Chapter 6

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 chiaroscuro, 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 in the 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 complete list 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!

IV.

FRA ANGELICO AT ROME AND ORVIETO.

[1445-1455.]

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 mistaken in 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 not Paulo 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--almost the 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.

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 circle of 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 the scholar'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 his own 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.

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 its hand; 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.

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.

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's thoughtful 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]

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 the compositions, 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 clearly [64] shows 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.