DOI article:
Frinta, Mojmír Svatopluk: Some Thought-provoking Musing: Angevino - Luxemburgian - Corvinian
DOI Page / Citation link:https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.51730#0084
Fig. 4 -Madonna, 14th Century. Barletta, S. Giacomo (Apulia)
S. Maria a Giano, now in the Diocesan Museum
in Bisceglie reproduces also these linear features
despite the fact that it is a replica of the Trecen-
to original.14 The Apulian and Adriatic examples
belong to the same iconographie scheine as the
Mariazell on which the Child is held at the right
arm of Mary, a feature already used in the En-
throned Madonna di Ripalta in Cerignano and
also in several Bohemian Madonnas, whereas
more usual in Middle Byzantine icons and in It-
aly is the Hodigitria type with the Christchild at
Her left arm. Andrea Vanni did not use the Child
at the left in his Madonnas but he used dense
patterning of the garment, often in the sgraffito
technique, favored first by Simone Martini, and
the Mariazell Virgin seems to feature such
a pattern. Upon the considération of these oc-
currences, I think that it is more plausible to see
this Madonna as belonging among the Madon-
nas painted in the Italian eastern littoral around
the middle and in the third quarter of the four-
teenth Century. This is the region through which
the traveller to and from Naples would have been
going to reach a harbor (Ancona?) to cross the
sea to Dalmatia, and the painting may have been
acquired there. I am anxious to find
a photograph of the Mariazell Madonna with her
sheathing removed to see the halos in order to
appraise whether they are related to the paint-
ings in Apulia and in the Marches.
The subject of the Madonna of Czçstochowa
seemingly does not belong to our topic but the
interprétation of the various ex-post traditions
makes the discussion justifiable. It is not only
the ultimate location of the work of art that con-
cerns us but important are also the channels of
transmission. Attention mus be paid to the tradi-
tion maintaining that the painting can be con-
nected with the foundation of the monastery of
the Pauline hermit order in Jasna Góra in 1382
and the personage of Ladislaus of Opole who
was a palatin at both courts, Hungarian and
Polish. According to this tradition, the Pauline
monks came from the monastery of St. Lawrence
in Buda, and a connection with the Anjou soci-
ety seems to be suggested. Confusing, it seems
to me, is a side-tracking tradition about the
presence of this Madonna in a South Moravian
Dominican monastery in Uherský Brod from
which it would have reached Hungary in the early
14th Century.
The painting is unfortunately heavily repain-
ted or reconstructed which intervention is by tra-
dition assigned to 1430 when the painting would
have been severely damaged in wrecking the
monastery so that any stylistic judgment is very
precarious. Especially the countenance of the
Christchild lacks any feeling of authenticity.15 On
the other hand, the face of the Virgin has a quite
spécifie expression which makes nie feel that it
perhaps reflects the original appearance.
78
S. Maria a Giano, now in the Diocesan Museum
in Bisceglie reproduces also these linear features
despite the fact that it is a replica of the Trecen-
to original.14 The Apulian and Adriatic examples
belong to the same iconographie scheine as the
Mariazell on which the Child is held at the right
arm of Mary, a feature already used in the En-
throned Madonna di Ripalta in Cerignano and
also in several Bohemian Madonnas, whereas
more usual in Middle Byzantine icons and in It-
aly is the Hodigitria type with the Christchild at
Her left arm. Andrea Vanni did not use the Child
at the left in his Madonnas but he used dense
patterning of the garment, often in the sgraffito
technique, favored first by Simone Martini, and
the Mariazell Virgin seems to feature such
a pattern. Upon the considération of these oc-
currences, I think that it is more plausible to see
this Madonna as belonging among the Madon-
nas painted in the Italian eastern littoral around
the middle and in the third quarter of the four-
teenth Century. This is the region through which
the traveller to and from Naples would have been
going to reach a harbor (Ancona?) to cross the
sea to Dalmatia, and the painting may have been
acquired there. I am anxious to find
a photograph of the Mariazell Madonna with her
sheathing removed to see the halos in order to
appraise whether they are related to the paint-
ings in Apulia and in the Marches.
The subject of the Madonna of Czçstochowa
seemingly does not belong to our topic but the
interprétation of the various ex-post traditions
makes the discussion justifiable. It is not only
the ultimate location of the work of art that con-
cerns us but important are also the channels of
transmission. Attention mus be paid to the tradi-
tion maintaining that the painting can be con-
nected with the foundation of the monastery of
the Pauline hermit order in Jasna Góra in 1382
and the personage of Ladislaus of Opole who
was a palatin at both courts, Hungarian and
Polish. According to this tradition, the Pauline
monks came from the monastery of St. Lawrence
in Buda, and a connection with the Anjou soci-
ety seems to be suggested. Confusing, it seems
to me, is a side-tracking tradition about the
presence of this Madonna in a South Moravian
Dominican monastery in Uherský Brod from
which it would have reached Hungary in the early
14th Century.
The painting is unfortunately heavily repain-
ted or reconstructed which intervention is by tra-
dition assigned to 1430 when the painting would
have been severely damaged in wrecking the
monastery so that any stylistic judgment is very
precarious. Especially the countenance of the
Christchild lacks any feeling of authenticity.15 On
the other hand, the face of the Virgin has a quite
spécifie expression which makes nie feel that it
perhaps reflects the original appearance.
78