Harvard University homepage
HARVARD.EDU

Giotto’s Maestà and the Architectural Understanding of the Virgin’s Body

Madisyn Schweitzer, University of California, Berkeley

Introduction: Mary’s Body

Nestled within a shimmering expanse of gold ground, Giotto’s Madonna confronts viewers with an elegance that solidifies her regality within this heavenly state. Throughout the Christian artistic tradition, the Virgin Mary’s icon has played an essential role in the aesthetic fidelity of devout worshippers and in conveying the full extent of the church’s inaugurating narrative. Throughout history, artists have used various iconic poses and symbols to capture the complex nature of this figure. She is depicted as both a maternal embodiment of humility and a divine woman, being specially created by God to conceive and give birth to humanity’s savior. Converging these polar identifying aspects into a single all-encompassing being, the most fascinating and earliest known representations of the Holy Mother depict her under the guise of the Regina Coeli,1 or the Queen of Heaven. In this rendering, identified in the visual tradition as early as the sixth century, Mary assumes an evident position of authority as she is exalted on an often elaborate architectural structure with the Christ child frontally positioned upon her lap. Typically backed with a shimmering gold ground emblematic of the Byzantine and medieval Italian tradition and an occasional surrounding audience of angels and saints, artists have emphasized this transcendent heavenly setting to codify Mary’s ascension and her unique, central high status within Christian paradise. Particularly drawn to this motif’s transformation of the well-established and meek Theotokos,2 the overarching question arises around the meaning and symbology of the throne and its role in perpetuating the Queen of Heaven icon. The body of the Virgin Mary has always been central to Christian theology and image theory, and it has received significant attention in contemporary art history. However, the relationship and mutual enhancement of Mary’s body and her throne in traditional Madonna iconography have yet to be fully explored. In this essay, I will argue that the architectural seat in this representation is an attribute of the Virgin’s body and her fecundity in producing Christ. Looking specifically at the thirteenth-century adaption by Florentine artist Giotto, recognized as the Ognissanti Madonna and the Life of the Virgin frescoes found in the Arena Chapel, my goal is to establish a chronological and visual relationship between Mary and architectural forms while bridging them to her ascension and role as the Queen of Heaven.

I: The Ognissanti Madonna: Between Gold and Throne

Often read in dialogue with the Maestà of his predecessors Duccio and Cimabue, Giotto’s Ognissanti Madonna has seldom been understood in a context outside of comparative interpretation and role as a notable transitional work leading into the heightened naturalism of the Italian Renaissance. In some ways, the art historical compare-and-contrast approach to the work seems to have impeded recognition of some of its most salient inner pictorial strengths — namely, the coalescence of body and throne architecture. Being more often interpreted as part of the story of increasing realism that establishes Giotto’s work as transitional from the earlier Florentine tradition of Cimabue or the Sienese local tradition of Duccio. 

Commissioned by the Humilati at the start of the fourteenth century, the Ognissanti Madonna was included as part of a larger requisition of several panel paintings for the Church of Ognissanti in 1310 to function as a central element on the high altar.3 Considering Giotto’s reputation as an established master artist at this time, it is consistent that an affluent affiliation such as the Humilati would entrust and compensate for such important pieces under his artistic care; as a result, we get some of the most defining panels in the establishment of his style. Amounting to around ten feet in height, the Ognissanti Madonna is a paralyzing compositional masterpiece that features Mary and the Christ child as Pantocrator at a larger-than-life scale (fig. 1).

Figure 1. Giotto di Bondone, Ognissanti Madonna, 1310.

Framed within the architectural structure of the ornate, gothic-style arches formulating her seat, they are prominently distinguished from the surrounding congregation of saints and angels. Taking note of the striking execution of volume, her body outfitted in a dense dark blue cloak consumes an outward space within this two-dimensional plane. Giottos famed illusionary painting techniques – in this case, his ability to create an illusion of the physical extent of the body – extend and elevate the weight and mass of her physical form. Her presence transcends visual realms, creating a surreal experience for the viewer. Through deliberate highlighting, Mary’s figure becomes demurely disclosed, with suggestions of her knees, stomach, and breasts. Giotto manages to emphasize her precise physical form without any suggestion of nudity. The application of gold, on the other hand, anchors his work in the Byzantine tradition typical of this motif; however, the ornamentation applied to her dress and throne is delicately palpable. With finely detailed trims, faux marble, imitated inlaid stone, and suggested bejeweling, there is an apparent emphasis on explicit regality, which challenges previous conventions of humility. With Giotto taking a contrasting approach to his predecessors, questions arise around the further complication of the Queen of Heaven iconography, especially concerning the intricate and ostentatious interpretation of the architectural throne.

II: The Architecture of Mary’s Body

Considering how we understand and interpret Mary within the configuration of architectural forms, it is necessary to note how affinities have been established through metaphorical and literary comparisons. Often equated with architecture herself, Mary’s body has historically been referenced as the “structure built by God” or the “holy temple of God”4 for its physical function in gestating the embryonic Christ within her womb; this is an implication visually reinforced across the retroactive artistic interpretations, with insinuations appearing early within depictions of her birth. Through the immaculate conception of her physical origin to the Annunciation, her virginal figure can be understood as an untouchable, pre-sanctified structure that inevitably houses the savior and ensures his arrival into the material world. Architecture, in this way, is interpreted through her biology as opposed to other traits that constitute her personhood. Keeping in mind that my argument directly correlates with the notion of fecundity, this correspondence completely dissipates if Mary is unable to bear divine offspring. Furthermore, Mary is frequently considered “interchangeable” with the Christian church.5 Despite relying on the authority of her Old Testament wisdom, there is an association that constitutes a corporeal attachment. Referring back to how this relates to the Queen of Heaven iconography, we get a foundational awareness of the presence of this structure in this image and others; however, this does not resolve the why for such an absolute glorification. As a topic of considerable debate, the crowning of Mary in Heaven is perplexing because it essentially places a human woman above the immaculate and at the right hand of Christ. Jaroslav Pelikan writes, “Her assumption had elevated her above all the angels and archangels, and even all the merits of the saints were surpassed by this one woman,”6 but why? The answer simply deducts to Mary’s roles as a virgin and as a mother. Throughout her recounted personal history, Mary has possessed a dedicated commitment to her bodily virtue through a vow of virginity and the absence of the original sin, hence the biblical emphasis on immaculate conception. As a result, per Christian values, her purity holds significance for her divine status. Similarly, her maternal love for Jesus and his followers is credited as a sizable factor. Through perfect maternity, unwavering love, and her role in shaping the humanity of the savior, the recognition of her contribution to this series of events demonstrates an acknowledgment of her role as a mother.7 She becomes exalted for upholding her son and embodying eternal devotion. The act of enthroning her and assuming the Queen of Heaven role, in conclusion, derives from iconographical associations of architecture with Mary’s fertility and her role in the Christian narrative as the virginal mother of Christ.

III: A Florentine Mary in Padua: Giotto’s Arena Chapel

Extending this concept further to the portrayals of Mary outside of the distinct Maestà iconography, there is an observable and recurring artistic visual mode that places her figure in proximity to architectural structures and subtle symbolic references to fecundity.  Looking directly at Giotto’s Arena Chapel, particularly the cycles of frescoes that narrate the virgin’s life, this notion manifests through optical continuity and an intentional emphasis on visible cues. Located within the Italian city of Padua, the Arena Chapel, constructed in 1300 predating the Ognissanti Madonna, was commissioned by Enrico Scrovegni, who notably acquired his new family wealth through the sinful act of usurious moneylending. Traditionally interpreted as an ardent push towards redemption, the chapel’s interior conveys an apparent theme of charity that counters the family’s misdeeds and acts as a mechanism towards acceptance into the heavenly paradise. The structure itself is even dedicated to Santa Maria della Carita or the Blessed Virgin Mary of Charity and, aligning with previous notions, elucidated as the architectural rendering of the Virgin’s bodily figure.8 Possessing an unprecedented inner pictorial narrative centralized on the lives of the Holy Family’s maternal ancestry, Giotto approaches Christ’s life and the Christian passions only after first chronicling the life of Mary and her parents, Joachim and Anna, within the upper register – the Life of Christ is entirely contained in the Life of Mary; thought the last anecdotes of the traditional Life of Mary iconography (namely, the Dormition after her death) is not represented on the wall. Respectively concentrating on the scenes from the Life of the Virgin, Giotto is keen to conceptually prophesie the impending immaculate conception and fertility exceedingly early, beginning in the first fresco of this cycle representing The Birth of the Virgin (fig. 2). Depicting the moments following Mary’s nativity, this image illustrates Anna in bed reaching out to her daughter, who is adorned with a golden halo, in the company of several other women. The halo alone in this fresco, not only distinguishes Mary but retroactively asserts her importance in the creation of Jesus, indicating her divine selection by the hands of God. 

Figure 2. Giotto di Bondone, The Birth of the Virgin, 1300.

Additionally, she appears twice within this single composition, being the only character to do so throughout the chapel. Though not explicit, this does bring forth questions about double imagery and the artistic decision to enact this method using Mary in the context of the grander narrative. What is particularly striking about this scene is the architectural form that encompasses the majority of the image’s surface. As a single-roomed structure that isn’t set realistically within proportion, it can almost certainly be understood as a material conception of the womb. Drawing directly from Don Denny’s perceptions in his text “Some Symbols in the Area Chapel Frescoes,” he outlines a direct correlation between the thalamus, referring to the visual combination of the house and bed chamber, and that of Mary’s body, directly alluding to her as the “living thalamus of the King of Heaven.”9 Paying close attention to the point of passage into the chamber, he relates the act of passing, what he understands as bread, through the portal as a direct reference to the living bread motif that, in summary, is the Son of God entering the Virgin’s body.10 The imitation between Anne, the attendant, and Mary is essential to affirming this notion, with the infant and bread acting almost interchangeably. Bridging Denny’s understanding with my argument, the illation derived is that the architecture in this specific nativity scene actively connects the body with built forms. By interpreting The Birth of the Virgin as an intentional correlation, we can perceive other compositions featuring Mary and architecture analogously in the context of pregnancy and maternity.

Continuing through Giotto’s frescoes within the Arena Chapel, the Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple is an additional composition that coheres the Virgin, architecture, and fecundity together. Exemplary for both method and narrative context, this work establishes a direct visual parallel while also being a crucial scene in the unfolding of later events, particularly the birth of Christ. Depicting the moment Mary declares her vow to remain a sanctified virgin, this display becomes imperative to establishing her unwavering commitment to God and therefore the catalyst for immaculate conception (fig. 3).

Figure 3. Giotto di Bondone, Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple, 1300.

In deconstructing the composition of this image, Giotto frames Mary between her mother and the high priest, utilizing their gestures as an indication of her centrality. In this way, she acts as the bodily divide between humanity and God, foreshadowing her ascension into the Queen of Heaven. Relating to Mary being remarked as a “holy temple,” the most glaring understanding of this scene focuses on her confrontation with the material temple itself. Positioned at the foot of its entrance, Giotto paints them analogously with one another, adding visual reinforcements through verticality and color. Almost appearing as if the temple is looking back at the young virgin, there is a dialogue between the two that possesses a sense of divine power and belonging; as if this is the moment she encounters her destiny without explicitly knowing it. Connecting this scene to the subsequent fresco works, there is a fascinating relationship between the color of Mary’s dress and the timeline of the chapel with her painted in white until the Annunciation where she is transitioned to red. Understanding the connotations of white with purity and the sequence of events including her presentation and marriage, acts as a distinguishing factor between the monumental periods of her life and, what I argue, indicates her immediacy towards enthronement. 

Portraying the union between Mary and Joseph, the Marriage of the Virgin and the Wedding Procession are two examples of frescoes that profoundly rely on visual cues and body language to convey suggestions of fecundity. Positioned chronologically before the Annunciation, these works are closest in proximity to immaculate conception, hence the overt references to pregnancy and the creation of offspring. Looking first at the marriage scene, the betrothed are composed before the temple in the company of the High Priest and a congregation of witnesses. Exchanging their wedding bands, this scene nullifies their union before God and corroborates their wedlock. With the men and women present being compositionally structured on opposite ends of the fresco, Giotto develops an allegorical reference to the bringing together of a man and woman that undoubtedly implies consummation and the conception of a child. This, of course, is a mere innuendo, as Joseph and Mary will never produce biological children given his age, her vow, and Jesus as the Son of God. Rendered with his blooming rod, however, there is a suggestion of male fertility or fertility in general that, to an extent, is affirmed by its necessity in the pictorial narrative and placement between himself and Mary.11 What is undeniably the most telling reference to fecundity in this work is the gesturing to their “rounded abdomens” enacted by Mary and her attendants; this is an action carried over into the Wedding Procession and is a highly intentional display on behalf of Giotto. The ambiguity of their form and the semiotics of the signal towards the stomach is a widely recognized connotation of pregnancy across social understandings. In their essay “Barren Metal and Fruitful Womb,” authors Anna Derbes and Mark Sandona interpret these scenes further through a fertility-intended scope, additionally indicating the “leafy garlands of the young musicians” and the “verdant branch projecting from the window of the bride’s house”12 in the procession scene are markers predicting the coming of the Christ child. With their analyses across multiple frescoes in the Life of the Virgin sequence, they further develop connections between Mary and fertility, which can then expand on previous notions of architecture, revealing the calculated visual decisions portrayed by Giotto across this space. This explicit objective to heavily pronounce fecundity as a primary theme conjointly acts to elucidate her interactions with architecture and the parallels that arise as a result; these conceptual models retain the comparison of Mary as a composite structure herself via her pregnancy. 

As the pinnacle episode of the Life of the Virgin fresco cycle, the Annunciation is arguably the most imperative work in highlighting the relationship between architecture and fertility relative to my argument. Located in a central position on the chancel arch, this composition diverges substantially from the adjoining frescoes within the Arena Chapel because of its organization across two distanced halves and the inclusion of considerably un-Giotto-like characters presented with detached and taciturn expressions.13 Focusing on the depiction of Mary found on the right-hand side of the arch, Giotto illustrates the deliverance of the divine proclamation to which she is told of the conception of the earthly savior within her body (fig. 4).

Figure 4. Giotto di Bondone, Annunciation, 1300.

With Archangel Gabriel featured in the corresponding image, the radiating light exuding from his celestial form emanates toward her figure, acting as a pictorial representation of this dialogue while being a crucial fastening element between the two compositions. Framed within an ornate architectural portal, the Virgin is portrayed kneeling in a garment reminiscent of thirteenth-century Italian dress and staged within a shallow and relatively empty chamber.14 Recalling the circumscribing structure of the thalamus represented in her nativity scene, this space retains a similar womb-like connotation, taking account of its tightness around the body and its anatomical color scheme composed of red tones. Possessing iconographical parallels with that in the Apparition to Saint Anne, Giotto additionally references the same curtain motif that stimulates questions about its role in the deliverance of pregnancy; with this form moving between opening and closing, its positions in these scenes are unclear, but recognized for its relevance in the acceptance of miraculous conception. Considering her body language, Mary’s gestures resemble her debut in the Presentation of the Virgin in the Temple. With her hands held across her chest, this repeated imagery recalls her initial confrontation with her fate before the temple structure, recurring in this juncture as she assumes her bodily-temple distinction. With the Annunciation being the pictorial convergence of Mary, fecundity, and architecture, it is fascinating to view this rendering in the context of the adumbrations suggested by Giotto in the preceding frescoes; it is in this moment, that those notions become realized in her embrace of her maternal duties. With her body transcending into its architectural form, Giotto composes this scene in an interesting manner similar to that of a Russian doll. With Mary being surrounded by the enclosed structural form, with herself being a biological structure in her own right, the parallel between the two becomes interlaced as the metaphor manifests visually around her; this, of course, is a very cross-dimensional way of thinking. Bringing this back to the Ognissanti Madonna and the Queen of Heaven iconography, it is foundational to recognize how this scene is crucial to her assumption of the crown. The Annunciation truly serves as the coronation that determines her post-life ascension, making it critical to deduct her importance within the Christian narrative and in the heavenly paradise. 

Conclusion: The Missing Dormition of the Virgin

With the frescoes in the Arena Chapel detailing only so much of Mary’s life within its transition into the Life of Christ cycle, Giotto excludes an imperative scene of her ascension into the portrayal delineated by the Ognissanti Madonna. Returning to the collection of works commissioned for the Church of Ognissanti, The Dormition of the Virgin, featured in Berlin’s Gemaldegalerie Museum, is a critical image in fusing this chronological gap through the representation of Mary’s death and consequential transition into her final heavenly state (fig. 5).

Figure 5. Giotto di Bondone, The Dormition of the Virgin, 1312.

Upholding similar aesthetic qualities to that seen in the 1310 Madonna, Giotto renders this somber and calamitous scene with a particular elegance that emphasizes her maternal reverence within the Christian narrative. With Mary’s lifeless body positioned at the center of the composition, she is gently positioned into her grave by an elderly apostle in the presence of a mourning congregation; take notice of the parallel between the congregation of angles and saints to those adoring the Maestà. With Giotto preserving visual characteristics between both panels, the color of her blue cloak is explicitly retained between the depictions.15 Recall previous comments on the colors evoking and distinguishing key periods of her life. The appearance of blue, in particular, remains present from the passions of Christ, such as the Crucifixion, continuing into the Virgin’s afterlife. Arguably the most fascinating aspect of The Dormition of the Virgin, the artist incorporates an ephemeral presentation of Christ, whose commanding but unacknowledged figure stands stoically over her dead mother’s body. Holding the pictorial representation of her spirit, which adopts the form of an infant, he gently cradles her reborn immaterial body, suggesting her ascension to paradise. While this particular piece does not further my argument concerning architecture, it is crucial to construct the timeline that bridges the frescoes of the Arena Chapel to the Ognissanti Madonna icon. The Dormition of the Virgin reinforces the moment her spirit transitions to become the Queen of Heaven while emphasizing the devotion of Christian worshippers who praise her for conceiving their savior. The importance of Mary as a mother returns in this scene as she is gathered by those she cared for in Jesus’ material absence and, in turn, reimagined as that receiving maternal-like care—an impetus that defines her enthronement as the Queen of Heaven following her architectural-adjacent life of servitude and care.Assuming her apical status through the Queen of Heaven iconography, Mary’s enthronement truly serves as an accolade for her selfless contribution to propagating the start of the New Testament through the birth of her son and savior, Jesus Christ. As the sanctified structure that produced and protected his divine and vulnerable fetal body, she acts as the portal between Heaven and Earth that was distinctively molded by God for her maternal purposes. Represented by Giotto in both her human and spiritual forms, Mary’s presence transcends into the metaphysical through the visual allusions to architecture pictured throughout her line of frescoes within the Arena Chapel. Referencing her biological anatomy, the enclosed structures become emblematic of the virginal womb, while the towering temples act in parallel to the entirety of her purified figure. The material composing her heavenly throne in this way acts comparatively, physically consecrating Mary on the foundation of her divine pregnancy and maternity.

Considering a detail not yet discussed in this paper, Giotto renders two angels within the foreground of the Madonna carrying attributions of the newly recognized Queen. Paying specific attention to the crown possessed by the angel on the left, this remarkable symbol represents the source of her enthronement: maternal love. An aspect characterized by Mary’s humility and devotion through the care of her son and faith in the heavenly King, the crown recognizes who she became after pregnancy. Establishing the Queen of Heaven motif on more than her physical ability to produce a child, this instead focuses on her as a person and as a mother capable of raising one. Presenting this symbol in the Arena Chapel’s Last Judgment, Giotto utilizes the crown to indicate her love, possessing a gentle connotation as opposed to the imposing ruler, typical of historical representations of royalty. With these concepts coming together in the Ognissanti Madonna, Mary the Queen of Heaven, takes her long-deserved seat on a divine throne; by reconstructing her lifetime through Giotto’s frescoes, we arrive at this final rendering where she, a mere human woman, becomes eternalized through her architectural adjacency. It is at this point where the visual narrative concludes with her bodily affixment within the shimmering gold ground of the divine.

Endnotes

  1. Jaroslav Pelikan. Mary through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1996, 204. ↩︎
  2. Jaroslav Folda, Byzantine Art and Italian Panel Painting: the Virgin and Child Hodegetria and the Art of Chrysography. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2015, 196. ↩︎
  3. Julia Isabel Miller and Laurie Taylor-Mitchell. From Giotto to Botticelli: the Artistic Patronage of the Humiliati in Florence. University Park, Pennsylvania: The Pennsylvania State University Press, 2015, 23. ↩︎
  4. Don Denny, “Some Symbols in the Arena Chapel Frescoes.” The Art Bulletin 55, no. 2 (1973): 205–12. https://doi.org/10.2307/3049094., 205. ↩︎
  5. William J. Malley, “Bread of Life and Seat of Wisdom.” Philippine Studies 28, no. 2 (1980): 129–41. 132. ↩︎
  6. Mary Pelikan, Through the Centuries: Her Place in the History of Culture, 206. ↩︎
  7. Malley, Bread of Life and Seat of Wisdom, 133. ↩︎
  8. Laura Jacobus, “Giotto’s Annunciation in the Arena Chapel, Padua.” The Art Bulletin 81, no. 1 (1999): 93–107. https://doi.org/10.2307/3051288, 93. ↩︎
  9. Denny, “Some Symbols in the Arena Chapel,” 206. ↩︎
  10. Denny, “Some Symbols in the Arena Chapel,” 205. ↩︎
  11. Anne Derbes and Mark Sandona, “Barren Metal and the Fruitful Womb: The Program of Giotto’s Arena Chapel in Padua.” The Art Bulletin 80, no. 2 (1998): 274–91. https://doi.org/10.2307/3051233, 278. ↩︎
  12. Derbes and Sandona, “Barren Metal and the Fruitful Womb,” 276. ↩︎
  13. Jacobus, Giotto’s Annunciation in the Arena Chapel, 97. ↩︎
  14. Jacobus, Giotto’s Annunciation in the Arena Chapel, 98. ↩︎
  15. Miller, From Giotto to Botticelli, 30. ↩︎

About the Author

Madisyn Schweitzer is a recent graduate from the University of California, Berkeley, where she pursued her two undergraduate degrees in History of Art and Art Practice. Her endeavors are centralized on portraiture, delving into the intricate nuances of Marian iconographies and feminine identity through both written and visual approaches. In her free time she enjoys reading, cafe hopping, and  exploring new cities with her partner.