BY GIANCARLO GRAZIANI AND SALVATORE PRATO | Ce.St.Art. – Center for Studies of Art Economy
This is an excerpt from the research paper presented at the Conference “Donatello: Workshops, Patronage, Revival” held at the Victoria & Albert Museum, Hochhauser Auditorium, in London on May 19th, 2023.
As part of the exhibition dedicated to Donatello at the Victoria and Albert Museum (“Donatello: Sculpting the Renaissance,” which took place from February 11, 2023, to June 11, 2023), a conference organized by the V&A Research Institute was held in London. It focused on the Medici sculptor par excellence, the only one honored with burial in the crypt of the Basilica of the Florentine dynasty of San Lorenzo. Speeches were scheduled over two days and saw the presence of the most important specialists in the international arena. They took stock of the studies dedicated to the Master, which, despite having a very extensive bibliography, still leave many questions open.
Among the most important topics was the High Altar of Saint Anthony of Padua, which today appears in an incongruous late 19th-century arrangement designed by Camillo Boito in 1895. Many reconstructive hypotheses have been proposed, but the “mystery” about its original realization remains. By promoting the restoration project of the Deposition of Christ al Santo by Donatello, we began to delve into historical sources and noticed, right from the best-known and ancient, evident questions to which we have not found congruent answers.
Together with two Italian restorers, we carried out an analysis of the issue, drawing new conclusions. This article presents only an excerpt of the research paper, which we presented for the first time at the Victoria and Albert Museum Conference. During this presentation, the methodological approach, the reasons for the research, new historical/artistic hypotheses, and the conclusions were presented. Many authors have written on the High Altar of Saint Anthony of Padua, and of those we traced who wrote about the Altar before the current arrangement, the descriptive notes do not provide a pertinent view.
Many historical reconstructive hypotheses focused on the representation of the High Altar made by the Anonymous Morelliano (in modern times identified with Marcantonio Michiel). He gave an “unusual” description of the Altar that seems to be a provisional setup bringing together Donatello’s works in marble, stone, and bronze but placing the Deposition – “the dead Christ with the other figures in a circle” – “from behind the altar.” This intermediate arrangement was certainly not by Donatello, given the overall uncertainty and even the placement of the Deposition on the back, in contrast with the previous descriptions and Vasari’s, which should be later.
It is possible that the “Primigenial High Altar” reached only a first degree of coincidence with what is depicted in the “Miracle of the Mule” and that it was not then completed and assembled due to the arrival of the Tergola donation, which made the project change from sculpture in marble and stone to a project of melting and refinishing in bronze sculptures, also divided into several phases as shown by the contracts between Donatello and the Ark.
This would lead us to think that the Anonymous Morelliano reported the forms of the provisional arrangement made for the feast of the Saint in 1448 and that, in fact, this arrangement did not yield the expected results. So much so that Donatello proceeded to implement other fusions. Only in 1966, one of the leading scholars of St. Anthony of Padua, Father Vergilio Gamboso, published his guide to the Basilica of the Saint, still considered today the most documented and detailed guide written on the famous monument. He writes that in the “Miracle of the Mule”– one of Donatello’s four bronze Miracles – “it is possible to find an echo of the destroyed great altar by Donatello.”
This statement was later confirmed by other scholars such as Alessandro Parrochi first (1966/1980) and Alberta De Nicolò Salmazo later (2006/2007), who confirmed the statement made by Father Vergilio Gamboso, overcoming the misconceptions based on the incomplete description attributed only in the modern era to the Anonymous Morelliano. They attempted to explain a “coexistence” on the High Altar of different sculptural elements with unacceptable and controversial results.
Only the rich donation of Francesco Tergola made possible the planning of a sumptuous Altar in bronze. Also, in this case, the idea gradually enriched and perfected so much that the implementation had at least four phases: the first for the 10 Angels and the 4 Evangelists, the second for the 4 Miracles and the 2 statues of Saint Francis and Saint Louis; the third for the other 5 statues and a further phase, after the test, for the Pietà (Dead Christ) and 2 other Angels.
It is to be assumed that this overlapping of commissions distorted Donatello’s ideas so much as to induce him not to complete the project for which the Venerable Ark withheld money from Donatello and entered into a dispute with him. There are two documents concerning Donatello and his Altar of the Saint of Padua that make the correctness of the statement made by Father Vergilio Gamboso increasingly evident.
A first document dated 1466 and recently discovered talks about a “Madonna gilded and with a green mosaic by Donatello” – discovered in a French private collection. Chemical analyses confirmed that it has been decorated with the same ceramic material used in the Deposition of Christ, and the expressionistic style applied by the Master makes this Madonna irrefutably conceived and carved at the same time and probably for the same complex, the Altar of Saint Anthony, before the post-donation phase: so important and well-known as to be reproduced in many replicas, some still existing today.
The discovery of this Madonna and its very close connection with the Deposition, together with two fragments of figures of Holy Bishops in Nanto stone (one of which has green ceramic inserts) stored at the Romano Foundation in Florence and already related to an initial processing of sculpted stones for the Altar, represents evidence of that “stylistic continuum” initially wanted by Donatello for his “Primigenial High Altar of the Saint.”
In his book “History of Italian Art,” Adolfo Venturi publishes a photo of a Donatellian stucco cast depicting a “Madonna and Child flanked by two Angels” from the Altar of the Saint. This leads us to think that this figure, perfectly consistent with the style of Donatello shown in the Deposition in Nanto stone, replicates the figure designed for the center of the “Primigenial High Altar.” Moreover, this icon has been reproduced in several replicas – including one stored in the Civic Museum of Padua – and this makes explicit the consideration in which the original was held.
Giorgio Vasari mentioned a “Very Beautiful Our Lady” (“Molto Bella Nostra Donna”) made by Donatello in Padua “in piece of a canton, of an old marble” (“in un cantone di un pezzo, di un marmo vecchio”), and this Madonna could therefore be the same mentioned by Vasari, who, however, had seen it in another place – not indicated– but not reconnecting that “Very Beautiful Our Lady” to the High Altar of Saint Anthony. Another document dated 1456 talks about the appointment by Donatello of a delegate called Simone – Giorgio Vasari referred that Donatello’s brother was called Simone – to manage the dispute with the Venerable Ark relating to their dissatisfaction with the work done and not finished by Donatello.
This “dispute” is closely connected to the fundamental artistic principle found in Donatello’s Work and of which he was the “father” and “source of inspiration” for many other Great Artists, a principle according to which the style of the fifteenth century applied “classical canonical harmony.” This – precisely in the case of the High Altar – certainly has nothing to do with the Baroque articulation of the Altar’s sculptural complex, which presumably was not in Donatello’s mind so much that he did not want to complete it, even reluctantly.
From all this, it is legitimate to think that Donatello thought in an initial phase of an Altar made on a shoestring using marbles and stones, including recycled ones, and ennobling the structure with the use of “colored majolica and gilding” based on the classical architectural scheme depicted in the “Miracle of the Mule.” This realization is perfectly consistent with his Work characterized by the revival of Ancient Times and with the previous examples such as the “Cantoria” of the Cathedral of Florence and the “Pulpit” of Prato. Of this “Primigenial High Altar,” we propose a first graphic reconstructive hypothesis consistent with the Renaissance Uses. The research continues!
© Giancarlo Graziani, Visiting Professor of Art Economy, Founder member and Supervisor of Ce.St.Art. – Center for Studies of Art Economy
© Salvatore Prato, Member of Ce.St.Art. – Center for Studies of Art Economy
Also Read
Deposition of Christ by Donatello – The Mystery of a Restoration
The World Art News (WAN) is not liable for the content of this publication. All statements and views expressed herein are opinions only. Act at your own risk. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written permission. © The World Art News
Categories: Architecture, Artifacts & Archeology, Artists, Europe, Fine Art, Investigations, Museums, Restoration, Sculpture