Italy: 1500 to 1600

The High Renaissance & Mannerism

The interest in perspective, anatomy, and classical cultures that thrived in the 15th century matured during the 16th

century as well. This is the brief time that historians have named the ‘High Renaissance’ and describes the time between

1495 through the death of Leonardo da Vinci in 1519 as well as the death of Raphael in 1520. The Renaissance style,

however, continued to dominate the later part of the 16th century or the Late Renaissance. A new style, Mannerism,

challenged that of the Late Renaissance almost as soon as Raphael was laid to rest in the Pantheon. The 16th century of

Italy has no singular style that characterizes the time, thus art of the period exhibits an astounding mastery of both

technical and aesthetic art.

Artists have been raised to that of a genius – partially due to that of poetry and how it spawned more of an interest in

the visual arts. Central Italy has the leading art centers in Florence and Rome where it produced three of the greatest

artists who have ever lived: Leonardo da Vinci, Raphael, and Michelangelo – whose work has appealed to those of many

generations to come.

*For the sake of the lecture notes, it is divided up into two sections: The High Renaissance and Mannerism. It will be

clearly outlined for you to follow.

HIGH RENAISSANCE

LEONARDO DA VINCI

Born in a small town near Florence, Vinci, he trained in the studio under Andrea del Verrocchio. He had a number of

interests and art was only one of many. The “Renaissance man” mapped out the routes that art and science were to

take for generations. Leonardo kept numerous journals of his notes which included (but not limited to) botany, geology,

geography, cartography, zoology, military engineering, animal lore, anatomy, as well as aspects of physical science

including hydraulics and mechanics – all of which helped his art. He stated many times that the study of his science

investigations made him a better painter and his scientific drawings are artworks themselves.

Leonardo’s greatest ambition was to discover the laws underlying the processes and change of nature. Keeping that in

mind, he was also very interested in that of the human body and contributed to the study of physiology (the branch of

biology dealing with the functions and activities of living organisms and their parts, including all physical and chemical

processes ) and psychology (the science of the mind or of mental states and processes). He considered the eyes to be

the most vital organ and argued that it would be better to be deaf than blind because through sight one could grasp

reality more directly.

Leonardo da Vinci. Cartoon for the Virgin and Child with St. Anne and the Infant St. John, 1498, charcoal

heightened with white on brown paper

Most drawing surfaces and their lack of availability limited the production of preparatory sketches. Most artists drew on

parchment (calf skin) or on vellum (skins of young animals) which were both very costly. With the development of the

printing industry, a less expensive paper made of fibrous pulp allowed artist to experiment more as well as to draw with

greater freedom. This led to the creation of sketches and artist executed these drawings in pen and ink, chalk, charcoal,

brush, graphite or lead. The design dimension of art production became increasingly important as artists cultivated their

own styles. At first, creating art was based on imitation and emulation, but now, in order for an artist to achieve

recognition, they had to develop their own personal style.

In this particular scene, Leonardo depicted monumental figures in a scene of tranquil grandeur and balance in a

preliminary drawing for a painting. Here, the glowing light falls gently on the majestic forms. The figures are almost

robust and monumental, their grace and movements very reminiscent of the Greek statues of goddesses in the

pediment of the Parthenon. Although, this familiarity of the Greeks cannot be attributes to Leonardo’s specific

knowledge of their monuments - he never visited Greece. His acquaintance with the classical art extended to that of the

Etruscan and Roman monuments and Roman copies of the Greek sculptures found in Italy.

Leonardo da Vinci. Last Supper from the refectory of Santa Maria delle Grazie (Milan), c. 1495-98, fresco (oil

and tempera on plaster)

Painted for the refectory (dining hall) in the Santa Maria delle Grazie, Leonardo painted the Last Supper. Although

restored in 1999, it still isn’t in the greatest condition (partially because of his experiments with materials). That aside,

this is formally and emotionally his most impressive work. The scene is one with Christ and his 12 disciples seated at a

long table which is placed parallel in a simple and spacious room.

This is the part of the narrative in which Christ, with his outstretched hand, has just claimed that one of them would

betray him and a wave of intense excitement has passed through the group. Each disciple is looking around and

questioning each other as well as themselves wondering who it is. Each disciple has a broad range of emotion including

fear, doubt, rage, protestation, and love.

In the center of the fresco we see Christ who for the most part has been separated from the group and the center

window in the background frames his figure. The curved pediment above this window, along with the diffused light, acts

as his halo. His head is the center point in which the lines of perspective all match up to.

Leonardo divided the 12 disciples into 4 groups of 3 – united by their gestures and postures. He has also gone against

traditional iconography and placed Judas on the same side of the table as the rest of them. Judas’s face is in the

shadows as he clutches a money bag in his right hand and his left hand is placed upon the table. This is interesting

because it relates to the scripture in Luke 22:21 when it states “But yet behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is

with me on the table.”

Leonardo revealed his strong ability to apply voluminous knowledge about the observable world to the pictorial

representation of a religious scene. This ability of his has resulted in a psychologically complex and compelling painting.

Leonardo da Vinci. Mona Lisa, c. 1503-1505, oil on wood

This is probably the most well known portrait as well as the world’s most famous painting. Who the subject matter is still

a scholarly debate. Giorgio Vasari writes in his biography of Leonardo, that she was Lisa di Antonio Maria Gherardini,

wife of wealthy Floretine, Francesco del Giocondo. (Hence her name Mona Lisa or ‘Mona’ which is a contraction of ma

donna or my lady). Despite whom she is, the representation of an individual is very conceiving. Leonardo paints her with

no jewelry or symbols of wealth, unlike earlier portraits which were icons of status. She sits quietly with her hands

folded across her lap, her gaze gently at the viewer, and her mouth forming a slight smile. This goes against proper

Renaissance etiquette which stated that a woman should never look directly into a man’s eyes.

The painting today is darker than it was 500 years ago and the colors are less vivid, but the painting still captures the

artist’s fascination with chiaroscuro as well as atmospheric perspective. This also shows his expertise in the use of

sfumato, or misty haziness, in the background planes. This mysterious background is what also attracts viewers to this

work. Why was she placed up against such a landscape with its roads and bridges that lead to nowhere? Originally, this

work was painted in loggia (under a columnar gallery), but when it was trimmed – not be Leonardo – the columns were

cut off. You can still see the bases of them to the left and right of her shoulders though.

RAPHAEL

Raffaello Santi or Sanzio – better known as Raphael was called upon by Julius II in Rome. Raphael was born in Umbria

near Urbino and learned from his father, Giovanni Santi, as well as influenced by Perugino, Leonardo, and many others.

Raphael developed his own style of art that exemplifies the ideals of the High Renaissance.

RAPHEAL. Philosophy (School of Athens), Stanza della Segnatura, Vatican Palace, Rome, Italy, 1509-1511.

Fresco approx. 19’X27’

Raphael was awarded the most important painting commission by Julius II, the painting of the papal apartments in the

Apostolic Palace of the Vatican. Stanza della Segnatura translates to the Room of Signatures, the papal library where

Julius signed official documents. On the four walls of the stanza there are paintings of the images that represented the

Western learning as Renaissance society understood it. The headings of his works are: Theology, Law (Justice), Poetry,

and Philosophy. The frescoes refer to the four branches of human knowledge and wisdom while pointing out the virtues

and learning appropriate to a pope. Given Julius II’s desire for recognition as both spiritual and temporal leader, it is only

appropriate that the Theology and Philosophy walls face each other. This gives the idea that the pope was a balanced

man: cultured, knowledgeable individual as well as a wise, divinely ordained religious authority.

In the Philosophy mural, or commonly known as the School of Athens, is not a ‘school’ at all, yet a large group of great

philosophers and scientist of the ancient world. Raphael depicted the persons of great wisdom, honored by Renaissance

humanist, all conversing and explaining their ideas and theories. The setting recalls that of ancient Roman architecture

and looks as if it were modeled after the new Saint Peter’s.

Colossal statues of Athena and Apollo, patron deities of the arts and of wisdom, oversee the interactions. Plato and

Aristotle serve as the central figures around which Raphael carefully arranged others. Plato holds the book titled:

Timaeus and point to Heaven, the source of his inspiration, while Aristotle carries his book Nicomachean Ethics and

gestures towards the earth from which his observations of reality sprang. Appropriately enough, the men who believe

that the ultimate mysteries that transcend the world stand on Plato’s side and on Aristotle’s are the philosophers and

scientist interested in nature and human affairs. Amongst them are the names of Pythagoras and his scale, Heraclitus,

Diogenes, Euclid, astronomers Zoroaster and Ptolemy, and in the very corner, we see Raphael who painted his own

portrait amongst the greats. Raphael placed himself on the side of the mathematicians and scientist rather than the

humanists.

Like in Leonardo’s Last Supper, School of Athens too has character that all communicate moods that reflect their beliefs

and Raphael tied these moods together. The vanishing point falls upon Plato’s left hand which automatically draws

attention to his book Timaeus. In the Stanza della Segnatura Raphael reconciled and harmonized not only Platonists and

Aristotelians but also paganism and Christianity, surely a major factor in his appeal to Julius II.

Opposite wall: The Disputation of the Sacrament (Italian: La disputa del sacramento), or Disputa – The Theology Fresco.

More commonly known as the Triumph of Religion.

Here we see that Raphael “represents Christianity’s victory over and the transformation of the multiple philosophical

tendencies shown in the School of Athens fresco on the opposite wall. The theologians of the Disputation are not

gathered in a vaulted temple like the philosophers of the School. Instead, their bodies make up the Church’s

architecture. They form one body, united in an ethereal apse flanking the Trinity and the Eucharist, that when

consecrated becomes the body of Christ.”

“Bramante leans on the balustrade at left; the young man standing near him has been identified as Francesco Maria

Della Rovere; Pope Julius II, who personifies Gregory the Great, is seated near the altar Dante is visible on the right,

distinguished by a crown of laurel.”

Raphael. Baldassare Castiglione, ca. 1514, oil on wood transferred to canvas

Raphael also excelled at portraiture as you can see here with Baldassare Castiglione. Most of his subjects for portraits

were those surrounding Leo X, the pope’s friend Count Baldassare Castiglione. He was an author of the Book of the

Courtier in which he lays out the perfect Renaissance courtier (a person who is often in attendance at the court of a king

or other royal personage).

Here, in Raphael’s depiction of the count, we see him looking straight at the viewer with a gentle expression. We see

him in three quarter view, which was made popular by Leonardo and his Mona Lisa. Both portraits mentioned exhibit

the increasing attention that the High Renaissance artists paid to the subject’s personality. The background is very

neutral, no landscape or columnar motif and the colors Raphael used are very muted (dull). The mood of the portrait is

very fitting of the middle aged man.

MICHELANGELO

Having a keen eye on artistic talent, Pope Julius II also commissioned Michelangelo Buonarroti, or Michelangelo for great

works of art. Although Michelangelo was first and foremost a sculptor, he was also an architect, painter, poet, and

engineer. He took to sculpting first because he felt there was a connection there to a divine power because in a sense,

he too was “making man”. Parallel to Plato’s ideas, he too thought that the creation from the artist’s hand must first

come from that of the artist’s mind. He also thought that the artist themselves were not the creators of the ideas they

conceived, rather that they find their ideas from the natural world and are inspired by beauty. One of Michelangelo’s

best observations about sculpture is that the artist must find the idea that is locked inside the stone. As the artist chips

away the excess, the artist takes the idea from the stone – bringing forth the living form.

Michelangelo arrived “at novel and lofty things” because he broke away from all of his predecessors in one important

aspect: he mistrusted the application of numbers as methods of beauty in proportions. He was quoted saying “it was

necessary to have the compass in the eyes and not in the hand, because the hands work and the eye judges”. So, setting

aside the ancient Roman architect Vitruvius, along with Alberti, Leonardo and many, many others who strived for the

perfect measure and instead he went with the thought that the artist’s judgment could identify other pleasing

proportions. He also went with the idea that only the artist was responsible for the limitations put on their creation and

was clearly an advocate for self expression. He thus separates himself from, the High Renaissance style that we have

seen so far and instead creates works of art that are often monumental in size. His work also put forth a style of

expressiveness and strength conveyed through forms that loom before the viewer in tragic grandeur.

Michelangelo Buonarroti. David, 1501-1504, marble. Florence, Italy

After the Medici family was exiled, Michelangelo fled from Florence to Bologna where he was impressed by the works of

Jacopo della Quercia. He returned to Florence in 1501, seven years later. When the Medici’s palace was looked over by

city officials, it was decided that the David by Donatello would join the one by Verrocchio in the Palazzo della Signoria.

David, being the important civic symbol of Florence, was once again the subject matter created by Michelangelo. The

Florence Cathedral Committee had asked him to create it using a left over block of marble from an abandoned sculpture.

His David, whom people referred to as ‘the giant’ assured his reputation then and now as having an extraordinary talent.

Only 40 years after the completion, Vasari praised this piece so highly and claimed “without any doubt the figure has put

in the shade every other statue, ancient or modern, Greek or Roman – this was intended as a symbol of liberty for the

Palace, signifying that just as David had protected his people and governed them justly, so whoever ruled Florence

should vigorously defend the city and govern it with justice.”

Going against the other sculptor’s versions, in which we see the triumphant David with the slain head of Goliath, we see

the scene before this has occurred. Michelangelo created the snapshot of David turning his head towards the left to

watch his approaching foe. At any moment it seems that David will hurl the rock which destroys the giant.

The anatomy of David tells a lot about the character and his prelude to action, for example, the rugged torso, sturdy

limbs, and large hands all tell the viewers of the massive strength yet to come. The swelling veins and tightening tendons

also amplify the psychological energy of David’s pose.

Like many of his colleagues, he too admired that of the Greco-Roman statues and style. More specifically, Michelangelo

admired their skillful and precise rendering of heroic physique. We see several references to the past with this sculptor.

One, we are instantly reminded of the Lysippan athletes as well as the insight and emotionalism of Hellenistic statuary.

From here on, he decides to focus more on pent-up emotion rather than calm, ideal beauty. He turned his own

frustrations, passions, and doubts into the great figures he created.

Michelangelo Buonarroti. Moses (San Pietro in Vincoli, Rome), c. 1513-1515, marble

The claim to fame of Michelangelo’s David caught the eye of Julius II who too appreciated classical references and

associated himself with the humanists and the Roman emperors. The first of many art works he had commissioned from

Michelangelo was his own tomb, to be placed in Old Saint Peter’s. The original two story structure that was designed in

1501 called for 28 statues to adorn the wall. This would have given Michelangelo an astounding amount of space in

which he could sculpt many forms in many positions. However, shortly after he had begun, for no mentioned reason, the

pope halted the work – more than likely it was a money problem in which he had to give more to the construction of the

new Saint Peter’s. Any ways, after Julius’s death in 1513, Michelangelo reduced the size of the tomb and was finally

given permission in 1542 to create only a third of the figures of his original design. The final project was completed in

1545 and not placed in Old Saint Peter’s basilica but in San Pietro in Vincoli, Rome (where he had served as cardinal).

Had Julius been able to see the final product and where it was going to be placed, he would have been bitterly

disappointed.

The spirit of the tomb can be summed up by the representation of Moses. Originally intended to be placed with seven

other massive forms and seen from below, this work doesn’t match the rest of the sculpture and does not convey the

impact as it was supposed to. Michelangelo carved the massive Old Testament figure with the tablets under his arm and

his other hand gathering his beard. We see the horns on his head, which has been a traditional way to determine who

he is in a group setting, and are taken from the literal translation in Exodus. (Recall the Well of Moses by Claus Sluter).

Again, we see the turned head as we did in David. This concentrated glare captures the expression of the awful wrath

that stirs in the mighty frame as well as in his eyes. The muscles bulge, the veins swell, and the great legs seem to slowly

start to move. Not since Hellenistic times have we seen a sculptor who depicted a work of art with so much pent-up

energy (both physical and emotional) in a seated statue.

Michelangelo Buonarroti. Tomb of Giuliano de’ Medici, Medici Chapel, San Lorenzo, Florence, Italy. 1519-34.

Michelangelo was too asked to create the tomb of Giuliano and Lorenzo Medici. The two tombs mirror each other and

are the twin versions on one another. Giuliano was the duke of Nemours and son of Lorenzo the Magnificent and

Lorenzo was the duke of Urbino and grandson of Lorenzo the magnificent. Unfortunately, Michelangelo never finished

either tomb, and most scholars believe there was to be pairs of river gods at the bottom representing the Underworld.

But the design of the toms still remains a mystery.

The two representations on the sarcophagi symbolize the realm of time, specifically, to the human world: dawn, day,

evening, and night. Humanity’s state in this vicious cycle of time is one of pain, anxiety, frustration, and exhaustion. To

the left, we see the female representation of night and to the right, the male representation of day. They both appear to

be chained into this never relaxing pose. This idea of representing pain and anguish by twisting the body in opposite

directions becomes a characteristic of Michelangelo and we see it appear on the Sistine Chapel ceiling as well as in the

Bound Slave sculptures. When one looks at Day, one will see his body has the thickness of a tree and the anatomy of

Hercules and can see his huge limbs straining against each other. Night, the symbol of rest, doesn’t seem to be doing

much of that. We see her twisting as if unable to get comfortable in order to fall asleep. We also see an owl and a

hideous mask both representing nightmares.

Some scholars believe that the figures are not representing the humanity’s pain, but, more the passing of time, the

cycles of life which eventually leads to death.

The two men are placed above the action showing their transcending worldly existence. They both represent the two

ideal human forms, the contemplative man (Lorenzo) and the active man (Giuliano). Giuliano sits in Roman emperor

garb and holds the commander’s baton. He looks off as if sitting in council while across from him, Lorenzo sits wrapped

in thought, his face in deep shadow. Together they represent the two ways an individual would find union with God,

through meditation or through an active lifestyle fashioned after that of Christ.

The two representations of the men are in fact not like them physically at all. Michelangelo didn’t care to present them

with the facial features that they actually had, because after all, who is going to remember a thousand years from now.

Instead he was more concerned with the overall human form.

Michelangelo Buonarroti. Ceiling of the Sistine Chapel (Vatican City, Rome), 1508-12, fresco

When Julius II suspended the work on his tomb, he gave the very bitter Michelangelo the commission to start painting

the ceiling on the Sistine Chapel. He insisted that sculptor was his primary work and that painting was only his secondary

line of work (he did this in the hopes that he wouldn’t be tied to a project when the tomb sculpture resumed). The

ceiling presented a number of difficulties, such as the height (70 feet off the ground), the dimensions (5,800 sq. feet),

and the way to present correct perspective when the vaulted arches bend the way they do, not to mention his

inexperience as a fresco painter. Yet, in less than four years, Michelangelo had finished the commission in a way that

served the pope’s request and agenda. He succeeded in weaving some 300 figures in the theme of the ceiling: the

creation, fall, and redemption of humanity.

The overall conceptualization of the ceiling’s design and narrative structure not only presents a sweeping chronology of

Christianity, but also keeps with the ideas of the Renaissance and its ideas about the religion’s history. These included:

the conflict between good and evil, youthful energy and wisdom of age, among others. The articulation of the ceiling

with its thousands of details was a superhuman achievement.

Like with his sculpture, Michelangelo concentrated his expressive purpose on the human figure. The body is what it was

all about; to him the body was the manifestation of the soul or of a state of mind and character. He represented the

body in its most natural form, in the nude or simply draped with cloth. He painted with a sculptor’s eye and paid close

attention to how light and shadow communicate volume and surface.

Michelangelo Buonarroti. The Last Judgment (Sistine Chapel, Rome), 1534-41

Michelangelo also agreed to paint the Last Judgment on the chapel’s altar walls of the Sistine Chapel. Here we see Christ

as the stern judge of the world. He raises his right hand with such strong force that alerts others that he will destroy the

all of creation. The choirs of Heaven surround him pulse with anxiety and awe. Below are trumpeting angels, the figures

ascending in to Heaven and the downward thrust of the damned. On the left, the dead wake and assume flesh, and the

demons with their gargoyle like masks and burning eyes awaken and begin their torture.

This version of the end of the world and the fate of sinners is even more grotesque than that of Signorelli’s Damned Cast

into Hell. Martyrs who suffered especially agonizing deaths are seen below Christ. Saint Bartholomew, who was skinned

alive, holds the knife and the skin (the face that appears on the skin is a self portrait of Michelangelo).

Although this image of the final days is meant to scare those, it also holds a glimmer of hope. A group of saved souls –

the elect- crowd around Christ, and on the far right appears a figure with a cross, most likely the Good Thief (crucified

with Christ) or a saint martyred by crucifixion, such as Saint Andrew.

ARCHITECTURE

Donato D’Angelo Bramante. Tempietto (Rome), 1502

The construction of Old Saint Peter’s which was started by Constantine was now an insufficient structure for the needs

and aspirations of the Renaissance papacy. Rebuilding the church would occupy some of the leading architects of Italy

for more than a century.

The first in line for the construction of the new Saint Peter’s was a man named Donato d’Angelo Bramante. Bramante

started out as a painter and went to Milan and stayed there until the French arrived but while he was there, he gave up

painting and became one of his generation’s most renowned architects. Much like his predecessors (Battista,

Brunelleschi, Alberti, and perhaps even Leonardo) he developed the High Renaissance style of the central plan church.

His style was also consistent with the humanistic values of the day and was based on ancient Roman architecture. This

style can be seen on his work known as Tempietto (“Little Temple”) which overlooks the Vatican. Its nickname is a

proper one for it because the round temples of Roman Italy are exactly what inspired his design. King Ferdinand and

Queen Isabella commissioned this structure to mark the presumed location of Saint Peter’s crucifixion.

At first glance, one may notice that the structure appears to be extremely rational – with its circular stylobate and

colonnade – neither feature giving any indication of an interior altar or of the entrance. However, Bramante was able to

achieve a very balanced relationship between parts (drum, dome, and base). Play on light and shadows seen around the

columns and balustrade and across the deep set rectangular and arched niches, as well as the walls and drum. The way

Bramante incorporates classical parts seen in a new way was revolutionary.

Michelangelo’s plan for new St. Peter’s, 1546

As noted above, Bramante was the first of several architects in line to construct Saint Peter’s. His plan was that of two

equal arms crossing to create a cross, each ending in an apse. This was the church that would mark St. Peter’s grave as

well as hold that of Julius II (which, as you already know – he wasn’t buried there). Julius II’s goal was that the Rome of

the popes be reminiscent of (if not more than) the Rome of the caesars – and the new Saint Peter’s was how he was

going to follow through with that idea. The rebuilding of such a symbolic church was carried out through Pope Paul III in

which he felt there was a supreme urgency to complete the reconstruction. Unfortunately, Bramante died and the

construction for his plan never went past the building of the crossing piers and the lower choir walls. His plan was

passed down to another architect who passed it down to another before it landed in the hands of Michelangelo. By now,

the church was facing the upmost of challenges which he reluctantly took on with no pay involved. One of his struggles

was to carry on the original Bramante design as well as what the other architects had attempted to start. He praised the

original plan and chose to retain it as the basis for his own design (a central plan church is what they both agreed on as

being the perfect design for a church).

Never doubting that he was a sculptor first and foremost, he decided that architecture was in a sense the same because

buildings should follow the form of the human body. This meant organizing the units symmetrically around a central and

unique axis – think of it in human forms such as how the eyes relate to the nose or the arms relate to the body. “For it is

an established fact, that the members of architecture resemble the members of man. Whoever neither has been nor is a

master at figures, and especially at anatomy, cannot really understand architecture.”

In Michelangelo’s altered plan from Bramante’s original, he reduced the central component from a number of

interlocking crosses to a compact domed Greek cross inscribed in a square and fronted with a double columned portico.

With a few strokes of the pen, Michelangelo was able to modify Bramante’s snowflake design into a massive unified and

cohesive design. We see the incorporation of the two story pilasters that were first seen in Alberti’s work at Sant’

Andrea – but St. Peter’s pilasters extend to the drum and the dome thus uniting the structure. In later historical

architecture, architects learn from Michelangelo’s design which stems from his original train of thought: that

architecture is one with the organic beauty of the human form.

The dome’s original design was to be ogival like that of Florence’s. But Michelangelo placed a hemispherical dome to

temper the verticality of the design of the lower stories and to establish balance. However, after Michelangelo’s death,

architect Giacomo della Porta restored the earlier high design of the dome and ignored Michelangelo’s reasoning. The

reasons were probably similar to that of Brunelleschi’s and the concern with weight. The end result of the dome is that it

seems to rise from its base rather than rest firmly upon it. Either way, the dome is probably the most impressive in the

world.

Michelangelo Buonarroti. Design for the Campidoglio on the Capitoline Hill, begun 1538 (engraving 1569)

While working on the Last Judgment fresco, Pope Paul III had asked him to accept another challenging commission: the

reorganization of Capitoline Hill in Rome. The pope’s desire was to transform the site of the great temple of Jupiter to a

symbol of the new papal Rome. This was a challenge for Michelangelo because he had two existing building that he had

to incorporate into his design: the Palazzo dei Senatori (Palace of the Senators) and the Palazzo dei Conservatori (Palace

of the Conservators). The two building forms an 80 degree angle which for other architects might have signaled defeat –

but, not for Michelangelo.

Michelangelo placed the new building in a location so that it stood at the same angle as the other previous structures.

This created a trapezoidal plan rather than a rectangular one. The ancient Roman equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius

(which survived the Middle Ages – surprisingly) became the focal point of the entire design. This statue was moved to

Capitoline Hill against Michelangelo’s wishes because he wanted to create a sculpture of his own to go in its place.

Although through comparisons of documents, the identity of the statue was mistakenly thought to be Constantine which

is why it probably appealed to Pope Paul III. Either way, the symbol of the equestrian rider carried double significance.

One, It was the ultimate symbol of the pagan Roman Empire which Christianity had triumphed over and; two, Italians

associated it with Constantine, Saint Peter, and the establishment of the papacy. This was the ideal center piece for the

civic center of Rome and beautifully served the needs of a humanist pope during the Counter-Reformation.

To unify the structure, Michelangelo placed it on an oval base inside an oval design on the pavement. Given the choice

of using an oval shape instead of a circle, matched the layout of the three structures being a trapezoid and not a square.

This inspired later Baroque artist who choose to use the oval above the circle.

ANTONIO DA SANGALLO. Palazzo Farnese (Farnese palace), Rome, ca. 1530-46

Pope Paul III requested Michelangelo take over construction of a palace for him back when he was Cardinal Alessandro

Franese. He had originally selected Antonio da Sangallo the Younger who had completed the design but died in 1546 in

which Michelangelo took over the project. Antonio came from a long line of architects and studied under Bramante

when he went to Rome in 1503.

The façade, which faces the spacious paved square, is the very essence of princely dignity in architecture. The quoins

(rusticated building corners) and the cornice firmly anchor the rectangle of the smooth front. The lines of the widows

(notice how the central row alternates the triangular and segmental pediments) mark a majestic beat all the way across

the façade. The window frames are not flat against the building and is instead coming forth making the front three

dimensional.

The courtyard displays column-enframed arches on the first two levels and on the third he changed it to overlapping

pilasters. He did this as an inspiration of the Colosseum and how every floor represents a new style of architecture.

The Palazzo Farnese set the standard for Italian Renaissance palaces and fully expresses the classical order, regularity,

simplicity, and dignity of the High Renaissance.

VENETIAN STYLE

Venetian style of painting depicted the soft colored light on Venice’s figures as well as landscapes. Venetian artist are

very easy to distinguish from that of High and Late Renaissance artist of Florence and Rome. One of the biggest artists of

this style of work was an artist named Titian. He was a supreme colorist as well as the most extraordinary and prolific of

the Venetian painters. Titian studied under both Bellini and Giorgione and it is difficult to tell whose work from who’s in

some of their works. Titian also helped paint the background on some of their unfinished paintings. In 1516, the

Republic of Venice appointed Titian its official painter.

TITIAN, Assumption of the Virgin, Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, Venice, Italy, ca. 1516-1518. Oil on Wood.

22’ 6” X 11’ 10”

Painted in oils for the monumental altarpiece (almost 23 feet high) of Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari, Titian depicts the

Virgin ascending up to Heaven. We see her being lifted by a great white cloud with putti helping it on its journey.

Awaiting Mary’s open arms is God the Father who also is seen with outstretched arms and is seen surrounded by golden

clouds. These clouds emphasize Titian’s remarkable skill with oil painting and how he could depict light by his paintings.

When looking upon them they really seem to glow and give off this illuminating Heavenly aura. Underneath this divine

event are apostles who are witnessing the assumption.

The entire painting has this incredible drama to it which Titian plays with the use of color. The light that he radiates from

God the Father gives off a glow that would have radiated throughout the entire church.

TITIAN, Madonna of the Pesaro Family, Santa Maria dei Frari, Venice, Italy, 1519-1526. Oil on canvas.

Approx. 16’ X 9’.

Bishop Jacopo Pesaro commissioned Titian to paint a piece of art which was named (rightfully so) Madonna of the

Pesaro Family. This piece of art was later presented to the Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari. This piece of art enriched

Titian’s personal style as well as his reputation with its rich surface textures and dazzling displays of color.

This painting tells a very elaborate story of historical events combined with Heavenly characters. First and foremost, we

have Mary who is seated in what could be her Heavenly throne illuminated by a sunlit setting. In front of her we see

Saint Peter who is looking down at Pesaro, bishop of Paphos in Cyprus and commander of the papal fleet. He had just

led a victorious expedition over the Turks during the Venetian-Turkish war. He had this piece of art commissioned in

gratitude. Behind Pesaro we see a soldier who carries a banner of the Borgia and of Pesaro with the escutcheons

(shields with coats of arms). Behind him we see a Turk with a turban on who is a prisoner of war. On the opposite side

of the throne we see Saint Francis who is introducing the other Pesaro family members (all of which are male). All of

these figures are seen underneath heavenly cloud bearing angels, thus emphasizing the worldly transaction.

In High Renaissance style of grouping figures together, Titian follows those rules as well as placing them within the

confines of weighty architecture. But he does NOT place them within a horizontal and symmetrical arrangement such as

Leonardo’s Last Supper. Rather, he places them on a steep diagonal, positioning Madonna – the central focus – well off

of the central axis. Instead he drew attention to her with the perspective lines and the directional gazes and gestures of

the other figures.

TITIAN, Meeting of Bacchus and Ariadne, 1522-1523. Oil on canvas, 5’ 9” X 6’ 3”. National Gallery, London.

Commissioned by the duke of Ferrara, Alfonso d’Este, had requested four artist to paint a bacchanalian scene for his

room of alabaster. He sought work after Titian, Bellini, Raphael, and Fra Bartolommeo – unfortunately Bellini only

painted one wall and Raphael and Fra Bartolommeo both died before getting any submitted, leaving Titian to complete

the remaining three walls by himself. One of the walls in the small room is this one, the Meeting of Bacchus and Ariadne.

RECALL: We have learned about both of these characters, but in case you are a bit rusty on your mythology, the story (in

a nutshell) is: Ariadne is the daughter of King Minos of Crete. She fell in love with Theseus and helped him in his victory

over the Minotaur in the labyrinth by giving him a ball of fleece to hold onto so he could find his way back out. Theseus

and Ariadne eloped and to the island of Naxos, but unfortunately, Theseus grew tired of her and lost interest and left

her there while she slept. When she awoke to find her lover gone, Bacchus was there and married her. RECALL: Bacchus

is the Roman name; Dionysus is the Greek name.

In Titian’s version of the mythological story, we see Bacchus arriving with a very noisy entourage and with a leopard

drawn carriage. He is presumably there to save Aridane from being left by Theseus. We see Titian’s inspiration to the

classical style of art here in two ways, one, the subject matter and the other to the character in the foreground entwined

with snakes, recalling that of the Laocoon group. Titian’s rich and luminous colors add greatly to the sensuous appeal of

this painting.

MANNERISM

The style of Mannerism is characterized by style. This emerged during the 1520’s, as stated earlier with the death of

Leonardo da Vinci and Raphael. The uses of the two ‘styles’ is this: the first ‘style’ refers to that of the time period as

well as artist, such as Gothic or Leonardo da Vinci; the second use of the word derives from the characterization of the

era, in this case class and elegance.

Among the most prevalent features associated with Mannerism is artifice, or trickery. Artist have always used this in the

sense that a painting is not real, rather an idea or expression. Artists of the High Renaissance tried to conceal that

artifice by using mathematical and scientific devices like perspective in their paintings. Here, Mannerist went the exact

opposite route and revealed the constructed nature of their work. In other words, Renaissance artist tried hard to

create work that appeared natural where as the Mannerist were less inclined to disguise their work. This conscious

display of artifice often reveals itself as imbalanced compositions and unusual complexities. Unique presentations of

traditional themes also surface in Mannerist art.

JACOPO DA PONTORMO, Entombment of Christ, Capponi Chapel, Santa Felicita, Florence, Italy, 1525-1528.

Oil on wood, 10’3” X 6’4”.

The point previously made is seen by Pontormo, as well as other Mannerist painters, were notable for elongated forms,

precariously balanced poses, a collapsed perspective, irrational settings, and theatrical lighting. As seen with his

Entombment of Christ we see all of these characteristics of Mannerist paintings. First of all, the scene is not a new one,

we have seen time and time again this narrative in which Christ is being removed from the cross and prepared for his

entombment. However, what is new here is the way in which Pontormo has omitted both the cross and the Christ’s

tomb, leaving the viewers to decide what is happening. Scholars have too often tried to understand what is actually

happening here whether it is the, Entombment of Christ, or the Decent from the Cross. Also, going against the traditional

ways to depict this narrative such as Rogier van der Weyden or Raphael and capture it horizontally, Pontormo displays

his characters on a vertical axis. This placement puts Mary in an awkward position as she falls back from the audience as

she releases her dead son’s hand and causes there to be a void where usually the viewer’s eyes would comfortably rest,

in the center. To fill this empty space, Pontormo draws the attention to the placement of hands, which again causes the

viewer’s to notice unique gap. This is done with a purpose because the emptiness is symbolic of loss and grief.

This painting represents the departure from the balanced, harmoniously structured compositions of the High

Renaissance.

PARMIGIANINO, Madonna with the Long Neck, ca. 1535. Oil on Wood, approx. 7’1” X 4’4”. Galleria degli

Uffizi, Florence.

Known simply as Parmigianino (his full name is Girolamo Francesco Maria Mazzola), too follows the rules of Mannerism

and can be seen best with his Madonna with the Long Neck. Notice the small oval head, the elongated neck, the delicacy

of her hand resting upon her chest bone, and her sensuous and elongated frame are all trademarks of the taste of later

Mannerism. Parmigianino emphasized her elegance by displaying her from head to toe. On her left we see a cluster of

angelic form whose expressions seem to be as soft as their skin. On her right we see a line of columns without capitals

and an enigmatic figure with a scroll whose distance from the foreground is immeasurable – this is the antithesis

(opposite) of the rational Renaissance portrayal of size with distance.

Exaggeration of limbs is not the only purpose of this painting. It takes its subject from a simile in medieval hymns that

compared the Virgin’s neck to a great ivory tower or column, in which se see to the right of her. So, we see beauty as

well as religious meanings in Parmigianino’s artistic portrayal.

BRONZINO, Venus, Cupid, Folly, and Time (The Exposure of Luxury), ca. 1546. Oil on wood, approx. 5’ 1” X 4’

8 ¾”. National Gallery London.

A pupil of Pontormo, Bronzino (Agnolo di Cosimo) too shows his take on the Mannerist style with his Venus, Cupid, Folly,

and Time. Commissioned for the King of France we see a unique depiction of Cupid who is fondling his mother Venus

while Folly prepares to shower them with flower petals. Time appears in the upper right corner and is drawing back a

curtain to expose this incestuous act. There are other human qualities being represented here as well such as Envy. The

masks, which happen to be a favorite tool of the Mannerists, represent deceit. Interpretations of the painting vary from

person to person, but one take on it is that love – accompanied by envy and plagued by inconsistency – is foolish and

that lovers will discover its folly (foolishness) in time.

The figures take up most of the space in this work and Bronzino pays special attention to the hands, heads, and feet for

the Mannerist thought that those features were the ones to carry grace, and the clever depiction of them as evidence of

artistic skill.

SOFONISBA ANGUISSOLA, Portrait of the Artist’s Sisters and Brother, ca. 1555. Methuen Collection, Corsham

Court, Wiltshire.

Here we see a new type of portraiture of irresistible charm which is characterized by an informal intimacy and subjects

that are often moving, conversing, or engaged in activities. We see the artist depicting the members of her family.

Anguissola was the leading female artist of her time. Her contemporaries greatly admired her use of relaxed poses and

expressions of her subjects. Obviously, since the children are members of her family, this was meant for private use. The

sisters wear matching outfits and the brother who is placed in between them holds a lapdog. The oldest sister (left)

displays dignity of the portrait while the brother looks at the artist with a very quizzical look. The youngest sister’s

attention is clearly being drawn to something at the artist’s left.

Anguissola had very recognized talents which allowed her to consort with other esteemed individuals of her time.

GIOVANNI DA BOLOGNA, Abduction of the Sabine Women, Loggia dei Lanzi, Piazza della Signoria, Florence,

Italy, completed in 1583. Marble approx. 13’ 6” high.

Here we see Mannerist principles of figure compositions. This is the first large scale group since the classical antiquity

designed to be seen from multiple view points. These multiple viewpoints change radically from one to the other as the

viewer walks around the sculpture. The three interlock to create a vertical spiral movement. Interesting thing about this

work is that Giovanni had no interest in portraying any particular subject. His desire was to create a demonstration piece

with an old man, a young man, and a woman, all nude in the tradition of ancient statues of mythological figures. This is

perhaps why the title of this work has changed from Paris Abducting Helen to the more recent Abduction of the Sabine

Women. We see here references to the Laocoon group, with the crouching old man and the woman’s arm that is

stretched up. Nonetheless, they display athletic flexibility and Michelangelesque potential for action.

TINTORETTO, Last Supper, Chancel, San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, Italy, 1594. Oil on canvas, 12’ X 18’ 8”.

Jacopo Robusti, or simply, Tintoretto claimed to be a student of Titian and aspired to combine his color genius with the

drawings skill of Michelangelo. His works of art are often imbued with dramatic power, depth of spiritual vision, and

glowing Venetian color schemes. Much like the other Mannerist, Tintoretto contains a lot of the same devices in his

work, such as the imbalanced composition and the visual complexity.

One amazing painting that depicts his mastery is the Last Supper – a scene in which we have seen before. This take on it

is a bit different from the others. For example, the setting is a very dark one that is illuminated by the single light in the

upper corner. The shimmering halos give the audience a clue as to biblical nature of the scene. In comparison to

Leonardo’s Last Supper, We know where Christ is and we do not have to search for him. Also, Christ is the vanishing

point so everything lines up to him. With Tintoretto’s we only locate Christ because of the extra strong orb of light that

frames him. The perspective lines are in fact going in the opposite direction of where Christ is and creates an effect of

limitless space.

PAOLO VERONESE, Christ in the House of Levi, 1573. Oil on canvas, approx. 18’6” X42’ 6”. Galleria

dell’Accademia, Venice.

Named Paolo Cagliari of Verona, or simply, Paolo Veronese we see brighter images than Tintoretto’s work. We also see a

difference between the two in the fact that Tintoretto gloried in monumental drama and deep perspectives where as

Veronese specialized in splendid displays painted in superb color set within majestic classical architecture. Veronese

usually painted for wealthy monasteries and his work would hang in the refectories which allowed him the

appropriateness of painting majestic figures seated around tables.

In the Christ in the House of Levi, originally called the Last Supper, we see characters in loggia and are all framed by three

monumental arches. In the direct center, we see Christ who is seen with the elite patrons of Venice. In the foreground

we see the chief steward welcoming his guests in grand fashion. Accompanying him in the foreground is a slew of

clowns, dogs, dwarfs, and robed lords.

The reason this work had to change its original title is due to the effects it had on the Catholic Church. (It is important to

note that this is the time of the Counter –Reformation). The Holy Office of the Inquisition accused him of impiety (lack of

reverence for God or sacred things) for painting such non holy creatures next to Christ and they ordered him to fix this at

his expense, so, he just changed the title.

Veronese returned to the High Renaissance style and painted his subjects in symmetrical balance. His shimmering color

is drawn from the whole spectrum, although he did avoid solid colors and turned more to half shades (intermediate

tones: red-orange, blue-green, etc.).

ANDREA PALLADIO, Villa Rotonda (formerly Villa Capra), near Vicenza, Italy, ca. 1566-1570.

Chief architect of the Venetian Republic and after making several trips to Rome to study their architecture, he wrote his

own treatise called “The Four Books of Architecture”. He acquired his reputation for his designs of villas on the Venetian

mainland, 19 of which are still standing.

His most famous villa, Villa Rotonda, does not really attest to his personal style. He built it for a retired monsignor which

is a title of honor in the Roman Catholic Church, born by persons of ecclesiastic rank and implying a distinction bestowed

by the pope. He wanted this particular villa for social events. It is a central planned building with four equal facades and

projecting porches. It embodies all of the qualities of self sufficiency and formal completeness sought by most

Renaissance architects.

Seeing the ancient building is Rome is clearly what influenced Palladio’s designs and such is seen with this structure as

well. Each façade represents a particular Roman temple. No doubt by the dome on the center was clearly a Pantheon

model.

ANDREA PALLADIO, West façade of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, Italy, begun in 1565.

Exterior: Dissatisfied with integrating a high central nave and lower aisles into a unified façade design, Palladio solved

this problem by superimposing a tall, narrow classical porch on a low broad one. The play of shadow across and the

surface of the building against the sea and sky all represent a remarkable color effect.

Interior: the inside represents strong roots in High Renaissance architectural style. Light floods the interior and crisply

defines the contours of the rich wall decorations.