Washington Madonna and Child

A small hand curls around Mary's index finger while the other reaches for the rose she offers. These two actions identify the Washington Madonna and Child, also called the Goldman Madonna, in the National Gallery of Art, Washington. The museum attributes the tempera painting on poplar to Giotto and dates it approximately 1310–15. Its accession number is 1939.1.256, and its painted surface measures 85.4 × 61.8 cm. ^[1]

This rose-bearing, half-length Madonna must be distinguished from Giotto's Madonna of San Giorgio alla Costa, an earlier enthroned Virgin accompanied by two angels. The descriptions of a throne, two angels, a height approaching two metres and the Florentine church below concern that separate painting. The two San Giorgio illustrations discussed below show that separate painting. Washington's picture has neither those angels nor that throne. Its subject is concentrated in Mary's supporting hands, the child's weight and the flower held between them.

The rose and the child's hands

Mary fills the panel with the breadth of her mantle. Her head inclines towards the child, who sits high on her left arm, on the viewer's right. The dark blue fabric makes a continuous mass across her shoulders and torso; green lining turns outward in a diagonal fold across her chest and again at her wrist. A red covering can be glimpsed beside her face. Along the edges, gold ornament turns the mantle into a precious enclosure around the pale faces and hands.

The child's bare upper body gives the scene a different rhythm. His rounded shoulder opens out against the gold, and the arm reaching towards the rose crosses the diagonal of the mantle lining. His other hand closes around the forefinger of the hand that supports him. Mary's fingers spread beneath him rather than merely touching the edge of his robe. They help us understand how he is carried. Below, a little foot rests against the blue fabric. The translucent cloth around his lower body allows the modelling beneath it to remain perceptible, while its gold edging describes a more definite, decorative boundary.

The flower is modest in scale. Its pale head and green leaves can almost disappear beside the broad dark mantle, yet the reaching arm gives it importance. Mary holds the stem with a controlled, delicate grip. The child extends his fingers towards the leaves and flower while retaining his grip on her other hand. The arrangement gathers two different kinds of contact into a compact space: reaching for something attractive and holding on to the person who provides support. Those actions are legible without assigning a single emotion to either figure.

A gold star-like ornament appears on Mary's shoulder. Around both heads, lines and dots describe halos; the child's halo has a cross distinguished by small floral ornaments. These circles retain their precise, frontal geometry even where the heads turn. An ornamental border follows the edge of the gold surrounding the group. The effect combines bodily presence with an emphatically worked, luminous surface. The figures seem substantial, but the painting never pretends that its gold is an ordinary landscape or room.

The following account introduces the traditional symbolism of the rose. Its opening claim about Giotto approaching the end of his career needs qualification: the present museum date, about 1310–15, is an approximate scholarly dating, not evidence of a final commission before his death in 1337. ^[20]

The Madonna and child were painted when Giotto was approaching the end of his career . Giotto used a conventional Byzantine background that involved a gold leaf that symbolized the kingdom of heaven. The white rose symbolizes Mary’s purity and also acts as a reference to depict the innocence that humankind lost after the original sin.

The next paragraph combines details from the two Madonnas. Its throne and steps belong to an enthroned composition such as San Giorgio, whereas the reaching child and flower belong to Washington. The NGA's technical account supports green underpainting and subsequent flesh modelling in the Washington panel; it does not establish the paragraph's general judgement about “classicism.” ^[21]

The elevated position of the Madonna and Child symbolizes spiritual superiority; however, it is made real by the illustration of a throne that has steps going into it. The steps do not float in mid-air as in other portraits. The child, who depicts Christ, is the focus of the painting as he represents salvation for mankind. The background of the painting is a gold leaf while the Madonna has a blue-green fabric with parts of yellow and red. The painting used on Madonna’s flesh is vermillion and green earth. The colours used in this painting are soft and classy which signifies classicism. There is also a restraint on the image with the child trying to reach for the flower in his mother's hand. This shows realism as this action is what an ordinary child does.

The Washington panel's material construction is more securely documented than such broad stylistic labels. The account below follows several findings from its technical examination; the exact sequence of preparation and painting is explained further below.

There is also individualism in the image which is depicted by the interaction of the mother and her child; this shows that the two are humans despite being religious figures. The values of Giotto’s renaissance are depicted in this painting. The painting was done on a gesso ground white in colour where radiographs display a fabric interlayer in between the wooden panel and the gesso. The painting has some gilded areas that were prepared using a green earth film and red bole. The decorative border on the edges is adorned with patterns that are crafted by hand on the ground made of gold. The image outline is also crafted in the ground. The fleshy part of the portrait was made by the application of green under the paint which brought out the shadows very well; the paint used was made in thin liquid layers.

The human immediacy of the gestures is visible, but the broader claims in the following paragraph require care. This is a tempera painting with gold leaf, rather than a drawing. No comparative evidence establishes that its paint was superior in quality to Giotto's earlier materials. Cimabue's earlier enthroned Madonnas cannot have copied this later Washington panel. The connection between the painters is a question of earlier traditions and Giotto's response to them, rather than the reversed sequence suggested here.

Cimabue’s Santa Trinita Maestà, now in the Uffizi. Compare the enthroned Virgin, ranked angels and gold ground with Giotto’s panel paintings; this work is by Cimabue. Image source. Public domain. Proportionally reduced reproduction; original composition, colour and photographic lighting retained.

In conclusion, the Madonna and Child painting by Giotto is an artwork that somehow changed the way people, more so Christians, perceive the Virgin Mary and her child Jesus. This drawing brought out a human aspect of the duo by depicting them as a human in addition to being religious figures. The paint used in this painting was also of high quality in comparison to Giotto’s previous works. This painting was quite different and had so many symbols that said more than what you can see. It was done with a high artistic level that made it outstanding The painting has such a huge impact such that it was duplicated in part by other painters thereafter; an example is the Madonna Enthroned that was created by Cimabue , someone believed by many to have been Giotto's teacher. All in all, Giotto was a prolific painter who brought out realism in his paintings.

Questions about the two Madonnas

The questions below range between the Washington rose Madonna and the separate San Giorgio painting. Dates, locations and descriptions are distinguished beside the relevant passages.

Table of Contents

Description of the Painting

When did Giotto Complete this Artwork?

What Techniques did the artist use for this Painting?

What is the Meaning of The Madonna and Child?

Did Giotto create any other Madonna paintings?

Where can The Madonna and Child be Found Today?

History of The Church of San Giorgio alla Costa

Where does this Piece fit into the Artist's overall Career?

What other Artworks did Giotto Produce at around this Time?

Large Image of Giotto's Madonna and Child

San Giorgio alla Costa: a different composition

The following description concerns San Giorgio alla Costa, not the Washington panel. The two angels, architectural throne and clothed, blessing child can be seen in the San Giorgio illustrations. The current Florentine museum record identifies that painting as an early work, approximately 1288–95, with a height of about 180 cm. ^[22]

The separate San Giorgio alla Costa Madonna, with a throne and two angels; this is not the Washington rose panel.

Description of the Painting

This is one of Giotto's simpler compositions, featuring the Madonna and Child enthroned within the foreground. They are enlarged to fit most of the length of the painting which symbolises their considerable importance, both within the painting itself but also to the Christian faith. Over their shoulders are two angels whose identities are confirmed by wings which protrude from behind. The artist adds a patterned moasic-like appearance to the back of the throne on which the madonna sits, with a sculptured effect continuing around the bottom. The madonna is dressed modestly, with a coat covering most of her body, with a pink dress just appearing with small details. The child is in a light blue tone with a pink shawl hanging over his shoulder. Their fingers are noticeably long and thin, a style common at that time but certainly elongated from what one might expect to see.

Dates: San Giorgio and Washington

The 1295–1300 span in the next passage concerns an older dating of San Giorgio. It must not be transferred to the Washington rose Madonna, which the NGA dates about 1310–15. The current Opera del Duomo record gives San Giorgio approximately 1288–95 and describes it as around 1295 in the accompanying text. ^[22]

When did Giotto Complete this Artwork?

Giotto di Bondone completed Madonna and Child for the San Giorgio alla Costa between the years of 1295-1300. As with much of the rest of his career, a more precise date is particularly hard to confidently attribute. Historians have managed to piece together the artist's movements across Italy during his lifetime which has made it easier to place artworks from his career, but to be more precise than spans of several years at a time has not been possible for most of his artworks. There have also been a number of projects, such as his Scrovegni Chapel frescoes , in which many separate artworks were completed together over a number of years and it would be impossible to tell where each one fitted within the overall delivery. With seven centuries having passed since these paintings were produced, it has been necessary to draw on other artist's biographies in order to learn more about Giotto's career.

Tempera, gold leaf and two different sets of figures

Both paintings use tempera on a wooden support with gilding. In the passage below, the angels and throne again identify San Giorgio. “Gold paint” is too loose a term for the Washington panel's gilded ground: its technical examination records layers prepared to receive gold leaf, with decoration incised into the surface. ^[21]

What Techniques did the artist use for this Painting?

The artist produced Madonna and Child using tempera on wooden panel. Many of his independent artworks were created in this manner, whilst his series tended to be as frescoes instead. The artist also used gold paint frequently and this was one of the signature elements of his style which had been passed on from those who originally taught him. Giotto chose to use golden colours for the background of some of his paintings, as well as on the halos which he gave to the key figures of each composition. In this case, for example, we find halos on both the Madonna and Child, as well as on the angels at the back of the painting. He chose to then use shades of pink, light blue, dark blue, red and green for the various details across the rest of the work, such as on the detail of the throne as well as each figure's clothing.

Meaning and devotional use

For Washington, the clearest starting point is the relationship between the rose, Mary's presentation of her son and his two hand gestures. The following general account of Madonna imagery should not be treated as a precise history of its beginnings or as a securely established total of Raphael's pictures. An enthroned Virgin and a half-length Virgin also offer different ways of presenting the same sacred relationship.

What is the Meaning of The Madonna and Child?

The Madonna has been used within art since around the 2nd century but it was not until the middle ages that the iconic image of The Madonna and Child would start to appear. It was most commonly found within Italian and North European art. They were most frequently seen from around the 13th to 16th century, where Giotto fits in, and the artist who is most well known for this specific genre would have to be Raphael. He produced around thirty different versions of this one topic. The meaning of The Madonna and Child specifically symbolises the motherly love of the Virgin Mary for Jesus. To see them enthroned, as is regularly found within these paintings, is a reference to their critical importance to the Christian faith, with most compositions rising them up off the floor to rise above the other figures around them.

Comparing Giotto's Madonnas

The next paragraph returns to a comparison with Ognissanti. Its assertion of an interval of at least six years cannot establish the sequence of the Washington picture: the Uffizi currently dates the Ognissanti Maestà about 1300–05, while the NGA dates Washington about 1310–15. A smaller panel also does not by itself prove execution by Giotto alone. Present collection attributions and the history of scholarly disagreement are more useful than an assumption based on size. ^{[20] [23]}

Did Giotto create any other Madonna paintings?

The artist also produced Ognissanti Madonna , and this remains one of his most famous paintings of all. That features a more complex composition, with many more figures and detail across the piece. The item in front of us on this page, however, is a simpler item which may have been intended for a smaller audience. The Ognissanti arrived at least six years later and so it is possible that some learnings from this earlier piece went into that one. Giotto regularly used assistants but would tend to complete smaller projects entirely on his own, and so both of these Madonna paintings may have been entirely his own work. Many question marks remain around his paintings, with attributions difficult because of the many centuries that have passed since then. Most historians are, however, entirely comfortable in attributing both of these items to his hand and there is little or no evidence to go against those judgements which were made centuries ago and have been strengthened in recent years through scientific research.

Where the two paintings are today

The Washington rose Madonna belongs to the National Gallery of Art in Washington. The Florentine locations in the next paragraph belong to San Giorgio. For that painting, the current custodian's record places it on deposit from the collections of the Archdiocese of Florence at the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo, in the Sala dei Frammenti. The older Museo Diocesano wording should therefore not be used as its current display address. ^[22]

Where can The Madonna and Child be Found Today?

The painting can be found at that Museo Diocesano in Florence. Originally, the artwork was to be found in The Church of San Giorgio alla Costa which is also based in central Florence, Italy. This religious venue has played host to a number of significant artworks in the past, though most have since been moved elsewhere. Alesso Baldovinetti's Annunciation, Paolo Uccello's The Thebaid and Giotto's own Madonna have all been on display here for extended periods before being relocated elsewhere in order to better protect them for the long term. As Giotto produced several Madonna depictions within his career, and the long length of time that this painting was on display within the church, it has become widely known as his Madonna di San Giorgio alla Costa. The church itself remains open today, but does not have quite the same significance that it once enjoyed.

The church belongs to San Giorgio's history

The church history below concerns the separate San Giorgio painting. It supplies no provenance for the Washington rose Madonna. Its comments on present disrepair, opening and suitability are an older general account, not a current visitor report or a verified assessment of the building's condition.

History of The Church of San Giorgio alla Costa

This particularly old church was dedicated to the martyr Saint George and for a period was joined by two other churches in close proximity. This building has been in use before the year 1000, making it a part of medieval Florence. Soon after Giotto had completed his commissioned piece, a convent was added on to the church. Over the next few centuries the building would then pass its ownership through a number of different congregations before being acquired by local authorities in the 19th century. In recent years elements of the building have fallen into disrepair and so the church would now be entirely unsuitable to hold any original artworks from past centuries and these have sensibly been moved to professional galleries and museums elsewhere in the city.

Scale and career position

The next paragraph's “nearly two metres” and church setting identify San Giorgio. Washington's painted surface is only 85.4 cm high, and its original church remains uncertain. The NGA catalogues it as Giotto, while also recording an attribution history that included Bernardo Daddi and an assistant of Giotto; its present attribution should not erase that history. ^[20]

Where does this Piece fit into the Artist's overall Career?

The Madonna and Child is not considered one of the highest profile commissions for Giotto, and is overshadowed by the projects which came just before and just after this work. However, its inclusion of such an iconic image has helped it to remain in our thoughts and it also holds one of the strongest attributions to Giotto of any paintings connected to his hand. At nearly two metres tall, it is an impressive piece but it is this artist's work that resides within major art galleries that tend to receive the most attention, because of the number of people who are able to view them in person. That said, there is something majestic about witnessing one of these early Renaissance pieces within a religious setting, just as was originally intended and so there are still plenty of visitors to the church who are drawn to this particular piece.

Chronology without a fixed itinerary

The following passage again concerns San Giorgio's early chronology. Its proposed route through Assisi, Rome, Florence and Padua must not be read as a dated itinerary proved by the Washington panel. Approximate stylistic dates cannot supply the missing documentary stages of a painter's travels.

What other Artworks did Giotto Produce at around this Time?

This Madonna and Child only has a loose dating of around 1295-1300. The artist moved around a lot in this part of his life, taking in Florence, Rome and Assisi at around this time. He is known to have worked on the Frescoes of the Franciscan Cycle in the Upper Basilica of San Francesco in Assisi in the years leading up to the Madonna depiction and shortly afterwards he would move to Rome in order to complete several frescoes in the loggia of the Lateran for Boniface VIII. Soon afterwards, at the turn of the century, he would head to Florence for the Badia Fiorentina, before then having his first spell in Padua which would play an important role within the next part of his career. The San Giorgio alla Costa itself is to be found in Florence and is believed to have come immediately after his work in Assisi, even though several projects span across each other.

Identifying the large illustration

The large existing image associated with this title shows San Giorgio alla Costa: the Virgin is enthroned, the child is clothed and blessing, and two angels stand behind the throne. Washington's rose Madonna is the half-length painting described at the beginning of this article. A shared subject title does not make the two objects interchangeable.

Large Image of Giotto's Madonna and Child

What the Washington rose means

The rose carries the eye from Mary's hand towards the child, and it also gives the image a theological vocabulary. The National Gallery's overview interprets the white rose as a sign of Mary's purity and of the innocence lost through Original Sin. ^[1] In the scholarly catalogue, Miklós Boskovits offers a related but more specific reading: Mary holds a rose in a variant of the Hodegetria type, the image in which she presents or indicates Christ. He associates the flower with the biblical rose of Sharon and with Mary as an image of the Church, the mystical bride of Christ. ^[20]

The Child grips Mary’s index finger and reaches towards her rose in the Washington painting. National Gallery of Art, Washington, Samuel H. Kress Collection,1939.1.256. Image source. Public domain. Proportionally reduced reproduction; no colour or content enhancement.

These interpretations help explain why an apparently everyday object has a central place in a sacred image. They need not cancel the simplicity of the action. The child reaches towards a flower held close enough to touch. At the same time, his other hand redirects attention towards the finger with which Mary might conventionally have indicated him. Boskovits suggests a sacrificial meaning for this gesture by comparison with related images. That is an interpretation of the pictorial tradition, rather than a fixed translation of every infant grasp into one exclusive message. ^[20]

The painting's intimacy is equally dependent on its arrangement. The dark mantle brings the pale forearm, wrist and fingers forward. The child's torso turns across Mary's body, while her supporting hand provides an answering diagonal. Very little narrative equipment is required. There is no crowded court to distribute the viewer's attention and no architectural setting to measure. The picture offers enough visible bodily weight and contact to make the sacred figures approachable, while gold, halos and the carefully ornamented clothing maintain their distinction.

A painted surface built in layers

The Washington Madonna is painted on a single piece of poplar with its grain running vertically. Later treatment thinned the wood and altered the edges of the arched upper section; the support was cradled in the late 1910s and again in 1937. The catalogue distinguishes the painted surface, 85.4 × 61.8 cm, from the present overall measurement, 87.7 × 63.2 cm including added strips. Those differences matter when imagining an original frame or comparing this panel with proposed companions. ^[21]

X-radiographs reveal fabric between the wooden panel and its white gesso ground. In the gilded areas, the preparation includes a thin layer of green earth followed by red bole. The halos and border were decorated with patterns incised freehand into the gold ground, and the figures' outlines were also incised. The rows of small impressions visible around the halos should be distinguished from a claim that the elaborate ornamental designs were stamped with patterned punches: the catalogue specifically describes freehand incision and the absence of punched motifs in those designs. ^{[20] [21]}

The flesh was also built in stages. A green wash first loosely established the shadows; verdaccio then developed them through fine hatching and broader strokes. Thin, fluid layers completed the modelling. This helps explain how the faces can be softly rounded without losing the precision of the eyes, noses and mouths. It is evidence about this panel's manufacture, rather than a recipe that should be imposed on every work attributed to Giotto. ^[21]

Infrared examination adds something the finished surface cannot readily show: the child's face was adjusted at the underdrawing stage, with the position of his eyes and ear shifted to tilt the head slightly upward. The alteration is small, but it shows that the final relationship of the two heads emerged through a decision made during the work. It does not tell us what Giotto privately felt, or prove that the child's expression records an observed individual. ^[21]

What survives is in generally good condition, according to the technical summary, though the gold has some abrasion. Small losses and woodworm exit holes remain, with losses concentrated in the lower part of Mary's mantle. In 2012, treatment removed discoloured varnish and included inpainting of staining in the mantle. The present legibility of the figures therefore depends partly on modern treatment, while the surviving losses and altered wood remain part of the object. ^[21]

The missing altarpiece

The panel's shape and format have led scholars to understand it as the centre of a dismantled polyptych, an altarpiece assembled from several painted sections. A central Madonna could be accompanied by saints in neighbouring panels, their separate fields of gold forming a larger sacred company. That context would make this surviving exchange between mother and child the focus of a wider ensemble. Its compactness today does not prove that it was conceived as an independent domestic picture. ^[20]

The frequently proposed companions are Saint Stephen in the Museo Horne, Florence, and Saint John the Evangelist and Saint Lawrence at Chaalis, from the Jacquemart-André collection. Roberto Longhi's reconstruction placed the Washington Madonna at the centre with saints on either side and another panel still unidentified. Similarities of size, style and ornament encouraged the association. Differences in panel structure, borders and the proportions of the saints have also prompted objections. A plausible visual reunion remains a reconstruction, rather than a surviving altarpiece or documented commission. ^{[20] [24]}

One objection needs particular care. Boskovits's main catalogue essay argued against a common origin with Saint Stephen partly because the preparation beneath its gilding was thought to differ from Washington's. The catalogue's editors correct that premise: subsequent technical examination found red bole above green earth on Saint Stephen too. Boskovits died before he could incorporate the results, and his submitted text was preserved with editorial qualifications. The supposed difference in gilding preparation consequently cannot serve as a conclusive reason to separate the paintings. Conversely, a shared preparation does not by itself prove that they stood on the same altar. ^[24]

Laurence Kanter's introduction to the catalogue likewise says that the newer technical study tends to support the proposed association while leaving room for disagreement. Chronology is another unresolved part of the comparison. The Museo Horne currently dates Saint Stephen about 1330–35, considerably later than the NGA's approximate 1310–15 for the Madonna. Accepting one museum's label does not automatically date every proposed companion. These differing positions should remain visible until a stronger reconstruction can reconcile them. ^[24]

The original church remains uncertain as well. Santa Croce and Ognissanti in Florence are the two probable possibilities named by the NGA; neither is a securely documented destination. A more precise Santa Croce chapel proposal depended partly on accepting the assembled group of saints, and it encountered questions about whether the proposed altar could accommodate so wide an ensemble. The Washington panel's altered edges and back further limit what the surviving wood can tell us. Naming an original church requires a different kind of evidence from recognizing the intimate gesture at the centre of the picture. ^[20]

From a Paris collection to Washington

The secure modern history is more definite than the proposed medieval setting. The painting belonged to the actor Edouard-Alexandre de Max in Paris and was sold to Duveen Brothers in 1917. By 1920 it belonged to the New York collector Henry Goldman, whose name remains attached to it. It returned to Duveen Brothers in 1937, passed to the Samuel H. Kress Foundation in 1939, and was given to the National Gallery of Art that same year. ^[25]

A story recorded in Edward Fowles's memoirs said that the painting had been given by a pope to an earlier owner's great-aunt. The NGA catalogue expressly notes that corroborating evidence is lacking. It is therefore a story from the picture's collecting history, not an established route from a medieval church to the modern market. The dates of the de Max, Duveen, Goldman and Kress ownerships are the useful framework; the earlier gap should remain visible. ^[25]

The attribution changed during that modern history. The picture was exhibited in New York in 1920 as Bernardo Daddi, and early discussion also assigned it to a painter close to Giotto. Other scholars defended Giotto's authorship, which became widely accepted after its arrival in Washington. The current museum attribution is Giotto, but neither a famous collector's ownership nor a panel's small scale supplies the proof. The catalogue weighs the painting's modelling, gestures, ornament and relationships with other works. ^[20]

Looking alongside Ognissanti

The Ognissanti Madonna offers a productive comparison because it gives the Virgin and Child an altogether different public scale. At 325 × 204 cm, the Uffizi painting encloses them in a throne surrounded by saints and angels. Its child blesses and holds a scroll; flowers appear as offerings carried by angels. Washington brings the flower into Mary's own hand and turns the child's action towards it. The comparison is about the choices made within a familiar sacred subject, not a simple progression from a small, supposedly private picture to a later grand one. ^{[20] [23]}

The Uffizi's present date of about 1300–05 also prevents treating Ognissanti as automatically six years later than Washington. Both works have generated chronological discussion, and approximate labels should retain their approximate character. What remains clear without an exact year is the difference in address: Ognissanti presents an enthroned company, whereas Washington draws the encounter into a close circuit of flower, fingers, cloth and supporting hands. Returning to those details brings the dispersed and debated altarpiece back to the surviving painting itself.