Vittorio Sgarbi
“For some time now, the ideology of certainty, of necessity, has been replaced by a more cautious and complex interpretative exercise. Man had to place himself at the disposal of chance, of the unknown in a creative cohabitation with the inexpressible, the unspeakable, the unpredictable. In this new context, we can know something about the things that surround us only to the extent that our codes of interpretation multiply until we become a real creative filter”.
Leonardo's creative complexity forces us to an interpretation that goes far beyond the perceived fact. His creativity alludes, on the one hand, to the idea of creation from which the human being results first between parties and on the other hand characterizes it as capable of "bringing into the world" the new. The desire for innovation is combined with that of crossing the limit by creating the transcendent.
La Virgin of the Rocks del Louvre, una tela su tavola, dipinta da Leonardo nel periodo milanese (1483-1486), era, destinata alla Cappella della Concezione nella chiesa di San Francesco Grande a Milano. Chiesa soppressa nel 1798 e demolita nel 1806. Secondo le ricostruzioni il dipinto avrebbe dovuto costituire la tavola centrale di un trittico collocato nell’ordine inferiore di una grande ancona composta, anche, da rocce in rilievo lignee e dorate.
We know what the clients intended to depict: a Madonna and Child surrounded by angels and prophets, on the side panels musician angels: "two singing and two playing" on each side. The work kept in the Louvre does not correspond to the provisions of the contract. Just as the other version does not correspond, the one found in the National Gallery in London from the church of San Francesco Grande which was considered less ambiguous in its dogmatic meaning.
"Surrounded by an ambiguous halo of magical power, of enchantments, of non-natural seductions", thus Vasari, in the first draft of The Quick (1550), describes Leonardo.
Many art historians have dedicated themselves to reading this work and, as always, especially for Leonardo, the results achieved must be remembered to write an organic story in continuous movement. This text will hardly succeed - due to the limited space dedicated to it - in opening up new interpretative scenarios, on the contrary it will rely on authoritative sources.
“Here we will limit the investigation to the search for the 'message made up of iconic signals that generate meaning and therefore belong to a defined cultural system'. And that the main road must be that of iconism is partially confirmed in Leonardo's biography and in the fact that his literary culture, one of the possible sources to be investigated for the purpose of understanding the visual text, would not be fruitful”.
“The neutral ground on which artists and men of letters in Florence could easily meet and wander in the decade 1470-1480 was not that of Hellenizing and Neoplatonic Humanism, nor that of style new umanistico e toscano insieme, inaugurato proprio allora dal Poliziano. Era il terreno trito e spianato di una letteratura popolareggiante che si alimentava della conversazione, improvvisazione e declamazione da taverna e di piazza: novelle, facezie, proverbi, indovinelli, rime equivoche e sentenziose, canzoni a ballo e sirventesi (canto composto per il proprio signore da un servo o da un cortigiano), romanzi e cantari; quella letteratura insomma di dove usciva in quegli stessi anni il Morgante, poema più importante di Luigi Pulci (edita nel 1478) e di dove erano usciti nell’età di Cosimo i sonetti del Burchiello, e che tuttavia era dominata dalla grande ombra, solenne e domestica, della Comedy di Dante. Quel tipo di letteratura che ha lasciato tracce nei manoscritti di Leonardo”.
The identity of the characters depicted are easily recognized. In order: San Giovannino, the Madonna, an angel and baby Jesus. Less easy, as in all of Leonardo's works, is to identify their meaning.
To do this, I think it is appropriate to approach the painting by isolating the individual constituents, to bring out what each element conceals. Only then can we practice a mode of operation able to relate them to each other to try to shed light on the indecipherable, the invisible.
“Dal punto di vista della descrizione meramente fenomenica, Maria è il centro pittorico e funge da bridge tra la parte sinistra del quadro e la destra, i veri centri tematici, e al di là delle evidenze formali la cosa diventa manifesta se solo si traccia una linea verticale che divida il quadro a metà. La parte sinistra si direbbe il lato terreno, non a caso Maria tocca, stabilendo una complicità fisica, il San Giovannino che come lei è figura eminentemente umana. Mentre il lato destro è quello soprannaturale della fede, occupato da un Dio che si è fatto uomo, e che manifesta la sua doppia natura toccando la terra con la mano sinistra e mantenendo la contiguità fisico-spaziale con un’Entità, l’angelo (?) dalla quale sembra ricevere addirittura sostegno. Nonostante la netta divisione tutto e tutti sono in relazione tra loro grazie a un dialogo muto fatto di direttrici dello sguardo, elementi del paesaggio, “toccamenti” e gesti mimici. Su questi ultimi, in particolare, risulta opportuno soffermarsi alla luce della lucida tassonomia formalizzata dall’Arnheim:”
Più genericamente, potremmo distinguere sei tipi di comportamento che le mani possono rappresentare: […] communicative, per esempio additare o far cenno; symbolic, per esempio giungere le mani per la preghiera, dare la benedizione […]; sign, per esempio un certo numero di dita alzate ad indicare quantità. Con questo immenso repertorio le mani sono eminentemente atte ad inscenare “microtemi”, vale a dire rappresentazioni simboliche del soggetto generale di un’opera accanto al centro della rappresentazione. Come rappresentanti semplificate della figura umana, esse inscenano simbolici spettacoli di marionette che riflettono con sorprendente immediatezza la storia dell’opera.
Il lato destro, abitato da Gesù bambino e dall’angelo, appare, in prima lettura, di facile interpretazione – ingenuamente si potrebbe pensare che le posture dei due personaggi e in particolare i loro gesti con le dita, possano indicarci la chiave di lettura - ma presto ci si accorge che, come sempre in Leonardo, niente è ciò che sembra. La Madonna pur partecipe di entrambe le dimensioni si limita a fare da ‘garante’ (testimone e tramite) della ‘narrazione’ che viene articolata con l’utilizzo della sua hand-dome sinistra; Il Gesù bambino, invece, alza la mano destra col gesto allineato a chi parla al San Giovannino, mentre la mano sollevata dell’Entità, la destra, apparentemente, si limita a indicare il santo.
“Ecco le raccomandazioni rivolte a chi si avventura nella lettura di un’opera dal punto di vista dei movimenti espressivi: «ci sono almeno due esigenze da rispettare. I movimenti devono organizzarsi in configurazioni che possano essere facilmente intese, e devono trovarsi in contesti che siano abbastanza univoci per essere interpretati», non si può non notare che il gesto dell’Entità, così come quello del bambin Gesù, già allocutorio e benedicente insieme sembrerebbe avere una valenza assai più articolata di quella immediatamente percepibile. Non v’è dubbio che con il suo gesto ‘assegni’ il ruolo chiave al futuro Baptist, drawing our attention to him; but, with the index finger at the same time it forms a '1', which could denote the Holy Spirit the 'finger of God, cooperating with the Father and the Son in the unity of their action', and that is the element which, if added to the '2' I am Father and Son, the number easily deducible from the gesture of Christ, would compose the Holy Trinity.
"As it is written in the Gospel, and verifiable in the tradition illustrated by innumerable pictorial examples, the second Trinitarian manifestation takes place on the banks of the Jordan, when the Holy Spirit arrives from above in the form of a dove at the act of Christ's baptism by the Baptist". One above all is the Baptism of Christby Piero della Francesca.
The light hand of the Entity that hovers over the head of the infant seems to replace the dove, not only that, the thin and turgid index finger is exactly on the horizontal line that connects it to the joined hands of San Giovannino, as if it were an anticipation of what will happen on the banks of the Jordan. Above, as if it were a roof, the docile hand draws the small house of Mary to recall the moment and place in which the Trinity manifested itself on earth for the first time on the occasion of theAnnunciation.
The question of the "one and triune" deserves ample study but, given the limited objective of this volume, one can resort to a consideration by Claudio Bottini:
I Padri della Chiesa Orientale, per esempio, considerando le operazioni delle Persone divine parlano del Padre come del soggetto agente, del Figlio come della sua potenza operativa e dello Spirito come dell’azione che ne risulta. Nello Spirito infatti il Padre tocca il mondo. Lo Spirito Santo procede dalla natura del Padre, di cui è l’effetto agente. Procede anche dal Figlio perché l’azione risulta dalla potenza; procede inoltre dal Padre attraverso il Figlio, perché il Padre porta ad esecuzione l’azione attraverso la potenza. The Spirit reveals the Trinity as it is the divine action which communicates God's graces to the world.
“That the Entity does not limit itself to indicating, but is in direct relationship with the idea of 'One', seems to find further confirmation in the vertical line that connects it to the soaring rock-pinnacle, clearly visible on the bottom thanks to a crack in the cave. This detail, external to the cave but even framed by it, recalls a column with its strongly verticalized shape and the hinted grooves at the base. It is a simple hypothesis, however as a column the rock would contribute to corroborate and unify the general theological setting if, with Daniel Arasse, one considers that: “figure tout à la fois de l'humanity et de la divinity du Christ, la colonne, accompagnée ou non de la colombe et de la figure de Dieu le Père, donne à voir l’infigurable et l’invisible”.
“If this were really the case, it would be the demonstration of Leonardo's profuse commitment to give shape and visibility (sayability) to a Christian "mystery" without resorting to simple tricks or stereotyped solutions. Leonardo, although influenced by the pervasive Milanese religiosity shaped by the figure of Sant'Ambrogio, seems to want to resort to originality capable of showing the mystery, the invisible.”
Kenneth Clark ha individuato come nel cartone Sant'Anna, the Madonna, the Child and San Giovannino (1501-1505) si ritrovino gesticolazioni del tutto simili all’opera in esame: Gesù bambino configura un ‘2’ con la mano, Sant’Anna compie il gesto dell’indice, in questa occasione rivolto verso l’alto.
The work The Virgin of the Rocks it is structured on the basis of a dense network of only apparently invisible relationships and this is reaffirmed by the dome shape of the rocks that mimic and recall the movement of the dome-hand of the Madonna overlooking Mary, the child Baptist and San Giovannino with joined hands.
We know how much the artist dedicated himself to the subjects' hands, giving them the task not only of 'indicating', but of revealing the characters' character by harmonizing the state of mind with the rest of the body. Giotto is the forerunner of this practice that ennobles every single character.
The ideological division of the picture in half, with both mimetic rock formations being on the left, where the landscape also opens up acquiring depth, highlights the substantial affinity between man and nature: an aspect animistic presente nel pensiero di Leonardo e documentato da un frammento del Codex Leicester.
Ultimately Leonardo, believer or not, was undoubtedly a communicator, albeit undoubtedly creative for the times, and while he explains and illustrates the mystery of the "Trinitarian dogma" and the importance of baptism to the young San Giovanni, who implores Jesus with folded hands, at the same time he explains to the spectators, also with folded hands, we can assume, the narrative signs of the Entity's presence.
Ritroviamo anche in quest’opera la costante Leonardesca: l’azione, il movimento evidente ed intimo, l’emozione. Pare sia questa l’origine dell’andamento circolare: andata, dal terreno al divino, da sinistra verso destra, e ritorno, svelamento di ruolo e dogma a destra e, tramite sguardo e gesto dell’angelo, nuovamente a sinistra passando per lo spettatore. Non a caso il San Giovannino è isolato sulla sinistra del quadro, mentre la gesticolazione chiarificatrice è concentrata sul lato destro e stratificata lungo una verticale in asse con la testa di Gesù. Almeno in questo Leonardo si attiene alla tradizione: “nell’arte cristiana l’orientamento del tempo è indicato da sinistra a destra per chi guarda il quadro”. In realtà Leonardo si attiene alla tradizione anche nella concezione del battesimo interpretandolo come un rito di passaggio, dalla terra al cielo, dalla materia allo spirito
“In conclusione l’aspetto più irrituale […] di quest’opera sembrerebbe consistere nell’abilità con la quale viene costruito un universo di senso dall’andamento narrativo verosimile in cui, tuttavia, la sceneggiatura manifesta qualcosa d’incompatibile con l’enciclopedia religiosa presupposta dall’opera stessa e dalla sua destinazione. E cioè, nello specifico, l’insistito invito a guardare alla dimensione terrena, in particolare all’uomo rappresentato sia dal santo, sia dagli spettatori all’esterno dell’opera. Al dunque un testo visivo il cui senso è idealmente e concettualmente accentrato rispetto al centro geometrico di superficie, che pure è e resta formalmente occupato dall’immagine della Vergine. Insomma, osservando questa Virgin of the Rocks, così intellettuale e ‘indipendente’ da regole rigidamente poste, pur tra i tanti dubbi non si può non condividere almeno la pacata considerazione di Gigetta Dalli Regoli: ‘Il Painting book di Leonardo, se considerato in rapporto all’attività concreta dell’artista, dalla giovinezza alla maturità, rivela che l’apparato teorico, complessivamente incline alla moderazione, non corrisponde del tutto agli interventi innovativi del pittore’ ”.
The comparison with the other version, finished close to 1506, the one visible at the National Gallery in London will help us to reveal more. The general layout seems the same, but the message has changed profoundly. “Here some details are emphasized and others literally disappeared or, with slight modifications, weakened if not changed in meaning. The raised hand of the Virgin, for example, previously so similar to a dome, now appears relaxed, flattened, and thus attributable to what Baxandall considers a gesture of 'invitation and expression of welcome'. In order not to take unnecessary risks, and at the same time eliminate a reference that would no longer find its equivalent, even the large hand of rock (disguised at the top left side of the cave) dissolves and leaves room for harmless plant elements.
Non basta, per soffocare ogni velleità terrena il San Giovannino esibisce una vistosa croce di canna (il bastone di canna è notoriamente attributo iconografico del Battista). Il suo ridimensionamento al ruolo di non protagonista è completo.
In this new guise he already knows everything he needs to know, he no longer needs to interpret the signs, his figure has been transformed into that of a herald. But the most sensational removal is related to the Entity's hand: it simply no longer exists, erased forever together with the fluffy silk sleeves with its load of meanings; just as the "column" on the bottom is jagged, resembling even more what it appears to be: a simple eroded rock.
E l’osservatore all’esterno del quadro? Non è più implicato dallo sguardo di quello che ora potrebbe essere effettivamente considerato un semplice angelo, ha subito una sorte simile a quella del Battista. In questa Virgin of the Rocksin fact, the angel keeps his original posture but loses his smile and his eyes, now clear, stare at the 'internal' void. The spectator has therefore become a totally foreign guest who is only asked to observe a scene that does not require his active contribution.
Everything fades, including the colors of the clothes and the skin of the protagonists. The anomaly has returned, the "mystery", which previously seemed unable to do without the human being, no longer needs the mystery depicted by the elaborate deictic movements of the gaze and hands that signaled the narrative path. Nor, least of all, of man's ability to interpret and investigate”.
LA “VERGINE DELLE ROCCE” NELLA VERSIONE CHERAMY
The existence of a forgotten version of the Virgin of the Rocks, a masterpiece created under the supervision of Leonardo by masters or students associated with him, and immediately traced back to the two paintings kept in the Musée du Louvre in Paris and in the National Gallery in London, was ascertained around 1845 following its discovery by the neoclassical painter Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres (1780-1867). Both paintings of the Virgin of the Rocks of Paris and London have enjoyed a considerable iconographic fortune which has seen the subject replicated in faithful copies, replicas and free shots. For both the first and second versions, there are currently about thirty reproductions which attest to how the subject was evidently in great demand and therefore highly appreciated both in Italy and in France, even if from a stylistic point of view – apart from a few exceptions – very often there is a loss of quality compared to the original models by the Lombard masters who made, in many cases, only sterile repetitions of little importance and copies of copies lacking Leonardo's canons.
Perhaps the most interesting group consists of reproductions derived from Virgin of the Rocks of the Louvre whether these were taken from the original or, as hypothesized, from cartoons or drawings. Among these, the Cheramy version is one of the most faithful versions. Carlo Pedretti, one of the leading experts on the life and works of Leonardo da Vinci, in his book Leonardo da Vinci. The "Virgin of the Rocks" in the Cheramy Version. Its history and critical success. Ed: CB Edizioni, 2017, aims to take stock of the Cheramy prototype with a section dedicated to the father of world cinema, Sergei M. Eisenstein. In the same volume Sara Taglialagamba traces the events of the commissions to Leonardo of the two versions of the Virgin of the Rocks now at the Musée du Louvre in Paris and at the National Gallery in London to then move on to the part that reconstructs the events of the painting with two insights into the restorations and other copies of derivations from the London version. Then follows a second part with a double signature by Carlo Pedretti with The Cheramy painting in the exhibition promoted by the King of Sweden (published in 1983) and by Gabriella Ferri Piccaluga with Σοφία (published in 1994) which offers an interesting look at the immaculate and amadeist theories of the time which would have influenced the iconography of the subject in a considerable way.
In the context of the jubilee events, in Senigallia, in the province of Ancona, in the Palazzo del Duca from 28 October 2016 to 29 January 2017 on the occasion of the exhibition CMother of mercy was exhibited there Virgin of the Rocks Chèramy, so called because it is included in the important collection of PA Cheramy in Paris. As has already been said, Dominique Ingres, convinced of Leonardo's authorship, gave an account of this third version only at the end of the 19th century. Starting in 1908, the picture was sold several times to private collectors and in 1991 Pietro Marani confirmed the attribution of the Virgin and a good part of the angel to Leonardo, while the rest of the painting was, it is believed, done by the workshop. This table, today attributed to the hand of Leonardo with the assistance of a pupil (Boltraffio?).
VITTORIO SGARBI
1 Aldo G. Gargani, The creative filter, Rome, Laterza Editors, 1999.
Claudio A. Barzaghi, The obvious and the hidden in Leonardo's Virgin of the Rocks, in «Fogli e Parole d'Arte», 18 June 2013 (https://www.foglidarte.it/il-rinascimento-oggi/321-il-palese-e-il-nascosto-nella-vergine-delle-rocce-di-leonardo.html).
Ivi. Rudolf Arnheim, The power of center, Los Angeles University of California Press, 1982, p. 167.
There. Gombrich's quotation is taken from EH Gombrich, Action and expression in western art, in, Paths towards art, Milan, Leonardo, 2003, p. 114.
There.
GC Bottini, The "hands" of God, in «The Holy Land», June 5, 1998.
D. Arasse, Annonciation/Enonciation. Remarques sur un énoncé pictural du Quattrocento, “VS Versus”, n. 37, January-April 1984, p. 7. In Claudio A. Barzaghi, The obvious and the hidden in Leonardo's Virgin of the Rocks, in «Fogli e Parole d'Arte», 18 June 2013 (https://www.foglidarte.it/il-rinascimento-oggi/321-il-palese-e-il-nascosto-nella-vergine-delle-rocce-di-leonardo.html).
Claudio A. Barzaghi, The obvious and the hidden in Leonardo's Virgin of the Rocks, in «Fogli e Parole d'Arte», 18 June 2013 (https://www.foglidarte.it/il-rinascimento-oggi/321-il-palese-e-il-nascosto-nella-vergine-delle-rocce-di-leonardo.html) .
There.
There. For the text by Gigetta Dalli Regoli see G. Dalli Regoli, The gesture and the hand, Florence, Olschki, 2000, p. 11.
Claudio A. Barzaghi, The overt and the hidden in Leonardo's Virgin of the Rocks, in «Fogli e Parole d'Arte», 18 June 2013 (https://www.foglidarte.it/il-rinascimento-oggi/321-il-palese-e-il-nascosto-nella-vergine-delle-rocce-di-leonardo.html).
For some time, the ideology of certainty and necessity has been replaced by a more cautious and complex exercise of interpretation. Man had to make himself available to chance,
to the unknown in a creative cohabitation with the inexpressible, the unspeakable, the unpredictable. In this next context, we can know something about the things that surround us only to the extent that our codes of interpretation multiply until they become a true creative filter”.
The creative complexity of Leonardo forces us to a reading that goes well beyond known information. His creativity alludes, on the one hand, to the idea of creation of which the human being is prim - an inter partes, and on the other hand, characterises him as capable of “bringing into the world” something wholly new. His desire for innovation combines with surpassing all limits to reach the transcendent.
The Virgin of the Rocks, a canvas on panel, painted by Leonardo in his first Milanese period (1483-1486) was meant for the Chapel of the Immaculate Conception in the church of San Francesco Grande in Milan, a church suppressed in 1798 and demolished in 1806. According to reconstructions, the painting should have occupied the central portion of a triptych located in the lower register of a great altarpiece, also composed of gilt wooden rocks in relief.
We know what it should have represented, according to the intentions of the patrons: a Madonna and Child, accompanied by angels and prophets with musical angels on the two lateral panels: “due che canteno e due che soneno”. The work, now in the Louvre, does not correspond to the actual commissioning contract, nor does it correlate with the other version, now found in The National Gallery in London, that came from San Francesco Grande a work less ambiguous in its dogmatic portrayal.
Vasari described Leonardo in his first edition of The Quick (1550) as “circondato da un alone ambiguo di potenza magica, di incantamenti, di non naturali seduzioni”.
Many art historians have dedicated themselves to interpreting this work, and, as always, in particular for Leonardo, past results must be remembered in order to write a coherent story that is still in continuous movement.This text will scarcely succeed – due to the narrowness of the space allotted here – to introduce new interpretative theses, but will rely on the proven authoritative sources that follow.
“Here we will limit the inquiry to the search for the ‘message composed of iconic signals that generate meaning and therefore belong to a defined cultural system’. And that the primary path must be that of ico nography, that is partially confirmed in the biography of Leonardo and in the fact that his literary culture, one of the possible sources for this investigation in order to understand the visual text, would not be fruitful”.
“The neutral ground on which artists and literati in Florence could easily meet and chat with each other around 1470-1480, wasn’t that of the Hellenizing and Neoplatonic humanism, nor that of the humanistic Tuscan style new inaugurated just then by Poliziano. It was the common- place and base popularized literature nourished by conversation, improvisation and discourse at the tavern and in the square: short stories, jokes, proverbs, riddles, equivocal and pompous rhymes, songs for dancing and servantsi (songs composed for one’s own master by a servant or courtier), novels and to sing – that literature out of which Luigi Pulci’s most important poem, “Morgante” (published in 1478) came and when the sonnets of Burchiello had appeared during the age of Cosimo, which was, however, overshadowed by that solemn and traditional work, The comedy by Dante – the kind of literature that left traces in Leonardo’s manuscripts”.
The identity of personages featured one can easily recognize in or- der: St. John, theVirgin Mary, and angel and the Christ child. Less easy, as in all works by Leonardo, is identifying the meaning.To do this, it is necessary to approach the painting by isolating the individual constituents, to bring out what each element hides. Only then will we be able to practice a mode of operation capable of relating them to each other and attempt to shed light on the indecipherable, the invisible.
“From the point of view of the purely formal description, Mary is at the center of the picture and provides a bridge between the left part of the painting and the right part, the true thematic center, and beyond the formal evidence elements? it becomes manifest if one traces a vertical line that divides the painting in half. The left part, one could say the earthly side, not by chance the part that Mary touches, establishes a physical connection, while the infant St. John who, like her, is eminently human. The right half is the supernatural side of faith, occupied by God-made-man, who manifests his double nature by touching the earth with his left hand and maintaining physical-spatial unity with an Entity, the angel(?), from whom he even seems to receive support. Despite the clear division, everything and everyone are related to each other, thanks to a silent dialogue comprised of the directions of their gazes, elements of the landscape, “touches”, and mimed gestures. On the latter, in particular, it is appropriate to dwell in the light of the lucid taxonomy formulated by Arnheim:”
More generically, we can distinguish six types of behavior that the hands may represent: [...] communicative, e.g. pointing or beckoning; symbolic, e.g., folding the hands for prayer, giving the blessing [...] sign language, e.g., a num- ber of fingers raised to indicate quantity. With this extensive repertoire the hands are eminently suited to acting out “microthemes”, that is, symbolic representations of a work’s overall subject near the center of the composition.... As simplified standins for human figures they perform symbolic puppet plays that reflect the story of the work with striking immediacy.
The right side, inhabited by the baby Jesus and the angel, appears at first easy to interpret – naively one might think that the postures of the two protagonists and, in particular, their hand gestures could indicate the key to reading the work – but we soon realize that, as always in Leonardo, nothing is what it appears to be. The Madonna, who participates in both worlds, merely acts as a “guarantor” (witness and in- termediary) of the ‘narration’, which is articulated with the use of her arched left hand (hand-dome); the baby Jesus, instead, raises his right hand in a gesture of speaking blessing? to the infant St. John, while the raised right hand of the Entity, apparently simply points to the saint.
“Here are the recommendations for those who venture into reading the work from the point of view of expressive movements: ‘There are at least two exigencies to respect. The movements should be organized in a configuration that they can be easily understood, and they must be in contexts that are unambiguous enough to be interpreted’, one cannot fail to notice that the gesture of the Entity, as well as that of the baby Jesus, already addressing and blessing together, it would seem to have a much more complex account than is immediately apparent. There is no doubt that with his gesture he assigns the key role to the future Baptist, drawing our attention to him; but, with the index finger contemporaneously forming a “1’, which could denote the Holy Spirit, the hand of God, cooperating with the Father and the Son in the unity of their action’, that is the element that if added to the ‘2’ I am the Father and Son, the number easily deduced by the gesture of Christ, would comprise the Holy Trinity”.
“As it is written in the Gospel and traceable in the tradition illustrated by countless pictorial examples, the second Trinitarian mani festation takes place on the banks of the river Jordan, when the Holy Spirit comes down from above in the form of a white dove when Christ is baptised precisely by the Baptiser himself”. One of the best examples is the Baptism of Christ by Piero della Francesca.
The light hand of the Entity that hovers over the head of the child seems to replace the dove, but not only that, the thin distended index finger is on the exact horizontal plane that connects it to the prayerful hands of the infant St. John, almost in anticipation of what will happen later along the shores of the Jordan River. Above, as if it were a roof, the docile hand forms the little house of Mary, recalling the moment and place where the Trinity was manifested on earth for the first time with the Annunciation.
The question of the “one and triune” deserves a broader study, but in absence of that opportunity here, given the precise objective of this volume, one can consider the words of Claudio Bottini:
The Fathers of the Eastern Church, for example, considering the operations of the Divine Persons, speak of the Fa- ther as the acting agent, the Son as the operative power and the Holy Spirit as the resulting action. In fact, through the Holy Spirit, the Father touches the world.The Holy Spirit proceeds from the nature of the Father, from whom he effects the result. It also proceeds from the Son, because the action results from power; it also proceeds from the Father through the Son because the Father carries out the action through power.The Holy Spirit reveals theTrinity, as it is the divine action that communicates to the world the grace of God.
“That the Entity does not limit itself to it indicating gesture, but is directly related to the idea of the “One”, it seems to find further confirmation in the vertical line that connects it to the towering pinnacle of the rocks, clearly seen on the bottom, thanks to a crack in the cave. This detail, on the exterior of the grotto but precisely framed by it, resembles a column with its strong verticality and the marked grooves at its base. It is a simple hypothesis, but as a column, the rock would help to corroborate and unify the general theological approach, if, we agree with Daniel Arasse, who wrote: “figure tout à la fois de l’humanity and some divinity du Christ, la colonne, accompagnée ou non de la colombe et de la figure de Dieu le Père, donne à voir l’infigurable et l’invisible”.
“If this were really the case, it would demonstrate Leonardo’s efforts to give shape and visibility (readability) to a Christian “mystery” without resorting to simple tricks or stereotyped solutions.Although influenced by the pervasive religiosity shaped by the figure of St.Ambrose, Leonardo seems to want to return to an originality capable of evincing the mystery, the invisible”.
Kenneth Clark identified how in the cartoon of The Virgin and Child with St. Anne and John the Baptist (1501-1505), we find gestures quite similar to the work in question: the baby Jesus forms a “2” with his hand; St. Anne completes the gesture with her index finger, in this case pointing it above.
The Virgin of the Rocks is structured on a dense network of relations which seems invisible, yet is confirmed by the form of the dome- shaped rocks that mimic and recall the the arched hand of the Madonna, as they tower over Mary, the Christ child, and the infant St. John with his clasped hands.
We know how much the artist dedicated himself to hands of his subjects, conferring to them the task of not only indicating, but also of revealing the character of the protagonists, harmonizing their state of mind with their bodies. Giotto is the forerunner of this practice that ennobles each of the figures.
The ideological division at the center of the painting, namely the two mimetic rock formations on the left, exactly where the landscape opens up to achieve depth, highlights the considerable affinity between man and nature: an animist particularity present in Leonardo’s thought and documented in a fragment in the Codex Leicester.
Leonardo, whether a believer or not, was without a doubt a communicator, and, of course, creative for his time in explaining the mystery of the “trinitarian dogma” and the importance of the baptism by St. John, who implores Jesus with clasped hands; but, he also explains to the viewer, with their hands too clasped in prayer, we suppose, the narrative signs of the presence of the Entity.
We find in this work the constant Leonardian tropes: action, clear and intimate movement, emotion. This seems to be the origin of the circular trend: from the earthly to the divine, from left to right and back the unveiling of the role of dogma at the right, and through the angel’s gaze and gesture left again passing by the viewer. It is not by chance that the infant St. John is isolated on the left of the painting, while the clarifying gesticulations are concentrated on the right side and layered along a vertical axis aligned on the head of Jesus.At least in this Leonardo abides by tradition: “in Christian art, the orientation of time is indicated for the viewer from left to right”. In reality, Leonardo retains the tradition also in the conception of the baptism, interpreting it as a rite of passage, from earth to sky, from the material to the spiritual.
In conclusion the aspect least ritualized [...] of this work would seem to consist in the ability with which a universe of meaning is constructed with a narrative trend in which, however, drama unfolded manifests something quite incompatible with the religious body of knowledge presupposed by the work and its destination. Moreover, specifically, there is the insistent invitation to look at the earthly dimension, in particular to the man whether represented by the saint or by the spectators gazing at the work. Thus, a visual text whose meaning is ideally and conceptually centralized with respect to the geometric center of the surface, and which is also formally occupied by the image of the Virgin. In short, observing this Virgin of the Rocks, so intellectual and so “independent” of rigidly imposed rules, despite the many doubts, one cannot fail to call attention to the calm consideration of Gigetta Dalli Regoli: ‘Il Painting book di Leonardo, se considerato in rapporto all’attività concreta dell’artista, dalla giovinezza alla maturità, rivela che l’apparato teorico, complessivamente incline alla moderazione, non corrisponde del tutto agli interventi innovativi del pittore’.
Making a comparison with the other version at The National Gallery in London, finished around 1506, we can learn more about our example.The layout seems about the same, but the message is profoundly changed. “Here some details are emphasized and others literally disappear or with slight modifications, are weakened if not changed in meaning. The raised hand of the Virgin, for example, when before it was similar to the dome, here it is relaxed, stretched out, and could be ascribed to what Baxandall considers a gesture of ‘invitation or a welcoming expression’. To not to take unnecessary risks, and at same time remove a reference that would no longer find its equivalent, even the great rocky outcropping (disguised at the top left side of the cave) dissolves and leaves room for unobtrusive flora.
It is not enough to stifle every earthly aspiration: now St. John exhibits a visible cross-staff (the cane staff is the well-known iconographic attribute of the Baptist). His downsizing to a supporting role is now complete. In this new guise he already knows everything that he needs to know: he no longer needs to interpret the signs, his figure now transformed into that of herald.The most sensational erasure relates to the hand of the Entity: it simply doesn’t exist anymore, forever obliterated, along with the diaphanous silky sleeve with its loaded meaning; just as the ‘column’ at the bottom is now jagged, resembling more like what it seems to be, a simple, crumbling rock.
And the viewer of the painting? He is no longer implicated by the gaze of the figure who could now be considered a simple angel who has suffered a fate similar to that of the Baptist. In this Virgin of the Rocks, in fact, the angel retains his original pose but loses his smile and his eyes, now clear, stare into the “internal” void.The viewer has, therefore, become a totally foreign guest who is only asked to observe a scene that does not require his active contribution. Everything fades, including the colors of the clothing and the complexion of the protagonists.The anomaly has returned, the “mystery”, which previously seemed to be unable to do without human element, no longer needs the enigma of elaborate deictic movements of the gaze or the hands that signaled the narrative. Nor does it even require man’s ability to interpret and investigate”.
The Virgin of the Rocks in the Cheramy version
The existence of a forgotten version of the Virgin of the Rocks, a masterpiece created by Leonardo with the help of his students - now brought back to critical attention in this book - was immediately traced back to the painting at the Louvre Museum in Paris after the discovery by the neoclassical painter Jean-Auguste-Dominique Ingres (1780-1867).
Both paintings of the Virgin of the Rocks in Paris and London have enjoyed considerable popularity in their iconography, considering the many faithful copies and other paintings liberally drawn from the originals.Whether looking at the first or the second version, the copies numbering about 30 attest to the how the subject was evidently requested often and was, therefore, highly prized in both Italy and France. Albeit from a stylistic point of view, apart from certain exceptions, a noticeable loss of quality compared to the original models by the Lombard master who made them, and, in many cases, the copies are only sterile copies of lesser importance, lacking the strict canons exacted by Leonardo. Perhaps the most interesting group consists of the reproductions derived from the Virgin of the Rocks at the Louvre, whether taken from the original or, as posited, from cartoons or draw ings. Among these, the Cheramy version appears to be one of the most faithful. Carlo Pedretti, one of the primary experts on the life and works of Leonardo, in his book Leonardo da Vinci. The "Virgin of the Rocks" in the Cheramy Version. Its history and critical success (Ed: CB Edizioni, 2017), sought to assess the Cheramy prototype in a section dedicated to the father of world cinema, Sergej M. Eisenstein. In the same volume, Sara Taglialagamba retraces the events of the commissions given to Leonardo of the two versions of the Virgin of the Rocks now in the Musée du Louvre a Parigi and in The National Gallery of London and then reconstructs the events of the paintings with two insights into the restorations and other copies of derived from the London version.Then proceeds a second part with two authors: Carlo Pedretti on the Cheramy painting from the exhibition promoted by the King of Sweden (published in 1983) and Gabriella Ferri Piccaluga on Σοφία (published in 1994), the latter offering an interesting look at the immaculist and Amadeite theories of the day that would have influenced the iconography in a considerable way. In the context of the Jubilee event held in the Palazzo del Duca in Ancona from 28 October 2016 to 29 January 2017 the Mother of mercy the Virgin of the Rocks from the P.A. Cheramy collection in Paris was on display, hence the name. This third version, was known only since the end of the nineteenth century, as mentioned above, because of Dominique Ingres’ attribution.
The expressive quality of this masterpiece is undoubtedly one of the most valuable aspects and is unique in its genre. In fact, observing carefully the Cheramy version and the underlying drawing, one cannot escape the attention to details such as the bodies of the children, or the reckless design of a transparent veil held between the fingers of the Virgin; also the evocative landscape with church buildings, another detail not found in any other painting, seems to represent the seal of a theoretical memory dedicated to the master's talented studies for the dome of the Cathedral.
These reflections, already referred to by Pedretti during his numerous essays dedicated to Cheramy, constitute the main arguments on which this new publication is based, which, as will be seen, is also enriched by a series of contributions that determine the state of the art on copies of Leonardo's masterpiece and his direct ancestry.
As we know, starting from 1908 the painting passed several times from hand to private collections. In 1991 Pietro C. Marani confirmed an attribution to Leonardo of the Virgin and in large part the angel, while he thought the rest of the painting was executed by one of the capable students in his workshop, perhaps Boltraffio (?).
VITTORIO SGARBI
1 Aldo G. Gargani, The creative filter, Rome, Laterza Editors, 1999.
Claudio A. Barzaghi, The obvious and the hidden in Leonardo's Virgin of the Rocks, in «Fogli e Parole d'Arte», 18 June 2013 (https://www.foglidarte.it/il-rinascimento-oggi/321-il-palese-e-il-nascosto-nella-vergine-delle-rocce-di-leonardo.html).
Ivi. Rudolf Arnheim, The power of center, Los Angeles University of California Press, 1982, p. 167.
There. Gombrich's quotation is taken from EH Gombrich, Action and expression in western art, in, Paths towards art, Milan, Leonardo, 2003, p. 114.
There.
GC Bottini, The "hands" of God, in «The Holy Land», June 5, 1998.
D. Arasse, Annonciation/Enonciation. Remarques sur un énoncé pictural du Quattrocento, “VS Versus”, n. 37, January-April 1984, p. 7. In Claudio A. Barzaghi, The obvious and the hidden in Leonardo's Virgin of the Rocks, in «Fogli e Parole d'Arte», 18 June 2013 (https://www.foglidarte.it/il-rinascimento-oggi/321-il-palese-e-il-nascosto-nella-vergine-delle-rocce-di-leonardo.html).
Claudio A. Barzaghi, The obvious and the hidden in Leonardo's Virgin of the Rocks, in «Fogli e Parole d'Arte», 18 June 2013 (https://www.foglidarte.it/il-rinascimento-oggi/321-il-palese-e-il-nascosto-nella-vergine-delle-rocce-di-leonardo.html) .
There.
There. For the text by Gigetta Dalli Regoli see G. Dalli Regoli, The gesture and the hand, Florence, Olschki, 2000, p. 11.
Claudio A. Barzaghi, The overt and the hidden in Leonardo's Virgin of the Rocks, in «Fogli e Parole d'Arte», 18 June 2013 (https://www.foglidarte.it/il-rinascimento-oggi/321-il-palese-e-il-nascosto-nella-vergine-delle-rocce-di-leonardo.html).