I

v ., ~r‘

 

1.1::
. L... a

g»- r'.

rm?

.y
.t.

“A: ‘

v“:
.. "an.
‘5 ~

L...

«x; .._
y.

m- .. ,

 

.‘V r v
y":l":'I

A
.3. ‘.....-
v..,u~:.

........”.

 

SILTY LIIBFIAR

lllllllllllllllllllllllllllHlllllllll |i1|

3 1293 0090

Illlll

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

THE SAN MARCO LAST SUPPER
BY DOMENICO GHIRLANDAIO:
A DOMINICAN MESSAGE

presented by

Rachel L. Hostetter

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

MA A. degree in __A_E_I'._H_Ls_t._o ry

 

new: $436

Major professor

 

Date July 25, I991

 

0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

kn

r’ “"w “W
LIBRARY
Michigan State

1 University

L ’-

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.

N DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

' I! g

 

 

 

 

r

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Li
l

l

 

 

 

I I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU Is An Affirmative ActiorVEqual Opportunity Institution
emana-oll

 

 

THE SAN MARCO W
BY DOMENICO GHIRLANDAIO:
A DOMINICAN MESSAGE

By
Rachel L. Hostetter

A THESIS
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
Department of Art

1991

ABSTRACT

THE SAN MARCO LAST SUPPER
BY DOMENICO GHIRLANDAIO:
A DOMINICAN MESSAGE

By
Rachel L. Hostetter

The Last Supper fresco by Domenico Ghirlandaio in the guest refectory
of the Dominican Convent of San Marco, Florence is typical in its subject
matter of refectory decoration during the Renaissance. It has been virtually
dismissed in the literature as a copy of Ghirlandaio's fresco of the same
subject in the refectory of Ognissanti. But, on closer examination, one finds
there are significant differences between the two. This thesis describes those
differences, and suggests why they were made.

Ghirlandaio's earlier Last Supper of 1476, at Passignano is shown to be
the source for his compositional format, the single-image loggia, employed at
both Ognissanti and San Marco, and the heightened contemplative spirit of
the San Marco fresco. Located in the foresteria, the image at San Marco proves
to embody a message of penitence and piety directed toward the guests of the

monastery, the wealthy and powerful members of Renaissance society.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank the members of my thesis committee, Dr. Susan Bandes
and Dr. Eldon Van Liere, for their encouragement, advice and genuine
interest in my research, and express special appreciation to my thesis advisor,

Dr. Webster Smith, for his guidance and editorial assistance which helped
give shape to this project.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Figures .................................................................................................................. iii

Introduction ................................................................................................................... p.1

PART I: BACKGROUND

Variations on the Theme of the Last Supper in Art ............................................. p.3
The Last Supper in Refectory Decor ........... p.6
Dominican Imagery ..................................................................................................... p.9
The Medici and Patronage at San Marco ............................................................... p.13

PART II: CHARACTER AND PURPOSE

Lay Piety and Penitential Culture ........................................................................... p.18
The Influence of the Last Supper at Passignano .................................................. p.24
Castagno's Influence on the Last Supper at Ognissanti ..................................... p.29
The Iconography of the Ognissanti and San Marco Last Suppers .................... p.33
Contracts and Workshop Practices ......................................................................... p.43
Conclusions ................................................................................................................. p.48
Figures ........................................................................................................................... p.52
Bibliography ................................................................................................................. p.65

ii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Domenico Ghirlandaio. Laet Supper. 1480's. Fresco. Small
Refectory, San Marco, Florence, p.52.

Figure 2. Domenico Ghirlandaio. Lag; Supper. 1480. Fresco. Refectory,
Ognissanti, Florence, p.53.

Figure 3. Domenico Ghirlandaio. Lag; Supmr. 1476. Fresco. Refectory, Badia
di Passignano, p.54.

Figure 4. Fra Angelica. Last Supmr. c. 1452-53. Panel. Silver Cupboard,
SS. Annunziata, Florence, p.55.

Figure 5. Fra Angelica. gemmunien pf the Apeetlee. c. 1452-53. Panel.

Silver Cupboard, Ss. Annunziata, Florence, p.56.

Figure 6. Taddeo Gaddi. Ligpum Vitae. Lae; Supper and cher Scenes.
c.1335-40. Fresco. Refectory, S. Croce, Florence, p.57.

Figure 7. Leonardo da Vinci. Last Supper. 1495-97/ 98. Fresco. Refectory,
S. Maria delle Grazie, Milan, p.58.

Figure 8. Plan, San Marco, Florence, p.59.

Figure 9. Pietro Perugino. Last Supper. 1490-95. Fresco. Refectory,
S. Onofrio di Fuligno, Florence, p.60.

Figure 10. Cosimo Rosselli. Last Supper. 1481-82. Fresco. Sistine Chapel,
Vatican, Rome, p.61.

Figure 11. Andrea del Castagno. Last Supmr. 1447. Fresco. Refectory,
S. Apollonia, Florence, p.62.

Figure 12. Giovanni Antonio Sogliani. St. Dominic and His Monks Fed by
Angele. 1536. Fresco. Great Refectory, San Marco, Florence, p.63.

Figure 13. Fra Angelico. Communion of the Apostles. c. 1436-45. Fresco.
Cell, San Marco, Florence, p.64.
iii

INTRODUCTION

Quattrocento Florence produced a wealth of artistic activity in both the
public and private arenas as the Florentine citizenry gained a heightened
appreciation for the varied purposes to be served through art. Art created for
the church often represented a combination of political and personal
motivations as well as religious concerns. The rising status of the artist
engendered increased interaction between artist and patron. These complex
relationships require us to ask who or what determined the character of a
particular commission; and why a particular theme or mode of expression
was employed.

The Lag; Supper fresco by Domenico Ghirlandaio in the Small
Refectory of the Dominican Convent of San Marco, Florence (Figure 1), is
most often dismissed in the literature as a virtual copy of Ghirlandaio's fresco
of the same subject in the refectory of Ognissanti (Figure 2), and at first glance
this does appear to be the case. Both works depict a vaulted upper room that
appears as a direct extension of the architecture of the actual room itself,
incorporating the console and vaulted ceiling into the images. Both also
share essentially the same compositional structure, and the same floral and
ornithological iconography. But on closer examination one finds increasing
differences in detail and overall tenor. The Ognissanti fresco is the more
animated and naturalistic; the San Marco fresco seems, by comparison, staged
and still. Here, the figures and objects are almost incrementally spaced on the
picture plane, recalling his earlier, nearly iconic, rendition at the Badia of

Passignano (Figure 3).

2

The Ognissanti fresco, dated 1480 by an inscription below Christ's feet,
(MCCCCLX)O() is presumed to have been painted first. The date of the San
Marco remains problematic. There are no documents associated with the
fresco, but it has been accepted as the work of Ghirlandaio, or, at least, his
shop, since Vasari.1 Ambiguous and conflicting generalizations are made
regarding the date of execution but it is agreed that it is the latest Last Supper
by Ghirlandaio and was painted sometime in the decade following that at
Ognissanti.

The fresco by Ghirlandaio is the only Last Supmr at San Marco. In 1536
Giovanni Sogliani painted the fresco St. Dominic and His Monks Fed by
£891.52 in the Great Refectory, a work which is presumed to be a faithful copy
of a composition originally painted by Fra Angelica in that same room and
which was later destroyed in the expansion of the refectory. Fra Angelica was
summoned to Rome in 1445, where he spent most of the rest of his career
until his death in 1455.2 The building of the Small Refectory in the
foresteria may not have been completed until after his departure.

The San Marco fresco is habitually associated with the Ognissanti.
Many scholars have even assumed that it dates from the same year, 1480. In
this thesis I will show that the San Marco version is significantly different,
and that it went so far as to reinstate an element of the devotional spirit seen
in his earlier Last Supper of 1476, at Passignano. I will then ask what caused
Ghirlandaio to paint the San Marco Last Supper to be so like the Ognissanti in
format and yet so different in character? I will suggest an answer to this
question by looking into the intended function of the painting as a focus

within the foresteria or guest wing of the cloister.

 

lWalker, 190.
2Walker, 185, 231.

PART I: BACKGROUND

VARIATIONS ON THE THEME OF THE LAST SUPPER IN ART

Prior to the mid-Quattracenta it was common to include an image of

the Last Supper as part of a Passion cycle, such as that in Duccio's Maesta and

 

Giotto's Arena Chapel frescoes.3 Duccio‘s and Giotto's versions represent
one type of Last Supper composition, which is primarily narrative, and likely
to focus on the identification of the treachery of Judas. Jesus and, or, Judas
may be depicted reaching into the bowl; sometimes Jesus himself presents the
marsel to Judas, depending on the Gospel account followed. Another type,
often called the "Communion of the Apostles," depicting Christ as celebrant
of the Mass serving the host4 and, or, chalice to the Apostles, is most often
used for altarpieces due to its sacramental nature. Luca Signorelli's painting
for the Cathedral of Cortona, c. 1470-80, exemplifies this type. Between these
two types is a third, which may be called the "Institution of the Eucharist."
Paintings of this type show the company of the Last Supper at table,
illustrating Christ's establishment of the memorial practice of his salvific act
on the Cross as recounted in the Gospel texts. His actions described there

would later take the form of the Eucharist of the Mass,5 the sacrament of his

 

3Passion (Latin "passio") meaning "suffering." It refers to the suffering of Christ on the cross
and the days leading up to it. It includes the Last Supper as part of this chronology but can also
be assumed to reflect Christ's suffering due to the pending betrayal by both Judas and Peter, and
the announcement of his death.

4Host (Latin 'hostia") meaning "victim." The Eucharistic bread or wafer is so-named because
in the traditional Latin Mass it is thought of as the body of Christ, who died on the cross.
5Eucharist (Greek "eucharistein") meaning "to give thanks." Walker, 37. In Catholic
theology, the Mass is understood as the ceremonial re-enactment and re—presentation of Christ's
sacrificial death as well as of his Last Supper. Hence, we find the common pairing with the
Crucifixion.

4

continuing presence with the church, as recounted in Luke 22:19:

. . . he took bread, gave thanks and broke it and gave it
to them, saying, "This is my body given for you; do this
in remembrance of me.

The recognition of these several types of image can be seen in the panel
paintings by Fra Angelica of 1452-53 for the Silver Cupboard used for storing
the sacramental chalices in SS. Annunziata, Florence. Fra Angelica
appropriately emphasizes the theme of the sacrament by including two scenes
derived from the Last Supper account, one panel, a narrative one (Figure 4),
identifying the Betrayer, Judas, and a second panel depicting the more strictly
sacramental Communion of the Apostles. (Figure 5) Though this last work
also includes the table in the background of the scene and is often given the

title Institution of the Eucharist Christ is clearly presented as a celebrant

 

serving the host in wafer form to kneeling Apostles. This is Christ
celebrating the Mass as it was practiced in the church at that time, and
therefore, one has a sense of greater distance from the narrative account.
Many works based on the Last Supper appear on a continuum between the
extremes, conflations incorporating elements of each. Such is the case with
Ghirlandaio's frescoes, though they are primarily based on the narrative
account.

The widely-circulated 14th century Franciscan text, by an anonymous

author, entitled Meditations on the Life of Christ instructs the reader to

 

consider four things regarding the Last Supper. "The first is the literal dinner;
the second is the washing of the feet; the third is how he instituted the

Sacrament; the fourth is the most beautiful sermon that he made to them."6

5

At San Marco, we find elements of three of these aspects; the dinner itself, the
institution of the Sacrament, and the sermon that follows. This last is
perhaps the most significant to the San Marco Last Supper. The inscription,
which reads, "1 confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father conferred one on
me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom/'7 is in fact
taken from Luke's account of the homily or sermon delivered by Jesus to the

Apostles after the Supper. The author of the Meditations on the Life of Qhrist

instructs the reader then to:

. . . meditate with discretion on everything that is said and
done, for all should be deeply impressed on you, and not
abbreviated but prolonged. . .This is the memorial that,
when received as food and faithfully meditated upon by the
knowing soul, should completely inflame and inebriate it
and transform itself completely into Jesus Christ by the
strength of love and devotion. . . He is the one on whom
your salvation depends, in whose will and power it is to give
you (or not to give you) the glory of Paradise.8

 

6Miep'ei gel Duecente e del Trgente, ed. Levasti (1935), 447 ff. This passage is reproduced in
Gilbert, 1974, 385.

7Walker, 188, confirms my reference for the inscription which I did not find translated
anywhere in the literature on the San Marco W. The Latin reads "EGO DISPONO
VOBIS SICUT DISPOSUIT MIT-II PATER MEUS REGNUM UT EDATIS, ET BIBATIS SUPER
MENSAM MEAM IN REGNO MEO."

3Me_tgitatign§, 310, 314-15.

THE LAST SUPPER IN REFECTORY DECOR

The Last Supper became a common subject for refectory decoration
beginning in the 14th century. The relationship between the Last Supper and
refectories actually goes back to the 12th century, when one occasionally finds
the Last Supper as the subject of the tympanum decoration over the entrance
to a refectory such as that of Saint-Benigne in Dijon.9 In Florence alone
there are 15 Last Suppers in refectories.10 Ghirlandaio himself painted four,
possibly five,11 the first in Passignano in 1476, the Ognissanti in 1480, a third
later that year in San Donato, Polverosa,12 and the San Marco fresco
sometime (it is presumed) in the decade following. The Italian word cenacolo
is variously used to indicate both the refectory itself, and, often, the fictive
dining room of the Last Supper decoration. This double meaning of the word
signifies the importance of the association of the room with the image,

although, in fact, the Last Supper was by no means the exclusive subject for

 

Win, 24. Braunfels, 145-46.

10Braunfels, 145. See Walker for a complete survey of Florentine refectory decoration c.1350-
1500.

11In his listing of Ghirlandaio's works, Schmeckebier, 217, includes "San Donate at Polverosa
(1480), and a destroyed Last Supper in the Camaldolite monastery in Florence." He offers no
documentation for the last work and I have encountered no other reference to such a work by
Ghirlandaio. Schmeckebier does not include the San Marco LaeLSgpper in this list. However,
on p. 217 he writes "A variation of [the Ognissanti] Last Supper executed by the shop, decorates
the refectory of the Convento di San Marco in Florence."

12Davies, 168. The LeeLSppper at San Donato, Polverosa is not mentioned by Vasari.
However, documentation of payment to Domenico and Davide exists dated 31 May 1481. See
Walker, 243 and Vertova, 48, for discussion of documentary material. It is assumed that it was
a variant of the Ognissanti and San Marco frescoes. It was destroyed in 1530 when the entire
convent was demolished in preparation for the siege of Florence, since it was situated on the
outskirts of the city. The loss is unfortunate not only in itself, but because it might have helped
resolve the problematic dating of the San Marco fresco.

6

refectory decoration.

The refectory wall allowed the subject to be treated on a new
monumental scale in the 14th and 15th centuries, in response to the
flourishing of monastic communities in that time. The earliest known
refectory Last Supper, in S. Croce, Florence, was painted by Taddeo Gaddi,

c. 1335-40 (Figure 6). Although it is one of a program of images including the
Crucifixion above, flanked by four smaller scenes, and occupies less than one
third of the wall space, Eve Borsook asserts that the Last Supper is the
dominant image here.” It is closest in proximity to the viewer and Gaddi
projects the company of the Last Supper into the refectory space by placing the
figures as though they were in front of the decorative bands which frame the
other scenes. Such an attempt to make a connection with the viewer is
characteristic of Renaissance art. John Spencer introduces Alberti's treatise of
1435, On Painting, by writing, "This art will not only please the beholder but
also touch him. It is to be effective, making a direct link between itself and the
beholder."(italics mine)14 The placement of Judas an the near side of the
table is symbolic of his separation from those who would remain faithful but

also creates an undeniable association with the viewer.15 Gaddi emphasizes

 

13Borsook, 1980.

14Spencer, 27. Belting, 197, writes of this Renaissance phenomenon of association with the
beholder, that often a caption accompanied the Imago Pietatis, addressed to the viewer, and
which reinforces the pictorial rhetoric with a verbal rhetoric: 'All you who pass by, behold
and see if there is any sorrow like my sorrow.‘ (O vos 0mm qui transitis per viam attendite et
videte si est dolor sicut dolor meus!)"

15In the centuries to follow, the representation of Judas develops to identify even more directly
with the beholder. A particularly startling example is the figure of Judas in the W in
the Badia di Monteoliveto, Florence by I] Sodoma, 1515, who turns and confronts the viewer in
much the same way as the cat in the San Marco Leatjpppeg. It is generally assumed that this
is a self-portrait of the artist. Andree Madeleine Hayun writes in Qievepni Amppip Bezzi - "11
Seem; "This violation of the barrier usually assumed between player and viewer. . .
provokes the viewer into a reaction stronger than the one warranted by the context or expression
residing in the work itself. . . But the realm of Christian personages. . . could be approached as

8

the relationship by making the figures of the faithful considerably larger than
life while Judas remains merely life-size, our size, a comparatively
diminished figure. The Judas figure in the 14th and 15th centuries
admonished the beholder "to fight the Judas in his own soul."16 The frati
eating in the refectory would naturally associate themselves with the
company of apostles, who mirror their own activity and would aspire to
emulate them in other ways as well. The ambiguity presented to the monk of
himself as both one of the faithful and the Betrayer would be cause for
meditation.

The San Marco Last Supper appears in the Small Refectory of the
foresteria, which was used primarily by guests of the monastery, laymen
rather than monks.17 We must consider who these guests were and how
they were related to the monastery to determine how their presence might

have effected the image chosen for their dining hall.

 

a palpable event." In another example of Judas associated with a specific person in a treatment
of the Last Supper, Pfeiffer, 389-400, discusses Lucas Cranach's Dessau Altarpiece, c.1565,
which portrays various reformers in attendance at the Last Supper. He argues that the figure
of Judas is a portrait of Friedrich Staphylus, a one-time adherent of Lutheranism who then
betrayed the faith.

16Philip, Lotte Brand. "The Prado Epiphany by Jerome Bosch." Art Bulletin )OO(V, 1953,290.
17Lauts 49.

 

DOMINICAN IMAGERY

The Dominican Order, founded by St. Dominic in 1215, committed
itself to three "heroic" traits: mortification, prayer, and love of neighbor. The
Dominicans were mendicant, scholarly, contemplative and penitential,
focusing on preaching and the preparation necessary for that calling. It was
the first order to link a life with God devoted to prayer and study to a ministry
of salvation through penitential preaching. St. Dominic established that the
outward-going activities of the pulpit and confessional were to be the sole
focus of their lives. Theological study was to equip them to combat heresy.18
The goal of community life for the friar was to "impose on him self-control,
constant scrutiny of conscience and obedience to rule and authority. [It]
subjectls] him to a ceaseless exercise of the virtues, restraining the impetuosity
of his emotions and passions; establishing peace in his soul; and nourishing in
him fraternal charity."(italics mine)19 The common dormitory was
abandoned almost everywhere in the late 14th and 15th centuries. The heart
of the monastery became the cells, in which the friars not only slept but
studied and worked. In Braunfels' words, "The friar arms himself for his
mission privily. . . Franciscan and Dominican mysticism was the governing
force in the cultural climate of the municipal republics and free cities of the
14th and 15th centuries, and outstanding preachers played a decisive part in

the spiritual and imaginative life of the urban population."20

 

18Braunfels, 128. The Inquisition drew its inquisitors primarily from the Dominican ranks due
to their superior theological knowledge.
19Catholic Encyclopedia, 965, 972.

10

Eve Borsook contends that the mendicant orders were responsible for
most of the great narrative cycles. These cycles exemplify the great
Dominican theologian St. Thomas Aquinas' three functions for pictorial
decoration: instructing the ignorant, rendering sacred mysteries visible so that
they could be better committed to mind, and exciting devotion.21 According
to William Hood, the painted images of the Dominicans served three
additional functions: explaining the ideals of common life, recording the
history of the order and presenting models of the preaching life; all
"stimulating imitation" of the virtues depicted.22

The concept of models for imitation had become prevalent by the
Quattrocento. Texts of that time collected in Mietig' del Dueeente e del
Treeente,23 reveal an emphasis on the importance of the likeness between
Christ and the writer who is stimulated to "resemble him perfectly."24 This
concept extended to a book written in 1454 for young girls titled Garden pf
P_raye; which encouraged the reader to associate places and people known to
her with those on which she is meditating to better enter into the meaning of
the stories.25 These writings employ emulation of a model as a didactic and
spiritual tool much as we see the concept at work in Dominican images.
With their emphasis on penitential preaching and pedagogy, the Dominicans
favored subjects supporting the mission and history of the Order. The
frescoes in the Spanish Chapel at S. Maria Novella by Andrea da Firenze,

1365, exemplify these values. The Triumph of the Dominican Order, also

 

2°Braunfels, 137.

21Borsook, 1980, XIX-XX.

22Hood, 111-12.

23Miti' lDu nto 1r no ed. Levasti,1935.
“Gilbert, 1974, 384.

25Baxandall, 46.

11

called the Triumph of Repentance, depicts the friars in the form of dogs
(domini canes)25 guarding the "estates" of the world and assisting them to
Heaven. The accompanying image, the Triumph of St. Thomas Aquinas,
represents the various means to truth and knowledge: Virtues, Evangelists
and Prophets, the Arts and Sciences, and leading practitioners of each
discipline.” Identification with the beholder in private areas of the
monastery often took the form of including saints of the Order in paintings of
secondary scenes in a program of images, as well as at the Crucifixion, which
often appeared in refectories together with the Last Supper or as the primary
image. At San Marco each of the cells reserved for the novitiate includes a
Crucifixion scene with St. Dominic who kneels grasping the cross staring up
at the figure of Christ. Thus, the hopeful novice is encouraged to associate
himself with the Order and the devotion required of him as he moves toward
taking his vows. Savonarola at San Marco instructed, "one should watch and
meditate on one's crucifix always thinking 'God is dead, crucified by me.'"28
R. Scott Walker confirms the prevalence of this model of direct association, as
he points out in his study of Florentine refectory decoration that the author of
the Ligpum Vitae encourages contemplation such that one can say, with the
Apostle Paul "I am nailed to the cross with Christ." (Gal. 2:19)29

Commonly found in the houses of other orders, there are surprisingly
few images of the Last Supper in Dominican refectories. The Madonna and

Child Enthroned with Sts. Dominic, Thomas Aquinas, lohn the BaptistI Peter
Marga, and a Donor in S. Maria Novella, c.1390, and the Crucifixion with the

 

26A black and white dog is a symbol for the Dominican Order due to their black and white
robes.

27Braunfels, 144.

28Ril-tgbom. 20.

29Walker, 52, note 21.

12

VirginI lehn the Evangeliet, and St. Deminie in San Domenico, Fiesole, c.1435

are typical of the preference for depicting scenes that include saints of the
Order.30 Only Ghirlandaio's fresco at San Marco and Leonardo's fresco at

S. Maria delle Grazie in Milan opt for the Last Supper as the subject for the
refectory decor. Walker accounts for the selection at Milan as being due to a
powerful patron, Ludovico Sforza, "whose desires overrode the traditions of
the order."31 The deviation from traditional subjects at San Marco supports
the contention that the image had a specific purpose. Located in the guest
refectory rather than the principle monastic dining hall, the primary
beholders of the image would not be brothers of the Dominican friary, but
rather members of the outside community. The inscription speaks directly to
the viewer in the first person; here Christ Himself exhorts all to follow in his
footsteps. In addition to this overt directive, the character of the work as a
whale manifests aspects of the Dominican persona, inviting contemplation

and a penitential response. This fresco is the visual equivalent of a sermon.

 

30Walker, 116, 124.
31Walker, 45, 54-55, note 33.

THE MEDICI AND PATRON AGE AT SAN MARCO

San Marco came under the patronage of Cosimo il Vecchio and his
brother Lorenzo dei Medici in the 1430's, following their support of a petition
to the Council of Constance to remove the Sylvestrines from the site and give
it to the Observantine Dominicans of Fiesole.32 The convent was originally
built in 1299 for the Sylvestrines who had since allowed it to fall into grave
disrepair}3 According to Giuliano Lapaccini, author of the chronicle of San
Marco (written mid-century), Eugenius IV transferred San Marco "out of
respect" for Cosimo and his brother Lorenzo}4 It has been suggested that
Cosimo was in the first place encouraged to undertake the patronage as an act
of penance for sins of usury in recognition that "contrition and lamentation
were made possible by external acts."35

Cosimo took his patronage seriously, using his influence to obtain a tax
exemption for San Marco in 1437, and, later, in 1455, obtaining a papal bull
from Calixtus III permitting the community to accept and retain property and
annual revenues with the proviso, which seems like a contradiction, that
"the convent remain observant."36 The Dominicans, as a mendicant order,
accepted a rule of poverty. At the same time, St. Dominic, himself, allowed

his Order to accept revenues in cash because, whereas land burdened the

 

32Brown, 406, 409.
33Brown, 405, 408.
34Rubinstein, 66.
35Weissman, 265.
36Rubinstein, 66-67.

13

14

organization with work, money freed them for their scholarly and pedagogic
avocations.37

In 1437 Cosimo employed the architect Michelozzo to renovate the
dilapidated structure of San Marco. A fire in 1436 necessitated the additional
task of rebuilding the dormitory area. All of the work was finished in 1443, at
which time Cosimo and Lorenzo commissioned Fra Angelica, himself a
Dominican, to paint frescoes throughout the convent and to create the main
altarpiece.38

A contemporary source called Cosimo's expense at San Marco
"insane." The Augustinian Canon Timoteo Maffei praised the size and
decoration of San Marco, the richness of its library, and the splendor of its
furnishings while observing that they were such as "the profession of poor
religious would hardly appear to require. "39 Antoninus in his Qhrenieles
begins with a sharp attack on the comfort and sumptuous display in
Dominican houses; writing "houses and cells enlarged, vaulted, raised to the
sky and most frivolously adorned with superfluous sculptures and
paintings." However, he goes on to point out that changed conditions
required them to dispense with the rule of poverty "since otherwise it would
not be possible to maintain themselves."40 Although numbers in the
monasteries had multiplied in the century following the devastation of the
Black Death of 1348, charity declined, patrons preferring to spend on

sumptuous gifts of art and architecture.“ However, Cosimo did help in

 

37Braunfels, 126.

38Brown, 409-11. Orlandi, 80, reproduces the document of commission.
”Rubinstein, 68.

40Rubinstein, 67-68.

41Braunfels, 129, writes that many joined monastic orders to escape the burdens of life. In 1277,
414 Dominican houses are on record, in 1358 that number rose to 635, and by 1720 there were 1076.

15

meeting the living expenses of the frati with monthly gifts and an
endowment once the restoration was completed.

Cosimo's involvement extended to having a cell reserved for his use
at the monastery, a double chamber at the end of the corridor by the
Library.42 According to Christopher Hibbert, the forementioned Antoninus
Pierozzi, the Prior of San Marco who became Archbishop of Florence in 1445,
"was one of Cosimo's closest friends . . . the two men could often be found
talking together, and with other members of the community in the large cell
which Cosimo reserved for his own private use and to which he retreated by
himself when feeling the need for quiet reflection."43

The patronage of the Medici was continued after Cosimo’s death by his
son Piera and particularly his grandson Lorenzo il Magnifioa, and yet it
appears to have been significantly reduced in terms of monetary support. On
Cosimo's death Antoninus recorded in his Chronicles, "He did not leave us
anything," which suggests that the endowment mentioned by Hibbert was,
after all, not substantial.44 Lorenzo continued to give weekly alms for the
living expenses of the monks, but lacked the financial means of his
grandfather, so his patronage took the form largely of using his influence on
behalf of the monastery. An indication of this support appears in a letter of
July 1487. Lorenzo wrote that he had recently " made strong representations
to His Holiness that he reform the convent of Santa Caterina at Pisa" by
transferring it to the friars of San Marco "which today consists entirely of
worthy men, and most of them are dedicated to studies ."45 He also wielded

his power against the wishes of the general of the Order in 1471, in supporting

 

42Hibbert, 317. Known as cell #39.
43Hibbert, 74.

“Rubinstein, 67.

“Rubinstein, 74.

16

the appointment of Santi Schiattesi as vicar. He justified his action as part of
inheriting the responsibility for "the peace and welfare of our convent of San
Marco" from his father and grandfather.46 This kind of patronal interference
in the affairs of the convent may perhaps have given impetus to the decision
to feature the prominant inscription in the fresco of the Last Supper in the
guest refectory, "I confer on you a kingdom. . .", which emphasizes service
and humility an the part of those who have position in this world.

It seems unlikely that the Last Supmr was paid for with Medici money.
Lorenzo commissioned fewer works than his father and grandfather. Still, it
is likely that he would have approved of the selection of Ghirlandaio as the
artist, as he recommended Ghirlandaio for work in Santa Trinita, 1483-86, and
S. Maria Novella, 1485-90, and for employment in the Sistine Chapel. Hibbert
notes that Lorenzo's reputation as a connoisseur was such that when a new
altar panel was commissioned from Ghirlandaio for Santa Spirito, one of the
conditions stipulated was that it should be done "according to the manner,
standards and form" as would please Lorenzo though he was not the patron
for the work.47 In light of this incident, his relationship with San Marco and
his later support of Ghirlandaio, it is conceivable that Lorenzo was in some
way consulted regarding the fresco.

Since Ghirlandaio's Last Supper was presumably painted sometime in
the decade of Savonarola's rise to power at San Marco, the question of his
possible influence on that image may be raised. Savonarola came to San
Marco in 1482. Unless the fresco was painted immediately after the
Ognissanti, which some scholars do suggest, the fresco would have been

painted during Savonarola's tenure there. Savonarola was assigned as lector

 

4"Rubinstein, 80, note 66.
47Hibbert, 166-68, 323, note 8.

17

in theology to San Marco in 1482, and became prior in 1491. Ronald Steinberg
states "For [Savonarola] the only value of art lay in its didactic functions and
as an aid to spiritual or mystical experiences."43 Savonarola's advocacy or
denouncement of specific artists, artworks and styles remains in dispute,
although it does seem fairly clear that he would have been likely to condemn
such a lavish decorative quality as is to be seen in much of Ghirlandaio's
work; and it so happens that this particular fresco exhibits a certain restraint
in ornamentation. Moreover, the clear message of the inscription would
appear to be in keeping with Savonarola's concern for devotion and piety. It
is not inconceivable that this fresco would have met with Savonarola's
approval, or else did not require it, as he did not rise to full power at San
Marco until 1491, by which time this work had most likely been finished for

some years.

 

48Steinberg, Ronald M., 49.

PART II: CHARACTER AND PURPOSE

LAY PIETY AND PENITENTIAL CULTURE

The church was not an unusual gathering place for the rich and
powerful in Quattrocento Italy. Cosimo il Vecchio's private cell at San Marco
testifies to the accepted role of the monastery as a retreat for the layman for a
period of days or weeks. Ludovico Sforza, patron of Leonardo's Last Supper
in the refectory of the Dominican monastery of S. Maria della Grazie in Milan
(Figure 7), was known to have eaten dinner in that refectory twice a week.
The refectory is situated near the entrance, making it a semi-public place
rather than the sole reserve of the monastic community!‘9 By the mid-
Quattrocento there were at least 100 lay confraternities in Florence; 41% of
them met in the five main friaries, one of which was San Marco, and more
than half of these were flagellants.so According to G. A. Brucker, the
Observant orders of the Dominicans and Franciscans received the most
support from patrons due to their ability to "create a conventual experience -
austere, spiritually intense, that appealed to the upper echelons of Florentine
society."51 It should also be noted that, as a preaching order, the Dominicans
were highly educated, providing an intellectual as well as spiritual stimulus
to the visitor. Hence, we have Cosimo's retreat and the foresteria at San
Marco.

Braunfels, in his study of monastic architecture, writes "[In the

 

”Braunfels, 146, finds this location significant to the activity of the monastery.

5°i-ienderson, 233-34. These are particularly illuminating numbers since due to the Black

Death the population of Florence had shrunk by two-thirds between 1340 and 1440, from over
100,000 to between 37,000 and 40,000.

51liruclter, 52.

18

19

Renaissance] the chapter-house, refectory, and church become 'public' in
character. It is there that [the frati] sway a congregation. . .[the refectory
becomes] the scene of sermons, discussion and study, as well as the place
where leading men of the town ate together with the brethren."52 He goes
on to state that the monastery became so integrated with the life of the
citizenry that they simply added cloisters as needed to accommodate them.
Hence, S. Maria Novella ended up with seven cloisters.53 At San Marco, the
building of the second cloister, which contains the guest quarters, was among
the later sections of the construction completed by Michelozzo.54 A corridor
beside the Small Refectory gives access to the street, thereby allowing
outsiders to enter the foresteria without disturbing the functioning of the
community. (Figure 8) There are entrances to the refectory in each side wall,
one to the monastery, the other to the corridor of the foresteria to the north.
The recently built Library of San Marco was the first to allow access to the
public.55 This would indicate even greater interaction with the citizenry and
the need to accommodate their presence with a meeting-place, the refectory,
designed with their use in mind.

Besides, as Ronald Weissman has stated, "Florentine intellectuals . . .
found acceptable the penitential culture of lay religion . . . and believed that
penitential culture itself supported and was supported by the vita civile."55

 

52Braunfels, 138.

53Brauniels, 140.

5I‘Marchese, V. n Mar convent de adri r icaton in Fir nze. Florence, 1853, 75-76.
Referenced in Walker, 185. Walker, 186, notes that the Medici arms are sculpted into the
center of the ceiling of the refectory. This does not in any way indicate patronage of the fresco,
since it was probably part of the original construction by Michelozzo which was done under
Medici patronage.

55Hood, 118.

56Weissman, 265.

20

This may account for the unusual inscription selected, "I confer on you a
kingdom. . .", from the Gospel of Luke for the San Marco Last Supper.
The original context of this passage is Luke's account of the identification of

Judas and the institution of the Eucharist:

. . .[when] a dispute arose among them [ the Apostles]

as to which of them was considered to be greatest. Jesus
said to them "The kings of the Gentiles lord it over them;
and those who exercise authority over them call
themselves benefactors. But you are not to be like that.
Instead, the greatest among you should be like the
youngest, and the one who rules like the one who serves.
For who is greater, the one who is at table or the one
who serves? 15 it not the one who is at the table? But I
am among you as one who serves. You are those who

have stood by me in my trials. And I eenfer Qn you a
kingdom, jug; as my Father conferred one on me so the;

you may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom and
sit on thrones.(emphasis mine)

LUKE 22: 24-30

 

The inscription thus makes a ready connection with the diners in the small
refectory, the powerful and wealthy citizens of Florence and from abroad who
needed to be reminded of Christ's perspective on what determines a person's
position now and in the hereafter. The portion of the passage used for the
inscription politicly focuses on God's grace. The viewers, however, would
readily recognize the context within which these words were spoken and
would perhaps have added the final phrase of the passage "and sit on
thrones," to their reading of the inscription.

Maundy Thursday was the center of the confraternities' Holy Week
celebrations, for it included the scene from the Last Supper in which Christ

demonstrated his true humility: in washing his disciples feet. The groups

21

read the scriptural accounts aloud to guide their actions as they went through
the imitation of Christ's actions.” The particular passage from which the
inscription is taken may also be interpreted as an encouragement to service
or, more specifically, patronage; just as Christ, the King, descended from his
high position to serve mankind, so should they. If the appeal to follow
Christ's example failed, the underlying doctrine of penance, so prevalent in
the Renaissance, remained a powerful motivation.

In his account of Christ's so-called sermon to the Apostles following

 

the Last Supper, the author of the Meditations on the Life of Christ widely
read in Quattrocento Italy, directs the reader to ". . . Meditate how. . . [Christ]
instructed them affectionately and solicitously, speaking of charity many
times: 'This is my commandment, that you love one another; and in this all
will know you as my disciples, if you love one another" (John xiii, 34, 35, xv,
12) . . . meditate how He admonished them to observe His commandments,
saying in the sermon 'If you love me, observe my commandments' (John xiv,
15), and 'If you observe my commandments, you will dwell in my love' (John
xv, 10)."58 The inscription in the San Marco "Last Supper" derives from
Luke’s greatly abbreviated account of this same period of instruction
following the Supper. It may be seen as Christ's final prescription for his
followers.

Marvin Becker, in his study of lay piety in Early Renaissance Florence,
identifies the emphasis placed on the imitatio Cristi, finding it was directly
related to a concern for "the possibility of realizing a 'true' Christian
community where affluent citizens would be fully cognisant of their social

responsibilities. . . the stress on charity and love might indeed look evasive

 

57Henderson, 242-43.
”Mahatma 315.

22

until one realizes that they surfaced with compelling social forces. These
virtues alone could foster the family, guard the city, and even enlarge a
Florentine empire. Men were regarded as God's creatures charged with
solemn obligation to care for one another; man's dignity did not reside in
solitary experience or in strategic personal relationships. Neither pride of
caste nor cultivation of autonomous feelings of selfhood were sufficient to
endorse this dignitas; instead, man's consciousness of his solidarity with all
men was quintessential."59 The inscription at San Marco, "And I confer on
you a kingdom. . . ," resonates with these implications. Becker notes that
according to contemporary sources "The [monk] . . . took the easier path
toward salvation living under vows, while the [layman] selected the hard
road when remaining in the world of temptation."6o Thus, the San Marco
guest refectory delivers a message of exhortation, grace and warning
combined to those who traveled the "hard road."

In a letter addressed to Antonio Zoccoli, Giles of Viterbo established
the critical nature of "the outpouring of love which the Incarnation effected
and symbolized. Through this love man is transformed into 'God' and
rendered immortal. The Incarnation, as a work of love, evokes from man a
response in love. Thus charity is seen as the principle duty of the Christian
life." The Catholic theologian John W. O'Malley's commentary on this letter,

in his study of Renaissance sermons, Praise and Blame in Renaissance Rome

 

addresses man's necessary response in the acceptance of grace. . .Man's
dignity or, in this instance, man's transformation is not viewed as assigning
him a niche in a hierarchy of honors, but as imposing upon him a mission. It

also imbues him with a holy dynamism that enables him to fulfill his

 

59Becker, 192, 196.
60Becker, 191, refers to Poggio and Lorenzo Valla as his sources.

23

mission. That dynamism derives from the love of God poured into men's
hearts."61 Duty and redemption are inextricably intertwined, the
consummate imitatio Cristi: "I confer on you a kingdom, just as my Father
conferred one on me, so that you may eat and drink at my table in my

kingdom [and sit on thrones.]"

 

61O'Malley, 173. Text of the letter is reproduced in O'Malley "Man's Dignity, God's Love, and
the Destiny of Rome: A Text of Giles of Viterbo," yiater, 3 (1972), 389-416.

THE INFLUENCE OF THE LAST SUPPER AT PASSIGN AN O

The San Marco Last Supper exhibits a marked stillness, as if capturing a
moment frozen in time. The scene is quiet, each Apostle self-contained and
introspective, as though he were an exemplar of solitary Dominican
contemplation. An almost regular pattern is created by the figures alternating
with their shadows across the picture plane, emphatically punctuated by the
gilded discs of their nimbuses. This almost mathematic regularity recalls the
Laet Supper at Passignano, where each Apostle is framed within his own wall
panel lined up with the perspective grid of the floor tiles. The circular halos
framing their heads have a distinctly iconic quality. The similarity in tone
between the Passignano and San Marco frescoes is undeniable.

The fresco at Passignano, dated 1476, marks Ghirlandaio's earliest
surviving and very likely first portrayal of the Last Supper. The Badia or
Abbey Church of Passignano was founded by St. Giovanni Gualberto, who
also established the Vallombrosan Order and died there in 1073. The Order
takes its name from the forest of Vallombrosa, southeast of Florence, and
incorporated many eremitic elements into the Rule of St. Benedict, including
poverty, strict enclosure and perpetual silence. The church was rebuilt in the
13th century, and enlarged and remodeled in the 15th century.62 At that time
the Abbott, Don Isidoro del Sera, originally engaged another painter ,
Bernardo di Stefano Rosselli, for the task of decorating the refectory. But in
1474, after completion of two lunetted images in the upper region of the wall,
Don Isidoro, apparently dissatisfied, paid Rosselli for his work and sought

 

62Walker, 169.

24

25

another painter.63

Ghirlandaio was commissioned to complete the original scheme as
designated by the Abbott. At that end of the Refectory the two sections of
vaulting, supported in the middle by a console of pietra serena, divide the
upper part of the wall into two lunettes, and thus eliminate the possibility of
a centrally located Crucifixion in this area. The Abbott designated an
Expulsion of Adam and Eve and a Murder of Abel for the left-hand and right-
hand lunettes, respectively.64 These scenes were completed by Rosselli and
remained when Ghirlandaio accepted the project. The lunettes were
separated from the area below by an architrave with a polychrome decorative
frieze, leaving only a narrow horizontal band of wall for the Last Supper.
Theologically, the sin of Adam and Eve and their subsequent expulsion from
Paradise established mankind's need for salvation. Cain's murder of his
brother Abel, the innocent victim who like Christ offered a sacrifice acceptable
to God, is seen here as a prefiguration of the Betrayal of Christ by one of his
own disciples, Judas. The Last Supper links these events, as the betrayal by
Judas brought about the final sacrifice that would expunge man's guilt; the
painting of the Last Supper for this refectory wall at once fills out the space
and rounds out a cohesive program of images. Perhaps most significant for
the study of Ghirlandaio's Last Supmrs, the project at Passignano confronted
the unique compositional challenge posed by the central positioning of the
console, and the division of the upper part of the wall into lunettes, which
prohibited the use of a traditional arrangement of scenes, and inadvertently
presented Ghirlandaio with the solution he needed several years later for the

refectory decorations of Ognissanti and San Marco. There, faced with the

 

63Vertova, 42.
64Vertova, 42 and Walker, 169. Walker reproduces the two lunetted images.

26

same central obstruction, a console, with two vaults springing from it on
either side, forming lunettes, he translated the two lunetted registers of
Passignano into two fictive vaulted bays, as though to create a loggia open to
the garden beyond, and thus establishing a single, coherent illusion that
functions as an extension of the refectory space itself. The fictive vaults are
painted as the star-studded heavens, like other ceilings at that time. The
actual vaulting of the room may have originally been painted in the same
way, enhancing the illusion of real presence.65 At San Marco, moreover,
Ghirlandaio created an additional link between the actual and fictive
architecture; the pietra serena consoles here have painted counterparts in the
form of supports for the arches that frame the outdoor vista: a Corinthian
pilaster and a Corinthian column or pier in the middle, thereby creating an
even greater sense of continuity with the true architectural space.

This type of illusionistic extension of a vaulted room was so successful
that it became the standard in the century to follow. Even when an artist
incorporated additional scenes, these occur in the landscape viewed beyond
the upper room rather than as the distinctly separate registers of the refectory
decor as seen at S. Croce and S. Apollonia. For example, the Laet Supper
fresco by Perugino, 1493-96, in the Great Refectory of S. Onofrio di Foligno,
Florence (Figure 9) includes the Agony in the Garden as if it were taking place
in the hills beyond the center arch of the loggia. In Cosimo Rosselli's get
m of 1481-82 in the Sistine Chapel (Figure 10), three events occur in the
landscape beyond, the Agony in the Garden on the left, the Betrayal in the
center and the Crucifixion on the right. Rosselli broke with convention by
placing these scenes in chronological sequence, rather than giving the

Crucifixion its traditional, hieratic placement in the center. But this sequence

 

65Walker, 35-36, makes this suggestion.

27

may be deemed appropriate for an image in a Passion cycle with a narrative
emphasis. This ordering of the scenes also serves to reinforce the impact of
the identification of Judas as the Betrayer in the primary image, by depicting
the actual betrayal in the Kiss of Judas directly above the major players.
Rosselli adopted the scheme even though it was not necessitated by
architectural features, finding the proportions of the format suited to the
register assigned him by the project.

Another compositional element originating at Passignano is the
positioning of Jesus, John and Judas with regard to the console. The central
location of this feature made impossible the expected central placement of
Christ, as at S. Croce. There, Gaddi balanced the placement of Judas to the
right of Jesus in front of the table by placing John to the left of Jesus, next to
Peter. John is collapsed on the table, creating a dark void above him that
counterbalances the dark mass of Judas to the fore. This void also provides a
clear visual field for Christ's gesture of blessing. At Passignano Ghirlandaio
simply moves Christ to the left of the console to avoid the appearance of its
piercing the top of his head and places Judas just to the right. John, in his
recumbent position between the two, rests his head nearly an the table and
thus out of the way of the console. This same sequence is repeated at
Ognissanti and San Marco. This compositional response to the intervention
of the console also brings out the implication that at this moment, at the table
of the Last Supper, the Apostle beloved by Christ is virtually eclipsed by Judas,
the Betrayer.

Vertova states that Domenico sent his brother, Davide, and assistants
ahead to Passignano so that they would execute the "less difficult" parts and
would limit his time in that remote locale,66 suggesting that it may be largely

28

a shop work. The self-containment of the individual Apostles, with no
interaction occurring between them, is apt for a Vallombrosan community,
which practiced enclosure and perpetual silence. The simple forms of
Apostles facing forward and placed behind the long white stripe of the
tablecloth establish a sense of order and clarity. Vertova considers this
regularized and stilled composition to be merely static, even a feeble effort, in
which "the heads are treated as busts as if any variety introduced would be a
desperate measure."67 And yet this careful placement and externally placid
countenance of the figures establish the character of the work. After an
attempt at Castagnesque activity at Ognissanti, Ghirlandaio was to reinstate
some of that contemplative quality at San Marco.68

The Last Supper at Passignano has been little known due to its rather
remote locale, and the Vallombrosan practice of enclosure, and, more
recently, its status as private property to which few outsiders have gained
access. Yet this early work provided the basis for Ghirlandaio's much-
admired composition of the Last Supper at Ognissanti, and, even more so, the

painting of the same subject at San Marco.

 

66Vertova, 44-45. This is a documented work, with records of payments made to Domenico and
Davide in 1476 and 1477. See Walker, 176, for manuscript sources.

~67Vertova, 45.
68Walker, 169. The fictive balustrade, and probably, the two outer rows of tile were added
later so the beholder originally had a greater sense of proximity to the scene.

CASTAGNO'S INFLUENCE ON THE LAST SUPPER AT OGNISSANT I

The San Marco Apostles have an introspective air with eyes downcast
or averted. The only eye contact made with the beholder is by the cat, who
stares pointedly out at the viewer. The Apostles' gestures record a variety of
meanings undetectable in their becalmed though melancholy faces: prayer,
benediction, and hands folded as if in resignation. One Apostle points toward
Judas while another indicates himself as if to ask "Am I the one?" Peter
grasps his knife foreshadowing events to come, when he would cut off a
man's ear at Jesus' arrest.

The Ognissanti LeeLSpppe; has been described as a "gathering without
center"69 though it anticipates the naturalism embodied in Leonardo's later
work.70 Walker states that Ghirlandaio was at the peak of his artistic powers
when he created these "rippling dramatic movements" toward Christ in
confrontation with Judas in a scene that is "intensely naturalistic.”1 It is
true that the Apostles are depicted as reacting to Christ's revelations of both
the betrayal and the institution of the New Covenant. They lean toward one
another, expressing dismay and puzzlement in their faces as well as through
posture and gesture. Their subtle halos hover above their heads in stark
contrast to the metallic discs of San Marco. Their garments are simple and
unadomed, compared to the gold-trimmed costumes of the company at San
Marco. The Apostles at Ognissanti are more "human;" they embody

 

69Wolfflin, 25, uses the phrase.

70Walker, 13, classifies Leonardo's "Last Supper" in S. Maria delle Grazie, Milan,
c.1495-97/ 98, as a Florentine work.

71Walker, 70.

29

30

ambiguous, confused emotions.

A definitive comparison of the central grouping of Christ, John, Peter
and Judas at Ognissanti with the corresponding figures at San Marco is
impossible due to the 17th century repainting of the head of Christ,72 and yet
it is notable that at Ognissanti John merely rests on Christ's breast, in keeping
with the gospel account, whereas at San Marco he appears emphatically
collapsed on the table (as at Passignano), asleep, or, as is sometimes suggested,
fainted in shock at the words he has heard. The author of the Meditap‘ene en
the Life ef §l_1rist emphasizes John's special devotion to Christ, presenting it
as exemplary. "John drew close to Him and did not part from Him. . . no one
was drawn to Him as faithfully and familiarly as John."73

Ognissanti was a Benedictine monastery for the Prati Umiliati of the
Arte della Lana, the wool guild. The land was given to the Umiliati in 1250,
close to the Arno, whose water was necessary for treating and dying wool.
They observed personal and community poverty, and, as manual laborers,
they also taught weaving and the working of wool to the urban poor.74 They
were craftsmen rather than scholars, perhaps more given to natural human
exchange than the Dominicans, whose interactions with the outside world
occurred primarily with the high-born of Florentine society rather than the

poor. The 13th century structure of the Umiliati was rebuilt in 1480, the

 

72Borsook, 1980, 116. Christ's head was repainted on a fresh patch of plaster, likely
destroying Ghirlandaio's work, in the 17th century by Carlo Dolci because of damage due to
humidity. The head is clearly in a different hand, a gilded halo frames Christ's head though
all of the Apostles halos hover discreetly above. Christ's halo is also cut off by the cornice
above the wooden bench on which he sits. The discrepancy between the sinopia, which is still
extant, which depicts a much more intimate scene as Christ leans his head toward John's, and
Dolci's repainting does not necessarily indicate a change of mind on Ghirlandaio's part because
the area of Dolci's repainting would allow for the position indicated by the sinopia.

”Madeira 310-
74Walker, 177.

31

refectory situated between two of three cloisters.75

The Ognissanti Last Supper is usually considered dependent on a work
of Andrea del Castagno, probably a lost composition in S. Maria N uova of
1457, described as depicting a so-called triclinium situated in an upper room
much like that found in Ghirlandaio's later compositions.76 From payment
documents and the descriptions of those who saw it, we know of a L_as_t
Supper; there in the "service" dining hall of the hospital. Comparison is often
made between Castagno's earlier Lag; Supper at S. Apollonia and
Ghirlandaio's fresco at Ognissanti. However, since 8. Apollonia was in
clausura77 at the time, and documentation indicates that the fresco at S.
Maria Nuova was still visible in 1677, any Castagnesque influence must
derive from that now lost work. The Laet Supper in S. Apollonia does not
include the "triclinium" described in the later work, but may yet reveal some
other influences on Ghirlandaio and the Ognissanti in particular. Castagno
made his fresco cenacolo an extension of the room itself as Ghirlandaio was
to do to an even greater extent at both Ognissanti and San Marco, since the
device is significant to the effective implication that the monks dine in the
company of the Apostles.78

The single-image format shared by Ghirlandaio's frescoes is virtually
dictated by the architecture of the rooms. Luisa Vertova notes that by the
mid-Quattrocento most refectories were built with lower, vaulted ceilings

rather than a high truss roof such as that of the S. Croce refectory painted by

 

75Walker, 177-78.
76Hartt, 355.
77Walker, 236, and Hartt, 263-64 , confirm that S. Apollonia was in clausura and therefore

inaccessible to the public, including artists. Hartt notes that the S. Apollonia Last Supmr was
virtually unknown until the Kingdom of Italy expropriated monasteries in the late 19th

century.
78I-lorster, 25.

32

Taddeo Gaddi.79 Ghirlandaio was commissioned to paint the Ognissanti
fresco the same year the refectory there was built,80 and San Marco had been
rebuilt by Michelozzo in the new style at mid-century. A succession of scenes
would be decidedly cramped in such a space. As noted above, this
compositional format devised by Ghirlandaio became popular as an effective
solution to that very problem.81

A second factor to recognize regarding Castagno's influence on the get
S_uppg at Ognissanti is his realism, seen in the heightened emotion expressed
through pastures and gestures, and reinforced by the intense corporeality of
each and every figure. He generates an impression of energy and agitation
rather than stillness. Castagno was much admired in Florence, so it is not
inconceivable that Ghirlandaio sought to emulate aspects of his approach to
the Last Supper at Ognissanti, except that here Castagno's energy and
concentration are made to tend towards mere agitation.82 At San Marco ,

on the other hand, the figures hardly move at all.

 

”Vertova, . Brown, 155.
80Borsook, 1980, 116.

81A few of the examples of refectory Mm adopting this format, which are included in
Vertova, are: Cosimo Rosselli, San Giorgio all Costa, Florence, 1488; Giovanni Sogliani, Santa
Maria de' Candeli, Florence, 1514; Franciabigio, Convento della Calza, Florence, 1514; Andrea
del Sarto, San Salvi, Florence, 1520. Even Leonardo follows this general plan for his "Last
Supper" fresco.

82Gilbert, 1974, 383.

THE ICON OGRAPHY OF THE OGNISSANTI
AND SAN MARCO LAST SUPPERS

Ghirlandaio had a love for detail and for meticulous craftsmanship.
These preoccupations of his are not surprising for the son of a goldsmith,83
and the detailed realism of Northern art also had its effect on him. A close
relationship is assumed between his fresco of St. Jerome at Ognissanti and
Van Eyck's small panel of the same subject, as both works exhibit a profusion
of symbolic objects, careftu placed and painted with exacting clarity.“
Ghirlandaio's Last Supmrs bear out Wolfflin's remarks in his book ges_si_c_
Apt in reference to the Ognissanti: "Ghirlandaio had to deal with a public
which would examine every detail with attention, which had to be regaled
with rare plants, birds and other animals, and he paid particular attention to
the setting of the table, even counting out so many cherries to each of the
company."85

Beyond the differences in iconographic elements, which will be
described below, one notes an overall emphatic clarity of presentation in the
San Marco fresco lacking in the Ognissanti. The scrupulous placement of
elements invites the viewer to "read" the work, moving from one object to
the next. The pictorial space is shallower, and, thus, with the effect of being
closer up, more accessible, to the viewer. The perspective of the tabletop is
tilted further, as though to better identify the foodstuffs scattered across it. On

close examination, one finds it intentionally didactic, and thus in keeping

 

83Hartt, 355.
84Antes-Lewis, 111.
85Woltilin, 26.

33

3 4
with the charge of a Dominican monastery. In 1480 Cristoforo Landino

described Fra Angelica, the quintessential Dominican artist, as "easily
understood and good for edifying and instructing people."86 His words
could also be used to describe Ghirlandaio's Mpg though it may have
required a particularly learned audience.

Precedent for such a strong intellectual didacticism does exist. Taddeo
Gaddi's fresco at S. Croce (Figure 6) is a prime example. Above the get
Suppe; are five scenes: in the center the Allegogy of the Crese illustrating the
Tgaetatpe gui ligpum vitae dig‘tpr, once thought to have been written by
Bonaventure, which tells the story of the legendary identity of the Tree of Life
and the wood from which the cross was carved. Gaddi cited the 12 fruits of
faith on scrolls ingeniously presented as branches of the "tree" or cross. The
Crucifixion would of course be a natural theme for a church dedicated to S.
Croce. Saints from the Order appear at the foot of the tree and a pelican
perched at the top signifies self-sacrifice on behalf of others.87 (The quail at
San Marco is the symbolic equivalent.) The four flanking scenes depict the
stories of Benedict in a cave receiving food at the upper right, Mary
Magdalene anointing Christ's feet in the house of Simon at the lower right,
Louis of Toulouse, a more contemporary saint, serving a banquet to the poor
at the lower left, and Francis receiving the stigmata at the upper left. These
scenes correspond with the themes of the two primary registers, the
Qrueifixien and the Laet Supmr.88 This refectory was used by students of the
school attached to S. Croce, and the fresco would have provided rich content
for them, involving Biblical themes, stories of Saints of the Order, and a

literary work for spiritual and intellectual enrichment. This fresco is directed

 

8éBaxandall, 150.
87Braunfels, 146.
88Gilbert, 1974, 375.

35

toward its specific audience, as are the W at Ognissanti and San
Marco.

Both the Ognissanti and the San Marco Last Suppers share a plethora
of symbolic elements: the cypress refers to death and the Crucifixion; the
palm, to victory; the citron and orange trees, to fidelity and purity - virtues
often associated with the Virgin Mary.39 These trees together represent the
means by which man receives grace: the Incarnation through the Virgin, the
Crucifixion and the victory of the Resurrection. A dove representing the
Holy Spirit and a peacock looking back into the room and signifying
immortality, or the all-seeing church, perch in the side windows, and thus
indicate the presence of God in the world. Above the trees a quail attacks a
sparrow hawk (far upper right at Ognissanti, upper right of the left arcade at
San Marco.) It was understood that the quail was prepared to sacrifice himself
to protect his young. The pheasant and quail allude to the Resurrection.
Sparrows, the lowliest of creatures who are nevertheless cared for by God the
Father, fly in the background of Ognissanti and perch on the cornice at San
Marco. According to Eve Borsook, this ornithological scheme exemplifies a
subtle medieval symbolism.90

Both works display vases of flowers on the cornice crowning each
wooden bench. The Ognissanti flowers are roses; white for purity and red for
martyrdom. They are arranged in a vase which bears the monogram of the
community, All Saints, a two-armed cross with O S S Ci (anee Saneti)

inscribed within its arms.91 The two vases flanking the scene at San Marco

 

89According to Ferguson the orange can also refer to the Fall of Man. Vertova indicates the
citrus trees in the San Marco are more exotic but easily read symbolically.

90Borsook, 1980, 116.

”Walker, 179, gives this explanation for the monogram. He also identifies the vase as
majolica, on p. 70.

36

hold lilies on the left, for purity, and a variety of other flowers, unidentified
at this time, on the right.

On the tables are strewn cherries symbolizing the sweetness of
character which is derived from good works.92 Cherries were commonly
included as part of the menu of special banquets called pietanze, given on
special occasions such as feast days of the church year and feast days of the
patrons of the monastery. Occasionally pietanze were offered to a particular
community by outside laymen; a reflection of the "generosity of secular
benefactors."93 The cherries would recall, then, a particular kind of
ceremonial meal to the beholders, one in which they themselves may have
participated. The Ognissanti also includes two peaches carefully placed at
either end of the table. These may refer to the silence of virtue, or a virtuous
heart and tongue, an aspiration appropriate for the IImiliati.94 The salt in
salvers, which symbolizes the prevention of death and decay, and the bread
and wine are elements of the traditional Passover supper. No other
indications of the Passover meal, such as the paschal lamb, so often included
in renderings of the Last Supper, remain. The bread and wine make
reference, at the same time, to the Eucharist, though the depiction of the
loaves and carafes of wine instead of the wafer and chalice, which often
appear in their place, prevent the scene from moving clearly into the
sacramental realm. The paired carafes of water and wine reflect the
Eucharistic symbolism in which water-mixed-with-wine has come to

represent Christ's humanity joined with his divinity in the salvific act of his

92Ferguson, 29.
93Walker, 25-26, gives documentation of specific examples for which there exist payment
records and menus.

 

94Ferguson, 36, for the meaning of the peach.

3 7
Incarnation.95 The golden wine at Ognissanti remains a puzzling anomaly.
The San Marco fresco offers the traditional red of Christ's sacrifice in his
blood.

The table sits on a raised platform. The U-shape, referred to earlier in
the discussion of the "triclinium" purportedly in Castagno's lost work at S.
Maria N uova, may be an oblique reference to the Roman triclinium.96 This
multi-sided table is another element that becomes commonplace in later
representations of the Last Supper. At Ognissanti, either end of the wooden
bench built into the alcove bears the monogram of the community - another
instance of association with its audience. The linen tablecloths in both
frescoes, embroidered in blue at either end, are of a type that had been
manufactured in Perugia since the 11th and 12th centuries. The Ognissanti
bears a hypogriffe design, winged dragons which sometimes refer to the
Saviour. The hypogriffe may derive from Castagno, for it adorns the ends of
the bench at S. Apollonia and may also have been a part of the iconography at
S. Maria N uova.

The Ognissanti includes a brass salver and ewers used for the foot
washing, which give the work a more domestic air. Thus the scope of the
Ognissanti comprises that event prior to the Supper, to indicate Christ's
humility in service to his disciples. The San Marco, on the other hand,
encompasses the events following the Supper by means of the inscription. As

read in its original Biblical context, this inscription, "I confer on you a

95Ferguson, 45.

95mm, A. "The Triclinium in Religious Art." Journal pf the Warburg Inetit_u_te 2 (1938-39):
271-76. Blunt notes that in Rome in 1588 a treatise titled De Triglinio was published by Pedro
Chacon or Petrus Ciacconus based an archaeological findings. Before this time, there may have
been knowledge of the term but a lack of accurate understanding. It is only in understanding the
triclinium at which one reclines, that one can fully comprehend details of certain events
described in scripture such as John leaning on Christ's bosom at the Last Supper and Mary
Magdalen standing behind Christ to anoint his feet.

 

38

kingdom. . .", proclaims an attitude of service toward others, but the story of
the washing of the feet is clearly the more servile in its emphasis, and thus is
in keeping with the charge of the Umiliati, compared to the more lofty
vocation of San Marco and its guests.

The company's feet are bare, recalling Christ's servanthood in the
washing of their feet, and a reminder that this is holy ground. Judas alone is
seated on his now standard stool in front of the table, the only figure excluded
from the elevated platform.97 Christ raises his hand in benediction. Only
the San Marco fresco depicts Judas wearing sandals - yet another indication of
his separation from the rest of the company and of his readiness to leave.
This Judas holds the morsel up in his hand for all to see. It is also he that is
accompanied by the cat, who confronts the beholder.

The figure of the cat behind Judas presents his mirror image in form as
well as in deceptive character.98 It is the only figure other than Judas on the
near side of the table. The cat was long considered one of the animal forms
assumed by the devil; as the cat tries to catch mice, so the devil tries to capture
the soul.99 This element may also derive from the account in John 13: 27
which says "As soon as Judas took the bread [as he has here], Satan entered
him." Vertova contends that the cat is the counterpart of Judas and an enemy
of the Domini Canes, the Dominican Dogs.

A cat was believed to be innocent as a kitten and devilish in old age.100

 

97Judas' placement on a stool apart from the rest of the company is sometimes explained in

that, as purse-bearer, he was delayed in his arrival due to making the final arrangements for
the supper and a place had to be added for him.

98According to Jobes, 296, the cat symbolizes ". . . cruelty, egotism, flattery, infidelity, love of

ease and luxury, perversity, prowling, slyness, thievery, treachery. . .One who is calculating,
false" and treasonous.

99Metford, 60-1.
100Jobes, 297.

39

The Biblical scholar, Johann Kaspar Lavater wrote that Judas "acted like
Satan, but like a Satan who had it in him to be an Apostle."101 Judas
represents evil, but he is aligned with it of his own choosing. Thereby, his
presence is a warning to "fight the Judas in one's own soul." Wayland Hand
identifies the period of the 14th - 17th centuries as the golden age of Judas
lore,102 when Judas became a part of popular culture and its literature such as
the Golden Legend, which was written by the Dominican, Jacobus de
Voragine, in the 13th century. The more than 500 manuscript copies in
existence today testify to its wide availability and influence.103 In this account
of the life of Judas, the seed of evil is in him from birth and, though he fights
it, he finally succumbs to that evil nature, betraying his master, Christ, to
whom he had turned for his salvation, in petty anger.1°4

Yet another view casts Judas as a hero who knowingly betrayed Christ
in order to bring about man's salvation. This interpretation is often justified
by the text of John 3: 27b, often misinterpreted as a directive from Jesus to
Judas in saying, "What you are about to do, do quickly." This heresy harks

 

101Source unknown.
1°2Hand, 296.
103de Voragine, vii of the Introduction.

104de Voragine, 172. The legend of the life of Judas , considered apocryphal, is told in the
Legend of Saint Matthias, who took Judas place among the ranks of the Apostles after Judas'
death. Before his conception, Judas' mother Ciborea dreamed that she would bear a son so evil
that he would be the downfall of his race. When he was born, she could not bear to raise him so
she put him in a basket, and set it to sea, whence it arrived on the shore of the Island of
Iscariot. The Queen found him and raised him as her son. He later killed her true son, his
"brother," and fled. He came to occupy a place of honor in Pilate's court. In the service of
Pilate, he killed his father to gain his land, and married his mother. Upon finding out the true
identities of his victim and his wife, he resolved to do penance by attaching himself to the
company of Jesus who made him his disciple and his purse-bearer. Shortly before the Passion,
Judas became angered at the wastefulness of Mary Magdalen, who anointed Jesus' feet with oil
that could have been sold for 300 pence. Hence he resolved to betray Jesus to the Jews.

This story attaches elements of Moses and Oedipus to Judas, heaping on him the crimes
of fratricide, patricide, and incest, making him wholly evil.

40

back to the 2nd century, when it was taught by a gnostic group known as the
Cainites and continued to resurface throughout the history of the church.105
Others held that Judas simply wanted to force Jesus' hand in bringing about
the Kingdom of God on earth.

Without question, the interpretation of the role and character of Judas
is complex. The orthodox view, however, maintains his guilt. That is the
understanding that would have been shared by the Dominican friars at San
Marco and their learned guests. The phrase "the Lord Jesus on the night
when he was betrayed" (I Cor. 11: 23), with which Paul begins his account of
the Lord’s Supper, shows that the betrayal belonged to the Passion kerygma
from the earliest days of the church,106 and was seen as the point at which the
final act of the plan of salvation was put into action. In the Golden Legend,
Jacobus de Voragine quotes St. Augustine as saying, "The Redeemer came,
and the deceiver [Satan] was vanquished; and what did our Redeemer do to
‘him who held us in bondage? He held out to him the mousetrap of His cross,
and placed therein the bait of His blood."107 Thus he reminds us who is in

control. Dante relegated Judas to the lowest level of hell in his Inferno the

 

ninth circle, calling it Giudecca, the Place of Judas, which was to be occupied
by traitors to kindred, country, and guests. Treason against a benefactor was of
the worst kind; treason against God the ultimate betrayal and absurdity.108

At San Marco, Judas' master addresses the beholder in the figure of the cat. In
conjunction with the inscription, that beholder is offered a choice; the

responsibility of a kingdom and Paradise, or the lowest circle of Hell.

 

105Gartner, vii.
106Jerernias, 95, note 5.
107de Voragine, 213.
losRussell, 135, 221.

41

Cats, and also dogs, do appear occasionally in scenes of the Last Supper
before Ghirlandaio, although at San Marco we have only the implication of a
confrontation between the Dominicans and the Deceiver. The Last Supper
fresco by the shop of Stefano di Antonio Vanni in 8. Andrea at Cercina,
dating to the 1470's, includes several dogs and cats playing with bones and
scraps that litter the floor. At the right, two stand off against each other.109 At
San Matteo, an earlier fresco of 1466, by Stefano de Antonio Vanni himself, a
small dog eats on the floor in front of the table, a symbol of faithfulness and
devotion.110 Cosimo Rosselli includes a cat and dog facing off against each
other warily in the foreground of the Last Supmr in the Sistine Chapel
(Figure 10.)111

Following the San Marco fresco, they appear with greater frequency
and with more aggressive symbolic posture. A tiger-striped cat at Judas' feet
looks out with him at the beholder at S. Maria Regli Angeli, Lugano, by
Bernardino Luini (early 16th century.) He is a predator. Another tiger-striped
cat, in the center of the image by Judas' feet in the Cappella del Corpus
Domini in S. Giovanni Evangelists, Brescia by Moretto Da Brescia (early 16th
century), stares, alert and intentional, at a dog which licks the floor, unaware
of the attention he is receiving from his enemy. A sketch by Peter Paul
Rubens portrays Judas staring out at the spectator, holding his purse in his
hand beneath his chin, while a dog rests, vulnerable, under his feet. Clearly

not simply domestic touches, these works are only several examples of the

 

109Walker, 154.

110Walker, 145.

1“ Ghirlandaio was working in the Sistine Chapel in 1481-82 and perhaps influenced
Rosselli's thinking along these lines if indeed the San Marco commission was already
completed prior to his departure for Rome, or was at least underway. Gilbert, 1974, 383 states
Rosselli's work is "wholly" dependent on Ghirlandaio's "Last Supper" compositions.
However, he may simply be referring to the format which could be derived from Ognissanti.

42

symbolic inclusion of these animals in the Last Supper. That many other Last,
Suppers involving cats and dogs may be found in less important locations by
the hands of lesser known artists only confirms the recognized symbolic
effectiveness of these elements.

A particularly startling depiction of a cat appears in Lorenzo Lotto's
Annunciation of the 1520's in S. Maria Sopra Mercanti Recanati. The cat
leaps away from the entering angel, back arched in terror, for the
announcement of the Incarnation marks his ultimate demise. In Veronese's
Feast in the House of Levi a cat plays under the table in front of Christ, while
a dog positioned in front of John faces it with a watchful gaze. Perhaps here
we find a foreshadowing of the events soon to follow which will fulfill God's
curse on the serpent following the Fall "he [man] will crush your head, and
you will strike his heel." (Gen. 3: 156) The author of the letter to the Romans
refers to the Church as the instrument of the completion of Christ's
redemptive act, when he writes "The God of peace will soon crush Satan
under your feet." (Romans 16: 20a) A representation of the Last Supper, such
as that at San Marco, carries with it all of these implications as the motive

that leads to Christ's salvific act.

CONTRACTS AND WORKSHOP PRACTICES

One may ask then how much direction it is likely Ghirlandaio received
for the commission for the fresco at San Marco. Ghirlandaio was a
businessman and exhibited a willingness to follow very specific instructions
from the client. The contract with Giovanni Tornabuoni for frescoes in S.
Maria Novella dated September 1, 1485 specifies exact pigments to be used,
details the architectural setting desired, delineates the subject matter and
format, and acknowledges Giovanni's authority to dictate every aspect of the

work:

. . . And in all the said stories and pictures mentioned
above, and on the whole of the wall of the said chapel, the
ceiling, arch and the columns inside and outside the said
chapel, he is to paint and depict figures, buildings, castles,
cities, mountains, hills, plains, water, rocks, garments,
animals, birds, and beasts, of whatever kind eLseeme

me: t2 the eaid Qiepenni, but according to the
stipulation of colours and gold as above; and he shall apply

and paint all the arms which the eaid Giovanni ehould

' onan artac din i own ihgwd
pleasure. It is further agreed between the said
commissioner and the contractor that the aforesaid
contractor shall begin to paint one or other of the above-
mentioned stories and paintings only after first doing a
drawing of the said story which he meet ehm te the said
Qievanni; and the said contractor may afterwards start

this story, but painting and embellishing it with any
additiene and in whatever form and manner the wig

'vannima have eclar 'n he al h

43

44

limitations and stipulations written above about coloure
and gold.(emphasis mine)112

Other contracts are similarly specific. According to Chambers, "What
Giovanni Tornabuoni required and received was a predictable, workmanlike
production in keeping with established conventions of style and sentiment. . .
little scope was left to the painter's imagination."113 In 1490, while scouting
for artists, an agent of the Duke of Milan described Ghirlandaio as a "good
master on panels and even more so on walls. His things have a 'good air'
and he is an expeditious man and one who gets through much work."114 This
attests to a recognition of Ghirlandaio's business acumen rather than of any
individual artistic flair. Vasari wrote in his LiLee "Ghirlandaio took such
pleasure in his work that he tOld his students to accept every commission
brought to his workshop, even though it were only to paint hoops for
women’s baskets, saying that if they would not paint them he would do them
himself - no one was to be sent away unsatisfied."115 Though perhaps more
anecdotal than factual, it again indicates Ghirlandaio's production oriented
approach and his attentiveness to client satisfaction.

Glasser states, "Admiration for a work of art may result in the desire to
'have one like it.‘ Mention has been made of the contract phrase modo et
forma which reads, in effect, 'make it in the manner and form of . . . "'116 For
example, several Franciscan churches commissioned altarpieces "in the

manner and form of" the Corgnatign pf the yirgin in Narni by the

112Chambers, 174-75.
113Chambers, 172.
114Baxandall, 25-26.
115Vasari (Burroughs), 139.
116Glasser, 65.

 

45

Ghirlandaio workshop.117 However, this phrase can indicate many things,
ranging from style, to composition, to iconographic scheme. The San Marco
commission may well have included such a phrase, for the correspondence
with the Ognissanti is no less remarkable than the differences discussed
above.

Ghirlandaio relied heavily on cartoons to develop his compositions.
Sinopie were the "ultimate stage of the preparatory process. . . their summary
arcs and contours are not form-searching, exploratory strokes, but, rather,
visual summaries of designs that presumably had been fully worked out in
drawings before."118 Jean Cadogan goes on to contend that any changes in
pose between the sinopia and the final work of the Ognissanti fresco seem too
deliberate to be the result of the latitude allowed for an assistant's hand.119 (It
has already been noted that an analysis of the figure of Christ at Ognissanti is
impossible due to the later repainting.) Eve Borsook agrees that Ognissanti
provided the model for the San Marco, noting that Ghirlandaio often made
use of spolveri because of his reliance on cartoons.120

Very early in 1480 Ghirlandaio became involved in plans for a major
commission, the frescoes for the Sassetti Chapel in Santa Trinita,Florence, at
the same time he might have been painting in San Marco.121 He was known
to rely heavily on his assistants and his brother, Davide, in particular, who
jointly signed contracts with him, handling business and financial matters on
his behalf. Though not an uncommon practice, the phrase "a sua mano"

regularly appears in Ghirlandaio's contracts, indicating the client's awareness

 

117Glasser, 66-7.
“8Cadogan, 278.
119Cadogan, 279.
12”Borsook, 1980, L, 116.
ulBorsook, 117.

46

of the need to specify elements Ghirlandaio himself would be required to
paint. Glasser cites an instance in which Ghirlandaio did not follow a
contractual stipulation to paint predella panels "a sua mano." A second
contract was subsequently drawn exempting him from the clause.122 This
provides yet more evidence of a business practice that still succeeded in
achieving client satisfaction. Walker writes, "the execution [of the San Marco
Last Supper], especially that of the figures, seems less polished [than the
Ognissanti], leading many authors to see a rather extensive intervention of
Domenico's shop [there.]"123 Schmeckebier states the San Marco was
"executed by the shOp." This may indeed be the case.124 But it does not
resolve the larger issue: that of the purpose behind the clearly intentional
deviations from the Ognissanti that cannot be attributed to the lesser skill or
the license afforded the shOp. They must be considered as the responsibility
of the master or of the patron.

A later incident at San Marco, regarding the commission of a work for
the Great Refectory, may betray workings in the monastery that have bearing
on the Ghirlandaio commission. In 1536 the frati of San Marco contracted
Giovanni Sogliani to paint the south refectory wall following a 1526
expansion. Because of the enlargement of this room by one bay, the original
south wall had been destroyed, probably including an original fresco
presumably by Fra Angelico, necessitating a new painting.125 Creighton
Gilbert suggests that Sogliani's composition is a faithful copy of the original
painting by Fra Angelico, bearing a distinct similarity to an extant predella

 

122Glasser, 74.
123Walker, 190.
124Schmeckebier, 219. Since he provides no support for this statement and there is no known

documentation, this statement must be accepted as conjecture.
125I-Iood, 130, note 8.

47

panel of the same subject for the Coronation Altarpiece by Fra Angelico.126
According to Vasari, Sogliani originally proposed an image depicting the
feeding of the five thousand but, "the friars refused," saying that they wanted
images that were "positive, ordinarie e semplici." Instead they ordered a scene of
an event in the life of St. Dominic when "being in the refectory with his friars
and having no bread, [he] made a prayer to God, when the table was
miraculously covered with bread, brought by two angels in human form."
(Figure 12) This story provides an even more direct mirror to the friars
dining in that room than the event of the Last Supper itself: a Dominican
preference discussed earlier, for recounting a moment in the history of their
order. Further, the figures portrayed are actual portraits of San Marco monks,
including one whom Vasari identifies as the donor. Sogliani does retain a
reference to the Last Supper by depicting St. Dominic's hands raised in the
traditional orant position, with 11 monks in the scene.

Vasari reflected a growing Renaissance sense of the artists' craft - quite
beyond the recognition that had been accorded to it in Ghirlandaio's time -
when he commented ". . . but Sogliani would have been much more
successful if he had executed what he had designed, because painters express
the conceptions of their own minds better than those of others. On the other
hand, it is only right that he who pays the piper should call the tune."127 In
any case, no artist could have introduced so prominant and incisive an
inscription, and other distinctive iconographic features, into a work such as
those found in the San Marco Laet Supper without patron directive or, at the

very least, approval.

 

126Gilbert, 1974380451.
127Vasari (DeVere), "Sogliani," 164.

CONCLUSIONS

The association of beholder with image in the effort to incite response
and affect a transformation of the beholder in imitatio Cristi had most likely
been a recognized aspect of the function of art at San Marco long before
Ghirlandaio's commission. John Pope-Hennessey observes that the cell
paintings at San Marco by Fra Angelico were designed as aids to meditation.
The depiction of the Communion of the Apostles (Figure 13) as the choice for
the cell program instead of a more narrative Last Supper reflects an
underlying intention of the frescoes, emphasizing the mystical participation
of the monk in the events portrayed.128 Susan Madigan suggests an
alternative interpretation of the cycle, indicating that the apparently random
organization of images actually follows the structure of the rosary, that may
have been part of a ritual practice of the Order at that time.129

In the 13th century the Dominicans adopted a part of St. Augustine's
Rule for conduct at table:

For ye shall not take your nourishment with your
mouths only, but your ears shall hunger after the Word

of God.130

Almost all Rules of religious orders prescribe the principle of table reading.

For example, in Chapter 4 of the Rule of St. Augustine, he instructs, "When

 

128Pope-Hennessey, 21-2.

129Madigan, Susan Pinto. "Fra Angelico at San Marco: A New Interpretation." Published in
W. The Mid-America College Art Association, 1977.
130Braunfels, 147.

48

49

you go to table, listen to the usual reading without talking or arguing until
the meal is finished." The Rule of St. Benedict (written c. 530), Chapter 28,
specifies:

At the meals of the brethren there should not fail to be

reading. . . And let there be the greatest silence, so that

no whisper, and no voice but the reader ’5 may be heard
there. But for the things that they need as they eat and
drink, let the brethren so supply them to one another
that no one need ask for anything. And should
something be needed, let it be requested by a sign and
not by words.131

These two passages indicate that attention of the diners was to be given to the
reading, nourishment for the soul. The physical evidence of the presence of
lecterns in refectories testifies to the widespread practice of readings at
table.132 Even the painted decor of some of these rooms bears witness to it.
Last Suppers such as that by Stefano di Antonio Vanni at San Matteo and
depictions of other kinds of monastic meals such as St. Deminie and His
Mgpks 15$ by Angels by Fra Angelico in the predella panel of the Coronation
Altarpiece may include a reader at a lectern in the painting itself. The Great
Refectory at San Marco has a pulpit of pietra serena built into the side wall.
The guest refectory, on the other hand, would not require such a furnishing,
given the comparatively small size of the room, which measures but 6.3 x 4.2
meters. And yet, since visitors came to the monastery to undergo the
conventual experience, it is likely that readings at mealtime were expected
here, too.

The San Marco Last Supper, like most refectory decoration, is raised

above a dado so all present may easily gaze upon it above the tables where

 

I31'I’hese two passages are reproduced in Walker, 20-21.
132Walker, 24.

50

they eat. The proscription against discussion during the meal directs one's
attention not only to the reading but also to the lone image which adorns the
room, to study and ponder its implications The Apostles themselves
embody this attitude of introspective contemplation and engender the same
in the beholder. The frati of San Marco appear to have taken the charge to
provide spiritual as well as physical nourishment seriously, employing art
that addresses its particular audience in each of their two refectories.

The close relationship between Ghirlandaio's San Marco and
Ognissanti Last Supgrs suggest the Dominican brothers' request "for one
like" the Ognissanti, specifying at the same time significant iconographic
additions such as the explicitly directed inscription and the cat, and stylistic
modifications to better suit their purposes. Such instructions would have
been followed as a matter of course by Ghirlandaio, from what we know of
his business and workshop practices.

Leonardo da Vinci believed that a painting was not complete until it
was seen. In the guest refectory at San Marco the intimate size of the room
establishes an unavoidable link with the beholder who encounters the
Company of His Lord addressing him directly. The still clarity of
Ghirlandaio's tableau-vivant133 style invites, even demands, a reading of the
image and of the wealth of symbols included, a type of activity that may have
appealed in any case to a gathering of prominant Quattrocento Florentines.
And the continued need for patron support may have prompted the
inclusion of an underlying message for those readers regarding their duty to
God's Kingdom.

Braunfels writes, "The Last Supper points to the paradox of the human

 

133Berenson, 31.

51

condition, poised between grace and guilt,"134 recalling the monition in the

Meditations on the Life of Christ "He is the one on whom your salvation

 

depends, in whose will and power it is to give you (or not to give you) the
glory of Paradise." The frati of San Marco extend to the guests of the
foresteria both the indictment of one who would betray Christ for 30 pieces of
silver, and a call to serve, thankful and penitential, as one who is truly great,

imitatio Cristi.

 

13“Braunfels, 146.

FIGURES

52

..&P;thvr§FP/57fl2 , .
. "isthmus: ~32 a. . .4 A: :5 ,
trill-L

 

Figure 1. Domenico Ghirlandaio. Last Supper. 1480's. Fresco. Small

Refectory, San Marco, Florence.

53

 

 

Figure 2. Domenico Ghirlandaio. Last Supper. 1480. Fresco. Refectory,
Ognissanti, Florence.

54

- OLOF .

llv tat

‘ .p— _..
. "k”

51.11
A" .1 _

 

Figure 3. Domenico Ghirlandaio. Last Suppe . 1476. Fresco. Refectory, Badia
di Passignano.

55

 

—- -- -— v — ——-:L:~.—-—.‘. “a”- ...._.. we ;' 1T;—‘— I _.:‘D:". ,3.

"SONYM GIVSDEM AHHl IHMACVLATVM FAClET SACRlFlClVM cLLCNEL’

      

 

 

    

.XLVl. j!

 

 

 

 

Figure 4. Fra Angelico. Last Supper. c. 1452-53. Panel. Silver Cupboard,
SS. Annunziata, Florence.

56

 

    

697” 69.30 V0815 \ncnfii. sve nomw S-QMEDATIS CARIIFSTBIEKIIS smewfiiegmim' a}

   
 

{W \

 

 

 

.I ”A g n mmvm M911 CHM mm Mi“? SANGVIH'E HABET mm emfiklovl.

Figure 5. Fra Angelico. Communion of the Apostles. c. 1452-53. Panel.
Silver Cupboard, Ss. Annunziata, Florence.

57

l \..

4. _.

I .,
a ..

a Y
.
/

./

M .
«fig.

‘
b

 

Figure 6. Taddeo Gaddi. Lignum VitaeI Last Supper and Other scenes.

c.1435-40. Fresco. Refectory, S. Croce, Florence.

58

 

Figure 7. Leonardo da Vinci. Last Supper. 1495-97/ 98. Fresco. Refectory,
S. Maria delle Grazie, Milan.

59

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7 9
2 3
6
l
1
5
4
14
l l
10 20 30 metres
1* l l J
I t I I .
25 50 75 feet

Figure 8. Plan, San Marco, Florence.

u—Iv—Ir-It-I H
wNHo‘OflVO‘UI-hwh)

be
.h.

Church

Sacristy
Chapter-house

Great Refectory
Cloister of St. Anthony
Lavabo

Small Refectory
Cloister of St. Dominic
Cloister of the Spesa
Corridor of the Pores teria
Poresteria

Corte del Granajo
Cloister of the
Sylvestrines

Former hospice

60

 

Figure 9. Pietro Perugino. Last Supper. 1490-95. Fresco. Refectory,

S. Onofrio di Fuligno, Florence.

61

 

 

 

Figure 10. Cosimo Rosselli. Last Supper. 1481-82. Fresco. Sistine Chapel,
Vatican, Rome.

62

.
.

, o
o
a
n
v

vo

 

oeeosbeooo

Fresco. Refectory,

1447.

Last Supper.

m.
a
t
S
0.
em
in.
a...
mm
Me...
.n
we.
moA
HS

63

 

Figure 12. Giovanni Antonio Sogliani. St. Dominic and His Monks Fed by
Angels. 1536. Fresco. Great Refectory, San Marco, Florence.

64

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 13. Fra Angelico. Communion of the Apostles. c. 1436-45. Fresco.

Cell, San Marco, Florence.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

_. Meditations on the Life of Christ. Trans. Isa Ragusa. Princeton
University Press, 1961.

Ames-Lewis, Francis. "Drapery Pattern - Drawings in Ghirlandaio's
Workshop and Ghirlandaio's Early Apprenticeship." The Art Bulletin LXIII
(1981): 49-62.

Ames-Lewis, Francis. "On Domenico Ghirlandaio's Responsiveness to North
European Art." Gazette des beaux-arts. Ser. 6, 114 (October 1989): 111-22.

Baxandall, Michael. Painting and Experienge in Fifteenth Centpey Italy. 2nd
ed. Oxford University Press, 1988.

Beck, James. Italian Renaissanee Painting. New York: Harper 8: Row,
Publishers, 1981.

Becker, Marvin B. "Aspects of Lay Piety in Early Renaissance Florence."
Trinkaus and Oberman, 177-99.

Belting, Hans. The Image and Its Publie in the Middle Ages: Perm and
Function of Early Paintings of the Passion. Trans. Mark Bartusis and
Raymond Meyer. Aristide D. Caratzas, Publisher, 1991. Originally published
1981.

Berenson, Bernard. Italian Painters of the Renaissance. Vol. 2. Phaidon,
1968.

Borsook, Eve. The Mural Painters of Tuscany. 2nd ed. Oxford at the
Clarendon Press, 1980.

Borsook, Eve, and Johannes Offerhaus. Francesco Sassetti and Ghirlandaio at
Santa Trinita, Flprenee. Davaco Publishers, 1981.

Braunfels, Wolfgang. Monasteries of Western Europe. Thames and Hudson,
1972.

Brown, J. Wood, M.A. The Builders of Florence. Methuen & Co., 1907.

65

66

Brucker, Gene Adam. "Monasteries, Friaries, and N unneries in Quattrocento
Florence." Verdon and Henderson, 41-62.

Cadogan, Jean K. "Observations on Ghirlandaio's Method of Composition."
Master Drawings. 2 (Summer 1985): 159-72.

Chambers, D.S. Patrons and Artists in the Italian Renaissance. MacMillan,
1970.

Davies, Gerald Stanley. Ghirlandaio. C. Scribner's Sons, 1909.

Dix, Dom Gregory. The Shape pf we Liturgy. Dacre Press, 1975. First
published 1945.

Dobrick, J. Albert. "Ghirlandaio and Roman Coins." Burlington Magazine.
123(June 1981): 326-29.

Fattorusso, Joseph, ed. Wenders pf Italy. The Medici Art Series, 1937.

Ferguson, George. Signs and Symbgls in Christian Art. Oxford University
Press, 1954.

Gartner, Bertil. Iscarigt. Trans. Victor 1. Gruhn. Fortress Press, 1971.

Gilbert, Creighton E. "Last Suppers and Their Refectories." Trinkaus and
Oberman, 371-407.

_. "Some Special Images for Carmelites, circa 1330-1430." Verdon and
Henderson, 161 -207.

Glasser, Hannelore. Artists' Contracts of the Early Renaissance. Garland
Publishing, Inc., 1977.

Gottlieb, Carla. The Window in Art: From the Window of God to the Vanity
pf Man. Abaris Books, 1981.

Guilland, Jacqueline and Maurice. Fra Angelico: The Light of the Soul. New
York: Clarkson N. Potter, 1986.

Hall, James. A Histogy of Ideas and Images in Italian Art. New York: John
Murray, Publishers, 1983.

Hand, Wayland D. A Dictionaty of Words and Idioms Associated with Igdas
Iscariot. University of California Publications in Modern Philosophy, 24
(1942) 289-356.

 

67

Hartt, Frederick. Histoty of Italian Renaissance Art. 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall, Inc. and New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1979.

Henderson, John. "Penitence and the Laity in Fifteenth-Dentury Florence."
Verdon and Henderson, 229-249.

Heydenreich, Ludwig H. Leonardo: The Last Supper. Allen Lane, 1974.

Hibbert, Christopher. The House of Medici: Its Rise and Fall. William
Morrow and Co., Inc., 1974.

Hood, William. "Fra Angelico at San Marco." Verdon and Henderson,
108-31.

Horster, Marita. Andrea del Castagno. Phaidon, 1980.

Hurll, Estelle M. The Life of Our Ldrd in Art. Houghton Mifflin, 1898.

Jameson, Anna. Sacred end Legenda_ry Art. Vol. 1. Longmans, Green, and
Co., 1883.

Jeremias, Joachim. The Eueharistje wdrds pf lesps. 3rd ed. Trans. Norman

Perrin.from the German. Fortress Press, 1977.

Jobes, Gertrude. Dietidnazy pf Mythdldgy, Folkldre and Smmls. Scarecrow
Press, 1961.

Kubovy, Michael. The Psyehelegy pf Perspective and Renaissance Art.
Cambridge University Press, 1986.

Lane, Barbara G. The Altar and the Altaepieee. Harper & Row, 1984.
Lauts, Jan. Domenico Ghirlandaio. Wien: Verlag Anton Schroll & Co., 1943.

Lavin, Marilyn Aronberg. The Plag pf Narrat_ive Mural Deepration in Italian
Churches 431-1600. University of Chicago, 1990.

Macadam, Alta. Slue Guide: Florenee. Ernest Benn, Limited, 1982.

Madigan, Susan Pinto. "Fra Angelico at San Marco: A New Interpretation."
Published in PaperzEssays en Art. The Mid-America College Art Association,
1977.

Meiss, Millard. The Great Age of Fresce. Phaidon, 1970.

68

Metford,J.C.J. Qietjenaty 9f Christian Lore and Legend. Thames and Hudson,
1983.

Micheletti, Emma. Demenied thrlandaie. Scala/ Riverside, 1990.
O'Malley, John W. "Preaching for the Popes." Trinkaus and Oberman, .

_. Braise and Blame in Renaissanee Reme. Duke University Press, 1979.
Orlandi, S. 11 Beatd @gelied. Florence, 1964.

Pepper, Curtis Bill. "Saving 'The Last Supper'." The New York Times
Magazine. 13 October 1985, 41-62.

Pfeiffer, Gerhard. "Judas Iskarioth auf Lucas Cranach's Altar der Schlosskirch
zu Dessau." Festsehrift Karl Qettjnger. Ed. Hans Sedlmayr and Wilhelm
Messerer. Erlagen: Universitatsbund Erlagen - N urnberg e.v., 1967, 389-400.

Piper, Sir David. The Randgm Hduse Dietienaey 9f Art and Artists. Random
House, 1988.

Pope-Hennessey, John. Ere Angelieg. Cornell University Press, 1974.

Ringbom, Sixten. Icon to Narrative: The Rise of the Dramatic Close-up in

Fifteenthfientpty Devotional Painting. Acta Academial Aboensis, Ser. A
Humaniora 31(1965) n.2.

Rops, Daniel. Christps, La Vie du Christ en Cent Chefs-D'guvres. Editions
du Florilege. Societe Internationale D'Edition, 1950.

Rubinstein, Nicolai. "Lay Patronage and Observant Reform in Fifteenth
Century Florence." Verdon and Henderson, 63-82.

Russell, Jeffrey Burton. Lug'fer: The Dew’l in the Middle Ages. Cornell
University Press, 1984.

Sandstrom, Sven. Leyels pf Unreality: Smdies in Swueture and Censtmetion
in Italian Mural Painting During the Renaissance. Uppsala, 1963.

Schiller, Gertrud. Iconogtaphy of Christian Art. Vol. 2. Trans. Janet
Seligman. New York Graphic Society, Ltd., 1972. Original German published
1968.

69

Schmeckebier, Laurence. A New Handbook of Italian Renaissance Painting.
Hacker Art Books, 1981.

Sill, Gertrude Grace. A Handbook of Sywbols in Christian Art. Collier Books,
1975.

Simons, Patricia. "Patronage in the Tornaquinci Chapel, Santa Maria

Novella, Florence." EatiQnage, Art and Seg'ety in Renaissance Italy. Ed. F.W.

Kent and Patricia Simons, with LC. Bade. Clarendon Press, 1987.

Spencer, John R. Introduction, notes and trans. Qn Painting. By Leon
Battista Alberti, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1956.

Steinberg, Leo. "Leonardo's 'Last Supper'." Art marterly. 36 (1973) 297-410.

Steinberg, Ronald M. Fra Girolamo Savonarola Florentine Art and
Renaissanee Histpriegi'aphy. Ohio University Press, 1977.

Vasari, Giorgio. _L_ives of the Most Eminent Painters, Sculptors and
Arehiteets. Trans. Gaston Duc DeVere. Philip Lee Warner, Publisher, 1912.
Originally published 1550.

 

Trinkaus, Charles. In Cur Image and Likengs: Humanity and Divinity 1n
Italian Humanist Thdught. Vol. 2. Constable Eco, Ltd., 1970.

Trinkaus, Charles, and Heiko A. Oberman, ed. The Pursuit of Holiness in

Late Medieval and Renaissance Religion. Papers from the University of
Michigan Conference. Leiden E.J. Brill, 1974.

Vasari, Giorgio. Vasari's Livg 9f the gtists. Ed. Betty Burroughs. Simon
and Schuster, 1946. Originally published 1550.

Verdon, Timothy Gregory, ed. Menasticism and the Arts. Syracuse
University Press, 1984.

Verdon, Timothy and John Henderson, ed. Christianity and the Renaissanee:

Image and Religious Imagination in the Quattrocento. Syracuse University
Press, 1990.

Vertova, Luisa. I Cenacoli Fiorentini. Turin, 1965.
Vloberg, Maurice. L'Eueharistie Dans L'Art. Vol. 1 and 2. B. Arthaud, 1946.

de Voragine, Jacobus. The Colden Legend. Trans. and Adapted from the
Latin Granger Ryan and Helmut Rippergen. Longmans, Green and Co., 1941.

70

Wackernagel, Martin. The Werld pf the florendne Renaissanee Artist.
Trans. Alison Luchs. Princeton University Press, 1981. Original German

published 1938.

Walker, R. Scott. Florentine Painted Refectories 1350-1500. Dissertation.
Indiana University, Bloomington, 1979.

 

Weissman, Ronald F.E. "Sacred Eloquence." Verdon and Henderson, 250-71.

West, Canon Edward N. Qutward Signs: The Langpage pf Christian
Smbolism. Walker and Company, 1989.

Wirz, P.D. Corbinian. The Hdly Eucharist id Art. P. I. Kenedy & Sons, 1913.
Wolfflin, Heinrich. Classie Art. Phaidon, 1952.

"llllllllllllllll