Skip to main content

Main image

Santa Maria Maggiore Altarpiece:
Catalogue entry

Catalogue contents

About the catalogue

Entry details

Full title
Santa Maria Maggiore Altarpiece
Artist
Masaccio and Masolino
Author
Dillian Gordon and Susanna Avery-Quash

Catalogue entry

, 2003

Extracted from:
Dillian Gordon, The Fifteenth Century Italian Paintings, Volume I (London: National Gallery Company and Yale University Press, 2003).

© The National Gallery, London

NG 5963: A Pope (Saint Gregory?) and Saint Matthias (© The National Gallery, London)

NG 5962 and 5963 come from a double‐sided altarpiece painted by Masaccio and Masolino for Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome, probably in 1428–9.

Masaccio 
NG 5962 
Saints Jerome and John the Baptist

c. 1428–9

Egg tempera on poplar (identified), 125.0 x 58.9 cm

Saint Jerome is dressed as a cardinal and holds an open inscribed book in one hand and a miniature church in the other; at his feet is his attribute of a lion, raising the paw from which the saint removed a thorn. Saint John the Baptist is slightly behind him, dressed in a pink cloak over a camel skin; with one hand he makes the gesture he typically makes when pointing to Christ, and in the other he holds a scroll and a staff surmounted by a cross. The two figures stand on a sloping terrain (fig. 3), barren except for a number of flowers, which include strawberries (fruit and flower), dandelion, daisy, scilla and violets; the elongated cones on either side of Saint John’s foot could be grape hyacinths, and by his instep is a fern.1

Saint John’s curling scroll is inscribed EC CE… (AGN)VS D(E)I (‘Behold… the Lamb of God’, John 1:29).

Saint Jerome’s book is marked with various letters, and with the inscription IN PRINCIPIO. C/REAVIT. DEVM / CELVM. ETTERRA’ / TERRA[M]. AVTEM / ERAT INNANIS / ET VACVA. ET / SPIRITVS . DOM/MINI. FEREBA/TVR . SVPER. AQVAS. E[T]CETE/RA, derived from the first two verses of Genesis (‘In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void;… And the spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters, etc.’).

Technical Notes
Panel construction

Dimensions: height 125 cm; width 58.9 cm; depth, including panel tray, 3.4 cm. The original sight size of the painted surface is 113.3 x 55 cm (as shown here), excluding the painted strip at the base and added top. The rectangular panel has been cut, trimming the internal arch by about 3 cm at the top. In 1950 the poplar panel was planed down. Before this, it was 1.2 cm thick and consisted of two vertical planks of unequal width; it was then thinned to 0.6 cm, and the left (seen from behind) section of the panel was removed and a balsa‐wood backing glued to the back.

A small rectangle cut into the wood, where a mortise to fix the panel to an adjacent one was removed, is visible in the photograph of the back (see fig. 1).

On the back was once the seal of the Farnese Collection and labels from the Fesch sale, 864.1315 and written in the paint N° 759.d.C. and 65 (see Provenance and fig. 1).2

The spandrels have been made up with later gesso. New gold covers the areas where original capitals have been removed.

As in NG 5963 and the related panels in Philadelphia and Naples, horizontal bands of linen were applied to each individual panel before the application of gesso (visible in the X‐radiograph, fig. 2).3

Restoration

Cleaned and restored in 1951.

Condition and technique

The paint surface is in good condition, with minor losses along the back of the neck of Saint Jerome and the tip of his beard, from the pink of the folds of John the Baptist’s drapery, and from below his right wrist. There are some scratches in the chest of the lion and to its right.

The haloes (see details on pp. 228 and 229) have an outer ring of triple dots made by repeating a single punch. Foliate patterns were incised within them, with rather random cross‐hatching. John the Baptist’s halo seems originally to have been cut at the right by the frame, although it is difficult to be certain, since this part has now been restored.

The outlines of the figures were incised. There are no pentimenti or changes of identity of the kind observed in the Philadelphia panels (see below). Investigation by the National Gallery’s Scientific Department has shown that the flesh painting has an underlayer of green earth throughout, similar to that in the Pisa altarpiece (NG 3046; see p. 205). Technical analysis has also shown that the medium differs from that used in NG 5963: the pigments used for Saint John’s flesh and for his red cloak have been bound with egg, with a trace of drying oil possibly added to the cloak (although this may be contamination from a later varnish), while in NG 5963 the flesh painting is done with tempera grassa and in the draperies the pigments were bound mainly with oil.4

The vermilion modelling of Saint Jerome’s robe has darkened, particularly in the mid‐tones, creating false shadows, and the green may also have darkened. The red lake of John the Baptist’s robe has probably suffered some fading.

The lion was always allowed for, but was clearly painted after the red robe of Saint Jerome; the flowers are painted over the red of the robe and over the gold background. The sloping landscape is incised and was therefore planned from the start.

It is common for the model church held by Saint Jerome to have rays emanating from its doorway,5 but here there is no trace of any such lines. Either they were applied with mordant gilding, which has come off (although it is unusual for mordant [page 225][page 226][page 227][page [228]][page [229]][page 230]gilding to leave no trace), or none may ever have been applied, since mordant gilding is applied only in the final stages; other features of the painting, such as the lack of a clasp on John the Baptist’s robe, also suggest that this panel may be not quite finished.6

Fig. 1

The back of Saints Jerome and John the Baptist (NG 5962) before treatment (© The National Gallery, London)

Fig. 2

X‐radiograph of NG 5962 (© The National Gallery, London)

Details of the saints’ heads (© The National Gallery, London)

© The National Gallery, London

Relationship to NG 5963

NG 5962 and NG 5963 once formed a single panel painted on both sides. At the time of acquisition, the various knots in the wood visible on the back corresponded precisely7 and it is therefore certain that the two pictures were originally painted on a single panel constructed from two vertical planks of wood, subsequently sawn apart.

Iconography

The left‐hand page of Saint Jerome’s book contains illegible letters, presumably intended to represent the opening verses of the Greek or Hebrew version of the Bible, which he has begun to translate into the Latin shown on the curved right‐hand page. Millard Meiss pointed out the grammatical error in writing DEUM in the accusative rather than the nominative case.8 Carl Strehlke notes that the iconography of Saint Jerome holding a model church is more common in Venetian painting, but cites a Florentine example in the altarpiece by Mariotto di Nardo for Florence cathedral, dated 1398.9

The cross carried by Saint John the Baptist is unusual in that it is supported on a column‐shaped shaft, generally thought to be a reference to the armorial device of the Colonna family (see below).

Attribution

NG 5962 was first attributed to Masaccio by Kenneth Clark.10 Despite Martin Davies’s reluctance to accept the attribution,11 and Decio Gioseffi’s attribution of part of the painting to the young Domenico Veneziano,12 it is now generally agreed that this panel is largely by Masaccio.13 Meiss saw the intervention of a second painter (possibly not Masolino): he was adamant that parts of NG 5962 were not by Masaccio.14 Cesare Brandi thought it impossible that the flowers could be by Masaccio,15 although one might argue that the starkly barren earth, bereft of any grass, and the extraordinarily geometric flowers are exactly what one might expect of Masaccio, particularly in view of the type of plants found in the Crucifixion (Naples, Capodimonte) in the Pisa altarpiece (see fig. 9 on p. 210). Moreover, the setting echoes that found in the thirteenth‐century apse mosaics of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome, from where the painting comes. The painting is a display of brilliant virtuosity, particularly in the foreshortened hand of Saint Jerome holding a book, the pages of which fall forward, opening up at the corners, with the backward‐curling clasp and his fingertips just catching the light, in the unfurling lettered scroll of the Baptist, and in the monumental yet minuscule sculpture above the doorway of the model church (see fig. 4).

Fig. 3

Detail of flowers (NG 5962) (© The National Gallery, London)

Fig. 4

Detail from NG 5962 showing the figure over the doorway of the model church held by Saint Jerome (© The National Gallery, London)

Provenance

Originally from the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome. See further under NG 5963 below.

[page 231]

,

Tommaso di Cristofano Fini da Panicale, known as Masolino, was born in Panicale, near San Giovanni Valdarno. He has been identified as the Maso di Cristofano who, around 1403, was working in the workshop of Ghiberti, which was run by Ghiberti’s stepfather until 1409. Masolino is first certainly documented, as a painter, in 1422, and matriculated with the Arte dei Medici e Speziali in 1423. Attributed to him is the Virgin and Child (Bremen, Kunsthalle), dated 1423, which bears the arms of the Carnesecchi and Boni families. His earliest documented work was for the Holy Cross Chapel for the Compagnia della Croce in Santo Stefano, Empoli, for which he received a payment on 2 November 1424. It is not known when he began his collaboration with Masaccio (see biography, p. 201), with whom he painted the Sant’Anna Metterza (Florence, Uffizi), probably c. 1423–4, and the Brancacci Chapel frescoes in Santa Maria del Carmine, probably c. 1424–5, left unfinished when Masolino went to Hungary to work for Pippo Spano. He had left Florence by 1 September 1425 and returned after July 1427. At an unknown date, probably 1427/8, he went to Rome, where he probably began the double‐sided altarpiece for Santa Maria Maggiore (see NG 5962 and 5963) with Masaccio; he certainly completed it after Masaccio’s death in 1428/9(?). In Rome he painted the frescoes for San Clemente commissioned by Cardinal Branda Castiglione, probably before 1431, and (now lost) frescoes for the Orsini Palace by 1432. In 1432–3 he painted in San Fortunato, Todi, and in 1435 he worked on frescoes in the Baptistery in Castiglione d’Olona, where he died, probably in 1436.1

Note

Masolino 
NG 5963 
A Pope (Saint Gregory?) and Saint Matthias

c. 1428–9

Tempera grassa and oil on poplar,16 now transferred to fibreboard, 126.3 x 59.1 cm

The pope, wearing a papal tiara, holds a book in his left hand and blesses with his right. His (now tarnished) silver and fringed cope is lined with green and has golden decorated orphreys. He is probably Saint Gregory the Great. Saint Matthias, wearing a green robe, holds a book and an axe stained with blood. They stand on a green foreground which reads ambiguously as either grass or Antique Serpentine.

Technical Notes
Panel construction

Dimensions: height 126.3; width 59.1 cm; depth, including panel tray, 2.4 cm. Sight size of painted surface (as shown here): 113.4 cm high (excluding gilded top and added strip of approximately 1 cm at bottom), 55 cm wide. The rectangular panel originally had an inscribed pointed arch, which has been cut approximately 3 cm from the top. The spandrels have been regessoed and regilded.

Transferred to fibreboard in 1951. Before the transfer the panel was 1.2 cm thick. The original wood was removed, exposing the back of the canvas, and a new support of fibreboard was applied. A photograph of the back of the panel before treatment is in the National Gallery archives (fig. 6). Davies17 reports that indentations left by the removal of the mortises which fixed this panel to the central panel are sited 111 cm from the (uncut) lower edge. Measurements for NG 5962 were not taken, but can be seen from the photographs to correspond. On the back were originally the Farnese seal and labels from the Fesch sale with the numbers 865‐1340 and, written in paint, N° 754.d.C. and 64 (see Provenance and fig. 6).

Restoration

Cleaned and restored in 1951.

Condition and technique

The condition is reasonable, but there are widespread small losses. Saint Matthias’s robe has been painted with brown on green, possibly in an attempt to achieve a cangiante effect. The brown robe beneath the green cloak is very damaged.

The pope’s cope is of silver leaf (now tarnished) which has been incised for texture and painted with a red lake glaze;18 some of the paint has flaked off the silver, especially where the axe handle overlaps it, creating a noticeable lacuna. The red vermilion of the fringe of his cope and his shoes has blackened. There may be a pentimento in the painting of his toe.

The gold of the tiara is water‐gilded. The X‐radiograph (fig. 5) shows that the mordant‐gilded morse was originally smaller and water gilded, and extended with mordant gilding. The gold border of the silver cope was glazed with green and the pope’s rings have been modelled with a brown glaze.

[page 232]
Fig. 5

X‐radiograph of NG 5963 (© The National Gallery, London)

[page 233] [page 234]
Fig. 6

The back of A Pope (Saint Gregory?) and Saint Matthias (NG 5963) before transfer (© The National Gallery, London)

[page 235]
Fig. 7

Reconstruction of the two sides of the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece (© The National Gallery, London)

[page [236]]

A Pope (Saint Gregory?) and Saint Matthias (NG 5963), detail (© The National Gallery, London)

[page 237]

The punching is somewhat erratic. The left side of the pope’s halo (see detail opposite) is different from the right side and appears to be a clumsy attempt to imitate the composite petalled punch used on that side, which was also used for all of Saint Matthias’s halo in clusters of four. This particular punch is not used elsewhere on the altarpiece and may have been lost.19

NG 5963 is painted in a different technique from NG 5962, with the result that the flesh tones are ruddier in appearance. A sample of the flesh painting examined in cross‐section showed that it had been done with a solid, very pale underlayer made up mainly of lead white with a trace of red lead, and there is no sign of any green earth underlayer. Furthermore, scientific analysis has shown that for painting the flesh of Saint Matthias tempera grassa (egg tempera admixed with oil) was used, while the pigments for painting the olive‐green robe and the pinkish‐cream robe of Saint Gregory(?) were bound with linseed oil.20 Due to the use of oil, the paint strokes are more blended than in NG 5962. The hands and feet, although damaged, seem to be more crudely painted than the faces, and may perhaps have been painted by an assistant.

The figures stand on a green foreground which reads ambiguously as either Greek porphyry (known in Italy as Antique Serpentine), represented by long jagged strokes of pale green on a dark green matrix, or as grass.

There are no changes to the identity of the saints, of the kind observed in the Philadelphia panels.21

Iconography

Saint Matthias holds his attribute of an axe: he was martyred by having his head hacked in half.22 The saint beside him, wearing a papal tiara, has been said to be either Pope Liberius, the founder of Santa Maria Maggiore, or, more probably, Pope Gregory the Great (see below).

Fig. 8

Masolino, The Foundation of Santa Maria Maggiore (The Miracle of the Snow). Tempera on wood, 144 x 76 cm. Naples, Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte, formerly Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome. © Photo: SCALA, Florence

Fig. 9

Masolino, The Assumption of the Virgin. Tempera on wood, 142 x 76 cm. Naples, Museo Nazionale di Capodimonte, formerly Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome. © Photo: SCALA, Florence

[page 238]
Fig. 10

Masolino, Saint Paul and Saint Peter. Tempera on wood, 114.2 x 54.3 cm. Philadelphia, Philadelphia Museum of Art, The John G. Johnson Collection, J. inv. no. 408. Formerly Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome. Photo: Joel Mikuliak, 1993

Fig. 11

Masolino, Saint John the Evangelist (?) and Saint Martin. Tempera on wood, 114.2 x 54.3 cm. Philadelphia, Philadelphia Museum of Art, The John G. Johnson Collection, J. inv. no. 409. Formerly Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome. Photo: Joel Mikuliak, 1993

Attribution

It is generally agreed that this panel is largely by Masolino,23 but for a fuller discussion of the attribution of the altarpiece, see below, pp. 2434.

Provenance

Originally from the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome, where seen by Vasari in 1568 (see below). From an unknown date, in the Farnese Collection in Rome, together with NG 5962.24 By 1644 the three pairs of panels of the double‐sided triptych to which NG 5962 and NG 5963 belonged had been sawn into six pictures – Farnese seals were placed on the backs of each at an unknown date.25 They are still recorded in the Farnese Collection in inventories of 1653 and 1697.26 The two central pictures were moved from the Farnese Palace to Naples in 1760, but it is not known what happened to the four other pictures in the eighteenth century: from 1815 at the latest, all four were in the collection of Cardinal Fesch in Rome.27 NG 5962 and NG 5963 were in the Fesch sale, Rome, 1845, lots 864‐1315 and 865‐1340.28 Bought by Baseggio with the two pictures now in Philadelphia (for which see below). They were in the Adair Collection at Flixton Hall, probably acquired c. 1850 by Sir R. Shafto Adair, 1st Bart.29 Purchased, Colnaghi Fund, with a contribution from the NACF , from Major‐General Sir Allan Adair, through Christie, Manson & Woods, 1950.

Other Related Panels and Original Location

NG 5962 and NG 5963 come from an altarpiece in the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome. Vasari, who viewed the altarpiece [page 239] in the company of Michelangelo, saw only one side of it, which he described in his Life of Masaccio as follows:30 Fece ancora a tempera molte tavole, che ne’ travagli di Roma si sono tutte o perse o smarrite. Una nella chiesa di Santa Maria Maggiore, in una cappelletta vicina alla sagrestia; nella quale sono quattro Santi tanto ben condotti, che paiono di rilievo; e nel mezzo Santa Maria della Neve; ed il ritratto di papa Martino di naturale, il quale con una zappa disegna i fondamenti di quella chiesa; ed appresso a lui è Sigismondo II imperatore…(He also painted several panels in tempera, which in the troubles of Rome have all been lost or displaced. One in the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, in a little chapel near the sacristy, in which there are four saints so well executed that they seem to be in relief; and in the centre the Miracle of the Snow; and the portrait of Pope Martin as if from life, who is drawing out the foundations of the church; and near him is the Emperor Sigismund II…) The constituent panels of the altarpiece were first reconstructed by Clark in 1951 on the basis of Vasari’s description and their common provenance, dimensions and stylistic congruence.31 They all survive in separated pairs, and are identifiable in the Farnese inventories, having been sawn into six pictures by 1644.

Fig. 12

Masolino, Saint Paul and Saint Peter (Photo: Joel Mikuliak, 1993)

Fig. 13

Masolino, Saint John the Evangelist(?) and Saint Martin (Photo: Joel Mikuliak, 1993)

Both showing changes to the identity of the saints in figs 10 and 11. Courtesy of Carl Strehlke and Mark Tucker.

In addition to NG 5962 and NG 5963, they are: Saints Paul and Peter (fig. 10) and Saint John the Evangelist(?) and Saint Martin (fig. 11) – both Philadelphia Museum of Art, John G. Johnson Collection; The Foundation of Santa Maria Maggiore (The Miracle of the Snow;fig. 8) and The Assumption of the Virgin (fig. 9) – both Naples, Capodimonte. Their association has been confirmed by technical evidence.

Other fragments associated with the altarpiece in the past have now been shown, through technical investigations by the Opificio delle Pietre Dure e Laboratori di Restauro in Florence, not to belong with the altarpiece.32 They are a pinnacle panel showing the Crucifixion (31.5 x 53.1 cm);33 andapredella panel showing the Burial of the Virgin (19.7 x 48.3 cm), both in the Pinacoteca Vaticana, Rome (inv. nos 260 and 245). Also associated with the latter was a Marriage of the Virgin (48.3 x 19.7 cm) destroyed in the Second World War.34

Reconstruction

Reconstruction of the original juxtaposition of scenes and saints is not possible on the internal evidence of the physical features of the altarpiece. The rectangular hollows left by removal of the mortises, visible in X‐radiographs of the central panels showing the Assumption and the Miracle of the Snow, are almost level on either side and difficult to match with any one individual side panel. The rectangular hollow left by the removal of mortises on the Miracle of the Snow occurs 111 cm from the bottom, as in NG 5963. In the Assumption the marks occur 107 cm from the bottom (but this panel has been cut).35 Reconstruction of the altarpiece has therefore to be hypothesised on the evidence offered by Vasari, the iconography and the patronage.

[page 240]
Fig. 14

Simone Ghini, Tomb of Pope Martin V (d. 1431). Rome, San Giovanni in Laterano. © Photo: SCALA, Florence Photo: The J. Paul Getty Museum, Los Angeles

Fig. 15

Anonymous 14th‐century French artist, Beatus Vir with added arms of Martin V. Page from a breviary. Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. lat. 14701. © Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Archivio Fotografico, Vatican City

Vasari can have seen only one side of the altarpiece, since he describes it as having only four saints. From his description it is clear that he saw the scene with the Miracle of the Snow. He may have elided his notes, because he identified the pope drawing the foundations of the church with a hoe as Pope Martin, and he says that the portrait of the pope is di naturale (‘as if from life’) – a phrase which seems not to be applicable to the face of the pope in the Miracle of the Snow, whereas the facial features of the Saint Martin in the Philadelphia panel have been said to resemble those of Pope Martin V (fig. 14).36 Furthermore, Vasari describes Martin as having Emperor Sigismund beside him, and in fact the saint beside Martin in the Philadelphia panel resembles the iconography of Sigismund (see below).37 Vasari must therefore almost certainly have seen the Philadelphia panel with Saints Martin and John the Evangelist(?). Since Saints Jerome and John were on the back of Saints Gregory(?) and Matthias, and Saints Martin and John the Evangelist(?) had Saints Paul and Peter on the back, the only remaining pair of saints facing towards the right, to balance Saints Martin and John the Evangelist facing to the left, are Saints Jerome and John the Baptist. If the arrangement of the altarpiece had not been altered by the time Vasari saw it, then one side originally showed Saints Jerome and John the Baptist, the Miracle of the Snow, and Saint John the Evangelist(?) and Saint Martin. On the other side were Saints Paul and Peter, the Assumption, and A Pope (Saint Gregory?) and Saint Matthias (see the reconstruction, fig. 7). Furthermore, it has been proposed that the ground on which stand Saints Peter and Paul and Saints Gregory and Matthias slopes up towards the Assumption (Heaven), while on the other side it slopes down towards the Miracle of the Snow (Earth).38

Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome, and the Identity of the Saints

Martin Davies pointed out that the iconography of the altarpiece locates it in Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome: the Miracle of the Snow shows the foundation of Santa Maria Maggiore itself, while the two central scenes of the altarpiece represent two of the three main feasts that were celebrated at the church: the Nativity, the Feast of the Snow (5 August) and the Assumption (15 August).39

The choice in NG 5963 of Saint Matthias – a saint rarely represented – is specifically linked to Santa Maria Maggiore, since his were among the church’s principal relics.40

The identity of the papal saint shown with Saint Matthias is uncertain. He was identified as Liberius (elected pope 22 May 352, died 24 September 366) by Clark and by Meiss.41 However, it has been plausibly suggested that he could represent Pope Gregory the Great (590–604). Lajos Vayer argued that the cult of Liberius, who had been an ineffectual pope, was a weak one, and also that his image in NG 5963 did not resemble his image in the Miracle of the Snow, either in facial features or in the papal tiara and cope, which differ in the two representations. Liberius in the Miracle of the Snow is not shown with a halo, whereas in the full‐length panel the blessing pope clearly has one. Liberius was not a saint. Vayer further argues that Gregory the Great had strong links with Santa Maria [page 241]Maggiore: at the time of the plague in 590, Gregory carried the icon of the Virgin, supposedly painted by Saint Luke, in a procession which terminated in Santa Maria Maggiore, and according to his legend, one Easter, when Gregory was saying Mass, a chorus of angels joined in. Furthermore, his cult was promoted by Martin V, who was pope when the altarpiece was painted, and possibly its patron (although see below). The iconography of the saint blessing and holding a book resembles that recorded in a drawing of the image of Gregory in the Codex Ciacconius (Rome, Biblioteca Vaticana), shown in now destroyed frescoes in the Benedictine monastery of Sant’Andrea in Clivo Scauri, traditionally the home of Pope Gregory.42 Lee Roberts43 further added that the iconography of the Assumption follows the traditional Tuscan formula, except for the angels, who are unusual in that they represent the nine hierarchies as ranked by Gregory the Great, who was probably appositely placed beside the Assumption.44

Saints Peter and Paul are canonical for a Roman basilica, and are the titular saints of two of the other papal basilicas. Paul balances Matthias, possibly because they shared a similar type of martyrdom – Paul was decapitated with a sword.45

The relics of Saint Jerome had been translated to Santa Maria Maggiore by the end of the thirteenth century and an altar there was dedicated to him.46 The model of the church held by Saint Jerome may symbolise Santa Maria Maggiore with its campanile and lunette windows, but with the entrance at the wrong end and lacking the thirteenth‐century façade mosaics.47 Jerome and the Baptist both appear individually in the mosaics of Santa Maria Maggiore (see below), John the Baptist in the apse and on the façade, and Jerome at the left of the apse. Allan Braham pointed out that Jerome was baptised by Pope Liberius, the founder of the basilica.48 It may also be relevant that Saint Augustine, while meditating on the respective glory of saints, had a vision of Saints Jerome and John the Baptist together.49

Saint Martin, Bishop of Tours, in the right‐hand panel, whose crozier contains a mitre held by an angel, almost certainly represents Pope Martin V (elected on Saint Martin’s Day, 11 November 1417; d. 1431), whose portrait was said by Vasari to be in the altarpiece; Mario Salmi, and then Meiss,50 argued that the full‐length figure of Saint Martin is an authentic portrait of Martin V. A breviary acquired probably in Avignon shows two angels holding a shield to which has been added his device of a crowned column with the papal tiara above (Rome, Biblioteca Vaticana, Vat. lat. 14701; fig. 15).51

Braham implausibly argued that the figure beside Saint Martin is a portrait of the Emperor Sigismund (perhaps Saint Sigismund),52 mentioned by Vasari as having been in the altarpiece.53 However, the figure is more likely to represent Saint John the Evangelist, who commonly balances John the Baptist. Meiss and Perri Lee Roberts54 suggested that John the Evangelist could be there for the pope’s brother, Giovanni, with John the Baptist included because the Colonna family chapel was dedicated to him.

The four figures on this side of the altarpiece are linked by their significance for the beginning of Christianity and the Church. Jerome’s text is from the beginning of the Bible and describes the creation of the world. John the Baptist carries the text of his words at the Baptism of Christ, an episode that marked the beginning of Christ’s mission. The saints flank the depiction of the founding of the church of Santa Maria Maggiore, symbolically set against the Sabine hills, and Braham pointed out that with Martin V the Great Schism finally ended and the renewal of the Church began.55

Which side of the altarpiece faced the front is nowadays impossible to say with certainty. Meiss argued that the Miracle of the Snow faced the front.56 A compelling argument in support of this theory is that the Miracle of the Snow is on the front of the marble ciborium commissioned for the high altar by Cardinal d’Estouteville, while the Assumption is on the back.57 It would therefore probably follow that the panels with the armorial devices, namely NG 5962 with Saints Jerome and John the Baptist and the panel with Saint John the Evangelist(?) and Saint Martin, were prominent on the front face of the altarpiece,58 which seems likely.

High Altar or Canons’ Choir?

The problem of which side of the altarpiece faced the front and which the back is in part linked to the question of whether it was designed as a high altarpiece or for a side chapel.

The Sacristy was in Vasari’s time approximately on the site of the present Cappella Paolina, and Procacci identified the ‘cappelletta’ as one near this and near the apse of the church, described as between columns and situated between the choir and the south aisle.59 The ‘cappelletta’ was dedicated to Saint John the Baptist and was under the patronage of the Colonna family.60

Discussion of the original site of the altarpiece has parallels with the debate over the site of Giotto’s Stefaneschi altarpiece, commissioned in the fourteenth century by Cardinal Jacopo Stefaneschi (d. 1343).61 The two altarpieces have roughly similar dimensions, and both are triptychs painted on two sides for a papal basilica. Hitherto it has been widely accepted that the Stefaneschi altarpiece was on the high altar of Old St Peter’s, as discussed by Julian Gardner.62 Consequently it has been argued by Miklós Boskovits, Fabrizio Mancinelli, Paul Joannides and Lee Roberts63 that the Masolino/Masaccio altarpiece was painted for the high altar, although Martin Davies objected on the grounds of the small size of the triptych.64 However, the church of Santa Maria Maggiore had a (probably) unbroken tradition of a ciborium placed on the high altar: a ciborium decorated with silver was first placed there in 793–4, to be replaced in 808–9 by Leo III with another from Old St Peter’s, which was itself replaced in the fifteenth century by the one commissioned by d’Estouteville.65 Sible de Blaauw convincingly argues that the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece stood not on the high altar, but in the canons’ choir: he argues that because only the pope could say Mass at the high altar, the canons had their own choir with altar and altarpiece, situated in the south part of the transept, which doubled as the Colonna family chapel dedicated to Saint John the Baptist, and that this explains the Colonna arms, the presence of Saint John the Baptist, and the double‐sided nature of the altarpiece, which would have been [page 242] isolated in the transept (see the plan of Santa Maria Maggiore by Sible de Blaauw, fig. 16).66

Fig. 16

Plan of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome, courtesy of S. de Blaauw. © Musei Vaticani, Archivio Fotografico, Vatican City, photo: M. Sari

If the Miracle of the Snow as the ‘public’ aspect of the altarpiece, with the Colonna arms and the foundation of the church itself, faced the nave, the concentric circles framing the Virgin and Christ in the Miracle would have provided a visual link with the high altar in the two circles framing Christ crowning the Virgin and the Agnus Dei in the apse mosaics.67 For the canons, the link with the high altar would have been in the subject of the Assumption itself, since the inscription beneath the central apse mosaic of the Coronation of the Virgin refers to the Assumptive Virgin: Maria Virgo Assu[m] [?]ptae ad Etherev[m] [?] Thalamv[m] [?],68 while the angels in the Assumption echo those on either side of the mosaic of Christ crowning the Virgin.69

The Patron and Circumstances of the Commission

It is not certain who the patron of the altarpiece was. The heraldic references are all to the Colonna family: in NG 5962 John the Baptist’s cross is, unusually, supported by a column; the cope of Saint Martin, embroidered with ‘M’s, is decorated with the Colonna arms on the orphreys, and the saint’s face is said to resemble that of Pope Martin V (see fig. 14), himself a member of the Colonna family and hitherto considered by most scholars to be the patron.70 Martin returned to Rome in 1421 and concerned himself with the refurbishment and redecoration of Roman churches (hence the theme of renewal).

The association of the Colonna family with Santa Maria Maggiore dated back to the thirteenth century. Cardinal Jacopo Colonna (d. 1318), cardinal deacon of Santa Maria Maggiore, who with Pope Nicholas IV added the transept, rebuilt the apse, embellished the façade and founded two family chapels in the left transept, is shown kneeling beside the Coronation of the Virgin opposite Pope Nicholas in the apse mosaic of 1295 by Jacopo Torriti. He was buried in Santa Maria Maggiore and bequeathed most of his possessions to the church.71 Jacopo Colonna is shown also on the mosaics of the façade – which include the Colonna arms and the scene of the Miracle of the Snow72 – kneeling opposite his brother, Pietro (d. 1326), who was also buried in Santa Maria Maggiore; according to a seventeenth‐century drawing and a description of 1741, the mosaics also included Saints Jerome and Matthias.73 There was therefore an early and close association of the Colonna family with the scene of the Miracle of the Snow. In the sixteenth century the altarpiece was situated in a Colonna chapel in the church.74 Martin V is therefore a possible patron of the altarpiece.

It has also been suggested that it could have been commissioned by Cardinal Rinaldo Brancacci (d. 1427), who was archpriest of the church from 1411.75 But if one accepts that the altarpiece was painted after Masolino’s return from Hungary (see below), this patronage is excluded by Brancacci’s death.

Carl Strehlke has put forward the proposal that the altarpiece was commissioned by Cardinal Antonio Casini of Siena, Brancacci’s successor to the post of archpriest in Santa Maria Maggiore. Casini had already commissioned a small painting of the Virgin and Child (Florence, Uffizi) from Masaccio and was close to Martin V; he wanted to be buried in Santa Maria Maggiore, and Strehlke has suggested that his portrait may be found in the cardinal holding the pope’s robes in the Miracle of the Snow. He suggests that the altarpiece was paid for out of 25 florins which Brancacci left for a chalice the church did not need (having already at least ten or twelve) and the bequest of Cardinal Pietro Morosini (d. 1424), who left 100 florins for a silver reliquary to house the relics of Saint Jerome; on 28 May 1428 the canons of the basilica and one of its archpriests, Jean Rochetaillé, successfully appealed to the pope to convert these two bequests for uses other than those intended by the testors.76

Altarpiece Design

Equivalents for this type of altarpiece have been cited by Meiss and by Longhi: the former cites Paolo di Giovanni Fei’s triptych showing the Birth of the Virgin in the Siena Pinacoteca77 and the latter proposes Vecchietta’s Assumption in Pienza as a derivative.78 The most important prototype is undoubtedly Giotto’s Stefaneschi altarpiece. However, the panels of the Masaccio/Masolino altarpiece were probably originally rectangular: the curved shoulders of the panels in Naples may be the result of later cutting. It is therefore legitimate to seek the prototype for the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece in the [page 243]local thirteenth‐century tradition in Rome and Lazio of large triptychs painted on both sides, with a central enthroned Christ (here adapted to fulfil a different narrative need and the particular iconography of Santa Maria Maggiore) and full‐length standing figures in the rectangular side panels. An example is that in Santa Maria Nuova, Viterbo, where the central enthroned Christ is flanked by the Virgin and Saint John the Evangelist on one side and a cherub with Saints Paul and Peter on the other.79 It is not impossible that the altarpiece by Masaccio and Masolino replaced an earlier altarpiece of this type in Santa Maria Maggiore,80 the basic structure being updated with an inscribed pointed arch within the rectangular panels.

Attribution, Division of Labour and Date

The key questions regarding the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece are whether it was painted before or after Masaccio’s Pisa altarpiece of 1426, and whether there was a time lapse between the activity of the two painters or they were collaborating simultaneously, as they seem to have done on the Brancacci Chapel and the Sant’Anna Metterza altarpiece;81 in other words, did Masaccio begin the commission alone and Masolino complete it after his death, or did the two artists execute it as a joint commission? There is also the related question of whether the altarpiece was painted in Florence or Rome.

Most scholars consider the two faces of the central panels to be by Masolino.82 Martin Davies gives a full account of scholarly opinion regarding the date and attribution of the paintings until 1961.83 Kenneth Clark, who attributed NG 5962 and parts of Saint John the Evangelist(?) and Saint Martin and of the Miracle of the Snow to Masaccio, considered that Masaccio received the commission in 1425/6, began the altarpiece and then left it unfinished, and that the commission was completed by Masolino c. 1428.84 Longhi, who attributed NG 5962 only to Masaccio, also thought that the commission dated from 1425 and that the altarpiece was completed by Masolino and an assistant in 1428/31.85 Salmi considered that the commission post‐dated the Pisa altarpiece and that the painting was begun in 1428 by Masaccio and Masolino together, with only NG 5962 being solely by Masaccio, and Boskovits likewise argued that it was begun by Masaccio alone.86 Procacci proposed that the altarpiece was begun by the two painters together in 1428.87 Hartt considered it to have been painted c. 1423, and NG 5962 to be by Masaccio.88 Significant contributions to advancing the argument have been made since 1964 as the result of technical investigation.

It was pointed out in 1964 by Meiss89 that in both Philadelphia panels the saints’ identities were changed in the early stages of execution. By examining incised lines, Meiss showed that Saints Peter and Paul had been reversed by changing their attributes and physiognomies, and from those incised lines which were not taken up in the final painting of Saint John the Evangelist(?) and Saint Martin he deduced that this panel had originally been intended to show Saints Gregory and Matthias. His observations were further developed and refined by Strehlke and Tucker, who, with the benefit of technical analysis, demonstrated that the identities of the saints were simply switched within the Philadelphia panels at an early stage in their execution (figs. 12 and 13).90 In accordance with contemporary practice, those areas that were to be gilded or silvered (keys, sword, crozier) were executed before painting began. In X‐radiographs, Paul’s silver‐leaf sword can be detected beneath the present Peter’s robe painted over it; the sword was originally held in the hand which now holds the keys. Similarly, it is possible to detect the shape and incisions of Peter’s gilded keys held in the hand in which Saint Paul now holds his sword.91 Strehlke and Tucker further showed that Saint Martin’s mitre was painted over a tooled halo, and that in John the Evangelist(?) the halo has been additionally tooled where a gap was left for the mitre; therefore, the figure was once intended to carry a crozier and wear a mitre, indicating that he was originally to be Saint Martin, and the present Saint Martin was originally John the Evangelist. Although they rule out the possibility that John the Evangelist(?) and Martin were originally to have been Gregory and Matthias, as argued by Meiss, they use tracings of the original incised lines to show that the design for Gregory is identical to that for Martin and that therefore the same cartoons were used for both. Similarly, Matthias’s hands are the same as those of Saint Martin, while Saint Gregory is a beardless version of Saint Peter and Matthias is the same as Saint Paul.92 Strehlke and Tucker claim that this indicates that the Philadelphia saints were finished before their features were adapted for the London saints – but the reverse is also possible.

Pigment and media analysis carried out by the National Gallery’s Scientific Department and the Philadelphia Conservation Department has revealed differences in technique in the painting of the flesh areas, which can be correlated with the changes in identity, supported by evidence derived from stylistic analysis. Most critics agree that the whole of NG 5962 is attributable on stylistic grounds to Masaccio. As discussed above, the flesh is painted with an underlayer of green earth and the binding medium is principally egg. This classic egg‐tempera technique is used throughout the panel. But in NG 5963 the faces have no green underpaint; instead, they have an underlayer of lead white with a trace of vermilion, and the binding medium is egg and oil (tempera grassa), and oil for the draperies (see Condition and Technique above). These differences in technique imply that a different painter is involved, who, on the basis of stylistic comparisons, is considered to be Masolino.

In the Philadelphia panel showing Saints Paul and Peter, Strehlke and Tucker observed that the X‐ray density of the paint indicated that an egg‐tempera technique had been used only in the hands and feet, not in the faces, and that the hands had been scraped back in part and repainted in order to adapt them to the different attributes when the saints’ identities were switched. The faces had been painted in the same technique used for those of Gregory and Matthias.93 This was subsequently confirmed by examination of cross‐sections of pigment samples and media analysis.94

In the Saint John the Evangelist(?) and Saint Martin panel, X‐radiographs indicated that the faces had first been under‐modelled with a white preparatory layer. Strehlke and Tucker [page 244]concluded that green undermodelling was entirely absent; when the identities were switched, these areas were scraped and repainted in the same technique; their hands were not painted in the first stage.95 Again this was confirmed by pigment and media analysis.

Strehlke and Tucker concluded that the whole National Gallery panel with Saints Jerome and John the Baptist was painted by Masaccio, as well as part of the Philadelphia panel with Saints Paul and Peter, which was begun by Masaccio and then completed by Masolino. Masolino had already painted at least the faces of John the Evangelist and Martin in the other panel before the identities were changed.96 They considered that these changes were probably made after Masaccio’s death in Rome in 1428.

Strehlke has subsequently argued that Masaccio died in 1429, probably shortly before 18 November of that year, when his death was recorded in Florence.97

Strehlke and Tucker imply that the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece was painted in Rome, whereas Joannides and Lee Roberts consider it to have been painted in Florence, in 1423–5.98 Subsequent to Strehlke and Tucker’s analysis, Joannides argued for a date before the Pisa altarpiece of 1426, namely c. 1423, and made the unconvincing suggestion that the secular figures in the Miracle of the Snow inspired those in Sassetta’s Miracle of the Host (Barnard Castle, Bowes Museum), completed in 1426. He argued that Masaccio was in a subordinate role and did not paint more of the altarpiece because his style was inimical to Masolino.99

One of the most useful contributions to the debate has been Ugo Procacci’s setting out in 1953 of the known fixed dates.100 Masolino’s involvement means that the altarpiece was painted either before he went to Hungary on 1 September 1425, or after his return; in the latter case it would therefore have been at the earliest after August 1427, when he may have been back in Florence, and at the latest after 11 May 1428, by which time he had certainly returned.101 Procacci, who assumed that the altarpiece was contemporary with the frescoes in San Clemente, Rome (which have a terminus ante quem of 1431), maintained that Masolino and Masaccio could not have painted either Roman commission in 1425.

In the previous years, between 1422 and 1424, Masolino and Masaccio were both engaged on commissions in Tuscany. Arguments concerning the period before 1426 become irrelevant if one accepts the date of the documented altarpiece painted by Masaccio for Santa Maria del Carmine, Pisa (NG 3046; see p. 201), as a terminus post quem. The powerful features of Saint Jerome in the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece (see p. 228) may be considered to reflect those of Saint Paul in the Pisan altarpiece (see fig. 10, p. 211).102 Taken in conjunction with Masolino’s dates, this would mean that the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece was begun after August 1427, possibly after May 1428. The fact that Masolino undertook to paint a fresco cycle in San Clemente around this date (before 1431), and probably a cycle of ‘Uomini famosi’ for Cardinal Giordano Orsini (completed by 1432), indicates that he stayed on in Rome after completion of the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece;103 he was in Todi by 1432.104

The changes in identity of the saints in the altarpiece may perhaps be explained as resulting from the wishes of the patron. Meiss105 considered that by moving Peter into the place of honour on the right of the Virgin and moving Saint Martin forward, greater prominence was given to the pope and to the Church. Strehlke has observed that in Rome Saint Paul was traditionally shown on the left and Saint Peter on the right.106 Certainly the armorial devices achieve greater impact in their present position. It is impossible to be certain at what moment after the cessation of Masaccio’s involvement the changes were made.

Exhibited

London 2001, NG , Masaccio: the Pisa Altarpiece (no catalogue).

Select Bibliography

Notes

1. Kindly identified by Celia Fisher (letter of 13 June 2000), who points out that the flowers are not special to Italy, nor confined to a single season. An outdoor setting for a polyptych is not unusual, and is often found in panels with Saint John the Baptist and Saint Onuphrius to indicate their eremitic life. One very curious example of John the Baptist standing on a rock with plants, while Saint Francis beside him stands on a marble floor, is in a triptych attributed to Rossello di Jacopo Franchi (Florence, Accademia 475; Fremantle 1975 , fig. 972). Another example of saints on a rocky platform with plants and animals is the altarpiece commissioned by the Compagnia di San Francesco, which met in Santa Croce, painted by Fra Angelico and documented in 1429, showing the Virgin and Child with Saint Jerome or John the Evangelist(?) and Saint John the Baptist and Saint Francis and Saint Onuphrius, with predella scenes showing the life of Saint Francis (divided between Altenburg, Berlin and the Vatican); see John Henderson and Paul Joannides, ‘A Franciscan Triptych by Fra Angelico’, Arte Cristiana, 742, 1991, pp. 3–6. (Back to text.)

2. A piece of wood with the stamp was cut from the panel before treatment in 1951, and the labels with the stencilled numbers 864‐1315 from the Fesch sale (see Provenance) were removed and are now kept in the NG archives. (Back to text.)

3. A technical investigation of all the constituent panels has been carried out by the Opificio delle Pietre Dure, collaborating with the Conservation Department of Philadelphia Museum of Art and the Scientific Department of the National Gallery. I am particularly grateful to Cecilia Frosinini and Roberto Bellucci for the discussions we have had concerning the altarpiece. See further Strehlke and Tucker 2002, pp. 110–29; Bellucci and Frosinini 2002, pp. 28–67. (Back to text.)

7. Davies 1961 , p. 353. (Back to text.)

9. Strehlke and Tucker 2002. Ridderbos (1984, cited in note 5, pp. 1–14) explains the church as symbolising that Jerome irradiated the sanctuary of God, according to the Legenda de Sanctis written by the Dominican Pietro Calo de Chioggia between 1330 and 1340. (Back to text.)

11. Davies 1961 , pp. 356, and 359, n. 30 (a summary of views up until 1961). See also note 23. (Back to text.)

13. For example, Longhi, Paragone, 1952 (cited in note 10), pp. 13–14, reprint of 1975, p. 82; Berenson 1963 , p. 134; Berti 1964, pp. 121ff. and 157; Berti and Foggi 1989, p. 138, no. 25; K. Christiansen, ‘Some observations on the Brancacci Chapel frescoes after their cleaning’, BM , 133, 1991, p. 5; Joannides 1993, p. 417; Lee Roberts 1993, pp. 92–6. (Back to text.)

16. Identified as poplar by the Forests Products Research Laboratory, January 1951 (note in the NG archives) (Back to text.)

17. Davies 1961 , p. 357, n. 9. (Back to text.)

18. For this technique, see under Masaccio, NG 3046, p. 205. (Back to text.)

19. For Masolino’s punches, without comment on this inconsistency but with the observation that the punches in this altarpiece have not so far been recorded elsewhere, see Erling Skaug, Punch Marks from Giotto to Fra Angelico, Oslo 1994, I, pp. 299–300, and II, chart 10.4. (Back to text.)

20. White and Pilc, NGTB , 1996 (cited in note 4), pp. 91–2 and 96. (Back to text.)

21. Lee Roberts 1993, p. 96, incorrectly states that Strehlke and Tucker demonstrated that Gregory the Great and Matthias had their positions reversed in the changing of identities discussed below. (Back to text.)

22. See Kaftal 1952 , no. 212. For a discussion of whether the saint could be Matthew, see Davies 1961 , p. 358, n. 19. (Back to text.)

23. See Clark, BM , 1951, p. 340. Full discussion of the attributional problems became more feasible when NG 5962 and NG 5963, hitherto relatively unknown, were acquired by the National Gallery in 1950. (Back to text.)

24. See Davies ( 1961 , p. 361, n. 34), who notes that many Farnese pictures came from the collection of Fulvio Orsini (d. 1600), but that this triptych is not identifiable in the inventory published by P. de Nolhac in GBA , 1884, I, pp. 427–36. Davies also notes that a Colonna chapel belonged in 1610 to Giulia, wife of Marzio, Duca di Zagarolo. Her grandson Pompeo (d. 1661) was the last of this Colonna branch, and on his death his possessions passed to a cousin, Stefano, Duca di Bassanello, whose father’s first wife had been Isabella, natural daughter of Ranuccio Farnese. She had died in 1645 (see P. Litta, Famiglie Celebri d’Italia, 1843, XI: Colonna, tav. VI and X). But Davies notes that it seems improbable that the pictures passed via this Colonna–Farnese connection and that there are further unpromising connections between the two families. I am grateful to Carl Strehlke for allowing me to read the typescript of his forthcoming catalogue, The Italian Paintings of the John G. Johnson Collection and Philadelphia Musem of Art, vol. I, in which he makes the more convincing suggestion that the altarpiece passed to the Farnese via Cardinal Alessandro Farnese (1520–1589), who was archpriest of Santa Maria Maggiore from 1537 until his death, or through Cardinal Odoardo Farnese (1567–1626), under whom Monsignore A.M. Santarelli, an active canon of the basilica, served as maggiordomo and auditore. (Back to text.)

25. See B. Jestaz (eds M. Hachmann and P. Sénéchal), Le Palais Farnèse. III, 3. L’inventaire du palais et des propriétés Farnèse à Rome en 1644, Rome 1994, p. 177, nos 4392 (Philadelphia) and 4403 (Naples); NG 5963 is no. 4400: ‘Un quadro in carta con una cornice di legno, il piano d’esso quadro è dorato, dipinto S. Gregorio et un altro Santo con accetta in mano, mano di Pierin del Vago’; p. 179, nos 4418 (Naples) and 4423 (NG 5962): ‘Un quadro in tavola con cornice di noce, il campo d’esso dorato, dentro è dipinto un S. Girolamo e S. Giovanni Battista, [page 246]mano del detto [Pierin del Vago]. See further R. Muzii in La Collezione Farnese. Museo e Gallerie Nazionali di Capodimonte, Naples 1995, pp. 101–3. (Back to text.)

26. Davies ( 1961 , p. 357, n. 12) cites the descriptions, similar to those in the inventory of 1644, given in the inventory of 1653 (Parma, Archivio di Stato, Miscellanea Storica – Raccolta di Manoscritti – no. 86), where NG 5962 is P337: ‘Un quadro in tavola fondo dorato, cornice di noce cō S. Girolamo, è S. Gio. Battista in piedi’, and NG 5963 is P334: ‘Un quadro cornice di noce fondo dorato con ū Papa in piedi è ū religioso con un accetta in mano pure in piedi’. Davies points out that the inventory of 1697 repeats that of 1653: NG 5962 is no. 296 (‘Un quadro in tavola fondo dorato cornice di noce con S. Girolamo e S. Gio. Battista in piedi’), and NG 5963 is no. 282 (‘Un quadro cornice di fondo dorato con un Papa in piedi’). The Miracle of the Snow is no. 479 and the Assumption is no. 453. The paintings in the Johnson Collection, Philadelphia, have been cradled and no longer have numbers on the back, but were nos 290 and 277. Davies also notes that the 1697 inventory includes the Farnese stamp, as found on the backs of the NG and Naples paintings. The manuscript of the 1697 inventory in the Archivio di Stato, Naples, was destroyed in the Second World War. Davies used a copy and an incomplete transcription was printed in Le Gallerie Nazionali Italiane, vol. V, 1902, pp. 271ff. For the 1653 inventory, see also P. Bourdon and R. Laurent‐Vibert in Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire, Ecole française de Rome, vol. XXIX, 1909, pp. 145ff. (Back to text.)

27. In the 1841 Fesch sale catalogue (Catalogue des Tableaux composant la Galerie du Feu son Eminence le Cardinal Fesch, Rome 1841, pp. 59–60), NG 5962 is no. 1315 and NG 5963 is no. 1340 (although described as ‘Trois Saints’), both as period of Fra Angelico. In the Fesch sale catalogue of 1844 (pp. 188–9), NG 5962 is 864‐1315, and NG 5963 is 865‐1340. The Philadelphia panels are 866‐1339 and 867‐1317. The four panels are there attributed to Gentile da Fabriano and are said to have come from Perugia or Fiesole, although the basis of this information is not given and it is likely to stem from a confusion with the work of Angelico. For the Fesch Collection, see also p. xxvi. (Back to text.)

28. Davies ( 1961 , p. 361, n. 39) observed that NG 5962 had in pigmenton the wood on the back No. 759.c.C., and NG 5963 had No. 754.d.C., and that Foppa NG 729 has a similar No. 758.d(u?).Cat. on the back, and that the numbers do not correspond with those of the Fesch inventory of 1839. See D. Thiébaut, Ajaccio Musée Fesch. Les primitifs italiens, Paris 1987, pp. 160ff., p. 170, nos 12839 and 12841, and p. 171, nos 12863 and 12864. (Back to text.)

29. Pictures were being purchased for Flixton at the Blayds sale, 1849; catalogue of the Adair sale, 8 December 1950; see Davies 1961 , pp. 356, and p. 361, n. 40. (Back to text.)

30. Vasari, Vite, ed. Milanesi , II, 1878, pp. 293–4, text of 1568, not in text of 1550; Vasari, Vite, eds Bettarini and Barocchi , III, 1971, p. 128. (Back to text.)

31. The Naples and Philadelphia panels had been associated together by L. Venturi, ‘Contributi a Masolino’, L’Arte, 19, 1930, pp. 165–79. His reconstruction (p. 175, fig. 4) proved incorrect when the National Gallery acquired its panels (see note 23 above); Clark’s reconstruction won general acceptance, except from Pope‐Hennessy ( BM , 1952, pp. 31–2) who made the unlikely suggestion that the altarpiece had been two‐tiered, with the Assumption and the Miracle of the Snow as pinnacles. Pope‐Hennessy’s misconceptions in his rejection of Clark’s reconstruction were corrected by M. Meiss, ‘London’s new Masaccio’, Art News, 1952, pp. 24 and 50–1. (Back to text.)

32. See note 3 above. (Back to text.)

33. Joannides 1993, pp. 423–4, no. 24, also rejects this as part of the altarpiece. (Back to text.)

34. Published by J. Pope‐Hennessy, ‘A predella panel by Masolino’, BM , 82, 1943, pp. 30–1. It has been argued that the predella fragments in fact come from the Annunciation (Washington, National Gallery of Art) by P. Joannides, ‘A Masolino Partially Reconstructed’, Source Notes in the History of Art, IV, 4, 1985, pp. 1–5; also Joannides 1993, cat. 29, pp. 436–9. Lee Roberts (1993, p. 212, no. xxvi) associates both panels with the style of Francesco d’Antonio (for whom see p. 70 of this catalogue). Andrea De Marchi (1996/1998, cited in note 6) suggests that lot 14 at Sotheby’s New York, 19 May 1995, may be a pinnacle from the altarpiece. (Back to text.)

35. Davies 1961 , p. 356, n. 8. The Philadelphia Saints Paul and Peter (408) has a similar indentation, 3.5 x 3 cm. See the Philadelphia conservation records made by Mark Tucker, 19 May 1992. Nothing is visible on 409. (Back to text.)

37. There is no figure that could be mistaken for the Emperor Sigismund in the Miracle of the Snow. (Back to text.)

38. Bellucci and Frosinini 2002, p. 55, and Strehlke and Tucker 2002, p. 112. The reconstruction first proposed by Clark in 1951, figs 5–10 (see note 10 above), and endorsed by Meiss in 1964, figs 1 and 2, has been reinforced by the studies of the iconography of Saint Sigismund published by Braham, BM , 1980, pp. 106–12, and of Gregory the Great published by Lee Roberts, BM , 1985, pp. 295–6. The reconstruction given by the present author in J. Dunkerton et al. , Giotto to Dürer: Early Renaissance painting in the National Gallery, London 1991, pp. 252 and 254, is probably incorrect. (Back to text.)

39. Davies 1961 , pp. 354–5, and p. 358, n. 20. Braham ( BM , 1980, p. 111) suggested the flowers are there to remind one that the miraculous fall of snow occurred in August. See also note 15 above. For the Miracle of the Snow, see H.W. Van Os, ‘Schnee in Siena’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, 19, 1968, pp. 1–50, esp. pp. 13–14. (Back to text.)

42. L. Vayer, ‘Analecta Iconographica Masoliniana’, Acta Historiae Artium, 11, 1965, pp. 222. Also thought to be Matthias and Gregory by Joannides 1993, pp. 414ff. (Back to text.)

43. Lee Roberts, BM , 1985, pp. 295–6. Lee Roberts notes (p. 296, n. 19) that the features of Saint Gregory follow those in Lorenzo Monaco’s altarpiece in NG 216 (see p. 171 of this catalogue). (Back to text.)

44. The argument against his being Saint Gregory might be the lack of the bird whispering in his ear, as traditionally shown in panel paintings, but he does in fact correspond in type to Saint Gregory in the frescoes in San Clemente, Rome, by Masolino, where he is not shown with the bird (although this could be due to damage). Illustrated in Joannides 1993, p. 188. (Back to text.)

45. Kaftal 1952 , no. 230. (Back to text.)

47. See the illustrations in Pietrangeli and Andreotti (eds) 1988, cited above, pp. 32 and 64–5, showing the original simple basilical structure before the Baroque accretions. (Back to text.)

49. For example, the predella of the altarpiece for San Gerolamo, Fiesole (Botticini, NG 227; see Davies 1961 , p. 120), and the predella for Signorelli’s altarpiece for the Company of San Gerolamo, Arezzo (see Davies 1961 , p. 487). See also Kaftal 1952 , col. 532, and H.I. Roberts, ‘St. Augustine in “St. Jerome’s Study”: Carpaccio’s Painting and its Legendary Source’, AB , 41, 4, December 1959, pp. 288ff. (Back to text.)

52. Braham, BM , 1980, pp. 106ff, esp. p. 108 for Sigismund. Braham points out that Vasari meant Sigismund I, not II. (Back to text.)

53. Braham ( BM , 1980, p. 107, n. 9) also suggested that the pope might represent Saint Martin, the eighth‐century pope whose feast day is adjacent to that of Saint Martin of Tours, shown in the Philadelphia panel from the other side. But the arguments for his being Saint Gregory seem more compelling. (Back to text.)

54. Lee Roberts 1993, p. 88. Carl Strehlke (forthcoming catalogue) has tentatively suggested that he may be Saint Matthew, whose relics were in Santa Maria Maggiore. See also note 22. (Back to text.)

55. Braham, BM , 1980, pp. 108 and 112. Braham also notes other features of the Roman setting, the pyramid of Gaius Cestius and the Porta San Paolo. (Back to text.)

[page 247]

56. Meiss in Studien zur toskanischen Kunst, 1964, p. 171. Joannides considered that the Miracle of the Snow was on the back because of its importance to the clergy for the history of the church (Joannides, Arte Cristiana, 1988, p. 339, and Joannides 1993, p. 414). However, this argument can be equally well used to support the view that it faced the front. (Back to text.)

57. In the Assumption the sculptor Mino del Reame retained the triptych element of the altarpiece in showing standing figures, on a reduced scale, on either side of the main scene. The iconography of the Miracle of the Snow and of the Assumption derives from that of the painted altarpiece. On the sides of the ciborium are the Nativity and Adoration of the Magi. Illustrated in Pietrangeli and Andreotti (eds) 1988, cited in note 46, pp. 196 and 202–3. (Back to text.)

59. Davies 1961 , p. 355, and p. 359, n. 24. (Back to text.)

60. Meiss (in Studien zur toskanischen Kunst, 1964, pp. 173–4) considered that the triptych was for the Colonna family chapel. (Back to text.)

61. The problem of whether it was painted by Giotto himself, or only by his workshop, will not be considered here. (Back to text.)

64. Davies 1961 , p. 359, n. 25. (Back to text.)

67. Illustrated in Pietrangeli and Andreotti (eds) 1988 (cited in note 46), pp. 132–3. For further comments, see Davies 1961 , p. 354, and p. 358, n. 18. (Back to text.)

69. See Lee Roberts 1993, p. 92. Illustrated in Pietrangeli and Andreotti (eds) 1988 (cited in note 46), pp. 134–5. (Back to text.)

70. Lee Roberts 1993, p. 86 and n. 9. (Back to text.)

72. Gardner, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 1973 (cited above), pp. 22–3. Gardner ( ibid. , p. 38) notes the impact of the scene on the fifteenth‐century altarpiece. (Back to text.)

73. Van Os, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, 1968 (cited in note 39), p. 4, and p. 5, n. 5, for the 1741 description; and Gardner, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 1973 (cited in note 71), p. 25 and fig. 20, for the drawing. The figures were destroyed when the loggia was added, but the scenes largely survive. (Back to text.)

74. See Salmi, Commentari, 1952 (cited in note 50), p. 16; De Angelis 1621 (cited in note 40), p. 55. (Back to text.)

75. First argued by Boskovits, Arte Cristiana, 1987, pp. 57ff.; see further A. De Marchi, Gentile da Fabriano, Milan 1992, pp. 212–13, n. 6, and Joannides 1993, p. 416. (Back to text.)

76. Strehlke and Tucker 2002, pp. 124–7. Strehlke (forthcoming catalogue) observes that depictions of Saint Jerome holding a model of the church were more common in Venice and could be due to Morosini’s Venetian origins. See also note 9. (Back to text.)

77. Meiss, Art News, 1952 (cited in note 31), p. 51. (Back to text.)

79. For example, E.B. Garrison, Italian Romanesque Panel Painting: an illustrated index, Florence 1949, p. 116, no. 299. See also the thirteenth‐century triptych signed by the Roman painters Nicolaus de Petro and Petrus de Nicola ‘Picto(res) Romani’ in Trevignano, Santa Maria Assunta ( ibid. , p. 111, no. 280); also that from Anagni, Sant’Andrea, dated by Garrison c. 1320–30 ( ibid. , p. 110, no. 278), and that now painted on one side only, apparently, from the Duomo, Tivoli ( ibid. , p. 118, no. 279). Such altarpieces were related by Gardner ( JWCI , 1974, cited in note 62, p. 73) to the Stefaneschi altarpiece. (Back to text.)

80. Possibly showing the Assumption of the Virgin. (Back to text.)

81. Although Joannides (Arte Cristiana, 1988, pp. 342ff.) argues for a subordinate role for Masaccio, their relationship in the Brancacci Chapel would make it seem that they worked as near equals. See Christiansen, BM , 1991 (cited in note 13), pp. 5–20, esp. pp. 11ff. (Back to text.)

82. See Clark, BM , 1951, p. 340. (Back to text.)

83. Davies 1961 , p. 359, n. 30. (Back to text.)

84. Clark, BM , 1951, p. 344. (Back to text.)

86. Salmi, Commentari, 1952 (cited in note 50), pp. 14–21, esp. pp. 19–21; Boskovits, Arte Cristiana, 1987, pp. 57ff. (Back to text.)

91. Ibid. , figs 10 and 13. (Back to text.)

92. Ibid. , p. 112. (Back to text.)

93. Ibid. , pp. 112–13. (Back to text.)

94. See the report made in 1993 by David Skipsey in the NG archives. (Back to text.)

96. Ibid. , p. 118. (Back to text.)

98. Joannides 1993, pp. 72–9 and 414–22; Lee Roberts 1993, p. 98. She considers that it was only after 10 March 1429, when Masolino sold his shares in the communal Monte in Florence, that he moved his workshop to Rome ( ibid. , p. 100). Recently it has been argued that it was painted in 1423, the year of the Jubilee (V. Farinella, ‘Un percorso nella cultura artistica romana (1423–1622)’, in A. Pinelli (ed.), Roma nel rinascimento, Bari 2001, pp. 341–3). (Back to text.)

99. Joannides, Arte Cristiana, 1988, pp. 342 and 345. This seems rather unlikely in view of their frequent collaboration. Joannides’ argument that Saints Gregory and Matthias are the only pair not to show pentimenti, and were therefore not begun until Saint John the Evangelist(?) and Saint Martin had been repainted and Saints Paul and Peter altered, runs contrary to everything which is known about contemporary painting practice: all the gilding and silvering would have been done at the same time as the rest of the panels. (Back to text.)

102. Although Joannides (Arte Cristiana, 1988, p. 342) argues the reverse. L. Berti (‘Donatello e Masaccio’, Antichità Viva, anno V, 3, 1966, p. 3–12, esp. p. 12) compares the head of Saint Jerome, which he dates to 1428, to Donatello’s bronze David. (Back to text.)

103. The San Clemente frescoes have a terminus ante quem of 1431, when Cardinal Branda Castiglione, who commissioned them, changed from being titular of San Clemente to Santa Rufina in Porto (Procacci, Rivista d’Arte, 1953 (1954), p. 6); Joannides (1993, cat. 22, pp. 399ff.) dates the frescoes 1428–30. For the other Roman commission, see Robert L. Mode, ‘Masolino, Uccello and the Orsini “Uomini Famosi”, BM , 114, 1972, pp. 369–78; Lee Roberts 1993, pp. 207–8, cat. XXI. (Back to text.)

104. Lee Roberts 1993, pp. 197–8, cat. XIV; Joannides 1993, pp. 430–1, cat. 27. Boskovits (Arte Cristiana, 1987, pp. 57ff.) argues that he was resident in Rome while painting in Todi. (Back to text.)

105. Meiss in Studien zur toskanischen Kunst, 1964, p. 182. (Back to text.)

Glossary

Antique Serpentine
A type of green porphyry
Arte dei Medici e Speziali
The guild of physicians and apothecaries to which Florentine painters belonged
bole
A red clay applied to the gessoed surface of a panel as an adhesive underlayer for gold leaf
cangiante
Literally ‘changing’ – used to describe shot colours, especially for drapery
cope
A semicircular cloak worn by a bishop (sometimes called a pluvial)
crozier
A staff carried by a bishop
Eucharist
The sacrament of the Lord’s Supper
lake
A pigment made by precipitation onto a base from a dye solution, resulting in a comparatively transparent pigment often used as a glaze
Mass
Church service commemorating the sacrifice of Christ with the celebration of the Eucharist
mitre
A liturgical hat worn by a bishop
mordant gilding
The process of applying gold leaf to an adhesive or mordant, usually done in the final stages of a painting
morse
A metal clasp used to fasten a cope
orphrey
The gold or richly embroidered border of a liturgical vestment
papal tiara
The triple‐tiered crown worn by popes
pentimento
Literally ‘repentance’ – used to describe changes made by the artist during the execution of a drawing or painting
terminus ante quem
AA fixed date before which (a painting must have been made)
terminus post quem
AA fixed date after which (a painting must have been made)
water gilding
Gold leaf applied to wetted bole and then burnished

Abbreviations

Institutions
NG
National Gallery, London
Periodicals
BM
Burlington Magazine, London, 1903–
JWCI
Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes
NGTB
National Gallery Technical Bulletin
Frequently cited works are given in abbreviated form throughout, as listed below:
Berenson 1963
B. Berenson, Italian Pictures of the Renaissance: a list of the principal artists and their works with an index of places. Florentine School, 2 vols, London 1963 (lists of 1932 revised)
Davies 1961
M. Davies, National Gallery Catalogues: The Earlier Italian Schools, 2nd revised edn, London 1961
Fremantle 1975
R. Fremantle, Florentine Gothic Painters from Giotto to Masaccio: a Guide to Painting in and near Florence 1300 to 1450, London 1975
Kaftal 1952
G. Kaftal, Iconography of the Saints in Tuscan Painting, Florence 1952
Vasari, Le Vite, ed. Milanesi
G. Vasari, Le Vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori ed architetti, ed. G. Milanesi, 8 vols, Florence 1878–85
Vasari, Le Vite, eds Bettarini and Barocchi
G. Vasari, Le Vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori nelle redazioni del 1550 & 1568, eds R. Bettarini and P. Barocchi, vol. II, Florence 1967; vol. III, Florence 1971

List of archive references cited

  • Philadelphia, Philadelphia Museum of Art, Conservation Department Records: Mark Tucker, conservation records, 19 May 1992

List of references cited

Bellucci and Frosinini 2002
BellucciR. and C. Frosinini, ‘Working Together: Technique and Innovation in Masolino’s and Masaccio’s Panel Paintings’, in The Panel Paintings of Masolino and Masaccio: The Role of Technique, eds C. Strehlke and C. FrosininiMilan 2002, 28–67
Bellucci, Frosinini and Parri 2002
BellucciR.C. Frosinini and M. Parri, ‘Technical Catalogue’, in The Panel Paintings of Masolino and Masaccio: The Role of Technique, eds C. Strehlke and C. FrosininiMilan 2002, 131–257
Berenson 1963
BerensonBernardItalian Pictures of the Renaissance: a list of the principal artists and their works with an index of places. Florentine School (revised lists of 1932), 2 volsLondon 1963
Berti 1964
BertiL.MasaccioMilan 1964 (English trans., University Park and London 1967)
Berti 1966
BertiL., ‘Donatello e Masaccio’, Antichità Viva, 1966, V33–12
Berti 1968
BertiL.L’opera completa di Masacciopresented by P. VolponiMilan 1968
Berti and Foggi 1989
BertiL. and R. FoggiMasaccio: Catalogo completo dei dipintiFlorence 1989
Berti and Paolucci 1990
BertiL. and A. Paolucci, eds, L’età di Masaccio. Il primo Quattrocento a Firenze (exh. cat. Palazzo Vecchio, Florence), Milan 1990
Boskovits 1987
BoskovitsMiklós, ‘Il percorso di Masolino, precisazioni sulla cronologia e sul catalogo’, Arte Cristiana, 1987, 7571847–66
Bourdon and Laurent‐Vibert 1909
BourdonP. and R. Laurent‐Vibert, in Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’HistoireEcole française de Rome, 1909, XXIX145ff
Braham 1980
BrahamA., ‘The Emperor Sigismund and the Santa Maria Maggiore altar‐piece’, Burlington Magazine, 1980, 122923106–12
Brandi 1957
BrandiC., ‘I cinque anni cruciali per la pittura fiorentina del ‘400’, in Studi in onore di Matteo MarangoniFlorence 1957, 167–75
Chioggia 1330
ChioggiaPietro Calo deDominicanLegenda de Sanctis, c.1330–1340
Christiansen 1991a
ChristiansenK., ‘Some observations on the Brancacci Chapel frescoes after their cleaning’, Burlington Magazine, 1991, 1335–20
Clark 1951
ClarkK., ‘An early Quattrocento Triptych from Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome’, Burlington Magazine, 1951, 93584339–47
Davies 1961
DaviesMartinNational Gallery Catalogues: The Earlier Italian Schools, 2nd revised edn, London 1961 (1st edn, London 1951)
De Angelis 1621
AngelisP. deBasilicae S. Maria Maioris de Urbe a Liberio Papa I usque ad Paulum V, Descriptio et DelineatoRome 1621
De Blaauw 1994
De BlaauwS.Cultus et Décor. Liturgia e Architettura nella Roma Tardoantica e MedievaleVatican City 1994, 1
De Blaauw 1996
De BlaauwS., ‘Das Hochaltarretable in Rom bis zum frühen 16. Jahrhundert: Das Altarbild als Kategorie der liturgischen Anlage’, Medelingen vari het Nederlands Instituut te Rome. Historical Studies, 1996, 5583–110
Da Marchi 1992
De MarchiA.Gentile da Fabriano. Un viaggio nella pittura italiana alla fine del goticoMilan 1992
De Marchi 1998
De MarchiA., ‘Gentile da Fabriano et Pisanello à Saint‐Jean de Latran’, in Pisanello. Actes du colloque organisé au musée du Louvre, 1996, eds D. Cordellier and B. PyParis 1998, I161–213
Dunkerton et al. 1991
DunkertonJillSusan FoisterDillian Gordon and Nicholas PennyGiotto to Dürer: Early Renaissance painting in the National GalleryNew Haven and London 1991
Farinella 2001
FarinellaV., ‘Un percorso nella cultura artistica romana (1423–1622)’, in Roma nel rinascimento, ed. A. PinelliBari 2001, 341–3
Fesch 1841
Catalogue des Tableaux composant la Galerie du Feu son Eminence le Cardinal FeschRome 1841
Fremantle 1975
FremantleRichardFlorentine Gothic Painters from Giotto to Masaccio: a Guide to Painting in and near Florence, 1300 to 1450London 1975
Fremantle 1975a
FremantleR., ‘Some new Masolino Documents’, Burlington Magazine, 1975, 117871658–9
Gallerie Nazionali Italiane 1902
Le Gallerie Nazionali Italiane: Notizie e DocumentiRome 1902, V
Gardner 1973
GardnerJ., ‘Pope Nicholas IV and the Decoration of Santa Maria Maggiore’, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte, 1973, 361–50
Gardner 1974
GardnerJ., ‘The Stefaneschi Altarpiece: a reconsideration’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 1974, 3757–103 (reprint, Patrons, Painters and SaintsAldershot 1993, V)
Gioseffi 1962
GioseffiD., ‘Domenico Veneziano. L’“esordio masaccesco” e la tavola con i SS Girolamo e Giovanni Battista della National Gallery di Londra’, Emporium, 1962, CXXXV51–72
Hartt 1959
HarttF., ‘The earliest works of Andrea del Castagno’, Art Bulletin, 1959, 41159–81
Henderson and Joannides 1991
HendersonJ. and P. Joannides, ‘A Franciscan Triptych by Fra Angelico’, Arte Cristiana, 1991, 797423–6
Henkels 1971
HenkelsH., ‘Remarks on the late 13th‐century Apse Decoration in S. Maria Maggiore’, Simiolus, 1971, 3128–49
Jestaz 1994
JestazB.Le Palais Farnèse. III, 3. L’inventaire du palais et des propriétés Farnèse à Rome en 1644, eds M. Hachmann and P. SénéchalRome 1994
Joannides 1985
JoannidesP., ‘A Masolino Partially Reconstructed’, Source Notes in the History of Art, 1985, IV41–5
Joannides 1988
JoannidesP., ‘The Colonna Triptych by Masolino and Masaccio: Collaboration and Chronology’, Arte Cristiana, 1988, 76728339–46
Joannides 1993
JoannidesPaulMasaccio and Masolino: A Complete CatalogueLondon 1993
Kaftal 1952
KaftalGeorgeIconography of the Saints in Tuscan PaintingFlorence 1952
Lee Roberts 1985
Lee RobertsP., ‘St Gregory the Great and the Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece’, Burlington Magazine, 1985, 127295–6
Lee Roberts 1993
Lee RobertsP.Masolino da PanicaleOxford 1993
Litta et al. 1819–1923
LittaPompeoet al.Famiglie celebri d’Italia2 seriesMilan and Turin 1819–1923
Longhi 1952
LonghiRoberto, ‘Presenza di Masaccio nel trittico della Neve’, Paragone, 1952, 3258–16 (reprint, Fatti etc.Florence 1975, 77–84)
Mancinelli 1988
MancinelliF., in Santa Maria Maggiore a Roma, ed. C. PietrangeliRome 1988
Meiss 1964
MeissM., ‘The altered Program of the Santa Maria Maggiore Altarpiece’, in Studien zur toskanischen Kunst. Festschrift für Ludwig Heinrich HeydenreichMunich 1964, 169–90
Mode 1972
ModeR.L., ‘Masolino, Uccello and the Orsini “Uomini Famosi”’, Burlington Magazine, 1972, 114369–78
Muzii 1995
MuziiR., in La Collezione Farnese. Museo e Gallerie Nazionali di CapodimonteNaples 1995
Nolhac 1884
NolhacP. de, in Gazette des Beaux‐Arts, 1884, I427–36
Pietrangeli and Andreotti 1988
PietrangeliC. and M. Andreotti, eds, Santa Maria Maggiore a RomaRome 1988
Pope‐Hennessy 1943
Pope‐HennessyJ., ‘A predella panel by Masolino’, Burlington Magazine, 1943, 8230–1
Pope‐Hennessy 1952a
Pope‐HennessyJ., ‘The Santa Maria Maggiore altarpiece’, Burlington Magazine, 1952, 9431–2
Procacci 1953
ProcacciU., ‘Sulla cronologia delle opere di Masaccio e di Masolino tra il 1425 e il 1428’, Rivista d’Arte, 1953 (1954), XXVIII3–55
Procacci 1976
ProcacciU., ‘Nuove testimonianze su Masaccio’, Commentari, 1976 (1978), anno XXVII223–37
Rice 1985
RiceEugene F.Saint Jerome in the RenaissanceBaltimore and London 1985
Ridderbos 1984
RidderbosBernhardSaint and Symbol: Images of Saint Jerome in Early Italian Arttrans. P. de Waard‐DekkingGroningen 1984
Roberts 1959
RobertsHelen I., ‘St. Augustine in “St. Jerome’s Study”: Carpaccio’s Painting and its Legendary Source’, Art Bulletin, December 1959, 414283–97
Salmi 1952
SalmiM., ‘Gli scomparti della pala di Santa Maria Maggiore acquistati dalla “National Gallery”’, Commentari, 1952, 14–21
Salviucci Insolera 1995
Salviucci InsoleraL., ‘Liturgia in figura. Codici liturgici rinascimentali della Biblioteca Vaticana’, Arte Cristiana, 1995, 83770387–90
Strehlke 2002
StrehlkeC., ‘The Case for Studying Masolino’s and Masaccio’s Panel Paintings in the Laboratory’, in The Panel Paintings of Masolino and Masaccio: The Role of Technique, eds C. Strehlke and C. FrosininiMilan 2002, 12–27
Strehlke 2004
StrehlkeCarl BrandonItalian Paintings 1250–1450 in the John G. Johnson Collection and the Philadelphia Museum of ArtPhiladelphia 2004
Strehlke and Tucker 1987
StrehlkeC. and M. Tucker, ‘The Santa Maria Maggiore Altarpiece: New Observations’, Arte Cristiana, 1987, 75719105–24
Strehlke and Tucker 2002
StrehlkeC. and M. Tucker, ‘The Santa Maria Maggiore Altarpiece’, in The Panel Paintings of Masolino and Masaccio: The Role of Technique, eds C. Strehlke and C. FrosininiMilan 2002, 110–29
Thiébaut 1987
ThiébautD.Ajaccio, musée Fesch. Les primitifs italiensInventaire des collections publiques françaisesParis 1987
Van Os 1968
Van OsH.W., ‘Schnee in Siena’, Nederlands Kunsthistorisch Jaarboek, 1968, 191–50
Vasari 1878–85
VasariGiorgioLe Vite de’più eccellenti pittori, scultori ed architettori, ed. Gaetano Milanesi9 volsFlorence 1878–85
Vasari 1967–71
VasariGiorgioLe Vite de’più eccellenti pittori, scultori ed architettori, eds R. Bettarini and P. BarocchiFlorence 1967 (I and II), 1971 (III)
Vayer 1965
VayerL., ‘Analecta Iconographica Masoliniana’, Acta Historiae Artium, 1965, 11217–39
Venturi 1930
VenturiL., ‘Contributi a Masolino’, L’Arte, 1930, 19165–79
White and Pilc 1996
WhiteRaymond and Jennifer Pilc, ‘Analyses of Paint Media’, National Gallery Technical Bulletin, 1996, 1791–103
Wohl 1980
WohlH.The Paintings of Domenico Veneziano, ca. 1410–1461. A Study in Florentine Art of the Early RenaissanceNew York and London 1980
Zuraw 1992
ZurawS.E., ‘Mino da Fiesole’s first Roman sojourn: The Works in Santa Maria Maggiore’, in Verrocchio and late Quattrocento Sculpture, eds S. BuleA.P. Darr and F.S. GioffrediFlorence 1992, 303–19

List of exhibitions cited

London 2001
London, National Gallery, Masaccio: the Pisa Altarpiece, 2001

The Organisation of the Catalogue
Chronological and geographical limits

Included in this volume are works by artists or workshops the bulk of whose surviving work falls within the first half of the fifteenth century, i.e. around 1400–60: Starnina (d. 1413), Lorenzo Monaco (d. c. 1423), Gregorio di Cecco di Luca (d. c. 1428), Masaccio (d. 1428/9), Masolino (d. c. 1436), Giovanni dal Ponte (d. 1437), Sassetta (d. 1450), Master of the Osservanza (active second quarter of fifteenth century), Francesco d’Antonio (active until 1452), Jacopo di Antonio (Master of Pratovecchio?) (d. 1454), Fra Angelico (d. 1455), Pisanello (d. 1455), Pesellino (d. 1457), Domenico Veneziano (d. 1461), Bono da Ferrara (active until 1461), Apollonio di Giovanni (d. c. 1465), Zanobi Strozzi (d. 1468), Filippo Lippi (d. 1469), Giovanni da Oriolo (d. by 1474), Uccello (d. 1475), Marco del Buono (d. after 1480), Giovanni di Paolo (d. 1482).

The exceptions to this are two paintings whose previous attributions were to artists represented in this catalogue but which are now attributed to artists active primarily in the second half of the fifteenth century. The Virgin and Child with Angels (NG 5581) used to be catalogued as by a follower of Fra Angelico. Now, it is generally accepted as being an early work of c. 1447 by Benozzo Gozzoli, and it is therefore included here. However, his work as an independent painter dates from 1450, and his altarpiece dated 1461 for Santa Maria della Purificazione, Florence, will be considered in a subsequent catalogue. A panel of the Nativity (NG 3648) used to be given to a follower of Masaccio, but technical evidence links it to the altarpiece attributed to the Master of the Castello Nativity (active mid‐fifteenth century), recently identified as Piero di Lorenzo di Pratese – a painter deeply enmeshed in the history of the Trinity altarpiece by Pesellino (NG 727 etc.) considered here.

The majority of the paintings included in this catalogue are from Tuscany, with the exception of those by Pisanello, his pupil Bono da Ferrara and his follower Giovanni da Oriolo. Because so few Venetian paintings in the collection date from the first half of the fifteenth century, those which do will be considered in another volume.

Artists: The artists are catalogued in alphabetical order. Autograph works precede those which are attributed.

Attribution: A painting is discussed under the artist where the attribution is not considered to be in doubt. ‘Attributed to’ implies a measure of doubt. ‘Workshop of’ indicates that the work has been executed by a member of the workshop, sometimes with the participation of the artist concerned.

Title: The traditional title of each painting has been followed, except where further research has made a more precise description possible.

Date: Reasons for the date given in the head matter are explained in the body of each entry.

Medium: This is generally assumed to be egg. Where this has been identified, it is stated.

Support: This is generally assumed to be poplar. Where this has been identified, it is stated.

Dimensions: The overall dimensions are given in the head matter. Height precedes width. More precise dimensions are given in the discussion of each work.

Restoration: The history of the restoration of a painting before it entered the National Gallery is not given unless specifically known.

Technique and condition: These are discussed together, since the condition of a painting is often the result of the techniques employed. Where pigments seemed unusual, samples were examined by Ashok Roy and in some cases the medium has been analysed by Raymond White.

Method: Every painting was examined and measured in the Conservation Department with a conservator – usually Jill Dunkerton, but in some instances Martin Wyld, Larry Keith and Paul Ackroyd. Some paintings were examined by Rachel Billinge with infra‐red reflectography (see p. 478).

X‐radiographs, infra‐red photographs and infrared reflectograms: The reader may find it frustrating that reference is sometimes made to X‐radiographs, infra‐red photographs and infra‐red reflectograms without their being illustrated. This is because once they are reduced to page size they are often no longer decipherable.

Bibliographical information: At the end of every catalogue entry is a Select Bibliography listing the main publications relevant to that entry, in chronological order. The works in this list are cited in abbreviated form in the notes following the entry. Full references to all works cited in the catalogue are given in the List of Publications Cited (pp. 435–55).

Comments: I have attempted to give as full an account as possible with regard to attribution, patronage, date, related panels, original location, subject matter, iconography, etc., and to make this information accessible and interesting to the lay reader as well as to the art historian. Inevitably the text contains some speculation – I have tried to make it clear when an argument is hypothetical. For ease of reference the comments are given subheadings, but their sequence varies according to the requirements of the argument.

Dating and Measurements

Dates – old style and modern

Dates are given in the modern style, but the old style (o.s.) is indicated where pertinent.

Florence:
The calendar year began on the feast of the Annunciation, 25 March.
Pisa:
The year began on 25 March, but anticipated the Florentine year by one year (i.e. 1 January–24 March = modern).
Pistoia (stile della Natività):
The year began on 25 December, anticipating modern style (i.e. 1 January–24 December = modern).
Siena:
The year began on 25 March, but sometimes followed the Pisan system.

(See A. Cappelli, Cronologia Cronografica e Calendario Perpetuo, 2nd edn, Milan 1930, pp. 11–16.)

Measurements

The Florentine braccio (fioretino da panno) was the standard unit of linear measurement in Florence from at least the fourteenth until the nineteenth century and was equal to approximately 58.4 cm. In Siena the braccio (per le tele) before 1782 was 60 cm, although Siena also used the braccio of 58.4 cm.

(See A.P. Favaro, Metrologia, Naples 1826, pp. 85 and 118; R. Zupko, Italian weights and measures from the Middle Ages to the 19th Century, Philadelphia 1981, p. 46.)

Infra‐red reflectography

Infra‐red reflectography was carried out by Rachel Billinge using a Hamamatsu C2400 camera with an N2606 series infra‐red vidicon tube. The camera is fitted with a 36mm lens to which a Kodak 87A Wratten filter has been attached to exclude visible light. The infra‐red reflectogram mosaics were assembled on a computer using an updated version of the software (VIPS ip) described in R. Billinge, J. Cupitt, N. Dessipris and D. Saunders, ‘A note on an improved procedure for the rapid assembly of infrared reflectogram mosaics’, Studies in Conservation, vol. 38, 11, 1993, pp. 92–8.

About this version

Version 1, generated from files DG_2003__16.xml dated 07/03/2025 and database__16.xml dated 09/03/2025 using stylesheet 16_teiToHtml_externalDb.xsl dated 03/01/2025. Structural mark-up applied to skeleton document in full; entry for NG583, biography for Uccello and associated front and back matter (marked up in pilot project) reintegrated into main document; document updated to use external database of archival and bibliographic references; entries for L2, NG215-NG216, NG1897, NG2862 & NG4062; L15, NG727, NG3162, NG3230, NG4428 & NG4868.1-NG4868.4; NG583; NG663.1-NG663.5; NG666-NG667; NG766-NG767 & NG1215; NG1436; NG2908; NG3046; NG4757-NG4763; NG5451-NG5454; NG5962-NG5963; and NG6579-NG6580 prepared for publication; entry for NG583 proofread and corrected.

Cite this entry

Permalink (this version)
https://data.ng.ac.uk/0E8O-000B-0000-0000
Permalink (latest version)
https://data.ng.ac.uk/0E6D-000B-0000-0000
Chicago style
Gordon, Dillian. “ Masaccio , NG 5962 , Saints Jerome and John the Baptist , Masolino , NG 5963 , A Pope (Saint Gregory?) and Saint Matthias ”. 2003, online version 1, March 9, 2025. https://data.ng.ac.uk/0E8O-000B-0000-0000.
Harvard style
Gordon, Dillian (2003) Masaccio , NG 5962 , Saints Jerome and John the Baptist , Masolino , NG 5963 , A Pope (Saint Gregory?) and Saint Matthias . Online version 1, London: National Gallery, 2025. Available at: https://data.ng.ac.uk/0E8O-000B-0000-0000 (Accessed: 19 March 2025).
MHRA style
Gordon, Dillian,  Masaccio , NG 5962 , Saints Jerome and John the Baptist , Masolino , NG 5963 , A Pope (Saint Gregory?) and Saint Matthias (National Gallery, 2003; online version 1, 2025) <https://data.ng.ac.uk/0E8O-000B-0000-0000> [accessed: 19 March 2025]