The “triptych” of the Collegiate
I used the words “was” and “were” because this precious work was stolen in 1977 and disappeared without a trace. In 2002, the central and right panels were discovered in a farmhouse in the province of Mantova, but the left panel containing St. Ambrose remains missing. The frame that held the three panels together no longer exists. The panels have large edges that remain unpainted and circular holes 8 cm. deep where kingpins were used to hold it up.  It does not appear that the frame was removed during a restoration performed by D. Podio and C. Matteucci in 1959/1960, under the direction of C. Maltese². During the restoration the existing damage was repaired with ocher stucco and the repainting was removed. These repairs can be seen in the restoration of the horse’s belly. Following the discovery of 2002, the panels were partially covered with Japanese tissue to prevent falling pictorial material. However, the panels appear to be in a good state of conservation because the fractures, which affect the surface and the wooden support (the most extensive of which appear in the Virgin’s panel), run along the parts plastered in the restoration of 1959/1960. More damage is seen in various other points of the existing panels, which occurred subsequent to the theft, leaving exposed a mixture of plaster and glue on the canvas, which were used to coat the wood so that it may retain the paint. Both panels display several incisions, especially on the outlines of the figures and clothing; in the latter case they do not often coincide with the painted folds. The gold background is made with a technique called clay bole. The triptych’s measure, before part of it went missing and including the original frame, was 1.12 x 1.93 x 0.09 m. The central chestnut panel measured 1.12 x 0.625 x 0.029 m.; and the right panel made of walnut measured 1.11 x 0.63 x 0.029 m.
Due to its form and dimension, the triptych could be considered a “dossale” or a “paliotto” and could be placed upon or under an altar. However, no other paintings compare to the Italian painting, as all contemporary examples are not structured as three separate panels³. Usually this division is typically made into a unique panel, or eventually divided by painted frames⁴. As M. Boskovits noted, the triptych of Amaseno is a rare occurrence because “forse per la mancanza di autorevoli prototipi, il maestro laziale non segue l’abituale impianto compositivo,” suggesting almost a premonition of later sacred conversations, in regards to the figures’ unusual dynamism (St. Nicholas offering up the book and St Ambrose mounting a horse, which is walking gravely towards the right)⁵.
Although incorrectly hypothesized to have been mounted upon a high alter, the triptych was in fact hung in the aisles of the church. In a Visita apostolica of 1580, before the Tridentine ordering, an altar of Saints Ambrose and Nicholas was mentioned⁶.
The work under examination is very interesting regarding both iconographic and stylistic viewpoints. in the central panel the Virgin is seated stiffly on a richly embellished throne without a back; she is wearing a red tunic with folds of matching tones and a blue maphorion with a golden hem and four stars. A crown made up of three peltas, of which the central is the highest, is on her head. She holds the Child with her left hand and has her right arm stretched out in front of him. Christ is lined up with the Mother, but is turned towards his right. He is wearing a contrasting tunic under a golden cloak. He is holding a book in his left hand and with his right hand he could possibly be blessing St. Ambrose. The left panel displays St. Nicholas of Bari, who is wearing an episcopal dress and accessories (chasuble, stole, mitre, pastoral) and on the right is St. Ambrose who must not be confused with the bishop of Milan. He is a local saint, a roman centurion who was martyred in Ferentino (in the province of Frosinone, not far from Amaseno), and therefore became the patron of the town⁷. The saint is portrayed as a horseman: he is wearing a pale blue tunic below a red cloak, knotted on the right shoulder, and swirling backwards, leading to his boots. In his right hand he grips a spear with two red banners, barely visible in the upper level of the painting. Whereas in his left hand he holds the reins to the horse, who walks gravely towards the right, turning his muzzle downwards. The animal’s harness is carefully designed and the red cloth is decorated with a çintamani design.
The triptych has not earned exhaustive critical feedback, but has always been limited to cursory judgments. Tomassetti briefly mentioned it as a work of the fifteenth century⁸. The first presentation of the triptych was the result of C. Maltese, who presented it in an exhibition catalogue in 1961, where it was revealed after the restoration of 1959/1960. The scholar detected within the work “echi della precedente pittura benedettina della Campania settentrionale,” affinity in the frescoes “della navata del duomo di Anagni” and believes that it was made by «un autore immune da inflessioni derivanti dalla capitale»⁹. More radical is E.B. Garrison’s telegraphic opinion that “is Latian of between 1280 and 1300, under both Florentine and Campanian influence”¹⁰. Recently, M. Mihályi drew attention to St Ambrose’s iconography¹¹; while, G. Leone proposed a date of the panel’s execution in the late quarter of the thirteenth century, considering this work in light of southern Italy’s art which in the 13th c. was exposed to the influences of Norman Sicily, as well as other so-called crusaders¹².
The briefly mentioned critiques have brought to light a composite, perhaps even eclectic, character of this painting. First, as already noted, this is a particular type of “triptych”; then the presence of holy horseman, still remains an unicum in the western panel painting until the end of the 13th century. Furthermore, St. Nicholas shows a canonical iconography (despite the uncommon charitable gesture, he is strongly connected to the dynamic nature of the triptych). The Virgin is also represented in a very particular manner. She is dressed with a traditional chromatic (red-blue, although contrariwise) and modest style robes. She wears a golden crown on her head which is a royal symbol that along with the rich garments, regularly occurs in the representations of the Madonna Regina (Basilissa), according to a Roman pictorial tradition, but is also widespread in Campania and Abruzzo¹³.
All the works that can be related to these regions show the Virgin as having a crown resting directly upon her hair or as having a veil that extends down to her shoulders. Despite having preserved some rare and unusual exceptions of 13th century art¹⁴, the Amaseno iconography seems to be linked to a late, more highly paradigmatic image, as the Madonna incoronata. This image appears in the apse of S. Maria Maggiore in Rome and was created by Jacopo Torriti from 1291 till 1296¹⁵. The Madonna incoronata would not be a revival of the typological crown, but a model that would quickly become a normative and widely popular in the innumerous works representing the Incoronazioni della Vergine¹⁶.
Scholars have discussed the affiliation of St. Ambrose with the art of crusaders or of southern Italy. It is evident that the Ferentino patron is derived from the images of holy horsemen, which were venerated by the military orders of the Holy Land¹⁷. The banner that waves from the spear, sadly without its interior decoration¹⁸, provides evidence of this fact. Other proof is the fact that military saints in the West were generally represented standing with the palm of martyr. In Italy, this particular worship is especially widespread in Puglia, along the Crusaders’ routes, but only surviving in mural paintings¹⁹. However, in this case, it is difficult to assume that the Collegiate panels are a “crusader” work or a work of southern Italy. We must remember that St. Ambrose is not included in the Amaseno triptych in order to pay homage to its patron, St. Lawrence, but to the saint of Ferentino.
It is improbable that in this small center the first iconography of holy horsemen were created, because this iconography was heavily worshiped in another large town. Unfortunately, we do not have any knowledge of other previous portrayals of St. Ambrose, but it is plausible that Amaseno looked to Ferentino for inspiration, but the opposite does not hold true. It is also possible that the holy horseman became elaborated upon during the thirteenth century, emulating a model not far from the mural painting of Puglia but consistent with the icons widespread in the Holy Land²⁰ and perhaps arriving in Ferentino following the crusaders or other incidents of contact with the East²¹. Continuing with the idea of the Crusader, it is possible that they decided to connect the patron with these horsemen who fight for Christianity. In Amaseno, the Ferentino prototype (now lost) was quickly copied as an image of reference for the saint, to whom  they wanted to  pay homage.
From a stylistic point of view, the triptych is the work of a good artist, who can draw on formal solutions of other artistic media, such as the miniature and goldsmithery, as seen in the little palm decorations on the throne and on the cover of St. Nicholas’ book. In fact, these stylistic details seem to imitate tooled leather because of their luminescent quality and ornate refinement. The gems on the throne of the Virgin seem to be set according to the griffes technique, as if it was a golden object.
Scholars have rightly drawn attention to the southern/Sicilian component of the triptych, which is essentially the late Comnenian style that spread from Monreale to the Italian peninsula in the first half of the 13th century²². It is a style that has an important clout in both Rome’s and Lazio’s paintings, from the mosaics of Grottaferrata to the frescoes of Anagni’s crypt. The garments of the Child have rigid geometric folds and his thickset face, marked by a large nose and a red mouth, can be compared with some figures of the Aula Gotica of SS. Quattro Coronati in Rome²³. Another late Comnenian “clue” is the anatomical definition in the Virgin’s hands, which brings to mind another pragmatic work, the great hand of the Pantocrator in the Monreale apse. These elements, however, seem chilled and outdated in regards to the vitality of the works of the first half of thirteenth century; for example, they lack the color freshness of Anagni. The weasel-face of the Virgin, the red robes which are loose-fitting and in matching tones, and evidence of some optic problems, seen especially in the halo of the Child, put this triptych in the second half of the thirteenth century. The Collegiate pulpit bears an inscription of some local artists that shows the completion of this work and the whole building in 1291²⁴. The frescoes on the vaulted ceiling and the lunettes of the church’s presbytery are related to this period. Despite their poor condition, the frescoes are very similar to the panels; above all there is a striking similarity between the triptych and the Virgin of the Presentazione al tempio in the lunette. Although these paintings are not studied, F. Gandolfo compared them with the first layer of Grottaferrata’s frescoes²⁵. In our triptych, however, only some elements appear to be referring to the decorations of the roman monastery. The artist chosen to make the panels was recommended by the commissioner and perhaps even came from Grottaferrata. He used an outdated style for the panels, yet this style, in the wake of late Comnenian art, was common to both southern Italy and the Roman paintings of the thirteenth century.