The Backgound

 

The background of medieval religious paintings (those painted on wood as opposed to frescos), most usually being of gold leaf, has a particular significance. While the human or divine figures and their setting, if any, were normally painted in tempera (coloured pigments suspended in a solution made with egg), the background (lo sfondo in Italian), whether flat or, in the case of haloes, having a punched or indented pattern, was very often made of extremely fine sheets of pure gold (gold leaf). This background, once applied, was highly polished and therefore glowed with a sparkling, flickering light, especially when on an altar lit with candles.

The significance of this costly gold background was that, whatever the scene being represented, the image was imbued with a sort of 'divine' otherworldliness, a quality of being outside time, of timelessness, and in a symbolic way, separate from our normal space. Gold could also be applied to salient points or objects in a picture, for instance, an angel's wings as is the case in Beato Angelico's glittering Annunciation at Cortona.

Annunciation, 1434 by Beato Angelico (Guido di Piero, aka Fra Giovanni da Fiesole), 

c.1395-1455. Tempera on panel

Museo Diocesano del Capitolo, Cortona, Italy

The photo above shows the work of an extraordinary painter, a monk, who is technically regarded as a Renaissance artist although, as this work demonstrates, Beato Angelico maintained some of the traditions of late medieval painting, in this particular case, amongst other things the use of gold leaf: around the dove above Mary's head, in the fabric covering her chair, in the stars decorating the ceiling of her apartment, in the words issuing from the mouth of the angel, in the decorative elements of his clothing and, most spectacularly, in the angel's wings. The use of gold in the haloes of sacred figures continued, as here, even as it declined as a standard background. The effect of the gold in the wings is amazing, at least for me, as, when I first saw this painting in Cortona, it was dazzling; the picture had been restored and the gold undoubtedly exerted its power on me as a viewer of this profound image. Despite having by that time seen many other paintings where gold leaf had been used, especially as the 'flat' background, its force in this case was extraordinary.

Annunciation, by Sandro Botticelli (1445-1510) 

Tempera on panel, 1489-90. Gallerie degli Uffizi, Florence.

By way of contrast, as the Renaissance got into full swing, a painting of the same subject, the Annunciation, made about 56 years later, has almost no gold at all and depends entirely on its suggestion of reality for its effect. Note incidentally, that here we are observers, definitely not participants (discussed later).

The function of the gold background however, apart from the, so to speak 'mechanical' one of making certain things 'precious', as in the Angelico above, was to intimate the sublime, the divine, the other world of a paradise. In the Beato Angelico work just discussed, the entire ambience of the scene is painted in great detail - which could and did happen in medieval painting, especially in manuscript illumination - with no gold background and, through Angelico's use of the then 'new' perspective techniques, is rendered physically-spatially plausible in a way unknown to medieval artists. 

The Mourning over the Body of Christ by Giottino (Giotto di Stefano or Tommaso di Stefano, 

1324-69). Tempera on panel, c. 1360-65

Gallerie degli Uffizi, Florence

In this exquisite painting (above) by Giottino we have an example of the late medieval use of a flat gold-leaf background. Although the individual figures are convincing in their 'realism' (they are solidly modelled, they have space both as individual actors and between them), and a sense of the tragedy is evident especially (and dramatically) in the figure of Mary Magdalen in the lower right corner, the extent to which the foreground action is based on (earthly) reality is, so to say 'contradicted' by the flat gold background. As if to say, yes, we are dealing with a human tragedy but one which at the same time is taken into the sublime world of divinity. A reminder here that, as twenty-first century viewers of medieval artwork we need to keep in mind not only the much-changed attitudes concerning religious devotion and belief, but also that, as with so many works of this age, the effect of the gold has diminished considerably and the colours used in the figures have also undergone various changes. In other words, this picture does not look as it did when it left its maker's workshop and its present collocation, in an art gallery, is not that for which it was made.

But it has occurred to me (as perhaps to others) that, with the various changes in subsequent periods of art history - as we have already seen, by the time Botticelli was working, gold leaf had almost entirely disappeared from 'modern' painting - ultimately, we may say, a 'substitute' was found. Throughout the Renaissance proper the aim was to make one's images resemble as near as possible observable reality, what was referred to as Nature, a concept which referred as much to human bodies as to anything else 'natural'; Nature, under the stimulus of Greco-Roman art, was seen as the perfect model, even if, in fact, Nature idealised was often the ultimate result. Until that point, much religious art was produced by repeating given 'types' even if an artist's individual personality was still discernible; with the advent of the Renaissance, Nature and the Greco-Roman past became the guides for and the aspirations of contemporary artists. So Nature itself, that is, the landscape, differing weather and light conditions, rivers, the pastoral life and so on were all included in the images contrived by those artists, both painters and sculptors. And, incidentally, the personality of the artist actually became much more obvious, seemingly, at least in part, as a by-product of their 'liberated-scientific' observation of Nature (both landscape and the human figure).

Slowly then, the divine - and the sublime - were conveyed in painting by means other than by a gold background; this is perhaps most easily seen in the study of nature (independently of the human figure) in Venetian painting where the landscape and effects of light, particularly the twilight, introduced a readily appreciated 'poetical' element understood as mirroring the divine. But following these developments, Italian art arrived at the period known as the Baroque, a period and a style which also followed great upheaval in the Catholic Church, upheaval which required a different attitude in art.

Sacred and Profane Love, c.1515 by Titian (Tiziano Vecellio, 1488-90 - 1576)

Oil on canvas. Galleria Borghese, Rome

This painting is a good example of what is stated above concerning the 'poetry' of the twilight landscape; as well, note the position of the 'subject' in relation to the viewer of the picture: we are observers, not participants. This is a relatively early Titian compared with his image below.

Baroque painting made no use of gold even if individual pictures, especially in churches and religious houses, might be framed in various materials, including gold; but gold was not used as an expressive element in the paintings themselves. However something else was: black. As a result of political and religious changes and requirements, deep emotional expression became a hallmark of the religious painting of the period; Caravaggio, bringing a kind of synthesis of earlier masters along with his own artistic temperament, gave this period a cue as to how to express the new attitudes of the Church. One important change was that the subject of a given image might be placed so close to the viewer that he or she became a quasi participant in the event portrayed; not merely or usually an outside observer, as with most Renaissance work. Parts of bodies seemed to protrude into the 'real' space of the people looking at these pictures; in the case of sculpture, figures almost stepped out of their frames (The Death of Saint Cecilia by Antonio Raggi, in Sant'Agnese in Agone, Rome) or were suspended into our shared space (Bernini's Ecstasy of Saint Therese in Santa Maria della Vittoria, Rome).

The Death of Santa Cecilia by Antonio Raggi (1624-86), high-relief marble sculpture. 

The church of Sant'Agnese in Agone, Rome.

As we can easily see, the figures on either side of this wonderful work overlap the frame of the scene and 'exist' in our space, the real space of this beautiful church situated in the Piazza Navona. The high relief of those two figures in particular projects this event further into 'our' space. Obviously, no dark background here but the proximity of the foreground sculpted actors to their viewers (us) is marked.

Venus blindfolding Cupid, c.1560 by Titian

Oil on canvas. Galleria Borghese, Rome

This picture by Titian, painted about 45 years later than his work above, exemplifies the tendency to bring the actors in the narrative very close to the viewer; here we see half-figures, not full figures, suggesting that we are virtually participants in the action, not merely observers of it.

And the background in paintings, no longer the gold of preceding ages, was dark, very dark tending to black. A black which often ate-up the background, consumed the ambient space in anonymous darkness out of which figures emerged as though being drawn into life out of a nebulous nothingness. No longer the clear brilliance of light-reflecting precious metal, no longer the sheer symbolic splendour of sublime divinity; rather, the abstraction of an ill-defined, mysterious ambivalence - sometimes a 'space', often a void. The actors thrown into 'our' space, into our reality; bodies no longer simply admired or pitied, now so close as to be touched. The emotionally neutral gold, replaced first by the natural world of the Renaissance, is now superseded by an active presence in the background of many pictures, a (possibly malevolent) darkness enveloping time and space to sharpen and deepen our emotional response while simultaneously being part of our world; and reflecting not a divine light but perhaps the incomprehensibility of the divine together with the dark spaces of our inner life. In other words, from the change in focus begun in the Renaissance - a focus on Man as creator and discerner - , artists gradually incorporated more of Man even into their religious images, that is, a perception of Man (and his psychological life) as a deliberate actor and not merely subject to the divine.

Mary Magdalen contemplating Death by Domenico Fetti (1589 - 1623)

Oil on canvas. Galleria Palazzo Doria Pamphilj, Rome.

We might remind ourselves at this point that half-figures and dark backgrounds were not 'invented' in the Baroque period but we can say that these elements and others were brought together at that time to serve particular purposes. Nor were all paintings as dark as late Caravaggio and many did in fact have some kind of setting, usually architectural. But the proximity to the viewer of one or more actors in a religious drama was very common, even in pictures where there are full figures. The use of dark shadows, strengthening the modelling of both figures and clothing, was however ubiquitous during the Baroque. We should also remember that the extreme darkness utilised in oil paintings on canvas was not technically possible in fresco which means that in certain places, churches and convents mostly, the discrepancy in tone between Baroque frescos and Baroque oil pictures is marked. The small painting above by Fetti is a good example of several Baroque tendencies, especially the fact that the 'background' in a sense 'absorbs' the figure, enwraps it rather than 'staying put' so to speak, in the actual background, in the space behind the figure. The saint's book and elbow particularly are very close to us, the viewers, as are her left hand and the skull she holds in it. Here Fetti has allowed the strong contrasting light to fall mainly on Magdalen's face and right arm and the book it rests on.

Here I would once again remind readers that my observations are those of a painter and not those of a trained art historian. My interest is, for the most part, in the ways painters and sculptors worked, the way they saw things and how that changed, and the way they dealt with (mainly) religious imagery. Allowing for the vast diversity of artistic expression, that is to say, that while discussing certain trends in the continuous movement of art, we need to keep in mind the fact that beside the major schools and periods of art history there were always those artists working on the fringes, those who worked in somewhat older styles and those who were virtually unique in their expression. In the specific case here under discussion, that there is a discernible trend or propensity in Baroque oil painting to favour dark, often enveloping backgrounds, without doubt there are many instances, even in oil pictures (as opposed to the fresco technique), where the same artists and others did not use a dark background, and we will conclude with just such an image, painted by the Spanish-by-birth but Neapolitan-by-choice artist, Jusepe de Ribera.

Saint Januarius (Gennaro) emerges unscathed from the Furnace, 1646 by Jusepe de Ribera (1591-1652). Cappella del Tesoro in the Cathedral of Naples

As is obvious, this large masterwork is not in any sense particularly dark and certainly does not have a dark background, on the contrary; in fact the sky-blue background in this painting is actually at odds with the bulk of the Spanish master's output, often concerning ageing hermit saints immersed in or emerging from a near black background.

All photographs were taken by the author who reserves copyright.

Vertical versus ... not so much!

  As usual, I hope the reader will be aware that these observations, like others made in these articles, are to be taken as general and that they do not pretend to definitively describe or define the objects and movements referred to. In attempting to 'read' the artworks of the past, particularly those of subtle styles such as the multi-levelled, multi-facetted Renaissance, interpretations are difficult and specifically definitive statements are best avoided. In the case of the present writer, an initial, one might say 'devotion' to the Renaissance has gradually broadened into a much more complex understanding of what the term 'Renaissance' might actually mean; once this occurred, appreciation was opened into the extraordinary off-shoot that is Mannerism which then led into the Baroque, a period I had not grasped at all. The remarks that follow are based on a much greater exposure, both in Rome and Naples, and in Sicily, to the work of that period, the Baroque, but the comparison suggested here may be simply the result of an unrefined eye finally seeing the obvious; I hope though it's a bit more than that. Incidentally, dates regarding the beginning and 'end' of periods in art history are moot.

The title of this article sums up some observations which occurred to me while considering the differences between Renaissance painting and sculpture and those of the Baroque period. Although, as previously discussed, the triangle is a common structural form governing the composition of much Renaissance work, so too is verticality: that is, an arrangement of vertical elements (usually figures but also architecture) sometimes frieze-like, reading across the image, at others supporting the perspective depth (the recession) as understood from the implied central position of the viewer. In 15th century Florence, the epicentre of the most influential cultural changes then taking place on the Italian peninsula, clear, candid and straightforward presentation of observable fact (nature) and the confident 'statement' of concept and idea (religious, political, pragmatic) reflected the enthusiasm for and influence of the 're-born' culture of an almost-lost past: the 're-birth' of or openness to various branches of knowledge either abandoned or deliberately suppressed during the medieval period: the study of antique Greek and Roman art, classical literature (ad fontes), the development of humanism, perspective illusion, and so on.

The Holy Trinity, 1425-27? by Masaccio (1401-28) in the church of Santa Maria Novella in Florence

In this very large fresco (above) we can see, combined, the surface triangle element and the vertical element; the first is formed by the two figures of the donors on either side at the base and, following lines from them through the Madonna and Saint John on ether side of the Cross, we arrive at the apex which is Jesus' head and finally God the Father; each figure is however also vertical as are the Cross itself and the pilasters and columns of the 'triumphal arch' framing the divine figures. Horizontal elements are the architrave above the arch, the arms of the Cross (and Jesus), the ledge on which the donors are kneeling and the sarcophagus beneath containing a horizontal skeleton 1. This painting is typical of much Renaissance work in which many of the problems associated with representing the human body are gradually overcome, together with the difficulties of the convincing suggestion of three-dimensional space; and note also the arch and barrel vault in this image which are heavily influenced by ancient Roman architecture.

Verticality was not though an invention of the Renaissance as this compositional device may be observed in much medieval art, for example in the strongly vertical (and elongated) decorative figures of saints and biblical personages on Gothic buildings, and in much pictorial art produced over that long (and varied) historical period. In a sense then, the common vertical disposition of the actors in Renaissance paintings and sculpture was merely a continuation of an already established mode. What the Renaissance did however, was to look back to a much earlier period, the classical one, that of ancient Greco-Roman culture; Gothic art, on the other hand, at the risk of over-simplification, may be seen as a kind of development of the Byzantine rejection of 'pagan' styles.

Baroque Rome was beset by serious disturbance, both religious and, as ever, political, given the now challenged power of the Catholic Church: prior to but including Luther's protests (1517) and, in any case, a widespread awareness of the corruption within the Church, it was forced to make substantial changes, generally known as the [Counter] Reformation (a debated term), of variable duration and efficacy, not least in the field of art. The narratives in painting and sculpture, so as to refine the message of the (Catholic) Church, were to be clear, relatively straightforward in their content, and were to have an easy emotional appeal to the 'average' member of the congregation; and to be much less 'seasoned' with the abstruse references which certainly only appealed to an intellectual elite (this last not applying however to private secular work which was often loaded with such erudite material!). Is it possible that the fairly obvious frequency of painted images dependent upon a diagonal, as opposed to or combined with verticals, might be seen as reflecting a change in the general climate, in Rome at least?

What I would like to do now is look at some examples of how the painting produced during these two periods (Renaissance and Baroque) commonly made some use of two 'structural' elements: in the first case verticality, in the second, the diagonal line - with or without the structural triangle. To do this we are going to look at the work of two major painters, that is, Piero della Francesca (c1412-1492) -  Florentine Renaissance, and Michelangelo Merisi - known  to the world as Caravaggio (1571-1610) - proto-Baroque.

 The Baptism, 1442 (?) by Piero della Francesca, tempera on panel. National Gallery, London

The image above is of a painting by Piero della Francesca, his Baptism, which is in the National Gallery in London. The image below is also a painting by that same sublime master, the Flagellation, which is kept in Urbino, in Italy; the one below that is a detail of this latter, an enlargement of the left side which is where the Flagellation is actually taking place. What I would like us to notice is the 'verticality' which is common to both paintings.

In the Baptism, verticality runs across almost the entire foreground of the picture: reading from the left, the three attendant angels, the large white-trunked tree, the column-like figure of Christ himself, and then the equally up-standing figure of his cousin, John (the Baptist) are all vertical elements; even the acolyte further back is half vertical, taking the viewer to the other side of the picture plane (and into the middle distance). The verticality is 'contradicted' as it were, by the opening of the Jordan River at the bottom of the painting, at first only a dry river-bed occupying more than half the immediate foreground; its meandering banks take us then, with their articulate watery-blue reflection, into the middle ground; after, their serpentine course leads our eye further and further into the painting's illusionistic depth. The distant background hills provide with their (horizontal) wavy undulations another counterfoil to the 'still' verticality of the actors in the foreground 'frieze'.

The Flagellation, 1452 by Piero della Francesca, tempera on panel. Palazzo Ducale, Urbino.

The Flagellation, detail of the left side.

This verticality appears again throughout Piero's Flagellation even if, in this extraordinary painting, the putative subject (the Flagellation of Jesus) is set back from the foreground into what could be understood as a secondary or minor place. Be that as it may, the verticality here, again, begins at the left edge of the image: the great column of the portico and within that the four standing figures - apart from Pilate who is however sitting upright; here, two more columns, including the one Christ is tied to, and the door-frames; then, in the foreground, the other front column of the portico, the foremost of several, which also divides the narrative in two; and, very obviously, the three standing (and mysterious) men on the right side - supported by the various verticals of the background architecture of the street. Again, in this composition, there are elements which 'contradict' the vertical parts, most obviously the orthogonal lines running from the lower and upper edges on the left of the image - the floor and the ceiling (with their respective horizontal shapes) - and the roofs on the right. With this architecture on the left of the picture, Piero has contrived a series of box-like shapes which recede in a geometrically diminishing series beyond Christ to the rear wall; a geometry of straight lines, horizontal and vertical, which contains and complements the vertical but human forms. 

Thus, in this particular painting, Piero has managed an extremely unusual manipulation of the principal spatial elements of the architecture into which or across which he has placed his human actors; which elements however allow or rather, encourage movement, the eye being drawn immediately back into the (dimly-lit) fictive space of the portico before 'emerging' into the (brightly-lit) open foreground on the right: that said, the dependence on or dominance of the vertical elements is clear. As well, in comparison with the image below, Piero's pictures are filled with natural light, a representation of physical reality - as well as of theological significance. 

The Flagellation, 1607 by Caravaggio, oil on canvas. Museo di Capodimonte, Naples.

At first glance, the painting in the photo above may also seem to be basically vertical in structure; but, if we recall that column-like verticality of the figure of Christ in Piero's Baptism and then look at Caravaggio's Christ, we can't help but be struck by the pathetic crumpled figure He has become as the (once) centre of this picture 2. In fact, the difference is stark: the bent knees of Christ and that of the torturer on the right, together with the folded limbs of the one crouching in the lower left, all contribute (soft) angles to the misleading initial impression of verticality. Christ's body indeed, from the hanging head, through the strongly angled shoulders and down along his torso, creates a long curve, his left leg moving in the opposite direction; movement and counter-movement: no longer the steady equilibrium of, for instance, a Piero della Francesca.

What has happened, at least in art, in painting, to cause it to move from the stability of such compositions as Piero's Baptism to the convulsed emotion of a Caravaggio? In purely formal terms, one answer might be found in another Michelangelo: Michelangelo Buonarroti, a Florentine, who with his tormented 'Slaves' and contrapposto-filled Last Judgement, introduced into modern Italian art the troubled 'question mark' of the passionate intellectual - the 'anima sconsolata' to use Petrarch's phrase (the 'disconsolate soul'). Struggling with relentless pressure, constant self-abnegation to conform with an all-powerful hierarchy, self-doubt struggling with a clear awareness of his own genius, a never-ending battle between his religious beliefs and his personal inclinations, all these, due to his almost universal influence, at least in Italy, found contemporary expression first in the appearance of Mannerism, and later, in the 'rationalised' Baroque 'simplicity' of painters like Caravaggio: he, Caravaggio, actually a kind of bridge linking the three-island chain of Renaissance-Mannerism-Baroque.

Whereas Piero della Francesca's upright Baptism Christ of 165 years earlier is clear, candid and set into an easily comprehensible space, the open space of the Italian countryside doing sunny duty for 1st century Palestine, Caravaggio's question here - not an answer - has little or no time for anything but the deep unknowable space of dark human emotion, a space without a setting, as determined by the Florentine Michelangelo: almost no landscape, almost no architecture; and what there might be, for instance in Caravaggio's Calling of Saint Matthew in Rome, is little more than a kind of necessary minimal theatrical backdrop. 

Not in his Flagellation however! A vague hint at a straight-line vertical column, barely visible in the nothing-space of this horrific event, but scattered round with bent and angular forms, the struggling-to-stay-upright, stoic victim warmly and lovingly lit, the monstrous executioners unable to hide their grim work in spite of the darkness which is always trying to swallow them back in! Here, although the crown of thorns is in its place, there is no blood, there are no signs of a beating; as often occurs in Baroque pictures, the very 'normal' male body (neither especially muscular nor especially ascetic, elderly desert-dwelling saints excepted) is, it might be argued, the 'real' subject of the painting: from a painter's point of view, a chance to make a study of the male nude. Not as it happens, a new chance, as such use of both religious and mythological themes dates to not only the Renaissance itself but actually much further back, again to ancient Greece and Rome. Baroque painters such Jusepe de Ribera (1591-1652) and Luca Giordano (1634-1705, later Baroque-Rococo) both painted the scene of Saint Sebastian tended by Saint Irena which, apart from the required presence of this female saint and her assistant removing the arrows from Sebastian's body, is as well an 'excuse' or opportunity to paint the male (almost) nude body - and incidentally, the part of the composition in the strongest light.

A Renaissance fresco  of the Annunciation, 1428-31 by Masolino da Panicale (1383-1440). The Cappella di Santa Caterina in the Basilica di San Clemente, Rome

Detail of a Baroque Saint Sebastian tended by Saint Irena, c1653 by Luca Giordano

The National Gallery of Victoria, Melbourne.    

As is clear from the two images immediately above, the principal observation of this article concerning the (gradual, occasional) introduction of the non-vertical as a structural device in Baroque painting is demonstrable; the earlier example by Masolino (perhaps assisted by Masaccio) is strongly vertical 3 (both the figures and the columns), while the later Giordano is (typically) structurally diagonal - at least, not vertical. It is important to keep in mind that circumstances had changed, both for the Church and for painters: for the Church politically and theologically; for artists because, apart from a 'natural' progression (not to be understood as improvement) in art theory and formal interests, their patrons, particularly the Church, required them to express new religious attitudes in a new way. Moving out of the somewhat confused and confusing modes of Mannerism and into the relative 'clarity' of Baroque imagery, painters were asked to make pictures which were clearly and immediately comprehensible as well as emotionally stimulating. 

1 I have here referred to the triangle as a 'surface triangle' meaning that, if we were to draw a triangle onto the image following the lines suggested, it would trace a triangular shape on the surface of the picture; however, it should be understood that that same triangle actually takes us simultaneously 'into' the depth of the illusion, moving from the kneeling donors into the space of Mary and John and then deeper to where Jesus is and then His Father. Another large inverted triangle begins in the depth of the painting, around the base of the Cross, and follows, 'upwards' the external diagonals of the vault as well as its main lines.  

2 This canvas has apparently been widened on the right side, possibly due to one or both of two events. Scientific analysis has shown that beneath the figure on the right there was initially a kneeling figure, possibly a donor (a person who commissioned the work); but, since we know that Caravaggio visited Naples twice, once fleeing a death sentence in Rome and once fleeing a serious problem in Malta - and probably ultimately heading for Rome - it is possible that, on his return, he reworked the original design, perhaps necessitating that addition of a strip of extra canvas on the right side (thereby shifting the figure of Christ from the centre of the canvas slightly to the left). Certain historians (e.g. Longhi) have suggested that he may have begun the painting in 1607 but left it unfinished when he went to Sicily and then Malta; according to this thesis, he then completed the picture on his return to Naples between 1609 and 1610, the year of his death.

3 As a final and somewhat tangential comment, while Masolino has in this Annunciation shown himself to have fully grasped the then new 'science' of perspective illusion with the 'correctly' receding ceiling and colonnades, the three actors (including God the Father) are however shown as though seen from directly in front, that is, not from a point of view looking up; this painting is on the high arch above the entrance to this chapel and therefore the view of the buildings in the image, as if seen from below, is coherent with our real point of view. But the two figures of the angel and the Virgin Mary (less so God, in the tondo between them) are not represented as if seen from below. Masolino is by no means unique in this, let's say, confusion of points of view; even during the Baroque period, when such views looking up from below (from the floor of a church for instance) into an imagined heavenly realm were perfected, this confusion occasionally persisted perhaps due, in the case of the Baroque, to the extreme foreshortening required by the logic of the viewpoint which would in fact render some figures - usually the principal ones - quite illegible! Whether or not Masolino inadvertently confused the two viewpoints we do not know but it is possible that he made a pragmatic decision concerning the three figures: given that his viewpoint for the architecture is extreme, and thus so would the view of the actors have had to be - making them appear distorted - he instead painted them from a different viewpoint. As far as the influence of this fresco's architecture is concerned, a compositional similarity is discernible in another Piero della Francesca painting, his Annunciation at the top of the Sant'Antonio polyptych altarpiece (before 1468) in Perugia! Although handled very differently by Piero, the general layout of the architectural spaces is not unlike Masolino's in San Clemente.

All photos taken by the author who reserves copyright.