FRA ANGELICO

THE DEAD CHRIST.THE DEAD CHRIST.

Rio supposes that the enthusiasm aroused by the greatDeposition in Santa Trinità, tempted the Company to covet the possession of a similar one.[47]

Only two figures, however, are common to the two paintings: one is the St. Simeon kneeling in the left corner who, in this second picture, is represented as a younger man than in the first; the other is a figure a little behind him, which is a reproduction of that one in the large Deposition with a hood on his head, who is speaking to the disciple below him, as he entrust to him the body of the Saviour;—a figure which Milanesi believes to be a portrait of the architect Michelozzo.

If this be indeed Fra Angelico's friend the Florentine architect, we may admit Cartier's assertion that this panel is a sequel of the larger Descent from the Cross, and may have been painted at the same time.[48]But these are things which we dare not affirm with any certainty, as we entertain doubts regarding the greater or less authenticity of writers on the subject of Michelozzo's portrait.

Besides many figures of saints, the painter has introduced those of St. Dominic and the Beata Villana, because the Company of the Temple had ancient rights over the relicsof this good woman which are preserved in the Dominican church of Santa Maria Novella. The other figures, though expressing divers feelings of sorrow and lively sympathy, have nothing in common with the famous Deposition either in character or technique and the picture does not reach the usual perfection.

Even the type of the Christ differs remarkably in the two paintings, so much so that no comparison can be instituted, or resemblance found between them; moreover, the panel of the Temple Company is badly spoilt by restoration, and the colouring is so altered that it is almost black in some parts.

"In the Chapel of the SS. Annunziata at Florence which Piero di Cosimo de' Medici caused to be built, Fra Angelico painted the doors of the presses where the silver plate is kept, with little figures executed with great diligence."[49]They represent the life and death of Christ in 35 small scenes, which are now in the Ancient and Modern Gallery.

FLIGHT INTO EGYPT.FLIGHT INTO EGYPT.

CHRIST BETRAYED BY JUDAS.CHRIST BETRAYED BY JUDAS.

Padre Marchese writes: "I believe it was in Fiesole that he painted many of those little panels, which may now beseen in the Gallery of the Florentine Academy of Design, and perhaps also the doors of the presses for the silver vessels in the chapel of the SS. Annunziata at Florence. In his first edition Vasari had enumerated them among his early works, which may have seemed probable, as Fra Angelico's first steps in art were in illuminating and painting small stories."[50]

But as it was only in 1448 that Piero de' Medici, to show his devotion to the Virgin of the Annunciation, obtained from the monks the patronage of that altar with the intention of adorning it with a splendour worthy of the dignity of Her to whom it was dedicated,[51]we cannot suppose that Fra Angelico painted the door of its treasure presses before that time.

Rio also dates at the epoch of the monk's sojourn in Tuscany towards 1450, the great unfinished painting now in the Academy of the Belle Arti, which has been regarded as one of Fra Angelico's first works. We know as a fact that in 1450 he was prior of the convent at Fiesole, and may believe that he stayed some time in Tuscany, before returning to Rome to finish the chapel of Pope Nicholas V.[52]But Rio adds that "besides the date of the building of the chapel,the fact that the portrait of Michelozzo represents him as older in this work than in the Deposition," suggests for this cyclic composition an approximative date, very far from that assigned to it previously.[53]

We must not forget, however, that several doubts arise as to the identity of the person representing Michelozzo.

Vasari recognises him in that old Nicodemus with a hood, who lowers the Christ from the cross in the Deposition, while Milanesi, asserting that Nicodemus has a saint's aureole not a cowl, holds that the portrait of Michelozzo is to be seen in the figure with a black hood who speaks with the disciple beneath him as he gives the body of the Lord into his hands. Certainly Milanesi has good reason to doubt Vasari's assertion, as Nicodemus has no hood: moreover Vasari himself in his second edition of the Lives (1568) assigns as the architect's likeness that very figure with a cowl who is speaking to the disciple. Therefore we must admit that the Aretian Historian was mistaken either in his indication of the figure, or in the reproduction of it as a headpiece to his Life of Michelozzo.

THE RESURRECTION OF LAZARUS.THE RESURRECTION OF LAZARUS.

THE SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS.THE SLAUGHTER OF THE INNOCENTS.

In any case, a similar figure to that in the "Deposition," and with the same head-gear, again appears a little older in the fresco of the convent of San Marco representing the "Adoration of the Magi"; also in another picture of the "Presentation in the Temple"; and in the little square with a "Flight into Egypt", on one of the doors of SS. Annunziata. If Michelozzo be really portrayed here, we must conclude that the Deposition was painted long before 1442, and the press doors about the same time, or a little later; but the student must take into account the curious fact that in the "Deposition" the disciple who talks to the man with a cowl above him, has also a certain resemblance to the supposed Michelozzo, and that Nicodemus reappears as St. John Baptist on the left of the large altar-piece painted for the church of San Marco, as well as in the picture of the dead Christ, and also as the kneeling King who kissesthe feet of the Babe in the fresco of the "Adoration of the Magi."

Therefore, without giving great importance to the question of the true portrait of Michelozzo, we find that these heads, whether of Nicodemus or the hooded disciple, are represented in various pictures by our artist, modified by age, so that from them we may establish the succession of the different works, i. e. first the "Dead Christ" of the Company of the Temple, next the picture at San Marco (1438), then the "Deposition," and lastly the fresco in San Marco, and the little "Annunciation." Thus all these works would certainly date during Fra Angelico's stay in Florence.

ENTOMBMENT OF CHRIST.ENTOMBMENT OF CHRIST.

CORONATION OF THE VIRGIN.CORONATION OF THE VIRGIN.

But to return to the doors of the presses in the SS. Annunziata, it is true, as Rio writes, that instead of being a series of subjects for future frescoes or altar-pieces, the "stories" seem a hasty resumé, often too hasty, of works already painted in the convent of San Marco or other places. Some of them are noticeable for firmness of design and vigour of colouring, others instead are unworthy of the master and evidently show another hand.

To give this great work its due appreciation we must take it as a whole, as the profound genius of Fra Angelico hadconceived it. Wishing to give it the unity of a dramatic poem, he placed at the beginning and at the end, like a prologue and an epilogue, two symbolic figures, in the last of which the seven branched candlestick serves as a support to the Old and New Testaments.[54]

We may enumerate among the best scenes the "Flight into Egypt," the "Slaughter of the Innocents," the "Betrayal of Judas," the "Dead Christ," and the "Resurrection of Lazarus," all composedin Giottesque style: but, when we think of the progress of Fra Angelico in art as shown in the frescoes in San Marco, and his best panel paintings, we cannot avoid noticing a certain want of vigour in these presses.

Having become accustomed to the grander methods of fresco painting, in which his talent and ability found greater scope for expression,—even though not attaining to the ease and force of some of his contemporaries and followers,—Fra Angelico must havenow found himself at the disadvantage, natural to one who, after moving free in wider space, is suddenly cramped into narrower confines. This explains why we find in some of these small panels, greater conventionality in the representation of scenes and action, and less ease and correctness of execution. We might add also, that many of them, where these defects are especially evident, may be ascribed to other hands, less clever than his own, those of his assistants who were called in to expedite the work and assist the artist.

Rio believes that two of Angelico's paintings, one of which was once in the Dominican monastery of San Vincenzo d'Annalena, and the other in that of the Frati dell'Osservanza in Mugello, but now both at the Belle Arti, wereexecuted later than the frescoes in the Vatican, to which they offer an extraordinary resemblance, not perceivable in the artist's earlier works.[55]

THE SYMBOLIC WHEEL.THE SYMBOLIC WHEEL.

THE MADONNA AND CHILD WITH SAINTS.THE MADONNA AND CHILD WITH SAINTS.(Annalena Convent.)

THE MADONNA AND CHILD WITH ANGELS AND SAINTS.THE MADONNA AND CHILD WITH ANGELS AND SAINTS.(From the Convent of the Osservanza.)

We cannot, however, accept the assertion of the French critic. These two pictures, though utterly different in character and type, too forcibly recall his previous works. And as according to the same author the altar-piece of the monksof the Mugello resembles the other in colouring, technique, the freer style of drapery, the type of the Virgin and character of the figures, we might reasonably conclude that both paintings belong to the period of his residence at Fiesole or Florence, i. e. previous to his departure for Rome in 1445.

We are even less inclined to endorse the opinion of Rio in regard to the date of the painting from the Annalena Convent. The internal organization of the convent was only regulated by a bull of Pope Nicholas V. after 1450, so there is probably no connection between the internal establishment of the convent and the Commission for the picture.

The convent (it is well to remember) was founded in 1453, but the religious intentions of Anna Elena Malatesta met with no slight resistance, and it was not till 1455, that Pope Calixtus III. conceded her permission to "build in her house a public oratory in which mass should be celebrated and the divine Offices performed." We cannot then admit that the picture was specially painted for the convent named[56]after that saintly lady. When one reflects that Anna Elena Malatesta, foundress of the monastery, was educated in the house of Attilio di Vieri de' Medici, and was by Cosimo Pater Patriæ married to Baldaccio of Anghiari, it is not unlikely that the picture had been a commission from Cosimo, and that when Annalena was left a widow, and took the vows in 1441, it was offered by him to the convent, to which the sad widow had consecrated all her care. It is the more probable, that it was painted for the Medici, because the two patron saints of their house are represented in it.

SS. Cosmo and Damian only appear in the pictures painted by Fra Angelico in Florence, probably in recognition of the benefits bestowed by Cosimo on the monks of San Marco; moreover, we do not think the work could have been done at Fiesole after the first visit to Rome in 1452, because the figures, weak in chiaro-scuro, are still treated as if they were enlarged miniatures, and do not show the character of his later works. On the other hand the picture of the Osservanza in Mugello displays the whole power of the artist, and may be compared, as Rio says, to the panel at San Marco both in the character of the figures and the larger style of treatment.

Vasari cites other works which have unfortunately been dispersed or destroyed, among which were an altar-piece inthe Certosa at Florence, representing the "Virgin and Child," with some angels below, and at the sides St. Laurence, St. Zenobi, and St. Benedict; the "Coronation of the Madonna," once in the lunette of the Acciajoli chapel: another with the "Virgin and two saints," painted "con azzurri oltramarini bellissimi," (with beautiful ultramarine blues): and the pictures in the dividing wall of Santa Maria Novella opposite the choir. The "Annunciation," which according to Vasari was in the church of San Francesco at San Miniato, and which Milanesi believes to be in the Museum of Madrid, is instead now in the National Gallery at London. It is a diptych, in one panel the archangel Gabriel, with golden wings outspread, crossing his hands on his breast bows before the Virgin, who in the other panel leans forward to listen to his blessed word. The scene is in a cloister, from the arches of which a field of flowers is seen, and in the distant horizon the outlines of the Apennine mountains. A great lily blossoms beside the Virgin, the two capitals of the columns of the cloister have the Albizzi arms carved on them.

"This good Father painted so many pictures for the houses of the citizens of Florence, that one wonders how one man could so perfectly execute even in many years all that he has done." So writes Vasari, and indeed a completelist of his paintings still existing in Italy and elsewhere would be too long; those we have illustrated will, however, suffice to give a good idea of his artistic genius, and the sentiment with which this gentle artist could represent the marvellous visions of a soul in love with heaven!

THE LAST SUPPER.THE LAST SUPPER.

CHRIST IN JUDGMENT.CHRIST IN JUDGMENT.(Orvieto, Cathedral.)

These many and various labours—writes Vasari—"having rendered the name of Fra Giovanni illustrious throughout all Italy, he was invited to Rome by Pope Nicholas V., who caused him to adorn the chapel of the palace, where the pontiff is accustomed to hear mass, with a "Deposition from the Cross," and with certain events from the life of San Lorenzo, which are admirable."[57]

But Vasari errs in giving to Nicholas V. the merit of having called Fra Angelico to Rome; he is also mistakenin affirming that the artist was offered the archbishopric of Florence, and on his modest refusal Sant' Antonino was proposed to the Pope: "and because Fra Giovanni appearing to the Pope to be, as he really was, a person of most holy life, gentle and modest, the archbishopric of Florence having then become vacant, he judged him worthy of that preferment."[58]

It was instead Pope Eugene IV., who wishing to embellish the Vatican with pictures, invited Fra Angelico to Rome in 1445, having admired his sanctity of life, and talent in art when in Florence. That Pope died the following year, but in his successor Nicholas V., Fra Angelico found another sincere admirer and friend, and he remained in Rome to finish the works he had begun. He painted two chapels in the Vatican, the one of the Sacrament for Eugene IV., the other for Pope Nicholas V., whose name it still bears. The former was pulled down by Pope Paul III. to improve the staircase.

"In this work," says Vasari, "which was an excellent one, Fra Giovanni had in his own admirable manner painted stories in fresco from the life of Christ, and had introduced many portraits of eminent persons then living. These portraits would most probably have been lost to us, had notPaulo Jovius caused the following among them to be preserved for his Museum: Pope Nicholas V., the Emperor Frederick, who had at that time arrived in Italy; Fra Antonino, who afterwards became Archbishop of Florence; Biondo da Forlì, and Ferdinand of Arragon."[59]

It is probable that after having finished the chapel of the Sacrament, and before the new commission was given by Nicholas V., Fra Angelico—by means of Don Francesco di Barone of Perugia, a Benedictine monk and celebrated master of glass painting—entered into negotiation with the Operai and Consuls of the Duomo at Orvieto, to paint the chapel of the Madonna di San Brizio. But before he accepted the commission he gave them to understand that he could only go to Orvieto in the months of June, July and August, when he did not wish to remain in Rome.

"He demanded 200 gold ducats a year, together with all expenses of board and lodging, colours and scaffolding; besides seven ducats a month for his assistant, and two for his boy. The contract was signed on these conditions by Messer Enrico Monaldeschi, the principal citizen—almostthe tyrant—of Orvieto, who always took a personal part in the most important events of the city. Fra Angelico took with him Benozzo di Lese, Giovanni di Antonio da Firenze, and Iacomo di Poli, with whose assistance he commenced the painting in the large lunettes on June 15th 1447. Pietro di Niccola of Orvieto was also employed. They painted together for three months and a half, but Fra Angelico did not return the following year.

"As the summer of 1449 drew near, the overseers, who were left with only Pietro Baroni, a proved artist, endeavoured to persuade Fra Angelico to go back again, and join Baroni, saying that if he failed them, they would prefer to postpone the work, as they looked more to the beauty than the expense, as they always had been accustomed to do. When every hope of obtaining Fra Angelico was lost, they gave Benozzo Gozzoli a trial to continue Fra Giovanni's frescoes,"[60]but the effect was not happy.

THE PROPHETS.THE PROPHETS.

Fra Angelico painted in the roof of the chapel a "Christ in Judgment," surrounded by a "glory" of angels. Sixteen saints and prophets are seated on clouds with the motto:Prophetarum laudabilis numerus. The Saviour in a circleof light raises His right hand on high, while the left supports a globe on His knees. On both sides are groups of angels in varied attitudes of adoration. The prophets stand out in pyramidal groups on a background of gold, and are either reading or meditating with religious calm. Rosini judges the Christ to be the work of Benozzo Gozzoli, because it seems inferior to the prophets, which show a grander treatment and better execution. "I think," he writes, "that the prophets alone belong to Fra Angelico; the Christ in glory, and the remainder to Benozzo and the others. I am led to this not only by their different style, but the heads of the prophets, although they are disposed one above the other, as the space demands, show the more dignified style, and perfect execution of the Florentine monk. That perfection ought to be seen also in the Christ, which seems to me to be a little inferior to them."[61]

But even while admitting that the features of the Saviour have in some parts the characteristics of Benozzo's style, we must not forget that he derived from his master both his good and bad points, and from the latter especially originated those peculiar defects, which are greatly emphasized in Benozzo's works. Hence it is natural that something of thescholar's manner should appear in that face, but it is no proof that he has worked at it. On the contrary it is enough to prove the impossibility of ascribing this figure to him, to glance at the head of Christ in Benozzo's fresco in the church of St. Francis at Montefalco, representing the meeting of St. Francis and St. Dominic. High up on the left the Saviour raises His right hand and the Virgin kneels at His feet. Now all the figures are absolutely wanting in dignity and character, especially the downcast head of Christ, with its projecting forehead and receding chin, which is absolutely vulgar. Here Benozzo has not even distantly remembered any of his master's noble representations of the Saviour. Therefore not only had he no part in that figure at Orvieto, but neither could he have done the prophets, for they are far superior to the Christ. Finally, it is not probable that Fra Angelico, with the feeling which inspired his work, should entrust to an assistant the execution of such an important figure as the Christ.

Even though the figure of the Christ is not to be compared to the finest of the prophets, yet we find in the countenance the same characteristics as the other heads display. True, it looks worse than it really is, for a crack in the roof has damaged the mouth and beard, and the fresco has besides suffered in the restorer's hands.

It is a known fact, that a few months after Fra Angelico left, it was necessary to repair the roof of the chapel in which he had worked, on account of the rain that percolated there, to the great detriment of the paintings.

However this may be, it is certain that the heads of the prophets have sweetness of expression and nobility of character, and all the figures are remarkable for their fine form, dignified attitudes, free and simple draperies, combined with bright and vivid colouring. These qualities are not so visible in the compartment of our Lord and the adoring angels, which may with more certainty be attributed to Benozzo.

Fra Angelico returned to Rome on the 28th of September in that year (1447) and never went back to Orvieto, but his reasons for breaking his contract and leaving a work incomplete are not explained.

Perhaps he perceived the difficulties of the composition and was arrested by the terrifying dread—which his character and feeling would have magnified—of painting a Last Judgment in such grand proportions. Or he may have had an intuition, that his work would never be worthy of that famous building, especially as he was called on to depict the punishments of hell and the various feelings of sorrow, passion and despair in the damned souls, sentiments so foreign to hisown nature. Or possibly the desire to finish the paintings entrusted to him in Rome by the new Pontiff Nicholas V., induced him to break his contract. In the absence of more precise records it is difficult to establish the truth.

Certain it is that Fra Angelico left Orvieto for Rome and that he painted there a "Studio" or Chapel for Nicholas V., for which the payment is entered in a register dated 1449, but "after this year," writes Müntz, "we find no more traces of the illustrious Dominican, in the books of the secret treasury."[62]

On January 10th 1452 Fra Angelico is again at Fiesole as prior of his convent, and in the same year the rulers of the Commune of Prato employed the good offices of Archbishop Antonino to induce Fra Angelico to paint the principal chapel of their church; but he refused, and the commission was given to Filippo Lippi.

The fact that the name of the Dominican artist has not been found in the registers of the Vatican Treasury after 1449, need not necessarily be taken as a proof that he was not working in the Chapel of Nicholas V. at a later date. Indeed, as he went no more to Orvieto, and would not undertake to paint the Choir of the Prato Cathedral, it seems probable that he should have gone back to Rome to finish his work there.The chapel which preserves these precious frescoes by Angelico may be considered one of the most famous monuments of Italian art.

On three of the walls, he has represented in two lines of frescoes the Vocation, the Apostleship, and the Martyrdom of St. Stephen and St. Laurence. On the first side St. Stephen receives the Communion from St. Peter, and distributes alms to the poor: on the second are his preaching and justification before the high priest: in the third his lapidation. Below on the first wall is the consecration of St. Laurence, and his almsgiving to the poor and maimed; second, his imprisonment and the conversion of the jailer; and lastly his martyrdom.

The design is free and firm, yet keeping true to the character of the artist. The execution is more accurate and equal; although less realistic than that of Masaccio, yet he succeeds in giving his figures a greater grace and softer expression, indeed, the sentiment with which he imbues his figures, was never reached by any other artist, and that sentiment is here more admirably expressed than in any other of his works.

CHAPEL OF POPE NICHOLAS V. VATICAN—ROMEST. LAWRENCE ORDAINED DEACON BY POPE SIXTUS II.ST. LAWRENCE ORDAINED DEACON BY POPE SIXTUS II.

THE PREACHING AND JUSTIFICATION OF ST. STEPHEN.THE PREACHING AND JUSTIFICATION OF ST. STEPHEN.(Vatican, Rome.)

Whether St. Stephen be kneeling in wrapt devotion to take the chalice, or with the love of divine charity giving money to the woman, while the little child gives him itshand; whether touching his thumb he seems to explain some religious question, while some women seated there hang on his words, exchange their impressions, or ecstatically clasp their hands in sign of admiration or faith; whether he speak before the Great Council, or is conducted at last torture, supporting it with faith and resignation;—his noble figure always inspires a feeling of profound piety, of serene calm and personal devotion.

Although the representation of buildings is still too fantastic, the perspective is not neglected as in some other works. In the "Ordination of St. Stephen," the design of the interior of the church is in good architectural style, but the canopy above the altar is so low in proportion to the figure of St. Peter, that if he were to rise to his full height he could not stand at the altar; in another the open space in which St. Stephen is preaching has a fortress on the right, and a palace of very doubtful character in the background. The details of ornamentation, however, are very carefully designed, the motives of the decoration being refined and elegant. The pilasters with their pretty candelabra and capitals rich with sculpture, combine so harmoniously with the purer architectural forms, as to produce a most pleasing effect and show the result of his studies among the numberless remains of ancient Rome.

CHAPEL OF POPE NICHOLAS V.—VATICAN—ROME.POPE SIXTUS II CONSIGNS THE TREASURES OF THE CHURCH TO ST. LAURENCE.POPE SIXTUS II CONSIGNS THE TREASURES OF THE CHURCH TO ST. LAURENCE.

The St. Laurence series is not less beautiful. It is marvellous that Fra Angelico could express motives so analogous to the former set of frescoes without repeating himself. Sixtus II., drawn with the lineaments of Nicholas V., consecrates to the diaconal office St. Laurence, who reverently kneeling extends both hands to receive the sacramental cup. Around them are some fine figures of ecclesiastics, who, robed in magnificent vestments, assist at the ceremony, together with deacons and acolytes, who hold the book and censer. There is, it is true, a great sameness in the heads, which suggests that most of them were studied from the same model.

In another fresco, the Pope consigns the treasures of the church to the saint, while a monk turns brusquely round at the noise made at the door by two soldiers who come to conduct St. Laurence to martyrdom. But where Fra Angelico has best succeeded in fully rendering his sentiment, is in the painting which represents the distribution of alms. Angelico evidently delights in the thought of the inner satisfaction of the saint, and the happiness of the recipients; and the sincere and serene joy transfused in the countenances of the different figures is expressed with unusual ability and extraordinary truth to nature.

He has enlivened the severity of the scene by the episode of two children, who are laughingly struggling over a piece of money received. Infantile grace and content breathe in their features, though slightly disturbed by the doubt which of them will remain possessor of the precious gift.

The two last frescoes are very attractive and equally admirable. One represents the condemnation of St. Laurence, the other his martyrdom. The study of classic art is still more manifest in these than in the others, for not only the architecture, but even the niches which contain statues are imitated from the antique.

In the "Condemnation" the Emperor Decius wears a cuirass with a toga over it fastened on the right shoulder, as in the ancient imperial busts. His sceptre is terminated by a little idol, and above his throne is the Roman eagle with outspread wings, in a garland of bay leaves: in the other fresco the statues appear to be reproductions of ancient Roman monuments. But unfortunately this last picture has been so injured and restored that we cannot fully appreciate its value.

CHAPEL OF POPE NICHOLAS V. VATICAN—ROMEST. LAURENCE GIVE THE CHURCH MONEY TO THE POOR.ST. LAURENCE GIVE THE CHURCH MONEY TO THE POOR.

ST. BONAVENTURE.ST. BONAVENTURE.

The execution of these pictures is really remarkable. Fra Angelico, as we have said, without losing his fundamental qualities, has acquired and here reveals new qualities; the four Evangelists among the clouds on a background of blue, dotted with golden stars, are noble and full of character; the figures of the saints on the simulated pilasters, and at the corners of each side of the chapel, might be classed among Fra Angelico's best. Who does not remember above the rest the fine and noble figure of St. Bonaventure, with his flowing white beard, thoughtful eyes, and an aspect of goodness and seriousness combined that is quite enchanting? What other figure, however beautiful, can show such just proportions, solid form, and majestic design, such a strong character and expression as this? The saint'sthoughtful gaze is turned to the left, his mouth lightly indicating a smile, or rather the sweet expression of innate goodness, the marvellously drawn hands support an open book which rests on his side. Here Fra Angelico reveals his skill in all its fulness; and when we reflect on his advanced age, we can only remain in admiring surprise before the freshness of his creative power, and the force of his execution.

We have documental evidence that Benozzo Gozzoli assisted his master in these frescoes, and doubtless we may attribute to him the fine decorations, where roses bud amidst flowers and foliage of every kind, and garlands are resting on pretty little children's heads, or are festooned on medallions bearing the tiara, and crossed keys of Nicholas V.; but we cannot give him the merit of having beautified the scenes of the "Preaching of St. Stephen," or "St. Laurence distributing alms."[63]

CHAPEL OF POPE NICHOLAS V. VATICAN—ROMEST. LAURENCE CONDEMNED TO MARTYRDOM.ST. LAURENCE CONDEMNED TO MARTYRDOM.

We admit the probability that Benozzo may have executed some of the figures, but there is a difference between this and supposing that he had any conspicuous part in thecompositions, especially in the St. Laurence series, which we cannot believe. If the whole scene were indeed by Benozzo, would not the difference of hand between master and scholar be more strikingly evident? And the more so, as the scholar had not yet reached mastery of technique, and his early frescoes show a certain crudeness, want of harmony and incorrectness of design, which far remove them from the proved technical ability of his master. Nor can we believe that he timidly followed the lines traced on the walls by Fra Angelico, for even in that case something peculiar to himself must have been clearly perceptible in them. Now this, to speak frankly, is not evident.

None of the women assisting at the preaching of St. Stephen recall the characteristic type of those which Benozzo painted in the frescoes at Montefalco. The saint's listeners have regular features, and remind one of the various female figures in the San Marco frescoes ("Resurrection of Christ" and "Prayer on the Mount of Olives"). Benozzo's handling is less solid, his outlines are hard and sharp, colouring crude and chiaroscuro weak; in the stories of St. Laurence we find instead, and in a very high degree, the solidity and correctness which we have admired in Fra Angelico's Florentine paintings.

It suffices to recall the "Adoration of the Magi," in San Marco, one of his last works before leaving for Rome,and the beautiful prophets at Orvieto; in both these pictures we meet with the same types and figures as in the Roman frescoes, especially in those representing "St. Peter ordaining St. Stephen," "St. Laurence distributing alms," and "St. Stephen before the high priest." Without then following up doubtful suppositions, it does not seem admissible that Fra Angelico, old as he was, should have ceded to his pupil either the direction, or the greater part of works of such importance, which it was greatly to his interest to finish with the utmost care and perfection.

Cavalcaselle remarks that the severity of the Orvietans who would not let Benozzo finish the work which Fra Angelico had left incomplete, is inexplicable; but we must remember that though Benozzo imitated his master's style, the inferiority of his talent was always apparent in the common types, false anatomy, and mistaken proportions of his figures. "He does not equal the master who guided him in his first years, but he follows his style as much as he can, with less talent."[64]

It was not therefore Benozzo's work which enlarged the master's style, but in the Vatican frescoes the master clearlyshows the effort he has himself made to render the action of his figures more grand, his painting more solid, figures more characteristic and the episodes with which his admirable compositions are enriched more fundamentally truthful.

These paintings prove that he had reached his greatest artistic development; although always retaining his innate character he concedes to the new requirements of art as much of his temperament and sentiment, as he can conscientiously yield. Thus his works display a continuous improvement, each new stage in the long road of his artistic career, represents a fresh conquest, a new and remarkable progress. His pupils and collaborators limited themselves to aiding him, and rendering his work lighter in parts of secondary importance, but he needed no other help to be, and always remain, worthy of the high company in which he finds himself in the Vatican.

In the Sixtine Chapel, near the quiet creations of the artists of the Renaissance, the power and awful force of Michelangelo stand out; in the "Stanze" Raphael has left an everlasting wealth of artistic treasures; and in the Chapel of Nicholas V. Fra Angelico with ingenuous expression and the purest and most sincere religious feeling, painted his master-piece.

But notwithstanding the great difference between the former giants of art, and our saintly artist, he is quite worthy of their glorious company.

The sweet gentleness of his character was all that hindered him from a more exact and deep study of reality, but it was precisely by means of this character that he succeeded, as no one else could do, in expressing the elevated ideas of his serene and calm soul, profound inspiration and naïve freshness of faith.

In 1455 after a life entirely dedicated to art, Fra Giovanni, at the age of 68 years, died in Rome, having well earned the grateful veneration of posterity. The austere virtues of his soul gained him the title ofBeato(blessed) and for the lovely lines traced by his brush, he was calledAngelico. A marble monument was erected over his tomb in the church of the Minerva, with his effigy and the following inscription, said to have been dictated by Pope Nicholas V. himself:

HIC JACET VEN. PICTOR

FR. JO. DE FLOR. ORD. P.

C C C C

Non mihi sit laudi, quod eram velut alter Apelles,Sed quod lucra tuis omnia, Christe, dabam;Altera nam terris opera extant, altera cœlo;Urbs me Joannem Flos tulit Etruriæ.

"Give me not praise for being almost a second Apelles, but because I gave to thy poor, O Christ, all my earnings. Thus part of my work remains on earth and part in heaven. My home was in that city, which is the Flower of Etruria."

Back to Index Next