The Brancacci Chapel
History
The Brancacci Chapel, as we saw, is located in the Florence's Santa Maria del Carmine church, which is run by an order known as the Carmelites. The chapel is one of the few remaining parts of the church that survived the fire of 1771. The initial patron of the chapel was Pietro Brancacci; however, he died before it could be finished, and because all his sons and brothers had also passed away, the responsibility fell upon his great nephew, Felice Brancacci. By 1435, the Brancacci family was exiled from Florence, and the Medici regime rose to power once more, leaving an unfinished chapel.
In the chapel it was clear that most of the paintings were from the life of St. Peter, the family saint of the Brancacci (specifically Pietro). The paintings also have representations of the Carmelite order, in order highlight both the patron and the religion. Masolino and Masaccio were the two artists chosen to work on the chapel. Masolino was hired first, but shortly after in 1425 he left to complete another project in Hungary. Soon after in 1427, Masaccio abandoned the chapel to work in Rome, where he died a year later. The way our reading described it, when looking at the work of both artist, based on style and technique, Masolino's paintings represent the end of the gothic era. On the other hand, Masaccio's pieces are one of the first to mark a clear beginning of a new era. The two were very different, both in painting and characteristically. Masaccio was known to be a brutish, rough man. The addition of the "accio" to his name, Maso, shows this. Masolino was more gentle. Although they were foils of one another in the art community, their unity on the chapel created elegant, ground breaking work for students like Michaelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci to learn from. When looking at the paintings today, we could make out the differences in their styles and even point out, which artist created what painting of the 12 panels.
The Art
Next we moved on to talk about the other panels individually. One of them was the Raising of Tabitha by Masolino. From the reading and from class, there are many interesting techniques and features of this panel that at first don't come to mind. First of all, it is clear that there are two St. Peters painted. The scene takes place in Jaffa, a village outside Tel Aviv. However, the buildings have Roman arches and some figures are wearing Carmelite order robes and attire from the 15th century. This gives the painting more of connection to the church it is in. On the right, St. Peter is raising Tabitha from the dead. The men surrounding are very expressive to the miracle, while the women have contained reactions. When dealing with space and mass, the women specifically seem to be composed of mostly drapery taking up volume without much showing of the body. On the left, St. Peter is helping a lame man. From the readings, we learn that St. Peter's expression on this side is a furrowed eyebrow, which indicates his doubt in his own abilities. The lame man, on the other hand, reaches out his hand. This extension shows trust and belief that through St. Peter, he will be healed. The painting tells a story, and incorporates many of the techniques we have studied over the past few days.
The painting to the left is called the Baptism of Neophytes by Masaccio. We can tell this is a Masaccio painting from many aspects of this painting. One of the first is the level of nudity and muscularity within the scene. The main part of this that was pointed out during discussion, was the shivering man on the right. This depiction became known as one of the most natural human poses an artist could portray.
In the chapel it was clear that most of the paintings were from the life of St. Peter, the family saint of the Brancacci (specifically Pietro). The paintings also have representations of the Carmelite order, in order highlight both the patron and the religion. Masolino and Masaccio were the two artists chosen to work on the chapel. Masolino was hired first, but shortly after in 1425 he left to complete another project in Hungary. Soon after in 1427, Masaccio abandoned the chapel to work in Rome, where he died a year later. The way our reading described it, when looking at the work of both artist, based on style and technique, Masolino's paintings represent the end of the gothic era. On the other hand, Masaccio's pieces are one of the first to mark a clear beginning of a new era. The two were very different, both in painting and characteristically. Masaccio was known to be a brutish, rough man. The addition of the "accio" to his name, Maso, shows this. Masolino was more gentle. Although they were foils of one another in the art community, their unity on the chapel created elegant, ground breaking work for students like Michaelangelo and Leonardo da Vinci to learn from. When looking at the paintings today, we could make out the differences in their styles and even point out, which artist created what painting of the 12 panels.
The Art
When we first entered the chapel, we were greeted by two walls of art on the outer boundary of the chapel. The one on the right is the Temptation of Adam and Eve by Masolino and the one of the left is the Expulsion from Paradise by Masaccio. As described in the history, Masaccio was a rougher personality than Masolino. We were put to the test to guess which painting belonged to which artist when we first arrived, and it was immediately clear to most of us. Although it is hard to see in the photos, since I was taking it from the floor, the expulsion is definitely a much more sensual representation of a religious scene. Both Adam and Eve have twisted bodies and unique gestures. Adam's is a gesture of shame, while Eve who attempts to hide her nakedness in a Venus pudica pose represents grief. The nude figures show antiquity and a naturalistic outlook on the scene. On the other hand, Masolino's, on the right, has gentle, less muscular and less contorted bodies in his painting. Both Adam and Eve are painted softly, without rough edges as Masaccio was known to do. This opening to the chapel in front of us represents some key differences between the painters that show how more than one artist worked to create the elegance of the chapel that stands today.
Here we are looking at the Tribute Money by Masaccio once again. The scene originally comes from the book of Matthew in the Gospels. Basically, the story begins in the middle with Jesus telling St. Peter to go catch a fish in the water. The story then moves to the left (which is a little cut out), where St. Peter is seen catching a fish and taking a gold coin out of its mouth. Then, on the right St. Peter is seen handing over the coin to pay the tax asked of Jesus for maintaining the temple in Jerusalem. This painting relates to the strong beliefs that the Carmelites had about their origins in the holy city of Jerusalem. Although we did not discuss some of the interesting things Masaccio did with this painting, I thought I should mention some. In the center we see that St. Peter and Jesus are pointing in the same direction, which could help the person looking at this painting follow the direction of the story. Moreover, in both the middle and right scene, the tax collector is the mirror image of St. Peter. This strengthens the narrative and gives perspective to the painting. It allows us to get a very three-dimensional feel to the painting for we can see how St. Peter looks from the front and possibly the back. In addition, the architecture within the painting frame the scene on the right, and act as a separation. Lastly, Masaccio uses two techniques that we learned today. One of them is that all the heads of the men in the painting line up on the same horizontal line, and the second is that there is a vanishing point on Christ's halo.
***Side note on one-point linear perspective
A common motif of the Brancucci Chapel is this technique. Take the above picture as an example. First the artist will create a picture plane. Then, the artist would create a horizon line and a vanishing point. Next, the artist will draw diagonal lines that will join together at the vanishing point created before. Objects that appear larger seem to be in front of objects that appear smaller in the picture. Masaccio was one of the first to use this method on a large-scale commission project.
Another painting in the chapel is the St. Peter Healing with His Shadow. A play on light, symbolism, one-point linear perspective and depth create an intricate portrayal of this scene. In the reading, we learned about monumental relief, and the sculpture-like characteristics of St. Peter and his angles of movement with his shadow. Moreover, both the landscape and urban scenery relates to those seeing the painting, because it is what people at the time were used to walking through. The architecture is also perspectival, creating depth. The vanishing point, as we observed in class, would have been somewhere off the page. The shadows of St. Peter fall as if light were coming from a nearby window. The light represents healing and is a metaphor for the Annunciation of Christ.
The Chiesa di Santo Spirito
Background Information
When we approached the church, the first thing that was noted was the simplicity of its design. It is very minimal in decoration and architecture. There are many straight lines that make up the building. In 1422, the building was burnt down and had to be rebuilt. We learned that the fire was started due to local festivities, such as dropping lit pieces of straw from the top of the church during Pentecost, which have now been changed in many churches, such as the Pantheon, to the dropping of rose petals to stay clear of more tragedy. The church that stands today was designed by Brunelleschi from 1444 to 1446. There was a lot of conflicting ideas that went into the design and building of this church. Brunelleschi had his vision, and the church has its revisions. The church was controlled by the Augustinians, who were able to have stricter control over artistic freedom, than in other churches in Florence.
On the left, we see the Brunelleschi design of part of the church. Originally, Brunelleschi envisioned the church having four doors and four aisles. The clergy members turned down the idea, because it is traditional for the middle aisle to me bigger than the two sides. Brunelleschi also wanted a barrel vault ceiling, however, one again he did not get his wishes, the ceiling was made flat. Brunelleschi actually opposed to much of the church's design in the end. Not only were the above things problems, he also wanted the church in a completely different orientation and with no art or decorations anywhere in site. Yet, of course none of this was granted. Brunelleschi does however stick with his simple ratio designs. The top part of the cross that is horizontal is in a 1:2 ratio with the bottom portion of the linear cross. Moreover, the arches in the church follow a 2:1 ratio as well. The arches are twice as high as the spaces above them and are romanesque.
We strolled into the church and the first thing we looked was Michelangelo’s wooden polychrome crucifix, executed when the artist was 17 years old. Michelangelo would dissect fresh corpses from the church's crypt to observe the dimensions, proportions and workings of the body to achieve naturalism in his sculptures. The sculpture apparently was found when someone stumbled upon it in the 1960s while going through the church’s old things. There was some doubt as to whether or not this is the work of Michelangelo because sculpture is not the usual heroic and muscular form of his later pieces. However, it is one of his earliest works known, and it is of course possible for an artist's style to change as he matures. In the 2000s, scientific studies concluded that it was the work of Michelangelo. The truly fascinating and shocking factor of this sculpture is the nudity. It is assumed that the sculpture originally had a real cloth put on it, but currently it does not have one. We also observed that the body is twisted, instead of a straight frontal that we are used to seeing in a crucifixion. The feet were purposefully laid one over the other, so that one nail could be hammered through them. Last, these wooden sculptures usually had the unique trait of motion of the arms. However, it is clear that Michelangelo did not have this feature because the arms are carved straight and do not look designed for sockets. However, lines can be seen where sockets have been installed, so that Christ can be taken down, wrapped, buried and then dug up on Good Friday.
Altarpieces
The conversation then quickly moved to a new topic: Altarpieces. In 1215 there was an ecumenical council known as Lateran IV that set the ball rolling to change how priests were oriented in mass. Instead of the priest having his back to the congregation with a lavish design on his robes, the priest now turned to face the people. The doctrine of Transubstantiation - that the bread and wine of the Eucharist truly become the body and flesh of Christ - was also confirmed. Artists began designing altarpieces to decorate and focus the masses the to the front of the room. Altarpieces have never been, nor ever are, a requirement for mass. The first types of altar decoration were called Frontals, located in front of the altar, and would block viewing the priest's feet. Eventually frontals were moved behind the altar, growing in size, and becoming altarpieces. These frontal pieces help to tell the story behind the priest where the altarpiece would lie. In the 15th century, artists played around with the design of altarpieces. Artists moved from the use of multiple panels (polyptych), to the single unified rectilinear field (a pala).
Altarpieces
The conversation then quickly moved to a new topic: Altarpieces. In 1215 there was an ecumenical council known as Lateran IV that set the ball rolling to change how priests were oriented in mass. Instead of the priest having his back to the congregation with a lavish design on his robes, the priest now turned to face the people. The doctrine of Transubstantiation - that the bread and wine of the Eucharist truly become the body and flesh of Christ - was also confirmed. Artists began designing altarpieces to decorate and focus the masses the to the front of the room. Altarpieces have never been, nor ever are, a requirement for mass. The first types of altar decoration were called Frontals, located in front of the altar, and would block viewing the priest's feet. Eventually frontals were moved behind the altar, growing in size, and becoming altarpieces. These frontal pieces help to tell the story behind the priest where the altarpiece would lie. In the 15th century, artists played around with the design of altarpieces. Artists moved from the use of multiple panels (polyptych), to the single unified rectilinear field (a pala). The first two we looked at were 1 panel examples with frontals. Here there is a frontal, a pala and a predella. Predellas were on most altarpieces and they consisted of 3-5 small panels under the pala that would tell a story of the main characters in the S.
Andrea Sansovino's piece above is an example we saw of a carved altarpiece. The Eucharist would go in the middle, and the other parts served as intricate decoration. We saw how he played with depth in the marble within the architecture. For example, in the Annunciation scene, you can see he carved very deeply to show perspective, which is incredibly difficult because the marble becomes weaker as it is pierced.
Until the first quarter of the 15th century, polyptych altarpieces were made. This one on the left is an example. They were more popular in earlier times. This specific one has lost its frame, however, we can still make out in the wood where it would have been. This style consists of lots of gold leaf in the background and is very expensive. As time went on in the 15th century, there was a massive change in that people valued skill of style over how expensive the materials were for the artwork.
This picture of a curtain was put in place when this altarpiece was moved to another location. The curtain shows us what would usually be placed in front of an altarpiece, since the church usually enjoyed revealing the work. Most of the time the curtains would be down and would only go up for mass or special ceremonies for holidays.
Above we observed the Capella Dei. This is the Madonna Enthroned with Saints and it has a very avant garde mannerism. The edges are soft, and the nudity and draping is very sexual. An example of this is seen on the man portrayed in the right corner of the piece (S. Sebastian), where the drapery is hung in very provocative manner. This transgressive and, often, demonic style is done by Rosso Fiorentino. He is an artist that enjoys pushing the edge, and being known as the antithesis of Michelangelo. He believes that his materials are dead, thus what he is creating is dead and enjoy painting creatures such a zombies coming to life in his painting. Michelangelo tried to bring life into his sculptures through naturalism of the human body.
The first and second part of the morning were rather different from one another. Each had their own motifs and stories. However, I think it is important that perfecting visual analysis, learning the history of altarpieces and the Brancacci chapel, and figuring out how to spot one-point linear perspective in a painting are what we each take away from the short morning.
Ciao,
Frances Grinfeld
