Madonna and Child, with the Blessing Christ [middle panel], c. 1415/1420

This panel was originally part of a triptychTriptych
 A picture consisting of three parts. The term denotes both the object itself and its compositional form. As an object, the triptych may vary in size and material, but usually consists of a central panel flanked by wings (or shutters), which may be hinged; as a compositional form it is a tripartite structure, often with an emphasized central element. Although its imagery was, until the 19th century at least, predominantly religious, the object as such was not tied to a specific function. —Victor M. Schmidt, Grove Art © Oxford University Press that also included Saint Peter, with Saint James Major [left panel] and Deacon Saint, with Saint Anthony Abbot [right panel]. The image of the Madonna and Child recalls the type of the Glykophilousa Virgin, the “affectionate Madonna.” She rests her cheek against that of the child, who embraces her. The motif of the child’s hand grasping the hem of the neckline of the Virgin’s dress seems, on the other hand, to allude to the theme of suckling.[1]  [1]
The post-­Byzantine term of Glykophilousa Virgin is used in the art historical literature to indicate a subtype of a wider iconographic group known under the name of Eleousa (compassionate) Virgin, in which the theme of affection between mother and son is predominant. Cf. Gregor Martin Lechner, “Maria,” in Reallexikon zur byzantinischen Kunst, ed. Klaus Wessel,” 7 vols. (Stuttgart, 2005), 6:17–114; also Nancy Ševčenko Patterson, “Virgin eleousa,” in The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, ed. Aleksandr Petrovich Kazhdan (New York, 1991), 3:2171. For the gesture of the child as allusion to suckling, cf. Dorothy C. Shorr, The Christ Child in Devotional Images in Italy during the XIV Century(New York, 1954), 146–148.  The saints portrayed are easily identifiable by their attributes: Peter by the keys, as well as by his particular facial type; James Major, by his pilgrim’s staff; Anthony Abbot, by his hospitaller habit and T-shaped staff.[2]  [2]
See George Kaftal, Saints in Italian Art, vol. 1, Iconography of the Saints in Tuscan Painting (Florence, 1952), 800, 508, 61–64, respectively.  But the identity of the deacon martyr saint remains uncertain; he is usually identified as Saint Stephen, though without good reason, as he lacks that saint’s usual attributes. Perhaps the artist did not characterize him with a specific attribute because the triptych was destined for a church dedicated to him.[3]  [3]
The dalmatic worn by the youthful saint indicates merely that he was a deacon, while the palm branch in his hand is the symbol of martyrdom; he therefore represents a martyr deacon saint, not necessarily Stephen or Vincent, with whom F. Mason Perkins attempted to identify him. F. Mason Perkins, “Su alcune pitture di Martino di Bartolomeo,” Rassegna d’arte senese 18 (1924): 12.

F. Mason Perkins saw the three panels in a private collection in London in 1924 and then published them under the name of Martino di Bartolomeo, thus confirming the attribution formulated by the panels’ owner.[4]  [4]
See Provenance note 1.  The proposal seemed convincing to various scholars but not to the authors of the catalogs of the National Gallery of Art, who, for reasons difficult to explain, registered the attribution to Martino with a margin of doubt; Carol Montfort Molten (1996) also maintained that reservation.[5]  [5]
See National Gallery of Art, Summary Catalogue of European Paintings and Sculpture (Washington, DC, 1965), 83; National Gallery of Art, European Paintings and Sculpture: Illustrations (Washington, DC, 1968), 74, 158; National Gallery of Art, European Paintings: An Illustrated Summary Catalogue (Washington, DC, 1975), 216–217; Fern Rusk Shapley, Catalogue of the Italian Paintings, 2 vols. (Washington, DC, 1979), 1:302–303. All cited the painting as “attributed to Martino di Bartolomeo.” Fern Rusk Shapley added, “If by him, the date is probably earlier than his polyptych in the Museo Civico, Pisa, signed and dated 1403,” since, she explained, “the latter is somewhat more lively in expression.” See also Carol Montfort Molten, The Sienese Painter Martino di Bartolomeo (PhD diss., Indiana University, 1992), 89–90.  Thus, after the publications of Perkins and Raimond van Marle (1924, 1934), only Burton B. Fredericksen and Federico Zeri (1972), Mojmir S. Frinta (1998), and Silvia Colucci (2005) have cited the triptych as a work by Martino.[6]  [6]
F. Mason Perkins, “Su alcune pitture di Martino di Bartolomeo,” Rassegna d’arte senese 18 (1924): 12; Raimond van Marle, The Development of the Italian Schools of Painting, vol. 2, The Sienese School of the 14th Century (The Hague, 1924), 590; Raimond van Marle, Le scuole della pittura italiana, vol. 2, La scuola senese del XIV secolo (The Hague, 1934), 646, 648 n; Burton B. Fredericksen and Federico Zeri, Census of Pre-­Nineteenth-Century Italian Paintings in North American Public Collections (Cambridge, MA, 1972), 122; Mojmir Svatopluk Frinta, Punched Decoration on Late Medieval Panel and Miniature Painting (Prague, 1998) 326, 408; Silvia Colucci, “L'iconografia del crocifisso con i dolenti in umiltà: Una questione aperta,” in Il Crocifisso con i dolenti in umiltà di Paolo di Giovanni Fei: Un capo­lavoro riscoperto, ed. Alessandro Bagnoli, Silvia Colucci, and Veronica Randon (Siena, 2005), 48.

As for its date of execution, most of the opinions expressed on the matter have accepted van Marle’s (1924) hypothesis.[7]  [7]
Raimond van Marle, The Development of the Italian Schools of Painting, vol. 2, The Sienese School of the 14th Century (The Hague, 1924), 590.  He asserted that the triptych should date to c. 1400–1410, probably following the artist’s period of activity in Pisa, which ended in 1405. Fern Rusk Shapley (1979), however, was of the view that if the triptych were indeed an autograph work by Martino, it ought to date earlier than 1403.[8]  [8]
Fern Rusk Shapley, Catalogue of the Italian Paintings, 2 vols. (Washington, DC, 1979), 1:302–303.  For her part, Monfort Molten (1996) placed the Gallery panels among the works of Martino di Bartolomeo postdating 1410.[9]  [9]
Carol Montfort Molten, The Sienese Painter Martino di Bartolomeo (PhD diss., Indiana University, 1992), 89.  She argued, however, that in the Gallery triptych “there is less affinity with the elegant and graceful qualities of the Saint Barnabas altarpiece,[10]  [10]
The altarpiece in question consists of the Madonna and Child with Saints Lawrence, Barnabas, Augustine, and Ansano, now in the Pinacoteca Nazionale in Siena (no. 160); a Crucifixion, now in the El Paso Museum of Art (no. 61.1.7, Samuel H. Kress Collection); and four stories of Saint Barnabas in the Philadelphia Museum of Art (no. 1945–25–120). See Carl Brandon Strehlke, Italian Paintings, 1250–1450, in the John G. Johnson Collection and the Philadelphia Museum of Art (Philadelphia, 2004), 242–247.  or with the Palazzo Pubblico Triptych.”[11]  [11]
The three panels in question (Saints Stephen, Mary Magdalene, and Anthony Abbot) come from a dispersed polyptych reframed to form an ensemble and hence cited as a triptych. Cf. Bernard Berenson, Italian Pictures of the Renaissance: Central Italian and North Italian Schools, 3 vols. (London, 1968), 2: fig. 433; Fabio Bisogni, Marco Ciampolini, and Elisabetta Avanzati, Guide to the Civic Museum of Siena (Siena, 1986), 119. The date 1408 attributed to these paintings seems devoid of foundation; see Carol Montfort Molten, The Sienese Painter Martino di Bartolomeo (PhD diss., Indiana University, 1992), 254–255.  Therefore, this work represented, according to Molten, “something of an anomaly in Martino’s work,” and the circumstance would make probable, in her view, the intervention of a studio assistant.[12]  [12]
Carol Montfort Molten, The Sienese Painter Martino di Bartolomeo (PhD diss., Indiana University, 1992), 90.

The doubts about Martino’s authorship of the triptych have never been clearly explained, nor does the judgment of the ostensibly limited qualitative level of the Washington panels seem well founded. It may be admitted that Martino was not one of the leading masters active in Lucca, Pisa, and Siena between the end of the fourteenth and the beginning of the fifteenth century. In particular, his frescoes in the oratoryOratory
 Small chapel or building for private prayer and, by extension, a faldstool (cushioned stool) at which a worshipper kneels for prayer. —Grove Art © Oxford University Press of San Giovanni Battista at Cascina, undoubtedly executed with the help of assistants but proudly signed as an autograph work and dated 1398,[13]  [13]
See Maria Laura Cristiani Testi, Affreschi biblici di Martino di Bartolomeo in San Giovanni Battista di Cascina (Pisa, 1978).  propose very schematic compositions and evince signs of some haste in execution, testifying to a quality that cannot be said to be outstanding. The polyptychPolyptych
 Type of object with several panels, usually an altarpiece, although it may also fulfil other functions. The polyptych normally consists of a central panel with an even number of side-panels, which are sometimes hinged to fold. Although in principle every object with two panels or more may be called a polyptych, the word is normally used as a general term for anything larger than a triptych. As with diptychs and triptychs, the size and material can vary. —Victor M. Schmidt, Grove Art © Oxford University Press now in the Museo Nazionale in Pisa, also signed by Martino and dated five years later,[14]  [14]
See Enzo Carli, Il Museo di Pisa (Pisa, 1974), 63–64.  is finer, but the forms of its robust figures, metallic in sheen and modeled with sharp chiaroscuro contrasts, seem rather far removed from the stylistic features of the triptych being discussed here. So the attempt to insert the Washington panels in Martino’s Pisan phase cannot be found convincing. In those years, Martino seems especially to have based his severe forms on models derived from such masters as Antonio Veneziano and Piero di Puccio. His paintings are filled with figures whose draperies seem starched and whose human grandeur is mainly expressed by physical bulk.

The artist’s style changed after his return to Siena and after his frescoes in the Sala di Balia at the Palazzo Pubblico (1404–1407) in that city.[15]  [15]
Gabriele Borghini, “La decorazione,” in Palazzo pubblico di Siena: Vicende costruttive e decorazione, ed. Cesare Brandi (Siena, 1983), 226, figs. 270–273.  In the polyptych dated 1408 now divided between the Pinacoteca Nazionale in Siena and a private collection,[16]  [16]
The four panels of no. 120 in the Pinacoteca Nazionale of Siena, respectively representing Saints James, Catherine of Alexandria, Mary Magdalene, and Ansano, have been convincingly linked with a Madonna and Child formerly in the Bonichi collection at Asciano and later in the Fossati Bellani collection in Milan, which bears the date 1408. For these paintings see, respectively, Piero Torriti, La Pinacoteca Nazionale di Siena, vol. 1, I dipinti dal XII al XV secolo (Genoa, 1977), 217; and Luciano Berti, “Note brevi su inediti toscani,” Bollettino d’arte 37 (1952): 256–258.  the painter shows he has resumed contact with the Sienese figurative tradition and especially with Taddeo di Bartolo (who also was involved in the pictorial decoration of the Palazzo Pubblico). Martino’s style now becomes more graceful and more animated. He seeks greater verisimilitude in softer complexions and in the silky fluency of hair and beards, and tries to imbue his figures with greater vitality through more complex and articulated movements. Martino also must have been struck by the imaginative pictorial narratives of Bartolo di Fredi, by now fully attuned to the late ­GothicGothic
 Term used to denote, since the 15th century, the architecture and, from the 19th century onward, all the visual arts of Europe during a period extending by convention from about 1120 to c. 1400 in central Italy, and until the late 15th century and even well into the 16th century in northern Europe and the Iberian Peninsula. The early gothic style overlapped chronologically with Romanesque and flourished after the onset of Renaissance art in Italy and elsewhere. The term gothic is applied to western European painting of the 13th century to the early 15th century. Unlike gothic architecture, it is distinguished more by developments in style and function than in technique, and even in these areas there is considerable national and regional diversity. The applicability of the term to Italian painting is debated, as is its usefulness in accounting for developments in Netherlandish painting from the early 15th century. Contact with Byzantine art was close in the early 13th century, but after c. 1250 survived principally in the Holy Roman Empire and Italy. —Peter Kidson, Grove Art © Oxford University Press style, and possibly he attempted to keep abreast of the figurative language of some painters in the younger generation. 

This must, however, have been a relatively brief phase. In paintings that can be dated to his last decades of life, Martino, without forgetting the experiences of the years between roughly 1405 and 1415, and without wholly rejecting the models proposed by Taddeo di Bartolo (with whom he fell out; indeed, Martino was fined in 1412 for slandering him),[17]  [17]
In August 1412, Martino was forced to pay a fine for “cierte parole che il detto maestro Martino disse ingiuriose a maestro Taddeo di Bartolo” (certain derogatory words that the said master Martino addressed to master Taddeo di Bartolo). See Sci­pione Borghesi Bichi and Luciano Banchi, Nuovi documenti per la storia dell’arte senese (Siena, 1898), 112; Carol Montfort Molten, The Sienese Painter Martino di Bartolomeo (PhD diss., Indiana University, 1992), 290.  seems to return to the ideals he had pursued in his earliest works, abandoning complex poses and simplifying the more animated profiles of his characters. His paintings are once again populated by solemn personages of massive physique, even though he now uses a soft and sfumato chiaroscuro to model their forms and makes some attempt to express the emotions that animate them. These developments are particularly evident in the four busts of the Evangelists [fig. 1]   [fig. 1] Martino di Bartolomeo, Saint Mark, 1425–1426, tempera on panel, private collection. Image: Robilant + Voena, London, Milan & St. Moritz [fig. 2]   [fig. 2] Martino di Bartolomeo, Saint John the Evangelist, 1425–1426, tempera on panel, private collection. Image: Robilant + Voena, London, Milan & St. Moritz [fig. 3]   [fig. 3] Martino di Bartolomeo, Saint Matthew, 1425–1426, tempera on panel, private collection. Image: Robilant + Voena, London, Milan & St. Moritz [fig. 4]   [fig. 4] Martino di Bartolomeo, Saint Luke, 1425–1426, tempera on panel, private collection. Image: Robilant + Voena, London, Milan & St. Moritz, recently (and rightly) proposed as components of the dispersed polyptych from the Sienese church of Sant’Antonio Abate in Fontebranda, formerly signed by the artist and dated 1425,[18]  [18]
See Ada Labriola, in Maestri senesi e toscani nel Lindenau-Museum di Altenburg, ed. Miklós Boskovits and Johannes Tripps (Siena, 2008), 98–100. The paintings in question, formerly belonging to the Society of the Cincinnati, Anderson House, Washington DC, were sold at auction at Christie’s, London, July 11, 2001, lot 72.  but similar aspects seem to be detectable in the Gallery panels [fig. 5]   [fig. 5] Detail of Saint Peter, Martino di Bartolomeo, Saint Peter, with Saint James Major, c. 1415/1420, tempera on panel, National Gallery of Art, Washington, Gift of Samuel L. Fuller. The delicate modeling of the flesh parts, the vivacity and tension of the facial expressions, the vigor with which the powerful hands clasp the objects they hold, and the clear-cut definition of the contours of the bodies suggest for these panels a date of execution perhaps slightly earlier than the polyptych of 1425, approximately in the years 1415–1420. They are the products, I believe, of the same phase in which Benedetto di Bindo and Gregorio di Cecco, exponents of the younger generation, were the culturally most advanced painters on the Sienese artistic scene,[19]  [19]
For Benedetto and his frescoes painted in San Domenico in Perugia between 1415 and 1417, cf. Giordana Benazzi, “Le opere d’arte del Medioevo,” in La Basilica di San Domenico di Perugia, ed. Giuseppe Rocchi Coopmans De Yoldi and Giulio Ser-­Giacomi (Perugia, 2006), 333–334; for Gregorio, the perceptive essay by Luciano Bellosi (“Gregorio di Cecco di Luca”) in Il gotico a Siena: Miniature, pitture, oreficerie, oggetti d’arte (Florence, 1982), 346–348.  and in which the very youthful Stefano di Giovanni (known as Sassetta (Sienese, probably 1392 - 1450)) was about to express a full-fledged Renaissance figurative style.

Miklós Boskovits (1935–2011)

March 21, 2016