T
he year 1989 marked the culmination of a 12-year project to
clean the Sistine Chapel ceiling (FIG. 22-1). Cleaning of Michel-
angelo’s Last Judgment (FIG. 22-21) behind the altar followed during
the next five years. Restorers removed centuries of accumulated
grime, overpainting, and protective glue, uncovering much of
Michelangelo’s original form, color, style, and procedure.
The before-and-after details (FIG. 22-20) of one of the lunettes
over the windows reveal the stark contrast in the appearance of the
frescoes in 1977 and today. In these semicircular spaces, Michelan-
gelo painted figures representing the ancestors of Christ (Matt.
1:1–17). After computer assessment of the damage (including use of
infrared and ultraviolet lights), the restorers worked carefully and
slowly to clean the fresco of soot, dirt, dissolved salts, and various
types of gums and varnishes made of animal glues. Over the cen-
turies, restorers had used various varnishes to brighten the darken-
ing fresco. Unfortunately, over time the varnishes deteriorated, dark-
ening the painting even more. For the latest cleaning effort, the
restorers first wet a small section of the fresco with distilled, de-
ionized water. The application of a cleaning solution made of bicar-
bonates of sodium and ammonium and supplemented with an anti-
bacterial, antifungal agent followed. Adding carboxymethyl cellulose
and water to this solution created a gel that clung to the ceiling fresco.
After three minutes, restorers removed the gel.
Michelangelo’s figures, once thought purposefully dark, now
show brilliant colors of high intensity, brushed on with an astonish-
ing freedom and verve. The fresh, luminous hues, boldly joined in
unexpected harmonies, seemed uncharacteristically dissonant to
some experts when first revealed and aroused brisk controversy.
Some scholars believed that the restorers removed Michelangelo’s
work along with the accumulated layers and that the apparently stri-
dent coloration could not possibly be his. Most art historians, how-
ever, now agree that the restoration effort has revealed to modern
eyes the artist’s real intentions and effects—and that in the Sistine
Chapel, Michelangelo already had paved the way for the Mannerist
reaction to the High Renaissance, examined later in this chapter.
The restoration of Leonardo’s Last Supper (FIG. 22-4), which
took more than two decades, presented conservators with an even
greater challenge. Leonardo had mixed oil and tempera, applying
much of it a secco (to dried, rather than wet, plaster) in order to cre-
ate a mural that more closely approximated oil painting on canvas or
wood instead of fresco. But because the wall did not absorb the pig-
ment as in the buon fresco technique, the paint quickly began to flake
(see “Fresco Painting,” Chapter 19, page 504). Milan’s humidity fur-
ther accelerated the deterioration. Restoration efforts, completed in
May 1999, were painstaking and slow, as were those in the Sistine
Chapel, and involved extensive scholarly, chemical, and computer
analysis. Like other restorations, this one was not without contro-
versy. One scholar has claimed that 80 percent of what is visible to-
day is the work of the modern restorers, not Leonardo. The contro-
versies surrounding the cleanings of the Sistine Chapel ceiling and
Santa Maria delle Grazie have not put a damper on other restoration
projects. After the cleaning ofLast Judgment,the Vatican continued
the restoration of the remaining frescoes in the Sistine Chapel (FIG.
22-18), including Perugino’s Christ Delivering the Keys of the King-
dom to Saint Peter (FIG. 21-40), completing the project in December- Restorers have also cleaned the frescoes in the Stanza della Seg-
natura in the Vatican Apartments in Rome, including Raphael’s
School of Athens (FIG. 22-9).
Restoring Renaissance Paintings
MATERIALS AND TECHNIQUESHigh and Late Renaissance 595not only the figures but also the whole composition. The reclining
positions of the figures, the heavy musculature, and the twisting
poses are all intrinsic parts of Michelangelo’s style.
The photographs of the Sistine Chapel reproduced here record
the appearance of Michelangelo’s frescoes after the completion of a
12-year cleaning project (1977–1989). The painstaking restoration(FIG. 22-20) elicited considerable controversy because it revealed
vivid colors that initially shocked art historians, producing accusa-
tions that the restorers were destroying Michelangelo’s masterpieces
(see “Restoring Renaissance Paintings,” above). That reaction, how-
ever, was largely attributable to the fact that for centuries no one had
ever seen Michelangelo’s frescoes except covered with soot and grime.Image not available due to copyright restrictions