The Mysterious Girl

Update:
I got an update from the Klesch Collection on this beautiful Vasari painting that intrigued me ever since I saw it when it was on loan at the National Gallery in London at the time. The evidence that Vasari was clearly inspired and in contact with Michealangelo for this work, following the suggestions of Michelangelo out of deep adoration for his  older friend is explained like this:

"....When Vasari painted this work in 1551, Michelangelo had just completed the Crucifixion of St. Peter in the Pauline Chapel in Rome where the figure of Joseph of Arimathea appears with his arms clasped to his chest in almost the same position as Patience in this painting...."

Oh my God, I was right, wasn't I? How wonderful is that? How great is it to think about art und maybe dive headfirst into your own ideas, thoughts and interpretations? 
Please see the referential artwork by Michelangelo, the source of Vasari's insperation, finished ca. 1550 by Buonarroti.
​I framed St. John for you. 

The Crucifixion of St. Peter​, by Michelangelo c. 1546- 1550

References:
The Klesch Collection
The Crucifixion of St. Peter (Michelangelo) - Wikipedia

*****

Allegory of Patience, Giorgio Vasari, c. 1552
Reference: ​photo taken by myself,  National Gallery London, November 2021

This painting was the first thing I noticed when I entered room 9 at the National Gallery in London. It hung across the room, and I was so magically drawn to it that I walked straight over without even bothering or looking at anything else on the walls. I consider myself as someone quite familiar with the works at the National Gallery, and so I was surprised why I had not noticed it on former visits. Of course, I was aware of the fact that there are always paintings on loan from other collections. But where did this painting come from?

The painting had a nearly indescribable, mysterious aura. The woman depicted in it was huge. And she was radiating such unbelievable presence that other pieces in the room, notable and famous works by Titian, Veronese, and Tintoretto you will be surprised to learn, got literally invisible for me the moment I saw her.

I walked closer and read the caption. 

- Photo taken at the National Gallery London, November 2021 -

I was immensely, immensely intrigued. What? It was painted by Giorgio Vasari, but Michelangelo was involved? Yes, I could see that somehow in her figure. But in what way exactly? What was Michelangelo's contribution to it or, more importantly, who painted that girl? Michelangelo or Vasari? Who was she and what was she doing there in that barren and cold landscape?

Questions over questions I was more than encouraged to find the answers to. And I must say what I discovered was more alluring and teaching than I ever had expected. More than that, in the course of finding explanations for myself I came across so many interesting artists and beautiful artworks unknown to me. I'm very thankful for that too. But, let's begin with the beginning. 

What do we see? 

We see a woman in an unusual pose, tall and with a rather strong built body. She has shiny hair, beautifully done with small braids and a jewellery hairpin in middle of her head. Her face is absolutely remarkable. The way she wears her hair exposes her face to the viewer so we would not miss any oh so tiny frown, blink, or smile. Such an incredible openness. But she is not smiling; she is focused, relaxed and determined. She is exactly knowing what she is doing there. She wears a cloth of iridescent colour, a pale pink dress in magnificent drapery. Her shoulders and arms are bare, her hands are tugged under her armpits because she protects herself from the cold air. A slit in her gown, adorned with a small piece of jewellery, reveals her bare leg from her thigh to her toes. She has no shoes. Her left foot rests on a stone, and the girl's eyes are directed to a hole in the stone washed out from dripping water. The water comes from a water clock on a rock next to the girl. The clock is rather simple, interesting are the two pendants attached to the golden lid. They match the girl's hairpin in colour. The background of the scene is rather plain, nothing distracts us from the girl in the foreground. This is important, I'll come back to it later. 

​The first thing I had to learn was that questions about who she was or what she was doing there were not the questions to be asked. I approached it from the wrong side. The girl herself, as striking as she is, has no name. She has no story. She is an allegory and must be seen as one. And as the Oxford dictionary tells us, an allegory is, I quote, 'A story, poem, or picture which can be interpreted to reveal a hidden meaning, typically a moral or political one.' This gave me my starting point to find out about the work. 

It all started with a letter in 1551.

The bishop from Arrezo, Minerbetti by name,  commissioned a painting that presented the figure of Patience. To execute this Minerbetti had chosen Giorgio Vasari. The artist had already painted the figure in question in 1542, and the Bishop was quite smitten with the traditional approach of a burdened girl. 

Patience, Giorgio Vasari, c. 1542

Gallerie dell'Accademia, Venice in Italy)

​Vasari, born in Arezzo and very pleased with having pulled off such a challenge, approached his idol and friend Michelangelo in order to ponder about an allegorical figure that constituted just that. It was a very fruitful meeting and Vasari passed on the results. 

The Bishop could not believe his luck that an artist as divine as Michelangelo had suggested the following, retold by Vasari to the Bishop: 'A standing woman, of middle age, neither completely clothed nor unclothed, so that she is halfway between Riches and Poverty, bond by her left foot... it being in her power with her free hands to unchain herself and leave her post. We have attached the chain to a stone; and she, courteous with her arms makes it known that she does not wish to leave until time... and dripping water... from an hourglass consumes the stone. Thus, she haunches her shoulders, staring fixedly at the stone to gauge how long she has to wait...' 

This is not all what made the Bishop swoon; Michelangelo had provided a drawing to support his invention. Albeit the drawing has not survived, the letters telling about it are accounted for. In those times it was very sophisticated to create academic puzzles both visual and stylistic in character, and Vasari was acquainted with a poet who deeply admired the artist's design of Patience and could give an educational touch to the painting. The writer Annibale Caro contrived DIVTVRNA TOLERANTIA (daily tolerance)  as a personal dedication to the Bishop. We can see the description on the stone to the woman's feet. 

This is perhaps nothing new. New is, however, what happened next and how I think all those details are of massive importance. 

When I started my research another painting under the same title came into view.

- Sources included in the next paragraph -

​​Wikipedia describes it with Allegory of Patience, maybe by Giorgio Vasari and Gaspar Becerra, displayed in Palazzo Pitti (Florence). It is dated with 1 January 1551. How can that be? Two paintings by Vasari about the same subject? In the same year? My further research revealed that up to today this painting is believed to be the original outcome of the collaboration between Vasari and Michelangelo. And how can it not? If you remember my demonstrations of the letters at the beginning of the post she would almost fit. But something did not add up for me. Why would Vasari do such a thing? Why would he paint two monumental pieces like this? Was the Palazzo Pitti Patience maybe by Vasari and the NG Patience by Michelangelo after all? As a first step to unravel the mystery I compared the National Gallery Patience with Vasari's works and Michelangelo's oeuvre. I absolutely love doing precise investigations as such and found astonishing similarities. Let's have a look.

Deposition from the Cross, Giorgio Vasari, c. 1529
- detail -

Look at the figure on the left, the shining colour of the robe and the drapery, especially the superb folding of the fabric. 

***

The Deposition, Giorgio Vasari, c. 1540
- detail -

Look at the girl, her face and hair. And, most intriguing, look at her toes. Why would Vasari, if we compare the Palazzo Pitti Patience and the NG Patience, all of a sudden, change his way of painting a female toe? Well, he would not, right?

***

Holy Family with St. Francis in a Landscape, Giorgio Vasari, c. 1542
- detail -

Once again, look the girl's face and hair. Please notice the colour of her upper dress, how the folds are painted, and the iridescent blue fabric. 

***

The Temptation of St. Jerome, Giorgio Vasari, c. 1542
- detail -

Please notice how the woman's dress resembles certainly that of Patience, and how her bare shoulders and arms are toned. 

***

Coronation of the Virgin, Giorgio Vasari, c. 1550
- detail -

Look at the jewellery adornment at the thigh, it is the same as in the NG Patience. Also, please see the fall of the fabric, the knee and leg. 

***

If there has ever been the slightest uncertainty that the painting at the National Gallery was by Vasari, I think I have shown you that this is without any doubt by the artist's hand. Next, comparing the Palazzo Pitti Patience with Vasari's and Michelangelo's works, I found nearly nothing that justifies the involvement of both artists.  This beautiful painting- if you look at it for quite some time and asorb its details like the fanciness of her dress, her toes, the structure of her face - is most certainly not by Giorgio Vasari and not, if you anticipate the Wikipedia reference, by Gaspar Becerra. One other thing stands out from the Palazzo Pitti painting. There is no discription. The motto DIVTVRNA TOLERANTIA is missing in the work. Vasari would never have forgotten to include it as it was singularly created for the Bishop, like a trademark actually. This means just one thing, I believe; the Palazzo Pitti painter had no knowledge about the exchanges between Vasari, Michelangelo, Minerbetti, and the poet Caro. 

Now, one point remains to explore. What exactly had Michelangelo contributed to the beautiful girl I have met at the National Gallery? I gave this question a long and intense thinking. Michelangelo was a very devout man. The teachings of the church, the commandments, Jesus Christ, defined Michelangelo's life most profoundly. However, very outstanding and unusual for a painter, he personally disliked any kind of overly using religious attributes and symbols in his works. His approach was all about physics, imagination, poetry, harmony. All about enigmatic meanings and subtle communication of his figures. 

David, Michelangelo c. 1501- 1504

This is David, a statue more famous than most people or things in the world. We all know the story of David and Goliath, and we somehow project it to the sculpture whose mind-blowing beauty and craftsmanship is literally other- worldly. But have you ever tried to ask a child what they would see in him? What would your child tell you about David after looking at him? You'd be surprised, I think, how accurate a child would expound the Michelangelesque perspective on David.  Michelangelo, without fail, rigorously avoided any hints of compartmentalisation or stereotypes. And so we don't find accessories, backgrounds overflowing with noise and people, or traditional attachments in his works. This is the same in our painting I saw in London. Even the chain, initially mentioned in the letter between Vasari and Michelangelo, has never made it into the original work. It is the absence of symbols, emblems, and attributes that proves the involvement of the most famous artist. It is also the absence that proves the collaboration between Michelangelo and Vasari, to be very precise. Vasari, as we can see in any of his other works, was a enthusiastic advocate of meaningful, visible tokens and elements. Patience has none of them, and it makes her outstandingly unique in Vasari's works. The beautiful simplicity, also the lack of any form of diversion or storytelling is exclusively by Michelangelo. Vasari shows us communication and understanding through art to an extent of utter brilliance with his powerful and compelling girl. A masterpiece.