro 14-681 bolognini dicianove a Paolo Ucellj per scarpe li fece dare a mastro de Uliignaldo a conto dc Paulo, in questo a c. 4 1 . fior. - bol. 19 den. -

[p. 43r.] Eadem ditto [6 de febraro 1468] bolognini vinti contanti a Paulo Ucellj et per modo de ser Francesco de Zacagna a conto dc Paulo, in questo a c. 45. fior. 1 bol. - den. -

DOCUMENTS

309

[p. 43r.] Eadem ditto [6 de febraro 1468] bolognini trentacinque a Paulo Ucelllj et per lui a Gaspare del Buffa per panno scarlatino li dette, in questo a c. 45. fior. 1 bol. 15 den. -

[p. 43r.] Eadem 12 de febraro [1468] florini 25...1'eduo ? quattro de bolognini vintitre de contante a Paulo Ucellj a lui, in questo a c. 45. fior. 25 bol 7 den. -

[p. 43r.] Eadem ditto [27 de febraro 1468] bolognini cinquanta a Paulo Ucellj et per lui a Bartolomeo Bisconti per lo nolo del letto et aver proposto a conto de Paulo, in questo a c. 45. fior. 2 bol. 10 de. -

[p. 44r.] E in sino adi ultimo dottobre 1468 florini tre doro detti a contante a Paulo Ucellj e florini doi a lui quanto torno da Fiorenza e florini uno al veturale che lo condusse qua a suo conto, in questo a c. 45. fior. 7 bol. 4 den. -

[p. 44r.] E in sino adi 2 de decembre 1467 bolognini quarantacinque per libre 1 1/4 de cupo (?) de acri 170 dette a Paulo Ucellj a suo conto, in questo a c. 45. fior. 2 bol. 5 den. -

[p. 44r.] Eadem ditto [2 de decembre 1467] bolognini trentasei per libri 1 de scarlato denari 70 dette a Donato de Paulo Ucellj a suo conto, in questo a c. 45. fior. 1 bol. 16 den. -

[p. 44r.| E in sino adi 28 de novembre [ 1467] bolognini dicenove sonno per braccia 2 5/8 de fustagno milanese e per braccia 1 1/8 de tela near dette a Donato de Paulo Ucellj a suo conto, in questo a c. 45. fior. - bol. 19 den. -

jp. 44r. 1 Eadem ditto 118 de novembre 1467] bolognini quatorcleci denari sette detti conto per Paulo Uccllj a Catortio per filo seta refe bambagio del giupone a Donato del ditto Paulo a suo conto, in questo a c. 4 5 . fior. - bol. 14 den. -

|p. 4 4 v . | Paulo dictus Uccllj dc Fiorenza de dare adi 23 de febraro florini diciotto bolognini scdice sonno per una sua ragionc, in questo a c. 38. fior. 18 bol. 16 d e n . (Libro B , Corpus Domini, Urbino, in Moranti, 1990, pp. 206-214, including all the entries on p. 37v., which as Moranti has established by calculating the total value of the payments recorded, relate to Uccello, even though he is not named in every entry)

310

DOCUMENTS

46 Uccello's 1469 Portata

[p. 2591 pagolo di d o n o dipintore quartiere di sanct[o] g° gon[falonle drago dinanzi davoj oficialj della gabella di s[oldiJ 2

disse nel 1427 pagolo d i d o n o dipintore ebi dichatasto s[oldi] 5 disse nel 1451 pagolo d i d o n o dipintore ebi di valsente ffiorinjj 3 sfoldij 3 di 9 disse nel 1457 pagolo di d o n o dipintore ebi di chatasto s[oldi] 8 disse nel 1468 pagolo d i d o n o dipintore ebi diventina sfoldi] 9 d[enar]j 4

sustantie U n a chasa p[er] mio abitare posta nellavja della ischala pop[o]lo santta lucia dogni santi d a p r i m o via sfechonjdo 3" cristofano di gabri ello vaiaio 4" sfer] p o c i e dibanbello panaiolo didetto p o p l o j l o

Laquale chonperai d a l o r e n z o dipiero lenzi f['iorinJj ciento dieci rogato ser franciescho di piero ista alia merchatantia sotto 21 daprile 1434 nella quale abito c h o m j a famiglia

Fu data alchatasto 1427 i n o m c di mona quida dona fu di franci escho sarrto gonfalone liochorno laquale o data sempre p[er] mio abitare

uno podere posto nel p o p [ o ] l o santto stefano angnjano pivjere di s e l l i m o chon chasa daoste e dalavoratore chojn[ staiora 53 djtera parte lavorat iva e parte vjngnjata c pergolata chome parttamcnlle raporlai alia gravezza del 1457 et dipoi

O aggiuntte staiora 1 3 diterra lavorali|v|a in detlo p o p | o ] l o laqualc chonperai da mona checha di d u c i o dipiero dona fu dilorenzo dipiero gonfalone hue p|or] pregio di f|iorin|j 6 3 rogato s|er| antonio clis|cr| batisla sotlo dj 17 di scte nbre 1459

E piu augiunlo islaiora 2 e dieci panora ditera vjngnjata in de tto p o p | o | l o d a p | r | j m o pagancllo filaloiaio s | e c h o n | d o 3° 4" pagolo d i d o n o so pradelto c h o | n | p e r a t a dagiovanni digiovanni dipiero d i c h o n l r o di detto poplojlo per p r e g i o di f|iorinfj. 19 s|oldi j - rogato s | e r | filippo di cristofano sotto di san trjano | ? | s o n o di 28 dotobrc 1458

E quale podere chontuttc ledette terre lavora ogi giovannj

DOCUMENTS 311

dantonjo didetto pop|o]lo e damene dafitto grano staio 58 posto in firenze lire chaponj paia 2 uova s[er) [.-•]

E piu vjno che a meza barili XIII isbatuto chane che sono 4 lengje some 3

[p. 259v.) Creditori cli monte

f[iorinX) 22 dicono in pagolo didono dipintore quartiere san gliovannjj E piu f[iorin]j 26 dimonte del 1466 [a libro] 644 O avere lepaghe dimagio 1469

f[iorinjj 80

ffiorinlj 13

boche Pagolo didono dipintore deta dannj 73

f[iorin lj 200

mona tomasa dibenedetto malif'icj dona didetto pagolo deta dannj 5 6

f[iorinJj 200

donate figliuolo disopradetto pagolo efigliuolo disopradetta monatomasa deta dannj 16

f[iorinlj 200

Truovomj vecchio e sanza invjamento e no[n) posso esercitare e ladona inferma

dca adi 8 dagosto 1469 nel quartiere isanto gio[van|nj

(ASF, Catasto, 926, vol. II, San Giovanni Drago, pp. 259-259 v., transcription based on Mather, 1948, pp. 63-64)

47

A Record of Uccello's W o r k s h o p

[1470] Una bottegha di mastro Pagholo Ucello da Firenze. (Memorie Istoriche, Ashburnham 644, Biblioteca Laurenziana di Firenze, in Gilbert, 1988, p. 203.)

312

DOCUMENTS

48 Uccello Sues Domenico del Tasso in the Merchants' Tribunal

[25 A u g . 1474J Dinanzi a messer ufficiale e corte expone etc. Pagolo d i D o n o Ucciegli d e p i n t o r e , c h e Domenicho di [blank] del T a x o [?] l e g n a i u o l o e suo debitore di fiorini tre larghi p e r quandri dui dipinti, a lui venduti e dati, c o m ' appare a l i b r o di Domenicho, Ricordanze s e g n a t e a c. 94, al quale se r i m e s s e , produce e depone apresso a ser A n t o n i o Fedi notaio. E piu volte richiese etc. Pertanto d o m a n d a vi piaccia pronumptiare e dichiarare e sia dichiarato per vostra sentenzia contro detto D o m e n i c h o a ddare [sic] e pagare al detto Paolo detti fiorini tre larghi ...[formula not read] le spese quale . . . [ f o r m u l a not read] E produsse il diritto p a g a t o a libro, c. 144. Item tutti statuti et ordini etc. Item messer officiale etc. c o m m i s s e etc. La richiesta d a farsi in forma vallida a N i c o l d Cintio m e s s o etc. Ad petitione di detto Paolo, Nicolo Cintio m e s s o predetto rapporto avere richiesto detto D o m e n i c h o ala c a s e . . . [ n o t read]. ( A S F , Mercanzia, n o . 1 4 8 3 , p . 781 v., in Beck, 1979, p. 4 )

49 Uccello's Final Will

In dei omnipotentis et S a n c t e trinitatis et beate et gloriose virginis Marie et sanctorum appostolorum omnium et singulorum sanctorum.

Prudens v i r P a u l u s o l i m doni donati uccelli piclor populi Sanctc Lucie o m n i u m s a n c t o r u m deflorentia sanus per dei gratiam m e n t e et intellectu licet more s e n i u m sponte languens intendens ut dixit testare e t testatus decedere h a b e t suum pracsens teslamcntum q u o d clicitur sine scriptis ordinavit et fecit in populo Sancte Lucie prcdictc.

In d o m o habitationis dicti pauli in a n n o domini noslri Jesu Crisli o b eius salutifera

incarnatione

millesimo q u a d r i n g e n t e s i m o septuagesimo quinlo indiclione nona ct d i e u n d e c i m a mensis novembris dicti anni presentibus testibus ad inslrumcntum omnia et singula habitatione nolarii el rogatis et proprio ore dicti teslaloris videlicet

Ser loderingho olim a n d r e a Johannis de stufa presbilero florentie

Ser L a z e r o d e Simonis stafani presbitero rectore ecclesie sancti m i c h a c l i s d e valle ami

Ser marcho Laurcntii maringhi de florenlia presbitero et cappellano unius cappelle in ecclesia Sanctis Amboxii de florentia

DOCUMENTS 313

Petro miniatis statu calzaruolo populi sancti laurentii de florentia

Francisco bencivennis Bartholomei detto scarfa cive florentie populi sancti pancratti de florentia

Danielo nannis miglioris de terra nova factore de ripoli Taddeo getti dominici testore drapporum populi sancta lucie omnium sanctorum de florentia.

In primis animam suam quandocumque a corpore migrari contingent et nunc et semper recommendavit et recomandat devotissime patri omnipotente et gloriose et beatissime semper virgini marie et omnibus sancis celestis curie paradisi et sepulturam sui corporis elegit et sepeliri voluit in sepulcro ipsius pauli positi in ecclesie sancti spiritus in quo positus est pater ipsius. Et reliquit et legavit operi seu sacristie sancta marie del fiore de florentie solidos viginti et operi murorurn et operi murorum civitatis florentie alios solidos viginti.

Item reliquit et legavit domini Thomaxie eius uxori et filie olim benedicti malifici dotes suas quas dixit et asseruit esse florenos ducentos auri de sigillo.

Item reliquit et legavit dicte domine thomaxie eius uxori et filie dicti benedicti omnes fructus redditus et proventus omnium et singulororn bono rum mobilium et immobilium dicti testatoris una cum eius filio et herede et dominam usufructuariam ut supra dummodo stet vidua et vitam honestam gerat aliter cadat ipso lure et legationc predicta.

In omnibus clamat suis bonis mobilibus et immobilibus juris nimone et actione eius hcredem univcrsalcm inslituit et fecit et esse voluit Donatum eius filium legiptimum et naturalem et filium etiam dicte domine thomaxie. Cum haberet quod si dictus donatus decederet ante dictam dominam ihomaxiam sine filiis masculis aut feminis legiptimis et naturalibus tunc el eo casu ex nunc instituit eius heredem dictam dominam thomaxiam eius uxorem in omnibus dictis bonis jure et actione.

Et hanc suam ulitmam voluntatem et ultimum testamentum asseruit esse ct etiam velle quam etc. (ASF, Pace di Bombello di Pace, 7, 1471-1476, p. 147, in Sindona, 1957, p. 44)

50

Uccello's Death

112 Dec. 1475] pagolo di ucello dipintore ri° in so spirito. (ASF, Registri di Morti, Medici e Speciali, 246, 1475-1486, fol. 3v., in Boeck, 1939, p. 107)

Bibliography Archival Sources, Florence

ASF Archivio Ceramelli Papiani: 1792, 'fdoni'

Arte della Lana 39, Codice Membranaceo Contenente un Registro per le Diverse Magistrature dell'Arte, 1 April 1388 31 December 1612 59, Deliberazioni degli Statutari e Composizioni degli Ordini dell'Arte Arte Medici e Speziale 21

Catasto 53, San Giovanni Drago 55, San Giovanni Drago 65, microfilm reel 123 75, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 139 77, microfilm reel 142 79, San Giovanni Drago 380, San Giovanni Drago 381, San Giovanni Drago 408, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1042 475, San Giovanni Drago 498, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1234 625, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 1527 826, San Giovanni Drago, microfilm reel 2063 926, vol. II, San Giovanni Drago

CRSGF 102,290, Giornale, 1428-1436 102, 295, Enlrata e Useila, 1402-1414 102, 296, Compagniadi San Pier Martyr, Enlrate e Uscitc, 1413-1419 102, 298, Entrata e uscita, 1455-1463 102, 321, Provisione, Delibcrazione e Partiti 102, 322, Slanziamenti; 102, 323, Enlratto delle Case 102,470, Debilori e Creditori

BIBLIOGRAPHY 3 35

102 Appendice, 58, Debitori e Creditori, 1443-1470 102 Appendice, 65, Entrata e Uscita, 1419-1427 102 Appendice, 67

102 Appendice 72, Debitori e Creditor, 1469-1517

CRSGF 132, 95, Visita Priorale, vol. H 132, 161, vols I-III, of 3 vols 132, 2 8 3 , Compendio Alfabetico de Statuti 132, 298 (one bundle) Deputazione Sopra la Nobilita e Cittadinanza 15, no. 21

Libri di Commercio e di Famiglia re

1693, Entrata e Uscita, Redita del Sig. Ruberto di filicce del Becuto 1694, Debitori e Creditori

MPAP 5 25, Libro di Deliberazione 1415-1416 26, Librodi Deliberazione 1416-1416 27, Libro di Deliberazionc 1417-1418 43,1425-1426 44, 1426-1427 169

Manoscritti 2 4 4 , Del sergente magiore Giovanni Vincenzio

Coresi del Bruno Governatore

S.A. R. della Citta

Presidio e Banda di Grossto 1720. Questo e 1'originate del Priorista in ristretto di Giuliano de Ricci del 1596. La Rota delle Famiglie alfabeto

che hanno riseduto

da felice di Ruberto del Beccuto

di collegia mesa per online

dal 1532 al 1606. II Catalogo

de Rotari

di

della

repubtica Fiorentina dal 1282 al 1531. II Catalogo delle famiglie Florentine che poi si dissero de grandi le cjuali I'anno 1215 avevano il governo della citta cioe godevano il consolato 6 2 4 , Sepoltuario

Fiorentino

ovvero Descrizione

Delle Chiese Cappelle

E Sepolture

Inscrizione Delia Citta Di Firenze E Suoi Contorni Fatta Da Stefa.no Rosselli

KIF Fototeca Uccello, Florenze, S.M. Novella

R.A.

Loro Armi Et

MDCLVII

316

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Uccello, Florenze, Prato Uccello, Florenze, Ausland

Biblioteca Cabrero della Commenda in S. Jacopo in Carnpo Corbolini fatta dall. 111.{mo) Sig.(r) Commendatore f. Bartolomeo Galilei, 1651-1654.

OPD Box 3966/3994/137 [Quarate predella and the Stories of Noah]

VT Fototeca: Paolo Uccello, Florence; Paolo Uccello, except Florence. Castello

ASMC Decima dela Chiesa di San Michele a Castello Decimario della Chiesa di San Michele a Castello.

Outside Italy

Agnevv's, London, Archive Stockbook no. 12

Ashmolean Museum, Oxford Curatorial File, The Annunciation, Fox-Strangevvays, 1850, C 329, 80

BPRO PRO 30/22/6B, Sam|uel | Woodburn, letter to Lord John Rupetly, 10 Mar. 1847 PRO 30122/1C, Samluel | Woodburn, letter to Lord John Rupetly, 4 Jul. 1848 CRRMF conservation files 5616 [Saint George] 5612 [Battle]

5614 [Profde Portrait of a Young Man]

Christie's, London, Archive CATALOGUE

OF THE CELEBRATED

DAVENPORT

BROMLEY,

COLLECTION

DECEASED:

WHICH

OF PICTURES,

OF THE REV. WALTER

Will be Sold by Auction,

BY MESSRS.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 3 1 7

CHRISTIE, JAMES'S

CATALOGUE

MANSON

SQUARE,

& WOODS,

AT THEIR

GREAT

ROOMS,

On FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1863, And following

OF THE VERY CELEBRATED

& VALUABLE

The greatest

early Italian Masters,

Connoisseur,

THE LATE SAMUEL WOODBURN,

8, KING

STREET,

ST.

Day. [...].

SERIES OF CAPITAL PICTURES,

Formed under singular advantages,

by that

BY

distinguished

ESQ. [...], (9-11 Jun. 1860).

Hamilton Kerr Institute, Fitzwilliam Museum Cambridge, MS. 1112-1993, Buttery Record Books, book C The Hunt In The Forest by Paolo Uccello: Technical Examination And Copy, Nicola Christie, The Hamilton Kerr Institute, Jul. 1988.

Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe Curatorial File, Inv. Nr. 606

Musee du Louvre, Centre de Documentation Dossier MI.469, Uccello (P), La Bataille

NGL Curatorial Files NG 583,1, unpublished material NG 583, IV, photographs, details, up until 1959, x-rays, infra red NG 583, photographs, details, up until and including 1959 NG 6294, x-ray photos NG 6294, infrared photos

NGV Conservation Files, Anon. Italian CI5th St George Slaying the Dragon, Tempera (?) on panel th

Curatorial Files, St. George Slaying The Dragon, 15 C. Felton Bequest Correspondence, 2/20, NGV Library, Melbourne National Gallery Minutes, 1 Mar. 1945 - Dec. 1955

On-Line Sources

Haines (ed.), 2004 Gli Anni della Cupola J417-1436,

Archivio

Digitale

delle Fonti dell'Opera

di Santa

del Fiore, M. Haines (ed.): vvvvvv.operaduomo.firenze.it, 2004, sighted 14 Apr. 2005.

Maria

318

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Herlihy, Burr Litchfield, Molho and Barducci (eds), 2002 Florentine Renaissance Resources, Online Tratte of Office Holders, 1282-1532, Machine Readable Data File, Edited by David Herlihy, R. Burr Litchfield, Anthony Molho and Roberto Barducci (Florentine Renaissance resources/STG, Brown University, Providence, R.l, 2002), sighted 14 Apr. 2005.

Herlihy, Klapisch-Zuber, Burr Litchfield and Molho (eds), 2002. Online Catasto of 1427. Version 1.3. Edited by David Herlihy, Christiane Klapisch-Zuber, R. Burr Litchfield and Anthony Molho. [Machine readable data file based on D. Herlihy and C. Klapisch-Zuber, Census and Property Survey of Florentine Domains in the Province of Tuscany, 1427-1480.] Florentine Renaissance Resources/STG: Brown University, Providence, R.I., 2002, sighted 14 Apr. 2005.

Opera di Santa Maria del Fiore di Firenze, 2001-2005 Opera di Santa Maria del Fiore di Firenze, Risorse Elettroniche, Registri Battesimali, www.operaduomo.firenze.it, 2001-2005, sighted 14 Apr. 2005.

Published Sources

Acidini Luchinat, 1995 Acidini Luchinal, C , 'Le Vetrate', in La Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore a Firenze, C. Acidini Luchinat (ed.), Florence, 1995, vol. II, pp. 273-301. Ainsworth, 1994 Ainsworth, M.W., 'The Art of Petrus Christus', in Petrus Christus: Renaissance Master of Bruges, M. Ainsvvorth with contributions by M.P.J. Martens (eels.), exh. cat., Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1994, pp. 25-67. Alberti, 1972 Alberti, L.B., On Painting and On Sculpture \De Pictura, 14351, edited with translations, introduction and notes by C. Grayson, London, 1972. Albertini, 1972 Albcrtini, F., Memoriale di Molte Statue et Picture di Firenze, with an introduction by P. Murray, Westmcad, 1972 (orig. cel. Florence, 1510). Alpatov, [1984| Alpatov, M., 'A Propos de la Comparaison de Deux Oeuvres dc Paolo Uccello el cle MaTtre Denis', in Scritti di Storia dell'Arte in Onorc di Roberto Salvini, C. de Benedictis (ed.), Florence, [1984], pp. 325-328. Ames-Lewis, 1974 Ames-Lewis, F , 'A Portrait of Leon Battista Alberti by Uccello?', The Burlington vol. CXVI, no. 851, Feb. 1974, pp. 103-104.

Magazine,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

319

Ames-Lewis, 1987 Ames-Lewis, F., 'Modelbook Drawings and the Florentine Quattrocento Artist', Art History, vol. X, no. 1, Mar. 1987, pp. 1-9. Anderson, 1997 Anderson, J., Giorgione: The Painter of 'Poetic Brevity',

Paris and New York, 1997 (orig,

French ed. Paris, 1996). Angelini, 1990a Angelini, A., 'Paolo Uccello', in Pittura di Luce: Giovanni di Francesco e I'Arte diMeta Quattrocento,

Fiorentina

L. Bellosi (ed.), exh. cat., Casa Buonarroti, Florence, 1990, pp. 73-77.

Angelini, 1990b Angelini, A., 'Paolo Uccello, 8. Predella di Quarate, (San Giovanni Evangelista Adorazione Francesco

del Magi; Santi Giacomo e I'Arte

Fiorentina

e Ansano)

di Meta

[...]', in Pittura di Luce;

Quattrocento,

a Patmos; Giovanni

di

L. Bellosi (ed.), exh. cat., Casa

Buonarroti, Florence, 1990, p. 78. Angelini, 1990c Angelini, A., 'Paolo Uccello, 9. Cristo Portacroce Francesco

e VArte Fiorentina

[...]', in Pittura di Luce; Giovanni di

di Meta Quattrocento,

L. Bellosi (ed.), exh. cat., Casa

Buonarroti, Florence, 1990, p. 82. Angelini, 1990d Angelini, A., 'Giovanni cli Francesco (?), 3. San Girolamo Penitente [...]', in Pittura di Luce: Giovanni di Francesco e I'Arte Fiorentina di Meta Quattrocento,

in L. Bellosi (ed.), exh. cat.,

Casa Buonarroti, Florence, 1990, p. 52. Angelini, 1991 Angelini, A., 'Paolo Uccello, il Bcato Jacopone da Todi e la Datazione degli Affreschi di Prato', Prospettiva,

no. 61, Jan. 1991, pp. 49-53.

Angelini, 2002a Angelini, A., ' 3 3 . Paolo Uccello (Paolo di Dono; Firenze, 1397-1475), Santa Monaca con Due Fanciulli Oranti [...)', in Masaccio

e le Origini del Rinascimento,

in L. Bellosi with the

collaboration of L. Cavazzini and A. Galii (eds), exh. cat., Casa Masaccio, San Giovanni Valdarno, 2002, pp. 198-200. Angelini, 2002b Angelini, A., '34. Paolo Uccello (Paolo di Dono; Firenze, 1397-1475), Madonna Bambino | . . . ] ' , in Masaccio e le Origini del Rinascimento,

con il

in L. Bellosi with the collaboration

of L. Cavazzini and A. Galli (eds), exh. cat., Casa Masaccio, San Giovanni Valdarno, 2002, pp. 202-204. Anonymous (Magliabcchiano), 1892 Anonymous (Magliabechiano), // Codice Magliabechiano Berlin, 1892.

[c. 1537-1542], C. Frey (ed.),

320

BIBLIOGRAPHY

A r a n c i , 1992 Aranci, G., ' 6 . 3 5 , Paolo Uccello (Attr.a), La V i a di Perfezione f...]', in La Chiesa e la Citta a Firenze nel XV Secolo, G. Rolfi, L. S e b r e g o n d i a n d P. Viti (eds), e x h . cat., Sotterranei di S a n Lorenzo, Florence, 1992, p . 145. A r g a n and Wittkovver, 1990 Argan, G.C. and Wittkovver, R., Perspective

et Histoire

au Quattrocento,

Suivi de

"La

Question de la Perspective, 1960-1968" par Marisa Dalai Emiliani, city n o t recorded, 1990 (orig. ed. part 2 , L'Arte, n o . 2, 1968). Armellini, 1972 Armellini, G., ' F a s c i s m o e Pittura Italiana, II: II Primo D o p o g u e r r a Metafisica e 'Valori Plastici", Paragone, no. 2 7 3 , 1 9 7 2 , pp. 3 6 - 5 1 . A r o n b e r g Lavin, 1967 Aronberg Lavin, M., ' T h e Altar of C o r p u s D o m i n i in Urbino: Paolo U c c e l l o , Joos van Ghent, Piero della F r a n c e s c a ' , The Art Bulletin, v o l . X L I X , Mar. 1967, p p . 1-24. A r o n b e r g Lavin, 1990 Aronberg Lavin, M . , The Place of Narrative:

Mural Decoration

in Italian

Churches, 431-

1600, Chicago and London, 1990. A r o n b e r g Lavin, 1996 Aronberg Lavin, M., 'Meditazione di P i e r o sulla Nativita di C r i s t o ' , in Citta e Corte nell'Italia di Piero della Francesca, (Atti del C o n v e g n o Internazionale di Studi, 4-7 October 1992, Urbino) C. Ciera Via (ed.), Venice, 1 9 9 6 , p p . 2 1 9 - 2 3 1 . Augusti, [19941 Augusti, A . , / / Monumento a Paolo Savelli nella Basilica di S. Maria Gloriosa del Frari, Venezia, [Venice), [ 1994). Averlino, 1965 Averlino, A. [called Filarele], Filarete's

Treatise

Antonio di Piero Averlino, Known as Filarete

on Architecture:

Being

the Treatise by

[ 1 4 6 0 - 1 4 6 4 | , trans. J.R. Spencer, New Haven

and London, 1965, vol. I. Avcrlino, 1972 Averlino, A. [called Filarete], Trattato di Architettura

11460-1464], A . M . Finoli and L. Grassi

(eds), Milan, 1972. A v e r y - Q u a s h , 2003 Avery-Quash, S., ' T h e (jrowth of Interest in Fiarly Italian Painting in Britain with Particular Reference to Pictures in the National G a l l e r y ' , in I). G o r d o n (ed.), The Fifteenth

Century

Italian Paintings, v o l . I, National Gallery C a t a l o g u e s , London, 2 0 0 3 , p p . xxv-xliv. Bacci, 1969 Bacci, M., 'II Punlo su Giovanni Boccati ( I ) ' , Paragone, vol. X X , no. 2 3 1 , M a y 1969, pp. 1 5 -

BIBLIOGRAPHY

321

Baillie, 1995 Baillie, M.G.L., A Slice Through Time: Dendrochronology

and Precision Dating,

London,

1995. Baldini, 1954a Baldini, U., 'Restauri di Dipinti Fiorentini in Occasione della Mostra di Quattro Maestri del Rinascimento', Bolletino d'Arte, vol. XXXIX, no. 4, 1954, pp. 221-240. Baldini, 1954b Baldini, U., 'Le Rassegne: Masaccio e i "Quattro Maestri del Rinascimento" in Palazzo Strozzi a Firenze', Arte Figurativa Antica e Moderna, no. 9, May-Jun. 1954, pp. 15-18. Baldini, 1981 Baldini, U., 'Un Quasi Inedito Botticelli: la Nativita\

in Santa Maria Novella, la Basilica, il

Convento, i Chiostri Monumentali, U. Baldini (ed.), Florence, 1981, pp. 157-160. Baldini, 2000 Baldini, U., 'L'Orologio Dipinto da Paolo Uccello nel D u o m o Fiorentino: Nuovi Studi e Precisazioni per la Sua Lettura', in Gli "Oriuoli Mechanici" Lippi: Documenti Paolo

Uccello

e Notizie Inedite sull'Arte dell'Orologeria nel Duomo Fiorentino:

Nuovi

Studi

di Filippo di Ser a Firenze/UOrologio

e Precisazioni

Brunellesco Dipinto da

per la Sua

Lettura,

Florence, 2000, pp. 35-70. Baldini and Berti, 1957 Baldini, U. and Berti, L , (eds), 'Paolo Uccello (Firenze, 1397 c. -1475)', in Mostra

di

Affreschi Staccati, U. Baldini and L. Berti (eds), exh. cat., Forte di Belvedere, Florence, 1957, p. 56. Baldinucci, 1974 Baldinucci, F., Notizie dei Professori del Disegne [...), reprint of Florence, 1845 ed., Florence, 1974, vol. I (orig. ed. Turin, 1686-1728). Bambach, 1999 Bambach, C C , Drawing and Painting in the Italian

Renaissance

Workshop:

Theory and

Practice 1300-J600, Cambridge and New York, 1999. Bambach, 2005 Bambach, ('.('., 'The Delli Brothers: Three Florentine Artists in Fifteenth-Century Spain', Apollo, Mar. 2005, pp. 75-83. Bambach Cappel, 1996 Bambach Cappel, C , 'Piero della Francesca, the Study of Perspective and the Development of the Cartoon in the Quattrocento', in Piero della Francesca

tra Arte e Scienza (Atti del

Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Arezzo and San Sepolcro, 8-12 Oct. 1992), D. Emiliani and V. Curzi (eds), Venice, 1996, pp. 143-166. Barocelli, 1996 Barocelli, F., La Pinacoteca Stuarddi Parma, Milan, 1996. Barocelli, 1998 Barocelli, F., La Pinacoteca "Giuseppe Stuard": II Percorso Museale, Parma, 1998.

322

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bartoli, 1992 Bartoli, R., ' 2 . 2 6 , Paolo Uccello, Guerriero a Cavallo [...J', in / / Disegno

Fiorentino

del

Tempo di Lorenzo il Magnifico, A . P . Tofani (ed.), exh. cat., Gabinetto D i s e g n i e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence, 1992, p. 7 0 . Battisti, 1981 Battisti, E., Brunelleschi: The Complete Work, London, 1 9 8 1 . Beaven, 2000 Beaven, L., ' 5 . Italian (Florentine) Profde Portrait of a Lady', in European Masterpieces:

Six

Centuries of Paintings from the National Gallery of Victoria, Australia, e x h . cat., Cincinnati Art M u s e u m , Kimbell A r t M u s e u m , Fort W o r t h , Denver A r t M u s e u m and Portland A r t M u s e u m , 2 0 0 0 , p. 2 6 . Beaven, 2003 Beaven, L., 'Italy, Florence Profile Portrait of a Lady c. 1 4 7 5 ' , in Paintings Before 1800 in the International

and Sculpture

Collections of the National Gallery of Victoria, T. Gott (ed.),

Melbourne, 2 0 0 3 , p. 2 5 . Becherucci, 1983 Becherucci, L., I Museidi Santa Croce e di Santo Spirito a Firenze, Milan, 1983. Beck, 1979 Beck, L, ' P a o l o Uccello and the Paris Saint G e o r g e , 1465. - Unpublished Documents 1452, 1465, 1474 - ', Gazette des Beaux-Arts, vol. XCIII, Jan. 1 9 7 9 , pp. 1-5. Beck, 1980 Beck, J., ' U c c e l l o ' s Apprenticeship with G h i b e r t i ' , The Burlington Magazine, vol. CXXII, n o . 933, Dec. 1980, p. 8 3 7 . Belle, 1972 Belle, L., A Renaissance

Patrician: Palla di Nofri Strozzi,

1372-1462,

PhD Thesis, T h e

University of Rochester, 1972. Bellosi, 1990 Bellosi, L., ' G i o v a n n i di Francesco c 1'Arte Fiorent'ma di Meta Q u a t t r o c e n t o ' , in Pittura di Luce: Giovanni di Francesco e PArte Fiorentina

di Metd Quattrocento,

in L. Bcllosi (ed.),

exit, cat., Casa Buonarroti, Florence, 1990, pp. 1 1-45. Bcllosi, 1999a Bellosi, L , 'II Maestro del Cassone Adimari e il Suo G r a n d e Fralello', in La Scheggia, L . Bellosi and M. Haines (eds), Florence and Siena, 1999, p p . 7 - 3 3 . Beilosi, 1999b Bellosi, L., ' C a l a l o g o dcllc Opere', in Lo Scheggia, L. Bellosi and M. H a i n e s (eds), Florence and Siena, 1999, pp. 7 3 - 1 0 1 . Bellosi, 2002 Bcllosi, L., ' D a Brunelleschi a Masaccio: Lc Origini del R i n a s c i m e n t o ' , in Masaccio e le Origini del Rinascimento, L. Bellosi with the collaboration of L. Cavazzini a n d A . Galli (eds), exh. cat., Casa Masaccio, San Giovanni V a l d a r n o , 2 0 0 2 , pp. 15-51.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

323

Bellosi, Angelini and Ragionieri, 1991 Bellosi, L., Angelini, A. and Ragionieri, G., 'Le Arte Figurative', in Prato Storia di una Citta, 1, Ascesa e Declino del Centro Medievale (dal Mille al 1494), G. Cherubini (ed.), Prato, 1991, pp. 907-962. Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002a Bellucci, R. and Frosinini, C , 'Working Together: Technique and Innovation in Masolino's and Masaccio's Panel Paintings', in The Panel Paintings ofMasolino

and Masaccio: The Role

of Technique, C.B. Strehlke and C. Frosinini (eds), Milan, 2002, pp. 29-61. Bellucci and Frosinini, 2002b Bellucci, R. and Frosinini, C., 'The Carnesecchi Altarpiece', in The Panel Paintings

of

Masolino and Masaccio: The Role of Technique, C.B. Strehlke and C. Frosinini (eds), Milan, 2002, pp. 81-86. Belozerskaya, 2002 Belozerskaya, M., Rethinking the Renaissance:

Burgundian

Arts across Europe, Cambridge,

2002. Ben-Aryeh Debby, 2002 Ben-Aryeh Debby, N., 'Patrons, Artists, Preachers: The Pulpit of Santa Maria Novella (14431448)', Arte Cristiana, vol. XC, no. 811, Jul.-Aug. 2002, pp. 261-272. Benigni, 1977 Benigni, P. (ed.), Filippo Brunelleschi:

L'Uomo e VArtista, Minestero per i Beni Culturali e

Ambientali Pubblicazioni degli Archivi di Stato, vol. XCIV, exh. cat., Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Florence, 1977. Bent, 1993 Bent, G.R., Santa Maria degli Angeli and the Arts: Patronage,

Production and Practice in a

Trecento Florentine Monastery, PhD Thesis, Stanford University, 1993. Berardi, 1992 Berardi, R., 'II Mazzocchio da Paolo Uccello a Piero a Leonardo', in Piero e Urhino, Piero e le Cord Rinascimentali,

P. dal Poggetto (ed.), exh. cat., Palazzo Ducale and Oratorio di San

Giovanni Baltista, Urbino, 1992, pp. 492-496. Berenson, 1896 Berenson, B., The Florentine Painters of the Renaissance,

with an Index to Their Works, New

York and London, 1896. Berenson, 1900 Berenson, B., The Florentine Painters of the Renaissance,

with an Index to Their Works, 2nd

ed. revised, New York and London, 1900. Berenson, 1909 Berenson, B., The Florentine Painters of the Renaissance, ed. revised and enlarged, New York and London, 1909.

with an Index to Their Works, 3rd

324

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Berenson, 1932a Berenson, B., ' Q u a d r i Senza Casa. - II Q u a t t r o c e n t o Fiorentino, I . ' , Dedalo, vol. XII, 1 9 3 2 , pp. 5 1 2 - 5 4 1 . Berenson, 1932b Berenson, B., Italian Pictures of the Renaissance:

A List of the Principal Artists and Their

Works, with an Index of Places, Oxford, 1932. Berensbn, 1 9 5 4 Berenson, B., Disegni di Maestri Fiorentini del Rinascimento

in Firenze, Turin, 1954.

Berenson, 1969 Berenson, B., Homeless Paintings of the Renaissance,

L o n d o n , 1969, (orig. Italian ed. 1932a).

Bernacchioni, 1990 Bernacchioni, A . , ' D o c u m e n t i e Precisazioni sull'Attivita T a r d a di D o m e n i c o d i Michelino: La S u a B o t t e g a di V i a delle T e r m e ' , Antichita Viva, vol. X X I X , n o . 6, 1990, pp. 5-14. Bernacchioni, 2 0 0 2 Bernacchioni, A., ' L a Bottega di Pittura della Badia Fiorentina: Da T o m m a s o del Mazza a M a s a c c i o ' , Mitteilungen des Kunsthistoriscen Institutes in Florenz, vol. X L V I , n o s 2-3, 2 0 0 2 , pp. 2 6 2 - 2 6 9 . Bernacchioni, 2003 Bernacchioni, A . , 'Paolo Uccello e le Confraternite', Arte Cristiana, v o l . X C I , n o . 819, N o v . Dec. 2 0 0 3 , pp. 4 1 5 - 4 2 2 . Bernard of Clairvaux, 1 9 7 9 Bernard of Clairvaux, On the Song of Songs

III, trans. K. W a l s h and I.M. E d m o n d s ,

Kalamazoo, 1979. Bernini, 1984 Bernini, D., ' U n a "Pittura Solennissima" per Federico d a M o n t e f e l t r o ' , in Studi in Onore di Giulio Carlo Argan, S.D. Squarzina (ed.), R o m e , 1984, vol. I, pp. 127-132. Berra, 1999 Berra, G., T m m a g i n i Casuali, Figure N a s c o s t e e Natura A n t r o p o m o r f a

ncllTmmaginario

Artistico R i n a s c i m e n t a l e ' , Mitteilungen

in Florenz, v o l .

des

Kunsthistorischen

Institutes

XLIII, no. 2 - 3 , 1999, pp. 358-418. Bertelli, 1994 Bertelli, C , ' S t o r i a di Due Cilia: Siena e V e n e z i a ' , in Rinascimento Michelangelo:

La Rappresentazione

dell'Architettura,

da Brunelleschi

a

H. Millon and V. M. Lampugnani

(eds), exh. cat., accompanying the exhibition Rinascimento

- Da Brunelleschi

a Michelangelo,

Palazzo G r a s s i , Venice, 1994, pp. 3 7 3 - 3 9 7 . Berli, 1954 Berti, L., ' D o m e n i c o V e n z i a n o ' , in Mostra di Quattro Maestri del Prima Rinascimento, M . Salmi (Presidente Comitato Esecutivo), exh. cat., Palazzo Strozzi, Florence, 1954, pp. 7 7 - 9 1 .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

325

Berti, 1961 Berti, L., 'Una Nuova Madonna e degli Appunti su un Grande Maestro', Pantheon, vol. XIX, 1961, pp. 298-309. Berti, 1967 Berti, L., Masaccio, University Park and London, 1967. Berti, 1969 Berti, L., '37, 38 The Miracle of the Scythe, Fresco...Sinopia...; 39, 40 The Miracle of the Raven, Fresco...Sinopia...' in Frescoes from Florence,

exh. cat., Hayvvard Gallery, London,

1969, p. 144. Berti, 1988 Berti, L., 'Gli Affreschi e Sinopie nel Chiostro: Paolo Uccello e Scuola; il Castagno', in La Basilica di San Miniato al Monte a Firenze, F. Gurrieri and C. Lionardi (eds), Florence, 1988, pp. 249-255. Berti, 1990a Berti, L., 'Da Masaccio, 47. Particolare della Sagra Quattrocento

a Firenze,

in L'Etd di Masaccio:

II Primo

E. Andreatta, L. Berti, M. Burresi, M.C. Fabbri, A . Natali, A.

Paolucci, M. Scalini and M. Sframelli (eds), exh. cat., Palazzo Vecchio, Florence, 1990, p. 154. Berti, 1990b Berti, L., 'Paolo Uccello, 80. Predella con Crista in Pietd tra la Madonna e San Evangelista

|...|', in L'Eta di Masaccio: II Primo Quattrocento

Giovanni

a Firenze, E. Andreatta, L.

Berti, M. Burresi, M.C. Fabbri, A. Natali, A. Paolucci, M. Scalini and M. Sframelli (eds), exh. cat., Palazzo Vecchio, Florence, 1990, pp. 220-221. Berti, 2002 Berti, L , 'Intervista Masaccesca 2002', Critica d'Arte, vol. LXV, no. 8, Mar. 2002, pp. 23-50. Betka,2001 Betka, U.L., Marian Images and Laudesi Devotion in Late Medieval Italy, ca. 1260-1350, PhD Thesis, The University of Melbourne, 2001. Biadi, 1824 Biadi, L., Notizie sidle Antiche Fahbriche di Firenze non Terminate e sulle Variazioni Quad i Piu Ragguardevoli Bible, Authorised

alle

Edifizi sono Andati Soggetti, Florence, 1824.

King James Version, 1998

The Bible, Authorised

King James Version, with an introduction and notes by R. Carroll and

S. Prickett, 2nd ed., Oxford, 1998 (orig. ed. 1997). Billi, 1991 Billi, A., IlLibro di Antonio Billi |c. 1481-1530], F. Benedettucci (ed.), Rome, 1991. Birkeand Kertesz, 1992 Birke, V.

and

Kertesz,

J.,

Die

Italienischen

Zeichnungen

der

Albertina,

Veroffentlichungen der Albertina, vol. XXXIII, Vienna, Koln and Weimar, 1992.

vol.

I,

326

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bjurstrom, 1971a Bjurstrom, P., ' P a o l o Uccello. Florence 1397 - Florence 1 4 7 5 , 2 Amour "Putto" avec des Guirlandes.'

in Dessins du Nationalmuseum

Comte Tessin, 1695-1770, Ambassadeur

Avec un Arc et

de Stockholm:

Collection

du

de Suede pres la Cour de France, exh. cat., M u s e e

du Louvre, C a b i n e t des Dessins, P a r i s , Bibliotheque Royale A l b e r t

l e r , Brussels a n d

Rijksmuseum, A m s t e r d a m , 1 9 7 1 , pp. 3-4. Bjurstrom, 1971b Bjurstrom, P., ' A r t i s t e Florentine I n c o n n u , vers 1 4 6 0 ' , in Dessins du Nationalmuseum Stockholm: Collection du Comte Tessin, 1695-1770, Ambassadeur

de

de Suede Pres la Cour de

France, e x h . cat., Musee du Louvre, C a b i n e t d e s Dessins, Paris, B i b l i o t h e q u e Royale A l b e r t ler, Brussels a n d Rijksmuseum, A m s t e r d a m , 1 9 7 1 , pp. 5-6. Blass-Simmen, 1991 Blass-Simmen, B . , Sankt Georg Drachenkampf

in der Renaissance:

Carpaccio-Rajfael-

Leonardo, Berlin, 1 9 9 1 . Bloede, 1996 Bloede, J., Paolo Uccello et la Representation

du Mouvement: Regards sur la Bataille de San

Romano, Paris, 1 9 9 6 . Bloodgood, 1959 Bloodgood, L.F., 'Paintings in Detail, V. St. G e o r g e ' , Apollo, vol. L X X , n o . 4 1 4 , Aug. 1959, pp. 19-23. Bloom, 1969 Bloom, K., ' L o r e n z o Ghiberti's Space in Relief: Method and T h e o r y ' , The Art Bulletin, v o l . LI, n o . 2, Jim. 1 9 6 9 , pp. 164-169. Boccaccio, 1982 Boccaccio, G., Decameron,

the John P a y n e translation, revised a n d annotated by C . S .

Singleton, B e r k e l e y , Los Angeles and L o n d o n , 1982. Bocchi, 2 0 0 4 Bocchi, P., Le Bellezze della Cittd di Firenze, G. Cinclli (cd.), reprint of Florence, 1677 e d . , | Florence 1, 2 0 0 4 (orig. cd. Florence, 1591). Boccia, 1970 Boccia, L.G., ' L c Armature di Paolo U c c e l l o ' , L'Arte,\oh

1 1-12, 1970, pp. 5 5 - 9 1 .

Boccia, 1987 Boccia, L.G., ' M a t e r i a l ! lconografici s u l l ' A r m a m e n l o Quattrocenlesco d ' A m b i c n t e T o s c a n o ' , Antichitd Viva, vol. XXVI, no. 3 , 1987, p p . 37-53. Boeck, 1931a Boeck, W . , ' F i n Friihwerk von Paolo U c c c l l o ' , Pantheon, vol. VIII, J u l . - D e c . 1931, p p . 2 7 6 281. Boeck, 1931b Boeck, W . , ' D i e "Erfinder der P e r s p e k t i v e ' " , Repertorium fur Kunstwissenschaft, 1931, pp. 145-147.

vol. LII,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

327

Boeck, 1933a Boeck, W., 'Drawings by Paolo Uccello', Old Master Drawings, vol. VIII, Jun. 1933, pp. 1-3. Boeck, 1933b Boeck, W.,'Uccello-Studien', Zeitschrift fur Kunstgeschichte,

vol. II, 1933, pp. 249-275.

Boeck, 1939 Boeck, W., Paolo Uccello: Der Florentiner Meister undSein

Werk, Berlin, 1939.

Boldt-Irons, 2003 Boldt-Irons, L., 'Crossing Over into Painted Space: Artaud's Retrieval of Self in the Work of Paolo Uccello', in Literary Texts and the Arts: Interdisciplinary

Perspectives,

C. Federici and

E. Ravent6s-Pons (eds), New York, Washington D.C., Baltimore, Bern, Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Brussels, Vienna and Oxford, 2003, pp. 119-134. Bora, 1988 Bora, G., I Disegni della Collezione Morelli, Bergamo, 1988. Borchert et al, 2002 Borchert, T.H. et al., ' 2 4 Jan van Eyck (c. 1390-1441) Niccold Albergati, 1438', in The Age of Van Eyck: The Mediterranean

World and Early Netherlandish

Painting, T.H. Borchert (ed.),

exh. cat., Groningemuseum, Bruges, 2002, p. 235. Borghero, 1986 Borghero, G., Collezione

Thyssen-Bornemisza:

Catalogo

Ragionato

delle Opere

Esposte,

trans. M. Attardo Magrini, revised and extended ed., Lugano and Milan, 1986 (orig. ed. 1981). Borghini, 1967 Borghini, R., // Riposo, M. Rosci (ed.), Milan, 1967 (orig. ed. Florence, 1584). Borsi, 1996 Borsi, S., 'Dipinti Perduti di Paolo Uccello e Pesellino: Decoro e Propaganda', Art e Dossier, no. 112, May 1996, pp. 37-39. Borsi and Borsi, 1994 Borsi, F. and Borsi, S., Paolo Uccello, trans. E. Powell, New York, 1994. (orig. Italian ed. Milan, 1992). Borsook, 1980 Borsook, E., The Mural Painters of Tuscany: From Cimahue

to Andrea del Sarto, 2nd ed.

revised and enlarged, Oxford, 1980 (orig. ed. London, 1960). Borsook, 1982 Borsook, E., ' L ' " Hawk wood" d'Uccello et la Vie de Fabius Maximus de Plutarque: Evolution d'un Projet de Cenotaphe', Revue de I Art, no. 55, 1982, pp. 4 4 - 5 1 . Borsook, 2001 Borsook, E., 'The Power of Illusion: Fictive Tombs in Santa Maria del Fiore', in Santa Maria del Fiore: The Cathedral and its Sculpture (Acts of the International Symposium for the VII Centenary of the Cathedral of Florence, Villa i Tatti, 5-6 Jun. 1997) M. Haines (ed.), Fiesole, 2001, pp. 59-78.

328

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boskovits, 1968 Boskovits, M , ' D e r Meister der Santa Verdiana: Beitrage z u r Geschichte d e r Florentinischen Malerei urn die W e n d e des 14. und 15. J a h r h u n d e r t s ' , Mitteilungen

des

Kunsthistoriscen

Institutes in Florenz, vol. XIII, nos I-IV, Dec. 1967 - Oct. 1968, p p . 3 1 - 6 0 . Boskovits, 1969 Boskovits, M., 'Mariotto di Cristofano: Un Contributo a l l ' A m b i e n t e Culturale di Masaccio Giovane', Arte Illustrata, vol. II, nos 13-14, J a n . - F e b . 1969, p p . 4 - 1 3 . Boskovits, 1975 Boskovits, M., Pittura Fiorentina alia Vigilia del Rinascimento

1370-1400, Florence, 1975.

Boskovits, 1990 Boskovits, M., ' P a o l o Uccello 1397-1475, 2 7 Christ o n t h e Cross, the V i r g i n and Three Mourning Saints', in The Thyssen-Bornemisza

Collection, Early Italian Painting

1290-1470,

M. Boskovits in collaboration with S. Padovani (eds), trans. F. Pouncey Chiarini, London, 1990, pp. 170-178. Boskovits, 1992 Boskovits, M., ' P a o l o Uccello', in The Martello Collection: Further Paintings, Drawings and Miniatures 13th-18th Century, M. Boskovits (ed.), Florence, 1992, pp. 140-143. Boskovits, 1997a Boskovits,

M., ' D a Masaccio

a

Piero

del Pollaiolo:

Studi

sul

Ritratto

Fiorentino

Quattrocentesco - 1 P a r t e ' , Arte Cristiana, vol. L X X X V , no. 7 8 1 , Jul.-Aug. 1997, pp. 255-260. Boskovits, 1997b Boskovits, M., ' S t u d i sul Ritratto Fiorentino Quattrocentesco - II Parte', Arte Cristiana, vol. L X X X V , no. 7 8 2 , Sep.-Oct. 1997, p p . 3 3 5 - 3 3 9 . Boskovits, 2002a Boskovits, M., 'Appunti sugli Inizi di Masaccio e sulla Pittura Fiorentina d e l S u o Tempo', in Masaccio e le Origini del Rinascimento, L. Bellosi with the collaboration of L. Cavazzini and A. Galli (eds), exh. cat., Casa Masaccio, San Giovanni V a l d a m o , 2 0 0 2 , pp. 5 3 - 7 5 . Boskovits, 2002b Boskovits, M., ' 3 2 . Paolo Uccello | . . . | Ritratto di Giovane, 1430-1435 c i r c a ' , in Masaccio e le Origini del Rinascimento,

L. Bellosi with the collaboration of L. Cavazzini e A . Galli (eds),

exh. cat., Casa Masaccio, San Giovanni V a k l a r n o , 2002, pp. 194-196. Boskovits, 2003a Boskovits, M., ' 1952.5.56 Giuliano de' Medici c. 1480', in Italian Paintings of the Fifteenth Century, M. Boskovits and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2 0 0 3 , pp. 170-172. Boskovits, 2003b Boskovits, M., ' F r a Carnevale', in Italian Paintings of the Fifteenth

Century, M. Boskovits

and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2 0 0 3 , p. 1 8 1 . Boskovits, 2 0 0 3 c Boskovits, M., ' D o m e n i c o Veneziano', in Italian

Paintings

Boskovits and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2 0 0 3 , p. 2 4 0 .

of the Fifteenth

Century, M.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

329

Boskovits, 2003d Boskovits, ML, 'Florentine Fifteenth Century, 1937.1.15, Matteo Olivieri (?), c. 1430/1440', in Italian Paintings of the Fifteenth Century, M. Boskovits and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2003, p. 240. Boskovits, 2003e Boskovits, M , '1939.1.255, Madonna and Child Enthroned,

1420/1423', in Italian

Paintings

of the Fifteenth Century, M. Boskovits and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2003, pp. 288290. Boskovits, 2003f Boskovits, ML, '1937.1.14, Portrait of a Young Man, c. 1423/1423', in Italian Paintings of the Fifteenth Century, M. Boskovits and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2003, pp. 453-454. Boskovits, 2003g Boskovits, ML, '1937.1.7, The Madonna of Humility, c. 1423/1424', in Italian Paintings of the Fifteenth Century, M. Boskovits and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2003, pp. 458-461. Boskovits, 2O03h Boskovits, M., '1939.1.109, Christ on the Cross, Adored by Saint Jerome and Saint

Francis,

c. 1445/1450', in Italian Paintings of the Fifteenth Century, M. Boskovits and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2003, pp. 569-570. Boskovits, 2O03i Boskovits, M., '1937.1.16, The Annunciation,

c. 1423/1424', in Italian Paintings

of the

Fifteenth Century, M. Boskovits and D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2003, pp. 466-467. Boskovits, 2O03j Boskovits, ML, 'Fra Angelico and Fra Filippo Lippi, 1952.2.2, The Adoration of the Magi, c. 1440/1445 or 1445/1460', in Italian Paintings of the Fifteenth

Century, M. Boskovits and

D.A. Brown (eds), Washington, 2003, pp. 21-26. Botticelli and Giovannoni, 1979 Botticelli, G. and Giovannoni, S., 'L'Orologio di Paolo Uccello nel Duomo Fiorentino', Critica d'Arte, vol. XLIV, 1979, pp. 177-181. Bowman Turner, 1960 Bowman Turner, B., 'Andrea di Giusto (Attributed to), d. 1450, Italian, St. Jerome in a Landscape', The Montreal Museum Of Fine Arts, 1960, pp. 36-37. Brigstocke, 2003 Brigslocke, FT, 'Lord Lindsay: Travel in Italy and Northern Europe, 1841-42, for Sketches of the History of Christian Art', The Walpole Society, vol. LXV, 2003, pp. 161-258. Brocchi, 1967 Brocchi, G.M., Descrizione della Provincia del Mugello, Bologna, 1967 (orig. ed. Florence, 1748). Brommelle, 1959 Brommclle, N., 'St George and the Dragon', The Museums Journal, vol. LIX, Apr. 1959, pp. 87-95.

330

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Brown, 1998 B r o w n , D.A., Leonardo da Vinci: Origins of a Genius, New Haven and L o n d o n , 1998. Brown, 2 0 0 1 a B r o w n , D.A., ' F i l i p p o Lippi [ . . . ] , 3, Woman with a Man at a Window', in Virtue and Beauty: Leonardo's

Ginevra de' Benci and Renaissance

Portraits of Women, D . A . B r o w n , exh. cat.,

National Gallery of A r t , Washington, 2 0 0 1 , pp. 106-108. Brown, 2 0 0 1 b B r o w n , D.A., 'Attributed to Paolo Uccello [...] 5, A Young Lady of Fashion', Beauty: Leonardo's

Ginevra de' Benci and Renaissance

in Virtue and

Portraits of Women, D.A. Brown,

exh. cat., National Gallery of Art, Washington, 2 0 0 1 , pp. 1 1 2 - 1 1 4 . Bruyere, 1993 Bruyere, A . , Venezia San Marco Pavimenti, R o m e , 1993 (orig. ed. Paris, 1990). Burckhardt, 1 9 7 9 Burckhardt, J., The Cicerone: An Art Guide to Painting in Italy, reprint of L o n d o n , 1918 ed., New York and L o n d o n , 1979 (orig. e d . Basel, 1855). Busignani and Bencini, 1979 Busignani, A . and Bencini, R., Le Chiese di Firenze: Quartiere

di Santa Maria Novella,

Florence, 1979. Busignani and Bencini, 1993 Busignani, A . a n d Bencini, R., Le Chiese di Firenze: Quartiere di San Giovanni, Florence, 1993. Bussi, 1992 Bussi, A.D., ' D u e Ipotesi per Matteo dei Pasti M i n i a t o r e ' , in Piero della Francesca tra Arte e Scienza (Atti d e l C o n v e g n o Intcrnazionalc di Studi, Are/./.o and San Sepolcro, 8-12 Oct. 1992), M.D. Emiliani (ed.), 1992, pp. 4 5 5 - 4 7 4 . Butterfield, 1997 Bulterfield, A., The Sculptures of Andrea del Verrocchio, N e w Haven and London, 1997. C., 1915 M.C., 'Battle Scene, by Paolo U c c e l l o ' , Museum of Fine Arts Bulletin, vol. XIII, no. 78, Aug. 1915, p. 6 2 . Caglioti, 2000 Caglioti, P . , Donatello e i Medici: Storia del David e delta Giuditta, vol. I, Cilia di Castello, 2000. Caglioli, 2001 Caglioti, F., ' N o u v c a u l e s sur la Bataille de San Romano d c Paolo U c c e l l o ' , Revue du Louvre, no. 4 , Oct. 2 0 0 1 , pp. 37-54. Campani, 1910 Campani, E.G., ' U c c c l l o ' s Story of Noah in t h e Chioslro V e r d e ' , 77?t' Burlington vol. XVII, A p r . - S e p . 1910, pp. 203-210.

Magazine,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

331

Campori, 1975 Campori, G. (ed.), Raccolta di Cataloghi Bronzi, Dorerie,

Smalti, Medaglie,

ed Inventarii

Inediti di Quadri, Statue,

Disegni,

Avori, ecc. dal Secolo XV al Secolo XIX, reprint ed.,

Bologna, 1975 (orig. ed. Modena, 1870). Carli, 1954 Carli, E., Tutta la Pitturadi Paolo Uccello, Milan, 1954. Carli, 1957 Carli, E., '65. II Diluvio, 66. Sacrificio e Ebrezza di Noe, Firenze, Chiostro Verde diS. Maria Novella', in Mostra di Ajfreschi Staccati, U. Baldini and L. Berti (eds), exh. eat., Forte di Belvedere, Florence, 1957, pp. 59-61. Carocci, 1906 Carocci, G., / Dintorni di Firenzi: Sulla Destra dell'Arno,

vol. I, Florence, 1906.

Carr-Gomm, 2001 Carr-Gomm, S., Hidden Symbols in Art, New York, 2 0 0 1 . Carra, 1919 Carra, C , Pittura Metafisica, Florence, 1919. Cavazzini, 1999 Cavazzini, L., '11 Fratello di Masaccio tra i Palazzi di Firenze e le Chiese del Valdarno', in // Fratello di Masaccio:

Giovanni di Ser Giovanni detto lo Scheggia,

L. Cavazzini (ed.), exh.

cat., Casa Masaccio, San Giovanni Valdarno, 1999, pp. 9-24. [Caviggiolil, 1954 [Caviggioli, A . | A.C., 'Una Fronte di Cassone di Paolo Uccello', Arte Figurativa Antica e Moderna, Jan.-Feb. 1954, pp. 28-29. Cecchi, 1989a Cecchi, C , 'Paolo Uccello (Firenze 1397-1475) 44. Lunetta con la Madonna col Bambino', in // Centra di Firenze Restituito: Affreschi

e Frammenti

Lapidei nel Museo di San Marco, M.

Sframeli (ed.), Florence, 1989, p. 110. Cecchi, 1989b Cecchi, C , ' 4 3 . Architrave di Porta', in // Centra di Firenze Restituito: Ajfreschi e Frammenti Lapidei nel Museo di San Marco, M. Sframeli (ed.), Florence, 1989, p. 110. Cennini, 1971 Cennini, C , // Libra

dell'Arte,

Commentate

e Annotato

Introduzione di Licisco Magagnato \ Il Libra dell'Arte

da Franco Brunello

con una

c. late 1300s), vol. I, Vicenza, 1971.

Ceriana, 2005 Ceriana, M., 'Fra Carnevale and the Practice of Architecture', in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca: Fra Carnevale and the Making of a Renaissance

Master, Keith Christiansen,

exh. cat., Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan and Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2005, pp. 97-135. Chaste], 1999 Chaste), A., L'ltalie et Byzance, Paris, 1999.

332

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Christiansen, 1997 [Christiansen, K.] C , K., ' P a o l o Uccello ( P a o l o di Dono), Italian (Florentine) 1397-1475, The Crucifixion (triptych) [...]', Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin, v o l . L V , no. 2, Fall 1997, p. 26. Christiansen, 2005a Christiansen, K., 'Florence: Filippo Lippi a n d F r a C a r n e v a l e ' , in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca: Fra Carnevale and the Making of a Renaissance Master, Keith Christiansen, exh. cat., Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan a n d M e t r o p o l i t a n M u s e u m of A r t , N e w York, 2005, pp. 39-65. Christiansen, 2005b Christiansen, K., ' [ 1 7 ] , Circle of Paolo U c c e l l o , Portrait of a Woman', in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca: Fra Carnevale and the Making of a Renaissance

Master, Keith

Christiansen, e x h . cat., Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan and M e t r o p o l i t a n M u s e u m of Art, New York, 2005, p. 178. Christiansen, 2005c Christiansen, K., ' [ 1 1 ] , The Pratovecchio M a s t e r , Madonna and Child', in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca: Fra Carnevale and the Making of a Renaissance

Master, Keith

Christiansen, e x h . cat., Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan and M e t r o p o l i t a n M u s e u m of Art, New York, 2005, p. 166. Christiansen, 2005d Christiansen, K., ' [ 1 2 ] , Circle of Donatello, Madonna and Child', in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca:

Fra Carnevale and

the Making

of a Renaissance

Master, Keith

Christiansen, e x h . cat., Pinacoteca di Brcra, Milan and M e t r o p o l i t a n M u s e u m of Art, New York, 2005, p. 168. Christiansen and Ceriana, 2 0 0 5 Christiansen, K. and Ceriana, M., ' G i o v a n n i di Francesco d a R o v e z z a n o (1412/28 | ? | 1 4 5 9 ) ' , in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca: Fra Carnevale and the Making of a Renaissance

Master,

Keith

Christiansen,

exh. cat., Pinacoleca

di

Brera,

Milan and

Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art, New York, 2 0 0 5 , pp. 2 8 3 - 2 8 4 . Christie's, 1980 Christie's, Christie's Pictorial Archive Index to Artists, London, 1980. Christie's, 2001 Christie's, ' 6 9 , Paolo Uccello, (Florence c. 1397-1475), the M a d o n n a E n t h r o n e d ' , Christie's London, Important Old Master Pictures, Sale 1 1 Jul. 2 0 0 1 , pp. 174-175. Ciabani et al, 1992 Ciabani, R., with the collaboration of B. Hlliker, E. Nistri, S. Bergellini, F. Cardini, A. Bruschi, and A. Pieraccini, Le Famiglie di Firenze, Florence, 1992. Cincinnati, 1959 Cincinnati, ' C a t a l o g u e ' , in The Lehman Collection: M u s e u m , 1959, p. 17.

New York, exh. cat., T h e Cincinnati Art

BIBLIOGRAPHY

333

Cirillo a n d G o d i , 1 9 8 7 Cirillo, G . a n d G o d i , G . , La Pinacoteca

di Parma della Congregazione

di San Filippo

Neri:

Dipinti e Disegni al XIV al XVIII Secolo, P a r m a , 1 9 8 7 . Clark, 1 9 6 1 Clark, K., Leonardo

da Vinci: An Account of His Development

as an Artist,

Harmondsvvorth,

1961 (orig. ed. C a m b r i d g e , 1939). Clark, 1 9 7 7 C l a r k , D . L . , ' O p t i c s for P r e a c h e r s : T h e De oculo morali by Peter of L i m o g e s ' , The Academician,

Michigan

W i n t e r 1977, p p . 3 2 9 - 3 4 3 .

Clark, 1 9 8 1 - 1 9 8 2 C l a r k , D . L . , ' F i l i p p i n o L i p p i ' s The Virgin Inspiring Studies in Iconography,

St. Bernard A n d Florentine H u m a n i s m ' ,

n o s 7 - 8 , 1981-1982, pp. 175-187.

Clark, 1 9 8 3 C l a r k , K., ' P a o l o U c c e l l o and A b s t r a c t A r t ' , in The Art Of Humanism,

K. C l a r k (ed.), L o n d o n ,

1 9 8 3 , pp. 4 3 - 7 6 . Cohen, 1988 C o h e n , J., ' E d g a r D e g a s , Paris 1 8 3 4 - 1 9 1 7 , 6 1 the B a t t l e of S a n R o m a n o , after P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , in Creative

Copies: Interpretative

Drawings from

Michelangelo

to Picasso,

E. H a v e r k a m p -

Begema'nn a n d C. L o g a n (eds), e x h . cat., T h e D r a w i n g C e n t e r , N e w York, 1 9 8 8 , p p . 198-199. Cohn, 1958 Colin, W . , ' M a e s t r i Sconosciuti d e l Q u a t t r o c e n t o F i o r e n t i n o , I. - M a r i o t t o di C r i s t o f a n o ' , Bolletino d'Arte, v o l . XLIII, n o . 4 , 1 9 5 8 , p p . 6 4 - 6 8 . Cole A h l , 1996 C o l e A h l , D., Benozzo Gozzoli, N e w H a v e n a n d L o n d o n , 1 9 9 6 . Cole A hi, 2000 Cole

A h l , D . , ' " I n corpo di c o m p a g n i a " :

Purificazionc Renaissance

Art and Devotion

c di San Zanobi o f F l o r e n c e ' , in Confraternities Italy: Ritual, Spectacle,

Image,

in the C o m p a g n i a and the

della

Visual Arts

in

B. W i s c h a n d D . C o l e A h l ( e d s ) , C a m b r i d g e ,

2 0 0 0 , pp. 4 6 - 7 3 . C o l l a r c t a , 1993 C o l l a r e t a , M., T)u Portrait a la B i o g r a p h i c : B r u n e l l c s c h i et Q u e l q u e s A u t r e s ' , in Les d'Artistes

"Vies"

(Actes d u C o l l o q u e International O r g a n i s e par le S e r v i c e Culturel d u Muscc d u

L o u v r e , Paris, 1-2 O c t . 1993), M. W a s c h e k (ed.), P a r i s , 1 9 9 3 , p p . 4 2 - 5 3 . Colnaghi, 1986 C o l n a g h i , Sir D.E., Colnaghi's Centuries,

Dictionary

of Florentine

Painters from the 13th to the 17th

with introductory e s s a y s by H . A c t o n , M . G r e g o r y , P. M a r c h i and C. M a l v a n i , C.E.

M a l v a n i (ed.), Florence, 1986 (orig. ed. L o n d o n , 1 9 2 8 ) . Conti,2002 C o n t i , A . , ' I n t r o d u z i o n e ' , in Sul Restauro, ( o r i g . ed. T u r i n , 1988).

A. Conti ( e d . ) , 10th ed. Turin, 2 0 0 2 , pp. 5 - 1 1 3 .

334

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Corti and Hartt, 1962 Corti, G. and Hartt, F., ' N e w D o c u m e n t s Concerning D o n a t e l l o , Luca a n d Andrea della Robbia, Desiderio, M i n o , Uccello, Pollaiuolo, Filippo Lippi, Baldovinetti and O t h e r s ' , The Art Bulletin, vol. X L I V , n o . 2, Jun. 1962, pp. 1 5 5 - 1 6 7 . Cristiani Testi, 1981 Cristiani Testi, M . L . , ' P a n o r a m i c a a V o l o d ' U c c e l l o : L a Battaglia di S. R o m a n o ' , Critica d'Arte, vol. X L V I , n o s 175-177, Jan.-Jun. 1 9 8 1 , p p . 3-47. Cristiani Testi, 1985 Cristiani Testi, M . L . , ' L a T r i n i t a di M a s a c c i o , Unita di C o s m o ' , Critica d'Arte, vol. L, no. 4, Jul.-Sep. 1985, p p . 109-112. C r o w e and Cavalcaselle, 1914 Crowe, J.A. and Cavalcaselle, G.B., A History of Painting in Italy: Umbria, Florence and Siena from the Second to the Sixteenth Century, T. Borenius (ed.), L o n d o n , 1914, vol. V, (orig. ed. 1892). Crowe and Cavalcaselle, 1980 Crowe, J.A. and Cavalcaselle, G.B., A New History of Painting in Italy, reprint ed., New York and London, 1980 vol. II, (orig. ed. L o n d o n , 1864). Crum, 1996 Crum, R.J., ' R o b e r t Martelli, T h e Council of Florence, and the Medici Palace Chapel', Zeitschriftfiir

Kunstgeschichte,

vol. L I X , 1996, p p . 4 0 3 - 4 1 7 .

Cummins, 1988 Cummins, J., The Hound and the Hawk: The Art of Medieval Hunting, L o n d o n , 1988. D ' A m i c o , 1981 D ' A m i c o , R., ' L a Chiesa e il Convenlo di S. M a r t i n o ' , in La Terra Promessa, Conservazione:

Attivita

Diocesi di Bologna,

di Catatogazione

Citta

e di Restauro

nelle Chiese della Citta e della

[accompanying exhibition Chiesa,

Artistico della Chiesa e VOrganizzazione

Conoscenza e

Compagna,

II Patrimonio

del Territorio, Sezione / / ) , R. d ' A m i c o (ed.), exh.

cat., Palazzo Pcpoli C a m p o g r a n d c , Bologna, 1 9 8 1 , pp. 4 5 - 6 1 . D ' A n c o n a , 1960 D'Ancona, P., Paolo Uccello, trans. H. A n d r e w s , London a n d Milan, 1960. |Da Calvoli], 1961 |Da Calvoli, G . | , Meditations

on the Life of Christ: An Illustrated

Manuscript

of the

Fourteenth Century, I. Ragusa and R.B. Green (eds), trans. I. Ragusa, Princeton, 1961. Da Villa Urbani, 2003 Da Villa Urbani, M., ' I Dipinli dai Mosaici della Cappella Z e n e del Battistero', in // Museo di San Marco, I. Favaretto and M. D a Villa Urbani (eds), Venice, 2 0 0 3 , p. 6 1 .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

335

Daffra, 2005a Daffra, E., 'In Search of Fra Carnevale, a "Painter of High Repute"', in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca:

Fra Carnevale

and the Making

of a Renaissance

Master,

Keith

Christiansen, exh. cat., Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan and Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2005, pp. 23-37. Daffra, 2005 b Daffra, E., '[46], Piero della Francesca, Madonna and Child with Saints, Angels, and Federigo da Montefeltro

(the Montefeltro AltarpieceY,

Fra Carnevale

in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della

and the Making of a Renaissance

Master,

Francesca:

Keith Christiansen, exh. cat.,

Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan and Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2005, pp. 267-271. Dal Poggetto, 1971 Dal Poggetto, P., 'Benozzo Gozzoli, 1420-1497', in Affreschi

da Firenze dal XIII al XVI

Secolo, exh. cat., Palazzo Reale, Milan, 1971, unpaginated. Dal Poggetto, 1992 Dal Poggetto, P., '55. Giovanni Boccati, (Camerino, 1410-1480 ca.), Uomini d'Arme', Piero e Urbino, Piero e le Corti Rinascimentali,

in

P. dal Poggetto (ed.), exh. cat., Palazzo

Ducale and Oratorio di San Giovanni Battista, Urbino, 1992, pp. 280-283. Darriulat, [1993] Darriulat, J., Metaphores

du Regarde: Essai sur la Formation

des Images en Europe

depuis

Giotto, Paris, 11993]. Darriulat, 1997 Darriulat, J., Uccello: Chasse et Perspective,

Paris, 1997.

Davics, 1953 Davies, M., Earlier Italian Schools, London, 1953, 2 vols. Davies, 1959 Davies, M., 'Uccello's 'St George' in London', The Burlington

Magazine, vol. CI, nos 678-

679, Sep.-Oct. 1959, pp. 309-314. Davies, 1961 Davies, M., The Earlier Italian Schools, 2nd ed. revised, London, 1961. Dc Marchi,20()5 De Marchi, A., 'Fra Carnevale, Urbino, and the Marches: An Alternative View of the Renaissance', in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca: of a Renaissance

Fra Carnevale and the Making

Master, Keith Christiansen, cxh. cat., Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan and

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2005, pp. 67-95. De Montor, 1843 De Montor, A., Peintres Primitifs: Collection de Tableaux Rapportee d'ltalie, Paris, 1843. De Simone, 2002 De Simone, G., 'L'Ultimo Angelico, Le Meditationes

del Cardinal Torquemada e il Ciclo

Perduto nel Chiostro di S. Maria sopra Minerva', Ricerche 2002, pp. 41-87.

di Storia delTArte, vol. LXXVI,

336

BIBLIOGRAPHY

D e T e r v a r e n t , 1997 D e Tervarent, G., Attributs et Symboles clans VArt Profane: Dictionnaire

cl'un Langage Perdu

(1450-1600), reprint of 2nd revised ed., G e n e v a , 1 9 9 7 (orig ed. 1958). De Watteville, 1989 D e Watteville, C , Collection Thyssen-Bornemisza:

Guide des Oeuvres Exposees, trans. C.N.

Guerra, Lugano and Milan, 1989. D e W i t t , 1886 D e Witt, A . , La Pietd di Paolo Uccello, Affresco

che Trovasi nella

Casa di Baldaccio

d'Anghiari e cliAnnalena Malatesta [...], F l o r e n c e , 1886. Degenhart and Schmitt, 1963 Degenhart, B . a n d Schmitt, A., 'Uccello: W i e d e r h e r s t e l l u n g einer Z e i c h n u n g ' , AlbertinaStudien, vol. I, n o . 1, 1963, pp. 101-117. Degenhart and Schmitt, 1 9 6 8 Degenhart, B . a n d Schmilt, A., Corpus der Italienischen unciMittelitalien,

Zeichnungen

1300-1450, Tell I. Siid

2. Band. Katalog 168-635, p a r t 1, vols I-IV, Berlin, 1968.

Deimling, 2000 Deimling, B . , ' T o m m a s o del Mazza ( M a s t e r of S a n t a V e r d i a n a ) ' , in Tradition and Innovation in Florentine Trecento Painting: Giovanni Bonsi - Tommaso del Mazza, M . Boskovits (ed.), A Critical

and Historical

Corpus of Florentine

Painting

by R. Offner

with K Steinweg

continued under the direction of M. B o s k o v i l s a n d M. Gregori, Florence, 2 0 0 0 , vol. VIII, pp. 108-143. Del Bianco, 1995 Del Bianco, M., ' L e Chiese di S. Martino M a g g i o r e e di S. Maria della Misericordia. Alcuni Documenti Inediti del XV S e c o l o \ S / r a w j Storica Bolognese, vol. X L V , 1995, pp. 247-257. De! B r a v o , 1983 Del Bravo, C , 'Etica o Poesia, e Meccnatismo: C o s i m o il V e c c h i o , L o r e n z o , e alcuni Dipinti', in Gli Uffizi, Quattro Secoli cli una Galleria

(Atti del C o n v e g n o Inlernazionalc di Studi,

Florence, 2 0 - 2 4 Sep. 1982), P. Barocchi and G. Kagioncri (eds), Florence, 1983, pp. 201-208. Del Bravo, 1996 Del Bravo, C , ' L o r e n z o e il Monumenlo " P a t r i P a t r u o q u e ' " , in La Toscana al Tempo cli Lorenzo il Magnifico:

Politico, Economiu, Culture,

Arte ( C o n v e g n o di Sludi Promosso dale

Universita di Firenzc, Florence, Pisa and Siena, 5 - 8 Nov. 1992), 1996, vol. I, p p . 253-260. Del Conte, 1979 Del Conic, S.S., ' U n a Tesi di Lauren su "II M a e s t r o del 1419 e Paolo Uccello", Facolta di Letlere e Filosofia: Relatore Prof. Decio G i o s e f f i ' , Arte in Friuli Arte a 'Trieste, vol. Ill, 1979, pp. 175-184. Del Corazza, 1991 Del Corazza, B., Diario Fiorentina (1405-1439),

(written 1405-1439), Biblioteca Toscana di

Storia e Letteratura, v o l . I, Clemente Marigliani, R o m e , 1 9 9 1 .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

337

Didi-Huberman, Garbetta and Morgaine, 1994 Didi-Huberman, G., Garbetta, R. and Morgaine, M., Saint Georges et le Dragon:

Versions

d'une Legende, Paris, 1994. Dixon, 2003 Dixon, L., Bosch, London, 2004 (orig. ed. 2003). Dobson, 2001 Dobson, C., Paolo Uccello, San Romano, The Art of War, Suffolk, 2001. Doerner, 1969 Doerner, M., The Materials

of the Artist and Their

Use in Painting

with Notes on the

Techniques of the Old Masters, trans. E. Neuhaus, London, 1969 (orig. German ed. Stuttgart, 1936). Dominici, 1955 Dominici, G., 'Dal "Governo di Curia Familiare'", in Prosatori Volgari del Quottrocento,

C.

Varese (ed.), Milan and Naples, 1955, pp. 21-40 (orig. ed. Florence, 1860). Dowd, 1985 Dowel, C.T., 'The Travel Diary of Otto Mundler: Edited and Transcribed by Carol Togneri Dowd', The Walpole Society, vol. LI, 1985, pp. 69-254. Dresel, Liidke and Vcy, 1992 Dresel, I., Liidke, D. and Vey, H., '17 Meister der Karlsruhe Anbetung, urn 1450 in Florenze tatig, die Anbetung des Kindes mit den Heiligen Hieronymus, Magdalena und Julian', in Christus und Maria: Auslegungen aus der Karlsruhe

Kunsthalle,

Christlicher

Gemalde

der Spdtgotik und

Friirenaissance

I. Dresel, D. Ludke and FI. Vey (eds), exh. cat., Staatliche

Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe, 1992, pp. 114-119. Dublin, 1964 Dublin, '1864-1964, Centenary Exhibition', exh. cat., National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin, 1964. Dunkertonand Roy, 1998 Dunkerton, J. and Roy, A., 'Uccello's Saint George and the Dragon; Technical Evidence Re evaluated', National Gallery Technical Bulletin, vol. XIX, 1998, pp. 26-30. Eiscnberg, 1989 pjsenberg, M., Lorenzo Monaco, Princeton, 1989. Eisenbichler, 1998 Eisenbichler, K., The Boys of the Archangel:

A Youth Confraternity

in Florence,

Ml 1-1785,

Toronto, Buffolo and London, 1998. Eisler, 1974 Eislcr, C , 'A Portrait of L.B. Alberti', The Burlington

Magazine, vol. CXVI, no. 858, Sep.

1974, pp. 529-530. Eisler, 1982 Eisler, C , 'Surgi d'un Mur Demoli', Connaissance

des Arts, no. 361, Mar. 1982, pp. 70-74.

338

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Elkins, 1991 Elkins, J., ' T h e Case against Surface G e o m e t r y ' , Art History, vol. X I V , n o . 2 , Jun. 1991, pp. 143-174. Elkins, 1994 Elkins, J., The Poetics of Perspective, Ithaca a n d London, 1 9 9 4 . Emmer, 1982 E m m e r , M., ' A r t and Mathematics: T h e P l a t o n i c S o l i d s ' , Leonardo,

v o l . X V , no. 1, Winter

1982, p p . 2 7 7 - 2 8 2 . Euclid, 1956 Euclid, The Thirteen Books of Euclid's Elements,

Translated from the Text of Heiberg, with

Introduction and Commentary by Sir T.L. Heath, trans. Sir T . L . Heath, 2 n d ed. revised with additions, N e w York, 1956, vol. I (orig. ed. C a m b r i d g e , n.d.). Fabbri, 1990a Fabbri, M . C . , ' P a o l o Uccello o Maestro di P r a t o [?), 7 8 . Scena

di refettorio

e Relativa

Sinopia, Storia monastica, Affreschi Staccati e S i n o p i a Staccata [...]', in L'Eta di Masaccio: 11 Primo Quattrocento a Firenze, E. Andreatta, L. Berti, M. Burresi, M . C . F a b b r i , A. Natali, A. Paolucci, M . Scalini and M. Sframelli (eds), e x h . cat., P a l a z z o V e c c h i o , Florence, 1990, p. 216. Fabbri, 1990b Fabbri, M.C., ' P a o l o Uccello o Maestro di P r a t o , 7 9 . Beato Jacopone da Todi (...]', in L'Eta di Masaccio: II Primo Quattrocento a Firenze, E. A n d r e a t t a , L. Berti, M. B u r r e s i , M.C. Fabbri, A . Natali, A . Paolucci, M. Scalini and M . Sframelli (eds), e x h . cat., Palazzo Vecchio, Florence, 1990, p. 2 1 8 . Faison, 1940 Faison Jr, S.L., 'William Boeck, Paolo Uccello',

The Art Bulletin,

vol. XXII, n o . 4, Dec.

1940, pp. 2 8 2 - 2 8 4 . Fergonzi, 2001 Fergonzi, F., ' O p e r e deH'Avanguardia Italiana nella Collezione Mattioli I: Carlo Carra', Prospeftiva, no. 102, Apr. 2 0 0 1 , pp. 2 - 3 1 . Fermor, 1993 Fcrmor, S., Piero di Cosimo: Fiction, Invention and Fantasia, L o n d o n , 1993. Ferro, 1990 Fcrro, M., ' G i o v a n n i di Francesco, 4. Crocifisso Francesco

|...|', in Pittura

e VArte Fiorentina di Me to Quattrocento,

in L

di Luce: Giovanni di

Bcllosi (ed.), exh. cat., Casa

Buonarroti, Florence, 1990, p. 54. Field, 1997 Field, J.V., The Invention of Infinity: Mathematics

and Art in the Renaissance,

York and T o r o n t o , 1997. Finarte, 2001 Finarte Casa d ' A s t e S.p.A., Paolo Uccello, M i l a n , 2 0 0 1 .

Oxford, New

BIBLIOGRAPHY

339

Fiocco, 1923-1924 Fiocco, G., 'Un Affresco di Paolo Uccello nel Veneto?', Bolletino d'Arte, vol. Ill, no. 2, 19231924, pp. 192-196. Fiocco, 1925-1926 Fiocco, G., Tl Rinnovamento Toscano dell'Arte del Musaico a Venezia', Dedalo, vol. VI, 1925-1926, pp. 109-118. Fiocco, 1935 Fiocco, G., i Giganti di Paolo Uccello', Rivista d'Arte, vol. XVII, no. 2, 1935, pp. 385-404. Fiocco, 1961 Fiocco, G., 'La Rinascita della Scuola del Masaico a Venezia', in Miscellanea Hertzianae

Bibliothecae

zu Ehren von Leo Bruhns, Franz Graf Wolff Metternich, Ludwig Schudt, Munich,

1961, pp. 152-156. Fiorilli, 1920 Fiorilli, C , T Dipintori a Firenze nell'Arte dei Medici, ecc.', Archivio Storico Italiano, vol. LXXVIII, no. 2, pp. 5-74. Flaiano and Tongiorgi Tomasi, 1971 Flaiano, E. and Tongiorgi Tomasi, L., L'Opera Completa di Paolo Uccello, Classici dell'Arte, Paolo Lecaldano, Milan, 1971. Fontana, 1986 Fontana, W., 'Affreschi di Paolo Uccello nel Palazzo Ducale di Urbino', in Federico Montefeltro:

di

Lo Stato, le Arti, la Cultura, le Arti, G.C. Baiardi, G. Chittolini and P. Floriani

(eds), Rome, 1986, pp. 131-149. Foster, 1986 Foster, R., '"St George and the Dragon", Sacrifice and Sacrament: Order out of Chaos', Listener, 16 Oct. 1986, pp. 13-14. Foster and Tudor-Craig, 1986 Foster, R. and Tudor-Craig, P., The Secret Life of Paintings,

Woodbridge, 1986.

Fox, 1983 Fox, D.S., Saint George: The Saint with Three Faces, Windsor Forest, 1983. Francaslel, 1952 Francastel, P., 'Un Mystcrc Parisicn Illuslre par Uccello. Le Miracle de 1'Hostic d'Urbino', Revue ArchaeologUjue, vol. XXXIX, no. 6, Apr.-Jun. 1952, pp. 180-191. Freemantle, 1977 Freemantle, R., 'Ricerche, Documenti di Archivio', Antichita

Viva, vol. XVI, no. 3, May-Jun.

1977, pp. 69-70. Print a, 1998 Frinta, M.S., Punched Decoration

on Late Medieval

Panel and Miniature Painting: Part 1.

Catalogue Raisonne of all Punch Shapes, Prague, 1998.

340

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Frosinini, 1987 Frosinini, C , ' A l c u n e Precisazioni su Mariotto di C r i s t o f a n o ' , Rivista d'Arte,

v o l . XXXIX,

no. 4 , 1987, pp. 4 4 3 - 4 5 5 . Frosinini, 1995 Frosinini, C , ' T e s t i m o n i a n z e Pittoriche e di A r r e d o tra D u e c e n t o e Q u a t t r o c e n t o ' , in La Cattedrale di Santa Maria del Fiore a Firenze, C . Acidini Luchinat (ed.), Florence, 1995, vol. II, pp. 193-232. Frosinini, 2 0 0 1 Frosinini, C , T . 5 , Masolino, ( T o m a s s o di Cristofano Fini), (Panicale in V a l d a r n o ? , 1383 prima del 1440), San Giuliano\

in Rinascimento,

Capolavori dei Musei Italiani.

Tokyo -

Roma 2001, A. Paolucci (ed.), exh. c a t , [Tokyo a n d ] Scuderie Papli al Quirinale, Rome, 2 0 0 1 , pp. 60-62. Frosinini, 2003 Frosinini, C , ' C h i o s t r o Verde', in // Complesso di Santa Maria Novella, M. G r e g o r i (ser. ed.) Firenze, Musei p e r la Citta, Florence, 2 0 0 3 , pp. 2 7 - 3 9 . Fry, 1909 Fry, R.E., ' T h e Umbrian Exhibition at the Burlington

Fine A r t s C l u b ' , The Burlington

Magazine, vol. X V I , Oct. 1909 - Mar. 1910 pp. 2 6 7 - 2 7 4 . Fry, 1911 Fry, R., ' O n a Profile Portrait b y Baldovinetti', The Burlington Magazine, v o l . XVIII, Oct. 1 9 1 0 - M a r . 1 9 1 1 , p p . 311-312. Fry, 1914 Fry, R., ' T h r e e Pictures in the J a c q u e m a r l - A n d r e C o l l e c t i o n ' , The Burlington

Magazine, vol.

X X V , Apr.-Sep. 1914, pp. 7 9 - 8 5 . Gal bally, 1987 Gal bally, A . , The Collections of the National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne, 1987. Galli, 1998 Galli, A., ' N e l Segno di Ghiberti', in La Bottegu delTArtista tra Medioevo e Rinascitnento, R. Cassanelli (ed.), Milan, 1998, pp. 87-108. Galluz/.i, 1992 Galluzzi, P., ' 9 . 2 4 , Paolo Uccello ( ? ) , Studio d i Calice in Prospelliva (...[', in / / Disegno Fiorentino del Tempo di Lorenzo il Magnified, A . P . Tofani (ed.), e x h . cat., G a b i n e t t o Disegni e Slampe degli Uffizi, Florence, 1992, p. 2 0 5 . Gamba, 1909 G a m b a , C , ' D i A l c u n i Quadri di Paolo Uccello o della s u a S c u o l a ' , Rivista d'Arte, vol. VI, 1909, pp. 19-30. Gamba, 1933 G a m b a , C , ' L a Mostra del T e s o r o cli Firenza S a c r a , la Pittura', Bollettino d'Arte, v o l . XXVII, no. 3, 1933, pp. 145-163.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

341

Gandi, 1928 Gandi, G., Le Corporazioni dell'Antica

Firenze, Florence, 1928.

Gaye, 1839 Gaye, G., Carteggio Inedito d'Artisti deiSecoliXIV.XV.

XVI., 3 vols, Florence, 1839.

Gebhardt, 1990 Gebhardt, V., 'Ein Portrait Cosimo de' Medici von Paolo Uccello', Pantheon,

vol. XLVIII,

1990, pp. 28-35. Gebhardt, 1991 Gebhardt, V., 'Some Problems in the Reconstruction of Uccello's "Rout of San Romano" Cycle', The Burlington Magazine, vol. CXXXIII, no. 1056, Mar. 1991, pp. 179-185. Germ, 2001 Germ, M., 'Leon Battista Alberti, Santa Maria Novella in Florence, and Nicolaus Cusanus', UmeniArt,

vol. XLIX, no. 1,2001, pp. 11-18.

Geronimus, 2000 Geronimus, D., 'The Birth Date, Early Life and Career of Piero di Cosimo', The Art

Bulletin,

vol. LXXXII, no. 1, Mar. 2000, pp. 164-170. Ghi berti, 1998 Ghiberti, L.,I Commentarii (Biblioteca Nazioneate

Centrale di Firenze, II, I, 333), introduced

and edited by L. Bartoli, Florence, 1998. Gilardoni, Orsini and Taccani, 1977 Gilardoni, A., Orsini, R.A. and T accani, S., X- rays in Art: Physics - Technique -

Applications,

Como, 1977. Gilbert, 1988 Gilbert, C.E., LArte

del Quattrocento:

Nelle Testimonianze

Coeve, Florence and Vienna,

1988. Gilbert, 1998 Gilbert, C.E., 'What Did the Renaissance Patron Buy?' Renaissance

Quarterly, vol. LI, no. 2,

Summer 1998, pp. 392-450. Gill, 1999 Gill, M.J., '"Remember Me at the Altar of the Lord": Saint Monica's Gift to Rome', in Augustine

in Iconography:

History and Legend, J.C. Schnaubelt OSA and F. van Fleteren

(eds), New York, 1999, pp. 549-570. Ginori Lisci, 1985 Ginori Lisci, L., The Palazzi of Florence:

Their History and Art, trans. J. Grillo, Florence,

1985, 2 vols (orig. Italian ed., Florence, 1972). Giovannozzi, 1934 Giovannozzi, V., 'Note su Giovanni di Francesco', Rivista d'Arte, vol. XVI, no. 2, 1934, pp. 337-365.

342

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Goffen, 1998a Goffen, R., 'Introduction: M a s a c c i o ' s Trinity

and the Early R e n a i s s a n c e ' , in

Masaccio's

Trinity, R. Goffen (ed.), Cambridge, 1998, p p . 1-32. Goffen, 1998b Goffen, R., ' M a s a c c i o ' s Trinity a n d the Letter to H e b r e w s ' , in Masaccio's

Trinity,

(ed.), revised ed., Cambridge, 1998, p p . 4 3 - 6 4 (orig. ed. Memorie Domenicane,

R.Goffen

1980, pp. 489-

504). Gombrich, 2 0 0 3 Gombrich, E.H., Aby Warburg: Una Biographia

Intelletuale,

t r a n s . A . dal Lago and P.A.

Rovatti, Milan, 2 0 0 3 (orig. English ed. London, 1970). Gordon, 2 0 0 3 G o r d o n , D., The Fifteenth Century Italian Paintings, vol. I, National

Gallery

Catalogues,

London, 2003. Gordon, Wyld and R o y , 2 0 0 2 G o r d o n , D., W y l d , M. and Roy, A . , ' F r a A n g e l i c o ' s Predella for t h e H i g h Altarpiece o f San D o m e n i c o , F i e s o l e ' , National Gallery Technical Bulletin, v o l . X X I I I , 2 0 0 2 , p p . 5-20. Gott, 2 0 0 3 Gott, T., A t t r i b u t e d to Paolo Uccello, Italian c. 1397-1475, Saint George slaying the dragon', in Paintings

And Sculpture before 1800 in the Internationcd. Collections

of the National

Gallery of Victoria, T. Gott (ed.), Melbourne, 2 0 0 3 , p . 23. Goukovskj, 1969 G o u k o v s j , M . A . , A Representation of the Profanation

of the Host: A P u z z l i n g Painting and

its Possible A u t h o r ' , The Art Bulletin, vol. L I , no. 2, J u l . 1969, p p . 1 7 0 - 1 7 3 . Griffiths, 1978 Griffiths, G., ' T h e Political Significance of U c c e l l o ' s Battle of San Romano',

Journal of the

Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. X L I , 1978, pp. 313-316. Gronau, 1902 Gronau, G., ' Z u Paolo Uccello', Repertorium fiir Kunslwissenschaft,

v o l . X X V , 1902, p. 3 1 8 .

Gronau, 1932 Gronau, G., ' Z u Paolo Uccellos S c h l a c h t e n b i l d e r n ' , Pantheon, vol. I X , J a n . - J i m . 1932, p. 176. Guarnicri, 1987 Guarnieri, E., Le Strode di Firenze: ITabernacoli,

le Nitove Strode, v o l . V I I , Florence, 1987.

Guidotti, 1994 Guidotti, G.C., Orafi in Toscana tra XV e XVIII Secolo: Storie di Uomini, di Cose e di Parole, vol. II, Document!, Florence, 1994. Gurrieri, Berli and Leonardi, 1988 Gurrieri, F., Berti, L. and Leonardi, C , La Basilica di San Miniato

a I Monte a Firenze,

Florence, 1988. Haines, 1983 Haines, M., La Sagrestia delle Messe del Duomo di Firenze, F l o r e n c e , 1 9 8 3 .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

343

Haines, 1999 Haines, M., 'II Mondo dello Scheggia: Persone e Luoghi di una Camera', in Lo Scheggia, L. Bellosi and M. Haines (eds), Florence and Siena, 1999, pp. 35-64. Haines, 2000 Haines, M., 'Artisan Family Strategies: Proposals for Research on the Families of Florentine Artists', in Art, Memory, and Family in Renaissance

Florence, G. Ciappelli and P. Lee Rubin

(eds), Cambridge, 2000, pp. 163-175. Haines, 2001 Haines, ML, 'Ghiberti's Trip to Venice', in Coming About...A Festschrift for John

Shearman,

L.R. Jones and L.C. Matthew (eds), Cambridge, 2001, pp. 57-63. Hall, 1998 Hall, E. "The Detroit Saint Jerome in Search of Its Painter", Bulletin of the Detroit Institute of Arts, vol. LXXII, nos 1-2, 1998, pp. 11-33. Harries, 2001 Harries, K., Infinity and Perspective, Cambridge and London, 2001. Hartt, 1956 Hartt, F., 'A New Attribution for a Famous Drawing', The Art Quarterly, vol. XIX, no. 2, pp. 162-173. Hatfield, 1970 Hatfield, R., 'Some Unknown Descriptions of the Medici Palace in 1459', The Art Bulletin, vol. LII, no. 3, pp. 232-249. Henderson, 1994 Henderson, J., Piety and Charity in Late Medieval Florence, Oxford, 1994. Hencly, 1964 Hendy, P., Some Italian Renaissance-Pictures

in the Thyssen-Bornemisza

Collection, trans. C.

Virch, Lugano-Castgnola, 1964. Herlihy and Klapisch-Zuber, 1985 Herlihy, D. and Klapisch-Zuber, C , Tuscans and their Families: A Study of the

Florentine

Catasto of 1427, New Haven and London, 1985 (orig. French ed. Paris, 1978). Herzncr, 1986 Hcrzner, V., 'Cerchia di Donatello, 45. Nativita ID. 45J 1465 ca. [...]', in Donatello e i Suoi: Scultura Fiurentina del Prima Rinascimento,

A.P. Darr and G. Bonsanti (eds), exh. cat., Forte

di Belvedere, Florence, The Detroit Institute of Arts and Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, 1986, p. 158. Hills, 1980 Hills, P., 'Leonardo and Flemish Painting', The Burlington

Magazine, vol. CXXII, No. 930,

Sep. 1980, p. 609. Hoff, 1961 Hoff, U., Catalogue of European Paintings before Eighteen Hundred, Melbourne, 1961.

344

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hoff, 1964 Hoff, U., ' A . J . L . McDonnell as Adviser to the Felton B e q u e s t and its Purchasing Policy During the Post W a r Period', Annual Bulletin of The National Gallery of Victoria, vol. VI, 1964, pp. 2-7. Hoff, 1973 Hoff, U., European Painting and Sculpture before 1800,3rd

ed. revised, M e l b o u r n e , 1973.

Hoff and Devapriam, 1995 Hoff, U. with contributions by E. Devapriam, European Paintings before 1800 in the National Gallery of Victoria, 4 t h ed. revised and e x p a n d e d , M e l b o u r n e , 1 9 9 5 . Holmes, 1992 H o l m e s , G., The Florentine Enlightenment 1400-1450,

Oxford, 1 9 9 2 .

Holmes, 1999 H o l m e s , M., Fra Filippo Lippi: The Carmelite Painter, N e w Haven and L o n d o n , 1999. H o m e , 1901 H o m e , H.P., ' T h e Battle-Piece by Paolo U c c e l l o , in t h e National G a l l e r y ' , The Monthly Review, Oct. 1 9 0 1 , p p . 114-138. Hoving, 1996a H o v i n g , T . , 'Is T h i s A Fake?' The Sunday Telegraph,

London, 18 A u g . 1996, p p . 1-2.

Hoving, 1996b H o v i n g , T., False Impressions: The Hunt for Big-Time Art Fakes, N e w York, 1996. Hueck, 1972 Hueck, I., ' L e Matricole dei Pittori Fiorentini P r i m a e D o p o il 1 3 2 0 ' , Bolletino dArte, vol. L V I I , n o . 1, pp. 114-121. Hueck, 1990 Hueck, I., ' L a T a v o l a di Duccio e la C o m p a g n i a clelle Laudi di Santa Maria Novella', in Gli Uffizi Studi e Ricerche. 6: La Maestd di Duccio Restaurata,

L. Berti and A . Petrioli Tofani

(ser. eds), Florence, 1990, pp. 33-46. Hughes, 1997 Hughes, G . , Renaissance

Cassoni, Masterpieces

of Early Italian

Art: Painted

Marriage

Chests 1400-1550, Polegate and London, 1997. lacopo da Varazze, 1995 Iacopo da Varazze, Legenda Aurea, | c . m i d - l a t e 1200s| A . and L. Vilalc Brovarone (eds), Turin, 1995. Inglis, 1995 Inglis, E., The Hours of'Mary of Burgundy, L o n d o n , 1995. Jacks and Caferro, 2001 Jacks, P. and Caferro, W., The Spinelli of Florence: Family, University Park, Pennsylvania, 2 0 0 1 .

Fortunes of a Renaissance

Merchant

BIBLIOGRAPHY

345

Jerzy Miziolek, 1995 Jerzy Miziolek, D., 'The Lanckoronski Collection in Poland', Antichita

Viva, vol. XXXIV,

No. 3, 1995, pp. 27-47. Joannides, 1993 Joannides, P., Masaccio and Masolino: A Complete Catalogue, London, 1993. Jolly (A.), 1998 Jolly, A., Madonnas by Donatello andHis

Circle, Frankfurt am Main, 1998.

Jolly (P.H.), 1998 Jolly, P.H., 'Jan van Eyck's Italian Pilgrimage: A Miraculous Florentine Annunciation Ghent Altarpiece', Zeitschriftflir

Kunstgeschichte,

and the

no. 3, 1998, pp. 369-394.

Jong-Janssen, 1989 Jong-Janssen, C.E.d., '[20], Zanobi Macchiavelli, [1418-1479], De H. Nicolaas vanTolentino Redt Een Gehangene, c. 1470', in The Birth of Panel Painting, R. Vos and H. van Os (eds), 's-Gravenhage, 1989, pp. 196-199. Joost-Gaugier, 1974a Joost-Gaugier, C.L., 'Uccello's "Uccello": A Visual Signature', Gazette des Beaux-Arts,

vol.

LXXXIV, no. 1269, Oct. 1974, pp. 233-238. Joost-Gaugier, 1974b Joost-Gaugier, C.L., 'The "Sketchbooks" of Jacopo Bellini Reconsidered', Paragone,

vol.

XXV, no. 297, Nov. 1974, pp. 24-41. Joost-Gaugier, 1974c Joost-Gaugier, C.L., 'Un'Eco Veneziano nell'Opera di Paolo Uccello', Arte Illustrata,

vol.

VII, no. 59, Oct. 1974, pp. 350-352. Kanter, 1994a Kanter, L.B., '45. The Annunciation; Saint Bridget and a Choir of Bridgettine Nuns', in Painting and Illumination

in Early Renaissance

Florence

1300-1450,

in J.P. O'Neill (ed.),

exh. cat., Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1994, pp. 319-321. Kan ler, 1994b Kantcr, L.B., ' 4 3 . Desco da Parto: A Birth Scene (recto); A Putto (verso) [...]', in Painting and Illumination

in Early Renaissance

Florence

1300-1450,

in J.P. O'Neill (ed.), exh. cat.,

Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 1994, pp. 311-314. Kantcr, 2000 Kanter, L.B., 'The 'cose piccole' of Paolo Uccello', Apollo, Aug. 2000, pp. 11-20. Kanter, 2004 Kanter, L.B., 'The National Gallery's New Catalogue of Fifteenth-Century Italian Paintings', The Burlington Magazine, vol. CXLVI, no. 1211, Feb. 2004, pp. 105-108. Katz, 2003 Katz, D.E. 'The Contours of Tolerance: Jews and the Corpus Domini Altarpiece in Urbino', The Art Bulletin, vol. LXXXV, no. 4 , 2 0 0 3 , pp. 646-661.

346

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kecks, 1988

Kecks, R.G., Madonna

und Kind: Das Hdusliche

Andachtsbild

im Florenz

des 15.

Jahrhunderts, Berlin, 1988. Kemp, 1991 K e m p , M., ' I n t r o d u c t i o n ' , in On Painting, M . K e m p (ed.), L o n d o n , 1 9 9 1 , pp. 1-29. Kemp, 1994 K e m p , M., ' N o t S o Eccentric, F r a n c o and S t e f a n o Borsi, P a o l o Uccello [...]', Times Literary

Supplement, 11 Nov. 1994, p. 12. K e m p , 1997

K e m p , M., Behind the Picture: Art and Evidence in the Italian Renaissance,

N e w Haven and

London, 1997. K e m p , Massing, Christie and Groen, 1991 K e m p , M., M a s s i n g A . with Christie N . and G r o e n K., ' P a o l o U c c e l l o ' s " H u n t in t h e forest",'

The Burlington Magazine, vol. CXXXIII, n o . 1 0 5 6 , 1991, p p . 164-178. Kennedy, 1938

Kennedy, R . W . , Alesso Baldovinetti:

A Critical

and Historical

Study, N e w Haven and

London, 1938. Kent, 1977

Kent, F.W., Household

and Lineage in Renaissance

Florence:

The Family Life of the

Capponi, Ginori, and Rucellai, Princeton, 1 9 7 7 . Kent, 1978

Kent, D., The Rise of the Medici Faction in Florence 1426-1434, Oxford, 1978. Kent, 1981

Kent, F.W., The Making of a Renaissance Patron of the Arts, in Giovanni Rucellai eel il suo Zibaldone, II, A Florentine Patrician and his Palace, London, 1981, pp. 9-95. Kent, 2000

Kent, D., Cositno de' Medici and the Florentine

Renaissance:

The Patron's

Oeuvre, New

Haven and London, 2000. Kent and Kent, 1982

Kent, D.V. and Kent, F.W., Neighbours and Neighbourhood

in Renaissance

Florence: The

District of the Red Lion in the Fifteenth Century, N e w York, 1982. Klecman and Willner, 1993

Klccman, E C and Willner, S.G., Ifaliaanse Schilderijen

13()()-150()/Italiun Painting 1300-

1500, Rotterdam, 1993. Klein, 1961 Klein, R., T o m p o n i u s Gauricus on P e r s p e c t i v e ' , The Art Bulletin, v o l . XLIII, n o . 3, Sep. 1961, pp. 2 1 1 - 2 3 0 .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

347

Koster, 2002 Koster, M.L., 'Italy and the North. A Florentine Perspective', in The Age of Van Eyck: The Mediterranean

World and Early

Netherlandish

Painting,

T.H. Borchert (ed.), exh. cat.,

Groningemuseum, Bruges, 2002, pp. 79-90. Krautheimer and Krautheimer-Hess, 1956 Krautheimer, R. and Krautheimer-Hess, T., Lorenzo Ghiberti, Princeton, 1956. Lachi, 1995 Lachi, C , // Maestro della Nativita di Castello, Florence, 1995. Lamo, 1996 Lamo, P., Graticola di Bologna, reprint ed. with essays by F. Chiodini, M. Marchi and G. Sassu, M. Pigozzi (ed.), Bologna, 1996 (orig. ed. 1560). Landino, 1974 Landino, C , 'Comento di Cristoforo Landino Fiorentino sopra la Comedia di Dante Alighieri Poeta Fiorentino', in Scritti, Critici e Teorici, edited and introduced by R. Cardini, Rome, 1974, vol. I (orig. ed. Florence, 1481). Lanyi, 1944 Lanyi, J., 'The Louvre Portrait of Five Florentines', The Burlington Magazine, vols LXXX1VLXXXV, nos 190-191, Apr. 1944, pp. 87-95. Lanzi, 1968 Lanzi, L., Storia Pittorica della Italia, M. Capucci (ed.), Florence, 1968, vol. I, (orig. ed. Florence, 1795). Lanzi, 1982 Lanzi, L., La Real Galleria di Firenze Accresciuta t'Arciduca

Granducadi

e Riordinata

per Comando

di

SA.R.

Toscana, Florence, 1982 (orig. ed. Pisa, 1782).

Lauts, 1966 Lauts, J., Katalog Alte Meister bis 1800: Abbildungen,

Karlsruhe, 1966.

Lazzi, 1990 Lazzi, G., 'Pittura di Luce. Giovanni di Francesco e l'Arte Fiorentina di Meta Quattrocento, a Cura di Luciano Bellosi, Milano, Olivetti-Electra, 1990', Antichitd

Viva, vol. XXIX, nos 2-3,

1990, p. 60. Lcnsi, 1934 Lensi, A., La Donazione Loeser, exh. cat., Palazzo Vecchio, Florence, 1934. Lensi Orlandi, 1978 Lensi Orlandi, G., Le Ville di Firenze: Di Qua dArno,

3rd ed., Florence, 1978 (orig. ed.

Florence, 1954). Lesnick, 1989 Lesnick, D.R., Preaching Dominican

in Medieval

Florence:

Spirituality, Athens and London, 1989.

The Social

World of Franciscan

and

348

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Lessanutti, 1996 Lessanutti, J . M . , 'Notes o n U c c e l l o ' s Battle of San Romano:

Identification of the L o u v r e

Panel with the Battle of A n g h i a r i ' , The Rutgers Art Review, vol. X V I , 1996, p p . 5 9 - 7 1 . Levin, 2 0 0 4 Levin, W.R., The Allegory of Mercy at the Misericordia Context, Iconography,

and the Documentation

in Florence:

of Confraternal

Charity

Historiography, in the

Trecento,

Lieberman, R., 'Brunelleschi a n d Masaccio in Santa Maria N o v e l l a ' , Cultura e

Istituzioni

Dallas, L a n h a m , Boulder, New Y o r k and Oxford, 2004. Lieberman, 1981

nell'Ordine Domenicano tra Medioevo e Umanismo, no. 1 2 , 1 9 8 1 , p p . 1 2 7 - 1 3 9 . Lightbown, 1978 Lightbown, R., Sandro Botticelli,

vol. II, Complete Catalogue,

B e r k e l e y a n d L o s Angeles,

1978. Lillie, 2 0 0 0 Lillie, A., ' M e m o r y

of Place: Luogo and Lineage in the Fifteenth-Century

C o u n t r y s i d e ' , in Art, Memory, and Family in Renaissance

Florentine

Florence, G. Ciappelli and P . Lee

Rubin (eds), C a m b r i d g e , 2000, p p . 195-214. Lipman, 1936a L i p m a n , J., ' T h e Florentine Profile Portrait in the Q u a t t r o c e n t o ' , The Art Bulletin, vol. X V I I I , Mar. 1936, pp. 5 4 - 1 0 2 . Lipman, 1936b Lipman, J., ' T h e Profile Portraits by the Master of the Castello N a t i v i t y ' , Art in America and Elsewhere, vol. X X I V , no. 3 , Jul. 1936, pp. 110-126. Lloyd, 1977 Lloyd, C , A Catalogue of the Earlier Italian Paintings in the Ashmolean

Museum,

Oxford,

1977. Lloyd, 1996 Lloyd, C , ' U c c e l l o , Paolo [Paolo di D o n o f , in The Dictionary

of Art, i. Turner (ed.),

Sunderland, Y o r k , Suffolk and Willard, 1996, vol. XXXI, p p . 5 12-5 18. Locser, 1898 Loeser, C , ' P a o l o Uccello', Repertorium fiir Kunstwissenschaft,

vol. X X I , 1898, pp. 8 3 - 9 4 .

Lollini, 1994 Lollini, F., ' M i n i a t u r e a Imola: Un A b b o z / o di Tracciato e Q u a l c h c Proposta tra Emilia e R o m a g n a ' , in Cor Unum et Anima Una: Coral i Miniati del la Chiesa di Imola, F. Faranda (ed.), Faenza (Ravenna), 1994, p p . 103-139. Longhi, 1926 Longhi, R., ' L e t t e r e Pittoriche: Roberto Longhi a Giuseppe F i o c c o ' , Vita Artistica, n o . 2, 1926, pp. 127-139.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

349

Longhi, 1927 Longhi, R., 'Saggi in Francia, I. Chambery, Un Ritratto di Paolo Uccello', Vita

Artistica,

1927, pp. 45-48. Longhi, 1928 Longhi, R., 'Ricerche su Giovanni di Francesco', Pinacotheca,

vol. I, no. 1, Jul.-Aug. 1928,

pp. 34-48. Longhi, 1940 Longhi, R.,'Fatti di Masolino e di Masaccio', La Critica d'Arte, vol. XV-XVI, nos 3-4, Jul.Dec. 1940, pp. 145-191. Longhi, 1952 Longhi, R., Tl "Maestro di Pratovecchio'", Paragone, vol. Ill, no. 35, Nov. 1952, pp. 10-37. Longhi, 1968 Longhi, R., 'Me Pinxit' e Quesiti Caravaggeschi

1928-1934,

Florence, 1968.

Longhi, 1996 Longhi, R., 'Propositions pour une Critique d'Art', in Propositions dArt/Roberto

Longhi, Esquisse d'une Biographie,

pour

une

Critique

trans. P. Falguieres, 1996, pp. 55-92.

Longhi, 2002a Longhi, R., The Art of Piero della Francesca; The Life of Piero della Francesca, in Tabbat (ed.) with an introduction by K. Christiensen, trans. D. Tabbat, Riverdale-On-Hudson, 2002, pp. 1-87, 173-206 (orig. ed. Rome, 1927). Longhi, 2002b, Longhi, R., The Art of Piero della Francesca: Notes [from 2nd and 3rd eds], in Tabbat (ed.) with an introduction by K. Christiensen, trans. D. Tabbat, Riverdale-On-FIudson, 2002, pp. 89-146 (orig. cds, Rome, 1942 and 1962). Liibke, 1887 Liibke, W., Katalog der Gemalde-Galerie,

Karlsruhe, 1887.

Lucco, 1990 Lucco, M., 'Venezia', in La Pittura nel Veneto, M. Lucco (ed.), Milan, 1990, vol. II, pp. 395480. Lunardi, 1983 Lunardi, R., Arte e Storia in Santa Maria Novella, Florence, 1983. Lusanna, Faedo and Santi, 1986 Lusanna, F.N., and Faedo, L., with contributions from B. Santi, II Museo Bardini a Firenze, Florence and Milan, 1986. Malacarne, 1998 Malacarne, G., Le Cacce del Principe: TArs Venandi nell Terra dei Gonzaga, Modena, 1998. [Malkiel-Jirmounsky ], 1932 [Malkiel-Jirmounsky, M.], 'Une Nouvelle Pnklelle d e Paolo Uccello', Gazette des BeauxArts, vol. VIII, 1932, p. 64.

350

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mallett, 1974 Mallett, M., Mercenaries and their Masters: Warfare in Renaissance

Italy, L o n d o n , Sydney

and Toronto, 1974. .Malquori, 1990 Malquori, A . , ' 1 7 . L a Via di Perfezione [...]', in Bernardo di Chiaravalle nell'Arte

Italiana

dal XIV al XVIII Secolo, L . dal Pra (ed.), exh. cat., Certosa di Firenze, P i n a c o t e c a , Florence, 1990, pp. 128-130. Malvasia, 1969 Malvasia, C.C., Le Pitture di Bologna, A. Emiliani (ed.), reprint ed., B o l o g n a , 1 9 6 9 (orig. ed. Bologna, 1686). Manetti, 1957 Manetti, A . , ' U o m i n i Singolari in Firenze Dal M C C C C ' [c. 1 4 9 4 - 1 4 9 7 ] , in P. Murray, ' A r t Historians and A r t Critics - IV: XIV Uomini Singolari in Firenze',

The Burlington

Magazine,

vol. XCIX, no. 6 5 5 , O c t . 1957, p p . 330-336. Manetti, 1970 Manetti, A . , The Life

of Brunelleschi

by Antonio

di

Tuccio

Manetti

[c. 1482-1489],

introduction, notes and critical text by H. S a a l m a n , trans. C. E n g g a s s , University Park, Pennsylvania and London, 1970. Mannini, 1984 Mannini, M., ' L e Strade e i Popoli nella Cartogralla del X V I S e c o l o ' , in Quartiere 9, Castello, Campagna Medicea Periferia Urbana, Studio G E 9 (ed.), Florence, 1984, pp. 137160. Marangoni, 1919 Marangoni, M., 'Osservazioni sull " A c u t o " cli P a o l o Uccello', LArte,

vol. X I I , 1919, pp. 37-

42. Marangoni, 1930 Marangoni, M., 'Gli AITreschi di Paolo U c c e l l o a San M i n i a t o al Monte a Firenze', Rivista dArte, vol. XII, no. 2 , 1930, pp. 403-417. Marangoni, 1932 Marangoni, M., ' U n a Predella di Paolo Ucccllo', Dedalo, v o l . XII, 1032, pp. 3 2 9 - 3 4 7 . Marc hi, 1992 Marchi, P., / Blasoni delle Famiglie Toscane Conservati

nella Raccolta

Ceramelli-Papiani,

Pubblicazioni degli Archivi di Stato, Sussidi 5, R o m e , 1992. IMarchini], 1969 IMarchini, G.) (ed.), Due Secoli di Pittitra Murale a Prato: Mostra di Affreschi, Graffiti dei Secoli XIV e XV, exh. cat., Palazzo Prelorio, Prato, 1969. Marchini, 1987 Marchini, G., ' L e Vetrate', Antichita Viva, vol. X X V I , no. 2, 1987, p p . 8 - 1 8 .

Sinopie e

BIBLIOGRAPHY

351

Marin, 1990 Marin, L., 'Architecture et Repesentation: Paolo Uccello au Chiostro Verde de Santa Maria Novella a Florence, Arts et Langage', in Symboles de la Renaissance,

Paris, 1990, vol. Ill, pp.

114-136. Marino, 1991 Marino, E., Tl "Diluvo" di Paolo Uccello in S. Maria Novella ed il Concillio di Firenze (14391443): Saggio dTconoteologia Storica', Memorie Domenicane,

no. 22, 1991, pp. 241-344.

Marquand, 1900 Marquand, A., 'Two Windows in the Cathedral Archaeology

(Journal of the Archaeological

of Florence', American

Institute of America),

Journal

of

vol. IV, no. 2, 1900, pp.

192-203. Martin, 2001 Martin, F., '"Eidem Dabitur Designum" la Realizzazione degli Occhi e la Loro Disposizione nel Duomo di Firenze', in La Cattedrale e la Citta: Saggi sul Duomo di Firenze (Atti del VIII Centenario del Duomo di Firenze, Florence, 16-21 Jun. 1997), T. Verdon and A. Innocenti (eds), Florence, 2001, vol. I, pp. 550-567. Massing and Christie, [ 19881 Massing, A. and Christie, N., 'The Hunt in a Forest by Paolo Uccello', The Hamilton

Kerr

Institute Bulletin, no. 1, [ 1988], pp. 30-47. Matchette, 2000 Matchette, A., 'The Compagnia della Purificazione e di San Zanobi in Florence: A Recostruction of its Residence at San Marco 1440-1456', in Confraternities Arts in Renaissance

Italy: Ritual,

Spectacle,

Image,

and the Visual.

B. Wisch and D. Cole Ahl (eds),

Cambridge, 2000, pp. 74-101. Mather, 1948 Mather, R.G., 'Documents Mostly New Relating to Florentine Painters and Sculptors of the Fifteenth Century', The Art Bulletin, vol. XXX, no. 1, Mar. 1948, pp. 20-65. Matter, 1990 Matter, E.A., The Voice of My Beloved: The Song of Songs in Western Medieval

Christianity,

Philadelphia, 1990. Mayer, 1930 Mayer, A.L., 'Die Ausstellung der Sammlung "Schloss Rohoncz" in dcr Neuen Pinakothek Munchen', Pantheon, vol. VI, Jul.-Dec. 1930, pp. 296-322. Mazzalupi, 2005 Mazzalupi, M., 'Documents in the Urbino Archives', in From Filippo Lippi to Piero della Francesca: Fra Carnevale and the Making of a Renaissance

Master, Keith Christiansen, exh.

cat., Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan and Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, 2005, pp. 299305.

352

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Mecatti, 1971 Mecatti, G.M., Storia Genealogica della Nobilitd, e Cittadinanza di Firenze,

Bologna, 1971

(orig. ed. N a p l e s , 1754). Meersseman, 1948 Meersseman, O . P . , G., 'La Predication D o m i n i c a i n e dans les C o n g r e g a t i o n s M a r i a l e s en Italie au XHIe S i e c l e ' , Archivium Fratum Praedicticatorum,

vol. XVIII, 1 9 4 8 , pp. 1 3 1 - 1 6 1 .

Meersseman, 1951 Meersseman, O.P., G., 'Etudes sur les A n c i e n n e s Confreries D o m i n i c a i n e s , I I . Les Confreries de Saint-Pierre M a r t y r ' , Archivium Fratum Praedicticatorum,

vol. X X I , 1 9 5 1 , pp. 51-196.

Meiss, 1969 Meiss, M., ' 3 7 , 38 T h e Miracle of t h e Scythe, Fresco...Sinopia...; 3 9 , 4 0 t h e Miracle of the Raven, F r e s c o . . . S i n o p i a . . i n Frescoes from Florence,

e x h . cat., Hayvvard Gallery, London,

1969, pp. 142-144. Meiss, 1970 Meiss, M., ' T h e Original Position of Uccello's John Hawkwood\

The Art Bulletin, vol. LII,

no. 3, Sep. 1970, p. 2 3 1 . Melbourne, 2 0 0 1 Melbourne, European Masterpieces: Six Centuries of Paintings from the National Gallery of Victoria, Australia,

exh. c a t , Cincinnati Art M u s e u m , Kimbell A r t M u s e u m , Fort Worth,

Denver Art M u s e u m and Portland Art M u s e u m , 2 0 0 1 . Melli, 1995 Melli, L., Maso Finiguerra: I Disegni, Florence, 1 9 9 5 . Melli, 1998 Melli, L., ' N u o v e Indagini sui Disegni di Paolo Uccello agli Uffizi: Disegno Sottostante, Tecnica, F u n z i o n e ' , Mittcilungen des Kunsthistoriscen

Institutes in Florenz, vol. XLII, no. 1,

1998, pp. 1-39. Melli, 1999 Melli, L., ' A N e w Investigation of t h e Preparatory Drawing for the Equestrian Monument to John Hawkwood

by Paolo Uccello: Its G e n e s i s and Relationship with the Fresco', in Le

Dessin Sous-Jacent

et la Technologic dans la Peinture ( C o l l o q u e XII, La Peinture dans les

Pays-Has au 16c Siecle, Pratiques d ' A t e l i e r Infrarouges et Autrcs M c t h o d e s d'Investigation, Bruges, 11-13 S e p . 1997), H. Verougslraete, R. van Schoule and with the collaboration of A. Dubois (eds), Leuvcn, 1999, pp. 261-272. Melli, 2002a Melli, L , ' 3 5 . Paolo Ucccllo (Paolo di D o n o ; Firenze, 1397-1475), Angela con Spada e Fode.ro; Coppa Sfaccettata (recto); Madonna con il Bambino (verso?) | . . . | ' , in Masaccio e le Origini del Rinascimento, L. Bellosi with the collaboration of L. Cavazzini a n d A. Galli (eds), exh. cat., Casa Masaccio, San Giovanni V a l d a r n o , 2 0 0 2 , p p . 2 0 6 - 2 0 8 .

BIBLIOGRAPHY

353

Melli, 2002b Melli, L., '36. Attribuito a Paolo Uccello (Paolo cli Dono; Firenze, 1397-1475), Sfera a Settantadue Facce Irta di Punte (recto); Figure Geornetriche (Visibili in Transparenza, verso) [...y,

in Masaccio

e le Origini

del Rinascimento,

L. Bellosi with the collaboration of

L.Cavazzini and A. Galli (eds), exh. cat., Casa Masaccio, San Giovanni Valdarno, 2002, pp. 210-212. Meloni Trkulja, 1975 Meloni Trkulja, S., 'Vicende Ignorate della "Battaglia di San Romano'", Paragone,

vol.

XXVI, no. 309, Nov. 1975, pp. 108-111. Merisalo, 1999 Merisalo, O., Le Collezioni

Medicee

nel 1495: Deliberazioni

degli Ufficiali dei

Ribelli,

Florence, 1999. Merkel, 1989 Merkel, E., 'Mosaici e Pittura a Venezia', in La Pittura nel Veneto: II Quattrocento, M. Lucco (ed.), Milan, 1989, vol. I, pp. 223-246. Merkel, 1994 Merkel, E., 'Rifacimenti Musivi in Facciata della Basilica di San Marco', in Storia

dell'Arte

Marciana: I Mosaici (Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi, Venice, 11-14 Oct. 1994), R. Polacco (ed.), Venice, 1994, pp. 305-322. Micali and Roselli, 1980 Micali, O.F. and Roselli, P., Le Soppressioni

dei Conventi a Firenze; Riuso e

Trasformazioni

dal Sec. XVIII in poi, Florence, 1980. Micheletti, 1954 Micheletti, E., 'Paolo Uccello', in Mostra di Quattro

Maestri del Primo Rinascimento,

M.

Salmi (Presidente Comitato Esecutivo), exh. cat., Palazzo Strozzi, Florence, 2nd ed., 1954, pp. 19-75. Michiel, 2000 Michiel, M., Notizia d'Opere

del Disegno, reprint ed with an introductory essay by C. de

Benedictis, Florence, 2000 (orig. ed. Vienna, 1896). Mignani Galli, 1976 Mignani Galli, D., 'Notizie Storiche', in Santa Maria e Brigida al Paradiso, Firenze:

Restauri

1974-1976, |Florence], 1976, pp. 31-42. Mode, 1972 Mode, R.L., 'Masolino, Uccello and the Orsini 'Uomini Famosi", The Burlington

Magazine,

vol. CXIV, no. 831, Jun. 1972, pp. 369-378. Moffitt Watts, 1982 Moffitt Watts, P., Nicolaus Cusanus: A Fifteenth-Century

Vision of Man, Leiden, 1982.

Molho, 1971 Molho, A., Florentine 1971.

Public Finances

in the Early

Renaissance,

1400-1433,

Cambridge,

354

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Monfasani, 1995 Monfasani, J., Byzantine

Scholars in Renaissance

Italy: Cardinal

Bessarion

and Other

Emigres, Selected Essays, Aldershot, 1995. Moran, 1992 Moran, L.M., ' 8 . 1 , Paolo Uccello, Cartonetto p e r il M o n u m e n t o E q u e s t r e a Giovanni A c u t o [...]', in UDisegno

Fiorentino del Tempo di Lorenzo il Magnifico, A . P . T o f a n i (ed.), exh. c a t ,

Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e , 1992, p. 170. Moran ti, 1990 Moranti, L., La Confraternita del Corpus Domini di Urbino, B o l o g n a , 1 9 9 0 . Morelli, 1969 Morelli, G., Ricordi [c. 1393-1421], V . Branca ( e d . ) , 2nd ed., F l o r e n c e , 1 9 6 9 . Morozzi, 1988 Morozzi, L., Le Carte Archivistiche della Fondazione

Herbert P. Home:

Inventario,

Milan,

1988. Miintz, 1889 Miintz, E., Histoire de VArt Pendant la Renaissance,

vol. I, Italie, Les Primitifs, Paris, 1889.

Miintz, 1890 Miintz, E., Les Archives des Arts: Recueil de Documents Inedits ou Pen Connus, Paris, 1890. Muraro, 1961 Muraro, M., ' T h e Statutes of the Venetian Arti A n d the M o s a i c s of the M a s c o l i Chapel', The Art Bulletin, vol. XLIII, no. 3, Sep. 1961, pp. 2 6 5 - 2 7 4 . Muraro and Grabar, 1963 Muraro, M. and Grabar, A., Treasures of Venice, trans. J. E m m o n s , G e n e v a , 1963. Neerman, 1983 Neerman, G., ' V I I . Giusto di Gand: F a " C o m u n i o n e degli A p o s t o l i ' " , in Urbino e le Marche Prima e Dopo Raffaello, M.G.C.Duprc d a l P o g g e t t o and P. Dal Poggetto (cds), exh. cat., Palazzo Ducale and Church of San D o m e n i c o , U r b i n o , 1983, p p . 8 4 - 8 6 . Neri Lusanna, 1990 Ncri Lusanna, E., 'Ventura di Moro: Un R i e s a m c della ( c r c h i a del P e s e l l o ' , Paragane, vol. XLI, no. 2 2 , Jul. 1990, pp. 3 - 2 0 . New York T i m e s , 1959 4

New York Times, 'Famous Painting Sold, S t G e o r g e and the D r a g o n Bought for Britain', Jan. 2 4 1959, p. 10. Nutlall, 2 0 0 0 Nuttall, P., 'Jan van F y c k ' s Paintings in Italy', in Investigating

Jan van Eyck (Jan van Eyck

S y m p o s i u m , London, 13-14 Mar. 1998), S. Foistcr, S. J o n e s and D. Cool (eds), Turnhout, 2 0 0 0 , pp. 169-182. O ' G r a d y , 1985 O ' G r a d y , J., ' A n Ucccllo E n i g m a ' , Gazette des Beaux-Arts, 99-103.

vol. C V , no. 1 3 9 4 , Mar. 1985, pp.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 3 5 5

O'Malley, 1998 O ' M a l l e y , M . ' L a t e Fifteenth-

and Early S i x t e e n t h - C e n t u r y

Painting C o n t r a c t s and the

Stipulated U s e of the P a i n t e r ' s H a n d ' , in With and Without the Medici: Studies in Tuscan Art and Patronage

1434-1530, E. M a r c h a n d and A . W r i g h t (eds), A l d e r s h o t , 1 9 9 8 , p p . 155-178.

Offner, 1 9 3 3 Offner, R., ' T h e M o s t r a del T e s o r o di Firenze S a c r a - I P , The Burlington

Magazine,

vol.

L X I I I , O c t . 1 9 3 3 , p p . 166-178. Orlandi, 1955 O r l a n d i , S., "Necrologio" MDIV Corredata Innocewnza

di S. Maria Novella:

di Note Biografiche

Taurisano,

Testo Integrate

Tratte da Documenti

dall'lnizio

(MCCXXXV)

Coevi con Presentazione

al

del P.

Florence, 1 9 5 5 , 2 vols.

Orlandini, 1940 O r l a n d i n i , A . A . , Descrizione

dei Lavori

di Ripristino,

Consolidamento

e Restauro

nella

Loggia di San Matteo a Firenze, v o l . X V I I I , [ F l o r e n c e ! , 1 9 4 0 . Oy-Marra, 1994 O y - M a r r a , E., Florentine)- Ehrengrabmaler

der Fruhrenaissance,

Berlin, 1 9 9 4 .

Paatz, 1 9 3 4 P a a t z , W . , ' U n a Nativita di P a o l o U c c e l l o e A l c u n e C o n s i d e r a z i o n i s u l l ' A r t e del M a e s t r o ' , Rivista dArte,

v o l . X V I , no. 2 , 1 9 3 4 , p p . 1 1 1 - 1 4 8 .

Paatz a n d P a a t z , 1 9 5 2 - 1 9 5 5 Paatz, W . a n d Paatz, E., Die Kirchen

von Florenz:

Ein Kunstgeschichtliches

Handbuch,

Frankfurt a m M a i n , 1 9 5 2 - 1 9 5 5 . P a d o a R i z z o , 1983 P a d o a R i z z o , A . , ' V I . La Prcdella di P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , in Urbino e le Marche Prima e Dopo Raffaello,

M.G.Ciardi Dupre dal P o g g e t t o a n d P. dal P o g g c t t o (eds), e x h . c a t . , P a l a z z o Ducale

and C h i e s a d i S a n D o m e n i c o , U r b i n o , 1 9 8 3 , p p . 7 9 - 8 2 . Padoa R i z z o , 1990 P a d o a R i z z o , A . , ' L ' E t a di M a s a c c i o , Firenze, P a l a z z o V e c c h i o , G i u g n o 1 9 9 0 ' ,

Antichitd

Viva, vol. X X I X , n o s . 2 - 3 , 1 9 9 0 , p p . 5 6 - 5 9 . Padoa R i z z o , 1991 P a d o a Rizzo, A . , Paolo Uccello: Catalogo Complete) dei Dipinti, Florence, 1 9 9 1 . Padoa R i z z o , 1992 P a d o a Rizzo, A . , ' P a o l o e Piero a U r b i n o ' , in Piero e Urbino, Piero e le Cord

Rinascimentali,

P. dal P o g g e t t o (ed.), e x h . cat., U r b i n o , P a l a z z o D u c a l e and O r a t o r i o di San G i o v a n n i Baltista, 1992, pp. 3 3 4 - 3 3 6 . Padoa Rizzo, 1997 P a d o a R i z z o , A . , La Cappella delTAssunta

nel Duomo di Prato, Prato, 1997.

Padoa Rizzo, 2002 P a d o a Rizzo, A . , ' L ' E d u c a z i o n e di M a s a c c i o . D o c u m e n t i , P r o b l e m i , P r o p o s t e ' , des Kunsthistoriscen

Institutes in Florenz, v o l . X L V I , n o s 2 - 3 , 2 0 0 2 , p p . 2 4 7 - 2 6 1 .

Mitteilungen

356

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Padoa Rizzo a n d Frosinini, 1 9 8 4 Padoa Rizzo, A . a n d Frosinini, C , 'Stefano d ' A n t o n i o di Vanni ( 1 4 0 5 - 1 4 8 3 ) : Opere e D o c u m e n t i ' , Antichitd Viva, vol. XXIII, n o s 4 - 5 , 1984, pp. 5 - 3 3 . Pagliai, 1996 Pagliai, D., ' P i e r o della Francesca e il Ritratto c o m e Genere: tra Storia d e l l ' A r t e e Mercato', in Piero della Francesca

tra Arte e Scienza

(Atti del C o n v e g n o Internazionale di Studi,

Arezzo and San Sepolcro, 8-12 Oct. 1992), M . D . Emiliani a n d V . Curzi (eds), Venice, 1996, pp. 5 4 3 - 5 5 3 . Panofsky, 1954 Panofsky, E., ' A Letter to St. Jerome: A Note o n the Relationship b e t w e e n Petrus Christus and Jan v a n E y c k ' , in D . Miner (ed.) Studies in Art and Literature for Belle da Costa Greene, 1954, pp. 1 0 2 - 1 0 8 . Panofsky, 1991 Panofsky, E., Perspective

as Symbolic Form,

Gernman ed. Vortrdge tier Bibliothek Warburg,

trans. C . S . W o o d , N e w York, 1991 (orig. 1924-1925, Leipzig and Berlin, 1927, pp.

258-330). Paoletti, 1992 Paoletti, J., 'Fraternal Piety and Family Power: T h e Artistic P a t r o n a g e of C o s i m o and Lorenzo d e ' M e d i c i ' , in Cosimo 'il Vecchio' de' Medici,

1389-1464,

F. A m e s - L e w i s (ed.), Oxford,

1992, pp. 195-219. Paoletti, 2000 Paoletti, J.T., ' C o s i m o de' Medici, Patronage, a n d the Church of San T o m m a s o in the Mercato V e c c h i o ' , Pantheon, vol. LVIII, 2000, pp. 5 4 - 7 2 . Parenti.2001 Parenti, D., ' O t t a v i a n o Nelli, II Crocifissione e Stigmate di S a n F r a n c e s c o | . . . | ' , in UPotere, Le Arti,

La Guerra:

Lo Splendore

dei

Malatesta,

A . Donati

(ed.), e x h . cat., Castel

Sigismondo, Rimini, 2 0 0 1 , p. 186. Paris, 1862 Paris, Catalogue des Tableaux, des Sculptures de la Renaissance et des Majolicpies du Musee Napoleon 111., Paris, 1862. Parronchi, 1957a Parronchi, A . , ' L e Fonti di Paolo Ucccllo, I T e r s p e t t i v i P a s s a t i " , Paragone, v o l . VIII, no. 89, May 1957, pp. 3-32. Parronchi, 1957b Parronchi, A . , ' L c Fonti di Paolo Uccello, II. ' I Filosofi", Paragone, v o l . VIII, no. 95, Nov. 1957, pp. 3-33. Parronchi, 1962 Parronchi, A . , ' C a m m e l l o per C a m a l e o n t e ' , Paragone, vol. XIII, n o . 1 5 3 , S e p . 1962, pp. 6467.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

357

Parronchi, 1964a P a r r o n c h i , A . , ' " U n a Nunziatina cli P a o l o U c c e l l o " R i c o s t r u z i o n e della C a p p e l l a C a r n e s e c c h i ' , in Studi su la Dolce Prospettiva,

[A. Parronchi ( e d . ) ] , Milan, 1964, p p . 1 8 2 - 2 2 5 (orig, ed.

Studi Urbinati, v o l . X X X V I , n o . 1, 1962). Parronchi, 1964b P a r r o n c h i , A . , ' P a o l o o P i e r o ? ' in Studi su la 'Dolce' Prospettiva, 1 9 6 4 , p p . 5 3 3 - 5 4 8 (orig. ed. Arte Antica e Moderna,

[A. Parronchi ( e d . ) ] , Milan,

1961).

Parronchi, 1965 P a r r o n c h i , A . , ' D u e N o t e P a r a - U c c e l l e s c h e ' , Arte Antica e Moderna, n o . 2 9 , J a n . - M a r . 1 9 6 5 , pp 1 6 9 - 1 8 0 . Parronchi, 1966 P a r r o n c h i , A . , Tl " D o s s a l e d i San C o s i m o e D a m i a n o ' " , Arte Antica e Moderna,

vol. X X I I I ,

Jan.-Mar. 1966, pp. 45-57. Parronchi, 1969 P a r r o n c h i , A . , ' P r o b a b i l i A g g i u n t e a D e l l o Delli S c u l t o r e ' , Cronache

di Archeologia

e di

Storia delVArte, v o l . VIII, 1 9 6 9 , p p . 1 0 3 - 1 1 0 . Parronchi, 1974 P a r r o n c h i , A . , Paolo Uccello, B o l o g n a , 1 9 7 4 . Parronchi, 1981 P a r r o n c h i , A . , ' P a o l o Uccello nel C h i o s t r o V e r d e ' , in Santa Maria Novella: La Basilica, il Convento,

i Chiostri Monumentali,

U. B a l d i n i ( e d . ) , F l o r e n c e , 1 9 8 1 , p p . 1 3 5 - 1 4 1 .

Parronchi, 1998 P a r r o n c h i , A., ' S u g l i Inizi di P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , Prospettiva,

n o s 9 1 - 9 2 , Jul.-Oct. 1 9 9 8 , p p . 4 4 -

47. Partner, 1968 Partner, P., ' F l o r e n c e and the P a p a c y in the Early Fifteenth C e n t u r y ' , in Florentine Politics and Society

in Renaissance

Florence,

Studies:

N . R u b i n s t e i n (ed.), L o n d o n , 1 9 6 8 , p p . 3 8 1 -

402. Pertici, 1999 Perlici, P., ' C o n d o t t i e r i Senesi e la Rotta di San Romano

di P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , Archivio

Storico

Indiana, vol. C L V I I , n o . 5 8 1 , 1 9 9 9 , pp. 5 3 7 - 5 6 2 . Pclriboni and Rinaldi, 2 0 0 1 Petriboni, P. and Rinaldi, M., Priorista (1407-1459),

with Two Appendices

(1282-1406),

with

an i n t r o d u c t i o n by J.A Gutvvirth, trans. G . Battista a n d J . A . G u t w i r t h , R o m e , 2 0 0 1 . Petrioli T o f a n i , 1983 Petrioli T o f a n i , A . M . , 'II G a b i n e t t o D i s e g n i e S t a m p e ' , in L. Berti (ed.), Gli Uffizi: Storia e Collezioni,

F l o r e n c e , 1983, p p . 2 1 4 - 2 2 7 .

358

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Petrioli Tofani, 1992 Petrioli Tofani, A., ' 7 . 9 , A n o n i m o Fiorentino, C o m p o s i z i o n e di figure n u d e su u n a struttura geometrica [...]', in 77 Disegno Fiorentino del Tempo di Lorenzo

il Magnifico,

A , P . Tofani

(ed.), exh. cat., Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e , 1992, pp. 154-155. Phillips, 1919 Phillips, Sir C , 'Florentine Painting before 1 5 0 0 ' , The Burlington

Magazine,

vol. XXXIV,

nos 190-195, Jan.-Jun. 1919, pp. 209-219. Piana, 1986 Plana O.F.M., C , 'Visita Pastorale alle C h i e s e Parrocchiali della Citta di Bologna sotto il Cardinal Albergati n e l 1 4 3 7 ' , Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia, v o l . X L , Jan.-Jun. 1986, pp. 26-54. Pignatti, 1985 Pignatti, T., Five Centuries of Italian Painting 1300-1800..From

the Collection of the Sarah

Campbell Blaffer Foundation, Houston, 1985. Piper, 1995 Piper, D., Treasures of the Ashmolean Museum: An Illustrated Souvenir

of the Collections,

2nd ed., Oxford, 1995 (orig. ed. 1985). Pochat, 1978 Pochat, G., 'Brunelleschi and the "Ascension" o f 1422', The Art Bulletin, v o l . LX, no. 2 , Jun. 1978, pp. 2 3 2 - 2 3 4 . Poggi, 1933 Poggi, G., ' P a o l o Uccello e 1'Orologio di S. Maria del F i o r e ' , in Miscellanea

di Storia

dell'Arte in Onore di Igino Benvenuto Supino, Rivista d ' A r t e (ed.), Florence, 1933, pp. 3 2 3 336. Poggi, 1988 Poggi, G., / / Duomo di Firenze: Docurnenti sulla Decorazione Tratti dall'Archivio

dell'Opera,

della Chiesa e del Campanile

M. Haines ( e d . ) , Florence, 1988, 2 vols (orig. ed. Berlin,

1909). Pol i/./otto, 2004 Polizzotto, L., Children

of the Promise: The Confraternity

of the Purification

and the

Socialization of Youths in Florence 1427-1785, Oxford, 2 0 0 4 . Pomilio and Otlino della Chicsa, 1967 Pomilio, M. and Oltino della Chicsa, A., L'Opera

Completa di Leonardo Pittore, Milan, 1967.

Pope-Hennessy, 1939 Pope-Hennessy, J., Sassetta, London and T o r o n t o , 1939. Pope-Hennessy, 1944 Pope-Hennessy, J., ' T h e Development of Realistic Painting in Siena - I.', The Burlington Magazine, vol. L X X X I V , May 1944, pp. 1 1 0 - 1 1 8 . Pope-Hennessy, 1950 Pope-Hennessy, J., The Complete Work of Paolo Uccello, L o n d o n , 1950.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 359

P o p e - H e n n e s s y , 1969 P o p e - H e n n e s s y , J., Paolo Uccello: Complete Edition, 2 n d ed., L o n d o n and N e w Y o r k , 1969. P o p e - H e n n e s s y , 1991 P o p e - H e n n e s s y , J., Learning to Look: My Life in Art, N e w Y o r k , 1 9 9 1 . P o p e - H e n n e s s y a n d L i g h t b o w n , 1964 P o p e - H e n n e s s y , J., assisted by R. L i g h t b o w n , Catalogue

of Italian Sculpture

in the Victoria

and Albert Museum, L o n d o n , 1 9 6 4 . Previtali, 1 9 9 6 Previtali, G., ' R o b e r t o L o n g h i , E s q u i s s e d ' U n e B i o g r a p h i e ' , in Propositions Critique d'Art/Roberto

Longhi, Esquisse

d'une Biographie,

Pour

une

trans. P . Falguieres, 1 9 9 6 , pp. 9-

54. P r o c a c c i , 1961 P r o c a c c i , U., Sinopie e Affreschi,

Milan, 1961.

P r o c a c c i , 1968a P r o c a c c i , U., ' L a T e c n i c a dei Dipinti M u r a l i e il L o r o D i s t a c c o ' , in Affreschi da Firenze dal XIII alXVI Secolo, exh. cat., P a l a z z o R e a l e , M i l a n , 1 9 6 8 , u n p a g i n a t e d . P r o c a c c i , 1968 b P r o c a c c i , U., ' P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , in Affreschi

da Firenze

dal XIII al XVI Secolo, e x h . c a t ,

P a l a z z o Reale, Milan, 1968, u n p a g i n a t e d . Procacci, 1969 P r o c a c c i , U., ' 3 6 The Nativity

S i n o p i a ' , in Frescoes

from

Florence,

e x h . c a t . , H a y ward

Gallery, L o n d o n , 1969, p . 140. Procacci, 1996 P r o c a c c i , U., Studio sul Catasto Fiorentino,

Citta di C a s t e l l o , 1996.

Pudelko, 1932 Pudelko,

G., ' S t u d i e n

iiber

Domenico

Veneziano',

Mitteilungen

des

Kunsthistorischen

Institutes in Florenz, v o l . IV, n o . 1, J u l . 1 9 3 2 , p p . 1 7 3 - 1 7 9 . Pudelko, 1934 P u d e l k o , G., ' T h e Early W o r k s of P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , The Art Bulletin, v o l . X V I , no. 3 , S e p . 1934, pp. 231-259. P u d e l k o , 1935a P u d e l k o , G., ' T h e Minor M a s t e r s of the C h i o s t r o V e r d e ' , The Art Bulletin, vol. X V I I , no. I, M a r . 1935, p p . 7 1 - 8 9 . Pudelko, 1935b P u d e l k o , G., ' P a o l o Uccello P e i n t r e L u n a i r e ' , Minotaure,

no. 7 , 1935, pp. 3 3 - 3 7 .

P u d e l k o , 1935c P u d e l k o , G., ' D e r Meister der A n b e t u n g in K a r l s r u h e ein S c h u l e r Paolo U c c e l l o s ' , in Adolph Goldschmidt

zu Seinem Siebenzigsten

Geburtstag,

B e r l i n , 1935, pp. 1 2 3 - 1 3 0 .

360

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Pudelko, 1936 Pudelko, G., ' A n U n k n o w n Holy Virgin Panel by Paolo U c c e l l o ' , Art in America and Elsewhere, vol. X X I V , no. 3 , Jul. 1936, pp. 127-134. R. Deputazione sugli Studi di Storia Patria [...], 1873 R. Deputazione sugli Studi di Storia Patria per le Provincie di T o s c a n a , deH'Umbria e delle Marche, Commissioni di Rinaldo degli Albizzi per il Comune di Firenze dal MCCCXCIX al MCCCCXXXIII, Florence, 1873. Ragghianti, 1937 Ragghianti, C.L., ' C a s a Vitaliani', La Critica d'Arte, vol. II, n o s 5-6, S e p . - D e c . 1937, pp. 236-250. Ragghianti, 1946 Ragghianti, C.L., ' A r g o m e n t i Lippeschi e Uccelleschi', in Miscellanea

Minore

di Critica

d'Arte, 1946, p p . 6 9 - 7 6 . Ragghianti, 1986 Ragghianti, C.L., TI Calice di Paolo Uccello U n o e Senza L i m i t e ' , Critica d'Arte, vol. LI, no. 8,Jan.-Mar. 1986, p p . 85-92. Ragghianti Collobi, 1974 Ragghianti Collobi, L., II Libro de' Disegni del Vasari, Florence, 1974, 2 vols. Reggioli, 1978 Reggioli, D., '(Attr. a) Pietro Nelli e Paolo Uccello: " T a b e r n a c o l o di Lippi e Macia (1416)" 1...]', in Lorenzo

Ghiberti:

'materia e ragionamenti',

L. Bellosi (ed.), e x h . cat., Museo

d e l l ' A c c a d e m i a and Museo di San Marco, Florence, 1978, pp. 101-104. Reynolds, 2000 Reynolds, C , " T h e King of Painters'", in Investigating

Jan van Eyck

(Jan van Eyck

S y m p o s i u m , London, 13-14 Mar. 1998), S. Foister, S. J o n e s and D. Cool (eds), Turnhout, 2000, pp. 1-12. Ricci and Zucchini, 1930 Ricci, C. and Z u c c h i n i , G., Guida di Bologna, 6th cel., Bologna, 1930. Richa, 1755 Richa, G., Notizie Istoriche delle Chiese Florentine Divife ne'fuoi

Quartieri,

vol. VII: Del

Quartiere di S. Giovanni, Florence, 1755. Richter, 1966 Richter, I., Selections from the Notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, L o n d o n , 1966 (orig. ed. London, 1952). Ridderbos, 1984 Ridderbos, B., Saint and Symbol: Images of Saint Jerome in Early Italian Art, trans. P. de Waard-Dekking, Groningen, 1984. [Robinson], 1969 (Robinson, D . D . ] , ' 3 4 , 35 Birth of the Virgin Fresco... Sinopia...' in Frescoes from Florence, exh. cat., Hayvvard Gallery, London, 1969, pp. 134-138.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

361

Roccasecca, 1997 Roccasecca, P., Paolo Uccello: Le Battaglie, Milan, 1997. Roccasecca, 1998 Roccasecca, P., "Tra Paolo Uccello e la Cerchia Sangallesca: La Costruzione Prospettica nei Disegni di Mazzocchio Conservati al Louvre e agli Uffizi', in La Prospettiva: Teorici eel Esperienze

Figurative

dall'Antichita

al Mondo

Moderno

Fonclamenti

(Atti del Convegno

Internazionale di Studi, Istituto Svizzero di Roma, 11-14 Sep. 1995), R. Sinisgalli (ed.), Florence, 1998, pp. 133-144. Roccasecca, 2000 Roccasecca, P., Tl Calice degli Uffizi: da Paolo Uccello e Piero della Francesca a Evangelista Torricelli a 1'Accademia del Disegno di Firenze', Ricerche

di Storia dell'Arte,

vol. LXX,

2000, pp. 65-78. Roccasecca, 2001 Roccasecca, P., 'VI.1.2, Anonimo, gia Attr. a Piero della Francesca [...] o a Paolo Uccello, Paolo di Dono detto [...] Studi per un Calice', in Nel Segno di Masaccio: L'Invenzione

della

Prospettiva, F. Camerota (ed.), exh. cat, Galleria degli Uffizi, 2001, p. 118. Rossi, 1979 Rossi, P.A., Tl Calice di Paolo Uccello', Critica d'Arte,

vol. XLIV, nos 166-168, Jul.-Dec.

1979, pp. 35-46. Rossi, 1981 Rossi, P.A., 'Soluzioni Brunelleschiane Prospettiva Invenzione ed Uso', Critica d'Arte, vol. XLVI, nos 175-177, Jan.-Jul. 1981, pp. 48-74. Rossi, 1984 Rossi, P.A., 'Paolo Uccello: Caccia di Oxford', Critica d'Arte,

vol. XLIX, no. 4, Apr.-Jun.

1984, pp. 86-89. Rossi, 1986 Rossi, P.A.,' La Madonna di Dublin', Critica d'Arte, vol. LI, no. 4, Oct.-Dec. 1986, pp 40-50. Roy and Gordon, 2001 Roy, A. and Gordon, D., 'Uccello's Battle of San Romano',

National Gallery

Technical

Bulletin, vol. XXII, pp. 4-17. Rubin, 1991 Rubin, M., Corpus Christi: The Eucharist in Late Medieval

Culture, Cambridge, New York,

Port Chester, Melbourne and Sydney, 1991. Rubin, 1995 Rubin, P.L., Giorgio Vasari: Art and History, New Haven and London, 1995. Rubinstein, 2000 Rubinstein, N., 'Family, Memory, and History', in Art, Memory, and Family in Florence, G. Ciappelli and P.L. Rubin (eds), Cambridge, 2000, pp. 39-63.

Renaissance

362

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Rucellai, 1960 Rucellai, G., " T l Zibalclone Quaresimale'", in Giovanni Rucellai ed il Suo Zibaldone, I "II Zibaldone Quaresimale", A . Perosa (ed.), London, 1960. Russell, 1965 Russell, J., ' A r t N e w s from L o n d o n ' , Art News, vol. LXIV, n o . 6, O c t . 1 9 6 5 , p . 54. Russo, 1987 Russo, D., Saint Jerome en Italie: ttude d'Iconographie

et de Spiritualite (XIHe-XVe siecle).

Image a l ' A p p u i , Paris and R o m e , 1987. Saalman, 1964 Saalman, H., ' P a o l o Uccello at San Miniato', The Burlington Magazine, v o l . C V I , no. 7 4 1 , Dec. 1964, pp. 5 5 8 - 5 6 3 . Saalman, 1980 Saalman, H., Filippo Brunelleschi: The Cupola of Santa Maria del Fiore, A. Blunt and J. Harris (eds), L o n d o n , 1980. Saalman, 1993 Saalman, H., Filippo Brunelleschi: The Buildings, Studies in A r c h i t e c t u r e , L o n d o n , 1993. Saccardo, 1896 Saccardo, P., Les Mosdiques de Saint-Marc a Venise, Venice, 1896. Saint Fare Garnot, 2 0 0 0 Saint Fare Garnot, N . , 'Breve Histoire d ' u n e R e d e c o u v e r t e ' , in Primitifs Italiens, J.P. Babelon (ed.), Paris, 2 0 0 0 , pp. 89-120. Salmi, 1930 Salmi, M., ' U n Libro di Disegni Fiorenlino del S e c . X V , Rivista d'Arte, vol. XII, no. 2, 1930, pp. 8 7 - 9 5 . Salmi, 1934 Salmi, M., ' P a o l o Uccello, Domenico V e n e z i a n o , Piero della F r a n c e s c a e gli Affreschi del D u o m o di P r a t o ' , Bolletino d'Arte, vol. X X V I I I , no. 3 , 1934, p p . 1-27. Salmi, 1939 Salmi, M., Paolo Uccello, Andrea del Castagno, Domenico Veneziano, trans. J. Chuzeville, of revised 2nd ed. of 1938, Paris, 1939 (orig. Italian ed. Rome, 1936). Salmi, 1950 Salmi, M., 'Riflessioni su Paolo Uccello', Commentari, J a n . - D e c . 1950, pp. 2 2 - 3 3 . Salmi, 1954 Salmi, M., ' C o m m e n t i : Fuochi d'Arlificio o della Pseudo Critica', Commentari, vol. V, 1954, pp. 6 5 - 7 8 . Salmi, 1957 Salmi, M., ' 6 3 . - Creazione dcgli Animali e d e l l ' U o m o , 64. - C r e a z i o n e di Eva e Peccato Originale, Firenze, Chiostro Verde di S. Maria Novella',

in Mostra di Affreschi Staccati, U.

Baldini and L. Berti (eds), exh. cat., Forte di Belvedere, Florence, 1957, p p . 5 6 - 5 8 .

BIBLIOGRAPHY 363

Salmi, 1 9 7 7 S a l m i , ML, ' P e r P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , in Studies

in Late Medieval

and Renaissance

Painting

in

Honor of Millard Meiss, I. Lav in and J. P l u m m e r (eds), N e w Y o r k , 1977, v o l . I, p p . 3 7 3 - 3 7 6 . Salvini, 1981 Salvini, R., ' T h e F r e s c o e s in t h e Altana of t h e Rucellai P a l a c e ' , in Giovanni Rucellai ed il suo Zibaldone, II, A Florentine Patrician and his Palace, L o n d o n , 1 9 8 1 , p p . 2 4 1 - 2 5 2 . Santi, 1 9 8 5 Santi, G., La Vita e le Gesta di Federico di Montefeltro

Duca d'Urbino:

Poema

in Terza

Rima, [c. 14801, L . M . Tocci ( e d . ) , V a t i c a n C i t y , 1 9 8 5 , v o l . I I , ( C o d i c e V a t . O t t o b . lat. 1305). Scalia a n d D e B e n e d i c t i s , 1 9 8 4 Scalia, F . and d e Benedictis, C , / / Museo Bardini a Firenze, F l o r e n c e and M i l a n , 1 9 8 4 . Scalini o r Sframelli, 1 9 9 0 a Scalini, M . o r Sframelli, ML, ' G i o v a n n i T o s c a n i , 18. Trittico c o n Madonna col Bambino, Girolamo e Santa Caterina; nel retro Pieta [ . . . ] ' , in L'Eta di Masaccio:

II Primo

San

Quattrocento

a Firenze, E. A n d r e a t t a , L. Berti, M. B u r r e s i , M . C . F a b b r i , A . Natali, A . P a o l u c c i , M . Scalini and M . Sframelli ( e d s ) , exh. cat., P a l a z z o V e c c h i o , F l o r e n c e , 1 9 9 0 , p. 9 6 . Scalini o r Sframelli, 1990b Scalini, M. o r Sframelli, M . , ' M a e s t r o del C h i o s t r o degli A r a n c i , 6 8 . San Benedetto ricomparire avvelenato

una fake

caduta del lago. San Benedetto

[...]'» in L'Eta di Masaccio:

II Primo

fa

ordina al corvo de portar via il pane

Quattrocento

a Firenze,

E. A n d r e a t t a , L.

B e r t i , M. Burresi, M . C . Fabbri, A . Natali, A . P a o l u c c i , M . S c a l i n i and M . Sframelli (eds), e x h . cat., Palazzo V e c c h i o , Florence, 1990, p . 196. Scatassa, 1902 S c a t a s s a , E., ' C h i e s a del Corpus D o m i n i in U r b i n o ' , Repertorium

fur Kunstwissenschaft,

vol.

X X V , 1902, p p . 4 3 8 - 4 4 6 . Schefer, 1 9 9 8 Schefer, J . L . , The Deluge, the Plague: Paolo Uccello, trans. T . Conley, 4 t h ed., A n n Arbor, 1998 (orig. French ed. Paris, 1976). S c h i a p a r c l l i , 1983 Schiaparelli, A . , La Casa Fiorentina e i suoi Arredi nei Secoli XIVe

XV, F l o r e n c e , 1 9 8 8 (orig.

ed. F l o r e n c e , 1908). S c h l o s s e r , 1938 S c h l o s s e r , J.von, ' X e n i a : Saggi sulla Storia d e l l o Stile e del L i n g u a g g i o nel 1'Arte F i g u r a t i v a ' , trans. G . F . Ajroldi, Bari, 1938, pp. 7 9 - 8 9 (orig. G e r m a n ed. V i e n n a and Leipzig, 1933). Schmarsovv, 1886 S c h m a r s o w , A . , Melozzo da Forli, Berlin a n d S t u t t g a r t , 1 8 8 6 . Scudieri, 2002 S c u d i e r i , M., T . 2 6 , Jacopo d e l Sellaio ( F i r e n z e , 1 4 4 2 - 1 4 9 3 ) T r i o n f o del T e m p o [ . . . ] ' , in Rinascimento:

Capolavori

dei Musei Italiani,

Q u i r i n a l e , R o m e , 2 0 0 2 , p. 88.

A . P a o l u c c i ( e d . ) , e x h . cat., Scuderi Papali al

364

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sebregondi, 1991 Sebregondi, L., Tre Confraternite Florentine: Santa Maria della Pietd, detta 'Buca' di San Girolamo, San Filippo Benizi, San Francesco Poverino, F l o r e n c e , 1 9 9 1 . Sebregondi, 2 0 0 1 Sebregondi, L., ' L a Fortuna Iconografica di Iacopone da T o d i ' , in Iacopone da Todi (Atti del X X X V I I C o n v e g n o Storico Internazionale, T o d i , 8-11 O c t . 2 0 0 0 ) , S p o l e t o , 2 0 0 1 , pp. 3 6 3 393. Sebregondi, 2 0 0 2 Sebregondi, L., ' C o s m a e Damiano. Santi

Medici e M e d i c e i ' , in Cosma

e

Damiano

dall'Orient a Firenze, E. Giannarelli (ed.), Florence, 2 0 0 2 , p p . 7 5 - 1 0 5 . Secrest, 1980 Secrest, M., Being Bernard Berenson, 2nd ed., Middelsex, 1980 (orig. ed. 1979). Seidel,2003 Seidel, M., Arte Italiana del Medioevo e del Rinascimento,

vol. I: Pittura, V e n i c e , 2003.

Serra, 1933 Serra, L., ' M o s t r a del Tesoro di Firenza S a c r a ' , Bollettino dArte,

v o l . X X V I I , no. 3 , 1933, pp.

37-48. Sframelli, 1990a Sframelli, M., ' P a o l o Uccello, 17, Madonna Primo Quattrocento

col Bambino

| . . . | ' , in L'Eta

di Masaccio: II

a Firenze, exh. cat., E. Andreatta, L. Berti, M . Burresi, M.C. Fabbri, A .

Natali, A . Paolucci, M. Scalini and M. Sframelli (eds), P a l a z z o V e c c h i o , Florence, 1 9 9 0 , p . 94. Shell, 1961 Shell, C , ' T h e Early Style of Fra Filippo Lippi and the Pralo M a s t e r ' , The Art Bulletin, vol. XLIII, Sep. 1 9 6 1 , p p . 197-209. Simons, 1985 S i m o n s , P., Portraiture the Tornaquinci

and Patronage in Quattrocento

Florence

and their Chapel in S. Maria Novella,

with Special Reference to

PhD Thesis,

The University of

Melbourne, 1 9 8 5 . Simons, 1987 S i m o n s , P., ' A Profile Portrait of a Renaissance W o m a n in the National Gallery of Victoria', Art Bulletin Of Victoria, no. 28, 1987, pp. 35-50. Sindona, Rossi, Becattini and Gherardi, 1972 Sindona, E., with Rossi, P.A., Becaltini, M. and Gherardi, R.L., 'Introcluzione alia P o e t i c a d i Paolo Ucccllo. Rclazione tra Prospettiva c Pensiero Teorelico/ Indaginc sulla Prospettiva nelle Opere di Paolo Uccello', LArte,

1972, pp. 7 - 1 0 0 .

Sindona, 1957 Sindona, E., Paolo Uccello, Milan, 1957.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 365

Sindona, 1960 S i n d o n a , E., ' G o t i c o e R i n a s c i m e n t o : Pisanello, P a o l o U c c e l l o e il Pittore d e l l ' A d o r a z i o n e ' , FedeeArte,

v o l . V I I I , n o . 2, A p r . - J u n . 1960, pp. 1 7 2 - 1 9 5 .

Sindona, 1970 S i n d o n a , E., ' U n a Conferma U c c e l l e s c a ' , L'Arte, v o l . I l l , n o . 9 , 1970, p p . 6 7 - 1 0 7 . Sisi, 1 9 9 2 a Sisi, C , ' 2 . 1 , A n o n i m o Fiorentino, Studio di d u e n u d i m a s c h i l i [...]', in / / Disegno del Tempo di Lorenzo il Magnifico,

Fiorentino

A . P . T o f a n i ( e d . ) , e x h . cat., G a b i n e t t o D i s e g n i e S t a m p e

degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e , 1992, p . 4 2 . Sisi, 1 9 9 2 b Sisi, C , ' 2 . 2 , B e n o z z o Gozzoli, S t u d i o di d u e n u d i m a s c h i l i e n t r o un p a e s a g g i o [...]', in / / Disegno Fiorentino

del Tempo di Lorenzo il Magnifico,

A . P . T o f a n i (ed.), e x h . c a t , G a b i n e t t o

Disegni e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e , 1992, p. 4 3 . Somare, 1946 S o m a r e , E., Uccello, Milan, 1 9 4 6 . Soupault, 1929 S o u p a u l t , P., Paolo Uccello, Paris, 1 9 2 9 . Spencer, 1991 S p e n c e r , J.R., Andrea del Castagno and His Patrons, D u r h a m a n d L o n d o n , 1 9 9 1 . Spier a n d M o r r i s o n , 1 9 9 7 Spier, J. and M o r r i s o n , G. ( e d s ) , San Marco

and

Venice,

e x h . c a t , N a t i o n a l Gallery of

Victoria, M e l b o u r n e , 1997. Staley, 1 9 0 6 Staley, E., The Guilds of Florence, L o n d o n , 1906. Starn a n d Partridge, 1 9 8 4 Starn, R. and Partridge, L., ' R e p r e s e n t i n g W a r in t h e R e n a i s s a n c e : T h e Shield of Paolo U c c e l l o ' , Representations,

n o . 5, W i n t e r , 1984, p p . 3 3 - 6 5 .

Sterling, 1957 Sterling, C., ' L a Collection L e h m a n au M u s e e d e l ' O r a n g e r i e ' , La Revue des Arts, no. 3 , 1957, pp. 3 - 1 2 . S t e r l i n g , Hulfteggcr, A d h e m a r , Baticle a n d B e g u i n , 1960 Sterling, C , Hulftegger, A . , A d h e m a r , H., B a t i c l e , J. and B6guin, S., 'Attribue' a Paolo Uccello ( P a o l o di D o n o ) , ( E c o l e florentine) 1 3 9 7 - 1 4 7 5 , 6 0 . Portraits d e G i o t t o , d e Paolo Ucccllo, d e D o n a t e l l o , d ' A n t o n i o M a n e t t i , et de B r u n e l l e s c h i ' , in Exposition de 700 de Toutes les Ecoles Anterieurs

a 1800 Tires des Reserves

du Departement

Tableaux

des Peintures, C.

Sterling, A. Hulftegger, H. A d h e m a r , J. Baticle a n d S. B e g u i n (eds), e x h . c a t , M u s e e d u L o u v r e , Paris, 1960, p. 2 7 .

366

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Sterling, Raggio, Laclotte and Beguin, 1957 Sterling, C , Raggio, 0 . , Laclotte, M. and Beguin, S., ' A t t r i b u e a Paolo Uccello', in La Collection Lehman de New York, C. Sterling (ed.), exh. cat., M u s e e de L ' O r a n g e r i e , 1957, p . 45. Stockholm, 2 0 0 1 Stockholm, Rendssansteckningar

frdn

Florens

ur Giorgio

Vasaris

Samling,

exh. cat.,

Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, 2 0 0 1 . Strehlke, 1986 Strehlke, Domenico di Bartolo, P h D Thesis, C o l u m b i a University, 1 9 8 6 . Strehlke, 1 9 9 4 Strehlke, C.B., ' F r a Angelico Studies', in Painting and Illumination Florence 1300-1450,

in Early

Renaissance

J.P. O'Neill (ed.), exh. cat., Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art, New York,

1994, pp. 2 5 - 4 2 . Strehlke, 2 0 0 4 Strehlke, C . B . , Italian Paintings 1250-1450

in the lohn

G. lohnson

Collection

and the

Philadelphia Museum of Art, Philadelphia, 2 0 0 4 . Strehlke, 2005 Strehlke, C.B., ' [ 8 ] , Master of the Castello Nativity, A. Saints Justus and C l e m e n t Praying for Deliverance from t h e Vandals [...] B. T h e Nativity [...] C. Saints J u s t u s a n d Clement Multiplying the Grain of Volterra', From FHippo Lippi to Piero della Carnevale

and the Making of a Renaissance

Francesca:

Fra

Master, K . Christiansen (ed.), Pinacoteca di

Brera, Milan, and Metropolitan Museum of Art, N e w York, 2 0 0 5 , p . 160. Supino, 1938 Supino, I.B., L'Arte nelle Chiese di Bologna Secoli XV-XVI, B o l o g n a , 1938. Sutton, 1985 Sutton, D., ' X I V . F r o m O t t l e y to Eastlake', Apollo, Aug. 1985, pp. 8 4 - 9 5 . Svvarzenski, 1947 Swarzenski, G., ' A Marriage Casket and its M o r a l ' , Bulletin of the Museum of Fine Arts, vol. X L V , O c t . 1947, pp. 55-62. Syson, Gordon and A v e r y - Q u a s h , 2 0 ( ) l Syson, L. and G o r d o n , D., with the collaboration of A v e r y - Q u a s h , S., Pisanello:

Painter to

the Renaissance Court, exh. cat., National Gallery, London, 2 0 0 1 . Taddei, 2001 Taddei, I., Fanciulli e Giovani: Crescere a Firenze nel Rinascimento,

Florence, 2 0 0 1 .

Tartuferi.2002 Tartuferi,

A., ' L a Mostra "Masaccio e le Origini del R i n a s c i m c n l o " a S a n Giovanni

V a l d a r n o ' , Gazzetta Antiquaria, vol. XL1I, no. 2 , N o v . 2 0 0 2 , p p . 3 4 - 3 9 . Terpslra, 1995 Terpstra, N., Lay Confraternities and Civic Religion 1995.

in Renaissance

Bologna,

Cambridge,

BIBLIOGRAPHY 367

Topsell, 1658 T o p s e l l , E., The History of Four-Footed

Beasts and Serpents, L o n d o n , 1 6 5 8 .

Tsuji, 1 9 9 6 Tsuji, S., ' F o u r Priniciples of P e r s p e c t i v e : L o o k i n g at t h e C S e g m e n t s ' , Zeitschrift Kunstgeschichte,

fur

vol. LIX, 1996, pp. 63-77.

V a n A s p e r e n de Boer, 1 9 7 0 V a n A s p e r e n d e Boer, J.R.J., Infrared Reflectography:

A Contribution

to the Examination

of

Earlier European Paintings, P h D T h e s i s , University o f A m s t e r d a m , 1970. V a n A s p e r e n de Boer, 1 9 7 9 V a n A s p e r e n de Boer, J.R.J., ' A Scientific R e - e x a m i n a t i o n of the G h e n t A l t a r p i e c e ' , Oud Holland, v o l . X C I I I , 1979, p p . 1 4 1 - 2 0 3 . Van Marie, 1927 V a n Marie, R., The Development

of the Italian Schools of Painting, T h e H a g u e , 1927, vol. IX.

V a n M a r i e , 1928a V a n Marie, R., The Development

of the Italian Schools of Painting, T h e H a g u e , 1 9 2 8 , vol. X

V a n M a r i e , 1928b V a n M a r i e , R., ' E i n e K r e u z i g u n g v o n Paolo U c c e l l o ' , Pantheon, v o l . I, Jan.-Jun. 1 9 2 8 , p . 2 4 2 . V a n Marie, 1930-1931 V a n Marie, R., T Quadri della R a c c o l t a del Castello R o h o n c z ' , Dedalo, v o l . X I , 1 9 3 0 - 1 9 3 1 , pp. 1 3 6 5 - 1 3 9 2 . Van Marie, 1932 V a n Marie, R., ' E i n e U n b e k a n n t e M a d o n n a v o n P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , Pantheon, vol. IX, n o . 176, J a n . - J u n . 1932, p p . 7 6 - 8 0 . Vasari, 1966-1987 V a s a r i , G., Le Vite de'Piu Eccellenti Pittori Scultori e Ar chit ettori Italiani, nelle Redazioni del 1550 e 1568, testo, G. M a r d e r s t e i g (ed.), F l o r e n c e , 1 9 6 6 - 1 9 8 7 , 6 vols. V a s a r i , 1981 V a s a r i , G., Le Opere di Giorgio Vasari, G. Milanesi ( e d . ) , reprint of 1906 ed., F l o r e n c e , 1 9 8 1 , vol. II, (orig. cd. Florence, 1878). V a s a r i , 1991 V a s a r i , G., Le Vite de'Piu Eccellenti Architetti, Pittori, et Scultori Italiani, da Cimabue

insino

a' Tempi Nostri, with a n introduction by G. Previtali, L . Bellosi and A . Rossi (eds), reprint of 1 9 8 6 ed., T u r i n , 1 9 9 1 . 2 vols. Vasoli, 2 0 0 2 V a s o l i , C , ' N i c c o l o C u s a n o e la Cultura zwischen

Deutscland

U m a n i s t i c a F i o r e n t i n a ' , in Nicolaus

Cusanus

und Italien (Beiuiige eines D e u t s c h - I t a l i e n i s c h e n S y m p o s i u m s , Villa

V i g o n i , L o v e n o , 2 8 Mar. - 1 A p r . 2 0 0 1 ) , M. T h u r n e r ( e d . ) , Berlin, 2 0 0 2 , p p . 7 5 - 8 9 . Venturi, 1930 V e n t u r i , L , ' P a o l o U c c e l l o ' , L'Arte, v o l . X X X I I I , n o . 1, J a n . 1930, pp. 5 2 - 8 7 .

368

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Verdon, 2 0 0 2 V e r d o n , T . , ' M a s a c c i o ' s Trinity: Theological, S o c i a l , and Civic M e a n i n g s ' , in The Cambridge Companion to Masaccio, D . Cole Ahl (ed.), C a m b r i d g e , 2 0 0 2 , p p . 1 5 9 - 1 7 6 . [Vergani], 1980 [Vergani, M . ] , ' B o l o g n a : Affresco di Paolo U c c e l l o ' , Arte Cristiana, v o l . L X V I I I , no. 673, Dec. 1980, 324. Vilanni a n d Cirri, 1993 Vilanni, G. and Cirri, V.,La

Chiesa Fiorentina: Storia, Arte, Vita Pastorale, Florence, 1993.

Vio, 2003 V i o , E . , ' L e Cassine e i Calchi dalla C a p p e l l a Z e n e d a l Battistero', in // Museo di San Marco, I. Favaretto and M . D a Villa Urbani (eds), V e n i c e , 2 0 0 3 , p p . 6 6 - 6 9 . Volpe, 1980 V o l p e , C , ' P a o l o Uccello a Bologna', Paragone, v o l . X X X I , n o . 3 6 5 , Jul. 1980, pp. 3-28. Waagen, 1854 W a a g e n , G.F., Treasures of Art in Great. Britain: Being an Account of the Chief Collections of Paintings, Drawings, Sculptures, Illuminated MSS etc etc., L o n d o n , 1854, vol. III. Wakayama, 1982 W a k a y a m a , E.M.L., ' P e r la Datazione delle S t o r i e di N o e di Paolo U c c e l l o : UnTpotesi di L e t t u r a ' , Arte Lombarda, vol. I, n o . 6 1 , 1982, p p . 9 3 - 1 0 6 . Waldman, 2 0 0 0 W a l d m a n , L.A., 'Fact, Fiction, Hearsay: Notes o n V a s a r i ' s Life of Piero di C o s i m o ' , The Art Bulletin, vol. L X X X I I , no. 1, Mar. 2000, p p . 1 7 1 - 1 7 9 . Wazbinski, 1987 Wazbinski, Z., L'Accademia

Medicea

del Disegno

a Firenze

nel Cinquecento:

Idea e

Istituzione, Florence, 1987, vols I and II. Weissman, 1982 Weissman, R.F.E., Ritual Brotherhood in Renaissance

Florence, N e w York, 1982.

Welch, 2 0 0 0 Welch, E., Art in Renaissance Italy 1350-1500, 2 n d ed., Oxford, 2 0 0 0 (orig. e d . 1997). Whistler, 2001 Whistler, C , The Hunt in the Forest by Paolo Uccello, Oxford, 2 0 0 1 . White, 1987 White, J., The Birth and Rebirth of Pictorial Space, 3rd ed., L o n d o n and Boston, 1987 (orig. ed. London, 1957). White, Pile and Kirby, 1998 White, R., Pile, J. a n d Kirby, J., ' A n a l y s e s o f Paint M e d i a ' , National

Gallery Technical

Bulletin, vol. X I X , 1998, pp. 7 4 - 9 5 . Wilson, 1992 Wilson, B., Music and Merchants: The Laudesi Companies of Republican 1992.

Florence, Oxford,

BIBLIOGRAPHY

369

Wilson, 1996 Wilson, C.C., Italian Paintings: XIV-XVI

Centuries

in the Museum of Fine Arts,

Houston,

Houston, 1996. Wohl, 1980 Wohl, H., The Paintings of Domenico

Veneziano ca. 1410-1461:

A Study in Florentine Art of

the Early Renaissance, New York and London, 1980. Wornum, 1864 Wornum, R.N., Descriptive and Historical Catalogue of the Pictures in the National With Biographical

Notices of the Painters, Foreign Schools,

Gallery:

39th ed., revised by Sir C.L.

Eastlake, London, 1864. Wright, 1976 Wright, D.R., The Medici Villa at Olmo a Castello: Its History and Iconography,

PhD Thesis,

Princeton University, 1976. Wright. 1998 Wright, A., 'Dancing Nudes in the Lanfredini Villa at Arcetri', in With and Without the Medici: Studies in Tuscan Art and Patronage 1434-1530,

E. Marchand and A. Wright (eds),

Aldershot, 1998, pp. 47-77. Wright, 2000 Wright, A., 'The Memory of Faces: Representational Choices in Fifteenth-Century Florentine Portraiture', in Art, Memory, and Family in Renaissance

Florence, G. Ciappelli and P. Lee

Rubin (eds), Cambridge, 2000, pp. 86-113. Wright and Marchand, 1998 Wright, A. and Marchand, E., 'The Patron in the Picture', in With and Without the Medici: Studies

in Tuscan

Art and Patronage

1434-1530,

E. Marchand and A. Wright (eds),

Aldershot, 1998, pp. 1-18. Zeri, 1974 Zeri, F., 'Major and Minor Italian Artists at Dublin', Apollo, vol. XCIX, no. 144, Feb. 1974, pp. 88-103. Zcri, 1985 Zcri, F., Renaissance Turin, 1983).

et Pseudo Renaissance,

trans. C. Paoloni, Paris, 1985 (orig. Italian ed.

List of Illustrations 1.

Uccello, Annunciation, A s h m o l e a n Museum, Oxford.

2.

Uccello, Saint George andthe Dragon, National G a l l e r y of Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

3.

Uccello, Virgin and Child, Museo di San Marco, Florence, formerly in o n e of t h e houses of the del Beccuto family.

4.

Uccello, Profile Portrait of a Young Man, M u s e u m of Art, I n d i a n a p o l i s .

5.

Uccello, Adoration of the Child, San Martino M a g g i o r e , Bologna.

6.

Uccello, Virgin and Child, National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin, before cleaning.

7.

Uccello, Virgin and Child, National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin, after c l e a n i n g

8.

Santo Spirito, Florence.

9.

Sepoltuario Fiorentino

ovvero Descrizione delle

Chiese Cappelle

e Sepolture

loro Armi et

Inscriiione della Citta di Firenze e Suoi Contorni Fatta da Stefano Rosselli, A S F , Manoscritti, 624, vol. I, p. 3 2 , recording U c c e l l o ' s patrilineal t o m b s t o n e a t no. 116. 10.

Fra Stefano Bonsignori,

Nova Pulcherrimae

Civitatis Florentiae

Topographia

Accuratissime

Delineata, 1585, s h o w i n g Santa Maria Maggiore mid-way between the D u o m o (top right) and Santa Maria Novella (bottom). 11.

Santa Maria M a g g i o r e (left) and the location of the Palazzo Del B e c c u t o before demolition (right), Florence.

12.

Del Beccuto family genealogy, A S F , Deputazione S o p r a la Nobilita e Cittadinanza, 1 5 , Section 2 1 , Part 1, with the addition of Uccello's maternal lineage.

13.

Ghiberti, Baptistery Doors (north side), Museo d e l l ' O p e r a d e l D u o m o , Florence.

14.

Fra Stefano Bonsignori,

Nova Pulcherrimae

Civitatis

Florentiae

Topographia

Accuratissime

Delineata, 1585, s h o w i n g Via della Scala running parallel t o the A r n o river between Piazza di Santa Maria N o v e l l a ( l o p right) and the city wall ( b o t t o m left). 15.

Via della Scala, F l o r e n c e , seen from Piazza di Santa Maria Novella.

16.

Uccello, Equestrian Monument for Sir John Hawkwood,

17.

Nineteenth-century lintel, copy of a fifteenth-century design, M u s e o di San M a r c o , Florence,

Duomo, Florence.

formerly in the Palazzo Del Beccuto, Florence. 18.

Kx-Spcdale di San Matteo, Florence.

19.

Uccello, Niccold da Tolentino at the Battle of San Romano, National Gallery, London.

20.

Uccello, The Unhorsing of Sienese Troops at the Battle of San Romano, Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence.

21.

Uccello, Michelotto Attendolo at the Head of Florentine Troops, M u s e e du Louvre, Paris.

22.

Via delle T c r m c , Florence, with the site of U c c c l l o ' s w o r k s h o p o n the right, after the first street lamp.

23.

Uccello, Resurrection, D u o m o , Florence.

24.

Uccello, Nativity, D u o m o , Florence.

25.

San Miniato al Monte, with the cloister to the right of t h e church.

LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS 371

26.

P a l a z z o Rucellai, F l o r e n c e .

27.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, M u s e e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e , P a r i s .

28.

U c c e l l o , Miracle of the Host, G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e d e l l e M a r c h e , U r b i n o .

29.

U c c e l l o , Miracle of the Host, detail of the first s c e n e , G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e delle M a r c h e , Urbino.

30.

U c c e l l o , Miracle

of the Host, detail of the s e c o n d s c e n e , G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e d e l l e M a r c h e ,

Urbino. 31.

U c c e l l o , Miracle of the Host, detail of the third s c e n e , Galleria N a z i o n a l e delle M a r c h e , U r b i n o .

32.

U c c e l l o , Miracle

of the Host,

detail of the fourth s c e n e , G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e d e l l e M a r c h e ,

Urbino. 33.

U c c e l l o , Miracle of the Host, detail of the fifth s c e n e , G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e delle M a r c h e , Urbino.

34.

U c c e l l o , Miracle of the Host, detail of the sixth s c e n e , Galleria N a z i o n a l e delle M a r c h e , U r b i n o .

35.

U c c e l l o , Christ Crucified with the Virgin and Saints John the Evangelist,

John the Baptist and

Francis, with original frame, T h y s s e n - B o r n e m i s z a M u s e u m , M a d r i d . 36.

A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of U c c e l l o , Crucifixion

with a Bridgettine

Nun Donor,

Sister

Felicita, triptych w i t h original f r a m e , M e t r o p o l i t a n M u s e u m of A r t , N e w Y o r k . 37.

U c c e l l o , Adoration Magdalene

38.

39.

with

the Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

and Eustace, S t a a t l i c h e K u n s t h a l l e , K a r l s r u h e .

U c c e l l o , Adoration Magdalene

of the Child

of the Child

with

the Virgin,

Angels,

and Eustace, r e v e r s e , S t a a t l i c h e K u n s t h a l l e , K a r l s r u h e .

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

X - r a d i o g r a p h y , detail s h o w i n g t h e interstices of the cloth interlayer,

A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford. 40.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

X-radiography

m o s a i c s h o w i n g a s i n g l e piece of cloth

interlayer,

A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford. 41.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, X - r a d i o g r a p h y , m o s a i c s h o w i n g a single piece of cloth i n t e r l a y e r e x t e n d i n g u p to a p o i n t n e a r the top of G o d t h e F a t h e r ' s papal tiara, National Gallery of Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

42.

U c c e l l o , Adoration Magdalene

and

of the Child

Eustace,

with

the Virgin,

X-radiography,

detail

Angels,

showing

Saints torn

Joseph,

Jerome,

pieces of cloth

Mary

interlayer,

Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe. 43.

U c c c l l o , Adoration Magdalene

and

of the Child

Eustace,

with

x-radiography,

the Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

detail s h o w i n g w o o d

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

grain, cloth interlayer and

c r a q u e l u r e m a t c h i n g at the edges of t h e cut, S t a a t l i c h e K u n s t h a l l e , K a r l s r u h e . 44.

U c c e l l o , Adoration Magdalene

of the Child

with

the

Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

and Eustace, detail s h o w i n g repainting o v e r the j o i n b e t w e e n the t w o parts of the

panel, Staatliche K u n s t h a l l e , K a r l s r u h e . 45.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, National G a l l e r y , L o n d o n , painted on c a n v a s .

46.

U c c e l l o , and w o r k s h o p ( ? ) , Scenes from

the Lives of Holy Fathers,

Galleria d e l l ' A c c a d e m i a ,

F l o r e n c e , painted on c a n v a s . 47.

U c c e l l o , Study for

the Equestrian

S t a m p e dcgli Uffizi, Florence.

Monument

for Sir John Hawkwood,

G a b i n e t t o Disegni e

372 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

48.

Uccello, Equestrian

Monument for Sir John Hawkwood,

without the fictive f r a m e , Duomo,

Florence. 49.

Uccello, Mounted Knight, Gabinetto Disegni e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, Florence.

50.

Lorenza Melli's d i a g r a m for the Holy Father and a Kneeling Companion o n the sheet with the drawing Mounted Knight (Melli, 1998, Fig. 16).

51.

Uccello, Angel with a Sword; A Cup, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence.

52.

Lorenza M e l l i ' s d i a g r a m of the design of the Virgin and Child o n t h e sheet with t h e drawing Angel with a Sword; A Cup (Melli, 1998, Fig. 25).

53.

Uccello (?), Chalice, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli Uffizi, Florence.

54.

Uccello (?), Mazzocchio

(with Octagonal Section), Gabinetto D i s e g n i e S t a m p e degli Uffizi,

Florence. 55.

Uccello (?), Mazzocchio

(with Hexagonal Section and Punte), Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe degli

Uffizi, Florence. 56.

Uccello (?), Profile Portrait of a Man, Gabinetto D i s e g n i e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, Florence.

57.

A page of V a s a r i ' s Libro de' Disegni with Child Riding a Camel; A 'Castoro'

(recto), Unicorn

Attacking a Doe; A Basilisk (verso), Cupid (?) with a Bow and a Putto Holding

Garlands

(recto); Two Monkeys and a 'Castoro' (verso) and Two Hunting Dogs; A Unicorn; A Panther; A Lioness and a Lion (recto), A Panther; A Lynx; A Monkey; A Porcupine;

A Unicorn; An

Elephant; Two Deer (verso), Nationalmuseum, Stockholm. 58.

Uccello (?), Polyhedron

with Seventy-Two Faces and Punte, C a b i n e t des Dessins, Musee du

Louvre, Paris. 59.

Uccello ( ? ) , Mazzocchio,

60.

Uccello, Adoration Magdalene

Cabinet des Dessins, M u s e e d u Louvre, Paris.

of the Child with the Virgin, Angels,

and Eustace,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

detail showing the pattern on Saint E u s t a c e ' s robe,

Mary

Staatliche

Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe. 61.

Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, detail of the pattern on the p r i n c e s s ' s robe, Musee Jacquemart-Andre, Paris.

62.

Uccello, Adoration

of the Child with the Virgin, Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

Magdalene and Eustace, diagram of the pattern on Saint F u s t a c e ' s robe, Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe. 63.

Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, diagram of the pattern o n the p r i n c e s s ' s robe, Musee Jacquemart-Andre, Paris.

64.

Uccello, Adoration

of the Magi, detail of Saint Joseph from the Q u a r a l e predella, Museo

Diocesano, Florence. 65.

Uccello, Adoration

of the Child

with the Virgin, Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

Magdalene and Eustace, detail of Saint Joseph, Slaatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe. 66.

Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, detail o f the dragon, National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne.

67.

A n o n y m o u s Florentine (?) artist, Dragon Fighting a Lion, location u n k n o w n .

LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS 373

68.

U c c e l l o , Adoration Magdalene

of the Child

and Eustace,

with

the

Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

X-radiograhy, detail s h o w i n g incised p l u m b l i n e ( n e a r t h e V i r g i n ' s

n o s e ) , S t a a t l i c h e K u n s t h a l l e , Karlsruhe. 69.

U c c e l l o , Adoration Magdalene

of the Child

with

the

Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

and Eustace, detail of a loss t o S a i n t E u s t a c e ' s robe s h o w i n g e x p o s e d u n d e r d r a w i n g ,

S t a a t l i c h e K u n s t h a l l e , Karlsruhe. 70.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

I R R , detail of the H o l y Spirit, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d .

71.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

detail of the Holy S p i r i t , A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

72.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

I R R , detail of t h e l o w e s t d e p i c t i o n of G a b r i e l , s h o w i n g his left hand

h o l d i n g a lily s t e m a b o v e his right sleeve, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d . 73.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

detail of the l o w e s t Gabriel w i t h t h e p o s i t i o n of the lily s t e m m o v e d to

t h e left, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford. 74.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

I R R , detail of the V i r g i n , s h o w i n g

an S s h a p e d c u r v e for a contour of

t h e d r a p e r y in t h e l o w e r folds of the V i r g i n ' s robe, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d . 75.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

detail of the V i r g i n , A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d .

76.

U c c e l l o , Scenes from the Lives of Holy Fathers, a detail o f the sinopie with the f i g u r e of a seated m o n k - s a i n t o n the east wall, cloister, San M i n i a t o al M o n t e , F l o r e n c e .

77.

U c c e l l o , Hunt in a Forest, IRR, detail s h o w i n g the p e r s p e c t i v a l c o n s t r u c t i o n c r o s s i n g the figure o f a hunter, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

78.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

I R R , detail of the a r c h i t e c t u r e , A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d .

79.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

detail of the d e c o r a t i v e frieze a l o n g the t o p of the building, A s h m o l e a n

M u s e u m , Oxford. 80.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

IRR, detail of t h e d e c o r a t i v e frieze a l o n g the top of the building,

A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford. 81.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, detail of t h e c o r k s c r e w c u r l s of G o d the F a t h e r ' s hair a b o v e e a c h shoulder, National Gallery of V i c t o r i a , M e l b o u r n e .

82.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

detail s h o w i n g a h o l e m a d e b y t h e point o f a pair of c o m p a s s e s in the

m i d d l e of a c h e r u b ' s head, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d . 83.

U c c c l l o , Annunciation,

IRR, detail of t h e c o r n i c e a r o u n d the pillar, A s h m o l e a n

Museum,

Oxford. 84.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

X-radiography, detail

of t h e c o r n i c e a r o u n d the pillar,

Ashmolean

M u s e u m , Oxford. 85.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

86.

U c c e l l o , Adoration

detail of the c o r n i c e a r o u n d t h e pillar, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d .

of the Child, detail of i n c i s i o n s f o r the punte,

San M a r t i n o

Maggiore,

Bologna. 87.

D i a g r a m s h o w i n g the underdrawn c o n s t r u c t i o n for t h e s i n g l e - p o i n t p e r s p e c t i v e in t h e Hunt in a Forest ( K e m p , M a s s i n g , Christie and G r o e n , 1 9 9 1 , F i g . 2 6 ) .

88.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, I R R , detail of t h e city, N a t i o n a l Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne.

374 LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS

89.

Uccello, Saint George

and the Dragon,

detail of the city, National G a l l e r y of Victoria,

Melbourne. 90.

Attributed to D o m e n i c o Veneziano, Profile Portrait of a Young Man, M u s e e d e s Beaux-Arts, Chambery.

91.

Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, detail of the princess' girdle, m a c r o p h o t o g r a p h showing remnants of red lake glaze over the gold, National Gallery of Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

92.

Uccello, Adoration

of the Child with the Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

Jerome,

Mary

Magdalene and Eustace, detail of the Angels, Staatliche Kunsthalle, K a r l s r u h e . 93.

Uccello, Adoration

of the Child with the Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Magdalene and Eustace, detail of Saint J e r o m e , Staatliche Kunsthalle, K a r l s r u h e . 94.

Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, detail of fingerprints in the h o r s e ' s saddle, National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne.

95.

Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, detail of fingerprints in the building behind the city gate, National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne.

96.

Uccello, Niccold da Tolentino at the Battle of San Romano, detail of fingerprints in the glazes on the armour, National Gallery, London.

97.

Uccello, Adoration Magdalene

of the Child with the Virgin,

and Eustace,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

detail of a fingerprint in the glaze o n t h e border of Saint Mary

M a g d a l e n e ' s robe, Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe. 98.

Uccello, Adoration of the Child, detail of a punta s h o w i n g the flaking dark red and light red a secco layers over a mid-tone red layer, S a n Martino M a g g i o r e , B o l o g n a .

99.

T h e location of the Bartolini house (right), o n the corner of Via di Porta R o s s a and the Corso degli Strozzi ( n o w Via Monalda), Florence.

100.

Masolino, Founding of Saint Maria Maggiore,

M u s e o e Gallerie Nazionali di Capodimonte,

Naples. 101.

Sacrestia clclle Messe, niche on the south wall, D u o m o , Florence.

102.

Sacrestia delle Messe, niche on the east wall, D u o m o , Florence.

103.

Andrea di Lazzaro Cavalcanti, called II B u g g i a n o , Washbasin ( n o r t h ) , Sacrestia delle Messe, Duomo, Florence.

104.

Attributed to Giovanni di Francesco, Stories of Saint Joseph, detail, altana, Palazzo Rucellai, Florence.

105.

Hx-Spcdale di San Martino alia Scala, Florence.

106.

Plan of the ex-Spedale di San Martino alia Scala, showing the location of the narthex at the bottom left, Florence.

107.

Uccello, Nativity, Uffi/.i, reserve collection, Florence.

108.

Diagram of the composition of the Nativity (Paatz, 1 9 3 4 , Fig. 3).

109.

Uccello, Nativity, sinopia, Uffizi, reserve collection, Florence.

110.

Masaccio, Trinity, Santa Maria Novella, Florence.

111.

Uccello, Nativity, detail of the gallows with a h a n g e d m a n , Uffizi, r e s e r v e collection, Florence.

LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS 375

112.

A m b o g i o L o r e n z e t t i , Effects of Good and Bad Government,

detail of the figure of Securitas,

P a l a z z o P u b b l i c o , Siena. 113.

U c c e l l o , Flood and the Recession of the Flood, C h i o s t r o V e r d e , S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a , Florence.

114.

U c c e l l o , Sacrifice and Drunkenness

115.

U c c e l l o , Flood and the Recession

of Noah, C h i o s t r o V e r d e , S a n t a Maria N o v e l l a , F l o r e n c e . of the Flood, detail o f a mazzocchio

s h o w i n g t w o adjacent

c o l o u r s , C h i o s t r o V e r d e , Santa M a r i a N o v e l l a , F l o r e n c e . 116.

M a p o f the popolo of San M i c h e l e a C a s t e l l o of 1 5 8 3 , A S F , C a p i t a n i di Parte, P i a n t e di P o p o l o e S t r a d e , f. 1 2 1 , 2, p . 3 7 5 . T h e location of t h e S p e d a l e d i S a n A n t o n i o is circled, n e x t to the ' V e r g i n a della Q u e r c i o l a ' - a r e f e r e n c e t o the t a b e r n a c l e o n the c o r n e r of the streets. A b o v e and to t h e left is the Villa II Vivaio, a n d a b o v e and to the right is the V i l l a Petraia w i t h its tower.

117.

A c c o u n t b o o k of the Confraternity of S a i n t P e t e r M a r t y r , 1 4 1 3 , r e c o r d i n g p a y m e n t for the S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o , Castello, starting o n line thirty ( i n c l u d i n g the d a t e s ) , A S F , C R S G F , 1 0 2 , 2 9 5 , E n t r a t a e Uscita, 1 4 0 2 - 1 4 1 4 , p. 2 1 2 .

118.

D u c c i o di B u o n i n s e g n a , Virgin and Child with Angels, G a l l e r i a d e g l i Uffizi, F l o r e n c e .

119.

T h e 1 4 2 7 portata

of D e o Beccuti, r e c o r d i n g h i s p r o p e r t y next to that of the Confraternity of

S a i n t P e t e r Martyr, starting on t h e t w e n t y - f o u r t h line, A S F , C a t a s t o , 5 3 , S a n G i o v a n n i D r a g o , p. 71 lv. 120.

T h e 1 4 2 7 portata of D e o Beccuti, r e c o r d i n g a d e b t f r o m M i c h e l e di Giovanni del T r i a , starting o n the n i n t h line, A S F , Catasto, 5 3 , S a n G i o v a n n i D r a g o , p . 7 1 6 .

121.

E x - S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o , Castello.

122.

Lintel w i t h inscriptions at the E x - S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o , C a s t e l l o .

123.

Lintel with the m o n o g r a m of the Confraternity of S a i n t P e t e r M a r t y r at the E x - S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o , Castello.

124.

C o v e r o f an a c c o u n t book of t h e Confraternity of S a i n t P e t e r M a r t y r s h o w i n g t h e m o n o g r a m , A S F , C R S G F , 1 0 2 , 2 9 8 , Entrata e Uscita, 1 4 5 5 - 1 4 6 3 .

125.

E m p t y t a b e r n a c l e on t h e corner of V i a R e g i n a l d o G i u l i a n o a n d V i a della Q u e r c i o l a , Castello.

126.

D e l B e c c u t o family a r m s over the d o o r of t h e E x - S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o , Castello.

127.

U c c e l l o ('?), Crucifixion, private c o l l e c t i o n , F l o r e n c e .

128.

U c c e l l o (?), Crucifixion, detail of C h r i s t ' s t o r s o , p r i v a t e c o l l e c t i o n , Florence.

129.

U c c e l l o (?), Crucifixion, detail o f t h e left part of the i n s c r i p t i o n , private collection, F l o r e n c e .

130.

E x - C h u r c h of San J a c o p o ( C a m p o C o r b o l i n i ) , F l o r e n c e .

131.

L a b e l o n the right side of the cross b a r of t h e S a n J a c o p o

132.

U c c e l l o (?) Crucifixion, detail of the d r a p e r y , p r i v a t e c o l l e c t i o n , F l o r e n c e .

133.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

134.

U c c e l l o , Adoration Magdalene

Crucifixion.

detail of G a b r i e l ' s d r a p e r y , A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d .

of the Child with the Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

and Eustace, detail of an A n g e l ' s d r a p e r y , S t a a t l i c h e K u n s t h a l l e , K a r l s r u h e .

135.

U c c e l l o , Hope, A s s u n t a Chapel, D u o m o , P r a t o .

136.

U c c e l l o (?), Crucifixion, detail of C h r i s t ' s torso, p r i v a t e c o l l e c t i o n , F l o r e n c e .

137.

U c c e l l o , Creation of the Animals and Creation of Adam, detail of A d a m , C h i o s t r o V e r d e , Santa M a r i a N o v e l l a , Florence.

376 LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS

138.

Del Lippi tabernacle, corner of V i a Fanfani and V i a dei Perfetti Ricasoli, n e a r Castello, north of Florence.

139.

A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist (and Uccello?), Virgin and Child with God the Father, the Holy Spirit, Angels, Saints and Prophets, from the Del Lippi tabernacle, C h u r c h of S a n t a Maria Mater Dei a Lippi, north of Florence.

140.

A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist (and Uccello?), Virgin and Child with God the Father, the Holy Spirit, Angels, Saints John the Baptist and Peter, Santa Maria M a t e r D e i a Lippi, north of Florence.

141.

A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist (and Uccello?), Saints Lawrence

and John the Evangelist (?),

Santa Maria Mater Dei a Lippi, north of Florence. 142.

A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist ( a n d Uccello?), Saints James and Stephen, Santa Maria Mater Dei a Lippi, north of F l o r e n c e .

143.

M a p of Castello, s h o w i n g the location of the E x - S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o in the circle and the Del Lippi tabernacle in the square. T h e grounds o f the Villa II V i v a i o at t h e top are shaded, as are the grounds of t h e Villa Petraia at the top right.

144.

Uccello, Creation of the Animals and Creation of Adam, detail of the sinopia, M u s e o di Santa Maria Novella, Florence.

145.

A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist (and Uccello?), Virgin and Child with God the Father, the Holy Spirit, Angels, Saints John the Baptist and Peter, detail of t h e sinopia d r a w i n g of t h e Virgin, Sovrintendenza ai Beni Artistici e Storici, Florence.

146.

A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist (and Uccello?), Saints Lawrence and John the Evangelist, detail of the sinopia, S o v r i n t e n d e n z a ai Beni Artistici e Storici, Florence.

147.

Uccello (7), Virgin and Child, private collection ( ' M a r t e l l o ' Collection), Fiesole.

148.

A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of Uccello, Virgin and Child, private collection, Prato.

149.

Approximate reconstruction of the Carncsccchi Altarpiece: Uccello, Annunciation

and Four

Evangelists - lost (top); Masolino, Scant Catherine of Alexandria - lost, Virgin and Child- lost, and Saint Julian, M u s e o d ' A r t e Sacra, Florence (middle tier); and M a s a c c i o , Scene from the Life of Saint Catherine - lost, Nativity - lost, and Scene from the Life of Saint Julian, Museo Home, Florence (predella). 150.

Map of Florence by G. Carocci, 1889, based on 1427 Catasto, detail o f Piazza di Santa Maria Maggiore and s u r r o u n d s .

151.

San Marco, Venice.

152.

Gentile Bellini, Procession of the Reliquary of the Cross in the Piazza San Marco, detail of the left part of the facade of San Marco, Galleria d e l l ' A c c a d e m i a , V e n i c e .

153.

Gentile Bellini, Procession of the Reliquary of the Cross in the Piazza San Marco, detail of Uccello's mosaic Saint Peter, Galleria d e l l ' A c c a d e m i a , Venice.

154.

Attributed to U c c c l l o , Wheel with Ribbon, San M a r c o , V e n i c e .

155.

Attributed to U c c e l l o , Stellated Dodecahedron, Venice.

u n d e r the d o o r of Saint Peter, San Marco,

LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS 377

156.

A t t r i b u t e d t o U c c e l l o , Stellated Dodecahedron,

detail o f the b o r d e r , u n d e r t h e d o o r o f Saint

Peter, S a n M a r c o , V e n i c e . 157.

U c c e l l o , Resurrection,

detail of the b o r d e r , D u o m o , F l o r e n c e .

158.

U c c e l l o (?), Stellated Dodecahedron

159.

U c c e l l o , Michelotto

with a circle of a r r o w h e a d s h a p e s , S a n M a r c o , V e n i c e .

Attendolo at the Head of Florentine

Troops, detail of g e o m e t r i c design for

t h e d e c o r a t i o n of the shield with a circle of a r r o w h e a d s h a p e s , M u s e e du L o u v r e , Paris. 160.

S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a , Florence.

161.

C h i o s t r o V e r d e , s h o w i n g the l o c a t i o n of the Creation

Stories,

at left, Santa M a r i a Novella,

Florence. 162.

U c c e l l o , Creation of the Animals and Creation of Adam,

Chiostro V e r d e , Santa Maria Novella,

Florence. 163.

U c c e l l o , Creation of Eve and the Original Sin, C h i o s t r o V e r d e , S a n t a Maria N o v e l l a , F l o r e n c e .

164.

G h i b e r t i , Doors

of Paradise,

detail of t h e creation of A d a m , M u s e o d e l l ' O p e r a d e l D u o m o ,

Florence. 165.

U c c e l l o , Creation

of the Animals

and Creation

of Adam,

detail of the c r e a t i o n of A d a m ,

C h i o s t r o V e r d e , S a n t a Maria N o v e l l a , F l o r e n c e . 166.

G h i b e r t i w o r k s h o p , Virgin and Child, V i c t o r i a a n d A l b e r t M u s e u m , L o n d o n .

167.

U c c e l l o , Virgin and Child, Museo di S a n M a r c o , F l o r e n c e .

168.

G h i b e r t i , Doors of Paradise,

panel with t h e story o f J a c o b and E s s a u , M u s e o d e l l ' O p e r a del

D u o m o , Florence. 169.

U c c e l l o , Annunciation,

Ashmolean M u s e u m , Oxford.

170.

G h i b e r t i , Doors of Paradise,

panel w i t h t h e story of D a v i d and G o l i a t h , M u s e o d e l l ' O p e r a del

D u o m o , Florence. 171.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, National G a l l e r y o f V i c t o r i a , M e l b o u r n e .

172.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, reverse, s h o w i n g the arch s h a p e of t h e panel inside the m o d e r n frame, N a t i o n a l Gallery of V i c t o r i a , M e l b o u r n e .

173.

U c c c l l o , Saint George and the Dragon,

detail of t h e g o l d e n r a y s , M u s e e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e \

Paris. 174.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, detail of the m o o n , M u s e e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r 6 , Paris.

175.

U c c c l l o , Saint George and the Dragon,

detail of t h e c r e s c e n t s o n the d r a g o n ' s w i n g s , M u s e e

J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e , Paris. 176.

U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, detail of the c r e s c e n t s o n the d r a g o n ' s w i n g s , National G a l l e r y of V i c t o r i a , M e l b o u r n e .

177.

A s s u n t a C h a p e l , with the Stories of the Virgin and Saint Stephen, o n the right of t h e main altar, D u o m o , Prato.

178.

U c c c l l o , Birth of the Virgin, Assunta C h a p e l , D u o m o , P r a t o .

179.

U c c e l l o , Presentation

180.

U c c e l l o , Disputation

181.

U c c e l l o and A n d r e a di Giusto, Stoning of Saint Stephen, A s s u n t a C h a p e l , D u o m o , P r a t o .

182.

U c c e l l o , Adoration

of the Virgin at the Temple, A s s u n t a C h a p e l , D u o m o , Prato. of Saint Stephen, A s s u n t a C h a p e l , D u o m o , P r a t o .

of the Child, detail of t h e incised d a t e , S a n M a r t i n o M a g g i o r e , B o l o g n a .

378 LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS

183..

Uccello, Adoration of the Child, detail of the Christ Child, San Martino M a g g i o r e , Bologna.

184.

After (?) of Donatello, Nativity, Bardini Collection.

185.

After (?) of Donatello, Nativity, Bardini Collection.

186.

Uccello, Adoration of the Child, detail of the sinopia showing the coats of a r m s , S a n Martino Maggiore, Bologna.

187.

Filippo Lippi, Adoration

of the Child with Saints Ilarione, Jerome and Mary Magdalene and

Angels, Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence. 188.

Uccello, Adoration

of the Child with the Virgin,

Angels,

Saints

Joseph,

Jerome,

Mary

Magdalene and Eustace, Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe. 189.

Uccello, Quarate predella, Museo Diocesano, Florence.

190.

Uccello, Saint John at Patmos, from the Quarate predella, M u s e o D i o c e s a n o , Florence.

191.

Uccello, Adoration of the Magi, from the Quarate predella, M u s e o D i o c e s a n o , F l o r e n c e .

192.

Uccello, Saints James and Ansano, from the Q u a r a t e predella, M u s e o D i o c e s a n o , Florence.

193.

V i e w of the inside of the Duomo, Florence, s h o w i n g the position o f the clock.

194.

Uccello, Clockface with Four Male Heads, D u o m o , Florence.

195.

Uccello, Sacrifice

and Drunkenness

of Noah, detail of H a m , C h i o s t r o V e r d e , Santa Maria

Novella, Florence. 196.

A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist, Portrait of Giotto, Uccello, Donatello, Manetti and Brunelleschi, Musee du Louvre, Paris.

197.

Bartolomeo di Fruosino, Desco da Parto; A Birth Scene (recto); A Putto ( v e r s o ) - verso, The New York Historical Society, on loan to Metropolitan Museum, N e w York.

198.

North Italian artist, Portrait of a Youth, National Gallery of Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

199.

Donatello and Michelozzo, T h e Tomb of Baldassare Cossa, Baptristery, Florence.

200.

Uccello, Female Saint with Two Children, Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence.

201.

Uccello, Scenes from the Lives of Holy Fathers, detail of an Angel on t h e east wall, cloister, San Miniato al Monte, Florence.

202.

Uccello and assistant, Scenes from the Lives of Holy Fathers, detail of m o n k - S a i n t s o n the south wall, cloister, S a n Miniato al Monte, Florence.

203.

Uccello, Man of Sorrows between the Virgin and Scant John the Evangelist,

A v a n e predella,

Museo di San M a r c o , Florence. 204.

Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, detail of the dragon, National G a l l e r y , L o n d o n .

205.

Attributed to Barlolomeo Ammannati ( 1 5 1 1 - 1 5 9 2 ) , Marble

Water Spout

in the Shape of a

Dragon, M u s e o di Santo Spirito, Florence, formerly Villa Busdraghi, V a l di Serchio. 206.

Ucccllo, Hunt in a Forest, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

207.

Lippo d A n d r e a , The Annunciation; Saint Bridget and a Choir of Bridgettine

Nuns, detail of the

latter scene, Bernard H. Breslauer Collection, N e w Y o r k . 208.

A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of Uccello, Crucifixion

with a Bridgettine

Nun Donor, Sister

Felicita, triptych, detail of Saint Bridget, Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art, N e w Y o r k . 209.

A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of Uccello, Crucifixion

with a Bridgettine

Nun Donor, Sister

Felicita, triptych, detail of the Virgin, Metropolitan M u s e u m of Art, N e w York.

LIST O F ILLUSTRATIONS

210.

379

Lorenza Melli's diagram of the design of the Virgin and Child on the sheet with the drawing Angel with a Sword; A Cup (Melli, 1998, Fig. 25).

211.

Anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello, Virgin and Child, private collection, Prato.

212.

Anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello, Virgin and Child, Getty Museum, Los Angeles.

213.

Anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello, Virgin and Child with Two Angels,

Hamilton

Collection, Paris (?) 214.

Anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello, Virgin and Child, North Carolina Museum of Art, Raleigh.

215.

Anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello, Virgin and Child, Bode Museum, Berlin.

216.

Anonymous workshop assistant of Uccello, Virgin and Child with Saint Francis and Two Angels, Allentown Art Museum.

3 Uccello, Virgin and Child, Museo di San Marco, Florence, formerly in one of the houses of the del Beccuto family.

5 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child, San M a r t i n o M a g g i o r e , B o l o g n a .

6 Uccello, Virgin and Child, National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin, before cleaning in 1968.

7 Uccello, Virgin and Child, National Gallery of Ireland, D u b l i n , after cleaning in 1968.

8 Santo Spirito, Florence.

iS/itc-tV

L'^>^j7t-Mr/}tU>

d*/^-&£ZAr*>

/\_/M^x;nt.$0

~~ Clx/ntf/* 'Znna

J TTWWH]

(17

~"Y

,,;/

""

,
/"">

,

^

/f

9 Sepoltitario Fiorentino ovvero Descrizione delle Chiese Cappelle e Sepolture low Anni et Inscrizione delta Citta di Firenze e Suoi Conform' Fatta da Stefano Rosselli ( A S F , Manoscritti, 6 2 4 , voi. I, p. 3 2 ) , r e c o r d i n g U c c e l l o ' s patrilineal tombstone at n o . 116.

10 F r a S t e f a n o B o n s i g n o r i , Nova Pulcherrimae Civitatis Florentiae Topographia Accuratissime Delineate, 1585, s h o w i n g Santa Maria M a g g i o r e m i d - w a y b e t w e e n t h e D u o m o (top right) a n d S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a ( b o t t o m left).

11 S a n t a M a r i a M a g g i o r e (left) and the location of the P a l a z z o D e l B e c c u t o before d e m o l i t i o n (right), Florence.

I

Tosco n.(o)...+

Azzo n.(o) ...+1154

Jacopo n.(o) ...-Hi 191

Jacopo detto Beccuto n.(o) ...+

Benincasa n.(o) ...+1260

Lottieri n.(o) ...+ 1295

Geremia n.(o) ...+1300

M.' Jacopo Doltore n.(o) +1320

Lippo n.(o) ...+1341

Vanni n.(o) . . . + . . . Del Consiglio 1342=Dina di Durazio de' Pulci

S u o Fratello Castello de' Priori 1348=1351=1355=nbbe p[er] Moglie Banca di Siivestio Alamunni 1

9

Deo n.(o) ...+ Squittinato nel 1391=Filia di Gio. Del Roso de Villamagna 1365=Dota la Capp.(a) di S.M.(a) Magg.(e) nel 1393

M.' Deo Lorenzo n.(o) + De' Priori 1427=Andreola diZanobi Carnesecchi 1404=

M'. Felice n.(o) ...+ De' Priori 1463 Lenadi Ruberto Pitti 1452

Paolo di Dono (Uccello)

M.' Ruberto n.(o) 1476 De' Ssig.(ri) 1517.1524 Piera di Batista Machiavelli 1510

12 Del B e c c u t o family g e n e a l o g y , A S F , D e p u t a z i o n e S o p r a la Nobilita e Cittadinanza, 15, S e c t i o n 2 1 , Part 1, with the addition of U c c e l l o ' s m a t e r n a l l i n e a g e .

13 Ghiberti, Baptistery D o o r s (north side), M u s e o d e l l ' O p e r a del D u o m o , F l o r e n c e .

14 F r a Stefano B o n s i g n o r i , Nova Pulcherrimae Civitatis Florentiae Topographia Accuratissime Delineata, 1585, s h o w i n g Via della S c a l a r u n n i n g parallel to t h e A r n o river b e t w e e n P i a z z a di S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a (top right) and t h e city wall (bottom left).

15 V i a della Scala, F l o r e n c e , seen from Piazza di Santa M a r i a N o v e l l a .

16 Uccello, Equestrian Monument for Sir John D u o m o , Florence.

Hawkwood,

17 Nineteenth-century lintel, copy of a fifteenth-century design, Museo di San Marco, Florence, formerly in the Palazzo Del Beccuto, Florence.

2 0 Uccello,

The Unhorsing of Sienese Troops at the Battle of San Romano, G a l l e r i a d e g l i Uffizi,

Florence.

21 Uccello, Michel otto Attendolo at the Head of Florentine Troops, Musee du Louvre, Paris.

22 V i a d e l l e T e r m e , F l o r e n c e , with the site of U c c e l l o ' s w o r k s h o p o n the r i g h t , after the first street lamp.

25 San Miniato al Monte, with the cloister to the right of the church.

2 6 Palazzo Rucellai, F l o r e n c e .

27 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, M u s e e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e , Paris.

2 8 Uccello, Miracle of the Host, G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e delle M a r c h e , Urbino.

29 U c c e l l o , Miracle of the Host, detail of t h e first s c e n e , G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e delle M a r c h e , U r b i n o .

31 U c c e l l o , Miracle of the Host, detail of t h e third s c e n e , G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e delle M a r c h e , Urbino.

32 Uccello, Miracle of the Host, detail of the fourth scene, Galleria Nazionale delle Marche, Urbino.

3 4 Uccello, Miracle of the Host, d e t a i l of the sixth s c e n e , G a l l e r i a N a z i o n a l e delle M a r c h e , Urbino.

35 Uccello, Christ Crucified with the Virgin and Saints John the Evangelist, John the Baptist and Francis, with original frame, Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum, Madrid.

36 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant o f U c c e l l o ,

Crucifixion with a Bridgettine Nun Donor, Sister Felicita, triptych with original frame, Metropolitan M u s e u m o f Art, N e w Y o r k .

37 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace,

3 8 Uccello, Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace,

Staatliche K u n s t h a l l e , K a r l s r u h e .

r e v e r s e , S t a a t l i c h e K u n s t h a l l e , Karlsruhe.

39 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, X - r a d i o g r a p h y , detail s h o w i n g the interstices o f t h e cloth interlayer, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

V.

1

111^!:'

IB.

•ill

111

4 0 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, X - r a d i o g r a p h y m o s a i c s h o w i n g a s i n g l e p i e c e of clodi interlayer, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

IIP

k

•

—

HHHM^IHIHHHIHHi

,.7

4 1 U c c e l l o , Sfl//?/ George and the Dragon, X - r a d i o g r a p h y m o s a i c s h o w i n g a sin i n t e r l a y e r e x t e n d i n g u p to a point n e a r t h e top o f G o d t h e F a t h e r ' s papal tiara, N a t i o n a l Gallery of Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

4 2 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary and

Eustace, X - r a d i o g r a p h y , detail showing torn pieces of cloth interlayer,

Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

Magdalene

43 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child, with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, x-radiography, detail s h o w i n g wood grain, cloth interlayer a n d craquelure patterns m a t c h i n g at the e d g e s of t h e cut, Staatliche K u n s t h a l l e , Karlsruhe.

44 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, detail s h o w i n g repainting o v e r the j o i n b e t w e e n t h e t w o p a r t s of the panel, Staatliche K u n s t h a l l e , Karlsruhe.

46 U c c e l l o ( a n d w o r k s h o p ? ) , Scenes from the Lives of Holy Galleria d e l l ' A c c a d e m i a , F l o r e n c e , painted on c a n v a s .

Fathers,

47 U c c e l l o , Sz/Yf/y / o r

Equestrian Monument for

Sir John Hawkwood, Gabinetto D i s e g n i e S t a m p e clegli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e .

"< Ml

•Jail

fill »4«*t1 1

•*»^y. ••••

t r r *

will 4 8 U c c e l l o , Equestrian Monument for Sir John Hawkwood, without the fictive f r a m e , D u o m o , Florence.

m m m

4

-

' I, -, . / -

-I

i|:iv,l

!

• ••' t-ij't -i'-f* s'-'JIV.-i ;i

•.Ml-"'

... I

'

I

'

-

*

1

.

r

49 Uccello, Mounted

Knight, G a b i n e t t o D i s e g n i e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, Florence.

5 0 L o r e n z a M e l l i ' s d i a g r a m f o r t h e Holy Father and a Kneeling Companion on the s h e e t with the d r a w i n g Mounted Knight (Melli, 1998, Fig. 16).

51 U c c e l l o , Angel with a Sword; A Cup, G a b i n e t t o D i s e g n i e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e .

53 U c c e l l o (?), Chalice, G a b i n e t t o D i s e g n i e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, Florence.

5 4 Uccello (?), Mazzocchio (with Octagonal Section), Gabinetto D i s e g n i e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e .

5 5 U c c e l l o (?), Mazzocchio (with Hexagonal Section and Punte), G a b i n e t t o D i s e g n i e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e .

5 6 U c c e l l o (?), Profile Portrait of a Man, G a b i n e t t o Disegni e S t a m p e degli Uffizi, Florence.

57 A p a g e of Vasari's Libra de' Disegni, with: Child Riding a Camel; A 'Castoro' (recto), Unicorn Attacking a Doe; A Basilisk (verso), Cupid (?) with a Bow and a Putto Holding Garlands (recto); Two Monkeys and a 'Castoro' (verso) and Two blunting Dogs; A Unicorn; A Panther; A Lioness and a Lion (recto), A Panther; A Lynx; A Mon key; A Porcupine; A Unicorn; An Ele phant; Two Deer (verso), Nationalmuseum, Stockholm.

6 0 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, detail s h o w i n g the pattern on S a i n t E u s t a c e ' s r o b e , S t a a t l i c h e K u n s t h a l l e , Karlsruhe.

61 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, d e t a i l of t h e pattern on t h e p r i n c e s s ' s robe, M u s e e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e \ Paris.

fH iiiiiir

1 '-

MIL I

tit

.-

6 2 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, diagam of the p a t t e r n o n S a i n t E u s t a c e ' s r o b e , Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

'')

,'j>-,

•

6 3 U c c e l l o , .Samr George and the Dragon, d i a g r a m o f t h e p a t t e r n on the p r i n c e s s ' s r o b e , M u s e e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e , Paris.

6 4 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Magi, detail of Saint J o s e p h from the Q u a r a t e predella, M u s e o Diocesano, F l o r e n c e .

6 5 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, detail of Saint J o s e p h , Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

67 A n o n y m o u s F l o r e n t i n e (?) artist, Dragon Fighting a Lion, location u n k n o w n .

68 Uccello, Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, X-radiograhy, detail showing t h e i n c i s e d p l u m b l i n e ( n e a r the V i r g i n ' s nose), Staatliche K u n s t h a l l e , Karlsruhe.

69 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, detail of a loss to Saint E u s t a c e ' s r o b e s h o w i n g e x p o s e d u n d e r d r a w i n g , Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

7 0 Uccello, Annunciation, I R R , detail of the H o l y Spirit, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

71 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, detail of the H o l y Spirit, Ashmolean M u s e u m , Oxford.

72 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, I R R , detail o f the lowest depiction of G a b r i e l , s h o w i n g his left hand holding a lily stern a b o v e h i s right sleeve, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

7 3 Uccello, Annunciation, detail of the lowest G a b r i e l with the position of the lily s t e m m o v e d to the left, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

74 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, I R R , detail o f t h e Virgin, s h o w i n g an S shaped curve for a contour o f the drapery in the lower f o l d s of t h e Virgin's robe, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

75 Uccello, Annunciation, detail o f the Virgin, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

7 6 U c c e l l o , Scenes from the Lives of Holy Fathers, a d e t a i l of the sinopie with t h e figure of a seated monk-saint o n t h e east wall, cloister, S a n M i n i a t o al M o n t e , F l o r e n c e .

77 U c c e l l o , Hunt in a Forest, I R R , detail s h o w i n g t h e perspectival construction crossing the figure of a hunter, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d .

79 Uccello, Annunciation, I R R , detail o f t h e decorative frieze a l o n g t h e t o p of the building, s h o w i n g the g r i d d r a w n a s a g u i d e for t h e decorative d e s i g n , A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d .

8 0 Uccello, Annunciation, detail of the d e c o r a t i v e frieze a l o n g t h e top of the building, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

81 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, detail s h o w i n g the incised c o r k s c r e w curls o f G o d the F a t h e r ' s hair a b o v e each shoulder, National Gallery o f Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

V.'-

>?>

m V

8 2 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, detail s h o w i n g a hole m a d e by the p o i n t of a pair o f c o m p a s s e s in t h e m i d d l e of a c h e r u b ' s head, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , O x f o r d .

8 3 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, I R R , detail of the cornice around t h e c o l u m n , A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

TO?

1

HHHI * *

•

•I lilillK 8 4 Uccello, Annunciation, X - r a d i o g r a p h , detail of the c o r n i c e a r o u n d t h e c o l u m n , A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

8 5 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, detail of the cornice around the c o l u m n , A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

8 6 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child, detail o f incisions for punte, S a n M a r t i n o M a g g i o r e , Bologna.

HQ

I

A

B

F

K

I

87 Diagram showing the underdrawn construction for the single-point perspective in the Hunt in a Forest, (Kemp, Massing, Christie and Groen, 1991, Fig. 26).

^ • .•^Cs

-*rV«' '^&V '4fe ' ' ^ "V r < I

* il

11

8 8 U c c e l l o , 5fl//ir George and the Dragon, I R R , detail of the city, N a t i o n a l Gallery of Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

8 9 Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, detail of the city, National G a l l e r y o f V i c t o r i a , M e l b o u r n e .

90 Attributed to Domenico Veneziano, Profile Portrait of a Young Man, Musee des Beaux-Arts, Chambery.

91 Uccello, Saint George and the Dragon, detail o f the p r i n c e s s ' girdle, m a c r o p h o t o g r a p h s h o w i n g r e m n a n t s o f red lake g l a z e o v e r t h e gold, N a t i o n a l Gallery of V i c t o r i a , M e l b o u r n e .

92 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the

Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome,

Mary

Magdalene and Eustace, detail o f the A n g e l s , Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

93 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the

Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome,

Mary

Magdalene and Eustace, detail o f Saint J e r o m e , S t a a t l i c h e Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

94 U c c e l l o , Saint George and die Dragon, detail of fingerprints i n the h o r s e ' s saddle, N a t i o n a l Gallery o f V i c t o r i a , M e l b o u r n e .

^

' :''*'•'£

,

ft§|

f

'' '-A

hHBHJI

•HuHi

HRhSHH

95 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, detail o f fingerprints in the b u i l d i n g b e h i n d t h e city g a t e , N a t i o n a l Gallery o f Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

/t. Vs.

96 Uccello, Niccold da Tolentino at the Battle of San Romano, detail of fingerprints in the glazes on the armour, National Gallery, London.

sj||§§§

111

I^J;1§U I

. ...

9 7 Uccello, Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Jo seph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, detail of a fingerprint in the g l a z e on the b o r d e r of Saint M a r y M a g d a l e n e ' s robe, Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

I

9 8 Uccello, Adoration of the Child, detail of a punta s h o w i n g t h e flaking d a r k r e d and light red a secco layers o v e r a m i d - t o n e red layer, S a n M a r t i n o M a g g i o r e , B o l o g n a .

.

JI

99 T h e location of the Bartolini h o u s e ( r i g h t ) , on t h e c o r n e r of V i a di P o r t a R o s s a a n d the Corso degli Strozzi ( n o w V i a M o n a l d a ) , Florence.

100 M a s o l i n o , Founding of Santa Maria Maggiore, M u s e o e Gallerie Nazionali d i C a p o d i m o n t e , Naples.

.'

'

-»'

si! i

.'

IF**

V,:

s"

!••.%*«•'*

,

•••r.il v.* -i-< j*;*

•*

fc A

^ --» \Mi "' - H ' 'i 1

J'

l

* '""TT

• ''.v;!r !, :h,f W , -

t

•

* <

«. * ft

.,

• X V • 4« *

i 1

'.»•**. ^"fl

' M f l i F ' U . I ' it

iiilj { t'^wsmi! m h j ^

1

t: "I *f

!''

11 1 0 1 S a c r e s t i a delle M e s s e , n i c h e on t h e s o u t h w a l l , D u o m o , F l o r e n c e

>rc*. hit I '•I '.1

a,

1 0 2 S a c r e s t i a delle M e s s e , niche on t h e n o r t h w a l l , D u o m o , F l o r e n c e .

i

103 Andrea di Lazzaro Cavalcanti, called II Buggiano, Washbasin (north), Sacrestia delle Messe, Duomo, Florence.

104 Attributed to Giovanni di Francesco, Stories of Saint Joseph, detail, altana, Palazzo Rucellai, Florence.

105 E x - S p e d a l e di S a n M a r t i n o a l i a Scala, Florence.

106 P l a n of the E x - S p e d a l e di S a n M a r t i n o alia Scala, Florence, s h o w i n g the l o c a t i o n of t h e n a r t h e x at the bottom left.

107 Uccello, Nativity, Uffizi, reserve collection, Florence.

108 Diagram of the composition of the Nativity (Paatz, 1934, Fig. 3).

109 Uccello, Nativity, sinopia, Uffizi, reserve collection, Florence.

vr-

110 Masaccio, Trinity, Santa Maria Novella, Florence.

/ft

111 U c c e l l o , Nativity, detail of t h e g a l l o w s and a h a n g e d m a n , Uffizi, r e s e r v e c o l l e c t i o n , F l o r e n c e .

112 A m b o g i o L o r e n z e t t i , Effects of Good and Bad Government, detail o f t h e figure of S e c u r i t a s , Palazzo Pubblico, Siena.

>

f

.

114 U c c e l l o , Sacrifice and Drunkenness

of Noah, C h i o s t r o V e r d e , S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a , F l o r e n c e .

115 U c c e l l o , Flood and the Recession of die Flood, detail o f a mazzocchio C h i o s t r o V e r d e , S a n t a M a r i a Novella, F l o r e n c e .

s h o w i n g t w o adjacent colours

116 M a p of the popolo of S a n M i c h e l e a C a s t e l l o of 1 5 8 3 , A S F , C a p i t a n i di P a r t e , P i a n t e di P o p o l o e Strade, f. 1 2 1 , 2, p . 3 7 5 . T h e location of t h e S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o is circled, n e x t to the ' V e r g i n a della Q u e r c i o l a ' - a r e f e r e n c e to the t a b e r n a c l e o n the c o r n e r of t h e s t r e e t s . A b o v e and to the left is the Villa II V i v a i o , a n d a b o v e and to t h e right is t h e V i l l a P e t r a i a with its t o w e r .

.1.

{.

ryv*teu , r

.^f^'-r^-

- "I

f|*^(4«S

•I

117 A c c o u n t b o o k of the C o n f r a t e r n i t y of Saint Peter M a r t y r , 1 4 1 3 , r e c o r d i n g p a y m e n t for the Spedale di S a n A n t o n i o , Castello, starting on line thirty (including t h e d a t e s ) , A S F , C R S G F , 102, 295 Entrata e Uscita 1402-1414, p. 212.

118 Duccio di Buoninsegna, Virgin and Child with Angels, Galleria degli Uffizi, Florence.

tie w_

f^t&ivpWf**

>&&cfrtfl9

r£fr*I*W.

" J F * - * ^ ^ "

1

lia 4

9 e * * £ > # « - * r * » *****

119 The 1427 portata of Deo Beccuti, recording his orooertv next m th^t „F n „ r « * , M a r , starting on the twenty-fourth line, W C ^ S ^ O ^ ^ ^ t y r

*

P

««

CH8V

^ J * * * * * * *

1

—

^WX.^r.»

'*»

A^*" '

fait**,

"

"

i

^

V

^

i

l

$1*^

^ ^ i L - i f t o x i ^ m

W

A^v^kt^

"

,,,,,

'

******

W

»

V

i*ftit

on t h e

1 2 1 E x - S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o , C a s t e l l o .

i

1 2 2 L i n t e l w i t h i n s c r i p t i o n s at t h e E x - S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o , C a s t e l l o .

123 L i n t e l with the m o n o g r a m of t h e C o n f r a t e r n i t y of S a i n t P e t e r M a r t y r at t h e E x - S p e d a l e di S a n A n t o n i o , C a s t e l l o .

1 2 4 C o v e r o f an a c c o u n t b o o k o f the C o n f r a t e r n i t y of Saint P e t e r M a r t y r s h o w i n g the m o n o g r a m , A S F , C R S G F , 102, 2 9 8 , E n t r a t a e Uscita, 1 4 5 5 - 1 4 6 3 .

1 2 5 E m p t y t a b e r n a c l e on t h e corner o f V i a R e g i n a l c l o G i u l i a n o a n d V i a della Q u e r c i o l a , Castello.

1 2 6 D e l B e c c u t o family a r m s o v e r the d o o r of t h e E x - S p e d a l e di San A n t o n i o , Castello.

127 U c c e l l o (?), Crucifixion, private collection, F l o r e n c e .

1 2 8 U c c e l l o (?), Crucifixion, detail o f C h r i s t ' s t o r s o , p r i v a t e collection, F l o r e n c e .

ft;^ |" - -

'

'

^-

131 L a b e l o n the right side o l the S a n J a c o p o Crucifixion.

1 3 2 U c c e l l o (?), Crucifixion, private collection, Florence.

1 3 3 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, detail of G a b r i e l ' s drapery, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

1 3 4 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child with the Virgin, Angels, Saints Joseph, Jerome, Mary Magdalene and Eustace, detail of an A n g e l ' s d r a p e r y , S t a a t l i c h e Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

1 3 5 U c c e l l o , Hope, A s s u n t a Chapel, Duomo, Prato.

136 Uccello (?), Crucifixion, detail of Christ's torso, private collection, Florence.

\ .Aft

1 3 8 D e l L i p p i t a b e r n a c l e , c o r n e r of V i a F a n f a n i a n d V i a dei Perfetti Ricasoli, n e a r C a s t e l l o , north of F l o r e n c e .

139 A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist ( a n d U c c e l l o ?), Virgin and Child with God the Father, the Holy Spirit, Angels, Saints and Prophets, from the D e l Lippi tabernacle, Church o f Santa Maria Mater Dei a L i p p i , n o r t h of F l o r e n c e .

1 4 0 A n o n y m o u s F l o r e n t i n e artist (and U c c e l l o ? ) ,

Virgin and Child with God the Father, the Holy Spirit, Angels, Saints John the Baptist and Peter, S a n t a M a r i a M a t e r Dei a L i p p i , F l o r e n c e .

1 4 1 - 1 4 2 A n o n y m o u s Florentine artist ( a n d U c c e l l o ? ) , Saints Lawrence, Stephen,

S a n t a M a r i a M a t e r Dei a L i p p i , F l o r e n c e .

John the Evangelist (?), James and

143 Map of Castello, showing the location of the Ex-Spedale di San Antonio in the circle and the Del Lippi tabernacle in the square. The grounds of the Villa II Vivaio at the top are shaded, as are the grounds of the Villa Petraia at the top right.

1 4 4 U c c e l l o , Creation of the Animals and Creation of Adam, d e t a i l o f the sinopia, M u s e o d i S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a , Florence.

fori • •* 145 A n o n y m o u s F l o r e n t i n e artist ( a n d U c c e l l o ? ) , Virgin and Child with God the Father, the Holy Spirit, Angels, detail of the sinopia, S o v r i n t e n d e n z a ai B e n i Artistic! e Storici, Florence.

146 A n o n y m o u s F l o r e n t i n e artist ( a n d Uccello?), detail of t h e sinopia for Saints L a w r e n c e a n d John the E v a n g e l i s t ( ? ) , S o v r i n t e n d e n z a ai B e n i Artistici e Storici, Florence.

147 U c c e l l o (l),Virgin and Child, private collection ('Martello' Collection), Fiesole.

148 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p a s s i s t a n t o f U c c e l l o , Virgin and Child, private c o l l e c t i o n , P r a t o .

1 4 9 A p p r o x i m a t e r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of t h e C a r n e s e c c h i A l t a r p i e c e : U c c e l l o , Annunciation

and

Four Evangelists - lost (top); M a s o l i n o , Saint Catherine of Alexandria - lost, Virgin and Child - lost, and Saint Julian - M u s e o d ' A r t e Sacra, F l o r e n c e (middle tier); and M a s a c c i o , Scene from the Life of Scant Catherine - lost, Nativity - lost, and Scene from the Life of Saint Julian, M u s e o H o m e , Florence (predella).

1 5 0 M a p of F l o r e n c e by G. Carocci, 1 8 8 9 , b a s e d on t h e 1427 C a t a s t o , d e t a i l of Piazza di Santa M a r i a M a g g i o r e and s u r r o u n d s .

151 San Marco, Venice.

1 5 2 G e n t i l e Bellini, Procession of the Reliquary of the Cross in the Piazza San Marco, d e t a i l o f t h e left p a r t of the f a c a d e of S a n M a r c o , Galleria deH'Accademia, Venice.

1 5 3 G e n t i l e Bellini, Procession of the Reliquary the Cross in the Piazza San Marco, d e t a i l o f U c c e l l o ' s m o s a i c Saint Peter, Galleria dell'Accademia, Venice.

of

-I

154 Attributed to U c c e l l o , Wheel with Ribbon, San Marco, Venice.

156 A t t r i b u t e d to U c c e l l o , Stellated Dodecahedron, detail o f t h e b o r d e r , u n d e r the d o o r of Saint P e t e r , S a n

158 A t t r i b u t e d to U c c e l l o , Stellated Dodecahedron, w i t h a circle o f a r r o w h e a d s h a p e s , San Marco, Venice.

157 U c c e l l o , Resurrection, detail of t h e b o r d e r , D u o m o , Florence,

1 5 9 U c c e l l o , Michelotto Attendolo at the Head of Florentine Troops, detail of geometric design for t h e d e c o r a t i o n o f the shield with a circle o f a r r o w h e a d s h a p e s , M u s e e du L o u v r e , Paris.

1 6 0 S a n t a M a r i a Novella, Florence.

1 6 1 C h i o s t r o V e r d e , s h o w i n g location of Creation Stories, at left, S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a , Florence.

1 6 3 U c c e l l o , Creation of Eve and the Original Sin, C h i o s t r o V e r d e , S a n t a M a r i a N o v e l l a , Florence.

164 Ghiberti, Doors of Paradise, detail of the creation of Adam, Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, Florence.

165 Uccello, Creation of the Animals and Creation of Adam, detail of the creation of Adam, Chiostro Verde, Santa Maria Novella, Florence.

1 6 8 G h i b e r t i , Doors of Paradise, panel with t h e story of Jacob and Essau, M u s e o d e l l ' O p e r a del D u o m o , F l o r e n c e .

170 Ghiberti, Doors of Paradise, p a n e l with t h e story o f D a v i d a n d G o l i a t h , M u s e o d e l l ' O p e r a del D u o m o , F l o r e n c e .

169 U c c e l l o , Annunciation, A s h m o l e a n M u s e u m , Oxford.

1 7 1 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, N a t i o n a l G a l l e r y of Victoria, Melbourne.

1 7 2 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, r e v e r s e , s h o w i n g the arch s h a p e of t h e p a n e l inside the m o d e r n N a t i o n a l G a l l e r y of V i c t o r i a , M e l b o u r n e .

frame,

1 7 3 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the detail o f t h e g o l d e n r a y s , M u s e e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e , Paris

Dragon,

174 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, detail o f t h e m o o n , M u s 6 e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e \ Paris.

*' '* ; >

ft-':* HP!

175 U c c e l l o , &•//"/// George and the Dragon, detail o f t h e c r e s c e n t s on the d r a g o n ' s w i n g s , M u s e e J a c q u e m a r t - A n d r e , Paris.

176 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, d e t a i l o f t h e c r e s c e n t s o n the d r a g o n ' s wings, N a t i o n a l G a l l e r y o f Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

178 Uccello, Birth of the Virgin, Assunta Chapel, D u o m o , Prato.

179 U c c e l l o , Presentation

of the Virgin at the Temple,

A s s u n t a Chapel, D u o m o ,

181 U c c e l l o and A n d r e a di G i u s t o , Stoning of Saint A s s u n t a Chapel, D u o m o , P r a t o .

Stephen,

1 8 2 U c c e l l o , Adoration of die Child, d e t a i l of t h e incised d a t e , S a n M a r t i n o M a g g i o r e , B o l o g m

HHHHHH

14

1 8 6 U c c e l l o , Adoration of the Child, d e t a i l of the sinopia s h o w i n g t h e c o a t s of a r m s , S a n Martino Maggiore, Bologna.

1 8 7 Filippo L i p p i , Adoration of the Child with Saints

1 8 8 U c c e l l o , Adoration

of the

llarione, Jerome and Mary Magdalene and Angels,

Child with the Virgin,

Angels,

Saints Joseph, Jerome,

Mary

G a l l e r i a d e g l i Uffizi, F l o r e n c e .

Magdalene and Eustace, Staatliche Kunsthalle, Karlsruhe.

4- ^LjX.

-

189 Uccello, Quarate predella, M u s e o Diocesano, Florence.

190 U c c e l l o , Q u a r a t e p r e d e l l a , detail of Saint John at Patmos, Museo Diocesano, Florence.

191 Uccello, Q u a r a t e p r e d e l l a , detail o f t h e Adoration Museo Diocesano, Florence.

of the

Magi,

192 U c c e l l o , Q u a r a t e p r e d e l l a , detail o f Saints James and Ansano, Museo Diocesano, Florence.

194 U c c e l l o , Clockface with Four Male Heads, D u o m o , Florence.

195 U c c e l l o , Sacrifice and Drunkenness

of

Noah, detail o f H a m , C h i o s t r o V e r d e , S a n t a Maria N o v e l l a , F l o r e n c e .

196 A n o n y m o u s F l o r e n t i n e artist, Portrait of Five Men (Giotto, Uccello, Donatello, Manetti and Bnmelleschi?),

Musee du Louvre, Paris.

197 B a r t o l o m e o di F r u o s i n o , Desco da Parte: A Birth Scene (recto); A Putto (verso) - v e r s o , T h e N e w Y o r k H i s t o r i c a l S o c i e t y , on l o a n t o M e t r o p o l i t a n M u seum, N e w York.

198 A n o n y m o u s N o r t h Italian artist, Portrait of a Youth, N a t i o n a l G a l l e r y of Victoria, M e l b o u r n e .

199 D o n a t e l l o a n d M i c h e l o z z o , Tomb of Baldasscire Cossa, Baptistery, Florence.

200 Uccello, Female Saint with Two Children, Galleria degli Uffizi, F l o r e n c e .

201 Uccello, Scenes from the Lives of Holy Fathers, detail of an Angel, east wall, cloister, San Miniato ai Monte, Florence.

4

( «t. i . .',-1. 202 U c c e l l o and assistant,

Scenes from the Lives of Holy Fathers, detail of south wall, cloister, San Miniato al Monte, Florence.

2 0 3 U c c e l l o , Man of Sorrows between the Virgin and Saint John the Evangelist, A v a n e predella, M u s e o di S a n M a r c o , F l o r e n c e .

2 0 4 U c c e l l o , Saint George and the Dragon, detail of the d r a g o n , National G a l l e r y , London.

2 0 5 A t t r i b u t e d to B a r t o l o m e o A m m a n n a t i ( 1 5 1 1 - 1 5 9 2 ) , Marble Water Spout in the Shape of a Dragon, M u s e o di S a n t o Spirito, F l o r e n c e , formerly Villa B u s d r a g h i , V a l di Serchio.

206 Uccello, Hunt in a Forest, Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.

2 0 8 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of U c c e l l o ,

Crucifixion

with a Bridgettine Nun Donor, Sister Felicita , triptych, detail of S a i n t B r i d g e t , M e t r o p o l i t a n M u s e u m o f A r t , N e w York.

2 0 9 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant o f U c c e l l o , Crucifixion with a Bridgettine Nun Donor, Sister Felicita, triptych, detail of t h e V i r g i n , M e t r o p o l i t a n M u s e u m of A r t , N e w Y o r k .

SHI 2 1 0 L o r e n z a M e l l i ' s d i a g r a m o f the d e s i g n o f the Virgin and Child on the sheet with t h e d r a w i n g Angel with a Sword; A Cup (Melli, 1998, p. F i g . 2 5 ) .

2 1 1 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of U c c c l l o , Virgin and Child, private collection, P r a t o .

2 1 2 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of U c c e l l o , Vigin and Child, Getty M u s e u m , L o s A n g e l e s .

213 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant o f Uccello, Virgin and Child with Two Angels, H a m i l t o n Collection, P a r i s ( ? )

2 1 4 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of U c c e l l o , Virgin and Child, North C a r o l i n a M u s e u m o f A r t , Raleigh.

2 1 5 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant o f U c c e l l o , Virgin and Child, B o d e M u s e u m , B e r l i n .

2 1 6 A n o n y m o u s w o r k s h o p assistant of U c c e l l o , Virgin and Child with Saint Francis and Two Angels, A l l e n t o w n Art M u s e u m .