Tátrai Vilmos szerk.: A Szépművészeti Múzeum közleményei 90-91.(Budapest, 1999)
SCHMIDT, VICTOR M.: A Duccesque Fragment of the Coronation of the Virgin
part above the Virgin enthroned corresponded to that of the central Passion scenes on the reverse, the exact width must have been 77.8 cm (fig. 18). 23 Even if one would take into account the possibility that in the Budapest Coronation the Virgin and Christ were placed closer to each other, the conclusion still would have to be that the fragment in its original size could not have fitted above the enthroned Virgin on the front of the Maestà. Independent Panel If the Coronation in Budapest originally was not part of the Maestà, what, then, was its original function? The most likely alternative is, I believe, to consider the Coronation as an independent panel, in which case there would be a precedent in Sienese painting. This is the panel by the Master of the Clarisse alias Rinaldo da Siena in the convent of S. Chiara in Siena (fig. 24). It does not show an actual Coronation, but a very similar theme: the Virgin and Christ enthroned next to each other. This formulation would seem to owe a great deal to Cimabue's majestic fresco in the transept of the upper church of S. Francesco in Assisi. 24 Also in the case of the Sienese panel a connection with the Franciscans is more than likely. The painting can be traced back to the sixteenth century in the Clarissan convent of S. Petronilla fuori Porta Camollia and the existence of the convent itself to at least 1260. 23 In modern times the image became venerated as an icon; it was carried in a procession on at least four occasions in 1586, 1655, 1723 and 1824, respectively. There is no evidence to suggest that the panel originally was part of a larger complex. Although it is somewhat smaller than the Coronation in Budapest in its reconstructed state (92 x 59 cm), it can be seen as an older example of an independent panel dedicated to the Glorification of the Virgin. The rich execution of the panel in the Szépművészeti Múzeum forms a perfect match for the theme represented. As I hope to have shown, it cannot have been part of Duccio's Maestà. But the panel is very close to that altarpiece in style and decorative motifs, and must have been created around the same time. If the Coronation was shown in the Maestà at all, the fragment in Budapest no doubt gives a good impression of its original appearance. Finally, if the Maestà is considered the apex of Duccio's work, the panel should be seen in that context as well. VICTOR M. SCHMIDT 23 Ibid., 365-366; White, Duccio... op. cit. (Note 12) 207-208. 24 Garrison, E. B., Italian Romanesque panel painting. An illustrated index, Florence 1949, no. 161; Stubblcbine, J. H., Guido da Siena, Princeton 1964, 67-69, no. VIII; Bellosi, L., Per un contesto cimabuesco senese: b) Rinaldo da Siena e Guido di Graziano, Prospettiva 1981, no. 62, 16—28, esp. 16-18. The panel is usually dated to the same period as Cimabue's frescoes, i.e. in the late 1270s. However, recently Luciano Bellosi has argued that the frescoes were executed during the pontificate of the Franciscan pope Nicholas IV (1288-1292). See Luciano Bellosi, with the assistance of Giovanna Ragionieri, Cimabue, Milan 1998. 160-167, 278-281. For the iconography of the panel, see also Bahr, I., Christus und Maria: ein Tafelbild aus dem Klarissenkonvent in Sicna, m Begegnungen: Festschrift fiir Peter Anselm Riedl zum 60. Geburtstag, Ed. Güthlein, K., Worms 1993, 35^41. 25 For the history of the painting, sec Ingeborg Bahr, in Die Kirchen von Siena, 2.1.1: Oratorio della Carito -S. Domenico, Eds.: Anselm Riedl. P. - Seidel, M., Munich 1992, 322-324, no. 8.
