Mona Lisa is not Mysterious or Enigmatic, part 3: Portraiture in the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance 

The EMERGENCE of Humanism

Let’s discuss early portraiture in the medieval-Renaissance period. Because there was this burgeoning interest in the power of humanity, we also start to see this affect other areas of thought. Greek scholars escaping the Ottoman invasions brought the Classics in their original Greek texts (which was enlightening in comparison to the mistranslated Latin texts with which they’d been dealing); many of these scholars went to key Italian cities, igniting the fire of intellectual creativity. Hooray!

Then the Bubonic Plague happened and did a great job killing people across Western Europe, particularly in Italy (and other areas with important trading centers. This is circa 1348-9. Scholars estimate that anywhere between 33-50% of Europe succumbed to the Death. Yikes!)

So obviously, it took a generation or two to recover. One beneficial result was higher wages across the board (fewer people = better leverage with landlords, unfortunately). Higher wages and greater stability led to a greater degree of disposable incomes (particularly in urban centers like Florence). Hooray! Don’t worry, it didn’t last (see: the Ciompi Revolt).

In the meantime, though, we see these incomes reflected in the boom in objects of personal piety replete with personal Christian iconography (in Northern and Southern Europe). This boom in Christian iconography also connects back to the humanization of Christ and the shift in focus on His earthly good works. One side effect of these paradigm shifts was the emergence of the conflating belief between personal piety, charitable donations, and the amount of time spent in Purgatory (see Le Goff, Birth of Purgatory). We don’t just see this in churches, but also private altarpieces in the home. Imbedded in these objects were portraits of the donor. 

One of the most intriguing examples is that of the Scrovegni Chapel, commissioned by Enrico Scrovegni as his personal chapel (attached to his home, which was demolished in the 19^th century). Around 1305, Giotto also travelled from Florence to Padua to decorate the newly built Scrovegni Chapel with frescos (Scrovegni Chapel is also called the Arena Chapel because it was built on the site of an ancient Roman arena). It was attached to his palazzo. Even though these paintings were made elsewhere, Giotto brought his Florentine style. Enrico Scrovegni made his money that funded the chapel and its decorative program from money lending, or usury: giving desperate people money and then charging high interest rates for the debt. Usury was considered a very grave sin in this period (St Thomas Aquinas, mentioned above, wrote extensively about it). It’s believed that Scrovegni built this chapel as a way to atone for his sins. As we can see here, he included a portrait of himself holding up a model of his chapel to his patron saints; this is called a donor portrait (it is not the same as the kind of portrait that the Mona Lisa is). Although 100 years before the Renaissance, we see these themes continue to develop through the 14^th and early 15^th centuries.

Early Examples of Portraiture

Alongside these religious and theological developments, Florence went from being a full republic to a republic in name only. Cosimo de’ Medici quietly usurped control of the Republican government that had existed since the 10^th century. Significantly, he ensured that Florence remained a republic, even if in name only. Why? He tricked everyone! No one really cared because he did a good job. And his crazy money from the bank he owned—and his deep, deep fear of the afterlife (he lived out his remaining  years as a hermit in the Dominican friary of San Marco, which he funded)—helped fund the Renaissance. The Art of Politics, y’all [see Castiglione and Guicciardini. And Machiavelli’s Discourses—NOT THE PRINCE. That’s another article though]. 

And what makes us know that Cosimo’s tricks worked is that he kept the infighting going between Florence’s premier families (Nota bene, they were not aristocrats). This could end violently and not always in the Medici’s favour (his son, Giuliano, was assassinated during mass in 1478). But it largely was just a bunch of peacocking, ostentation, and arguing. One way to display oneself was, again, through funerary monuments and the Church. However, it’s in this period (1430s-70s) that we start to see the earliest (known) Renaissance portraits. These folks already understood the importance of donor portraits; they simply translated them into the concept of portraits as embodiments of the political personas they aimed to present to the public.

These are all well done paintings. They are naturalistic. However, two of them are imbued with a greater degree of humanity. Ghirlandaio achieves it by having the sitters interact with one another; Jan van Eyck achieved this by having the sitter make eye contact with the viewer. This painting was made 70 years before Mona Lisa and it’s doubtful that Leonardo would have seen it. However, Leonardo was not the first to think of portraiture in this way.

Part 4 of the Mona Lisa series is coming soon — subscribe below to be notified. In the meantime: