Timeline

Giotto's career stretches from the great painted crosses of late thirteenth-century Italy to the foundation of Florence's cathedral bell tower in 1334. Between them stand the Scrovegni Chapel, ambitious altarpieces, family chapels, royal employment and a surprisingly substantial record of property and business. Some dates belong to surviving documents; others are estimates attached to paintings whose contracts have disappeared. Reading those kinds of evidence together gives a fuller picture than a sequence of masterpieces alone.

The timeline below keeps that distinction visible. Documented date identifies a dated record, Approximate date a proposed range, and Disputed dating a significant disagreement. Later account marks testimony written after the event it describes. A payment can establish employment without dating every brushstroke, while an appointment can precede the recipient's arrival. For the continuous life story, see the Giotto biography; for comparisons among the pictures, see Giotto's paintings.

Dates at a glance

• c.1265–1267: uncertain birth and early training
• Late 1200s–c.1300: crosses, early panels and Assisi
• By 1301: Florentine property
• c.1300–1305: Ognissanti and Padua
• 1309–1312: debt, legal standing and a loom
• c.1310–1320: panels, Peruzzi and Roman commissions
• 1315–1326: land, guild and family
• After 1317: the Bardi Chapel
• 1328–1333: Baroncelli and royal employment in Naples
• c.1330–1335: Bologna and Saint Stephen
• 1334–1335: civic office and the Campanile
• Mid-1330s–1337: Milan, death and burial
• After 1337: completion, commemoration and conservation

c.1265–1267: a birth estimate, followed by an undocumented apprenticeship

Approximate date. Giotto's birth is usually placed around 1265 or 1267. Neither is a certified birthday. The familiar 1267 calculation depends on the Florentine poet Antonio Pucci's statement that Giotto died in his seventieth year. Pucci wrote within a few decades of the painter's death, making his testimony valuable, but seventy could also express a conventional full lifespan. Michael Viktor Schwarz and Pia Theis accordingly question whether it should be treated as precise arithmetic. Vasari's much later 1276 date presents a further difficulty rather than a second securely documented possibility. ^[1]

Vespignano in the Mugello belongs to the tradition of Giotto's origins, and his later property there is documented. That does not identify an authenticated birth house. The archival family evidence instead brings Florence into focus: his father Bondone was a blacksmith, and a brother, Martino, followed the same occupation. This gives the young painter a credible urban craftsman's background without supplying the missing details of his education. ^[1]

Later account. The child drawing sheep and attracting Cimabue's attention is an influential story, preserved in later biographical writing. It has no securely dated contemporary discovery record. A timeline therefore cannot responsibly give a year for that encounter, Giotto's entry into Cimabue's workshop, or his graduation to independent master. His relationship with earlier Florentine painting can be examined in the works; the childhood episode belongs to the history of his reputation. ^[4]

Late thirteenth century: early panels and the Santa Maria Novella cross

Approximate date. The Madonna from San Giorgio alla Costa is an important early reference point. Its current Opera del Duomo record gives approximately 1288–1295, while the accompanying description centres on about 1295. These are catalogue estimates, informed by the painting and its relationships with other works. They do not come from a surviving contract naming the day the panel was delivered. ^[5]

The Santa Maria Novella Crucifix; its execution date remains disputed.

Disputed dating. The Santa Maria Novella Crucifix makes the dating problem particularly clear. The church's public account proposes 1288–1289. Its historical archive note allows a first-decade-of-the-fourteenth-century date, with a secure boundary before 1312. Schwarz argues for 1298–1301 through comparisons and a reconstruction of the painter's early career. These positions should remain distinct; combining them into an apparently agreed date would conceal the question. ^[6]

The cross itself explains why this early phase matters. Christ's lowered head, bent legs and downward weight make the body seem suspended from its support. Small figures of Mary and John occupy the ends of the horizontal beam. Looking at the object gives substance to a discussion of Giotto's early achievement, even where a precise year remains elusive. Its large scale also belongs to a public church setting, quite different from a small panel intended for close inspection.

The firmer historical anchor comes later: a 1312 testament provided for a lamp associated with the cross, and a related 1314 account named Giotto as its maker. A bequest to illuminate an existing image establishes its presence and esteem; it need not identify the person who originally commissioned the painting. ^[6]

c.1290s, or a proposed later campaign: the Upper Church at Assisi

Disputed dating. The twenty-eight scenes of Francis's life in the Upper Church of San Francesco at Assisi are often placed in the 1290s. They have also generated unusually persistent arguments over both date and authorship. The basilica's own account acknowledges competing Giotto and Roman-school positions. Treating the whole sequence as twenty-eight unquestionably autograph paintings would suppress a central part of its history. ^[7]

Schwarz proposes a different sequence: a first campaign around 1308, with Paduan ideas transmitted either through Giotto's limited direction or through a former assistant, followed by further work. His proposal depends on the organisation of the paintings, their stylistic differences and the direction of relationships with other cycles. It is a named scholarly reconstruction, rather than a newly established consensus replacing the earlier chronology. ^[7]

The distinction has a large consequence. In one reconstruction, Assisi helps explain the development towards Padua; in another, knowledge of Padua helps explain Assisi. These are competing accounts of the relationship between the cycles. Neither establishes Giotto's continuous residence in a city throughout the proposed painting range.

Around 1300: Rimini and an early reputation across cities

Approximate date. Rimini's municipal account places Giotto's visit around 1300 and dates the surviving painted crucifix to the end of the thirteenth century. It remains in the church originally dedicated to San Francesco, later transformed into the Tempio Malatestiano. The surviving cross and the possibility of a lost fresco cycle are different kinds of evidence: one is an extant object; the other is a partially recoverable historical commission. ^[8]

An early-fourteenth-century writer, Riccobaldo of Ferrara, names Giotto's works at Assisi, Rimini and Padua, including the Arena Chapel and Padua's communal palace. His testimony shows that Giotto's name was already attached to work across several cities. It does not establish exact arrival and departure dates, identify the hand behind every surviving Assisi scene, or guarantee that all the works he knew remain intact. ^[9]

By 1301: a Florentine house

Documented date. Giotto is named as the owner of a house in the parish of Santa Maria Novella by 1301. Later records identify tenants and further references to his property. The painter who travelled for major commissions also had a financial and social connection with Florence that can be followed independently of the dates assigned to his pictures. ^[9]

Property records supply something that stylistic chronology often cannot: a particular legal relationship at a particular time. Even so, owning a house is different from occupying it every day. This evidence neither proves uninterrupted Florentine residence nor establishes a marriage date. It does make the familiar image of an artist wholly detached from business and ordinary urban affairs difficult to sustain.

c.1300–1305: the Ognissanti Madonna

Approximate date. The Uffizi currently dates the Ognissanti Madonna to about 1300–1305. The frequently repeated date around 1310 belongs to a different chronological assessment. The museum's present range is useful because it identifies the position adopted by the current collection record; it should not be silently averaged with the later date. ^[10]

The picture is tempera on a gold-ground wooden panel. Its tall throne, the substantial body of Mary and the tiers of partly concealed saints give this traditional subject a powerful sense of occupied space. At the bottom, kneeling angels offer flowers. This is a different undertaking from decorating a chapel wall, even though the panel's proposed range overlaps the Paduan commission.

Its original position within Ognissanti remains uncertain. A possible side-altar or screen setting is not a documented installation. The chronological lesson is that overlapping ranges do not necessarily conflict: they may reflect limited precision in our knowledge, different phases of production, or the work of an organised workshop. They do not by themselves recover a day-by-day itinerary. ^[10]

c.1303–1305: painting the Scrovegni Chapel; 1305: consecration

Approximate date and documented ceremonial anchor. Padua's official account dates the principal decoration of the Scrovegni Chapel to 1303–1305. The chapel's history also records an initial dedication in 1303 and its consecration in 1305. Construction, the painting campaign and consecration concern related stages in the life of the building, rather than three interchangeable dates for the same event. ^[11]

The Padua Lamentation within the chapel campaign conventionally dated 1303–05.

The programme covers the interior with the lives of Mary and Christ, a starry vault, opposing Virtues and Vices, and the Last Judgement. It is a particularly useful chronological anchor because much of the larger decorative setting survives. We can see how individual narratives belong to one room, while still allowing that different parts demanded different working methods and assistance.

In the Lamentation, a rocky slope directs attention towards Mary's encounter with the dead Christ. Back-turned mourners fill the foreground, John extends his arms, and grieving angels break across the blue sky. These details show the concentration of gesture and bodily presence achieved in this campaign. They cannot, however, assign a precise day to the scene or establish an assistant headcount.

The chapel's patron was Enrico Scrovegni. Its devotional purpose, family representation and concern for salvation belong together. Explanations centred entirely on repentance for usury have been challenged in scholarship; the dates of foundation and decoration do not independently prove a single motive or a securely identified theological adviser. ^[12]

1309–1312: an Assisi debt, legal capacity and a rented loom

Documented dates. A 1309 Assisi debt record connects Giotto with the painter Palmerino. It provides a valuable documentary link with the city. It is not a commission contract for the Upper Church's twenty-eight Franciscan scenes, and the existence of the debt does not resolve which surviving passages Giotto painted. ^[9]

In 1311 a Florentine notarial record identifies Giotto as an emancipated son of Bondone. The term concerns legal capacity within the family. It does not mean that Giotto had only just become an independent artist: his reputation and substantial commissions already preceded it. Medieval family law and the development of a painter's career ran on different timetables. ^[13]

The following year brings a notably concrete business transaction: Giotto rented a French loom to a worker named Bartolus Rinuccii. The document places him within the material economy of a textile-producing city, alongside his activity as a painter. It supports an account of investment beyond painting without requiring spectacular calculations of his profit or invented conclusions about the treatment of the worker. ^[13]

These modest records help explain the texture of the chronology. Painting commissions survive unevenly, while debt, rent and family obligations can leave a precise written trace. A year with a property transaction and no securely dated masterpiece is still part of the life.

c.1310–1320: small panels with separate catalogue dates

Approximate dates. The Washington National Gallery of Art dates its rose-bearing Madonna and Child, accession 1939.1.256, to c.1310/1315. This is the intimate image in which the child reaches for a flower and holds his mother's finger. It is distinct from both the early San Giorgio Madonna and the monumental Ognissanti panel. ^[14]

The London National Gallery's Pentecost, NG5360, is catalogued as Giotto and Workshop, probably about 1310–1318. Its compact architecture separates the gathered apostles from people listening outside. It belongs to a dispersed group of small Christ narratives, rather than being the fresco of the same subject in Padua. ^[15]

One associated panel, the Metropolitan Museum's Adoration of the Magi, accession 11.126.1, carries the museum's own qualified date, possibly about 1320. That small panel combines the reclining Mary and newborn child with the approaching kings. Its catalogue date should remain visible alongside London's broader, earlier range. A proposed common original ensemble does not make all modern catalogue dates identical. ^[16]

These are not the dates of the biblical events represented. They are estimates for the making of particular objects. Repeated subjects make that distinction essential: the Metropolitan panel and the Padua Adoration have different supports, settings and histories.

c.1311–1315, or a much later fresco campaign? The Peruzzi problem

Approximate date. The North Carolina Museum of Art dates the Peruzzi Altarpiece to about 1311–1315. Christ blessing occupies the centre, with Mary and saints beneath the other gables. The combination of John the Baptist, John the Evangelist and Francis supports a proposed origin in the Peruzzi family's chapel at Santa Croce. That destination is an argument from the ensemble, rather than a surviving commission contract. ^[17]

Disputed dating. The Peruzzi wall paintings are a separate work. Santa Croce's current account proposes c.1310–1311 for their paired stories of the two Johns. Schwarz instead argues for 1334–1336, chiefly through relationships with Andrea Pisano's Baptistery door and the character of Giotto's late work. ^[18]

These are rival dates for the same surviving cycle, rather than evidence of two separate painting campaigns. Schwarz's further suggestion that the range might narrow to 1334–1335 depends on assumptions about the beginning and location of Peruzzi devotional observances. The records of those observances do not themselves name a fresco completion date. ^[18]

The disagreement affects the shape of the whole career. An early date places the cycle near the aftermath of Padua; a late date makes it part of the final Florentine years. Its damaged, largely dry-ground painting also complicates visual comparison. A timeline can show the competing positions clearly without pretending that the absence of a contract has been overcome.

1315–1320: Mugello land and the painters' matriculation list

Documented dates. Landholding around Vespignano becomes particularly visible in records of 1315 and 1318. Giotto dealt with properties, debts and representatives; members of his family increasingly appear in the same local record. This rural connection is substantial, but it does not retrospectively certify Vespignano as his birthplace. ^[19]

Schwarz and Theis suggest that a period of acquisition might reflect the investment of a large painting fee, possibly associated with the Bardi Chapel. That is a plausible historical interpretation, not a payment document naming the chapel. The date of a purchase cannot simply be transferred to the frescoes as their documented completion. ^[19]

In 1320 Giotto heads a new list of painters within the Arte dei Medici e Speziali, the physicians' and apothecaries' guild. The position of his name suggests unusual prominence, although the list's ordering is not fully explained. A different register began in 1312 and later incorporated painters' names; its opening year is not proof that Giotto personally enrolled in 1312. The institutional change and his actual surviving entries need to be distinguished. ^[20]

1324–1326, with a further mention in 1331: family and ecclesiastical connections

Documented dates. In 1324 a papal provision benefited Giotto's son Bondone, also recorded as Donato. The alternative name belongs to the documents; it need not be explained through a speculative linguistic derivation. The provision reveals the family's access to ecclesiastical networks, including a Stefaneschi connection. It establishes such relationships by that date, without dating every painting made for the same patrons. ^[21]

The family evidence also changes how neatly a biographical timeline can be written. Seven children are documented: Bice, Bondone/Donato, Caterina, Chiara, Francesco, Lucia and Nicola. That means seven recoverable individuals, not necessarily every child ever born. Their later legal affairs reveal different activities and connections, including clerical careers and a painter son-in-law. ^[21]

Ciuta di Lapi Pele appears as Giotto's wife in documents of 1326 and 1331. Those mentions establish the marriage at those moments; they do not supply its beginning. An exact wedding year remains unknown. Ciuta's later involvement in the estate also shows why the painter's death does not end the family's documentary story. ^[21]

After 1317: the Bardi Chapel

Disputed dating, with a firm lower boundary. The Bardi Chapel paintings must follow 1317, the year Louis of Toulouse, represented on the rear wall, was canonised. Santa Croce's current historical dossier retains that boundary while acknowledging continuing disagreement over the exact date. Schwarz and Theis associate the commission with the period around 1320; Miklós Boskovits discusses a common placement around 1325. These remain scholarly positions within an unresolved chronology. ^[22]

Here Giotto and his workshop present Francis's life through six large side-wall scenes, with the Stigmatisation above the entrance and further figures on the rear wall and vault. This is a different ensemble from the Upper Church cycle at Assisi. Shared subjects cannot transfer the date, authorship or conservation history of one programme to the other.

The probable patron is Ridolfo de' Bardi. Both the family's patronage and the chapel's position within Santa Croce matter to its history, but an open dating range is more informative than an invented year of commencement. It allows the visible work, iconographic boundary and surviving documentary context to be considered together. ^[22]

Around 1320: the Stefaneschi Triptych and a less secure date for the Navicella

Approximate date. The Vatican Museums date the Stefaneschi Triptych to around 1320, with their description giving 1315–1320, and attribute it to Giotto with assistants. Cardinal Jacopo Stefaneschi commissioned the double-sided altarpiece for Old Saint Peter's. Its two faces accommodated different viewpoints; the patron is represented holding a model of the painting. ^[23]

The cardinal also commissioned the Navicella mosaic. The often cited 1298 date reaches us indirectly and remains problematic. The early commission, its later copies and the heavily reworked mosaic now seen at Saint Peter's require separate treatment. An image of the present mosaic cannot supply an untouched visual record of what Giotto made, and the triptych's date does not settle that of the mosaic. ^[24]

After 1328: the Baroncelli polyptych

Approximate date with an architectural boundary. Santa Croce dates the Baroncelli Polyptych after the chapel's foundation in 1328 and identifies Giotto and his workshop. Its signature, naming the work of Master Giotto, is important evidence of the commission's identity. It does not settle the allocation of every figure among the painters. ^[25]

The Baroncelli Polyptych, dated by Santa Croce after the chapel’s 1328 foundation.

The crowded ranks of saints and musical angels spread across the panel divisions towards the central Coronation of the Virgin. The rectangular upper frame seen today belongs to later remodelling: the original pointed compartments were altered in the late fifteenth century, and the removed central pinnacle is now in San Diego. Dating the panel and dating its present framing are therefore different tasks. ^[25]

8 December 1328: a salary order in Naples

Documented date. A royal order of 8 December 1328 instructed payment of Giotto's monthly salary, effective from 1 December. The published documentary text reads December, resolving a September date repeated in some accounts. It establishes royal employment by the end of 1328 without recovering the precise date he entered Naples. ^[2]

The Neapolitan texts survive through their transmission and publication; they should not be imagined as newly inspected original parchments. Their practical detail nevertheless gives this part of the timeline a different character from an approximate panel date. Giotto was working within King Robert of Anjou's court and its machinery of salaries, supplies and accounting.

20 January 1330 and 20 May 1331: court standing and workshop expenditure

Documented dates. On 20 January 1330 Giotto was received as a royal familiar. This was a place within the king's household, accompanied by honours and privileges. It is not a record of knighthood. ^[2]

An account dated 20 May 1331 records expenditure involving decoration of the large and private chapels at Castel Nuovo, and a panel made in Giotto's lodging. Giotto appears as the leading master, alongside payments to other painters and manual workers. Gold, gilded tin and other materials make the work tangible even where the paintings themselves have largely disappeared. ^[2]

The document's final dating clause gives 1331. A conflicting 1330 reference in narrative summary should not override it. Nor does a single account date mean that every item was purchased or every painting completed on that day. It gathers expenses from a working enterprise, revealing organisation and collaboration more securely than the full appearance of the lost decorations. Further records carry Neapolitan payments into 1333, without filling every interval with a known location for the master. ^[26]

c.1330–1335: Bologna and the Horne Saint Stephen

Approximate dates. The Pinacoteca Nazionale di Bologna dates its signed Bologna Polyptych to about 1330 and describes production by Giotto and his workshop, probably in Florence. Its account proposes an original destination in the papal palace's great chapel near Porta Galliera. Schwarz favours a different context involving Santa Maria degli Angeli and the Pepoli family. These competing reconstructions affect how the painting is placed within Giotto's late commissions. ^[27]

Bologna Polyptych

The reverse of the central panel bears a graffito read as referring to 1326. Schwarz explicitly cautions against treating it as though Giotto had formally signed the front and dated the back. It cannot supply a certified execution year. A portable altarpiece might also travel without its maker: its destination alone does not establish a personal visit on a particular date. ^[27]

The Museo Horne dates its Saint Stephen to about 1330–1335 and proposes that the panel may have belonged to an altarpiece at Santa Croce. Attempts to associate it with the Washington Madonna remain a reconstruction problem. The differing current catalogue dates should remain attached to their respective objects, rather than being forced into one agreed ensemble chronology. ^[28]

12 April 1334: Florence appoints Giotto to civic building responsibilities

Documented date. The Florentine decision of 12 April 1334 appointed Giotto to responsibilities extending across Santa Reparata, the city's walls and fortifications, and other communal building works. This was broader than the bell tower alone. The document's praise also makes clear that the city valued the prestige and knowledge of the famous painter. ^[3]

The cathedral bell tower Giotto began, with its later completed elevation.

Its invitation wording treats Giotto as someone to be welcomed home. The appointment therefore does not independently prove that he stood in Florence on that exact day. Office, return and physical work on the building have related but separate chronologies.

The name Santa Reparata belongs to the cathedral context of the record. Giotto's appointment does not make him the author of the entire cathedral as it now stands. The later dome, later architectural phases and nineteenth-century facade fall outside his lifetime work. The cathedral history and the Campanile explain those distinctions in greater detail.

18 July 1334: the Campanile foundation, as reported by Villani

Contemporary chronicle account. Giovanni Villani reports that the new bell tower's foundation began on 18 July 1334, with a public ceremony involving bishop, clergy and civic authorities. His chronicle was written close to the events; it supplies a different kind of evidence from the April administrative decision. The two dates concern appointment and foundation respectively. ^[29]

Giotto began the tower, but the complete building visible today incorporates the work of successors. Its marble patterns, sculptural levels and large upper windows belong to a long construction history. Neither its enduring nickname nor a photograph of the completed tower proves that Giotto designed every visible feature or carved its reliefs.

12 December 1335: a witness in the cathedral workshop

Documented date. A notarial record made at Santa Reparata on 12 December 1335 names Giotto Bondonis, painter, as a witness. The transaction acknowledged a small pious bequest to the cathedral works. It supplies a fixed Florentine point in the final phase of his life. ^[30]

Its value is partly its modesty. A person identified in an ordinary transaction can locate the painter more firmly than a wide stylistic range assigned to a prestigious picture. It still leaves the surrounding months open: the record cannot turn an incompletely known late career into a continuous itinerary.

Mid-1330s: service in Milan

Near-contemporary account; precise itinerary uncertain. Villani says Florence sent Giotto to serve the lord of Milan and that the painter returned before his death. The Milanese ruler was Azzone Visconti, who should not be given the later title Duke of Milan. The chronicle establishes the episode more securely than its exact duration or the full appearance of the lost decoration. ^[29]

This service belongs near the end of the career, alongside the Florentine building office. It does not justify assigning Giotto an uninterrupted Milan residence between invented arrival and departure dates. The gaps remain real even in the best-documented final years.

8 January 1337: death in Florence

Near-contemporary account. Villani records Giotto's death on 8 January 1336 in Florentine year reckoning, corresponding to 8 January 1337 in modern dating. Florence began its year in March, so January belonged to the preceding numbered year. The apparent disagreement between 1336 and 1337 can therefore be a calendar difference rather than contradictory evidence of two death dates. ^[29]

Villani also reports burial with great civic honour in Santa Reparata. The burial, the later commemorative monument and the modern identification of excavated bones are separate questions. Schwarz and Theis caution that the proposed skeletal identification has not securely established Giotto's remains. It should not be used to give the timeline an authenticated physical portrait or medical conclusion. ^[31]

After 1337: the tower, the remembered artist and the surviving surfaces

1359: completion by successors. Andrea Pisano and Francesco Talenti continued the Campanile after Giotto's death. The Opera del Duomo dates its completion to 1359 under Talenti, whose crowning terrace varied the initial project. The tower's completed silhouette thus belongs to Giotto's legacy as well as to the history of later builders. ^[32]

Fourteenth and fifteenth centuries: literary fame. Giotto had already appeared in Dante's Purgatorio, where Oderisi speaks of the changing fame of Cimabue and Giotto within a meditation on pride. Later, Boccaccio and Ghiberti helped shape the painter's remembered character and origins. The dates of these literary witnesses belong to reception history; their stories do not become contemporary records of childhood merely because later writers repeated them. ^[4]

1490: a cathedral memorial. Benedetto da Maiano was paid in 1490 for the sculptural commemoration of Giotto in Florence Cathedral. Its inscription praises the revival of painting and the tower. The monument shows how strongly Florence had claimed him as an exemplary citizen and artist more than a century after his death. Its portrait is commemorative, rather than a securely documented likeness taken from life. ^[33]

1851 and 1957–1959: the Bardi paintings reappear and change again. Uncovering beneath limewash began in 1851, followed by Gaetano Bianchi's extensive restoration. In 1957–1959, Ugo Procacci and Leonetto Tintori removed nineteenth-century additions, exposing both original painting and major losses. The 2022–2026 campaign pursued preservation and improved legibility together. These dates explain why photographs made at different moments can show different versions of an apparently identical scene. ^[22]

2001–2002: conservation at Padua. The major Scrovegni campaign belongs to the modern history of the chapel, alongside subsequent monitoring and maintenance. It helps preserve the paintings as a connected environment rather than isolated famous images. ^[34] Following Giotto through time therefore also means following the later lives of his works: altered frames, rebuilt architecture, damaged surfaces and careful conservation all stand between their making and their appearance today.