Page:The painters of Florence from the thirteenth to the sixteenth century (1915).djvu/103

1447] style. But they are so much superior to the later work executed by Masolino, that it is difficult to suppose they are by his hand; while their position, on the upper part of the walls above Masaccio's indisputable works, makes it almost impossible that they should have been added after the death of that painter. These reasons go far to justify Crowe and Cavalcaselle's contention, that Masaccio was the author of all the frescoes now remaining in the Brancacci Chapel, and that the differences we discern in the earlier and later works are only the result of the same artist's gradual development and emancipation from his master's style—such as we see, for instance, in the case of Raphael. Certainly the Crucifixion in the Mond collection, or the St. Sebastian at Bergamo, come as near to Perugino's manner as these three frescoes do to that of Masolino. When Albertini and Vasari state that half of the Chapel was painted by Masolino, and half by Masaccio, they probably allude to the destroyed frescoes of the roof and lunettes, which were undoubtedly Masolino's work; while in the case of the three doubtful subjects, the scholar may well have made use of cartoons prepared by the master before he was called away.

Masolino's presence in Florence in 1425, is proved by a small payment made to him by a Guild connected with the Carmine Church; but in the same year he went to Hungary, at the request of Filippo Scolari, a Florentine soldier who had defeated the Turks and risen to high distinction in the service of Sigismund, king of Hungary. This bold Ghibelline leader, now Obergespan or Hospodar of Temeswar in Hungary, popularly known in his old home as