(PDF) Raphael's "Transfiguration" as Visio-Devotional Program"

Raphael's Transfiguration as Visio-Devotional Program Christian K. Kleinbub Even to his contemporaries, Raphael's Transfiguration (ca. The three modalities of vision were related in terms of a 1518-20) must have seemed both beautiful o;»/strange (Fig. functional hierarchy. The person who hoped to undei^stand 1). C^onibining two distinct narrative subjects with anachro God wotild pass sequentially from the perceptions of physical nistic witnesses in a single setting, it had few equivalents for vision through the increasingly immaterial images of the sheer complexity among altarpieces of its penod, being mar- imaginative and intellectual kinds. Augitstine's analysis of the velous not only for its diversity of elements but also for the modalities of vision arose from the necessity of explaining harmony of their integration. For today's viewer, tlie com- Paradise as portrayed in Genesis, but he concentrated the plexity of the altarpiece remains one aspect of its fascination, main part of his analysis on 2 Corinthians 12:2-4, in which for despite the considerable progress made toward under- Paul tells of his vision of the Third Heaven. In examining the standing the work, no definitive interpretation has emerged enigma of Paul's experience, Augustine demonstrated that that convincingly explains its imusual features in terms of a intellectual vision, being altogether detached from the cor- cohesive program or meaning.' In supplying the program poreal images used in physical and imaginative vision, was to that is lacking, I argue that Raphael created an imprece- be considered the loftiest of all visual modalities, the means dented hybrid: a marriage between the new style of the by which the blessed saw God's very essence in the beatific hisioriated allarpiece and the spiritual ftmctions of tradi- vision.'^ tional sacred images communicated through a complex ico- Theological discussion of vision reached a high point dur- nography of physical and spiritual vision. ing the Middle Ages when the Scholastics debated, resolved, Sacred images had long been defined by their ability to and codified the central ideas about the varieties and opera- arouse contemplative attitudes in tlieir beholders. Medieval tions of bodily and spiritual \ision." Especially impressive for thinkers often defined the devotional function of the sacred its detailed analyses of visual and \isionary phenomena, image as its ability to cliannel the response of the viewer from Thomas Aquinas's Summa fheologira served as a compendium sensible surfaces to contemplation of divine things: the on numerous vision issues in later centuries. This was never viewer was enjoined to perceive the image with the eyes, truer than in Renaissance Rome, where Aquinas's theology recall its subject from memory, and then meditate on its enjoyed a virtually unrivaled prestige among the members of spiritual meaning.^ Approached in the proper way, the image the curial establishment who were the patrons and advisers of served as a vehicle or physical sign—rather than a self-suffi- much of the art produced there in this period.'*^ cient object—referring beyond representation to the Deity.^ Theologians were not the only Renaissance people aware These established attitudes about the function of images of the mechanics of spiritual vision. Whereas theologians survived well into the early modern period, enjoying contin- knew their Augustine and Aquinas, laymen could rely on ued respect even as late medieval and Renaissance artists vernacular texts as diverse as Dante's Dixñne Comedy. Girolamo increasingly embraced the visceral, physical power of more Savonarola's sermons, and Balda.ssare Castiglione's Book of the naturalistic imagery, thereby further complicating the tradi- Courtier to imderstand vision and visionar\' issues." Given the tional contemplative functions of their works.' Indeed, these wide variety of sources that inculcated both general and ai tists continued to create prominent religious images that arcane aspects of vision theory, it should be assumed that promoted the shift from what was called corporeal to incor- literate artists had a fair grasp of the topic, with some attain- poreal vision, and whoso ultimate goal, in theory if not always ing to real sophistication. Jusi as we can adduce a long line in practice, was to inspire a state of imageless contemplation.^ of Renaissance artists who were deeply invested in issues of The viewer's elevation from corporeal to incorporeal xisual physical vision—a topic not as far removed from problems of experience in front of the devotional image indicates that the spiritual perception as one might think—we have, in the period's visuality—the totality of its concepts about vision— poetry of Michelangelo, rich documentation of at least one differed from our own.*^ According to the classic formulation artist's incessant ruminations on the mental and spiritual of Saint Augustine in On the Literal Inierpretatio-ii of Genesis, potentials of vision in relation to his art.'" \ision could be divided into three classes: physical, imagina- It it probable that Raphael, like his .sophisticated peers and tive, and intellectual. Whereas physical vision referred to the predecessors, was sufficiently saturated ^v\^h information on sensible perception of the world through the bodily eyes, these matters as to engage vision issues on a relatively com- imaginative and intellectual vision described "spiritual," "in- plex level, supplementing what he did not know of specifics corporeal," or "internal" vistia! processes. Imaginative \'ision by discussing the problem with theological advisers. Raphael perceived images recalled or evoked in the imagination, the may have received the foundations of his education in the organ of Aristotelian fac^^lty psychology that roughly corre- theological issues of vision early on from Fra Bartolommeo, sponds with what today is called the memory; intellectual the Dominican painter with whom he exchanged artistic vision was used to behold abstract concepts that had no knowledge and probably some particulars of Dominican the- physical corollaries in images at all/ ology while living in Florence.''^ That there was a theological 368 BULLETIN SEPTEMBER 2008 VOLUME XC NUMBF.R 3 1 Rapliat'l, íiansfigiimíion, ca. 1518-20, oil on panel, Ki iL 3 in. x [) i\. 1 in. (4.Ü5 X 2.78 iii). l'iiiacotc-ta, Vatican Museums, Vatican State (artwork in tlie public domain; photograph provided by Scala / Art Resource, NY) ¡ HA.\SH(.UIi.'il lUiS AS VlSU)-l»t.\OllUNAI.. Í'KOI;R.\M 359 2 Raphael, Madonna di Foligno, detail showing cloud putti, ca. 1511-12, oil on panel transferred to canvas. Vatican Museums, Vatican Stale (artwork in the public domain; 3 Fra Bartolo mi neu, God Ihc Fathrr A/jpmring to Saint Calhirine photograph provided by Scala / Art Re.source, NY) qfSim/i and Mary Magdalmp, ca. 1508, oil on panel, 9 ft. 3 in. X 9 ft. 6 in, (2.81 X 2.89 m). Pinacoteca Na/inna!c di Palazzo Marisi, Lucca (artwork in the public domain; photograph provided by Scala / .Art Resource, NY) exchange between the two artists is suggested by Raphael's use of cloud putti in works like the Dispula, Madonna di Foligno (Fig. 2). and Sistine Madonna. Althougli Raphael's Raphael compares his amorous rapture to that of Paul's source for his cloud putti has been heretofore uncertain, it visionary ecstasy: can be shown that the de\ice descends from examples in Bartolommeo's so-called Lucca Altarpiece (Fig. 3) and other Como non podde dir d arcana Dei Dominican contexts.^"* This fact becomes important when it Paul como dis[c]eso fu dal cello is realized that these cloud putti probably ultimately derive COSÍ el mi [o] cor d'imo amoroso vello from Aquiuas's theory of the physical visionary, his theoiy a ricoperto tuti i penser mei proposing that some apparitions are really angelic simulacra shaped fri>m the air in a process resembling the condensa- (fust as Paul couid not speak of the hidden (iod, tion ofcloudfi.'•' once descended from heaven, Examples of Raphael's exposure to the theology of \'ision so my heart vÂxh. a lovely veil could be multiplied, and his knowledge of the topic undoubt- covered all my thoughts)'^ edly gicw (Mice he began his Roman career and had contact with such important theologians as the general of tlie Augus- Considered alongside the numerous theological references tinian order. Egidio da Viterbo."^ The point remains that in Raphael's Roman-period works, these lines have been Raphael had obtained at a relatively early age a substantial taken as evidence of the artist's considerable knowledge of foundation for thinking about the visionary in independent theology.'" It is relevant here to note that the poem would terms. It is perhaps enough to add that there is some indica- have been largely meaningless without a basic understanding tion of Raphael's theological sophistication in one of the few of theological discussions about Paul's vision of the Third texLs that sui-vive from his own hand. In a fragmentary poem, Heaven, and visionary phenomena more generally. 370 2(¡Uíi \(JLLMl!. If Renaissancf artists like Raphael paid .special attention to As we shall see, Raphael's more systematic exploitation of visual theories of spiritual \'isioii, it was at least partly because they categories in his religious paintings had the effect of making registered an artistic problem within the contemporary the- them more distinctly and legibly multivalent, superimposing ory and practice of painting. For one thing. Renaissance representations of spiritual vision over the physical kind, so theories of painting—theories articulated by the likes of Leon that he might literalize in historical form the very process of Battista Alberti and Leonardo da Vinci—did not explicitly finding spiritual significance in the devotional work. acknowledge the potential for \isionaiy experience in Raphael's Transfiguration works precisely in this way, en- painted works. Instead, theoiy proclaimed that painting's compas.sing more than the events surrounding its eponymous immediate imperative was to present the optical sensations of subject in the Gospels by encoding acts of visual and visionary the world as known to the physical eyes and as rendered by experience in a figuration of the devotional movement from means of perspective, a device based in the presumed geom- corporeal to spiritual seeing. It is an image in which the goal etries of corporeal seeing.''^ of knowing God through faith is rendered metaphorically as But if naturalism and illusionism might become problem- the choice between external and internal vision. Faith, de- atic in the context of religious art, sometimes seeming to lead fined as belief in unseen things, is equated here with internal [o the exclusion of higher orders of vision from painting's vision; faithlessness, in contrast, is associated with the delu- province, the giowing prestige and popularity of the figurai .sions of ihe bodily eyes paired with disorderly, and materially narrative, or isUrria, raised important concerns as well.^*' In inclined, imagination. In the contest of internal and external particular, the early Cinquecento proliferation of narrative vision, portrayed in the altarpiece as the struggle of the subject matter in devotional contexts complicated the tradi- apostles to heal the possessed boy, the prize is the vision of tional spiritual goals of more iconic religious images."" En- the transfigured Christ on the moiuitain, a vision believed to couraging the deployment of dramatic movement, asymme- anticipate the beatific vision of the divine essence. Through tiy, and contextual detail, the historicization of devotional this unprecedented program of metaphoric vision imagery, works could detract from the contemplative aims traditionally Raphael olfers a statement on the relation between vision served by the stillness, axial symmetry, and idealization com- and spiritual knowledge, using the depiction of historical mon in earlier periods.^^ The consequences of tbis develo|> incident to figure the ascent of the eyes and mind to God. ment for altarpieces became especially apparent over time. Whereas quattrocento altarpieces with narrative subjects typ- The Painting ically preserved the frontalit)', iconic focus, and ambiance of The 'íran.sJigi(niHovwa.s commissioned by Cardinal Gitilio de' timelessness of traditional sacre conversazioni, privileging the Medici, the future Clement VH, .sometime in 15Hi or early spiritual dignity of the actors over the plot of the event itself, 1517, as an altarpiece for the seat of his new bishopric, the the more common Cinquecento examples frequently placed cathedral of St-juste in Narbonne. To encourage the best more weight on the specific temporal circumstances of the results from Raphael, the cardinal commissioned a compan- drama, while dispersing focus across the pictorial field.^^ The ion piece. The Raising of Lazarus (Fig. 4), from Sebastiano del veiy immediacy of naturalistic narrative painting conld thus Piombo, the piotégé oí Michelangelo, Raphael's great rival.^^ undermine the impetus toward abstraction necessary for the It was said that Sebastiano followed Michelangelo's drawings, highest forms of devotion, making action and illusionism hoping to match Raphael's skill in coloring by the efforts of competitive with contemplation.""* his own brush while availing himself of Michelangelo's in- There is abundant evidence to suggest that artists were comparable genius in design.'•^•' Despite the formidable tal- aware of how the transformation of the altarpiece might ents ranged against him, Raphael produced by the time of his affect devotional function. Indeed, no better proof of the death in 1520 an altarpiece of such originality and sophis- consequences of narrative for the altarpiece can be given tication that it transcends simple comparison. Immediately than the trouble taken by certain artists to protect the genre's recognized as Raphael's masterpiece and deemed too good devotional functions. It has been shown, for example, that for Narbonne, the Trnnsfigiirnlion was first placed above Ra- Michelangelo deliberately crafted his own historiated altar- phael's bier and then installed in S. Pietro in Montorio in pieces to highlight tbe devotional centrality of the body of Rome, where it was exalted by generations of artists and Christ, emphasizing the iconic nature of Christ in the altar- connoisseurs as the world s greatest painting.^*' piece despite or, rather, in addition to its new, narrational Raphael's Transfiguration represents two Gospel episodes, presentation.'"'' Moreover, sixteenth<entury Venetian artists one portrayed above the other, hi the upper half of the deployed Byzantinizing elements and even sculpture in their altarpiece, the artist shows the climactic moment of the altarpieces as a reassertion of traditional iconic appearance Transfiguration itself, when Jesus, having brought Peter, and devotional ideals in the face of the radical transforma- James, and John with him to the top of Mount Tabor, man- tion of the genre.^'' ifests himself in glory before the apostles (Matt. 17:1-9, Mark Yet no artist could be said to illustrate the stresses inherent 9:1-8, Luke 9:28--i6). Flanked by Moses and Elias, Christ in the transition, or the possibilities of potential resolution, floats in gleaming white garments as a bright cloud appears better than Raphael himself'"^ This is because Raphael man- over the summit. From the cloud booms the voice of God the aged to develop in his work a unique iconography tbat allowed Father, who proclaiuis the identity of Christ: "This is my him to depict, more clearly than any of his peers or prede- beloved Son, in whom 1 am well pleased; hear ye him" (Matt. cessors, the desired devotional movement from corporeal to 17:5).•'' The three apostles cower below Christ on the moun- spiritual visual experience by means of pictorial devices indi- taintop, shielding their faces from the overwhelming light of cating the visual "register" of particular aspects of his image. his glory. On the left kneel two deacons. These figures pos- K.Al'HAÍ-.l/S rHAWSJ-ICVHATION AS V l i i O-l) t V ( H 1 O N AL l'KUCiR.\M 3 7 1 4 Sebastiano del Piombo, The Raising of Lazarus, ca. 1517-19, oil on canvas, 150 X 93 in. (381 X 236 cm). National Galten'. London {artwork in ihe public doinain; pboiograph provided by Art Resource, NY) sibly represent Justus and Pastor, martyred patron saints of and middle of a mountain in a land.scape, they are clearly Narbonne.^^ differentiated, making their relation bard to explain. The two In tbe lower half of tbe painting. Raphael depicts the stoiy stories of tbe altarpiece are separate narratives occurring in in whicb tlie nine apostles wbo did not ctiinb Tabor with diiferent places at approximately the same time. Moreover, Cbrist failed to beal a demon-possessed boy brought to tbem the figures of the two scenes do not interact; no figure in the by his kin (Matt. 17:14-21, Mark 9:14-29, Luke 9:37-45). bottom half of the composition looks directly at the moun- Tbe meaning of tbe story is partially explained by what occurs tain with his eyes, and no figure on the mountaintop acknowl- afterward: wben Christ descends from Tabor with tbe tbree edges the figures below. Because of their apparent disassoci- to rejoin tbe nine, be heals tbe boy and tells tbe boy's part)' ation, the upper and lower scenarios have .sometimes seemed tbat tbeii faitb bad been wanting, exclaiming, "You laitbless to lack a common theme, as though tbey were two elements and perverse generation" (Matt. 17:17). When the nine apos- Joined for the sake of appearances rather than meaning.'^^ tles ask why tbey could not cast out tbe demon themselves, Noting the compositional similarities between the lower Cbrist answers: "Because of your little faitb." And be contin- section of Raphael's altarpiece and Sebastiano's Raising of ues, "If you have faith the size of a mustard seed, you will say Lazarus, some scholars have explained Raphael's combina- to this mountain, 'Move fiom here to there,' and it will move; tion of the iwo subjects as a competitive reaction to Sebas- and nothing will be impossible for you" (Matt. 17:20-21). tiano's work. Onginally, Sebastiano's numerous active figures Aitbougb the two scenes share the same setting, the top would bave contrasted migbtily witb Rixptiael's less populou.s 372 ,\RT BUI.l.RTIN SEPTEMBER 'iOOM \.C NUMBtR 5 Giovanni Bellini, Transfigïtrauon. ca. 1490. oil on panel, 45 X 60 in. (11.5 X 151.5 cm). Museo Nazionale di (:ap<)dinn)nte, Naples (artwork in the public domain; photograph provided by Scala / Art Resource. NY) scene, for, as we shall see, Raphael's first idea for the altar- piece (which was actually begun after his rival's) was a rela- tively subdued drama treating only the Transfiguration event itself. Indeed, the finished altarpieces utilized similar gestural and compositional devices, such as the pointing hands of the protagonists and the cutting diagonals used to bisect crowds, which may well indicate Lhat Raphael, when he came to add the second subject, borrowed some of Sebastiano's composi- tional ideas,'"* But while similarities between the two altarpieces eîdst, 6 Pietro Peiiigino, Transji^uradon, ca. 1498, fresco, 89 X 90 in. suggesting that Raphael joined his two scenes in order to (226 X 229 cm). Collegio del Cambio, Palazzo dei Priori, Perugia (artwork in the public domain; photograph provided maich Sebastiano's dramatic composition, it is likely that the bv Scala / Art Resource, NY) juxtaposition was also justified on tlieological grounds— though these are grounds that have yet to be identified. One reason for the difficulty in determining the theological pro- gram of Raphael's Transfiguration is that there is no prece- Goethe's celebration of the ptirposeful harmonization of dent in theological or pictorial tradition for the combination contrary forces in the Transfiguration strongly influenced the of the two scenes. Earlier portrayals of the Transfiguration opinions of later interpreters. Friedrich Nietzsche read the subject, such as Giovanni Bellini's naturalistic interpreta- lower zone as showing "primal pain" contrasted with an illu- tion and Pietro Perugino's more conventional one, focused sory realm where all enjoy "wide-eyed contemplation" in an exclusively on the Transfiguration event itself (Figs. 5, 6); no event entirely invisible to the inhabitants of the lower zone.^ Renaissance painter before Raphael depicted the failure of Jacob Burckhardt wrote excitedly of the "monstrous" juxta- the apostles to heal the possessed boy."*"^ position of the two scenes whose effect enhanced the vision- In the absence of clear precedents, some critics have pro- ary quality of the Transfiguration itself. He affirmed the posed that each scene stands for larger, paradigmatic values strange harmony of the whole in much the same terms as rather than those contained in the words of the Gospel Goethe, adding that its integration "exists only in the mind of accounts themselves. Beginning with Johann Wolfgang von the spectator." *'^ Goethe, the painting's two halves were acknowledged as be- Most interpreters have followed in the wake of these classic ing different but as having complementary, allegorical mean- assessments, generally affirming that the two Gospel scenar- ings: "WTiat is the point then of separating the upper section ios have no literal, historical tmity inside the painting. Like from the lower? Both are one. Below are those who are Burckhardt, they see a harmony of opposites in the altar- suffering and need help: above is the active power that gives piece, whose thematic and pictorial links can be appreciated succour: both are inseparably related in their interaction.""""^ in their totality only by the viewer."^'' Some have even pro- Rejecting clichés about the disunity of the painting and its posed that Christ's Transfigtiration, in the upper portion of disjointed presentation of two unrelated themes, Goethe saw ihe painting, far from representing the historical incident is a struggle between the active and passive principles of man's a vision, a vision beheld by the viewer through his surrogates, being, the spirittiai bifurcation of the world resolved in a Justus and Pastor, on the mountaintop. This vision, however, thematically cohesive painting. is not available to those of "little faith," and thus the nine RAPHAFl.'S TR.ANSF/GURATION AS VISIO-DEVOTIONAI. I'RUtiR.'VM 373 7 Riiphael, The Vision of Ezekiel, ca. 1518, oil on panel, 16 X 12 in. {40 X 30 cm). Galleria Palatina, Palazzo Pitti, Florence (artwork in the public domain; photograph provided by Scala / Art Resource, NY) apostles below Tabor's summit fail to see Christ above the the apostles to heal. Raphael created an area somewhere motintain.'*" It is fair to ask, though, as few scholars have between the base and summit of tlie mountain, which serves done, whether it is absolutely certain that none of the apos- as the setting for the lower half of the altarpiece. The upper tles has tlie power to see Christ in glory above Tabor: Despite section of the altarpiece is occtipied by a small, flattened the apparent division in ilie altarpiece, might there be a way Tabor that looks Uke a circular stage. On this stage are for the halves to communicate with one another?'" gathered Peter, James, and John. To the right of the sununit In his later works, such as The Vision of Ezekiel (Fig. 7), opens a view of a valley seen from above. On the Icfl, the Rapliael tended to portray visionary experiences, which ear- inconspicuous deacon saints kneel just below^ the mountain- lier he had shown as being continuous with the physical top. In the foreground, the apostles and tlie party of the world, as incompatible with the world of sense, even distorted possessed boy occupy an area between the valley floor on in terms of magnitude and scale.'^'' The division between the the right and the summit accessed, one assumes, on the left. visible and the invisible is not obvious, though, in the land- The boy's party arrives in the foreground from the valley scape setting of the Transßgiiration. Tabor's topography, in below, and members of the party can be seen climbing a fact, would appear to nnite rather than divide the two halves graded patli on the right. They have come paiüvay up the of the painting. To accommodate the story of the failure of mountain to ask the apostles for help. 374 ART ltl.ll.I.F.TIN .StPTEMRER 2008 VOLUME XC NUMRF.R 3 8 Raphael, Parnassus, ca. 1510, fresco, 22 ft. (6.7 m) at base. Stanza della Segiiatura, Vatican Palace, Vatican State (artwork in the public domain; photograph provided by Scala / Art Resource, NY) In many ways. Tabor functions in the Transfiguration like a world, a spiritual connection is formed, making the vision of Christological Parnasstis.^^ Raphael may have thotight of his Christ on the mountain available to those below by means of fresco Parnassus vihe^n designing the Transfiguration {Fig. 8). internal vision. Tlie topography in his altarpiece recalls not only the setting Of cotirse, not all of the figures in the lower scene have of Parnassus but also some of the details of its figtnation. access to the true internal vision of Christ. The red apostle Christ's upturned head, eyes, and flowing hair in the Train- and his eight companions on the left are divided from the figuration are remini.scent of Apollo in Parnassus, in which the possessed boy and his kin on the right by a diagonal gap god of poetry, wearing an expression of inspiration, looks resembling a trough of shadow. Like warring factions, the two upward toward a still loftier divinity.*** Furthermore, the face groups are ranged against tlie other as if involved in a con- of the prophet Elias in the altarpiece, who gazes at Christ, frontation, their faces and gestures describing the nature of resembles that of the Muse Erato, who SÍLS holding her lyre on their clashing positions. In considering these figures in this Apollo's mountain. WTiile these similarities strongly imply a way, the viewer may move from reading the scene as a more- connection between the Transfiguration and Parnassus, they or-less literal illustration of Scripture, one highlighting the also make clear an important difference. Whereas the phys- spiritual failure of the entire group, to acknowledging (he ical bodies of poets are seen to scale Parnassus, no mortal is spiritual struggle that can lead beyond the impasse depicted shown climbing the uppermost slopes of Tabor. The physical there. pathway to the summit, which would presumably appear on The part)' of the possessed boy on the right is hysterical. the left, is purposefully hidden from view. With glaring eyes that seem to question the apostles, the boy's Just as Tabor's slopes present an apparent impasse to phys- father places with his hands the hard evidence of his problem ical bodies, another barrier, a band of shadow, divides the before them in the person of his tormented son. The women mountaintop from the lower scene. This shadowy band falls of his group point frantically at the miserable child, attempt- across the upper slopes of the mountain below its summit, ing to redirect the attention of the apostles; they are unsuc- separating the bright upper zone from the dark lower one cessful. The father's glare on the right answers the closed eyes just above the heads of the apostles. Only one element in the of the pointing aposde on the left. The contrast between entire picture, the pointing hand of the apostle in red on their open and closed eyes suggests divergent visual ap- the left, breaks across this dark strip, and it is key to reading proaches to the problem at hand. the whole painting (Fig. 9). The apostle's pointing hand The gulf that divides the red apostle and the father is stands out agaiust the dark botmdaiy, showing the one way to elaborated by their companions. From a drawing, we know access the upper part of the altarpiece from below. While no that the red apostle and his blond companion were con- figure turns to look at the mountain, the meaning of the ceived as working together, two bodies melded as a unit, like signaling hand is clear. The red apostle shuts his eyes, press- those of the wide-eyed father and his writhing son (Fig. 10). ing his right hand to his heart as he points with his left. He The young blond apostle leans forward to explain his com- does not observe the transfigured Christ on the mountain by panion's inner seeing to the possessed boy's mother across corporeal vision btu by internal, spiritual perception.*'' Thus, the divide. He presses his two hands against his breast, indi- although Raphael divided the visible and the invisible in the cating that the red apostle's sight is located not in his eyes but painting, he also represents an alternative route that con- in his heart. Together, these apostles display the spiritual nects them. By the introspective rejection of the sensible alternative, a counterdemonstration, to the father's wide- K.'\PHAb.l.S r KA NSFIGL'RATION AS VI SIO-nEVOTlON Al. PROGRAM 375 9 Ríiphael, 'I'mns/tf^uiutinn. dt^iail showing Üie apostle in red (amvoik ill the public domain; photograph provided by Scala / Art Resource, NY) 10 Raphael, l-'n-p/imtoiy Umwing of iwo Afmstles, ca. 1518, eyed desperation, an exhortation to the possessed boy's party tncialpoint and red chalk, 13% X 8yi in. (34 X 2'¿.1 CITI). Musée du Louvre. Paris, 3864 (artwork in the pulilic domain; to direct its attention away from external manifestations of photograph © Reunion des Musées Nationaux, provided by evil and inward into themselves. A.s such, these apostles prof- Art Resource, NY) fer spiritual insights that .stand against the collective imperfec- tion of faith that results in the failure to heal the boy. Other figures join the red apostle in the proper conteni- plaiion of spiritual things. Behind the apostle with a book in seated on a log turns in surprise to look at the boy. He has the lower left is a group of three others who have witnessed consulted texts but has found nothing there to address the the vision of Christ internally, Turned away from the viewer, current situation. This apostle's error has been to seek in a an apostle on a log addresses the two apostles in blue who work of merely human wisdom the answer to a larger, spir- stand facing him. He points fervently toward Christ above the itual problem. His consultation of texts is like that of the mountain. The standing apostle on the right looks down- elderly man on tlie far left of the Disputa-who turns away from ward, as if withdrawn in contemplation of Christ in his heart, tlie altar to consult a book {Fig. [2). Botli figures are embod- his manner reminiscent of Saint Paul In the early Coronation iments of the materialistic disposition of some human minds: of the Virgin (Fig. 11). The apostle on the lefl opens his hands they signify men who put earthly wisdom above the spiritual in a gesture of speechless wonderment. His solemn expres- sion tells of the sublimity of the vision.''*' Just as there aie incidents of external vision among the Yet even as many of the apostles are engaged in internal apostles on the left, there are examples of internal sight seeing, others are distracted by the external, visual world. among the members of the possessed boy's party on the right. The two bearded apostles standing at the center of the scene Notably, we see a face in shadow beyond the head of the engage the problem with theii bodily eyes. Wliile the yoimger possessed boy's father and under the arm of the man in red. of the two points toward tlie boy, the older one looks down This figure's head tilts backward with eyes closed, as if to his nose to inspect the scene. In tlie older figure's frown and acknowledge the figure of Christ floating above. The face rumpled face, we may discern the featiues of Judas, a con- speaks to visionary ecstasy, as does its owner's hand, which noisseur of evil, who recognizes ibe demon in tlie child."'^ opens as if to receive the unseen light of internal illumina- Meanwhile, in the lower left corner, the apostle with a book tion. 376 ••^'*''' BL'LLETiN SEPTEMBER 20(18 VOI.liME X<; Nl'MBtR i 12 Rapliael, Disputa, detail, ca. 1509, fresco. Stanza della Segnatura, Vatican Palace, Vatican State (artwork in the public domain; photograph by Erich Lessing, provided by Art Resource, NY) the center with hands held up as if in surprise may derive 11 Raphael, Coronation of the Virgin, ca. löO!^, oil on piinel directly from the figure of Sergius Paulus himself. These transferred to canvas, 105 X 64 in. (267 X 163 cm). Pinaco- parallels suggest that the ñginal situation in the lower scene teca, Vatican Museums. Vatican State (artwork In the public of the Transfiguration is a battle between two worldviews: a domain; photograph proudcd by Scala / Art Resource, NY) confrontation between the empirically minded, who are bent on external explanations, and those of higher spiritual wis- dom, who reject the material world of the senses. Through Raphael's lower scene in the Transfiguration is more easily tlie dialectical struggle of internal and external vision in the recognized as a contest of visions once it is perceived as a work, we see the path from one zone of the painting to the creative adaptation of Raphael's own Blinding of Ely m as (Fig. other: in the Transfiguration the horizontal composition of 13), wherein the battle of spiritual vision and physical blind- the tapestry has given way to a vertical one where we see the ness is figured in the confrontation of Elynias with the pro- vision of Christ, the object of internal sight. phetic Paul.'^ The 7'mH.i^^mraí¿on bears several compositional The contest of visions in the altarpiece is not, however, and figurai similarities to tlie lapesoy, including iLs chiastic simply a struggle of internal and external seeing as emblem- composition and its figuration describing a xdsion-related atized by the juxtaposition of the red apostle and the wide- event. The red apostle pointing toward the transfigured eyed father of the possessed boy; the situation is far more Christ can be compared to the Paul of the shaded visage on complex. The father, who presents his writhing son as exter- the left in The Blinding of Elymas in both his apparent with- nal evidence of affliction, fails to see the nature of the boy's drawal from external sight and the authority of his pointing plight as an internal disorder of the mind and soul. ge.sture. Moreover, the figures of the father and the boy It is not that the boy's body is not expressive of his inner ultimately descend jointly from that of Elynias, who, like state, for the very instability of his contorted contrapposto them, is spiritually blind. The boy matches the magician in makes his internal struggle clear (Fig. 14). While the hoy's the unbalanced qualit}' of his legs, as does the father in his left foot is brought foi-ward with the leg, his right is planted hunched-over posture and his strained expression. The cen- perpendicular to the other. The instability of the figure is tral grotip of the scene might be associated with the procon- such that it needs support from behind, and thus, in a sul and his aides. The seated figure of a bearded apostle at peculiar pas de deux, the father's bulk supports the precari- í'HANSflCURAriON AS V ISIO-OK VOX ION AI. I'ROHRAM ••J^'J'l 13 Raphael, Tlie Blinding of Elymas, ca. 1515, tempera on paper mounted on canvas, 11 ft. 3 in. X 14 ft. 8 in. (3.42 X 4.46 m). Victoria and Albert Museucn. London (artwork In the public domain; photograph provided by the Victoria and Albert Museum, London / Art Resource, NY) oils body of the boy. The boy's left hip and buttock, clad in work under way could be his iinpuhlished commentary on blue, is swung unnaturally forward, his chest turned back Horace's Art of Poetry, which Ixrgins with a comparison of again toward the viewer. As if in contrast to the left hip, the poetic inspiration and the unveiling of prophecies to the left shoulder is dramatically lowered, cotintered on the right .seer.^" Here and elsewhere in Raphael's work, defects of sight by the hand extending dtamatically upward. By means of point to access to realms of spiritual revelation. Like the blind gestures and expressions exceeding even the expressive ef- Homer in Parnassus v/ho tilts his head backward a-s if to "see" fects of the tnarble Laoroön, the boy reveals that he suffers heaven through closed eyes, highirami perceives his lofty something more harrowing than physical pain. goal despite tlie impairment of his eyes. Such a pose shows It is the boy's face that conveys the nature of the inner Inghirami as akin to those figures in devotional painting who turmoil that lies beneath his skin. With his mouth open in lower spectacles or lenses from the object of their spiritual anguish, the boy's eyes are turned in different directions. His attention as irrelevant to higher, spiritual seeing.''' Not un- right eye follows a natural path, shooting upward in the like a prophet or evangelist, the poet thus receives inspiration direction of his tiplifted hand, which opens in the direction through spiritual vision, his lofty insight focused and en- t)f Christ, showing that the Ixiy—or the demon that possesses hanced by the presence of optical impediments. him—is conscious of Christ above the mountain. Meanwhile, In the case of the Transfiguration, the walleyed counte- his left eye wanders back toward the top of his head. It is this nance obviously does not speak to a state of divine inspira- left eye that alludes to the lK)y's affliction; at the same time, tion. Nevertheless, it signals the boy's disengagement of his it joins his left arm in its movement away from Christ. This external senses and his exercise of imaginative vision. Imag- literally and ftguratively "sinister" hand splays itself in an inative vision—the internal vision involved with images in the unnatural way. The boy is retit in two by opposing forces, memory also known in the Renaissance as fantasia or by its pulled toward earth on his left, where the unnatural distor- Latin name, ivmginatio—held an intermediary place between tions converge, and toward heaven on his right, as if anxious intellect and senses, or the mind and the eye. in Renaissance for his own cure. faculty psychology and was the chief organ of inspiration, The boy's prominent visual infirmity, namely, his walleyed henign or otherwise.^^ As Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirán- state, has an important precedent in Raphael's portrayal of dola put it in Ort th/- Imagination of 1501, fantasia "coincides the illustrious humanist Tommaso Inghirami, in which Ra- witli sense in that, like sense, it perceives the partictilar, phael turns a similar visual defect to the purpose of describ- corporeal, and present; it is superior to sense in that, with no ing the nature of his sitter's inspiration (Fig. 15). With pen external stitnulus, it yet prodtices images, not only present, poi.sed ahove blank page, the walleyed Inghirami of Riiphael's but also past and future, and even such as cannot be brought portrait is in the midst of his evocation of God or the Muses to light by nature."'^"'' Fantasia served as the clearinghouse of Iwfbre the art of writing. Another book placed on ihe right itnages loi- the soul, receiving sensible images from the phys- indicates that Inghirami is not inventing an independent ical eyes and simultaneously .semng as the seat of tlie imag- work, hut rather is in the act of interpreting another texL The ination's reworking of these images into new forms. 378 BIH.l KTIN SEPTEMBER 2008 VOLUME XC NUMBER 3 15 Raphael, Tommaso Inghirami, ca. 1510-12, oil on panel, 36 X 24 in. {91 X 62 cm). Galleria Palatina, Palazzo Pitti, Florence (artwork in the public domain; photograph provided bv Scala / Art Resource, NY) It is fantasia, therefore, where the "spiritual eye, joined to the body, makes use of images to contemplate truth, as the eye of dull vision uses glass lenses to gaze at a sensible object."''^ As such, fantasia was the factilty where divine inspirations were implanted in prophets, where revelation was "disclosed to 14 Raphael, Transfigiimtiim, detail showing tlic possessed boy them by imaginative vision."''' {artwork in the public domain; pbotograph provided by As Raphael's painting makes clear, divine inspiration was Scala / Art Resource, NY) not the only kind of inspiration that could make u.se of fantasia. Malignant and e\'il spirits conid also plant images before the eyes of the fantasia. Indeed, as a result of this danger, Pico viewed imaginative vision with considerable Fantasia was also the place where soul and body were trepidation. Not unlike bodily sight, imaginative vision could thought to meet and to be brought into conjunction: be distorted: "Influenced by [the] humors in the act of cognizing, the spiritual eye of the soul, the intellect, changes Since man is constituted of tlie rational soul and body, and and is deceived, just as the bodily eye experiences illusions is, so to speak, a conjunction of the two; and since the through tinted, parti-colored lenses."'''^ Because of these ten- substance of the spiritual soul is ver)' different from the dencies, Pico thought purer and simpler imaginative images earthly structure of the body; it naturally followed that more wholesome lor spiritual well-being and argued that one the extremes were joined by a suitable mean, which in should not succumb to either too few or too many imagina- some way should partake of the nature of each, and tive images in order that the imaginative faculty does not through which the soul, even when united to the body, work itself too narrowly or widely and thereby go astray. The should perfoi-m its own functions.^"* truly devout, moreover, should focus the eyes of their imag- RAPHAF.l.'S TRANSFir.UliATin.W AS VISIO-REVOTIONAI. PROT.RAM 379 ¡nation on the image of the beatific vision of the essence of including landscapes, costumes, and atmospheric effects: the God, the ultimate goal of spiritual life as enjoyed by the very descriptive minutiae disdained hy Michelangelo in Neth- tilessed in Paradise.^"^ In doing so, the faithful would find erlandish art.'^*' Commenting on Raphael's tactical retreat imaginative vision es.sential both to achieving eternal bliss from the nude, Vasari sa>-s that Raphael made an admirable and avoiding damnation. decision under the circumstances by pursuing the things that H imaginative vision could enhance or endanger spiritual he does best. But Vasari does not fail to reveal his conviction life, it also played a centrai role in Renaissance discus.si<ins that Raphael, in abandoning the nude to Michelangelo, had about art. We need only recall the first Unes of Horace's distanced himself from the loftiest standard, the imaginative influential treatise the Art of Poetry and their popularity in the manipulation of human fonn, by which the final gloiy of art Renaissance to understand how some Cinquecento critics was jtidged. mighl approach artworks displaying the extravagances of ar- Although these comparisons of Raphael and Michelangelo tistic imagination:"''^ belong to authors writing long after Raphael's death, they may nevertheless elaborate ideas held among his advocates Imagine a painter who wanted to combine a horse's neck during his lifetime, when the rivali7 between Rapliael and with a human head, and then clothe a miscellaneous Michelangelo was most intense. Given the agonistic circum- collection of limbs with variotis kinds of feathers, so that stances of the commission, one cannot help but think that what started out at the top as a beautiful woman ended in the relative merit of the two ai tists was already a matter of a hideously ugly fish. If you were invited, as friends, to the heated theoretical debate, even a subject to be addressed in private view, could you help laughing?*'*' their respective commissions. It appears reasonable to won- derwhether Riiphad's Transfiguration was an image abotit not Commentators like Gabriele Paleotti, who wrote that artistic only the problematics of spiritual imagination but also the imagination should not get in the way of the accurate retell- predicament oï fantasia in the realm of art itself. Might the ing of a religious stoiy, argued that some painters cultivated picture's apparent discoui se on the nature of good and bad obscurity deliberately so as to look "grand and marvelous, imagination be an opportunity for Raphael to make some since they do not speak or paint of trivial things, but rather demonstration of liis own position on art? sublime ideas that come from the tliird heaven."''' The dan- In pursuit of this thought, we may ask whether Raphael's ger was that the willful and arrogant artist might confuse the possessed boy might be an attempt to show through an fruits of artistic imagination with spiritual prophecy and le- extreme dislocation of the body an envisioning of artistic gitimate visionary experience. imagination taken in the wrong direction. The boy's por- Although Raphael was obviotisly capable of high invenzione, trayal calls out for comparison, after all, with that of Christ Renaissance criticism did not associate him with the type of hovering over the mountaintop. whose perfect contrapposto the willfully obscure and extravagantly imaginative artist and balanced arms prove an admirable demonstration of mocked by Horace and his followers.**^ Just as Raphael's graceful figuration. The boy's strange contrapposto, seen in posthumous admirers saw him as the foremost master of clear comparison with the natural pose of Christ, might intention- and graceful exposition, an artist who submitted his artistic ally evoke an extreme example of the diffifuità of Michelan- ego to the requirements of his subject matter, they often gelo's figures, not to mention the imaginative freedom for attacked the living Michelangelo for the very opposite ten- which that artist was later frequently criticized.*'' Although dencies. For them, Michelangelo was the artist who most Vasari says Raphael strategically conceded the luunau figure frequently gave way to the extremes of his fantasia and did so, to Michelangelo, perhaps things did not happen in this way. they claimed, at the expen.se of legibilit), literal truth, and Raphael's juxtaposition of the tormented body of the boy even public decency. Michelangelo's oversize fantasia was with the perfectly poised fignre of the floating Chrisi speaks oftenjuxtaposed to Raphael's artistic moderation in order to to Raphael's command, when context demanded, of boih demonstrate Raphael's superiority as an artist.*''' extreme difficultá and perfect grace, and even the superiority In considci ing Renaissance opinion on iirúaúc fantasia, it is of the one when confronted with the other.''^ After all, no useful to listen to Michelangelo's proponents as well, for Renaissance viewer could have easily ignored the fact that these writers thought fantasia the ultimate value of art. They Raphael's possessed boy is supported by a figuie tliat. beyond did not doubt that Michelangelo gave the highest demonstra- ÍLS resemblance to Raphael's own Elymas. is surely meant to tion oi fantasia in his work, investing, as Nino Semini wrote to recall the pose and facial expression of Michelangelo's out- Cardinal Ercole Gonzaga, "the main of his force into creating rageously animated Ezehiel^ov the vault of the Sistine Chapel, imaginative figures in diverse poses."''"" Like Sernini, many whose determined, though nearsighted, ga/e is pressed up to commentators saw Michelangelo's imagination as primarily the face of an angel (Fig. 16). It is plausible, though not expressed in the inventiveness aud difficultà of his figures. provable, that Raphael's exploration ai' fantasia thus ser\ed in Thus, ill his life of the artist, Giorgio Vasari argued that part as an insider's manifesto on both the universal range of Michelangelo concentrated on the human body because it its author and the deficiencies of his artistic rival, with the was the highest subject matter of all, conveying with the closed-eyed apostle and the inieriuil vision of Christ he be- fullest ptofundity the "passions and joys of the soul."''' Ac- holds set up as an answer to Michelangelo's staling prophet. cording to Vasari's account, Raphael himself understood Othei important aspects of Raphael's Trunsfigiiration reveal Michelangelo's .superiority in rendering the nude and re- the artist's intensive desire to outdo his competitors and solved that, since he could not better Michelangelo in this claim superiority to Michelangelo. Whether or not we believe way, he would better liim in the "wider field of painting," that Raphael conceded inferiority to Michelangelo in render- 380 ' ^ " ^ Bl'l.l.F.TlN S K l ' l f . M B t R Ü(MI« V O L U M E XC M MBER :i innovations he produced in the Trrmsfigiiration. Naturally, he did not make use of Leonardo's "dark manner" merely to serve his competitive artistic aspirations but because it en- hanced his treatment of the vision themes already described as figured in the lower half of the altarpiece. Whereas the upper half of the picture is more forcefully illuminated by the radiant figure of the transfigured Christ, darkness reigns among the nine upostles further down tlie mountain. While this darkness betokens the benightedness of the fallen world that lives without Christ, it simultaneously engulfs the faces of those who would block the fallen world out so as to pursue Christ internally.'' It will be noticed, for instance, that the red apostle's face is conspicuously shadowed, but that of the possessed boy's father i.s ilhmiinaled. These contrasts of light and dark contribute to our sense of the opposition between ways of seeing and relate to external and internal vision respectively.'"' Raphael's significant use of chiaroscuro in the Transfigura- tion leads us, moreover, to a passage from Peter's second epistle.'"^ In this epistle, Peter exhorts his hearers to numer- ous virtues, including faith (2 Peter 1:5-7), He explains that their religion is not one of empty promises, founded on "cunningly devised fables," but rather a faith based in the accounts of those like himself who "were eyewitnesses to [Christ's] majesty" in the Transfiguration (2 Peter 1:16): For [Christ] received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory. "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased." And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy moimt. 16 Michelangelo, Ezekiel, ca. 1509-10, fresco. The Sistine Peter goes on to assure his readers that "we have also a more Chapel, Vatican Palace, Vatican State (artwork in the piihlic sute word of prophecy," saying, "whereunto ye do well that ye domain; photograph by Erich Lessing, provided by An take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until Resource, NY) the day dawn, and the day star arise, in your hearts" (2 Peter 1:17-19).''' The luminous imagery of these epistolaiy passages is rele- ing the human form, it is nevertheless true that Raphael vant to reading Raphael's painting. As has been pointed out emhraced a more comprehensive approach to, depicting the by others, Peter's text helps to explain Raphael's dramatic natural world in his work, ll is similarly true that the expan- shadows.'** The glorious radiance of the tiansfigiued CHirist, sive character of Raphael's painting was not unlike that of after all, appears like the "light that shineth in a dark place" Leonardo, whose ever-growing influence on Rapliael reached within the shadowy world of the altarpiece. In accordance its climax in the Transfiguration.*''^ Leonardo called Michelan- with Peter's text, we also see dawn breaking over the distant gelo "wooden" and believed he obsessed about anatomy at hills of Jerusalem on the right.'' The brittle light that illumi- the expense of the other aspects of painting. To Leonardo's nates the figures below the moimtain is not, however, the mind, Michelangelo's specific talent did not contain all the radiance of Christ but rather a light from an unseen source excellencies of his own brand of "universal painting" in which on the left. This light, which contrasts with the dawn, is the physical world might be comprehensively surveyed and perhaps that of the setting moon, whose pale rays highlight recorded.'" Raphael may have been aware of Leonardo's particular passages in the lower scene, for instance, the shoul- criticisms and perhaps learned from them, for by engaging dei"s of the kneeling woman in blue and pink in the fore- the "wider Held" of painting in his works, Raphael followed in ground.™ Peter's text is most itnportant, however, insofar as Leonardo's ibotsteps. Raphael's adoption of Leonardo's dra- it connects the idea of faith to the Transfiguration: "we have matic chiaroscuro effects in his later paintings, especially the also a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that Transfiguration, perhaps indicates the degree to which Ra- ye take heed."'^ Peter believes that the Transfiguration is the phael came to associate tlie alternative to Michelangelo with surest proof of the righteousness of his faith in Christ. The Leonardo's artistic style.'' Transfiguration itself serves as the beacon of that faith, being If Raphael's emulation of Leonardo's style grew from his like "unto a light that shineth in a dark place." Within the desire to claim a place in the artistic ftrmatnent oí early darkness of Raphael's Transfiguration, Christ pro\ides that Cinquecento Rome, this is not to diminish the devotional light to those who struggle toward faith "until the day dawn." KAl'HAtl.'ft IR.\NSt'IGl'RA-I'¡aN AS VISIO-DF.VOTIO N A I. PROGRAM «Ql The theme of faith, so prominently ioniiected to the Trans- account by showing the Transfiguration both as a historical figuration in Peter's epistle, obviously relates to the failure of event and a spiritual vision. Just as Origen proposes that the ilie nine apostles to heal the possessed boy in the lower half Transfiguration is manifested differently to each one of his of the altaipiece. hideed, the struggle of visions that we have auditors ("appearing to each man according as He kntïws described is itself a thcmatization of the contest of faith tliat it will be expedient for him" and not "in a manner and faithlessness. After all, the most definitive of all biblical beyond his capacity"), Raphael's intended viewer would be definitions of faith connects it directly to bodily .sight: in inspired by the spiritual program in the altarpiece to turn Hebrews we read that "faith is the evidence of things not inward and find his own Christ according to his own capacity. seen" and that the "things which are seen were not made of Another likely source of Raphael's imagery of the "eyes of things which do appear" (Hebrews 11:1, S).**" The issue nf the heart" is to be found in Augustine. In his sermon on faith, as Augustine pointed otit, was a matter of believing in Matthew, chapter 17, Augustine recalls tliat before his ascent the invisible."^' Thus, when Peter exhorts his audience to up the mountain Christ promised the apostles that some of remain filled with faith until the "dav star arise in your them would not die until they had seen the "Son of man in hearts," we do well to understand this internal dawn as a sight his kingdom."^ ' Augustine then demonstrates that the Trans- seen by internal vision. Although the connection between the figuration itself must be the visioti promised by Christ in use of "hearts" and "eyes" is not made in Peter's epistle, it is fiilfillment ofhisword. But how can it be, Augustine a.sks, that brotight up in exegetical texts on the Transfiguration that the apostles see the Kingdom of Heaven before death? Here elaborate on Peter's Ideas. These texts can teach us a great Atigustine returns to the meaning of the Transfiguration. deal about why Rapliael made use of portrayals of internal The kingdom is fotmd in the Church, and tlie Church is to be vision in his altarpiece."^^ associated, aliegorically. with the white garments of the trans- One of the most prominent of these exegetical texts is by figured Christ. Thus, in the garments of Christ, the apostles Origen, who is quoted by Thomas Aquinas in his Catena see the Chnrch, the kingdom, and the promise of resurrec- aurea. Origen first explains diat Christ takes the three apos- tion. In his glor)' on the motmtain, Christ is tlie light "that des with him to the top of Tabor after six days "because in six enlightens every person coming into this world." Christ is like days this whole visible world was made; so he who is above all the sun, Augustine continues, and "what this sun Is to the eyes things of this world, may ascend into die high motuitain, and of the body. He is to the eyes of the hean [ofu/w (.ordwj; what this there see the glory of the Word of God."^^ Origen then is to bodies. He is to hearts.""'' enjoins his readers to follow in the footsteps of the apostles, Like Origen. Augustine proposes that the Transfigtiration moving beyond the visible world in order to have a spiritual story has a spiritual importance for Christians that extends view of the transfigured Christ on the mountain: beyond the retelling of its historical circumstances. Christ's white garments, which symbolize the kingdom of saints, are When any one has passed the six days according as we have meant as a vision of a future beatitude, a vision that, as said, he beholds Jesns transfigtired before the eyes of the Augustine writes in the City of God, will be experienced not heart. For the Word of God has various forms, appearing only with the eyes of the beatified body but also with the "eyes to each man accoiding as He knows that it will be expe- of the heart," that is, spiritually."*' It is to the beatific vision dient for him; and He shews Himself to none in a manner that Raphael's red apostle clearly refers. Regarding Christ beyond his capacity: whence he says not simply, lie u<as with the "eyes of his heart," the aposde signifies a spiritual transfigured, but, btfore them. For Jesus, in the Gtwpels, is nieauing beyond the physical trappings of history."" merely understood by those who do not mount by means of exalting works and words npon the high mountain of The Vision of the Transfigured Christ inside and outside wisdom; but to them that do monnt up thus. He is no History longer known according to the flesh, but is understood to Althotigh the imagery of the eyes of the heart allowed Ra- be God the Word. Before these then Jesus is transfignred phael to bridge the gap between the lower and tipper zones . . . and He is shewn to them as the Sun of righteousness.*^^ of the altarpiece, the historical event of the Transfiguration as told in the Gospels was not altogether subordinated to its Origen here turns his analysis of the Gospel text into some- rendering as a vision. Raphael's Tmns/igiiration began, after thing resembling a devotional program or exercise, calling all, as a careful retelling of the historical Transfiguration on his readers to contemplate Christ abstractly, by way of the alone. At the beginning of the work's long gestation, Raphael "eyes of the heart." had not yet arrived at the idea of a visionaiy program. Judg- Writing about the Transfiguration in this way. Origen ing from a drawing thought to reflect his original modello, bridges the gap between the historical and the \-isionary Raphael's first idea for the altarpiece was to picture the aspects of the Transfiguration, Just as Raphael does in his moment jtist before the stoiy's climax (Fig. 17). Pointing to altarpiece by highlighting vision and visionary i.ssucs. Indeed, Moses and Ellas, Peter enthusiastically proposes the erection Origen's description of the "high mountain of wisdom" may of three tabernacles for Jesus and the prophets (Matt. 17:4). have inspired Raphael's Christological Parnassus in the paint- Christ looks in Peter's direction, opening his arms in bene- ing. The spiritual journey, which is one of internal vision, diction, while God the Father prepares to make his an- culminates in a vision seen with the "eyes of the heart." Not nouncement. Boldly conceived in anticipation of the high unlike Origen, Raphael's painting calls on the viewer to point of the historical event, Raphael's idea at this early stage acknowledge the spiritual meaning of the transfigiu ed Christ is for a work wth active figures rehearsing their roles in a ah(ive and beyond the "works and words" of the Gospel dramatic, narrative altarpiece.^^ 382 ^^"^ Bl'M.KTIN SEPTEMBER 200H VOLUME XC NUMBER 3 historical manifestation of the Transfiguration, though mi- raculous, was a fully visual phenomenon. No one questioned that the Christ of the historical Trans- figuration was of the same substance as the man. Qtioting Jerome, Thomas Aqtiinas affirmed that no one should "sup- pose that Christ, though being said to be transfigured, laid aside His natural shape and coimtenance, or substituted an imaginary or aerial body for His real body."'"^ Wliere the Gospel declares, "His face did shine as the sun, and His raiment was white as snow" (Matt. 17:2), Aquinas says these things "argue not a change of substance, but a putting on of glory."'" Aquinas defines the precise nature of Christ's trans- figuration in visual terms that even a Renaissance art theore- tician like Alberti could appreciate: Figure is seen in the otitlinc of a body, for it is that which is enclosed by one or more hotindaries. Therefore what- ever has to do with the outline of a body seems to pertain to the figure. Now the clarity, just as the color, of a non-transparent body is seen on its surface, and conse- quently the assumption of clarity is called transfigura- üon. "^ For Aquinas, the appearance of the transfigured Christ is explained according to norms of the figure, a transformation not of basic otitlines or shapes but of the reflection of colors and lights on surfaces.''^ It was out ofthese ideas that Raphael crafted his paradigmatic figure of Christ in his painting. Like a cutout set against a netitral background, Raphael's Christ is shown in contrapposto, emphasizing his "figurai" stattis, with his otitline clearly delineated. Suhtle blues and grays describe the shadows and modulate the white surfaces of his gar- ments.-'"* 17 Giiilio Romano, after Raphael, modclh Im ihe fransfifr- uration, ca. 1517, pen and brown wash with white heightening, Rapliael's interest in the physicality of the historical Trans- 15% X 10% in. (40.2 X 27.2 cm). Alhertina, Vienna, 193 figuration appears to have extended to the atmosphere sur- (artwork in the puhlic domain; photograph provided by the rounding Christ's figure. Aquinas had used the imagery of air Albertina, Vienna) and light to evoke the miraculous physical and vistial me- chanics that brotight about Christ's transfiguration in the body: Yet, as we have seen, Raphael's finished altarpiece portrays But in Christ's transfiguration clarity overflowed from His both the Transfiguration and the faihirc of the apostles to Godhead and from His soul into His body, not as an heal. What is more, Raphael changed the event depicted in immanent quality affecting His very body, but rather after the upper portion of the altarpiece, choosing the moment of the manner of a transient passion, as when the air is lit up the Father's announcement over the anticipator^' one in his by the sun. Consequently the reftilgence, which appeared first modello. The finished altarpiece therefore assumes the in Christ's body then, was miraculous."*'' character of a paradigmatic and iconic event, though its subject is undeniably based on the historical episode. Peter, Perhaps aware of Aquinas's sophisticated theological meta- James, and John see the transfigured Christ not as a contem- phors, Riiphael shows a divine light falling on Christ's open plative ohject inside their minds hut as a real-life abimdance face like the glory "overflowiing] from His Godhead," the of natural light that oveiwhehns their mortal eyes. In addition outpouring of clarity "from His soul into His body," causing to its presentation as an ohject of spiritual vision, Raphael's his cheeks to redden "after the manner of a transient pas- Transfiguration takes place as an actual event on the histor- sion." It is just possible, moreover, that Raphael made use of ical Tabor, witnessed hy three apostles in its physical and Aqtiinas's meteorological imagery, for while the cloud's pe- temporal dimensions. riphery is as blue and insubstantial as the air, it glows a Iti choosing to display the transfigured Christ as the object brilliant white at its center where the light falls. This air is of internal and external vision simultaneously, Raphael set "transfigured," changed in the blush of the clotid."' himself a difficult task. It was especially so because the Trans- Raphael had to adjust his physical image of the Christ of ñguiation was generally defined as a physical event, not as a the Gospel to make it sen'e equally well as an object of inner vision. Whatever theologians thought of the contemplative contemplation, the object of the "eyes of the heart" of the dimensions of the Transfigtiration, they all agreed that the figures in the lower scene. In order to accomplish this, Ra- RAPHAEI.-S TRANSFIGURATtON AS VlSIO-DEVOTIONAl. PROtiRAM 383 phael did two things: ht- elevaied Christ from the ground, and he made Christ disproportionately larger than the other figures around liini. By detaching Christ from the ground, Raphael signaled C^hii.st's partial disengagement from the historical context of the Gospel event. Although there were hi.storical precedents for the floating Christ of the Transfig- uraticjn, Raphael had not used tliem in his earlier designs leading np to the finished painting.'*" Judging from both the modello and a copy ;ilter a later compositional drawing (Fig. 18), it would seem that it was only as Raphael developed his last idea for the altarpiece with its visionary intentions that the artist decified to lift the figure in the air.^** Christ's floating figure is at the center of the cloud and is flanked by the two prophets. Functioning to display the dispensation of gloiy from above in its physical form like the "bright cloud" of Matthew's Gospel (Matt. 17:5), the cloud sets (Christ apart from the others as if he were a visionary apparition, like Jehovah's cloud in The Vision ofEzekiA. The figure of the transfigured Chri.st, scaled much larger than the two prophets and the three apostles below him, sets him in direct variance with the three-dimensional order of the work as a whole while establishing a new unity of planar surface geometries.^" For this reason, we are left to wonder why Vasari described Raphael's Christ as foreshortened in a clear or radiant light {"diminuito in nna aria lucida"), which might imply that the figure was accurately proportioned ac- cording to perspective.'"" Taking Vasari to indicate the use of perspective here, some scholars Wew the mountaintop as a surface tipped slightly forward with the floating figures of Christ and (he prophets occupying a tilting plane that rises perpendicularly from Tabor's inclined summit. Seen in this way, Christ and the prophets hover somewhat closer to the foreground than the three apostles on top of Tabor, making the former appear larger than the latter."" 18 Mter Raphael, copy ot compositional study for the If we accept the idea that the three airborne figures are Transfiguration, ca. 151H, pen and brown ink, wash, and black chalk, Í61/4 X 10% in. (4f.3 X 27.4 cm). Musée du Louvre, tipped forward with the mountain, there may be a way to Paris, 3954 (aitwork in the public domain; photograph © imdei"stand the spatial device in scriptural tenns. Perhaps, for Reunion des Musées Nationaux, provided by Art Resource, the faithful who would see Christ internally, the mountain N\') has indeed moved. If this is what Raphael intended, the truth of Christ's words to the faithless apostles (Matt. 17:20-21) is reified in concrete visual terms that correspond to the paint- ing's contemplative ends. Clhrist appears to the apostles who a way that indicates that he nnderstands its significantly con- would see him by the eyes of their hearts as larger than life, an templative aims. On reaching the figure of (^hnst, Vasari's image expanding in the foreground of their imaginations.^**^ admiration monnts to an enthusiasm bordering on religious ecstasy: What Christ Sees Clothed in snow-white garments, Christ himself extends Christ is the focal point of the painting, but the composition his arms and raises his head, and seems to reveal the suggests something beyond its boundaries: Riîphael's Christ Essence and Godhead of all three Persons of the Trinity, looks heavenward and visually engages a still loftier object fnsed in him by the perfect art of Raphael. And Raphael unseen above him (Fig. 19). Our eyes are not greeted by seems to have sutnmoned np all his powers to demonstrate Christ's gaze btit are urged to follow his own. As has been the strength and genius of his art in Christ's countenance; mentioned already, Christ's upturned face would appear to for having finished this . . . he died without taking np the relate to the model of the head of Apollo in Parnassus—or, brush again."" more proximntely, the head of Saint Cecilia in the Saint Ocilia Altarpiece (Fig. 2())."'' Like the eyes of these xisionaries, Vasari here speaks abotit Raphael's Christ in a remarkable the eyes of Christ, the climax of Raphael's aitarpiece, gaze on fashion, wielding language that stre.sses abstract theological something beyond the frame, and thus beyond representation. ideas invisible to the viewer. In Vasari's view, Raphael could The iconographie explanation for Christ's upturned gaze go no further, dying at a moment of pictorial revelation. is to be found in Vasari's life of Raphael. In it, Vasari discusses In the passage, Vasari describes what he sees in (Christ's the Transfiguration at length, reading it from bottom to top in face as the essence and the Trinity of the Godhead, concepts 384 BULLETIN SEPTEMBER '2()0H VOLUME XC. MlMllhK :1 in Paradise because this vision was beyond the capacity of living men: "(iod cannot be seen in His essence by a mere human being, except he be separated from this mortal life."'" Only the blessed conld see the divine essence because the supreme intelligibility of God was absolute and therefore ovenvhelmed the intellectual capacity of mortal beings: "what is supremely knowable in itself, may not be knowable to a particulaf intellect, on account of the excess of tlie intelligi- ble object above the intellect; as, for example, the sun, which is supremely visible, cannot be seen by the bat by rea.son of its excess of light."' '^ God's absolute intelligibility tlius rendered the divine essence visible only by means of intellectual vision, a fact of which Raphael's contemporaries were well aware. In his Comnmitaiy on Ihe Sentences, for example, Egidio da Viterbo classified access to God in three stages ascending from con- templation of the vestiges, to that of images, to the experi- ence of the divine pssentia, a threefold journey that parallels Augustine's division of sight into corporeal, imaginary, and intellectual species in The Literal Meaning of CenesisV' The divine essence, the essenlia in Egidio's scheme, thus could be fully seen not by means of the bodily eyes or the images in the fantasia, but only by means of intellectual vision. Because of Ils absolute iutelligibility, God's essence was frequently associated with divine light. When Dante cele- brates the "Light Eternal [hice etternaY in his final vision in the Paradise he is celebrating the light of God's all-knowing mind: O Light Eternal, who alone abidest in Thy- self, alone knowest Thyself, and, known to 19 Raphael, Transfiguration, detail showing Jesus C^hrist Thyself and knowing, lovest and smilest on (artwork in the public domain; photograph provided by Thyself!"'' Scala / Art Resource. NY) To see the divine essence, therefore, was to see by the divine light of the Godhead; indeed, this is why intellectual vision was defined by Aquinas as a vision of the divine light itself."^ relating to the idea of the vision of the divine essence enjoyed Dante's vision of the "Light Eternal" of the Godhead is facil- by the blessed in Paradise. ^''^' hi seeing the divine essence, the itated by means of the "divine light" or the "light of glory," beatified person would see simultaneously the unity and in- which acted on the created intellect to expand its scope to see dividuality of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. The vision God. Dante expressed his experience of it as "my sight, itself was the highest visionary experience possible in the becoming pure, was entering more and more through the cosmos, the seeing of the divine essence being equivalent lo beam of the lofty Light which in Itself is ti\ie.""^ seeing God's very nature and existence: "Since God then is not compo.sed of matter and form. He must be His own But within the seemingly invisible territory of discussions of Godhead, His own Life, and whatever else is thus predicated the divine essence, there lies an important paradox. While to Him."'""^ the divine essence was generally discussed in abstract terms, theologians agreed that Christ's glorified body would always God's essence was often expressed in terms of vision. The be discernible during the beatific vision as a participant in Deity knew himself by a perpetual looking-upon himself: "So the Trinity. Therefore, even at the climax of his beatific vision we say that God sees Himself in Himself, becanse He sees of the three in ter re flee ting colored circles of Gtid's triune Himself through His essence; and He .sees other things not in essence, Dante sees the corporeal image of Christ emerge themselves, but in Himself; inasmuch as His essence contains within the vision: the similitude of things other than Himself."^"^ The recipro- cal acts of seeing that define the Godhead's triune unit)' are That circling which, thus begotten, ap- recorded in many places.'"'* They appear prominently in peared in Thee as reflected light, when my Nicholas of Cusa's On the Vision of God, where an all-seeing eyes had dwelt on it for a time, seemed to me icon of Christ is portrayed as imparting knowledge of his depicted with our image within itself and in essence by means of his vision. En%isioning Christ in terms of its own color, wherefore my sight was en- the divine essence as absolute sight, even as "an eye," Cusa tirely set upon it."' exclaims that "you thus observe all things in yourself.""*'* Elsewhere he writes, "Your sight, Lord, is your essence."''" Being both divine and human, the glorified body of Christ Only the souls of the blessed could .see the divine essence cannot be separated from this, the loftiest image of the R.'VPHAKl.S t H.'^.^'.SI^I^.l:f^AIIO.\ AS VISIO-DKVoriONAL PROGRAM Godhead. If considered in this way, Christ's glorified body- could even serve as an image of tJie entire divine essence because of the Trinity's self-reflexive seeing. As Cusa formu- lates it. "In the absolute Son I see the absolute Father, for the son cannot be seen as son unless the father is seen.""** Forever gazing inward on his Father, who is part of himself, Cusa's Christ alludes lo his overall essence through his eyes. After all, Christ's image was perfect, for, as Cusa says, "just as an Image between its exemplar and which a more perfect image cannot mediate subsists most closely in the truth of which it is the image, so I see your [Christ's] hiunan nature subsisting in the divine nature.""^ Christ's physical self refers most directly to the Godhead, its divine exemplar.'^" Given the essentiality of Christ's glorified body to the di- vine essence, it is no wonder that theologians considered the Transfiguration a premonition or image of the beatific vision in ihe life to come. As we have seen, Augustine had called the transfigiued Christ a representation of the "Son of man in his kingdom."''^' And Thomas Aquinas had said that the trans- figured Christ was "n kind of image representing that perfec- tion of glory," meaning the Transfiguration was an image of the glorified body of Christ as it would appear in the Trinity of the beatific vision.'"' Therefore, to visualize man's ap- proach to the divine essence, a theologian could do no better than portray il in terms of an aspirational journey from corporeal to imaginative and finally intellectual images of God, leading directly through the image of the transfigured Christ. In his Journey of the Mind to Cod, Saint Bonaventure does just that.'"^ In his first six chapters, which contain exercises that are explicitly compared to the six days leading up to the Transfiguration on Taboi,'"' Bonaventure gives an account of a contemplative journey that moves through the three types of vision, from external evidence of God to internal images and then, finally, to intellectual images oí him.'"-' In the last stages of intellectual vision, Bonaventure's readers 20 Raphael, Saint Cecilia Altarpiece, ca. 1515-16, oil on panel are asked to contemplate the unity of both the divine essence transferred to canvas, 94 X 59 in. {238 X 150 cm). Pinacoteca and the Trinity by the light of the mind. At the work's Nationale, Bologna (artwork in the public domain; photo- conclusion, Bonaventure relates one further step that can be graph pro\ided by Scala / Art Resource, NY) taken only after the completion of the others: After our mind has beheld God outside itself through and Christ, the stages of Bonaventure's /oumiy share a great deal in vestiges of Him, and within itself through and in an in common with Vasari's account of Raphael's Transfigura- image of Him, and above itself through the similitude of tion. In each, a vision of Christ reflects both the divine es- the divine Light shining above us and the divine Light sence and the Trinity. Moreover, each shares the idea that iLself in so far as it is p<issible in our state as wavfurer and the fullest vision of God is possible only in death. While I do by the effort of our own mind, and when at last the mind not mean to imply Bonaventure's direct influence here, Va- has reached the sixth step, where it can behold . . , Jesus sari's theological imagery reflects the aspirational tone and Christ . . . it must still, in beholding these things, tran- progressive nature of Bonaventure's contemplative journey scend and pass over, not only the \isible world, but even in a way that suggests tlie widespread nature of these ideas itself. In this passing over, Christ is the way and the door; about contemplation in the culture. It was thus natural for Christ is the ladder and the vehicle, being, as it were, the Vasai i to imagine Raphael taking part in a spiritual exercise Mei cy-Seat above the At k of God and the mystery luhich has that moved the artist so close to the actual beatific vision that been hidden from *'^^ he, in fact, completed it by dying. Like Dante, Vasari's Ra- phael had attained the lofty vision for himself, but having Here, as elsewhere, the beatific vision of God, though almost revealed it to his fellow men in his greatest painting, he accessible through contemplation of the figure of Christ, passed back over to the beyond. ultimately requires leaving behind the state of the wayfarer. Vasari's description, in fact, goes far toward explaining God's essence could only be truly experienced alter death.'^' aspects of Raphael's Transfiguration. After all, Raphael's altar- In anticipating the beatific vision through the image of piece does lead the viewer on the course of a spiritual journey. 386 ART BULLETIN SEPTKMBER ïï()()8 VOLUME XC NUMBER this Christ that we understand tliat Riiphael's Transfiguration takes up and then surpasses the theme of Sebastiano's Raising of ÎMzanis. pointing beyond the resurrection of the dead in this Hie to the lofty reward that follows it in heaven. Like Cusa, writing of his experience of the all-secitig icon of Christ, any Renaissance viewer of religious pictures might exclaim before an image of the Savior: "I .stand before this image of your fare, my Cxod, which I observe with the eyes of sense, and I attempt with inward eyes to behold the truth that is designated in the picture."'"^ Although Cusa's words are presumably addressed to an icon of the Holy Face, a type of image popularized in the later Middle Ages, they couldjust as easily have been uttered in sight of the face of Christ at the climactic apex of Raphael's Transfiguration, which, given its sense of stillness, symmetrical setting, and iconic aspect, may well refer to traditional iconic images. The Renaissance \iewer might even i^ssume that the prominence of Christ's face car- ried a meaning like those more tradidonal works, referring like a s^Tiibol to the vision of the invisible God.'^^* This was, after all, what Vasari had done. But between Raphael's Transfiguration and almost all other Renaissance religious images lies an important difference, for Raphael's altarpiece does not simply invite but describes the process by which the mind might be turned to internal vision of Goá. It directly engages the problem of how the icon can be used spiritually by deploying its actors so that they do not merely play out their narrational roles but rather enact or figure the veiy activity of contemplation in gestural terms. This devotional aspiration of Raphael's Transfiguration is remarkable in an age in which altarpiece.s were shedding some of the outward trappings of their more contemplative functions. As we have seen, iconic altarpieces—where devo- 21 Miirlino Rota aiU-r riiiaii, iMdh uj Sainl I'l'ler Maiiyr. tion of the kind described by Cusa might be centered and CA. 1560, ciching and engraving, 15% X 10% in. (40 X 27.7 cm). The Metropolitan Museum of Alt, New York, anticipated by static, hierarchical forms—came to be re- I'urchase, 1917,Joseph Pulitzer Bequest, 17.50.16-155 placed by altarpieces whose main subject matter were Isiorie (artwork in the public domain; photograph © The depicting energetic narrative scenes.''"' Raphael, in fact, was Metropolitan Mtiseum of Art) one of the leaders of this movement, creating one of the first fully historiated altarpieces of the Renaissance in his Entomb- ment}^^ Narrative altarpieces like this one, although some- The painting explicitly addresses the three varieties of vision times adapted to reflect their contemplative function, gener- that arisif repeatedly in discus.sions of the contemplation of ally fostered devotion by rendering affective scenarios irom God. In the lower zone of the composition, we witness the the lives of Christ, the Virgin, and the saints. Predicated on struggle of external (corporeal) and internal (imaginary) dramatic subject matter, the new narrative altarpieces, like vision in the confrontation of the apostles and the possessed Titian's Death of Saint Peter Maríyrní 1530 (Fig. 21), presented boy's party, while above on Tabor we have the historical and more circumstantial tneanings than the iconic altarpieces imaginary vision of Chri.st himself, who satisfies the internal that came before them."^' vision of the apostles below and also points beyond it. As the Even beyond providing a unique figurai enactment of the beatified souls of Justus and Pastor look on, light falls on devotional process, Raphael's Transfiguration is singular Christ's face from beyond the frame: it is the divine light of among Italian Renaissance works of its time In its effort to intellectual vision, the "luce etterna" of the Godhead. In- rationalize the veiy visual multivalency inherent in the devo- deed, Raphael's Christ looks upward at his Father, and in tional project. It illustrates an instance in the history of early contemplating himself, he carries through the act of self- modern painting when the dialectical estrangement of the reflexive seeing tliat defines his triune essence. All these empirical and spiritual aspects of images is anticipated by the things invite us to imagine the Transfiguration as sharing the artist's rigorous differentiation of the visual and the visionary same spiritual goal as a work like the Journey of the Mind to God within the same pictorial s^lrface.'^^ With the Transfigiiratiori, in attempting to elevate the mind of the devout viewer to one might say, the visuality in Renaissance painting is the contemplation of God through a series of steps visually cul- subject of the work, and that Raphael here came to under- minating in the figine of Christ—a Chri.st like Bonaventure's, stand the problem of faith and the problem of religious whose open-ended gesture and gaze show us by their exam- paititing as being closely related in the acconmiodation oí the ple the way beyond vision and representation. It is throtigh unseen. It is no wonder, therefore, that traditional icono- RAPHAEL'S TRANSFlGURATtON AS VlSIO-DEVOTIO.NAl, rR()(;RAM graphic analyses cannot fully explain the altarpiece: without Multigrafica, 1984), 3:1-41; C. Ciardner Teufiel, "Sehasiiano del Pi- ombo, Raphael, and Narbonne: New lividence," HurlingUm Magazine attention to the very premises of representation in the Re- 126 (1984); 765-66; Da\-id Alan Brown, -Leonardo and Raphael's naissance, its full character remains just beyond our own Transfiguration," in Raffacllo a Roma. ed. Christoph Luitpold Fronimt'l abilities lo see and comprehend. In reading Raphael's Trans- and Matthias Winner (Rome: Kdi/ioni d'Elefanie, 1980), 237-43; Ru- dolf Preimesberger, "Tragische Motive in RalTaels Tmtisftfruration" figuration, visuality precedes iconography, and understanding Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 50 (1987): 88-115; Patricia Rnbin, "11 con- depends on the whole of the early modern epistemology of tribnio di Raffaello alio svihippo della pala d'alt;ire rinascimentate," Arte Cristiana 78 ( 1990): l(i9-82; Oberhuber. Riiph^i. Tlw Paintings seeing. (Munich: Prestel. 1999). 223-29; Susanne Schroer-Tramlxtwsky, In the history of Renaissance painting, Raphael's Transfig- "'Refa'el-Heil von Goit"; Das Vermächtnis von Raphaels Transfignra- tion'; Heilungswirkung durch Malerei," in Festschrift ßir Konrad Oberha- uration stands out as a unique and noteworthy event, an ber. t'á. Achim Gnann, Hein/. Widanei- el al. (Milan: Electa. 2000). attempt at devotional efficacy like no other. The Transfigura- 43-55; Jodi Cransion, "Tropes of Revelation ÍTI Raphael's Transfigura- tion," Renaissance Quarterly bD (2003): 1-25; ManTred Krüger, />(> Ver- tion harmonized both narrative and iconic aspects of contem- klärung auf dem Berg: Frktnntnis und Kiin.st (Hildesheim: Georg Olms porary altarpieces, offering a marriage of the isloña, and all Verlag, 2003), 197-235; Andreas Henning, Ra/faeh "Transfiguration " that the istoria stood foi". to the spiritual function of the und ili-r Wettstreit um die Farfif (Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2005); JCn-g Meyer vuv (Kapellen. The Romiin tirtiginus Pointings, cu. l'>Ofi-I32(l. altarpiece through an unprecedented themiitization of the vol. 2 of Raphael: A Critical Catalogue of the Paintings, trans. Steliin B. stages of contemplative seeing. This profoimdly original visio- Polter (Ltindshut; Arcos Verlag, 2005). 19.5-209; and (Gregor Bern- hart-Königstein. Raffaels Weltvniiliming: Dus berühmteste (kmälde tier Wett devotiona! program thus presents an innovative solution to (Petersberg; M. Inhof Verlag. 2007). the challenge of religious painting in the early Cinquecento, attempting an ingenious reconciliation of divergent devo- 2. See the description of the visio-devononal process in JefTrey F. Ham- burger, "Seeing and Belie\ing: The Siis])iciou ul Sight and ihe Ati- tional ideals In a single work, and thereby preserving intact thentication of Vision in I^iie Medieval .Art and Devotion," in Imagina- the impetus toward Imageless contemplation. Being the cul- tion und Wiiicliihkeit: Zum Verhältnis von mentalen und realen lUldtm in der Kun.st derfnthen Seuwit, ed. Klaus Krüger and Alessan<li'o Nova mination of Raphael's lifework, the veiy stimma of visuality in (Mainz: Philipp von Zabem, 2000). 47. Ajiother such description •A\> Italian Renaissance painting, Raphael's Transfigitration re- pears iti Sixten Riiigbom. kon to Narrative: '¡'he Rise of tlie Dramalic Close-up in Fifleenth-Ofnlury Devotionat Painting, 2nd ed. (Doomspijk: mains an Incomparable d(icument of its moment and the Davaco, 1984), 19. sophisticated thinking of its maker. 3. This is made clear by the so-called Nee Dens distich ("Nee Deus est nee homo, praesens quam cernis imago, / Sed Detis est et homo, quem sacra figurât imago" [Neitlier CKKI nor man is the pieseni im- age, which you perceive, / Bui (iod and man is he whom the sacred Christian Kleinbub is assistant professor at Ohio State University, image figures]) that appeared on numerous medieval images to re- mind viewers ol" their ptirely referential intent; Jack M. Greenstein, where he teaches (he history of Italian Renaissance art. Beyond his "On Alberti's 'Sign'; Vision and Gompositiou in Quattrocento Paint- work on the visionary in Raphael, he pursues research on a wide ing," An Bulletin 79 (1997); 675. On the "Nee Deus" in medieval art, see Christine Versar Bornstein. Portals and Politics in the Early Italian range of representational probiems in the theory and practice of early City-State: Tlie Sculpture of Nifhclaus in Context (Panna; Civiha Medi- modem painting [Department ofHistoiy of Art., Ohio State Univer- evalc. 1988), 104. sity, ColunibiLS, Oh. 43210,

]. 4. linages in the later medieval peiiod increasingly embraced the per- suasive powers of physical descnpdon to help inspire the devout. On this, see Ringbom, ¡con tit Nairative. 17-20 and passim; JefTrey F. Ham- burger, Tlie Jiiithachilit Canticles: Art and My.Uici.tm in fJanden anil the Notes Wiinrtand circa 1300 (New Haven; Yale University Press, IÍI9I), esp. 162-67, where boili popular and elite pressures catising tbe prolifera- This paper wa.s begun as a research project in 2002. An early version of it was tion and acceptance of physical imagery are di.scussed; Cynthia H a h n . presented as H FritkTalk at the Instltuit- of Fine Arts in New York in '2004 and ~Visio Dei: Changes in Medieval Visiialit)." in Viiualily liefore and beyond was stibseqiicnily dt-vt-lopftl as a chapter in my dissertation, ""\'ision and the the Renamance. ed. Rol>ert S. Nelson (Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- Visionary' in Raphael" (PhD dLss., Columbia University', 2006). .\inonfi the sity Press. 2000), 169-96; aud idem, "Vision," in A Companiim to Meih- nnmerous, gênerons scholars who have contribiiled in significani wa>*s to my evalArt, ed. Conrad Rudolph (Maldeu, Mass.: Blackwell. 2006). 4-1- thinking abont the Transfi^ratUm, David Rosand dcseives my special thanks 59. lor his extraordinary insight and support. L'nless otherwise indicated, iranslarions are mine. 5. Later, Nicliolas of Cusa will be disctissed as a Renaissance example of this ideal, hi the meantime, see Nicholas of ("usa. De vi.ûorie Dei, vol. 6 1. Important scholai-ship on rhe 't'rarti/if^umtîan includes Aldo Bertini, of Nicolai lie ('.itsa Ofiera omnia, ed. .'\delaida Dorothea Riemann (Ham- "La Trasfi^ireuLione c I'ultima cvoln/ione della pittiira di RafFaello," burg: Felix Meiner. 2000). The objective of imageless contemplation Critica d'Aria U (I%1): Í-1Í1; S. J. Frecdberg, Pniriting of the High Re- remaitied important even for late cinqtiecento art theorists. Gabriele naissance in Honu- and Hort-nre (Cambridge, Mass.: Haivard University Paleotti. for one, proclaimed that the works of the Christian artist Press, 1961), voi. I. 336-62; Konrad Oberhiiber, "Vorzeichnungen zu must elevate the eyes of iheir viewers ("levando gli ocelli in alti>") be- RaHaels Trarisfiguraliim." Jiilirhurh fltr Brrlinrr Miaifm 4 (19ti2): 116--ÎÎ!; yond men and temporal tbiugs ("nomini e comniodi temporali") so H. von Ehienip "Die Vn^laniri^ Chrixti nntl die Heilung des Rfsfs.n-nm that they might repose in eternal ones ("che sta riposTo nelle cose von RafFael," Ahhandlungtti ¡irr Akadnnie der Wi.ufisrhaftim uiiil der Li- eterne"). Paleotti, "Discorso intorno alle imagini sacre e profane." iti teratur in Mainz b (1966); 3-33; John Pope-Heniiessy, Raphael (New- Sciitti d'lirte dfl cinquecmto, ed. Paola Barocchi, 3 vols. (Milan: Riccardo York; Haiper and Row. 1970). 71-78; Lnitpold Dussler, Raphtirí: A Ricciardi Editore. 1971-77). vol. 1. 908. Well into the Renaissance, Chtiial CatatiifFiii' i>f Hh Hi turn. Wall-Paint ings, and Tafie.strii:', (London: actual altarpieces clearly promoted the engagement of spiritual vision. Phaidon, 1971), 52-55; Kathleen W. G. Posner, I^omirdo and Central as diil Fra Angelico"s Comnatiim of the Virgin Altarfiiece m the Mnsée dn Italian Art: 1515-1330 (New York: New York University Press, 1974). LottvTe. Paris. See Patricia Rubin, "Hierarchies of Vision; Vrá Angeli- 1-28, 43-47; Fabrizio Mancineili ei al., ¡'rimo piano di un rapolavoro: co's C^mmation of tlu- Virgin from Sati D(tmenico. Fiesole," Oxfmd Art La Tra.sfi^irazioni' di Rnjfaflh (Vatican CJity: Vatican Cit)' Art Museums Journal 27 (2004): 137-51. The immense range of strategies deployed and Galleries, 1979); Emst tiombrich. "The Ecclesiastical Significance by Fta Angélico for figuring incorporeal truths in visual tenns are de- ol' Raphael's Transfiguration." in Ars Aun> ¡hior: Stuitia loaiini liihstocki scribed in Georges Didi-Hubetman. l-ra Angélico: Dis.semblame and ¡•igu- sexagenario dienta, ed. Julius Chriiscicki (Warsaw; Panslwowe Wydawn rati'in, trans. Jane Mane Todd (Chicago: L'niversitv of Chicago Press. Navik. 1981). 241-43; Catherine King, "The Liturgical and Commem- 1995). For an example of similar ideals at work in the noi th, see Bret orative Allusions in Raphael's Transfiguration and Failure to Heal," Roihstein, "Vision. Cognition, and Self-Refleciion in Rogier van der Journal of thf Warbuf}; and Courtautd Institutes 45 (1982): 148-59; Ober- Weyden's Biadelin Triptych," Zeitschrift ßiiKunstge.schithte tri (2001); htiber, Raphatis "Transfiguration': Stil und Üe(tfutung (Stuttgart; Urach- 37-55. A stistained introduction to these issues can be found in Patri- hans, 1982); Roger |ones and Nicholas Penny, li/iphat^l (New Havt-n: cia Rubin, ¡mages and ¡dtntily in l-ijtei-nth-Century ¡-loreiue (New Ha\'en; Yale Universit) Press, 1983), 235-39; Manri/io Calvcsi, "Raffaello; La Yale University Press. 2007). Of course, many descriptions of the visio- Trasfigurazione," in Oltre RaffaeUo: Aspetti della culturafigurativedel devotional proce.ss nece.ssarily simplilV' the complexity of the hisioricai Cinquecento romani), ed. Luciano Cassanelli and Sergio Rossi (Rome; situation. On this, see Shern' Lindqtiist, review of Sight and .Spirituality . \ R r B l L l . t T l N . S E H l K M B t R ÜÜOM V O L U M t XC N U M i l t k :t 388 in Early Nelherlandiih Fainting by Bi^el Roih.stein. fij'naiuavn' (hiiirlnly discusses the technicalities of prophetic vision in his sermons; see 59 (2006): 583-85. Savonarola, I\ediche siypra Ezekiete, ed. Roberto Ridiilfi (Rome: Angelo 6. "Vi.suality" has been defined as "ilie distinci historical manifestations Berlardeiti Edliore, 1955), vol. 1, 20. Baldas.sare Casdglione's ISook of the Courtier, 4.71. features conversation on the nature and scope of ofvisiiai experience in all its possible modes." See Martin Jay, Dinon- visionary experience. It is a documented fact that artist.s were familiar rasl Eyes: 'i'he Denigration iij Vision in Twentieth-CenUiry l-'renrfi Thmigkl with these texts. For example, Ascanio Condivi writes about Michelan- (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993). 9. Foe an introdiK- gelo's deep knowledge of Dante, Petrarch, and Savonarola in his Vita tion to ihe historical evolution of ronteptions of vision, see David C. di Mifhelagnolo Buonarotti, ed. Giov-anni Nencioni (Florence: Studio Lindbeig, Theimfis of VisionframAt-Kindi to Kcpltr (i^hicago: ünivei'sity per Edizioni Sceltc, 1998), 61-62. In addition. Michelangelo had of Chicago Press. 1981 ). For an art historical perspective and bibliog- probably read (.hastig! i o tie, as demonstrated by David Summers, Michel- raphy, sef Robert S. Nelson. "Introduction: Descaries's Cow and angelo and tftr Language of Art (Princeton: Princeton Univei"sity Pre.ss. Other Domestications of the Visual," in Nelson, VUMIÏ/I/V belore and 1981), 9, who also argties that the mature Michelangelo probably read heyond the Renaissance, 1-21. Latin. Michelangelo tiiight have learned about vision from Petrarch 7. See Angustine, Di' gniesi ad litteram libri duodeam, vol. 28 (sec. 3, pt. 2) because Petrarch regularly ttinied his pen to discuss interior vision in of Corpus scriptomm eccksiasticorurn (ntinonnii rilüum ronsilio et ¡mpmsis Augustinian terms, as lie did iu his letter about his a.scent of Ventoux. arafifmuie lillnarum raesareae vindoliojien.d\, ed. Joseph Zycha (Prague: See Gill, Augustine in the Italian Renaissance, 104. Generally speaking, F. Tempsky. 1894). 387-88 (12.7). On Augustine's understanding of scholars tend to utîdetestimate the theological sophistication of Re- vision, see Margaret Miles, "Vision: The Eye of the Body and the Eye naissance artists. For an appreciation of the intellectual aspirations of of the Mind in Saini Augustine's iJe trínil/ile and Confessmu." Jottm.nl tif artists of the period, see Francis Ames-Lewis, The Intellectual Life ofthe lieligion 63 (1983): 125-42. In Raphael's time. Augustine's tripartite Early Renaissance Artist (New Haven: Vale Universit)' Press, 2000). scheme infortned discussion of Ihe vi.sionar^' al the papal court, a.s in Egidio da Vilerbo's "Sentential ad menteni Platonis," MS, Vat. lat. 12. Michelangelo's poetic ruminations on the workings of spiritual vision 6325. .A sermon osiensibly on Saint Stephen delivered before the pa- are numerous. For examples, .see nos. 105. 107 in Michelangelo pal court in tlie late fifteenth centtiry tiiade use of the tripartite .Au- Buonarroti, Rime, ed. Etiio N. Girardi (Bari: Gius. Laterza, e Figli, gustinian srlienie of vision; Raynaldus Mons Aureus, Orntin <ie Visione 1960), 60-61. Michelangelo's imagery of corpoieal and incorporeal Dei (n.p., after 1496), Hain Innmabuhim no. 11548. For context on vision is explored in Sunnners, Michelangelo and the. Language of Art, this sermon and discussion of the tendency of the Renaissance ora- 415-17; and in Robert Clemens, "Eye, Mind, and Hand in Michelan- tors of the papal court to dwell on visual and vision topics in their gelo's Poetry," FMLA (39 (1954): 324-36. seiTOons, see John W. O'Malley. Praixe rinil Blame hi lii-.na'issance Romt: Rheloric, Doclrini', and Ibform in llw Sarrrd ChalOTs of the Papal Court, 13. According to Vasari. Raphael taught Bartolotntneo perspective in re- turn for the iatter's instruction on his subtle blending of colore. See c. 1450-1321 (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1979), 130. For the 1550 text of Giorgio Vasari, Le vite de' pik eccelknti piltmi sculttm e more on Augtisdne's tripartite vision scheme iu Renais.sance culture architettari, ed. Rosanna Bettarini and I'aola Barocchi, 9 vols. (Flor- and his infhience on Renaissance \i.sualily, see Meredith J. Gill, Augus- ence: Sansoni, 1966). vol. 4. 163-64. On the relationship between tine in Ihe Italian Hi^naissfinre: Art and Philosophy from Petrarch to Mkhd- Fra Bartolomnieo and Raphael, see G. Fiocco, "Fra Bartolommeo e angelo (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), esp. 125-47. Raffaello," Rivista d'Arte 29 (1954): 43-53; and Ludovico Borgo, '"Fra [.ate medieval visuality was deeply indebted to Augustine's ideas aboui Bartolommeo e Raffaello: L'incontro romano del 1513," in Studi su vision, and il set the stage for Renaissance \isuality ;<s well. See Hahn, Rajfaelh, ed. M. S. Hamotid and M. 1.. Strocchi (Urhino: Quat- "Visio Dei: Changes in Medieval Visuality," 169—96. troVenti, 1987), 499—507. Dominicans were deeply concerned with problems of vistiality in spirittial matters. On the emblematic nature 8. Augustine, l)egmesi ad liltt^am, 433-34 (12.36). of Dominican ideas about visuality on the eve of the Renaissatice, see 9. So intense was the niedlevai discussion of vision that it sometimes be- Dallas O. Denerv' 11, Seeing and Being Seen in the Ljiter Medieval World: came a matter of excommunication, as was the case ol the contro- Optics, Theology and Religious Life (Cambridge: Cambridge University versy surrounding tJie problem of the beatific vision. See Jeffrey P. Press. 2005). F"or more oti the itnpact of Dominican theology on the Hergan. .Si. Albert Ike Great's Theory of the Bealijir Vision (New York: Pe- work of a leading Renaissance artist, see Didi-Htiberman. Fra Angélico, ter Lang, 2002), 1-11. Peter Lombard's widely influential Sentences 114-18 and passim, where the author di.scusses the impact of Saint may have played some role in encouraging ruminations on the vision- Antoninus's Summa theologiae on Fra Angelicij's depictiotis of the An- ary, too, for the numerous commentaries written on tfie Lombard nunciation. often expanded on his oviii ideas, as Thomas Aquinas did in his Cum- mentary on the Sentimces. The theological discourse on the visionary did 14. John Shearman was unsure of the origins of the cloud putto in Ra- not end in the Renaissance, although discussions tended to depend phael's work but thought that the cloud putti of northern Italy were on patristic and Schola.stic precedent. This is evidenced by the four- the most likely source. Like Andiea Mantegna in his Trivuhio Ma- teenth-century treatise by Juan Lei, Tractalus loannis ¡^ O, P. "De vi- donna. Giovanni Bellini tised small, discrete, tuftlike cloud putti sione beata,"ca. Emmantiel Caudal (Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostólica around the Holy Spirit in his Coronation ofthe Virgin at Pesaro. See Vaticana, 1963), which considers the issue of the beatific vision sys- Sheannan. "Raphael's Clouds, and Correggio's," in Hamotid and tematically, tnaking extensive reference to Augustine's thotights on Strocchi, Stvdi su Raffaello, 660. It should be added that cloud puiti Paul's vision of (lie Third Heaven, as was then traditional. Other texts like those in Bellini's (Coronation ofthe Virgin appear again, inconspicu- known atid i"ea<l in Retiais.sanre Italy explicitly deal with ihe relation ously, around the mouth of the cave in Giorgione's Atiéndale Adirration between "spiritual vision" and painting: Bartliolomevi' Ritnbertinus's (National Gallery of Art. Washington, D.C). Shearman seems, how- On the .Sensible Delights of fleavrn and Peter of Liinoges's On the Moral ever, to have been unaware of another, more pi^oximate tradition in a?itl Spiritual Eye. Both are discussed in Michael Baxandal), Painting central Italy. The cloud ptitto makes one of its earliest appearances ami Expfrimre iti Fijteenth-Centuiy Italy, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford Uui- in a Dominican church, that of S. Maria sopra Mineiva in Rome vei-sily Press, 1988), 103-8. (ca. 1488-93). On the vaults of the Carafa Chapel there (a chapel dedicated, significantly, to the Virgin and Saint Thomas Aquinas), the 10. Ludwig Pastor. Geschichte dtr Papste im Zritaltn der Renaissance von ili-r Florentine artist Filippino Lippi painted figures of sibyls floating on Wahl Innnrmi' MIL bis zum TorleJulius' ¡I., vol. 3 of (iesrhirhtr drr Papste large clouds with cloud putd emerging from them. On his return to seit linn Ausgarig lU^s Mittelallets, lOvols. (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, his home city, Filippino used these putii iti the same fashion again for 1895). 780-81, 786-87, points to the centiality ofThomas Aquinas in the clouds supporting the prophets on the vaults of his next big com- Raphael's work. On Aquinas's preeminent place in sixteeuth-cenuiry mission, the Strozzi Chapel of the main Dominican church in Flor- Rotnan theology', see John W. O'Malley, "The Feast of Thomas Aqui- ence, S. Maria Novella (ca. 1500). Even beyond these monimiental nas in Renai.s.sance Rome: A Neglected Document and Its Import," in fresco decoradons, Filippino's concept of the cloud ptitto made its Hfligious Culture in the Sixteenth CATitury: I^ieadiing, Rhelcrric, .Spirituality, way into Florentine painting through one of his assistant.s in Rome, and Reform (Brookfield, Vi.: Variorum, 1993), 1-27. John Shearman's Raffaeilino del Garbo, who incorporated cloud putti in one ()f his fin- analysis of ihe sources behind Riiphael's tapestry cartoons leaves no est devotional paintings, the Vir^n and Child (Metropolitan Museum doubt of Aquinas's centrality; Sheannan, Raphael's (lartnons in the. Coi- of Art. New York). Based on the visual similarities, including the lection of Her Majesty the Queeti und tlw Tafje.Uries for the Si.stine Chapel greater continuity between putto and clotid in Bartolommeo's work, it (London: Phaidon, 1972), 45-46 and passim. For more general schol- is probably this tradition that the latter tapped for the semicircle of arship on Roman Renaissance religion, see the whole of O'Malley, cloud putti behind Cod the Father in his .so-called Lucca Altarpiece, Praise and Blamf. and Ingrid D. Rowland, The Culturi- of tlu- High liimais- which 1 believe Raphael knew in some form before his departure for .sance: Ancients and Modems in Sixtevnth-CetUuiy Ronw (Camhridge: Cam- Rome in late I50S. It should be noted, however, that R:iphael himself bridge University Prew, 2000), 193-98, 24r>-.54. sketched the cloud putti on the ceiling of the Strozzi Chapel jtist be- fore his departure, too. On Raphael's drawings after Filippino's 11. In his Faradiso, Dante speaks contiutially about the mecbanics of sight Strozzi vaults, see Dominique Cordellier and Bernadette Py, Raphaël, and how his sight is inadequate without the aid of grace to see the son atelier, .w.t copistes (Paris: Reunion des Musées Nationaux, 1992). spiritual ofjjects of heaven. For examples, see canto 33 of Dante. The. 94-95. no. 83 (recto and verso). The drawings are mislabeled as cop- Divine Comedy: Paradiso, trans, and ed. Charles S. Singleion (Prince- ies after the vaults of the Carafa Chapel iti S. Maria Minerva in Eck- ion: Priticeton Universitv' Press, 1975), 370—81. (iirolamo Savonarola RAPHAELS TfiANSFIGURATION AS VISIO-DEVOTIONAI. PROGRAM hart Rnab et at.. Raphael: Die Zeirhnungeri (Stuttgart: Urachhaus. Martin Kemp (Cambridge: Cambridge University' Press. I9itO). 143- 1983), 581. nos. 276, 277. On Filippino's Carafa Chapel, see Gail L. 64. Geiger, Filippino l.ippi\ V.amjii Ch/ipel: litnaismnce Ati in Rome (Kirks- \ille. Mo.: Sixteenth Century Journal Piibhshers. t98(i5. esp. 51^-72, 23. Htimfrey, The Altarpiece in Renaissance Venire. 80. where Geiger discii.sscs the sibyls on tlouds on the vaulis (hut does 24. Ibid., 225. As Humfrey points out elsewhere (85), a concern for the noi disciiM ihe cioud ptiiti). aesthetic power of an altarpiece could rival devoiional aims in tbis period. For more on these matters, see Patricia R\ibin. "Commission 15. On the physical mechanism hehind ibt- physical visionai^y, see and Design in Central Italian Altarpieces c. 1450-1550," in Italian Al- Thomas Aqtiinas. Summa iheologiae. ed. P. Caratnello (Turin: Marietti, tarpifces 1250-1530: l-'unrtion and Design, ed. Eve Borsook and Fiorella 1952), pi. 1, q. 51. ait. 2. S. Gioffredi (Oxiord: Clarendon Press, 1994), 201-11. 16. One ofthf major theological forces in Renaissance Rome. Egidio da 25. Nagel. Michelangelo, 83-90, discusses Michelangelo's unusual and f<> Viterho was the atithnr of several itnportani theological and bistoncal cused use of tbe Man of Stjrrows motif in his London [entombment as works, incltiding his still largely unptiblishcd "Senientiae ad tnentem part of wider thinking about the altaipiece in about 1500. He also Platonis," Vat. lat. 6;Î25. Egidio's relationship with Raphael is consid- adduces Jacopti da Pontomio's Deposition for S. Felicita. Florence ered in Heinrich Pffitfcr, Zur Ikonographif von Ra/fafis Disputa: I'^dto (ea. 1528) as an example of an altarpiece thai deliberately preserves da ViíCT*o und die chmtlifh-plalonisrlw KoiizefHion der Stanza della Segna- aspects of traditional altarpiece function and design (139-40). luTa (Rome: Gregoriana, 1975). On tbe wider context, sec Epdto da Viterbo, O.S.A, f il íiw U-mpa: Alti del V Convegno deü'Istitulo Storico Agos- 26. Nagei, i'e\iew of Humfrey, The Altarfiiece in Rmais.sance Venice, HI. The liniano. Roma-Viiniio, 20-23 oltubre 19S2 (Rome: Analecui Atigustini- isstie of media in devotional art is explored at length in idem, Michel- ana. 1983); and John W. O'Malley. Ciles of Viiirbo au Church and ¡if- angelo. 188-215. ¡linn: A Study in RimaLw/inre Thought (leiden: E. J. Brill, 1968). 27. For a sensitive reading of Rapliaei's deeply meditated assimilation of 17. R;iphael, in John Shearman, Raphael in Earh Modem Sourm. ¡483- modern "history painiing" wiih the traditiotial altarpiece. see Nagel, 1602 (New Haven; Yale University Press, 2004). vol. 1. 132. doc. 1509- Michelangelo, 113-40. 10/1. trans, mine. The poem is also published in PfeifFer. ZIIT Ikonog- 28. Raphael probably received his commission for tbe Transfiguration be- raphie xion Rajfaeh Disputa, 255. fore Sebastiano received bis. Tliis appears to be ihe implicaiion of a 18. U.-iing Raphael's sonnet. Shearman. Raphtwl'.í Cartoom, 90, makes the letter from l-eonardo Sellaio (early 1517) in Rome to Michelangelo persuasive case that Raphael was not only capable of designing pic- that explains thai Raphael was doing everything in his power to pre- tures of deep and even esoteric iconograpbic sophistication but also vent the competition ("Ora mi pare che Rafaello metta soio.sopra el could do so wilb some degree of independence from professional mondo percbé Itii non lia fac[i]a, per non venire a paraghoni"). Of tbeologians. course. iJie letter demonstrates Michelangelo's deep interest in the competition. Shearman. Raphael in Early Modem Source.\. \ol. 1, 280- 19. In bis rreati.se on painting, Leon Battista Alberti asserted, "No one will 81. doc. 1517/2. On the issue of ibe competilion it.self, see Rona Gof- deny that things which are not xisible do not concern tbe painter, for fen, Renaixmnce Rivals: Micltelangelo. I.eonanUi. Raphael. Titian (New be strives to represen! only the things that are seen": Alherti. On Haven: Yale University- Press, 2002), 246-47. Painting, trans. Cecil C.rayson, ed. Martin Kemp (London: Penguin Books, 1991). :Í7. For tbi' Italian, "Drllf (ost- qtiali non possianio ve- 29. For an extensive analysis of Micbelangelo and Sebastiano's competi- dere, neuno nega ntilla apartenersene al pittore. Solo studia il pittoie tive strategies during the making of the Tramjiguration and other fingere quello si vede," see Alberti. Df pirtum, in vol. 3 of 0^i° wilgari, paintings, see Goffeii. Renaissance Rivah, 243-64. On Sehastiano's col- ed. Ocil Grayson (Bari: Gius. Latería e Figii, 1973), 1.2. Greenstein, oristic contributions to the commission, see Costan/a Barhieri, "The "On Alberti's 'Sign.'" fiHl-83. takes up the specific problem of "sensi- Competition between Raphael and Michelangelo and Sebastiano's ble surfaces" in Alherii's ibeor^' of painting. Toward the end of the Role in It," In Tlie Cambridge Companion to Raphael, ed. Marcia B. Hall quaitrocenio. Leonardo derided knowledge procured by means other (C:ambridge: (Cambridge Uni\ersity Press, 2005), 141-6-1. The respec- than corporeal vision, reiterating Alherti's sentiments hy declaring tive roles of Sebastiano and Michelangelo in works like Tlie Raising of that "tbe scope of painting does not extend beyond the representa- Lazarus are clearly aiticulated in Ludovico Dolce's Dialogue tin Paint- tion of the solid body or the shape of all the ibings that are visible"; ing. See Mark W. Roskill, Dolce's "Aretino" and Venetian Art Theory of the Leonardo, (M Painting, trans, and ed. Martin Kemp and Margaret Cinquecento (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000), 95ff. Walker (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1989), 15. For the Italian, "invero la pittnra non s'asiende più oltra che la stiperfizie, per la 30. See Vasari s description of Raphael's death in Le iñte. vol. 4, 210. On qiiale si finge il corpo figiu'a di qualonqtie co.sa e\idente," see Leo- the Transfiguration's unparalleled fame in the seventeenth century and nardo, Libro di pittura: Codiff ur/iinatc tat. 1270 nella Bihlintfra Apostolira the legacy of its reputation through the beginning of the nineteenth Vaticana, ed. Carlo Pedretti and Carlo Vecce (Florence: Giutiti. 1995). ceritur\\ see the history provided in Eliiiabeth Cropper, Tiie Domeni- vol. 1. 133 (pt. I, sec. 3. Urb lv-2r). chino Affair: Novelty, Imitation, and Theß in Seventeenth-Century Rome (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2Ó05), !-21. 20. For more on the problem of naturalism in lourieenth-ceutury reli- 31. This and all subsequent quotations come from the King James Ver- gious painting, see Didi-Huberman, Fra Angeliro, esp. 1-10. Of course, sion of the Bible. even Alberti, the first writer lo theorize the istmia in a stibstantial way, 32. The most common identification of the saints with Justus and Pastor acknowledged that paintings ought to engage the mind of the viewer derive.^ from the fact that they are the patron sainLs of Narbonne (/> piriura 2.42. 3.52) and that many naturalistic images aimed at fur- whose patronal festii'al fell on the same day as that of tbe Transfigura- thering larger intellectual and spiritual missions. For studies devoted tion. This identification, however, is by no means definite. Among ibf to the nonliteral (that is, allegorical and metaphoric) meanings stand- other saints ihat have been pioposed as possibilities are Agapitus and ing liebind Renaissance ¡Atorie. see Leo Steinberg, l^onardo's Incessant Felicissimus, deacon saints who served tinder Sixtus II and who are ¡Mst Sufffier (New York: Zone Books, 2001): and Jules Lubhock, Stoty- commemorated as martyrs in the missal on the Feast of the Transfigu- lelling in Chnstian Art fnm (iiotto to Donntello (New Ha\en: Yale L'niver- ration. FOI more on the historiography of this issue, see King, "The sity Press, 2006). Liturgical and Commemorative .Allusions." 150. 21. Tbe classic discussion of tlie movement toward narrative in late medi- 33. Eighieenth-centuiy critics found ibe work to he historically (and ihus eval and Renaissance devotional works remaitis Sixten Ringhom's ¡con aesthetically) disjointed. In his Italian Journey, \u\\Ann Wolfgang von lo Narrativ/'. The changing nature of the Italian altarpiece in the early Goethe mentions the idea of the total distinity of tJie two halves as cinqtiecento is noted hi Jacob Btirckhardt. '¡'he Attarpiece in Renaissance being hotli unintelligent and ouimoded. See Goetbe, Italian journey, ¡laly. ed. Peier Humfrey (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, trans. W. H. Auden and Elizabeth Mayer (London: Penguin, 1970). 1988), 128-45. It sbould be ntned that tbe tension between iconic 433. .\lso, on the transformation of the reputation of the painting and narrative presentation of religious stibject matter in Renaissance ivTought by Goethe, see Oberhuber. Raphael's "Tramjigiiration, " 12. It altarpieces is merely the latest manifestation of a long-standing issue should be noted that Raphael's altarpiece stands apart from other in C'hiistian mt, as sbown in Herbert L. Kesslei, Spiritual Seeing: Pictur- two-tiered altarpieces of the period, stich as re])resentati()ns of the ing (kid's Invisibility in Medieval An (Pbiladelphia: University of Penn- Corooation of the Virgin, where the dramatic atid thematic connec- sylvania Press, 2000). tions betiveen upper and lower scenes were tightly cixirdinated. 22. See Peter Htimfrey, The AUaipiere in Renaissance Venice (New Haven: 34. For a representative declaration on this matter, see Freedberg, Paint- Yale University Press, 1993), 79-85; Alexander Nagel. re\iew of Thr ing of the High Renaissance, vol. 1. 358. Altarpiece in Renaissance Venicf. by Humfrey, Art Bulletin 77 (1995): 35. Ibid., 357: "The subject of tbe whole picture, as it is painted here, bas 139-42; and idem, Mifhelangela and the Reform of Art (Cambridge: no precedent." See also Dussler. Raphael: A Critical CaJalogue. 53. Cambridge University Press. 2000), esp. "Tbe Altarpiece in the .A.ge of History Painiing." 113-40. On the general taxonomy and ftinciion of 36. Goetbe. Italian journey. 433. altarpieces. with special consideration of Riiphael. see David Rosand, 37. Friedrich NicUsche. The Birth of Tragedy and Other Writings, trans, and "'Divinilà di cosa dipinta': Pictorial Structure and the Legibility' of the ed. Raymond Geuss and Ronald Speirs (Cambridge: Cambridge I'ni- Altarpiece," in The AUarpiece in the Renaissance, ed. Peter Humfrey and versity Press, 1999). 26. 390 ART BULLETIN SEPTEMBER 2008 VOLUME XC 38. Jacitb Biirflihardt, The C.irmvne: An Ar! (¡uidr in I'ninUng iv lUily jm the bis painting. Like myself. Freedberg. Painting nf ihe High ¡Renaissance, ÍV il/ Travderfi and Stwimts, irans. A. H. Cloiigh (New York: StnbiiLT. 359, bas acknowledged general compositional similarities between the 1908), 145. We might add Heinrich Wólfflin LO this tradition oC read- lower part of the Transfiguralion atid the Sistine tapestries, ing Jtix ta posed opposites in (he altarpiece. He saw in it "contrast, a 50. Tommaso Inghirami, Ct>mmentaria in aiiempoeticam. Vat. lat. 2742, fol. marked countfrpoint,'' depending <in the integration of ihe two Ir. For more on Inghirami, see Rowland. The Culture of the High Re- halves: "in the upper part, peace, solemnity, celestial heaiity; in ihe naissance, 151—.57. Sec also Joost-Gaiigier, Raphael's Stanza delta .Sfgn.a- lower, ilie noisy thiong and earthly wretchedness"; WölHIin, CUissir lura, 22-42. where Inghirami, Julius II's librarian, is credited witb de- Art: An Introdurlion to the Italian Renaissance, Erans. Peter Miii^ray and vising the program of the Stanza della Segnatiira. Linda Murray (London: Phaidon, 1994), 137. In mote recent times, Freedbcrg. Paintí?¡g of tki- High lienaisiance, vol. 1, 357. was adamant 51. Among other places, the symholic removal of spectacles appears in alioui the in^e con cil ability ol the two parts of the Transfiguration. Joos van Cleve's Ma4onna and Chiltl with Donor (ca. 1510) in ihe Met- ropolitan Museum of Ait in New York, as discussed iti Hans Belting, S9. For example, Daniel Arasse. "Extases et visions beatifiques à Tapogée Likeness and Preseiice: A History of the Image before the Era of Art, Irans, de la Renaissance: Quatre images de Raphael," SUkmges rlf ITxolf Frnn- Edmund |ephcott (Chicago; University of Chicago Press, 19ií4), 474— (aise <ie Rome: Moyen Age. l'etnp.s Moilmiex 84 (1972): 46.'i-66. This clas- 75. sic essay has been reprinted with modification.s in ¡J-S visions de Ha- phafl (Paris: Liana Levi, 2003), See also Cranston, "Tropes of 52. The best and most extensive discussion oi fantasia in the artistic Revelation," 1-25. context is fotind in Stimmers, MirMangeli) and thf ¡Mnguage of Art, 103-43. For views on the problem of fania-^ia and the visual arts of 40. Cranston, "Tropes of Revelation," 18, argues that the apostles fail to tbe cinqtiecetKo atter the death of Raphael, see Stephen J. Campbell, "interpret" the possessed boy because they "look past" the pointing "'fare vna Cosa Moría Parer Viva': Michelangelo, Rosso, and the and kneeling woman. "Their inability to see the figure [ol' the (Un)Divinity of Art," Art Bulletin 84 (2002): .596-620. woman] emphasizes tlieir corresponding inahility to \iew the hody as more significant than a sick child, to discover and imagine more iban 53. Gianfrancesco Pico della Mirándola, On the Imaffnation (De imagina- is apparent to the eye." If ont' sees the prominence of this figure's ¿iitni'}, ed. and trans. Hariy (Kaplan (New Haven: Yale Universit)' Press, pointing bands as being contrasted witb the gesture of the apostle in 1930), 30-31 (cbap. 3): "(kim sensu coit quia et particiilaiia, qtiemad- red, who points toward Christ on Tahor, one might assume that the modum ille, et corpórea et praesentia percipit; praestat illi quia, nullo latter gesttire sliouid lake precedence over the former, if only because etiam movente, prodit imagines, iiec praesentes tnodo, veiTjni et prae- Christ is the obvious key to die boy's healing. terilas et futuras, et quac eiiatn promi a naiura in Iticem neqneunt." 41. Konrad Oherhuber repeatedly advanced the idea ibat die two halves 54. Ihid., 40-41 (chap. 6): "Clum enim ex rationali anima et corpore con- are interconnected in this way, but without providing an exegetical stiluatur quasique compagineiur homo, iÍifTerat<|iie plurimtim a explanation. For example, see Oberhuber, Raphael: The Paintings, 22fi. terrena mole corporis spiritalis animae substantia, ex re fuit ut ex- trema medio opportuno conjnngerenliir, quod utriusque quodam 42. Tliis is a reading of die trajectory of Raphael's visionary works tbat modo naturan] saperet, et per qiiod ofliciis anima etiam uiiita corpori differs in important ways frcim that articulated in Arasse, "Extases et fungeretur." visions béatitiqties," 403-92. 55. Ibid.. 50-51 (chap. 8): "Utitur namqiiam iiiis corpori jtinctus ad veri- 43. On the meaning and literary associations of Mount Parnassus in the tateni contemplandam, veluti hcbeti visu oculus specillis vítreis ad Renaissance, see Christiane L. Joost-Gatigier. Raphael's Sttmzfi della rem sensiiem intuendam, eoque pacto quo et oculus ipse decipitui," Segnatura: Meaning and Invention (Cambridge: Cambt idge University Press. 2002), 115-16. Nietzsche, The Birth oj Tragedy, 26, implicitly 56. Ibid., 56-57 (chap, 8): "\isione phantastica patefacta sunt." made tlie connection between Tabor and Parnassus in his di.scussion 57. Ibid., 50-51 (chap, 8): "Quem ad modum sanguine, pituita, bile of Raphael's Christ as an Apollo figure. rubra aut atra abundat quispiam, sic et eius imaginatio philosopho- 44. Nor is this similarity surprising considering the fact that Apollo Iiim- rum medicorumque tesdmonio huiiis modi naturam sectatur. ut pro self W"as frequently linked to Christ. Examples may he found in Marsi- eomm diversitate ad diversas imagines—hilares, tórpidas, truculentas, lio Ficiuo, Platonic Thmlogy, trans, and ed. Michael Allen et al. (Cam- maest;is—exsdmulettir, a quidhus non secus intellectus. .spiritalis ani- bridge, Mass.: I Tatti. 2001), vol. 1. 2.55-29 (4.1.6-28). mae oculus, in cognoscendo variai atque decipitur ac corporeus dc- pictis variegad.sque specillis haüucinaiur." 45. Tbe idea that tbis aposde iiiighl see the Transfiguradon inwardly was first advanced in Oherlniher. "Vor/eichnungen zu Raffaels Trmisfigii- 58. Ihid., 80-81 (chap. II): "Quo tu ut qui huic intellegendi modo pro- ration" 142. Oberhubei". Rtiphrwl: The Paintings. 226, acknowledges btit pior est [that is, in the manner of God contemplating his own es- does not thoronghly discuss what is here described as the "visual con- sence], eo sit a casu atque errore distandor." test" in the lower section of ihe altatpiece. Kri'iger, Die VerkUlrung auf 59. Iti Ltidovico Dolce's Dialogue on Painting, Aretino is made to compare dnn. Rng, 223-24, agrees wiib Oixiihiiher's posiiion, although he asso- the itiapproptiate use of imagination with the painter parodied in ciates the red apostle with |ohn the Baptist. The figure has been iden- Horace's Ars poética. The ultimate target of Areiino's criticism here is tified as James the Lesser by Preimesherger, "Tragische Motive iti Ral- Michelangelo, who Aretino later describes as misusing his imagina- faels Transßgnmlion." 103-5, and, less convincingly, as Jesus himself in tion. See Roskill. Dolrc's "Arelino," 123—25. These lines make another Bernliart-KÓnigsiein, Rnffaeh Weltverklfinmg, 128-30. appearance in (iahriele Paleotti's extensive discourse on the propriety of grotesques in his "Discorso intorno alle imagini." See Barocchi, 46. The gt'siure is comparable to several otbei^s in Raphael's work. Tbere Scritti d'atie del Cinquecento, vol. 3, 26.56-57. For an extensive analysis of is the figure of Leo X, posing as Leo IV in the Haitle nf Ouiti in the the Horatian tradition in relation to Renaissance art Iheoi-y and par- Stan/a dell'lncendio, who thanks the heavens for bis glorious victory ticularly the work of Michelangelo, see Stmimers, Michelangelo and the over the Saracen.s. Alternatively, we find the newly enlighiened figure Language of Art, 129-43. of Dionysius tlie Areopagite, converted by the words of Saint Paul, listening in the rigbt foreground of Paul in Athms. It also rt-semhles 60. Horace. Ars Poetim 1.1-5, in The Epistles of llorare, tiaiis. David Ferry the gesture of tlie foretnost deacon saini iti the earliest survi\iiig mo- (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 2001), 151. dello for the 'Tmnsfigumtiim itself (Alheriina, Vienna). In all these cases, ihe gesture is one of aive or Ihanksgiving, normally addressing a 61. Bernadine Barnes, Michelangelo's "Last ¡ndgmpnt": Ihe Rrnais.sance Re- visionary or miraculous happening. Here it shows tbat the two figures tponsn (Berkeley: University of California Piess. 1998), 99. in blue, having mined inward, arc already pany to the vision of faitli 62. Among other things, Raphael famously contributed to tbe rebirth of on the mouimiin. By opening his hands before him, the blue apostle grottesrhi: On Rapbael's grottesche m-AAc in collaboration witli Giovanni on the far left acknowledges the vision of faith that he has experi- da Udine foi' the Loggia of Leo X. see Nicole Davos, Ee logge di lîaf- enced internally. faello. 2nd ed. (Rome: Instituto Poligrafico e 7,ecca tiellc) Stato, 1*186), 31-37. 47. Oskar Fi.scbel was Lhe first to associate Juda.s with thi.s figtire. See Fi- schel, Raphael, trans. Bernard Rackbam (London: Spring Books, 63. Dolce makes these comparisons throughout his Dialogue. For exam- 1964), 282. Fiscbel's opinion is shared by Oberhuber. Raphael's ples, see Roskill, Dolce's "Aretino," 173-77. "Transfiguration, "26. 64. Trans, adopted from Barnes, Michelangelo's "Last judgment, " 1^, where 48. Cranston, "Tropes of Revelation," 20, makes this comparison, too. ibe letter's context is described. For a transcription of Sernini"s letter, which specifically addresses the contemporary leception of Michelan- 49. It should be borne in mind that the Blinding of Ely mas itself depends gelo's LtLst Judgment, see I-iidwig Pastor, Geschichte dir Papst Pauls III., on the example of Leonardo's Adoration of the Magi. Much has been vol. 5 of (kschichte der Päpste (1909), 843: "tutto il sno sforzo ha messo made of the compositional simJIariiies between Leonardo's unfinished in fare figure hizzare et in atti diversi. . . ." Barnes's translation of altarpiece and the 'Irunsfiguiation, especially in Posner, Leonardo and Sernini's Ilalian "bizarre" as the English "imaginative" is accepted. Central Italian Ail, 5-7. See also Oberhuber, Raphael's "Transfiguration." 17. Urown, "Leonardo and Rapbacl's Transfignralion," 238, bas argued 65. Vasari. 1^ vite. vol. 6, 69: "passioni e contentezze dell'animo." ihat Raphael was even deliberately asserting his debt lo Leonardo in 66. Vasari, l^ vite, vol. 4, 206: "Ma conoscendo nondimeno che non po- the Trurnftgiiralion so as to identify' himself with the older master and teva in (jnesta parte arriv'are alia perfe/.^ione di Michelagnolo, come RAPilAKl.'S riiA.\St-l<.VHA IIÜN AS VISlU-üE VO T I ü N A I. i'ROÍlRAM 3g] uomo di grandissini« frii'f!Í7Ío considero che la pittiini non consiste Ol)erhuber compares the lighi of the "inner sun" (thai is, Christ) to solamente in fare uoiiiiiii nudi, ma che ell'ha ii campo largo. .. ." Va- thai of the setting "outer sun" shown over Jerusalem. .sari goes on to desciilx- the univei-se oí particulars to which Raphael 78. It will l>e iiodced thai a similar combination of lights is used in the devoted himself thereafter, including such things as "la v-arietà e background and foreground of Raphael's Lo spaúmo. which also lakes üiravaganza delle prospettive, de' casamenti e de' pacsi, il leggiadro place iu Ihe early morning. modo di vestiré le figure, il fart- che elle si perdino ulcuna volta nello scuro et alcuna volta veiighino innanzi col cliiaro, il fate vive e belle As also noled by Posner, ¡Avnardo and Ontral Italian Art. 44. le teste dello fcmrnine. de' pntti, de" giovasii de de' vecchi. e dar loro For anodier inierpretation of the relevance of ihese passages, see secontto ¡1 bisogno rnoven/a c bravura." Raphael did preci.sely as the Cranston, "Tropes of Revelation," 19. Netherlandish artists had done: he spread his painterly attentions 81. On these matters, see Augustine, De fide rerum quae non videnlur. in widely. Michelangelo famously criticized this approach as it appeared in Netherlandish painiiug; "And I do iiol speak so ill of Flemish Stinrti Aurelii Aufru.<:tini hippnnni.sis fpixa>jñ ofitrn omnia post tm'aviensium thi-oh^tintm reœn.sionmi, ed. llie Benedictine Order, Congregation of S. painting because it is all bad but because it attempts ui do so many Mauri, andJ.-P. Migne, vol, 6 (Paris; Venti apud Editorem in Vico things well (each one of which would suffice for greatJiess) that it Dicto Montrouge, 1841), 171. does none wt-ll," in Francesco de Hollanda. ¡-'imr Diahgufs on Painting, trans. Aubrey F. G. Bell (Westport, Conn.: Hyperion, 1979), 15-16. 82. On major themes in the exegesis of the Transliguraiion in ihe early Church Fathers, see John Anthony McGuckin, The Tmmjiguration iif 67. This is not to suggest iliat Raphael's other figures, likf the woman Christ in Scripture tind Tradition (l^wiston. N.Y.: Edwin Mellen Press pointing toward the bov with boili hands, were not demonstrative of a 1986). certain liijpiultà derived in pan from Michelangelo's example (in this 83. Thoma.<i Aquinas, Catena Aurm: Coymnentary on the Four Ihspeb. CMtfcted ca.se. directly from Michelangelo's l)mi iondo amK lAliynri Sifrd). bui that Raphael, in imagining the posses.sed boy, waiiied to point to a Dut of Ifif Winks of thf Fathi^. trans. Mark Patiison ( New York: Preserv- mosi extreme example to which Michelangelo's aesthedc mighi be ing Christian Ptiblicaiions, 2000). 599-600 (Matt. 17:1-4), Cntmn aurm in (fnalunr Kvangetia, ed. Angélico Guaricnti (Turin: Marietti, laken. Whether admired or chastised, the diffuultà asciibed 10 Michel- 1953), vol. 1. 258-59: "Vel quia in sex diebus toiiis facttis esi visibilis angelo's nu<ies and other figures was seen as a prodtict of fren/ied mundus: qui iranscendit itmnes res mundi. potest a.scendere super imagination; they were, as Nini Sernini wrote, "imaginative figures" montcm excelsutn. et gloriam a.spicere Verbi Dei." (Barnes, MirftrlnngFlo's ~¡JL.\IJudjrmenl,"7H). Michelangelo's pictorial inventions were thus criticized when it was thought tbat ihey pushed 84. .Aquinas, CMtena Aure.a, trans. Pattison, 601 (Malt. 17:1-4), Catena nti- poetic intentions l)eyond the liieral lelling of a stoiy or the natural rea. ed. Guarienti, vol. 1, 258-59: "Mystice autem, ctuii aliquis iran- appearance of thingK. .\m<ing these crilics, perhaps the most interest- scenderii sex dies, secundum quod diximus. videt tratisfigunitutn le- ing is Dolce, who. in his dialog\ie on painiing called the Arftinii, sum ante oculos cordis sui. Diversas enim habei \'erbiim Dei formas; writes ihat Michelangelo's painting is both extreme and obscure and appaiens unicuique .secundum quod xidenti expediré cognoverit: el claims that he has allowed an to ovei-whelm decorum and even reli- nemini supra quod capit. semedpsum ostendit: unde non dixit simpli- gion in his I .list Jtidgrtu'ul. Most important, Dolce judges Michelangelo citer tramfiguratus est, sed coram m. In Evangeliis enim lesus simplici- unfavorably against Raphael, comparing tbe former's use oí strange ter intelligitur ab eis qui non ascetidunt per excitatii)nem verbonim figunil poses to Dante's learned and convoluted poetic figures, while spiritualium super excetsum sapientiae montfm; eis autem qui ;LS- cenduttt, iam non secundum carncni cognoscitur, sid Deus Verbum seeing the latter as related to the sweet and varied style of Petiarch. inielligitur. Coram bis ergo transfiguraUir lesus, et non coratn illis qui In comparison to such tomeliness, Dolce finds Michelangelo's work sunt deorsutii in conversadone terrena viventcs. HÍ autem coram qui- uglyflfirfincomprehensible. See Roskill, Doke's "A/rimo, " 273fI. On bus transfiguratur, facti suni lilii Dei, et c)stenditur eis sol esse iusti- Dolce's dialogue and its comparison of Michelangelo and Raphael, tiae[.]" see Barnes, MicMangeto'i "IMAI /uilg7nenl,''94. 85. Augtistine. "Sermon 78," in Sitmons on tlie Nm> Te.staTnent, imns. Ed- 68. After all, Vasari thought thai Raphael was the most graceful of all art- ists, both in terms of bis behavior and his art, calling him "il graziosis- mund Hill (Bntoklyn: New City Press, 1991), vol. 3, .140. in Sennvne\ simo" {Le vile, vol. 4. 8). For more on grace in Raphael, see David R o vol. 5 of Santti Aurelii Augii.stini. . . itfierti omnia, 490. Il sbould be sand. "Una Linca Sola non Stentata: Castiglione. Raphael, and the noied here ihat this passage also refers 10 the l^st Judgment, as ex- Aesthetics of (irace." in tîmding Medimal Cntluvf: E.uay.s in Hniifir of pounded a! It-ngth in Bernhart-Kônigstein, Raffiieh Wetlverklärunfr. Hobfjl W, Hnnning. ed. Robert M. Stein and Sandra Pierson Prior 86. Augtisilnf. "Sermon 78." in Sermons mi the Neiu Te.Uament, 340 (empha- (Notre Dame, hid.: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005), 454-79. sis added), Sertiwnp.'í. 490: "Dominus ipse Jesus re.splenduit sicut sol: See also Daniel Arasse. -Raifaello senza venusta e l'eredità della gra- vestimenta ejus facta sunt catîdida .sicut nix. . . . Ipse Jesus quidem, zia," in Hamoud and Strocchi, iiludi su Raffaello, 703-14. ipse splenduit sictit .sol. se lumen esse sigiiificans quod illuminât om- nem hominem venientem in hune mundum. Quod esi iste sol otulis 69. I'osner. ¡j-onardo and Crnlral Italian Art, 5-7 and pa.ssim. carnis, hoc iile oculis cordis: et quod iste carnibtis. hoc ille cordibns." 70. Although Leonardo does not name him in the passage, his intention 87. Augusdne. City of Cod, trans. Marcus Dods (New York: Random to criticize Michelangcl»» is clear. I^onardo, Li//ro di ¡¡ilium, vol. 1. 199 House. 1993), 862 (22.29). De civilate Dei, vol. 7 of ()f>er<i (hnitui. (125, Urb 48r): "O pittore notomist;i. guarda che-lia troppa notizia 22.29.3, col. 799. The Latin here read.s "oculum cordis." ddii ossi. corde e muscoli non sieno causa di larti un pittore legnoso. col volere che li tuoi ignurli mostrino tutii li sentimend loro." For .\t least one other contemporary artist was seemingly aware of Augus- more on Leonardo's crilicism of the unnamed "aiiatoEiiical painter" tine's discussion of tbe "eyes of the heart" in relation to the Transfig- who can be ass<K-ialed with Michelangelo, see Martin Kemp. Leonardo tiratiou: .Sandro Botticelli and Ins workshop produced a Transfigura- du Vinci: Tfw Manvltmi.s Winks of Nature and Man (Cambridge, Mass.: lion (ca. l.'iOO), a triptych now in die Galleiia Pallavicini in Rome, ihat Hanard University Press, 1981), .'Í37-..SS. depicLs the eponymous event iu the central panel as oKservcd by SaintsJerome and Atigustine Irom their siudics in the laii-iiil wings. 71. Il has been argued that Raphael, being in competition witb tbe sculp- Notably, Augustine ga/es in the direction of (he cciiiial panel while tor Michelangelo, chose the chiaroscuro mode in order to prove his pointing to his heart. On this picture, see Manfred Ki'uger, Die VVr- prowess in rendering lilimo. See Posner, Uonardn and Cmilml ¡taliti» ktiining auf d^m Herg, 177-95. Art, 15. 89. The drawing is Ginlio Romano's copy of Raphael's firsi moddlo. For a 72. On chiaroscuro and verisimilitude, see ibid., 13. cbron<ilogical survey ol Raphael's development of the altiupiece, see 73. On Ihe tiieaning of shaded faces (and sfumatn) a.s an indicator of sub- Oberbubcr. Raphael's "'¡'ramfigiiralion,'JMiï. jeciive consciousness, see .AJexander Nagel. "Leonardo and Sfumato." 90. Tboma.s Aquinas, Summa Tlmilogica, trans. Fathers of the English Do- /ÎKÎ 24 (1993): 7-20. Paolo Alei also argues thai veils and shadows al- minican Province (Westminster: Christian Classics. 1981), vol. 4. 22.55, lowed poeus and paintei-s to cotivey unstated meanitigs to the "specta- Siimma, ed. Caramello. pt. 'i. q. 45, art. 1: "Hieronymus dicit. super tor's eyes of the mind"; Alei, '"Intflkgilur plus Semper quam ñngitur: Matth.. nemo putet Chiistum per hoc quod transfiguratus dicitur. The Renaissance Heritage of Timanthes' Veil" (PhD diss,, Oxford pristiiiani formam ei faclem perdidisse, vel amisi.sse corporis verilatem University, 2002). 177-86. et assumpsisse coi-pus spiriiuate vel aereum." 74. Peter's epistle figured in the liturgy of the Mass on the Feast of the 9 1 . Aquinas, Summa, trans. Dominican Fathers, vol. 4. 2255. Summa, eel. Transfiguration. See Posner, l^onnrdo and Onlreil Italian Art. 44. Caramello, pt. 3, q. 45, art. 1: "Sed (¡uomodo tramformatm sit, ICvangelista 75. Emphasis added. ilrmonstrat, direns: 'Rrsplenduit fades rim iiciU sol, venimenla autinn eins ffirla sunt aüm sirul nix. " Ubi splendor fari» oslenditur, el laitdor drsnibitur 76. Einem, "Die Vn-ktârung Christi," 303. vestium, mm sub.itantia tollitur, sed ghiia commutâtm." 77. I take Posner's view, ¡Mnardo and Ontrat Italian Arl, 83 n. 4, thai the 92. Aquinas, Summa, trans. Dominican Fathers, vol. 4, 2255. Summti. ed. picture shows dawn, given the connection betiveen the Transligura- Canunello, pt. 3, q. 45, art. I: "Ad secundutn dicendum quod hguia tioii and Peter's epistle. For the contrary view, that the sky and light circa extremitatem corporis considérainr: est enim figura i/vae trrmino represent sunset, see Oberhuber, Raphaet: The Fainting!,, 224, whete vet terminis fomprehniditur. F.I ideo omnia ilia qtiae circa estremit;item 392 AR I H U L L t l l N SLPltMBLR 2IMIti V O L U M E XC NUMHF.R corporis con.sideraiitur, ad figiiram quodammodo pcrtiiiere videntur. eme con la virtù sua per mostrare lo sforzo ed il wiíor deli'arte nel Sicut autem color, ita et claritas coiporis non traiisparenlis in trius volio di Cristo, che Onitolo, come tiltima cosa cbe a fare avesse, non superficie atiendiiur. Et ideo assumpüo claiiEatis transfigurutio dici- toccó più pennelli, sopragiungnendoli la morte." Vasari had originally iiir." stated (1550 edition) ihat Chrisi looks up toward God the Father ("al Padre"), and not the divine essence ("essenza"), suggesting a refine- 93. Compare .'\qu¡na.s's discussion of figure and surface in the transfig- ment in bis own understanding of the painting. ured Ciirisi lo .Mberti's I^cin description of circumscription (as per- tains to figures) and coloicd surfaces, to which is added ihe idea of" 105. On the nature and origins of the problem concerning the visuality of composition. See Alberti, ¡)e pietura, 2.30. Tliat .\ugustine wa.s a source the bealific vision of (.iod's essence, see the whole of Hergan, Si. Albert for Alberli's emphasis on drawng and design lias been posited by the Great's Theory of the Bealific Vision. Ctill, Augti.stinf in the Italian Rennismnre, 96. However, il would not be 106. Aquinas, Summa, trans. Dominican Fathers, vol. 1, 16, Summa, ed. surprising if Alberti had not first learned of Augustinian ideas Carameiio. pt. I, q. 3, art. 3: "Et sic, cum Deus non sit composittis ex through Aquinas, especially as Aquinas quotes Augusdne extensively. materia et forma, ut ostensum est, oportet quod Deus sil sua deitas, 94. On the symbolism of the white color of Christ's garments, see Hen- .sua vita, et quidquid aliud sic de Deo praedicatur." Additional infor- ning, RaffaeLs "Transfiguration,"(>5-10, 131. and passim. mation on the theology of the beatific \i.sion can be found in H.-F. Dondaine, "L'objei et le 'médium' de la vision béatifiqtie chez les thé- 95. Aquinas, Summa, trans. Dominican Faihei-s, vol. 4, 2236, Summa, ed. ologiens du Xllle siècle," Reclieirhes de Thi-ologie Ancienne et Médicale 19 Carameiio, pi. 3, q. 45, ari. 2: "Sed ad corpus C:hristi in Irans figura- (1952): 60-129. For more on the imagery of tbe beatific vision in me- lionc derivata esl clariias a divinitaie et anima eins, non per modum dieval art, see Lucy Freeman Sandier, "Face to Face with (rfid: A Picto- quaîiiiitis immanends et atîicieniis ipsum corpus: sed magis per m o rial Image of tile Beatific Itnage," in F.tigUind in lhe Fourteenth Century: dum passionis u^anseuntis, sicul cum aer illuminatur a sole. Unde ille Proceedings ofthe J985 Harlaxton Symposium, ed. W. M. Ornirod (Wood- fulgor lune in corpore Christi apparens miracttlosus fuit: sicut et hoc btidge, U.K.: Boydell, 1986), 224-35; and Jeffrey F. Hamburger, Si. ip.siim qnod ambulavil super undas tnaris." John the Divine: The Deified Evangelist in Medieval Art and Theology 96. Raphael's technique also matched the requirements of tbe theological (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002), esp. "Images and the metaphor. As Marcia B. Hall has observed, the upper regions of the Imago Dei: Vision and the Theology of Deification," 18.5-201. altarpiece are ibinly painted in a delicate unione mode, utilizing fine glazes and rangiantismo to produce otherworldly eflects in translucent 107. Aquinas, Summa. Irans. Dominican Fathers, vol. 1, 76, Summa, ed. layers. Not only do these subtle coloristic efVecLs set themselves off Carameiio, pt. I, q. 14, art. 5: "Sic igiiur dicendum est quod Deus from the chiaroscuro mode of the lower half of the altarpiece. but seipsum videi in seipso, quia seipsum videt per essetitiam suam. Alia they may also potenlially express the subtleties of light passing auteiTi a se videt non in ipsis, sed in seipso, inquantum essentia sua through iranspareni substance, as is appropriate to the iheological continet similitudinem alionim ab ipso." explanation of the subject. For more on tbese matters, see Hall. Color 108. See, for instance. Hamburger's discttssion ofthe Cistercian William of and Meaning: L'ractire and Theory in I-tenais'iante Painting ((.Cambridge: St. Thierry in St. John the Divine, 190-91. Cambridge University Press, 1992), 135-36; and also Henning, Rnffaeh "Transfiguration. " 131-46. More general information on color in the 109. Cusa, "On the Vision of God," in Nicholas of Cusa: Selected Spiritual Renaissance can be found in Hall, ed., Coloi and Technique in Renai.%- Writings, trans. H. Lawrence Bond (New York: Paulist Press, 1997), sance Painting: Italy and the North (Kocust Valley, N.Y.: J. | . Augustin, 249, De viwine Dei, ed. Riemann, 8.30: "Domine, tu vides et habes ocu- 1987); and Mosche Barasch, Light and Color in the Italian Renaissance los. Es igitur oculus, quia habere tuum est esse; ob hoc in te ipso om- Theory of Ait (New York: New York Universit)* Press. 1978). nia specularis." 110. Cusa, "On the Vision of God," 250, De vLúone Dei. ed. Riemann, 9.32: 97. For example, consider Perugino's Transfiguration at ihe Collegio del "Visus tutis, domine, esl essentia tua." Camhio in Perugia (Fig. 6). See Fiorenzo Canuti, // Feruff.no (Foligno; 111. Aquinas, Summa, trans. Dominican Fathers, vol. I, 57, Summa, ed. Car- Ediioriale Umbra, 1983), vol. 1. 1S4^37. mello, pt. 1, q. 12, art. 11: "Deus videri per es.sentiam non potest, nisi 98. After designing the composition kn()wn from the Albertina drawing ah hac vita moriali separetur." (Fig. 17). Rapiiael decided on the two-iier composition known frotn a copy of his modelUi by (iiovanni Prnni now in the Loitvre (Fig. 18). In 112. Aquinas, Summa, trans. Dominican Fathers, vol. 1, 49, Summa, ed. the Penni drawing, Raphael appeai-s to liave developed many ofthe Carameiio, pi. 1, q. 12. art. 1: "Sed quod est maxime cognoscibile in figurai and composidonal motifs that he would use lattr in the final se, alicui intellectui cognoscibile non esl, propter excesstim inlelligibi- allarpiece. In faci. ihe iip])er portion of tbe drawing already shows lis supra intellectum: sicut sol. qui est maxime vislbiüs, videri non Lhe climactic moment ofthe Transfiguration witb ihe aposiles cower- potest a vesperdlione, propter excesstun luminis.' ing on the ground before the transfigured Chrisi. Vet the figure of 113. See n. 7 above. i^hrisl and the tuo prophets still stand with tbeir feet firmly planted 114. Dante, Paradüo, trans. Singleton, 378-79 (canto 33, lines 124-26): "O on the ground. On the evolution of Riiphael's design as reflected iti luce etterna che sola in te sidi. / sota t'intendi, e da te intelletta, / c the Penni drawing, see Oberhuber, Raphaels "Transfiguration," ^^-Ab. intendente Le ami e arridi!" On Dantes understanding of optics, spiri- 99. On tension between the two- and ibree-dimensional schemes in tlie tual vision, and lhe beatific vision, see Rolx-rt Podgurski, "Where O[> painting, see Oberhuber, Raphaels "Transfiguratiim,' 19ff. tics and Visionary Metaphysics Converge iti Dante's Novella Visio," Ital- ian Quarterly 35 (1998): 29-38; and Richard Kay, "Dante's Empyrean 100. This phrase is used in boih editions of Vasari's Lives. See Vasari, Le and die Eye of God," Speeulum 78 (2003): 37-65. vite, vol. 4, 204. There is, however, yet another way to understand Va- sari's words. Vasari's "diminuito in una aria lucida" need not be ifans- 115. Aquinas, Summa, trans. Dominican Fathers, vol. 1, 50, Summa, ed. lated as the figure of Christ shown "in clear midair in perspective," as Carameiio, pi. 1, q. 12, ari 2: "Dicendum ergo quod ad videndum Dei some would bave it, bui rather as "foreshortened in a clear air," that essentiam reqttiritur aliqua similitudo ex parte visivae potentiae. scili- is, proportioned according to the rules of atmospheric perspective. cet lumen gloriae, cotifortans intellectum ad \idendum Deum: de quo Since "clarity overflowed" frotii his Godhead, it is possible that tbis dicitur it) Psaltno [35, 10]: in lumine tuo videhimus lumen. Non autem clarity also affected lhe visibility' of Christ, making him more apparent per aiiquam similitudinem creatam Dei essentia videri potesi, quae as a result of the divine light's removal of the general interference ipsam divinam essentiam repraesentet ut in se est." beiween visible object and eye. 116. Dante, Paradüo, 374-75 (canto 33, lines 52-54): "che la mia vista, 101. For more on tbe spatial reladons here, see Renato Angeli and Renato venendo sincera, / e più e più intrava per lo raggio / de I'alta luce ZIni, "1.3 prospetiiva: Invenzione o scoperta?" in La prospettiva rinasci- che da sé è vera." For a discussion of light imagery in Raphael's work mentale: Codißiazioni e trasgressioni, ed. Marisa Dalai Emitiani (Florence: based on lhe example of Dante's Paradiso, see Martin Kemp, "In the Centro Di, 1980), vol. 1. 132-36. Light of Dante: Meditations on Natural and Divine Light in Piero della Francesca, Raphael, and Michelangelo," in An naturam adiuvans: 102. Note that Augustine held that corporeal and incorporeal vision alway.s Festschrift fur Matthias Winner zum II. März 1996, e d . V i c t o r i a v. F î e m - acted together, even when one mode was dominant and active. On ming and Sebastian Schulze (Mainz: Phillip von Zabem, 1996), 162— this, see Miles, "Vision," 139. Augustine's acceptance of lhe combined 70. nature of visual categories may explain some of the ambiguity in Ra- phael's presentadon of Christ in the paindng. 117. Dante, Paradim. 378-79 (canto 33, lines 127-32): "Quella circulazion ehe si concetta / pareva in te cotne hime reflesso. / da li occhi miei 103. On the history and iconography of tbe heaven-directed gaze, see An- alquanto circunspetia, / dentro da sé, del suo colore stesso, / mi drea Hentiing, 'Der himtnelnde iilirk": Zur Ceschichte eines Bildmotivs von parve pinta de la nostra effige: / per che 'I mio viso in lei tutlo era Raffael bis Rotari (Emsdelten: Imorde, 1998). messo." 104. Giorgio Vasari, The Lives of the Artists, trans. George Bull (London: Penguin, 1987), 315, />• vite, vol. 4, 204: "Cristo . . . vesiito di colore di 118. Cusa, "On the Vision of Crf>d," 275, lie visione Dei, ed. Riemann, 20.88: neve, pare che aprendo le braccia el alzando la te.sta mostri la essenza "Video in filio absoluio patrem absolutum; filius enim non potest ut e la deità di tutte tre le Persone, uniiamente ristrette nella perfezzi- filius videri, nisi pater videatur." one deli'arte di Raffaello; il quäle pare che tanto si restrignesse insi- 119. Cusa, "On tbe Vision of God," 275, De visione Dm, ed. Riemann, 20.88: RAPHAF.L'S rRAS\'>h¡(iVHArtC)\- AS VISIO-D E VOTtO NAL PROGRAM 393 "Sed similitud« est sine medio iuiicta exeniplari, ¡la quod magís si- fied. One should note that the Christ in Raphael's Transfiguration milis nec esse nec cogitan potest in natura humana seu rationali." holds up his hands and face in a way ihat clearly anticipates his Cruci- 120. For more on f.hrist as the unequaled image of the Father, see Ham- fixion and thus our salvation through those means. The Ixidy lan- burger, St. John the Divine, 185. guage of Christ in the Transfiguration again matches the description of 121. Set n. 85 alwjvf. the Christ in the final vision in Bouaventure'.s/iJiirarv. Bonaventure's words also show the growing acteptahilitj' in die later Middle Ages of 122. Aquinas, Suvima. trans. Dominican Fathers, vol. 4, 2256, Summa, ed. using visual images to evoke the beatific vision, even the invisibiiity of Caramello, pt. 3, q. 45, art. 2: "quaedam imago repraesentans illam God. See Hamburger. St. John the Diviw, 189. glonae perfcctionem secundum quam corpus erit gloriosum." 128. Cusa, "On the Vision of God," 252, De x'imme M, 10.38; "Sto coram 123. Bonaveniure'syoiííTjíy of tkr Mind to God even had a lay audience, judg- imagine faciei luae, deiis meus, quam oculis scnsibilibus respicio, et ing from the fact that it was translated and published in Italian dur- nitor oculis intedodbus iniueri veritatem, quae in pictura signattir." It ing the Renaissance. Anne Jacobson Schutte, Printed Italian Venuirular should be stated that althoiigh the "sublimation" of corporeal vision Religious Hooki 1465-1550: A Finding List (Geneva: Librairie Dro/., into more spidtual categories iv.is the ideal for theologians, the ten- 1983), 99. The full entr\ lor this item reads: Bonaventura, St. "Dia- dencv in the later Middle Ages and Renaissance was also to develop logo di quatro mentali exercitii con uno altro suo rhiamato Iiiner- ario" Venezia; /\]bertiiio Rossi, 1502. devotion as a matter of su.staining physical ocular interest per se. as disctissed in Suzannah Biernoff, ,Sight ami iimbodivient in thr Middle Ages 124. Bonaventure, Itinerarium mentis in Deum, in Opera omnia. ed. studio et (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2002). cura Patrum (.Mlt«gii a S. Bonaventura ad plunmux codices mis. eméndala, 129. For more on the meaning of Holy Face icons, including their status as arifcdoth anita, prolegommis srholiis notisifue illustrata (Quaraccbi: C^ol- lege of S. Bonaventurc. 1901), vol. 5, 297 (l.ó); Bonaventtire, /ownin' divinely wroti^ht objects with contemplative purposes, see Herbert I.. of the Mind to (Uxl, trans. Philothetis Boehiier, cd. Stephen F. Brown Kessler and Gei hard WoU; eds.. The Holy Face and the Paradox of Repre- (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1993), 1.5, 6. sentation: Pa/ierspom the ColUx/uium Hel/I at the Bibiiotheca Herlziana. Rome, and the Villa Spehnan, ikorence, IW6 (Bologna: Nuo\-a Alfa Edilo- 125. Bonaventure, /íjíímí^, 28: "It is possible to contemplate Cod not only riale, 1998). See also Hamhurger, St. John the IHvine, 185. Raphael's uiitsidf us and within us but also alx>ve tis: outside, ihrotigh vcsiiges altarpiece may have purposefully adopted features of medieval iconog- of Him; within, through His image; and above, through rhe liglit that raphy {for example, hierarchical scaling) to make his aUarpiece's con- shines upon <iiir mind"; ¡tinerarium, 308 (5.1): "Qiinniam aulem con- templative function clear. tingii rontenipliiri Dfum noti solum e.xtra nos et íntra ma, vonim etiam supra nos: extra per vestigium, intra per imaginem et supra per lumen, 130. For an excellent disciusion of altarpiece painling in Raphael's Rome, quod est signatum supni nieiiti*m nostram, quod est lumen Veritatis see Eva-Bettina Ki-ems, Raffaels Romisrhe Altaiinlder: Kontext, ¡konagia- aetemae. .. ." phie, Krziihltionzr/)t; Die Madonna del Pesre und IM Spasimo di Sicilia (Mn- nich: Akademischer Vertag. 2002), 3:^47. Krems also identifies and 126. Bonaventtire,yiM¿T7íO'. 37. ¡tineraiium, 312 (7.1): "postqiiam mcns nos- discusses the special characteristics of Raphaels narrative altarpieces tra contuita esi Deum extra se per vestigia et in vestigii.s, intra se per and the dch exegetical meanings they carry- (280). imaginem el in imagine, .supra ic per dlvinae lucis similitudineni super nos relncentem et in ipsa hue, secundum quod possibile est secun- 131. For more on the genesis of this painting, see Nagel, Michelangelo, dum statum viae et exercitiiun mentis nostrae; cum latidem in sextci 113-40. Some have even said thai Raphael's Kntovibment was the gradu ad hoc pen'enerit, ut spcculeitu' in principio primo et summo first narrational altarpiece of the Renaissance. For discussion of et mendiatore Dri el hominum. lesu Christo ea quorum similia in crea- this problem, see Kj-ems, Raffaels Römische Altarbilder, 4,'>. For more turis millatenus reperiii possunt, et quae onmem pcrspicacitatem hu- specifics, see Hubert Locher, Raffaet und das Altarbild dn Renais- mani intellectus excedunt: restât, ut haec speculando tianscendat et sance: Die 'Pala Bagliiini' als Kunstwerk im snhfilen Kontext (Berlin: iranseai non solum mundum istum sensibilem. venim etiam semetip- Akademie Verlag;, 1994). sain; in qtio transitti Christtis est via et o.stium, Chiistus est srala ei ve- 132. On Titian's destroyed altaqjiece in relation to Raphael's Transfigura- hifuhnn tanqtiam propitiatorium .tuper arcam Dei roUoratum et saname-n- tion and other works, see Patricia Meilman, Titian and the .Mtarfwre in lum a satTulis ahscimdituvi,'' Ri-naissance Venice (Cambridge: C:amh]idge University Press, 2000), 94- 127. Bonaventure, Iiinirarium, 313 (7.6): "Qui quidem igtiis Deus est, et 100. buitis lamintis est in lirusalem. el Christus hunr accendit in fervore 153. The classic account of the separation of ihe visionary from the visual suae ardentissimae pa.ssionis, quem solus ule veré peicipit, qui dicii: is found in Ei-win Panofsky, Perspective as Symbolic Fonn, trans. t:hristo- Suspendium etfgit anima mea, et mortem ossa mea. Quam modem qui pherS. Wood (New York: Zone Books, 1997), 70-72. On Cinquecento diligit \idere potest Deum, quia indubitanter veiiim est: Non videhit me and Batoque incidents in which a detente lietweeii the visionary and homo ei vivet." Here Bonaventure difierenriates Iiim.self from Aquinas's the visual is achieved, .see Klaus KWiger, "Malerei als Poesie der Ferne disciLssion of the vision of the di\ine essence in his Summa by under- im Cinquecento," in Krüger and Nova. Imngination und Wirklichkrit, lining the idea that the fullest vision of the di«ne essence is arailahle 119-121; and V'ictor 1. Stoichita, Visionaiy lixpeiienre in the Golden Age of only in death through the image of Christ, preferably of Christ cruci- Spanish Art (London: Reaktion Books, 1995).