Renaissance Artists’ Signatures: More than Just a Name

Richmond University (Florence)

Spring 2011

High and Late Renaissance Art

Prof. Peter Porcal

Natalie Acone

s

Renassiance Artists’ Signatures: More than Just a Name

AconeRenaissance Artists’ Signatures: More than Just a Name

2

Art can tell a viewer so many different things. It is complex, and multifaceted. From creation

to the final work, the process of understanding one single artwork is long and often difficult

because of all the intricacies. An element of art that may go overlooked is the signature of the

artist. Before the Renaissance, many artistic works were left unsigned. But, with the rebirth that

the Renaissance brought, came a new claim on authorship by artists. The signatures of the artists

reveal much more than who completed the work. Standardized signatures may reveal who the

artist is, where he or she came from, where and when the work was created, and for whom the

work was created. The signature of an artist is the artist establishing his own presence in the

work, and giving himself up to scrutiny or praise. A signature of a Renaissance artist is unique

because it has the power to reveal further information about how the artist views and feels about

his work. Renaissance artists claimed authorship of their works in a variety of ways. Renaissance

artists created signatures through words, self portraits, and hidden images.

In order to understand why the signatures of Renaissance artists are so unique it is important

to understand what elements of the signatures make them different. The words, fonts, and

numbers used to express a signature are as equally complex as the artwork itself. The

Renaissance brought great changes to art, including how a work was signed. For example,

between the fourteenth and early fifteenth centuries, before the Renaissance arrived in Venice,

the signature of an artist was very conventional and straight forward. Most often, the signature

included the artist’s name, a date, which is assumed to be the date of completion, and

occasionally information about the person who commissioned the work and the site where the

work was completed. The placement of the signature was either on a frame, along the bottom

edge, or on the lowest area of the central panel. The language used was Latin, numbers were

Roman Numerals, and the style of writing was Gothic (Matthew). This conventional signature


3

began to change during the 1440s with the arrival of Renaissance Florentines in Venice

(Matthew). The first change can be seen the form the signature is written in. The Gothic style

was replaced with Roman lettering. In addition, the signature was no longer an added piece of

the work. It became a part of the work, meaning, “the signature becomes more consistently part

of the painted illusion” (Matthew). The placement was no longer along the bottom or out of the

way. The signature was more a part of the work, and often contributed to the overall meaning of

the work.

For previous generations the signature was simply a declaration of authorship. But, beginning

in the fourteenth century an increasing amount of artists became more loquacious with their

signatures. It was no longer the standardized name, date, patron, and site. Additional phrases

were attached to the signature that had some meaning to the artist, or gave some meaning to the

work. The phrase attached to the signature can tell us how the artist felt about his work, and how

the artist wanted viewers to feel about his work. For example, Duccio di Buoninsegna of Siena

completed a sculpture of Mary called Maestà that was installed on the high alter of Siena

Cathedral in 1312 (Goffen 113). The signature inscribed on the base of Mary’s throne reads,

“MATER SANCTA DEI SIS CAUSA SENIS REQIEI SIS DUCIO BITA TE QUIA PINXIT

ITA,” which translates to, “Holy Mother of God, be peace for Siena’s sake, be life for Duccio

who has painted you thus,” (Goffen 113). This signature was not solely created to express

authorship. The prayer attached to it expresses pride in the creation of the work. The creator

implores Mary to grant peace to Siena, and life to Duccio. Although the words attached to

Duccio’s signature are directly personal, not all Renaissance artists’ signatures were equally as

personal, but did reveal additional information about the creator. For example, the signature on

south doors of the Florence Baptistery reads,


4

“ANDREAS:UGOLINI:NINI:DI :PISIS:ME:FEDCIT:A D:M:CCC:XXX (Goffen 113). This

signature identifies the artist, Andrea Pisano, where he was from, and the date of the work.

Furthermore, the signature reveals a certain amount of pride in the work by saying me fecit. This

phrase allows the signature to take on the persona of the work because this translates to “made

me” (Goffen 113).

This style of signature relates to the only signature ever left by Michelangelo. The Florentine

artist notoriously left works unsigned. But, the one signature that he did leave, on his sculpture of

the Pieta, reveals one of the most significant changes that occurred in Renaissance artists’

signatures. It involved the tense the signature was written in. In order to fully understand the

impact of this signature by Michelangelo it is first important to understand how this one

signature came to exist. The story of how the signature came to be begins after the Pieta was

installed. In 1564, a month after Michelangelo’s death, Vasari published the anecdote of the

signature’s existence. Varsari wrote the signature came:

Into being because one day Michelangelo entering the place where it [the Pità ] was installed, found a great number of Lombard strangers who were praising it highly, one of whom asked another who had done it; he answered; ‘Our Gobbo from Milan,’ (referring to Cristiforo Solari). Michelangelo stood silent, but it seemed somewhat strange to him that his efforts should be attributed to someone else. One night he shut himself in there and, with a little light, having brought his chisels, he carved his name there (Goffen 117-118).

There have been many speculations among artists, and art historians about why Michelangelo

decided to sign this particular sculpture. Vasari speculated that it was pride in the work that

caused Michelangelo to sign it. Vasari concluded that Michelangelo signed the work because he

was “satisfied and pleased with himself” (Goffen 117). The anecdote was told to by an unknown

correspondent, but is able to support Vasari’s theory. It gives evidence to the fact that

Michelangelo wanted viewers to know that it was him that created the beautiful work.


5

Another theory of why the signature exists takes an opposite approach, and relates to the

words outside of the name. The signature is placed across Mary’s breast, and reads,

“MICHEL.ANGELVS BVONAROTVS FLORENTINVS FACIEBA…”. This literally

translates to “Michelangelo Buonarroti the Florentine was making”. The additional theory of

why Michelangelo signed the Pieta relates to the concept of false modesty. In class we discussed

how in his signature Michelangelo writes FACIEBA [T]. This is the imperfect tense of the verb

FEDCIT, to make, which is seen in the signature of Andrea Pisano. This tense gives the word

the literal translation of “was making.” The use of FACIEBA conveys the message that the work

was not yet finished. It is interesting that Michelangelo stated the work was not yet finished

because it is one of his most well done sculptures. Rona Goffen states:

Given the high finish of the Pieta, the signatures assertion of incompleteness seems immodest, a self conscious and perhaps insecure disavowal of pride in the achievement (Goffen 116).

Goffen is stating that the imperfect tense signature does not convey a sense of pride in the work.

Instead it creates a sense of reserve and insecurity in the painter. The use of FACIEBAT

is a play on false modesty which stems from the work of Greek antiquity painter Apelles. When

Apelles created a painting of a basket of cherries that looked so realistic that it even fooled birds

who went to steal the cherries from it, he signed the painting with FACIEBAT. By using the

imperfect tense of this verb Apelles created a false sense of modesty. This signature conveyed

the message that even though the painting looked perfect, and could fool anybody into thinking it

was real, it was not completed, and could be made even better. Well aware of Apelles’s false

modesty, Michelangelo used it for his own seemingly perfect sculpture. He added to the aspect

of being unfinished by even leaving the word FACIEBAT unfinished. He left out the final T. The

question that the use of FACIEBAT left people with was why Michelangelo felt he needed to use


6

false modesty on the Pieta. As previously stated, when an artist leaves a signature he is placing

his presence in the work, leaving himself open for praise and criticism. By using false modesty

an artist is able to protect himself from the criticism because he has the defense that is not yet

finished. Pliny brought up Apelles use of FACIEBAT in the Preface to his National History.

Pliny wrote:

…even the masterpieces […], with a provisional title such as Faciebat Apelles or Polyclitus, as though art was always a thing in process and not completed, so that when face by the vagaries of criticism the artist might have left himself a line of retreat to indulgence, by implying that he intended, if not interrupted, to correct any defect if noted (Goffen 114).

What Pliny suspected, as do many other art historians, was that the artists that signed their works

in this manner they wanted the work to never been seen as completely finished. If a work is

never finished, it can constantly be corrected if the artist has the moment and desire to do so.

This type of signature acted as a defense against criticism for the artist. It has been speculated

that this was the intention of Michelangelo when he used it to sign the Pità. Michelangelo’s use

of FACIEBAT was the first Renaissance use of the text, and ushered in a movement of artists

who used it. After Michelangelo, 90% of Renaissance artists would use FACIEBAT in their

signatures (Porcal). The signature no longer was just a name. By signing a work in the imperfect

tense, the signature revealed that the creator wanted to protect both his work and his reputation

from criticism.

For Renaissance artists a signature may not be found in words, but in the artwork itself.

Often, in the paintings of Renaissance artists, the creator will construct a self portrait within the

work that will be the artist’s claim to authorship, and therefore the artist’s signature. The manner

in which the self portrait is created can reveal what the artist wants the viewer to see, how the

artist wants the viewer to perceive the work. Many times the self portrait is different from the


7

rest of the painting, and draws the attention of the viewer. An example of this can be seen in

Botticelli’s Adoration of the Magi. In this painting Botticelli literally paints himself as in the

painting. He is represented as one of the men assisting in the central event. Botticelli is seen on

the right side of the painting, as a robust figure, adorned in gold. What makes this figure different

from the rest is his placement, and the direction of his gaze. The self portrait seems out of place

when comparing it to the placement of the other figures. He is in the front, and moved slightly

away from the rest of the figures. The direction of Botticelli’s self portrait is what really sets it

apart from the rest of the figures. The man is not gazing at Mary and baby Jesus, but outward,

towards the viewer. Botticelli wanted his self portrait, his signature, to catch the eye of the

viewer, and” introduce the event of the painting to the viewer” (Gale). When an artist included a

self portrait as the signature of his work he physically placed his presence in the work, and was

able to show the viewers what he wanted them to see.

Recent research has shown an additional way Renaissance artists applied a signature to

their work. In 2004, The Greenland Art Research began conducting a study on hidden images in

paintings. In particular they looked at various works of the Renaissance artist Titian. Examples

included in Titian’s “Sacrifice of Isaac” where there is a blurred self portrait of Titian in

Abraham’s red dress, and Titian’s painting “Joseph and the wife of Potiphar” where there is a

hidden signature. No evidence exists for why Titian included these hidden images in his works.

They hypothesis that the Greenland Art Research has developed reasons that Titian wanted to

make his work “copy proof”. Because the images were so well hidden, it would be nearly

impossible for a completely accurate copy to be made. The hidden images, whether they are an

actual signature or not, can act as a signature of authenticity of the work.


8

Because of the variety of forms that a signature can come in, a signature on a work of art

can reveal a great deal of information beyond the name of its creator. Standard elements like the

date of completion, birthplace of the creator, place of creation, and the name of who

commissioned the work can all be revealed through a signature. There is deeper meaning to the

signatures as well. If the signature is imperfect tense, and reveals the work to be unfinished this

reveals insight into the character of the artist. In the case of imperfect tense, the artist is not

boastful or prideful. Instead, he is taking precaution to protect his work and his reputation from

criticism. When an artist uses a self portrait as a signature he is inviting the viewer into the

image, and introducing the event. If the artist leaves only hidden images as a signature they are

smalls claims to authenticity that reveal the creator wanted it to be known the work was his.

Even though this information may be revealed through a signature, caution must be taking when

examining a signature on an artwork. Signatures could be added a later site, changed,

undiscovered, overpainted, or rubbed off (Matthews). This is why it is important to make sure

the signature is authentic. A signature creates authenticity only if the signature itself is authentic.

When the signature of a Renaissance artist is found, it will reveal more than a name. It can tell a

story that is as complex as the work of art itself.


9

Bibliography

Gale, M. "Adoration of the Magi (Attitude towards the Viewer in the Renaissance Paintings) - Alternative View on Art, Architecture and Religion." Alternative Information Newsletter

- Alternative View on sArt, Architecture and Religion. 2008. Web. 01 Apr. 2011. <http://www.aiwaz.net/adoration-of-the-magi-attitude-towards-the-viewer-in-the-renaissance-paintings/a109>.

Goffen, Rona, and Michelangelo. Renaissance Rivals: Michelangelo, Leonardo, Raphael, Titian. New Haven [u.a.: Yale Univ., 2004. Print.

Hendriksen, Svend Erik. "Miniatures and Faces in Renaissance and Impressionist Paintings." Artist Perspectives - Interviews with Artists. Greenland Art Research, 2005. Web. 01 Apr. 2011. <http://www.artist-perspectives.com/articles/hendriksen.htm>.

Matthew, Louisa C. "The Painter's Presence: Signatures in Venetian Renaissance Pictures." Access My Library. The Art Bulliten, 10 Dec. 1998. Web. 1 Apr. 2011. <http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-54073963/painter-presence-signatures-venetian.html>.

Porcal, Peter. "Michelangelo." Class Lecture. Richmond Univeristy, High Late Renassiance Art. 22 Feb. 2011. Lecture.

Renaissance Artists’ Signatures: More than Just a Name

Documents

Transcript of Renaissance Artists’ Signatures: More than Just a Name