Mary, Mother of Jesus Christ Mason, John Mitchell
THE NEW SCHAFF-IIERZOG
(certainly before the time of Constantine) , keep close to scriptural lines; and the same is true of the numerous representations of the Adoration of the Magi, such as those in the catacomb of Domitilla and in SS. Pietro e Marcellino. Not even where Mary appears simply with her Child or in the Holy Family are there any traces in those early days of her elevation to a supernatural dignity; and the influence of Apocryphal legends enters comparatively late into art. The commemoration of Mary by architectural monuments dedicated to her can not be clearly shown before the fifth century, especially the time of the triumph of the Theotokos-doctrine at Ephesus in 431. The church in which the council met received at that time its dedication to " the Holy Mother of God." The first church with this dedication at Rome, Santa Maria Maggiore, was built soon after 432 by Sixtus III. on the site of a basilica erected a century earlier by Liberius and dedicated for the first time to the Virgin by Sixtus. It is at least half a century earlier than Santa Maria in Trastevere, of which the first written record dates from 499. Not till the eighth or ninth century does the legend of the Assumption begin to influence the imagination of artists. About the same time were made some extant representations of the figure of Mary enthroned in heaven holding her Child, such as the mosaics put up about 816 by Paschal I. in the churches of St. Cecilia and Santa Maria della Navicella. But the attribution of actually regal attributes to her does not yet occur in this period of transition to the Middle Ages.
After the iconoclastic controversy there is a marked separation between Eastern and Western artistic traditions on this subject. The Byzantine type of the Madonna shows no further development after the termination of this contro- 2. Develop- versy in the middle of the ninth century, ment of In the Western Church, however, there Types in was a constant progression following Painting, the lines of ecclesiastical architecture, as they passed through the various periods of Byzantine, Romanesque, Gothic, and Renaissance. In painted representations of the Madonna it is possible to trace quite distinctly the same four periods as named above — only that the duration of the first or partially Byzantine type extends somewhat later into the Middle Ages than is the case with architecture, occurring as late as the end of the crusades. The second, with its tendency to humanize the ideal Madonna, coincides closely with the fourteenth century; the third, whose principal characteristic is the emphasis laid on the spotless virginity of the Queen of Heaven, is contemporary with the late Gothic, practically covering the fifteenth century; while the fourth, distinguished by an almost wholly naturalist type of Madonna, corresponds both in conception and in date to the period of the Renaissance. For the first period scarcely any names of artists have been preserved. In the second, the leading names are those of Giotto and the two Sienese painters Guido and Simone Martini. Fra Angelico shows a transition to the next period, marked by the names of Masaccio, Mantogna, Perugino, Pinturicchio, and 1'iJippi Lippi in Italy, Master Stephen, the un-
known painter of the great picture in Cologne cathedral, and Hans Memling in Germany. With all the varieties of artistic invention in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, there is a constant tendency to subordinate the religious factor to the realistic. Raphael, Correggio, and Titian endow their Italian beauties with the fulness of human charm, and in the two latter at least religious devotion is almost lacking. In the Madonnas of Durer and Holbein the fervor of devotion is less prominent than the chaste and pious feeling of their German ideals of family life. Murillo, in ardent subjection to the Franciscan and Jesuit type of devotion, succeeds in transfiguring the delicate features of his Spanish beauties so far as to approach, with the use of apocalyptic symbols, the realization of the mystery of the Immaculate Conception. It is impossible to estimate the effect upon modern Protestant feeling of the splendors which art has consecrated to this subject; but, while the Evangelical Christian may perfectly well admire these as works of art, it does not follow that he must approve the insidious attempts made by some of recent years to bring back something scarcely to be distinguished from the doctrinal basis which inspired such painting in bygone years. (O. ZocKLERf.)
Bibliography: The Biblical side of the subject is treated with more or less completeness in the works on the life of Christ. An extensive bibliography, particularly of the earlier works on the entire subject, appears in Hauck- Herzog, RE, xii. 309, 314, 323-324. Among the sources should be included the Apocryphal gospels which deal with the life of Mary, especially those which are translated in ANF, viii. 361-415. For Mary in the Bible, in early patristics and in the Apocrypha of the N. T., consult: F. W. Genthe, Die Jungfrau Maria, ihre Evamgelien und ihre Wunder, Halle, 1852; K. Benrath, in TSK, lix (1886), 1-28 (cf. the reply to Benrath by F. Linsenmann, in TQ, 1888, pp. 265-299); F. A. von Lehner, Die Marienverehruno in den ersten Jahrhunderten, Stuttgart, 1886 (Roman Catholic); J. B. Lightfoot, in his commentary on Galatians, London, 1890; T. Livius, Mary in the Epistles, ib. 1891; idem, The Blessed Virgin in the Fathers of the First Century, ib. 1893 (also Roman Catholic); O. Bardenhewer, Der Name Maria, in Biblische Studien, i., part 1, Freiburg, 1895; J. NirschI, Das Grab der heiligen Jungfrau Maria, Mainz, 1896; A. Schafer, Die Goitesmutter in den heiligen Schrift, M unster, 1900; J. Richar J, La Maternitede Marie chez les pi rendu SS.siecle, Lyons, 1901; DB, iii. 286-293; EB, iii. 2952-69; DCG, ii. 140-142.
On the history of various phases of development of the cult consult: J. C. W. Augusti, Handbuch der christlichen Archaologie, i. 559-565, Leipsic, 1836; Review of M<iri«latry. Liturgical, Devotional, Doctrinal, London, 1S6U; K. Benrath, in TSK, lix (1886), 197-267 (on the Middle Ages); F. G. Holweck, Fasti Mariani, Freiburg, 1S92; J. C. L. Dubosc de Pesquidoux, L'lmmaculce Conception. Hilt, d'un Dogme, 2 vols.. Tours, 1898; B. Saint John, The Blessed Virgin in the 19th Century, London, 1903; E. Bishop, Origins of the Fcaxt of the Conception of the Virgin Mary, ib. 1904; J. Lemann, La Vicrge Marie d,v;> Vhist. de V orient chrt'tien, Paris, 1904; S. Beimel. Gcschichte der Verehrung Marias in Deutschland wahrend des Mittclallers, Freiburg, 1909; Schaff, Christian Church, ii. 2S.1-2.S4, iii. 409 Bqq., 425 sqq., 716 sqq., 807, v. 1, pp. 831 sqq.; idem, Creeds, i. 108-128; Neander, Christian Church, vols. ii.-v. passim; Harnack, Dogma, vols, ii.-vii. passim; KL, viii. 711-727, 802-826, 831-859.
Controversial or dogmatic presentations are: J. E. Tyler, Worship of the Blessed Virgin Mary . Contrary to Holy Scripture, London, 1847; E. B. Pusey, Eirenicon, pp. 101-190, Oxford, 1865 (cf. J. H. Newman, Letter to Pusey on his Eirenicon, pp. 2S-159, London, 1S66); h. Preuss, The Romish Doctrine of the Immaculate Conception Traced from its Source, Edinburgh, 1867; A. Kuri, Mariologie oder Leh,re tier katholischen Kirche ubtr die