How does this artwork elucidate its Style?
The painting demonstrates the mature style of Cimabue, in which the artist overcomes the more rigid Byzantine styles with forms that are more loose and humanistic. According to Giorgio Vasari, this style made Cimabue the first to replace that style. The frontal view of the throne, the serene face of the Virgin, the details of the blunt face and sfumatoed chiaroscuro place the work far from the Byzantine canon from which Cimabue gradually freed himself. 
Compared to his preceding Maestà paintings, this one presents a more profound use of perspective. In the throne, there are three vertical panels with increasing depth, compared to the two panels of Cimabue's previous works. The pedestal and steps of the throne also have a concave design and are hollowed out in the front. The throne is shown from the front and reveals both its inner sides and that it is not a simple cross shape. The layout of the angels is also different. They are not simply placed over, but around the throne, which gives the composition further depth.
The figures are more expanded than Cimabue's earlier work, giving greater realism. The folds in clothing are no longer rigid and tight, as in the Maestà of the Louvre from c. 1280. Instead they fall amply, as over the legs of Marie, or appear less arched, as in the blue mantle that covers her head. Byzantine iconography reappears in that blue mantle, but only for decorative purposes—a serene addition to the ample folds. The golden highlights from Damascening suggest the fluid touch of light on the Madonna's mantle and the clothing of Jesus. And the facial chiarascuro creates more effective contrast.
There is also better anatomical features to the faces, with their smoothed edges and detailed brushstrokes. For example, the Madonna has a cut at the level of her nostril that slips into the fin of her nose or accents her smile, a detail missing from early Cimabue. 
Despite these improvements, there is a certain resistance to the stylistic innovations and techniques of Duccio and Giotto. This Maestà does not have the figurative refinement of the two works of the 1280s by Duccio, the Rucellai Madonna and the Crevole Madonna. Even the innovations of students of Giotto from 1290 on, barely appear here. The contrasts achieved here by Cimabue, for example, do not follow the principles of a single light source. Nor do the folds seem to find better positions over the bodies. The gazes remain vague. The color palette is also limited in its complexity, especially when compared with the recent developments of the nascent Sienese School and the palette of Giotto himself. In that, Cimabue seems to recreate features of his earlier work, which made him famous but now make him seem outdated compared to his contemporaries.
Giorgio Vasari Crevole Madonna Sienese School Cimabue Byzantine iconography Maestà Duccio Damascening Giotto Vasari sfumato Rucellai Madonna