Page 17 - Jacobello del Fiore - His Oeuvre and a Sumptuous Crucifixion
P. 17

proved highly attractive and found                   has been completely revised and if our basis
immediate assent from Andrea De Marchi,              for judging him has become considerably
who treated the subject once again, adducing         broader thanks to the appearance of new
further support for identifying Francesco del        paintings, Jacobello still suffers – especially
Fiore as the Master of the Giovanelli                in Italy – from the narrow evaluation given
Madonna, to whom he attributed a further             by Longhi in his Viatico, itself based on the
painting of extraordinary formal quality, a          understandable idiosyncracies of scholarly
grand Crucifixion with Mourners and Saints in a      approaches in his day.15This is precisely what
French private collection, perhaps originally        Christiansen notes in his book on Gentile da
the central panel of an altarpiece triptych.14       Fabriano: ‘Jacobello del Fiore suffers from a
Francesco del Fiore therefore became a               greater critical misunderstanding than any
significant connecting link between the              other early Venetian artist. R.Longhi judged
Trecento culture of the followers of Jacopo          him a lesser personality than Niccolò di
Avanzi and Altichiero and the more modern            Pietro or Zanino because his works seemed
style of his son Jacobello.                          deeply linked to Venetian painting rather
                                                     than of the mainland. In fact, Jacobello was
   Conversely, what follows – the result of          the greatest local artist of his generation’.16
reconsidering the whole question – agrees            After being placed in such limbo,17 it is
with those who followed Coletti in                   perhaps time to restore Jacobello del Fiore
recognizing the artist as responsible for a          to the special rank he held in the
stylistically homogenous group attributed to         development of Venetian painting between
the young Jacobello del Fiore: among these           the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.
special mention should be made of Keith
Christiansen, who has for some time (as I                      eee
have been informed by Patrick Matthiesen)
verbally expressed himself in favour of this                    FRANCESCO DEL FIORE:
hypothesis.The succession of scholarly views                 A PROBLEMATIC IDENTITY
on the Matthiesen panel is thus a good
demonstration of how our convictions                 Francesco del Fiore – the object of recent
regarding old master paintings wax and                   scholarly attention with regard to the
wane, and of the importance of reading and           present painting – remains the starting-point
rereading a work according to the relative           for any discussion, and it should be stated at
emphasis we give to one painter or another.          the outset that the works assembled under
Even if the chronology of his known works

                                                 18
   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22