eye ever-upward and never permit it to rest until it reaches the sky.
The Italian tower is entirely different. Neatly subdivided into cubic
sections, Giotto’s tower is the sum of its component parts. Not only
could this tower be removed from the building without adverse ef-
fects, but also each of the parts—cleanly separated from each other by
continuous moldings—seems capable of existing independently as an
object of considerable aesthetic appeal. This compartmentalization is
reminiscent of the Romanesque style, but it also forecasts the ideals of
Renaissance architecture. Artists hoped to express structure in the
clear, logical relationships of the component parts and to produce self-
sufficient works that could exist in complete independence. Com-
pared with Cologne’s towers, Giotto’s campanile has a cool and ratio-
nal quality that appeals more to the intellect than to the emotions.
In Florence Cathedral’s plan, the nave (FIG. 19-19) appears to
have been added to the crossingcomplex almost as an afterthought. In
fact, the nave was the first section to be built, mostly according to
Arnolfo di Cambio’s original plans (except for the vaulting). Midway
through the 14th century, the Florentines redesigned the crossing to
increase the cathedral’s interior space. In its present form, the area be-
neath the domeis the design’s focal point, and the nave leads to it. To
visitors from north of the Alps, the nave may have seemed as strange
as the plan. Neither has a northern European counterpart. The Flor-
ence nave baysare twice as deep as those of Amiens (FIG. 18-19), and
the wide arcades permit the shallow aisles to become part of the cen-
tral nave. The result is an interior of unmatched spaciousness. The ac-
cent here, as it is on the exterior, is on the horizontal elements. The
substantial capitals of the piersprevent them from soaring into the
vaults and emphasize their function as supports.
The facade of Florence Cathedral was not completed until the
19th century and then in a form much altered from its original de-
sign. In fact, until the 17th century, Italian builders exhibited little
concern for the facades of their churches, and dozens remain unfin-
ished to this day. One reason for this may be that Italian architects
did not conceive the facades as integral parts of the structures but, as
in the case of Orvieto Cathedral (FIG. 19-12), as screens that could be
added to the church exterior at any time.Pisa, Venice, and Milan
Italy’s port cities—Genoa, Pisa, and Venice—controlled the ever busier
and more extended avenues of maritime commerce that connected
the West with the lands of Islam, with Byzantium and Russia, and
overland with China. As a port city, Pisa established itself as a major
shipping power and thus as a dominant Italian city-state. Yet Pisa
was not immune from the disruption that the Black Death wreaked
across all of Italy and Europe in the late 1340s. Concern with death
was a significant theme in art even before the onset of the plague and
became more prominent in the years after midcentury.
CAMPOSANTO, PISATriumph of Death (FIG. 19-20) is a tour
de force of death imagery. The creator of this large-scale (over 18 49
feet) fresco remains disputed. Some attribute the work to Francesco
Traini(active ca. 1321–1363), while others argue for Buonamico
Buffalmacco(active 1320–1336). Painted on the wall of the Cam-
posanto (Holy Field), the enclosed burial ground adjacent to Pisa’s
cathedral (FIG. 17-25), the fresco captures the horrors of death and
forces viewers to confront their mortality. In the left foreground (FIG.
19-20,left), young aristocrats, mounted in a stylish cavalcade, en-
counter three coffin-encased corpses in differing stages of decomposi-
tion. As the horror of the confrontation with death strikes them, the
ladies turn away with delicate disgust, while a gentleman holds his nose
(the animals, horses and dogs, sniff excitedly). At the far left, the hermit
Saint Macarius unrolls a scroll bearing an inscription commenting on514 Chapter 19 ITALY,1200 TO 140019-19Arnolfo di Cambioand others, interior of Florence
Cathedral (looking east), Florence, Italy, begun 1296.
Designed to hold 30,000 worshipers, Florence Cathedral has fewer
but wider and deeper nave and aisle bays than do northern Gothic
cathedrals. The result is an interior of unmatched spaciousness.of the neighboring 11th-century Romanesque baptistery of San
Giovanni (FIGS. 17-26 and19-18,bottom left).
The vast gulf that separates Florence Cathedral from its northern
European counterparts becomes evident in a comparison between the
Italian church and a full-blown German representative of the High
Gothic style, such as Cologne Cathedral (FIG. 18-45). Cologne Cathe-
dral’s emphatic stress on the vertical produces an awe-inspiring up-
ward rush of almost unmatched vigor and intensity. The building has
the character of an organic growth shooting heavenward, its toothed
upper portions engaging the sky. The pierced, translucent stone trac-
ery of the spires merges with the atmosphere. Florence Cathedral, in
contrast, clings to the ground and has no aspirations toward flight. All
emphasis is on the horizontal elements of the design, and the building
rests firmly and massively earthbound. The clearly defined simple
geometric volumes of the cathedral show no tendency to merge either
into each other or into the sky.
Giotto di Bondone designed the cathedral’s campanile in 1334. In
keeping with Italian tradition (FIGS. 17-20and 17-25), it stands apart
from the church. In fact, it is essentially self-sufficient and could stand
anywhere else in Florence without looking out of place. The same
hardly can be said of the Cologne towers. They are essential elements
of the building behind them, and it would be unthinkable to detach
one of them and place it elsewhere. No individual element in the
Cologne grouping seems capable of an independent existence. One
form merges into the next in a series of rising movements that pull the
19-19A
ANDREAPISANO,
south doors,
Baptistery,
Florence,
1330–1336.19-19BANDREA
ORCAGNA,
tabernacle,
Or San Michele,
1355–1359.