ROSSO FIORENTINO

This portrait of a young man is characteristic of the Mannerist phase of Florentine painting in the first third of the sixteenth century. The sitter’s languid hands and relaxed coiffure have nothing to do with his sharp gaze, undiminished by a landscape background totally at odds with the sitter’s decidedly urban toughness. Strips later added all around diminish the sense of tension that is one of Rosso’s hallmarks.

Rosso’s Assumption of the Virgin is found, along with works by Baldovinetti, Andrea del Sarto and Pontormo in the atrium of Santissima Annunziata.

Given the notoriety of the works of Michelangelo and Raphael recently completed in Rome, it is Rosso Fiorentino’s credit that he was an artist of extreme individuality and independence. The works of these artists, along with those of Leonardo, must have appeared so perfect on their own terms that it was imperative to either break with them or totally succumb to them. In this early painting, which has suffered from weathering, Rosso already expresses his own unconventional interpretations.

Rosso’s inventiveness is particularly clear in the upper section of the fresco portraying the Virgin rising to Heaven. He represented the Virgin ascending dramatically upwards into the golden firmament on lavender-coloured clouds with a chorus of angels at her feet. This daringly foreshortened, angled ring of naked children is surprisingly accomplished. Certain angels are seen in the same pose but shifted round, suggesting that Rosso painstakingly studied them first from purpose-made sculptural models in the studio.

Individual apostles in Rosso’s fresco are attenuated and in motion. The draperies are massive and consist of a few billowing folds, such that the apostles appear to be composed mostly of drapery, which contributes to the expressive potential of the poses. Many heads are highly agitated as they crane upwards to follow the Virgin’s ascent.

The painting was executed on the commission of Carlo Ginori for the chapel dedicated to Mary and Joseph in the church of San Lorenzo in Florence. The name of the artist, “Rubeus Florentino”, is included among the letters of the first line of the second paragraph of the text which the saint marks with her finger, and also clearly written, together with the date of execution, on the step beneath the figure of the priest.

Like the Dei Altarpiece, this painting is another example of moderation compared to the formal boldness of the works belonging to the early Florentine period and the sojourn in Volterra. The composition takes up some figurative ideas from the frescoes of Pontormo and Franciabigio in the Chiostrino dei Voti in Santissima Annunziata.

Rosso executed this remarkable painting for Bishop Leonardo Tornabuoni, a Florentine by birth. One of the striking formal characteristics of this painting is the highly refined modelling of the bodies, which become extraordinarily soft under the effect of a warm, intense light. The artist had clearly abandoned his taste for the sharp-cornered angularities that characterize the linear structure of his Florentine and Volterran works, which are, on the other hand, recalled in the varied range of complementary colours, with their delicate changing colour effects.

Christ’s naked body has undeniable similarities with works by Michelangelo: the Vatican Pietà and the Risen Christ from the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva. What interested Rosso in this case, however, over and beyond the literal translation of Michelangelo’s figurative ideas, was to exalt the beauty of the human body, which, following the example of the illustrious model, is accurately portrayed down to the very last detail. The total nakedness of Christ’s body, not entirely free of a note of sexuality, forms part of this same tendency.

The handsome young body, languidly and sensually slumped in a serene repose, and literally dominating the pictorial composition, retains little of the traditional iconography of the dead Christ, being closer to the pagan representation of the figure of Adonis. Indeed, the signs of Christ’s martyrdom, which dramatically concluded the earthly existence of God’s son, are barely hinted at in the painting: the small wound in his side touched by the hand of an angel, the thin crown of thorns surrounding the head of the Redeemer, and the rod with the sponge soaked in vinegar and the nails, depicted along the lower edge of the painting.

Rosso Fiorentino, summoned to France in 1530 at the instigation of Francis I, devised in 1534 a compartmented decoration, stuccoed and painted, for the gallery at Fontainebleau; he completed it, with the aid of numerous assistants, in 1536. Each compartment forms a self-contained composition. Framing the scene of Venus Scolding Cupid is an elaborate stucco ornament including strapwork scrolls, putti, baskets of fruit, and two graceful life-size, naked figures. At the top, in the center, appears the gilded royal emblem, the salamander. The soft, pliant modelling and the grace and femininity of the bodies are characteristic of the Fontainebleau school, representing the ideal of French Mannerism freed from the stamp of Italy.

The painting was commissioned in 1527 by the Confraternity of Santa Croce, and was probably finished before 1 July 1528. Compared with the preceding Deposition in Volterra, to which the painting refers in the figure of the deposer on the left descending one of the three ladders resting against the cross, and in the curly-haired young St John, portrayed in the background burying his face in his hands, as in the Volterra altarpiece, the Deposition of Sansepolcro places a greater emphasis on the figure of Christ, who has been taken down from the cross and is now lying in the Virgin’s lap in the foreground.

A reference to the moulded characterization of Michelangelo’s anatomies is visible in the bodies of Rosso’s painting; observe, for example, the youth standing to the right of the Virgin bending slightly forward in the act of holding up Christ’s back. The light which covers the foreground of the composition and contrasts with the dark background is brightest in the clothing of this figure, highlighting its refined golden-yellow floral motif, and produces the extraordinary changing colour effects of the dress of the bystander seated in the foreground to the left of Mary Magdalene.

More than for the reelaboration of elements associated with the art of D�rer and the great masters of classicism, the Sansepolcro Deposition is distinguished by a number of iconographical peculiarities. The most striking is the complete nudity of the body of Jesus, a clear break with tradition, emphasis being given to the ample volume of its swollen rib-cage. Transferring to the Virgin, the iconography which from the 14th century in Italy was traditionally used to represent Mary Magdalene, Ross portrays the mother of Christ with her arms splayed and held up, as if she herself was reliving the moment of crucifixion; the expression of the crucified Jesus seems in fact to be impressed upon the face of Mary, who is now prostrate with grief. Behind her, the horrible animal-like figure directing his squint-eyed gaze away from the scene probably takes up the theme of the bodyguard, the symbol of the treachery and wickedness that determined the killing of Christ, and also present in the Volterra Deposition.

Transferring to the Virgin, the iconography which from the 14th century in Italy was traditionally used to represent Mary Magdalene, Ross portrays the mother of Christ with her arms splayed and held up, as if she herself was reliving the moment of crucifixion; the expression of the crucified Jesus seems in fact to be impressed upon the face of Mary, who is now prostrate with grief. Behind her, the horrible animal-like figure directing his squint-eyed gaze away from the scene probably takes up the theme of the bodyguard, the symbol of the treachery and wickedness that determined the killing of Christ.

In this work the main character is the colour, and the colour is devoted to one end: a violent and emotional expressiveness which overrides everything else, and seeks only to provoke in the spectator a thrill of horror and grief comparable with that which shattered the men and women who helped to lift Christ from the Cross and bury Him.

The drawing is not conceived as a means of describing forms, but as a means of stating ideas. The light is not a normal illumination nor even a poetic evocation: the scene is lit as if by lightning, and in the blinding flash the figures are frozen in their attitudes and even in their thoughts, while the great limp body of the dead Christ, livid green with reddish hair and beard, dangles perilously as his dead weight almost slips from the grasp of the men straining on the ladders.

Rosso too acknowledges, as the Pontormo Deposition does, Michelangelo’s Roman Pietà, but the Christ of the Deposition is far more closely connected with a drawing for a Pietà which Michelangelo made about 1519-20, and which haunted Rosso to the end of his life.

The painting was previously located in the Duomo of Volterra, but has been moved to the town art gallery.

Rosso too acknowledges, as the Pontormo Deposition does, Michelangelo’s Roman Pietà (the body of Christ is clearly inspired by the Vatican Pietà), but the Christ of the Deposition is far more closely connected with a drawing for a Pietà which Michelangelo made about 1519-20, and which haunted Rosso to the end of his life.

Validating the theory that Rosso spent some time in Rome, presumably between 1518 and 1521, are clear references to the frescoes of the Sistine ceiling. One of the references is the use of the gesture of Eve expelled from the Paradise for the posture of the figure of St John. This red-haired young man, who buries his hands in an expression of intense anguish, has been interpreted as a “self-portrait denied” of Rosso, who by including this figure in the painting is thus personally involved in the event represented. Examples of this exist in more or less contemporary northern figurative art, in D�rer particularly, who has been identified as one of the most probable sources of inspiration for the painting and to whom some facial characterizations are referable.

In addition to his pictorial originality, Rosso also had considerable technical skill as is demonstrated in this detail. By this time the Florentines were using oil paint effectively, but their approach depended upona thinner, highly fluid application of the paint rather than the thick impastos used by their Venetian contemporaries.

In 1528 Francis I, King of France, decided to replace the Gothic hunting lodge at Fontainebleau, southeast of Paris, with a fitting palace. The heart of the new palace is the Gallery of Francis I, a grand ceremonial space with elegant decoration designed by Rosso Fiorentino. Between 1534 and 1539, Rosso, Primaticcio, and a team of artists created a programme that was visually and iconographically unprecedented in northern Europe. Rosso was in charge of the paintings, Primaticcio and his assistants executed the stucco caryatids, putti, garlands and other framing motifs. Francesco Sibeco da Carpi, a carpenter, prepared the intricate inlaid, wooden wainscoting in 1539. The entire room was completed when Charles V visited in December 1539.

The great cycle of stucco decorations created by Rosso and Primaticcio at Fontainebleau have no real precedent, but the elongated figures with their languid poses, and the richness of the invention carry forward the ideas of the late Raphael, particularly as developed by Parmigianino.

At the châteaux of Blois (1515) and Chambord (1519), Francis I had favoured a rich external decoration with the internal walls left bare for tapestry. At Fontainebleau, however, this was reversed: the fa�ades are of an austere simplicity, as the stone used was unsuitable for sculpture, while the interior received rich and permanent decoration. In 1530 Rosso Fiorentino was entrusted with the decorations of the interior, later joined (1532) by Francesco Primaticcio. Together they developed the style of the first Fontainebleau school, in effect the first extensive and consistent display of Mannerism in northern Europe.

Rosso died in 1540, but Primaticcio is known to have worked here as late as 1555, having been joined by Niccolò dell’Abbate in 1552. The most complete interior surviving from Francis I’s reign is the gallery bearing his name on the first floor of the block that joins the Cour de l’Ovale to the Cour du Cheval Blanc. Decorated by Rosso (c. 1533-40), like so much at Fontainebleau it has suffered from frequent readjustments and restorations. Each of the 14 piers between its windows is treated as a decorative unit, the lower part in walnut paneling carved by Francisco Scibec de Carpi and lightly gilded, the upper part containing a large fresco surrounded by an elaborate frame of stucco figures and strapwork ornament. Rosso’s stucco figures (1535-37) are often in high relief and show the influence of Michelangelo, while the iconography of the paintings (1537-39) is extremely involved, representing in a cryptic manner the achievements of Francis I.

At the châteaux of Blois (1515) and Chambord (1519), Francis I had favoured a rich external decoration with the internal walls left bare for tapestry. At Fontainebleau, however, this was reversed: the fa�ades are of an austere simplicity, as the stone used was unsuitable for sculpture, while the interior received rich and permanent decoration. In 1530 Rosso Fiorentino was entrusted with the decorations of the interior, later joined (1532) by Francesco Primaticcio. Together they developed the style of the first Fontainebleau school, in effect the first extensive and consistent display of Mannerism in northern Europe.

Rosso died in 1540, but Primaticcio is known to have worked here as late as 1555, having been joined by Niccolò dell’Abbate in 1552. The most complete interior surviving from Francis I’s reign is the gallery bearing his name on the first floor of the block that joins the Cour de l’Ovale to the Cour du Cheval Blanc. Decorated by Rosso (c. 1533-40), like so much at Fontainebleau it has suffered from frequent readjustments and restorations. Each of the 14 piers between its windows is treated as a decorative unit, the lower part in walnut paneling carved by Francisco Scibec de Carpi and lightly gilded, the upper part containing a large fresco surrounded by an elaborate frame of stucco figures and strapwork ornament. Rosso’s stucco figures (1535-37) are often in high relief and show the influence of Michelangelo, while the iconography of the paintings (1537-39) is extremely involved, representing in a cryptic manner the achievements of Francis I.

At the châteaux of Blois (1515) and Chambord (1519), Francis I had favoured a rich external decoration with the internal walls left bare for tapestry. At Fontainebleau, however, this was reversed: the fa�ades are of an austere simplicity, as the stone used was unsuitable for sculpture, while the interior received rich and permanent decoration. In 1530 Rosso Fiorentino was entrusted with the decorations of the interior, later joined (1532) by Francesco Primaticcio. Together they developed the style of the first Fontainebleau school, in effect the first extensive and consistent display of Mannerism in northern Europe.

Rosso died in 1540, but Primaticcio is known to have worked here as late as 1555, having been joined by Niccolò dell’Abbate in 1552. The most complete interior surviving from Francis I’s reign is the gallery bearing his name on the first floor of the block that joins the Cour de l’Ovale to the Cour du Cheval Blanc. Decorated by Rosso (c. 1533-40), like so much at Fontainebleau it has suffered from frequent readjustments and restorations. Each of the 14 piers between its windows is treated as a decorative unit, the lower part in walnut paneling carved by Francisco Scibec de Carpi and lightly gilded, the upper part containing a large fresco surrounded by an elaborate frame of stucco figures and strapwork ornament. Rosso’s stucco figures (1535-37) are often in high relief and show the influence of Michelangelo, while the iconography of the paintings (1537-39) is extremely involved, representing in a cryptic manner the achievements of Francis I.

On the commission of Ranieri, the son of Carlo Dei, the artist executed this painting for the church of Santo Spirito in Florence. Later it was transferred to Palazzo Pitti. Following the restlessness of his youthful period, this painting represents a moment of moderation, in which the references to the examples of Fra Bartolomeo and Andrea del Sarto appear more evident. The painting was much admired by Vasari, especially for the “vividness of the colours”, which, with the greater regularity of the composition and the poses of the single figures, reveal a more original quality and come closer to the eccentric use of colour in the previous works, especially in the St Catherine kneeling in the foreground.

The unusually large assortment of saints comprises Sts Bernard, Augustine, Sebastian, Jacob, Joseph, Catherine, Peter, Anthony Abbot and two other unidentified male saints.

The painting was executed for the parish church of Villamagna near Volterra. Compared to the complexity of the contemporary Deposition the compositional solution of this painting, signed and dated in the lower left corner, at the foot of St John the Baptist, is regulated by a simpler scheme and a greater symmetry, an evident recall to classical tradition. Andrea del Sarto’s Madonna of the Harpies is one of the most probable iconographical references for Rosso’s painting as far as the general structure is concerned, and in the pose of the Virgin, who, firmly anchored to a supporting base, extends her knee forward and places her right arm around the Child clutching at her side. The figure of St Bartholemew with the book, who in Rosso’s altarpiece looks towards the observer, recalls the St John the Baptist portrayed by Andrea del Sarto to the left of the Virgin and Child.

A neurotic, even deformed stylisation that at times verges on the grotesque is the most immediate characteristic of Rosso Fiorentino’s paintings, and can be glimpsed in this painting commissioned by Leonardo di Giovanni Buonafe (c. 1450-1545), “spedalingo” (i.e. rector) of the Hospital of Santa Maria Nuova in Florence. This “Sacra Conversazione” is called “Pala dello Spedalingo” (Rector Altarpiece).

The altarpiece portrays the Virgin and Child between St John the Baptist, St Antony Abbot, St Stephen and St Jerome. The faces of saints, darkened by heavy shading, are utterly devoid of that serenity which characterizes the figures in traditional altarpieces. In the figure of St Jerome, the sunken abdomen, the prominent sternum, ribs and collar-bone of the chest area, and the skeletal thinness of the neck, arms and fingers, reveal unquestionable links with the studies of decomposing or flayed bodies that began to interest a great number of Tuscan artists from the 15th century.

Buonafe saw the altarpiece before it was finished, and was horrified by the harshness of the saints, who seemed to him like devils; Vasari remarked that the finished painting would have been softer in effect. The picture was rejected, and it has been suggested that it was modified and sent to a church dedicated to San Stefano at Grezzano, outside Borgo San Lorenzo. In the altarpiece space is compressed, and the saints appear argumentative, and somewhat demented, rather than devilish, but there is already something of Rosso’s later style in the stylised poses and consciously shocking treatment of the subject.

The restlessness of the whole work contradicts a High Renaissance ideal: that of serene majesty. This accentuates the expressive dynamism of his compositions, whose colours and tones seem burnt or lividly overstated. The almost infernal aspect of some of his characters has given rise to a number of sometimes wild hypotheses about the painter’s far-from-happy psychology. (He committed suicide.)

A neurotic, even deformed stylisation that at times verges on the grotesque is the most immediate characteristic of Rosso Fiorentino’s paintings, and can be glimpsed in this painting commissioned by Leonardo di Giovanni Buonafe (c. 1450-1545), “spedalingo” (i.e. rector) of the Hospital of Santa Maria Nuova in Florence. This “Sacra Conversazione” is called “Pala dello Spedalingo” (Rector Altarpiece).

The altarpiece portrays the Virgin and Child between St John the Baptist, St Antony Abbot, St Stephen and St Jerome. The faces of saints, darkened by heavy shading, are utterly devoid of that serenity which characterizes the figures in traditional altarpieces. In the figure of St Jerome, the sunken abdomen, the prominent sternum, ribs and collar-bone of the chest area, and the skeletal thinness of the neck, arms and fingers, reveal unquestionable links with the studies of decomposing or flayed bodies that began to interest a great number of Tuscan artists from the 15th century.

Buonafe saw the altarpiece before it was finished, and was horrified by the harshness of the saints, who seemed to him like devils; Vasari remarked that the finished painting would have been softer in effect. The picture was rejected, and it has been suggested that it was modified and sent to a church dedicated to San Stefano at Grezzano, outside Borgo San Lorenzo. In the altarpiece space is compressed, and the saints appear argumentative, and somewhat demented, rather than devilish, but there is already something of Rosso’s later style in the stylised poses and consciously shocking treatment of the subject.

The restlessness of the whole work contradicts a High Renaissance ideal: that of serene majesty. This accentuates the expressive dynamism of his compositions, whose colours and tones seem burnt or lividly overstated. The almost infernal aspect of some of his characters has given rise to a number of sometimes wild hypotheses about the painter’s far-from-happy psychology. (He committed suicide.)

The painting is an example of the early Florentine Mannerism. Due to a change in the colour of the varnish, the colurs of the painting changed significantly.

The painting was executed on the commission of Carlo Ginori for the chapel dedicated to Mary and Joseph in the church of San Lorenzo in Florence. The name of the artist, “Rubeus Florentino”, is included among the letters of the first line of the second paragraph of the text which the saint marks with her finger, and also clearly written, together with the date of execution, on the step beneath the figure of the priest.

Like the Dei Altarpiece, this painting is another example of moderation compared to the formal boldness of the works belonging to the early Florentine period and the sojourn in Volterra. The composition takes up some figurative ideas from the frescoes of Pontormo and Franciabigio in the Chiostrino dei Voti in Santissima Annunziata.

The detail shows the kneeling figure on the left side of the painting.

The detail shows the kneeling figure of St Apollonia on the right side of the painting. As far as traditional representations of this theme are concerned, quite unusual is the presence among the onlookers in the foreground of St Apollonia who certainly could not have witnessed the event.

The drawing depicts Cupid disarming Mars at the behest of Venus. It was executed in Venice for king Fran�ois I.

Among Rosso’s paintings concerned with the representation of themes belonging to the religious iconographical tradition, this painting is a very special case, not least due to the rarity of the subject. The title of the painting refers to an episode of Moses’s youth narrated in the book of Exodus (II, 16-22). The seven daughters of Jethro, priest of the land of Midian, while drawing water from a well and filling troughs to water their father’s flock, are troubled by a group of Midianite shepherds who take advantage of the labours of the young women to water their own herds. Moses, sitting near the well, witnesses the scene; driving the Midianites away with threats he intervenes physically in defence of Jethro’s daughters who thanks to his help can finally water their flocks. In recognition of the meritorious action performed by the young Moses, Jethro gives him the hand of one of his daughters, Zipporah.

There are unequivocal references in the painting to the two cartoons made by Michelangelo and Leonardo for the decoration of the Great Council Hall in Palazzo della Signoria. Rosso’s canvas reproposes the extremely articulated compositional structure of Michelangelo’s Battle of Cascina, displaying a broad range of nude figure poses which reflect the artist’s predilection for counterpoise. The emphasizing of gestures and clothing, and the impassioned savagery of the actions and expressions, on the other hand, are associated with Leonardo’s Battle of Anghiari.

Suggested listening (streaming mp3, 5 minutes):

Gioacchino Rossini: Moses, Moses’ Prayer

The detail shows Zipporah, one of the daughters of Jethro.

This painting is one of the principal works of the maturity of the painter. The obvious inspiration from Michelangelo is surpassed by the intense compression of the various plastic planes which become shining planes of colour. In their brilliant chromatic polish and in the tangle of the masses in violent “contrapposto” there is an unreal smoothness which tends towards a visionary effect.

The painting was restored in 1995.

This little work belonging to the period of maturity of the artist, who was a pupil of Andrea del Sarto, together with Pontormo.

In 1605 the picture was collocated in the Tribune beside the more precious masterworks Medici family had collected. Recent studies revealed the panel to be a fragment of a larger painting including - such as other altarpieces by Rosso - the angel in the lower part of the scene. A sense of vitality and tenderness emanates from this little cherub playing a lute, probably dating to the beginning of the third decade of 16th century.

Suggested listening (streaming mp3, 2 minutes):

Francesco da Milano: Tre fantasie for lute

Rosso addressed the theme of the dead Christ again towards the end of his artistic career when, after completing the decoration of the Gallery at Fontainebleau for Fran�ois I, painted the Pietà. The painting once hung above the door of the chapel of the High Constable Anne de Montmorency in the castle of Ecouen. The painting, of all the works executed by Rosso during his stay in France (1530-40), is the only surviving example that is certainly original.

The painting is a “close-up” of the body of Christ, which extends across the whole width of the composition, literally filling the pictorial space. Christ’s body, having taken down from the cross, of which there is no trace in the composition, and from the maternal lap, is elegantly placed on a cushion lying on the ground. Behind the body of Jesus the Virgin opens her arms and collapses into the arms of one of the pious women. Light shines in the foreground of the composition, highlighting, compared with the dark background, the various shades of red in the clothing, which contrast with the white of the scarf surrounding the upper part of Mary’s dress, and the delicate lace of Mary Magdalene’s dress, in which the golden yellow of the sleeve stands out.

Early Renaissance portraits show subjects in profile. By the time Rosso made this uncompromising depiction, however, painters had largely freed their sitters in the name of naturalness. Here, the angle of body and head create a deliberately laboured torsion, typical of Rosso’s postures, even more difficult than Michelangelo’s.

This painting for the Cathedral of the provincial Umbrian town of Città di Castello depicts the risen Christ with saints below. Rosso has moved toward a more mechanistic composition on a monumental scale. Created in an irregular octagonal format, the picture retains a strong vertical emphasis. Separate figures and incidents, along with the idiosyncratic treatment of the parts, overwhelm the impact of the composition as a whole.

Rosso’s greatest project was the decoration of the Galerie Fran�ois I (in situ) at the château of Fontainebleau, the plan for which was conceived in 1532, and the stuccowork and painting carried out under Rosso’s supervision from 1536 to 1539. Allegorical, mythological and occasionally historical frescoes, celebrating the power of the King, are framed by extravagant stucco grotesqueries - scrolls, armoury, trophies, garlands, goddesses, nymphs and putti - and employ a technique probably brought by Primaticcio from Mantua, where he had worked at the Palazzo del T�. Although Rosso probably expected to provide all 16 principal frescoes, the gallery has only 12, including the Royal Elephant, a complex allegorical tribute to the King.ng.

In Greek mythology, King Pieride, once king of Macedonia, had nine daughters he named after the nine Muses, believing that their skills were a great match to the Muses. He thus challenged the Muses to a match, resulting in his daughters being turned into magpies and jackdaws. In Greek mythology these nine daughters of the king usually are referred to as the Pierides.

Rosso Fiorentino, summoned to France in 1530 at the instigation of Francis I, devised in 1534 a compartmented decoration, stuccoed and painted, for the gallery at Fontainebleau; he completed it, with the aid of numerous assistants, in 1536. Each compartment forms a self-contained composition. Framing the scene of Venus Scolding Cupid is an elaborate stucco ornament including strapwork scrolls, putti, baskets of fruit, and two graceful life-size, naked figures. At the top, in the center, appears the gilded royal emblem, the salamander. The soft, pliant modelling and the grace and femininity of the bodies are characteristic of the Fontainebleau school, representing the ideal of French Mannerism freed from the stamp of Italy.