WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.660 Welcome to the Deep Dive. Today we are traveling 00:00:02.660 --> 00:00:06.620 back, way back, to a real turning point in Western 00:00:06.620 --> 00:00:09.019 art. We are indeed. We're looking at a man whose 00:00:09.019 --> 00:00:11.660 reputation was just immense, even in his own 00:00:11.660 --> 00:00:14.179 time. Right. His contemporary, the chronicler 00:00:14.179 --> 00:00:16.820 Giovanni Villani, he didn't mince words, called 00:00:16.820 --> 00:00:18.699 him the most sovereign master of painting in 00:00:18.699 --> 00:00:21.239 his time. It's incredible praise. We're talking 00:00:21.239 --> 00:00:25.300 about Giotto di Bondone, born around 1267, and 00:00:25.300 --> 00:00:28.239 he really is that pivotal figure, late Gothic, 00:00:28.600 --> 00:00:31.899 proto -Renaissance, whatever you call the period. 00:00:32.119 --> 00:00:34.460 He's the one making the break. A decisive break, 00:00:34.600 --> 00:00:37.539 you said, away from that very stylized, very 00:00:37.539 --> 00:00:41.460 flat Byzantine look that had dominated for, well... 00:00:41.940 --> 00:00:44.100 Exactly. And that's our mission today, really, 00:00:44.179 --> 00:00:46.000 to get a handle on Giotto's revolution. We have 00:00:46.000 --> 00:00:48.799 some amazing, solid evidence, you know, the Cervini 00:00:48.799 --> 00:00:51.039 Chapel, the Florence Campanile design. But everything 00:00:51.039 --> 00:00:54.359 else, it seems like smoke and mirrors, his birth, 00:00:54.600 --> 00:00:57.320 his training, sorting the facts from the, well, 00:00:57.380 --> 00:00:59.560 the legends. That's the challenge. It is. And 00:00:59.560 --> 00:01:01.179 it's crucial because the stakes are just so high. 00:01:01.259 --> 00:01:02.960 You have Giorgio Vasari, the big art historian 00:01:02.960 --> 00:01:05.579 writing later. Oh, yeah, Vasari. He claims Giotto 00:01:05.579 --> 00:01:09.150 basically kick -started... the great art of painting 00:01:09.150 --> 00:01:12.269 as we know it today, introducing drawing accurately 00:01:12.269 --> 00:01:15.090 from life. Drawing accurately from life. I mean, 00:01:15.109 --> 00:01:18.450 it sounds so basic now. But Vasari says it was 00:01:18.450 --> 00:01:21.609 a skill neglected for 200 years. If he's right, 00:01:21.730 --> 00:01:23.670 Jadot didn't just tweak things. He essentially 00:01:23.670 --> 00:01:26.349 rebooted Western painting. He sort of ended the 00:01:26.349 --> 00:01:29.269 Middle Ages, artistically speaking. Okay, let's 00:01:29.269 --> 00:01:31.530 wade into this fog then. Start at the start. 00:01:31.849 --> 00:01:35.870 If he was so incredibly famous, why is even his 00:01:35.870 --> 00:01:38.560 birthplace a question mark? Well, the legend 00:01:38.560 --> 00:01:41.060 is always better, isn't it? The traditional story, 00:01:41.200 --> 00:01:43.420 the romantic one, puts him in a farmhouse out 00:01:43.420 --> 00:01:46.579 in the countryside near Florence. Colle di Romagnano, 00:01:46.739 --> 00:01:48.799 maybe Romignano. Right, and there's even a tower 00:01:48.799 --> 00:01:50.840 house you could visit today claiming he was born 00:01:50.840 --> 00:01:53.739 there. Colle Vespignano. Exactly, and that narrative, 00:01:53.739 --> 00:01:56.780 it really feeds into the idea of this rustic, 00:01:56.780 --> 00:02:00.560 untaught genius discovered out in nature. Pure 00:02:00.560 --> 00:02:03.000 talent. But the paper trail often tells a different 00:02:03.000 --> 00:02:05.340 story. What's the more recent thinking? Well, 00:02:05.359 --> 00:02:07.760 recent documentary finds suggest something maybe 00:02:07.760 --> 00:02:10.599 less romantic, but perhaps more plausible. He 00:02:10.599 --> 00:02:13.199 might have been born right in Florence. Son of 00:02:13.199 --> 00:02:16.099 a blacksmith named Bondone. Ah, so not a shepherd 00:02:16.099 --> 00:02:19.379 boy at all. A city kid. Son of a craftsman. Which 00:02:19.379 --> 00:02:21.259 means he would have had access to Florence's 00:02:21.259 --> 00:02:23.360 whole artistic and commercial scene from the 00:02:23.360 --> 00:02:26.020 get -go. Makes his rise maybe less miraculous, 00:02:26.099 --> 00:02:28.400 but, you know, more understandable in a way. 00:02:28.539 --> 00:02:31.629 And even his name, Giotto. That's likely a nickname 00:02:31.629 --> 00:02:33.750 too, right? Almost certainly. Probably short 00:02:33.750 --> 00:02:37.069 for Ambrogio Ambrogiato. Or maybe Angelo Angelato. 00:02:37.349 --> 00:02:40.449 But history just remembers Giato. The name stuck. 00:02:40.669 --> 00:02:43.150 Okay, so let's get to the big one. The foundational 00:02:43.150 --> 00:02:46.490 myth. The shepherd boy drawing sheep on a rock, 00:02:46.650 --> 00:02:49.900 discovered by the great Simabue. This is pure 00:02:49.900 --> 00:02:52.120 Vasari. It is, and it's brilliant storytelling. 00:02:52.400 --> 00:02:55.000 Vasari paints this picture. Giotto, this clever, 00:02:55.099 --> 00:02:57.319 happy shepherd kid out with his flock. Along 00:02:57.319 --> 00:03:00.020 comes Cimabue, already a big deal Florentine 00:03:00.020 --> 00:03:02.280 painter. And he catches Giotto sketching. Yeah, 00:03:02.300 --> 00:03:04.599 sketching his sheep on a flat stone with, like, 00:03:04.659 --> 00:03:06.979 another sharp stone. But the drawings aren't 00:03:06.979 --> 00:03:10.159 just symbols. They look real, lifelike. So Cimabue, 00:03:10.199 --> 00:03:12.919 blown away by this raw talent, just takes him 00:03:12.919 --> 00:03:14.979 on as an apprentice right there. That's the story. 00:03:15.060 --> 00:03:17.419 It neatly connects Giotto to the master before 00:03:17.419 --> 00:03:20.719 him, but also frames his genius as this innate, 00:03:20.780 --> 00:03:24.020 natural gift. Perfect origin story. And then 00:03:24.020 --> 00:03:26.180 there's that other story from the apprenticeship, 00:03:26.460 --> 00:03:29.020 the one with the fly, that really cements the 00:03:29.020 --> 00:03:31.719 idea of his skill. Oh, the fly anecdote. Yeah, 00:03:31.759 --> 00:03:34.240 supposedly Giotto, while Chimabue is out, painted 00:03:34.240 --> 00:03:37.639 this tiny, incredibly realistic fly on the face 00:03:37.639 --> 00:03:39.879 of a figure in Chimabue's current painting. And 00:03:39.879 --> 00:03:42.080 Chimabue comes back. And tries to brush it off. 00:03:42.490 --> 00:03:45.150 Again and again, until he realizes it's paint. 00:03:45.289 --> 00:03:48.229 It's the ultimate proof, right? His realism could 00:03:48.229 --> 00:03:50.569 even fool the master's eye. But hang on, that 00:03:50.569 --> 00:03:53.909 story, it sounds familiar. It's not original 00:03:53.909 --> 00:03:56.090 to Giotto, is it? It feels like something from, 00:03:56.129 --> 00:03:58.750 like, ancient Greece or Rome. You nailed it. 00:03:58.830 --> 00:04:01.270 It's almost identical to a story Pliny the Elder 00:04:01.270 --> 00:04:04.330 tells about the Greek painter Zeuxis. You know, 00:04:04.370 --> 00:04:06.349 the one who painted grapes so real that birds 00:04:06.349 --> 00:04:08.810 tried to eat them. Right, so Vasari using that 00:04:08.810 --> 00:04:10.949 story for Giotto wasn't just saying he was good. 00:04:11.360 --> 00:04:14.020 No, it was a deliberate power move. It links 00:04:14.020 --> 00:04:17.319 Giotto directly back to the legendary artists 00:04:17.319 --> 00:04:20.040 of classical antiquity, skipping right over the 00:04:20.040 --> 00:04:21.980 whole Byzantine period. It's basically saying, 00:04:22.060 --> 00:04:24.519 real art is back, picking up where the Greeks 00:04:24.519 --> 00:04:27.019 left off. It's historical marketing. Wow. Okay, 00:04:27.079 --> 00:04:29.560 so the legend itself is crafting history. What 00:04:29.560 --> 00:04:31.680 about the story of the Pope's test, the perfect 00:04:31.680 --> 00:04:33.660 circle? That seems more about his professional 00:04:33.660 --> 00:04:36.800 clout. The O of Giotto, yeah. Another great story. 00:04:37.199 --> 00:04:39.279 Pope Benedict XI, or maybe the one before him, 00:04:39.339 --> 00:04:41.899 is looking to commission work and wants proof 00:04:41.899 --> 00:04:44.740 of skill from various artists. He sends a courtier 00:04:44.740 --> 00:04:47.379 to Giotto. Asking for a sample drawing. Right. 00:04:47.439 --> 00:04:50.259 So Giotto takes a sheet, dips his brush in red 00:04:50.259 --> 00:04:53.680 paint, rests his arm, and just draws a perfect 00:04:53.680 --> 00:04:56.420 circle. Free hand, no compass, nothing. And just 00:04:56.420 --> 00:04:58.120 hands that to the courtier. I bet the courtier 00:04:58.120 --> 00:05:01.540 was confused. Or insulted. Totally. He thought 00:05:01.540 --> 00:05:03.600 Giotto was messing with him, maybe mocking the 00:05:03.600 --> 00:05:05.959 Pope. But back at the Vatican, the Pope and his 00:05:05.959 --> 00:05:08.339 advisors look at all the elaborate sketches from 00:05:08.339 --> 00:05:10.560 other artists. Lots of effort. Complex designs. 00:05:10.939 --> 00:05:13.779 And then they see Giotto's circle. Simple. Perfect. 00:05:14.399 --> 00:05:17.160 Effortless. They got it instantly. What exactly 00:05:17.160 --> 00:05:19.560 did they get? That he was good at geometry? No, 00:05:19.600 --> 00:05:22.779 it was about mastery, absolute control, confidence, 00:05:23.120 --> 00:05:26.600 speed. It showed a level of skill and, frankly, 00:05:26.779 --> 00:05:29.220 intellectual command that was just beyond his 00:05:29.220 --> 00:05:31.759 rivals. He didn't need to show off with complexity. 00:05:32.439 --> 00:05:35.139 Perfection was his signature. It really highlights 00:05:35.139 --> 00:05:37.720 Johto as this dominant personality, not just 00:05:37.720 --> 00:05:40.120 a painter. Okay, so whether through legend or 00:05:40.120 --> 00:05:43.139 actual skill, his reputation clearly exploded. 00:05:43.839 --> 00:05:45.860 Let's try to nail down some facts about his early 00:05:45.860 --> 00:05:48.240 career before we hit the big controversies. Right. 00:05:48.259 --> 00:05:52.420 We know he married around 1290. They called her 00:05:52.420 --> 00:05:54.660 Chuta. Had a bunch of kids, eight apparently. 00:05:54.980 --> 00:05:57.660 One son, Francesco, also became a painter. And 00:05:57.660 --> 00:05:59.879 by the early 1300s, he wasn't just getting by. 00:06:00.139 --> 00:06:03.100 No, definitely not. By 1301, the records show 00:06:03.100 --> 00:06:05.379 he's pretty well off. Owns property in Florence. 00:06:05.980 --> 00:06:08.500 comfortable and already getting major commissions 00:06:08.500 --> 00:06:11.240 that required travel including jerome right which 00:06:11.240 --> 00:06:13.540 was a hotbed for stylistic innovation then absolutely 00:06:13.540 --> 00:06:16.339 he was definitely in rome around 1297 to 1300 00:06:16.339 --> 00:06:18.819 he did a fresco cycle for pope boniface viii 00:06:18.819 --> 00:06:21.959 for the huge jubilee year of 1300 anything left 00:06:21.959 --> 00:06:25.560 of that sadly just a tiny fragment it's at the 00:06:25.560 --> 00:06:28.629 arch basilica of saint john lateran now But more 00:06:28.629 --> 00:06:31.170 famously, he designed the Navicella. The huge 00:06:31.170 --> 00:06:34.089 mosaic for old St. Peter's facade. Yeah, a massive 00:06:34.089 --> 00:06:36.709 undertaking, depicting Christ walking on water. 00:06:36.910 --> 00:06:39.970 Also, mostly lost now, known only through later 00:06:39.970 --> 00:06:42.430 copies and bits and pieces. But the point is, 00:06:42.490 --> 00:06:45.430 very early on, he's getting these top -tier monumental 00:06:45.430 --> 00:06:47.949 commissions at the very heart of the church. 00:06:48.189 --> 00:06:50.050 So back in Florence, there are some key early 00:06:50.050 --> 00:06:53.189 works that help us track his style. Yes. Definitely. 00:06:53.250 --> 00:06:55.750 For the Dominicans at Santa Maria Novella, there's 00:06:55.750 --> 00:06:58.350 that incredible suspended crucifix. It's huge, 00:06:58.550 --> 00:07:01.709 like five meters tall, dated around 1290. And 00:07:01.709 --> 00:07:03.230 you can already see the difference there. Oh, 00:07:03.230 --> 00:07:06.329 yeah. The figure of Christ has real volume, real 00:07:06.329 --> 00:07:09.149 weight. It's already moving away from that flat, 00:07:09.189 --> 00:07:12.689 symbolic Byzantine Christ. And there's the body 00:07:12.689 --> 00:07:15.370 of Polyptych, now in the Uffizi Gallery. That 00:07:15.370 --> 00:07:17.649 shows his early thinking about grouping figures, 00:07:17.790 --> 00:07:20.550 creating a sense of space. Okay. Now for it. 00:07:20.589 --> 00:07:23.779 Assisi. the basilica of saint francis the fresco 00:07:23.779 --> 00:07:25.879 cycle of saint francis's life in the upper church 00:07:25.879 --> 00:07:28.120 possibly the biggest attribution headache in 00:07:28.120 --> 00:07:30.579 art history it really is the crux of the matter 00:07:30.579 --> 00:07:33.399 for early giotto if he painted that cycle say 00:07:33.399 --> 00:07:36.819 in the 1290s then he was a full -blown revolutionary 00:07:36.819 --> 00:07:39.100 right out of the gate if he didn't and the whole 00:07:39.100 --> 00:07:41.980 timeline shifts who influenced whom Exactly. 00:07:41.980 --> 00:07:45.139 For centuries, it was just assumed. These amazing 00:07:45.139 --> 00:07:49.160 narrative, emotionally resonant frescoes, they 00:07:49.160 --> 00:07:51.459 had to be by the young Giotto. It fit the story 00:07:51.459 --> 00:07:54.420 perfectly. He does a Sisi, pioneers the style, 00:07:54.519 --> 00:07:57.699 then goes to Padua and perfects it. But the physical 00:07:57.699 --> 00:08:00.819 evidence, or lack thereof, is a huge problem. 00:08:01.339 --> 00:08:03.759 Something about Napoleon's troops. Yeah, a real 00:08:03.759 --> 00:08:06.120 tragedy for art history. When Napoleon's army 00:08:06.120 --> 00:08:08.680 occupied Assisi, they apparently used the upper 00:08:08.680 --> 00:08:12.000 church as a stable and the Franciscan monastery's 00:08:12.000 --> 00:08:14.540 archives, which would have held the contracts, 00:08:14.740 --> 00:08:16.680 the payment records for the frescoes. They were 00:08:16.680 --> 00:08:19.399 destroyed, used for betting, or burned. Pretty 00:08:19.399 --> 00:08:22.259 much. So the paper trail just goes cold. No hard 00:08:22.259 --> 00:08:24.660 proof either way. So without documents, people 00:08:24.660 --> 00:08:27.139 just defaulted to the most famous name. Basically, 00:08:27.139 --> 00:08:29.720 yes. If a fresco in the upper church looked really 00:08:29.720 --> 00:08:32.600 good and wasn't clearly by Simabu, who also worked 00:08:32.600 --> 00:08:34.980 there, it got chalked up to Giotto. It was convenient. 00:08:35.299 --> 00:08:37.840 Until science intervened in the 20th century, 00:08:38.039 --> 00:08:41.299 what did the technical analysis show? This was 00:08:41.299 --> 00:08:44.279 a game changer in the 1960s. They analyzed the 00:08:44.279 --> 00:08:46.779 paint chemistry. They found white lead pigment 00:08:46.779 --> 00:08:50.379 used in parts of the St. Francis cycle. And white 00:08:50.379 --> 00:08:54.299 lead was found in Simabu's nearby work. But crucially, 00:08:54.379 --> 00:08:57.240 it was not found in the works we know for sure 00:08:57.240 --> 00:09:00.480 are by Giotto, like the Scriveni Chapel frescoes 00:09:00.480 --> 00:09:04.259 in Padua. His technique, his medium was different. 00:09:04.399 --> 00:09:06.580 So the workshop practices just didn't line up. 00:09:06.580 --> 00:09:08.740 The chemical signature was wrong. Exactly. It 00:09:08.740 --> 00:09:11.399 strongly suggests different artists or at least 00:09:11.399 --> 00:09:13.259 a different workshop tradition. Which leads to 00:09:13.259 --> 00:09:15.960 a radical rethinking. If Giotto didn't paint 00:09:15.960 --> 00:09:18.740 Assisi, then who did? And what does that mean 00:09:18.740 --> 00:09:21.440 for his revolution? It means the revolution might 00:09:21.440 --> 00:09:23.779 have been brewing elsewhere, too, possibly among 00:09:23.779 --> 00:09:26.399 highly skilled Roman artists working in Assisi. 00:09:26.519 --> 00:09:28.139 Sometimes they're called the Isaac master or 00:09:28.139 --> 00:09:30.240 just referred to as Roman masters. They were 00:09:30.240 --> 00:09:33.460 already exploring naturalism, emotion, architectural 00:09:33.460 --> 00:09:36.179 space. But Giotto wasn't necessarily the inventor 00:09:36.179 --> 00:09:38.460 of that style. He might have been more the great 00:09:38.460 --> 00:09:41.129 synthesizer. the one who saw what was happening, 00:09:41.269 --> 00:09:43.830 perhaps influenced by the Assisi painters, and 00:09:43.830 --> 00:09:46.049 then took those ideas to an entirely new level 00:09:46.049 --> 00:09:49.269 of coherence, power, and emotion in Padua. That 00:09:49.269 --> 00:09:51.250 really does change the story. It's less a lone 00:09:51.250 --> 00:09:54.269 genius, more a broader wave with Giotto riding 00:09:54.269 --> 00:09:57.110 the crest. Precisely. It makes the Proto -Renaissance 00:09:57.110 --> 00:10:00.110 a more complex, interconnected phenomenon. But 00:10:00.110 --> 00:10:02.190 regardless of the Assisi debate, Giotto's fame 00:10:02.190 --> 00:10:04.830 certainly spread like wildfire. By the early 00:10:04.830 --> 00:10:07.090 1300s, he was working all over. We know he was 00:10:07.090 --> 00:10:09.679 in Rimini. Yes, there's a surviving crucifix 00:10:09.679 --> 00:10:12.799 there dated before 1309. And writers from the 00:10:12.799 --> 00:10:14.820 time mentioned him working in Assisi, Rimini, 00:10:15.000 --> 00:10:17.840 Padua. His reputation was massive. He had large 00:10:17.840 --> 00:10:20.279 estates, ran a big workshop, which leads us to 00:10:20.279 --> 00:10:22.559 Padua and the commission that leaves no room 00:10:22.559 --> 00:10:25.039 for doubt. Right. If Assisi is the question mark, 00:10:25.159 --> 00:10:27.620 the Scriveni Chapel in Padua, also called the 00:10:27.620 --> 00:10:30.620 Arena Chapel, is the giant exclamation point 00:10:30.620 --> 00:10:33.840 done around 1305, UNESCO World Heritage Site. 00:10:34.100 --> 00:10:36.059 It's considered the masterpiece of the early 00:10:36.059 --> 00:10:38.909 Renaissance. It absolutely is. There's no debate 00:10:38.909 --> 00:10:41.049 here. This is Giotto's vision fully realized. 00:10:41.289 --> 00:10:43.649 It's a complete painted environment commissioned 00:10:43.649 --> 00:10:46.970 by a banker named Enrico degli Scriveni. And 00:10:46.970 --> 00:10:49.230 Scriveni had a bit of an image problem, didn't 00:10:49.230 --> 00:10:51.690 he? Something about his father and Dante. A big 00:10:51.690 --> 00:10:56.009 one. His father, Reginaldo, was a notorious moneylender, 00:10:56.129 --> 00:10:59.350 a usurer. So notorious, in fact, that Dante stuck 00:10:59.350 --> 00:11:01.529 him in the seventh circle of hell in the Inferno. 00:11:01.750 --> 00:11:06.309 Ouch. So the chapel was maybe an act of atonement? 00:11:06.840 --> 00:11:09.000 Trying to buy some goodwill, spiritually speaking. 00:11:09.259 --> 00:11:11.399 Very likely. It was meant as a private family 00:11:11.399 --> 00:11:13.820 chapel, a burial place, but also as a public 00:11:13.820 --> 00:11:16.840 display of piety. And it was used for an annual 00:11:16.840 --> 00:11:19.399 religious play, which fits the very narrative, 00:11:19.419 --> 00:11:21.480 almost theatrical style of the frescoes. The 00:11:21.480 --> 00:11:24.000 theme is salvation. The big focus on the Virgin 00:11:24.000 --> 00:11:26.509 Mary. Where did Gietto get the stories? Not all 00:11:26.509 --> 00:11:28.710 straight from the Bible, right? No, he drew heavily 00:11:28.710 --> 00:11:31.490 on popular contemporary texts. The Golden Legend 00:11:31.490 --> 00:11:34.049 by Jacobus de Voragine was huge then, full of 00:11:34.049 --> 00:11:36.509 saints' lives, and also things like the Meditations 00:11:36.509 --> 00:11:39.029 on the Life of Christ, which was much more emotional 00:11:39.029 --> 00:11:42.490 and descriptive than the Gospels. The layout 00:11:42.490 --> 00:11:44.350 itself is brilliant. It's not just random scenes. 00:11:44.429 --> 00:11:48.080 It flows. Incredibly logical. 37 scenes in three 00:11:48.080 --> 00:11:50.919 horizontal bands wrapping around the walls. You 00:11:50.919 --> 00:11:53.320 start high up with Mary's parents, Joachim and 00:11:53.320 --> 00:11:56.279 Anne. Then you follow Mary's life down. Then 00:11:56.279 --> 00:11:59.360 Christ's childhood and miracles. And the lowest 00:11:59.360 --> 00:12:02.360 tier is the passion. It reads like a book, top 00:12:02.360 --> 00:12:04.559 to bottom, left to right. And I heard Giotto 00:12:04.559 --> 00:12:07.039 even uses Christ's posture to keep you moving 00:12:07.039 --> 00:12:09.419 through the story. yeah it's subtle but effective 00:12:09.419 --> 00:12:12.559 christ is often shown in profile and his gaze 00:12:12.559 --> 00:12:14.899 or the direction he's facing consistently points 00:12:14.899 --> 00:12:17.000 you towards the next scene towards the right 00:12:17.000 --> 00:12:20.779 until until the kiss of judas exactly that scene 00:12:20.779 --> 00:12:23.100 breaks the flow it's the dramatic turning point 00:12:23.100 --> 00:12:25.679 signaling the start of the passion sequence very 00:12:25.679 --> 00:12:28.019 clever visual storytelling and below all this 00:12:28.019 --> 00:12:30.460 narrative drama there's another layer the virtues 00:12:30.460 --> 00:12:33.330 and vices Done differently. Yes. Down on the 00:12:33.330 --> 00:12:35.830 lowest level, sort of like a foundation, he painted 00:12:35.830 --> 00:12:38.730 allegorical figures. Justice, injustice, charity, 00:12:38.950 --> 00:12:41.769 envy, and so on. Seven pairs. But he painted 00:12:41.769 --> 00:12:46.179 them in grise. Monochrome gray, like stone. Exactly 00:12:46.179 --> 00:12:50.220 like stone statues. It creates this amazing contrast, 00:12:50.559 --> 00:12:53.879 the colorful human drama of salvation unfolding 00:12:53.879 --> 00:12:57.440 above, grounded by this stern, classical -looking 00:12:57.440 --> 00:12:59.940 moral framework below. It's like he's deliberately 00:12:59.940 --> 00:13:03.279 invoking ancient Roman sculpture, linking Christian 00:13:03.279 --> 00:13:05.799 virtue to classical gravitas. Let's talk about 00:13:05.799 --> 00:13:07.919 the paint itself, that blue. It's famous for 00:13:07.919 --> 00:13:09.669 being faded. Especially compared to the other 00:13:09.669 --> 00:13:12.830 colors. Why? Ah, the blue. It tells a story about 00:13:12.830 --> 00:13:16.110 cost and technique. The pigment was ultramarine, 00:13:16.110 --> 00:13:19.509 made from ground lapis lazuli. Insanely expensive. 00:13:19.590 --> 00:13:21.950 Literally worth more than gold back then. Wow. 00:13:22.049 --> 00:13:24.730 So Scrivenia... really splashed out. He did, 00:13:24.889 --> 00:13:27.570 but here's the catch. True fresco technique involves 00:13:27.570 --> 00:13:30.169 painting on wet plaster. The pigment chemically 00:13:30.169 --> 00:13:33.009 bonds with the plaster as it dries. But ultramarine 00:13:33.009 --> 00:13:35.330 didn't react well with the wet plaster. It degrades, 00:13:35.330 --> 00:13:37.409 loses its brilliance when mixed with the lime 00:13:37.409 --> 00:13:39.870 in the wet plaster. So to keep that stunning 00:13:39.870 --> 00:13:42.929 deep blue, Giotto had to paint it a secco, meaning 00:13:42.929 --> 00:13:45.129 on top of the plaster after it had dried. Like 00:13:45.129 --> 00:13:47.399 painting on a drywall. Right. Which means it 00:13:47.399 --> 00:13:49.299 didn't bond chemically. It was basically just 00:13:49.299 --> 00:13:51.399 sitting on the surface, much more vulnerable 00:13:51.399 --> 00:13:55.740 to flaking and fading over time. So the faded 00:13:55.740 --> 00:13:58.320 blue we see is the ghost of incredible expense 00:13:58.320 --> 00:14:02.320 and a conscious technical compromise. A compromise 00:14:02.320 --> 00:14:03.799 for brilliance. OK, let's get to the heart of 00:14:03.799 --> 00:14:06.500 it. The Giotto breakthrough. We talk about three 00:14:06.500 --> 00:14:08.580 dimensional figures. How did he do that? What 00:14:08.580 --> 00:14:11.500 was different from the Byzantine style? Byzantine 00:14:11.500 --> 00:14:15.139 figures are often elegant, ethereal, but flat. 00:14:15.740 --> 00:14:19.080 They float in a golden, symbolic space. Giotto 00:14:19.080 --> 00:14:21.419 brings them down to Earth. He uses light and 00:14:21.419 --> 00:14:23.820 shadow chiaroscuro to model the forms, giving 00:14:23.820 --> 00:14:26.259 them a sense of roundness, volume, weight. So 00:14:26.259 --> 00:14:28.080 they look solid. They look solid, like they actually 00:14:28.080 --> 00:14:31.080 displace space. And he puts them in... believable 00:14:31.080 --> 00:14:33.440 spaces. He uses architecture, landscape elements, 00:14:33.659 --> 00:14:35.679 painted with a kind of intuitive perspective, 00:14:35.960 --> 00:14:38.419 not mathematically perfect yet, but it creates 00:14:38.419 --> 00:14:40.279 an illusion of depth. Like little stage sets. 00:14:40.500 --> 00:14:42.639 Exactly like stage sets. And crucially, he placed 00:14:42.639 --> 00:14:44.700 figures with their backs to the viewer. That 00:14:44.700 --> 00:14:47.440 was radical. It implies the space continues beyond 00:14:47.440 --> 00:14:49.259 the picture plane, includes you, the viewer. 00:14:49.360 --> 00:14:51.919 It pulls you in. But beyond the technical stuff, 00:14:52.120 --> 00:14:54.879 it's the emotion, isn't it? The faces. That's 00:14:54.879 --> 00:14:57.740 the real revolution, I think. The humanity. Byzantine 00:14:57.740 --> 00:15:00.580 figures often have stylized expressions representing 00:15:00.580 --> 00:15:04.120 piety or sorrow. Giotto's figures feel real emotions. 00:15:04.299 --> 00:15:06.940 Look at the massacre of the innocents. The mother's 00:15:06.940 --> 00:15:09.759 faces are pure agony. And that one soldier. Yeah, 00:15:09.799 --> 00:15:11.860 the soldier dragging the baby away. He's not 00:15:11.860 --> 00:15:15.600 just a villain. He looks almost burdened. Ashamed, 00:15:15.600 --> 00:15:18.259 maybe. It's complex. Or the lamentation over 00:15:18.259 --> 00:15:21.100 the dead Christ. The grief is palpable. Even 00:15:21.100 --> 00:15:23.080 the angels in the sky aren't serene. They're 00:15:23.080 --> 00:15:25.860 contorted, wailing. It makes these sacred stories 00:15:25.860 --> 00:15:29.360 feel incredibly immediate, relatable, which ties 00:15:29.360 --> 00:15:32.240 into what that critic, John Ruskin, said. Ruskin 00:15:32.240 --> 00:15:34.539 nailed it in the 19th century. He said Giotto 00:15:34.539 --> 00:15:36.820 painted the Madonna and St. Joseph in the Christ. 00:15:36.960 --> 00:15:39.639 Yes, by all means. But essentially, Mama, Papa, 00:15:39.740 --> 00:15:41.860 and Baby, he made the Holy Family feel like a 00:15:41.860 --> 00:15:44.200 real family. Amazing. Before we leave Padua, 00:15:44.320 --> 00:15:46.960 that star in the Adoration of the Magi, it doesn't 00:15:46.960 --> 00:15:49.019 look like a typical star. No, it looks like a 00:15:49.019 --> 00:15:51.779 comet. A fiery ball with a tail streaking across 00:15:51.779 --> 00:15:55.179 the sky. And the timing fits perfectly. Halley's 00:15:55.179 --> 00:15:57.759 Comet made a very visible appearance in 1301. 00:15:57.919 --> 00:16:00.970 So Giotto probably saw it. And painted it. It 00:16:00.970 --> 00:16:02.990 seems almost certain. He painted what he saw. 00:16:03.190 --> 00:16:05.529 And that connection is so strong that the European 00:16:05.529 --> 00:16:09.029 Space Agency actually named their 1986 probe 00:16:09.029 --> 00:16:13.090 to Halley's Comet. Johto. That's brilliant. Isn't 00:16:13.090 --> 00:16:16.899 it? Art history meets astrophysics. One last 00:16:16.899 --> 00:16:19.600 Padua anecdote, the one with Dante. Apparently 00:16:19.600 --> 00:16:21.919 Dante visited while Giotto was working. Yeah, 00:16:22.019 --> 00:16:24.220 another story that highlights Giotto's personality. 00:16:24.639 --> 00:16:27.740 Dante supposedly seeing Giotto's own children 00:16:27.740 --> 00:16:29.759 who were apparently quite plain looking. Unlike 00:16:29.759 --> 00:16:32.100 the figures in the chapel. Right, so Dante asks 00:16:32.100 --> 00:16:34.340 him, how can a man who makes such beautiful things 00:16:34.340 --> 00:16:37.519 have such ordinary kids? And Giotto's reply. 00:16:37.860 --> 00:16:40.480 Quick as a flash, I make my pictures by day and 00:16:40.480 --> 00:16:43.580 my babies by night. Ha, perfect. It's witty self 00:16:43.580 --> 00:16:46.450 -deprecating. But it also subtly elevates his 00:16:46.450 --> 00:16:49.149 art, right? The daytime work is inspired, godlike 00:16:49.149 --> 00:16:52.850 creation. The nighttime stuff is just human biology. 00:16:52.850 --> 00:16:56.129 It reinforces this idea of the artist as an intellectual 00:16:56.129 --> 00:16:58.450 set apart, a very Renaissance concept starting 00:16:58.450 --> 00:17:01.409 to form. So after Padua, Giotto is basically 00:17:01.409 --> 00:17:03.830 the biggest name in Italian art. He returns to 00:17:03.830 --> 00:17:07.029 Florence around 1311, a superstar. But this is 00:17:07.029 --> 00:17:08.750 where the workshop issue gets really tricky, 00:17:08.869 --> 00:17:11.390 right? Yeah. How much is actually him? It's a 00:17:11.390 --> 00:17:13.730 constant question with major artists running 00:17:13.730 --> 00:17:16.950 large workshops. But we do have one panel painting 00:17:16.950 --> 00:17:19.230 from this period that pretty much everyone agrees 00:17:19.230 --> 00:17:23.049 is pure Giotto, the Ognissanti Madonna, painted 00:17:23.049 --> 00:17:25.609 around 1310. That's the one in the Uffizi now, 00:17:25.710 --> 00:17:28.130 often shown near Cimabuse, Duccio's, Madonna's. 00:17:28.170 --> 00:17:31.410 Exactly. And the comparison is incredible. Cimabuse 00:17:31.410 --> 00:17:35.069 and Duccio's are beautiful, but still quite Byzantine, 00:17:35.069 --> 00:17:37.950 elegant lines, lots of gold, relatively flat. 00:17:38.089 --> 00:17:41.240 Giotto's Madonna is just... Monumental. Solid. 00:17:41.359 --> 00:17:43.019 She looks like she has real weight sitting on 00:17:43.019 --> 00:17:44.799 that throne. She absolutely does. The throne 00:17:44.799 --> 00:17:47.240 itself has depth. The way her robes fall feels 00:17:47.240 --> 00:17:49.799 natural. She's less an icon, more a tangible, 00:17:50.000 --> 00:17:52.880 queenly presence. It's a powerful statement of 00:17:52.880 --> 00:17:54.539 his mature style. But then you get something 00:17:54.539 --> 00:17:56.779 like the Stefaneschi triptych, commissioned by 00:17:56.779 --> 00:17:59.539 a cardinal for St. Peter's around 1320. We know 00:17:59.539 --> 00:18:01.500 Giotto got the commission. We have the documents 00:18:01.500 --> 00:18:04.259 for that one, which is rare. Cardinal Giacomo 00:18:04.259 --> 00:18:07.299 Stefaneschi paid him. But when you look closely 00:18:07.299 --> 00:18:10.859 at the execution, the brushwork, the details... 00:18:10.859 --> 00:18:12.680 It doesn't feel quite like the Agnissanti Madonna. 00:18:12.960 --> 00:18:16.160 To many scholars, no. The quality varies. It 00:18:16.160 --> 00:18:18.779 suggests that Giotto likely provided the overall 00:18:18.779 --> 00:18:21.740 design, the master plan, but a lot of the actual 00:18:21.740 --> 00:18:24.000 painting was done by assistants in his workshop, 00:18:24.240 --> 00:18:26.779 probably Roman artists brought in for the job. 00:18:26.960 --> 00:18:29.240 So he's becoming more like a director, an artistic 00:18:29.240 --> 00:18:32.119 CEO. Inevitable, really, given the demand. He 00:18:32.119 --> 00:18:34.259 couldn't be everywhere, paint every single panel 00:18:34.259 --> 00:18:37.480 or fresco himself. Delegation was key. Back in 00:18:37.480 --> 00:18:39.539 Florence, though, he undertook some major projects 00:18:39.539 --> 00:18:41.740 for wealthy families in the Santa Croce church. 00:18:42.299 --> 00:18:45.259 The Peruzzi and Bardi chapels. Yeah. Hugely influential. 00:18:45.720 --> 00:18:48.579 Massively influential, especially for later Florentine 00:18:48.579 --> 00:18:51.339 artists. But again, controversy. This time it's 00:18:51.339 --> 00:18:53.500 about the dating. Which one came first? Because 00:18:53.500 --> 00:18:55.460 they look so different now. Radically different. 00:18:55.519 --> 00:18:58.259 The Peruzzi chapel with scenes from the lives 00:18:58.259 --> 00:19:00.759 of St. John the Baptist and St. John the Evangelist 00:19:00.759 --> 00:19:03.680 is in terrible condition. Why so bad? Because 00:19:03.680 --> 00:19:06.359 it was painted largely a secco on dry plaster. 00:19:06.619 --> 00:19:09.819 Like the blue in Padua, the paint just didn't 00:19:09.819 --> 00:19:12.789 bond well and has flaked off dry. over the centuries. 00:19:12.950 --> 00:19:15.230 It's a shadow of its former self. Where's the 00:19:15.230 --> 00:19:17.609 Barty Chapel next door? Depicting the life of 00:19:17.609 --> 00:19:19.750 St. Francis, that one was mostly done in true 00:19:19.750 --> 00:19:23.009 fresco on wet plaster. And the compositions are 00:19:23.009 --> 00:19:25.609 maybe a bit simpler structurally, so it survived 00:19:25.609 --> 00:19:29.450 much better. So the debate is, did he paint the 00:19:29.450 --> 00:19:32.289 ruined Peruzzi Chapel earlier? using the less 00:19:32.289 --> 00:19:34.509 durable technique perhaps because he was rushed 00:19:34.509 --> 00:19:37.150 or painting over something else? Or did he paint 00:19:37.150 --> 00:19:39.809 it later, representing a more complex, ambitious 00:19:39.809 --> 00:19:42.829 phase of his style, despite the technical choice? 00:19:42.950 --> 00:19:45.509 That's the puzzle. The Peruzzi frescoes, even 00:19:45.509 --> 00:19:47.690 in their ruined state, show incredibly sophisticated 00:19:47.690 --> 00:19:50.150 architectural settings, real attempts at creating 00:19:50.150 --> 00:19:52.789 deep, believable spaces. That feels like a later 00:19:52.789 --> 00:19:55.509 development. But the secco technique often suggests 00:19:55.509 --> 00:19:58.089 speed or difficulty. It's a classic art historical 00:19:58.089 --> 00:20:00.890 tussle. But even ruined, the Prudsey Chapel was 00:20:00.890 --> 00:20:03.710 like a textbook for later artists. Masaccio, 00:20:03.910 --> 00:20:07.490 Michelangelo. Absolutely. Masaccio, who really 00:20:07.490 --> 00:20:09.910 kicks off the full Renaissance painting style 00:20:09.910 --> 00:20:13.230 in the 1420s, clearly studied Giotto's figures 00:20:13.230 --> 00:20:16.170 in the Peruzzi Chapel. He took Giotto's sense 00:20:16.170 --> 00:20:18.950 of volume and weight and placed it within mathematically 00:20:18.950 --> 00:20:21.910 constructed perspective spaces. So Giotto laid 00:20:21.910 --> 00:20:24.890 the groundwork. He did. And even Michelangelo, 00:20:24.910 --> 00:20:27.509 a couple of hundred years later, is known to 00:20:27.509 --> 00:20:29.609 have sketched Giotto's compositions in Santa 00:20:29.609 --> 00:20:32.049 Croce. They were foundational. Now the Bardi 00:20:32.049 --> 00:20:34.230 Chapel, the one in better shape, you mentioned 00:20:34.230 --> 00:20:37.099 it's... Structure is unusual, not strictly chronological. 00:20:37.279 --> 00:20:40.299 Right, that's fascinating. Jada arranges the 00:20:40.299 --> 00:20:42.859 seven scenes from St. Francis' life in a way 00:20:42.859 --> 00:20:45.319 that deliberately breaks the timeline. For instance, 00:20:45.420 --> 00:20:47.960 the most famous event, St. Francis receiving 00:20:47.960 --> 00:20:51.039 the stigmata. The wounds of Christ. That scene 00:20:51.039 --> 00:20:53.640 is actually painted outside the main chapel space, 00:20:53.799 --> 00:20:56.460 above the entrance arch. See if it'll look back 00:20:56.460 --> 00:20:59.140 as you leave, or see it as you enter. separate 00:20:59.140 --> 00:21:01.859 from the main narrative sequence inside. Exactly. 00:21:02.119 --> 00:21:04.539 And inside, scenes that happened years apart 00:21:04.539 --> 00:21:06.720 might be placed directly opposite each other 00:21:06.720 --> 00:21:08.640 on facing walls. Why do that? What's the point? 00:21:08.839 --> 00:21:12.519 It forces you, the viewer, to think beyond just 00:21:12.519 --> 00:21:14.880 following a story. You're encouraged to make 00:21:14.880 --> 00:21:17.539 connections across the space. Compare Francis 00:21:17.539 --> 00:21:19.819 renouncing his wealth on one wall with his death 00:21:19.819 --> 00:21:22.740 on the other, for example. It turns viewing into 00:21:22.740 --> 00:21:26.460 a more contemplative, symbolic exercise. Really 00:21:26.460 --> 00:21:29.029 sophisticated. Giotto's fame just kept growing. 00:21:29.230 --> 00:21:31.470 He ends up working outside Florence again in 00:21:31.470 --> 00:21:33.809 his later years. Oh, yes. His reputation was 00:21:33.809 --> 00:21:37.789 pan -Italian. In 1329, he gets summoned to Naples 00:21:37.789 --> 00:21:40.430 by King Robert of Anjou. Who names him first 00:21:40.430 --> 00:21:42.910 court painter. That sounds prestigious. Very. 00:21:43.210 --> 00:21:45.910 Came with a nice salary, too. But sadly, like 00:21:45.910 --> 00:21:48.190 a lot of his work outside Florence and Padua, 00:21:48.329 --> 00:21:51.470 most of his Neapolitan paintings are lost. Fragments 00:21:51.470 --> 00:21:54.410 exist, workshop pieces maybe, but the major cycles 00:21:54.410 --> 00:21:56.609 are gone. But his final major role brings him 00:21:56.609 --> 00:21:59.529 back to Florence. And it wasn't painting. It 00:21:59.529 --> 00:22:02.369 was architecture. That's right. In 1334, the 00:22:02.369 --> 00:22:04.750 city appoints him Capamaestro, chief architect 00:22:04.750 --> 00:22:06.750 or master builder for the Florence Cathedral, 00:22:07.069 --> 00:22:09.269 Santa Maria del Fiore. And his main job was the 00:22:09.269 --> 00:22:11.980 bell tower. The Campanile, exactly, which is 00:22:11.980 --> 00:22:14.059 now universally known as Giotto's Campanile. 00:22:14.140 --> 00:22:16.849 He designed it. oversaw the beginning of the 00:22:16.849 --> 00:22:19.670 construction, laid the foundations, started the 00:22:19.670 --> 00:22:22.210 first level with its intricate marble cladding 00:22:22.210 --> 00:22:24.390 and sculptural program. Even though he died before 00:22:24.390 --> 00:22:27.430 it was finished. He died in 1337, only three 00:22:27.430 --> 00:22:30.049 years after starting. It was completed later 00:22:30.049 --> 00:22:33.210 by Andrea Pisano and Francesco Talenti, who tweaked 00:22:33.210 --> 00:22:35.250 the upper levels a bit from his original design. 00:22:35.769 --> 00:22:38.069 But it remains his architectural masterpiece, 00:22:38.490 --> 00:22:41.329 a landmark of Florence, and a testament to his 00:22:41.329 --> 00:22:44.150 incredible versatility. It's amazing how famous 00:22:44.150 --> 00:22:46.440 he was during... his life, not just commissions, 00:22:46.519 --> 00:22:48.779 but being mentioned by the literary giants of 00:22:48.779 --> 00:22:51.380 the age. That really sets him apart. Being name 00:22:51.380 --> 00:22:53.920 -checked by Dante Alighieri in The Divine Comedy, 00:22:54.079 --> 00:22:55.880 that's the ultimate contemporary validation. 00:22:56.319 --> 00:22:58.380 Right, that famous bit in Purgatorio where Dante 00:22:58.380 --> 00:23:00.940 says, basically, Simabui thought he ruled painting. 00:23:01.519 --> 00:23:04.200 But now Giotto's got the top spot, and Simabui's 00:23:04.200 --> 00:23:06.640 fame is fading. Simabui believed that he held 00:23:06.640 --> 00:23:09.420 the field in painting, and now Giotto has the 00:23:09.420 --> 00:23:12.680 cry, so the fame of the former is obscure. It 00:23:12.680 --> 00:23:14.859 establishes Giotto as the new standard, right 00:23:14.859 --> 00:23:17.720 there in Italy's greatest poem. And Boccaccio, 00:23:17.900 --> 00:23:20.779 who actually knew Giotto, gives us that rather 00:23:20.779 --> 00:23:23.140 blunt physical description. Yeah, Boccaccio, 00:23:23.220 --> 00:23:25.559 writing in the Decameron, calls him no uglier 00:23:25.559 --> 00:23:28.019 man in the city of Florence. Which sounds harsh. 00:23:28.220 --> 00:23:30.839 But maybe it reinforces the idea that his genius 00:23:30.839 --> 00:23:34.660 was internal, not physical. Could be. It certainly 00:23:34.660 --> 00:23:37.319 fits the narrative of transcendent talent in 00:23:37.319 --> 00:23:40.559 an ordinary or even unattractive vessel. And 00:23:40.559 --> 00:23:43.660 there's that other story from Sochetti that shows 00:23:43.660 --> 00:23:47.940 his sharp wit and maybe his lack of patience 00:23:47.940 --> 00:23:50.559 for pretentious clients. Oh, the coat of arms 00:23:50.559 --> 00:23:53.609 story. It's hilarious. Some civilian. probably 00:23:53.609 --> 00:23:55.769 a merchant trying to look important, commissions 00:23:55.769 --> 00:23:58.529 Giotto to paint his family coat of arms on a 00:23:58.529 --> 00:24:00.450 shield. Like he's some great knight. Exactly. 00:24:00.670 --> 00:24:02.670 Giotto apparently saw right through the guy's 00:24:02.670 --> 00:24:04.609 vanity, so instead of painting the actual coat 00:24:04.609 --> 00:24:07.109 of arms, he covers the shield with every kind 00:24:07.109 --> 00:24:09.670 of weapon imaginable. Swords, helmets, daggers, 00:24:09.690 --> 00:24:12.250 chainmail, just a ridiculous over -the -top display. 00:24:12.549 --> 00:24:15.210 Armed to the teeth, literally. The client must 00:24:15.210 --> 00:24:18.660 have been furious. Oh. outraged but giotto's 00:24:18.660 --> 00:24:20.799 response was priceless he basically told the 00:24:20.799 --> 00:24:23.839 guy you want to talk about arms go see the world 00:24:23.839 --> 00:24:26.930 fight a battle or two then come back Don't act 00:24:26.930 --> 00:24:29.029 like you're the Duke of Bavaria. Did the guy 00:24:29.029 --> 00:24:32.150 sue him? He did. But Giotto countersued, arguing 00:24:32.150 --> 00:24:34.349 he had painted arms as requested. And incredibly, 00:24:34.650 --> 00:24:37.109 Giotto won. That's amazing. He shows the artist 00:24:37.109 --> 00:24:39.309 is no longer just a hired hand. He's got status, 00:24:39.390 --> 00:24:41.690 confidence he can push back. Utterly. He's an 00:24:41.690 --> 00:24:44.269 intellectual sparring partner, not just a craftsman. 00:24:44.289 --> 00:24:48.589 That's a big shift. So famous, rich, witty, maybe 00:24:48.589 --> 00:24:52.440 ugly. But then he dies in 1337. and even his 00:24:52.440 --> 00:24:54.920 burial becomes a puzzle, the mystery of the bones. 00:24:55.079 --> 00:24:57.400 Right, the final enigma. Where was he actually 00:24:57.400 --> 00:24:59.859 buried? Vasari claimed it was in the Florence 00:24:59.859 --> 00:25:02.259 Cathedral itself, Santa Maria del Fiore, with 00:25:02.259 --> 00:25:04.500 a marker. But others said the older church underneath. 00:25:04.720 --> 00:25:07.259 Santa Reparata, yes. The ruins of which are directly 00:25:07.259 --> 00:25:09.519 beneath the current cathedral floor, and this 00:25:09.519 --> 00:25:12.420 debate simmered for centuries. Until excavations 00:25:12.420 --> 00:25:15.119 in the 1970s actually found some bones down there, 00:25:15.259 --> 00:25:19.240 near where Vasari suggested. Exactly. Unmarked 00:25:19.240 --> 00:25:22.759 grave, but in the right zone. This led to a major 00:25:22.759 --> 00:25:25.359 forensic investigation around the year 2000. 00:25:25.660 --> 00:25:27.759 And the science turned up some pretty specific 00:25:27.759 --> 00:25:30.160 clues pointing towards a painter. Really specific, 00:25:30.420 --> 00:25:33.660 yeah. The bones showed unusually high levels 00:25:33.660 --> 00:25:36.420 of lead and arsenic. Which were common in pigments 00:25:36.420 --> 00:25:39.480 back then. Very common. Red lead, lead white, 00:25:39.599 --> 00:25:43.240 yellow arsenic sulfides like orpiment. A painter 00:25:43.240 --> 00:25:45.599 working with these daily would absolutely absorb 00:25:45.599 --> 00:25:48.819 them through skin, dust inhalation. It's strongly 00:25:48.819 --> 00:25:51.440 suggested a painter's remains. skeleton itself 00:25:51.440 --> 00:25:53.319 showed wear and tear consistent with painting. 00:25:53.480 --> 00:25:56.339 It did. The neck vertebrae had damage consistent 00:25:56.339 --> 00:25:58.759 with spending a lot of time looking up exactly 00:25:58.759 --> 00:26:01.019 what you do painting frescoes on ceilings. Like 00:26:01.019 --> 00:26:03.700 in the Scriveni Chapel or Santa Croce. Precisely. 00:26:03.700 --> 00:26:06.140 And the front teeth were worn in a peculiar way, 00:26:06.220 --> 00:26:08.420 maybe from habitually holding brushes in his 00:26:08.420 --> 00:26:10.880 mouth while working or mixing colors. Okay, that 00:26:10.880 --> 00:26:13.160 sounds like a strong case for Giotto. A painter 00:26:13.160 --> 00:26:15.720 working in Florence buried where tradition said, 00:26:15.900 --> 00:26:18.720 but then came the bombshell. The bombshell was 00:26:18.720 --> 00:26:21.259 the skeleton's height. It belonged to a man who 00:26:21.259 --> 00:26:24.779 was very short, little over four feet tall, possibly 00:26:24.779 --> 00:26:27.319 someone with a form of congenital dwarfism. Four 00:26:27.319 --> 00:26:30.960 feet tall, that seems unexpected for such a dominant 00:26:30.960 --> 00:26:33.299 public figure. It immediately revived an old 00:26:33.299 --> 00:26:35.759 theory that a small dwarf -like figure depicted 00:26:35.759 --> 00:26:38.740 in one of the Santa Croce frescoes might actually 00:26:38.740 --> 00:26:42.440 be a Giotto self -portrait. But wait, doesn't 00:26:42.440 --> 00:26:44.460 that contradict other supposed self -portraits? 00:26:44.829 --> 00:26:46.650 Like the figure in The Last Judgment in Padua, 00:26:46.789 --> 00:26:49.890 he looks normal height there. Exactly. The Padua 00:26:49.890 --> 00:26:52.069 figure, often identified as Giotto presenting 00:26:52.069 --> 00:26:54.630 the chapel model to God, looks perfectly average 00:26:54.630 --> 00:26:57.150 in stature. And surely, if Giotto had been that 00:26:57.150 --> 00:26:59.809 unusually short, someone like Boccaccio or Dante 00:26:59.809 --> 00:27:02.009 would have mentioned it. It's a pretty striking 00:27:02.009 --> 00:27:04.369 physical characteristic to ignore, more specific 00:27:04.369 --> 00:27:07.329 than just ugly. So the dwarfism throws a major 00:27:07.329 --> 00:27:09.609 wrench in the works. It creates a huge contradiction 00:27:09.609 --> 00:27:13.049 for many scholars. Is the Santa Croce dwarf figure 00:27:13.049 --> 00:27:16.819 symbolic? A depiction of an assistant. Are these 00:27:16.819 --> 00:27:19.119 bones just some other unrelated short painter 00:27:19.119 --> 00:27:22.240 from the era? So despite the Italian team reburying 00:27:22.240 --> 00:27:24.400 the bones with honors, calling them giottos. 00:27:24.680 --> 00:27:26.920 International skepticism remains really high. 00:27:27.039 --> 00:27:29.720 It led to that famous dismissal by the architectural 00:27:29.720 --> 00:27:32.359 historian Franklin Talk Talker, who basically 00:27:32.359 --> 00:27:34.779 said they're probably just the bones of some 00:27:34.779 --> 00:27:38.940 fat butcher. Ouch. So even in death, giotto remains 00:27:38.940 --> 00:27:42.089 elusive. It's the perfect summary of his whole 00:27:42.089 --> 00:27:45.410 story, isn't it? This constant tension. His artistic 00:27:45.410 --> 00:27:48.910 achievement is monumental, undeniable. He changed 00:27:48.910 --> 00:27:52.650 everything, created this new world of naturalistic 00:27:52.650 --> 00:27:55.569 emotional art, the absolute key figure leading 00:27:55.569 --> 00:27:57.569 into the Renaissance. No question about the impact 00:27:57.569 --> 00:27:59.589 of the art. Not at all. But the man himself, 00:27:59.829 --> 00:28:02.890 his birth, his training, who painted what exactly, 00:28:03.109 --> 00:28:05.769 even where his physical remains lie, it's all 00:28:05.769 --> 00:28:08.650 tangled up in legend, controversy, and missing 00:28:08.650 --> 00:28:10.650 evidence. It leaves you with this fascinating 00:28:10.650 --> 00:28:14.049 contrast, the enduring, vivid physical reality. 00:28:14.190 --> 00:28:16.930 of the Scruveni Chapel frescoes, you can go stand 00:28:16.930 --> 00:28:19.490 in front of them today, versus the almost complete 00:28:19.490 --> 00:28:21.529 uncertainty about the physical reality of the 00:28:21.529 --> 00:28:23.930 man who painted them. Maybe his legacy was always 00:28:23.930 --> 00:28:26.529 destined to be the art itself, so powerful, so 00:28:26.529 --> 00:28:29.029 revolutionary, that it just completely overshadowed 00:28:29.029 --> 00:28:31.690 the biographical details of the artist. Maybe 00:28:31.690 --> 00:28:34.230 we're meant to focus on the work. It does seem 00:28:34.230 --> 00:28:37.130 like the work speaks for itself, perhaps louder 00:28:37.130 --> 00:28:39.650 than any historical document could. I think so. 00:28:40.009 --> 00:28:42.269 Whether he invented the style or perfected it, 00:28:42.539 --> 00:28:45.420 His genius shines through. We strongly encourage 00:28:45.420 --> 00:28:47.940 you listening to look up the images we've talked 00:28:47.940 --> 00:28:50.440 about, especially those faces in the Scriveni 00:28:50.440 --> 00:28:53.099 Chapel, the grief -stricken angels, the conflicted 00:28:53.099 --> 00:28:55.640 soldier, the human intimacy of Mary and Joseph. 00:28:55.920 --> 00:28:58.259 You really can witness the revolution for yourself.