The Florentine Painters of the Renaissance With An Index To Their Works — Context and Discussion

Attribution as Argument

Berenson's prefaces foreground the mechanics of attribution. He inserts Jacopo del Sellajo 'for the first time,' citing articles by Hans Makowsky, Mary Logan, and Herbert Horne—an acknowledgment that his catalog depends on a network of specialists. The inclusion of Cimabue and revised lists for Giotto stem from Cavallini's fresco at S. Cecilia in Rome, which 'illuminated with an unhoped-for light the problem of Giotto's origin.' Berenson does not simply list works; he signals the reasoning behind each change, making the index a record of scholarly debate.

The Problem of Misattribution

A recurring concern is the confusion of minor masters with greater ones. Botticini, Berenson notes, 'sounds too much like Botticelli not to have been confounded with him'; Pier Francesco Fiorentino has been 'similarly confused with Piero della Francesca.' He cites specific examples: Botticini's 'Assumption' in the National Gallery 'already passed in Vasari's time for a Botticelli,' and a 'Nativity' at Karlsruhe attributed to Piero della Francesca is 'surely nothing more than the echo of the real author's name.' The catalog thus functions as a corrective, disentangling tenth-rate painters from their illustrious neighbors.

Structure and Scope

The body of the work is a dense list of artists and their works, with locations ranging from major museums (Uffizi, Pitti, Berlin) to private collections (Conte Niccolini, Mr. Charles Butler). Each entry typically includes a title, date, and location, sometimes with inventory numbers. Berenson does not provide analysis of individual paintings; the index is the argument. The third edition expands to include artists like Amico di Sandro, 'partly for the intrinsic value of their work, and partly because so many of their pictures are exposed to public admiration under greater names.' The book is a reference tool for those who already know the paintings.

Readers should approach this edition as a snapshot of early twentieth-century connoisseurship, not a definitive catalog. Berenson's attributions have been debated and revised since 1909, and the index reflects his personal judgments. The prefaces offer the clearest insight into his method: a blend of visual analysis, archival research, and reliance on a community of scholars. For students of Florentine painting, the value lies less in the lists themselves than in the questions they raise about how we assign authorship to Renaissance art.