1m fiv— ., , — A_, # W _- , ,# # ,7 if , w > :1 | sgl : | 01—: \l 010 HI (no 4 “ERA ANGELICO’S DREAM OF HONOREUS XII Thesis for the Degree of M. A. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY ROSE MARIE ALTEUIS 1967 M (It LIBRARY Michigan State University v alumna- BY ‘7' HUAG & SDNS‘ 300K BINDERY INC. Luann av among 5 8-, "I‘ll-flu ABSTRACT FRA ANGELICO'S DREAM OF HONORIUS III by Rose Marie Althuis During the early 15th century, painters and sculp- tors sought to express Renaissance ideals through the rep- resentation of classical architecture within pictorical compositions. Fra Angelico did just that in the Dream of Honorius III, a predella to the Coronation of the Virgin, located in the Louvre. The artist has represented a classi- cal basilical church facade as the dominant feature in the composition. My study is concerned with establishing the significance of this structure, a possible influence for its design, and the attribution and date of the predella as a whole. It has been possible only to suggest various pro- posals. It is my opinion: that the predella is an authentic painting by Fra Angelico though there may be some evidence of the-work of assistants; that the painting was executed between 1433-1437; that there appears to be strong Ghibertian influences; and that the panel contains one of the earliest surviving examples of a Renaissance design for a church facade. FRA ANGELICO'S DREAM OF HONORIUS III BY Rose Marie Althuis A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Art 1967 (F a; I 23/ 3 o \ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS My sincere appreciation to Dr. Webster Smith for his interest and assistance throughout the duration of my studies and the preparation of this thesis. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENT PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PANEL I SUBJECT II ATTRIBUTION III DATE IV THE CHURCH FACADE BIBLIOGRAPHY TABLE OF CONTENTS iii Page ii iv 13 20 iques Photograph Archives III. (I) :3 -:-l H O G O 11‘. \H O E (U (D H D Fra Angelico I . SUBJECT Fra Angelico's Dream of Honorius III is the first of seven narrative panels comprising the predella of the altarpiece of the Coronation of the Virgin in the Louvre. The predella paintings deal with episodes from the life of St. Dominic, founder of the Dominican order of Friars. The scenes in order of position are: the Dream of Honorius III, St. Peter and St. Paul Appearing to St. Dominic, The Rais- ing of Napoleone Orsini, Pieta, The Desputation of St. Dom- inic and the Miracle of the Book, St. Dominic and His Com— panions Fed by Angels, and The Death of St. Dominic. The setting for the Dream of Honorius III is out- doors. To the right in the middle ground the artist has placed a cutaway view showing Pope Honorius in his sleeping chamber. The drawn curtain reveals the sleeping Pope attired in formal robes. A three tiered circular structure rises from behind the sleeping chamber. To the left in the fore- ground St. Dominic braces himself against the front of a falling church. The scene reminds us of the Dream of Innocent III at Assisi, attributed to Giotto. The story represented by the fresco at Assisi is as follows: When his followers had increased to a dozen, Francis drew up a short informal rule consisting chiefly of the gospel counsels of perfection. This he took to Rome in 1210 for the Pope's approbation. Innocent III appeared at first averse, and many of the cardinals alleged that the orders already established ought to be reformed and their number not multiplied, and the intended poverty of this new body was impracticable. Cardinal John Colonna pleaded in its favor that it was no more than evangeli- cal counsels of perfection. The POpe afterwards told his nephew, from whom St. Bonaventure heard it, that in a dream he saw a palm tree growing up at his feet, and in another he saw St. Francis propping up the Lateran Church, which seemed ready to fall (as he saw St. Domi- nic in another vision five years after). He therefore sent again for St. Francis and approved his rule, but only by word of mouth, tonsuring him and his companions and giving them a general commission to preach repentance. Before the two founders could seek formal confirma— tion Innocent had died and Honorius began his pontifical reign. Therefore, Honorius ". . . gave formal confirmation to the order of St. Francis and that of St. Dominic, and it may be added that now he did all that he could to favor their spread. He recognized in them the salt that was to preserve the masses, especially in the towns for whom little enough was being done by the clergy."2 But there is no evidence to to my knowledge that Honorius experienced such a vision in- volving St. Domonic preventing the church from falling into ruin. Perhaps on this point Innocent and Honorius were con- fused in the artist's or his patron's mind. lAlban Butler, Lives of the Saints, Edited by Herbert Thurston, S.J. and Donald Attwater, New York, 1956, IV, p. 25. 2Horace K. Mann, The Lives of the Popes in the Middle .Ages, London and St. Louis, 1925, XIII, pp.’153-154. II . ATTRIBUTION Most authors attribute the altarpiece to Fra Angel- ico with or without the intervention of an assistant. The early biographer, Vasari, makes no mention of the use of assistants. Vasari writes that the Coronation is . . . superior to all the other works that Fra Giovanni made, and the one wherein he surpassed himself and gave supreme proof of his talent and of his knowledge of art . . . ."3 One or two authors go as far as to suggest a name for the possibly collaborating artist. Pope-Hennessy is one of these. His position is based upon an analysis which points out the in- consistant use of perspective in the Coronation of the Vir- gin. The perspective system within the upper and lower por- tions do not correspond with one another. "At the top, the niche, with its receding lines, represents an approximation, to correct perspective, and the foreshortened pattern of brocade on the two sides is incorrectly drawn. But when we descend to the foreground of the painting, we find our feet set on a solid floor, composed of the utmost complexity."4 3Georgio Vasari, Lives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects, London, 1912-11, III, p. 30. 4John Pope—Hennessy, "The Early Style of Domenico Veneziano," Burlington Magazine, XCIII, 1951, p. 219. 3 Another inconsistancy is evident when we compare the Corona- tign_with the predella scenes. For example, it is strange that in the main panel the artist chose to represent a Gothic can0py while the first predella panel a "Brunelleschian" church facade dominates the composition.5 POpe-Hennessy sug- gests that the foreground in the main panel and the predella were painted by a more progressive artist: namely Domenico 6 Veneziano. Robertson points out that the Coronation doesn't have any affinities with the subtle coloration found in the St. Lucy Altarpeice. Besides it is difficult to establish any close relationship between the parts of the Coronation attributed to Domenico and the St. Lucy Altarpiece. He feels that even though there is evidence that the composi- tion contains the work of assistants, it is unified by the hand of Angelico. However, the painting could not possibly contain the work of two such independent masters and it is unlikely that Domenico would have accepted the conventions oflngelico's studio to any great extent; which would have been necessary under the circumstances. But then there is SIbid. 6Ibid., p. 223. Approximately 1438-39 Domenico Veneziano contacted Piero di Medici by means of correspondence. Pope-Hennessy suggests he was commissioned to complete the unfinished work which was abandoned when Fra Angelico was commissioned to paint at San Marco. the chance that the assistant could have been influenced by Domenico or his studio. One should not rule out the possi- bility that the Coronation may have been the last surviving 7 work by Angelico representing his final maturity. John White also disagrees with Pope-Hennessy's pro- posal. He (White) indicates that the overall design with figures turned inward had already appeared in the Frankfort panel. Furthermore the artist intended to portray the un- usually low viewpoint as shown by the foreshortened steps and the recession of canopy and floor to one vanishing point. It is probable that Fra Angelico was in control but did not completely execute the composition.8 Giulo Carlo Aragan states: I cannot share this View (Pope-Hennessy's proposal). To my mind, the entire work is by Fra Angelico and what we really have here is a deliberate trick of perspective. The divergent viewpoints from which we see the scene are calculated to heighten the illusion of distance between the choir of angels and saints, on the one hand, and Christ and the Virgin on the other, who thus stand domi- nant at the apex of the composition. The device is quite in keeping with the festive character of the work, replete 7Giles Robertson, "A Recent Book on Fra Angelico," Burlington Magazine, XCVI, p. 186. A further difficulty in accepting Domenico's parti- cipation lies in determining the relationship of his supposed activity here to his work on the fresco of the Madonna from the Carnesecchi tabernacle in Florence, now in the National Gallery, which shows a more primitive use of perspective than the Coronation, thus indicating that his supposed work on that picture could not have been among his first assignments on his arrival in Florence. 8John White, The Birth and Rebirth of Pictorical Space, New York, 1958, p. 187, note 3. with stage effects, and its distinctly worldy--not to say political-~rather than sacred tenor. Hence what seems to me the idea underlying the painting: the ne— cessity and indeed the intrinsic beauty of hierarchial order, not only on earth but also in heaven. It is not for nothing that these figures are the worldiest he ever painted; and the symbology ungainly, the tone blatantly oratorical, the inordinately solemn and ornate.9 "Let it be said that the Coronation of the Virgin has often been regarded as by two or more hands. A measure of studio intervention is, for example, presumed by Papini and Muratoff, while Wurm looks on the entire painting as a studio work and Salmi ascribes parts of the main panel and the entire predella to a miniaturist imitator of Angelico, 10 Moreno concedes that the Battista di Biagio Sanguigni." figure types in the predella appear more advanced but does not accept Veneziano's participation.ll Bazin also detects an indication of intervention in a few instances in the main panel. However, the predella, with the exception of the last, is undoubtably by the hand of Angelico.12 My opinion is that Angelico was the artist in con- trol of the painting. Observation has brought to light 9Guilo Carlo Aragon, Fra Angelico, London, Paris, New York, pp. 64-67. 10Pope-Hennessy, op. cit., p. 219. 1Carmen Gomez-Moreno, "A Reconstructed Panel by Era Angelico and Some New Evidence for the Cronology of His Work," Art Bulletin, XXXIX, p. 190. 12Germain Bazin, Fra Angelico, London, Paris, New York, p. 45. several characteristics in the altarpiece which are preva- lent throughout a good share of Angelico's oeuvre. I will mention a few salient characteristics within the remaining discussion. Among several distinctive traits included in Fra Angelico's style is the tendency to intermingle Gothic and classical elements. This is obvious in the Louvre BEES? nation, (the main panel contains a Gothic canopy while the first predella contains a representation of a classical church facade),the Linaiuoli triptych, (in the Martyrdom of St. Mark Gothic buildings are placed in front of a classi- cal wall), and the Perguia polyptych, (in the first pre— della, a classical church is set among several Gothic structures). Another conspicuous trait is Angelico's inclination to represent figures which seem too large for their archi- tectural settings. Certain characteristics in the Louvre music angels are strikingly similar to those in the Linai- uoli triptych. Briefly, these are the design of the gowns and a few of the hairstyles. This matter is thoroughly discussed in the section which concerns the dating of the Louvre altarpiece. This evidence of the relationship between the Louvre altarpiece and other compositions executed approximately within the same period would seem to strengthen the case for attribution to Fra Angelico. III. DATE With one or two exceptions most authors favor a date (for the Louvre altarpiece) between 1430-40. POpe— 13 14 Hennessy suggests 1438-39, Muratoff about 1425, while 15 Schottmfiller and Aragonl6 propose between 1430-40. Salmi believes the work began around 1430 but progressed slowly 17 Bazin favors the date 1433-37.18 and finished after 1435. As a result of studying the halo designs of several Madonna's, Moreno considers the possibility that the paint- ing was begun relatively early in Angelico's career but completed later. The Gothic lettering in the halo design of the Louvre Virgin was not used after the early 1430's.19 Also in compositions before the Linaiuoli triptych (1433) 13Pope-Hennessy, op. cit., p. 223. l4Ibid., p. 173. lSIbid. l6Aragon, op. cit., p. 62. l7Stefano Orlandi, Beato Angelico, Florence, 1964, p. 24, note 4. 18Bazin, op. cit., p. 24. 19Moreno, op. cit., p. 189. 8 the halos of the figures have many patterns incorporating Gothic lettering without any relationship between them. But from 1433 on a relationship exists among the halos ac- cording to the importance of the figures. Langton Douglas favors His reasons are because of the 20 the early date of 1425.21 presence of Gothic elements and the favorable comparison of some principle figures (St. Nicholas of Myra for one) with parison of the use of movement gin and Assumption (before the design of the Coronation shows stiff and formal.24 Robertson suggests the that the composition is ". . . Angelico and that its advances rity. . . ."25 22 A com— minature painting. in the Dormition of the Vir- end of 143023) and the lineal the latter to be much more date 1447 and the possibility the last surviving work of represent his final matu- I am tempted to date the panel approximately 1433-37 (though this is only a suggestion, not a positive date) for 201bid., p. 190 21 Langton Douglas, Fra Angelico, London, 1902, p. 49. 22Ibid., p. 48. 23Ibid., p. 29. 24Ibid., p. 49. 25Robertson, loc. cit. 10 reasons which will become clear in the remaining discussion. There are certain elements in the Louvre Coronation which recall the Linaiuoli altarpiece of 1433. The Louvre music angels appear to be garbed in gowns which resemble a loose overblouse and long skirt with flute-like folds. The gowns have a delicate all-over pattern with heavier decora- tive bands toward the lower portion of the skirt. Some of the gowns are slit on the left side. The figures of the angels suggest hollow cylindrical volumes. These features also characterize the Linaiuoli angels. The hair of one angel to the right of the throne in the Louvre Coronation is styled almost identically to two Linaiuoli angels; the first trumpeter at the left of the Madonna and the one with a tambourine, third from the bottom to the right of the Ma- donna. All three of these angels have longer stringy curls rather than the shorter curly hairstyle of the other angels.26 There are some elements in the predella the Dream of Honorius III which are reminiscent of the Linaiuoli pre- predella panel of The Martyrdom of St. Mark. These are the narrow rectangular doorway of the church facade which is like the one in the structure in the left middle ground, (of the Martyrdom of St. Mark) the naive perspective in the 26The treatment of the gowns compare favorably with those in the heavenly Coronation ca. 1435-40 and those in the Perguia polyptych ca. 1437. ll architectural representations and the use of classical ele- ments in the Louvre church facade brings to mind the wall in the background of the Linaiuoli predella. The earliest instance in which we find the use of classical architecture is in the Martyrdom of St. Mark, a predella to the Linaiuoli triptych of 1433. Oversized fig- ures dominate the foreground and bland architectural struc- tures occupy the middle ground. The city wall is articulated by classical fluted pilasters with Corinthian capitals. Dated approximately 1437, two of the predella panels to the Perguia polyptych provides another instance where Angelico made use of the new architecture. These episodes are the Vocation of St. Nicholas and the Death of St. Nic- hplag. In the first of these St. Nicholas is preaching from a pulpit to a small group of citizens. To his right is an interesting representation of a church. The facade is divided into three portions; a wide lower zone and two narrow zones above. The lower zone is pierced by a large rectangular opening and can be approached by a flight of stairs. The third zone, topped by a triangular pediment, contains an oculus. Each zone, the pediment and the extrem- ities of the building is outlined by wide moulding.27 27The church facade in the East wall of the Arezzo frescoes bears considerable resemblance to Angelico's fa- cade—-perhaps della Francesca was familiar with the St. Nic- holas predella. 12 The Death of St. Nicholas takes place within an austere courtyard, which one might call "Ghibertian." The wall of the courtyard articulated by narrow unfluted pilas- ters is divided into two zones; the lower being the taller. The total effect of the courtyard, with its tall, thin un- fluted pilasters and the division of the wall into a full story with an attic is reminiscent of the round building in the Joseph panel from the Gates of Paradise. These panels were cast approximately 143728 29 but not completed until 1452. 28Richard Krautheimer, Lorenzo Ghiberti, New York, 1956, p. 165. 291bid., p. 16. IV . THE CHURCH FACADE The most interesting feature in the composition is the church facade. The upper and lower zones are articu- lated by pilasters. It is difficult to tell whether or not they are fluted. The pilasters on the main storey have heavy Corinthian capitals and rest directly upon small bases. The pilasters on the attic have no capitals. The rectangular doorway appears to be framed by pilasters with capitals. The entablatures are strange in their prOportioning; in the main story the entablature is very thin in relation to the pilasters; on the attic storey the entablature is thicker; one would expect the Opposite. Nevertheless, the facade gives us the general impression of being consistently clas- sical in style, and of calling attention to itself as an architectural design. In the Gesu at Cortona is a studio replica of the Dream of Honorius III, a predella to the Virgin Enthroned with Angels and Saints dated approximately 1430-40. The first panel contains three episodes; the Dream of Honorius III, the Meeting of St. Francis and St. Dominic, and SE. Peter and St. Paul Appearing to Dominic. My discussion con- cerns the first of the episodes. The iconography is the same as that of the Louvre panel. But the Gesu St. Domonic 13 14 is much more animated in his attempt to brace himself against the falling church. And the church facade is Gothic and occupies only a small, fairly inconspicuous part of the design. On the other hand, although the church facade in the Louvre panel may appear intended as a demonstration of the new architectural style, I cannot accept Mr. Pope- Hennessy's characterization of this facade as "Brunelle-- schian." I have found no instance where Brunelleschi has placed pilasters upon such small bases nor designed a fa- cade with a central Opening of rectangular shape. Nor is it plausible that he would employ such unusual proportions in the structural membering, i.e. narrow entablature versus wide pilasters. Yet, in spite of these inconsistancies the overall design imparts a feeling of classicism and ranks among the early attempts of an artist to express Renaissance architectural ideals within the background of a painting. During the early 15th century, painters and sculp- tors sought to express Renaissance ideals through the rep- resentation of classical architecture within pictorial com- positions. I will review these in chronological order. The earliest instance of this is found in a work by Masaccio. The Trinity, ca. 1425, is set within a monumental arched vault. The arch supported by Ionic columns frames the im- portant figures who seem, as a result of a perspective de- vice, to be within the depth of the composition. Vasari 15 mentions that Brunelleschi designed the architecture of the fresco.30 Ghiberti's partiality toward the new architecture becomes evident in the Gates of Paradise (ca. 1437); for example, the Isaac, Joseph, and Solomon panels. The Mira- cle of the Strozzi Boy from the main panel of the St. Zeno- bius Shrine, ca. 1435-37, is another example. One detail contains a basilical church facade set upon a stepped base. Four slender pilasters divide the lower zone into three bays and support a wide entablature. Parts of pediments are placed at the side aisles and over the nave. As a whole the facade is unencumbered by ornamentation which would de- tract from the preciseness of the whole. "Obviously these late architectural designs of Ghiberti's are intended to revive the architecture of antiquity. But within the full range of antique architectural vocabulary excludes such well known elements of ancient architecture as the column or decorated frieze. The entire membering is unencumbered by ornament. The contrast between the membering and the smooth wall surface, the clear interrelation of all the parts,the rational composition and perfect consonance of facades, buildings and entire palaces, the precision of the membering, their chaste coolness, their almost frigid purity result in a highly sophisticated, reticent and somewhat 3OIbid., p. 263. 16 uncorporeal classicism. These structures are of a rare and 31 subtle beauty." The St. ZenObius panel contains ". . . the first facade of the Renaissance."32 The use of Renaissance architecture is prominent in Donatello's reliefs dealing with the Miracle of St. Anthony ca. 1447. The Miracle of the Ass is one example. The acti— vity is placed within three arched vaults flanked by fluted pilasters. The three arched vaults recall the Basilica of Constantine in Rome. Fra Angelico's greatest achievement in architectural settings lies in the Nicholas V frescoes, ca. 1449, in Rome. These frescoes for the most part are imbued with representa- tions of classical architecture. San Lorenzo Giving Alms is but one example. The activity is placed before a large rectilinear opening flanked by pilasters. Within the Open- ing is a long colonnaded nave drawn in correct perspective. San Lorenzo distributing alms to several misfortunate human beings:n3placed in front of this imposing setting. The architecture appears quite sculptural, heavy, and grand as compared with buildings depicted elsewhere by Fra Angelico. These frescoes were completed before the building projects of Nicholas V and none of the interiors comply with the description of the proposed basilica. "These architectural 311bid., p. 260. 321bid., p. 258. 17 backgrounds must, therefore, be taken for what they are-- illustrations of the current architectural taste at the papal court--but practically valueless as an aid to the theoretical reconstruction of the projected basilica."33 Piero della Francesca also chose to incorporate classical architecture within a pictorical composition. In the Brera Madonna (early 1470's) an apse within the arched vault with coffered ceiling and pilasters below, combine to create an impression of monumentality lending to the serene dignity of the scene. The Baltimore and Urbino Panels attributed to Lau- rana (ca. 1470) provide an example of ". . . large scale urbinistic . . ."34 planning, capitalizing upon classical architectural design. Among the structures in the Urbino panel is a representation of a basilical church facade. Like Ghiberti's the facade is marked by clarity of design. The structure is divided into two zones, the lower contains three bays articulated by pilasters. The nave and side aisles are crowned by triangular pediments. Each bay has an entrance with triangular pediments above. Of all the pictorical compositions discussed, the facade in the Zenobius panel is closest to our example. 33Torgil Magnuson, Studies in Roman Quattrocento Architecture, Stockholm, 1958, pp. 202-203. 34Krautheimer, 0p. cit., p. 272. l8 Angelico's design for the church facade in the Louvre pre— della could have been influenced by Lorenzo Ghiberti. The manner of articulation is similar to Ghiberti's facade. Pilasters divide the lower zone (of the Louvre facade) into two narrow bays and a wide central bay. If the lower, wider part of Angelico's facade had been presented as just one tall story (rather than as a story plus an attic), the re- semblance to the facade in the Zenobius panel would even be 35 a date which coincides with stronger. Approximately 1432, the Zenobius commission, Ghiberti designed the frame for Fra Angelico's Linaiuoli altarpiece. Perhaps as a result of this Fra Angelico became aware of Ghiberti's preliminary plans for the design of the main panel though it probably 36 "He (Ghiberti) mentions in was not modeled until 1435. his autobiography that '. . . he rendered great services to painters, sculptors, [and] architects and made very many sketches in wax and clay. . .'"37 Fra Angelico has chosen a classical design for the central focus of the composition. No doubt his work re- flects his early ideas concerning the new mode in architec- ture. For the most important moment in St. Dominic's life the artist has chosen to represent the mother church in the 35Ibid., p. 6. 36Ibid., p. 143. 37Ibid., p. 7. 19 most dignified style of architecture. "Architecture is thus directly related to the actions for which it is intended, and to the human beings who participate in these actions."38 . . . Architecture is aimed at creating dignified back- grounds for dignified actions of dignified peOple."39 If the Zenobius Shrine contains "The first [basilical] facade of the Renaissance,"40 then here we may well have the second. 38Ibid., p. 270. 39Ibid., p. 271. 40 Ibid., p. 258. BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Aragan, Guilio Carlo. Fra Angelico. Translated by James Emmons. New York: Skira Inc. Bazin, Germain. Fra Angelico. London, Paris, New York: The Hyperion Press. Berenson, Bernard. Piero della Francesca. New York: McMillan Co., 1954. Butler, Alban. Lives of the Saints. Vols. III & IV. Edited by Herbert Thurston, S. J. and Donald Attwater. New York: P. J. Kenedy and Sons, 1956. Clark, Kenneth. Piero della Francesca. London: Phaidon Press LTD., 1951. De Wald, Ernest T. Italian Painting, 1200-1600. New York: San Francisco, Toronto, London: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1961. Douglas, Langton. Fra Angelico. London: George Bell and Sons, 1902. Drane, Augusta Theodosia. The History of St. Dominic. Lon- don and New York: Longmans, Green and Co., 1891. Gould, Cecil. An Introduction to Italian Renaissance Paint- 1 g. London: TPhaidon Press, MCMLVII: Krautheimer, Richard. Lprenzo Ghiberti. New York: Prince- ton University Press, 1956. Magnuson, Torgil. Studies in Roman Quattrocento Architecture. Stockholm: Almqvist & WikseIl, 1958. Mann, Horace K. The Lives of the Popes in the Middle Ages. Vols. XII & XIII. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., LTD. St. Louis, Missouri: B. Herder Book Co., 1925. 20 21 Orlandi, Stefano. Beato Angelico. Florence: Leo S. Olschki, 1964. Pope-Hennessy, John. Fra Angelico. London: Phaidon Pub- lishers Inc., 1952. Rea, Hope. Donatello: Il Maestro Di Chi Sanno. London: George Bell and Sons, 1900. Salvini, Roberto. Giotto de Bondone. Part I & II. Trans- lated by Paul Colacicchii New York: Hawthorne Books, 1964. Van Marle, Raimond. The Develppment of the Italian Schools of Paintipg. Vol. X. The Hague: Martinus Nijtoff, 1928. Vasari, Georgio. Lives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculp- tors, and Architects. Vol. III. *Translated by Gaston Du C De Vere. London: Philip Lee Warner, Publisher to the Medici Society LTD., 1912-14. White, John. The Birth and Rebirth of Pictorical Space. New York: Thomas Yoseloff, 1958. Articles and Periodicals Clark, Kenneth. "Architectural Backgrounds in XVth Century Italian Painting," I & II, The Arts, (1946-47), 13- 24, 33-42. . "Architectural Backgroundsjstenaissance Pictures," qual Institute of British Architects, XLI (February 10,1934), 325-328. Gilbert, Creighton. "Beato Angelico, by Stefano Orlandi," Review, Art Bulletin, XLVII (June, 1965), 273-274. Kimball, Fiske. "Luciano Laurana and the High Renaissance," Art Bulletin, X (December, 1927), 125- Moreno-Gomez, Carmen. "A Reconstructed Panel by Fra Ange- lico and Some New Evidence for the Chronology of His Work," Art Bulletin, XXXIX (1957), 183-193. Pope-Hennessy, John. "The Early Style of Domenico Veneziano," Burlington Magazine, XCIII (July, 1951), 216-223. Robertson, Giles. "A Recent Book on Fra Angelico," Review, Burlington Magazine, XCVI (June, 1954), 186. 22 Spencer, John R. "Spatial Imagery of the Annunciation in 15th Century Florence," Art Bulletin, XXXVII (1955), 273-280. ‘Whol, Hellmut. "Summary of Dissertation: Domenico Vene- ziano Studies," Marsyas, VIII (1957-59), 83. M'1111111111le1“flfiflflTfiifiifiwfliflTflflfifEs