|
|
|||
Andrea Mantegna
(1431-1506) - La Camera degli
Sposi (1467?-1474)
|
||||
|
||||
|
The
northern wall- the Court Legions of scholars have identified
everything that can be identified and noticed certain significant
absences. Historical archives, medallions, comments and political
vicissitudes at that time have allowed us to give a name, at times
hypothetic, to each person present or just glimpsed. These are admirable
and illuminated efforts, useful in a historical placement of the
represented scenes, but subject to different interpretations and font of
discussion that has come from a couple of disputable presumptions: that
Mantegna had completely followed the indications of his commissioner as
to what events to record and had “photographed” instead of
re-creating them. We prefer to be on safe ground. In
the court scene the protagonist is Ludovico who has just received
a letter from his secretary Marsilio Andreasi (but according to others
he is an unknown messenger: the identification is based on a medallion,
there being no other portraits of Andreasi). The marquis is in his bed
clothes with slippers, not really struck by what he has read. What the
letter really contained is the object of supposition: it could be the
announcement of the nomination in 1461 of his son Francesco (then
seventeen years old) as a cardinal, a political move of great importance
that sanctioned the official recognition of the Gonzaga family by the
Roman Curia. In this case Ludovico showed signs of admirable aplomb,
because along with the diplomatic success were united the good prospects
of a financial restoration for the ever suffering coffers of the marquis.
The other figure that dominates the scene is that of Barbara of
Brandenburg, wife of Ludovico, significantly placed in a central
position and surrounded by her children, Gianfancesco, who has his hands
on his brother Ludovico’s shoulders, Paola who is biting into an apple,
Rodolfo standing behind his mother and the beautiful Barbara beside her
nurse. According to other investigations, this last figure is probably
Paola Malatesta Gonzaga, the mother of Ludovico, who died in 1449 and
was painted in the monastic clothes in which she had been buried. The
figures in dark clothes behind Rodolfo and Gianfrancesco have been
identified as the great architect Leon Battista Alberti and Vittorino da
Feltre, the famous humanist called by the marquis Gianfancesco to teach
his own children. On the right are other court dignitaries,
recognisable by the Gonzaga family heraldic colours of their clothes –
a tunic with a white border and two-coloured trousers, red and grey –
and a different character wearing red hose, who seems to be waiting to
be received (an ambassador?). These last figures are leaning up against
the curtain that, in the left part however, is almost completely closed;
the new arrivals move it to enter and form, apart from a sense of
profundity, a good contrast for the compactness of the group formed by
Ludovico and his family. It is impossible to not observe the disquieting
dwarf, also because she is
the only one who is staring “straight ahead” with her rather severe
gaze fixed on the observer. She has not been identified but we do know
that (thanks to the research of Rodolfo Signorini) that the dog curled
up under Ludovico’s chair was one of his favourites and was called Rubino and died in 1467,
fifteen years before the work of art had been completed.
The
western wall- The Meeting The
meeting between Ludovico and some of his children took place in Bozzolo on the
first of January, 1462. The Marquis ( who was also the general
lieutenant of the Lombard Duchy) was on his way to Milan, called by
Bianca Maria Visconti to guarantee the continuity of power during the
illness of her husband, Francesco Sforza, which was thought to be fatal.
Federico and Francesco, however, returned from Milan where they had been
to thank the Sforza for their help in the nomination of the first
cardinal in the Gonzaga family. To the left, a vast part of the
fresco has been irrevocably lost due to infiltration of water in the
room, an air duct, above the small opening destined to hold a lamp and
candles. There remains only a hand
with a finger
indicating the scene and a
confusion of hypotheses as to whom it belonged. The scene is dominated
by the strong presence of Ludovico’s horse, decorated with the signs
of the radiant sun inserted into the crescent moon. The powerful size of
the horse, which reminds us of a Hungarian breed, manages to hide one of
the family - only a leg can be seen. Other members of the family hold
dogs on their leads, probably Great Danes and Bloodhounds. Below the arch in the rock and in
front of a walled
city full of towers is a curiosity – sketches of dromedaries, now only
monochromatic that allude to the procession of the Kings towards
Bethlehem and would confirm the date as the first of January. Partly
behind the false pillar are two characters in profile, one
with a letter
in his hand
and the other with a letter pushed into his hat, who might be of
interest but their faces have been completely re-painted during one of
the restorations. In the middle fresco, the architrave of the door,
slightly to one side in respect to the centre of the wall, serves as a
stand for the angels
that support
– tiredly, two have
renounced
the task – a large, false bronze plaque on which is written the
dedication with which Mantegna donates his work to Ludovico and Barbara.
This dedication is something new, unusual for its era: the marquis and
his wife do not appear as commissioners of this work of art, but it is
Mantegna himself who allows himself to dedicate it to them in a
relationship that is almost on a par. On the other hand, the high
opinion that Ludovico felt for Mantegna is well-documented. The writing
is in early Roman capital letters, then only recently discovered by
humanists such as Vittorino da Feltre and appreciated by Leon Battista
for its geometry and elegance and reads:
ILL.LODOVICO
IL M.M./PRINCIPI OPTIMO AC FIDE INVICTISSIMO/ ET ILL.BARBATAE EJUS/
CONIVGI MVLIERIVM GLOR./ INCOMPARIBILI/ SVVS ANDREAS MANTINA/ PATAVUS
OPUS HOC TENVE/ AD EORV DECVS ASBOLVIT/ ANNO MCCCCLXXIIII. Translated it reads: “ To the
illustrious Lodovico, second marquis of Mantua, excellent prince of true
faith, and to the illustrious Barbara, his wife, true glory of women,
their Andrea Mantegna, Paduan, this small work of art executed in their
honour, in the year 1474”. The date that marks the conclusion
of the work is considered reliable, whilst there are many hypotheses as
to the length of time which goes from almost a decade ( on the base of
the inscription 1465. D. 16 juni on slanted side of the northern window)
to that of only two summers. The divergence is far too great to face
this argument here, we prefer to observe the
butterfly wings of some angels. Of these
butterflies, all different and seemingly real, not imagined, we could,
perhaps, determine the names or at least the species. Let us continue. Before passing to the crowded
“Meeting” it is advisable to pause on the false pillar to the right
of the door. Of interest is the addition of profundity, given the
movement of the curtain pulled across the architrave, almost an exercise
in draping that here shows its blue reverse side (whilst the curtain of
the third panel has a grey reverse). Vasari writes about the
Camera
picta that “the style of draping is still a little crude and thin,
almost dry, but many things are painted well and with good will”.
Synthetic and shared. Continuing along the flourishing, floral
decoration of the pillar, more or less in line with the standing
angel’s faces is a little surprise: a hidden
self-portrait
of Mantegna. It is placed at a strange height, about three quarters (or rather five
eighths) up the pillar, perhaps not inserted at eye level to render it
less evident, perhaps in reply to some geometrical reason and to be a
focal point on the higher part of the pillar. Even the de-centralised
position of the door, highlighted by the symmetry of the false pillars
is a response to a mathematical calculation governed by the “divine
proportion”. To this regard, the three dogs beside the pillar on the
left can be placed in a golden section that Mantegna divided with the
genial idea of the Bloodhound with its nose in the air as its observes
the strange butterflies over the door. The last part of the western wall
contains the meeting between Ludovico and his son Francesco. The marquis,
perfectly in profile, wears his armour and carries his sword; his son is
already dressed as a cardinal and holds the hand of his little brother,
Ludovico who in turn holds out his hand to Sigismondo, Federico’s son
(who appears on the right edge of the scene with his cloak thrown over
his shoulders in a particular way). Signorini has, thanks to firmly
documented dates, recognized amongst the others the Emperor Federico III
in the character facing Federico and King Christian of Denmark, the
marquis’s brother in law, placed slightly behind the other two with
his violet captain’s beret. It should be said that in the past this
last figure was mistaken for a self-portrait of Mantegna or a portrait
of Leon Battista Alberti or even Vittorino da Feltre. The dog behind
Ludovico however is a pleasant example of the Lagotto
di Romagna species. The young boy between
Ludovico and Francesco is Gianfrancesco, another of Federico’s sons.
The presence of these children constitutes an anachronism in respect to
the date of the meeting; in 1462 Gianfrancesco and Sigismondo were not
yet born and Ludovico was less than a year old. But what was the problem
when the idea was to celebrate the Gonzaga family, perhaps to mention
the Marquis’s hope of having not only his child but also some
grandchildren well placed inside the Curia?
“Pitiless”
portraits? Mantegna liked to paint his figures
as they were, no adulation and no embellishing, at the most he used
small tricks to hide the more evident faults, to paint them “in an
old-fashioned way” using perhaps a cloak, as in the Meeting, to
hide Federico’s hunchback. Hunchbacks were in Ludovico’s family, so
much so that the marquise Barbara admitted that at least four out of her
ten children had “defects” but the others were not exactly
“beautiful and straight” as was affirmed and the small Gonzagas
in the Camera
picta appear ugly and rachitic. The profile of the girl with the apple is as
painful to look at as that of her little brother behind, and the
confrontation with the chubby angels without protruding foreheads
holding the scroll is cruel. Ludovico appears tired, his wife has a hard
face, Gianfrancesco’s weight seems emphasized, cardinal Francesco’s
expression does not exactly shine. The daughter Barbara, charming but
not overwhelming, was known as “the Beautiful” at court. The
Camera
degli Sposi was also the object of a publication in a magazine
concerning endocrinology, where the subject of dwarfism as a consequence
of inter-marriage, a widely diffused policy to reinforce alliances and
dynasties, was discussed. To confirm the scarce availability that
Mantegna showed with regard to doctoring the painting of his figures
remains the episode of Isabella d’ Este, who judged her portrait as
being “ so badly painted…..it does not resemble me”. Galeazzo
Maria Sforza had the sketches for his portrait burnt “ they appear to
have not been done well”. But both Isabella and Galeazzo were not
ready to accept Mantegna’s “natural” style of representation
whereas in Mantua it was accepted without protest even if the marquis
and his family had been painted in a nearly-cruel manner. Certainly,
Ludovico admitted that “Andrea could use some more grace in painting
portraits”. |
Text by
E-mail - |
Parete
settentrionale - La Corte Schiere
di studiosi hanno identificato tutto l’identificabile, e colto anche
certune assenze significative. Archivi storici, medaglie, commentari e
vicende politiche dell’epoca hanno permesso di dare un nome, a volte
certo, a volte ipotetico, a ogni persona presente o anche solo
accennata. Sono sforzi lodevoli e illuminanti, utili per la collocazione
storica delle scene rappresentate, ma soggetti a interpretazioni
discordi e fonti di diatribe che partono da una coppia di presupposti
discutibili: che Mantegna abbia seguito alla lettera le indicazioni del
suo mecenate sugli avvenimenti da ricordare, e che li abbia
“fotografati” anziché ricreati. |
.
|
|