In the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent by God to a town in Galilee called Nazareth, to a Virgin engaged to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David. The Virgin`s name was Mary. And he came to her and said, "Greetings, favored one! The Lord is with you." But she was much perplexed by his words and pondered what sort of greeting this might be. The angel said to her, "Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have favor with God. And now, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you will name him Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High, and the Lord God will give him the throne of his ancestor David. He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end." LUKE 1: 26-33
First, I will cede a mere modicum of divers postulations or anomalies, in order to give you better acumen as to my presence of mind. The story of the Annunciation is only told in the book of Luke, yet the portrayal of the Annunciation subject in art is ubiquitous for the timeframe discussed herein, the late Medieval and early Renaissance periods in Italy. Someone had a clear motive to propitiate the firmness of this account. Next, Fra Angelico was under the spell of a furious blast of winds, the zephyrs of Catholicism, truly blown by the Mendicant orders, the Franciscan and Benedictine, the latter of which he was a member. Expeditiously, Fra Angelico is in some measure Gothic, but at the same time, a practitioner of new ideas, accrued from the fresh insights of Masaccio! (Please note that Lorenzo Monaco was his chief mentor). Contemporary scholarship on Beato (Angel), exclusively for the recent Metropolitan exhibition, has been made ready by Laurence Kanter, the chief art historian for this prodigious panoply. Essential to ones collection is Fra Angelico by Laurence Kanter and Pia Palladino, and published by The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York and Yale University Press, New Haven and London. The principium of this text, and sharply in opposition to John Pope-Hennessy from the old school, is that Kanter upholds Fra Angelico`s position as an deviceful artist, in the Florentive Quattrocento, conspicuously after the death of Masaccio in 1428, and before the advent of Fra Filippo Lippi. Foremost, when I experienced this exhibition on December 27, 2005, and without herein unveiling indulgent rhapsodies, I was bestruck with its perfection and fragrance of beauty, never played back in prior romps! Beato had such a saintly inspired and steady hand! So delicate was his application of paint-zealously, I scrutinized the surfaces of these antiquated panels-that one may imagine that the temper paint was applied with a needle, rather than a brush! So with these theories as an underpinning, I will begin to mull over sundry executions of the Annunciation.
The earliest rendering of this subject by Fra Angelico was plausibly painted between 1413 and 1417 (see Laurence Kanter-pp. 22-24). It was done on two different panels, one as The Annunciatory Angel (11 3/8 x 12 ¼ in.) and one as The Virgin Annunciate (11 ¾ x 12 3/8 in.). In point of fact, I ogled these ethereal gems at the Metropolitan last December! Both are close models of Lorenzo Ghiberti`s bronze relief of the subject on the north door of the Baptistry in Florence. Even God the Father is shown in the top left hand corner of the Virgin piece with golden rays and the dove of the Holy Ghost. While the two medallion-like works are still primarily Gothic, the folds in the Virgin`s blue robes are true to nature. The wings of Gabriel are exquisitely articulated as he grasps a lily in his left hand. The Annunciation by Simone Martini painted some one-hundred years before, has a lily in Gabriel`s hand as well, yet it is the right hand. Angelico`s interpretation differs from Ghiberti`s in that the figures are discernible within the interior of the architectural structure.
Throughout his tenure there is an apparent, increasing sculptural quality to his models-Donatello`s marbles and bronzes were very much an inspiration. The paint colors (tempera only) chosen are roses, blues, pinks, golds, and grays. Angelico employs bolder color choices than other artists from that time, with Lorenzo Monaco or Gentile da Fabriano as amenable guides. It is unknown what function the panels served, but they must have been part of a tabernacle or reliquary (Laurence Kanter-p. 23).The two heavenly characters are also separated out in Giotto`s Annunciation, a most famous version in the Arena Chapel in Padua, painted around 1305, and not long after the chapel was built by its wealthy patron Scrovegni. Giotto`s Mary is matronly and more closely resembles an indigenous Italian of the Trecento. Angelico`s is to a greater extent innocent, perhaps younger, and more in tune with the other world. Duccio Buoninsegna`s Annunciation, in the National Gallery, London, and painted in Siena in the early Trecento, manifests a harbinger of modernity, with the central characters in motion, and a contemporary architectural backdrop. Duccio makes use of a lively application of color, and circumscribed command of the robes of Gabriel and Mary, in their shading and folds. Noteworthy too, are the mystical mastery of the vase of lilies and the descending dove of the Holy Spirit up in the arches. As to whether Fra Angelico ever saw Giotto or Duccio`s paintings, there is no surviving record, but it is believable that he did, when one examines his offerings.
I choose to discuss the next three principal versions of the Annunciation by Fra Angelico in ascending order (from the base of the mountain to its pinnacle), according to my predilection for the paintings. The Annunciation at the Museo Nacional del Prado, Madrid (1425-1426) is one piece associated with Fra Angelico`s early-middle period; that is, when he was still under the spell of Lorenzo Ghiberti and Gentile da Fabriano. He is especially informed by Fabriano in his use of color and his penchant for meticulous design. Please study Gentile da Fabriano`s perception of the Annunciation. It does appear as if Fra utilized Fabriano`s streaming diagonal beam of golden light, radiating from God. The small altarpiece for San Domenico at Fiesole by Fra Angelico is wrought with detail; just look at the Garden of Eden drama unfolding to the left side of the panel, with Adam and Eve, an angel, and vivid verdure coupled with the bountiful fruits of paradise. Moreover, there is much painstaking accessary in the Archangel`s wings and his gilded rose-colored garments. The edifice, enveloping Gabriel and Mary, and highlighting the miracle with tans and whites, exudes mathematical precision and harmony. Profoundly, Angelico projects out of the Gothic references of Fabriano and his recent past, and into the scientific cadences of a Fillippo Brunelleschi or a Ghiberti. Conjointly, observe the subtle shading of the back chamber behind Our Lady-perhaps the boudoir of the Virgin herself! Curiously examine the swallow (rondine) perched on an iron tie rod to the left, and just above the Virgin-no doubt, a pun referring to the patron Allessandro Rondinelli (Laurence Kanter-p. 83).
The real space depiction of the figures in its architectural context, as well as their more pronounced genuflection (Kanter`s word), is a departure from Fabriano`s mostly rigid models and flat spatial frame of reference. Both of the blessed models are humbly stooped, and their hands are folded in sacrosanct devotion. Their faces are gentle, soft, and rosily irreproachable, and magnanimous gilded halos radiate about their heads! Too, the draperies behind the Virgin echo the gold/ochre of Gabriel`s wings, as do the deep blues of her robe parallel in tone the upper arches cascading down to the columns. The pinks of the Virgin`s undergarments are appreciably lighter than the Archangel`s, and subtly act as bookends to the smaller angel in the paradise scene to the left of the panel.
The Annunciation altarpiece from the church of San Domenico in Cortona (1430 or 1431) is emblematic of the late-middle period of Fra Angelico. This stylistic shift is outlined by a pruning of excessive elements, along with a sharper focus on the thematic developing drama within the painting (Laurence Kanter-p. 24). That is, considerable more tribute is paid to Masaccio, who died in 1428 in Rome. Some of the cornerstones of Masaccio`s revolutionary vicissitudes include: figures that appear more sculpture-like (inspiration from Donatello), the depiction of real space, as it appears to the naked eye in nature, the use of foreshortening, the employment of chiaroscuro, and lastly, the simplification of particular peripheral elements. Moreover, a most significant breakthrough of Masaccio, is the illustration of personages in histrionic motion or expression. I am proffering, as an example, the Expulsion from the Garden of Eden, in the Brancacci Chapel, which is within the church of Santa Maria del Carmine in Florence. And without the differentiating flagrancy of a bellowing braggadocio, I had the charmed occasion to visit this church in October of 2000, and could give testimony firsthand to the salient qualities of Masaccio`s revelations of technique.
With these new forms at his disposal, Fra Angelico begins to give birth to a number of compositions that betoken this new late-middle period style. In order to better grasp Beato`s newly acquired synthesis of the modus operandi of the one gifted Masaccio, I beseech you to look at The Apostle Saint James the Greater Freeing the Magician Hermogenes, painted in the late 1430s.This piece is in the permanent collection of the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth-I shall make a point to feast my eyes on it with flagitous fanfare! Its creation coincides with a contiguous date to the Cortona Annunciation, as the figures also betray emotive action in their drawing. So then, as a result of the lessons gleaned from Masaccio, one may observe how much more motion is detectable in the Archangel and Mary of the Cortona piece, than in the Prado painting of about five or six years before. True also, the clothing reveals Masaccio`s influence notably, with the judicious use of chiaroscuro, and in the delineation of the folds of say, Mary`s blue robe or the rose skirt of Gabriel. One befuddlement, since his late-middle period is primarily associated with a bereavement of excessive ephemera, i.e. in apparent contradistinction-yet oddly the gilded wings of Gabriel are considerably embellished and thus distinguished from earlier productions, and the golden throne is almost Byzantine, with its geometric ornamentation! This can be made plain, perhaps, by the fact that these delicate touches give credence to the central drama of the calling up of Mary. As a consequence, they are not mere incidental minutiae that cast the eye away from the substrative vision, but contribute to the cardinal proceedings of the pictorial narrative-this too would be in deference to Masaccio!
By way of comparison, the Deposition, originally in the sacristy of the Santa Trinita of Florence, is in like manner from Angelico`s middle period (early 1430s), and is stylistically aligned to the Cortona Annunciation (Laurence Kanter-p. 87). Further, the components of the Deposition are realistic, as in the wood grain of the cross, the lash wounds on Christ, the cypress trees, the city of Jerusalem, and as a final embroidery, the indigenous Florentine attire of the saints and sinners (Laurence Kanter-p. 87). The Adoration of the Magi by Gentile da Fabriano, finished in 1423, and in the same church, provides sustenance for Beato`s panoramic depiction of Christ`s removal from the cross (Laurence Kanter-p. 87). Both paintings are distinguished by jewel-like precision and are fairy-tale portrayals of two unique biblical events, construed, in both cases, with much detachment.
The last of Beato`s oeuvre that I will deliberate on, does emphatically bestow an optimum ravishment for my eyes, as do many of the frescoes from the Benedictine convent of San Marco in Florence. It is another Annunciation, painted in the 1440s, for the north corridor of the convent . The only other reference to the frescoes in San Marco that I can provide here, is Saint Dominic in Adoration before the Crucifix, that resides in the cloister of the convent, and is closest in style to the Annunciation. These two masterpieces, falling in the late years of his career, were painted by Beato only, as they reveal the hallmarks of his gentle hand. A considerable large quantity of these frescoes brandish the intervention of assistants (Laurence Kanter-pp. 184 and 185). This is primarily due to the fact that Fra Angelico depended on assistants to help him complete the considerable volume of work necessary to satisfy the demands of his patrons. Too, I am most fond of the fresco medium, and this contributes to my appreciation for this particular rendition. And another suggestion is the stark simplicity of this work, where ones eye is only focused on the blessed visitation of the Archangel Gabriel, as messenger, delivering the inevitable cosmic fate of the Virgin Mary.
Markedly, this painting is Masaccioesque-with the sweeping, agile genuflection of the models-they have body and presence, as they would in nature. Examine the Expulsion from Paradise to see how Masaccio captures Adam and Eve moving away in sorrow, after they have gravely disappointed their Maker! The stately edifice, in the San Marco fresco, is bathed in natural light, and this augments its religiosity and is proof of its simplicity; one can only see form in nature according to the conditions of light on that environment. This is a trait of Beato`s late phase, as he increasingly uses the effects of light on the models and the architecture; and this illumination as to the effects of light dictates his use of color, shading, and depth perception (Laurence Kanter-p. 184. note: some of this is my own idea). The cognition of the effects of light is an opulent divination for the Benedictine monk, as he more confidently grasps its true meaning!
As an opened-ended synopsis, I will just append some scant, yet canny inklings that visited my brain while I was partaking of my morn-peregrinations. First, and legitimately, Fra Angelico has not been given a befitting entitlement, as argued by Laurence Kanter, assuredly a preeminent authority on the subject of Beato. In some measure, the grounds for this are that the Dominican monk elevated or extended the revelations of Masaccio; this is principally a verity with regards to the three-dimensional depiction of models in real space. These factors include: motion, shading, and the use of light, utilized as rules or perhaps, as milestones, i.e. dictates, by which he could exactly position the lines and colors on the wood panel! The evidence that he put them in the exact befitting point and used the appropriate colors is, nothing short of a miracle! Next, Angelico`s creations are both religious and scientific at the same time-aye, most harmoniously balanced between these two zeitgeists! That is, he used traditional biblical stories, but projected them into the present with au courant buildings and people, and contempo clothing-yea, these outfits assume the quality of costumes to us today. Just to give proper credit, Giotto had initiated this trend in the early Trecento, then Gentile da Fabriano and others had upheld it. One clear aesthetic syndrome used by Beato is the idealization of models, such as the Virgin, Gabriel, and Jesus. And while others before him had inaugurated this, Beato did it most superbly, so the models appear as real saints-truly, they could reside in heaven itself! Lastly, the master Beato had the most graceful hand in the entire history of art-his central nevous system was wired to perfection; not even Leonardo had such a gentle touch!
