Colonial architecture and sculpture in Peru cj82k773g

Citation preview

COLONIAL —” ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE

IN PERU ©

BLANK PAGE

COLONIAL © ARCHITECTURE AND SCULPTURE _

IN PERU sis Harold €. Wethey

COPYRIGHT 1949 BY THE PRESIDENT AND FELLOWS OF HARVARD COLLEGE

PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA _

This book is published with the assistance of _ _ the Horace H. Rackham School of Graduate

: , Studies of the University of Michigan, and , the American Council of Learned Societies.

LONDON * GEOFFREY CUMBERLEGE * OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

TO AS. W.

BLANK PAGE

PREFACE _ The present study is devoted to colonial architecture and sculpture within | the boundaries of modern Peru, the leading cultural center of Hispanic South

America during the colonial period. My initial plan to include all of the orig- : inal viceroyalty of Peru, notably Bolivia, was abandoned because of the mag- — nitude of the scope, and hence I have published elsewhere a series of articles

on that region. | | the book possible. | My research in Peru and Bolivia was carried out during 1944 and 1945 with the assistance of a grant from the Rockefeller Foundation. Subsidies from the

American Council of Learned Societies and the Horace H. Rackham School |

of Graduate Studies of the University of Michigan made the publication of A number of Peruvian and American scholars helped me greatly throughout the course of travel and research. I am especially indebted to Padre Victor Barriga of Arequipa, Dr. José Uriel Garcia of Cuzco, and Padre Rubén Vargas Ugarte of Lima for their generosity in giving me unpublished documentary material. I have profited much by the advice and knowledge of Peru of Dr.

Albert Giesecke, Dr. Alberto Santibafiez Salcedo, Dr. Jorge Basadre, Dr. Pio | Max Medina, Dr. Horacio Villaneuva Urteaga, Dr. Franco Hinojosa, Sefiora Mercedes Gallagher de Parks, Emilio Harth-terré, Monsefior Juan Antonio Casanova, Monsefior Aurelio Guerrero, Padre Graciano Montes, and Padre |

Rosario Zarate. | |

I wish to acknowledge my sincere appreciation for permission to reproduce | ,

floor plans drawn by Mario Buschiazzo (Figs. 4, 7, 12-16), Alva Manfredi (Figs. 1-3, 9, 11), Emilio Harth-terré (Figs. 6, 17-19), Morales Macchiaveli VII

) PREFACE oe (Figs. 10, 20); those of the last two architects have previously been published in Arquitecto peruano, 1941-1942. I am grateful to Mrs. Elizabeth Kelemen | for the use of three photographs (Figs. 233, 250, 320). The map for the end papers was prepared by Dr. Edwin Raisz of Cambridge, Massachusetts. | The criticism of my text by Dr. Robert C. Smith, the first American scholar to devote himself to the study of Latin American art, was of inestimable value. I am greatly indebted to Mrs. Delphine Fitz Darby for her advice in connection with the proofs and to my wife for expert assistance in the preparation of

the manuscript and proofreading.

HAROLD E. WETHEY Ann Arbor, Michigan November 1, 1948

VIII

' INTRODUCTION | : , I THE EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL ART IN PERU 5 , Time and Place, 3. The Artists, 6. Styles and Terms, 9. The Evolution of

' Colonial Architecture, 11. Colonial Sculpture, 25. , |

i | ARCHITECTURE .

W THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY 29

Ayacucho, 30. Region of Lake Titicaca, 33. , , Il THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY: CUZCO 39

IV LIMA | a | 69 Interiors, 71. Sacristies, 77. Chapter Houses, 79. Portals, 80. Cloisters, 89.

South of Lima: Pisco, Nazca, Ica, 93.

V CENTRAL PERU 98 , Ayacucho, 98. Huancavelica, 106. Other Andean Churches, 109.

VI NORTHERN PERU—I | ae Trujillo, 112. Guadalupe, 120. Safia, 121. Chiclayo, 124.

VII NORTHERN PERU—II | - 1270 Cajamarca, 127. ,

Arequipa, 140. | |

VII SOUTHERN PERU: THE MESTIZO STYLE—I 140 IX SOUTHERN PERU: THE MESTIZO STYLE—II 15S) Region of Lake Titicaca, 157. Province of Puno, 167. , Ix

, CONTENTS SCULPTURE , X CHOIR STALLS 179 XI PULPITS . | 196 XII RETABLES | | 211

. Cuzco, 214. Lima, 221. Ayacucho, 230. Trujillo, 232. Cajamarca and the Lake Titicaca Region, 237. Figure Sculpture, 239. ,

, APPENDIX ,

CATALOGUE OF MONUMENTS IN LIMA | 246

BIBLIOGRAPHY | 281

NOTES | | 289 INDEX | | 321 ILLUSTRATIONS

x|

Trujillo, Cathedral, High Altar, Detail © 23 Cuzco, Casa del Almirante, Exterior

] | , 24 Lima, Torre Tagle Palace, Exterior FLOOR PLANS 25 Lima, Torre Tagle Palace, Corridor 26 Lima, Torre Tagle Palace, Patio

x Juli, San Juan, Plan (1590) 27 Trujillo, Casa Ganoza Chopitea, Facade

2 Juli, San Pedro Martir, Plan , 28 Lambayeque, Colonial House, Patio 3 Puno, Cathedral, Plan . 29 Trujillo, Casa de los Herrera, Exterior 4 Cuzco, La Compania, Plan (1651) © 30 Cajamarca, Colonial House, Portal

5 Lima, Dominican Monastery, Plan (after |

, Meléndez, 1681) | CHAPTER 6 Pisco, La Compafiia, Plan : II ,

7 Cuzco, Cathedral, Plan 31 Cuzco, San Francisco, Cloister ,

8 Lima, Cathedral, Plan (Drawing of 1755) | 32 Cuzco, Santo Domingo, Cloister a | 9 Lima, San Pedro (La Compafiia), Plan 33 Cuzco, San Francisco, Cloister, Capital of ,

(1624) ) , Lower Gallery , 10 Lima, San Francisco, Plan (1657) 34 Cuzco, San Francisco, Cloister, Detail of 11 Cajamarca, San Antonio, Plan (1682) Upper Gallery ,

12 Cuzco, La Merced, Plan > 35 Ayacucho, San Cristébal, Portal (1540) 13, Cuzco, San Francisco, Plan | 36 Ayacucho, La Merced, Facade

14 Cuzco, Santa Teresa, Plan 37 Ayacucho, La Merced, Interior 15 Arequipa, San Francisco, Plan — 38 Ayacucho, La Merced, Lateral Portal, De-

16 Arequipa, La Compafiia, Plan tail ,

17 Lima, Colegio de Santo Tomas, Plan 39 Ayacucho, San Francisco, Facade | 18 Lima, El Corazon de Jesus, Plan (1758— 40 Ayacucho, San Francisco, Facade, Detail

1766) | 41 Ayacucho, Jesuit Chapel, Portal (circa 1723) 42 Ayacucho, Santa Clara, Orue Escutcheon 20 Trujillo, Santa Teresa, Plan (1568) | , 43 Ayacucho, Santa Clara, Portal (1568) 19 Ayacucho, San Francisco, Plan (1712- 1§70) , OO

1650 , 1563) , CHAPTER I 44 Juli, San Pedro Martir, Crossing (circa

, 1565)

21 Cuzco, El Triunfo, Painting: Cuzco in 45 Paucarcolla, La Inmaculada, Portal (circa

22 Cuzco, Casa del Almirante, Patio 46 Chucuito, La Asuncidn, Lateral Portal

ILLUSTRATIONS 47 Juli, San Juan, Front Portal 86 Cuzco, La Merced, Second Cloister 48 Juli, La Asuncién, Lateral Portal 87 Cuzco, La Compafia, Cloister 49 Chucuito, La Asuncién, Exterior 88 San Jerénimo, Parish Church, Facade — 50 Chucuito, La Asuncidn, Interior 89 San Jerénimo, Parish Church, Interior 51 Ilave, San Miguel, Sacristy Portal go Checacupe, Chapel, Exterior

52 Ilave, San Miguel, Portal of Chapel , 53 Ilave, San Miguel, Lateral Portal CHAPTER IV

| 91 Lima, Cathedral, Interior | 54 Ilave, San Miguel, Nave

CHAPTER III 92 Lima, San Francisco, Nave | | 93 Lima, La Merced, Nave

55 Cuzco, Santo Domingo, Lateral Portal 94 Lima, San Pedro (La Compafiia), Right

56 Cuzco, La Merced, Front Portal Aisle ,

$7 Cuzco, San Juan de Dios, Patio 95 Lima, El Corazén de Jesus, Interior 58 Cuzco, San Juan de Dios, Lateral Portal 96 Lima, El Corazén de Jesus, Baptismal

59 Cuzco, Santa Clara, Interior Chapel

60 Cuzco, Santa Teresa, Interior 97 Lima, Santo Cristo de los Milagros, Interior 61 Cuzco, Santa Clara, Exterior 98 Lima, Santo Cristo de los Milagros, Wooden

62 Cuzco, Cathedral, Exterior — Grille

63 Cuzco, Cathedral, Main Portal 99 Lima, San Pedro (La Compaiiia), Sacristy 64 Cuzco, La Compania, Main Portal 100 Lima, Santo Domingo, Chapter House ,

| 65 Cuzco, Cathedral, Interior tor Lima, San Francisco, Chapter House

: 66 Cuzco, Cathedral, Interior 102 Lima, Santo Domingo, Exterior (after

67 Cuzco, La Compafia, Exterior Meléndez, 1681) a 68 Cuzco, San Pedro, Facade 103 Lima, Cathedral, Facade , 69 Cuzco, El Belén, Facade 104 Lima, Cathedral, Main Portal

70 Cuzco, San Sebastian, Facade 105 Lima, Cathedral, Main Portal, Design of

71 Cuzco, San Sebastian, Facade, Detail 1626 (after Harth-terré) , , 72 Cuzco, La Compafia, Interior 106 Lima, San Francisco, Lateral Portal (1674)

73 Cuzco, San Pedro, Interior 107 Lima, San Francisco, Detail of Main Portal

, 74. Cuzco, La Compania, Dome 108 Lima, San Francisco, Facade _ 75 Cuzco, San Pedro, Plans Dated 1699 109 Lima, San Francisco, Main Portal

76 Cuzco, San Francisco, Interior 110 Lima, La Merced, Facade (Photograph circa

77 Cuzco, San Francisco, Vaults | 1890)

78 Cuzco, San Francisco, Exterior 111 Lima, San Agustin, Facade (1720) 79 Cuzco, Santo Domingo, Exterior 112 Lima, La Concepciédn, Lateral Facade

80 Cuzco, La Merced, Exterior 113 Lima, Cathedral, Rear Entrance (1732) 81 Cuzco, La Merced, Detail of Tower 114 Lima, San Carlos, Exterior

82 Cuzco, La Merced, Nave 115 Lima, Santa Teresa, Facade 83 Cuzco, La Merced, Stairway of Cloister 116 Lima, San Marcelo, Facade (Old photo-

84 Cuzco, La Merced, Main Cloister graph) 85 Cuzco, La Merced, Main Cloister 117 Pisco, La Compafia, Exterior , XII

ILLUSTRATIONS 118 Nazca, San José, Facade 152 Huancavelica, Matriz, Fagade 119 Lima, Santo Domingo, Tower (before 153 Huancavelica, Santo Domingo, Fagade

1940) 154 Huancavelica, Town Hall, Exterior Cloister , 156 Mamara, Parish Church, Exterior ,

120 Lima, Dominican Novitiate, Upper 155 Cocharcas, Nuestra Sefiora, Facade | 121 Lima, Santa Teresa, Cloister __ 157 Mamara, Parish Church, Lateral Portal | 122 Lima, Santa Teresa, Cloister ,

123 Lima, La Merced, Cloister CHAPTER VI |

124 Lima, San Francisco, Main Cloister , , |

125 Lima, San Francisco, Casa de Ejercicios 158 Trujillo, Cathedral, Facade 126 Lima, Colegio de Santo Tomas, Cloister 159 Trujillo, San Agustin, Nave

127 Lima, Santo Domingo, Tile Revetment 160 Trujillo, Cathedral, Nave :

(1606) | 161 Trujillo, Santo Domingo, Nave

128 Nazca, San José, Facade 162 Trujillo, San Agustin, Monastery Portal

129 Nazca, San José, Tower 163 Trujillo, La Merced, Cloister

130 Nazca, San José, Lateral Portal _ 164 Trujillo, La Merced, Pendentive

131 Nazca, San Xavier, Exterior. 165 Huaman; Santiago, Facade

132 Nazca, San Xavier, Tower 166 Safia, Matriz 133 Nazca, San Xavier, Facade, Detail 167 Safia, San Agustin, Exterior

134 Nazca, San Xavier, Interior, Detail 168 Safia, San Agustin, Nave | 169 Safa, San Agustin, Vault of Aisle

CHAPTER V 170 Safa, San Agustin, Cloister

. , 171 Guadalupe, Nuestra Sefiora, Vault

135 Ayacucho, La Compajfiia, Interior 172 Chiclayo, Santa Maria, Exterior 136 Ayacucho, La Compafiia, Facade _ 173 Chiclayo, Santa Maria, Cloister |

137 Ayacucho, La Compafiia, Left Side 174 Safa, La Merced, Facade : 138 Ayacucho, Cathedral, Exterior, Side View 175 Ferrefiafe, Santa Lucia, Facade, Detail

139 Ayacucho, Cathedral, Facade | 176 Ferrefiafe, Santa Lucia, Facade -

Chapel, Portal

140 Ayacucho, Santo Domingo, Facade

141 Ayacucho, Santo Domingo, Baptismal | CHAPTER VII 142 Ayacucho, Santo Domingo, Monastery 177 Cajamarca, Cathedral, Facade

Portal 178 Cajamarca, Cathedral, Lateral Portal 143 Ayacucho, Cathedral, Nave (1686) 144 Ayacucho, San Francisco de Paula, Interior 179 Cajamarca, Cathedral, Facade, Detail 145 Ayacucho, Santa Teresa, Facade 180 Cajamarca, Cathedral, Facade, Detail 146 Ayacucho, San Francisco de Paula, Facade 181 Cajamarca, Cathedral, Nave } 147 Ayacucho, San Francisco, Interior 182 Cajamarca, San Antonio, Facade ,

148 Ayacucho, Santa Ana, Exterior _ 183 Cajamarca, San Antonio, Nave a 149 Ayacucho, Santa Clara, Tower 184 Cajamarca, Capilla de la Dolorosa, Facade 7

7 XIII | |

150 Huancavelica, San Francisco, Main Portal 185 Cajamarca, Capilla de la Dolorosa, Interior

15t Huancavelica, San Sebastian, Portal 186 Cajamarca, El Belén, Facade

ILLUSTRATIONS | 187 Cajamarca, El Belén, Facade, Detail 219 Juli, San Juan, Lateral Portal, Detail

188 Cajamarca, El Belén, Nave 220 Pomata, Santiago, Nave | 189 Cajamarca, El Belén, Dome 221 Pomata, Santiago, Dome 190 Cajamarca, La Recoleta, Facade 222 Olmedo (Spain), La Mejorada, Dome

191 Cajamarca, La Recoleta, First Cloister (after Lampérez)

i 223 Archidona (Spain), Santo Domingo, Dome CHAPTER VIII | 224 Pomata, Santiago, Sanctuary . ,

225 Juli, San Juan, Baptistry 192 Arequipa, La Compafiia, Facade, Detail 226 Juli, San Juan, Right Transept 193 Arequipa, La Compafiia, Facade (1698) 227 Juli, San Pedro Martir, Facade —

, 194 Arequipa, La Compafiia, Lateral Portal 228 Juli, Santa Cruz, Right Transept

| (1654) 229 Juli, Santa Cruz, Choir Piers, Detail

195 Arequipa, La Compafiia, Nave 230 Sucre, Arafia Collection, Colonial Desk

| 196 Arequipa, La Compafia, Cloister 231 Juli, Santa Cruz, Choir Piers 197 Arequipa, La Compania, Cloister Entrance 232 Juli, Santa Cruz, Sanctuary

(1738) 233 Juli, La Asuncién, Tower , , 198 Arequipa, Santo Domingo, Cloister 234 Juli, La Asuncién, Atrium Gate 199 Arequipa, San Francisco, Cupola of Aisle 235 Pomata, San Miguel, Choir Piers |

200 Arequipa, Santa Catalina, Exterior 236 Zepita, San Pedro, Exterior 201 Arequipa, Santo Domingo, Lateral Portal 237 Zepita, San Pedro, Lateral Portal 202 Paucarpata, Parish Church, Lateral Portal 238 Zepita, San Pedro, Lateral Portal, Detail —

203 Arequipa, Casa del Moral, Portal 239 Lampa, Parish Church, Exterior 204 Yanahuara, San Juan Bautista, Facade 240 Ayaviri, Parish Church, Lateral View

(1750) 241 Lampa, Parish Church, Facade ,

205 Arequipa, Casa del Moral, Patio 242 Ayaviri, Parish Church, Facade 206 Yanahuara, San Juan Bautista, Facade, 243 Lampa, Parish Church, Choir Piers

, Detail 244 Asillo, Parish Church, Facade

207 Caima, San Miguel, Facade 245 Lampa, Parish Church, Nave 208 Caima, San Miguel, Facade, Detail 246 Ayaviri, Parish Church, Nave

209 Caima, San Miguel, Exterior 247 Juliaca, Santa Catalina, Exterior

210 Caima, San Miguel, Roof 248 Juliaca, Santa Catalina, Nave 211 Caima, San Miguel, Nave 249 Juliaca, Santa Catalina, Facade 212 Caima, San Miguel, Aisle 250 Puno, Cathedral, Facade (1757) 213 Arequipa, San Agustin, Sacristy, Dome 251 Puno, Cathedral, Facade , 214 Chihuata, Espiritu Santo, Dome 252 Puno, Cathedral, Facade, Detail , 253 Puno, Cathedral, Lateral Portal (1755)

CHAPTER IX 254 Puno, Cathedral, Nave

, 215 Pomata, Santiago, Exterior CHAPTER X 216 Pomata, Santiago, Facade, Detail |

217 Pomata, Santiago, Lateral Portal 255 Sucre, Cathedral, Choir Stalls (1592-

218 Pomata, Santiago, Lateral Portal, Detail 1599) a , XIV

ILLUSTRATIONS 256 Lima, Santo Domingo, Choir Stalls 295 Ayacucho, La Compafiia, Pulpit , 257 Lima, Cathedral, Choir Stalls 296 Ayacucho, San Francisco de Paula, Pulpit. 258 Lima, Cathedral, Choir Stalls | 297 Trujillo, San Francisco, Pulpit 259 Cuzco, San Francisco, Choir Stalls 298 Trujillo, San Francisco, Pulpit, Detail 260 Cuzco, San Francisco, Choir Stalls, Detail 299 Trujillo, Santo Domingo, Pulpit —

261 Lima, Santo Domingo, Choir Stalls, Detail 300 Trujillo, San Agustin, Pulpit =» , 262 Cuzco, Cathedral, Choir Stalls 301 Trujillo, Santa Clara, Pulpit 263 Cuzco, Cathedral, Choir Stalls, Detail 302 Trujillo, Santa Teresa, Pulpit | 7 264 Lima, La Merced, Choir Stalls 303 Lima, San Carlos, Pulpit 265 Trujillo, Cathedral, Bishop’s Throne _ 304 Lima, Santo Cristo de los Milagros, Pulpit

266 Trujillo, Cathedral, Choir Stalls — ,

267 Lima, San Francisco, Choir Stalls, Detail CHAPTER XII ,

268 Lima, San Francisco, Choir Stalls. , 269 Cuzco, La Merced, Choir Stalls 305 Cuzco, Santo Domingo, Cloister Retable 270 Lima, San Agustin, Choir Stalls 306 San Jerénimo, Parish Church, Altar

271 Lima, San Agustin, Choir Stalls, Detail (1609) : , , 307 Cuzco, San Blas, Altar of Nuestra Sefiora CHAPTER XI del Buen Suceso 308 Copacabana, Nuestra Sefiora, Altar (1618)

272 Cuzco, San Francisco, Lectern (1628) 309 Lima, Cathedral, Apostles (1608) 273 Cuzco, San Francisco, Pulpit 310 Cuzco, Cathedral, Retable of the Trinity 274 Ayacucho, Santa Clara, Pulpit (1637) (1655) 275 Cuzco, Cathedral, Ambo (1656) 311 Cuzco, La Merced, Retable of the Soledad

276 Arequipa, San Francisco, Pulpit (1660) |

277 Lima, Sagrados Corazones, Pulpit 312 Cuzco, La Merced, Retable of the Soledad,

278 Cuzco, Santa Catalina, Pulpit Detail — |

279 Cuzco, La Merced, Pulpit 313 Cuzco, Santa Catalina, High Altar 280 Cuzco, La Compafiia, Pulpit 314 Cuzco, San Blas, High Altar 281 Cuzco, Santa Teresa, Pulpit (1675) 315 Juli, La Asuncién, High Altar, Detail

282 Cuzco, Cathedral, Pulpit 316 Ayacucho, La Compafiia, Altar 283 Cuzco, Cathedral, Pulpit, Detail 317 Cuzco, Santa Teresa, High Altar (1675),

284 Cuzco, Santo Domingo, Pulpit Detail ,

285 Cuzco, San Pedro, Pulpit 318 Cuzco, La Compafia, High Altar, Detail _ , 286 Cuzco, La Almudena, Pulpit 319 Cuzco, La Compania, High Altar, Detail

287 Cuzco, San Blas, Pulpit 320 Copacabana, Nuestra Sefiora, High Altar 288 Cuzco, San Blas, Pulpit, Detail 321 Cuzco, San Pedro, High Altar (1720) © 289 Checacupe, Parish Church, Pulpit 322 Cuzco, San Francisco, Sacristy Altar

290 Cuzco, El Belén, Pulpit 323 Cuzco, Santa Catalina, Lateral Altar

291 Arequipa, La Compafiia, Pulpit 324 Lima, Cathedral, Altar of the Immaculate

292 Lima, Jests Maria, Pulpit | Conception -

. XV | |

293 Ayacucho, Cathedral, Pulpit 325 Lima, San Pedro, Altar of St. Francis 294 Pisco, La Compafiia, Pulpit Xavier , ,

ILLUSTRATIONS 326 Lima, San Pedro, Altar of St. Ignatius 346 Trujillo, Santa Clara, Altar of the Cruci-

327 Lima, Jests Maria, High Altar fixion ,

. 328 Lima, Jesis Maria, Altar of Crucifixion 347 Trujillo, Santa Teresa, High Altar (1759) _ 329 Lima, San Francisco de Paula Nuevo, Lat- 348 Trujillo, San Agustin, High Altar, Detail

eral Altar (1764) 349 Trujillo, Santa Teresa, High Altar, Detail

330 Lima, San Francisco. de Paula Nuevo, Lat- 350 Trujillo, San Lorenzo, High Altar (1774)

eral Altar, Detail 351 Trujillo, San Lorenzo, High Altar, Detail

331 Trujillo, Santa Teresa, Lateral Altar 352 Cajamarca, Cathedral, High Altar

332 Lima, San Carlos, High Altar 353 Pomata, Santiago, High Altar

333 Lima, San Agustin, Sacristy 354 Cajamarca, Cathedral, High Altar, Detail 334 Cuzco, Cathedral, Retable 355 Pomata, Santiago, High Altar, Detail 335 Lima, La Concepcion, High Altar (1783) 356 Juli, San Juan, High Altar, Detail

336 Lima, San Sebastian, High Altar 357 Ayacucho, San Francisco de Paula, St.

337 Ayacucho, Santa Teresa, High Altar Anne |

(1703) 358 Cuzco, San Francisco, St. Francis

, 338 Ayacucho, Cathedral, Altar of the Im- 359 Cuzco, La Compafiia, Lateral Altar maculate Conception (1764) 360 Lima, La Merced, Crucifix by Martinez 339 Trujillo, San Francisco, Lateral Altar, | Montanés

Detail 361 Mollepata, Parish Church, Crucifix _

Detail Column

340 Trujillo, San Francisco, High Altar, Detail 362 Lima, Cathedral, Holy Family .

341 Trujillo, Santo Domingo, High Altar, 363 Ayacucho, La Compafiia, Christ at the 342 Trujillo, San Francisco, Transept Altar 364 Cuzco, La Almudena, Madonna (1686) by

343 Trujillo, Cathedral, High Altar Juan Tomas | ,

344 Trujillo, Cathedral, High Altar, Detail 365 Ica, Parish Church, Ivory Crucifixion 345 Trujillo, Santo Domingo, Altar of the 366 Lima, Santa Catalina, Immaculate Con-

Rosary , ception

XVI

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS FOR ILLUSTRATIONS The floor plans reproduced in this book were drawn by Alva Manfredi (Figs. , _ I-3, 9, 11), Mario Buschiazzo (Figs. 4, 7, 12-16), Emilio Harth-terré (Figs. 6, , , 17~19), and Morales Macchiaveli (Figs. 10, 20). Figs. 5 and 1oz are from

Meléndez, Tesoros verdaderos de las Indias (Rome, 1681), vol. I; Figs. 8 and , 75, from Diego Angulo, Planos de monumentos ... en el Archivo de Indias (Seville, 1933-1939), plates 202 in vol. III and 27 in vol. I, respectively; and

Fig. 222, from Lampérez y Romea, Arquitectura cristiana espanola (2nd ed., , Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1930), vol. IJ, fig. 368. Fig. ros is a design of 1626 as , interpreted by Harth-terré in Arquitecto peruano, June, 1941. Of the three hundred and forty-three photographs reproduced in the book, one hundred and seventy-two were taken by the author. The balance were supplied by the following professional photographers, except for the three included

from the collection of Elizabeth Kelemen of Norfolk, Connecticut (Figs. 233, , , 250, 320): in Lima, Alva Manfredi (Figs. 171, 189); Camacho (Figs. 83, 268);

Gonzalez Salazar (Figs. 25, 26, 41, 82, 91-95, 99—IOI, III, II14—116, 120, 139, , 140, 143, 145, 146, 253, 256, 270, 292, 300, 303, 324-328, 331-333, 336338); Guillén (Figs. 21, 29, 30, 61, 88, 96, 98, 107, 119, 125, 177-180, 182, 184, | 186, 187, 190, 194, 234, 257, 258, 304, 309, 315, 335, 361); Alberto Rozas (Figs. 24, 36, $5, 56, 71, 80, 81, 106, 1r08—110, 113, 118, 123, 124, 128, 217, 7 221, 224—226, 231, 260, 262, 275, 280, 282, 283, 294, 312, 334, 3535 356, 358)3 | in Cuzco, Chambi (Figs. 22, 59, 60, 63, 65, 67-70, 79, 84, 85, 87, 244, 259, 269, 287, 288, 313, 314, 321-323); Gonzalez (Figs. 62, 66); Ochoa (Figs. 64, 155— 157); in Arequipa, Sciollo (Figs. 192, 193, 201, 203, 205); and in El Escorial,

Spain, Zubillaga (Fig. 223). | ,

| | Oo XVII , | : ,

BLANK PAGE

Introduction oe

BLANK PAGE

7|I

THE EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL ART , IN PERU

TIME AND PLACE | ,

"TyeRv holds first rank among the Span- power. Church and State were united as

Ps colonies for high quality and for never before, as a result of the establish-

extraordinary quantity of artistic achieve- ment of the Royal Patronage. By a series ment, being rivaled only by Mexico. Lima of agreements with the Spanish pope, Alexwas the capital of Hispanic South Amer- ander VI, and with his successor, Julius II, ica from the start. Always in direct con- the Spanish Crown secured the delegation tact with the mother country, she clung unto itself of supreme authority in eccle-

to her position as the leading cultural cen- siastical matters throughout the Spanish ter of the Spanish section of the conti- territories of the New World.* The king nent until the nineteenth century. The of Spain was responsible for the physical © early colonists, if not the conquistadors, well-being of the Church. The bishops and numbered among them educated men, the religious orders were subject to him and some of them university graduates. These to the Council of the Indies, and not to

men were no illiterate provincials, for the pontiff at Rome. Without their aumany of them read the most recent liter- thorization no church could be established,

ary works of Spain.” Even higher educa- no religious order founded, and no mem- |

tion was available in the New World at ber of the clergy could travel to the |

a remarkably early date. It began at Lima colonies. , :

in 1574 with the opening of the Univer- The Spanish Empire reached its apogee , sity of San Marcos, just a little more than in the sixteenth century. It held vast new four decades after Pizarro’s initial conquest territories, the extent and importance of

of Peru.’ which no one even suspected. Great wealth The best accomplishments of the Span- soon came pouring into Spanish coffers.

ish colonial period in the arts lie in the The source was not merely the loot in field of ecclesiastical architecture and sculp- precious metals which the conquerors gath-

N3K | |

ture. The reasons are not difficult to dis- ered, but mines of silver in Mexico and cover. The Church held a position of un- Peru. The discovery of fabulous silver deparalleled political, social, and economic posits at Potosi in 1545 and of mercury at ;

COLONIAL ART IN PERU Huancavelica in 1563 brought economic pleted in 1492 just before Columbus’ disprosperity to the viceroyalty of Peru which covery, was projected into the newly found

staggers the imagination. Large portions lands. More worlds to conquer for the of that wealth went into the building and Crown and the Cross! The Counter Refor-

embellishment of churches and monas- mation of the Catholic church (its two

| teries. By the seventeenth and the eight- greatest leaders the Spaniards, St. Ignatius eenth centuries ecclesiastical vessels of gold, Loyola and St. Theresa of Avila) gained silver, and precious stones, like the mon- momentum by the second half of the six-

, strance of La Merced at Cuzco, were of teenth century. Its full force carried into surpassing beauty and priceless value. Sil- America with all of the vigor of youth. ver altar frontals and tabernacles were The significance of the patronage of the commonplace. Great altarpieces of gilded Crown and of the upper classes can hardly wood filled the churches everywhere, even be exaggerated in any consideration of the

in the poorest Indian villages. wealth and beauty of Hispanic ecclesiastiThe society of Latin America was aris- cal art. The nobles of Spain had always tocratic, with privileges and wealth belong- made vast donations to churches and moning to the few. The social inequality of the asteries and for the perpetuation of their

Hispanic colonies, where the wealth of the favorite cults. In the New World they |

: upper classes contrasted with the extreme had still greater opportunities to found poverty and the virtual serfdom of the new religious establishments and to enmasses, constituted an extension of medieval dow others. A rich landowner, Diego de Spain. The Spanish concept of the gentle- Vargas, and his wife, Usenda de Loayza, man and the exaggerated importance given were the original patrons of the monastery

to high birth were brought into even of La Merced in Cuzco. A miner of Potosi,

| stronger relief in the colonies where the Andrés Cintero, left money in 1643 for few of Spanish blood ruled over thousands the foundation of the Dominican Colegio

of subject Indians. — de Santo Tomas in Lima. Every man, rich | - The Spanish Church was an integral part or moderately successful financially, beof the aristocratic society and the feudalism queathed legacies large and small. to the

of medieval Spain, inevitably and ines- Church, and ordered that masses be said capably so. The position of the Church in for his soul. Anyone who searches through Hispanic America was consonant with and the testaments in notarial archives will be _

a magnification of the increased power struck by this fact. ,

| which it had begun to assume in Spain dur- § The Crown assumed the guardianship | ing the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella. of the Church. Vast contributions were With the Royal Patronage the State was made for the construction of cathedrals,

i united to the Church, one and insep- churches, and monasteries. These sums

N41 |

arable. The spirit of the Reconquest of stood well in excess of the ecclesiastical Spain from the Moors, which was com- tithes due to the king, at least in the first

oe TIME AND PLACE , century and a half of colonization. Peti- To the first monks who evangelized His-

tions to the Council of the Indies for panic America is due much of the credit | money, and plans of buildings sent with for the rapid success of the Spanish conthem, have been preserved in the Archives quest. Some militant men like Fray of the Indies in Seville. Their publication Vicente Valverde had more of the spirit by Diego Angulo Ifiguez has supplied a of the conqueror than of the evangelist.

fund of invaluable data.* - The celebrated Franciscan accompanied In the reports of the viceroys the status Pizarro on the first invasion of Peru, went of the clergy and of the churches and their on to Cajamarca in 1532, and. two years

furnishings are given full attention. Noth- later to Cuzco for its founding as a Spaning escaped their zealous eyes. Francisco ish city. There he received his reward as de Toledo berated the clergy and laymen first holder of the episcopal see of the re- |

of Cuzco for their delay in the construc- gion. Other churchmen were as brave as tion of the cathedral on his visit there in he, but possessed of far greater humanity. 1571. The Conde de Lemos a century later One of these was the Dominican, Fray is said to have been the driving force for ‘Tomas de San Martin, likewise a member © the building of a new shrine to the Virgin of Pizarro’s expedition. From Cuzco he at Copacabana.” The viceroy Amat, whose struck south in the rigorous altitude and popular fame rests upon his love affair with cold of the Andes, penetrating to the the actress, La Perricholi, contributed sub- shores of Lake Titicaca. There missions for

stantially to the rebuilding of the nunnery the conversion of Indians were set up at of Las Nazarenas and their church in Lima Chucuito, Juli, Pomata, and other villages

after the earthquake of 1746. where the native population was heavily — Great churchmen like the bishops, Santo concentrated. The work of the Dominicans | Toribio, Morcillo Rubiéd de Aufién, Mar- in the very first years of the conquest was tinez Compafdén, Alonso Océn, and Man-_ the boldest and most courageous of all the

uel de Mollinedo, were fired with religious monastic orders. Their numbers were few, : zeal in their desire to increase the prestige but their spirit was mighty. They cannot and splendor of the Church. Manuel de be accused of self-advancement, for they Mollinedo, bishop of Cuzco, was the great- faced terrible and incalculable hardship on

est single patron ever known in colonial every hand. — a Peru. The rebuilding of his city after the No one should be surprised to learn that disastrous earthquake of 1650 is in great the district of Lake Titicaca is one of the part his creation. He endowed churches, most important centers of sixteenth-cenand gave altars, pulpits, silver altar fron- tury architecture. The churches built by tals, and ecclesiastical vessels with princely the first Dominicans, however, have van- , munificence. Mollinedo was to Cuzco what ished with the probable exception of the the Medici were to Florence in the Renais- east end of San Pedro Martir at Juli.

| | | NM5AK | |

sance. More is said of him in Chapter III. They were humble structures of adobe and

: COLONIAL ART IN PERU , thatch, which gave way to more endur- and the natives did not need to be gathing works later in the same century. ered by the thousands for religious instruc-

, The Dominicans, Franciscans, and Mer-_ tion, as they were in Mexico.”

cedarians entered Cuzco at the time of its foundation in 1534, and Lima on January , , a

eighteenth of the succeeding year. The THE ARTISTS _ | Augustinians arrived later, disembarking UR knowledge of the builders, archiat Lima in 1551. Last in appearance among ( )iccts, and sculptors of the colonial pethe great orders was the newly established riod is due largely to the investigations Company of Jesus, which was to become of Padre Vargas Ugarte and Emilio the most powerful of all. Six Jesuits landed Harth-terré in Lima, Padre Victor Barriga at the capital in 1568 and twelve more a in Arequipa, and Dr. José Uriel Garcia in year later. Beginning in 1576 the viceroy Cuzco.’ In the first years of the conquest _

Francisco de Toledo took from the Do- the builders were carpenters and masons, minicans their hard-won territory along for the most part modest artisans. Such was the edge of Lake Titicaca and assigned it Juan de Escalante, carpenter, recorded at to the Jesuits.° The Jesuit expansion was Lima as early as 1536. Diego de Torres, bold and rapid, and they soon dominated mason, who prepared the designs for the most of the universities and educational Town Hall in the capital, had something centers throughout the continent of South to do with the laying out of the streets, and

America. also secured a license to sell soap (1549). For all their missionary zeal the religious Another mason, Jerénimo Delgado, reorders were relatively modest in their ar- ceived the commission to build the transept chitectural and decorative ambitions dur- of the church of Santo Domingo (1547).”°

| ing the sixteenth century. The viceroyalty A carpenter named Diego Martin was of Peru and South America in general among the original settlers of Arequipa in never saw anything comparable with the 1540. In the same city a mason, Toribio great monasteries and churches erected in de Alcaraz, erected the portal of the Iglesia ‘Mexico by the Franciscans, Dominicans, Mayor (1544) before moving on to Potosi and Augustinians.’ The difficulty of travel and Chuquisaca in the van of the great and of transportation in Andean territory silver rush.” The most famous architects made any such rapid artistic development and sculptors of Spain could not have been as that of Mexico impossible. Colonial Peru expected to leave a prosperous and com-

lay mainly in the heights of the Andes, fortable life at home to brave the hard- —

| except for the important cities of Lima ships and uncertainties of the frontier. : and Trujillo which were situated at sea Francisco Becerra was the first outstandlevel on the narrow strip of coastal desert ing master to establish himself in the vicewhich borders the Pacific Ocean. Moreover, royalty of Peru. He was called there the Indian population of Peru was smaller (1582) by the viceroy, Martin Enriquez

NOR

Ot THE ARTISTS de Almansa, after a laudable career in Mex- «skilled as workmen and builders, a fact

ico whither he had gone from Spain nine which explains the rapid expansion of the years earlier. The importance of his proj- constructional programs of the Spanish, ects for the cathedrals of Cuzco and Lima especially in Mexico.

is discussed in Chapters III and IV. , Some professional artisans were memBy the last years of the sixteenth cen- bers of the religious orders. Early among tury and the beginning of the seventeenth these were Padre Juan Ruiz, carpenter, and many competent artists migrated to Peru. the Italian, Padre Bernardo Bitti, a painter. Among them were Juan Martinez de Arr- Both Jesuits, they practiced their profes-

ona and pedro de Noguera, architects and sions in the last quarter of the sixteenth , sculptors active in Lima. Those trained in century. Martin de Aizpitarte, another the artistic capitals of Spain were still the member of the Society of Jesus, was the leaders in their respective professions in architect of the Compafiia in Lima (1624the New World. They arrived by ship at 1638). The Méercedarians numbered Lima. Some were called from there to other among them the professional architects: centers, as Andrés de Espinoza and later Fray Pedro Galeano, designer of their new Juan de Aldana (1643) were engaged to church in 1628, and Fray Cristébal Caball-

build the cathedral of Arequipa. A Portu- ero, who lived in the second half of the guese, Constantino Vasconcellos, was ex- same century.” Contemporaries of Fray

ceptional in being an important architect Pedro Galeano included the Augustinian, , of non-Spanish birth. He designed the new Fray Jerdnimo de Villegas, and the Fran-

church and extensive monastery of the ciscan, Fray Miguel de la Huerta. | Franciscans at Lima in the mid-seventeenth Some writers have assumed that Diego

century. , Arias de la Cerda, at first a priest at UruSome monks and churchmen also fol- bamba and later canon of Cuzco Cathe-

lowed artistic professions, but their num- dral, was chief architect of that cathedral ber and high position have been much ex- and a sculptor as well. The fact is that aggerated. The small adobe churches built Padre Diego Arias held the office of adby the priests and missionaries in remote ministrator (obrero mayor) of the catheAndean settlements were undoubtedly dral. His energy and devotion contributed planned by the clergy. At the outset they much to the construction and embellish- 3 were utilitarian structures and not highly ment of his church. No evidence at all sophisticated architectural schemes. San supports the belief that he was an artist. Cristobal at Ayacucho (1540) is probably This question is further elaborated in

one of these (Fig. 35). Only the stone arch Chapter III. Other instances of the mis- | of the doorway would demand any knowl-__ taken attribution of artistic achievement to

edge of even the mason’s craft. The actual’ the clergy will be encountered. laborers were, of course, the native In- By the seventeenth century a number of

| NM 7K

dians, then and always. They were highly artists were creoles, that is, born of Spanish

COLONIAL ART IN PERU parents in Peru. Miguel Gutiérrez Sencio, Unfortunately few contracts relating to who passed the larger part of his life as these monuments have been discovered and chief architect of Cuzco Cathedral, was published. Whatever is known of the arpresumably native born. As time went on, tists shows them to have been Indians. An

more and more important figures were Indian, Sebastian de la Cruz, was author creoles, as those of Iberian birth decreased of the fine mestizo tower of La Compafiia in number. In the eighteenth century San- at Potosi (1700-1707). He also began the tiago Rosales, mulatto, the illegitimate son church of San Francisco there (1707-

| of a white man, reached the high office of 1714) and was succeeded after his death chief architect (maestro mayor) of Lima by two other Indians, Joseph Agustin and Cathedral and held the same title for the Felipe Chavarria.*° The Argentine writer,

| monastery of the Augustinians.“ This fact Angel Guido, states that the celebrated sheds an interesting light upon the com- facade of San Lorenzo is the work of a parative liberalism of Hispanic American quechua named José Kondori.” He gives, countries in the matter of race mixture. however, no indication of any source for Indeed, the earliest families to settle Peru the discovery of the name. There exists soon had a generous admixture of Indian a notice of two Indian sculptors, natives blood. Since the Spanish population in the of Juli, a town which is one of the chief sixteenth century was predominantly male, centers of mestizo art. These men, Juan the creation of the new mestizo race was Huaican and Marcos Rengifo received the

not long delayed. contract (1705) for the high altar of a The crossbreeding of cultures, like the. church at Moquequa at some distance from mixture of races, was inevitable. From the their home.** Simén de Asto, the man who ©

, first days of the conquest that phenome- signed the facade of Puno Cathedral, was , non produced very beautiful hybrids in surely a native with an Hispanicized name. textiles. Predominantly native in materials As more documentary discoveries are made,

and technique, they soon manifested the evidence will surely accumulate to prove infiltration of Christian and other Euro- the predominance of the Indian artist in

pean themes.” The same conditions works of the mestizo style. One excepbrought into existence the creole or mes- tional case is that of an artist of pure Intizo style of sculptural and architectural dian blood whose architecture and sculpdecoration. It flourished in southern Peru ture are so completely Spanish that his race from Arequipa through the altiplano along would never be suspected. He was Juan. Lake Titicaca and down into La Paz and Tomas Tuyru Tupac, active at the end of Potosi, the last two now within the bor- the seventeenth century, architect of San ders of Bolivia. The native population far Pedro at Cuzco, and sculptor of the Masurpassed that of the whites or the mixed donna of the Almudena.

race (mestizo) in these regions, and it still , Se does today except in the city of Arequipa. ne A&R

STYLES AND TERMS | a

_ STYLES AND TERMS 7 Oo HE chronology of artistic styles in Eu- include late-Gothic works like the facade

T rove varies considerably in different of San Gregorio at Valladolid. The intencountries. In the Spanish colonies still tion is to define a surface-covering decoragreater deviation from the normal occurs, tive scheme on the theory that it resembles Gothic features such as decorative ribbed the work of silversmiths (plateros). In vaults survive in the New World well be- reality the basis of this style is Islamic in yond the Gothic period. In Spain itself its tendency to carpetlike patterns. Latin they persisted during the sixteenth century American critics expand the expression,

in the last of the Gothic cathedrals, for plateresque, still further to include all example, those of Salamanca and Segovia, lavishly decorated surfaces; they abandon and occasionally even during the Baroque the period limitations which are strictly

age in the northern part of the peninsula. observed by other historians. The reader _

They are commonplace in the seventeenth will understand why it is preferable to a and eighteenth centuries in the New avoid such unnecessary confusion. |

— World. , The last period of the Renaissance in , _ The Gothic pointed arch was used in Spain (circa 1565-1610) is marked by the | Becerra’s cathedral of Lima as late as 1598— strictest classicism of the Italian High | 1604. Very few examples of it still exist, Renaissance. Juan de Herrera, architect of

however. They include the bay within the the Escorial, is the most famous Spanish lateral portal (circa 1540-1552) of Santo exponent of the style, and, as a conse-

Domingo in Lima, the crossing of San quence, it is often known as “Herreresque.” - Pedro Martir at Juli (circa 1560, Fig. 44), Francisco Becerra was its leading protago-

the chapel on the left and on the right on nist in Peru, but it continued well into the , entering Cuzco Cathedral, and the former seventeenth century years after his death

Franciscan cloister at Chiclayo. | in 1605. —

Renaissance and Baroque are considered The Baroque extends over a long period in the present volume ‘as stylistic periods from about 1600 to 1750. The first fifty

in the history of art. Hispanic Renaissance years in Spanish architecture are distin- | art both in Spain and the colonies corre- guished by a relatively restrained treatsponds to the sixteenth century, although ment. The late Baroque (circa 1650continuing in its last phase into the early 1750), on the other hand, is given to seventeenth in many cases. The word sumptuousness in decoration and a highly “‘plateresque” (plateresco), used by Span-_ pictorial concept. Following the accession

; | N9K

ish historians to distinguish the early deco- of the French dynasty to the Spanish rated phase of Renaissance architecture in throne in the person of Philip V, French Spain (circa 1500-1560), is avoided as far culture and more specifically French rococo

as possible. English and American writers art gained the ascendancy. By 1750 its tri- ,

have extended the usage of the word to umph was almost complete. - oo

COLONIAL ART IN PERU | The name of José Churriguera is fre- adopted from the Spanish is the term “‘saloquently applied to the last phase of the monic column” (salomdnica) signifying a Hispanic Baroque. The spiral or salomonic spiral or twisted column. That feature is

| | column is the most prominent element of the very signature of the high Baroque , this style which is characterized by a lav- style in Hispanic countries. Another ex| ish decorative scheme. As a matter of fact pression which may need clarification is José Churriguera (1665-1725) did not “triangular penetration.” This refers to the create the “Churrigueresque,” for it began _ slightly concave section of triangular shape

in Spain about 1650 and reached Peru by which makes the transition from the bar1665. The style gained its full momentum rel vault to the vertical wall containing

: in the years circa 1690-1740. the clerestory window, according to the The mudéjar is mentioned often in this usual practice in European architecture of volume because of its great popularity in the Renaissance and Baroque periods.

, the Spanish colonies. Mudéjar is distin- The remainder of this chapter will be guished by Islamic (Moorish in Spain) or- devoted to a summary of the development

, namental themes and techniques. Moslems of the architecture of colonial Peru, ice., living in Christian territory in Spain were within the present boundaries of the counoriginally called mudéjares, and thus the try (see end papers). Upper Peru, which meaning of the word was extended to de- corresponds to the modern republic of

! scribe Christian art in Moorish style. The Bolivia, belonged to the Viceroyalty of most typical are the geometric patterns of Peru until 1776. That region is not ininterlaces and star forms such as those used cluded within the scope of this book, but in Andalusian glazed tiles and in wooden has been studied elsewhere.” In the suc-

ceilings composed of laths. ceeding chapters the monuments are studIn the use of technical terms this book ied by geographic divisions. Inasmuch as

, attempts to follow established usage. Many the chronology of colonial art follows words, well known to historians of archi- geographic patterns, this procedure seemed

tecture and of the fine arts in general, will the most workable. The material is so seem obscure to the layman. In dealing abundant that a purely chronological cross with Hispanic culture some terms are en- section would be confusing. In dealing countered for which no English equivalent with Lima, a catalogue of principal monu- | exists. Thus the Spanish word ¢rascoro re- ments and secondary monuments has been

| - fers to the wall behind the choir when the prepared (see Appendix) which may serve _ latter is placed in the nave of a church. for reference. The major portion of the The word “retable” is employed as an_ text is devoted to the development of the equivalent for retablo, meaning a large architecture. The sculpture is discussed by altarpiece. The English definition of a categories: choir stalls, pulpits, and retables. retable as a raised. shelf behind an altar is A general book like the present, which is never intended in the present book. Also the first of its kind, cannot hope to treat

| AJ 10 & |

COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE the material exhaustively. A whole volume nave. The Andalusian type of church with |

might easily be given to the works included vaulted apse and a wooden covering of |

in each chapter. mudéjar interlaces over the nave was pre-

| , ferred in Lima throughout the sixteenth _ - , , century. The mixture of the Gothic and

THE EVOLUTION OF COLONIAL later of the Renaissance styles with the

ARCHITECTURE | virile Islamic tradition of southern Spain

HE standard church of the sixteenth produced a distinctly regional school of

T centers was a long narrow edifice of architecture there. In Peru the cultural , adobe covered by a pitched roof of tiles relations with Andalusia always remained | or of cane and thatch. The earliest still strong throughout the colonial period. extant appears to be San Cristébal (1540) Lima, the capital, was constantly in com-

at Ayacucho (Fig. 35). Stone or adobe munication with Spain and with Seville benches were placed along the walls of in particular. Hence there is no cause for

the nave, thus eliminating the need of surprise on discovering that the ecclechairs or pews. La Merced in the same city siastical architecture of Lima was derived

(Figs. 36-38), to be dated in the fifth to sucha great extent from that important decade of the century, is larger. Moreover, source. four lateral chapels and an elevated choir The basilican church of Sevillian mudéwere included in the plan. Santa Clara in jar origin was introduced to Lima by the Ayacucho holds the distinction of being three leading monastic orders in the mid-

the earliest nunnery (1568) preserved. century: the Dominicans (circa 1540This church of single nave without chapels 1552), the Franciscans (1555), and the

has upper and lower choirs on the short end Augustinians (1574). Wooden ceilings | opposite the sanctuary. It is exactly like were used in each case, those of the Dothe nunneries of Seville (Santa Clara, Santa minicans and Augustinians being made of

Paula, San Clemente) and of many other mudéjar interlaces. If only this precedent Andalusian cities. The plan became almost had been followed throughout the history , universal in nuns’ churches of Peru except of Lima’s architecture, the perfect solu-

that the lower choir was often placed at tion both structurally and artistically the right of the sanctuary. A triumphal would have been reached. Instead, imitaarch precedes the apse, a characteristic of tion barrel vaults of cane and plaster were the sixteenth century to be noted also in adopted as the standard practice in the

San Jerédnimo (1572) near Cuzco and in seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. | | the Titicacan churches (Figs. 50, 54, 89). The church of single nave continued,

In Santa Clara a fine mudéjar ceiling still however, to be the accepted type through

roofs the sanctuary. | the land in the sixteenth century. The

A 11

- Even the first cathedrals of Lima and Augustinians of Trujillo adhered to it in Cuzco were humble structures of single the second half of the century. The heavy

COLONIAL ART IN PERU | walls of that building are incorporated in some detail by an anonymous chroninto the nave of the present edifice. The icler.”* He praises the main portal as the original stucco ceiling of Renaissance ara- best in Peru, but one must make allowances

besques and pine cones yielded to a barrel for that sort of hyperbole. Nevertheless, vault in the rebuilding after the earth- his description does contain the informa-

quake of 1619.” A group of sixteen tion that the portal was constructed of churches was begun in the villages on the stone and that columns were grouped about shores of Lake Titicaca in 1590, and luck- the niches containing statues of saints. It

ily half of them still exist. The plans of all was obviously a typical Renaissance comare very similar, long and narrow with position of triumphal-arch division and chapels in the position of the transept. without much question superior to any-

, Most of them have lost their. original thing still in existence today. a

thatched or tiled roofs, which have been The best Renaissance carving is to be replaced by ugly coverings of galvanized found on the capitals in the large cloister

iron. : , of San Francisco at Cuzco (Figs. 33, 34). The portals of La Merced (circa 1540- The curious combination of a band of

1550) and San Francisco (circa 1552) at acanthus below an echinus embellished Ayacucho afford the best examples of the with volutes is paralleled by the Jeronyearlier Renaissance phase in Peru (Figs. 38, mite cloister at Lupiana, in Santa Cruz at 40).-Here the classical orders and the frieze Toledo, and elsewhere in Spain. The

, of cherubs’ heads and rosettes in alternation pseudo-Corinthian capitals: at Ayacucho are provincial versions of European work. are in reality very rustic (Figs. 38, 40). Yet Peru can offer nothing to compare The facade of the parish church (1572) with the numerous fine Renaissance por- at San Jerédnimo near Cuzco is a Renaistals of Mexico. Nor does any surviving sance work (Fig. 88). It has a triumphalsculpture equal the beautifully carved ara- arch entrance with niches and frieze of. besques on the doorways of Quito Cathe- cherub heads which was imitated in the

| dral in Ecuador. region well along in the following cenThe only Peruvian work which could tury. A more severe classical phase of the

oo conceivably be called plateresque is the Renaissance appears in the Titicacan disportal of the Jesuit Chapel (circa 1570) trict (Figs. 45, 50, 52) at Paucarcolla

, in Ayacucho (Fig. 41), decorated with (1563) and in the interior portals of La the arms of the Orue family. We are speak- Asuncién at Chucuito and San Miguel at

ing, of course, of extant monuments. Ilave (1590). The most interesting feaDoubtless, more splendid examples existed tures of the latter building, however, are

in the sixteenth-century churches of Lima, the entrances to the sacristy with the Arequipa, Trujillo, and Cuzco. The first pointed arch in a rectangle, a mudéjar com-

church of the Jesuits, built in Cuzco in position, known as the alfiz (Fig. 51). | the last quarter of the century, is described Thus the exotic Orientalism of Spain puts

NK

, | COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE | in an appearance at the most unexpected height of nave and aisles used in Lima Ca-

times and places. _ thedral places it in the category of a hall

- Writers have often held that the Open church. That type was also of Andalusian | Chapel or Capilla de Indios was an exclu- parentage, and the piers at Lima, sur- ) sive product of Mexican society of the six- mounted by a classical entablature block, | teenth century. The practice of celebrating unquestionably are descendants of those in mass in a small chapel in the open air and Diego Sildee’s cathedral of Granada. Be-

the custom of preaching and instructing cerra’s groin vaults of brick were shortIndians in this manner were, to be sure, lived, for they suffered irreparable damage essentially Mexican developments. The rea- in the earthquakes of 1606 and 1609. The _ son lies in the large native population which consequence was that a council of archicould not be gathered conveniently within tects, held previous to the rebuilding of .

a church. Open Chapels did exist, however, the church: (1613-1622), decided upon , in Peru. The Jesuits at Lima preached in ribbed Gothic vaults as the most resistant

the open air in the early years before their to earthquakes. — po building program had reached fruition.” We have, therefore, the strange spectacle The Franciscans at Cajamarca said mass in of the Gothic vault, apparently unused on an Open Chapel on Sundays and festivals, a large scale in sixteenth-century Peru, as explained in Chapter VII. The apertures widely adopted in the succeeding century

in the apses of Santo Domingo at Cuzco at a time when it had passed out of favor | (Fig. 79), Santiago at Pomata, and Santa in Europe. Gothic ribbed vaults covered Catalina at Juliaca, on the other hand, cer- the nave of the new church of La Com-

tainly cannot be interpreted as Open pafiia (1624-1638) in Lima, although , Chapels. Professor Kenneth J. Conant’s small cupolas were placed over the aisles.

suggestion that they were used for the La Merced, rebuilt in 1628, had Gothic display of relics is the most acceptable. vaults of brick over both the nave and

_ Mass was said on feast days froma bal- aisles. / So _ | cony in the facade of Lima Cathedral. This The type of single-naved structure

custom, described by Padre Cobo, is not known as Isabellan Gothic, which develpeculiar to the Spanish colonies, however, oped in Spain in the late fifteenth century,

and is not comparable with the special pur- was the basic ancestor of the vaulted non- | pose of the. Open Chapel.” . *.° basilican churches of Santo Domingo, Mex. The first completely vaulted structure ico, Peru, and all other Hispanic countries in Peru was the cathedral of Lima:(1598—- excluding, of course, the Portuguese posses- _ , _ 1604), the work.of the famous architect, sions in Brazil. In Mexico these Gothic

_ Francisco Becerra. Its rectangular ground monuments, mostly monastic, were erected ,

| | N13 0K |

plan. (Fig. 8), probably derived from:the in: great quantity and high quality in the cathedral of Jaén, had become a favorite mid-sixteenth century. In Peru, as we have in. sixteenth-century Spain. The equal seen, the vaulted church delayed until the

COLONIAL ART IN PERU beginning of the seventeenth. One of the the vaults are domical in section. This con-

finest is the superb structure of single nave stitutes in reality a continuation of the at Guadalupe, reérected after 1619. The same type of medieval construction as that

| monastic church of San Agustin at Safia used in Cuzco Cathedral and the Com(Fig. 168) and others in the same village, pafiia, simply omitting the decorative

now ruined, belonged to the same category. Gothic ribs. -

| As late as 1668 the architect, Francisco At times barrel vaults are also essentially , Jiménez de Sigiienza, designed the famous medieval in the way the masonry curves up shrine of Copacabana (Bolivia) on the continuously from the horizontal springIsabellan model. The dome over the cross- ing. An example of this system occurs in ing and the plain classical cornice of the Santiago at Pomata where the windows are | _ nave alone suggest the lateness of its date. splayed into the vault (Fig. 220). FenestraThe example of Lima extended to Cuzco. tion is generally small in Peru, because of Gothic vaults were selected for the cathe- the tropical light and its increased intensity dral (1598-1654), the original project for in the high regions of the Andes. In some which also came from the hand of Fran- of the churches of Arequipa, such as those _ cisco Becerra (Figs. 65, 66). The success of at Caima and Paucarpata, a few small cir-

: these vaults in withstanding the earthquake cular openings and an occasional window of 1650 undoubtedly induced the Jesuits to alone break the continuous surfaces of the

adopt them for their own church, built vaults (Fig. 211). , shortly after the catastrophe. Elsewhere in The materials used in vaulting differ ac_ Cuzco, the Gothic construction was limited cording to the geographic location. Finely to the sanctuary and the arms of the cut ashlar characterizes most of the Andean transept. Thus in San Francisco (1652) the region from Cajamarca to Arequipa and decorative late-Gothic vaults (Fig. 77) are Lake Titicaca, extending also into Bolivia. — combined with domical vaults in the nave.” On the other hand, the builders of Cuzco Their example was followed in the parish and Ayacucho preferred red brick, even church at Ayaviri, combined there with though the stone of the Andes was avail-

barrel vaults in the nave. able to them. The churches of Lima, The typical Renaissance-Baroque barrel erected in the first half of the seventeenth

— vault is almost universal in Peru from 1650 century, also received vaults of brick. onward with exceptions to be noted. Trans- ‘Their repeated destruction by earthquake verse arches or ribs separate it into bays. A led the architects to resign themselves to

| concave section, generally triangular, makes the imitation of barrel vaults by means of the transition from the barrel vault to the cane coated with plaster. The first imporvertical lunette of the clerestory. At Cuzco, tant work in which these methods were by contrast, the lunette at the sides of the employed throughout was San Francisco vault is arched and the window placed di- at Lima (1657-1673, Fig. 92). That set rectly in the wall (Figs. 73, 77), wherever a fashion never to be abandoned in the

Ni4Kh |

COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE | capital. At times wood alone sufficed and of Ayacucho (1632-1672) shows a slight

with sad results, as in the wooden Gothic divergence in the introduction of a den- | vaults of the present cathedral. Other telated cornice (Fig. 143). That detail set coastal cities, subject to conditions similar the standard for the local school during the , to those of the capital, followed in her next century and a half. Churches of the

wake. Only in Trujillo on the coast first half of the seventeenth century like do many of the seventeenth-century Santa Clara in Cuzco, La Compafiia in brick vaults survive down to the present Ayacucho, and Santo Domingo in Tru-

day. | jillo (Figs. 59, 135, 161) have the direct — The late Renaissance style known as the earnest appeal of the utilitarian handiwork

Herreresque triumphed in the cathedrals of the pioneer, __ of Lima and Cuzco, designed first in 1582 Portals in the first half of the sevenbut begun in their final form in 1598. The teenth century remained sober, although | interior of Cuzco Cathedral, not finished less so than interiors. The portal of the until 1654, is the most complete represent- chapel of La Vera Cruz in Lima, after the ative, inasmuch as Lima Cathedral today design of Diego Guillén in 1613, and the

is only a replica in wood and plaster, re- lateral entrance of Santo Domingo (Fig. constructed in the mid-eighteenth century. 102) are late Renaissance works, comThe barrenness and austerity of the gigan- parable with monuments of the same date

tic piers and the large molded entablatures in Spain, such as Nuestra Sefiora de las | of Cuzco are majestic and awesome (Figs. Angustias at Valladolid (1597—1606).” 65, 66). The example of the cathedral was Equally classical is the Doric entrance to

‘so impressive that it established the norm the monastery at Guadalupe, north of for the school. The churches of the second ‘Trujillo (circa 1619). Although exactly half of the century, San Francisco, La contemporary, the doorways of San AgusMerced, San Pedro, and El Belén, clung to tin at Safia (Fig. 167) retain more of an Doric pilasters and molded entablatures, earlier Renaissance flavor in the frieze decomaintaining a sober classical design (Figs. rated with rosettes and the fluted pilasters 75, 76, 82). Only the Jesuits showed inde- in truncated form. pendence in choosing Corinthian pilasters One work in Cuzco, the portal of Santa

and a bracketed cornice (Fig. 72). | Clara (Fig. 61), affords a fixed date at this

The interior of Trujillo Cathedral (Fig. time (1603-1622). Its design is that of a |

160), designed by Diego Maroto in 1643, simple Renaissance triumphal arch. The

is equally as sober as the churches of Cuzco. upper part was never completed. The peIndeed, any nonclassical work is the excep- culiar capital, a Doric cushion topped by tion in this period. Very little in Lima itself volutes, is so common throughout the city

| NR

save the chapel of La Vera Cruz and in the seventeenth century and perhaps : Nuestra Sefiora de Montserrat maintain earlier that it may be regarded as charac- | vestiges of the early years. The cathedral teristic of the school. The side entrance of -

COLONIAL ART IN PERU San.Juan de Dios (Fig. 58), now blocked contrasted to the sculptural stability of the

up, is a fine sturdy composition of rus- Renaissance.” 7 a an

| ticated stone which appears to have orig- Against the bare stone walls of the

inated. in this period. Equally powerful, facade the cathedral portal stands out, conthough not as well designed, is the portal of centrated and in sharp opposition. The the seminary adjoining La Compafia at effect is of a jewel shining in a sober set-

Ayacucho (Fig. 137). 7 ting. That scheme of contrasts is typically The date, if not the quality, of the three Spanish, being characteristic of Spanish ar-

portals of Santo Domingo in Cuzco (Fig. chitecture from the late Gothic thence55) may always be controversial. They forth. To mention San Gregorio at Vall-. belong precisely to the transition from the adolid, Santa Cruz at Toledo, and Pedro Renaissance to the more broken compo- Ribera’s Provincial Hospital at Madrid will

sition of the Baroque. They may have sur- serve as a reminder. A still more pervived the earthquake of 1650, but I be- sistently Spanish tradition should be noted

lieve that they were part of the subse- in Cuzco Cathedral, and that is the use quent reconstruction. The same conserva- of flat terraced roofs. Even the Gothic tism is manifested in the front entrance of style with its highly pitched roofs did not La Merced (Fig. 56) dated in the sixteen- change the Spanish preference for the hori-

fifties. : zontal and rectangular silhouette. Both the Martinez de Arrona’s design (1626) southern Mediterranean customs of the

for the main entrance of Lima Cathedral Moors and the relatively warm climate lie

(Fig. 105) reveals the Baroque in the at the root of that usage. In the New abrupt transitions of contour and plane World, however, the pitched roof is much

, in the niches even more than in the broken more common because of its practicality pediment. The dimensions were large and in a country subject to a rainy season. the tendency to verticality might be re- This type is characteristic of the unpre-

garded as a survival of Mannerism. tentious structures of the sixteenth cen-

- The full Baroque arrives in Peru with tury. , a the portal (1654) of Cuzco Cathedral The facade of the cathedral established

(Figs. 62, 63). Columns and wall surfaces the Baroque style at Cuzco (Fig. 63). The

are stepped out from the body of the portal of La Compafiia (1668) is a close facade moving toward the center. Planes follower of it, distinguished by more sculpand directions are constantly shifted. The tured ornament (Fig. 64). La Merced, San

: breaking of cornices and moldings and the Pedro, El Belén, are all variants (Figs. 68, curve of scrolls both contribute to an ex- 69, 80). San Pedro manifests greater sobri-

| pression of agitated movement and to a_ ety in its plain columns and undecorated , pictorial flow of light and shade. This is wall surfaces. In many respects this church, the dynamic pictorial style of the Baroque, designed by an Indian, Juan Tomas, is the so successfully analyzed by Wolfflin and most Spanish of all in its barrenness and

COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE dignity. The richly carved surfaces of San architect, Diego Maroto, lived in the capi-

Sebastian (Figs. 70, 71) display greater tal. The huge size of the towers was ap-

Baroque exuberance. , parently an idea of José de la Sida, first The low proportions of the cathedral introduced by him in San Agustin (1637)

towers in relation to the broad facade (Fig. at Lima. | , 62) are to be explained by the fear of The important new direction taken by

earthquakes. The memory of the devasta- seventeenth-century architecture in Lima tions of 1650 was still vivid when these came with the rebuilding of the church and belfries were erected (1654-1657). Far su- monastery of San Francisco (1657~1673). perior is the composition of La Compafiia As previously explained, the decision to on the exterior (Fig. 67), extraordinarily adopt imitation barrel vaults constructed fine in its scale and in the interrelation of cane and plaster was decisive (Fig. 92). of all of its elements. The influence of this This expediency solved the problem of the monument was second only to that of the earthquake-ridden city, and thenceforth cathedral in establishing the most notable no attempt was made to employ heavier school of architecture of Hispanic type in materials. The mudéjar ornament in plas-

colonial Peru. The artistic authority of ter, spread over the vaults and pilasters, — Cuzco was by no means limited to the marked the most wholehearted adoption city. Its artists worked throughout the en- of that style in a city where Andalusian , tire region. The churches at Lampa and mudéjar elements had always been conAyaviri (Figs. 239-242, 245, 246) are de- spicuous. La Merced, rebuilt in 1687-1706, pendent upon those of the Andean capital. was the most faithful follower of the Fran-

In painting, the geographic range of in- ciscan church in plan and type of construc- , fluence was even greater, extending into tion (Fig. 93). In both cases chapels are

Bolivia. | : domed and walls rusticated in plaster. A

The mid-seventeenth-century facade of chain pattern of rectangles and ellipses in |

Ayacucho Cathedral (Fig. 139) has broad alternation on the walls of the nave relow dimensions and two towers which in- places the Islamic patterns of San Frandicate its dependence upon the cathedrals cisco. The concept remains unmodified. | of Lima and Cuzco. The composition is, The basilican floor plan with single sanc- | however, very clumsy and faulty. It looks tuary, dome over the crossing, and the as though several architects had worked aisles covered by cupolas was introduced upon it, each with contempt for his prede- by the Jesuits in San Pedro (1624). Here cessor. The exterior of Trujillo Cathedral, the builders still clung to Gothic vaults in on the contrary, is unified and consistent the nave. The Franciscans followed the in design (Fig. 158). The portals are good precedent established in San Pedro, but and decidedly conservative for the period substituted barrel vaults in the nave (Fig. (1643-1666). Here the school of Lima 92), and the Mercedarians followed suit in prevails and that is no wonder since the 1687. The plan of San Pedro in Lima (Fig. _

| A I7 A

| COLONIAL ART IN PERU 9) was partly derived, in my opinion, from (Fig. 16), begun about 1650, and the Merthe Jesuit church at Quito, begun in 1605, cedarians in 1657, the latter shifting the because the disposition of the two monu- dome from the crossing to the sanctuary. ments is almost identical. Moreover, Martin ‘The plan influenced the enlargements and

, de Aizpitarte, architect of San Pedro, had_ rebuildings of the monastic churches of served his novitiate in the Jesuit house at Trujillo: Santo Domingo, San Francisco,

| Quito. To be sure Padre Nicolas Duran La Merced, and San Agustin. In these inMastrilli stated that he brought to Lima a _ stances, domical vaults lighted from above

model of the Casa Profesa in Rome. The take the place of cupolas, as they also do church built in the time of Padre Duran in Santo Domingo at Arequipa. San An-

, | shows marked differences from the Gest tonio at Cajamarca (Fig. 11) falls into the at Rome, however. Writers have also same category. All openings from above claimed that La Compafiia at Cuzco (Fig. are omitted in the aisles, however, a change 4) is based in its disposition upon the Gest. explained by the intense light in this high

It is built, nevertheless, in the form of a altitude. , ,

- Latin cross with shallow lateral chapels. The facade of San Francisco (1669— | Hence it is the successor of a type common 1674) marks the rise of the full Baroque everywhere in the Gothic and Renaissance in Lima (Figs. 108, 109) just a few years

periods, and not in any way dependent later than its appearance in Cuzco. This upon the Jesuit prototype in Rome. A sim- frontispiece is, indeed, a retable transilar plan was used by the Jesuits in their ferred to the exterior of a church. Long ago

church at Pisco and in San Pedro Martir at the retable facade had started upon its Juli (Figs. 2, 6). Yet, elsewhere, they pre- course in Spain, as, for example, in a work

ferred a larger basilican edifice. The truth of the late fifteenth century like San : is that the Jesuit order never officially Gregorio in Valladolid. During the Renaisadopted a specific type of floor plan or sance it continued to flourish in such wellchurch as its own in Peru or anywhere known monuments as San Esteban and the

else.” cathedral at Salamanca. | The plan of the Gest in Rome was the The treatment of the columns and the

source, though modified, of La Compafiia ornament on the Franciscan fagade at Lima

at Quito. The Jesuits in Lima followed (Figs. 107-109) so closely resemble the

, certain innovations of their order in Ecua- retable of the Immaculate Conception in dor, even though they possessed the plans the cathedral as to suggest that both were of the Casa Profesa of Rome. Thenceforth designed by the same artist. In spite of the the plan of La Compafiia in Lima was to extraordinarily high quality of the porbecome a basic type in Peru, employed by tal, it is dwarfed by the gigantic towers several religious orders, especially in Lima, and the heavy rustication of the walls.

N18 xf

Arequipa, and Trujillo. The Jesuits at These unpleasing dimensions were introArequipa chose it for their new structure duced by José de la Sida in San Agustin

COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE (1637, Fig. 111). As previously noted, It adds little or nothing to an understand-

they were successfully improved by Diego ing of the style.

Maroto in his project for the cathedral of A tendency to small churches charac-

Trujillo (Fig. 158). terizes the school of Lima in the eighteenth One of the best portals of this period century and also districts subject to in-

is that of Santa Lucia at Ferrefiafe (1690) fluence from the capital. In contrast to the near Chiclayo (Figs. 175, 176). The com- type of monuments just discussed, sculp-

position is refreshingly original and ingen- ture and carved ornament are absent. The | iously put together. Female heads accom- style is competent but undistinguished.

panied by cloth swags filled with fruit The composition is one of relatively sim- , decorate the columns here, as they do those ple architectural elements. Two small bel-

of San Francisco at Lima. | fries decorated with pilasters having volute The ultimate in retable facades is capitals are the rule. An early specimen, reached in the large compositions of two Santa Rosa de las Monjas (1704-1708), | or three stories in which spiral columns was succeeded by numerous others in Lima.

(saloménicas) enframe niches containing The two-towered churches of Ayacucho | statues, and a prodigal wealth of ornament partake of the same general characteristics invests the entire monument. Vines and (Figs. 145, 146). The type traveled up and grapes usually entwine the columns, and down the coast, and is found in structures

- the planes of the surface and the com- such as Santa Teresa in Lima, El Belén at | plexity of the moldings combine to cre- Trujillo, San José at Nazca, and La Com-

ate an expression of dynamically agitated pafiia at Pisco (Figs. 115-117, 128). , —

exuberance. The first of these works in About 1740 the French rococo began to 7 Lima was the frontispiece of La Merced filter into the art of viceregal Peru. It is (1697-1704), known today in a modern responsible for the gay lilting spirit of the replica (Fig. 110). Virtuosity soared even facade of Santa Teresa, now demolished. higher in the filmy spun sculpture of San The sparkle and crisp rhythms of eight-

Agustin (Fig. 111), now unluckily recut eenth-century music find their counter-

and endowed with a gratuitous attic story part in such architecture. Some of these , and round window, both added in 1908. monuments of Lima cannot be dated ex- , The true masterpieces of this type are three actly. The rebuilding of the city after the

churches of the first half of the eighteenth earthquake of 1746 saw the rococo style century in the highlands of Cajamarca: the triumph over all others. This movement cathedral, San Antonio, and El Belén (Figs. produced not only churches like San Carlos

177-187). They are, indeed, Hispanic (1758-1766) and El Cristo de los Milagros retables of gilded wood transformed into (1766-1771), but also the tower of Santo

M19 |

stone. The application of the term ““Chur- Domingo, retables, and church furnishings _

rigueresque’’ to this type of Baroque art has (Figs. 114, 119, 329-336). | | : become common, as previously explained. The most interesting innovation in the

COLONIAL ART IN PERU | floor plans of the eighteenth century is the | Mestizo or creole art is the most original

elliptical shape (Fig. 18) of El Corazén de contribution of the Hispanic colonial peJess (1758-1766). Elsewhere in the Span- riod. Its distinguishing and flavorsome ish colonies it also put in occasional appear- qualities were those of the Indian’s heritances at this time. One of these was Santa age. Mestizo is the more accurate term, beBrigida in Mexico City and another, the cause this art like the new race was procreHospicio, at San Vicente in Salvador. The ated by the crossbreeding of two races. Cre- _

plan belongs to the rococo movement as do ole is the term generally employed, althe centralized church of El Cristo de los though its meaning fails in adequacy, since Milagros at Lima and the Capilla del Po- creole in Latin America refers to a person ©

| cito in Guadalupe, Mexico, even though the of European blood, born in the New

latter is based upon a Renaissance drawing World. , ,

of Serlio.” The mestizo style is limited almost excluFor the most part, Lima’s eighteenth- sively to remote Andean regions where the century churches are of the conventual population was largely Indian. It is concentype, small with a single nave. Barrel vaults trated in the south, extending from Areof cane and plaster are universal. Doric quipa through the regions of Puno, Lake pilasters and molded cornices persist, but Titicaca, and on down into La Paz and the dentelated cornice is also widespread. Potosi, now within the borders of Bolivia. The signature of the school is the use of a As explained earlier in this chapter, all evidecorative bracket upon the cornice in the dence points to the probability that the center of each bay. A bracket or volute architects and sculptors were pure Indians

, capital was also very popular, occurring or else mestizos who had had only a superrather frequently in the preceding century ficial contact with European civilization.

: too, but attaining an unparalleled vogue in The chronology of the development is

. the eighteenth century. still obscure for lack of documentary inforThe death of colonial art in Peru came mation and because some of the earliest exwith the Neoclassic invasion of the first amples have surely been destroyed. At presyears of the nineteenth century. The chief ent Santo Domingo in Arequipa (1677— apostle was a Spanish-born artist, Matias 1680) occupies a key position, since it apMaestro.” His own dull efforts are not too _ pears to be the first dated work (Fig. 201). distasteful to cause particular resentment. The sculpture upon the face of the choir The fact that he and his fellow enthusiasts and the side portal already manifest a fully ruthlessly destroyed and burned a vast por- developed tradition. Thenceforth many

tion of the priceless works of colonial art splendid facades follow in its wake: La

cannot be forgiven. He transformed the Compafiia (1698), San Agustin, and Baroque splendor of the interiors of San those of the churches of Yanahuara (1750) Francisco and Santo Domingo into the drab and Caima (Figs. 193, 204-208). The luxdismal spectacle which they present today. uriantly carved cloister of La Compafia

| M20KR

COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE | (Figs. 196, 197) is dated 1738. To the same and textiles were also transportable media

year belongs a fine example of domestic ar- for the dissemination of such ideas. | ,

chitecture, known as the Casa Ricketts. Mestizo facades are the exception in , In the architectural decoration masked northern Peru. The church of Santiago at heads, sometimes with long objects sprout- Huaman (Fig. 165) near Trujillo is the

ing from their mouths, are the most strik- work of a primitive master, although not | ing of the pre-Columbian themes (Fig. by a mestizo artist of southern Peru. The 206). Local flora and fauna, particularly presence of the mermaids playing the char- | the lily of the Incas, called the ccantu, ango may possibly suggest some knowland the puma, are ever recurrent. The nat- edge of Titicacan traditions. These mythi-

ural primitivism of the design and tech- cal creatures are mainly concentrated in nique, however, is the most significant and southern Peru and Bolivia. Although the determinative factor. The naive primitive theory cannot be proved, it is quite probartist, at whatever epoch in history or at able that they were associated by legend whatever part of the globe, creates simpli- with Lake Titicaca, and that, just as in Eufied geometric patterns which he repeats ropean lore, they lay in wait of the unwary. over and over again. His technique is often They appear on facades of the churches at rude, yet at times he shows great genius in Puno, Lampa, La Compafia at Arequipa,

his basic sense of form. Thus the Coptic or Nuestra Sefiora de Montserrat near Anda- , Merovingian carver may arrive at results huaylas, San Lorenzo at Potosi, below the very similar to those in the Andes of Peru. choir of San Miguel at Pomata (Fig. 235)

By 1750 mestizo art had reached its and on houses at Oropesa, as well as on

peak. The facades of Puno Cathedral retables in Santa Clara of Cuzco and La | (1757) and San Francisco at La Paz(1753— Asuncidn at Juli. 1772) already suggest the overripeness of No attempt is made in the present book autumn (Figs. 250-252). Outside of Are- to give an exhaustive account of civil and quipa, the shores of Lake Titicaca showed domestic architecture. The town hall with its finest flowering in Santiago at Pomata, two stories of open galleries upon the main and in San Juan and Santa Cruz at Juli plaza was a standard type in the Spanish (Figs. 215-229). Tropical plants, fruit, colonies. It represented a continuation of birds, and monkeys contribute much to the the cabildo found commonly in small Span-

exoticism of these rich products of the ish villages. Unfortunately nearly all of - decorator’s art. Furniture of inlaid wood them in Hispanic America have disappeared whose highly stylized patterns display the in recent years during the rapid growth

_ same fantastic array of themes is a product and expansion of cities. The Andean vilof the same culture (Fig. 230). Manufac- lages of Peru, like Huancavelica and Ayatured in the same regions and also in the cucho, and tiny pueblos which have escaped tropics of Bolivia, it probably contributed modernization, still possess them (Fig.

M21 Ak

to the diffusion of these designs. Drawings 154). _ |

COLONIAL ART IN PERU Virtually all Spanish cities in America every house around a court. Social customs were laid out upon the gridiron plan with played their part in this matter. The seclua Plaza Mayor in the center. Charles V sion of family life and the Oriental attitude originally issued regulations for the urbani- toward women, who were shut up as though zation of the colonies, and they were later ina harem, are equally, if not more, impor-

elaborated by Philip II. Thus the urbaniza- tant factors than architectural tradition. tion of Lima and Trujillo was established Brick covered with stucco was employed | at the very outset upon their foundation in the small houses at Cuzco. Stone was

in 1535, whereas Cuzco maintained a great plentiful, however, and for that reason part of the plan of the Incaic city.” Cuzco even modest edifices enjoyed the added

, alone, among the larger cities, however, has beauty of fine materials. The rich landpreserved its colonial domestic architecture owners and nobles of Cuzco built themalmost unscathed. That of Lima has been selves large palaces of stone, often using destroyed in the present century. Arequipa Incaic structures as quarries. Most famous lost the center of her public life in a con- of them is the so-called Casa del Almirante

flagration in 1844. (Figs. 22, 23). It has a large patio of two , _ The arcaded walks of Cuzco’s plaza were arcaded galleries supported by stone col7 reconstructed immediately after the earth- umns. The capital, a rather provincial type quake of 1650, when the city endured the of Doric with the addition of volutes, beworst disaster in its history. A large paint- came more or less the standard for the city. ing in the church of the Triunfo presents a The vertical strip over each capital in the

, precise description of the city as it looked lower gallery establishes a rectangular alfiz in 1650 (Fig. 21). The plaza has changed arrangement of mudéjar origin, also preslittle from the time of the original founda- ent in the Renaissance cloister of San Fran| tion in 1534. Even the arcades of today go cisco at Cuzco. The superstructure is made

a back in part at least to these early years. of brick. In one corner of the court a Houses at Cuzco are of two storiesin the broad stairway leads to the second story. center of the town, contrary to the general Here the main formal hall occupies the practice of limiting them to a single story. street side, following ancient custom in Every house had and still has its patio and European palaces. The service quarters are is covered by a slightly pitched roof of red consigned to an inner court. tiles. The force of tradition was so great The exterior of the Casa del Almirante that the Spanish took the patio with them is a rectangular mass, built of stone. The

| even to the coldest climates. It originated few windows, placed high in the second in the warm Mediterranean world and is_ story, give an almost fortified aspect. One eminently suitable to the tropical coastal corner window with angle caryatid recalls regions of Peru. Nothing could be less prac- many familiar prototypes in Renaissance tical, however, in the rigorous cold of the Spain. The stone trefoil window like the Andean highlands, yet the Spanish built alfiz of the patio introduces the Oriental

A 22K

COLONIAL ARCHITECTURE mudéjar note. A fine stone portal, sur- at Lima (Fig. 24), now occupied by the mounted by escutcheons and a knight’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. A row of shut-

helmet in good Spanish style, has the char- ters upon horizontal bars could be tipped | acter of Renaissance design. It is difficult to outward to allow the ladies to peer down

say whether this palace is really a sixteenth- upon passersby. The origin of these is to be

century structure or an archaistic work of sought in the Near East where they are | a hundred years later. Related portals exist very common in the streets of Cairo. The in Cuzco. The house known as the Casa de Moslems brought them to Spain, whence

los Cuatro Bustos has four busts of men in they traveled to the New World along with | mid-sixteenth-century costume upon the the Spaniard’s definitely Oriental concept

lintel of its doorway.” These busts, as well of women. as the architectural elements, are very con- The Orientalism of the Torre Tagle Palvincing pieces of evidence for dating the ace is not limited to the balconies. The building in the sixteenth century. Investi- main patio (Fig. 26) of trefoil arches, large | gation of the archives and identification of and small in the upper gallery, is one of family shields must be achieved before a the finest pieces of mudéjar art in Peru. — |

definitive solution of many of these prob- The Sevillian tiles upon the dado of the |

lems is accomplished. second story have the date 1735, sufficient Throughout the seventeenth century as a guide to the period of the building.

Cuzco’s arcaded patios of stone changed ‘The tile pavement and fountain in the , little. The second story sometimes has court are, on the other hand, modern. A wooden posts and the flat Moorish type of splendid Baroque portal marks the street

capital known as the zapata (shoe). Pro- entrance, and another sets off the stairway , jecting roofs like those which line the within the court. A short corridor leading

streets of Cuzco are universal in Spanish to the patio (Fig. 25) is richly carved in ; colonial towns. Their purpose is frankly stone with flat lacelike designs of frankly

utilitarian, for they afford protection to mudéjar character. The second court is the house and to the pedestrian from sun _ restricted to a carriage entrance and service and rain. Equally ubiquitous is the balcony, quarters. As usual the principal salon runs also ever present in small villages in the across nearly the full breadth of the facade

mother country. , in the second story. |

A more peculiarly Oriental type of Lima was once a city of balconies. Those

closed balcony provided a protected look- in the old section in the vicinity of the - | out for the women in the cities of Lima Plaza Mayor are now almost entirely of the and Trujillo. The importance of social cus- nineteenth century, and only a few of them toms in their influence upon architecture is still remain in the Calle de la Vera Cruz. , obvious here. The large carved balconies Virtually all of the single-storied houses (called miradores by the Spanish) are espe- with an occasional balcony on the street cially beautiful in the Torre Tagle Palace have disappeared. One stands picturesquely

A 23 A

COLONIAL ART IN PERU aslant.of the large arches on the Paseo de long balconies run a full block on each side

Aguas, a broad promenade with pools of of a large house. A picturesque landmark |

| water in French style built by the Franco- of this sort is the Casa de los Herrera (Fig.

phile viceroy, Amat. | 29) on the corner of the Plaza Mayor — Throughout the length and breadth of in Trujillo. Another stands near the center

Latin America the houses of the common of Lambayeque. , people were single-storied structures of | The portals of the houses of Cajamarca adobe or brick. Roofs were generally tiled; (Fig. 30) deserve special mention in any frequently in primitive districts they were discussion of domestic architecture. Re-— thatched. A small patio always stood in the lated in type to those of Trujillo, they are

center, and in larger establishments one or more lavishly decorated with splendidly | more patios were added, the last one for the carved ornament. Although sometimes in

service quarters. stone, they are more frequently in stucco. At Trujillo a considerable amount of At Trujillo itself the highly decorated good domestic architecture of the colonial frontispiece exists in only one example to-

, period gives distinction to the town. Por- day, the Casa de los Arana. tals are usually rectangular with a full en- © Arequipa surpasses all other cities of tablature as cornice and truncated pilasters Peru for the beauty of its ashlar construc-

| at the sides. The Casa Obregoso on the tion, made of the gray volcanic stone of the Plaza de San Agustin has a well preserved region. Houses, like churches, are built in entrance of this type. A very handsome solid rectangular masses, making fine cubic eighteenth-century facade is that of the volumes. The main salon is usually vaulted,

Casa Ganoza Chopitea (Fig. 27) whose a phenomenon for which there is no parBaroque pediment provides a climactic ele- allel elsewhere in the country. Windows

ment. The sheltered balcony, here at the are rectangular with a flat hood at the right, was just as popular at Trujillo as at top and good iron grilles. The single-storied Lima. The large fine iron grilles, the very patios, generally small, have neither arcades essence of Spanish architecture, are numer- nor the post-and-lintel system.“ As ex-

ous and particularly good in quality at plained in Chapter VIII, the stone portals Trujillo. A short corridor leads into the carved with mestizo ornament achieve very main patio which is small in this region. beautiful decorative effects (Figs. 203,

| Columns of wood topped by zapata capi- 2035). , |

tals are the rule whether the court is An attempt has been made in the present

single storied, or the more rarely used two- chapter to set forth the chief features of

storied type. colonial architecture in Peru. In the suc-

| No great variation in domestic architec- ceeding chapters the material will be ture is noted up and down the coast treated in some detail, including not only

| NM 24K

whether it be at Lima, Trujillo, or Lam- stylistic problems but also questions of his-

bayeque (Fig. 28). Some extraordinarily torical and archaeological nature. ,

| COLONIAL SCULPTURE , COLONIAL SCULPTURE | , “1 the last three chapters, which are de- conceived as subordinate to the decorative

J voted to sculpture, the material is ar- whole. The same is often true in Spain, yet | | ranged by categories of monuments: choir the mother country did produce many | stalls, pulpits, and retables. The develop- sculptors whose fame rests upon their han-

ment is treated chronologically in each dling and interpretation of the human fig-

case. Since the material is studied in its ure. No such master of outstanding dis- ,

broad general aspects, a synthesis of the tinction ever appeared in Peru. -

sculpture has not been included in the The scope of the present volume does not present chapter, as in the case of the archi- extend to the inclusion of the minor arts, tecture. The choir stalls of the seventeenth such as the countless magnificent works in , and eighteenth centuries, principally in silver. The altar frontals, tabernacles, and Lima and Cuzco, comprise an important ecclesiastical vessels in precious metals de- ,

corpus of works never before studied. Pul- serve a special study in themselves, so great | pits are still more prolific in numbers, and is their artistic worth. The entire field of qualitatively unsurpassed anywhere in the colonial painting in Peru, likewise, has yet world. The high point of achievement in to be investigated. Although far less rethis branch of artistic endeavor was reached warding than the architecture and sculpin Cuzco in the second half of the seven- ture, a history of painting will add another

teenth century. | interesting chapter to our knowledge of To speak of Spanish sculpture is to think Hispanic culture. . ,

of retables. The gigantic altar filling the Hispanic-colonial and Portuguese-colobreadth and height of a chapel is an _ nial art in America constitute a new phase uniquely Spanish creation. This develop- in the history of civilization. The New _ ment which began in the fifteenth century World must always be studied with refer- | is One more indication of the Spanish love ence to the Old, otherwise any comprehenof the grandiose and the luxurious. By no _ sion of it is faulty. Yet, the colonial culture accident is the word impresionante one of of America was far more than a provincial

the most often used in the Spanish lan- extension of that of the motherland. The guage. The architectural style of retables different social, political, economic, and closely follows the flux of movements in artistic factors in Spanish America promonumental buildings. In fact, the Baroque duced new situations which find no exact — style of architecture is more complete and parallel in Europe. The native Indian cul-

better fulfilled in retables than elsewhere. ture in Hispanic lands was joined to Old

These structures are pieces of decorative World traditions with an impact which was | architecture, resplendent in the beauty of unprecedented in the history of man. Only

their gilded wood. The figure sculpture it- in very recent years has a realization of | self never attained a position of great sig- their significance in respect to the fine arts

nificance in the Spanish colonies, for it is come to the attention of historians at large. .

M25 A

BLANK PAGE OS

7 Architecture

BLANK PAGE |

| .. THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY |. 7 | “TtHE sixteenth century in Peru was the sian, or more precisely to Sevillian models.

T ie of conquest, colonization, and con- The Dominicans were the first to introduce | version. Distances were great and travel the basilican plan in a large edifice circa

over the Andean region demanded in- 1540-1552, and shortly thereafter the ,

domitable courage and physical stamina. Franciscans (1555) and the Augustinians , Fired with the spirit of the crusades, Span- (1574) followed suit. The Mercedarians ish friars accompanied Pizarro and his fol- (circa 1541-1542) seem to have combined lowers on their first adventures, setting up the Andalusian wooden ceiling with some the Cross wherever they went. Their first features of the Isabellan type of church: churches were humble structures of adobe the single nave flanked by lateral chapels

and thatch without architectural preten- and the elevated choir.” oo sions. At times they transformed an Incaic | Churches of the simplest early type were

temple into a Christian church. Thus it replaced in the major centers by finer edi-

happened at Cajamarca in 1532 that Fray faces as the colonies prospered. Earthquakes | Vicente Valverde set up a shrine to St. also took their toll. Consequently very few

Francis in the Temple of the Sun.’ of the sixteenth century still exist today, Early churches were long and narrow in and they are situated in remote regions. | the form of a single nave (Fig. 1). To this Those of Ayacucho and others upon the category belonged the first cathedrals of shores of Lake Titicaca are studied later in

- Lima and Cuzco, built in the second quar- this chapter.

ter of the century. In Lima throughout the The colonists of Lima and Cuzco had il- | sixteenth century the parish, monastic, and lusions of architectural grandeur a quarter conventual churches were all of this plan century after these capitals were founded.

with three exceptions. A vault over the They proposed huge cathedrals in both

_ sanctuary and a wooden mudéjar ceiling cities to rival the best of Spain. Although | over the nave constituted the usual arrange- the foundation stone was laid in Cuzco in

- ment, a fact which points unmistakably to 1560, and in Lima plans were under way in | Andalusia as the architectural source of 1565, these projects came to naught. Not

these monuments, When the three leading until the very end of the century were the |

| NM 29 4 | |

monastic orders built large structures of two edifices begun in earnest upon plans by

basilican type, they still turned to Andalu- Francisco Becerra. They incorporate the

| THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY | AYACUCHO style of the late classical Renaissance of AN CrIsTOBAL of Ayacucho is probably

Spain which carries over well into the S the oldest surviving colonial building

seventeenth century. in Peru, having suffered no transformation Extant monuments of the sixteenth cen- to the present day. It was erected in the tury are very few in Peru. Aside from the fifth decade of the sixteenth century at the churches of Ayacucho and the Titicaca re- time. of the first settlement of the town.” gion, the cloisters of San Francisco and San Cristdbal has historical and sentimental Santo Domingo in Cuzco (Figs. 31-34) importance, for it provides an extant ex-

_ are the only important structures. Both ample of the type of humble church of were erected in the mid-century. The up- rubble and adobe which the first colonists

| per gallery of the Dominican cloister ap- built wherever they settled. Here are no pears, however, to have been reconstructed pretensions, merely a long rectangular

after the earthquake of 1650, as will be room, low and dark, crudely built, and shown in Chapter III where the entire covered by a pitched roof of basket-woven school of Cuzco is treated in some detail. cane. A narrow bench is built into the left Both cloisters consist of two stories, fol- wall, a substitute for pews in the early days. lowing the custom of important monas- Another such bench, in this case of stone, teries in Spain throughout the Middle Ages lines the wall of the facade within the tiny

and later. The stone capitals are slightly atrium. The portal (Fig. 35), unlike the provincial renderings of their contempo- rest of the building, is made of large blocks | raries of the Renaissance in Spain. The par- of stone. Its broad round arch and the simticularly Spanish note is struck, however, ple channeled molding which takes the

, by the vertical strip above each capital, place of a capital are dignified and humble, thus establishing the mudéjar arch in a_ like hundreds of others in rural districts of rectangle which is known as an alfiz. These Spain. The single bell tower and the piccloisters of Cuzco are large and splendid turesque roof of red tiles add a note of — and all the more precious because they are charm to this relic of the early days of the unique in Peru. They remind us that the conquest of Peru. Renaissance monuments of Lima were The convent of the Merced, founded acequally fine before earthquakes and neces- cording to Chavez de Guevara in 1540, San |

sary reconstruction swept them away. Francisco, established in 1552, and Santa _ The cloister (Fig. 173) of the former Clara, inaugurated in 1568, all in AyacuFranciscan monastery at Chiclayo in the cho, provide the only related group of

oe northern coastal region apparently is a sur- mid-sixteenth-century structures in Peru.* vival of the first building campaign (1572— Other works of the sixteenth century are 1594). Its pointed arches spring from small the church of Paucarcolla (1563), and piers and the material throughout is brick those of Chucuito, Ilave, Juli, and Zepita,

7 M30 K

covered with stucco. contracted in 1590. As explained elsewhere,

, , AYACUCHO the great monastic structures of Safia and — received no architectural decoration, and it

Guadalupe in northern Peru cannot be has only two small rectangular openings — placed earlier than the sixteen-twenties. which give light into the choir. The single The Merced represents a step beyond the belfry to the left is simply handled with | primitive chapel of San Cristébal, being Doric pilasters and unornamented mold-

considerably larger and having more archi- ings, in general contemporary with, but , tectural style, although the main walls are more sophisticated than, the tower of San

still rubble and adobe (Fig. 37). It is cov- Cristébal. - , 7 ered by a pitched roof of cane, supported — The side portal of the Merced (Fig. 38) by small wooden tie beams. Here, as in San escaped restoration, due to the fact that it Cristébal, benches are built along the walls is now blocked up and enclosed within a of the nave. To the single-naved plan are shed which houses the impoverished Indian |

added chapels, two in the position of a sacristan and a chicken yard. For that transept, and a second chapel adjoining happy accident we may be thankful, even | them on both sides. The entrances of the though it is consequently impossible to a chapels with one exception take the form photograph the monument satisfactorily. _

of a round arch with the channeled mold- The broad round arch is constructed of. , ing which acts as substitute for a capital. large pieces of masonry, and the capitals This same stylistic feature is characteristic consist of channeled moldings exactly like of the school, recurring in the side portal those of the chapels within the church. The of La Merced and also in the portals of San same type of column which is used elseFrancisco and. San Cristébal. The remain- where in the edifice reappears here. The ing chapel has an entrance decorated with frieze of the entablature is decorated by one column at each side. The capitals are alternate rosettes and cherubs’ heads, a very _ , the same provincial Corinthian type as common treatment in the sixteenth centhose of the exterior. By exception in a tury. Considerable charm is added to the |

church of this sort the raised choir is sup- portal by the Annunciation carved in the ported on stone barrel vaults, which are spandrels; at the left Gabriel with his ban-

reinforced by three transverse arches. derole bearing the phrase Ave Maria gratia | The facade, also partly of stone, was plena, and at the right the Virgin Mary completely ruined in 1940, when a well- seated at her prayer desk. The sculpture is intentioned restorer covered it with a coat the equal of that found on many provincial

-of cement. The photograph reproduced churches in Spain itself, effective in its here (Fig. 36) has documentary value, place, but not aesthetically important. The since it was taken prior to the restoration. technique is distinctive in the repetition of | The channeled columns and rather crude flowing incised lines, recalling in a very Corinthian capitals closely resembled those general way the sculpture of the school of

of the portal of San Francisco (Fig. 40). Avila, as represented by the frascoro of | Very strangely the upper part of the facade Avila Cathedral. The presence of the Mer- |

| N31 Re |

THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY cedarian shield on the keystone of the arch section of the tower, judging by the stone, and on the bases would be proof, if it were is the only other part of the church which needed, that the monastic order brought was left standing when the interior underthis church into existence. Whether the top went a complete rebuilding in the early of the portal was crowned by a pediment, eighteenth century. The Franciscans came like that of San Francisco, cannot be deter- to Ayacucho in 1552, and they must have mined because of the wooden shed which called upon the architect of the Merced to

| has been raised over it. build their church, almost immediately This side portal of the Merced has the after their arrival. The doorway of the distinction of being the only work of its small cloister, carved with the Franciscan kind dating from the mid-sixteenth cen- cord, may also belong to the original structury which has escaped the hand of the ture, as Harth-terré and Marco Dorta have restorer. The facade of the church (Fig. suggested.” It too has suffered from unin45) of Paucarcolla (1563) belongs to a_ telligent restoration, in this case by an ap-

more classical stylistic phase, as do the other plication of cement. __ | churches of the Puno region, built at the Santa Clara, the latest of the Renaissance

end of the century. | foundations of Ayacucho, is accurately _ The portal of San Francisco (Figs. 39, dated. Its inauguration took place in 1568, 40) is so nearly identical in style to that of thanks to the generosity of the founder, the Merced that no doubt can be harbored Don Antonio de Orue.° In a small con-

| that they are the work of one and the same _-ventual church of single nave, a triumphal architect. Columns, capitals, and frieze as arch precedes the sanctuary opposite which

, well as the archway with its channeled are both upper and lower choirs. Covering molding repeat the Mercedarian side por- the sanctuary is a magnificent mudeéjar tal. The Franciscan shield of the five stig- ceiling of interlaces, recessed octagons, and mata stands upon the keystone of the arch bosses, the earliest still extant in Peru,

| and the pedestals of the columns, in the whereas the pitched ceiling of the nave was same manner as the Mercedarian. The pedi- renewed and plastered in 1941. The stone

| ment contains the kneeling figure of St. body of the church is equally simple on the

| Francis as he receives the stigmata while exterior. Its real distinction is due to the Brother Leo sleeps beside him. These reliefs, majestically beautiful bell tower (Fig.

as well as the statues of St. Anthony of 149), added subsequently about 1712.’ Padua and St. Clare atop the columns, the ‘The principal side portal (Fig. 43), openangels of the spandrels, and the frieze, were ing on the plaza, lacks the architectural sig-

recut and refaced in the past ten years. nificance of those of the Merced and San Hence they have lost all of their sixteenth- Francisco. The escutcheons, carved with

| A 32 A

century character. That fact can readily be elephant and griffin, beside the semicircular

understood by a comparison with the un- tympanum, are those of Antonio de Orue

, scathed portal of the Merced. The lower and his wife, Luisa Diaz de Rojas. The same

, | LAKE TITICACA | , channeled molding which is used in all six- built by them. The designer of the portal , teenth-century buildings of Ayacucho ap- displayed his independence in not follow‘pears at the springing of the arch of the ing precisely the style of the other Renaisdoorway, and also upon the triumphal arch _ sance buildings of Ayacucho, just discussed

within the church. The capitals of the above. The treatment of the columns, capichanneled shafts do not, however, follow tals, and frieze and the general decorative :

the precedent previously established at arrangement exhibit his originality. The Ayacucho. On the contrary, they have vo- lions’ heads on the frieze over the columns lutes which resemble those in the cloisters and over the center of the doorway are new

of San Francisco and Santo Domingo in to the city, even though familiar motives

Cuzco. ne in the period. This portal is indeed a rare

The last of the Renaissance monuments example of Spanish plateresque architecture |

of Ayacucho is the portal of a small chapel in Peru. In fact, it is the only work which (Fig. 41) which stands at the right of the may properly be called by that term, bechurch of the Compafiia. The patrons must cause of the flourish and floridity in the have been the Orue family in this case once | handling of the foliate ornament. For that again, because their escutcheon provides reason it is precious, as well as for its own the decorative motives of the stone tym- innate provincial charm. Very recently, it

panum. Except for the replacing of the has been damaged by clumsy pedestals quartered shield of Antonio de Orue with added as reinforcement beneath the col-

AMR, monogram of the Madonna, we have umns. , :

a repetition here of the coat of armson the = : choir wall within the church of Santa — |

Clara (Fig. 42). The leaves are broader LAKE TITICACA © ,

and longer, but otherwise there is little HE Dominican, Fray Tomas de San | modification. The seated griffins of the T startin, who accompanied Pizarro in

Orue are used like guardian spirits, watch- his conquest of Peru, left Cuzco after its ing at the sides. The elephant is a heraldic foundation in 1534 and set forth across the device of the same family, and cannot jus- region of Lake Titicaca. Thence he penetifiably be cited as an example of Far East- trated into distant Charcas, now Bolivia. In

ern influence.* , , 1540, at the time of the erection of the

This chapel is probably an early founda- province of the Dominican order in Peru, tion of the Orues (circa 1570) about con- a monastery was about to be established at temporary with the church of Santa Clara. Chucuito. This house is mentioned as exThey must have ceded it to the Jesuits some isting in 1553, dedicated to St. Vincent, — | time after the arrival of the first preacher and there were other Dominican missions. of that order in 1583.° In the decoration of in Juli, Ilave, Zepita, Acora, and Yunguyo,

the portal there are no insignia of the these latter presided over by only one or :

AN 33 A

Jesuits which would indicate that it was two monks. The great importance of the

, THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY - lake district, known as the province of in the region of Lake Titicaca is that of the Chucuito, may be deduced by the fact that Inmaculada in a small village called PauSan Pedro Martir of Juli held a full com- carcolla, just north of Puno. According to plement of twelve monks in 1565. It ranked Meléndez, the bishop of Charcas, Fray third in size, next to Lima and Cuzco, Domingo de Santo Tomas, paid a visit here © among all of the Spanish Dominican estab- about 1563. Finding no church he ordered

lishments in South America.” one built at his own expense “with walls The rectangular apse and transept of San of adobe, portals of brick, and a wooden

Pedro Martir (Fig. 2) at Juli were prob- roof.””* The description may be based ably constructed at that period, prior to the upon Meléndez’s own familiarity with the

expulsion of the Dominicans from the building or upon a report of the bishop’s _ whole region. On the initiative of the vice- pastoral visit which Meléndez undoubtroy, Francisco de Toledo, they were re- edly had seen in documentary form. The placed by the Jesuits (1576). Hence this present church follows the description, and

_ must be the earliest extant work (circa the architectural style clearly indicates a 1565) in the ancient province of Chucuito, date in the third quarter of the sixteenth

The Gothic survival in the use of three century. -

| pointed arches under the crossing (Fig. 44) An excellent piece of design is the facade provides the most interesting architectural (Fig. 45), based in its disposition upon the feature, and one of the very rare instances triumphal-arch motive, and essentially of of the pointed arch in the viceroyalty of the late classical Renaissance in its applica-

Peru. It also occurs in the cloister (Fig. tion of pediments and in its undecorated 173) of the former Franciscan monastery surfaces. The stepping back of the pilasters at Chiclayo (circa 1572-1594). Sixteenth- at each end is a usage familiar in Michel- | century examples of the pointed arch are angelo’s work, such as the top story of the to be found, however, in Santa Clara at court of the Farnese Palace in Rome and Tunja, Colombia, in the cathedral of Quito, the exterior of St. Peter’s. The balustered Ecuador, and in the crossing of San Fran- colonnettes in the niches and on the frieze

- cisco in the same city. Rubble and adobe re effective, but simplified and provincial were used in this early structure at Juli, compared with Italian or Spanish usage. now in a lamentable state of disrepair, the The treatment of moldings with dentils sanctuary covered with corrugated iron, shows good. taste, also in evidence in the and the transept roofed in wood. The low general scale and proportions of the work. dome of cane over the crossing must, for The familiar Renaissance medallion here is structural reasons, have been rebuilt, when inscribed with a disk which turns up again the new nave with its barrel vault of stone in La Asunciédn at Chucuito (Fig. 46).

masonry was added at the close of the ‘The channeled capitals have precedent as

seventeenth century. - far away as Ayacucho, in the churches of

| A 34K

_. The earliest complete church still extant La Merced and San Francisco (Figs. 38,

| , ~ LAKE TITICACA — , 40). Rather strange is the placing of the La Asuncién at Juli there is no definite | arched niche in the center of the main reference save that it was finished in 1620.°

_ pediment. Within the church, the chapel All of the churches are of single-naved , to the right is preceded by a brick portal type (Figs. 1, 54). Some of them must , , in which the same balustered colonnettes of have had a raised choir, as the remains of the facade reappear. Other fine portals the wooden beams in San Juan at Juli dem-

lead into the arms of the transept, in this onstrate. No choir contemporary with the | case distinguished by recessed squares in the original building is preserved today. In two frieze and by Doric pilasters enframing the cases they were rebuilt in stone at the end

round arch. ; of the seventeenth or at the beginning of The floor plan at Paucarcolla is long and _ the eighteenth century. The construction

narrow with chapels in the arms of the of the choir of La Asuncién at Chucuito is transept and with a polygonal apse, now in especially interesting, because it is carried ruins. The same type recurs in the churches on square piers which support domical

of La Asuncién at Chucuito, San Juan at vaults in the lower story. The way the Acora, San Miguel at Pomata, and La Asun- arches cut across the original doorway to

cién at Juli. , the baptistry is clear evidence that they are The great similarity of the sixteenth- of later date than the church. The type of century churches in this region is explained construction and the curious ornament on by a contract of October 13, 1590, accord- the surface toward the nave also place them ing to which Gabriel Montalvo y Peralta about the year 1700. Another choir, mag-

ordered the construction of sixteen nificent in its sculptured reliefs of the early churches by Juan Gomez and Juan Lépez, eighteenth century, is that of San Miguel

carpenters, and Juan Jiménez, mason. at Pomata (Fig. 235). Both of the above , Three churches were to be erected in Chu- works will be discussed in more detail later. cuito, three in Juli, and two each in Acora, From the architectural point of view the

Ilave, Pomata, Yunguyo, and Zepita. An- most interesting features are the portals. _ other document of 1595 shows that ten of The churches are generally oriented later- | them had not yet been begun. By 1601 ally to the plaza with a side portal which

‘seven were in process but, on the other enters the nave and another portal on the | hand, eight still existed only as projects. short side. Exceptions in which the normal The facts about the eight churches still ex- facade on the short side overlooks the plaza

tant today can be summarized thus: San are San Juan at Acora, La Asuncién at Juan at Juli, San Miguel at Ilave, and San Paucarcolla, and San Pedro Martir at Juli,

Miguel at Pomata were begun in 1590 and the latter still in its original disposition, | still incomplete in 1601; the churches of even though the nave was rebuilt at the end , La Asuncion at Chucuito, San Sebastian at of the seventeenth century.

Zepita, and San Juan and San Pedro at The earliest and the most sophisticated | Acora were ready for inception in 1601; to of the portals is that of Paucarcolla (Fig.

THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY , 45), already discussed. It had a follower in most noteworthy features of the series of the side portal of San-Pedro at Acora, where churches under discussion. They appear in the shell niches with bulbous colonnettes La Inmaculada at Paucarcolla, La Asuncion and the stepping back of the pilasters give at Chucuito (Fig. 50), and San Miguel at

clear indication of the prototype. Imitation Ilave. oe

was not servile, however, for the general The long nave of San Juan at Juli proportions at Acora are narrower and (Fig. 1) and the front portal (Fig. 47)

higher, while the use of disks in the frieze still survive from the period of 1590,

se and the large medallion of the pediment whereas its side portal, transept, and apse have no precedent at Paucarcolla. The were rebuilt about 1700. The facade has frieze of disks belongs, nonetheless, to the been diminished in height by the raising of regional school, for it appears with good the ground level in recent years. Its sober

, effect in the interior portals of La Asun- design is one of the best of this group. , cién (Fig. 50) at Chucuito. A similar type Doric pilasters flank the round arch of the , of frieze distinguishes the portals of houses doorway and the pediment is loaded at the in Tunja, Colombia, at the end of the sides by uxns. The globe of the world sursixteenth century, indicating that it is a mounted by a cross stands at the summit late Hispanic Renaissance feature, not lim- of the pediment. Unity of design, not al-

ited to the highlands of Peru.™ ways notable in. these monuments, is - The front portal of San Pedro at Acora achieved by the cross-inscribed disks of the has a sober design in excellent scale with spandrels and the larger medallion enclos-

- the stepped pilasters again, disks in the ingthe IHSinthe pediment. © spandrels, and a frieze of rectangular cof- The side portal of La Asuncién at Juli

fers. The latter type of frieze was the (Fig. 48) constitutes an enlargement of favorite of the builders of the region, for that of San Juan by the addition of a pithey used it in the front portal of San laster and a medallion with the THS at each

, Juan at Juli (Fig. 47), the side portal of side. That modification is sufficient to disLa Asuncién at Juli (Fig. 48), the side rupt the fine dimensions of the other monportal of San Sebastian at Zepita, the side ument. The main facade, now in ruins as is

, portal of San Miguel at Pomata, the inte- nearly half of the long nave, followed the rior portals of the chapels of San Miguel at same style. Recently a covering of galvaIlave (Fig. 52), and the facade of the same nized iron has been placed over the tran-

| church. The earliest appearance of all, if sept, apse, and part of the nave, and thus we are correct in our dating, is upon the the church is being protected from further portals which give access to the chapels of decay. The walls of the apse were re-

the transept at Paucarcolla. , inforced with buttresses in 1944.. The

| N 36K

The use of large portals, as splendid as church may have been projected in 1590, those of the exterior, to mark the entrances but it underwent considerable delay and of the chapels of the transept is one of the did not see completion until 1620.” La

| | | LAKE TITICACA ~~. Asuncién’s magnificent tower of stone chapels, all on the interior. of the church. ,

(Fig. 233); since partly ruined by light- The pointed arch enframed within a mudé- ; ning,.came into being about one hundred jar alfiz makes the sacristy doorway a sig-

years later. © © ©... nal case of Hispanic archaism, one which : A provincial architect’s attempt to astonishes the student on his first discovachieve splendor is the impression given ery of it. The large frontispieces of the by the side portal of La Asuncién at Chu- chapels, on the contrary, have a sober latecuito (Fig. 46). Here the ornamentation of Renaissance enframement of Doric pilasters disks and niches and the channeled columns and the familiar coffered frieze of the reprovide a more lavish composition than gion. A curious note here is registered by elsewhere in the region, but one which is the small colonnettes of the spandrels. —

poor in design, lacking any sense of the = The front entrance of San Miguel is _ proper relation of the various motives. Cer- very nearly an exact replica of the cortain details recall the church facades of responding section of the church of San Ayacucho and others in the province of Pedro at Acora, the closest neighboring Cuzco, such as those of San Jerénimo (Fig. village. At Ilave the pediment has disap88) and Oropesa. There too.the cherubs’ peared and the stucco covering the brick

heads occur in the frieze, so characteristic has in large part disintegrated. The side of the Renaissance; moreover, shafts and portal at Ilave, which opens upon the plaza, |

friezes are fluted. , has, in spite of its classical sobriety, a mudéAmong all of the portals in the lake re- jar frieze of interlacing quatrefoils. Here

gion, only those of La Asuncién at Chu- one sees variations upon local themes, the , cuito are built of stone. That fact alone basic design of its companion on the other does not make them superior to others of side of the building being modified by the this group. The modest front portal of La use of channeled half columns and tiny Asuncién with its simple Doric pilasters voluted Ionic capitals, similar to those at

and channeled frieze is better than the Chucuito. Brick covered with stucco, fol- a more elaborate side entrance. Really excel- lowing general practice in the lake region,

lent in scale and chaste in design are the is the material employed in all of these

large frontispieces of the lateral chapels charming portals at Ilave. | within the church (Fig. 50). Here orna- The churches on the shores of Lake ment is sparingly employed, being limited Titicaca usually have a single tower, large to disks on the frieze and in the spandrels. and devoid of architectural features, the The most interesting series of portals in belfry with two openings on each face. It any one church of the Titicaca district are is frequently located on the gospel side

those of San Miguel at Ilave (Figs. 51-54). (Acora, Ilave, Chucuito [Fig. 49], Po- Very rare in Peru is the use of the pointed mata), and occasionally on the epistle side ,

| N37 R ,

arch. It appears here in the sacristy en- (San Juan at Juli, Paucarcolla). The beltrance and in the two portals of the lateral fries of San Pedro Martir and La Asuncién

, THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY at Juli, of San Pedro at Acora, and of San the eighteenth century. Some tattered frag-

Miguel at Ilave were reconstructed in the ments of painted silk cloth, which origlate seventeenth or eighteenth century. inally concealed the branches, supply eviMaterials employed in these late six- dence of an unusual method of enhancing teenth-century churches are brick, rubble, the beauty of a church. On the outside, and a generous admixture of adobe. The tiles combined with thatch still survive. _ portals, as previously indicated, are con- Thus the picturesque charm of the exterior structed of brick and stucco, with the ex- is preserved, as likewise in the thatched exception of the stone portals of La Asunciédn _ terior of San Miguel at Pomata.

at Chucuito. The roofs were trussed on The atria within which the early poles and covered with heavy thatch or churches stood have also disappeared with tiles. Nearly all of the colonial roofs have the centuries in great part. Some of the

, disappeared and have given way to a_ round-arched enclosure still stands at Paupractical but extremely ugly covering of carcolla. La Asuncién at Chucuito (Fig. galvanized iron. The roofing of the nave 49) is the most fortunate of all in that reof San Juan at Juli is a trussed construction spect, its long open arcade rising in romanof branches, undoubtedly a replacement of tic abandon above the quiet spacious plaza.

| N38 R

- TT | |

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY: CUZCO [/\UZzCO, capital of the Incas, is unrivaled sons made colonial Cuzco a city of stone.

| Cin all of the Americas, a city of two The fine brown Andean stone, called ancivilizations superimposed, the Incaic and _ desite, with its slight reddish cast gives to

the Hispanic. Situated in a valley at an Cuzco a uniformity like that of Florence altitude of eleven thousand feet with with its stone palaces of the Renaissance. mountains rising high above on every Stone abounds in all of Cuzco’s churches, hand, Cuzco is a land of breath-taking its cloisters, its arcaded plazas, and in the beauty. Legendary associations are said to portals and patios of its houses. Lima is a

have been the determining factors in the city of adobe and wood; Cuzco, a city of ,

establishment of the Incan capital here. sturdy brown stone. |

Yet it is difficult to avoid the belief that . Spanish Cuzco, which Pizarro founded | the natives were sensitive to the allure of in 1534 on the ruins of the Inca empire, the mountains and valleys, notwithstand- was later demolished, not by man but by

ing the rigors of the altitude and cold nature, in the great earthquake of 1650.

climate, _ , Diego de Mendoza, a Franciscan contem-

Although the Spanish conquerors at- porary, asserts that among the churches ,

tempted to destroy the society and the only Santa Clara, San Juan de Dios, and. city of the conquered, they never suc- the new cathedral escaped destruction in ceeded, and still today the walls of Incaic that fateful year." Hence we have in Cuzco , palaces and temples serve as foundations of a city of the second half of the seventeenth

Hispanic convents, churches, and man- century, a period of unbelievable activity,

sions. The magnificent stonework of the when a new and still more magnificent | Incas, perfectly cut and fitted without use Cuzco arose. Unfortunately scarcely a of mortar, can be seen on every hand, building of the sixteenth century survived standing in sharp contrast to the Euro- except the main cloister of San Francisco pean technique of ashlar and mortar which and the lower gallery of Santo Domingo.

the Spanish employed in the churches of The great architectural glory among ‘Cuzco. Availability of stone, both in the many in Cuzco is its cathedral. Authorized , - quarries and in the great Incaic palaces by papal bull of 1553, it is the finest |

| A 39 AR

~which the Spanish used as quarries, and church of the western hemisphere, in my

the added advantage of skilled Indian ma- own opinion. The first stone on the pres-

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY ent site was laid March 11, 1560. The take eighty-two.’ The structure was to architect in charge, Juan Miguel de Vera- have had three naves covered with vaults mendi, who hailed from Viscaya, Spain, or a wooden roof as seemed best, with the then resided in Chuquisaca, Bolivia. He had reservation that the capilla .mayor be _ received the contract on the basis of plans vaulted. Moreover, of interest is a curious submitted on October 10, 1559. When in provision that there should be a choir but

Bolivia I searched the archives of Chu- no trascoro, all of which proves that the quisaca with the hope of finding a record plans of 1571-1572 were not those of the of Juan Miguel de Veramendi there, but present church. After Francisco de Toledo succeeded only in discovering the name of left Cuzco, work on the cathedral was an architect, Francisco de Veramendi, who paralyzed, because the bishop refused to

was paid for work on foundations of a contribute the church’s share of the cost, chapel of the cathedral in 1583. Since the insisting that the king, citizens, and InSpanish population of the town was very dians pay for everything! The town counsmall at that date, the two men named cil made feeble efforts to combat the bishop Veramendi must have been related, per- in 1574, but as usual nothing happened.° haps father and son.” Another architect, . The next and really important event in , Juan Correa, appears as maestro mayor of the complex history of Cuzco Cathedral is Cuzco Cathedral in 1562.*. These docu- the appearance of the famous Spanish ar-

, ments are of purely academic interest, how- chitect, Francisco Becerra, whose career is , ever, since little was accomplished in the discussed as a whole in the section devoted

, early years, and there is no reason to be- to the cathedral of Lima. According to the , lieve that Veramendi’s plans were in any testimony presented in court at Lima in way related to the church as eventually 1585, Becerra had drawn plans for both

built. ee Oe the cathedrals of Cuzco and Lima at the

_ Nothing more is heard until the famous command of the viceroy Martin Enriquez viceroy, Francisco de Toledo, with a show (died 1583), who had called him from of anger ordered on October 9, 1571, that Cuzco to Lima in 1582. Becerra’s trans-

, the church be finished within six years, fer to Lima at that time may partly exstating that the plans, supplies, and every- plain why the construction at Cuzco seems

thing necessary were available. One year to have been abandoned for a matter of | later he became still more drastic. He sixteen years. Padre Reginaldo Lizarraga lashed out and reduced the priests’ salaries who visited Cuzco, probably in the period by seventy-five pesos monthly, ordered a 1594-1597, remarked that the old cathetax on all inhabitants to contribute to the dral of mud was very poor, and that con-_

edifice, the Indians to fulfill their share sidering the great wealth of the diocese by manual labor. Once again he reiterated he did not understand why the new one

A 40 |

, that the church must be finished in six had not been built.’ a / _ years, and little did he realize that it would In 1598 the viceroy, Luis de Velasco,

: co CUZCO | demanded less grandiose plans for Lima they had no plans for the cathedral, for , Cathedral which could be completed they were in the viceroy’s possession! He | within a short time, and in the same letter said the cathedral had been well begun by stated, “I have ordered that the same be its first master “Francisco de Carrién,” but done.in that of Cuzco which has also been that subsequent architects had made a

begun in these days.” * Although the Iet- thousand errors. The confusion of the ter does not say specifically that Becerra names of Francisco Becerra and Bartolomé

drew the new plans for Cuzco Cathedral, Carrién is indicative of the chaos which the evidence for such a belief is over- appears to have prevailed. The architect whelming. Most compelling of all is the then in. charge, Miguel Gutiérrez Sencio, , similarity of the floor plans and pier con- submitted a statement, averring that he struction of the two churches, and Be- had had to make new drawings and plans cerra’s authorship of the first cathedral of since there were none, and explaining in Lima (1598-1604) has been proven be- some detail the system of proportions he

yond a doubt by several documents. In had used, a scheme which does not. cor- | | 1603 the viceroy appointed a new maestro respond to the edifice as built.” In March mayor of Cuzco Cathedral, an architect, 1619 the archdean petitioned the king that

Bartolomé Carrién, who had previously the bishop have the right to name the constructed the main portal of Tunja Ca- maestro mayor without the interference of thedral in Colombia. He was ordered to the viceroy.’ And so, matters dragged on proceed with the construction according interminably. Nineteen years later a royal to the plans he had recently drawn. Car- cedula was forthcoming with the command rién remained in charge from 1603 until that work on the cathedral proceed, but

1607 at least. Only in the latter year were the need was for an‘energetic bishop, at | , this provision and a petition of the archi- long last realized in the person: of Alonso , tect entered in the “Actas Capitulares.”° Océn. When Bishop Océn entered Cuzco _ Very little could have been accomplished in 1644, he found the walls of the church : in these years, considering subsequent his- not more than half built, and yet seven

tory. Harth-terré’s theory that Bartolomé years later he was able to send a detailed | | Carrién should be given entire credit for account to the king and to state that only © the cathedral as it now stands is uncon- ten arches and seventeen vaults remained

vincing, for many reasons.” , to be concluded. Fifty masons, significantly

- On December 2, 1616, the town council “all Indians,” were at work upon the oo of Cuzco evinced enough interest to send fagade.’* In the great earthquake of 1650 the models of the church and a report of | the damage to the new cathedral was slight, architects to the viceroy.” In November and by July 1654 the work was complete

| A 4r RK |

1617 Fray Miguel de la Guerra, obrero except for the towers which were delayed _

mayor of San Francisco, Lima, turned in a about three years more.” |

report to the viceroy stating that in Cuzco Thus the actual construction of the ca-

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY thedral for which the first stone was laid A man to whom much credit should be in 1560 may be summarized as follows: a given was the canon, Diego Arias de la — plan by Francisco Becerra prepared in Cerda, who was the executive administrator 15823 a final plan in 1598, most probably of the work (obrero mayor) in these years. reworked by Becerra; subsequent modifica- Writing to the king in 1657, the Bishop tions by Bartolomé Carrién and Miguel Pedro Ortega y Sotomayor praised him Gutiérrez Sencio and others; very slow highly, stating “‘to his continuous presence, - progress until 1644, when due to the in- industry, and skill all of the work of this

, sistence of Bishop Océn the structure was temple is due ...”** People have errovaulted and brought to conclusion in ten neously concluded that Diego Arias was

years. , an architect and have accredited to his own The question as to the author of the hand the architecture of the fagade, which

- plans of Cuzco Cathedral may always re- is obviously a mid-seventeenth-century demain a controversial issue. As previously sign, the sculpture of the choir stalls and — stated, it seems to me impossible to avoid the pulpit, and even the casting of the the conclusion that the original project of cathedral bells.” Undoubtedly it is due in Becerra has survived in the main. This great part to the zeal of Diego Arias de la belief is based upon the virtual identity Cerda that all of these projects were realof Cuzco with Becerra’s undeniably docu- ized. His position was, however, that of

, mented work, Lima Cathedral. Ample administrator (obrero mayor) to which precedent for the use of the same plans he was appointed in 1648, and not of chief

long after the death of the original archi- architect (maestro mayor) .” tect can be cited throughout architectural The man who has been largely overhistory: Diego Sildee’s cathedral of Gra- looked, but who, by several documents, is nada, completed a hundred years after the shown to have worked on the cathedral — master’s death, Alberti’s Sant? Andrea at for at least thirty-two years, is Miguel Mantua, and innumerable Gothic churches Gutiérrez Sencio. He is mentioned as

throughout Europe. maestro mayor in 1617, in 1625, and again | An attempt to give Bartolomé Carrién in 1628.” The latest document with his credit for the creation of Cuzco Cathedral name, discovered by Monsefior Casanova, is is based on Miguel de la Guerra’s report of a payment of salary in 1649.” In matter 1617 that the cathedral had been begun by of length of service Gutiérrez Sencio easily

, its first master “Francisco de Carrién.” The outstrips all other contenders for honors confusion of the names of Francisco Be- as architect of Cuzco Cathedral. It was he cerra and Bartolomé Carrién is a symbolic who carried out Francisco Becerra’s plans coincidence. Whatever Carrién did is spec- and, no doubt, modified them. greatly.

N42k :

| ulative, but the structure of the cathedral Gutiérrez Sencio’s activity was not limited itself testifies to its blood relationship to to the cathedral, however, for he was ar-

Becerra’s cathedral of Lima. chitect of a cloister of the Merced in 1634,

| , CUZCO | | a work to be discussed later on in this same fied. Their Ionic capitals are noted by V4z-

chapter sis , quez de Espinosa about 1619.” ,

_ The name of one other man, Antonio de . The differences between Becerra’s orig- , la Coba, is mentioned as architect (alarife) inal cathedral of Lima (1598-1604) and of Cuzco Cathedral in 1651,” but since the present cathedral of Cuzco are the that is the full extent of our information following: the former had pointed arches about him, little speculation can be haz- and groined vaults (for details see Chaparded. Just possibly, Gutiérrez Sencio, who ter IV), whereas Cuzco has round arches was a man at least of middle age by that and decorated Gothic vaults. Unquestiontime, might have died. If the documents ably Becerra’s original plan for Cuzco was of Cuzco are ever systematically read and modified in detail by Bartolomé Carrién published, a fund of new data on the ca- and Miguel Gutiérrez Sencio and others.

thedral will surely come to light. Most certainly Becerra intended to use ' The ground plans of Lima and Cuzco pointed arches, as is proven by the fact (Figs. 7, 8), as previously stated, are alike that the arches of the first chapel to the | in all essentials, differing in that Lima is right and the first chapel to the left, on one bay longer and that it originally had entering the church, are pointed. All other a chapel dedicated to St. Bartholomew be- arches in the building are round, clear evi-

hind the capilla mayor, whereas at Cuzco dence of a change in plan. Becerra may _ there is no chapel in that position. Both also have intended groined vaults at Cuzco churches are of the hall type, consisting as at Lima, but that possibility lies in the

of three naves of equal height, and both realm of pure speculation. have nonprojecting transepts without lan- The rectangular plan of Lima and Cuzco , tern. Perhaps most convincing of all is the Cathedrals adheres to the type established identity in the shape of the piers of Lima in Spain in Seville Cathedral (1402) where

and Cuzco Cathedrals, and the large Doric it came into existence as a result of the | entablature block above the capital. The use of the site of the Moorish mosque, exact counterpart of these piers is not to which like all mosques was rectangular. be found anywhere in the world; hence the Due to the great prestige of Seville Cathe-

similarities are most noteworthy. dral, this plan became very popular in It may be argued that the stylistic rela- Spain in the sixteenth century, particution between the two buildings is invalid larly in Andalusia, whence it passed to the because the cathedral of Lima was rebuilt New World. Jaén Cathedral (1540) is the

after the earthquake of 1746. Nonetheless, direct prototype of the cathedrals of Cuzco , the ground plan was retained throughout and Lima. In Mexico City, Puebla, Guada-

the numerous restorations and reconstruc- lajara, Mérida, Habana, and Panama City, , tions as can be seen in the plan of 1696, the rectangular plan was adopted, yet so oe and there is no reason to believe that the different in proportion and detail from _

NBR

shape of the piers at Lima was ever modi- the Peruvian churches, as to further em-

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY | | phasize the -close relationship between more vertical had pointed arches been used Cuzco and Lima.” The same is true of the as first intended.”* The late-Gothic vaults

like design of the cruciform piers with with decorative ribs do not disturb the large entablature blocks in Cuzco and Herreresque classicism of the piers, the Lima (Figs. 65, 91). Their derivation as walls, and the space. Gothic vaulting at so well as that of the ground plan and hall late a date is a reflection of the same contype are to be sought in Andalusia. Diego servatism seen on the Spanish peninsula in Sildee introduced the entablature block the sixteenth-century cathedrals of Grafrom Renaissance Italy, employing it first nada, Salamanca, Segovia, and elsewhere. In

in Spain in Granada Cathedral (begun the New World, too, Gothic vaults per1528), and thence it became characteristic sisted in the Renaissance cathedrals of of Andalusia, appearing in the cathedrals Guadalajara and Santo Domingo (1521-

of Malaga, Jaén, Guadix, etc.” With the 1541).” The return to Gothic vaults in rectangular plan it spread to the new Peru, after Becerra had used groined vaults world: to Guadalajara (1561-1618), in Lima Cathedral, is further explained, which like Cuzco has Gothic vaults and is however, by the fact that architects bea hall church, to Puebla and Mexico City lieved that the Gothic construction would where its design was very different from show greater resistance to earthquakes. —

that of the massive cruciform piers of No small part of the grandeur of Cuzco

Cuzco and Lima. Cathedral is explained by the beauty of the The style of the interior of the cathedral hard reddish-brown Andean stone of the of Cuzco (Figs. 65, 66) with its colossal Incas. Unfortunately the beauty of mate-

proportions and austere simplicity is in rial has been damaged by painting the in, marked contrast to the style of Mexico terior light gray. The vaults of brick, as City (begun 1563) and Puebla (designed usual in Cuzco, are now painted blue with

, circa 1555-1575). Cuzco, replanned in the ribs white. The slightly domical shape | 1598, represents the very last phase of the of the vaults as well as the material became , Spanish Renaissance, the rigorous classicism characteristic of Cuzco in the second half

| introduced to Spain by Juan Bautista de of the seventeenth century, although only Toledo, when in 1559 he was called to Ma- in La Compajfiia are the Gothic ribs imi-

drid from Spanish Naples to design the tated. The Doric entablature block, on Escorial. This classicism was made famous the other hand, was borrowed in other by the great architect, Juan de Herrera, churches, notably for San Francisco, La who succeeded as director of the building Merced, El Belén, and San Pedro (Figs. 72,

of the Escorial in 1567. The solemn bare- 73, 76, 82). _

ness of the walls and the austere majesty | To the late Renaissance Herreresque in-

, of Cuzco are incomparable in the New terior of Cuzco Cathedral was added a a World. Its majestic space is awesome, a facade (Figs. 62, 63), obviously designed

MN 44K |

space which might have appeared slightly in the mid-seventeenth century, and com-

| i , CUZCO Oe pletely Baroque.in its style. The portal in per facade of La Compafiia. The soberest | the center is composed of several planes classicism prevails in the two smaller rus-

which move toward the middle. The entire ticated doorways and in the simple rus- | concept is pictorial, with the constant ticated pilasters of the towers. The balls shifting of outlines and breaking of cor- and pyramids which crown the towers and nices, moldings, and entablatures.” The roof tops likewise are survivals of the late design is, nonetheless, architectural, for Renaissance. Two features of the exterior the elements employed are columns, pi- of the cathedral are markedly Hispanic: lasters, entablatures, and empty niches with the flat terraced roofs, which characterize

a minimum of surface ornament, a con- Spanish architecture even in the Gothic trast to the later, so-called Churrigueresque period, and the disposition of the facade. style of the eighteenth century, as repre- By the latter is meant the emphasis on the

sented by the facade of San Agustin, Lima, central portal which is contrasted with | and the churches of Cajamarca (Figs. 111, the broad expanse of bare walls at the sides.

177-187). In these cases the facade is a This contrast of surface is an outstanding tapestry of delicately cut ornament. On characteristic of Spanish architecture in the contrary, the flat rather geometric pat- the Renaissance and later, as for instance, terns on the lower columns and bases of the facades of the hospital of Santa Cruz the Cuzco portal and the cloth swag con- in Toledo (1504-1514) and the cathedral

_ taining apples upon the columns in the of Gerona.” The latter portal furnishes an | second story are entirely subordinated to interesting parallel to the portal of Cuzco the architectural whole. This portal set the Cathedral, although the Spanish example is

standard for the entire school of Cuzco more restrained in design. —_ in the second half of the seventeenth cen- = The proportions of the Cuzco facade | tury, serving as a model for the portals of (Fig. 62) are very broad in relation to the , La Compafiia, El Belén, San Pedro, and height of the towers. The reason for low

San Sebastian (Figs. 67-70) with impor- towers is obviously a practical one, since , tant modifications in each case. Retables, they were completed only seven years after

too, follow a similar style in the middle of the disastrous earthquake of 1650 had the seventeenth century. Among them the ruined the city. This defect is less evident , high altar of Santa Catalina (Fig. 313) is in the presence of the church than it ap-

the best example. Very characteristic is pears to be in photographs. The whole | the contrast in the planes and the abrupt mass of the church is rectangular and

breaking of the pediments, with the wide powerful, and the virile ruggedness of the , gap over the main arch in the center. The brown Andean stone adds in no small curious webbed volute at the upper sides measure to the solemnity and grandeur of | of the crowning of the cathedral portal the exterior. The particular disposition of recurs in the lunettes of the choir stalls the facade undoubtedly is derived from

within the church, as well as in the up- that of Lima Cathedral, as it appeared in -

AN 45K

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY the early seventeenth century, although served as Casa de Moneda in the early ninethe two facades vary greatly in detail and teenth century and now as the Colegio de

in proportions. Educandas.* The church, modest in size The architect who designed the facade and unpretentious in architecture, appears

of Cuzco Cathedral is unknown. Of the to belong to the early seventeenth century, architects who were engaged here in the probably rebuilt after 1617 when the mid-seventeenth century only the names monks came to take charge of the old hosof Antonio de la Coba and Miguel Gutié- pital of St. Bartholomew.” Its long single rrez Sencio have been preserved.” Whoever nave has a pitched wooden ceiling with he may have been, the author of the Cuzco crossbeams which are decorated with the facade was no provincial, but a man thor- familiar mudéjar eight-pointed star, thus oughly familiar with the latest develop- constituting the most interesting feature ments of the Baroque style in Spain. He of the church. As for the equally unpremust have been a Spaniard, and he was a_ tentious exterior with tiled roof, the stone highly original and gifted artist, one who portals are nondescript today, particularly

set into motion Baroque architecture in the side portal of fine rusticated stone Cuzco. He was a professional architect and which has been blocked up and recon-

surely not the zealous and able adminis- structed. oe ,

| trator, Diego Arias de la Cerda, canon of Santa Clara (Fig. 59) is a far more imCuzco and priest of Urubamba. , portant example of early Cuzco architecArchitecture in Cuzco is accurately ture. Although small and consisting of a dated by the great earthquake of 1650 single nave, as is customary in convents of (Fig. 21), or rather series of earthquakes, nuns, it has interesting features, especially which almost completely destroyed the the domed vault with rectangular recesses city. The Franciscan chronicler, Diego de over the sanctuary.” This simplification of Mendoza, who was an eyewitness, gives a coftered Renaissance vault appears in no relatively exact information as to the fate other extant building in Cuzco, but there of the churches. The new cathedral escaped may have been others prior to the earthwith slight damage, a fact confirmed by quake. The coffered effect is found, on the Bishop Océn’s letter; the churches of San contrary, in Bolivia, notably in La Merced —

| Juan de Dios and Santa Clara were the and San Francisco in Sucre. The nave only others which stood unharmed.” Hav- proper of Santa Clara consists of only three ing already discussed the cathedral (1598— bays separated by stone arches and cov-

1654), whose interior is late Renaissance ered by groined vaults of brick. The and whose facade is Baroque, we now turn. groined vault, likewise, seems to represent

to these two churches as examples of pre- an early phase of construction in Cuzco,

earthquake architecture. since only one other case is found and that

| NM 46 A |

The hospital of San Juan de Dios (Figs. in the aisles of Santo Domingo, to be dis57, 58) has had a checkered career, having cussed later. The upper and lower choirs

CUZCO | are very large and completely screened off tect called Juan Gutiérrez to begin the from the nave, occupying the end of the work. By agreements of May 24, 1599, a church opposite the sanctuary. The two contract for the facade was let to Lucas — deeply splayed portals open in the long Quispe and for the main arch (arco toral) side of the church (Fig. 61). These portals to Pedro Zufiga.” As Marco Dorta has alon the outside are made of ashlar in the ready suggested, the present church is of usual local brown stone, whereas the body later date, for the first church to be erected of the church is built of irregular stone set on the new site collapsed before it reached in mortar. Both portals are late-Renaissance completion. Diego Mendoza is the author-

classical designs, one in simple rusticated ity for this information, which explains

pattern, the other in the familiar tri- the fact that the nuns did not move into umphal-arch arrangement with free-stand- the new convent until 1622. Marco Dorta’s ing columns and entablature. The capitals, attribution of the church to a Greek friar, which are a curious combination of a Doric Manuel Pablo, follows a tradition fostered _

echinus topped with Corinthian volutes, by a recent prior of San Francisco who are also found in the service patio of Santa had the attribution painted upon the walls Clara, and in numerous other cuzqueno of the Franciscan cloister. Diego Mendoza buildings of the seventeenth century, both again is the authority. In the biography of

ecclesiastic and domestic.” This portal of Fray Manuel Pablo, who was the head. Santa Clara was originally planned with a workman (obrero) in the Franciscan monsecond story, but left unfinished as can be astery at Cuzco, he states that Fray Manuel seen by the central plaque and the niches took charge of the rebuilding of the church

at the sides. The tower of Santa Clara and monastery of Santa Clara (se encarstands in sober majesty, free from the body gasse de aquella obra), a fact which does

of the church. It must have been added not imply that he was the designer and in the second half of the seventeenth cen- architect. Fray Manuel died in 1615, seven | tury, for it is identical in style with those years before the inauguration of the new

of San Pedro (Fig. 68) and San Cristédbal convent.”

built in that period. a It seems advisable to abandon the chronThe fabric of the church was complete ological plan of this chapter for a moment for inauguration in 1622 on a new site to mention two convents, Santa Catalina for which the viceroy had given authori- and Santa Teresa, which were built in the zation in 1603. Hence Santa Clara is the third quarter of the century, following the — oldest extant church in Cuzco. According earthquake of 1650. Both consist of a sinto Dr. José Uriel Garcia, he once located gle nave without transept and are modest contracts in the archives of the notaries of in size, as is the rule with the churches of Cuzco which revealed the name of the pa- nuns. Santa Catalina, which had been troness of the monastery of this period, founded in 1605, was completely ruined | Beatriz de Villegas, who engaged an archi- in the great earthquake.” Reconstruction

a N47 |

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY , of the church began immediately in 1651, Santa Teresa nor Santa Catalina is there ‘and the nuns were able to return to the con- evidence of the new Baroque architecture

vent by 1653. Judging from the style of -inaugurated in the facade of the cathedral. the architecture of the church and its re- Their retables, on the contrary, fall into

tables, it was finished in short order. More- the full stream of the new style. over, a series of pictures of the life of St. In Cuzco the most important architecCatherine is dated 1669, a fact which may tural:-monuments after the cathedral are serve as indication of the approximate ter- the monasteries of the leading religious ormination of the church. Santa Teresa (Fig. ders, the Jesuits, Franciscans, Dominicans, 60), a new foundation of Carmelite nuns and Mercedarians. The Augustinian monof the year 1673, was ready for inaugura- astery is in ruins. The oldest of these tion in 1676, according to the testimony churches is the Franciscan, for which forof Bishop Mollinedo.* Both churches are tunately ample documentation was procovered with barrel vaults of brick sepa- vided by the Franciscan historian, Diego rated into bays by stone arches, and in each de Mendoza, who lived in the monastery case the bay corresponding to the sanctuary at Cuzco in the mid-seventeenth century. is larger with a small lantern raised over ‘The site of the present church is the third, the center of a slightly domical vault. In having been selected in 1549.* By the both churches a broad molded cornice runs year 1645 the sixteenth-century church below the vault at each side. On the other was in bad condition, and the monks dehand the dado of colored Spanish tiles in cided to rebuild. Work had progressed well

the nave of Santa Teresa is unique in along when the fateful year of 1650 arCuzco churches. The entrance to Santa rived. The tower fell and much damage Teresa occupies the short side opposite to was done to the church, but the vault of the sanctuary, and hence the lower choir the nave withstood the shock of the reis at the right of the high altar and the peated earthquakes. Hence the new church upper choir above the entrance. On the reached its conclusion in 1652, a solid edi_ contrary, the two portals of Santa Cata- fice of brown Andean stone, covered with lina are on the long side of the church, strong domical vaults of brick, separated and the upper and lower choirs.are in the into bays by stone arches. The nave (Fig. west end, separated from the body of the 76) is considerably broader and higher church, exactly as in Santa Clara. Neither than the two lateral aisles.*” The sanctuary, church is of great architectural significance elevated 1.10 meters above the nave and but both are substantial structures, Santa approached by steps, comprises a single Catalina being the superior in scale and apse flanked by sacristies, the plan also folproportions. The simple rusticated portals lowed in Santo Domingo. The influence of

of the latter are conservative Renaissance the cathedral (Fig. 65), then being designs, and may be reconstructions of brought to completion, is clearly in evithose built a half century earlier. In neither dence here, in the use of a large entablature

N48

| es CUZCO | block on the piers of the crossing and in It is less articulate, less emphatic than the |

the nave. The same source may also explain other: early Baroque portals of Santo Dothe decorative late-Gothic ribs in the vaults mingo and La Merced (Figs. 55, 56, 80),

of the sanctuary and the arms of the tran- and is distinguished from them by the sept (Fig. 77). The use of Gothic vaults rectangular enframement of the first story. here, combined with domical vaults in the Here is the age-old Hispanic mudéjar | rest of the church, is unparalleled in the alfiz, whose antecedent can be seen in city of Cuzco. Similar disposition, how- the portal of the mirab in the mosque of ever, has ample precedent elsewhere in Spanish Cérdoba. It reappears in the small South America and Mexico.*® Like Santo facades of the chapels of Loreto and San Domingo and the Merced, the church (Fig. Ignacio which adjoin the church of. the

13) has no side chapels, and the choir is Compafiia at Cuzco (Fig. 67). Another raised over the main entrance according to feature of San Francisco, and one unique

Hispanic tradition. The choir is carried in Cuzco, is the broad medieval type of

on simple groined vaults, and over the narthex which occupies half of the space | crossing is a domical vault with small lan- beneath the choir. Three arches flush with

tern. Unfortunately the interior of San the wall serve as entrances to the narthex , Francisco has been disfigured by ugly blue (Fig. 13) whence one continues into the _ paint. Still worse, the great gilded retables church through a single door straight : of the colonial period were destroyed about ahead, whereas a short passage to the left the year 1900 and replaced by feeble imita- leads to the monastery. San Francisco is

tions of Italian Gothic altars, made by a oriented curiously, as indeed are all of

local carpenter. the churches of Cuzco, in this case with the The exterior of San Francisco (Fig. 78) sanctuary directed to the northwest. — is not impressive, in part because of the un- The large cloister of San Francisco (Figs. interesting use of irregularly cut stone set 31, 33, 34) may well be the oldest struc-

in mortar. The composition appears trun- ture in Cuzco, since its capitals of pure cated, and yet judging by Mendoza’s de- Renaissance type suggest a date in the

scription there never was more than one second half of the sixteenth century. The , tower. The main facade is obviously incom- capitals of the first gallery consist of a ,

plete, otherwise it would be impossible to broad neckband topped by a projecting , explain the curious disposition of blind echinus which is decorated with the eggarches in the upper section. Ashlar is used and-dart motive. Long slender volutes rise in the mediocre tower and in the imposing from the lower part of the neckband to

A499

side portal, which occupies an intermedi- the four corners of the capitals. The capi- | ate stage stylistically between the Renais- tals of the upper gallery have the same sance design of Santa Clara (Fig. 61) and cushion shape, but are very differently orthe full Baroque of the cathedral, La Com- namented. The neck has a single row of

pafiia, and San Pedro (Figs. 63, 64, 68). acanthus leaves, and on top of the echi- ,

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY nus are two small volutes at each of the lery. Their date suggests the period circa

four corners. The bases of all of the col- 1650~1660. | umns are decorated with a stylized leaf, The second cloister of San Francisco is and of no small consequence in the beauty pure Tuscan Doric. It covers an area about

of effect is the reddish brown stone in equal to that of the main cloister, both which the columns and capitals are carved. having ten arches to a side in the lower The mudéjar again makes an appearance gallery. The upper galleries differ, howin the vertical strip upon the wall above ever, in that the main cloister has an equal each column, thus establishing the alfiz number of arches in both galleries, whereas

arrangement. __ in the second cloister the two-over-one

For Spanish parallels to these Renais- scheme is used. This arrangement also apsance capitals, Marco Dorta has already pears in the neighboring cloister of the mentioned the Jeronymite cloister at Lu- Franciscan Colegio de San Buenaventura

: piana.” Others in the patio of the hospital (now Colegio Nacional de Ciencias), , of Santa Cruz at Toledo may be cited, and founded in 1690, but with piers instead — in each case the definite provincialism of of columns in the first gallery.“ The first

the Cuzco sculpture is evident. Nor is half of the seventeenth century seems to apology necessary when one considers the have been the period for the building of , remoteness geographically from Spain and Doric cloisters, a great many of them with

, the mid-sixteenth-century date of the two arches in the upper gallery to one in

cloister. the lower. For this reason, the second cloisNot only the style but also Diego de ter of San Francisco may have been erected Mendoza’s detailed description of the mon- in that period, prior to the establishment

| astery helps to confirm an early date. of the Colegio.” The protracted survival Throughout his very accurate account of of the late classical Renaissance in Spain

, the cloisters, their stairways, the fountains, doubtless accounts for the preference for etc., Mendoza fails to mention any damage Doric sobriety in the colonies. The change caused by the earthquake of 1650, whereas to the Baroque cloister arrived in Cuzco

| he states specifically that the cloisters of in the third quarter of the century with Santo Domingo fell, and one side of the the famous cloister of the Merced. _

. cloister of La Compafiia. Hence there can The main cloister of Santo Domingo , be no doubt that the main cloister of San (Fig. 32), like that of San Francisco, quite ! Francisco still stands as built in the second surely dates back to the sixteenth cenhalf of the sixteenth century. A marked tury, but it met a fate less fortunate in the contrast is afforded by the Baroque style great earthquake. Mendoza states that it of the retable of the Immaculate Concep- fell,’ and its reconstruction after 1650 tion, and above it the small wooden dome would account for the use of double the

| | decorated with reliefs, which were added number of arches in the second gallery to in the northwest corner of the upper gal- that in the lower gallery. In this respect it

Ns QR

| , CUZCO. | i differs from the principal cloister of San . different design. The latter might be called a Francisco which has an equal number of typically cuzqueno for they abound ~ ten arches in both galleries. The plan of throughout the city and apparently were

Santo Domingo is slightly rectangular with carved in something like mass production , ten and nine arches to a side. The capitals in the seventeenth century. It is the plain in the lower gallery are cushion-shaped, Doric cushion capital topped by volutes, consisting of a broad neckband and large similar to those in the portal and service

echinus, strangely topped with double patio of Santa Clara, the main cloister of _ volutes at the four corners, A small hori- the Recoleta, the house of the Condes de , zontal band of stylized leaves decorates Peralta, the Casa Garmendia, and innumerthe echinus and a half rosette appears able other patios throughout the city. Two

just above in the.center of each face. These capitals at the head of the stairway in the , capitals are almost identical with those in principal cloister of San Francisco belong the upper gallery of San Francisco (Fig. tothe same group and hence must be resto-

34), with the exception that the latter has rations after 1650. , a single row of acanthus leaves on the neck- Considering the evidence of the seven- band which is absent in Santo Domingo. teenth-century capitals and the two-overThe workmanship of the Franciscan capi- one system, the conclusion must be reached | tals is, however, much superior. The bases that the upper gallery of the Dominican of the columns in both monasteries are dec- cloister was rebuilt in its entirety after orated with four stylized leaves, and in 1650. The lower gallery, on the contrary, both monuments the vertical strips form- with its sixteenth-century capitals seems to

ing the alfiz appear. | have needed only slight repairs and hence

_ The capitals in the upper gallery of Santo remains intact. Very famous is this cloister, |

Domingo are very different from those be- not as a colonial monument, but for its low: in size on account of the smaller scale Incaic walls which once formed part of the resulting from the two-over-one scheme, Temple of the Sun, Moon and Stars.” Sub-

and also in design and workmanship. On stantial sections of the pre-Columbian the northwest wing adjoining the church, structure were incorporated into the colothe capitals are poor imitations of those in nial monastery, and still survive despite the lower gallery with a variation in the Christian fanaticism and earthquakes. .

ornament on the echinus which in this case The church of Santo Domingo is basiliconsists of two stylized oak (?) leaves can in plan with nave and two lateral aisles, placed diagonally. On the southwest side of nonprojecting transept, a single apse with , the cloister there are three of the same type, sacristy at each side, and a raised choir over but with an acanthus between the volutes, the entrance. As in San Francisco and the and also three copies of the capitals in the Merced, the sections of the choir over the lower gallery. All other capitalson the same aisles serve only as passageways. The gen-

A 51 A |

side and in the two remaining wings have a_ eral disposition is similar to San Francisco,

| THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY. although the sanctuary is less elevated and wrought by the restorers of 1895. They, the aisles are exceptionally narrow.” The like the renovators of San Francisco, derestricted size and the low single-arched stroyed the magnificent gilded retables and openings between the bays give the aisles put in their places miserable imitations of the appearance of chapels. The nave is Italian Gothic. They painted the fine brown covered with a semicircular barrel vault of stone, and still worse they changed the , brick, separated into bays by stone arches. shape of the windows in the nave to suit Consequently, the effect is entirely unlike their Gothic mania. The total result is dis-

the vaults of other Cuzco churches, because astrous. ,

this vault is nondomical and makes much The exterior of Santo Domingo (Fig. the same impression as a continuous barrel. 79), although better, is not distinguished, One window is let directly into the vault and the irregularity of the stone clearly beat each side in each bay, an expedient which speaks a ruined structure rebuilt. The most looks amateurish in the period of triangular famous and interesting part is the apse with penetrations. Only less surprising are the its magnificent curving wall which once

a simple groined vaults over the aisles, in the formed part of the great Temple of the arms of the transept, beneath the choir, Sun of the Incas. Above is a three-arched and in the chapels below the choir. The opening located behind the high altar, an only other church in Cuzco which has unusual arrangement which led Buschiazzo groined vaults is Santa Clara. As in San to suspect an Open Chapel.” To place an , Francisco and the Merced a domical vault Open Chapel here would be altogether peis raised over the crossing. The general non- culiar, and moreover the ground falls off

conformity to the Cuzco school in the ar- sharply in an unsuitable way. Professor

| chaic structure of Santo Domingo leads to Kenneth J. Conant’s suggestion that this the belief that in the rebuilding subsequent balcony was used for the display of relics

to the earthquake of 1650, the plan of the seems more plausible. : older church of about 1610 was repeated in The portals and the tower of Santo Do-

| its main features. The fact that it was de- mingo have considerable architectural stroyed in the catastrophe of 1650 and re- merit. The latter represents the final step built thereafter cannot be questioned. The in the development of cuzquero towers, statement of Meléndez in 1681 that the having been built in the years 1729-1731.” Dominican church at Cuzco was new con- The spiral columns on the belfry resemble firms that fact.’ Various other details find those on the facade of Jess y Maria (1733-

, no parallels in Cuzco, for example: the 1735) so closely as to suggest that the same very narrow aisles, the frieze with dentils architect designed both. The main portal, in the nave, the capitals with rosettes, and well proportioned and late Renaissance in the plain rectangular piers. The interior of its sober and symmetrical design, might Santo Domingo is the least interesting in have been built as early as 1625. Equally Cuzco, even when one disregards the havoc effective are the convent door to the left

AN 52K

: er — . CUZCO. | and the two windows in the same wall. The of the other monasteries of Cuzco, because

side portal (Fig. 55), too, a most satisfac- of the existence of a chronicle covering | tory work by a first-rate professional archi- the second half of the seventeenth century. tect, shows the same conservatism when I had the opportunity to read the chronicle,

compared with the Baroque concepts of the which is an unpublished manuscript in cathedral facade. This portal retains the the library of this monastery. Francisco traditional triumphal-arch motive very Miranda Valcarcel y Peralta, the author skillfully integrated with the niche above of the work, called Cronica de esta by the excellent spacing of the scrolls and provincia del Cuzco 1650-1707, states in pyramid pinnacles. The hand of the archi-- the preface that his intention was to write tect is sure and reveals greater knowledge only of the period of slightly more than of his profession than does the similar por- fifty years, during which he had worn the

tal of Santa Clara. Judging by style alone habit of a Mercedarian. Miranda Valcarcel a the portals of Santo Domingo would be confirms the statement of Mendoza that dated prior to 1650, but the probability is scarcely a stone was left standing in 1650, | that they were redesigned and rebuilt en- and he praises Padre Juan Riquelme (com- __ tirely following the earthquake, since de- mander, 1651-1657) for his great zeal in struction of the church was complete. pushing forward the building of the new Harth-terré’s attribution of the side portal church.” By the year 1670 the church and to Bartolomé Carrién is unconvincing, since cloister must have been completed, for the that architect’s documented portal of Tunja style suggests that fact as well as Miranda

Cathedral in Colombia (1598-1600) is Valcarcel’s statement that the viceroy

stylistically unrelated.” , -. Conde de Lemos who visited Cuzco in 1669. _ The two great monasteries of Cuzco greatly admired the sumptuous beauty of which belong in their totality to the seven- the convent “which would serve as the palteenth century are the Merced and that of ace of the king, our lord.” ™

the Jesuits, commonly known as La Com- The architectural fame of the Merced pafiia. Both maintain uniformity in style rests upon the main cloister (Figs. 84, 85), and a high quality which place them on a a work of great originality and surpassing.

much higher level architecturally than the beauty, built of the warm brown stone of | Franciscan and Dominican establishments. the Incas, cut in blocks which are proOf the two, the church of the Jesuits is the nouncedly rusticated. The unknown archi-

finer monument. As for the cloisters, the tect showed genius in the use of materi- | Mercedarian is not only the better, but one als and textures,” contrasting the virile

of the most beautiful to be found in all strength of the rusticated walls with the |

Latin America. an opulent decoration of the free-standing The history of the rebuilding of the columns. In the first gallery the columns _ Merced after its destruction in 1650 can be have Corinthian capitals, and the shafts reconstructed more fully than in the case are carved with vertical rows of ornament

M53 R

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY which might be called a tongue motive. ceilings of rectangular coffers, partly

The lower section of the column is sepa- __ gilded. | | rated by two crowns of acanthus leaves, Hispanic colonial architecture knows

| between which are horizontal rows of a nothing more beautiful than the cloister of _ scale motive, similar in type to that used in the Merced. Magnificent handling of open _

antiquity, and notably in the Florentine space, lightness and grace combined with Renaissance by such sculptors as Donatello sturdy virility of mass, the deep beauty of and Desiderio da Settignano.” The same the color, extraordinary richness and origitreatment of columns is found on the reta- nality in treatment of textures, unerring bles within the church of the Merced (Figs. taste in scale and proportions, all this and -—-«- 31, 312), three side retables in Santa Cat- more make the Mercedarian cloister unique. alina, the retable of the Trinity (dated by As impressive as the cloister itself are the

inscription 1655) in the cathedral (Fig. two monumental stairways which connect 310), and in other contemporary altars of the upper and lower galleries. The same the school of Cuzco. In the spandrels of superb handling of rusticated stone dis| the arches appear the familiar long stylized tinguishes the construction which is carleaves, so common in architectural decora- ried on three broad arches in each story. On

, tion in southern Peru and Bolivia. The col- the side facing the Plazuela de la Merced , umns of the upper gallery are different, the a wide central ramp rises part way to a | : lower section being carved with a guilloche broad platform, and then breaks into dou- | pattern running in spirals and contrasted ble ramps which return and rise to the secto the vertical flutings above. The half col- ond story (Fig. 83). The stairway facing umns at the sides play another variation on the Calle San Bernardo is planned in reverse the same theme in which vertical bands of fashion. Two ramps rise from the first gal-

the tongue motive combine with conven- lery to a platform where they join into a tional fluting. Both galleries carry an en- single axial ramp. This second stairway was tablature with Roman brackets and a pe- not constructed until 1692-1696." culiarly large bracket over the capitals. The | To these same years belongs the rebuildcloister has six broad arches to the side with ing of the second cloister (Fig. 86) of the equal division in both upper and lower Merced,” a large structure in serene Doric galleries. The walk adjoining the church is style consisting of piers carrying six arches covered with decorative late-Gothic ribbed toa side in the first gallery and double that

, vaults of stucco. The other three walks, ex- number in the second gallery. The scale is cept for the Gothic bay in each angle, have excellent and far superior to that of the magnificently carved wooden ceilings of small third cloister which housed the cothe second half of the seventeenth century Jlegio and was added in 1707." For the sec-

in a good state of preservation. In the ond cloister, which had been erected prior upper gallery only two sides, the northwest to the earthquake of 1650, the original | and southwest, retain their original wooden contract is preserved, dated October 30,

| MN 54A

CUZCO | | , 1634. The architect, Miguel Gutiérrez vaults are of simple early Gothic type. The Sencio, was engaged to build ome side, interior of the Mercedarian church is archiwhich was to consist of eleven arches of tecturally far more satisfactory in every restone carried on ten square Doric columns.“ spect than the Dominican and Franciscan.

Dr. Garcia has stated that the second clois- Moreover, unlike its companions, it escaped , ter was reconstructed after the earthquake the extremes of the renovating frenzy of

of 1650, that is in 1692-1696, on the origi- fifty years ago.” | nal plan of 1634. The disparity between The exterior of the Merced (Fig. 80) is the ten square Doric columns of the con- placed laterally to the street and oriented — tract and the six rectangular piers of the to the southwest. The northeast door (Fig.

existing structure does not justify that sup- 56) which would normally be the main 7

position.” portal adjoims the entrance to the convent.

The church of the Merced follows in its It is a single arched doorway flanked by plan (Fig. 12) the same tradition as that Ionic columns and adorned with a blind of the Franciscan (Fig. 13) and Domini- niche above, which is brought into relation | can churches of Cuzco: nave and two with the lower section by lateral scrolls and aisles without lateral chapels, nonprojecting pyramids. The design is sober and dignified _ transept, raised choir, and single sanctuary; and like in spirit to the side portal of Santo

_ and, curiously enough, the floor plans of Domingo (Fig. 55). The side portal of the the three churches have almost the same Merced (Fig. 80), on the other hand, is the measurements.” The Merced differs from principal portal which, with the single

the others in that the sanctuary is only tower at the left, presents a handsome slightly raised by three steps, and instead of grouping. A most interesting feature is the -

closed sacristies at the sides, a small chapel chapel provided with altar in the second , without walls of separation occupies the story directly over the door. The presence _ _ space at either side of the sanctuary. Like of the altar leaves little doubt that mass San Francisco the interior of the Merced was said here, while the populace assembled _ (Fig. 82) clearly reveals the influence of in the square below. Over the side portals

the cathedral of Cuzco in the use of the of Santo Domingo and San Francisco is a large entablature block over the pilasters of niche in the corresponding position, but the nave. The body of the church is stone large enough only for the statue of the and, as usual in Cuzco, the vaults are brick. saint, and hence in neither case an open

The vaults of both nave and aisles have a chapel. An excellent and conservative piece | noticeably domical section, and they, like of Baroque architecture is this portal, those of the other churches of Cuzco, are planned in two stories of equal breadth. separated into bays by stone arches. Over ‘The influence of the cathedral facade (Fig.

the crossing is a domical vault with small 63) will escape no one, a fact betrayed by

M55 |

lantern, just as in the case of San Francisco the general concept, as well as by such deand Santo Domingo. Under the choir the tails as the design of the lateral niches and

| THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY the flat ornament on the lower section of dral prototype appear in San Sebastian

the columns in the first story. This orna- (Fig. 70; right tower 1664, and left: ment is a skillful bit of mudéjar patterning tower 1799), where to the pilasters are and very different from the lozenge design added Corinthian half columns the lower

| on the columns above. The Merced facade part of which is decorated with the scale has few planes and only four columns in motive. The bracketed cornice too shows a

each story, and hence is restrained com- rejection of the Doric simplicity of the pared with the more exuberant Baroque of cathedral, and is similar to the cornice of

| the cathedral. According to Dr. Garcia, the Mercedarian tower. | Padre Riquelme let a contract for the con- The towers (Fig. 67) of the Compafia struction of the church to two architects, (circa 1651-1668) inaugurate a new deAlonso Casas and Francisco Monya in sign with the cupola raised upon a drum

1654." which has an arched opening in each face.

The single tower (Fig. 81) at the left of The transitions at the corners are made by

the main portal ranks among the best ina arched turrets. These two features had a , splendid series of towers for which Cuzco great influence on other towers in Cuzco, | is famous. Although the exact year of con- yet strangely enough the other striking instruction is not established, the Merced novation was never copied in the city: the chronicle makes it entirely clear that con- _ single elliptical opening on each side of the

, vent, church, and tower were completed by belfry. The humble village church at Ti-

1696-1699.” quillaque, south of Cuzco, does have one

_ The earliest of the cuzquefo towers is tower containing this feature. ,

that (Fig. 78) of San Francisco (1652) An interesting result comes about with which lacks architectural style or distinc- the union of the two prototypes in the tion.” The series really begins with the church of San Pedro (1688-1699). The cathedral belfries (1657) which have two belfries (Fig. 68) have two-arched openarched openings on each side (Fig. 62), ings and pilasters like those of Santa Clara separated by rusticated Doric pilasters. A (Fig. 61), San Cristébal, and El Belén

low cupola tops the structure, and the (Fig. 69), but they are topped by cupola transition is made by round pinnacles at on drum and angle turrets derived from

, the corners and a square pinnacle between. the Compafiia (Fig. 67). In the tower The design is chaste and effective. The (Fig. 81) of the Merced (circa 1675towers (Fig. 69) of El Belén (circa 1696) 1680) the cupola with drum, even to its

a and the belfries of Santa Clara (Fig. 61) elliptical windows and angle turrets, is a _ and San Cristébal, both of the second half descendant of La Compajfiia. The belfry, of the seventeenth century, are derived however, shows great originality, although from the cathedral towers with an impor- the two-arched openings like those of. the

, tant change in the smooth, nonrusticated cathedral persist. The originality lies in the pilasters.” Other modifications of the cathe- groups of half columns lavishly decorated.

NM 56K

re CUZCO : | with the scale motive in the lower part and enclosing statues of saints, probably a typi- ee a delicately incised lozenge design covering cal Renaissance triumphal-arch type. In the the rest of the shaft. The broad cornice famous painting of Cuzco during the earth-

_ with brackets closely resembles the cornices quake of 1650 (Fig. 21), which hangs in ! in the Merced cloister.” The tower of the the church of the Triunfo at Cuzco, details

- Merced is one of the most original and of La Compaiiia are not explicit. It can be a | surely one of the most monumental in the seen, however, that the church was small

city. It is large and powerful rather than and unpretentious. _ | chaste and graceful like the belfry of Santa Of great interest is the fact that the Clara. The tower (Fig. 79) of Santo Do- canons of the cathedral instituted legal promingo (1729-1731), like the churches of ceedings in the sixteenth century to pre- |

Jesus Maria and the Triunfo, represents the vent the Jesuits from locating their monas- , aftermath, the twilight of the school of tery on the Plaza Mayor, so near the cathe-

Cuzco. The Dominican tower is a copy of dral. According to the Amales del Cuzco a | the Mercedarian with important modifica- like controversy arose over the rebuilding tions in the cupola and turrets. Here only of the Jesuit church after the earthquake among the cuzqueno towers spiral columns of 1650, but the Jesuits calmly ignored the _ ,

appear, and also carved moldings which re- injunction issued to restrain them.” | flect the same indigenous taste displayed in The additions to the Washington manu- __

the two late churches just mentioned. script, which continue to the year 1653, These towers of Cuzco are among its most include the history of the building of the brilliant creations and they endow the city chapel of Nuestra Sefiora de Loreto which with some of its most characteristic and in- stands at the left of the present church of

gratiating aspects. La Compafiia. This chapel was begun on | ~The Jesuits first arrived in Cuzcoin 1571 the day of St. Augustine in 1651 and com-

under the leadership of the great pioneer, pleted on the same day in 1653, constructed _ Padre Gerénimo Ruiz de Portillo. The his- “with the aid and industry of Padre Juan

tory of their early years in Cuzco is related Bautista Egidiano, with his constant assist- | in a recently published manuscript in ance and his excessive work.” Whether this the Library of Congress at Washington.” means that Padre Egidiano was the archi- | _ The anonymous Jesuit who wrote in the tect or just the overseer is not entirely

year 1600 states specifically that Padre Por- clarified.” | | tillo himself designed the first church and © The chapel of Loreto (Fig. 67) has a

that the structure was completed under his small two-storied facade with a rectangular - successor Padre Joseph Tiruel. Although center which is derived from the side portal

the chronicler undoubtedly exaggerates of San Francisco. The design is mediocre | when he calls the principal portal the finest and might conceivably have been planned |

in all Peru, his description is valuable. The by an amateur like Padre Egidiano. The ,

| M57 R

stone portal had many columns and niches interior consists of three bays of barrel

| THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY , vaults with triangular penetrations, and a earthquake of 1650, rebuilding began the domical vault with tiny lantern over the following year and it was ready for consesanctuary. The walls carry a simple molded cration in 1668.”

cornice, and the whole chapel, whose por- The church has the plan (Fig. 4) of a tal on the outside has an inscription dated Latin cross with large dome over the cross1654, shows no relation in style to the ing and shallow chapels on both sides of the principal church. The chapel of St. Igna- nave, all of which are features new to the tius (now the Artisans’ Exhibition Rooms), ecclesiastical architecture of Cuzco. This

_ which acts as a pendant to the chapel of arrangement is commonly called the Jesuit Loreto at the right of the main church, plan. However, there is in reality no such has a single nave of three bays with trian- thing as a Jesuit plan, for many Jesuit gular penetrations, each bay topped by a churches were built on the basilican plan, — small lantern. The large bracketed cornice others without chapels, and conversely is like the cornice in the main church, and many non-Jesuit churches have the form _ hence probably by the same architect. The of a Latin cross with chapels at the sides of facade, on the contrary, is a replica of that the nave and dome over the crossing.” The

of the chapel of Loreto. only safe and scientific expedient is to refer _ The problem as to who was the architect to the Gest plan, the problem of which is

, of the principal church of La Compafiia in discussed in this book in the section de- . Cuzco is still unsolved, in my opinion. Re- voted to San Pedro of Lima. Only one other

7 cently Padre Vargas Ugarte has published church in Cuzco, San Pedro (Fig. 75), not the biography of Padre Egidiano, a Fleming a Jesuit foundation, was later to adopt the who lived in the monastery at Cuzco from floor plan of the Compajiia.” 1642 until his death in 1675. To him Padre The choir of the Compafia is raised over

Vargas attributes the church and also the the main entrance as usual, and the five

| design of the high altar. The docu- bays of the nave, the sanctuary, and tran- _ mentary basis lies in the Washington manu- sept are covered with late-Gothic ribbed script which connects him only with the vaults of brick which are copied from those

chapel of Nuestra Sefiora de Loreto, also of the cathedral (Fig. 72). Almost inexknown as the capilla de los indios; and, in plicable is this reactionary use of Gothic addition, in the Carta de Edificacién writ- vaults when the rest of the church is a

| ten as a memorial one year after Padre Baroque monument representing a revoluEgidiano’s death in Cuzco. Until further tionary departure from other works of the evidence is forthcoming, the architect of school of Cuzco. The walls of the nave are La Compafiia must remain a problem. treated with double Corinthian pilasters

. The church of the Compafiia is one of between the arches raised on large bases the best-known examples of colonial archi- 2.10 meters high. The chapels have double _ tecture in Latin America. After the de- Doric pilasters which are much shorter and struction of the original monastery in the thus provide scale. This composition of wall _

| MN 58 & |

a | CUZCO , surface originated in the Italian Renais- white ribs can tarnish the dignity of the ) sance, and soon passed to all European architecture. countries. A heavy cornice runs through- In the proportions of the whole compoout, deeply projecting and with peculiarly sition lies the secret of the.beauty of the awkward brackets, composed of an acan- Compajfiia’s exterior (Fig. 67). The mass of

thus leaf supported by a volute. Bracketed the church with its flat roof, prominent cornices appear in Spain during the Renais- dome, and two graceful towers is superbly

sance on the exterior of the apse of the balanced and magnificently scaled. Here is cathedral and of San Jerénimo in Granada. the product of a first-rate architect who In the third quarter of the seventeenth cen- thought not simply of isolated details but

tury they became a characteristic of the of the entire monument. | interiors of churches in the school of | The facade naturally demands principal Madrid.” Their appearance here at Cuzco attention. The central portal was inspired in the nave of La Compajiia clearly demon- in its general disposition by the portal of

strates the architect’s knowledge of con- the cathedral (Figs. 63, 64), but it differs , temporary buildings in the capital of Spain. greatly in detail. The proportions of the Atop this cornice at Cuzco a corridor entire facade are in fact much superior to with balustrade provides communication those of the cathedral. The portal itself

throughout the upper regions. shows a taste for profusion in ornament in , The large stone dome rises on a drum contrast to the purely architectural quality over pendentives which are intricately of its prototype. Striking are the Corincarved with the THS as the central feature. thian columns with the crowns of acanthus At the crossing the pilasters give way to leaves on the shafts, three in the first story

columns which are original in the placing and two in the second. The flat carved of a band of basket weave just below the ornament over the niches, the design of the center of the shaft and a crown of acanthus central section with additional recesses, the

leaves above it. The crown of acanthus three windows of the second story, all add , leaves becomes universal as a decorative mo- to the complexity of the composition but

tive on the retables and the pulpits of certainly constitute no improvement over | Cuzco in the second half of the seventeenth the cathedral portal. The characteristic century, and thence spreads throughout webbed volutes reappear here and much

Peru. a , | _ more prominently, and another detail of no The interior of the Compafiia is serene, great significance, the clusters of. apples in

imposing, and harmonious in spite of the a cloth swag on the columns of the third | ugly cornice. It enjoys, too, the advantage story. One of the most interesting elements

of not having suffered from the hand of of the Jesuit portal is the large trefoil the restorer. The natural reddish brown shape of the top, another example of this

N59 A

stone has been painted an inoffensive light uniquely Hispano-Moresque device. On

gray, and not even the blue vaults with the other hand, the most peculiar part of |

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY the facade is the large cornice which runs great monastery which the brothers left across the front and curves above the tre- forever in 1767 when the Jesuits were exfoil portal, the same strange cornice used pelled from all Spanish lands. The fine

within the church. ; Doric cloister was entirely rebuilt after The singular beauty and originality of 1650, if one is to place any faith in the the towers (Fig. 67) have already been dis- accuracy of the famous view of Cuzco of cussed. The idea of a single elliptical open- that date. It has eight and nine columns to ing on each face is most successful, and yet the side in the lower gallery and, as so frecuriously enough, never imitated in Cuzco. quently in this period, double the number

Neither was another innovation, the two- in the upper gallery. The columns are storied triumphal-arch niches on the lower strictly Tuscan Doric without ornament part of the towers, for elsewhere in Cuzco except for a few in the northwest gallery _

! the towers are undecorated below the bel- which have four stylized leaves on the base | fry. The raising of the cupola on a drum and a small tongue ornament on the echiand the use of angle turrets, which add nus. From the cloister one of the finest much to the height and grace of the tow- views of the church in profile is obtained,

ers, were imitated thereafter, in the Mer- massive, austere, and imposing. ced, San Pedro, and Santo Domingo. The former convent facade (Fig. 67) is The full-sized dome of the Compafia very low compared with the church at (Fig. 74) was the first of its kind in Cuzco, whose side it stands, so much so that the and found only one successor in that of San effect is almost ludicrous. Built of the faPedro. A low domical vault with small lan- miliar red-brown stone, it is rather heavy

: tern at the top covers the crossing in San and somber despite or perhaps because of its Francisco, Santo Domingo, and La Merced, profuse ornamentation. Most prominent at and in the cathedral the crossing is treated first view is the projecting square device exactly like any other bay of the vaulting. like a recessed coffer in reverse which deco-

On the exterior of these three monastic rates the pilasters throughout. The twochurches the small lantern plays no part in _ storied division carries columns ringed with the architectural composition, serving as a an acanthus crown in the lower section, and

purely utilitarian source of light. The drum the remaining wall surfaces are covered of the Jesuit dome, in contrast, is high and with stylized leaves, mask heads, a peculiar monumental with large double volute- ball-and-tongue device, and long volutes shaped buttresses and four windows. The beside the niches in the upper center. In

glazed tiles of green, yellow, and blue the top center again appears the trefoil which cover the cupola add a colorful and motive, and just below it another mudéjar

most attractive note. variant of the same in the niche. The indig-

The former Jesuit convent now houses enous flavor prevails here but in a heavythe University of Cuzco within its cloister handed way, and without the exquisite (Fig. 87), a suitable adaptation of the once fantasy of the true mestizo style.

60 KR

| ee GUZCO a ; |

~ San Pedro is the only church in Cuzco crossing. The choir, as usual elevated over |

which follows in its ground plan (Fig. 75), the main entrance, is supported by a handand solely in its ground plan, the new type somely designed four-pointed arch. Al-

introduced to Cuzco by the Compafiia. though the ground plan and dome are deKnown as San Pedro, its correct name is rived from the Compafiia the treatment of

Nuestra Sefiora de los Remedios, so dedi- the walls (Fig. 72) shows. no relation to | cated at its foundation in 1572 by Fran- that church.” The source of the style, charcisco de Toledo, but popularly called the acterized by colossal Doric pilasters stepped Hospital de los Naturales in the colonial back at the sides and topped by a high en-

period.” The institution was rebuilt under tablature, is the cathedral of Cuzco (Fig. , the patronage of Bishop Mollinedo and his 65). An interesting evidence of change in

nephew, Andrés de Mollinedo, whose es- taste is the use of domical vaults similar to cutcheons appear over the first chapels to those of the Merced and San Francisco, the left and right respectively on entering rather than ribbed vaults which prevail in the church. The first stone was laid in the two churches from which San Pedro is 1688,” and in 1699 the local authorities otherwise derived. Smaller than the Comsent a report to the Council of the Indies in pafiia and less imposing, San Pedro neverSeville with a request for fifty thousand theless is in no way inferior in its handling pesos needed to complete the building. of space and scale. No church in the city Luckily the plans submitted with this re- embodies greater purity of design or more port are preserved in the Archivo de Indias, serenity in mood, qualities which many will , this being the only building in Cuzco of prefer to the more luxuriant Baroque of ©

which records are still extant there. In- the Compafia. , 7 ,

cluded is a description of the church, and The facade of San Pedro (Fig. 68) is less , the statement that they were then working graceful and elegant than that of the Com-

on the windows and cornices, the vaults pafiia, and it suggests rather power and having been constructed.” Still more inter- simplicity in its lower proportions and bar-

esting is the information that the architect ren walls. With its Doric belfries and un- | was an Indian, Juan Tomas.Tuyru Tupac, adorned towers it is more sober than the none other than the sculptor of the pulpit Jesuit church. Once again its two ancestors , in the same church and of the statue of the are the Compafiia in the use of the cupola Virgin of the Almudena in the church of on a drum, and the cathedral, the portal

that name.” , being a simplified copy of the latter (Figs.

The interior of San Pedro (Fig. 73), one 62, 67). The result is colder than either |

of the finest in Cuzco, is built of stone, prototype, lacking in Baroque exuberance now painted gray, and covered with sturdy _ particularly in the details of the niches and domical vaults of brick. Stone arches di- in the ornament. The tone of classical se-

AN 61K

vide the nave into five bays and a sizeable renity which was established by the interior

stone dome rises on pendentives over the of the cathedral set the dominant key for

, , THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY . Cuzco architecture of which San Pedro is such as Santa Clara, Santa Catalina, and one of the most satisfying and most majes- Santa Teresa, and in every respect it is more

tic examples. ‘luxurious, thanks no doubt to the MolliEl Belén, originally founded by Fran- nedos. Without exact precedent in Cuzco cisco de Toledo in 1572,°° was rebuilt con- are the three arched niches to a side in temporaneously with San Pedro and must which small retables are set, and the small have been well along toward completion in chapel on either hand just upon entering. 1696, when Bishop Mollinedo mentioned it EI Belén is one of the outstanding works of

in his letter of that year.” The two Mol- Cuzco, ranking with San Pedro and the linedos, whose zeal for church building Merced, a fact which is all too generally knew no bounds, were the chief patrons overlooked, undoubtedly because of the here as well as of San Pedro. The Bishop’s superabundance of architectural riches shield appears over the doors at the left and which Cuzco possesses.

right as one enters, and again on the silver The facade of El Belén, obviously very altar frontal which bears the date 1696. similar to San Pedro (Figs. 68, 69), has one Portraits of both men are included in de- striking feature which sets it apart and that votional pictures flanking the altar, the is the rectangular hood over the main door.

| bishop on the gospel side (left) and the This Hispanic shape, which has been noted

priest on the epistle side. previously in the lateral portal of San Fran-

The style of El Belén forces the conclu- cisco and in the facades of the chapels ad-

| sion that the Mollinedos employed the same joining La Compafiia, strikes a peculiar architect here as they did for San Pedro, note here, for it cuts in half the two colthat is to say, Juan Tomas Tuyru Tupac. umns above at the sides of the window. The The interiors of the two churches are iden- rest of the portal is almost identical with tical in the design of the colossal pilasters that of San Pedro-except in details such as

| and huge entablature block and in their the omission of the webbed volutes. Juan majestic austerity. The barrenness of the Tomas reveals his provincialism, notwith-

walls serve as an excellent background to standing the fact that he wasa great archithe lavishly carved and gilded retables and _ tect, in attempting to unite two incompati-

the picture frames in the upper reaches. ble types of design without resolving their The brick vaulting is even more domical differences. In the towers he returned to the than in San Pedro, and the space differs due two-arched opening and simple cupola, the

to the plan which in this case consists of tradition which starts with the cathedral

| one long single nave of seven bays with and continues also in Santa Clara and San elevated choir. El Belén was formerly the Cristédbal. Over the doorway in primitive church of a convent of nuns, a fact which relief sculpture the Holy Family kneel at explains the omission of transept and dome. the manger, guarded by the three kings on Here the size of the church far exceeds horseback. Despite its faults, the general

those of the other female orders in Cuzco, proportions of the Belén facade are excel-

N 62K

CUZCO : lent, and it has an impressive exterior even must be confessed, nonetheless, that Sahua-

though this is not equal to the harmonious aura is thus identified as architect of the

and spacious interior. tower, but not necessarily of the rest of the , San Sebastian, which stands in the vil- facade. The left tower, an exact replica of

lage of that name in the suburbs of Cuzco, its mate, has a verbose inscription, dated | is the last in the series of two-towered 1799, in the lower section.”

churches to be mentioned, although not the The portal belongs to the second half of | last to be built. Also founded by Francisco the seventeenth century on the evidence of de Toledo in 1572, it had a single nave with style alone, since it is derived in its general adobe walls nearly two meters thick.” In disposition from the cathedral (finished —

1696 four arched openings were cut 1654), and the rich ornament on the col- © through each wall of the nave and an aisle umns is almost identical with that of the was added at each side.” The unvaulted in- choir stalls (Figs. 262, 263) of the catheterior today presents the most forlorn and dral (circa 1657-1678). In addition, docudilapidated appearance imaginable, its slop- mentary evidence is preserved in Bishop ing cane roof covered in part with corru- Mollinedo’s letter of 1678 in which he said gated iron, its once lavish decoration of that the portal had been finished, “tof such

large paintings with gilded frames and its beauty that it might have been worked in retables of the late seventeenth century wax.” ™ It is probable that the facade was ruined by neglect and drenched by years begun after Mollinedo’s arrival in Cuzcoin _ of exposure to tropical rains. Even now 1673, since he had his escutcheon placed in with national laws for the protection of the upper center. His generosity did not works of art, execution of good intentions end there, as is proved by the presence of

is woefully wanting. his shield within on the magnificent silver If the facade of San Sebastian (Figs. 70, altar frontal and on the left side of the 71) is lacking in the excellent scale which high altar. Indeed, the splendor and luxury

characterizes related works in Cuzco, it displayed in the retables and paintings of _ should cause no wonder, for it was built in this church in a poor Indian village can three stages. The right tower at its base has only be explained by the munificence of a long inscription with date 1664 and the Manuel de Mollinedo. names of bishop, priests, and noble Indians, The towers of San Sebastian, as previbut without mention of the architect. Lo- ously stated, follow the precedent created cated farther above, another legend gives by the cathedral, with modifications in the the name of an architect, Siendo Manuel use of Corinthian half columus, decorated de Sahuaraura, maestro mayor. Much stress with the scale motive in the lower section

has been laid upon the fact that he was an and carrying a cornice with brackets above. | Indian,” and this, indeed, is added proof of The really unique feature of the church, _ the important place in society held by Juan however, is the portal. The general scheme Tomas’ compatriots. Interpreted strictly, it of the cathedral (Figs. 62, 63) has been al-

AS 63 |

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY tered only by the elliptical window in the construction of the two churches adjoining

center and the substitution of a single niche the cathedral (Fig. 7). At the left the for the third story. A. genuine devotion Sagrada Familia, begun in 1723, then abanto surface pattern, such as is seen normally doned, and later completed in 1733-1735,”

| in retables, brought into being this lacily is a small church of five bays with lateral carved monument of stone, so exquisitely chapels, and domical vaults. Its Doric pilascut that Mollinedo aptly compared it with ters recall the cathedral but it is an uninwax. The columns are covered with pat- teresting building at best, rendered gro-

, terns of arabesques, of stylized volutes, tesque today by the ugliest paint in imitaleaves, and vines, and in the center of each tion of marble anyone could conceive. The is a big Spanish jar, wreathed in large leaves exterior lacks distinction and is interesting and containing pomegranates and peaches. chiefly because spiral columns are used on For some reason, this obviously European the portal, the only example in Cuzco and classical variety of jar has been incorrectly good testimony to the predominantly archidescribed as an Indian maceta. Various tectonic character of the Baroque in Cuzco.

ornamental motives, such as the female These spiral columns are identical with ; heads, and also the style of carving, suggest those of the tower of Santo Domingo and

, that the same sculptors who worked upon probably the work of the same architect. , the choir stalls of the cathedral were also . At the opposite flank of the cathedral is engaged here. The columns are ringed with the Triunfo, on the site of which once stood

crowns of acanthus, like the facade of La a mud structure which for more than a Compafiia (Fig. 64), and in the upper set century served as cathedral. After the presa cartouche is added. The decorative reper- ent basilica was inaugurated, the Triunfo

tory of Cuzco is brought into full play received its much-needed reconstruction, everywhere, with the scale motive on the under the aegis of the energetic Diego Arias brackets below the niches, and the tongue de la Cerda, as recorded by the inscription motive on the pilasters at the sides. The of 1664 on the front of the building.” Not facade of San Sebastian is more fascinating many years later the structure was demolin detail than in its entirety. It is a deco- ished and the present church, designed in rator’s triumph like the facades of Juli, the form of a Greek cross by the Carmelite,

Pomata, Cajamarca, and Arequipa, al- Fray Miguel Menacha (1729-1732), rethough stylistically of another sort. placed it.”* The Triunfo has the distinction The golden age of Cuzco architecture of being the only church of central plan in came to an end with the dawn of the eight- Cuzco, and it carries a fine stone dome on ©

eenth century. The great earthquake of pendentives over the center. Indicative of 1650 had wrought havoc, but it produced the infusion of the mestizo taste are the a renaissance of fabulous extent. Only the carved bands of stylized leaves and carepilogue remained to be performed, chiefly touches on the arches beneath the dome. the continued building of retables, and the The rest of the church has domical brick

AM 64K

| , CUZCO | oe _ vaults. It will be noted that the sober Doric Virtually all village churches near piers persist, further testimony to the pre- Cuzco, as elsewhere, are adobe in construcponderant authority of the architecture of tion with pitched roofs of cane and occathe cathedral throughout Cuzco’s cultural sionally portals of brick. Most surprising

life. The exterior does not measure up to of all is the enormous size of the parish the fine interior. Yet it maintains the re- churches, and the tiny scale of other vilserve and good taste of cuzqueno tradition, lage chapels. The plan almost universally

and its three portals with familiar Cuzco is that of a long single nave without chap- , ornament and lunetted skyline forma suit- els or transept, and a raised choir, someable pendant to the Sagrada Familia. times carried on arches as at San Jerénimo A few other ecclesiastical structures of (Fig. 89) and at Huaro. The former, a Cuzco remain undiscussed, but they have foundation of Francisco de Toledo in 1572 not sufficient importance to receive more may,” in spite of the earthquake of 1650, © than brief mention in a general book of the _ still preserve its original construction, for

present type.” | | the capitals under the choir are identical

The Indian villages in the neighborhood with those in the large cloister of San of Cuzco, as throughout Peru, have Francisco at Cuzco, which belongs to the churches filled with fabulous riches in second half of the sixteenth century. San retables, silver altar frontals, and religious Jerénimo has other sixteenth-century feapaintings. Stone edifices like the large tures, such as the prominent triumphal church at Urubamba (circa 1678-1696) arch preceding the sanctuary, and a facade

are the exception.” Here the Latin-cross composed of a three-arched narthex with | plan and nave with lateral chapels resem- balcony above (Fig. 88). The latter arble the plan of the Compafiia and San _ rangement recurs at Urcos.”” The balcony

Pedro in Cuzco, although the vaults are itself without narthex but with single made of cane rather than brick. The facade tower (Calca, Oropesa, Andahuaylillas) or —

with three stories of Corinthian columns double towers (chapel at Checacupe, Fig. , has only one tower completed. The parish 90) is, on the contrary, a very common church of Andahuaylas (department of feature. The single attached tower is more

Apurimac) resembles that of Urubamba prevalent than twin towers, and in addi- | slightly in its stone construction. Never- tion the single isolated tower with atrium | theless the differences are great, although occurs (parish church, Checacupe). The _ the period is contemporary, for the church portal of San Jerénimo consists of a tri- at Andahuaylas followed the usual pueblo umphal-arch motive, a round-arched door-

plan of long single nave without chapels, way with empty niches between the

with raised choir and pitched roof. Its pilasters at each side, a type of design en- | _fagade in two stories of Doric columns countered repeatedly in this region. Some, shows excellent taste in scale and in han- like San Jerénimo, have a frieze of cherubs’ ,

™ 65 A , |

dling of ornament. , heads over the portal (Oropesa, Calca) and

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY in the other cases the frieze is plain (par- altar frontals. Unity of style, both inside

ish churches at Yucai, Checacupe, Anda- and out, prevails with surprising con-

huaylillas). A variant occurs at Chuqui- sistency. ,

bambilla and Antabamba (Apurimac) Occasionally novelties are forthcoming, ‘where a row or rows of large blind niches as in the delightful little chapel of San cut across above the portal and the frieze José at Urubamba, formerly a Franciscan of cherubs is lacking. The dates of these Recoleta (founded 1613), where a high churches are problematic. San Jerénimo broad tower of reddish-brown stone with seems tO preserve its original structure two open arches at the top replaces the (1572). The triumphal-arched design of usual mud structure. Or again, a greater

| the portal and the frieze of cherubs’ heads novelty comes to pass in the large stone prove their adherence to sixteenth cen- church, standing in complete isolation in tury models. On the other hand, nearly all the fields called Tiobamba, where two

| of the other churches must have been re- broad open towers flank the usual narthex. built after 1650, as in the case of Yucai Here the portal, also in stone, and richly which dates about 1685. That conclu- carved in primitive mestizo style in the sion is forced upon us not only by the eighteenth century, would be not surprisearthquake, but by the fact that retables, ing in Puno, but is rare in the district of pictures, and altar frontals belong almost Cuzco. The Ermita at Oropesa (1685) entirely to the late seventeenth and early likewise has a stone doorway,” charming ~ eighteenth centuries, with rare exceptions in its naiveté and indigenous stylization,

like the pulpit at San Jerénimo (circa which would seem more at home in the

| 1625) and two side retables in the parish region of Lake Titicaca, although not church at Checacupe. Although the ma- specifically a product of that school.

, jority of the churches are oriented with Cuzco is without question the greatest the short side facing the plaza, the reverse center of Hispanic architecture in South |

, situation with the long side upon the America. Qualitatively, as well as quanplaza is not infrequent (Checacupe, Yucai, titatively, it might have been challenged

Andahuaylas). by Lima had not repeated earthquakes reSmall Andean chapels of adobe usually duced the latter city to rubble, especially with one tower, occasionally with two in 1746. The great earthquake of 1650 in (Checacupe, Fig. 90), characterized by a Cuzco, on the other hand, came early, small porch formed by the projection of when colonial Peru was still at its apex, the pitched roof, are innumerable, visible and so the city arose anew, more magon every hand in villages and in private nificent than ever it had been before. Rehaciendas as one drives through the coun- mote as it was, and still is, Cuzco had the tryside (Yucai, Chitabamba). Unpreten- force of tradition behind it, as the capital tious from without, every chapel holds of the Incas, and so under the Spanish it within unbelievable riches in retables and became a still greater city. At the start,

M66 KR

CUZCO even Upper Peru (Bolivia) was subject to ing his escutcheon are still in place in El

ecclesiastical rule from Cuzco, the bishop- Belén (1696), San Cristdbal, San Sebastian, ric extending to the shores of Lake Titi- and in the village of San Jerénimo (dated

caca, and the monasteries, too, ruled by after his death in 1702). It would be tethe mother houses in Cuzco. dious to list all of his donations: the ma, Great patrons played a decisive role in jority of the pulpits in Cuzco, many | the building of religious Cuzco and noble retables such as that of the trascoro of the , families in the erection of many vast pal- cathedral, the high altars of San Sebastian aces. The early bishops were no patrons and San Blas. Entirely rebuilt at the exof the arts, and it will be remembered that pense of Bishop Mollinedo and his nephew Bishop Sebastian Lartatin sabotaged the Andrés were El Belén and San Pedro, prob- —

viceroy’s intentions of bringing to com- ably the finest church after the cathedral, | pletion the cathedral within six years by la Almudena, and San Sebastidn in great

refusing to contribute the financial share part. He built the tower of San Cristdébal; | of the church. Not until Bishop Océn he contributed to San Antonio, Santa Cata(1644-1652) assumed his charge, were en- lina, and Santa Teresa. Not even Julius II ergetic measures taken to give to Cuzco or Lorenzo de’ Medici has a better record,

at long last the magnificent cathedral and yet present-day cynics, unable to unwhich still stands today. Immediately upon derstand such a phenomenon, scoff and the heels of the earthquake, the churches say the bishop placed his shield everywhere and monasteries were rebuilt with incred- at will. The contemporary history, the ible rapidity, a virtual renaissance, ex- bishop’s letters, and the style of the monu-

plained by the men of great zeal with ments belie such an attitude. Mollinedo whom the city was endowed at this time. was not the only patron of the day, but First among these was Manuel de Mo-_ his example was inspirational. There is no

llinedo, the greatest bishop Cuzco ever other explanation for the prodigality of , knew, and the most munificent patron of retables and silver altar frontals (such as the arts in the history of Spanish colonies, Yucai, Urubamba, San Juan de Dios in

a virtual Medici of the seventeenth cen- Urquillos, Oropesa) throughout the re- | tury (1673-1699). At the time of his gion in the late seventeenth and early death it was said that he had donated four- eighteenth centuries. And still nothing has , teen churches of brick, thirty-six of adobe, been said of the vast quantity of pictures

fourteen pulpits, eighty-two custodias, and which Mollinedo donated,” nor of the , twenty frontals of silver. His letters, as astounding productivity of Cuzco in paint-

well as the prodigal quantity of works ing and sculpture in this period. extant bearing his shield, add further tes- The style of cuzqueno architecture was timony. Many silver objects have been set toa considerable degree by the cathedral

melted down for money in years past, but which, so far as its interior is concerned, is , in Cuzco itself magnificent frontals bear- a product of the late classical Renaissance __

BS 67 YK

THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY of Spain, usually known as the Herr- a school and in breaking with the more eresque. San Francisco in the mid-century, conservative classicism which had preceded and even at the end of the seventeenth cen- it, and which continued even after 1650 tury San Pedro and El Belén, still preserve in the portals of Santo Domingo and in the the style of the cathedral, designed a hun- front portal of La Merced. The school was _

dred years before. In general, exuberance established in La Merced, San Pedro, El in ornamentation is reserved for retables Belén, and San Sebastian. The facade of and choir stalls against a sober architec- the Compafia, too, followed the precedent tural background. Nowhere in Cuzco it- established by the cathedral, but added self does one encounter the lavishly orna- ornament to produce a more lavishly mented architecture which characterizes Baroque edifice. In the matter of vaulting,

| the mestizo style of Arequipa and Lake the cathedral and the Compafiia with their Titicaca. In the great capitals like Cuzco Gothic vaults are surprisingly enough the and Lima the Spanish tradition predom- most conservative structures. Elsewhere inated in all matters cultural and the in- they found no imitators, for even Santa digenous element was suppressed. Only in Clara in the early seventeenth century had

the Indian villages of the province and groined vaults. Otherwise, domical and _ to a reserved degree in the cloister of the barrel vaults prevailed after 1650. An in-

| Merced does that factor make an impres- teresting case is San Francisco with domical

sion. 7 } vaults, save in the arms of the transept and The exteriors of the churches of Cuzco sanctuary, where late-Gothic ribbed vaults give a general impression of mass and so- are used for purely decorative reasons. This

briety. The strength and character of the solution, however, is not of local origin, reddish-brown stone, so distinctive of the but one, as previously explained, wide-_ region, contributes in no small measure spread in Mexico and Bolivia. to the majesty of cuzquefo architecture. = As one thinks of Cuzco, one sees towColor, texture, and mass are inherent in ers of red-brown stone, massive stone

, the material, the legacy of the magnificent churches, sober solemn interiors, and above edifices of the Incas. The flat rectangular all the unforgettable majesty of the cathesilhouette of Cuzco architecture is, how- dral. The school of Cuzco is not provincial. ever, strictly Hispanic, characteristic of It is Hispanic, and it is colonial because it churches and domestic architecture of that was of the Spanish colonies. Here the great. peninsula far back into the Middle Ages. traditions of the past did much to spur the The facades of Cuzco, too, are marked by haughty Spaniard to make his Cuzco still

architectonic sobriety in the main. The more magnificent than ever it had been portal of the cathedral, advanced architec- under the fabulous rulers who preceded tural Baroque, was decisive in founding him, the mighty Incas.

AS 68 R

| IVLIMA | , |, ia, the capital of South America in the new and unattractive Government Pal- |

L colonial days, held unbroken sway un- ace (1937) which so recently replaced the

til the nineteenth century, when she fell colonial Casa del Virrey. , behind the modern metropolises, Buenos Nature as well as man has conspired to Aires and Rio de Janeiro. Lima too has harm the Spanish colonial city. Repeated grown and expanded in the past half cen- earthquakes have devastated Lima, the tury, her present population of a half mil- worst of them in 1687 and 1746, and the lion spreading out into modern suburbs far most recent serious catastrophe in 1940. beyond the limits of the original city. Lit- Not a single edifice has survived without tle remains of the colonial setting except damage at one time or another. Little did

the churches. — , : Francisco Pizarro foresee the tragedies to ,

In the realm of domestic architecture, come when he founded his capital on the the Torre Tagle Palace (Figs. 24~26), the banks of the Rimac in 1535, a site located portal of the Casa de Pilatos, an eighteenth- just three miles from the sea on the flat century balcony on the Paseo de Aguas, plain which borders the Peruvian coast. other balconies on Calle Santa Cruz oppo- The conquerors chose to build the city site Santo Domingo, these and other scat- here, because they found a river at hand

tered bits give hints of the former charm and ready communication with the sea which men have done their utmost to de- through the port of Callao. That the warm

stroy. The end has not yet come, for the climate was a factor in their choice is present plan of urbanization in Lima doubtful, for those intrepid’ men cared sweeps all before it. The Plaza Mayor has little about the amenities of life. Climate , already been ruined forever, and largely as well as the geographic situation, how- _ within the past ten years. Antonio Rivas’ ever, is an important factor in architectural

superb bronze fountain of 1650 still pre- development. For example, the lack of rain , sides serenely over the thronged streets, in Lima made possible the roofs of cane | where the vast square was once tranquil and mud, which were universally adopted

and expansive. On the east side, the ar- after brick vaults of colonial churches cade built under the Conde de Moncloa proved cumbersome and dangerous in a :

in-1699 is the only vestige of colonial do- land of many earthquakes. ,

| NM 69 AR

mestic architecture left. Opposite stands The history of limeno architecture in

, LIMA

the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and at the same time cumbersome because | must be reconstructed almost entirely from of the numerous rebuildings subsequent to literary sources. Not a building survives earthquakes. Hence a catalogue supplied from the first century of Lima’s existence, with facts, description, and bibliography and even the seventeenth century can be seemed the best method of handling the evoked in completeness in just one impor- innumerable problems involved in this

, tant monument, the church and monastery study. Fuller references will, therefore, be of San Francisco. The eighteenth century, found in the Appendix. The present chapon the other hand, is well represented by ter is regarded as an introduction to the churches entirely of that period and by catalogue in which the stylistic evolution numerous reconstructions on earlier foun- of the architecture is traced from the sixdations. To the nineteenth century belongs teenth century up to the early nineteenth the tragedy of wanton destruction by the century. hand of man in a frenzy of Neoclassic mod- Documents relating to Lima’s churches ernization. The churches of Lima and other have been studied and published to a

! cities were stripped of their magnificent greater extent than in any other part of Baroque altars which were consigned to Peru with the possible exception of Arethe fire. Thus priceless and irreplaceable quipa, which has recently been so thorworks of art were burned, not even sold. oughly investigated by Padre Victor BaThe cathedral, San Francisco, La Merced, rriga. Unfortunately very few of the mon- _ nearly all of them save San Pedro suffered uments of which the documents speak are

this ravage. Only a relatively poor and still extant, whereas in Cuzco the reverse modest church like Jesus Maria was over- is true. There the archives have scarcely looked, and hence today it possesses the been touched, but the works of art still

| finest colonial interior in Lima. exist in abundance. For Lima much excel-

For all of man’s stupidity and the earth- lent work in the archives has been done quakes again and again, Lima is still rich by the late Fray Domingo Angulo and in ecclesiastical monuments. The recently Horacio Urteaga who published their find-

formed Consejo Nacional de Restauracién ing in the Revista Histérica. Padre Rubén y Conservacién de Monumentos Histéricos Vargas Ugarte in many books and articles. y Artisticos has made a valiant effort, and and Lohmann Villena have brought to has arrested much destruction. They have light important information.’ Harth-terré _

, been unable to save Santa Teresa, however, has contributed extensively to the study of — and overthoroughness of restorations has limefo documents in various articles, the

sometimes resulted in loss. most important of which have been colA catalogue of the churches of Lima, lected in his recent book.’ dividing them into principal monuments Much of our knowledge of lost monuand secondary monuments, has been pre- ments is based upon the descriptions left

| M70 RK

pared (see Appendix). The material is vast by chroniclers, nearly all of them priests

INTERIORS and monks. Among these works which will which was widely followed in the city. | be cited in due course, the Historia de la Santa Ana (about 1553) had the same feaFundacion de Lima, written by Padre tures, and likewise the Espiritu Santo built Bernabé Cobo, is the most important source some twenty years later. The nave in these for a study of the churches of Lima which later churches, however, had paneled were built in the sixteenth and early seven- wooden ceilings, whereas the rudimentary teenth centuries. Padre Cobo, a Jesuit, lived pitched roof appears to have been used many years in the monastery at Lima, in the cathedral. The same type of church

where he wrote his invaluable history about without lateral chapels continued well

1629, although he did not sign the preface along into the seventeenth century, as, for until 1639 after a sojourn of ten years in example, in the church of Santa Catalina

Mexico.” His work is extraordinarily ac- (1624). A slight modification, in that curate, particularly for his day, and is re- the crossing as well as the sanctuary was plete with dates of foundations and with vaulted, took place in the Encarnacién brief but explicit statements about types (1562), the Concepcién (1573), and El

and construction of churches. Belén (1606). Other single-naved churches

| of the sixteenth century apparently had

| the wooden roof throughout: San Pedro,

INTERIORS | Santos Cosmé y Damian, and later in 1604, N the year 1535 at the very beginning Santa Clara.

oo” Lima’s existence, a humble church The Spanish prototypes for these was begun on the Plaza Mayor. Six years churches are to be found in Andalusia, later it was elevated to the rank of cathe- where the single nave covered by a wooden

dral, and hence the first Spanish founders ceiling is characteristic of the fourteenth, | felt the urgent need of a better edifice to fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries. Fresuit its high station. The need was met in quently the apse alone was vaulted, just as 15st by a structure with vaulted apse, a in the parish and conventual churches of single nave covered with a wooden ceiling, Lima. Late examples in Seville, like Santa

and an elevated choir. A simple type of Paula, Santa Clara, and San Clemente, , single-naved church without lateral chap- which were reconstructed in the fifteenth els and covered by a pitched wooden roof and sixteenth centuries, approximate these was the rule throughout Peru in the six- first religious edifices in the Peruvian capi-

teenth century, as already explained in tal. The sixteenth-century churches of _ the second chapter. Few examples of that Granada also belong to the same tradition.

early period survive today except in the The basilican type, composed of nave region of Lake Titicaca and in Ayacucho. and two side aisles, and covered by wooden

AN 7IR |

The humble cathedral of Lima of 1551, ceilings of mudéjar interlaces, was intro-

with only its sanctuary covered by a vault duced to Lima from Andalusia by the - : of brick, established, however, a precedent Dominicans, Franciscans, and Augustin-

LIMA ians. The Andalusian models are so nu- of both churches are based upon Becerra’s

. merous that only a few, such as Omnium original projects of 1582. Both structures Sanctorum, San Lorenzo, and San Andrés underwent numerous modifications, but | in Seville, need be cited.* The Dominicans they maintained in common the features apparently anticipated the other orders mentioned, and they have no exact duwhen they began their large new church plicates anywhere in the world. The recin Lima circa 1540-1552. It was followed tangular plan, as explained elsewhere, is by those of the Franciscans in 1555 andthe derived from sixteenth-century Spanish

Augustinians in 1574. architecture, probably from the cathedral

, The Mercedarians’ church, begun in of Jaén. The pier construction with large 1542, had a floor plan derived from late- entablature block is an offshoot of the Gothic Isabellan models of Castile and a Andalusian school, originating in Diego paneled wooden ceiling of the Andalusian Sildee’s cathedral of Granada. school. This particular combination, judg- With the severe damage done the brick ing by Padre Cobo’s description, seems to groined vaults of Lima Cathedral in the

have been followed in San Sebastian, a earthquakes of 1606 and 1609, a council church for which Francisco Becerra drew of architects was called to consider what

plans in 1585. course should be followed in the recon-

Meanwhile, an ambitious scheme for a_ struction. The decision was reached to re-. great vaulted cathedral of basilican type, duce the height of the piers and to replace

to equal the best of Spain, was proposed the groined vaults with ribbed Gothic

, , in 1565. The matter dragged on ineffec- vaults of brick. Vazquez de Espinosa, who tually for more than a quarter century. lived in Lima in 1619-1620, describes this Francisco Becerra’s plans of 1582-1584 new church of 1613-1622, mentioning the came to naught until the viceroy, Luis de Gothic vaults and Ionic piers. Hence it is

Velasco, instructed Becerra to reduce the certain that in the rebuilding of the edi-

, size of the project. Shortly the church fice in wood and plaster (1751-1755),. begun in 1598 was half finished, and ready because of the devastation caused by the

for dedication six years later. earthquake of 1746, they faithfully re: This church was the first completely produced the ruined church. In this state

vaulted structure known to us in Lima. the cathedral exists today.

It had groined vaults and pointed arches, The adoption of the Gothic vault in an unusual type of construction which was 1613 was a matter of constructive expenot repeated. The rectangular floor plan diency and not a question of stylistic pref-_

(Figs. 7, 8), the hall type of church with erence, for the Gothic had long since nave and aisles of equal height, and the become outmoded in favor of the Renaispier construction were, however, repeated ance barrel vault. Unfortunately, nobody in Cuzco Cathedral (Figs. 65, 91). This thought of suggesting a paneled wooden fact seems sufficient proof that the plans ceiling of Renaissance type or a mudéjar

A 72 R

| INTERIORS - , ceiling, both of which were employed ex- 1673). The vaults (Fig. 92) were then , tensively in Lima in the sixteenth and early constructed of cane and plaster, and seventeenth centuries. Aesthetically such a thenceforth appeared no serious attempt to

solution would have been highly satisfac- use heavier construction on a large scale. | tory for the cathedral, and for Lima in These vaults of San Francisco are the oldgeneral. It would also have been the best est in Lima, having withstood numerous .

adaptation to a region subject to re- earthquakes. The nave has a barrel vault, | , peated earthquakes. Instead, imitation bar- but the aisles, following the innovation of

rel vaults of wood or of cane and plas- San Pedro, are covered with cupolas. No. ter became the rule throughout Jimeno less important than the construction is the churches from the mid-seventeenth cen- mudéjar plaster work of extraordinary | tury thereafter. Today every church in richness and invention which decorates Lima has imitation vaulting and the effect vaults and pilasters. The mudéjar ornamen-

is in most cases highly unsatisfactory. tation has precedent in the Compafiia at The turn to completely vaulted churches Quito (1605-1616). There, however, the at the start of the seventeenth century was star designs, interlaces, and chain patterns

short-lived by necessity. It included the are cut in stone upon the piers with plascathedral, the Dominican Recoleta (1611), ter only on the upper walls and vaults. At

San Ildefonso (1612), La Trinidad Quito an indescribably sensuous beauty is (1614), San Pedro (1624), and La Mer- produced by the gilded patterns in relief ced (1628). The nave vault of Santo against a red background; here the oriental Domingo is only a copy in wood and plaster sumptuousness of the Alhambra lives again

of those of the cathedral, having been re- in the New World. At Lima the color is , constructed in 1660-1666 (see Appendix). lacking. The walls are whitewashed, and | The new basilican church of the Merced the geometric patterns do not invest the en(1628) had ribbed Gothic vaults through- tire surface. Indeed, the chapels and piers

out. San Pedro, however, represented a are finished like rusticated stone, done in strange combination of Gothic vaults in plaster over a brick core. It appears highly the nave and cupolas in the aisles. The cu- doubtful that the interior of San Fran-

polas were to have a profound effect all cisco at Lima followed the fashion set by | over Peru, being adopted in the new that great masterpiece of Hispanic Ameri- 7

church of San Francisco (1657), in the can architecture, the Jesuit church at rebuilding of La Merced after the earth- Quito. The case could be argued in the quake of 1687, and passing far afield to affirmative, due to the similarity of floor

Arequipa and Trujillo. | plans, the use of cupolas in the aisles, as Gothic vaults in Lima ran their course well as the mudéjar designs on the wall in the first three decades of the century, surfaces. The plan, however, already ex-

- and a definite and distinct change appeared isted in San Pedro at Lima. The ornamenin the new church of San Francisco (1657— tal motives in Lima are not identical with |

N73 R

LIMA those employed in Quito. More probably ans used the ornament much more sparthe style came independently from Spain, ingly than the Franciscans. They employed , where similar decoration is encountered on as the chief decorative device a chain conthe interiors of Andalusian churches, for sisting of rectangle and ellipse in alternaexample, San Lucas at Jerez de la Fron- tion, a motive which is found in identical tera, and Nuestra Sefiora de la Angustias form on the portal of the Compafia in — at Granada. Comparable effects also occur Granada, and in the chapel of the Archiin the contemporary facade of San Miguel episcopal Palace at La Zubia, a suburb of at Jerez (1672). Here is more evidence of the same city.° the constant influence of Andalusian art The nave vaults, many times rebuilt, at

upon that of colonial Lima. present have no decoration, whereas, on The basilican floor plan with single sanc- the contrary, the aisles and the elliptical

tuary, dome over the crossing, and the dome of the choir contain geometricized aisles covered by cupolas (Fig. 9), was in- leaves in relief. This large elliptical dome

troduced by the Jesuits in San Pedro over the first bay of the raised choir pro(1624). They derived it from the Com- vides an unusual and impressive architec-

pafiia of Quito, begun in 1605, even tural feature as well as allowing for an though they possessed a model of the Casa interesting play of light. The ellipse also

Profesa at Rome, as explained on pages indicates the turn of the new century 17, 18. The Mercedarians adopted the in which the church was reconstructed same ground plan for their new church in (1688-1706). Trefoil arches cut across 1628 and the Franciscans in 1657 (Fig. the angle of each arm of the transept. This

10). is an extraordinary arrangement not found

The new church of San Francisco pro- in San Francisco, although the mudéjar vided the model for the rebuilding of the trefoil in itself is so widespread as to be

Merced, after it fell in ruins during the almost commonplace in colonial art.

, earthquake of 1687. The basilican plan of San Francisco and the Merced have a the brick church of 1628 was retained, but relation to each other similar to that bethe ribbed Gothic vaults were replaced by tween the Compafiia and the Merced at a construction of cane and plaster (Fig. Quito, that of innovator and follower. It

| 93) in imitation of the Franciscan edifice. may be, as previously stated, that the The aisles follow the prototype closely in mudéjar interior traveled from Quito to the use of domes, in the pronounced rus- Lima, but I believe, because of stylistic tication of the walls in a plaster imitation differences, that both were imported in-

of stone masonry, and even in the lunettes dependently from Andalusia. | over the arches. The nave too has a barrel The normal type of seventeenth-century vault and rusticated piers with the mudéjar interior with plain vaults, Doric pilasters, ornament limited in this case to the pilas- and molded cornice, like San Francisco and — ‘ters and transverse arches. The Mercedari- San Pedro at Cuzco, certainly existed in

A 74.B

INTERIORS | '

many churches of Lima. The restored inte- partum within the main portal and the

_ riors of the chapel of the Vera Cruz (about retables, however, manifest its later pe- |

1613), attached to Santo Domingo, and riod. | ,

Nuestra Sefiora de Montserrat belong to At the very start of the new century

this group, although nearly all others have (1704-1708) the nuns’ church, Santa Rosa }

been destroyed. de las Monjas, introduced a new feature in

As the eighteenth century advanced in the dentelated cornice, which has a large Lima, new styles appeared, leaving San bracket in the center of each bay. An unFrancisco and La Merced without follow- usual arrangement occurs in the terminaers. It may be, however, the result of the tion of the wall pilasters halfway to the mudéjar spirit which led to the decoration floor. The placing of a decorative bracket of the aisles of San Pedro (Fig. 94) with midway between the pilasters in a molded |

gilded wooden panels, carved in flowing cornice became a characteristic feature of arabesques. The patterns themselves are Jimeno architecture in the eighteenth cennot mudéjar, but the taste for allover or- tury (Fig. 95), appearing in San Carlos

nament is, as well as the revetment of and the Corazén de Jests (both dated glazed Sevillian tiles. The date of thislovely 1758-1766) and in the churches of the decoration is subsequent to the earthquake Carmen and the Virgin of Copacabana. of 1687. Similar arabesques, although in ‘The latter were rebuilt subsequent to the stucco, appear beside the transept windows earthquake of 1746. The bracketed cornice

of the Compafia at Pisco (1678-1728), without pilasters found favor in the sac- , -and on the walls of the stairway in the risty of San Agustin and in the small cloister of the Seminario de Santo Toribio chapel which adjoins the sacristy of San _

in Lima. The precedent of the Merced, Francisco. The bracket seems to have nevertheless, explains the use of a geo- reached the height of its popularity in the

metric pattern in the clerestory of the mid-century. It traveled up the coast to

church of the Carmen. Trujillo, which always followed in Lima’s _

The new churches of the eighteenth footsteps, and there put in an appearance century in Lima were for the most part in Santa Rosa (1758-1777) and in Santa

of the nunnery type, small and of single Teresa (about 1759). A somewhat monu- , nave. The exception is the basilican San mental variant of the limeno bracket was Francisco de Paula Nuevo, a mediocre and developed in San Antonio at Cajamarca unfinished structure (1748-1814), which (Fig. 183) ‘where the cornice projects presented no innovations. Jesis Maria deeply above it. Arequipa, occasionally an (1698-1721), too, might have been built artistic disciple of Lima in the colonial in the preceding century, so far as the period, adopted the dentelated cornice with design of the interior is concerned, for it bracket in the rebuilding of Santo Dohas traditional Doric pilasters with molded mingo after the earthquake of 1784.

| NIK Oo

cornice and barrel vault. The shell tym- Another interesting use of the bracket

LIMA |. | occurs in Las Trinitarias (1722), where it constitute the outline of the choir. The shell replaces the usual pilasters below each of tympana in the doorways and in the bapthe transverse ribs of the nave and also tistry (Fig. 96) add a charmingly gay dec-

terminates the ribs of the dome. Las orative note. Mention has been previously Trinitarias is one of the most complete rep- made of the corbeled cornice, so character-

resentatives of the eighteenth century in istic of limevo architecture of the time. Lima and a more important architectural As for the elliptical plan, it is common monument than is generally realized. This enough in Italy during the seventeenth substitution of the bracket for the pilaster century, whereas in Spain its use is less had a follower in the church of Magdalena widespread. Among the few examples there

la Vieja, and also far off in the northern which can be cited are the Bernardas at sierra in the cathedral (Fig. 181) of Caja- Alcala de Henares and the Desemparados

marca (1686-1762). at Valencia. In the mid-eighteenth century A fine small interior of different sort is a general trend toward circular and ellipti-

that of the chapel of the Virgen del cal plans is apparent: San Marcos, Madrid; Patrocinio (1734). It has a large dome the chapel of Nuestra Sefiora del Pilar, over the sanctuary instead of the cross- Saragossa Cathedral; Agustinos, Valladolid; ing. This scheme was a favorite in nun- San Francisco, Madrid, and others.” To this neries. Good examples of it in the seven- phase of Hispanic architecture the Coraz6n

teenth century are the churches of Santa de Jestis of Lima adheres. Elsewhere in the Clara (Fig. 59), Santa Catalina, and Santa New World too the elliptical building was Teresa (Fig. 60), all of them in Cuzco. occasionally adopted. Fairly close parallels Later the type was followed in Bolivia in to the plan used in Lima are those of Santa Santa Teresa (1753-1790) at Cochabamba _ Brigida (1740-1745) in Mexico City, reand in the Oratorian church of San Felipe cently demolished, and the Hospicio at San Neri at Sucre (1795). The interior of the Vicente (1765) in Salvador.* At CochaPatrocinio at Lima is sober and good in bamba in Bolivia the Carmelites started out scale, with a large dentelated cornice add- to build a structure of the same type, but

ing to its dignity. changed it into a conventional single nave An elliptical floor plan set within a rec- (1753-1790). oe 3

tangle, something entirely new to Lima, The one complete rococo monument of was introduced in the Corazén de Jests Lima is Santo Cristo de los Milagros (Las (Fig. 18), also known as the Huérfanos. Nazarenas) erected in 1766-1771, and, if The main portal and sanctuary occupy the we are to believe the inscription upon the

, short ends of a rather elongated ellipse. viceroy Amat’s portrait within the conTo the right are chapels and sacristy. The vent, he was the architect. Recent invesrococo spirit of the period (1758-1766) tigations have revealed Amat’s extensive prevails in the ornament throughout the activity as a military engineer.” To what church and in the reversed curves which extent he practiced architecture has yet to

M764 :

, SACRISTIES be established. That he donated funds for and the fine bulging pulpit (Fig. 304). the new church, and took a direct interest Contrary to all else the wooden grilles (Fig. in the project cannot be doubted. French 98) of the sanctuary and choir betray their

taste, introduced to Spain by Philip V and Hispanicism in retaining mudéjar patterns | his court, spread throughout the Spanish but with a rococo sauce in the rocaille mocolonies in the second quarter of the eight- tives of the tympana. Santo Cristo de los eenth century. The popular legend that Milagros is the epilogue of colonial archi-

Amat himself introduced the rococo to tecture in Lima. It was followed by the Peru is utterly without foundation, since Neoclassicism of Matias Maestro. He dehe did not arrive in Lima until 1761, well stroyed and restored to make way for his after the style had been adopted there. | own academic works, which are at times The main feature of the church of the more redolent of the French Empire than Milagros (Fig. 97) is the large dome over of true Neoclassicism. Because of his acthe crossing preceded by a short nave of tivity and the taste of his day the leadtwo bays. An interior narthex lies beneath ing churches of Lima were stripped of their _ the elevated choir, attached to a centralized Baroque retables. Thanks to Matias Ma-

plan. The walls of brick and plaster are estro, much of the colonial grandeur of divided inside into bays by Corinthian half Lima has been lost forever.

columns and the effect of marble is simu- | a

lated throughout in grayish paint. Here , | for once the marbleized treatment has been SACRISTIES

handled tastefully and is not offensive. HE sacristy of Lima Cathedral is the The same fashion prevails in the high altar T itdes of the city, having originated which is related in design to the interior surely in the early seventeenth century. as a whole. We meet for the first time a The rectangular room, much smaller than complete break with the ancient Hispanic the sacristies of the chief monastic orders, tradition of gilded wood sculpture, a glo- has a barrel vault, Doric pilasters, and a

rious tradition which was never to rise cornice the frieze of which is decorated | - again. Throughout the church the rococo with rosettes. Whether Becerra’s design of ‘details are charming: the hoods over the 1598 still remains here is a moot question, | | four small doors in the crossing, the orna- but the Renaissance character is evident.

‘ment of the niches, and the altars of the The most notable feature of the sacristy, , nave. Moldings in all cases are gilded, as however, is the fine series of apostles usual in rococo works. Very effective is the (Fig. 309) carved in wood by Martinez de

handling of the numerous reversed curves Arrona in 1608. | in the facade of the raised choir. The in- Among the best monuments of colonial terior of Santo Cristo de los Milagros has Lima are the ante-sacristy and sacristy of

unity, every detail being planned as part San Agustin. The original contract for the of the whole composition, even the altars, work, dated 1643, has recently been pub-

S778

, , LIMA lished in full by Alberto Santibafiez Sal- in the turn of the century, contemporary cedo. The ante-sacristy preserves its mag- with the carved and gilded decorations in nificent coffered ceiling of wood, superbly the aisles of the church. Prominent are the worked, as was usual in the period. The long stylized leaves like those which deco-

sculptor, named Diego de Medina, also rate the facade of the Merced (1697-

, made the ceiling of the sacristy, now lost, 1704). , and the statuettes (1643-1651), which are A bronze plaque near the entrance of still extant (Fig. 333). The ante-sacristy the sacristy of San Francisco bears a legend with its lovely dado of glazed tiles isin the which divulges the year of its erection in main a splendid work of the mid-seven- 1729. The portal has the name of the ar-

| _ teenth century. Modifications were intro- chitect, Lucas Meléndez, carved in the upduced a hundred years later in the form of per regions. A ponderous example of late the shell tympana over the doors and win- architectural Baroque with heavy projec-

, dows. The sacristy itself fell into ruins in tions, it also includes foliate and scroll orthe earthquake of 1746, and it was rebuilt namentation related to the interior of the with a barrel-vaulted ceiling of cane and sacristy. The sacristy proper, broad, high, plaster which rises from a cornice decorated and barrel vaulted (21 X 10 meters), con-

| with corbels in typical limeno style of the sciously maintains the style of the church, period. The vault collapsed again in 1940, built more than fifty years previously. and underwent reconstruction with con- Florid plaster work characterizes the vault,

scientious exactitude immediately there- in which scrolls and arabesques play a>

after. prominent part. Few of the strictly mudéThe sacristy of San Pedro (Fig. 99), like jar motives, so strikingly significant in the all of the others under discussion, is a rec- church, recur here. Thus the span of time

, tangular room of good size. The wooden is betrayed. The magnificent large shell ceiling by exception is flat, and is covered tympana of doors and niches clearly indi-

| by three long rows of octagonal paintings. cate the eighteenth century, as likewise do A large array of pictures lines the walls, the small gilded retables. The tiny domed set in tabernacle-like frames of gilded chapel which adjoins the sacristy has unwood. These frames take on architectural adorned walls and a corbeled cornice which

significance by virtue of their size and belong completely to the style of the permanence. In the wood carving of fili- eighteenth century. Here the relative | gree and arabesque lies the glory of the anachronisms of the main hall are missing. , sacristy of San Pedro, lavish and luxurious, The sacristy of San Francisco, spacious _ one of the high lights of Lima. If anyone and imposing, fittingly climaxes the limeno doubts the splendor of colonial Peru, its series. La Merced provides the epilogue, a fabulous wealth, and its unlimited cultural joyous bit of rococo, dating from 1773-

aspirations, he need but tarry a moment 1776, and notable especially for its de-

| here, and reflect. The style suggests a date lightful set of chests and cupboards with

A 78 A

CHAPTER HOUSES : their panels of Frenchified paintings on full length of the hall are crisply carved glass. The tiny Islamic domes which pro- with scale and tongue motives, and the vide the roofing to this small room are the upper row carries Doric colonnettes. A nar-

most interesting feature from the strictly row chapel with tile dado and tile altar architectural angle. They are another case frontal contains a small salomonic retable of the unexpected in colonial art, appear- of the early eighteenth century. The mas- _ ing to date originally from 1765-1768. terpiece, however, is the superb tribune. They were reconstructed in 1912 without The ornament is gilded against a red back-

the original mudéjar ornament. , ground, and a splendid relief in the lunette , represents St. Anthony of Padua’s Vision

| | , of the Madonna. The arabesque upon the : CHAPTER HOUSES | Corinthian columns are beautifully deHAPTER houses of-the leading monastic signed and cut, while the pilasters in the

(orders have in most cases little architec- upper section have the peculiar bracket tural interest, being significant instead for capitals which are also found on Manuel de

their furnishings. The room is normally Escobar’s side portal of the church. The long and narrow with a tribune at one end_ decoration of the hall is completed by a and an altar at the opposite end, occasion- row of paintings of Franciscan saints set | ally enlarged as at San Francisco into a in gilded frames against the upper wall. chapel. The chapter house of San Agustin The original vaulting has been replaced by has simple Gothic vaults which, along with a plain modern ceiling of wood.

the simplicity of the room, support the be- = The chapter house of Santo Domingo |

lief that it is the room mentioned by Ca- (Fig. 100) marks the high point of the , lancha.” Hence it is to be dated in the late limefo group in a broad and lofty hall sixteenth or early seventeenth century. roofed with a large barrel vault of cane The ledge of seats and the continuous up- and plaster. Huge long brackets replace _ rights against the wall, with good but un- the usual pilasters, and produce a striking

pretentious wood carving, must have orig- and rather bizarre effect. Paintings on the inated at that period. Paintings set in the walls, the massive tribune, the prior’s end wall bear the date 1657, and the throne and the friars’ seats are worked into ‘superb tribune beneath them is mentioned one unified scheme, magnificently intein the Libro de Gastos about 1670. grated. Rusticated plaster enframement is The chapter house of San Francisco (Fig. provided for doorways and niches which

ror) has lost its original vaults, but is are topped by crisp and decorative shell otherwise well preserved and contemporary tympana. Unity is attained with superb with the new church and monastery, balance and good taste on a definitely lux-

oe N79 R |

erected in the third quarter of the seven- urious scale. No better wood carving is to | teenth century. Two rows of seats, like be found in Lima than on the grandiose upper and lower choir stalls, which run the tribune or in the strictly mudéjar balcony

LIMA of the viceroy which hangs aloft above the The second story, dated 1722 by inscripmain portal. Here the colonial City of the tion, harmonizes extremely well with the

Kings put forth its best about the year older section. That is achieved to a great

1730. extent by the repetition of a similar entablature in both stories, replacing the

more severe classical design of 1626. The

PORTALS rustication of wall and pilasters fits satisT(HE earliest portal in Lima appears to factorily into the whole composition, as

; T ie that of the chapel of La Vera Cruz, does the conservative Baroque handling of , attached to Santo Domingo. The work of the central section. This main portal of the 7 Diego Guillén in 1613, its original compo- facade is the best architectural feature of sition as shown in Meléndez’s print (Fig. Lima Cathedral in its present-day status. 102) has escaped modification in several In the field of domestic architecture the rehabilitations.” The sober classicism with portal of the house, known as the Casa de one broken pediment is exactly what would Pilatos, is the one important survivor of be expected in the Spanish colonies. In the the first half of the seventeenth century. mother country itself the late Renaissance Its dignified early Baroque composition is of Herrera was still the prevailing style. indeed admirable. The balcony and winThe side entrance of Santo Domingo can- dow are modern, and the interior of the not be far removed in date. About a decade house throughout has been considerably re-

later is the facade of San Agustin at Safa constructed. (Fig. 167). To the same period belongs the San Francisco provides the best architec-

: first story in the central section of the ture of seventeenth-century Lima. The encathedral facade (Figs. 103-105), begun trance of the monastery and the facades of

| in 1626 after the design of Juan Martinez the church and the chapel of the Soledad, , de Arrona. It still retains the main features all belong to the time of Luis de Cervela of the original, despite repeated restora- (1669-1674) and are visible in an entions, as can be seen by a comparison with graving of 1673, published by Suarez de the architect’s drawing which was discov- Figueroa. The first of these is broad with

ered and published by Harth-terré. The trefoil portal flanked by large windows , Renaissance is dominant in the giant Co- which are covered by a flat arch and filled rinthian columns and the triumphal-arch with iron grilles. The rusticated wall sur-_ motive, but the niches with their broken faces and the mudéjar latticework of the pediments and moldings herald the Baroque frieze correspond exactly to the style of style. In the drawing, however, the en- the church interior. Oval windows which tablature does not break forth over the were to become very popular in Lima make columns, as it does in the present structure. their first securely dated appearance here Details of ornament and the carved frieze in the second story and in the cloister. They

are also missing in the sketch. were probably antedated, however, by the

A 80K

, , PORTALS | oval openings in the main cloister of Santo from the center sidewise and in depth toDomingo. The problem is discussed in the ward the wall. Although the Tuscan order section devoted to cloisters in this chapter. and comparatively undecorated surfaces are

Another interesting detail is the large sober in themselves, the composition as a volute capital used on the pilasters of the whole carries a sonorous Baroque forcefulcentral section of the monastery entrance ness. Here is the germ from which devel-

of San Francisco. It turns up again in the oped the later and more lavish portals, lateral portal of the church, dedicated to such as that of the sacristy of San Fran- | - §t. Louis of Toulouse, which has the date cisco and the chapel of the Carmen in the 1674 and the name of Manuel de Escobar Descalzos. A detail which Escobar started cut in the spandrels. This type of capital upon a notable new career is the crisp shell was adopted by architects of the following of the central niche and of the side lunettes. century to the extent that it became a sig- It turns up again and again in limeno ar-

nature of limeno buildings. chitecture of the eighteenth century, espeThe monastery entrance of San Fran- cially in doorways. cisco constitutes a felicitous union of mu- The facade of the chapel of the Soledad, déjar and Baroque elements resulting in a member of the Franciscan group, catches an original composition which is almost the eye because of the unusual handling of symbolic of colonial Lima. The pronounced the rustication in large oval shapes, compyramids which space the windows and _ bined with more conventional horizontal

load the pilasters seem like a throwback to bands. Oval windows as well bring the , the days of Herrera, a hundred years be- composition into relation with the monasfore. The same pinnacles, in larger scale, tery entrance nearby. The modification of

load the buttresses of the church and rise the central part of the facade and the tow- | starkly against the skyline. , ers took place under the hands of the NeoThe side portal of San Francisco (Fig. classicists of 1815. Both the difference in 106), as already stated, bears the date style and the documentary evidence of the

1674 and the name of the well-known engraving published by Suarez de Figueroa -

architect, Manuel de Escobar. Despite the prove the fact. | volute capitals and the half-disk ornament One other portal in Lima, related in style on the pilasters, like those of the upper to San Francisco, is that of Nuestra Sefiora center of the monastery entrance, the two del Prado. It is doubtful that it corresponds works are very unlike in style. The latter, to any of the three portals designed by due to its homogeneity with the church, Juan de Aldana in 1638, since the descripmay be from the design of the first archi- tion of them does not seem to apply. Stylistect, Constantino de Vasconcelos. Escobar’s tically, the use of brick and plaster with

portal introduces ponderous but effective rusticated pilasters and frieze, and the

| | MN 81 & a |

Baroque masses which are constructed in prominent ovals of the spandrels and sides

four deep planes as the entablatures break connect it with the Soledad. At present |

LIMA disigured by the modern wooden frame Agustin was the prototype of San Fran-

and balustrade at the niche, the Prado por- cisco. | ,

tal is, nevertheless, discreet and excellent The portal itself, on the contrary, isone _ in scale, the work of a first-rate architect, of the most interesting works of colonial apparently of the third quarter of the Peru. Of stone, unlike the rest of the strucseventeenth century. It might, on the other ture, it has a yellowish color as the result of hand, have been completed by the time the numerous coats of paint, a fact which does

| church was inaugurated in 1640. That pos- not interfere with its effectiveness. Suarez sibility seems unlikely, for in that case the de Figueroa’s description of the main portal Prado portal would be a forerunner rather in 1674 and the engraving in his book es-

than a follower of the style which tri- tablish without any doubt the date of the

umphed in San Francisco. present work. Mugaburu states that portals The main facade of San Francisco (Figs. and towers were still incomplete in 1672.”

107-109) is by far the most important of Its exact contemporary, the side portal, seventeenth-century Lima (1669-1674). which bears an inscription with the year

| Materials are brick and plaster treated to 1674 and the name of the architect, Manuel imitate rusticated courses of stone, and at de Escobar, differs so strikingly in style as present painted gray with moldings, archi- to suggest that another man, probably a traves, and cornices in white to afford con- sculptor, was the author of the principal trast. Proportions are broad and massive, entrance. To be sure, the two portals have but instead of creating an impression of a few details in common: the extremely

, power and monumentality the effect is calligraphic shell niches, the pilasters with overweighted and clumsy. The composi- volute capitals, and the half-disk orna-

tion lacks scale, and suffers very distinctly ment on the pilasters. , in comparison with a contemporary facade, The concept of the main portal is not such as that of the Compafiia in Cuzco. In architectural, however, but sculptural in the latter case, relations of the whole com- its extensive application. of surface ornaposition are beautifully integrated, whereas ment. The pictorial handling of the masses,

in San Francisco at Lima the portal is with pronounced projections of moldings, dwarfed by the excessive breadth of the broken cornices, and the constant movestructure and the ponderously large towers. ment throughout which makes the eye

, _ These faults must have originated in the dance fitfully hither and yon, give it an facade of San Agustin, as first projected by advanced Baroque character which anticJosé de la Sida whose name with the date ipates the developments of the eighteenth | 1637 is inscribed in the base of the left century. It has been suggested that the very tower. Although the present portal is dated top constitutes a modification of the lat1720, the bases of the colossal two-storied ter period because of the almost rococo

_ | A 82 KR | |

towers establish the proportions of the rhythms of cornices and lunettes. This | structure, leaving no doubt that San suggestion cannot be accepted. The webbed

PORTALS volutes are also present in retables and on signed by Pedro de Noguera in 1623. One the facade of the Compafiia at Cuzco (Fig. other instance of their use in a monumental 64) in the third quarter of the seventeenth way on the facade of a church is that of

century. The main portal of San Francisco Santa Lucia (Fig. 175) in Ferrefafe

is in reality a retable like those of gilded (1690). © | wood, translated into stone, and viewed in Figure sculpture is restricted to the that light its style is homogeneous and con- statue of the Virgin of the Immaculate

sistent with its date (1672-1674). Lima Conception in the upper center accom- | has lost nearly all of her retables of that panied by kneeling figures of St. Francis period, but other cities have many, for and St. Dominic. The Hispanic taste for instance, the altars of the Compafiia of surface patterns reveals itself in the panels Cuzco and that of Santa Teresa (1675) in of arabesque on the base, the jambs, and

the same city. The retable of the Immacu- intrados of the arches, as well as the spiral , . late Conception (Fig. 324) in Lima Cathe- and zigzag bases of the columns, —s_—> | dral itself has the same decorative details The portal of San Francisco is the first as the portal to such a degree that it must important retable facade of Lima, and one

be either by the same sculptor or derived which possesses great originality in its defrom the portal. This retable was recon- sign as a whole, as well as in the ingenious

structed by the famous retablero, Diego de manipulation of its multiple ornamental | _ Aguirre, in 1692-1696, according toa doc- devices. Baroque unity is manifest in the ument mentioned by Harth-terré.* Un- swelling crescendo which rises to the statue

fortunately none of the other retables of of the Madonna through the upward curve | the artist is preserved so that it is difficult of the broken pediment to the central | to determine on stylistic grounds to what niche. It finishes off at the top with a

extent he remodeled the retable of the flourish of volutes and lunettes, and is Immaculate Conception or whether it is brought to a quiet conclusion by the oval almost entirely his own creation. Both the window and the final curve of the gable Franciscan portal and the retable have the overhead. The presence of figure sculpture, same columns: a spiral base, the fluted shaft as well as relief ornament, helps to produce

decorated with draped female heads and an effect of richness which makes San swags of cloth containing flowers and fruit, Francisco the forerunner of the salomonic

and at the top Corinthian capitals. The facades of the eighteenth century. | frieze also includes the draped female head. Lima’s churches in this latter period _ These combined with swags may justly which brought the colonial era to a close be termed choir-stall themes, since they are small in scale, and the facades consti- , are found among the ornament of all of tute a homogeneous school of late archithe principal stalls of Peru in the seven- tectural Baroque. The exceptions were pro-

MS 83 R |

teenth century. They first occur in the vided by the two great monastic orders, | choir of Lima Cathedral which was de- the Augustinians and Mercedarians, whose

, LIMA |

large and magnificent churches suffered by comparison with the facade of San almost complete destruction in the earth- Agustin where the gables do not exist. quake of 1687, and were rebuilt with lav- Both monuments strike one as strangers ish “‘Churrigueresque” facades. The latter who have penetrated within the walls of | term is generally used in Hispanic lands to Lima. The facade is carved in gray stone describe retables and decoration of late with cornices and moldings painted rose. Baroque style in which spiral (salomonic) San Agustin, like the Merced, was laid columns play a predominant role. This waste in the great earthquake of 1687. The style began about 1650, and reached its new portal (Fig. 111), dated 1720 by inclimax circa 1690-1740. The Spanish usage scription, is the only original work of its of the word “salomonic,” which is em- type in central Peru. In the restorations of

ployed to signify the twisted or spiral 1903-1908 the statues were drastically column, has been adopted in this book, modified and the decorative sculpture rebecause it is specific and useful in writ- cut, so that much of the quality of the ing. The word is explained by the legend carving has been lost. A heavy coat of gray that a spiral column in St. Peter’s came paint and some use of plaster also mask the

from Solomon’s temple. richness and freshness which the surface of The facade of the Merced (Fig. 110) the stone itself would convey. The oval was the first of its type in Lima, dating window and broken Baroque cornices at from 1697-1704. Demolished at the be- the top were replaced by the present round ginning of the present century, it was re- window, and by a new small story surproduced in replica in 1940, under the di- mounted by a continuous molding. Thus | _ rection of Harth-terré.“ This modern copy the builders of the neo-Romanesque intefollows the original, as known in old pho- rior sacrificed stylistic consistency. The tographs, with painstaking accuracy. Slight facade remains, nonetheless, a very effec-

modifications were made in the cornices tive work. of the top story and in the central niche. © The central niche above the doorway in The carving itself is hard and mechanical, which stands a large statue of St. Augustine

lacking the beauty of touch and exquisite is the iconographic and compositional

| quality of original works like the facades focus of the facade. The broken cornices | of Cajamarca. Saints in niches and paired above the entrance carry the eye upward, spiral columns entwined with vines and and the progressive diminution of the bunches of grapes, make of the Merced height of the stories combines to bring the facade a true retable translated into stone. work into Baroque unity. The sculpture is The arrangement of the rectangular His- a filigree of exquisite lace which envelops panic frames over the doorway and central the entire wall. Spiral columns, draped with niche introduces a discordant note in the vines and bunches of grapes, and ringed in

otherwise flowing melodious style, an ob- the lower section, flank the niches, both _. servation which can better be understood major and minor. The niches themselves

| — NM 84K

. PORTALS | | have shell tympana, crowned by fantastic this facade is that its proportions with two

architectural fragments. In the third story, colossal towers overshadowing the portal originally the last, are pilasters with bust- are exactly like those of San Francisco length caryatids which turn at the waist (Fig. 108). Moreover, the date 1637 proves

into long plumelike frills. The frieze in the that José de la Sida first introduced this | entablatures is cut with heads and ara- heavy ungainly composition to Lima, and besques. One strong touch of local idiom that of San Francisco (1657-1674) is the

is the mudéjar chain pattern on the jambs follower, not the originator. | and archivolt of the doorway, an unmis- Lamentable as the restorations of the | takable reminiscence of San Francisco’s dec- early twentieth century were, matters

orative repertory. would have been even worse, had the facade The original portal of San Agustin wasa of San Agustin been crowned with a cennoteworthy work of colonial Peru, and it tral tempietto flanked by domes, as the still is, in spite of the added top story and architect then proposed. His design, pub-

the recutting of the sculpture. Its design lished in 1908, never saw fulfillment,

is immeasurably superior to that of the thanks to the good fortune that funds were : |

Merced which we know in photographs and __ lacking.” | in the modern replica. The only similar The great and devastating earthquakes _ works in Peru which surpass it are the three of 1687 and 1746 brought such widespread

churches of Cajamarca (Figs. 177-187) destruction to Lima that little save San whose remoteness has spared them the hand Francisco, prior to the eighteenth century, of the modern restorer. It is not fitting to has survived. Hence ecclesiastical architecclassify San Agustin with the facades of ture of Lima is predominantly of this later

Arequipa and the Titicaca region, since period. Notable are the numerous facades

they represent the indigenous interpreta- of small churches. which constitute a uni- , tion of the Hispanic retable facade, and form and original school. Persistent features constitute a separate and a distinctive style are the two small towers which flank the

in themselves. | facade. Santa Rosa de las Monjas (1704—San Agustin is now towerless, but the 1708) and Nuestra Sefora de Copacabana | huge bases remain, the left of which hasan (1700) are early in the development. In

inscription with the name of the architect, both the small belfries are decorated with | José de la Sida, and the date 1637. The huge pilasters which have volute capitals. The belfry above fell victim to the restorers of tall slender bases upon which the belfries 1903 and is known only in photographs stand are faced with colossal pilasters. The

which, however, give an excellent idea of same arrangement prevailed in the de- , its style.” The volute capitals of the pilas- stroyed church of the Caridad and in the ters as well as the cane and plaster materials recently cement-surfaced Nuestra Sefiora | suggest that it was rebuilt after the earth- de Cocharcas (1777). The belfries are simquake of 1687. The interesting fact about plified and rather ugly in the cases of Las |

NM 85 A | :

, : LIMA

| ‘Trinitarias (1722) and the Patrocinio century development is the portal of La

(1734). Concepcién (Fig. 112), dated 1699 and

Very charming and beautifully designed the work of the architect, Diego Pérez de were those of the destroyed facade of San Guzman.** The style of the seventeenth Marcelo and of Santa Teresa (Figs. 115, century is still present in the flat mudéjar116), a precious work which, likewise, has like ornament of the pilasters and frieze. been demolished (1946). In these two cases The new period prevails in the fine shell the belfries rested upon a plain undeco- tympanum in the upper center and in the rated wall beneath. The general style falls upward sweep of the broken cornices over. — into the first half of the eighteenth century. the door. These details have a long line of

a Occasionally a wooden balustrade sur- descendants of various types in the eight, rounds the belfries as in Nuestra Sefiora de eenth century, but not often so interestCocharcas, La Compafiia at Pisco (Fig. ingly manipulated. The curious oblique 117), San José at Nazca (Fig. 118), and wall with single tower attached to the side the destroyed facades of San Marcelo and of the church was conditioned by the locaLa Caridad at Lima. These towers are not tion of the building on the corner of two limited to coastal Peru alone, but are found narrow streets. The graceful tower, distin-

as far south as Concepcién in Chile. A guished by volute capitals and cupola, is drawing for the cathedral of Concepcién is identical with the belfries of Nuestra Sefiora

interesting not only in its stylistic relation- de Cocharcas (1777), and hence must be ship to the school of Lima, but likewise in dated in the same period and attributed to

its corroborative date of 1744." the same architect. A simplification in design, which includes Specific variants of the Concepcién poran abandonment of volute capitals and _ tal are the two rear entrances of the cathe-

| , domed turrets in favor of molded pilasters dral (Fig. 113), dated 1732, which display and flattened roofing, sets in with the sec- greater simplicity in the elimination of all

ond half of the century in San Carlos surface ornament, save rustication. They | (1758-1766) (Fig. 114) and Santo Cristo are also more emphatically architectural in de los Milagros (1766-1771). The results the depth of planes between wall, column, | are dull and uninteresting, lacking in the and entablature. Good taste and excellent charm of their predecessors. Another inno- scale, although with less fantasy than in vation, unsuccessful and without progeny, some of their contemporaries, make them was introduced in the Corazén de Jestis in pleasing. A reduction of the cathedral porthe form of broad heavy octagonal towers. tals and far inferior is that of the Patrocinio Possibly this might be regarded as a rein- (1734) which betrays its model in spite of

carnation on a small scale of the ponderous numerous changes from the prototype, massiveness which characterizes the facades such as the elliptical windows.

of San Francisco and of San Agustin. Santa Rosa de los Padres, begun in 1676, At the very beginning of the eighteenth- did not reach completion until 1728, and it

AS 86 AR |

PORTALS was in the later years that the facade must an extension to the exterior of a device very

- have been built. It represents an intermedi- common in eighteenth-century interiors; ate stage between the portals of the Con- the one other case of exterior usage being cepcién and the cathedral, with the oval the side entrance, Portada de los Guitarre-

window of the choir the most striking var- ros, of the Merced, which Padre Barriga , iation. This oval window started its career dates very late, in 1765-1768.” The style, : in the monastery entrance of San Francisco on the contrary, locates it in the first half

(1669-1674). It became virtually a char- of the century. The contours of moldings acteristic of limeno portals, as well as of her and cornices strike a gay note, abetted by cloisters of which more will be said later. the deep projections of the second story. As

In the eighteenth century the best known usual a narrow vertical border of scrolls examples.are the facades of the Trinitarias, enframes the portal at the sides. The origi- , _ Patrocinio, Santa Rosa de los Padres, San nal monument, alas, no longer exists. It was Marcelo, Cocharcas, and the parish churches dismantled after slight damage in the earth-

of Surco and Huaura. | quake of 1940, and replaced by a cement The Trinitarias (1722) belongs in the copy which has none of the charm of the

same category as Santa Rosa de los Padres, colonial work. | | its many variations notwithstanding. The The facade of San Marcelo (Fig. 116), narrower and more compact composition recently demolished (1925-1933), reached of the latter is difficult to judge from the a climax of eighteenth-century brilliance. point of view of quality because of the Its wide rhythmic portal embodied new

destruction of the gable. The second story variations on familiar themes, as in the four lacks articulation, however, because of the oval cameos on either side of the central short heavy pilasters and the shallowness of | niche which in turn was topped by a limefio contrasting planes. Very broad, on the con- oval window. The proportions of the extrary, is the exterior of Nuestra Sefiora de terior were perfectly adjusted, characterCocharcas, the latest edition (1777) in this istic towers giving the final touch of com-

series of related works. a , pletion. |

The entrance to the chapel (1703) of The masterpiece of the century in Lima the viceroy’s palace, to judge by an old was the facade of Santa Teresa (Fig. 115). photograph, ranked as one of the most ad- It was destroyed in 1946, along with its vanced architectural designs of its day. It lovely cloister, in order to widen a street. ' was destroyed in 1937. Of the same period Needless to say, such disregard of the price(1704-1708), but without exact counter- less heritage of the past is lamentable; espepart, is the small portal of Santa Rosa de cially in the case of a work which was the las Monjas, flanked by Corinthian columns, very personification of the charm of its and notable especially for the lovely shell epoch. Familiar and typical were the gracetympanum over the doorway. The placing ful towers, the pilasters with volute capiof the calligraphic shell in that position is tals, and the lilting melodious flow of the |

A 87K

| LIMA | , |

moldings. Unique was the particular com- portal between them. The breadth of the position of them and impeccable the scale portal, and the use of two windows in both and the creative fantasy. The stories dimin- first and second stories, have no exact anaished in height and breadth from the broad logue. The rococo is less in evidence than arch and pilasters of the doorway, through within the church, although some of the the niche above and to the rococo curves moldings have that flavor. The use of Co-

| of the large window at the top. The volutes rinthian capitals and the curiously close and curves were woven by repetition into grouping of the half columns and pilasters

a rhythmic calligraphic unity. Not the least indicate an unmistakable stylistic relation effective in the picturesque beauty of Santa to the famous tower of Santo Domingo. Teresa was the play of shadows over the That fact raises anew the question of the walls and niches, like stillness broken by supposed activity of the vicefoy Amat as an

soft music. architect. His portrait which belongs to the A marked change of style appears in the nuns of Las Nazarenas states that Amat churches of the third quarter of the eight- designed and directed the construction of eenth century. It takes the direction of their church, Santo Cristo de los Milagros. greater sobriety, indicative of more influ- Tradition holds that he also designed the ence of contemporary French art. Two of tower of Santo Domingo which was built | them, San Carlos (Fig. 114) and El Cora- by the engineer, Juan de la Roca. Alzon de Jestis, are exactly contemporary though his activity as a military engineer in (1758-1766), and the portals similar in the fortification of the coast of Peru and

_ disposition. In both cases the first story Chile has been established, nothing is with simple Doric pilasters and entablature known of the exact extent to which he is contrasted with the second story where engaged in the profession of architect. It the curious volute capitals reappear. The may be that he was an interested amateur broken rococo pediments and the urns on who made suggestions with a regal sweep

the two churches are nearly identical, but of the hand. Flattery to the powerful the general composition and detail of San would easily motivate giving him more Carlos make it infinitely the superior of credit than was due. the two. The finishing off with small tow- The tower of Santo Domingo (Fig. 119) ers makes a very pleasing facade, whereas is grandiose in size, and it virtually dwarfs El Corazén de Jesus’s large polygonal tow- the church beside it. Except for its three

: ers result in a heavy and ungainly group- stories and polygonal shape, it bears no re-

ing. lation to the earlier tower as seen in the The facade of Santo Cristo de los Mila- engraving published by Meléndez.” The gros (1766-1771) breaks with the tradi- undecorated first story is succeeded by tions of Lima in the modified simplicity Tonic columns in the second and Corinthian and rectangularity of the design of the tow- in the third. The rococo spirit is projected ers and in the entire composition of the in the small broken curves of the pediments

| MN 88 KA |

CLOISTERS and in the close spacing of the columns. porteria, indicating that no more than one The tower of Santo Domingo is successful had yet been erected. Hence the original as a monument which looms large and im- construction of the second cloister must be oO posing over the roof tops of Lima, a me- placed later in the first half of the seven-. morial to the splendor of her colonial past. teenth century, and given a presumed first The epilogue of viceregal architecture of place in the long line of mudeéjar patios for | Lima included the now demolished portal which Lima is famous. It has been much of the Augustinian Capilla de la Guia restored, and hence lacks the beauty of later (about 1760) which was purely rococo. It structures of the same type. The cloister of was overlaid by cartouches in stucco, much the Dominican novitiate, in wretched con_ in the manner of retables of the same time. dition and largely dismantled, also pre- San Francisco de Paula Nuevo (1748— serves a few trefoil arches. It is impossible __

1814) is an academic throwback to the to say whether the original work of 1586— large towered facade of San Francisco. The 1590 had the same design. My belief is that :

uninteresting portal is dependent upon this section and the extremely beautiful the earlier group represented by the rear en- second story (Fig. 120) with its handsome trances of the cathedral. The crash came, domed staircase were reconstructed in the however, with Matias Maestro and the dull eighteenth century. The corbels and other

Neoclassic Portada de las Maravillas, a decorative details point emphatically to Doric triumphal arch of stucco and imita- that conclusion. The ribbed dome is closely tion marble. It marked the passing of His- analogous to the one over the crossing of

panic colonial architecture. the Trinitarias (1722). Moreover, the ma-

a , - , terials of wood and plaster were adopted

| universally in Lima in the eighteenth cen- | CLOISTERS os tury, with brick frequently used in the

imMa’s cloisters are her loveliest eccle- first story. The stone cloisters of the earlier L siastical structures of the colonial pe- years had to be abandoned because of their riod, and by good fortune they exist in con- unsuitability in this land of earthquakes. siderable numbers. The most picturesque A most enchanting corner of Lima was and striking are those which have arches of the cloister of Santa Teresa (Figs. 121, trefoil shape. That these arches were intro- 122), built in 1683-1686 and destroyed in duced as early as the seventeenth century is 1946 to widen a street. The trefoil arches _

unmistakably proven by the print of Santo had very shallow lobes in this case, and | Domingo (Fig. 102) which Meléndez pub- were used only in the first story. The rusti-

lished in 1681. Trefoil arches in the second cation in stucco over a brick core was | cloister can clearly be distinguished. Lizar- adroitly designed to make an interesting

| AN 89 A _

- raga in his description of Santo Domingo wall surface and cornice. There were many ; (circa 1602) says that Salvador de Ribera charming details, such as the oval openings

(1582-1586) finished the cloister and in the corner piers, the lovely shell orna-

_ LIMA ments, and the slim pilasters pendant on a__ the rustication of the first story are made leaf which filled the spandrels of the arches. of stucco over brick, whereas cane and The second story of Santa Teresa was of stucco are employed in the upper gallery. cedar, stained dark brown, with fine zapata Here the graceful trefoil arches separated capitals carrying a horizontal roof. The by corbels suspended on tiny lobed arches

_ contrasts between arches below and lintel rise from small rectangular piers. : construction above, between the white The large cloister of the Merced (Fig. stucco and the dark brown wood were 123) with its beautiful garden and picturhighly effective. A balustrade in the upper esque mudéjar second story is the most gallery added to the horizontality and memorable colonial site in Lima, and all the helped to give scale to the composition. more so since the patio of Santa Teresa has

| Another patio with trefoil arches in the vanished. Luckily the second story is dated first story only was that of Espiritu Santo, by the rebuilding of 1777-1780. Thus it is the second story of which was remodeled established as the last of its kind before the

| in the nineteenth century. The whole struc- Neoclassic invasion. The large trefoil arches ture was destroyed in 1946 to make way alternate with small trefoil arches in a for the new basilica of Santa Rosa. graceful and rhythmic progression, the Very common is the contrary arrange- same arrangement which is so effective in ment in which trefoil arches occupy the the patio (Fig. 26) of the Torre Tagle Pal-

, second story and round arches the lower ace (about 1735). Doric columns of cedar , gallery. Santa Rosa de las Monjas (1704— marked by an exaggerated entasis, a very 1708) provides a dated example where common peculiarity of Hispanic -colonial Doric columns of wood in both stories sup- architecture, provide the usual contrast of. port this arrangement of the arches. The materials in the second story of the Merced. two inner cloisters of San Agustin, now José Gabriel Navarro has stated that both part of the Augustinian school, also have features originated in Quito and thence |

, trefoil arches only in the upper gallery spread throughout Hispanic America. This which is manifestly of eighteenth-century claim that the exaggerated entasis first came design because of the typical corbel in the into existence in the sixteenth century in

spandrels of the arches. Both have been the cloister of San Francisco (circa 1573—-

miserably restored and covered with ce- 1581) at Quito has yet to be proven. ment. That of the Augustinian seminary is Navarro’s other assertion which gives priorunusual because of the projecting points of ity in the use of alternately large and small

the lobes. arches to San Agustin at Quito, under conThe very beautiful cloister of San Fran- struction in 1650, must definitely be re-

| cisco Solano (1732-1734), now part of the jected. The Augustinian cloister of Lima seminary of Santo Toribio, is in ruinous begun in the last quarter of the sixteenth

. condition, subsequent to the earthquake of century and described by Calancha (pub1940.” The round arches, the pilasters, and _ lication of 1638) is at least one monument

AS 90K

—— CLOISTERS | in which that usage definitely preceded its his description (1651) of the sixteenth-

adoption in Quito.” century monument speaks of eighty-eight | Judging by Calancha’s accurate descrip- columns of stone, presumably in the upper tion, the present main cloister of San Agus- gallery. The present work belongs to the

tin is a copy of the structure which col- rebuilding of 1669-1674. Unquestionable lapsed in 1687. Instead of the original stone proof of that fact is afforded by the enpiers, brick covered with stucco was sub- graving of the cloister published by Suarez

stituted in the rebuilding, and the vaults de Figueroa in 1675. The only discrepof the first story gave way to wooden ceil- ancies between the print and the preserved

ings. The main cloister of the seminary of work are the mudéjar interlaces of the Santo Toribio, originally dedicated to San frieze and the corbel ornaments as conBuenaventura, follows the same scheme trasted with the rectangular pattern in the with rectangular piers in the first story and frieze and the pyramidal hoods in the span-

the alternation of small and large arches in drels which appear in the engraving. These , the upper gallery. The simple rusticated minor variations can logically be attributed panels in stucco and the oval of the span- to the engraver’s lack of interest in subordrels recall the large cloister of San Fran- dinate details, other instances of which are

cisco, to the great monastic complex of found in the print of the exterior of the which the seminary belongs, The later date church and monastery. |

(1734) is revealed by decorative details The materials of the second story are like the great masks in the upper corners of wood and plaster, the design being notable the court and still more by the lovely stair- for the large oval openings. These as well way between the cloisters of San Francisco as the mudéjar frieze and the rustication in

Solano and San Buenaventura, where ara- stucco carry through the same stylistic besques and large masks are spread over the features as the church itself. The alternat-

wall at the turn of the steps, recalling ing large and small arches link the cloister , the decorative fantasy of the transepts in with those of San Agustin and San Buenathe Compafiia at Pisco. These two eight- ventura, both of which, on the other hand, eenth-century cloisters of San Francisco are are much smaller in area.

outstanding works of colonial Peru. Just It would be logical to conclude that San one more instance of the alternation of large Francisco was the innovator in the use of and small arches in the second story should oval openings because of their appearance

be mentioned, the patio of Jests Maria throughout the church and monastery. Yet __

(1698-1721). , Meléndez’s print of 1681 shows a portion

The main cloister of San Francisco (Fig. of the upper gallery of the main cloister of 124) retains the ground plan of the original Santo Domingo (Fig. 102) which has the structure which, according to Padre Cobo, same design as the corresponding part of was erected in the time of the Marqués de San Francisco. For stylistic reasons it is diffi-

| : Nor KK | Cafiete (1556-1 561). Cérdoba Salinas in cult to believe that the Dominican cloister ,

LIMA could date from the time of Salvador de modest in size, but often very pleasing. _ Ribera (1582-1586), or to be sure that it The Descalzos Franciscanos and the former was contemporary with the tiles which Augustinian College of San Ildefonso which have the years 1604, 1606, and 1620 in- now houses the Academia de Bellas Artes scribed upon them. The question isa purely have small courts in which piers support academic matter, but one which is inter- round arches, the materials being brick covesting to the historian. The conclusion must ered with a plain coat of white stucco. The

, be reached, however, that the elliptical inner precincts of the Mercedarias and openings probably made their first appear- the Monasterio del Prado follow the same ance in Lima in the Dominican cloisters on scheme. Rusticated stucco work of seventhe occasion of a reconstruction during the teenth-century type was the variation on

, early seventeenth century. Perhaps a later the same theme in the Encarnacién, now

| revelation of the archives will further destroyed. In Arequipa and Trujillo even clarify this interesting chronological prob- the great monastic orders, the Dominilem. The present upper gallery of wood can, the Jesuits, and the Mercedarian, pre_ with plaster ornaments seems to identify a ferred the single-storied structure on piers remodeling subsequent to the earthquake (Figs. 163, 196-198).

of 1746. In eighteenth-century Lima, Doric colUnmistakably an offshoot of the school umns of cedar carrying slender round of San Francisco is the Claustro de los Doc- arches became very popular. Good extores of the Merced, a work of strikingly amples are the cloisters (Fig. 125), in the

| mudéjar character, which like the church Casa de Ejercicios (1777) of the Francisof the same order, must have been built cans, the cloisters of the Nazarenas (1766-

anew after the earthquake of 1687. It fol- 1771), Santa Clara, and the Casa de Ejerlows the usual type of construction in the cicios of the Descalzos Franciscanos. Inner use of brick in the first story and wood in patios in which zapata capitals with the the second covered by rustication and pat- post-and-lintel system make a picturesque

, terns in stucco. The disposition of the and eminently Hispanic composition still arches and the oval openings, as well as the survive in Santa Clara and the Mercedarias.

mudéjar motives, indicate its relationship Once very numerous both in conventual to the Franciscan cloister, without, how- and domestic architecture, they have now

: ever, equaling the high quality of design dwindled to very few. , , and workmanship of the latter. Today the Unique in Peru is the large circular cloisMercedarian cloister suffers from the ex- ter of the Colegio de Santo Tomas (Fig. traordinarily ugly paint, vivid blue and 126), a work which appears to have been

, white in the upper gallery and, unbelieva- rebuilt after the earthquake of 1746. The ble as it sounds, red in the lower. most likely Spanish prototype for the plan The cloisters of nunneries and the lesser is the unfinished palace of Charles V at male orders are usually single storied and Granada. There the circular court reflects

| A 92 A

, | SOUTH OF LIMA | | the enthusiasm for round buildings which at Seville in Santa Clara (1578), San Cleflourished during the Renaissance. The mente (1588), and the Museo Provincial, groined vaults of Santo Tom4s are caneand_ re nearly identical with those in Peru.” |

plaster resting on brick walls and piers. | |

Very curious is the entablature block ar- , |

rangement of the piers and the pilasters at- CITIES TO THE SOUTH OF LIMA: tached to the wall, a late instance of the _PISCO, NAZCA, ICA — influence of the pier construction of Lima HE most important churches in the

Cathedral. | | T eons region of southern Peru beAny discussion of Lima’s beautiful clois- tween Lima and Arequipa are three Jesuit ters should include a mention at least of the foundations: the Compafia at Pisco, and lovely tile revetments in the lower walks of _ the churches on the haciendas of San José

certain of them. Among the most magnifi- and San Xavier in the valley of Nazca. cent in the world are the Sevillian tiles Here the country is completely arid, and © upon the walls and piers of the large court for many miles a pure desert of sand and of San Francisco. In a number of places the dunes stretches in picturesque desolation. |

dates 1620 and 1639 occur in the tiles Thus it begins just south of Lima, and themselves. The late patio of the Fran- so continues for three hundred miles until ciscans (Fig. 125) also contains a fine set the mountains rise to the north of Nazca.

_ (1777) into which rococo elements have Thereafter they grow increasingly large as found their way. The earliest of all line the the traveler goes to the south. The first two walls of the main Dominican cloister (Fig. churches mentioned represent an extension 127), the dates 1604 and 1606 appearing of the school of Lima. San Xavier at Nazca, repeatedly and the year 1620, just once. A on the other hand, although it shows some

legend in the ceramics of the north wall evidences of limefo influence, must be reads Me fecit Garrido 1606. The name is placed within the orbit of Arequipa. Thus

surely that of a Moor. | the two churches at Nazca divide their al-

The glazed tiles of Seville, heritage of the legiance between the two great cities of the | Moslem civilization in Spain, are eloquent coast, a fact which is symbolic of their geo-

evidence of the prominent position mudé- graphic position, just midway between jar art held in colonial Peru. In the capital, Lima and Arequipa. Lima, the closeness to Andalusian Spain is Pisco, one hundred and fifty miles south even more striking than elsewhere. Tile re- of Lima, is nearer to the capital both in its

vetments also decorate the walls of the location and in the style of its one fine churches of San Pedro at Lima, Santa Te- colonial church, originally erected by the - resa at Cuzco, and the sacristy of San Agus- Jesuits. The earthquake of 1687 left the tin at Lima. Although the majority of the earlier building in ruins, promptly to be

tiles were imported from Spain, some were replaced by the present delightful work ,

oe N93 K , |

fabricated in Lima itself. Dated examples which stood ready in 1723.” A commemo-

a LIMA , rative portrait in the sacristy records the aliy limevo, over the transept door. Before

name of the patron and founder of thenew quitting the interior of the Compafia, Jesuit colegio, Andrés Ximénez de Vilches mention must be made of the very beauti-

y Vallés.” Its Latin-cross plan (Fig. 6) ful pulpit and salomonic retables which with single nave flanked by lateral chapels, shine like gold reliquaries against the white its dome over the crossing, and the single walls. In period and quality they resemble

apse resemble in a general way the Jesuit the fine collection of sculpture in Jesus churches of the Compafiia at Cuzco and Maria at Lima (Figs. 292, 294, 327, 328).

, San Pedro at Juli. The limevo coastal tradi- Moving out to examine the facade (Fig. tion, on the other hand, is in evidence not 117) of the Compafia at Pisco, we find

| only in the stylistic features but also in that it has the small towers characteristic methods of construction, that is, in the use of Lima in the eighteenth century. Analoof brick and plaster walls topped by a bar- gous were the towers (Fig. 116) of the farel vault with triangular penetrations and cade of San Marcelo, even to the plain base —

, a dome, both made of cane and stucco. and the wooden balustrade about the belThe interior is small in scale and the fry itself. In the same category were the chapels rather shallow. The white walls, towers of Santa Teresa (Fig. 115) and the a the chaste molded piers and entablature es- Caridad, also demolished in recent years. tablish a restrained mood which is modu- The facade is marked by an oval window lated, like eighteenth-century music, by of limevio parentage, but the design is prooccasional florid embellishment. Here it in- vincial in detail. The first and second stories volves volutes and arabesques of extraordi- lack coérdination both in scale and in uninarily beautiful quality beside the windows fying decorative elements. The silhouette _

of the transept and in the pendentives of of the central section forms a trefoil and the dome. The style recalls the arabesques the same mudéjar motive recurs in the in panels of gilded wood which decorate monastery portal to the right. Despite its the aisles of San Pedro in Lima and the fine provincialism the facade of the church at

stucco work over the stairway in the Fran- Pisco is pleasing with its yellow walls ciscan Colegio de Santo Toribio. Bits of against which the columns and ornament ornament accent the frieze in the center stand out in white. The rusticated transept | of each bay of the nave at Pisco, and the portal and entrance to the former monas- — clerestory windows also carry volutes be- tery are offshoots of the style introduced in side them. An unusual arrangement here is the monastery entrance of San Francisco at the isolation of each window by a balus- Lima, and hence belong to an earlier stylistrade instead of the usual continuous balus- tic phase than the rest of the Compafiia at

| trade atop the cornice, so commonly used Pisco. The ruins of the cloister show an | in Jesuit churches. One other architectural altogether unconventional type of — pier detail of the interior deserves mention, and with great bulbous curving base, which

that is the fine shell tympanum, so typi- has a Spanish parallel of the eighteenth

N94 1A

SOUTH OF LIMA | century, however, in the cloister of San the body of the structure. This salomonic

Hipdlito at Cérdoba. The moldings at the retable on the exterior of a church has no springing of the arch cut curiously into exact parallel in Peru, those of Huancave-

the swelling side. At the roof level, beams _ lica being constructed of dark red stone and are carried on zapata bracket capitals. Only decorated with columns entwined in the

- an amateur could have invented such a bi- usual grapevine. The spiral shaft at Nazca | zarre and fantastic piece of architecture. with three-part division also occurs in the One hundred and thirty-five miles south portal of the Compafiia at Quito, a fact of Pisco lies the valley of Nazca, site of a which does not, however, presuppose any great pre-Columbian civilization in the artistic relation between the two works. The early centuries of the Christian era. Here facade of San José at Nazca was probably _ stand, half ruined, two Jesuit churches of the creation of a retablero who traveled extraordinarily high quality, far surpassing down the coast from Lima. A partly de-

anything of that period in Lima itself. The faced inscription on the facade contains the | facade of San José (Fig. 118), damaged as date 1744. Another in the sacristy states it is, is unrivaled of its kind throughout all that the first stone of the church was laid in Peru. The two fine limeno belfries closely 1740 and that it was finished on March 19,

resemble those of the Compafiia at Pisco. 1744. |

The composition as a whole has excellent The side portal (Fig. 130) of San José at _ dimensions, and it identifies the hand of a Nazca is embellished with lovely scrollfar more gifted architect than that of the and-leaf ornament, a mudéjar frieze with latter church. The mudéjar patterns of in- the oval chain pattern similar to that of La

terlocking squares which cover the pilas- Merced at Lima, and curious half columns | | ters of the towers (Fig. 129) undeniably suspended on tiny corbels. The entrance to — betray an admiration on the part of the the sacristy is exceptionally interesting, less

designer for the patterned interior of San for its arabesques in stucco than for the |

Francisco at Lima. ~ , grimacing masks, some of them with proMost striking is the portal (Fig. 128), in jecting tongues. Here the student encoun- | truth a salomonic retable of two stories ters an undeniable case of the reappearance | with niches occupied by Jesuit saints. The or survival of an ancient pre-Columbian columns are divided into three horizontal theme, so thoroughly characteristic of

bands, the center smooth and the others Nazca pottery and textiles, which were 7 channeled, by crowns of gaily flamboyant produced in this same valley many cen- , acanthus leaves. The arabesques in the mid- _turies before the arrival of the Spaniards.”

dle section of the portal and around the Similar heads can also be discerned on the

oval window represent the art of the colo- upper part of the towers. ! nial decorator at its best. The material is The single-naved interior of San José lies stucco over a wooden framework in the ina grievous state of ruin, its vaults having upper part, with brick and adobe forming been shaken to the ground in the earth-

| M95 KR a |

| LIMA quake of 1940. The sanctuary is elevated decorates the deeply splayed doorway in

by four steps, and behind the high altar a_ the sacristy. a rectangular chamber constitutes an unor- The church of San Xavier del Ingenio in thodox practice in Peruvian churches, al- the valley of Nazca is undated, but its style though it does occur in the Jesuit church very clearly places it in the first half of the of San Pedro at Lima and in Puno Cathe- eighteenth century. The nearest clue to dral. The stucco patterns here, unlike those documentation is the fact that the Jesuits of the more lavish church of San Xavier at of Lima purchased some land in the disNazca, are limited to the transverse bands trict called Arpicho in the Valle de Ingenio of the barrel vault and the moldings about in the year 1713.” I have not been able to the clerestory windows. The patterns of ascertain whether that is the exact spot

, rosettes and heart-shaped scrolls, Islamic in upon which the church now stands. San character, resemble metal chains in their Xavier surpasses even its companion just a

, sharp crisp outlines. A really extraordinary few miles away in decorative fantasy. Here, piece of stucco work adorns the face of the too, grimacing masks with open mouths choir loft: masks with plumed headdresses and projecting tongues peer from the and serpents in great calligraphic coils. friezes of the towers and fagade (Figs. 132, Once again a pre-Columbian theme is re- 133). Their grotesque headdress defy deborn, for the serpents are very common in scription and evoke admiration for the un-

the pottery and textiles of Nazca and rivaled decorative skill and imagination of Paracas. No better proof of native Indian their anonymous masters. The flourish and influence could be forthcoming, yet the rhythm of the foliate ornament throughmotive is usually passed off as Asiatic. The out the church is achieved with consumtruth is that both indigenous and mudéjar mate artistry, both in the bands upon the

| factors explain this exoticism, without re- facade and inside of the church, in the course to hypothetical missionaries bearing frieze, pilasters, and ribs of the vault. Bustto the New World the arts of the Far East. length female figures with plumed headWitness the fine mudéjar tiles of green and dresses accent the friezes at regular interyellow upon the floor of the nave and sanc- vals above the pilasters. The pilasters (Fig.

tuary. 134) next to the sanctuary carry in addiA broad molded cornice runs the length _ tion to the foliage a tall seated figure about

: of the church, and a cedar balustrade iso- which encircle two dragons in heraldic oplates the windows, the same disposition position. A great lily plant rises below from previously noted in the Compafiia at Pisco. a classical vase, and the human body itself Corbels rather than pilasters indicate the interpenetrates the highly stylized design. division into bays between the wall re- Once again Asiatic elements have been decesses within which the retables were set. A clared present, but indigenous tradition fine limevo shell tympanum tops the side and fantasy seem to be the only logical and door within the church, while another reasonable explanations. The mudéjar, too,

M96 A )

| SOUTH OF LIMA. puts in its appearance in the geometric ern city on the coast of Peru between molding under the frieze and in bands of Arequipa and Lima, has lost nearly every

the vaulct. vestige of its colonial heritage. The present |

The stucco work throughout the interior parish church is the only one which retains | | is of surpassing beauty. Even the font for its colonial plan, a nave with barrel vault holy water is part of the unified scheme nd the aisles covered by domes. This folwhich was originally complemented by a lows the type of the Merced and San Franseries of large paintings upon the walls, cisco in Lima. The materials are brick and

now, alas, in ruinous condition. The plan adobe in the walls, whereas cane coated of San Xavier is that of a single nave like with plaster provides the vaults. The facade San José with the usual elevated choir. To suffered rebuilding in Neoclassic style in the

the left of the sanctuary stands the large nineteenth century, and at the same time _

sacristy covered by a dome. | the interior was much altered. Two small The interesting fact about the facade of retables of limefo origin in the transept San Xavier (Figs. 131-133) is that it ap- anda beautifully carved shrine with ivory pears to be the product of crossed influ- crucifix are the best colonial remains in the

ences from Lima and Arequipa. From the city. The church, originally established as | latter, nearer city come the large polygonal part of the new Jesuit foundation in 1746, towers adorned with grotesque masks. The passed into the hands of the Mercedarians

prototype is the tower of Santo Domingo in 1780 after the expulsion of the Com-

- in Arequipa, originally designed by Juan pany of Jesus.” On | de Aldafia in 1649 and twice rebuilt subse- ‘Much-rebuilt churches of other monastic

quently. The two-storied central section orders in Ica have recently been demolwith its curving broken pediments and el- ished: San Francisco in 1945 and San

liptical window is derived from the school Agustin in 1943. Neither the convent of , of Lima, as seen in the rear entrances of the Augustinian nuns, designed by Cristébal

cathedral (1732) and the church of Santa de Vargas in 1769, nor the church of San | Rosa de las Monjas (1702-1704) (Fig. Jerénimo (1692-1700) exists today.”

113). , | Ica is equally impoverished in the field of

The two churches at Nazca, now in a domestic architecture. The present post pitiful state, half ruined and virtually office functions in an eighteenth-century __ abandoned, belong to large haciendas whose building in the patio of which are two owners, it is to be hoped, will protect them wooden columns with zapata capitals and a

from still greater decay. Each is unique, large pair of eighteenth-century doors. without any exact counterpart either in Across the way on the main plaza are the style or in quality throughout South ruins of a house with an interesting portal

| N97 KR

America. ' which opens into the patio, the former resiIca, the largest and most important mod- dence of the Marqueses de Torre Hermosa.

; CENTRAL PERU , AYACUCHO | | | |

fIYACUCHO’s primary importance in tectural pretensions. Its rather heavy rude Aiicchiveccare lies in the exceptional simplicity has a serious and humble appeal. number of her monuments of the sixteenth Light is dim, for there are just two round century. These works of the earliest days openings in the nave vault, a window in of the conquest, San Cristdbal, La Merced, the raised choir, and no dome. The transSan Francisco, Santa Clara, and the plater- verse ribs of the barrel vault hang susesque portal of the Jesuit chapel, have al- pended on corbels, and a simple rounded ready been examined in Chapter II. Only molding runs along the springing of the the region of Lake Titicaca with its numer- vault. This is a church of pioneers and misous churches of the fifteen-nineties can vie sionaries in a newly conquered land. The with Ayacucho. Churches of the seven- single-naved plan without lateral chapels teenth and eighteenth century also abound has the same humble forthrightness. It behere, but they do not occupy the same high longs to no school and to no type, and is

, rank within their periods. | entirely innocent of any connections with _ The history of the churches of Ayacucho a so-called Jesuit plan.

| has been well established, thanks to the Chapels occupy the position of a transplendid recent monograph by Dr. Medina sept, as in the late sixteenth-century

| and the earlier studies of the diocese by churches of the Titicaca region and the , Bishop Olivas Escudero. Dr. Medina gives Merced in Ayacucho. Both are domed. The the dimensions of each building and various one on the left has pendentives covered

historical data of value." with designs in stucco consisting of octaMost important in the seventeenth cen- gons and other mudéjar motives, and the tury are the Compafiia, the cathedral, and cross within interlaces decorates the dome.

| Santo Domingo. The earliest is the church The stucco work, like the fragment of a (Fig. 135) of the Jesuits, begun about fine retable in the same chapel, must be 1614, nine years after the founding of the dated in the second half of the seventeenth colegio here on August 15, 1605.” The con- century. Contemporary is the sacristy, struction is low, its massive walls of stone large and more sophisticated than the origiand brick barrel vaults very solid and utili- nal church, its barrel vaults surfaced with tarian in their purpose and without archi- stucco panels.

M98 A

, AYACUCHO - On the epistle side of the church is the style, such as the main entrance of the chapel of Loreto. It is lower than the chapel of the Educandas, formerly San

church proper, but otherwise identical in Juan de Dios. |

its massive construction and humble sim- The two large towers of the Compafiia plicity. Light enters only from the main (Fig. 136) are clearly additions to the orig-

door and a single window above. Narrow inal facade in the first half of the eight- | stone benches line the walls, showing still eenth century. Nine horizontal rows of further how closely the chapel adheres to four-leaved ornament, highly stylized, give _ the customs practiced in the early days of a unique appearance to the entire structure. the conquest. The nearest thing to deco- Nothing comparable with it can be found

ration are the small rosettes and shells in Peru, although precedent for similar upon the cornice. Simple recesses in the rows of ornament exists on the atrium gate _ wall permit the setting of a statue here and and great tower of La Asuncidén at Juli. there. The walls, newly painted, glare in The latter works display a far more highly

their barren whiteness, yet they are re- developed sense of decorative design. It freshing compared with the ugly marble- may have been, nonetheless, some wander- _

- ized paint in the church proper. ing builder from the Juli region who creAt the left of the Compafiia fagade is ated this original piece of mestizo art in the entrance to the former colegio of the the towers of the Compafiia at Ayacucho. Jesuits (Fig. 137), now occupied by the ‘The vertical bands of ornament which he Colegio Seminario de San Cristébal. Al- added at the sides of the main doorway are

though plans were drawn as early as 1645, in typical mestizo idiom of which the the main body of the colegio was under churches of Santa Ana and La Magdalena construction in 1674, and work upon both provide other instances. The belfries differ

it and the church continued as.late as from numerous others of the type in the 1687-1693. Nevertheless the massive por- same city in the bulbous onion dome at tal is of sober classical design with pro- the top. The facade of the Compafia at

nounced rustication in deep red stone. The Ayacucho has unique and attractive fea- , diamond points on the wall, so common tures compensating to some degree for its in Spanish and Italian palaces of the Renais- lack of unity, which is the almost inevisance, make for added vigor. The same table result of modifications and alterastyle and the same red stone prevail in tions. Some of these are frankly clumsy, for the original portals of the church and the instance, the middle section between the ,

chapel of Loreto. The Doric order and the towers, constructed of brick, with an ac- | plain uncarved stone manifest the austerity ceptable window but a weak and ineffec-

of the late Spanish Renaissance. These are tual gable at the top. ,

more sober than the portals of San Agustin The cathedral of Ayacucho merits atten-

| AS 99 IR |

at Safia but of less significance architec- tion by virtue of its size and the influence turally. Cuzco possesses works of. similar which its architecture had upon subsequent ,

CENTRAL PERU | | buildings, rather than for anything notable nave, aisles, and transept topped by the about its quality. The facade (Fig. 139), fine low dome. A lateral portal on the gos-

, its poorest feature, is frankly bad in scale pel side with channeled Doric pilasters and and in the complete failure to solve the triangular pediments carries over the severe problem of bringing some sort of coérdi- classicism of the late sixteenth century. —

, nation among the upper story, the first This portal must be identified with the | | story, and the towers. The general idea of first campaign in the building of the cathea broad facade having three portals and dral which lasted four years, 1632-1636, flanked by towers is borrowed from the only to be paralyzed until 1662. In the sec-

cathedrals of Cuzco and Lima, but there ond campaign the. work was carried as the connection stops. The central section far as the vaults (Fig. 143) which were with the awkward niche over the portal erected along with the towers and dome and its free-standing columns is mediocre (1669-1672) under the great benefactor _ | in itself, but even more the complete lack of the diocese, Bishop Castilla y Zamora.* of harmony with the smaller portals pro- His power, wealth, and munificent ways duces a shock. The latter constitute an are explained by the fact that he was a

— interesting phenomenon in the cutting of natural son of King Philip IV of Spain. An the rusticated stone, now painted red, inscription in the aisle on the epistle side which resembles pre-Columbian technique. records the consecration of the church on

| Doubtless the native Indian workman was May 19, 1672, in honor of the Madonna responsible for this survival from an earlier of the Immaculate Conception.

epoch. The towers, built in the time of | The plan of the cathedral of Ayacucho © Bishop Castilla y Zamora (1669-1672), is rectangular, thus following the tradiestablished a prototype which was repeated tion established in Peru by the cathedrals again and again in the following century. of Lima and Cuzco, whose influence has Characteristic are the single-arched open- also been noted in the broad proportions

ings in the front, the cupola, the pyram- of the two-towered facade. Further than idal pinnacles, and the dentils in the cor- that the dependence does not extend. At nice. The band of rosettes upon the cupolas Ayacucho the nave is slightly higher than and the four-leaved ornament at the cor-_ the aisles and the sanctuary stands against ners also recur later. These towers of Aya- the extreme wall without aisle behind it, cucho Cathedral are effective in themselves, contrary to the arrangement at Cuzco and

_ but too small in relation to the breadth Trujillo. The most pronounced stylistic of the facade. The generally poor aspect feature of the building is the large cornice of the frontispiece has been further dam- with dentils. which was later to be imiaged by layers of cement in modern times. tated in several churches within the city. The general mass of the cathedral is pleas- The barrel vault of common seventeenth- | _ ing, however, when viewed laterally (Fig. century type collapsed in 1881 and was 138) across the varying roof levels of restored thereafter. Slightly domical vaults

A 100 A

AYACUCHO | are used in the aisles which leave them and choir, and that Padre Gaspar de la |

rather dark. A magnificent burst of light Fuente made the stone cloister. Another illuminates the church, however, through document refers to building a new church | the fine dome on pendentives over the a century later in 1715.” Survivals of the crossing. The choir occupied its tradi- early seventeenth century are the monastional place in the nave until the early tery portal and the baptistry (Figs. 141, twentieth century, when it was trans- 142). The first has an extraordinary tym-

ferred to the sanctuary. — panum decorated with the sun and moon, The earliest section of the church is taken over from native Indian rather than

clearly the sacristy and the small chapel Christian worship. They are combined with | at each side of the sanctuary. These parts the Sacred Heart, vegetable patterns, and are lower and heavier in construction and a knight’s escutcheon, the identification of covered with a longitudinal barrel vault. which would still further clarify the date. Rather curiously each of the chapels re- The general shape of the tympanum sugceives light from a round window in the gests a trefoil. The same fusion of pagan center of the vault. After this initial cam- and Christian themes takes a still more

paign in 1632, plans were radically naive and primitive form in the portal | changed in the direction of a larger church, of the baptistry. Here the stars, sun, and as the small scale of this part of the build- moon from the native Indian altar com-

ing unmistakably indicates. bine with the cross, the diadem of Mary, The cathedral of Ayacucho is spacious the Dominican shield, and the pomegran_ and dignified, but lacking in architectural ate. The iconography recalls a still more

refinements. A contemporary work with famous work, the portal of San Lorenzo, , which it might logically be compared, such Potosi (1728-1744), which from the point

as the cathedral of Trujillo, although not of view of sculpture and decoration is a one of the masterpieces of Peruvian art, masterpiece which does not brook com-

outstrips it on every point, from scale re- parison with this humble chapel of Aya- |

lations to details of moldings. cucho, _ —_ Se

The convent of the Dominicans, estab- The exterior of the church of Santo

lished in Ayacucho in 1548, was one of the Domingo (Fig. 140) produces an unusual

earliest foundations of the order in Peru. impression because of the large narthex and Of the original convent nothing is left the open porch above it. Although Santo today, and the rather nondescript church Domingo in Lima also has a deep narthex, has been twice rebuilt. A royal provision the best comparison to be singled out is

of 1606 refers to the fabrication of a new the church at San Jerdnimo near Cuzco, a | church, a piece of evidence which Meléndez work of the late sixteenth century. The

corroborates in his statement that Fray explanation of the upper porch both in , Bartolomé Martinez, prior in the early these instances and commonly in the An- _

| MN 101 &

seventeenth century, completed the church dean region seems to be that they were

! | CENTRAL PERU designed for preaching to large crowds and _ because of its unfinished state, and the open

for the display of relics. It is probable that espadaia, the whole upper section rebuilt

the rebuilding of 1715 did not constitute in brick not more than fifty years ago.

| a complete abandonment of the old church The mid-sixteenth-century portal of and that the facade still antedates the rest San Francisco (Figs. 39, 40), the only im-

of the church by a hundred years. From portant survivor of the original church, the standpoint of style that seems to be a has previously been discussed. By virtue of

reasonable explanation. The belfries, on its style the belfry falls into the group the other hand, clearly fall into the Aya- of eighteenth-century monuments, and cuchan series of eighteenth-century date, may be dated with a fair degree of ac-

| and are related to those of San Juan de curacy at the time of the rebuilding of Dios and San Francisco de Paula (1783) the church. A large painting in the sacristy

(Fig. 146). bears an inscription which states that the

The body of the church is built of gray high altar, the sacristy, and the picture | stone throughout, including the barrel were concluded in 1712. The consecration vaults and dome. The building has suf- of the church delayed until May 30th, fered by miserably inept painting, some of 1723.° The style and plan (Figs. 19, 147) it white and some of it black, not to speak fall completely outside of the traditions

| of the white stripes on the exterior. The of the local school, an indication that an interior has the most garish overlay of blue architect from without was responsible.

, marbleized paint in all Peru which, al- Its basilican plan, the only church except } though most distressing to see, is not ir- the cathedral which has nave and two

remediable. aisles, is most unusual. A deep entrance cor-

, The Latin-cross plan without lateral ridor of two bays passes beneath the raised chapels and the raised choir place it in the choir into a broad rectangular area of three

usual category of monastic churches. The bays which terminates in a single apse. cornice with dentils is a signature of the Four large cruciform piers carry the vaults, local school, subsequent to the building of those of the nave being domical in section

the cathedral, whereas the corbel in the without clerestory, and slightly higher center of each bay is unique in Ayacucho. than the aisles. Over the first two bays of That. peculiarity was borrowed from the the side aisles are half domes constructed _ school of Lima, where it found great favor on ribs, an altogether peculiar scheme

in the eighteenth century. which would suggest a central type of _ The dome takes first place in this church, church. The piers at the crossing receive —

| for it is large and refulgent within, and dramatic emphasis by the use of the large built up in four levels on the exterior into entablature block which descends from the an impressive mass, roofed in fine red tiles. cathedrals of Lima and Cuzco. A chain Other matters to be recorded on the exte- motive decorates the lower molding. The rior are the side portal, difficult to analyze setting is prepared as for a dome, but the

MN 102 & |

| AYACUCHO | , vault of the crossing differs from its neigh- instead of pilasters recalls Las Trinitarias bor only in the placing of a circular win- (1722) in Lima. The shell tympana over _ dow in the top. The ends of the transept both doorways within the church are are barrel vaulted, like the choir, apse, and frankly limefio, the only other appearance —

sacristy. The interior of San Francisco re- of this motive in Ayacucho being in the

veals the mind of a definitely unorthodox main portal of the cathedral, a phenomearchitect. That qualification is not synony- non which must be regarded as an eightmous with provincial, because the build- eenth-century modification. The interior ing must be characterized as a distinct suc- impresses one by its unusual height and

cess, the work of a man who knew his pro- resultant spaciousness, crowned by a fine | fessional technique, as has been demon- barrel vault with a gilded rosette in the strated in Harth-terré’s analysis of the center of each bay. Like other churches of

geometry of the plans.” Broad, spacious, the interior of Peru, Santa Teresa has the and harmonious, San Francisco of Aya- good fortune to have retained her splendid

cucho deserves a place in the upper reaches collection of colonial retables and a fine |

of Peruvian colonial architecture. _ pulpit. Especially magnificent and, in fact, a From an architectural viewpoint the unique is the beautiful wooden grille of eighteenth century in Ayacucho was most the upper choir, which is gilded and inlaid __

productive, It saw the completion and con- with mother-of-pearl. 7 secration of Santa Teresa in 1703, the foun- Passing to the exterior, the small twodation of the order of San Francisco de towered facade (Fig. 145) is also related

Paula in 1713, the establishment of the to the Lima tradition of the late sevenmonastery of the Buena Muerte (1720— teenth and eighteenth centuries, although

1726), and the rebuilding in part of San it differs in detail from works of the vice- | Francisco, La Compafiia, San Agustin, San regal capital. The Ayacuchan tradition is

Juan de Dios, Santa Ana, La Magdalena, seen in the belfries, the first being those _ and the addition of the tower to Santa of the cathedral (1669-1672), the second

Clara. | those of Santa Teresa (1683-1703), to be The house of Carmelite nuns owes its followed by every one of the churches establishment to Padre Francisco de Ja _ listed at the beginning of this discussion

Maza in 1683. To his brother, Diego, some as built or remodeled in the eighteenth cen-

writers have credited the architecture of tury. Just one exception is to be noted

the church and convent.® The historical here, the fine bell tower of Santa Clara 7 facts provide little basis for the belief that (Fig. 149), added, about 1712, to the he was anything more than the spiritual sixteenth-century church.’ This beautiful and financial benefactor. The style of this tower soars serene and lofty in excellently |

church of single-nave type, general in cut masonry. It is unmistakably modeled

AN 103 A ;

nunneries, suggests a limeno architect. The upon the towers of Cuzco of the previous , dentelated cornice suspended on corbels century, and no doubt upon that of Santa

CENTRAL PERU | Clara in Cuzco (Fig. 61) which it resem- others in the smaller diameter of the high

bles more closely than any other. More- cupola at the crowning. | over, the tower in the two Franciscan nun- A round-arched doorway topped by an neries occupies the same position relative entablature, a single window also with , to the church. The most notable difference round arch, and two oculus openings above

, is that the belfry at Ayacucho has two constitute the simple elements in the porstories, whereas the Cuzco towers have tals of San Francisco de Paula and the

one. Buena Muerte. A negro monk of the Bene-

| The exterior of Santa Teresa manifests dictine order is said to have been the archi- | a sobriety which becomes a characteristic tect of the latter, and it does not seem

| of the entire school of the city. The gen- hazardous to attribute the former to him. , eral verticality and slimness of proportions Final consecration of San Francisco de are an eighteenth-century Peruvian trait. Paula did not take place until 1783, an The rusticated portal, made of brick and event which often delayed many years, 7 stucco, is exceptional in the omission of a whereas the foundation belongs to the early

_ ‘window to light the choir. The general part of the century. | effect, however, is one of greater dignity The facade of San Juan de Dios, some-

| than that of contemporary works of the what inferior to the others, must either be city, notwithstanding the fact that the ascribed to the same architect or be reentire frontispiece has suffered from an garded as an imitation. The foundation of

overlay of cement surfacing in recent the hospital goes back to the year 1555,

years. and it was later taken over by the brothers Three of the churches of Ayacucho, San of San Juan de Dios (1630). At that peFrancisco de Paula (founded 1713), the riod the church was first erected, but it Buena Muerte (1720~—1726), and San Juan underwent much modification or amplide Dios, have facades (Fig. 146) similar fication in the eighteenth century, and was enough to be the works of the same archi- inaugurated in this new guise in 1783. tect. All are distinguished by the usual A similar history holds for San Agustin, towers and dentelated cornices, varying whose friars settled in Ayacucho in 1637. chiefly in the details of the belfries. Those Their church was reconstructed in 1767 of San Francisco de Paula more closely and again modified in 1871." The latter

/ resemble the towers (Figs. 39, 145) of San cannot be regarded as a major operation, _ Francisco (circa 1712-1723) and Santa and was limited to the portal whose row Teresa (1703), but have cherubs’ heads at of niches and Renaissance frieze speak for the angles and the four-leaved ornament the revivalist eclecticism of the past cen-

| which also appears upon the cathedral tury. towers. The belfries of the Buena Muerte, The interiors of these churches are also San Juan de Dios, and San Agustin are very similar. San Francisco de Paula (Fig.

N 104K a

| virtually identical, differing from the 144) has a very shallow transept sur-

AYACUCHO , mounted by a fine dome on pendentives. fact which in itself symbolizes the povThe cornice is of the simple molded type, erty and insignificance of this humble

and the retables stand within wall niches. structure. , Stone prevails throughout, as elsewhere in The facade of Santa Ana (Fig. 148), un- | the city, both in the barrel vaults and the like that of La Magdalena, is well designed

cupola. as a unit and well built. The ayacucheno San Juan de Dios, the Buena Muerte, and towers enframe a portal which has no San Agustin are all small churches such exact counterpart in the city, but which as are frequently associated with religious does fall into the same style and period as orders. They have single naves and raised the portal (Fig. 150) of San Francisco

choirs with barrel vaults throughout, and (1772) in Huancavelica. The same master in no case do more splendid features such or school must have been responsible for : as dome, transept, and lateral chapels exist. both, and that is only one of. the instances

The same school or even the same architect of interrelations between the two cities. produced them all, in each case using the The free-standing column on each side of , dentelated cornice and simple pilasters, the doorway may have been suggested by

ubiquitous in Ayacucho. - a Renaissance portal, such as that of San Santa Ana (Fig. 148) and La Magda- Francisco at Ayacucho (Fig. 40). Conlena, both parish churches of sixteenth- tact with the mestizo taste which appears , century origin, were enlarged and rebuilt in the exterior of the Compafiia (Fig. 136)

in the second half of the eighteenth cen- is evident here in the stylized vine and

tury. How persistent and consistent was leaves at the sides, an exact replica of the | local tradition strikes one forcibly in the ornament beside the doorway of the Com-

repetition of the same towers, these almost pafiia in Ayacucho. The interior, despite ! a duplicate of the Franciscan belfry. The its dome and stone barrel vault, is small and , earliest of the series were those of the ca- unprepossessing. It does, however, contain

thedral (Fig. 139) in 1669-1672, now an array of colonial painting in a state of brought to a close by La Magdalena whose complete abandon, open to the elements

right tower has the date 1797, a span of and the birds, as well as a splendid high , one hundred and twenty-five years. The altar of the seventeenth century, and a portal of this church is decorated by volute sumptuous silver altar frontal and altar pilasters, scroll ornament at the sides, and back with candelabra, dated 1796. In the an elliptical niche in the tympanum. The silver work French rococo influence premasonry of the broad facade reveals how it dominates. As so frequently, the visitor was lengthened and increased in height, by is both amazed by the great luxury of the adding on to the original walls. The small colonial past and depressed by the fact interior in the form of a Latin cross has a_ that it is now moldering away, neglected

M105 B |

_ pitched roof of cane, the only unvaulted and forgotten. : |

church of any importance in the city, a In summary, the seventeenth- and eight-

, CENTRAL PERU eenth-century architecture of Ayacucho is Cristébal, Santa Clara, and the Jesuit porcharacterized by good solid construction tal, not solely because of their quality, but

, in which the gray stone of the region is still more because they are unique in all

, employed throughout, in vaults as well as Peru. in walls. Arches of windows are frequently | ee

made of brick, a material also present in

the facade of Santa Teresa. The style is HUANCAVELICA | generally sober and very restrained in deco- UANCAVELICA lies in the remote ration. The chief exception in the period SH heights of the Andes at an altitude is the appearance of the mestizo style in of 12,500 feet, where cold and bitter winds the rows of stylized leaves upon the facade sweep the year around. Its fame spread of La Compafiia. Towers are the most dis- far and wide in colonial days, due to the tinguished feature of the region, small, prodigious wealth of its mercury mines, good in scale, and well placed. Those of the discovery of which allegedly took place the Jesuit church again prove the excep- in 1563. Francisco de Toledo issued the tion to the tradition with their curving official charter for the foundation of the Baroque moldings and onion-shaped cu- city in 1571, and a year later he expro-

, polas. One other exception remains to be priated the mines as property of the Spanrecorded, the unimportant chapel called ish crown. Pampa San Agustin, a mid-eighteenth- This discussion cannot be anything more century building with salomonic portal and than a superficial account of the religious

: single ayacucheno tower. A builder from architecture of Huancavelica, since my Huancavelica or perhaps just a simple re-visit there was limited. It was impossible

tablero was its architect. to study the monuments satisfactorily or Interiors throughout are sober, with bar- to secure sufficient photographic docurel vaults, usually a dentelated cornice, and mentation. The state of neglect and dis-

flat pilasters. The exceptions in Santa repair of the churches is worse than in | Teresa and San Francisco have already been any other city of Peru, the roofs being discussed. Strangely enough not a single inadequate to keep out the rain and the cloister of the many monastic houses has state of dilapidation inside beyond belief.

| survived from colonial times, a phenome- No monasteries or nunneries function tonon which is largely explained by the ex- day, and the former churches and houses claustration of the monks in the nineteenth of the Jesuits and Augustinians have totally

century. The cloisters of the nuns of Santa disappeared. -

Clara have met a better fate, but they are The churches of Huancavelica are built

_ invisible to the male student of architec- of the gray stone of the region and covture. The true fame of Ayacucho rests, in ered by wooden vaults or roofs in every

, the last analysis, upon her Renaissance case. This method deviates from the usual monuments, La Merced, San Francisco, San custom of vaulting the churches with stone

MN 106 &

, HUANCAVELICA in mountainous regions. The latter practice dinary bareness, may possibly be incomwas followed in Ayacucho, Arequipa, and plete. Although the bulk and mass of the | the Titicaca district, whereas in Cuzco latter church are impressive, the appearbrick was preferred. The two largest struc- ance is more provincial and less refined than | tures of Huancavelica are the matriz and that of its companion. The great size of ' Santo Domingo, both basilican in plan these towers makes one think of San Franwith nave and two aisles, the former cov- cisco and San Agustin of Lima, but other-

ered by a clumsy wooden barrel vault and wise they have no points of contact. , the second by a sloping wooden roof. Both The salomonic portals in soft red stone are constructed with piers and Doric cor- make the two churches still more like nonnices decorated with dentils as though identical twins. Both must be dated in the vaulting had been originally planned. The first half of the eighteenth century when general style is related to the cathedral of they appear to have been added to the

Ayacucho, and the local school must be in original facade. The unfortunately poor |

part an offshoot of it. quality of the stone, which has crumbled It seems likely that the same architect and deteriorated, interferes with the otherdirected the construction of both the wise good decorative effect of the work.

matriz and Santo Domingo in the second The two portals, unmistakably by the same half of the seventeenth century. Meléndez, hand, have an elliptical window in the upwho affords the only documentation, states per center of each, like the eighteenth-

that the Dominican house became a priory century churches of Lima. They differ in 1590, and that in the time of Fray from each other in detail and in the fact Domingo de Montenegro the first adequate that the matriz consists of two stories and church was built. Judging by the context Santo Domingo of one. As previously sugand the fact that Meléndez speaks of Mon- gested, the portal of the chapel in Ayacutenegro as alive in one passage and in an- cho, called Pampa San Agustin, may be an other states that he died the day after the offshoot of the school of Huancavelica.

church was finished, we may conclude that Spanish prototypes, especially in Andalusia, , the friar died about 1675."" The period is such as Santa Maria in Alicante, are easily |

corroborated by payment for unspecified cited. | :

work on the matriz in 1668." — , The interiors of the two churches present

The exteriors of the matriz and Santo a lamentable disarray of paintings and | Domingo (Figs. 152, 153) are also similar retables in a ruinous and neglected con-

but not identical. Both have very large dition. In large part the works of art date flanking towers with two-storied belfries from the eighteenth century, the high topped by cupolas. The towers of Santo point of the prosperity of the town. EspeDomingo carry the usual complement of cially beautiful is a lavish chapel in Santo pilasters and entablatures, whereas the tow- Domingo, the walls of which are invested ers of the matriz, because of their extraor- with carved and gilded wooden panels. The

| NM 107 A

CENTRAL PERU donor was Jerdnimo de Sola y Fuente, gov- columns flank the doorway with a very ernor and superintendent of the mines in strange provincial interpretation of a Doric

1744. A fine primitive portrait with long frieze. The rectangular window of the inscription preserves the memory of him. choir is set between pilasters in the form The most sophisticated in plan of the of atlantes, old men swathed in togas. This churches of Huancavelica is San Francisco, theme is of rare occurrence in Peru, being laid out in the form of a Latin cross with- present in the tiles of San Francisco at out lateral chapels. As usual in a building Lima, dated 1620, and in the former porof single nave, the choir is raised above the tal of San Andrés of Cuzco, a work of main entrance. A molded cornice, Doric the second half of the eighteenth century. pilasters, and a dome on pendentives over ‘The abundance of retables of caryatid type,

a the crossing fulfill the usual requirement dated in the latter period, as well as the of a Baroque church. Cane coated with late classicism of the portal of San Sebasplaster, as in Lima, imitates stone vaults, tian, suggest that general time for its in this case designed to give the impression origin. No other architectural monument

of groined vaults between transverse in Peru is exactly comparable with it in —

arches, — style. The quality is pleasing, sober, and ©

, _ The style of San Francisco is consistent in good taste, although unconventional in with the date 1772, inscribed in the upper usage. A two-storied open espadana rises

center of the facade (Fig. 150). The left to the left of the facade. The interior is tower was never completed, and the stucco small, one nave and two short aisles, and

| work upon the facade itself is fragmen- an interesting wooden ceiling still survives tary. The portal with its free-standing Co- over the sanctuary and part of the right rinthian columns resembles that of Santa aisle. The ruinous and dejected state of the Ana in Ayacucho (Fig. 148) more closely churches of the town finds no exception — than any other. It is beautifully designed, here, an example being the really fine pullike a Renaissance work, but the lack of pit from which the moldings have been

| conventionality in the handling of detail partly ripped away.

and the ornamental motives themselves be- | The other churches of Huancavelica tray the later mestizo spirit. Sharply cut were visited in a downpour of rain which arabesques in alternate progression occupy made study or photography well-nigh im-— their customary place at the sides, and the possible. The small single-naved church of

familiar four-leaf stylization decorates the Santa Ana, roofed in wood, has a few curious double frieze and also the elliptical modest retables of the eighteenth century.

, window which opens into the choir. The facade is simple, with a single tower _ The classical spirit prevails even more to the right and a doorway topped by a strongly in the portal of San Sebastian molded entablature including dentils. The (Fig. 151) which stands upon the same humble church of the Indians, dedicated to _ plaza near San Francisco. Double Doric the Ascension, calls for no particular com— BN 108 &

, OTHER ANDEAN CHURCHES | ment, its portal being in red stone and the the most important centers either in eccleinterior of single nave. The larger church siastical or domestic architecture, deserves

of San Cristébal stands on the outskirts of more study. |

the city. The broad two-towered facade _ a ,

enfolds a portal whose first story has plain | spiral columns and the second story curious OTHER ANDEAN CHURCHES ©

voluted capitals of provincial invention. y original hope to compile a com-

, The picturesque church and hospital of ) } [ plete catalogue of the colonial monSan Juan de Dios lack noteworthy architec- uments of Peru had to be foregone because tural features. Square piers and red-tiled of the vastness of the project. The whole , roofs make for a charming and simple region of the Callején de Huaylas was patio, while the little church has a plain omitted because of the lack of time to visit

facade and single open bell tower. The that region. The fact that the architecture buildings of this institution, originally there is very provincial, consisting in large founded in 1608,” are dated 1771-1776, part of Andean chapels of the usual type, by virtue of a long inscription upon the means that our understanding of Peruvian portrait of the benefactor, Domingo An- architecture does not suffer by its exclutonio Jaurequi y Aguirre, governor of the sion. From Colombia and Ecuador through city, which hangs within the former hos- Peru and Bolivia down into Argentina, the |

pital. a - Andean chapel is essentially an expression The domestic architecture follows the of the same humble provincial architecusual pattern of the Hispanic colonial tra-_ ture.“* Usually of adobe, sometimes of

dition in remote centers: one- and two- brick, it generally has a pitched roof of storied houses, tiled roofs, balconies, and wood covered with thatch or with tiles. —

arcaded sidewalks. It is picturesque, al- The use of the slightly recessed porch though it lacks the distinction of beautiful formed by the salient roof is widespread portals, like those of Cajamarca and Tru- through all of the countries, and undoubtjillo. Dilapidation prevails everywhere. But edly was intended as shelter from sun or

_ that in itself possesses at least one virtue rain. When the interior is vaulted, the , in that the town has escaped bad restora- round-arched recess reveals the fact. Towtion which is limited here to the Prefec- ers are of varying sorts: the open arched tura. The town hall (Fig. 154), except belfry (espadazia), the single-staged tower, for modern balconies, is well preserved and or double towers flanking the facade. The typical with an arcade over the sidewalk latter type with balcony ‘between is one

and an open loggia in the upper center of the most common, having been discussed | where the wooden posts have zapata capi- in the chapter devoted to Cuzco. A good 7

tals. The date 1673 upon the city’s coat of example can be cited at Santa Rosa de , arms may record the. year the hall was Ocopa and it extends even into North built. Huancavelica, although not one of America in the well-known mission |

| M109 R

CENTRAL PERU | churches of the state of New Mexico. single tower to the right has a fine portal Wherever well preserved, these chapels composed of Doric columns in triumphal-

| have picturesque charm, as for instance the _ arch disposition, the second story narrower thatched-roofed churches at Rosapata near than the first. The stylized rosettes and the

Juliaca and at Coata near Puno.’ The re- leaf ornament upon the portal belong in - gion of Huancavelica abounds in them. the category of primitive mestizo design, | Too often the incursion of galvanized-iron so familiar in rural districts. The church, roofs as a substitute for the original thatch on the whole, is not provincial, but must or tiles has broken the spell of the past, and have been planned in the seventeenth cen-

replaced it with the tawdriness of ugly tury by some architect who had been

cheap materials. reared in the school of Cuzco.

In the region of Huancayo no architec- The most splendid of all the remote ture of significance has come down to us, Andean churches is the sanctuary of Nuessave numerous Andean chapels in the val- tra Sefiora de Cocharcas (Fig. 155) in the ley of the Rio Mantaro, photographs of province of Andahuaylas, whose cult long

which have been published by Harth- ago spread into other regions of Peru, and terré.’° The famous monastery of the Fran- into Bolivia and Chile. The substantial ciscans at Ocopa is, alas, entirely devoid of stone structure has the plan of a Latin interest, having been completely rebuilt cross with dome over the crossing and an

after a disastrous fire in 1900. elevated choir at the facade end. Glazed — Notice must be given of four interesting tiles decorate the pavement and the inte-

churches in the remote fastnesses of the rior of the dome. Andes: Cocharcas, Mamara, Santo Tomas, The exterior, known to me only by phoand Andahuaylas. The first two lie far in tographs, appears large and impressive with

the mountains without roads and can only two towers flanking a simple portal of

| be reached by mule or on foot. The latter Doric pilasters and moldings. The portal | two stand upon a road, passable by auto- of the atrium is an interesting case of promobile. Of the four, I have visited only vincial craftsmanship in which simple geo- _

Andahuaylas. metric interlaces and linear patterns cover San Pedro at Andahuaylas is a large the surface. It appears to be a case of natstructure of fine stone masonry, consisting ural primitivism rather than of mudéjar

| of a long high single nave. Salient pilasters influence. Nor would there seem to be any separating the interior into bays indicate stylistic relation to the mestizo churches

an intention to use vaults, an intention of Arequipa and Lake Titicaca. _ which was abandoned in favor of a pitched According to documents in the archives cane roof. The large choir at the entrance at Cocharcas, the present church was be-

, is raised upon a barrel vault. The splendid gun in 1672. An inscription upon the high quality of the stone and the tile roof make altar states that it was complete by 1675,

for a good sober exterior. The facade with an astoundingly short time.’ Hence this

NM 110 Q

OTHER ANDEAN CHURCHES | structure is the third upon the site, the the capitals. The columns of the main por-

first having been begun in 1598, only to tal, on the other hand, are more eclectic in , be replaced shortly thereafter by the sec- their decorative themes, although the ori- |

ond in 1623.” gin remains the same. Throughout, the , Scarcely less important than Cocharcas carving in low flat planes and the high | as an architectural monument is the par- degree of stylization place the church in |

ish church (Figs. 156, 157) of an Andean the category of mestizo work. To the favillage called Mamara (province of Anda- miliar rectangular leaf pattern is added the huaylas). No historian either of architec- shell in great abundance. Most extraordi-

ture or of the Church has ever braved the nary of all are the cherubs’ heads in the : rigors of mountain passes by muleback to spandrels of the main portal, with their , visit it. Luckily it is known as the result fantastic calligraphic lines, made to fill of an expedition of a photographer of the architectural space. A low wall sur-

Cuzco. rounds the atrium into which entrance is

The style of both the church and the given by a fine portal of the same charretables within attests to its derivation acter. The church at Mamara, virtually from Cuzco, probably at a date sometime buried and forgotten, is a notable testiin the first half of the eighteenth century. mony to the vigorous spirit of viceregal

Whether documentation exists either in Peru. re |

the form of archives or inscriptions only Mention should be made of an important investigation on the spot will reveal. The and unpublished church in the village of general type of stone church with fagade Santo Tomas in the southern part of the in two stories, flanked by towers, is de- province of Cuzco, near the province of

rivative from Cuzco. Details supply fur- Arequipa. Although now reachable by | ther evidence, for instance, the elliptical road, it is virtually unknown. Judging ~ | openings of the towers (La Compania, from a poor photograph, I suspect that Cuzco), and the elliptical window in the the richly carved portal should be resecond story which opens into the choir garded as derivative from the school of (San Sebastian, Cuzco). In the side portal Arequipa, to be dated in the first half of at Mamara the architect imitated the col- the eighteenth century. No one can doubt umns of the Mercedarian cloister at Cuzco, the splendor of this church of finely cut copying the scale and guilloche patterns, masonry, crowned by an unusually promias well as the crowns of acanthus leaves and nent dome.

| Mur Qo |

| NORTHERN PERU—I

| TRUJILLO | a | | RUJILLO is situated on the coastal des- tals of houses. which, after Cuzco, Are-

| Te of northern Peru, and today is the quipa, and Cajamarca, are the finest in all | most important center to the north of Peru. Its ecclesiastical architecture lacks Lima, although numbering only about the great vitality and originality of that forty thousand inhabitants. The Andes of southern Peru and of Cajamarca, and rise deceptively close at hand, seemingly might be described as agreeable and modwithin the plain of sand and desert grass rately interesting. Retables, on the con-

| along the sea. Slightly inland the valley trary, are both abundant and of excepof Chicama harbors great sugar planta- tionally high quality. , tions and farms, and in Trujillo's own © The cathedral of Trujillo, like that of valley of Chim lies the great pre-Colum- other coastal. cities, has suffered from rebian capital, Chan-Chan, not to speak of peated earthquakes and constant restoralesser archaeological sites. Farther north are tions, but unlike many others, it retains its Chiclayo, which has flourished as a com- colonial design. Thanks to the scholarly mercial center in recent years, and still monograph on the diocese by Garcia Iri-

beyond toward the equator, Piura, the goyen, with its thorough documentation first town Pizarro founded. Cajamarca, an from the cathedral. archives, the complex Incaic capital and the site of one of the history of the edifice is known.” When the most famous episodes of the conquest, diocese of Trujillo, embracing all northern nestles high in the Andes, still a colonial Peru, was actively separated from that of city, but one which has suffered utter de- Lima in 1616, the parish church ‘on the ‘generation, forgotten and forlorn in this plaza served as cathedral. After the earth-

, _ -present world. , , : - quake three years later, they began a new Architecturally the city of Trujillo has building under the architect, Bartolomé

| less to offer than Cajamarca, that is, in de Cueva. One of the most severe earthquality not in quantity, and churches in quakes came later in 1635, after which the Guadalupe and Safia far surpass anything Dominican architect of Lima, Diego Ma-the present regional capital has to offer. roto, presented plans for a new and larger Trujillo, nevertheless, maintains much of cathedral (1643). That structure, finally its colonial aspect, particularly in the por- begun four years later, and consecrated in

MN 112 &

TRUJILLO | 1666, seems to be in all essentials the fabric Cathedral was originally in like position, of today. Diego Maroto supplied the plans, but there were two bays to the rear and

but probably never directed the work per- a chapel dedicated to St. Bartholomew.

sonally in Trujillo; at any event a man Other than in the floor plan the cathedral | , named Francisco Balboa was in charge in of Trujillo bears no relation to either of 1664.” Another earthquake in 1687 caused the other famous rectangular churches of

much damage which was thoroughly re- Peru: Cuzco and Lima. At Trujillo a paired in the time of Bishop Mimbela fine dome over the sanctuary produces a

(1721-1740). He gave the church many climactic effect in a simple and dignified | jewels, constructed the Sala del Cabildo interior (Fig. 160) which is marked by (1732), and apparently donated a pulpit cruciform piers with molded capitals and and the present high altar, as well as the the customary molded cornice beneath the silver tabernacle and. sagrario, now lost.’ vaults. Exceptional is the use of groined In 1755 the’ church council sent the king vaults throughout with the bays separated — the report of an architect, Toribio Ramirez, by the usual transverse arches. Niches for

requesting eight thousand pesos for re- altars, four to the side in the aisles, are pairs,* but. presumably no action was taken decorated with large canvases of the seven-

before the next and last great catastrophe teenth century, one of them being dediof 1759. Cristébal de Vargas, of wide repu- cated to Santo Toribio and bearing the date

tation from Lima to Potosi, is said to have 1681. There can be little doubt that Tru- | had charge of the subsequent restorations jillo Cathedral should be regarded as Diego in 1768—1771,° and reconsecration took Maroto’s creation and as his masterpiece.

place in 1781. New towers (1782-1784), The floor plan he obviously based upon badly constructed and involved in litiga- that of Cuzco Cathedral, and the austere tion, had to be reérected by the contract- interior just as unmistakably carries the ing architect, Tomas Rodriguez. Since that stamp of the surviving classicism so typitime no radical alteration in the edifice has cal of Peru in the seventeenth century. been made except the transfer of the choir The exterior (Fig. 158) embodies a like

stalls to the sanctuary and the destruction spirit of conservatism, Doric portals with , of the trascoro (1911) which had occupied broken pediments but without any sugits traditional Hispanic place in the nave.® gestion of Baroque movement and devoid ,

The ground plan as reproduced from of surface decoration. The elliptical win- | the work of Martinez Compafién shows a dow over the main portal affords some light , rectangular church with the choir in the in an extremely dark interior. The design nave and an elevated sanctuary approached of the portal and window later served as -by.a flight of steps." The arrangement is model for the facades of El Belén and Santa

like that of the cathedral of Cuzco (Fig. Rosa, both of Trujillo. The cathedral 7) with the difference that Trujillo has throughout is constructed of brick cov-

‘no lateral chapels.. The sanctuary of Lima ered with stucco. _ oe ,

A113 RR

NORTHERN PERU ~The school of Trujillo never adopted a plan. Calancha avers that the walls of the genuinely Baroque style like that of the Augustinian structure withstood the great facades of the cathedral and La Compafiia catastrophe.” The plan of the long nave

in Cuzco. In this region Santiago de (Fig. 159), so characteristic of Peruvian Huaman and Santa Lucia at Ferrefiafe churches of the sixteenth century, cor(Lambayeque) (Figs. 165, 176) are the roborates the written word. Part of the exceptions to the rule. It was solely in heavy walls and surely the low barrel Cajamarca that the late Baroque of the vaults belong to the reconstruction of the | eighteenth century flourished in northern sixteen-twenties. Presumably at this time Peru, and that must be regarded as an in- the aisles, or more properly chapels, were dependent school. Otherwise, the cathe- added, two chapels to the right and three dral of Trujillo did much to establish the to the left. The irregular shapes of the latseventeenth- and eighteenth-century style ter and the clumsy construction of the for the entire diocese which included all piers which were cut through the original

that lies to the north. walls can be noted both within the church The chief religious orders were repre- and from the roofs. They leave no doubt — sented in Trujillo and at an early period. that the church was never planned thus at

The Franciscans are said to have come the outset.

, shortly after the foundation of the city In 1931 the present neocolonial facade which took place in 1535, the Mercedar- was erected, replacing the original of which ians presumably in the same period, the a photograph hangs in the reception room Augustinians in 1558, the Jesuits in 1627, of the monastery. The unpretentiousness

| and the Bethlehemites in 1680.° The first of the Trujillo school prevailed here too | Dominican house, now destroyed, was lo- in the simple doorway flanked by pilasters cated nearby in Chicama, a foundation of and the one tower to the left. To the left of

, Fray Domingo de Santo Tomas, mentioned the church, the early seventeenth-century by Cieza de Leén in 1553.” The same friar facade of the convent (Fig. 162) furnishes established a convent in Trujillo itself some a striking contrast to the contemporary

: time between that date and his transfer to imitation of the colonial. The wall of brick

| Chuquisaca as bishop in the year 1563. covered with white stucco is topped by These facts and his many virtues are re- crenelations. A very fine portal, flanked by corded in the legend on his portrait which Doric half columns, supports a curiously.

hangs in the Dominican church at Tru- shaped tympanum at each side of which jillo, probably a contemporary picture but are pyramidal pinnacles. Most striking of ‘many times repainted and now in a dilapi- all is the repeated pattern of octagonal cof-

dated condition. , fers within the tympanum. The convent

7 Except for San Agustin, none of the doorway of San Agustin, authentically co-

churches of Trujillo antedates the earth- lonial, surpasses all else of its type, either quake of 1619 in anything save the ground religious or domestic, which has survived

AN 114 A

an TRUJILLO from the mid-seventeenth century in Tru- Madre de Dios. Afio de 1641. The word

jillo. a “slaves” is not to be interpreted literally, The church of San Francisco, likewise for thus devotees of the Madonna of the rebuilt after 1619, has much the same Rosary called themselves. According to

character as San Agustin in its heavy walls, Meléndez, the pre-earthquake structure : clumsy proportions, and low barrel vaults. was made of stone and topped by a cedar. Very curious is the heavy cornice, which roof of interlaces. The church of his own projects too much in an amateurish way. day, apparently the edifice which has come

Fear of further upheavals of nature and down to us, was of brick and mortar, per- | hasty reconstruction explain the appear- fected in the time of the prior, Padre Este-

ance of both buildings. In San Francisco, ban Bara.” Oo

too, arches cut through continuous walls The interior of Santo Domingo (Fig.

communicate with the side aisles in such 161) is the most satisfactory among the

a way as to suggest that it was previously monastic churches of Trujillo, dignified , a cruciform structure of single nave. The and broad in its feeling of space, even if windows, one in the center of each bay of somewhat low in proportions. Its molded | the nave vault, were added in recent years, cruciform piers and general austerity recall so great was the desire for more light. The the cathedral, from which it differs strikugly pink and imitation-marble paint fur- ingly in the lack of clerestory. The general

ther damages a makeshift interior, and the style of Santo Domingo may have influ- |

elevated choir is modern. , enced the later design of the cathedral it- | - The exterior of the church was subjected self, so far as its barrenness and Doric piers

to the fate of cement surfacing, a common are concerned. The plan of basilican type , phenomenon in the twentieth century. Its with projecting sanctuary belongs to the principal feature is the large octagonal Lima-Arequipa group, formerly discussed,

tower to the left of the facade which was especially in respect to vaulting, charactererected subsequent to the earthquake of ized by barrel vaults in the nave and domi- , 1759. These towers are characteristic of cal vaults topped by lanterns in the aisles. northern Peru in the eighteenth century, In Arequipa, La Compafiia and La Merced, as witness the single octagonal towers of and in Lima, La Merced and San Francisco, San Lorenzo in Trujillo, Mansiche, and San all have this arrangement. Trujillo adheres Pedro at Lambayeque. Santa Lucia at Fe- to the same coastal tradition in Santo Do-

rrehafe (1690) has twin towers (Fig. 176) mingo, San Francisco, La Merced, and San

of the same shape and very large. _ Agustin, although the vaults are domical | The Dominican is the best of the early rather than cupolas as in Lima and: Are-.

| Ns RQ

churches, dating in part at least, from quipa. All of these churches suffered in the , 1641, to judge by an inscription in the earthquake of 1759 according to Feyjdo’s left aisle. This reads: Esta capilla se hizo de celebrated report, but chiefly in the vaults;

la limosna de los esclavos y esclavas de la none was completely demolished.” =

| | | NORTHERN PERU - The only unusual features of the interior still be seen within the monastery. Two half | of Santo Domingo are the peculiar long columns of the Doric order are attached to U-shaped choir and the double pilasters the piers, an arrangement exactly like that

for each transverse arch in that section. of the Augustinian cloister of Safia, disThe facade with single tower to left has cussed later in this chapter. They are cera conservative Doric portal with niche tain evidence of stylistic connection beabove. The portal recalls in style the por- tween the two houses of the same monastic

tals of Santo Domingo and the front door- rule. | way of La Merced in Cuzco (Figs. 55, 56), Small and unpretentious in size, La Meralthough the Trujillian work does not have ced today holds the sad distinction of being volutes in the second story and also differs the dirtiest and most neglected church in in other details. It is, of course, a matter Trujillo. The basilican plan, with barrelof the classical style of the period rather vaulted nave and the aisles covered with than of any direct relationship. The side domical vaults lighted from above, has alentrance of Santo Domingo in Trujillo ready been mentioned in the discussion of with its shell niche within the door must Santo Domingo. Like San Francisco the di, be an eighteenth-century reconstruction, mensions are heavy and clumsy, the Merced

, I should judge by its style. differing from the other seventeenth-cenThe Dominican cloister which now serves tury monastic churches of Trujillo in the as the local prison has no architectural dis- shortness of its nave. One feature should be tinction, being of single story with round noted: the lack of cornice in the nave even arches carried on plain square piers. In in the presence of a clerestory, an omission Trujillo none of the colonial cloisters of common in Bolivia, as in the Merced at La monks continues in monastic service today, Paz, Santo Domingo and La Merced of

for all were transferred to secular use in Sucre, and Santo Domingo at Cocha-

! the exclaustration of the early republic. bamba."* Only the stone reliefs (Fig. 164) | The cloister of San Francisco, originally of the life of San Pedro Nolasco in the pensimilar to that of Santo Domingo, now dentives of the dome, now wooden, merit | serves in a much altered state, as the Colegio consideration. The fagade of the Merced is Nacional de San Juan. The Jesuit cloister by far superior to the interior, due in large and that of the Mercedarians (Fig. 163), part to the open-arched belfries which are also of single story and both rusticated in graceful and recall those of La Recoleta in surface, have been altered and transformed Cajamarca. They were built after the earthinto the University of Trujillo and the quake of 1759, in which La Merced suffered Court of Justice respectively. San Agustin, severely, according to Feyjéo. The portal

the only cloister of two stories in Trujillo, with three orders superimposed, Doric, existed until demolished in 1931 to make JIonic, and the top indescribable, is simple

way for a street and a market. Four forlorn and pleasing. ,

| NM 116 &

arches of brick covered with plaster can One of the best of the monastic churches

— TRUJILLO |... of Trujillo was the Compafiia, at present good care and cleanliness. The facade, half ruined, its vaults partly destroyed, and clearly of eighteenth-century facture, reused as a storehouse by the university which sembles its contemporary, Santa Rosa, in its

functions in the cloister. In contrast to two small towers and the elliptical window others it has excellent scale and space rela- with its rusticated wall surface above the tionships, unmistakably indicative of the portal. The small twin towers characterhand of a professional architect. The rusti- ize most of the mid-eighteenth-century cation of the pilasters and transverse arches churches in Trujillo: El Belén, Santa Rosa, contrasts in texture with the wall, the ma- Santa Ana, and Santa Teresa. - terial throughout being brick coated with El Belén has undergone unfortunate disstucco, except for the cane-and-plaster bar- figurement in recent times on the exterior, : rel vaults. The Latin-cross plan with niche particularly in the ugly pseudo-Russian top

chapels in the nave conforms in a general placed on the dome, and a side buttress, | way to the erroneously so-called Jesuit type clumsily set against the nave to support

and is the only example of it in Trujillo. recent fractures. :

The skillful placing of the elevated choir Santa Teresa met the common fate of seover a flattened arch, and the successful de- vere damage in 1759 at the moment it was ,

sign of the dome over the crossing con- to have been inaugurated, just thirty-five tribute to an effective interior. The tower- years after the foundation of the Carmelite ~ less facade comprises two stories with Ionic nuns in Trujillo. Restoration followed and _ half columns below at the portal and Co- the consecration at last took place in 1773."

rinthian above, where a single large win- The church is small with single nave of ! dow gives light into the choir. An interest- nunnery tradition (Fig. 20), having, as so ing Palladian detail is ‘noted in the use of commonly, a lower choir to the right of brackets beneath the cornice of the portal. the sanctuary and the elevated choir above As for the date of the church, it may be the main entrance. The cornice with a corpresumed to have been erected in the mid- bel in the center of each bay betrays its

seventeenth century, sometime after the connection with the contemporary school ,

first fathers came in 1627. of Lima, where that detail is a signature of Considerable damage befell the church the mid-eighteenth century. The ever- , and hospital of El Belén, founded in 1680, present dome rises in its customary position in the earthquake of 1759. It must be con- in the bay corresponding to the crossing, sidered as largely rebuilt immediately there- and as usual there are barrel vaults in the

after. In the hospital only one small cloister rest of the church. The retables have , of single story, like the others of Trujillo, brought to the church exaggerated local remains. The simple cruciform plan of the fame, for in no way does Santa Teresa church, the dome on dentelated cornice, equal Jess Maria in Lima, nor Santa Teresa and the barrel vaults constitute a good un- in Ayacucho, nor many others in the sierra.

pretentious interior, and one which enjoys Architecturally the interior is satisfactory ,

MN 117K |

| NORTHERN PERU , but undistinguished. Frankly bad is the the portal has a large triumphal-arch moonly description which can be given to the tive. The single-naved interior of Santa facade, with its small twin towers, its two- Ana‘*° now can be characterized only as a | storied division with heavy Corinthian col- complete ruin, and the cruciform San Loumns below and curious bulging pilasters renzo is a very poor structure of wood. The above, all of which lack scale and result in unpretentious facade has a single polygonal a heavy ugly composition. The building tower of Bishop Luna Victoria’s day, simi- _ does little credit to its architect, General lar to the tower of Mansiche. The fame of

Mateo Vitores de Velasco. this church, however, must rest upon its

_ The other nunnery in Trujillo, Santa magnificent high altar (Figs. 350, 351), a Clara, established in 1743, has been trans- fine monument to the bishop’s memory, formed into neo-Romanesque within re- and one which is discussed in the chapter

cent years, and hence can no longer be on retables. classified as colonial. The ground plan be- For the sake of completeness, there relongs to the same type as that of Santa mains the mention of the chapel of the Teresa, although considerably larger. Here, Seminario de San Carlos y San Marcelo,

as in La Merced, the one interesting sur- first built by Bishop Juan de la Calle y vival is the series of stone reliefs carved on Heredia, but now Gothicized beyond re-_ the pendentives of the dome, in this case, pair,’ and the church variously known as naturally enough, dedicated to the life of the Portada de la Sierra or the Capilla de __

Santa Clara. | , la Union. The latter, a long narrow edifice _ - Among the parish churches Santa Rosa of one nave crudely built, retains no vestige claims the distinction of being the best. Re- of the church reérected in 1786, and soon

built by Bishop Luna Victoria (1758- after restored by the architect Evaristo | 1777);*° it resembles El Belén in the ellipti- Noriega (1798-1801), for which docucal window and rusticated treatment of the ments are preserved in the Archivo de In- —

center and its other contemporaries of Tru- dias in Seville.” , , , jillo in two small towers. Newly restored In pueblos near Trujillo interesting , with simplicity and good taste, it has be- churches are found at Huaman, Mansiche, come a small chapel with the apse aban- and Huanchaco. The single-naved plan, doned. The corbeled cornice recalls Santa brick walls, and wooden roofing prevail in Teresa, but in the modern rebuilding of the all, the first two having simple pitched vault the customary transverse bands have roofs and the last a barrel vault of cane

been omitted. and plaster. A single large tower suffices at

| Santa Ana and San Lorenzo, Bishop Luna Mansiche and Huanchaco, both undoubt| Victoria likewise restored, the former much edly posterior to the earthquake of 1759, in the style of Santa Teresa so far as the and belonging to the series of towers charfacade is concerned with the difference that acteristic of northern Peru in this period,

NM 118 & |

| TRUJILLO © | which have already been mentioned in con- on the contrary, with frequency in the nection with San Francisco of Trujillo. The sierra of southern Peru and Bolivia: Lampa,

facade of Mansiche is two-storied with the Puno Cathedral (Figs. 251, 252), Santa Doric order below and peculiar flat pilasters Maria de Montserrat (near Andahuaylas), ending in pyramids above. The elliptical ina retable of Santa Clara in Cuzco, houses window which let into the choir, now de- in Oropesa (Cuzco), San Lorenzo, Potosi,

stroyed, occurs repeatedly in the Trujillian and elsewhere. Other interesting details at _ school, following the model first established Huaman are the draped heads on the frieze, } in the cathedral. The portal of Huanchaco a motive which also embellishes the choir also has the oval window, but the design _ stalls of Trujillo Cathedral, and retables in consists of the broad single story of classical San Francisco, San Agustin, and La Merced. _

orders like the Jesuit church in Trujillo. The draped head in much more elaborate F{uanchaco’s true glory is its dramatic situ- fashion decorates the columns on the facade

ation, rising upon a desolate sandy height, of the church at Ferrefiafe (Fig. 176). Its surrounded by an atrium wall, and over- derivation from the school of Lima is dislooking the open sea of the Pacific Ocean. cussed in the chapter on Lima, and in the

_ The sites of both Mansiche and Huanchaco section on retables. , were established early, but the present The facade of Santiago de Huaman is buildings belong in large part to the time another instance of native Indian taste in of Bishop Vitores de Velasco (1705— the allover decoration of wall surface, and

1713), their towers to the post-earth- it contrasts sharply with the sober re- a quake (1759) period, plus various modern straint of the facades of Trujillo itself, —

restorations. from which such exuberance is conspicuThe church of Santiago at Huaman de- ously lacking. The cherubs’ heads on the serves recognition as possessing the most in- arch of the doorway strike an anachronistic

teresting facade (Fig. 165) in the region note, a revival of Renaissance usage in the of Trujillo. Two towers, now very much _ eighteenth century. Strips of ornament like |

aslant, flank a portal of triumphal-arch de- side pieces of a retable recall such devices , sign with statues of saints in the niches. of southern Peru. Charming and amusingly Santiago, the patron, appears as matamoros primitive is the large scroll-like stylization |

on horseback, and the rest represent Mer- of flowers in the corners beside the mer-

cedarian saints, to which order the church maids. The yellow paint of the background pertained, as the Mercedarian shield also against the white reliefs and columns plays indicates. Over the doorway are two re- no small part in the gaiety and naive charm © cumbent mermaids complete with fish tails, of this surprisingly original composition. playing the charango, a surprising appear- —- The religious architecture of Trujillo is

| Nu9¥ i

ance of the mermaid motive in northern unpretentious and definitely conservative. : Peru, the only case known to me. It occurs, Santo Domingo and the cathedral in the

NORTHERN PERU

- _— | GUADALUPE «> a

middle of the seventeenth century estab- HE former Augustinian monastery of lished the norm which prevailed through- T Ness Sefiora de Guadalupe stands | out. These two churches deserve praise for in the village which inherited its name on their dignity, sobriety, and good taste. the Pan-American highway, one hundred Santo Domingo tends to low, heavy pro- and thirty kilometers north of Trujillo. portions which in the case of San Francisco The church and cloister are accurately and San Agustin descend to clumsiness and dated by Calancha who states that the rusticity. The Compafiia, now in an aban- house established in 1564 fell to the ground

doned state, must have been elegant in its in the great earthquake of 1619.” Three prime, and the eighteenth-century church days later on May 17, 1619, the site of the of El Belén, inside at least, is well planned. new establishment was chosen at a distance The destruction in the earthquake of 1759 of one quarter of a league from the origiwas limited, according to Feyjéo’s account, nal location. The present church and cloisto vaults and towers, and in the restora- ter were erected, therefore, in the sixteentions the seventeenth-century character of twenties. Since Calancha was prior of the the churches was not lost. The numerous Augustinians at Trujillo at the time of the retables of Trujillo antedate 1759 with a earthquake, there is no reason to doubt the few exceptions, another proof that damage accuracy of his statement. He speaks of was not as extensive as might have been ex- “the most sumptuous church of vaults and pected. Brick and mortar prevail because lacerias,” the usual terminology for deof lack in this region of stone, a material scribing, in the seventeenth century, Gothic which nowhere occurs in any edifice. Brick vaults (Fig. 171) with decorative ribs. Calvaults were replaced by cane in some in- ancha aptly stresses too the “sumptuous

stances in the eighteenth century, for ex- cloister” and its fine vaulting. perience proved it the more serviceable ma- The Augustinian churches at Guadalupe

terial along the whole coast of Peru, so and Safia are located near each other geofrequently visited by upheavals of nature. graphically, and they are so similar in style

The best of Trujillo, however, lies in its that they must be the work of the same retables and in its domestic architecture. architect. The man was undoubtedly Blas Trujillo boasts a good collection of retables de Orellana, who was engaged upon the of the eighteenth century, having suffered church and cloister of San Francisco at

, less than Lima in the renovations of the Safia and upon San Agustin in the same nineteenth, After Cuzco, which possesses city in 1617-1619. The vaults of the latby far the largest number and the best in ter (Figs. 168, 169) are especially like those quality, and Ayacucho, which falls well at Guadalupe, where the late-Gothic decobelow Cuzco, Trujillo ranks as the third rative ribs rest upon corbels. The designs city of Peru in the variety and quantity of of the ribs are not, however, identical,

its wood sculpture. those of Guadalupe being more sophistiMN 120 &

SANA cated and purer Gothic than the nave cities of Hispanic America: Antigua in vaults of Safia. Particularly lovely are the Guatemala, overwhelmed by earthquake, circles and ogive ellipses which the ribs de- and Old Panama City, abandoned after the scribe. The plan at Guadalupe follows the ravage it suffered from the English pirate,

usual single-naved type with an elevated Henry Morgan, in 1671. None of these is , choir. The exterior of the church, much re- more picturesque, and none so remote

stored, has lost its original aspect. from the world of today as Safia, where | The large cloister of single story is se- dim echoes of the past grandeur are hidverely classic and sober in its use of a Doric den amid a flat expanse of desert sands, dot-

half column attached to each molded pier ted here and there by low brush. Founded — , on the court side. Simple groined vaults of in 1563, the city grew to prosperity in brick rest upon corbels placed against the the production of sugar and leather, until wall and against the piers. The cloister por- catastrophe overtook her when the English tal, the very essence of late Renaissance dig- pirate sacked the region for seven days in nity, far surpasses in that respect the por- 1686. The deathblow fell later on March

tals of San Agustin at Safia. Its Doric 18, 1720, in the form of a torrential flood columns and molded pediment are austerely which swept away the entire city within a barren of all ornament. To the right the few hours. Only the churches, because of bell tower of two open arches has an inter- their solider construction, remained to esting rusticated treatment, as likewise do some degree intact.” They gradually disthe three windows which open into the sec- integrated into still greater ruin, and Safa ond story of the monastic quarters. The never lifted her head again, for her citizens material throughout is brick covered with moved off to Trujillo and Lambayeque.

stucco. | _ Her unfavorable geographic position was — The church at San Pedro de Lloc, a short too great a drawback and could not withdistance south of Guadalupe, has suffered stand the onslaughts of both man and na-

considerably from restoration. At best a ture. Today a poor village of humble peas- | provincial building, it has an interesting ants lies on the rim of the old city, the

main portal. | plan of whose very streets is lost. Only

, ' ~ the ruined walls of her churches, over- — | grown with vine and brush, rise up ghost-

SANA , like in quiet pastures. | , N the northern coastal desert of Peru The convents of the Augustinians, the

( ii the ruins of Safia, once the capital Franciscans, and the Mercedarians, as well

of a province and after Trujillo the most as the matriz, were large and important _ | _ important city of the region. The crum- structures. Less so were Santa Lucia, San bling walls of its seven churches, over- Joaquin, and San Juan de Dios, the latter

grown with brush, rise in romantic deso- small and modest according to the chronlation (Fig. 166). Safia recalls other dead icler of the order.” This church still exMN 121 &

NORTHERN PERU , ists, though much rebuilt and rededicated fragmentary. The triumphal arch looms to Santo Toribio, for the sainted archbishop awesomely alone and intact, and at some

a of Lima died in Safia on March 23, 1606, distance stands the main wall of the facade. while making his third pastoral visit to his The church and cloister were ordered by see, which at that time stretched from Lima an agreement of October 30, 1617, from a

far to the north.” mulatto architect, named Blas de Orellana. The monastery of Nuestra Sefiora de las He was under contract to the Franciscans _ Mercedes was the latest of the religious or- and Augustinians at the same time, a sitders to be established in the city, the monks uation which caused him considerable diffi-

resettling here in 1637, after having pre- culty. In 1618 the local magistrate served viously abandoned their monastery because notice upon the architect that he must fulof the unhealthy climate.” Today only the fill his obligations to both religious com-

brick skeleton of the church facade (Fig. munities without further salary. In order | 174) and a side portal mark the site of the to obtain first rights to his services, the -Mercedarian house. There is sufficient to prior of San Agustin took Orellana into , reveal, however, a restrained classical style his religious community as a monk. The similar to that of the school of Trujillo Franciscans appealed on the grounds that in the seventeenth century. The two-tow- Orellana was married and hence disqualiered facade has a dignified doorway flanked fied for a monastic career! Later they by Doric pilasters and surmounted by a_ reached a compromise, whereby he was alsimple broken pediment. The window lowed to complete his work in San Franabove, which repeats the same design, gave cisco before continuing with the construc-

light into the choir loft. | tion of San Agustin.” These events took _ The portal of the matriz (Fig. 166) is place previous to the great earthquake of almost an exact repetition of the Merceda- May 14, 1619, which destroyed the monrian and for that reason would seem to be- astery at Guadalupe, south of Trujillo. As long to the sixteen-thirties. The vaulting we have seen, the Augustinian monastery of late-Gothic style, on the other hand, is there was rebuilt immediately afterwards characterized by ribbed construction on at one quarter of a league from the site of corbels, very closely related to that of the the sixteenth-century establishment. The | church of San Agustin at Safia. The matriz close similarity between San Agustin at surpasses all other monuments of this dead Safia and at Guadalupe leads to the con-

, city of Peru in its picturesque desolation. clusion that Blas de Orellana, the mulatto

It is so buried in sands and thicket that friar, was the architect of both. | only an excavation could fully reveal the The church and cloister at Safia (Figs.

, extent of its large basilican floor plan. 167-170) are well enough preserved to The exact disposition of the single-naved give an excellent idea of their original magchurch of San Francisco is even more con-__ nificence. Calancha, writing about the year ©

MN 122 & |

jectural and its crumbling walls still more 1635, described “the excellent vaulted

, SANA | | ~ church with beautiful chapels.” * The plan throughout all Peru only by those of the of the church is most extraordinary, giving contemporary church of Guadalupe. _ the impression in its ruinous condition of The main entrance to the church of San three small churches in parallel alignment. Agustin (Fig. 167) consists of a fine classiIn reality the church proper has a nave cal. portal flanked by Doric pilasters and with rectangular sanctuary and the usual loaded at the sides by pinnacles. The metraised choir above the portal. At the right opes of the Doric frieze are decorated with

hand isa short aisle consisting of only three disks in Renaissance style, while the ap- oo bays. The opposite aisle runs the full length proach of the Baroque period is suggested ,

of the church, and terminates in a large by the broken pediment. The window just _ sacristy which projects well beyond the above, which gives light into the choir, has

apse. The material throughout is brick, a semicircular hood suspended on trun- , originally covered with plaster. The three cated pilasters, likewise in late Renaissance

bays of vaulting in the nave, which have style. The convent door at the left hand, survived in relatively good condition, pro- topped by the same Doric frieze, conforms vide adequate testimony to the splendor of to the same late-classical spirit, which in

the edifice in its heyday. They are late- Peru continues well into the seventeenth , Gothic ribbed vaults with liernes and century, and crossbreeds with the Gothic tiercerons, but not highly decorated. The in such an interesting fashion here at Safia, ribs spring from corbels, and the bays are at Guadalupe, and in the cathedral of

separated by broad transverse arches of Cuzco. |

seventeenth-century type. The elevated The huge cloister (Fig. 170) numbers ,

choir is reached by a stairway fromacham- nine round arches to the side, each pier ber which is connected with the cloister, carrying two Doric half columns upon the according to established practice in monas- inner face. Like the cloister at Guadalupe tic houses, so that the friars could enter it is limited to one story, but in the latter it directly from the monastery. The vault- the compound piers have single Doric half ing of the truncated aisle to the right, only columns. Very little can be said of the one bay of which survives, was like that of monastic quarters, since only the hall and the nave. The four vaults of the opposite chamber on the west wing of the first aisle, all in existence, have an exceptionally floor have endured to the present day.

lovely design with a large rosette in the San Agustin was without a doubt one © center upon which converge eight ribs. In of the most splendid of all monastic estabone of the drawings in his manuscript of lishments in South America. Of the three

1681 the Spanish architect, Simén Garcia, monuments, related in type, which have , introduced a similar vault. It reflects the survived the ravages of earthquakes, floods, school of Rodrigo Gil de.Ontafién who and reconstruction, all are Augustinian

lived in the preceding century.* These houses: those of Safia, Guadalupe, and

vaults at Safa are rivaled in beauty Copacabana. ae 7

NORTHERN PERU Some day, perhaps, excavations will condition and employed until recently as throw more light upon the lost architec- a basketball court, possesses but moderate tural history of Safia. Little new documen- interest. Its round arches and molded piers _ tary information can be expected, since suggest the seventeenth century, a date the archives were of a certainty destroyed contemporary with the church. Two gables _

in the great flood of 1720. with scroll ornament rise strangely lost

—_ CHICLAYO , housed portals. a The original church, covered with a

| amid the ruins, in sections which once

HICLAYO, a modern city, has only one wooden roof, collapsed in the great earth-

(Slonial monument of importance, the quake of 1618, and the rebuilding began

| , former Franciscan convent, and that is in the following year. Progress must have about to be demolished to widen a street. been rapid for that age, since Vazquez de

The main cloister (Fig. 173), which for Espinosa spoke of the monastery (circa many years housed the Colegio Nacional 1630) as “elaborate and architecturally de San José, possesses a feature apparently very interesting.” ~ The church (Fig. 172) unique in Peru: pointed arches carried on is unpretentious although sizeable, far more

rectangular molded piers. Whereas the satisfactory outside than within. It can be Gothic arch occurs with some frequency classified in a general way as an offshoot of

, in Mexico, it is found rarely in Peru: in the school of Trujillo of the seventeenth — the crossing of San Pedro at Juli (Fig. 44), century. The side portal with molded piin the first chapel to the left and to the lasters and plain semicircular hood, broken _

| right in Cuzco Cathedral, just within the in the center, is dignified and conservalateral portal of Santo Domingo in Lima,” tive like the Trujillian prototypes. The in the Sala Capitular of La Merced at Are- two-storied fagade, likewise, embodies clas-

quipa, and in the church at Azangaro. sical restraint and good dimensions. The The foundation of the Franciscan mon- gable above and the towers are neo-Ro-

astery at Chiclayo took place in 1561. manesque additions of modern facture, Work on the construction of the church fortunately not unduly incongruous, The and monastery was in progress during the one feature which gives the church a defyears 1572~-1594, and I am inclined to be- initely colonial stamp, and imparts a cer-

lieve that the main cloister belongs to tain picturesqueness, is the use of crenelathis period.” The structure of brick and tions, an anachronism very common in stucco, now picturesquely overgrown with Hispanic America as late as the mid-

trees and shrubbery, is unique in Peru, and _ eighteenth century. deserves a better fate than the guillotine The plan of the church includes nave to which local authorities have condemned and two aisles without lateral chapels, a

, it. It. consists of a single story of five projecting sanctuary, dome over the cross-

| A124 KR

pointed arches to each of the four sides. ‘ing, raised choir, and molded rectangular The second cloister, already in ruinous piers. The eight bays of the nave are sepa-

| CHICLAYO | rated by transverse arches, and covered by ~ The style at Ferrefiafe is severe, with heavy barrel vaults of cane and adobe. The Doric pilasters and a frieze of triglyphs materials used in the vaults indicate that and disk metopes. Here is unmistakable they were reconstructed in the eighteenth evidence of local tradition, in view of the century. Walls throughout are brick, cov- similarity to the frieze on the portals of ered with plaster. The exceptional use of San Agustin at Safia. The two-storied cen-

transverse barrel vaults in the aisles strikes ter of the church at Ferrefiafe establishes , an unusual note, in a frankly provincial the unknown architect as a man with an

and mediocre interior. , - excellent sense of relative dimensions. The , For the sake of completeness, mention traditional scrolls unify the design, rather should be made of the one other colonial than act as pure decoration. The ball-

church in Chiclayo, formerly a private and-tongue ornament, common in Truji- | chapel and now a parish church dedicated _Ilian domestic architecture, and in churches to Santa Verénica. A small modest edifice in Lima, Cuzco, and elsewhere, puts in an

with roofing of wooden beams and adobe, appearance in the upper center. Most inits walls are constructed of a series of piers. ‘testing of all is the recurrence of the The two-towered facade, low and humble, draped female heads on the columns, a has a simple doorway, flanked by Doric motive found not only in Lima in the main

half columns which suggest an eighteenth- portal of San Francisco, and the retable of

‘century date. — a _ the Conception in the cathedral, but also | Much the finest church facade (Figs. in the choir stalls of Trujillo Cathedral 175, 176) on the coast of northern Peru and a few small retables in the same city.

is that of Santa Lucia in Ferrefiafe, a vil- Even the typical choir-stall motive, a lage nineteen kilometers northeast of Chi- draped cloth filled with fruits, is used: clayo. It has the added virtue of being tropical fruits produced locally, such as dated by a large inscription at the base of cherimoyer and papaya, along with the tra- | the left tower within the present parochial ditional and allegorical grape and apple. | office, Avio de 1690. The composition is Unfortunately the excellence of the Fe- | excellent with a two-storied Baroque portal rrefiafe facade is partly masked by ugly red between large polygonal towers. The latter paint in imitation of bricks, a condition, belong to the series of octagonal towers however, which another coat of paint could — located in northern Peru, and previously easily rectify. The handling of the window _ discussed in connection with San Fran- in the upper center is effective and original

cisco at Trujillo. Those of Ferrefafe are -with the rather prominent balcony, the perhaps the earliest, because of the destruc- repetition of scrolls laterally, and the shell ; tion of the others in Trujillo in the earth- with pediment above. Just below the bal-

quake of 1759. The octagonal tower of cony two nude sculptured youths hold San Pedro of Lambayeque, much nearer the escutcheon of the town of Ferrefiafe, Ferrefiafe, is also an eighteenth-century a plate upon which are displayed the eyes

: MN 125 4 |

structure. of. the patroness, St. Lucy.

: NORTHERN PERU a | The side portal is a curious two-storied painting of the interior in imitation red affair composed of giant rusticated col- marble (1942). Only the lateral door of umns, made of brick and stucco as is the simple rusticated design has escaped the whole church. The architect could scarcely destructive hand of remodelers. , have been the same man who designed the At the side of San Pedro stand the ruins main facade. Here a coat of paint consist- of three other churches, joined together in ing of alternate bands of red and white parallel alignment. The one now under the produces an altogether bizarre effect. The jurisdiction of the Third Order of the interior, originally a long single nave, has Franciscans is intact: a long single nave lost all of its colonial appearance, and is and a simple facade with two bell towers described here merely as an example of of open arches. Another facade, two, degeneration of taste. Tall thin columns storied in brick and stucco, with imitation of wood, painted like marble, were added rustication, is the best architecturally of in 1911 to give the illusion of a basilican these churches in Lambayeque. The inchurch, and the retables were destroyed or terior has been destroyed, as well as that

: modernized. Only the fine shell tympanum of the fourth church, which has a single within the main portal remains unharmed. door in a nondescript exterior.

The roof, now wood and tin, must have A few colonial houses in Lambayeque been vaulted in times past. Otherwise there deserve mention. The most complete is the would be no explanation for the enormous house at 91 Calle 8 de Octubre which has buttresses added at the sides, at a period a strangely original portal with ruined balsubsequent to the original construction. cony above. Two half columns topped by For all its miserable interior, Santa Lucia turrets flank the door against a background

, at Ferrefiafe deserves front rank among of half columns, all of which consists churches of northern Peru, by virtue of its of stucco veneer over brick. An arched highly original and exceptionally beautiful passage leads directly into a charming pa-

facade. | _ tio (Fig. 28) of single story, on two sides In the village of Lambayeque, the of which run porches carried on wooden

churches have been reduced from four to columns with zapata capitals. On the street two, the larger being the parish church of side an open stairway leads to the single

_ San Pedro (1691) which resembles: in room and balcony in the second story of plan and style Santa Maria in Chiclayo the facade. Very striking for its length is and adheres to the school of Trujillo.” the wooden balcony of another house A large basilican structure with molded which extends continuously for a block — piers, barrel vaults in the nave, domical on one side of the house and a half block

, vaults in the aisles, and a modern dome of on the other. Lambayeque today is for tin, it has been completely ruined by the most part dull and colorless, with just restoration, consisting of cement on the a flash here and there, as a reminder of exterior, a modern fagade, and grotesque greater prosperity in days gone by.

| MN 126 &

oo Vil | oo , NORTHERN PERU—II

- CAJAMARCA | | — -

AJAMARCA, once a capital of the Incas, Some walls remained behind the present Cie. in the mountains of northern Peru. Capilla de la Dolorosa until they were Situated in a valley, at an elevation of gen cleared away for no apparent reason in

thousand feet, it is rich in eucalyptus and 1928-1931.” ,

mountain vegetation, and overhung with Unmistakable evidence of the existence

radiant blue sky and the great billowing of an Open Chapel in the early days of white clouds of the sierra." Much like Cajamarca is divulged in Santo Toribio’s Cuzco in its landscape, Cajamarca is fur- report of his pastoral visit, apparently made

ther testimony to the Incas’ appreciation in 1593. He says, “Although large, the : of nature. Here Pizarro came in November church does not hold all of the people of

1532 with his small band of adventurers the village in it... and thus they say which included the celebrated Franciscan mass on Sundays and festivals in a chapel

friar, Padre Valverde. It was here that (adjoined to the same church) which is Atahualpa, the emperor, fell prisoner, lan- in the cemetery. In the latter all of the guished incarcerated for a year, and then people of the village gather all the mornwas put to death notwithstanding his will- ing, etc.” * That the Open Chapel was an

ingness to submit to baptism into Christi- expedient of the frontier throughout the , anity at the hands of Fray Valverde. Spanish colonies, and not limited to Mex| On the arrival of the Spanish an Inca ico, becomes more and more apparent as

Temple of the Sun was promptly trans- Hispanic studies progress. | formed into a Christian church dedicated Cajamarca belonged to the diocese of to St. Francis. About 1562 the Franciscans Trujillo until 1908. Nonetheless, the style

built a new church of rubble and brick of ecclesiastical architecture in the two

covered by a wooden roof. It was long cities is strikingly different, due to the a and narrow, the familiar type of the mid- remoteness of Cajamarca and to geographic sixteenth century in Peru, like La Merced and climatic conditions completely unlike

_and San Cristébal in Ayacucho, San Juan those of Trujillo. The latter stands in the. , at Juli, and San Jerénimo near Cuzco. This desert near the sea, and in its architecture church was dismantled in 1687, previous relied upon brick and stucco. Lofty Cajato the inauguration of new construction. marca, like Puno and Arequipa, used stone

| A 127A

NORTHERN PERU throughout, even in the vaults, and de- tal, however, fall within the later years veloped facades luxuriantly sculptured. of the seventeenth century. This side porNotwithstanding. these features in com- tal (Fig. 178) bears the royal escutcheon

mon, the school of Cajamarca is inde- of Spain and the inscription, Avo de pendent of southern Peru. Its facades are 1686. It and the contemporary portal of identical in technique and decorative mo- the Sagrario beside it present a restrained tives with the gilded retables of eighteenth- architectural design characterized by the century Peru. The indigenous elements pilasters pendant on corbels, and by the

| which characterize Puno and Arequipa are stylized leaf in rectangle, both upon of minor significance here. Very few deco- the frieze and on the surface of the arch. © rative themes of indigenous type appealed The dated portal has a clearly seventeenthto the Cajamarcan sculptors. The flat prim- century character in the rectangular em-

itivism of mestizo design is notably absent phasis of the design and in the use of except in some details of the facade of San the familiar scale motive on the central Antonio and the interior of the Capilla de corbel. The Sagrario portal must have been

, la Dolorosa. Both Cajamarca and Puno be- delayed in the finishing, judging by the long to the late Baroque period of efferves- scrolls in the second story which so closely

cent floridity, but the former is essentially resemble those of the eighteenth cen-

| Hispanic and the south of Peru, mestizo. tury on the main facade. The magnificent Cajamarca possesses six churches. San escutcheon with flourishing plumed helmet

José, a humble Andean chapel of adobe, is that of the city of Cajamarca. , with single bell tower and salient roof to Some relationships between Cajamarca form a porch, has no particular interest and the coastal region of Peru are found save its inscription which gives the date in the plans of the churches. The basilican of its construction in 1683.* In addition, type with single apse, dome over the crossthere are the Franciscan Recoleta and La ing, and barrel vaults in the nave, tran-

| Inmaculada Concepcién, but the glory of sept, and sanctuary is common to Lima, , Cajamarca are the three eighteenth-cen- Arequipa, Trujillo, and Cajamarca. They tury churches with retable facades: San differ, however, in the vaulting of the Antonio de Padua, the cathedral, and El aisles. In the churches of San Francisco

Belén. (Fig. ro) and La Merced of Lima, and in The present cathedral of Cajamarca, La Merced and La Compafiia (Fig. 16) of originally a parish church, was raised to the Arequipa, each bay of the aisles is covered

, category of matriz in 1682,° at which time with a small dome lighted from above. : a new structure was begun. Eighty years Instead of a dome, a domical vault, lighted elapsed before the consecration of the from above, is used in the aisles of Santo church took place in 1762, and even then Domingo of Arequipa, and likewise in the the facade was unfinished, and thus it re- churches of the monastic orders in Trumains today.° The floor plan and side por- jillo: Santo Domingo (Fig. 161), La Mer-

| MN 128 &

CAJAMARCA Oo ced, San Agustin (Fig. 159), and San_ ren, and lofty in proportions, far superior

Francisco. In all of these churches the to its Trujillian prototypes. Cajamarca too | large dome over the crossing is lacking only has the advantage in beauty of materials, in La Merced of Arequipa, where it has for dressed stone masonry is employed

been transferred to the sanctuary. throughout the entire church in vaults as _ Among the churches of Cajamarca, San well as in walls. Solid stone construction is

Antonio (Fig. 11) follows the coastal tra- always limited to the sierra regions, such dition the most closely. It varies only in as Cajamarca, Puno, and Arequipa. In the omission of light from above in the Cuzco and Ayacucho, on the contrary,

domical vaults of the aisles, and surely less stone walls are combined with vaults of |

light is needed in this region than in Lima brick. |

and Trujillo. The cathedral of Cajamarca The present Franciscan church, dedi(Fig. 181) omits the large dome over the cated to San Antonio, was begun about — crossing, as well as the lighting of the aisles 1699 following the plans drawn by the arfrom above. The aisle vaults of the cathe- chitect Matias Pérez Palomino. An earlier

_ dral have the peculiarity of an elliptical effort (1690) to replace the inadequate shape, an indication of their eighteenth- old structure had come to naught. The

century date. : confused problem of the origin of San The piers in the cathedral of Cajamarca Antonio has been solved by Padre Vargas are extremely large, so much so that the Ugarte’s recent publication of several imnave in reality has continuous walls with portant documents. An inventory of 1737, arched openings which connect with each discovered by the Jesuit scholar, shows that bay of the aisles. The same heavy ungainly the vaults of the choir and a few others construction follows the precedent set in in the main body of the church were still San Francisco and San Agustin (Fig. 159) incomplete in that year. The architects in

in Trujillo. In the latter church the ar- charge at that time were Jos¢ Manuel and , rangement results from the alteration of Francisco de Tapia, successors of Pérez a Latin-cross plan by the addition of aisles. Palomino, who was undoubtedly dead. Just

The appearance is unfortunate, but San how far along the sculpture of the portals Agustin of Trujillo seems to have pro- had progressed by 1737, we do not know vided the model for San Francisco in Tru- for lack of documentary information.’ | jillo and the cathedral of Cajamarca. One Two years later the Bethlemite brothers striking and important difference is to be of Cajamarca secured a temporary injunc-

noted, that the heavy pilasters in each bay tion to prevent the Franciscans from quar- | of the nave are omitted in Cajamarca. A rying more stone in the hill of Santa Apo_corbel at the height of the cornice replaces lonia. The quarrel with the Bethlemites each pilaster, a device repeatedly encoun- had begun long before in 1677 when the

tered in the eighteenth century. The inte- Franciscans tried to prevent them from |

AS 129 A

rior of Cajamarca Cathedral is severe, bar- taking charge of the local hospital.* , ,

| NORTHERN PERU. | Fray. Vicente Valverde had played an curious tongue in a rectangle, repeated at historic role in the first conquest of Caja- the top and down the sides. No other part

marca by Pizarro, and the Franciscans of the interior is carved, the vaults being thenceforth had always been entrusted in fine smooth stone masonry, unlike the with the teaching of the Indians there,.a elaborately worked vaults of El Belén and privilege which they guarded. zealously. the Capilla de la Dolorosa. The interior of For more than a half century the monks San Antonio is one of the best in all Peru, defied orders from the king and viceroy awesome in its majestic space composition to abandon their church and turn it over and technically expert in detail. The presto the Indians, a quarrel which is recorded ent elevated choir with its rococo shape is

in documents of 1811 preserved in the not the original but a refabrication of Archivo de Indias.° These papers say that 1880, the time during which most of the the Indians had built the church in 1717, restorations in the church were made.”

| a statement not to be taken literally, for The great distinction of the religious the work endured for more than one year architecture of Cajamarca lies in the re(1699-1737), but it does corroborate the markable sculptured facades of San An-

period. a tonio, the cathedral, and El Belén. They

San Antonio is a magnificent large struc- are contemporary works of the first half of ture 73 meters in length and 26.70 meters the eighteenth century, constituting one —

, in breadth within the walls. Its floor plan school. Curiously the facades of all three , (Fig. 11), as already noted, derives from were left unfinished in the upper parts and the coastal tradition of Peru, the chief the towers only begun. The explanation — variation being the omission of lighting might easily be financial, when a city the

| from above in the aisle vaults.°° Niche size of Cajamarca attempted three such chapels, large enough only to contain al- ambitious structures contemporaneously. tars, flank the aisles within the thickness of That will be realized readily by considerthe walls. The interior of San Antonio ing their known dates. The cathedral was. (Fig. 183) differs radically from the cathe- begun about 1682 and consecrated in 1762;

dral, due not only to its greater size and to San Antonio, started in 1699, was still the large dome over the crossing, which the under construction in 1737. The monks cathedral lacks, but also to the design of of El Belén in 1677 took charge of the the interior. Large cruciform piers with old hospital of Cajamarca which they

, Doric pilasters and plain cornice provide found very miserable. They began a new the framework of a grandiose composition. church about 1699, but the major share The large bracket in the center of each bay of the construction was carried out beof the cornice is a familiar eighteenth-cen- tween 1727 and 1744. An inscription upon

tury feature, here boldly placed like a the pedestals of the statues in the second | _ ledge beneath the clerestory. The window story states that the facade was finished by frames inside are carved in stone with a José Morales on May 18, 1744.”

A 130 KR

, | oe CAJAMARCA : The fagade of the cathedral (Figs. 177- and the exquisite decorative qualities of 180) is the largest and the most lavishly the design have no equal except in the

decorated, yet lacking completion at the finest gilded retables. When first com- | top. It is easy to see that work stopped pleted, the facades of San Agustin and La abruptly one day, and was never resumed. Merced in Lima (Figs. 110, 111) might El Belén (Figs. 186, 187) has a complete have approached the Cajamarcan school in facade and one tower half finished, whereas quality. Today the former is but a shadow

San Antonio (Fig. 182) is the farthest of itself, the carving having lost its vigor from termination and technically drier in restoration and recutting, while the Mer- , than the others. The cathedral looks rather ced is a replica of the original and com- , forlorn because of its truncated condition, pletely mechanical, so far.as the sculpture but that should not obscure the luxuriant is concerned. Grapes and vines entwine the magnificence of its stone reliefs. The cen- spiral columns of Cajamarca Cathedral, the tral section rises two and one half stories, large luxuriant bunches overshadowing divided into the triumphal-arch division by _ the vines and leaves. Customarily, the latter

spiral columns with niches between them predominate, and the grapes are relatively , in the traditional manner. The two side inconspicuous. This reversal in the decoraportals have single columns and a broad tive emphasis is especially notable in the attic section. Above in the second story cathedral portals. Flamboyant birds with three open arches are hung with bells. The crisp broad feathers peck at the eucharistic entire arrangement is puzzling, for this grapes in one of the oldest themes of Chrissecond story does not correspond to the tian symbolism. An occasional pomegrancenter of the facade. If bell towers were to ate emerges. The columns of the side por-

have risen still another story, what was tal rise from a lower drum cut with the to have been done with the clock tower zigzag motive, also very common in retable

to the left? It is possible that the use of design. : 7 bells here is a subsequent modification and —In the central portal, on the contrary,

that simple niches were in the original the drum is cut with arabesques, as a con- , plan. Observe the irregular filling in of the trast to the spiral part above, except in the niches from below, a clear indication of top story. The most flamboyant and calli-

nonprofessional modification. San Antonio graphic in their sweeping rhythm are the , suffered a similar fate as late as 1941, when great volutes, also of retable origin, along

the ugly octagonal tower was added, and the sides of the two smaller. portals. A the wall to the right was quite inexplicably tapestry of crisp full leaves spreads. over

finished off with a sloping top. the upper center of the facade. Strangely The great beauty of the sculpture in the out of key are the lateral sections with their | first story of the cathedral facade and in rectangular stones slightly concave and the :

A 131K |

the entire central section would be difficult obviously unfinished pedestals and volutes.

to exaggerate. The crispness of the carving The frieze in the first story is composed ,

, NORTHERN PERU of rectangular blocks carved with stylized the upper wall over the right portal with leaves in the side portals; the main portal its very poor stonework and diagonal top, has alternately flower pots and cherubs’ and also the gable of the upper center were heads accompanied by pomegranates. Hu- added in the year 1941. The appearance

, man figures are limited to the graceful re- was more satisfactory before these recent cumbent angels in the main spandrels who changes, as can be seen in an old photo-

, carry the keys of Paradise and censers, graph, which shows three open arches hung pairs of angels with the Sacred Heart over with bells in place of the tower.” The en-

the niches, and grotesque busts. tire wall surface was to have been carved The peculiar attic section of the side por- with stylized leaves and rosettes, as can tals contains a European motive which be- be deduced from the walls of the right

, came very popular with mestizo artists. portal. In the second story of the central They used it frequently in colonial textiles section the carving was started from the and in portals of the regions of Arequipa, lower rows but stopped when scarcely un-

Puno, La Paz, and Sucre, as well as in der way. On the left side the carvers be-retables and pulpits of Bolivia. That mo- gan at the top and completed two rows tive is the human bust, here male, which before the work was paralyzed forever. turns into stylized leaves at the waist. It Clearly the original scheme embraced two would be wearisome to describe every bit large towers, as was also the case for the

of ornament on this lavishly exuberant Belén. , ; facade, ornament which comprises classical The cathedral facade (Fig. 177), parmotives like the egg and dart, dentils, as ticularly the central section which is copied well as the guilloche pattern, stock-in-trade in all essentials, served as model for San

| cusps in unconventional usage, along with Antonio, which stands opposite it across the fantastic inventions of an artist who the broad Plaza Mayor. Evidence that was without doubt a decorative genius. The the cathedral inaugurated the Cajamarcan

, diamond points in the upper left wall, school lies in its greater fantasy and inven| on what presumably was to have been a_ tion, and the fact that San Antonio is a _ tower, play a much greater role in the simplification of its prototype. Moreover, church of El Belén. The facade of Caja- the craftsmanship of the carving of the marca Cathedral is one of the remarkable Franciscan church is far inferior. That is achievements of Latin American art, and not to say that the facade of San Antonio

- one likely to be underestimated in photo- is poor, but rather that it does not achieve , graphs, because of the sadly truncated state the same decorative brilliance, and the

of the upper story. carving is a drier repetition of its model. - The facade of San Antonio (Fig. 182) A comparison of the angels of the spanis the farthest from completion of the three drels of the two main portals brings out contemporary churches of Cajamarca. As the mature handling of form in a graceful previously stated the ugly conical tower, and accomplished contrapposto in the ca-

| M132 RK

, CAJAMARCA , thedral, whereas the angels of San Antonio beside the windows recall the same motive

although derivative are rustic, technically so widely disseminated in southern Peru

inexpert, and devoid of decorative design. and Bolivia. , ,

Amusing in this case are the stylized clouds The portal of the Capilla de la Dolorosa in the form of balls inscribed with volutes, (Fig. 184), the chapel which adjoins San recalling medieval conventions, such as the Antonio, is contemporary with and very

stylized ground in the reliefs of Santo similar to the works just discussed, al- , Domingo de Silos in Spain. Similar con- though variations in ornamental details are ventions do not necessarily indicate inter- numerous. The wall of the chapel is comrelations, but rather independent arrival posed of smooth masonry rather than at a similar conclusion at Cajamarca by a_ rusticated. The window rises higher, larger,

naive mind, for surely this is native In- and unadorned in a facade which is of

dian invention. _ a greater scale. The enveloping semicircular The spiral columns of San Antonio were lunette, which represents the barrel vault

copied from those of the cathedral, but within, provides a rather bold and dra- } rather dryly and superficially, without pro- matic frame against the swinging rococo | ducing the richness in contrasts of light curves of the gable above it. Small and and shade which are so notable in the ca-_ sparkling bell towers with the same eight-

thedral sculpture. The nude babies in the eenth-century gaiety top the buttresses.

vines of San Antonio. are an exceptional The composition as a unit is peculiar, per- , and playful touch, the most pleasing among haps not thus planned at the outset, but

the variations from the prototype. The nevertheless arresting in its contrasting statues of saints in the niches do not rise masses. The chapel was begun in 1722, and | above the commonplace and the provincial. if it followed the usual pattern of the day, Considerably more originality is displayed the work was in progress for ten to twenty in the flanking portals, although they too years. A report of 1760 demonstrates that

betray derivation from the cathedral, in it had been finished well before that year.”

this case from the lateral portal (1686) The facade of El Belén (Figs. 186, and the Sagrario entrance (Fig. 178) be- 187) holds the distinction of being the

side it. These doorways of San Antonio most complete of the three contemporary , might be said to carry on the same tra- churches of Cajamarca, and, moreover, an dition in a later and more florid stage of original creation both in design and in stylistic development. The corbels in place detail. Although obviously of the same

of pilasters rest upon an object which re- school and possibly by the same artist, El | sembles a melon and two stylized lilies. An Belén does not copy the cathedral, which

interesting treatment is the handling of the seems to be the first in the series, and upon ,

| AN 133K

window over the door with diagonal mold- which San Antonio so closely depends. El

ings which rise like a truncated pyramid. Belén lacks only its towers, one of them The long stylized leaves against the wall half finished and its mate never begun, so

, NORTHERN PERU that aesthetically the aspect of the whole of Islamic art and of all of its Spanish

| composition is by far the most pleasing of derivatives, such as the mudéjar and the the three monuments. We note here the original manifestations of Spanish plater-

age-old Hispanic scheme of contrasting a esque art. ,

. profusely decorated portal with a bare ex- Returning to the facade of El Belén, we panse of wall, in this case the bases of the discover the same two-and-one-half-story towers. The extraordinary bulk of these division as that of the cathedral but very towers takes on the appearance of a for- different in detail. Striking is the window tification. The bases combined with the of the second story which opens into the facade proper would have formed a bet- choir, quatrefoil in shape and excellently

| ter composition without the proposed placed within the well-proportioned design hexagonal belfries. Rows of projecting of the whole facade. The quatrefoil, which lozenges or diamonds decorate the frieze has an origin in both Gothic and Islamic of the towers, the entire surface of the art, is not uncommon in the Spanish colbelfry, and the pilasters and base of the onies. The sixteenth-century facade of the lower portal. They also invest the walls chapel at Santa Ménica in Mexico has this and vaults within the church. This motive type of window in the same position.” It

| became a signature of Cajamarcan art of is the natural companion of the trefoil the eighteenth century, appearing in the doorway, as in Santo Domingo at Cochacathedral facade, on the windows in San bamba. Considerable imagination is shown

| Antonio’s smaller portals, on the facade in the placing of the shell beneath the of the Women’s Hospital of El Belén, on window, an illogical procedure, but nonethe convent portal of the nuns of the Con- theless an inspired thought from the deco-

cebidas Descalzas, in domestic architecture, rative point of view. , and on the high altars of La Recoleta If any criticism of the design of the (nineteenth century) and San Antonio Belén is made, it would be that the niches (1863). The covering of an entire wall of the second story are small in relation surface with an ornamental motive, asem- to the wall above and that the omission ployed on the tower and within the church of columns or pilasters in the top story of El Belén, has ample precedent in Spain constitutes a rather abrupt change of key. in such famous buildings as the Casa de los ‘The cornice finishes with fine sweeping re-

Picos at Segovia, the palace of the Duque versed curves of the eighteenth century del Infantado in Guadalajara, the Casa de which, combined with other factors, and las Conchas in Salamanca, and the Palacio the dated inscription of 1744, lead to the de Javalquinto at Baeza.” It occurs even in conclusion that El Belén is the latest of Italy, for example the Casa dei Diamanti the three monuments, The sculptured orat Ferrara. The Moorish basis of this aes- mament rises to the same high standard as thetic is obvious, since surface decoration that of the cathedral, both in design and in repeated patterns is the very foundation technique. The spiral columns. are cut with

N 134K

, CAJAMARCA | | | , a vine-and-leaf pattern, completely unlike facade of the former Hospital of Women, the spiral of the cathedral and San An- now used as a colegio, whose portal is dated

tonio. The friezes and archivolt of the by inscription above it in 1763-1767." doorway have continuous ornament instead The work is a rustic interpretation of the of the carved blocks of the other two mon- same motives, so magnificently manipuuments. Very lovely is the handling of the lated on the facade of El Belén. The poor rinceaux, that is, the vines in rhythmic provincial artisan lacked any sense of decocurves which enclose stylized flowers and ative design, handling the patterns clumleaves. They comprise the principal orna- sily without understanding of formal re-

ment over the entire surface and are han- lations, and the carving itself is only dled with great clarity, emphasis, and con- slightly less inept. trast, which result in decorative articula- The church of El Belén (Fig. 188) contion superior to that of the upper reaches _ sists of a single nave without lateral chapof the cathedral, where many of the same _ els, except for the baptismal chapel to the

patterns are to be identified. Angels re- left beneath the choir upon entering by cline in the spandrels of the doorway, in the front portal. An extremely bizarre imthe same position as in the cathedral, here pression greets the visitor, and, although it supporting the three crowns of the Beth- somewhat diminishes after the initial surlemite shield in one hand and a ring of prise, it never fades. The first impression, clouds in the other. Not to be overlooked, that the stone walls are entirely covered | in passing, are the exquisite shields in iron with large projecting diamond points, upon the wooden doors just below. The proves on examination to be inexact, for stone statues in the niches of the facade do in reality the rows of geometric ornament

not rise above the commonplace, one more re limited to the window frames, to the , proof that the sculptors of colonial Peru pilasters, the frieze; the broad transverse were great decorators but inferior figure arches, and a wide band which runs lon- —

sculptors, a fact amply illustrated by the gitudinally in the center of the vault for abundant retables throughout the land. _— the full length of the church. This latter For sculptural magnificence the three feature is most unconventional, and only church facades of Cajamarca are unique increases the general feeling of heavyin Peru. Truly retables in stone adapted handedness which the interior admittedly to an architectural purpose, they display possesses. The sacristy portal in the right inventive imagination in design and noth- wall of the sanctuary is, on the contrary, ing short of genius in the decorative fan- very pleasing and in good scale, with its tasy of the relief sculpture which both single row of diamond points on frieze and _ technically and creatively will stand the pilasters, the large calligraphic shell over test beside the best which Spain itself or the doors, and the rococo busts at the top. | any other land has to offer. A few years The sacristy within has a well-constructed = __

| N 135K _

later than these monuments is the small stone barrel vault. - ae

NORTHERN PERU | ‘Strangest of all is the large stone dome of importance architecturally, and today, (Fig. 189) with reliefs of the four Evan- with their poor state of repair, they are gelists in the pendentives and eight half- without interest. A small belfry rises at length angels who appear to sustain the one corner adjacent to the church, and the dome of heaven above them. These angels dome cuts a compact, sturdy silhouette have naked human torsos which turn into against the sky. The men’s hospital, of long stylized leaves at the waist. As pre- eighteenth-century date, and still the only viously stated, their origin is European, hospital in the city, stands upon the first but the compositional arrangement of them patio. It is a stone structure in the form as well as the magnification of their size of a cruciform church with barrel vaults. and the erect frontality of their posture Bays are separated by transverse arches, and are highly original and distinctly the crea- a large stone dome tops the crossing. Light tion of a native mestizo craftsman. Other, comes in from a clerestory, and in every less spectacular appearances of the same _ respect the hospital looks like a church, theme are on the facades of the cathedral even with altar for mass, and as unfitted and the Women’s Hospital. I know of no for the sick as can be imagined, according dome similar to this work, for that (Fig. to modern ideas of hospitalization. Unlike 214) at Chihuata (Arequipa) has full- the church proper, the walls are plain and length angels which fit into a tapestrylike undecorated. The hospital continues, of pattern. A garish coat of modern paint course, the Spanish medieval tradition, as

with the reliefs in red and green against seen in the Hospital de Santa Cruz at

a blue background produces a crude im- Toledo. pression at Cajamarca which was surely no Another interior with abundant stone part of the original intention. In the up- sculpture in relief, but different from El per reaches of the dome rows of peculiar Belén, is that of the Capilla de la Dolorosa volutes and leaves alternate with bands (Fig. 185) which adjoins the church of of flowers interspersed with cherubs’ heads. San Antonio. The facade of the chapel has Rather quaint are the large flowers, re- previously been discussed. The interior con-

calling pond lilies, which decorate the sists of five bays and nearly equals the

frieze below the dome. church of El Belén in size. There are no The interior of El Belén is an interesting lateral chapels. The elevated choir occuexperiment but one not often repeated. An pies its usual place above the main entrance, allover pattern can produce a sumptuously and in the spandrels on the front wall are rich effect, and one of the highest quality Gabriel and Mary in the mystery of the aesthetically, as is proven by the interior Annunciation. The barrel vault, like that of the Compafiia in Quito, one of the of El Belén, has a broad longitudinal band

| world’s great churches. Like success was in the center, in this case carved with

not achieved here at Cajamarca. stylized leaves. The vault over the sanc-

| | A 136 R

The two patios of El Belén were never tuary is entirely worked in stone relief giv-

CAJAMARCA | ing an effect similar to embroidery. The where decorative genius of the highest window frames are decorated with the order is revealed. Nor can it compare techsame stylized leaves as well as various un- nically with the facades of the cathedral - conventional moldings, one of which looks and El Belén of Cajamarca itself, where

strangely like an Islamic blind arcade. artists of extraordinary endowment were ,

Quite without parallel is the broad frieze engaged. | , containing heads of Franciscan saints, both Two other monuments, La Recoleta and male and female, while in the sanctuary the Church of the Immaculate Conception, seven busts of kings at each side replace belong to a later period and to a stylistic the saints, the busts separated, amusingly phase unrelated to the works just discussed. enough, by large flower pots. All of the The former Franciscan monastery of the figured reliefs have been crudely painted Recoleta, which now houses the Colegio

in recent years, and the poor quality of Nacional, was founded in 1650, and the the sculpture has not been improved first cloister is dated 1668-1678 by an in-

thereby. , | scription over the principal entrance: EmAt the sides of the sanctuary are two peg¢dse este convento en 14 de julio de 1668

large scenes in stone relief, the Last Supper yy se acaboé el ano de 1678. It is a small at the left and the Washing of the Feet cloister (Fig. 191) of single story with of Christ at the right. The sculpture is Doric half columns attached to the piers crudely provincial both in design and in on the court side. The vaults of the galtechnique. Most peculiar of all is the plac- _leries rest on corbels against the wall. The ing of figured reliefs above the clerestory second and larger cloister, likewise of single windows in the following manner: on the story and groin vaulted, is presumably of right wall, the Circumcision, Christ among eighteenth-century facture, because of the the Doctors, Ecce Homo, Christ with An- rectangles and diamond points which deco-

gels Holding Instruments of the Passion; rate the walls and piers of the court. The on the left wall, the Nativity, the Flight style of this cloister is so unlike that of the

into Egypt, Ecce Homo, Christ with An- small cloister of 1668-1678 that it leads to | gels Holding Instruments of the Passion. the conclusion that the later work was The poor quality of the figure sculpture added in the mid-eighteenth century, a pe- | does not interfere with the effectiveness riod in which the use of surface decoration |

of the chapel as a whole. | was characteristic of Cajamarca. The mateThe structure is well planned and pro- rials of both structures are brick and stucco.

portioned, and has additional interest for Cajamarca has no other cloisters of impor- | those interested in curiosities of religious tance, those of the large monastery of San

iconography. This chapel is delightfully Antonio being humble single-storied build- , naive and entertaining, yet it cannot take ings of brick and stucco with wooden posts mo rank with the stone-carved interiors of for columns, originating during the reha-

NM B74 |

Santiago of Pomata and San Pedro of Juli, bilitation of 1868-1870.” So

NORTHERN PERU , , _ The church of the Recoleta is a single- ter over reeds. The convent portal is a | naved structure of no great size, as usual in picturesque and somewhat rustic revision the houses of the Franciscan novitiates. of Cajamarcan domestic architecture with

— Most impressive of all is the great stone large diamond points covering the pilasters

, dome at the crossing, which appears espe- and frieze. — cially monumental above the mass of the In this review of the ecclesiastical archichurch, as seen from the large cloister. The tecture of Cajamarca I have attempted to

| interior of the church, its barrel vaults, point out some of the relations of the | molded cornice, and raised choir look me- churches of Cajamarca to those of other re-

| chanical and dull asa result of the resurfac- gions of Peru and to emphasize the great ing with cement in 1937. The facade (Fig. originality and extraordinarily high quality 190), however, entirely of gray stone, and of the cathedral, El Belén, and San Antonio. topped by two open bell towers, is a spirited So far as anything is ever original, the fa-

, composition. The eighteenth-century verti- cades of the three churches are that. They cality of the towers and the gaiety sug- are offshoots, to be sure, of the Hispanic gested by the whirling volutes are delight- family tree, and their distant antecedents ful. The small tabernacle over the portal are to be found in the great retable facades has been added in recent times. In spite of of San Gregorio and San Pablo of Valladothe dedication of the church by Bishop lid in the epoch of the Catholic Kings; or Mimbela in 1736, recorded in a picture later in the sixteenth century in the facade which hangs in the choir, I believe that the of San Esteban in Salamanca and the tran-

| facade was erected thirty to forty years sept portals of the cathedral in the same later, contemporary with the towers of the city. Merced in Trujillo which were rebuilt after © Many of the Spanish colonies developed

the earthquake of 1759. _ the retable facade in the seventeenth and The nuns of the Concebidas Descalzas eighteenth centuries to an extent far exdel Velo Negro came to Cajamarca in 1747, ceeding that of the mother country. Particand their church was consecrated in 1806.” ularly notable are churches of this type in

The single-naved edifice has thin Doric Mexico, at Guanajuato, Taxco, Zacatecas, pilasters which rise to the full height of the Mexico City, San Luis Potosi, etc.** Many

walls both within and without. It is a cold similarities are to be explained by their academic design of early Neoclassic taste. common Iberian sources and the working The large polygonal tower, unfinished, of indigenous influences in similar fashion seems:to be a late member of the series of both in North and South America. The _ such towers in northern Peru, like that of latter might well account for a decorative San Pedro at Lambayeque and the towers motive such as the long stylized leaf, someof Santa Lucia at Ferrefafe (Fig. 176). what resembling a fern, which is extremely The roof is now covered with galvanized common in southern Peru and Bolivia,

| iron, and the ceiling within is made-of plas- turns up occasionally in northern Peru as

A138 A

CAJAMARCA a on the lateral portals of San Antonio in tin and La Merced in Lima in their prime. Cajamarca, and is also known elsewhere, as, ‘There would be no justification for pre- — for example, in Mexico on the facade of the suming, however, that limeno sculptors

cathedral of Aguascalientes.” worked at Cajamarca, since the composiIn the viceroyalty of Peru itself the tion and the decorative motives used in mestizo facades of Arequipa, Puno, La Paz, Lima have limeno ramifications and are un-

and Potosi form a separate school, nota- like those of Cajamarca. Conversely, some ble for their markedly indigenous character mestizo traits do give an individual characboth in design and technique. As already ter to the local school, most notably in the indicated, the triad of Cajamarca has no interior of the Capilla de la Dolorosa and

close parallel save the facades of San Agus- the dome of El Belén. _ |

A 139 A ,

Vill :

SOUTHERN PERU: THE MESTIZO STYLE—I AREQUIPA

REQUIPA, the second largest city of 1844, had totally destroyed the magnificent

Apes ranks first as a land of blue skies seventeenth-century cathedral, and hence

| , and radiant sun. Situated at an elevation of the city is in large part a product of the — eight thousand feet, it lies at the foot of second half of the nineteenth century. The snowcapped mountain ranges among which | plaza belongs to that period,* the altars and

| the great conical peak of Mount Misti rises furnishings of the churches, and the majorsheer and majestic. Edifices of white stone ity of the houses. Yet domestic architecture built in solid rectangular mass, houses of has preserved the white stone construction single story, ecclesiastic and domestic por- of single story, the patio and the grilled tals lavishly carved in exotic mestizo style windows of colonial days, with the result give to Arequipa’s architecture its own dis- that Arequipa still maintains its individual-

tinctive character. The city of Arequipa, ity. There is no disguising the fact, howfounded in 1540, has preserved only a faint ever, that the story of arequipeno architec-

shadow of its heritage. Here even more ture is the story of what once existed more

, than in Lima tragedy has stalked in the than of monuments extant today. form of earthquake after earthquake which Not a vestige of the sixteenth century have reduced the city to ashes time and remains. Toribio de Alcaraz built the poragain. The worst of these were in 1582, tal of the principal church on the plaza 1600, 1687, 1715, 1784, and 1868. On the (1544) before migrating to Potosi in the last occasion the local newspaper, La Bolsa, wake of the discovery of silver mines there.

under date of August 19, 1868, mourned I have shown elsewhere that this man who the fact that “ten minutes were sufficient is traceable in Sucre and Potosi from 1549 to bring to the ground the work of three until 1573 could not have been the same

, centuries, churches and buildings which person who also practiced architecture in resisted the terrible earthquake of May 13, Mexico.” Gaspar Baez, resident of Lima, 1784, which was, without doubt, in no way made plans for the Franciscan church comparable with that which occurred on (1569) and for the church and colegio of

the afternoon of August 13, 1868... the Jesuits (1573). These and other ; beautiful Arequipa exists no more!” meager notices tell us little about the build-

A 140 RK _ |

An earlier catastrophe, the great fire of ings themselves.

AREQUIPA | The chief ecclesiastical monument of the and the work presumably came to an end

seventeenth century was the huge cathe- with the facade which has the date 1698 dral, a basilican structure of stone covered inscribed upon it. — , with Gothic vaults of brick. A well-known This facade (Figs. 192, 193) is the city’s architect of Lima, Andrés de Espinoza, pre- finest work in the mestizo style of archi-

pared the project and began the work in tectural decoration. The whole problem of , 1621, but death overtook him seven years this style will be discussed later along with

later. It was carried on by the architect the facade of San Agustin, the portals of , Moscoso in 1634. After further interrup- Santo Domingo and Santa Rosa, and the tions, the church came to completion under churches of nearby pueblos, Caima, Yana-

Juan de Aldana (1643-1656), a Spanish huara, and Paucarpata. The facade of the _ architect, who moved from Lima toa long Compafia is basically the type of twocareer in Arequipa.* The present cathedral storied structure so common in European (1844-1847), a neo-Renaissance edifice, churches of the sixteenth and seventeenth replaces its colonial predecessor, destroyed centuries. From Rome, the place of origin,

in the fire of 1844. it spread throughout the Christian world. | The one church which has survived in- In Arequipa, however, the native element is tact from the repeated disasters to which so strong that it all but submerges the Eu-

Arequipa has been subjected is La Com- ropean frame in a carpet of exotic mestizo , pafiia. Higher tribute to its builders could) ornamentation. The trefoil pediment is not be imagined. Only its tower, shaken to Hispanic but strikingly original in its ap- | the ground on various occasions, is modern _ plication here. The columns have great col-

(1919). The first church, the project for lars of zigzags in the lower story and a which Gaspar Baez prepared in 1573, col- more modest spiral in the second story, in

lapsed in the earthquake of 1584. The both cases ringed above and below by a | Jesuit fathers did not actually become es- crown of leaves. Between the columns at tablished in Arequipa until 1578, after five the lower left a shield bears the words El

years of negotiation. Ano and on the right side of the door, De _Another church was begun in 1595 un- 1698. In these flat spaces and in the strips | der the direction of a Jesuit, Padre Diego of ornament at the sides of the portal, fanFelipe. The inception of the present struc- tasy is given free rein in a flat tapestry ture, however, seems to date from approxi- of stylized ornament: vines and bunches mately 1650. By contract of 1654,a builder of grapes, pomegranate, ccantu flower, named Simon de Barrientos agreed to con- _heraldically disposed birds, a cherub whose _ struct the lateral portal of stone, two vaults body consists of swirling leaves, and long

in the nave, two chapels, the enclosure volutes. The frieze carries a meandering around the church, and a stairway leading vine with geometric rosettes, flowered an-

from the ante-sacristy to the roof. The gels, and the letters SD—SF—SI—MN vaults were not entirely finished until 1690, (Sanctus Deus, Sanctus Fortis, Sanctus Im- ,

AS 141 KR |

SOUTHERN PERU | mortalis, Miserere Nobis). These words, archaic flavor turns the horse’s mane into taken from the Good Friday mass, appear long serpentine coils and the mandorla into | in full on the facade of the church at Asillo a shell-like niche. The horse’s body stands. (Fig. 244) and upon two houses in Are- in profile and the head in full face, thus | quipa, formerly owned by the Jesuits.° I approximating the Egyptian convention. have been unable to discover any explana- The primitive mind of the sculptor contion for their peculiar association with ceived objects in a simple two-dimensional

Jesuit buildings. aspect. Hence he placed St. James in a In the upper center the large flowers, frontal position, sidesaddle upon his mount.

square and rectangular, stand forth promi- Below the relief, two mermaids with

, nently, along with the crowned double- angels’ wings (!) naively recline like her- _ headed eagle of the Hapsburgs. Upon the aldically opposed guards. Thus the mer_ frieze are carved the monograms of Christ, maids of Lake Titicaca who lured the unMary, and Joseph. The puppet-like St. wary, like their Greek predecessors, are Michael in the niche of the pediment is Christianized and transformed into angels. flanked by angels and filling ornament as The lion of St. Mark and the ox of St. Luke abstract in their natural primitivism asany with iconographical peculiarity occupy the of their Merovingian, Coptic, or Mozarabic frieze between clusters of grapes and papredecessors. At the extreme sides the clas- paya. The half-disk pattern, also met in sical shell and volute are mingled with gro- Cuzco and Lima, turns up here on the pi-

tesque Indian masks, profile heads like gi- lasters set between the columns. |

, gantic caricatures, and an Indian head with In floor plan (Fig. 16) the Compafia high feathered crown. The grotesque faces has one nave, two side aisles, single projectout of whose mouths flow long serpentine ing sanctuary, and raised choir. Stone ma-

- objects are throwbacks to Nazca pottery sonry is maintained throughout including

7 and textiles. If any art or race was ever the dome, the barrel vaults, and the three crossbred, if ever there was a mixture of small domes in each aisle (Fig. 195). Ionic

European and native Indian, the monu- half columns carry the high entablature ments of Arequipa and Puno are the proof which serves as a large cornice in the nave,

thereof. large enough to afford a balustraded corThe side portal (Fig. 194) is much ear- ridor at the springing of the vaults. The

, lier and less fantastic, having been com- interior is painted white with red balus- _ , missioned in 1654 of the same Barrientos trade atop the cornice, red pendentives, and who worked upon the vaults. In the tym-_ gilded dentils. It has a refreshing well-kept _ panum a relief of Santiago Matamoros, to appearance. In La Compaifiia three retables, whom the church is dedicated, shows the anumber of colonial pictures in their gilded

, saint brandishing his sword to slay the tur- frames, and a fine pulpit of the late seven- _ baned Moors lying crushed beneath his teenth century help to recall what Are-

charger’s hoofs. The stylization with good quipa once was. ,

A 142K

| | AREQUIPA. | One of the finest parts of the building is cupolas was first introduced to Peru in the — the sacristy, square in shape and covered by Jesuit church (1624) at Lima. The Fran- , a huge stone dome which comes down very ciscans and Mercedarians borrowed it from

low on pendentives, Interesting early mu- them, using barrel vaults in the nave inral paintings of purely decorative nature stead of the Gothic vaults, originally in San representing flowers, apples, bananas, wa- Pedro. Thence the plan passed to Arequipa termelons, and nude putti decorate the sur- and Trujillo. The Compafia of Arequipa

face of the dome. | , _ was built largely in the second half of the Another fine sacristy, though smaller, is seventeenth century (circa 1650-1698), _ that of San Agustin (Fig. 213), the only whereas the church at Lima was consepart of the interior not destroyed in 1868. crated in 1638.

It is an octagonal chamber, 7.60 meters in The Merced in Arequipa was rebuilt in _ , diameter, likewise domed. Ionic pilasters 1657 on the same scheme as the Compajiia,

upon the walls end abruptly on corbels under the direction of Juan de Aldana.’ halfway to the floor. The decoration of the Here again an-architect, originally from

dome is carved in the stone with great skill. Lima, took over the prevailing architectu- a Highly stylized leaves, rosettes, ccantus, ral ideas of the capital. Stone is used stars, and volutes spread over the surface throughout, however, as usual in Arequipa,

which is subdivided by ribs, themselves both in the barrel vault of the nave and , covered with the scale motive. This dome the cupolas over the aisles. The heavy, is a masterpiece of mestizo art, character- rather ungainly dimensions were doubtless : ized by the highly geometric quality of chosen with the hope that thick walls would

design which is the very essence of the style. resist earthquakes. Padre Barriga is the au- , _ The basilican plan with single sanctuary thority for the information that the sanctu-

like that of the Compafiia was adopted by ary was reérected after the earthquake of | the Mercedarians, Dominicans, and Fran- 1687. The construction.of the apse is pecul-

ciscans (Fig. 15), all of whose churches iar, the first bay being barrel vaulted and

maintain their ground plans of the second the second topped by a large dome. The | , half of the seventeenth century, but have only near parallel is found in the nunneries been repeatedly restored. Their similarity of Cuzco, where a dome is placed over the to San Pedro, San Francisco (Figs. 9, 10), sanctuary instead of the crossing.

and La Merced in Lima is surely no acci-. In 1868 some of the Merced vaults , dent. Architects from Lima like Andrés de collapsed,® apparently those in the center

Espinoza and Juan de Aldana transferred rather than the domes over the aisles. With | their activity to Arequipa, and there is no the rebuilding the sober Doric piers and reason to doubt that European ideas ema- ‘simple cornice were touched up with inconnated from the capital. As already pointed gruous frills: a Gothic corbel: table under

out in Chapter IV, I believe the basilican the cornice and Renaissance leaves with plan in which the aisles are covered by cherubs’ heads on the frieze!

| AN 143K

| SOUTHERN PERU , _ The exterior of the Merced is disappoint- was badly damaged, however, in-the earth- _

ing, the facade having been modernized.” quakesof 1784 and 1868.9 The former convent door, decorated with The design of the nave betrays the rerosettes and vines, is now blocked up. The modeling after 1784 in the treatment of best view of the flat roofs and terraced the dentelated cornice. Here a projecting mass, so peculiar to Arequipa, can be seen corbel is used as a decorative accent in the from the garden side. Here too stands the center of each bay. This device, so common

: , fine lateral portal, a simple round-arched in Lima in the eighteenth century, does not

, entrance crowned by a tall sculptured occur elsewhere in Arequipa. The vaulting group of the Madonna of Mercy. The Ma- throughout appears to date from the recon-

— donna is placed within a large shell niche struction of 1873, recorded by an inscrip, supported on spiral columns, details indica- tion upon the triumphal arch.” The barrel tive of a date in the late seventeenth or vaults in the nave and transept, the domical

early eighteenth century. vaults in the aisles and lantern, which are The single-storied cloister of square piers, lighted by an oculus.in the center of each, above which is a modern second story, lacks are heavy and uninteresting. The extent of

distinction, but the old Sala Capitular, now the degeneration of architecture in the used as a storehouse, is a superb relic of the nineteenth century is much in evidence. past. It is composed of two large bays, the Then they rebuilt the sanctuary with an

| first carrying a simple quadripartite Gothic ugly ribbed semidome and wall pilasters. vault and the second a fine late-Gothic Tocap the climax, pointed neo-Gothic winvault with clover design in its ribs. Here dows were added in the clerestory and leaf stands the only survivor in Arequipa of the patterns in the spandrels of the nave.

, Gothic style of the seventeenth century. Its Juan de Aldana originally designed the quality is excellent, and the whole room large free-standing polygonal tower in seems strangely like a page torn loose from 1649. Born in Spain, he had built three

medieval Spain. portals in the church of Nuestra Sefiora del Two original stone inscriptions establish Prado at Lima in 1638. Moving to Arethe date of the ground plan and walls of quipa, he became the leading architect of

Santo Domingo. In the vault under the the city in the mid-century. He brought choir an inscription says Avo 1677, and a_ the new cathedral to its conclusion (1643—plaque on one of the piers records the con- 1656), and had charge of the rebuilding of

secration of the church in 1680. The plan La Merced (1657).” Later in the first half falls into the same category as those of La of the eighteenth century, Aldana’s tower Compafiia and La Merced, also originating of Santo Domingo influenced those of San in the third quarter of the century. The ‘Xavier at Nazca. The Dominican tower, piers (2.32 meters thick) are gigantic with badly ruined in 1784 and 1868, is now a the intent of resisting earthquakes. They as mediocre reconstruction of 1891." well as the choir remain intact. The church = The main facade of Santo Domingo is a MN 144 RK

AREQUIPA — chaste and majestic composition of the by Diego de Mendoza in 1664 as having a seventeenth century, built in two stories single vaulted nave and a domed sanctuwith Doric columns and deeply projecting ary.’* Harth-terré believes that the church entablatures. Its style would normally sug- preserved today still retains the plan pregest a period thirty years earlier than 1677— pared by Gaspar Baez in 1569." It seems 1680. Yet chronological consistency is clear, however, that Mendoza in 1664 was never to be relied upon in colonial art. This describing Baez’s structure of 1569. Hence facade has no analogue in Arequipa today. the rebuilding and enlargement of the ediThe only hint of the local mestizo style is fice by the addition of aisles must be placed to be found in the semi-abstract ornament later in the seventeenth century, possibly in the spandrels of the archway and upon after the earthquake of 1687. The walls of

the window above. | the sixteenth-century edifice may be incorThe earliest dated example of mestizo porated in the huge supports and piers of carving in its full development is the deco- the nave.*” Heavy banded barrel vaults of ration on the face of the choir (1677) stone follow the local tradition throughout. within the church.” It consists of long In the aisles the vaults are exceptional in _ leaves and rosettes, partly gilded, and the that they are placed transversely. The purescutcheons of the Dominicans and Fran- pose may have been to provide buttressing ciscans. The lateral exterior portal (Fig. for the nave. That the scheme was structur-

201) of Santo Domingo has similar orna- ally successful is demonstrated by the fact | ment, and it would normally be assigned that they apparently have survived the the same date. On the other hand, the style earthquakes since their construction at the is so similar to that of Paucarpata (Fig. end of the seventeenth century. The cross202), and the portals (Figs. 204, 206-208) ing and the chapels in the transept are of Caima (1719-1730) and Yanahuara domed. The one at the right (Fig. 199) is (1750), that the student must pause to re- a most surprising and interesting gored or | flect. The model established at Santo Do- melon dome. Here again the art of Islamic mingo in 1677-1680 was apparently fol- and medieval Spain is projected into the

lowed for seventy-five years. Otherwise, it New World. -

would be necessary to assume that the The best part of San Francisco is the fine Dominican portal also is later. More docu- stone choir raised over the entrance. The

ments will help to solve these problems, face is skillfully carved with reliefs in mes- | which will be studied in greater detail later ¢izo style: vines and rosettes, and figures of

in the present chapter. _ the Madonna of the Immaculate Concep- | _ Also very much refashioned is San Fran- tion, St. Francis, and St. Dominic. They , cisco, although it suffered less in the earth- are superior to the similar decorations on

quakes than Santo Domingo. The founda- the choirs of Santo Domingo and Santa tion of the monastic order in Arequipa took Teresa. In date they apparently lie just beplace in 1552, and the church is mentioned tween the two, the former dated 1677 and

. AN 145K

SOUTHERN PERU the latter about 1710. Extremely interest- maintain the local methods of building, ing too is the frieze of fruit and flowers be- however. The portal brings to an end the neath the choir. The treatment of the walls Arequipa series of mestizo sculptures. The

, in this section is almost unique in the way strips of vines and rosettes upon the but- | the surfaces are corrugated vertically and tresses at the sides and the tympanum have divided into panels by the Franciscan cord. a quaintly archaic tinge. In the latter, a The most drastic changes in San Fran- medallion encloses the kneeling figures of cisco were introduced in the nineteenth St. Francis and St. Clare who adore the century. Then colossal Corinthian columns, Host in a large monstrance placed between

| exactly like those of the high altar, were them. The plain twisted columns which set against the piers of the nave. The effect border the doorway are unorthodox in this _ is grotesquely incongruous. New pieces of last lingering note of a great period. ornament touch up the section beneath the All of the cloisters of Arequipa are single small dentelated cornice of an earlier day. storied with arches on square piers. Only The date, 1871, on the exterior of the tower one is exceptionally distinguished and that | gives the clue to the period of this refur- is the lavish Jesuit cloister (Figs. 196,197), |

bishing. for many years left to ruin and recently

- The facade and tower are surprisingly restored as an office building. A small patio nonacademic for that time. The first story with the date 1738 inscribed over the archis paneled and embellished with rococo-like way precedes the main court which is abarabesques. In the upper part, there hang normally small for a monastery, four and ~

suspended from mask heads great sprays five arches to a side. Each pier (.80 m. of roses which are delicately naturalistic x .80 m.) is carved in identical style on like wax flowers in a Victorian glass case. each of the four faces: cherub’s head, Strangely enough the facade is pleasing and grapes, papaya, shell, rosettes, ccantus, highly original. The old entrance to the and enfolding vines. On the keystone of monastery, now blocked up at the right of each arch is a rosette topped by three large the church, has one noteworthy feature: a Indian feathers like those of the Puno rewindow in the shape of an Islamic poly- gion. The spandrels have the monograms of

lobed arch. Christ, Joseph, and Mary, so commonly disAttached to the left transept of San played on Jesuit buildings. Figure sculpture Francisco stands the smaller church of the is limited to small figures of St. Ignatius Tercera Orden, built in 1775-1777. It and St. Francis Xavier in the spandrels on —

fell in 1784, and was promptly reérected.** the entrance side. | , The church, a perfect Latin cross with a The surface-covering richness of the fine dome over the crossing, incorporates Jesuit cloister has the spirit of Oriental

| the academic correctness of the approach- luxuriance, but to suggest the influence

A 146 R

ing Neoclassicism. The grayish stone, the of the Far East, as has so frequently been flat mass, and the prominent buttresses still done, seems to me preposterous. Not a

_ AREQUIPA | single motive is Oriental, nor is there any three, Santa Catalina, Santa Teresa, and : technical aspect which might be so inter- Santa Rosa, all of which maintain the trapreted. The exotic decorative repertory and dition of such churches in their single naves the technique are autochthonous in every without chapels. Santa Teresa alone has an respect. An Italian painter, Sartorio, set the ample lower choir to the right of the sanc-

fashion for this hypothesis of Orientalism tuary. In the others both upper and lower in the New World. Anttnez de Mayolo choir stand at the end opposite the sanctuspoke very sensibly and convincingly in ary. All are barrel vaulted in stone and all refutation of these theories, and recently have lost their gilded retables, replaced by Martha de Castro and others have added neo-Renaissance altars in the second half of their voices with the same rational judg- the nineteenth century. Santa Catalina, the -

ment.” first convent of nuns in the city, was The second cloister of La Compafiia, founded by authorization of Francisco de

now completely ruined, was built in one Toledo in 1576. Rebuilt by Archbishop Al- |

story of plain rectangular piers supporting moguera after its ruin in 1662, it under- , round arches. All of the others in the city went restoration, by another archbishop, are alike in type: La Recoleta,” Santa Te- Juan Bravo del Rivero (1743-1752), to resa, San Agustin (now the University), which the date 1758 in the choir grille La Merced, Santo Domingo, and San Fran- must refer. It appears to have been refur-— cisco. Three patios in the latter monastery bished in its present condition when consehave modern upper stories, to their great crated in 1874, an event recorded by a picarchitectural loss. They and the cloister ture on the wall.” Disappointing as the of Santo Domingo (Fig. 198) are groin interiors of these churches are with their vaulted in fine ashlar. Indeed, the excellent modern appointments, the exterior of Santa

dressing of the stone is one of the best Catalina (Fig. 200) has, in its fortress-like | _ qualities of the school of Arequipa. Next massiveness, its flat roofs, powerful recto the main cloister of the Compafia, the tangular buttresses, and sturdy dome over

Dominican (circa 1677-1680) is the most the sanctuary, no equal in the whole school | important in the city. Its massive square of Arequipa. Moreover, the yellow walls Oo piers are austere and imposing, and the with white buttresses and white dome are decoration is limited to a band of stylized enchantingly picturesque against the cloudleaves and volutes on the frieze. A low _ less blue skies of Arequipa. The modest and

modern wall between the piers and the dignified tower has the distinction of be- | _ modern balustrade at the roof level are un- ing the only colonial tower in the city, : fortunate. Yet the patio is spacious and for it alone withstood the earthquake of ,

beautifully overgrown with palm trees, and 1868.” Oe | it affords a splendid side view of the The convent of Santa Teresa of rather . church, | late foundation (1700) opened in 1710,” The colonial nunneries of Arequipa are and although it has never suffered much

A 147 A

SOUTHERN PERU damage from the forces of nature, it has columns of the nave and the barrel vault lost virtually all of its colonial aspect. That of stone seem to have been rebuilt on the is because the neo-Renaissance facade, the original scheme, however. The church totower, and retables are ‘“modernizations” day consists of only four bays instead of

of the later nineteenth century. Judging the seven mentioned by Travada y Cor| from photographs, generously supplied by doba in 1752, unless his method of cal-_ the mother superior, the interior of the culation was different. Of especial interest convent in clausura has been less reno- is the treatment of windows, some let in at vated, since numerous colonial paintings the sides by lunettes, and others as oculi adorn the lower choir, refectory, library, set in the top of the vault. On the whole, and inner chapels. Within the church, the windows are very small in the churches of

fine stone barrel vault and the face of the Arequipa and this region because of the upper choir are intact. The latter, carved sun, brilliant for ten months of the year.

, with leaves, four-petaled flowers, the Oculus windows in the center of the vaults ccantu, and the Carmelite shield, is reminis- are especially characteristic of the school,

cent of the Dominican and Franciscan occurring in the aisles of La Merced, Santo choirs. The frieze upon the wall of the Domingo, and San Francisco, and in the nave was much redone in the past cen- naves of Santa Rosa, Yanahuara, Caima

| tury, neo-Renaissance cherubs’ heads and (Fig. 211), Paucarpata, and Characato.

leaves having been added. a | Sculptured portals in mestizo style are , ~ Santa Rosa held the distinction of being the most distinctive contribution of Arethe newest of the nunneries. (1744-1747) quipa to colonial art. The beginnings are when the catastrophe of 1868 came.” It found in the lateral portal of La Compafia must have been the poorest in construction, (Fig. 194), the work of Barrientos in the for it collapsed to the ground, and had to year 1654. Stylization of a natural primibe rebuilt. A very fine side portal with- tive sort already marks the design of the stood the shock. Inscriptions say that it tympanum and the grotesque heads upon | was erected in 1745 and reérected in 1871, the pedestals beside it. The lower section,

| but surely the sculpture was unharmed. however, is essentially European and deThe reliefs are replete with the full mes- void of specifically local themes or tech-

tizo repertory of flower vases, grapes, nique. a , papaya, nude putti, and puma heads. Ap- ‘The side entrance of Santo Domingo propriately, a large geometric rose plays a (Fig. 201) occupies the first position prominent part in the decoration here and chronologically among the numerous mes-

not in other buildings. _ a tizo monuments of the region. It seems to | Within the church the rows of Corin- belong to the church of 1677-1680, in thian columns in the sanctuary imitate the view of the appearance of the same style neo-Renaissance cathedral, and the retables of carving upon the face of the choir. The belong to the same style. The Doric half composition manifests great originality,

| | MN 148 & |

_ AREQUIPA | not only in ornament but also in the way churches except that the toy pumas at the the pilasters are raised in a series of three bottom occur only in the village church. entablature blocks. Thus is established a In both instances put#i recline cross-legged , powerful frame surmounted by a curving in the spandrels, each blowing a horn and

tympanum at the top of which are two holding a long-stemmed flower. | volutes. St. Paul stands in the upper cen- § These artists were naive and unself- | ter in an elliptical mandorla wreathed with consciously primitive. At the same time | vines and bunches of grapes. Heavy vines they had a-natural sense of humor which

meander down the broad border at the no one who studies their work can miss. sides of the portal. Here the grotesque Their sense of design was most acute, and masks in profile with stems growing from. they were above all great masters of deco-

their mouths are the most striking instances _ ration. 7 ,

of the survival of pre-Columbian themes. | The main facade of La Compajiia , Highly stylized versions of Indian corn and (1698), already discussed (Figs. 192, 193),

the native lily or ccantu flower sacred to is the most important monument of the the Indians are included within an Euro- mestizo style in Arequipa. By that time pean concept. Nude pztti, as in European the school had reached its apex. It was to Renaissance ornament, clamber among the continue to flourish without any major

foliage. Other clothed putti blowing horns variation for another sixty years. _ | recline cross-legged in the spandrels. The Next to that of La Compafiia, the facade | square flowers and rosettes upon the archi- of San Agustin is the most lavish in the

volts and supporting pilasters are less city. The columns and sculpture are exceptional. They find a place in the painted white against a green-gray backornamental schemes of provincial artists ground. The general impression is very _ almost everywhere in Latin America. colorful and rich in the way the carving The lateral portal of the church at stands out like lace over the surface. The Paucarpata (Fig. 202), just a short dis- compositional basis is European with its tance from Arequipa, is so similar to that two-storied division and the symmetrical | of Santo Domingo that they seem to be balance of doorway and niches. In these the work of the same master. The chief niches the shell tympanum adds a touch —

difference between the two is that the of decorative elegance. The columns of the | architect used half columns at Paucarpata first story have no exact parallel. The | instead of the pilasters in tiers. The tym- spiral band of the ornament dotted with pana with their broken contours, central balls is set on the lower section between — | volutes, and sculptured medallions leave two crowns of leaves. In the second story, no doubt of their close relationship. Christ half-length angels occupy the correspond-

bearing the Cross occupies the place of ing space in a fashion similar to those on honor at Paucarpata. The broad bands of the church at Caima (Fig. 208). As usual | ornament are nearly identical in the two the sides of the portal display broad bands

A149 A

SOUTHERN PERU : of curving vines and leaves. The repertory tts. Its date of 1738 is carved in stone of ornament which spreads out over the within the patio. The cloister of the Jesuits facade is familiar: flower vases on the pi- originated in exactly the same year, as the

: lasters, the double-headed eagle of the inscription over the entrance shows. Hapsburgs in the upper story as in the Hence sufficient inscribed works survive Compafiia, long-stemmed vines, heavy to indicate that the mestizo style flourished leaves, rosettes, and cartouches. The date in Arequipa from at least 1677, the date of of the Augustinian facade has not been the Dominican choir, to 1750, the year of established by documents. Judging by the the Yanahuara facade. The side entrance school as a whole, I should place it in of Santa Rosa (1745), although pleasing, — the first half of the eighteenth century.” does not measure up to the best standards. The shell niches and half-length angels are The last lingerings of an age, already prominent on the facades (Figs. 204, 207) | slightly anachronistic, best describe the fine

of Caima and Yanahuara (1750). The lateral portal of the Third Order of the style of San Agustin is nearer to these mon- Franciscans (1775). Even as late as 1794,

uments than to the Compafia. the traditional local composition stead-Mestizo monuments of the eighteenth fastly persisted in the doorway of the Casa

, century abound in Arequipa. They include de Moneda. The ornament had been transportals of private homes, the most impor- formed, however, from mestizo into tant of which are the Casa Ricketts and rococo. Meanwhile, the lateral entrance of the Casa del Moral (Fig. 203). The large Santa Marta was carved some time in the . tympanum filled with a thick carpetlike mid-eighteenth century. The design inmass of flat ornament is typical of domes- cludes local characteristics but is less contic as well as ecclesiastical architecture. The sistent than usual. The placing of the mon-

themes carved in the portal of the latter strance as the predominating theme in the house are especially significant, for they tympanum is explained by the fact that include puma heads out of whose mouths the church was famous for its celebration coil long serpentine objects. They are, as of the festival of the Host. The female previously stated, related to Nazca pottery heads upon the half columns have surely and textiles. Other native themes include been recut in modern times. Indian dancers in flounced skirts and the In Caima and Yanahuara, pueblos in the

ccantu, sacred lily of the Incas. This suburbs of Arequipa, are the two finest - house and the Casa Ricketts have lost churches of the eighteenth century in the

much of their authenticity so far as the region. Especially beautiful are their quality of the carving is concerned, be- facades (Figs. 204, 206-208), that of cause of recent and overconscientious res- Yanahuara with date Enero 29 Afio 1750

toration. Five large ccantu flowers in being almost an identical twin of Caima

, strict profile and rigid symmetry fill the (circa 1719-1730).” The lacelike effect of , center of the tympanum of the Casa Rick- the white reliefs against a background

N10 RK |

, oo AREQUIPA painted yellow is rich and sparkling in the The facade of San Miguel at Caima is bright sun. Both facades are two storied similar to that of Yanahuara (1750), alwith double columns at the sides of the though the church was consecrated as early

doorway over which is a large niche of as 1730. The consecration does not imply | shell form. The elements of design in the that the structure was entirely complete at second story are better organized at Yana- that time.” The white reliefs against a huara in the relation of the central niche yellow ground are lovely in their decora-

to the smaller one at each side and in tive organization. As already noted, the the setting off of the three-part cornice composition of the second story is someat the summit. A relief of the Madonna of what less expert than Yanahuara’s. St. the Rosary upon a crescent moon occupies Francis and St. Dominic kneel here adoring

the upper center, and: just below in the the Madonna of Candlemas of whom there large niche is St. John the Baptist, to whom is a famous miracle-working statue within

the church is dedicated. Beside him stand the church, _ | ,

St. Francis and St. Dominic with the shields Curious details are the half-length an-

of their respective orders above them. gels (Fig. 208), with baskets upon their Statues of St. Anthony of Padua and St. heads, who decorate the lower band of the Vincent Ferrer load the buttresses at the columns. The same iconographic peculiar-

very top of the facade. | ity is repeated upon the convent door of Each column of the first story is deco- San Agustin in Arequipa. Details of orna- , rated with a cherub’s head crowned with ment differ considerably from those at Ya- , long-feathered headdress, so frequently en- nahuara, particularly in the broad strips countered in mestizo churches but not at the sides of the portal. The twin towers

often in this particular location. In the are inscribed with the year 1876, showing

lower section are two crowns and a car- that they were reérected after the earth- | touche. The same stock of motives occurs quake eight years earlier. In the left tower . in the border ornament at the sides of the appears still another date, 1783, indicative portal, as on the side entrances of Paucar- of its first construction, and the words pata and Santo Domingo (Figs. 201, 202), Beato Michali Arcangel. 'To St. Michael the

but the spacing here is wider and hence church is dedicated. , ,

the pattern stands out more clearly. There The church was first designed in 1719 is also a greater tendency to verticality in by the architect, Pérez del Cuadro, in the

the position of the stems which rise from form of a single nave. The consecration | the cornucopia and mask heads. At the took place on February 10, 1730. The celesides of the door contemporary fashion is brated priest of Caima, Juan Domingo curiously introduced in the hat worn by Zamacola y Jauregui, enlarged the struc-

the half-length figures, just as the angels ture by the addition of lateral aisles in : of San Juan (Fig. 219) at Juli are dressed 1783-1802. This fact is learned by inscrip-

in full-skirted coats. | tions in the left aisle and his initials, JZJ,

AS 151 A

| SOUTHERN PERU carved in the vault. In 1782 Zamacola en- icated, and the papal insignia. The camarin

| gaged the architect, Carlos Aranchi, to de- of the miraculous Virgin of Caima, an elesign the dome.” The inscriptions and the vated chamber behind the high altar, which

‘construction, as well as the former side is reached by stairway from the sacristy, entrance (Fig. 212) which now opens into has been redecorated in recent years.” the right aisle, show that aisles were built The views of San Miguel at Caima taken in two bays alongside of the original nave. at the side and upon the roof (Figs. 209, Arches were opened in each wall to al- 210) give an excellent idea of the superb low for two passageways into the aisles. ashlar construction in gray volcanic stone.

: Probably there was only one tower, on This fine material and workmanship are the right, at the outset, just as at Yana- among the best features of the school of , huara, and so the date 1783 on the left Arequipa and very typical. Walls are built tower would indicate that it was added at straight upward and then stepped into _ the time of the enlargement of the church. terraces at the haunch of the vault. Roofs

The devotion of nineteen years to this are uniformly flat. The barren geometric building campaign is explained to some mass is particularly attractive to the moddegree at least by the severe damage the ern eye. This is virtually abstract art. church endured in the earthquake of 1784. | The church at Caima is a unique gem. ‘The tympanum over the side portal (Fig. It is significant not only for its excellent

210) in the wall of the original church stonework and its lavish mestizo facade, of single nave still exists. It contains a re- but also for the romantic beauty of its lolief of St. Michael, now half concealed by cation. It stands in an enchanting setting

the roof of the right aisle. The sculpture upon the plaza of a small village which can be studied upon the roof, and though - still maintains its architecture, and is evoc-

badly weathered, enough is preserved to ative of the secluded tranquillity of. the

give evidence of a work of good quality. colonial past. - —_ The church (Fig. 211) is barrel vaulted The church at Yanahuara has been trunin stone, including the original sacristies cated rather than enlarged like its neighwhich flank the apse and have transverse borat Caima. It has lost the apse and the vaults. The sanctuary by contrast carries a right transept of its Latin-cross plan, both ribbed groin vault in the center of which of which now lie in ruins. The high altar

, is a small oculus window. The other oculus stands. beneath the dome of the crossing and four. lateral windows are let into the and the sacristy occupies the left transept.

, crossing. The arches between the bays of The interior is low and heavy with oculus the nave, contrary to general practice, are windows in the vaults. The indifferent prosuspended on corbels richly decorated. The portions along with the modern furnishvaults have reliefs: St. Rose of Lima un- ings make for dullness. The massive dome

der the choir, and in the succeeding bays, and the cubic terraced construction, as St. Dominic, the shield of Castile (2) erad- seen from the side or rear on the exterior,

N12 Kk

, AREQUIPA . | are very impressive here, as in all of these 1880 would suggest. A decorated side por-

churches. a - tal of the eighteenth century is a rustic ,

_ The Espiritu Santo in a tiny and deso- product of the arequipeno school, not com- |

late pueblo called Chihuata (Fig. 214) de- parable in quality with any of the works serves consideration for its very remarkable previously discussed. All of the usual exotic | sculptured dome of the eighteenth cen- motives appear but manipulated by an artury. It ranks second only to Pomata as a_ tisan lacking in skill and sense of design.

creation of mestizo art in which, likewise, The churches at Caima, Yanahuara, _ the Spanish mudéjar in the ribbed design Chihuata, and Paucarpata, all were Dominis curiously crossbred with the indigenous. ican foundations in regions first evange-

Twelve angels in flounced feathered skirts lized by Fray Pedro Ulloa.“ The mestizo stand with arms upraised vertically, sepa- portal of the latter has already been studrated by twelve strips of rectangular flow- ied in this chapter. The church is a singleers which rise from vases. Over the head naved structure with stone barrel vault, a of each angel is the monogram of Mary type very common in small villages of the and at a distance below the feet a molded district. Window openings are few, in this pedestal. Cherubs’ heads with feathered case limited to a small oculus in the cenheadgear decorate the circular cornice and_ ter of each vault of the nave and to four

upon it stand nude putti. Full-length re- lunettes at the sides. The sacristy had to , liefs of St. Francis, St. Dominic, St. An- be reérected after the earthquake of 1784, thony of Padua, and St. Vincent Ferrer and the neo-Renaissance facade, which is occupy the four pendentives. Scattered almost the rule hereabouts, has the date rosettes and other mestizo ornament fill 1875 upon it. Very similar is the facade the space surrounding the saints. Tech- (1876) of the parish church at Sanbandia _ nically the carving is not the equal of that nearby. at Pomata, and the design lacks the rhythm The interior of the Mercedarian founwhich is almost terpsichorean in the more dation at Characato is single naved with famous sanctuary on Lake Titicaca. The barrel vaulting and a method of lighting stone at Chihuata is white, and the back- following the same system mentioned at ground of the dome, painted blue, makes Paucarpata. The church was rebuilt from for a two-color effect like a fine tapestry. the foundations after the earthquake of _ This dome, virtually unknown, ranks as 1687.” The front portal with a few bits

one of the most original works of the of ornament is a modest product of this

colonial period. | time. The Doric lateral entrance, inscribed

The fabric of the structure at Chihuata, 1787, points ahead to the Neoclassic and | a small Latin cross in solid masonry, is no away from the local mestizo style. At this more notable than hundreds of other vil- same period the vaults had to be replaced

lage churches, It has suffered much from following the catastrophe of 1784." The |

restoration, as its altars dated 1878 and chief attraction of the church lies in the |

| | NM 153 w

SOUTHERN PERU characteristically massive construction of with rosettes borrowed from Arequipa’s the Arequipa school. Against the rectangu- wood-carved retables of the eighteenth lar silhouette of the structure are set gi- century rather than from her architectural

| gantic curving buttresses, 2.78 meters deep. sculpture. Other churches of importance They recall somewhat the exterior of Santa in isolated villages surely exist, awaiting —

Marta in Arequipa, and were undoubtedly discovery by investigators of colonial

added in the light of the experience with art.

, the late eighteenth-century earthquake. It is hoped that the present chapter will The remote parish church at Yana- supply the basis for an understanding of quigua, at some distance from Arequipa, «requipeno architecture of the colonial peis known to me only in photographs. For riod. When Padre Barriga’s investigations the sake of record, it is mentioned as a_ of the archives are completed, many chronhandsome ashlar monument of the Are- ological problems will be solved and the quipa school. The putti blowing trumpets lacunae left by destruction partially filled.

of the Dominican lateral entrance have If one stops to consider the fact that two

| found their way to the same position here. thirds of Arequipa’s artistic past has been Otherwise, the sculptured doorway at lost in upheavals of the earth, the imagYanaquigua has no counterpart in the re- ination is left aghast at the thought of her gional capital. Its columns are decorated vanished colonial splendor.

NM 154 A

Oo «IX | |

, SOUTHERN PERU: THE MESTIZO STYLE—II HE geographic range of the creole or Some writers have characterized mestizo

T nesting style extends from Arequipa art as the “Arequipa style,” thus making in southwestern Peru through Puno and that city the center in which it was crethe district of Lake Titicaca down to ated and from which it disseminated.” It Potosi in Bolivia. During the colonial pe- exists all over Latin America, however, and riod Upper Peru (Bolivia) fell within the cannot be regarded solely as Peruvian, aljurisdiction of the viceroyalty of Peru un- though the highest expression was attained til the establishment of the viceroyalty of there.” Even in the viceroyalty of Peru, the La Plata in 1776. Thereafter Bolivia was question arises as to whether the mestizo ruled from Buenos Aires. Hence it causes facades of Potosi were created independ- |

no wonder that the art of central South ently or whether workmen from Arequipa ~ America displays stylistic unity. Moreover, transplanted the style there. Here is where

the archbishopric of La Plata at Sucre, our need for more documentation is im- | | founded in 1552, included Bolivia and the erative before the problem can be reregion of Lake Titicaca. A later reorganiza- solved. On the other hand, most of the | tion in 1605 placed the district of Chu- Potosi monuments are later than those at

- cuito in the diocese of La Paz. Not until Arequipa: Santa Teresa (1685-1692), the , 1866 was the present bishopric of Puno facade of La Compafiia (1700-1707), San

created. _ Francisco (1707-1714), and San Lorenzo An exact chronology of the development (1728-1744). The other mestizo facades of the mestizo style cannot be established in the region all belong to the eighteenth until more documentary evidence is forth- century: El Belén, La Merced, San Bercoming. With our present knowledge, the nardo, and the Casa de Moneda (1753church of Santo Domingo in Arequipa, 1773) in Potosi and the recently discovered |

rebuilt in 1677-1680, seems to be one of fagades in the neighboring villages of the earliest monuments. The carving upon Santa Lucia and Salinas de Yocalla.* The the choir and the side portal are thus im- same period holds for the splendid church

| portant in the inception of the style. The of San Francisco at La Paz (1753-1772). facade of La Compafiia (1698) marks the The region of Lake Titicaca and Puno

apex of the movement which was to con- which lies geographically between the ex- a - tinue with full force for another sixty treme points of Arequipa and Potosi was

M155 AR | |

years in Arequipa. the recipient of influences from both di-

SOUTHERN PERU | rections. There seems to be no possibility death by two others of indigenous stock, that the first origins are to be sought here, Joseph Agustin and Phelipe Chavarria.”

since none of the churches can antedate | Far more surprising than the natural 1690-1700. The lack of dated works is primitivism of native artists is the survival particularly to be regretted. The quality, of pre-Columbian decorative themes. The on the other hand, is unsurpassed along the masks of Nazca and Tiahuanacu culture lake shores. Santiago at Pomata, the tran- occur in the ornament upon the portals of sept of San Juan at Juli, Santa Cruz at Arequipa and Zepita. Their appearance has

| Juli, and San Pedro at Zepita represent the also been pointed out in San Xavier at finest flower of mestizo art (Figs. 215- Nazca. The grotesque heads with serpen-

238). tine objects issuing from their mouths have

. Mestizo art, like the mestizo race, is been noted in Arequipa as survivals of the the product of the crossbreeding of the distant past. The inclusion of local flora, European with the indigenous. The most such as the sacred lily or ccantu, and superficial study of the problem makes that local fauna, like the puma, is undeniably apparent, and all historians agree upon the indicative of the contributions that na-

subject. The natural primitivism of sim- tive folklore made to this artistic phe-

plified geometric design is the expression nomenon. , |

of the naiveté of the Indian. That same = The popularity of the papaya and the

: preference for two-dimensional pattern banana, monkeys, and tropical birds in the characterizes the art of all prehistoric and repertory of mestizo decorators has led , primitive peoples; it is indicative of a cer- some scholars to propose that these elements tain state of intellectual development. Dr. were brought to the highlands by missionNeumeyer in his recent stylistic analysis aries from Paraguay and the lower Amaof the whole phenomenon of mestizo art zon.° The sources of the style itself cannot in North and South America rightly calls be placed in those regions, however, since attention to parallel developments in Eu- no prototypes of Andean decoration exist rope which were produced by similar fu- there. Media for the diffusion of tropical

sions of different cultures.* themes throughout the highlands were un_ The very fact that mestizo art is con- doubtedly textiles, drawings, and even fur-

centrated in remote Andean regions, niture, and their carriers must have been largely populated by the native alone, the clergy, since they were the principal proves that he is the determining factor. European overlords. Mestizo marquetry The names of the workmen and architects (Fig. 230), a virtually unstudied ramificain the region are Indian. The builder of tion of the development, involves the same

| the tower of La Compafiia at Potosi was aesthetics and the same problems as the an Indian, Sebastian de la Cruz. He also architectural decoration and textiles. ‘began the church of San Francisco in the One other factor must be mentioned in same city, and was succeeded after his connection with the formation of the

M156 R

LAKE TITICACA. | | mestizo style. That is the Spanish mudéjar the source of our knowledge of the Domin-

(Hispano-Moresque). Other writers have cans’ activity in the lake district, says, recognized that the characteristics of mu- speaking of the monastery, “They are

_ déjar art, ie., the abstraction of orna- building sufficiently [sic], it has a most | ‘ment into stylized patterns and: the cover- beautiful church and in it a miraculous ing of large areas of surface with flat de- image of Nuestra Sefiora del Rosario, the signs cut into the plane, reénforced the church adorned with rich retables, carved same tendencies in the mind of the in- images and fine paintings.” ° The very fact digenous artist.’ Moreover, specific mudéjar that Meléndez does not make any reference

types of architectural construction are en- to the church as being entirely of stone, as countered, as for example, the ribbed he usually does in such cases, suggests that domes of Pomata and Chihuata (Figs. 214; the present edifice had not yet been begun.

221). . , The statement, estd edificando, refers to the ee monastery of which nothing whatsoever

oO a : remains today. Oo

_ REGION OF LAKE TITICACA — The archives of Santiago at Pomata have

HE masterpiece of the mestizo style in not yet been thoroughly searched. Harth- |

T south America is the church of San-_ terré did find, however, three valuable reftiago at Pomata (Figs. 215-224), a small erences in the inventories of the sacristy: village on the southern shore of Lake Titi- the completion of the high altar in 1722, caca. Built of rose-colored stone through- and repairs done to the vaulting in 1729 out, it is incomparable in its beauty of de- and 1732.° From this evidence it is safe to sign and fine workmanship. The Domin- conclude that the church was erected in the icans, who evangelized this region in the first quarter of the eighteenth century.

fifth decade of the. sixteenth century, Various dates appear in inscriptions in had established a house in Pomata before the church, but they are subsequent to the

1553. Probably no more than two or three main fabric. The atrium arch with its monks lived there. In 1569, with the ex- legend and year 1763 is a provincial struc-

pulsion of the Dominicans from this re- ture, unconnected stylistically with the gion, which the viceroy handed over to the masterpiece to which it gives access.’” On Jesuits, the Dominicans left Pomata but the base of the left tower is the inscription:

were permanently reinstated in 1600. From Quiroga acabé 1794. The curious fact that oe that time forward the importance of their the belfry of this tower does not exist, 7

mission grew, and by 1606 the house at whereas its mate to the right does, leads | Pomata was elevated to the rank of a_ to the conclusion that the upper part col-

monastery, == © - lapsed at some subsequent period. The sur_ The exact dates of the present magnif- viving tower with its two-arched openings icent church are. problematic. Meléndez in is in a general way derivative from the

his chronicle, published in 1681, which is school of Cuzco. It resembles the tower of ,

M157 A

SOUTHERN PERU the church at Lampa (Fig. 239), notably Santiago at Pomata lingers in one’s memin the division of the base into sections by ory primarily because of the hauntingly

| horizontal moldings. lovely rose hue of its stone and the indeThe ground plan of Santiago at Pomata scribable richness of the carving which is almost identical with that of San Pedro abounds in every part. Moldings on the Martir (Fig. 2) at Juli: a Latin cross with bases and cornice are rather numerous but _ single nave and six lateral chapels at each satisfactory in scale. The sculptured orna-

, side. Richly carved doorways beneath the ment, on the other hand, surpasses the elevated choir give access to the baptistry imagination. Crisply cut and highly styl-

, at the right and to the tower at the left. ized patterns form continuous bands on The two churches clearly belong to the the arches of the chapels. Most interesting _ same school and may even be the work of and original is the placing of a cone-shaped the same architect, although Santiago (Fig. candelabrum of leaves in the spandrels of

220) is by far the superior in space and _ the arches. Wooden candelabra upon pic, | _ dimensions and infinitely richer in sculp- ture frames are common in Cuzco and | tural detail. In both cases the chapels are Checacupe but obviously less practical than — shallow, and the bays are marked by a_ these of stone. The splays of the windows broad transverse arch. Stepped-back pilas- (Fig. 224) are superbly decorated with ters and a large cornice come out strongly large classical jars, from which palmettes en ressaut, In the apse a small subordinate and star flowers rise stiffly. The arch is rib occurs between the broad transverse covered by broad palmettes or fronds acarches, a scheme similar to the vaulting of companied occasionally by monkeys or the church at Lampa. The clerestory win- putti. The word “fabulous” only suggests dows are deeply splayed into the vaults the luxuriant beauty of the windows in without the triangular penetration of Euro- the apse with long palmettes, rosettes, baspean and of most colonial Baroque. The kets overflowing with grapes and papayas,

curve of the barrel vault at Santiago is and at the top the monogram of Christ , semicircular, while that of San Pedro at held by two putti. A rectangular shield of Juli flattens out at the summit. The dome ornament occurs repeatedly on the pilas_ at Pomata (Fig. 221) soars, lofty and im- ters, on the frieze, on the transverse arches,

| posing, over the crossing in excellently cut and throughout the vaults. The pilasters masonry, whereas at Juli a low dome of under the crossing come in for still greater cane and plaster was accommodated to the emphasis with pots of flowers, leaves, and

, sixteenth-century east end. A curious ar- shells, similar to the decoration of the chitectural feature is the window, opened facade. The mermaid playing the chain the apse behind the high altar at Pomata, rango, so beloved of mestizo artists, turns possibly for the display of relics. Analogues up at Pomato too, in the vault of the apse.

were noted previously in Santo Domingo The dome is one of the most celebrated at Cuzco and Santa Catalina at Juliaca. in colonial art. It rises loftily on penden-

AN 158 KR |

| LAKE TITICACA | tives upon which are stone reliefs like undeniable beauty of the work both in | woven tapestries. Stems and leaves placed in composition and decorative detail. The pre-

great pseudoclassical urns are interspersed dominant motives are many-petaled flowwith flat-petaled flowers, grapes, and oc-_ ers in flat frontality, long stems and leaves, _ casional birds.“ The bust-length figure, so and, within the rings of the center of the common in mestizo art, acts as caryatid to vault, stylized lilies which may represent

the vase in each pendentive. , the ccantu.

In the dome itself (Fig. 221) eight flat Decorated interior portals are two, one bands radiate from the center in what is on the gospel side of the apse (Fig. 224) _ -an undeniably mudéjar scheme, common and another in the transept, both of them in Spanish medieval architecture. A large entrances to the sacristy. Rather top-heavy

medallion of great beauty is woven be- in proportions because of the shortness of tween the ribs in an exquisitely rhythmical the pilasters in relation to the broad en_ pattern. A convincing prototype for the tablature, they are nonetheless showpieces whole composition is the dome in the chapel of decorative splendor. The urns of cut

of La Mejorada at Olmedo (Fig. 222) near flowers which flank the tympanum stand , Valladolid in Spain. This appearance, in the in inflexible symmetry, completely stone

eighteenth century, of a dome basically in texture and quality. This primitivism of mudéjar in design is not unique. Another design and technique suits the standards example has been cited in the church at of taste set by twentieth-century conven-

Chihuata (Fig. 214), but it is in Spain tions of criticism. |

that we find them most commonly in the = The small portal on the exterior which , Baroque period, especially in Andalusia. gives access to the right transept is good The dome in the church of Santo Domingo in its dimensions and hence much superior

at Archidona (Fig. 223), in the province to the sacristy entrances. The design is | of Malaga, is a splendid Baroque monu- beautifully calculated throughout. The ment, the contemporary of that at Pomata. main thematic devices are stems, leaves, In actual design, however, the latter ad- and flowers, sometimes rectangular in patheres more closely to their common medi- tern, at other times with petals which curve

eval forerunners. as in a whirling disk. The abstract volutes The Pomata design has been interpreted at the sides which recall an Oriental fire

as a native dance, but it must be assumed motive are also noteworthy on the facade , , that any suggestion of dance rhythms was of San Francisco at La Paz and on the high

unpremeditated. Dr. Neumeyer believes altar of San Francisco in Cochabamba, both

that angels are represented according to in Bolivia. / ,

long established European custom, but here The main facade of Santiago (Fig. 215) carried to. an unusual degree of symbolic at Pomata stands within a round-arched abstraction.” This latter seems the more recess. This arrangement is frequently en-

M159 A

likely explanation. Few will question the countered in southern Peru (Ayaviri, ,

| SOUTHERN PERU , Asillo, Lampa, Juliaca, Zepita, Figs. 236, of La Merced at Sucre, until the restora241, 249) and in Bolivia (Santo Domingo tions of 1944 cleared it away.

at La Paz; San Lorenzo, La Merced, El The church at Pomata in its entirety is

| Belén at Potosi). At Pomata the carved incomparable, a complete and perfect — reliefs are limited to the columns and jewel. It is rivaled in details by San Juan

| cornices, the walls themselves being left and Santa Cruz at Juli but neither of the bare. This extraordinary simplicity suggests latter possesses the same unity and com-

that the facade is earlier in date than pleteness, nor the same beauty of material, the side portals. Its three and one-half the rose-colored stone. This monument at

, stories diminish in height as they rise, leav- Pomata alone would suffice to prove the ing the large square window which lights original genius of colonial builders, and the choir unrelated to the arched doorway the peculiar qualities of imagination which

, and to the three rows of niches. The orna- the crossbreeding of European and native ment on the columns (Fig. 216) has the cultures produced. quality of good Byzantine relief, especially San Juan at Juli, originally built about in the first story, where a crisp shell alter- 1590, of rubble, brick, adobe, and wood, nates with an eight-petaled flower within received a new transept and apse as well as interwoven medallions. At the base of the anew portal, all in dark brown stone, about

| column is the familiar half-length caryatid the year 1700. In quality of carving it

figure. equals Pomata and even surpasses it in

, The side portal (Figs. 217, 218), some- lavishness, but San Juan lacks the unity of

what later and far more lavish, is like an the neighboring church. The floor plan : embroidery of long palmettes which spread (Fig. 1) is a Latin cross with single recover the semicircular tympanum and spiral tangular apse. A destroyed sacristy on the

, columns and flare out above the niches. A gospel side of the apse and the portals hard solid stem winds about the shafts to which communicated with it from the effect the spiral curve, and amid the leaves apse and left transept do not appear in the

appear parrots, monkeys, catlike pumas, plan reproduced here. An octagonal bapand tropical fruits such as bananas and tistry (Fig. 225), connected with the right papayas. More primitive-looking puma arm of the transept and the apse, is covered heads decorate the corbels below. The two by a fine stone dome on pendentives consun-faced disks on the columns of the sec- structed with eight ribs. The doorway in-

ond story are to be explained by in- side has a round arch within a Moorish digenous sun worship rather than as the label or alfiz, the center of which rises in attributes of the Dominican, St. Thomas extraordinary fashion in two volutes. The _ Aquinas. The same theme recurs in the flanking spiral columns are twins of those Jesuit church of San Juan at Juli and on within the transept and on the side portal. _

, the facade of San Lorenzo at Potosi. It for- The sacristy is a large room, like a chapel, merly existed over an arch in the left aisle built in four bays of banded barrel vaults, — NW 160 &

LAKE TITICACA | all in well-cut masonry. It is lighted by Cruz at Juli (Fig. 232). Another portal four windows, deeply splayed in heavy in the right transept opens into the bap-

stone walls. tistry, and in the same position in the left

The crossing and transept (Fig. 226) are transept a portal, now blocked up, gave the highlights of San Juan at Juli, the only access to a sacristy which has fallen into church in Peru where four large spiral ruin. These stone-carved doorways are recolumns stand free under each of the four lated to the others in the same location in corners of the dome. Above rises a large Santiago at Pomata, but are better in scale, |

square drum of masonry which is topped lacking the ponderous entablature and

by a low dome of wood, lined with a tympanum of the latter. The door in the © _ painted silk covering. The monumental gospel side of the apse of San Juan is par- | scale of the columns, resting upon a high ticularly fine with the large triple rosettes _ base and crowned by a deep massive en- and the pomegranates in the spandrels. | _ tablature, produces a truly grandiose ef- Round and square rosettes alternate on the fect, the high point of the Baroque splen- surface of the arch, and at the sides the dor of Jesuit art in Peru. At each end of interlacing vine enclosing a flower recalls

the transept stands a colossal stone arch, a similar theme in the Casa Ricketts of semicircular within a rectangular label. Arequipa. Specific relations to Pomata are The flat decorative ornament which is spun indicated by the cone of leaves which across the entire surface defies description. seems to be a candelabrum. It flanks the Clearly of the same school as Pomata, the arches throughout both these churches of

ornament, nevertheless, varies considerably Santiago at Pomata and San Juan at Juli. . in detail, further proof of the creative The baptistry door in the right transept fancy of these mestizo sculptors. On the has a flatter, crisper allover pattern of pilasters double rows of flat-petaled flow- many-petaled flowers and, at the sides, ers, subtly varied in shape, rise from a volutes which spin around dynamically. classical urn at the base. The flat crisp tex- The exterior side portal of San Juan tile-like treatment of the stone is exactly (Fig. 219) completes the stone sculpture comparable with the technique used in the of the church. It inevitably invites comwood carving of the gilded picture frames parison with the side portal of Pomata and altars nearby. Both gilded wood and (Fig. 218). The free-standing columns are —

stone fuse into a. sensuously sumptuous shorter and heavier with rather large,

unity. clumsy capitals, and the scale of the comA richly carved doorway stands in each position is ponderous and more provincial of the lateral walls of the apse and above throughout. In detail the sculpture of San them is a deeply splayed window, magnif- Juan very nearly equals that of its rival.

icently carved with the familiar vase of Peculiar in the decorative repertory is a flowers, grapes, and birds. Exactly the same long pod which looks like a red pepper. —

arrangement recurs in the apse of Santa Clusters of grapes are more predominant NWN 161 &

SOUTHERN PERU here than at Pomata, and the cutting is per- end of the seventeenth or beginning of haps flatter and less varied. Otherwise, the the eighteenth century. The plan (Fig. 2) two monuments must be considered works and construction are almost exactly like of the same school, although not of the that of Santiago at Pomata with a numsame master. Very charming are the trum-__ ber of variations in detail. For example, the peting angels in the spandrels at San Juan, piers of San Pedro have high molded bases,

wearing wig and full-skirted coat, fash- somewhat awkward in treatment, which ionable in high society in the early eight- occur in Santa Cruz at Juli (Fig. 228). eenth century. Similar figures are found in but not at Pomata. The barrel vaults in colonial painting of the same period. San Pedro Martir are lower and flatter in No less magnificent than the stone section, and a small intermediate rib reinsculpture are the carved and gilded picture forces the vault between the transverse frames which line the interior of the nave arches. This arrangement is also found in enclosing a series of scenes of the life of the apse at Pomata. At Juli sculptured St. John the Baptist. Whereas the frames ornament is sparingly limited to stylized cannot strictly be regarded as architectural leaves in the frieze and a large rectangular decoration, the carved wood adornment of piece in the center of each bay of the vault. the splayed windows might logically be so Later in the eighteenth century, ornament

classified. It would be difficult to surpass was painted upon the walls of various them as decoration, their patterns so beau- chapels in mestizo style. In the second — tifully stylized in rigid symmetry. The chapel to the left, behind the altar, stands Middle Ages in Europe never knew any- a blind arch the jambs of which are beautithing finer. Technically and stylistically fully carved with the vertical stem and they differ from the Byzantine only in leaf, punctuated by an occasional flower. their more rhythmic exuberance and hence A comparable pattern decorates the exless geometric severity. The thematic ma- terior doorway of the transept at Pomata.

terial is common to the stone carving of Pier buttresses support the transverse the period, flower pots from which grow arches on the outside of San Pedro Martir, branches interspersed with star-shaped and the roof level of the chapels falls well

flowers. Among the foliage are birds below that of the nave. The walls consist

, usually in heraldic opposition, putti, and of irregular stone instead of the dressed monkeys, favorite of this region. At the masonry of the interior. At Pomata (Figs. base recur the tropical fruits, papaya and 215-224), on the contrary, ashlar is used bananas, also popular in the lake district, throughout, and the nave walls rise straight while rather exceptionally a pair of op- without buttresses or contrast in roof levels. - posed peacocks act as corbels with elegant San Pedro Martir at Juli is modest and pro-

flourish. vincial in every respect in comparison with

| MN 1624

The nave of San Pedro Martir at Juli the finished masterpiece at Pomata. The was entirely rebuilt by the Jesuits at the two monuments are obviously related in

| | OS LAKE TITICACA 7 period and style, that of Juli possibly the affords make it one of the most imposing |

earlier of the two, although it would be monuments of colonial Peru. The belfry, | dangerous to be categorical about the chro- almost totally destroyed, had two round | nology without some specific documentary openings to a side, and single spiral col- -

evidence. a , | - _umns. Most unusual is the spacing of the The main facade of San Pedro Martir at story just below the belfry, where pyramiJuli (Fig. 227), the wall of which isa non- dal entablature blocks stand just above and

descript mixture of rubble, brick, and just below the spiral columns. The tapering adobe, is a stylistic and chronological prob- _corbel is a signature of the local school, aplem. In spite of the classicism of the free- pearing in the vaults of San Pedro at Zepita,

standing Doric columns in two stories, Santa Barbara at Ilave, and San Pedro at nothing of the type is known in Peru be- Acora. The multiplication of moldings in fore the seventeenth century. The facade, the cornices strikes a peculiar note. which, of very retarded style, is probably contem- though provincial, is justified by the probporary with the nave, for reasons of con- lem of scale. Notable here, as well as upon struction including the use of brown ash- the contemporary archway of the atrium lar. The shells in the spandrels of the first (Fig. 234), is the characteristic mestizo story are like those in the pendentives of ornament, the square and rectangular mul-

the sixteenth-century crossing, but the lat- _tipetaled flowers. ,

ter ornaments must have been added at the A complete monument of the eighteenth time of the rebuilding when a new dome of century in mestizo style and one of surcane replaced the old. The long mestizo passing decorative beauty was Santa Cruz leaves in stucco on the second story of the at Juli, now abandoned and disintegrating. facade seem strangely out of relation to the Four bays of the nave vault of brown ashlar

rest of the design. — survive intact, while the rest of the church , The eighteenth-century tower to the is open to the sky. Rubble walls fill the inright is considerably later than the nave tervening sections between the ashlar of and portal. Spiral columns carved with vine _ the piers, transverse arches, and vaults, The and grapes enframe the elliptical openings, portals and windows are also in stone, and

and below, a cornice with corbels effects the beautifully decorated. | division between the belfry and the main The Latin-cross plan falls into the same

body of the tower. | -. group as those of San Pedro Martir at Juli The same architect was undoubtedly the and Santiago at Pomata except that arched , | master of the great square tower, now half recesses for the retables rather than shallow

ruined by a thunderbolt, which looms ma- chapels line the nave. As usual the masonry jestically beside the late-Renaissance church _ barrel vault is separated into bays by trans-

of the Asuncién at Juli (Fig. 233). Its ex- verse arches supported by pilasters and a ceptional bulk, the excellent brown ashlar, half column. The entablature block is limand the effective scale which the decoration ited to each bay and to the four angles of __

M163 QR |

| SOUTHERN PERU the crossing (Fig. 228), leaving the walls the triumphal-arch portals (Figs. 229, of the interior without continuous cornice. 231) placed laterally below the choir at | The most extraordinary originality is dis- the main entrance of the church. The theplayed in the use of a band of basket weave, matic material is common to the regional |

, topped by a double row of flowers, which school, but it bursts forth with exceptional cuts across the piers. This peculiar flower exuberance here. The cutting is deeper with

motive may be a version of the ccantu a richer play of light and shade than in the

| It is also placed upon the base of the pilas- side portals of Pomata and of San Juan at ters. The capital too is unusual in the Juli. The capitals with their sharply cut crisply cut leaves and the thin volutes rows of leaves are similar to those of the

, above. The latter indicate that it isa long- latter monument but better in scale. Not distant descendant of the Roman composite usual in the school is the horizontal band ©

capital, of leaves which subdivides the shafts. MonThe sculptured decoration is the true keys play an exceptionally prominent role glory of Santa Cruz at Juli. As in Pomata here, clutching papayas or large bunches of

| the deeply splayed windows of the clere- grapes. Although they belong to the mes| story are superbly carved with the same /izo repertory of the lake region, nowhere motives, large vases filled with stylized else are they so amusing and so prominent. plants and flowers, scattered through with They must be regarded as the inheritance birds in heraldic opposition. Occasionally of pre-Columbian art. They are ubiquitous

| the sun face puts in an appearance. In the in textiles and pottery of the late indig-

center of some windows appears the IHS enous cultures. ,

and in others AM, the favorite though not Also very much in evidence in Santa exclusive monograms of the Jesuits. Cruz are bunches of grapes, large pomeThe lateral windows and doorways of the granates cut through laterally revealing a apse (Fig. 232) are especially luxuriant in sizable core of seeds, papayas, bananas, and their handling. Winged harpies with Indian _ birds. The arch of the doorway is cut with profiles and bust-length angels with vo- the long leaves and starlike flowers common lutes at the waist are carved in crisp archaic to the Juli-Pomata school, here treated with technique. The instruments of the Passion particular flourish and luxuriance in their

| are worked into an abstract design with calligraphic curving rhythms. A curious a the crown of thorns encircling the IHS sur- double shell occupies the keystone. Fantasy mounted by a cross. The composition isen- and playful imagination combine in a work

closed by a long stem which ends in the which is the ultimate achievement in this familiar ccantu flower. The doorways exotic art, the result of the crossbreeding below, about equal in size to the windows, of the native with European culture. | originally gave access to the sacristies. _ The facade of Santa Cruz is a badly

| AN 164 A |

The high point of decorative invention planned provincial work, by no means the throughout the entire region is reached in creation of the same architect who designed

| LAKE TITICACA | the interior. A poor bell tower of three abandoned long before the advent of San

open arches is constructed of brick and Pedro at Zepita. | | adobe. The portal itself lacks distinction of | On the exterior the church stands laterany sort, being badly jumbled in composi- ally within a large atrium. The fine bell tion and poorly carved. The spiral columns tower, very similar to that of Santiago at

of the first story lack the fine quality of Pomata (Fig. 215), the low dome, salient | the portals within the church. The upper transept, and recessed portal make an exsections attract the attention solely because tremely effective composition. A functional

of their naiveté. Two tall angels, Indians note is struck by the way the tile roofs rein dress and features, hold instruments of veal the curves of the barrel vault. The the Passion of Christ as they stand guard dark red stone adds immeasurably to the beside the large shell niche. The monogram picturesque beauty of this building which of Christ within a large crown of thorns also has the advantage of being located

occupies the tympanum. 7 near the shores of Lake Titicaca. Reflections of the Juli school of mestizo | The fame of the church rests, however,

art leave their traces in domestic architec- on the large sculptured lateral portal (Figs. , ture of the town, the most interesting ex- 237, 238) which is recessed within an arch.

amples of which are the stone carved por- To the left the titular St. Peter stands tals of the Casa Zavala on the main plaza. within a niche and to the right his comSan Pedro at Zepita (Fig. 236) is a panion, St. Paul. The two-storied division

highly original monument, a product of into a broad triumphal arch with freethe Titicaca region, but one which shows standing columns is European in descent, great individuality in detail. It must be the but the detail is the most exotic of all work of an independent disciple of the churches of the mestizo school in southern Juli-Pomata school. The church of Latin- Peru. The short columns bulge out in excross plan has no lateral chapels, and the traordinary fashion, and the lower half is transverse arches of the barrel vault are divided off by a ring of stylized leaves. The suspended on corbels. The latter with their interwoven chain devices have no parallels

three rows of stylized leaves resemble the in other mestizo monuments. They are ornaments in the spandrels of Santiago at probably analogous to rather than specifi- | Pomata and San Juan at Juli. The interior cally mudéjar, just as the application of flat is barren and sober without further decora- ornament like tapestry to the wall is natution except for some carving upon the _ ral primitivism which occurs independently

sacristy portal. The usual raised choir is throughout the world at many. different placed over the doorway opposite the sanc- epochs. The grotesque masks, at times fetuary. Unexpectedly a narrow bench is _ line, and the frontally seated figures at the

built along the wall on each side of the extreme sides can permit of no doubt that |

, M165 A |

nave, ‘preserving the custom of sixteenth- they are a combination of pre-Columbian century rural churches which was generally survival and natural primitivism.:The the-

SOUTHERN PERU | ory that they reflect Asiatic influence The style of carving and motives match brought by missionaries seems utterly ro-- those of Zepita, and even surpass them in mantic.” These female figures with pend- quality. The ingenious interlacing chain ant breasts in geometric symmetry put in pattern covers the entire columns in San

| their appearance again and again at Asillo Miguel. Great vertical headdresses grow like throughout its decoration and in pulpits as huge plants over the heads of the mermaids _ far south as the Merced at Sucre (Bolivia). who play the charango. This is indeed a Most startling and fantastic of all is the sumptuous example of the archaic formal-

| enormous vertical volute which rises out of ism and majestic symmetry of mestizo the headdress, springing into crisp knobs design. Its beauty is hard to match.

, ‘at the sides, and cut down through the cen- Another eighteenth-century choir in a ‘ter in slightly projecting scales. sixteenth-century church must be men_ The filigree relief of the doorway and tioned, that of La Asuncién in Chucuito. friezes is more lacelike than elsewhere in In this case the sculptured decoration is the Titicaca region. The thematic material, limited and unimpressive, consisting of however, has been encountered often be- acanthus leaves over the arch and between fore, especially in San Juan at Juli: triple the arches large bowls of papayas, apples,

, rosettes, spiral rosettes, long ferns, vases and pomegranates. The construction here with flowers and leaves, and heraldically provides more interest than the ornament,

- opposed birds. More numerous than else- the choir being sustained on four small where are the putti who take part in the square piers which carry six small domical jarge abstract compositions occupying the vaults.

niches of the second story. Loading the The church of Santa Barbara at Ilave, verticals are large urns with stiff metallic- dating from the late seventeenth or early |

| _ looking plants and flowers, triumphs of the eighteenth century, is a building entirely decorator’s art, and prime favorites of mes- of masonry and without notable archi-

tizo sculptors, not only here but also at tectural features on the exterior. The Pomata (Fig. 224) and elsewhere. atrium archway of stepped form resembles _ The small front doorway at Zepita does the still finer one of La Asuncién at Juli not startle, yet its stone embroidery is im- (Fig. 234). The decorations in mestizo style peccable, as exquisitely drawn and cut as_ consist of disks, flat reliefs of saints, and

the finest colonial textiles. The light- spiral colonnettes, the latter the only indicolored stone of both portals has been cation of the date of the church. The type

painted a dark red. of monument, the long single nave covered The master of Zepita produced a still with barrel vaults suspended on corbels, — | finer achievement in the magnificently belongs to the regional group, more similar carved wall piers (Fig. 235) which support to San Pedro at Zepita than to any other. the choir added in the eighteenth century Certain peculiarities are observed in the to the church of San Miguel in Pomata. way the barrel vault of the apse is raised

| NM 166 &

PUNO a , higher than that of the nave. The very bay. Equally unusual is the handling of the _ limited fenestration in the nave consists of U-shaped choir. It is not merely suspended

only one window near the crossing and an- on a vault, but also has two large supportother which illuminates the raised choir. ing columns at each side (Fig. 243). The Carved decoration, so characteristic of the columns are ungainly with their huge capimestizo school, is altogether lacking here. tals and short thick shafts upon which ap-

, | , | pear two crowns of stylized leaves. The doors of the two chapels beneath the choir

_ PROVINCE OF PUNO a are flanked by half columns of similar de- | NTERMEDIATE geographically between sign. A rather fantastic note is obtained by | J Cuzco and Puno and intermediate sty- the gigantic decorative shell at each side listically as wellisa group of churcheswhich below the choir. Otherwise ornament is includes those of Lampa, Ayaviri, Asillo, sparingly used, in contrast to the Puno reJuliaca, Pupuja, Pucara, and Vilque. The gion. It is limited to three rectangular finest of these is at Lampa, reached by auto- shields of stylized leaves in three of the | mobile from Juliaca. This church was for- four bays of the nave and the three large merly in the diocese of Cuzco, and none leaves in each pendentive of the dome. other than the great Bishop Mollinedo re- The Latin-cross plan without side chapels

ported in 1678 its inception and in 1685 its is clearly related to that of the churches of completion.“ Lampa (Fig. 245), like the the Puno region. The influence of Cuzco, other churches of this group, has the plan on the other hand, is equally clear in the of a Latin cross with extremely long nave, Doric cornice and in the entablature block single rectangular apse raised by four steps, at the crossing and over the pilasters, which ©

elevated choir, and a broad molded cornice first entered the school of Cuzco in the which runs the full length of the church. cathedral there. Other features, nonarchi-

One rather large chapel is placed at each tectural, such as the picture frames with , side below the choir, but otherwise the nave spiral columns in natural cedar, are cuz-

has no chapels, an arrangement which oc- queno in origin, as is the pulpit which ina |

curs also at Juliaca and Ayaviri. The general sense is related to the type of pulpit churches in the region are barrel vaulted in found in Cuzco Cathedral. Even more pro-

stone, and carry a large dome over the nounced influence of the school of Cuzco crossing. Asillo, the exception, had a appears in the main portal (Figs. 239, 241)

thatched roof originally. , which is based directly on that of La ComThe vaults of Lampa have an unusual pafiia (Fig. 64). Most striking are the col-

and original character, for between the umns ringed with two crowns of acanthus transverse arches of stone in each bay, two leaves, the use of flat carved ornament in intermediate arches are added. The ribbed the central section, and even the general

effect which results is very satisfactory be- composition of the facade with its three ,

| | AN 167 KR | |

cause of the considerable length of each stories, the window giving into the choir,

SOUTHERN PERU | and the placing of the niches. The reddish- by four steps. It has only one chapel at stone portal of Lampa is in no sense a copy each side beneath the choir, a prominent of the Jesuit church at Cuzco, but the pro- dome on pendentives over the crossing, a totype is unmistakable. The familiar arched large cornice with entablature blocks at recess, within which the Lampa portal is the crossing and over the pilasters. The set, is typical, on the contrary, of the Puno- portal is based directly upon that of Lampa Bolivian region. Also popular in the south (Figs. 241, 242). On the word of Bishop

are the mermaids who guard the shield of Mollinedo the church at Lampa is dated the Virgin just above the door. Mermaids 1678-1685, and Ayaviri had been finished reappear in the same position on the fagade by 1696.” These data, plus the higher qual-

of the church at Asillo (Fig. 244). The ity of Lampa throughout, leave no doubt side portal at Lampa is a reduction of the as to which is the earlier. The portal at principal portal, but consisting only of two Ayaviri shows a greater taste for ornamen-

stories. tation than its model, adding the frieze of

| The general composition of the church | stylized leaves in the first story and the (Fig. 239) from the exterior, set within a rosette and interlace in the second story. large atrium, is excellent. The fine bell Both are redolent of the Puno region. Al-

| tower of masonry is separated into three though the general proportions at Ayaviri stages by plain broad cornices. Its isolated are excellent, the detail is coarser with a position is definitely a rural feature, un- show of more provincial taste, and the light

known in Cuzco, but common in small brown stone has far less flavor than the pueblos like Checacupe. Simple ball pin- reddish. The composition of the exterior at nacles load the buttresses of the nave and Ayaviri, when seen as a whole standing the dome. The unusual size of the two within its spacious atrium, in some respects

chapels at the front gives something like surpasses its rival. The twin towers of | the impression of a second transept as seen Cuzco derivation present a well-balanced | from the distance. Their sloping red-tiled unity and the two chapels toward the front roof and the brown stones of the structure are small and inconspicuous without the blend well with the reddish stone of the medieval silhouette of those at Lampa. The portals. The parish church at Lampa is out- flat roof and strong rectangular buttresses standing among those of the small villages are well fitted into the composition (Fig.

| of Peru, notable for the high quality of its 240), but the appearance of the church workmanship and the originality of its today is sadly marred by the recent restocomposition. It is interesting too in the way rations using galvanized-iron roofs for the

it shows its descent from the architecture transept and dome. |. , of both the Cuzco and Puno regions. Within as well as without, the two The church at Ayaviri (Fig. 246) is very churches (Figs. 245, 246) differ in detail,

, similar to that at Lampa, consisting of a although less so within. The fine stone barLatin cross with single sanctuary elevated rel vault at Ayaviri is divided into five bays

MN 168 &

| | PUNO : , with a single transverse arch at each bay in niches, which have Indian guardians with traditional style, in contrast to the four feathered headdresses. In the second story

bays and two intermediate arches at Lampa. the three hearts bear the inscription: The choir too follows the traditional Sanctus Deus, Sanctus Fortis, Sanctus Immethod of construction, being suspended mortalis, also present in abbreviated form on a flatly arched vault. The less usual on the facade of La Compafiia at Arequipa. features in Ayaviri are the use of early The irregular stone of the lateral walls and Gothic ribbed vaults in the arms of the the bright red portal of Asillo are imposing transept and the large blind arch supported in this tiny Indian village of eight hundred by columns in the ends of the transepts. souls. But this art is rustic and provincial ‘The same taste for ornament displayed in without the exquisite qualities of the best the portal comes to light in the shield, floral primitive work. Today the church is roofed and scroll, in the center of each bay of the with galvanized iron, which has replaced _

_ vault and the flat scroll designs in the pen- the thatched original, a mournful loss for | |

dentives. The influence of the school of its picturesqueness. a oe

Cuzco here again is not limited to the ar- The Latin cross persists at Asillo as do | chitecture alone, but appears still more elo- the single apse, now raised only two steps,

quently in the high altar, the pulpit, and and the broad cornice. Lacking are the | the large pictures of the nave. The latter stone vaults and the stone dome of the re-

are signed by Isidoro Francisco Moncada of gion. The fenestration strikes an entirely | _ Cuzco in 1768. It is difficult to do full jus- new note here with two large windows in tice to the church of Ayaviri, because of each wall of the nave instead of the small the very dilapidated condition of both in- openings placed high in each bay at Lampa

terior and exterior today, whereas the and Ayaviri. |

church at Lampa is in an excellent state of | The interior of Asillo is rustic, and even

preservation. : though the specialist is delighted by iconoThe church at Asillo, under construction graphic and ornamental curiosities in the 1678-1696, has a facade (Fig. 244) which | altars and pictures, he must not forget that is modeled directly on its contemporary at aesthetically they possess no great merit. Ayaviri some twenty miles away.” The Far better is the really awesome interior of two-towered facade with three-storied por- the cruciform church at Pucara with its tal of red stone differs, however, in the enormously long and narrow nave, its high — thoroughly primitive Indian character of stone barrel vault, its large dome, and the

the dimensions and the ornament. Every- tiny raised choir. This church is barren and , thing is done with a strong quechua accent. austere like a Mexican monastic church of

The columns swell more than usual; the the sixteenth century, although judging by

acanthus crowns of Cuzco, via Lampa- local style, it belongs to the late sevenAyaviri, are heavy and coarse. The Sacred teenth or early ‘eighteenth century. The Heart is carved above each of the side clumsiness of the exterior, consisting of

| MN 169 AB

SOUTHERN PERU | , portal and flanking towers with the left having survived from about the year 1700. tower unfinished, is partially offset by the The high altar was donated by Dofia Maria

, bright red stone of the portal and the stark- del Ribero in 1847 according to an inscrip-

ness of the landscape setting. tion above it. In stone letters beneath the Vilque, once an important commercial choir appear the following words: Hiso el —

center, to which Argentines went from Dr. Don Manuel de la Pena Montenegro : Salta to sell their mules, is now an aban- esta iglesia. Se empesé en el ato de 1790 y

| doned village of one hundred inhabitants. se acabéd 1793. This statement that the Facing the plaza is a splendid church en- church was built in 1790-1793 by Manuel tirely of stone, light tan in color, with de la Pefia Montenegro is an exaggeration,

single tower of cuzqueno lineage to the for it can refer only to the portal. The left. This church, finished in 1696, on the church and tower clearly are contemporary word of Bishop Mollinedo, obviously is a with the churches at Ayaviri and Lampa,

, close relative of Ayaviri and Lampa.‘ The as the style and the word of Mollinedo handling of the rectangular buttresses is prove. The portal, on the contrary, was obidentical, but the quality of the cut ma- viously remade in the eighteenth century

, sonry is superior to any others of the group. and fitted rather awkwardly into the reIn plan there are striking differences, for cessed niche which is too small for the huge _ here at Vilque the church has a single nave capitals and projecting entablatures. This and no dome. The barrel vault of masonry portal is a late adaptation of the side en-

- counts only six bays throughout, and in trance of Lampa. The capitals consist of general the scale is smaller than in the two rows of large incised leaves topped by others. A plain molded cornice runs below volutes, and the shafts are encircled below the vault, and the bays are indicated by by two crowns of leaves, as at Lampa. An stone arches carried on pilasters. The win- allover decoration of grapes, leaves, and dows as at Lampa are small and the mid- pomegranates betrays the later date and the dle bays unlighted. A baptistry is located influence of the mestizo facades of Puno, to the right under the choir, and a stairway Juli, and Pomata. This is a tame reflection

| in the lower part of the tower to the left of the sumptuousness of the latter, how| leads to the choir. These projections and _ ever, the postscript to a greater past. Techthe sacristies flanking the sanctuary give nically the facade is inferior to the body contrasts in roof levels on the exterior. The of the church, whose best feature is its roofs, originally of red tiles, have recently beautifully cut masonry. The side portal, been covered with the prevailing curse, gal- which unmistakably belongs to the original

vanized iron. - construction of the late seventeenth cen-_ _ The portal is an addition of the late tury, is a dignified composition of two. eighteenth century and the retables and _ stories with unchanneled and undecorated pulpit were all replaced in the mid-nine- shafts topped by a Corinthian type of capi-

teenth century, only the silver candelabra tal possessing large volutes. | M170 RK

| | - 6 PUNO! | The parish church at Santiago de Pupuja that the inscription is correctly read as in the vicinity of Pucara is a fine structure 1774 and noti711.” in reddish stone. It has a two-towered fa- The portal stands within a semicircular

cade and a Latin-cross plan with dome. I recess like so many others of the region. , believe it is modeled on the church at The curiosities, such as the cherub heads on > Ayaviri, although it is known to me only _ the stilt block above the capitals, the frieze in photographs. An inscription beneath the of cherubs over the upper niche, the half-

choir is said to state that the construction length figure with pendant breasts as in 7 was finished in 1767, a date which is clearly Puno Cathedral and the retables of Asillo, betrayed in its facade of mestizo style.* interest the spectator but the design and

Although the general disposition of the workmanship are second rate. , architectural design descends from Ayaviri, Definitely not so is the body of the the flat ornament covering the entire sur- church, again set in a broad atrium and face has an unmistakable Puno-esque flavor. facing upon a large plaza. The front, with

This crossbreeding of the two regions pro- its single bell tower at the left and a side duces a highly exotic offspring. Most nota- glimpse of the dome and buttresses, is

ble are the columns which taper sharply picturesque. Magnificent is the view from toward the top and consist of a succession the opposite extreme with the apse and of crowns carved with leaves. Here are the transept rising to equal heights and the acanthus-leafed crowns of Cuzco, multi- dome soaring above (Fig. 247). The butplied and presented in a completely native tresses are loaded with pinnacles, enchant- , and mestizo guise, as reinterpreted by ar- ing in their fantasy, with rows of crisply —

tists steeped in Puno traditions. : stylized leaves. To complete the circuit of Juliaca lies farthest to the south, nearest the exterior, mention must be made of the to Puno, a fact which might be surmised side door of trefoil shape whose moldings

from the architecture of its church, Santa are carved with pomegranates, vines, and , Catalina (Fig. 249). Like Santiago de Pu- grapes. In the rear wall of the apse is an | puja, it incorporates, but in a different way, arched recess enclosing a broad window. »

the Indianism of the south. The date too is Here is a rare feature and an exact parallel of the eighteenth century, for an inscrip- to the balcony (Fig. 79) in the apse of tion on the portal which I could decipher Santo Domingo, Cuzco, which Buschiazzo only in part reads:. . . se acabé esta portal interpreted as an Open Chapel.” As previ-

avo 1774 (“this portal was finished in ously explained, greater probability favors | 1774”). The late period is attested by the the theory that the opening in the apse was

spiral columns and the lack of ornament, intended for the display of relics. Oo indicative of the change to a more classical The interior of Santa Catalina (Fig. 248)

taste. The fact that the composition is strikes one immediately by its enormous based upon that of the facade (Figs. 250, length, and then by its fine dome and stone |

| M171 A |

251) of Puno Cathedral (1757) also shows barrel vaults. All of these features occur at

SOUTHERN PERU Lampa and Ayaviri as do the chapels on Don Miguel Jacinto San Roman, at the either hand beneath the elevated choir. time of whose death of unrecorded date Quite new to the churches in the present the structure had been completed except group are the shallow arched niches, in for the vaults.” The Latin-cross floor plan each bay of the nave, which from the out- (Fig. 3), the only type used in important side give the mistaken appearance of chap- churches of the Andean region of southern els. The sacristy at the right also looks more Peru during the eighteenth century, has

prominent than it should, as it does at no lateral chapels at Puno. It follows the | Lampa. The Puno-esque character comes same plan as the churches at Lampa and forth in the ornament of the frieze with its Ayaviri. Everything about the construcalternation of rosette and rectangular styl- tion of Puno Cathedral (Fig. 254) places it ized flower, a signature of Puno-Arequipa- stylistically with the churches in the region © Bolivia. The vaults too have large stylized just to the north of the city: the stone bar-

shields similar to those of Puno Cathedral rel vault with penetrations, the severe (Fig. 254). The six bays of the nave are molded cornice, the raised choir, and the thus decorated: with female head (St. fine stone dome on pendentives over the Catherine?) ; with stars, sword, crown, and _ crossing. The same holds for the exterior half wheel (the attributes of St. Catherine with its excellent ashlar, the flat roof, the of Alexandria); with the giant face of the stone dome loaded by turrets, and the pro- _

sun; with stars; with AM (Ave Maria); nounced rectangular buttresses, like those

| and with the monogram, IHS. The dome of Ayaviri and Vilque. Novelties are the | too carries the monograms of Christ and low buttresses of the transept and apse, Mary and a row of stylized flowers. The rising little more than half the height of right transept has the Franciscan crossed- the church, like a deep wall with curving arms in its vault, perhaps a later addition, top. They recall the large curving butand the left transept the Bethlemite shield tresses massed against the wall of the church of three stars and crown. Hence the church, at Characato near Arequipa. Unfortunately

Oo at present in charge of the Franciscans, the appearance of the exterior at Puno is seems to have belonged to three religious badly marred by the galvanized iron which

orders, for the THS and the pierced heart has recently been placed over the stone

7 upon the facade suggest the Jesuits. This vaults. description gives no adequate picture of the Ample sacristies of rectangular shape peculiar and primitive charm of the inte- flank the apse of Puno Cathedral, each with

| rior of Santa Catalina at Juliaca, charm doors opening both into the transept and which persists, although a fire stripped it the sanctuary. The square chamber which

, of all its original retables and furnishings. projects beyond the apse might be interThe new cathedral of Puno, dating from preted as a camarin, not very commonly ~

the first half of the eighteenth century, placed in that position, although a good was begun at the expense of a rich miner, example of it can be cited in the church at

M172 A

, | | PUNO , ~ Copacabana. The analogue is less certain May 25, 1757, and the name of the sculp-

in the churches of San Pedro at Lima tor, Simén de Asto. They read as follows: © (Fig. 9) and San José at Nazca. The ca- Se acabé es(ta) portada oi 25 de maio de marin is a special chamber or shrine placed 1757 afos and El maestro que hiso esta behind an altar-containing a cult statue of portada fué Simén de Asto. On the colthe Virgin or other saint. It appears to be umms of the second story the date is re-

particularly characteristic of Latin Amer- peated, Acabé ato de 1757. oo

ica. - The general composition of the facade of

_ The sculptured decoration of the inte- Puno Cathedral with its high portal berior is limited to the center of each bay of tween two square towers is derived from the vault, and to the long figures (now the school of Cuzco where it originated in destroyed) with great feathered headdresses La Compafiia (Fig. 67), followed by San

in the pendentives of the dome. The plac- Pedro and El Belén at Cuzco and by the | ing of a saint in relief enframed in stylized church at Ayaviri. Otherwise, the style is leaves in the vault follows the precedent of related to the mestizo works of southern Arequipa, as seen in the churches of Caima Peru. The bases of the towers are divided and Paucarpata. At Puno the Immaculate into stories by moldings as at Zepita. The Conception appears over the sanctuary, the belfries seem to have been added by an

Madonna and Child in the transepts, fol- architect who changed the original designs, . _ lowed in the bays of the nave by St. Rose for they are small and slightly out of pro-

of Lima, a praying figure, St. Michael, St. portion to the mass of the towers. The Dominic, and St. Francis. Today the inte- stone used in the belfries has a light yellow

rior of Puno is disappointing because the color, unlike the gray stone throughout

altars and furnishings are entirely modern, the rest of the church, another indication | as the result of a fire in 1930. The original of a lapse of a few years, probably at the high altar was transferred to the church at time of San Roméan’s death. The plain Taraco in 1877, and there it still exists. | colonnettes, ringed by crowns of leaves and

The facade (Figs. 250, 251) and side pinched in the center by a band, and the portals of the cathedral constitute an amal- large capitals with rigid leaves point in the |

gamation of the style of Arequipa and that direction of the Ayaviri-Lampa circle of Juli and Pomata. The main fabric of the rather than toward Juli-Pomata in the church, on the other hand, belongs to the south. Puno Cathedral throughout stands regional school of Ayaviri and Lampa. at the crossroads where the two schools

These sculptured portals, in contrast to meet. - | , , others of the lake region, are exactly dated. | The highly decorated portal by Simon

That on the epistle side (Fig. 253) has an de Asto is the work of a man who had

inscription, Avo de 1754. In the spandrels practiced his trade at Juli, judging by his | of the front doorway (Fig. 252) are two repertory of ornament. A heavy vine twists | inscriptions giving the date of completion, about the columns, dividing them into

M173 A

SOUTHERN PERU spiral bands as on the portals of Pomata titular. saint of the church, Charles Borand of San Juan and Santa Cruz in Juli romeo, is accompanied at the sides by Saints (Figs. 218, 219, 231). The familiar mestizo Peter and Paul. Just below, the Madonna _ motives (grapes, papayas, flat crisp-petaled of the Immaculate Conception is sustained flowers, and broad leaves) stand out promi- in an elliptical mandorla by tiny angels,

nently. The carving here is hard and dry, and adoring her are Saints Dominic and lacking in the luxuriance and decorative Francis. Over the doorway, a quechua St. exuberance of the best work at Juli and Michael, wearing a feathered headdress and Pomata. The mermaids, popular in southern flounced skirt, slays the dragon. The short

Peru and Bolivia (Arequipa, Juli, Po- primitive statues in the main niches, neg- | - mata, Potosi), play their charangos as they ligible in merit, represent St. Mark at the float over the niches within which stand right and possibly St. Matthew at the left. solemn evangelists.” Interesting as the fa- A number of interesting details of the _ cade of Puno Cathedral is, its extremely facade deserve mention. The spiral column static rigidity produces the effect of cold- to the left of the doorway, now reénforced ness which makes it fall aesthetically into a by iron bands, is the only one which, like category well below the churches of Juli, Santa Cruz at Juli (Fig. 229), has mon-

Pomata, and Zepita. keys in the decoration. An acanthus crown

From the archaeological standpoint the of leaves, of Cuzco tradition, also appears Puno facade (Figs. 250-252) is intriguing here and on the columns of the second because it gathers up and combines cross- story. The frieze over the columns is carved currents from the Titicaca region and from with a rosette topped by three feathers, the Arequipa. The composition of the portal latter like an Indian headdress. The feathers in two stories and the general disposition turn up now and again in mestizo art and indicate that Simén de Asto had visited with especial frequency among the ornaArequipa, and had admired the facade of ment within the church at Asillo and in the Compafiia there (Fig. 193). The frag- the cloister of the Compafiia at Arequipa.

ment of an entablature at the sides which The two side portals (Fig. 253) of Puno makes a transition between the two stories Cathedral, like the facade, are adaptations is borrowed directly from the Compafiia. of the Arequipa school, but so modified as

: Likewise derivative from Arequipa is the to become original works. The general aruse of a broad flat fringe of vine-and-leaf rangement: round-arched doorway with ornament (Figs. 201, 202, 206) at the pilasters, a horizontal frieze or entablature outer edges of the portal. To be sure, the above, a rounded tympanum with voluted artist modified the prototype radically in hood, a niche or sculptured relief in the proportions, in detail, and especially in the center, are found, though differently prointroduction of figures of saints, as though portioned, at Paucarpata and in the side in a great retable. The large empty niche, portal of Santo Domingo at Arequipa which must have contained a statue of the (Figs. 201, 202). The corbel beneath the

M174

, PUNO | | | niche, supported by a nude putto, is also the rosettes, and rectangular flowers. The arequipeno, as for example in the portal of | side portals have excellent scale and most , Caima (Fig. 208). Only the spiral colon- effective composition, combined with deconettes belong to the lake region, the rest of 1 rative invention. The ornament; both in the ornament being definitely of arequi- technique and motives, is sufficiently unlike peo flavor. Especially notable in that re- that of the facade to suggest that some spect are the grotesque heads in profile and other master, rather than Simén de Asto, |

even the designs of the vines, the leaves, conceived it.

A 1758 | :

Oo BLANK PAGE

Sculpture -

BLANK PAGE

|X

, CHOIR STALLS , CT’SE extraordinary importance of the The paintings of apostles and saints in half TT thoi stalls of colonial Peru has passed length which occupy the main panels have hitherto almost unnoticed. Only the series been retouched on numerous occasions. in Lima Cathedral has received much at- The most drastic changes took place, how-

tention, in spite of the fact that the ever, in 1825 when the choir stalls were churches of Lima alone contain five superb moved from their traditional Hispanic lo- | sets of the seventeenth and eighteenth cen- cation in the nave to their present position , turies. Furthermore, Cuzco has three fine in the apse. The elliptical backs of red plush series and Trujillo one. No other country with gilded frames were added then, as well

in South America possesses anything com- as the late rococo gables at the top. Perhaps , parable either in quantity or quality. it would clarify the situation to state the The earliest choir stalls in South Amer- case positively and say what has survived

ica, so far as I know, are those in the of Christédval Hidalgo’s work: the large cathedral of Sucre in Bolivia, a city known panels which serve as backs to the upper in the colonial age as La Plata and as Chu- stalls, the bishop’s throne, and the caryatid quisaca. Among the books and loose papers figures between the seats. The seats of the in the cathedral archives which record the upper stalls and the lower stalls in their

expenditures of the late sixteenth century entirety are later. , are numerous payments to Christéval Hi- | Hidalgo’s style reveals clearly that he dalgo, sculptor of the stalls (1592-1599). was Spanish born. The large decorative Funds were collected from all over the — cartouches of the late Renaissance serve as diocese, as far away as Chucuito, at that frames for elliptical paintings of apostles,

time within the episcopal jurisdiction of and balustered colonnettes separate the |

Chuquisaca.* panels. The freedom of Renaissance artists

These interesting stalls of the late six- from adherence to strict classical usage is

teenth century have been considerably manifest in the free interpretation of the damaged by later alterations (Fig. 255). Ionic capitals and in the association with

Not the least is the white paint with them of a Doric frieze. The bishop’s throne

| NM I79K | : | touches of gilt on details of ornament, thus with its fine canopy supported by the same masking the natural color of the cedar and _ balustered colonnettes is an outstanding ex-

giving an artificial look to the sculpture. ample of Renaissance craftsmanship.

SCULPTURE , The choir stalls of Sucre Cathedral are manner above the seats of the upper stalls. unique in South America. Only one other Their architectural enframement clings to

series stands near them in date, that of an early Renaissance design, even at this Tunja Cathedral in Colombia (1598— _ late date. Columns, fluted in the upper two 1603), the work of a certain Francisco thirds of the shaft and topped by a CorinVelazquez. The style of the latter is unre- _thian capital, separate the panels. The frieze lated to the church furniture of Peru and displays the freedom of Renaissance interBolivia. Most extraordinary is the arrange- pretation of classical themes in the use of ment of these stalls as separate chairs, each the triglyph over the column and in the of which has a prayer desk before it.” molding of dentils, while the main section

a The earliest set of choir stalls in Peru is over each saint is filled by an arabesque. located in Santo Domingo at Lima (Fig. The saints represented include an impos-. 256). They are assignable by style and lit- ing array of Dominicans, the apostles, the -erary allusion to the first quarter of the Fathers of the Latin Church, and the major seventeenth century. Padre Lizarraga, who personalities of sacred history, such as St. _ departed from Lima for Chile in 1603, Catherine of Siena, St. Catherine of Alex-.

, makes no mention of them throughout his andria, St. Agnes, St. Ursula, St. Lucy, St. detailed description of the church. On the Sebastian, St. Martin of Tours, etc. The other hand, Padre Cobo in his history of the patroness of Spanish America, St. Rose of

, city (circa 1629) speaks of the fine stalls Lima, was added in the late seventeenth with many carved figures of saints.” century. The usual custom in Dominican _ By some miracle these stalls have escaped and Franciscan churches of placing over destruction in numerous earthquakes, al- the prior’s throne the meeting of St. Franthough the church has suffered repeatedly. cis and St. Dominic at Rome is observed

Damage has been limited to the pinnacles here. | and moldings at the top which are modern Each of the panels has a round arch at in large part. The backs of the seats in both the top, and the saint in most cases is

| the upper and lower ranges have a mudéjar crowded in the space. This crowding of the pattern which is repeated almost without figure and the animation attempted in modification throughout. A vertical chan- many of the postures are in general charneled motive constitutes the rectangular acteristic of the sixteenth-century stalls of

frame, and within are elliptical inter- Spain.* The swaying of the body, in the laces. Similar mudéjar designs decorate the reliefs representing St. Michael, St. Agnes,

| lower sections of the seats in the four other and others, suggests the Gothic hip-swing. series of choir stalls in Lima, the only fea- Close examination, however, leads to the

, ture which those of Santo Domingo have in suspicion that Renaissance contrapposto

common with them. was the real intention of the sculptor. The

_ Forty-seven panels, each carved with the attempt to rotate the body at the hips and figure of a saint, are arranged in the usual to throw forward one leg and one shoulder

MN 180 & |

CHOIR STALLS , is not successfully accomplished. For the ment which was known to first-rate ar- | most part the handling of the human figure _ tists in Spain. Because of the belated nature | ranges from competence to failure. St. Se- of the sculpture and the personal naiveté

bastian and St. Agnes fall into the latter it embodies, direct stylistic relations with , category. In general, the artist paid little any specific school of Spanish sculpture attention to the problem of composition. would be difficult to establish. The noneither of the figure or of its relation to the professional artist, very frequently the space about it. The technical equipment of member of a religious order, is by nomeans the artist was not equal to the task in such a rarity in the cultural history of Hispanic

panels as St. Martin and the Beggar, or America. | Santiago Matamoros. These reliefs do have The choir stalls of Lima Cathedral (Figs. a naive charm which appeals to the special- 257, 258) may be justifiably called the most

ist, but our critical sense would be inade- important in Peru, not only because of quate, if we did not recognize the provin- their high quality, but also because of the

cial quality of the work. precedent which they established for subCertain figures like that of the Magdalen sequent works. After a period of competi-

are touched by the classical style in the tive bidding among the chief sculptors of disposition of the pallium. On the whole, the day, the contract for them was awarded , however, the drapery displays an attitude to Pedro de Noguera, one of the outstandwhich is naturalistic rather than concerned ing colonial artists of the seventeenth cenwith decorative qualities or effects of style. tury. Noguera won this highly prized comThe choir stalls of Santo Domingo are petition in April 1623. The following year —

definitely retarded works of art. In Spain he engaged to work with him under his they would be dated about 1530, that is direction two of the men who had been

approximately one hundred years earlier. his rivals in the bidding: Luis Ortjz de The most surprising archaism of all is the Vargas and Martin Alonso de Mesa.° The

relief devoted to St. Anne, Mary, and the latter died in 1626, and hence probably acInfant Christ (Fig. 261), which retains the complished comparatively little upon the , iconography of the Annaselbsdritt,so com- left side of the stalls which was assigned mon in northern Europe in the fifteenth to him.’ Luis Ortiz de Vargas’ share concentury whence it penetrated to Spain.’ sisted of the right side. How much he comThe group in Lima is dignified and expres- pleted is difficult to surmise, for he was sive, one of the most successful pieces of back in Seville in 1628. Highly significant

sculpture on the stalls. is the fact, however, that ornamental deThe sculptor of the Dominican stalls was tails, such as the putti supporting the , surely Spanish born and just possibly a canopy and the draped female heads, are monk. He was acquainted with the church used both on the Lima stalls and on those furniture of the mother land, but he was of Malaga Cathedral in Spain. Ortiz de an amateur without the technical equip- Vargas, himself, was entrusted with the

MN 181 4 , |

~ SCULPTURE | , , decorative carving of the latter in the six- niche above each of the upper stalls. Toteen thirties. Notices of his activity in day, as one approaches the choir, the four

| Lima are limited to the years between 1622 Fathers of the Latin Church, the Four

and 1627." : Evangelists, and the apostles are equally It must be admitted that the style of divided between the left and right sides

the choir stalls is uniform throughout, giv- facing each other. With them are other , ing little evidence of the collaboration. saints, such as Joseph, Michael, and SebasPedro de Noguera prepared the designs, tian. Their arrangement is confused, beand he must have had a number of sculp- cause of errors made in their transfer from tors and carpenters to carry out his plans the original choir to the sanctuary. On both under his close supervision. The workshop sides near the altar there follow female coéperated as a well-organized unit, as was saints such as Barbara, Agnes, Clare, customary from the Middle Ages to the Theresa, Catherine of Siena, and the Mag-

. nineteenth century. dalen. With them stand Franciscans and The stalls originally occupied their tra- Jesuits. The rear wall, likewise, is mainly

, ditional Hispanic position in the nave. devoted to monastic saints, in large part During the restorations and alterations of of the Dominican and Franciscan orders. Lima Cathedral in 1895-1897 the ¢rascoro A second bishop’s throne holds its normal was destroyed and the stalls transferred to position in the center of the rear wall. their present place in the sanctuary. In the Padre Rubén Vargas Ugarte generously exreinstallation the positions of the saints plained to me the reasons for the peculiar

, were so completely rearranged that it is occurrence in Lima of the two episcopal impossible to say exactly what the pre- chairs and of still a third which is in reality vious disposition was. An old photograph, the stall of the dean of the canons. The published by Martin Noél, shows that the presence of this third and most extraordi-

| bishop’s throne with the figure of the Sal- nary feature Padre Vargas solves on the vator Mundi occupied its customary place basis that the dean of Lima often acted for in the center of the rear wall.’ Seven apos- the bishop and hence was especially hon-

tles and the Purisima were placed in two ored in that city. His stall stands on the groups on each side of Him. Today the right side and is given the same prominence bishop’s throne stands at the left of the as that of the primate. The existence of high altar as the spectator faces the altar. the first bishop’s throne at the left is In this region at both the left and right easily understood, because the position of of the throne appear empty panels without the high altar in the middle of the sancseats below. These sections are modern imi- tuary relegates the normal throne to a dis-

tations of the original carving. tant and unsuitable location. The lower stalls as usual have only deco- The style of the figure sculpture disrative ornament. A saint in full length, plays considerable animation in the poses carved in high relief, is placed within the of the saints. The lower part of the body MN 182 &

7 , CHOIR STALLS | with one knee bent forward assumes of secondary artists who lack that instinct virtually the same position in each relief. for selection native to really great masters.

_ The torso is swung slightly to the left or Even though the figures of the saints , right, and the movement of the head must frankly be termed mediocre, that fact usually follows the same direction. In some does not alter the splendor of the stalls as | cases the postures are badly motivated, the a whole. The reliefs of St. Rose of Lima desire to introduce variety of action hav- and San Francisco Solano, canonized in ing prevailed to the disadvantage of com- 1671 and 1726 respectively, are excellent

position. The poorest relief is that of the sculptures beautifully conceived with a | Visitation in which an ugly distortion of fine sense of composition and motivation. | body results from the projection of the Especially memorable is the graceful move- ,

knees and the inability of the artist to ment of the latter’s arm which holds the | cope with the problem of two figures em- bow of the violin. These figures are in con- _ bracing. The confused and disorganized trast to the kneeling St. Jerome whose dishandling of the draperies still further dis- traught and penitent mind is reflected in

tresses the critical observer. the nervous draperies. The figures of the In general, the style of drapery is char- two local saints of Lima must have been acterized by sharp-edged folds, numerous added subsequent to 1726, the date of San creases, and puckers. The intention is Francisco Solano’s canonization, since they ,

clearly to create a pictorial play of light are both by the same hand. Possibly they — and shade. Although a successful effect is were carved by Santiago Rosales when he |

achieved in some instances, the drapery restored the stalls after the earthquake of , usually appears metallic, and is lacking in 1746. Still later, belonging to the Neo_ good design and in motivation. The classi- classic period of the nineteenth century, are

cal handling of rounded folds with chan- two colossal wooden statues in the round,

neled divisions, seen in Martinez de which represent St. Rose and St. John the | Arrona’s Apostles (Fig. 309) in the sacristy Evangelist. One stands in each corner of of the cathedral, was the point of departure the choir behind the high altar.

for Pedro de Noguera’s drapery. He trans- The architectural scheme of the Lima _ formed it into a metallic pictorial concept. stalls belongs to the early Baroque phase, |

Among the most successful reliefs are the even though the ornamental motives might , four Fathers of the Latin Church and St. _ be classified as Renaissance. The niches enFrancis which display composure and hence closing the figures of saints are topped by

suffer from no straining for effect. The two volutes upon each of which reclines a Salvator Mundi on the bishop’s throne female figure. A rectangle fills the space would logically be regarded as the most between the volutes, itself finished by a important piece of sculpture. The body is broken pediment and more volutes. The posed with dignity and the drapery is pleas- constant change of direction, the breaking

| MN 183 KR |

ing. Yet it is overelaborated in the manner of lines, and the contrast of planes con- |

¢

SCULPTURE stitute the first major appearance of the decorative ornament in European art. It

| Baroque in Lima. Even the rectangle of does occur prominently upon the high the niche and the other small rectangle altar of San Miguel at Huejotzingo (1580)

above it break out at the corners. in Mexico. The apple may or may not be The canopy at the top likewise carries symbolic in intention. If symbolism is im-

through the Baroque spirit in the agitated plied, it would have reference to sin, movement resulting from the interplay brought upon mankind when Adam and

. , and contrast of numerous curving lines. Eve ate of the fruit of the Tree of Know]-

: The pinnacles in the shape of molded can-_ edge. | | dlesticks cause the attention to fluctuate The chairs themselves are first rate in

restlessly. The draped female heads and design and sculptural decoration. On the — lion heads which alone interrupt the mold- sides between the seats is a half-length fe-

| ings and volutes are also employed promi- male figure, a classical European theme, nently in the ornament upon the chairs with pendant breasts and large abdomen in and columns below. The frieze with its which the navel is prominently stylized. channeled design, similar to a triglyph, The profile of these panels separating the strikes a sober note. Nude putti act as seats is composed of inward and outward caryatids as they bend forward with the sweeping curves, a triumph of Baroque curve of the canopy, an arrangement composition. A grotesque mask, generally found in the Baroque choir stalls of the human but occasionally that of a lion, fin-

, cathedrals of Malaga and Cadiz. Within ishes the outward swell of the curves. Anthe curve a large shell inscribed in an el- other type of mask head, like that of a lipse set in a rectangle makes a pleasing satyr with grimacing open mouth, is carved and restful transition between the upper upon each of the misericords. These heads

and lower registers. are fanciful and imaginative in addition to

| The columns carry fine Corinthian capi- being superb in their decorative organiza-

tals upon a channeled shaft with pro- tion. |

, nounced entasis. On the broad band at the The backs of the seats show considerable

: lower end are carved festoons of fruit variety in handling, although most com_ grouped about a draped female head. Just monly the draped female head occupies below each column a lion’s head acts as_ the center of the panel with swags of cloth corbel. In the narrow panel between the containing apples arranged about it in heads is carved a decorative motive com- curvilinear patterns. Frequently two eagles

| prising two swags of cloth containing ap- in heraldic opposition confront a fountain ples. A cartouche in the center of the panel and the female head flutters above it. This provides the stabilizing feature. The swag thematic repertory undergoes many varia-

| | AN 184K |

with apples is repeated again and again on tions, but unity prevails in the general the backs and on the sides of the chairs. scheme. The few restorations, probably That particular motive is not common in those carried out by Santiago Rosales

CHOIR STALLS | shortly after 1746, are easy to recognize, The draped female head, a favorite of for the imitation of the original ornament Pedro de Noguera, is of Renaissance origin.

is perfunctory.” Note, for instance, the See, among many Spanish examples: the | columns with mask heads and the narrow retable in the sacristy of Avila Cathedral

panels accompanying the figures of St. (1549-1553), the retables in the parish Rose, St. Jerome, and San Francisco So- church at Palenzuela (1591), the pulpit at lano. Still later modifications were made in Villafranca del Cid; as well as choir stalls in

1895-1897 when the choir was transferred southern Italy and in Switzerland, and

from the nave to the sanctuary, and the Italian engravings of ornament.” It soon neo-Gothic canopy was placed over the passed from the cathedral stalls into the bishop’s throne on the left side. The re- main body of Peruvian art at Lima, Cuzco, straint of the design is self-effacing, so that and Trujillo.” In fact, the work of Pedro no unpleasant conflict is established with de Noguera is the foundation of the Peru-

its Baroque environment. ' vian school of the seventeenth century. _ The derivation of the ornament of the Nearly all of the subsequent choir stalls oe Lima choir stalls is classical, coming from owe something to him. Those of San Fran- _ Italy via Spain. Swags, masks, caryatids, cisco in Cuzco are virtually a copy of the and arabesques are, needless to say, the very cathedral series. In addition to the introessence of antique ornament, as reinter- duction of the decorative motives already

preted in the Renaissance and Baroque pe- mentioned, his use of the nude female

riods. The geometric panels on the lower busts,” the swag of cloth containing ap- , , sides of the seats are the only details which _ ples,“* and the mask upon the misericord * | may be specifically termed as Spanish be- was widely emulated. All of these features cause of their mudéjar character. They put he had come to know in Spain where they

in their first appearance in the stalls of belong to the main body of European traSanto Domingo, and passed into Peruvian dition.

- tradition, being used on the choir stalls of The choir stalls of Lima Cathedral hold : San Francisco, La Merced, and San Agustin first rank among the several fine series of

in Lima as well as on those of San Fran- Peru. They are the work of Spanish ar-

cisco at Cuzco. tists in the New World, and they deserve The most beautiful and the most Renais- recognition even on comparison with sculpsance sections of the cathedral sculpture are ture in European lands. To be sure, the the two columns which support the canopy figures do not measure up to those of a over the Visitation. They recall works of masterpiece like Alonso Berruguete’s stalls a century earlier. Arabesques like those of in Toledo Cathedral. They are, however, _ the Ara Pacis of Augustus, masks, shells, not inferior to Guillén de Olanda’s re-

and the draped female head are woven into liefs in Valladolid “ and may be coma design, carved with a skill equal to the pared with many other similar works in

best European standards. : Spain and Italy. A 185 R

, SCULPTURE | San Francisco at Cuzco possesses a series the chief master. Dr. José Uriel Garcia dis-

of choir stalls (Figs. 259, 260) which are covered a contract in the notarial archives

| discussed next because of their direct de- at Cuzco by virtue of which Sebastian pendence upon those of Lima Cathedral. Martinez agreed in 1631 to make the choir

| The sculptor was unmistakably instructed _ stalls of San Francisco within three years."

to use the latter as his model, a fact made This document seems to be contradicted obvious by the most cursory examination. by Fray Diego de Mendoza’s statement that

| The columns, the capitals, and the archi- the sculptor was a Franciscan friar, Luis tecture enframing the saints at Cuzco are Montes.’* From the same author we learn copied with only slight modification from that the stalls were damaged by the col-

the earlier set. The changes involve the lapse of the church tower in the earthelimination of the recumbent female fig- quake of 1650. Dr. Garcia suggested that ures which are stretched out on the volutes Fray Luis Montes’ share in the work was in Lima and minor variations in ornament. probably limited to their restoration after The canopy above the upper stalls at Lima 1650. That indeed may have been the case,

is copied at Cuzco where the elliptical for it is difficult to believe that a single shell, the nude putti, and the channeled friar could have carried out the project frieze are repeated. The greatest difference alone. A modern inscription painted upon —

_ in the two works occurs in the crowning the walls of the choir states that Fray Luis at Cuzco. Here saints in niches replace the Montes was assisted in 1652 by two brothearlier decorative cartouches. The seats fol- ers of the Third Franciscan order, Isidro low their model with great fidelity. Some Fernandez Inca, carpenter, and Antonio variation occurs in the handling of the de- de Paz, workman. Because of the loss of tails of the swags of cloth and fruit and in the archives verification of that informa-

, the geometric panels in the lower reaches. tion is impossible. The inexactness of a The grotesque masks upon the misericords, number of these modern inscriptions in _ the female figures with pendant breasts, San Francisco makes one hesitate to accept

, | and the volutes ending in masks, all ap- them without qualification. The style of

| pear again. — the decorative sculpture, so closely modeled The quality of the carving is somewhat upon the choir stalls of Lima Cathedral drier in the stalls at Cuzco than at Lima. (1623), is compatible with the document Yet the relationship is so close that it is of 1631 identifying Sebastian Martinez as difficult to avoid the supposition that some the master. Fray Luis Montes may have as-

, of the artists moved on to the Andean capi- sisted in planning the iconographic scheme tal after finishing their first contracts. Such and in the carving too. The restorations a large project, which included thirty-four after the earthquake of 1650 were carried lower and forty-six upper stalls, demanded out in such a way that no change of plan

MN 64 a

the services of several woodcarvers and or style is discernible. carpenters working under the direction of In contrast to the decorative part, the

| ! CHOIR STALLS : figure sculpture of San Francisco shows no angels replacing the usual array of saints is ,

relation to that of Lima. The style is indeed charming. The slender childlike an- , more sober and the garments fall in sim- gels, each carrying a book, stand within | ple vertical folds for the most part. The shallow round arches. The space above is — conventional forward bend of one knee, strangely barren of adornment except for

so common in Peruvian sculpture of the a small corbel or cartouche. Instead of a | period, was adopted. The repetitiousness of canopy, a shell lunette alternates with a the great number of Franciscan saints tends head centered in Renaissance arabesques,

to monotony, although certain of the friars spaced by pinnacles. | have a Spanish intensity of feeling which The pilasters place the design of the Meris emotionally stirring (Fig. 260). The fig- _cedarian stalls in a category without coun-

ures are far more spirited than those of terpart in Peru. Nude putti act as cary- , the Franciscan choir stalls in Lima, to be atids supporting a capital from which an

discussed later. | acanthus leaf springs forth like a great The saints in the Cuzco series comprise plume. Long sprays of acanthus ending in a total of forty-six large panels and forty- a cluster of apples complete the pilaster

five smaller reliefs at the top. Inscriptions below. | originally identified each saint, allof whom = Notwithstanding the originality of the are male Franciscans with the exception of main features of the Mercedarian stalls in a few Franciscan nuns and certain major relation to the other Peruvian works, the church personalities such as St. Peter, St. seats in both rows are based directly upon John the Baptist, St. Anthony Abbot, St. those of Lima Cathedral. The chief dif-

Sebastian, etc. a , ference consists in the more extensive use The choir stalls of La Merced (Fig. 264) of arabesques of pure Renaissance type in

at Lima fall, like those of the cathedral.and the Mercedarian choir. Otherwise, the de- . those of San Francisco at.Cuzco, into the sign and the decorative repertory are unisecond quarter of the seventeenth century. formly alike, with the quality of the carv-

A document of 1628 indicates that their ing distinctly the superior in the earlier donor was Bernardo de Villegas, the great work in the cathedral. The differences are benefactor of the monastery.” Solely on those usually distinguishable between orig-

stylistic grounds they would be placed inal creation and school repetition. Cherub

earlier than the contemporary stalls just heads take the place of the lion heads below | mentioned, inasmuch as Baroque elements the pilasters, and the anatomy of the fe- of the architecture are notable for their male busts between the seats is considerably absence. The scale of these stalls is smaller, under-emphasized. The two large panels because of the lack of a canopy at the top which join the angles contain a Mercedarand the reduced size of the figures. All of ian shield, accompanied by floating putti them are angels dressed in the Mercedarian set in a splendid sheaf of Renaissance .ara-

| | N 187 & oe |

habit. The idea of a choir exclusively of besques. i

SCULPTURE A life-sized statue of Nuestra Sefiora de dral and La Compafiia (Figs. 63, 64), not _ las Mercedes presides in the center of the to speak of numerous retables. The Franchoir stalls. The statue, now painted white, ciscans informed me that the choir stalls is a splendid eighteenth-century work in of Santa Clara originally belonged to the spite of its disfigurement by a large crown dissolved monastery of the Augustinians. and modern jewels. The central niche and Cuzco Cathedral has the distinction of the smaller shrine above it with its statue possessing the most lavish set of choir stalls of St. Michael have been restored in an in Peru (Figs. 262, 263). They are datable unsatisfactory fashion. That the spiral col- between 1657 and 1678. A letter directed -umns did not belong to the original scheme to the king in the former year gives a re-

| of 1628 can be seen in the way they are port upon the cathedral but makes no - set in the second story without logical re- mention of the stalls. In 1678 Bishop Manlation to the niche. The first alteration uel Mollinedo spoke of them in high praise

| clearly belongs to the period when the as part of the work completed after his statue of the Madonna was added. The arrival in 1673.” crude uncarved sections must be twen- Forty-three panels carved with full-

tieth-century restorations. length saints form the wall behind the Only a brief reference can be made to upper seats. Above them is a row of the choir stalls of Santa Clara in Cuzco, three-quarter-length figures, all female

, inasmuch as they are unphotographed and saints and female martyrs. On the same inaccessible. I was allowed to see them ata _ level the Infant Christ stands within a distance and in dim light, looking through niche in one corner faced by the infant , the screen which separates the choir from St. John the Baptist who occupies the corthe nave of the church. They number responding position opposite. San Francisco

thirty-four upper stalls, and their decora- in Cuzco (Fig. 259) provides the only tion is entirely architectural without hu- precedent in Peru for this smaller second- | man figures. The design appears to be dat- ary row of saints in the upper register. The

| able in the mid-seventeenth century, be- iconography is developed on traditional cause the same style was current then in lines with the Madonna of the Immacuthe retables of La Merced and in the high late Conception behind the bishop’s throne.

altar of Santa Catalina at Cuzco (Figs. In a great niche above her is the royal 311-313). The pilasters are decorated with escutcheon crowned by a large canopy and

the tongue motive, so popular in the city a profuse Baroque architectural setting. at that time, and a scroll occupies the po- Eight apostles occupy the main panels of

, sition of the capital in most instances. The the rear wall with the two leaders of the webbed scrolls upon the triangular pedi- church, Saints Peter and Paul on each side

ment at the top are the very signature of the Madonna.” On the long sides the of mid-seventeenth-century Baroque in remainder of the apostles appear, together _ Cuzco, as witness the facades of the cathe- with the Evangelists and the Fathers of MN 188 &

CHOIR STALLS , the Latin Church. Each saint is identifiable vian ornament after its initial introduction not only by his attributes but also by his in the choir stalls of Lima Cathedral.

name in gold letters on a Baroque shield . Nearly all of the elements of the archiabove his head.“ The selection and icono- tectural and decorative style of the school graphic grouping of the saints may well of Cuzco of the second half of the sevenhave been evolved by the canon, Diego teenth century come to a focus in the stalls. Arias de la Cerda, who is known to have The webbed volutes and the voluted carbeen a most energetic and enthusiastic ad- touches so prominent on the choir stalls are

- ministrator (obrero mayor) of the cathe- equally so on the facade of the Jesuit dral at this time. The attribution of the church which stands nearby upon the sculpture itself to him or to Francisco Plaza Mayor. The facade (Fig. 71) of San Dominguez de Chavez y Arrellano, whose Sebastian (circa 1673-1678) is related in personality is entirely unknown, cannot be design and ornament to such a degree that maintained.” No light has yet been shed the same workshop must have produced

upon the sculptors and carpenters who both monuments. Other wood sculptures must have labored upon the project for which show stylistic affinity are the pulpit ,

many years. | and high altar of Santa Teresa (Figs. 302, | The Cuzco stalls constitute a new trend 317) in Cuzco (1675), by the sculptor in the Peruvian school, independent of the Diego Martinez de Oviedo.” It is to be

tradition established by the first important hoped that a thorough search of the ar- | set in Lima Cathedral. The nude female chives in Cuzco will eventually provide a figures which decorate the arms of the seats basis for a more complete study of these are the only important survival from the relationships. The high altar, side altars, latter. The misericords and the mudéjar and pulpit of the Jesuit church (Figs. 280, panels of the earlier works have been aban- 319, 359) also fall within the same orbit

doned. The Renaissance survivals in the and may eventually prove to have come ornament have given way to the full His- from related workshops. The extraordi- _ panic Baroque. A salient cornice like a narily beautiful spiral columns at the sides

canopy over each column provides abrupt of the episcopal chair belong in a like clas- , contrasts in planes and deep shadows. The sification. The angel’s head against a shell _ multiplication of subordinate moldings, the is a somewhat novel device placed beneath variety of contrasts, and the general lavish- the columns and in the hoods upon the

ness of ornament are carried through with cornice of the choir stalls. | the dexterity of a first-rate master of the | The figure sculpture maintains a high | Baroque style. The arabesques upon the col- level of excellence throughout, and al-_umns and in panels upon the seats are spun though several sculptors must have been

| A 189 A |

out with great imagination and virtuosity. engaged upon it, no appreciable variation Here the draped female head appears again, in style is detected. The poses are natural

having passed into the repertory of Peru- and reposeful with few exceptions. The |

| SCULPTURE | convention of one knee projecting to give have an exaggerated entasis in the chan-

| variety of surface continues here as in vir- neled section and a cartouche is carved | tually all Peruvian stalls. Ancient classical upon the band at the base. This general custom is likewise repeated in the way the type of colonnette is essentially of Renaismantle is caught at the waist leaving the sance origin and in that respect analogous arms free. The modeling of surface is broad to those of Lima Cathedral. The panels on

and naturalistic without any trace of the the seats also have points of contact with Renaissance channeled folds which were the school of Lima in the use of the draped noted in the choir stalls of Lima Cathedral. female head centralized and balanced on

| The choir of Cuzco Cathedral is perfect each side by a draped cloth filled with in its completeness down to the last detail apples. At first glance the Trujillo stalls of the wooden gates and of the balustrades may impress one as secondary in imporin the organ loft. As a monument to the tance. Such is not the case, it seems to me,

| munificence of the colonial age and to the for they are first rate in technique and in splendor of Baroque imagination, it would expertness of design. The bishop’s throne,

be difficult to surpass. a work of extraordinary beauty, has the The choir stalls of Trujillo Cathedral draped female head as the major theme were moved from the nave to the sanctuary upon the colonnettes. In the center of the

, in 1911, and undoubtedly that fact plus main panel are the attributes of St. John a the numerous earthquakes explain why the Evangelist, the eagle and the chalice. only eight upper stalls in addition to the At the top, as usual on the bishop’s chair,

bishop’s throne have come down to us appear the tiara and keys, insignia of the (Figs. 265, 266). There must have been at pope whose authority is invested in the least thirty or forty when they were origi- bishop. A few widely spaced arabesques are nally carved. Their date is unrecorded but interwoven in the setting and the panel is

, the style suffices to make them contempo- topped by a trefoil arch. Anything superior rary with the construction of the new ca- in decorative quality would be difficult to thedral- (1643-1666) or very nearly so. find at any time or place. They are the most important stalls in Peru San Francisco at Lima is the largest monin which figure sculpture is absent.” Their astery in Peru, and fittingly it possesses the creator probably came from Lima. The biggest set of choir stalls (Figs. 267, 268). .

style prompts that assumption, and we Seventy-one upper stalls and sixty-two know by the architectural history of Tru- lower fill the deep broad space of the choir,

| jillo that most of the artists active there testimony to the great numbers of Fran- —

came from the capital. - ciscans who dedicated themselves to the

| ~ Large elliptical panels, like escutcheons church in the colonial age. When a new filled with interlocking volutes about a organ was installed some years ago, three central cartouche, form the upper wall be- upper and three lower stalls were removed hind the seats. The Corinthian colonnettes and sold. In 1912 they were donated to the

M190 A

a CHOIR STALLS | Hispanic Society of America in New York repeated again and again. In several in-

where they are now on exhibition.” stances a classical urn forms the center of Fray Luis de Cervela under whose ad- the composition. The theme is given several ministration the rebuilding of the monas- variations, at times with vines and grapes tery was completed (1669-1674) was also looped about the urn. In others there are responsible for the furnishing of the choir. vines and leaves very much like distant deThe stalls were nearing completion in 1674 scendants of the ancient vines and rosettes

according to the report of Fray Juan de on the Ara Pacis of Augustus in Rome. Benavides, but unfortunately he makes no Peacocks in heraldic opposition are added mention of the names of the sculptors and in several cases in a manner analogous to carpenters who were engaged upon them.” early medieval sculpture. The Franciscan

They continued some of the features in- shield of the five wounds is also employed | troduced in Lima with the choir stalls of in the center of several panels, and in the the cathedral, but in other respects, par- space about it is spun a cartouche of vo-

ticularly in the design of the main wall be- lutes. , | , paths, _ , nality. In general, the irregularly shaped hind the upper range, they broke into new The sides of the chairs display great origi-

The masks of the misericords with their panel is filled with vine and leaves, but in oe open mouths and large tongues, grotesque a number of them are lions in a miniature

in their humor, have become familiar to landscape, or an eagle, and occasionally a the reader by this time. It is significant to fish. The puma appears twice and likewise

contrast the smooth curvilinear designs of the elephant, rendered with delightful the cathedral misericords with these of San humor, as can be seen in the illustration Francisco, which are sharp, angular, and (Fig. 267). The elephant looks Chinese, pictorially planned in a Baroque manner. suggesting that the wood carver used a The heavy-breasted females, half-length textile or print for his model. Here is an and changed into leaves below the waist, indication of some familiarity with Orienrecur in a manner at once more sophisti- tal art, but there is no question whatsocated and less subordinated to the decora- ever of Eastern influence upon the style of , tive scheme. Other ornamental devices carving.” which descend from the sculpture in Lima Turning to the wall of saints in the upCathedral are the mudéjar panels beneath per range, one discovers elements entirely the seats, the swags of cloth filled with new to Peruvian tradition. For the first apples, and the draped female head: The time a cherub’s head within a shell forms _ patterns of arabesques on the backs and the tympanum, the top of which is semi-

sides of the seats display, however, an inde- circular and crowned by two inverted : pendence of previous models in Peru. volutes. Stepped rectangular moldings act Drawings were prepared by the chief mas- as frames to the subdivisions such as the ter in charge and the same designs were pilasters, tympana, and reliefs of saints.

Naot K

SCULPTURE . The pilasters offer a number of surprises, raised to considerable height. It is topped most of all in the transposition of the fe- by the usual projecting canopy, embel-

male figures, half-length and ending in lished by a flourish of volutes and interacanthus leaves, from their usual place be- locking moldings. The tortuous spirals of tween the chairs to their new positions as two large “salomonic” columns create a caryatids. They have become more youth- feeling of dramatic tension about the center

ful and angelic in their faces and more of the composition that they enframe. The fully clothed in body. Possibly the original columns themselves are divided horizon-

idea of caryatids upon the pilasters was tally into four bands, alternately fluted borrowed from the Mercedarian choir stalls spirally and carved with the eucharistic

| in Lima where nude putti perform the grape and vine. These are the first dated same function. The latter are closer to the salomdnicas of the type in Peru, so far as Renaissance in every respect. The caryatids I know. The bishop’s throne in Cuzco Ca, of the Franciscans support a long capital, thedral is given similar dramatic emphasis, concave in shape and divided into four but the columns there are continuous spi-

| compartments, each very curiously con- rals carved with arabesques and girded in taining an apple. Below the caryatid is sus- the lower third by two crowns of acanthus

pended a drumshaped object with a frill leaves. | around it ending in a tassel. For all of their The quality of the figure sculpture of quaintness many of these devices are more the Franciscan choir is frankly poor, well

unusual than effective. below the general standard of such work _ A great array of sixty-two male saints, in Peru. Some monotony might be expected

most of whom are Franciscans, six Fran- because of the repetition of so many ciscan nuns, and two Dominican nuns pre- monks in Franciscan habit. They lack,

, side over the choir. Behind the bishop’s however, the fervor and intenseness of throne stand St. Francis and St. Dominic, feeling which places the Franciscan saints founders of their respective orders, as they in their monastery at Cuzco on a much embrace in commemoration of their meet- higher artistic plane (Fig. 260). These ing at Rome in 1216. The same event is also saints in Lima are mechanical puppets with

made the iconographic high point on the few exceptions. The sculptors were unstalls of Santo Domingo in Lima. In an able to manipulate the body with any sigelliptical medallion in the upper region the nificant motivation because of their poor Madonna of the Immaculate Conception technique and their intellectual shallow- — stands with the crescent moon and cherubs’ ness. Several different wood sculptors were

heads at her feet. The two smaller medal- at work here, a fact which is evident from lions, one at each side of the Madonna, the variation in degree of effectiveness. The must have been carved with reliefs which best results were obtained in the saints have since been destroyed. This whole cen- upon the episcopal throne, and in the

tral section is set back within a niche and panels adjoining it. To these the chief

A192 A

, CHOIR STALLS | master clearly gave his attention. The tury character of the work isin evidence in © poorest are the panels upon the long range the complex curvilinear involutions of the

at the sides, | ornament upon the arms of the chairs and, The choir stalls of San Francisco at Lima likewise, in the hoods upon the cornice. A

are notable for their great number, and comparison with the choir stalls at Cuzco they are pleasing as church furniture from Cathedral (Figs. 262, 263) is significant, a decorative point of view. In detail they because it shows that the sculptor of the do not measure up to the design or crafts- Mercedarian relied to some extent upon manship of the other series of Peruvian the earlier series in the two sections men-

stalls hitherto discussed. tioned. Yet his own style constitutes a _ Two works remain to be considered, later stage of development. Elliptical both of them of the first quarter of the medallions of half-length saints replace the eighteenth century, one in the Mercedarian rectangular panels used in the upper regis-

_ church at Cuzco, the other in the Augus- ter of the cathedral choir. oe tinian church at Lima. The former can be — ‘The figure sculpture lacks distinction in

dated about 1710, inasmuch as the style the motivation of drapery and in emotional , belongs to that period. Other pertinent expressiveness. Most of the saints stand facts are that the Mercedarian chronicler with their shoulders bent slightly forward _ of 1650-1707 does not mention them and _ and the head tilted to the side. The result that the large paintings in the choir have is a weakly sentimental attempt at piety. an inscription with the year’ 1708. The ‘Thirty-five saints and Venerable Fathers, _ date of these paintings would indicate that most of them Mercedarians, occupy the

the completion of the furnishing of the niches behind the upper stalls, whereas in , choir took place at that time. Moreover, a the medallions are male and female saints comparable period style, so far as the use of of various periods and religious orders.” - spiral columns and of elliptical medallions A long rectangular relief with excellent is concerned, can be observed in the choir carved frame fills the space over each doorstalls (1702) of the Carthusian church of way, the saints represented being the Mag-

Seville, part of which are now in Cadiz dalen and St. Mary of Egypt, both in

Cathedral." penitence. If regarded as church fur- _ _ Here is the only instance in Peru where niture, the Mercedarian stalls fulfill their , spiral columns enframe the niches, thus function as luxurious products of the dec- ,

giving a highly Baroque feeling of rich- orator’s art. Oc a

ness and movement (Fig. 269). Leavesand © The choir of San Agustin in Lima branches of nondescript fruits serve as or- (Figs. 270, 271) was described by Calannament on the columns. The sculpture is cha, writing about 1637, as a magnificent hard and dry in quality and not equal to work in cedar which cost thirty thousand — the highly effective decorative design of pesos. A saint stood between each pair of the whole monument. The eighteenth-cen- columns with a relief illustrating some epi-

AS 193 R

SCULPTURE sode from his life placed above him. The is replaced in the Augustinian series, howsame arrangement is found in the Spanish ever, by a grotesque head or mask. In all Renaissance stalls of Burgos and Jaén Ca- three cases masks are carved upon the cor-

thedrals.* Disastrously damaged in the bels beneath the columns, and upon the

, earthquake of 1678, enough fragments misericords, only a few of the latter in

were salvaged in 1717 to supply chairs for San Agustin having withstood the repeated

the Augustinian choir, A new row of earthquakes of Lima. ,

, saints for the wall behind the upper stalls, The dilapidated condition of the Augusadded in the years 1721-1725, brought tinian choir in 1945 made investigation the sculpture to its present status.” The difficult. The church, damaged in the chairs themselves and also the columns are earthquake of 1940, was still unrestored.

, clearly of early seventeenth-century de- It was necessary to climb through scaffolds, sign, but the quality of the carving is so brush off layers of dust, lift heavy covermediocre that it must be assumed that ings of cloth, and peer through at the stalls. most of it was restored and recut in 1717. The swags of cloth and apples, the araMuch of the work can be regarded only as_ besques, and the geometric panels beneath an early eighteenth-century reproduction — the seats constitute the decorative repertory

after the original models. | as they do in Lima Cathedral. The quality Egiguren states that he has discovered a of the sculpture is in no way comparable,

, contract with the date August 17, 1620, however, and the designs are imitatively in which Pedro de Noguera was awarded mechanical. The eighteenth century is unthe commission for the Augustinian choir.” mistakable in the heads with plumed helEven though the fabrication of the chairs mets upon the backs of the seats and in the as they exist today cannot be regarded as male heads, like hermae, upon the arms.

a product of Pedro de Noguera’s shop, the between them. |

details of ornament and the type of column The full-length saints in high relief are are very similar to his masterpiece in Lima documented in the period 1721-1725, as

| Cathedral. Hence it is entirely possible that previously noted. Under the present arhe supplied the sketches for the works so rangement thirty figures form the back enthusiastically described by Calancha. The wall of the upper stalls, set up in this way

only other choir stalls in Peru which have during the rebuilding of the church in Renaissance columns of this sort are those 1903-1908. Nine panels of monks and of San Francisco at Cuzco. They, as we seven of nuns are kept in storage.” have seen, are replicas of Noguera’s pro- The sculptor of these figures was a skilltotype. The art of Noguera would explain ful technician who shows great ability in why the intertwining circular vines upon the handling of the human body as an the columns in Cuzco (Figs. 259, 260) instrument of expression. The saints stand —

| A194 A |

and those of the Augustinians in Lima are in high relief, modeled with vigor in masalmost identical. The draped female head sive sculptural volumes. They reflect the

CHOIR STALLS | | academic traditions of the Baroque period clothed only in her long flowing hair, the. | with their slow majesty, inherited in a gen- panels kept in storage belong in the cate-

eral sense from antique sculpture. The gory of apprentices’ work. The row of oO word “academic” should not necessarily be saints at the left, a detail of which is re-

regarded as a term of condemnation, but produced (Fig. 271), contains the best. rather as constituting traditional style and The right side of the stalls is unknown to _ high standards. So it was regarded in the me because of their inaccessibility followeighteenth century and in this sense it is ing the earthquake of 1940. The sculptor employed here. Qualitatively these sculp- of the Augustinians was a well-trained and

tures surpass all other figures upon the competent artist, even if not one of the several series of Peruvian choir stalls. They world’s great geniuses.

are superior even to Juan Martinez de Arro- The church furnishings of the colonial

na’s fine apostles (1608) in the sacristy age, presented in this chapter, are products | of Lima Cathedral. The latter show their of European culture in their religious ico- , dependence upon the antique still more ography, their style, and their technique. , clearly, especially by the channeled folds At times the Spaniard manifested a com_ and by the disposition of the drapery. In plete resistance to his New World environspeaking of the reliefs of the Augustinian ment. Yet in certain regions, his culture

stalls with such high praise, I refer only united with the native to create mestizo , to the best of them which represent the art, a phenomenon already investigated. hand of the chief master. Several less able The choir stalls, on the contrary, reveal : assistants in the workshop collaborated. scarcely a trace of the native, for they are With the exception of St. Mary of Egypt, Hispanic through and through.

7 A 195 A |

a | PULPITS | oe -YIHE importance of preaching as an in- The octagonal base of the lectern with

TT testa part of the program of evan- its eight Tuscan colonnettes is made of

gelization in the New World is reflected cedar. In each panel a niche is flanked by in the great number of superb pulpits of scroll-capitaled pilasters and topped by a the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. broken pediment. The arabesque inlays of Lavishness in ecclesiastical furniture pre- lighter wood, presumably carey, decorate vails throughout Hispanic America in the the base, the frieze, and main panels on colonial period. Nevertheless, no country, the four principal sides. The pilasters of not even Mexico, can equal Peru in the these four windowlike niches have delicate number and quality of wood-carved pul- inlays of ivory. The same material is used pits nor in the variety of types and styles. for St. Francis’ shield containing the stig-

The earliest datable pulpit is in San mata, placed above the capitals, and for Francisco at Cuzco (Fig. 273). The only the Franciscan escutcheon. The latter conone of its kind known to me, it is com-_ sists of a crucifix standing upon the globe posed of inlaid woods and ivory. The date of the world within a medallion and the can easily be established because of the arm of St. Francis crossed by the arm of fact that in design, materials, and work- Christ. This shield appears upon each of manship it is identical to the lectern (Fig. the four sides of the bookrest and also in 272) in the choir of the same church. The the frieze below. The inlaid arabesques are latter has an inscription upon it with year particularly beautiful in their arrangement

1628 saying it was made during the upon the upper sloping sides of the lec| guardianship of Fray Pedro Gémez. I veri- tern, the surface of which is studded with fied the reading of this date, previously brass knobs to prevent the books from

| interpreted as 1678, by a search of the scratching the wood. ,

archives of the Franciscans at Cuzco. Pedro The technique and design of the Fran-

Gomez is recorded as guardian in the years ciscan pulpit are so nearly identical with

| , 1627-1630. If further proof of the cor- the lectern that they must be assigned to rectness of my reading of the date be the same anonymous artist. Red cedar is the needed, both the lectern and pulpit are de- principal material. Ebony is used for the

| A 196 R

, scribed in Vasco de Contrera’s report of pediments of the niches, and numerous in-

1650.” | lays of ivory decorate the pilasters and the

| - PULPITS © , friezes. The Tuscan colonnettes like those The beautiful gilded pulpit in the par-

of the lectern and the flat inlaid ara- ish church of the village of San Jerénimo , _ besques place the Franciscan work in a near Cuzco can be dated by its style about

stylistic category entirely unrelated to 1630. The free-standing colonnettes are other pulpits of the school of Cuzco, pro- now Corinthian instead of Tuscan, but the |

duced a quarter of a century later. The simplicity of design and the supporting | chasteness of the design of the niches may volutes beneath the pulpit place it near in _ be characterized as the earliest phase of date to that of San Francisco. Two of the the Baroque in Peru, more restrained, for paintings, the Crucifixion and the Assump-

example, than the contemporary choir tion of the Virgin, are modern. The restalls of Lima Cathedral. On the pulpit, maining two representing St. Dominic and the Franciscan shield and the stigmata in St. Anthony Abbot are originals of the ivory medallions occur several times. The colonial period. The beauty of this pulpit, escutcheon also fills the large panel be- however, lies in the excellence of its archineath the canopy. A death’s head and cross _tectural design and in the polychromy. The bones below it are.a reminder to the faith- medallions of the red and gold frieze sug-

ful of the need for repentance in this tran- gest the sun, attribute of St. Dominic, and sitory life. The domed canopy over the the Dominican shield with its Maltese cross

speaker’s tribune is the simplest in Cuzco, is painted in the upper.corners of the

as would be expected at this early date. niches. oe a , Four volutes upon the cupola notwith- In Santa Clara at Ayacucho the pulpit standing, the outline is comparatively (Fig..274) has the unusual distinction of closed, with none of the lavish detail of an inscription with the year of its origin,

later works. The four volutes upon the 1637.° The art historian is ever grateful base of the pulpit give far more Baroque for such rare. accidents, since they provide

expression. , a secure ground upon which to establish Restoration has marred the wall panel chronology. Like the work in San Fran- _ beneath the canopy, and ugly modern cisco at Cuzco the colonnettes are Tuscan, paint has made the statuettes in the niches but in this instance channeled and with a

garish. These images are constructed of noticeable entasis. The architectural niches wood and dressed in cloth stiffened by plas- are similar in design, except that the piter, a technique very common in Hispanic lasters in Ayacucho have additional vercolonial art. They represent St. Dominic, tical bars of ornament and the pediments a pope who may be St. Gregory, and two are loaded with spherical pinnacles. The bishops. The letters upon the base of one diamond points and the oval ornaments in of the latter read Cisneros. A statuette of general recall the imitation of gems in St. Francis in wood atop the canopy is similar fashion on medieval reliquaries and. bereft of an arm, a fact which accentuates altar frontals. The cedar wood of the pul-

A 197 KB |

the almost Gothic swing of the body. —_—s pit was. given a dark brown stain and the

, SCULPTURE | statuettes repainted in ugly colors by a each of the ambones stand in erect quiet local carpenter in 1941. Only the figure of poses. That they belong to the same reSt. Francis atop the canopy retains the gional school as the figure sculpture of the original black and gold polychromy. The cathedral choir stalls is immediately recog-

other statuettes are: St. Clare beneath the nized.° - canopy, and upon the pulpit, St. Eliza- Another pulpit now in the chapel of the beth of Hungary, St. Louis of Toulouse, Colegio de Educandas, badly repainted and St. Catherine of Alexandria, and St. An- regilded, and second rate in quality, must

| thony of Padua. The abbess, named _ be located chronologically in the mid-cen: Catherine according to the inscription, tury. By exception in this type of monumust have been a relative of the Orue who ment, the pilasters are decorated with the founded the nunnery. Her patron saint, as tongue ornament which was so commonly we have noted, occupies the middle niche used at the period. The statuettes of the

upon the pulpit. The architectural de- four Evangelists manage to look pleasant signs and the use of inlays set these works and typical of the school, even though of San Francisco at Cuzco and Santa Clara smeared with recent gilt. The pulpit is at Ayacucho entirely apart from other said to have been transferred here from the

extant pulpits in Peru. destroyed chapel of San Andrés and can , The next group is formed by the sculp- therefore be dated circa 1650-1665." ture of Martin de Torres, who signed the One of the finest colonial examples of contract for the two ambones (Fig. 275) ecclesiastical furniture stands unnoticed in of Cuzco Cathedral in 1656.° Torres was the church of San Francisco at Arequipa a leading sculptor of his day as can read- (Fig. 276). On style alone it should be ily be deduced by the number of retables placed about 1660-1670. Perhaps some day - mentioned in various documents. The high a document will reveal the name of the altar of the Mercedarians (1631) was de- sculptor who was without a doubt one of stroyed by fire in the nineteenth century, the leading Peruvian artists of his day. and two others among his works have also Most surprising is the expression of vigor disappeared.” The design of the cathedral and movement and the heroic proportions ambones fits perfectly in the architectural of the bodies. These saints represent Fran-

| style of the mid-seventeenth century in ciscans and St. Agnes. The niches, though Cuzco. The band of diamond points on similar to those of the ambones of Cuzco the paired colonnettes and the handling of Cathedral, receive added complexity by the the niches with their stepped rectangular placing of volutes vertically along the sides. .

| tops, as well as the pediments of webbed The spiral bands on the lower part of the volutes with an elliptical cartouche in the colonnettes establish a contrast in tension

| center, are comparable with the retable of to the vertical channels above, which are Martyrdoms (circa 1660) in the left tran- repeated in the vertical bars of the frieze. sept of La Merced. The five apostles on Another interesting feature is the rolled

M198 RK

| PULPITS | a

bracket upon the pedestal beneath the are the saints in the niches, St. Peter Nolascolonnettes. Grotesque masks, so popular on cus, San Ramén Nonato, St. Andrew, and

misericords, and in sculptured decoration a Doctor. The circular ledge on the top of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries seems to be the only important piece of

in Peru, here occur upon the long scrolled restoration. |

brackets beneath the pulpit. Some modern The tribune in the Sala Capitular of San restoration, conscientiously carried out, can Agustin is a superb piece of ecclesiastical

be detected here. furniture deserving mention here. A seated Most unexpectedly I found a provincial figure of St. Augustine presides in the niche copy of the Franciscan pulpit of Arequipa within the recess of the wall. An intricate

in the shrine of Nuestra Sefiora at Copaca- juxtaposition of rectangles, interrupted bana. The repetition of the architectural spiral volutes, flower pots, and involuted details with only slight variations can leave arabesques in the niches provide a dynamic no doubt of this, even though the propor- Baroque design. The draped female head tions and quality of the carving through- is cut upon the frieze above the colonnettes.

out are inferior. The ugly modern blue Padre Graciano Montes, a zealous student paint does much to disfigure this work of of the Augustinian archives, informed me the second half of the seventeenth century. that a record of payment about the year

A pulpit which must be placed very 1670 mentions this masterpiece of the high on any list is in the chapel of the wood carver’s art. — Colegio de los Sagrados Corazones in Lima, Returning to Cuzco, we approach the : brought there from the destroyed church golden age of pulpits of colonial Peru. of El Belén (Fig. 277). Here again the Groups can be established which surely design of the niches is similar to those just correspond to individual workshops. In discussed and the spiral bands separate the some cases, separate groups may represent

lower part of the shaft from the upper. a single workshop at different stages of The most exceptional details for a pulpit development. Following upon Martin de are the draped heads and swags of fruit just Torres’ ambones of Cuzco Cathedral below the capitals. They are similar enough (1656), next in the chronology come the

to the main portal of San Francisco in Lima pulpits of La Merced and Santa Catalina , (1669-1674) to make one believe that the (Figs. 278, 279), both of them by a sinpulpit must be contemporary. Similar too gle artist. Suffice it to observe the iden-

are the interlocking arabesques upon the tical design of the niches, the two masks , base. The volutes with masks and the con- upon the volutes beneath the colonnettes, tours are smoother and less complex than the delicately cut patterns like goldsmith usual. It is easy to distinguish the school of work, the swags with fruit upon the frieze, Lima with its stronger Renaissance tradi- the exact repetition of the hemispherical tions, to be observed even in the delicate base and its flat leaves, the pendant pine arabesques of the frieze. Smaller than usual cones, and the horizontal chain of ellipses

A 199 A

SCULPTURE upon the molding. The gilding which is and that of Santa Teresa, circa 1675limited to details of ornament and cos- 1680." The third, belonging to the detume has the same technical features stroyed church of San Agustin, has dis-

, throughout, although both pulpits have appeared. The Jesuits with their tendency undergone the misfortune of recent re- to the sumptuous in church decoration had touching. Only one important difference their pulpit completely gilded. For that exists in that the paired colonnettes are reason its luminous richness against the smooth spirals in the Merced and the shafts cold stone wall of the church makes an in Santa Catalina are cut in zigzags. Even unforgettable impression, even though the the large panel beneath the canopy has the wood carving itself is equaled and even same elliptical mandorla cut with the scale surpassed elsewhere in Cuzco. The Carmotive and a similar treatment of the or- melites, whose patron was the munificent

, nament on the rectangular frame. The Bishop Mollinedo, were content with the architectural design of the nuns’ pulpit gilding of the edges of ornament and cosstands very close to that of the retable tume, leaving the natural cedar otherwise (Figs. 311, 312) of the Soledad (1660) in untouched. The Jesuit pulpit has suffered the right transept of La Merced.” Hence from vandalism in recent years, and is

both pulpits seem to belong to that period lacking several colonnettes. | : (1660-1670). The figures in the two The canopies with volutes and torches, works are handled in a broad sculptural the panels beneath them, and the speakway, their draperies disposed in full deep ers’ boxes, are nearly identical in the pulpits folds, and the movements suggestive of of the Carmelites and the Jesuits (Fig. 72).

vigorous inner life.’ - A new style is inaugurated here with the , We may suspect that these two pulpits use of the carved spiral colonnettes. Niches are early works of Diego Martinez de are surmounted by curving voluted pediOviedo who in 1675 signed the contract ments, elliptical cartouches, and angular for the pulpit and high altar of Santa stepped moldings. The same features dis-

, Teresa (Figs. 281, 317). The specification tinguish the high altar of Santa Teresa. that the Carmelite pulpit should be identi- As already explained, Diego Martinez de cal with that of the Merced, or San Agustin, Oviedo received the contract for both the

or La Compafiia (Fig. 280) is no final pulpit and high altar of this church in proof of common authorship, but it is a 1675. Another innovation in the pulpits link in a chain of evidence.” Diego Mar- under discussion is the greater complexity tinez reproduced the Jesuit model in Santa of the hemispherical base to which have Teresa, and both are sufficiently akin to been added a concave molding of acanthus our first group to be regarded as a later leaves, two projecting bands of ornament, phase in the career of the same sculptor. and corbels of nude female figures turn-

The document, just mentioned, estab- ing into a long acanthus leaf below the lishes the Jesuit pulpit about the year 1675 waist. This latter motive has been menNM 200 &

PULPITS | tioned before because of its. repeated oc- Catalina may be assigned to Diego Mar-

currence on Peruvian choir stalls. As a tinez de Oviedo in the sixteen-sixties and , matter of fact, the Jesuit pulpit terminates those of La Compafiia and Santa Teresa in | like the top of a splendidly carved inverted the following decade. Another example,

urn. The Carmelite pulpit combines the the one in the church of the seminary, new multiplication of moldings with the dedicated to St. Anthony Abbot, must be hemispherical base of the earlier examples, his work or that of his shop in the latter that is, of Santa Catalina and La Merced. period. It is nearly a replica of the type he In the church of Santa Teresa, Martinez established in Santa Teresa, even to the

also repeated the small chain pattern. ©‘ technique of gilding only the edges of the In every case the figure sculpture is less ornament and leaving the rest of the wood interesting and significant than the deco- in its natural color. The chief variation is ration, and the style shows considerable the omission of the nude female caryatids variation. The chief master, Diego Mar- in the seminary. Appropriately, the patron

tinez, must have had numerous assistants of the church, St. Anthony Abbot, is in his workshop. On the preacher’s box of given the most. prominent position atop

La Compafiia five priests, undoubtedly the canopy, and second place is awarded | Jesuits, dressed in red and white robes, St. Thomas Aquinas on the large panel. stand in the niches. A statue of St. Ignatius The iconography of the saints in the four

holds forth upon the summit of the can- niches is obscure, although they should opy. A second Jesuit is carved upon the logically be the four Fathers of the Latin large panel which is always placed against church. Bishop Mbollinedo reported the the wall behind the spot where the speaker building under construction in 1678, and

stands. The pulpit in Santa Teresa dis- the wood sculptures fall within those

plays upon the canopy the statue of a years.” |

monk with a sword in his breast, possibly A much discussed artist of the late St. Albert, patriarch of Jerusalem, and a seventeenth century in Cuzco was a man relief of a Carmelite monk in the usual of noble Indian lineage, named Juan Tomas

position beneath the canopy. In the niches Tuyru Tupac. Even the king of Spain , St. Theresa of Avila, the greatest of the heard his praises sung, when in 1699 funds Carmelites, holds the scene by herself, ap- were requested of the crown for the com_ pearing five times either kneeling or stand- pletion of the church of San Pedro which

ing. On one occasion the presence of an Juan Tomas had designed. On that occaangel indicates the vision in which her sion his sculpture as well as his architecture heart was transfixed by an arrow, symbolic was extolled.“ Previously he had comof divine love. In two reliefs the Infant pleted and gilded the retable (Fig. 307)

Christ stands upon her prayer desk as she of Nuestra Sefiora del Buen Suceso (1678— ,

kneels before it. , + 4679) in the church of San Blas, and he

NM 201k |

_ The pulpits of La Merced and Santa had carved the Virgen de la Almudena

SCULPTURE (1686) for the church dedicated to her usual in Cuzco, crowns.of acanthus sepa(Fig. 364). Bishop Manuel de Mollinedo, rate the lower part of the shaft. The icono_who had been the priest of the church in graphic scheme in the Almudena involves

| Madrid where her cult originated, brought the four Evangelists in the niches and an with him to the New World a small piece apostle under the canopy. The cedar wood, of wood taken from the statue of the Vir- intended to be left unpainted, has a recent gin in Madrid. He had the token placed in coat of ugly green house paint and in gen-

the head of the new work which he or- eral the state of preservation is bad. The dered and consecrated to her cult.” The canopy eluded the hand of the dauber, statue, now heavily dressed in real clothes, thanks to its higher position and the prob-

is hardly visible, and somewhat repainted able lack of a ladder to reach it, a very in the face, yet nevertheless a work of con- common phenomenon.

siderable grace and charm. Her original The iconography in San Pedro is similar garment is a gold and blue cope lined in in that the Evangelists recur, St. Matthew red with a rose tunic, very lovely in the and St. John remaining and the other two _

handling of the polychromy. having been lost. The Madonna with the Dr. Garcia’s discovery of the testament Child is given the central niche, while the of Andrés de Mbollinedo, the bishop’s titular saint, Peter, stands in the customary

nephew, provides further information position behind the speaker’s box and St. about Juan Tomas. He is proved to be the Paul, his companion, holds forth upon the author of the pulpit in San Pedro and of canopy.

the doors of the sacristy."* His chief pa- Of major significance is the pulpit of trons were the two Mollinedos for whom he Cuzco Cathedral (Figs. 282, 283), carved worked in both San Pedro and the Almu- in natural cedar, unpainted and ungilded. dena. The historian is justified in assuming The whirling interplay of Baroque lines

, both on documentary and stylistic grounds reach a high point of artistic expression _ that Juan Tomas was the general director in the balustrade of the steps which lead of the sculpture and architecture of the up to the speaker’s box. Spiral colonnettes,

two buildings.” , dominant and subordinate, adorn the com-

Inasmuch as the pulpit of San Pedro is position. The statuettes have liveliness and __ a documented work of Juan Tomas, the sparkle here, their iconography following similar work in the Almudena must be as- the same scheme just mentioned above.

, cribed to him (Figs. 285, 286). The close With our present information it is imposrelationship between the sculpture of the sible to attribute the sculpture either to two churches is at once recognizable in the Diego Martinez or Juan Tomas. Notwith-

general proportions, the handling of the standing the close relationships of the niches with their flat tops, the compara- school, stylistic details are different from

tively large area above them, and the the previous works. The pulpit has been rosettes upon the spiral colonnettes. As ascribed to Diego Arias de la Cerda, genMN 202 &

PULPITS > eral administrator (obrero mayor) of the grapes. Decorative leaves turn back and cathedral at that time. The chronicler of forth with spirited abandon.

Cuzco states that he made the pulpit, choir The niches are occupied by vivacious , stalls, ambones, and numerous other works statuettes of the Purisima and the four

in the cathedral.** He was not an artist. Evangelists. The canopy, topped by a large : The documents show that Martin de Torres figure of St. Paul, is equally remarkable carved the ambones. The attempt to make in its virtuosity. An array of smaller stat-

the canon an architect and sculptor of uettes includes the four Fathers of the prodigious activity is not reasonable. _ Latin Church and angels bearing the in- © Surely by the same hand as the cathe- struments of the Passion. The eucharistic dral pulpit is that in Santo Domingo (Fig. grapes put in another appearance sus284). It has unfortunately suffered the loss pended beneath the tiny bust-length angels of all of the figure sculpture except the on the edge of the canopy. St. Blas on the St. Dominic upon the canopy who is well panel beneath is a surprisingly dull piece

out of reach of common vandals. of sculpture which must be the handiwork : ~The climax of the cuzquefio school is of a helper of the chief master. The pulpit reached in the famous pulpit of San Blas of San Blas deserves its wide renown not (Figs. 287, 288), first mentioned by Bishop only in Peru, but as a major manifestation

Mollinedo in 1696." No documentary no- of the high Baroque at its fantastic best,

tice regarding the sculptor has been forth- anywhere in the world. | , coming. Its attribution to Juan Tomas” The Indian village called Checacupe a does not carry weight in view of the dis- few miles south of Cuzco has a humble

similarity of the style of his authentic adobe church, yet it is sumptuously fur- , | work. Now the spiral columns have dis- nished with retables, paintings, and a pulsolved into undulations, showing freedom pit (Fig. 289). The latter is a modified and fantasy in the manipulation of orna- replica of that of San Blas. The master of ment which would be difficult to rival. San Blas certainly supplied the design and Numerous tiny cherubs’ heads appear amid part of the sculpture of the Checacupe the swirl of palm leaves, long torches, and pulpit. The statues of St. Paul at the sumepiscopal mitres. At the top of each shaft mit of the two works are identical. The is carved a chalice with the Host, accom- canopy at Checacupe is simplified by the © panied by eucharistic grapes. A domical omission of the many smaller figures. The canopy projects over the niches, another splendidly draped and energetic image of

innovation of which there are legion in St. Peter is eminently characteristic of the , this masterpiece of San Blas. Tiny nude San Blas Master. The main body of the pul-

putti stand like caryatids beneath the pit, likewise, is much simpler, the more colonnettes. Below, gay grinning masks usual spiral colonnettes entwined with

spring forth at the end of each bracket, vines and grapes recurring here. The |

| A 203 AR

the beard terminating in a bunch of domed canopies over the niches and the

SCULPTURE spirited masks upon the brackets under- ity of these works can hardly be exagneath clearly betray their relationship to gerated. To the patronage of the Bishop their prototype. The Purisima and the four Mollinedo much credit is due. Only at a Fathers of the Latin Church in the niches period of extraordinary productivity and were left in large part to assistants who economic prosperity could such a state of

followed the master’s sketches. This sculp- affairs exist. | ae ture is excellent and it suffers only on With the pulpit of Santa Clara in Cuzco | : comparison with its exceptionally bril- we move into the early years of the eightliant prototype and predecessor, that of eenth century. The edges are gilded, its

San Blas. ornament an .exquisitely delicate filigree, Two other pulpits of Cuzco are related with new motives such as the shells over to those just discussed: that of El Belén the niches. An inscription, twice stated, (Fig. 290), reported by Bishop Mollinedo reads as follows: De este monasterio la in 1696 and a ruinous specimen in San flor Dona Maria de Peralta. The nunnery Sebastian. The canopy of the latter, as archives would doubtless reveal the time usual out of reach of unathletic vandals, at which this lady lived there, were one falls within the present group. Saints Peter of the sisters inspired to search out such

, and Paul have both survived, but the data. The pulpit is in lamentable condition, , niches are stripped bare. To El Belén be- all but two of the colonnettes torn away fell a like fate, so far as the saints are con- and two of the niches empty. St. Anthony cerned, for only the beaconing St. Paul of Padua holds the uppermost position with persists aloft. The speaker’s box, in nat- St. Francis beneath him and in the niches

ural cedar, is lovely with its twisted colon- St. Clare and two Franciscans. , nettes spotted with cherub heads. Here the Cuzco sculptors went far and wide in main niches are trefoil, the only case in southern Peru. To pursue their peregrinaCuzco, and topped by a crownlike canopy tions in detail would require years of re-

lifted on a voluted pediment. Still more search and a large volume for the comnovel is the introduction of a smaller sec- _pilation of the results. The fine pulpit in

ondary group of niches below the major the church at Lampa, for instance, is of

row. Cuzco derivation, especially to be observed

| With our present lack of documentary in the canopy, but it cannot be assigned

information it is impossible to attempt to any particular group. The iconography more than the general classification of the used here is also the most common in pulpits as proposed here. Undoubtedly a Cuzco, although not exclusively limited _ goodly number of these works come from to that region. The four Evangelists on the

, a single sculptor’s shop, if one allows for speaker’s box have red and blue polyintentional diversity in style and design chromy, and the Purisima in the large and the intervention of many assistants. panel against the wall is untouched. The The inventiveness and the first-rate qual- rest, alas, has been daubed with white A 204 AR

7 PULPITS | |

paint, a crime of bad taste, all too wide- 1650, however, because the pilasters are 7

spread. still flat and they carry a vertical strip of

Farther afield geographically, in San the tongue motive. At the top and bottom Pedro at Juli, the exquisitely gilded pulpit they curve into volutes. The most inter- , is further removed in design and facture. esting parts are the large elliptical panels Here is another tradition iconographically of flat ornament covered by small voluted

too, for the Purisima tops the canopy and_ canopies. A painting of a Franciscan fills 7 the wall panel is blazoned with the Jesuit the wall panel in an exceptional usage. This escutcheon. As so often, the statuettes have canopy, with just a few volutes and crock-

disappeared. Winged busts with exag- ets and encased in the scale pattern, is simgeratedly long pendant breasts, a theme pple, pleasing, and also indicative of an

recurrent in southern Peru, bend like early date. | | | brackets beneath the speaker’s box. | About the beginning of the eighteenth , The absence of niches and figure sculp- century a sculptor active in Ayacucho proture upon the tribune distinguishes a num- vided several of the churches with new pul-

ber of pulpits throughout Peru. This type pits. Those of Santa Teresa (circa 1703), is usually gilded. A lovely specimen is that the cathedral, and La Magdalena, appar- | of La Compafiia in Arequipa (Fig. 291), ently came from his shop. The best of the gilding of which renders it particu- these, in the cathedral (Fig. 293), is large larly unforgettable. Elliptical shields with and in natural cedar, now given a brown the THS and the monogram of Mary, stain. All of them resemble each other in

AMR, are set in the flat panels of ara- the shape of the elliptical panel on each , besques. A small cartouche at the base of of the five sides, centered by a smiling the otherwise plain spiral colonnettes and angel’s head in the midst of a spirited play various decorative motives suggest a date of volutes and arabesques cut in low re-

about 1675. Only one statue, the image of lief. A single spiral colonnette fills the

St. Ignatius, is used and that in the cus- vertical space at each angle in the usual | tomary situation upon the canopy. Un- way. The wall panel in the cathedral hasa spectacular as the pulpit may appear in fine relief of the Purisima and on the

a photograph, it is in reality very beautiful, canopy is the image of Christ. | far more effective in the original than © The pulpit of Santa Teresa is gilded in

many more virtuoso and more celebrated its entirety and devoid of figure sculpture,

productions, | although a crowning statue, now lost, may The pulpit in San Antonio, Cajamarca, have existed. The base cuts off flatly withnow covered with a recent brown stain, out the long pointed silhouette seen in the is mentioned because it is an early exam- cathedral. In La Magdalena the wood carvple of a type prevalent in Ayacucho and _ ing also shines in gleaming gold, and here the school of Lima in the early eighteenth St. Dominic stands in low relief against century. This design can be dated about the wall as though he were the orator. An

AM 205 RK |

SCULPTURE angel with trumpet finishes off the com- lists ecstatic in their expressiveness. Spiral

position above. colonnettes enframe these scenes and also The most enchanting of all is the pulpit the Purisima upon the wall panel. Otherof La Compafiia (Fig. 295), round rather wise the decorative details are restrained. than the customary polygon and carved ‘They are consistent with the traditions in a filigree of low relief, all of it ex- of the local school in which niches, canoquisitely gilded. A winged cherub’s head pies, and intricate complexity of planes — stands out at the top and at the bottom of are notably absent. The crowning statue each spatial division, as well as upon the of a bishop must be a Franciscan, possibly frieze of each twisted colonnette. The St. Louis of Toulouse.

naked heavy-breasted females in half Lima, the viceregal capital, was surely length adorn the corbels below, as they the center in which first developed the | do in some sculptures of Cuzco and so pulpit with elliptical panels separated by commonly the arms of choir stalls. With- spiral colonnettes. Even though it is not. out a modicum of documentary guidance possible, in view of the destruction of

| it is difficult to determine what rela- earthquakes, to establish chronological prition the sculptor of La Compafiia bore ority, the primacy of the cultural center

, to the author of the group previously dis- of South America can hardly be chalcussed, The ellipse is a basic shape in all lenged. The pulpit of Jests Maria in Lima cases, and this is still more emphatic in the (Fig. 292), in general contemporary with sumptuous shield of the giant-sized wall the high altar of 1708,” is classifiable in

panel, emblazoned with the Jesuit IHS. the same category as the works in AyaSt. Ignatius fittingly receives the hierarchi- cucho, although presumably not designed

cal distinction of the place of honor upon by the artist who was active there or the canopy. These wood carvings, as well shipped his wood carving from Lima to

| as the splendid array of retables, give Ayacucho. The monograms of Christ and Ayacucho an enviable distinction in the Mary stand out upon the elliptical shields, field of Peruvian colonial sculpture.” and at the top of each is an angel’s head. Falling completely outside of the pattern The round arch above and the small bracket of the Ayacuchan school is the beautiful below suggest a lingering in the designer’s

pulpit, carved in natural cedar, in the mind of the traditional niche arrangement. church of San Francisco de Paula (Fig. St. Joseph upon the wall beneath the 296). Instead of niches, four panels are canopy, within an ellipse between spiral carved in high relief with figures of the colonnettes, and St. Bonaventure at the four Evangelists, accompanied by their summit are logical iconography in a Car- symbols and clouds of cherubs’ heads. melite nunnery. The cut-out openwork of Nothing in Peru exactly comparable with the domical portion of the canopy estabthis sculpture is known to me. The lishes a new and unusual note here. The compositions are spirited and the Evange- quality of gilding of the entire surface MN 206 &

| PULPITS , | maintains the high standards of colonial Recognizable as very much akin to the. production. Much of the same sort is the Pisco pulpit is that of the Iglesia del Prado pulpit in the small but precious church of in Lima, now painted white. It has been re-

Magdalena la Vieja. | modeled, most noticeably in the volute piA nonconformist to the contemporary lasters which were originally spirals and school of Lima is the example in Santa Rosa in the ugly modern balustrade and canopy. de las Monjas. The canopy and wall niche Pulpits of the paneled category must have

with its relief of St. Dominic are far more been legion in the eighteenth century. florid. The main body, unlike the pulpits of Only a few of them have withstood the the previous group, contains niches in vicissitudes of time. They are to be local-

which stand St. Rose of Lima and four ized in Lima and her subsidiaries, which : Dominican nuns. Partly nude female busts for some reason included Ayacucho. | are in this instance competently clothed Traveling north from Lima to Trujillo, in paint and gilt. The design and work- we come to a city distinguished as an out-

manship point to the hand of some me- standing center of wood sculpture. The | diocre practitioner of the wood carver’s earliest pulpit is the one in which San Franart, or perhaps two men, since the upper cisco Solano is said to have preached in

section is distinctly the better. , 1603, foretelling the earthquake of 1619. Two related works of the elliptical panel It has greater importance as a relic than as

type are those of La Compafiia at Pisco a work of art, since it is only a fragment (Fig. 294) and San Xavier at Nazca. The and not of high quality. Rectangular styllatter is in natural cedar and the former ized leaves, so common in rustic carving, gilded, but they are alike enough to have and channeled pilasters are the chief mo- | come from the same shop about the year tives. The best one can do is conjecture its | 1720. The school of Lima projected itself date as about 1600. This saint’s relic is kept into this coastal region, and can easily be in the church of San Francisco, whose reg-

recognized on a comparison with the wood ular pulpit (Figs. 297, 298) in the nave sculpture in Jestis Maria and Magdalena _ is unusually fine. The panels of the tribune la Vieja in the capital. Backed against the © of the latter have an urn in the center, and

wall between deep hoods at Pisco is a bil- out of it curve long stylized vines and lowing figure of the Purisima. St. Ig- leaves. At the foot of each panel a draped natius is perched aloft. The entrance here female head is centered, accompanied by is made by a flight of steps, whereas at two swags of cloth, filled with apples. The

_ Nazca a passageway penetrated the thick- same female head substitutes for a capital, | ness of the wall. The door opening into the and suspended beneath it is a cluster of ap- | pulpit has been destroyed, and further ples. The wall panel bears the Franciscan damage has been inflicted in replacing the escutcheon and the stigmata of St. Francis. lost spiral colonnettes with Tuscan pilas- The composition finishes off with a fairly

ters. , simple canopy, underneath which hovers a OS 207 R

SCULPTURE . dove. A’ small archangel flutters at the panel and the founder, here St. Francis, top. A slightly later copy of this pulpit, upon the canopy follow established icono-

now painted an ugly brown, belongs to graphic practice. a the church of the neighboring village of Perhaps less distinguished in quality but Mansiche. The problem of dating these fitting into the same category is the pulpit

| monuments is considerable, since they do of Cajamarca Cathedral. The iconography not correspond to other types whose chro- differs only in the canopy statuette which

, nology can be established. The decoration probably portrays St. Catherine of Alexof choir stalls, such as those of the cathedral andria, titular saint of the church. The and La Merced in Lima, furnish the most gilded ornament tends to flatness with some satisfactory analogies. Hence we may sug- faint hint of the rococo in the frilled curves gest that these pulpits belong to the second with cherubs’ heads between. The Evange-

quarter of the seventeenth century. lists move with emphatic and imploring The gilded pulpit of Santo Domingo attitudes. Most charming in her tall primi(Fig. 299), modest but lovely, has just tive slimness is the Madonna, like a Zurone statue, that of St. Dominic placed baran female saint, in rich and fashionable upon the canopy. The horizontal flat piece dress. , upon the tribune is modern, as likewise The climax is reached in Trujillo with the door opening upon the staircase within the pulpit of San Agustin (Fig. 300) the walls. The arabesques in two interweav- which has the distinction of possessing the

ing heartshaped patterns fill the vertical most extraordinary canopy in all Peru. It

| sides of the pulpit, separated by spiral sweeps upward like lashing flames in a colonnettes. They are undecorated except swirl of golden leaves spotted through by for the flat entwining vine. Here is a fine large black flowers. Floating at the apex, — composition without exact counterpart, St. Augustine stretches out his arms in the

presumably produced about 1670. act of blessing. Upon the body of the pulMoving on to the second quarter of the pit the four Fathers of the Latin Church eighteenth century, the pulpit in Santa are placed full length in shallow trefoil Clara at Trujillo (Fig. 301) is a beautiful arches. The carving tends to emphasize work, entirely gilded, which has an un- flat planes here again, as it does in most usual combination of the shell tympanum monuments of later date, in this instance,

in trefoil division over the panels of one would conjecture about 1760. The rethe four Evangelists. The iconography and versed curves of the molded top unmisalso the placing of the figures on flat panels takably introduce a French rococo note. instead of within recessed niches indicate The Madonna and Child within a roundel some common denominator in tradition be- upon the wall panel are modern. tween the monuments of Santa Clara in The rococo triumphs completely in the Trujillo and San Francisco de Paula in pulpit of Santa Teresa (Fig. 302) at Tru-_ Ayacucho. The Purisima upon the wall jillo where spiral colonnettes give way to

| A 208 KR | :

| PULPITS :

a series of ripples in lieu of pilasters. The in a full rococo silhouette without carved trefoil arches are transformed into rhyth- ornament of any description. The moldings mic curves edged by the typical scalloped are gilded, and the stylistic unity of the molding of the rococo, and the rest of the church is maintained throughout. A conornament is consistently French. Only the trary situation obtains in El Corazon de general components of the composition Jesus where a local sculptor of retables procarry over from the Spanish Baroque. A duced a work altogether devoid of underpainting of St. Theresa decorates the door standing of the new style. The tiny busts of the speaker’s tribune, this usage repre- are familiar in retables and ecclesiastical senting a departure from established prece- furniture of the day. Provincial rococo dedent. Polychromed figures of the titular signs characterize the shields in the center | saint and other Carmelites fill out the com- of the hexagonal panels, bearing the instruposition. Thus we have approached the ments of the Passion of Christ. These car-

end of a long tradition, whose direction touches and bits of ornament are gilded changed at the moment of the restoration against a background of tan paint.

of the church (1759-1773) after the great The new style spread everywhere in earthquake of the mid-century.” Spanish America. By the end of the century The three major rococo pulpits of Lima it had passed into Bolivia to the churches of

fall into the third quarter of the eighteenth Santa Teresa at Cochabamba and Sucre, century when the churches in which they and to San Felipe and the chapel of Guadaare located were rebuilt: San Carlos and lupe at Sucre.” El Corazén de Jests (both 1758-1766). | The iconography of pulpits in the repre‘The best is the first mentioned (Fig. 303), sentation of saints is varied. Religious ora fact not disguised by the ugly black paint ders place their founder either upon the

of fifty years ago. The pilasters spring canopy or the wall panel behind the * out in reversed volutes like the legs of a speaker. The niches on the tribune contain Louis XV table. The body of the tribune, other saints of the same order. The women’s entirely changed in its proportions, com- branches of the Franciscans and Domini-

pared with earlier works, curves inward cans always include the male founder and ,

and then rounds out into plain classical other leading male saints.” ,

moldings. Familiar rococo cartouches and Occasionally that tradition is abandoned scalloped moldings prevail with a few in favor of placing the four Fathers of the cherubs’ heads at salient points. The highly Latin Church in the niches. The Augusexpressive statue of a Jesuit at the summit, tinians and the Bethlemites at Trujillo disSt. Ignatius no doubt, is a reminder that played that independence. In the case of

the church belonged to his order. Augustinians the iconography is logical,

7 A 209 A | The pulpit in El Cristo de los Milagros since their founder is one of the four. The

(Fig. 304) is completely French with no seminary at Cuzco, because it is a school |

Spanish antecedents, The tribune swells out for priests, would also understandably pre-

SCULPTURE | fer to honor the chief medieval authors of or for the saint to whom the church is dedi-

Christian doctrine. cated.” St. Michael, occupant of high places - By far the predominant favorites for in medieval times, occasionally receives that representation upon the preacher’s tribune distinction on pulpits. At Cuzco the two. are the four Evangelists. They, as preachers leading apostles, Saints Paul and Peter, are

: of the Christian gospel, are indisputably the given primacy in a number of pulpits, apconsistent choice. In the present chapter pearing upon the canopy and the wall panel eleven examples of that iconography have respectively.** Frequently the dedicatory

| been mentioned. Among the religious or- saint of the church appears on the wall _ ders the scheme is less common, yet it was panel instead of aloft upon the canopy.” _

_ adopted in the churches of La Merced at The absence of the figure of Christ in Cuzco, Santa Clara at Trujillo, and San any of these iconographic groups is noticea| Francisco de Paula in Ayacucho, respec- ble. The only instance known to me of His | tively, Mercedarian, Franciscan, and Mi- appearance on a pulpit is the figure of the

norite. Infant Jesus upon the canopy of the pulpit All but three of the eleven pulpits con- in Ayacucho Cathedral. The explanation of taining the Evangelists are located in Cuzco His presence here lies in the local cult of

or its vicinity. That phenomenon may be the “Weeping Christ Child” of whom explained by local tradition and also by there is an image in the same church. the fact that so many pulpits are preserved Peruvian sculptors put forth their best there. The Evangelists alone occupy the efforts in the creation of pulpits. The same niches upon the speaker’s tribune in seven men were also active as architects and pro-

- of them.” In the remaining four, all of the ducers of retables, a fact specifically docuCuzco school, the Evangelists are accom- mented in the cases of Pedro de Noguera at ©

| panied by the Pwurisima in the central Lima and of Diego Martinez de Oviedo at niche.” The Madonna very frequently Cuzco. The architectural and decorative holds a more prominent place upon the wall designs follow the same stylistic evolution panel behind the speaker. Such is the case whether they be facades of churches, choir in four of the present group.” Even in pul- stalls, retables, or pulpits. The two latter

pits whose tribunes are unadorned with categories of monuments allow for the statues she sometimes holds this same im- greater scope in decorative fancy. Colonial

_ portant position.” artists of Peru were equal to the oppor_ The statue upon the canopy is often re- tunity presented. No one who studies their served for the founder of the religious work can fail to admire their inventiveness

order in whose church the pulpit stands*® and their technical skill. | |

MN 210 &

XII ee | | RET ABLES | | HE large Spanish retable, mounting Today no Renaissance sculpture of imToward in several stories and fre- portance has escaped the slipping sands of quently spanning the breadth of a chapel, time. The triumphal-arch retables in the

came into being in the fifteenth century four corners of the Dominican cloister at a at the time of the rising political and eco- Cuzco (Fig. 305) are Renaissance in style, nomic power of Spain. The sculptured al- probably of the second half of the sixtars of Vich and Tarragona in the early teenth century. They are, however, so ruspart of the century are only a prelude to tic in nature, fabricated in stone and plas-

numerous vast works a few years later, ter by an unskilled workman, that their | such as the high altars of Toledo Cathedral, interest is solely archaeological. Similar are

Seville Cathedral, and the Carthusian the two side altars in the parish church at church of Miraflores.* Painting and sculp- Checacupe and another at Huaro, both ture are frequently combined in these mon- near Cuzco and placeable at the end of

uments of the late-Gothic period, and the the century.” ,

same tradition is carried into the Renais- How retarded the colonies could be is sance and Baroque periods. Alonso Be- proven by two small altars in the Andean

rruguete’s high altar (1529) of the Colegio village of San Jerénimo, near Huancayo. de los Irlandeses in Salamanca, a master- The paintings and the architectural setpiece of the Spanish Renaissance, is cited ting of wooden balustered columns in the as one of many similar works of the pe- altar of the Crucifixion (Fig. 306) would riod. The New World too saw Renaissance be dated about 1530 in Spain, whereas the

monuments of great splendor and high legend in gold letters at the lower right

quality in the retables of Huejotzingo clearly includes the year 1609. The other, | (circa 1580) and Xochimilco in Mexico.” a fragment by the same master, belongs

-- In South America, including Peru, the to 1614 according to the lengthy inscrip- | peak of sculptural magnificence was at- tions on the predella. The columns are tained during the second half of the seven- hung with clusters of fruit and centered — , teenth and the early eighteenth centuries. by a lion’s head. The design is surprisingly

The viceroyalty of Peru has lost its good, in spite of ineptitudes in the irregu-

sixteenth-century treasures which once lar fluting.*

MN 211 & |

adorned the monastic churches at Lima. — The transept altars of La Asuncién at

SCULPTURE Juli apparently fall in the same decade, in stucco reliefs recline upon the sloping inasmuch as the church itself was prob- cornices at the sides. In the predella the ably not initiated until after 1590 and it four Fathers of the Latin Church stand — was completed in 1620.° Of brick and guard beside reliefs of the Nativity and _

| stucco, they are set into the body of the Birth of the Virgin, while the six elliptical wall. The capitals, composed of Ionic medallions about the central niche enclose volutes joined to a channeled collar, can half-length figures of the sibyls. Clusters be sought as far back as the Hospital of of fruit, winged putti, and nude female the Holy Cross in Toledo (1504—1514),° busts add to the decorative assembly. The _ yet the cartouches of the frieze point to a paintings and statues are a miscellany,

| later day. Again the architectural arrange- not belonging to the altar originally. | ment is good, whereas the statues of Jesuits The high altar of Sucre Cathedral are primitive Indian pieces. Attention (1604-1607), long since destroyed, ocshould be drawn to the clearly Spanish cupied a position far more advanced in character of the crucifix and the Risen style and was first rate in quality. Its auChrist in the altar of the left transept. The thor, Joseph Pastorelo, was without queselongated mannerist proportions of the tion European born, perhaps Italian, judg-

latter figure elicit more interest than usual, ing by his surname. The original drawbecause of the rarity of this style in colonial ing, attached to the contract of 1604, I

Peru. had the good fortune to discover in the The dated work (1618) in a lateral archives of the cathedral.” Here we meet chapel of the Augustinian church at Copa- the turn from Renaissance to Baroque, the cabana (Fig. 308) was originally the high classical features soberer, and the Baroque altar and the shrine of the miracle-working in evidence in broken pediments and in Madonna.’ It has more than usual impor-_ the irregular outlines of the voluted tabertance, because it is the best example of the nacle. The same volutes, carved with the |

Renaissance style in the viceroyalty of scale pattern, act as pilasters flanking the Peru. For that reason it is included here, Crucifixion in the attic story. The pyramalthough Copacabana lies within the mod- idal pinnacles descend from the school of ern boundaries of Bolivia. Only the broken Juan de Herrera, but the bracketed frieze —

pediment in the top center and the cor- is new. The figures, tall and slender with

| nices and volutes at the sides suggest the small heads, are in the full stream of Manearly seventeenth century. Possibly the nerism. Such a retable as this would be a volute pilasters with human-headed capi- priceless manifestation of colonial greattals might also be included among these ness, but alas, none exists. The sketch gives auguries of a later style. Otherwise, the us some hint of the beauty which abounded Renaissance prevails in the architecture in the churches of Lima, Cuzco, and other and in the frieze, decorated with cherubs’ capitals, even within the first hundred heads and lighted lamps. Faith and Hope years of settlement. NM 212 &

RETABLES | , Numerous documents attest that Span- 1608 makes them doubly significant to the

ish sculptors and painters of first rank historian. Recorded in Lima as early as

shipped their works to the Indies.? Few 1599, he became chief architect of the , of them have come down to us; far fewer cathedral in 1614, a post which he held © than reasonable, because of the extraordi- until his death in 1635. His most important

nary destruction caused by repeated earth- contribution to colonial architecture was : quakes. The retable of St. John the Bap- the design for seven portals of the cathetist (1607-1612), in the church of La dral (1626). The drawing of the main porConcepcién at Lima, carved by the cele- tal, discovered by Harth-terré (Figs. 104, brated Sevillian, Juan Martinez Montafiés, 105) shows that the first story, however is the only work of its kind which the much remade, still incorporates some feaNew World still possesses. The fact that it tures of his composition.” is one of the artist’s earliest achievements . The Apostles in the sacristy embody the adds to its importance, even though repaint last stage of Renaissance classicism, The and minor restorations have inflicted un- approach of a new age is betrayed only in

necessary damage upon it. the row of cartouches at the crowning. A fragment of a Spanish retable of the The Corinthian columns are handled corsame period, possibly imported from the rectly, and the frieze of rinceaux with premother country, stands in a side chapel of cision. Martinez de Arrona was an acaSan Francisco at Ayacucho. Placed above demic master, highly competent and well a later altar of the eighteenth century, it grounded in his craft, yet uninspired. The is dedicated to St. John the Baptist whose prevailing classicism, drawn from the statue occupies the central niche. Panels fount of ancient Roman sculpture, is unin relief relate the chief episodes of his mistakable in the well-poised bodies and legend. Lack of detailed photographs and in the draperies, fluted in the antique manthe high location of the altar make a more ner. These sculptures would win respect accurate analysis impossible. Up to the anywhere. They are good enough to make present it has escaped the attention of stu- one wish that the artist had been more

dents of Hispanic art. than academic, that he had had just one _ The nearly life-sized reliefs of Christ spark of the temperament and emotional and fourteen apostles in the sacristy of insight which might have made him a great

- Lima Cathedral cannot be classified lit- master. His extant sculpture is the only erally as a retable, yet they seem to fit best representative of classicism in Peru bein the present chapter (Fig. 309). They queathed to us. His dominant position in

rise like a wall in cedar above the chests the school of Lima figures in the discus- | (cajoneria) in which ecclesiastical vest- sion of Pedro de Noguera’s choir stalls of

ments are stored. Their documentation to Lima Cathedral. | | ,

the hand of the well-known sculptor and Knowledge of the retables of Lima dur- , architect, Juan Martinez de Arrona, in ing the first half of the seventeenth cen-

, NM 213K

SCULPTURE tury is limited to documents, the works the seated statues of the Trinity. The figure

themselves having been lost, for the in- of St. Peter to the left has lost its comevitable reason: earthquakes." The fine panion, St. Paul, who on the right is rechoir stalls of the cathedral and La Merced placed by a borrowed though colonial —

, do much, however, to fill the sculptural piece. The sculptures, like the paintings,

lacuna. are local products of Cuzco, and the ico-

oo nography is confused and unconventional. The alfiz setting of the central niche reee _. CUZCO minds the student of the contemporary ~uzco too has little to offer in the early portals of San Francisco and the Capilla de

(years thanks to the same caprices of Loreto in Cuzco. Most significant, how, nature. The retables by Martin de Torres ever, is the decorator’s skill in manipulation in La Merced (1631), in San Agustin of ornament. Tiny pearled strips run ver(1639), and in the cathedral (1646) have tically upon the shafts of the columns, the disappeared. Of all the work by this im- lower band of which has a lozenge pattern portant sculptor, only the ambones of the in the second story, and in the first story a

cathedral (1656) survive.” variant of a basket weave. Columns of , After the earthquake of 1650 the rate this type are the signature of the Cuzco of productivity was extraordinarily high school in the mid-century. The broken

, in all branches of artistic endeavor. The pediments centered by a niche begin here, _ two lateral altars in Santa Catalina seem and will develop greater complexity in to be among the rare works which antedate later works.

the earthquake, in this case possibly by The Merced has a large array of altars two decades. The shafts are carved with of the period immediately following the the scale motive except in the lower band earthquake, only the high altar and those which is fluted spirally. Conservatism too of the two chapels at either side being of

7 stamps the first lateral altar of La Com- the nineteenth century. The retable in the pafiia, dated 1651.” Its arrangement has_ right transept (Figs. 311, 312), dedicated been confused by subsequent alterations. to the miraculous image of Nuestra Sefiora The Doric order is exceptional, but other de la Soledad, was completed and gilded

types of ornament of the period, such as in 1660 by Juan Calderén.“ Greater voluted brackets and the tongue motive, Baroque involutions in broken cornices and

are included. | contrasted planes distinguish the architec-

| An important milestone, the retable of tural design from that of the Trinity altar

the Trinity in Cuzco Cathedral (Fig. 310), five years earlier..The gilded columns are provides the point of departure for a study beautifully handled with beaded zigzags of the school during the second half of the and a band of volutes and arabesques in seventeenth century. An inscription with the lower section. Smaller columns look

the year 1655 runs in several lines above like palm trunks with the scale motive

MN 214K |

“RETABLES , below. The close similarity of this wood 313) fits into this same group, although carving to the pulpit in Santa Catalina slightly later, perhaps about 1665. The (Fig. 278) is noted in Chapter XI. The niches have become deeper and the mold-

well-preserved set of paintings relate the ings more intricate. The now familiar carv- | Passion of Christ. The modern restorer ing of the columns, the heart-shaped carruined the central section of the altar by touches, and webbed moldings recur. On stripping off the Baroque ornament, as he the other hand, the spiral column, in this did the companion piece in the left tran- case plain above a spiral band, makes its

sept. The latter work is contemporary, and appearance, quite possibly for the first _ probably by the same architect. The pic- time in Cuzco.” As previously observed, tures which are devoted to Martyrdoms facades and retables pursue the same stylisare outstanding for their unusually high tic course, but the latter are always more quality. Charming statuettes of the four exuberant in decoration. Allowing for difEvangelists and a relief of the Epiphany ference of function the facades of the cabadly daubed with modern paint constitute thedral and La Compafiia are unmistakthe predella. The same men who worked ably products of the same school as the upon the cloister of the Merced must also Santa Catalina altar, although probably not

have designed these retables. The stone of the same workshop. : columns of the cloister (Figs. 84, 85) like To the south of Cuzco on the shores of | - the wood sculpture are cut with vertical Lake Titicaca, the high altar of La Asun-

strips of a knob ornament and. the lower cidén at Juli (Fig. 315) is a fine structure | section with the scale motive or spirals. of gilded wood, datable about 1660, but in , The only notable difference is the use of a state of ruin and collapse. The large shell the crowns of acanthus leaves to separate niches in the center do not belong here,

the lower band, missing in these early and the painting above replaces the origretables. The later salomonic retables inal relief of the Assumption of Mary adopted them almost universally from which is now stored in the transept. The

about 1675 thenceforth. - Mannerist style lingers on in the elongated Two, retables of paintings, one in each bodies of saints and angels, both in the , of the arms of the transept in La Compafiia_ sculpture and in the paintings. The lake are very closely related and perhaps from region shows the force of tradition in the _ the same workshop as the transept altars familiar mermaids woven into the frames

of La Merced. The Jesuit works are more at the sides.

luxuriantly carved in the first story: no- Ayacucho, next to Cuzco, has preserved tably the columns of arabesques and the the best collection of mid-seventeenth female torsos used like brackets over the century wood sculpture. The altar of the capitals. They stand out in sharp distinc- Capilla de Loreto, addorsed to La Comtion from the salomonic retables nearby. pajiia, surely is not later than 1650, its _ The high altar of Santa Catalina (Fig. fluted columns and its general conserva-

N25 RR

SCULPTURE tism comparable with the altar of 1651 in diffused in the period, including Lima, althe Jesuit church at Cuzco. In the same though no visible evidence has survived in

manner as the Mercedarian altars of 1660 tthecapitalh —— — | , is the high altar of Santa Ana at Ayacucho, The niches of the first story are devoted excluding the eighteenth-century central to sacred vessels containing relics of saints. section. The fine architectural setting for The panels on the two upper stories have

the paintings of the life of St. Francis paintings of saints and in the top center Xavier in the Jesuit church fits also in the Crucifixion. The central niche which this category, and perhaps is a product enshrines a statue of the Madonna was re-

| of the identical workshop. More strikingly embellished in the mid-eighteenth century, original is the altar of Jesus Nazareno in and various mirrors were then inserted in

oe the same church (Fig. 316). Here, by ex- this section. The silver tabernacle is specifiception, the statues are first-rate Hispanic cally said to be the gift of Bishop Gutié-

, sculptures, both the Christ Bearing His rrez Gadeano (1745-1749). Cross and St. Ignatius. The large frame- Returning to Cuzco, we find that the work of columns builds up splendidly, the last third of the seventeenth century, that

| columns very beautiful in their alternate is to say, the period of Bishop Manuel de bands of cartouches and spiral flutings."* Mbollinedo, was one of unparalleled artistic

The high altar of Ayacucho Cathedral production. Retables and pulpits poured holds first rank among the masterpieces of forth from sculptors’ shops, refurbishing

the seventeenth century. It was probably all of the churches. No really accurate in place at the time of the consecration of chronology of them can be established, the new church in 1672 or shortly there- however, until the notarial and episcopal after. The most suitable stylistic compari- archives are thoroughly searched for docu-

son is with the altar of Nuestra Sefiora del mentation. | Buen Suceso in San Blas at Cuzco (Fig. The retable of Nuestra Sefiora del Buen 307), mentioned as existing in 1678. Here Suceso (Fig. 307)°in the church of San the spiral columns rise above a lower band Blas was begun circa 1673-1675, presum- _ decorated with cartouches. Although not ably at the request of Bishop Mollinedo, identical with the first story in Ayacucho, since the latter mentions it in his letter to

it is at least comparable in period. The the king, dated 1678. Payments for the second row of columns also recalls the completion and the gilding of the altar : Cuzco school, but in this case the earlier were made to the famous Indian sculptor, , phase, as represented by the cloister and Juan Tomds Tuyru Tupac in 1678-1679." altars of La Merced (Figs. 84, 311). Ie The spiral column makes one of its earliest

| would be hazardous to propose, however, appearances in Cuzco in this work. That | that the sculptor active in Ayacucho was fact is evident in the relatively chaste hanspecifically a cuzqueno artist. The orna- dling, with fluting but unadorned by

MN 216 & |

mental vocabulary must have been widely foliate ornament and grapes like others

| RETABLES appearing within a few years thereafter. altar of Lima Cathedral (1675) were | The band with cartouche sets off the shafts among those which launched the style. in the first story. Probably from the same Shortly the salomonic retable controlled shop is a lateral altar of Santa Clara, the the field unchallenged, and it held sway center of which was later modified by the until the advent of the rococo in the mid-

superposition of a glass niche, dated 1779. eighteenth century. Oo

Just how the spiral column was intro- A monument of considerable impor- |

duced to Spanish America is uncertain. tance is the high altar of Santa Teresa | The most important single factor in its (Figs. 60, 317), awarded by contract to | widespread popularity throughout Europe Diego Martinez de Oviedo in 1675. It was | was Bernini’s baldacchino (1627-1633) in to be identical with the high altar of La St. Peter’s at Rome. A replica designed Merced, now destroyed.” The spiral colby Diego de Aguirre was projected for umn fills the dominant positions in all Lima Cathedral in 1675 but never real- three stories. Only the smaller shafts which

ized. a flank the niches cling to the older tradition, By the middle of the seventeenth cen- as exemplified by the Mercedarian tran-

tury the spiral or salomonic column ap-_ sept altars. Two crowns of acanthus leaves , peared in several retables in Spain.” The encircle the lower section, establishing the

first certain example of it in America seems one-to-two-part division. The vocabulary | to have been the high altar of Puebla Ca- of ornament grows increasingly richer. thedral in Mexico, a work carried out by Among the new themes are cherubs’ heads | the sculptor Lucas Méndez after a draw- and nude putti amid the grapevines on ing sent from Spain by Martinez Mon- the columns. The bracketed frieze and the tafiés. The engraving of it, dated circa draped female head upon the cornice join 1650 and indubitably prior to the death company with the familiar scale motive, of the engraver, Juan de Noort, in 1652, the half-disk or tongue moldings, the denplaces the altar in the fifth decade of the telated edges, and the broken hooded niches

seventeenth century.” In Peru spiral col- which are topped by the elliptical car- | | umns decorate the episcopal throne of the touches. Gilded throughout, the high altar

choir stalls in Cuzco cathedral, a monu- of Santa Teresa is a masterpiece, although , ‘ment designed about 1660. The same fea- its beauty is partially concealed by the new ture is repeated in the choir of San Fran- glass cages placed around the statues, and cisco at Lima (1674). Nearly all of the the atrocious sunburst and Lamb of God in

retables and pulpits at Cuzco adopted it the center. The latter with its tin crown = after 1670. The altar of Nuestra Sefiora was placed there by the nuns of the pres- © del Buen Suceso in San Blas, mentioned ent century. This damage could easily be above (circa 1673-1678), the high altar repaired. Modern clothes, too, obscure the and pulpit of Santa Teresa commissioned statues of the Madonna and three Carin 1675, and the project for the high melites. St. Theresa herself and Christ are

M217 KR | ) |

SCULPTURE modern religious images of the waxworks rious array of gilded Baroque wood carv- _ variety, no doubt bought in Paris or New ing, painted canvases, and polychromed —

~ York. , statues. Three life-sized Jesuits in wood _ Diego Martinez de Oviedo was appar- sculpture, painted black and gold, fill the ently the leading sculptor of the second dominant niches in the upper section. They half of the seventeenth century in Cuzco. are majestic, broadly draped with full

The numerous pulpits which came from rounded folds which are arranged in his shop were studied in Chapter XI. They groups and gathered in at the waist. The include those splendid monuments in La style is reminiscent of the Sevillian school Merced, Santa Catalina, Santa Teresa of the seventeenth century. The figure of (1675), La Compafiia and the seminary the Madonna, in the central position, is

| (Figs. 278-281). His documented retables entirely gilded. She is unmistakably a are the high altars of Santa Teresa and San Baroque copy of a Gothic prototype which

Sebasti4n (1679-1680).” The provision the artist had admired or one the Jesuits that the former was to be exactly like wished him to reproduce. The type is very the main altar of La Merced would sug- close to the fourteenth-century statue in gest that Martinez was the author of the Toledo Cathedral, known as Nuestra

, chosen model. Surely it could not have been Sefiora la Blanca. The Christ Child is the work ordered from Martin de Torres omitted at Cuzco, and the subject is the

in 1631, for the spiral columns like those Assumption. ,

a of Santa Teresa were not used at that date. A painting of the Transfiguration of The similarity in the designs of Mar- Christ appears just above the Madonna,

tinez de Oviedo’s two altarpieces is easily and on either side of her a painting of an recognized in spite of the extensive mod- archangel. The statues in the niches beside ern additions to the Carmelite retable and the tabernacle do not pertain to this altar, the dilapidated condition of its companion although they are colonial. The statuettes

in San Sebastian. The latter was on the of the predella are lost, but one fine statue verge of collapsing to the ground until of a Jesuit, like the three others previously partially reénforced in recent years. Many mentioned, still remains on the lower right, _

, of its spiral columns have been lost and var- where the retable turns against the wall of ious mirrors have been added. In general the sanctuary (Fig. 319). It is possible here the state of preservation is very poor in this to comprehend the dignity of interpretamonument whose donor’s shield, that of tion, combined with a consuming fervor, the priest, Juan de Cardenas, is placed upon so eminently Hispanic. These lateral niches

the lower niches. are trefoil in shape.

For decorative splendor and extraordi- Most imposing of all is the beauty of narily fine quality of figure sculpture, the the architectural setting, built up in two high altar of La Compafiia excels all others high columned stories and finished off with in Cuzco (Figs. 72, 318, 319). It is a glo- an attic of niches, gables, and cartouches.

MN 218 &

RET ABLES The large spiral. columns of the first contain two excellent statues of St. Jerome story create an added sense of restlessness and St. Francis (Fig. 359), brought here in which the Baroque delights. Acanthus from the destroyed chapel of San Andrés.

crowns encircle the lower third of the | The high altar of the famous shrine of | shafts, and the usual arabesques and grapes Copacabana (Fig. 320) on Lake Titicaca spread over the surfaces. Nude putti oc- lies beyond the present geographic borcur here as in the high altar of Santa Teresa. ders of Peru. Nonetheless, it is a dated Still more in evidence are the unmistakably monument, and for that reason, it helps female nudes, most of them turning into to establish the chronology of the period. flowing leaves at the waist. This theme, The present church was begun in 1668 and so popular upon the arms of choir stalls, an inscription upon the retable states that also decorates the brackets and the friezes it was gilded in 1684.” Hence it is approxi-

here repeatedly. mately contemporary with the high altars The columns of the second story have of Santa Teresa, La Compafia, and San beautiful long-stemmed foliate ornament Sebastian in Cuzco. More conservatism is ending in three stylized flowers. By con- suggested by the adoption of the spiral

trast a zigzag is carved into the lower column only in the secondary positions | band. Secondary columns display consid- flanking the niches. The major columns = erable versatility in treatment, with ara- display a rich overlay of arabesques and besques and shields the most noteworthy. elliptical shields comparable with the small Spinning over the surfaces recur many fa- shafts beside the Madonna of the Jesuits in

miliar devices of the Cuzco school: the Cuzco. It would be hazardous to suggest, scale motive, channeled moldings, the ball however, that the Cuzco school projected

and tongue, brackets, beaded edging, etc. itself to the shores of Lake Titicaca. In , It would be impossible to exaggerate the view of the lack of documentary informa-

beauty of the high altar of the Compafiia tion and of exact stylistic relationships, in Cuzco, or to overestimate its historical speculation as to the origin of the sculptor significance. It is the greatest masterpiece is unjustified. The architectural composi- | among the altarpieces of colonial Peru. tion as well as details of ornament are bet-

_ Without any documentary information as_ ter in the Jesuit retable at Cuzco, and the : to the author, an attribution would be figure sculpture attains a much higher hazardous in view of our limited informa- level of quality. For all of that, the Copa-

tion about artists of the period. The style cabana retable is a brilliant work. The is close to the work of Diego Martinez de mutilations of the tabernacle in the presOviedo, although the quality is somewhat ent century and the neo-Renaissance superior. The altar of the Immaculate Con- round-arched enframement of the miracu- . ception in the right transept of La Com- lous image are unfortunate but not dis-

paiiia is a splendid work by the master of astrous. , ,

the high altar. At present the lower niches Precise information is available in re- -

M219 RK

| SCULPTURE gard to the date of the high altar of San large academic paintings are uninteresting Blas (Fig. 314) in Cuzco, since the bishop additions of the nineteenth century.

claimed it to be the best in the city in So many other altarpieces and decorative

, 1696, when it was being gilded.“ At the sculptures were produced in Cuzco at the end of the century the spiral shaft ex- turn of the century, that a whole volume cluded all other types of columns which would be needed for a thorough study of had been conspicuous by their variety them. The interior of the seminary, works

: hitherto. In San Blas the difference in in the cathedral, and the high altar at period and workshops is also noted in the Checacupe are representative. For a half predominance of the rosette instead of the century the traditions remained without usual grapevine. Whirling movement and _ essential variation. The principal altar in —

| decorative richness mark the last phase of the church of San Pedro (Fig. 321), orthe Hispanic Baroque, so frequently yet dered of Lorenzo de Vega in 1720, is a incorrectly called ““Churrigueresque.” Very gigantic three-storied structure that main-

charming are the scrolled pediments with tains the high standards of the school.” shell in the second story. The mudéjar The division of the niches between painttrefoil establishes the shape of frame in ings and statues is especially characteristic four of the paintings. As usual the sculp- of Cuzco, although it does occur to a lesser

ture is superior to the oils. The statue extent in Lima. The tabernacle has recently of the Purisima is especially lovely. The been restored in colonial style. The statues others too, St. Blas, Saints Peter and Paul, of Mercedarian saints are also recent as a and the two Saints John, are effective and result of the transfer of the church to

| somewhat similar to the figures on the sisters of that order. pulpit in the same church. The mirrors and The high altar of Jesus Maria must be glass canopy do not belong to the original contemporary with the rebuilding of the composition, but were added about 1750. church in 1733-1735. Possibly the same The trascoro of Cuzco Cathedral (Fig. workshop produced the main altar in the

, 66) shines with great splendor, making parish church of the town of Oropesa, one the entry into this church dramatic be- of the masterpieces of the province. Beyond that of all others in Peru. The huge cause of its rural location, the sculpture spiral columns, hung with clusters of has escaped later alterations such as those grapes and vines, and brilliantly gilded, are which mar the related monument in Cuzco.

extraordinarily beautiful. The smaller col- The flatness of pattern and the sharper umns beside the cult picture of Nuestra distinctions between planes suggest that a Sefiora de la Antigua by contrast are carved native Indian artist created this slightly in a series of rosettes. Bishop Mollinedo’s more static interpretation of the late Ba-

escutcheon in the upper center combines roque. with the style to place the ¢rascoro in the — The fine altar of natural cedar, ungilded, last decade of the seventeenth century. The in the sacristy of San Francisco at Cuzco

MN 220 &

| RETABLES has flat lacy borders and broad openwork masterpiece, the choir stalls of the cathemoldings which also indicate this late pe- dral, is studied in Chapter X. Noguera, a riod. The main panels are devoted to paint- Catalan born in 1592 at Barcelona, is first’

ings of the Passion of Christ. The zigzag mentioned in Lima in 1619. He married | columns of the second story are the only two years later, and enjoyed a long and case in the city of an imitation of the pul- distinguished career, succeeding Martinez pit of San Blas, somewhat exaggerated, to de Arrona as maestro mayor of the cathe-

be sure (Figs. 322, 288). dral in 1638. He carried on the building One utterly charming altar of the eight- of the cathedral portals, carved retables and eenth century in Santa Catalina (Fig. 323) pulpits, and prepared the design for the remains to be mentioned. Dedicated to the fountain in the Plaza Mayor at Lima. Only

Madonna, her small statue stands within a the latter work and the choir stalls have : closable circular shrine in the center. The survived. He is last mentioned in 1655.” Dominican saints beside her are modern, © Martin Alonso de Mesa, active in Lima but.the niches and columns are exquisitely from 1595 until his death in 1626 and jewel-like. The elliptical reliefs in stucco Luis Ortiz de Vargas, both of whom colabove depict the Trinity, the Ascension of laborated with Noguera on the choir stalls, Christ, and the Descent into Limbo. Upon were also creators of retables. None of

the summit sit spirited little figures of them has come down to us. The same fate nude angels playing harps and guitars. For has befallen the prolific production of

fantasy of, invention and delicacy of ex- Asencio Salas. Not a single work from his , pression, this altarpiece would be difficult hand has survived. Born at Logrofio, Spain,

to surpass. Oo in: 1612, he practiced his art in Lima from 1637 until his death in 1669.”

- _ The most important extant sculpture in

LIMA Lima dating from the mid-seventeenth |

—ritre sculpture of Lima in the seven- century is the series of saints over the ,

T teenth century is well documented, wardrobes (cajoneria) in the sacristy of thanks to the study of archives made by San Francisco. Across one end of the room , - Lohmann Villena, Padre Rubén Vargas twelve monastic saints, in large part Fran-

Ugarte, and Harth-terré.” Juan Martinez ciscan, stand on either side of the main a de Arrona, architect and sculptor, has al- central niche which enshrines the image of ready been discussed at the beginning of Christ. The Immaculate Conception holds the present chapter in connection with his the central position in the left wall, acfine series of Apostles (Fig. 309) in the companied by a row of ten saints. On the sacristy of Lima Cathedral (1608). The opposite wall her pendant is St. Catherine

- most important figure of the first half of with twelve saints. Individual figures are , the century, or so today he appears to competently managed, if uninspired. The _. have been, was Pedro de: Noguera whose general impression of the architectural set-. MN 221 &

SCULPTURE ting with the figure sculpture is rich and tation. An important work came in 1681 splendid. On the basis of the style a date when he agreed to provide an altar for circa 1650, long before the rebuilding of the Capilla de Animas in San Marcelo. It

| the sacristy in 1729, is indicated. was to comprise two stories and eighteen The refurbishing of the sacristy of San saloménicas. This notice is of significance Agustin in 1643 included the ceiling and for it signalizes the definitive triumph of a series of twenty-eight saints.” The lux- the spiral column which Bernini had done

urious chests and the wall of niches above so much to popularize.” , them (Fig. 333) now belong to the pe- Just one of Diego de Aguirre’s many riod about 1760, subsequent to the great works has daunted the hand of fate which earthquake. The statues are generally be- has swept away the major portion of Lima’s lieved to have escaped the disaster of 1746 artistic past. That is the retable of the Imas they did in 1940. Pleasing graceful fig- maculate Conception (Fig. 324) in the

ures in wood, subdued in their poly- cathedral, originally the work of Carlos

| chromy, they number thirty today. It is Pavia. Diego de Aguirre was engaged to not at all certain that these sculptures are dismount and reconstruct it (1692-1696) entirely the work of Diego de Medina. A because of the damage it suffered in the soft flowing movement in many of them severe earthquake of 1687. The exact date seems to suggest the eighteenth century. of Pavia’s design is unknown, but it must The leading sculptor of Lima in the be placed about 1675, contemporary with second half of the seventeenth century was the main facade of San Francisco.” As exDiego de Aguirre. He is called sculptor and plained in the analysis of this latter monu-

ensamblador (joiner) signifying that he ment, the relationship to the retable is so was a specialist in retables. Many commis- close that the facade may also be attrib-

sions are recorded from the year 1667, uted to Carlos Pavia. The alternative pos- . when he made a large tabernacle for the sibility is that Pavia was a pupil and close nuns of Santa Catalina, until his death in follower of Constantino Vasconcellos, ar-

1718. The project for the high altar of chitect of San Francisco. | Lima Cathedral (1675) which was to re- It is difficult to be sure that Aguirre conproduce Bernini’s baldacchino in St. Peter’s tributed more to the retable than the shell

| at Rome makes an impression upon any art tympanum in the center and the elliptical historian.” Thus we realize that Lima was panels. The rococo details of the lower not isolated from the ecclesiastical and ar- sides postdate Aguirre, belonging to the tistic capitals of Europe. The death of the second half of the eighteenth century. At archbishop who proposed the new altar this time the gray background and gilded

, meant the abandonment of the undertak- details replaced the traditional Hispanic ing. Aguirre was then engaged upon the method of gilding the entire monument. high altar of San Agustin (1673) which The statue of the Madonna and the altar must have done much to establish his repu- furnishings are modern Gothic. The origMN 222 BR

, RETABLES | inal reliefs at the sides are episodes in the The conclusion must be reached that it life of the Virgin: the Presentation in the was damaged in the earthquake of 1687 Temple, the Marriage, the Annunciation, and replaced by the existing structure not

and the Nativity. long afterwards. The entire church was The church of San Pedro in Lima is a redecorated at that period, and the wood virtual museum with its nine retables of carvings and paintings were added to em-

- the late seventeenth and early eighteenth bellish the aisles. | centuries. They have not been visible since In the first story of the altar, horizontal the earthquake of 1940, on account of the rings divide the spiral columns into four restoration of the church. Hence an ade- zones, a usage which seems to characterize

quate discussion of them is impossible. one particular workshop of Lima. In the

Judging by a photograph, the retable of second story only one ring separates the | the Purisima has a second story of about lower third of the shaft which is curi1650, a first story redone in 1700, and ously decorated with melons in addition

modern statues. , to bunches of grapes. Above the large The retable of St. Francis Xavier (Fig. statue of St. Francis Xavier the Madonna _ 325), it seems to me, should be dated about is enthroned beneath a canopy, delicately —/

1700. Padre Vargas Ugarte has generously cut with a lacelike filigree of open work. : furnished me with valuable information Pulpits of Lima also have similar canopies. by letter to the effect that the retable of The shell tympanum behind the Madonna

St. Francis Xavier was mentioned as re- likewise testifies to the stylistic unity of , cently completed in the Annual Letter, the school in which doorways of the eight-

ie, the report of the Jesuits of Peru, in eenth century carry the same feature. This | the year 1648. The same source states that gilded altar of St. Francis Xavier is elo- | they had placed a statue of the saint by quent evidence of the high quality of the hand of Martinez Montafiés in the Jlimefo retables of the second half of the altar. The large standing figure of the seventeenth century. Very few of them.

Jesuit in polychromed wood which occu- have survived. . 7 , pies the main niche seems most probably The altar of the Trinity in San Pedro to be that very work. It resembles some- appears in the photograph to be a splendid — | what the statues of St. Ignatius and St. monument (circa 1700). The treatment Francis Xavier in the University Chapel of the spiral columns, here using the rosette at Seville.” Padre Vargas believes that the instead of grapevines, is more common

figure of St. Francis Borja in San Pedro than the style of the workshop just dis- |

at Lima should also be attributed to Mar- cussed. | | tinez Montafiés. The retable of St. Fran- | No counterpart exists in Peru for the —

cis Xavier in Lima, however, cannot pos- altar of St. Ignatius in the transept of | sibly be dated circa 1648, since the style San Pedro (Fig. 326) for the simple rea- | |

a MN 223 B | Be

of architecture and spiral columns are later. son that it is a copy of the transept altars _

SCULPTURE dedicated to St. Ignatius and to St. Fran- Maria is the central niche over the tabercis Xavier in La Compafiia at Quito, Ecua- nacle, occupied by life-sized statues of the

dor. These altars in turn were derived in Holy Family. As in colonial painting they their composition from those by Andrea are presented standing, with the Infant Pozzo in the church of Sant’ Ignazio at Christ between Mary and Joseph. A relief Rome.” The giant spiral columns in sin- in the upper center depicts the Coronation gle story enframing one large niche are of the Virgin by the Trinity. The niches Italian in origin. The altar in Lima had no contain Franciscan and Dominican saints: imitators. It is a foreign importation which St. Francis, St. Clare, St. Dominic, and St.

is less satisfactory today because the wood Rose of Lima. | is painted black, one of the nineteenth cen- The proportions of the altar in two stotury’s worst aberrations. Thus in Spanish ries are broad and low on account of the America the Italian marbles were replaced size of the sanctuary. The architectural orby wood. At Quito the Hispanic gold and nament is spun out with greatest delicacy, polychromy united with the Italian com- weaving back and forth in spirited curv-

| position to produce splendid results. These ing rhythms. Much of the verticality of altars are subsequent to the year 1700, the preceding altars is lost in a complex ripapproximate date of their Roman proto- pling play of lines and masses, dissolved and

type. diffused in a flow of golden light and shade. The first half of the eighteenth century The deeper niches and broader undulating in Lima and the coastal region was one of pediments all contribute to the enchant-

the best and most prolific periods in re- ment of this rich glowing expression of table production. Lima seems to have been, spiritual warmth. The rococo had not yet and logically, the fountainhead. As a point reached Lima, and yet pure Hispanic art of departure for study, the rich array of underwent a leavening which seems to be

wood sculpture in Jestis Maria serves ad- native to the new century. oe , mirably. The high altar (Fig. 327) was For high quality and unity of a single commissioned of Joseph de Castilla in 1708. period it would be difficult to surpass the He must have been one of the leading and interior of Jesus Maria. Nearly all of the one of the most influential masters of his lateral altars may have come from the shop day. Documents of his activity range from of Joseph de Castilla, they are so similar.

the year r7or until his death in 1739, and Particularly lovely is the altar of San Ide-

, yet only one other work mentioned in the fonso, completed in 1734. Here the figures , records may still exist.° That is the retable of the saint upon his knees and the Mafor El Belén, a church which was destroyed donna and the angels are arranged and in recent years and its altars rearranged and modeled with great charm. The altar of transferred to the modern edifice of the the Crucifix (1714-1718) in the transept

| Sagrados Corazones. _ (Fig. 328) likewise merits special consid-

a AN 224 A

The focal point in the high altar of Jesis eration.” The unusual breadth of the de-

RETABLES sign is again noteworthy, a characteristic of of Pisco boasts of the Compafiia, a fine

works of this period. church of the first quarter of the eight- The altars in the church of Magdalena eenth century whose high altar, transept la Vieja in Lima are contemporary with altars, and pulpit alone suffice to establish

those of Jests Maria and much akin in an enviable claim to fame. Some retablero style and quality. Several workshops must of Lima answered the call to practice his have functioned in close relationship, judg- art there or else he shipped his creations ing only by the few preserved monuments. from the capital. Anyone will recognize

The high altar has much the same disposi- that he was a contemporary of Joseph de | tion as that of Jesus Maria, here enshrin- Castilla. His altar of the Crucifix is outing the Magdalen in the upper story and standing, worthy of the best Castilla ever the Immaculate Conception in the princi- achieved. The high altar and the altar of

pal niche, the latter badly repainted and St. Joseph do not quite measure up to this adored by waxwork angels. The other standard, and indeed are probably by anmajor statues represent St. Peter, St. Fran- other hand. One is struck by the division

cis, St. Dominic, and another Franciscan. of the spiral shafts into three registers by | Rosettes decorate the spiral columns to the horizontal rings. Ornament, composition,

exclusion of grapes. The clusters of ap- proportions are clearly limetio. The Maples which by exception were favored by donna and four Jesuits comprise the sculpthe artists of Jestis Maria were not adopted ture of the high altar which is set against here. The six side altars, all of like fac- a scalloped shell, another favorite arrange-

ture, make this interior a veritable jewel ment of Lima. | , box of unforgettable luster. _ The Jesuit church in Arequipa possesses Several retables from the first half of three splendid retables all of the same style

the eighteenth century, formerly in El and period. Asa result of earthquakes and Belén, now in the Sagrados Corazones, have still more of the Neoclassic mania in the

lost their original gilding and are now nineteenth century they are the only costained in natural cedar. On the contrary, lonial altars of any importance in the entire

the pristine beauty of the small altar of city. The one dedicated to St. Francis the Crucifix and of the altar dedicated Xavier was gilded by a certain Felipe to the Purisima still remains intact in the Morén de Carmona in 1717. Lavish and sacristy of San Francisco. The rebuilding luxuriant, this structure of three stories of the sacristy in 1729 in addition to their sparkles with the rosette type of salostyle provides adequate evidence of their mdénica. The statues of wood and cloth re- | period. The altar in the Sala Capitular fits inforced with plaster carry a convincing into the same group, as will be recognized religious fervor. The stylistic features, such _ when the refabrication of the top story is as the deep niches with shell tympana the

taken into consideration. ribs of which are carved in foliate or-

A 225 A |

South of Lima upon the coast, the town nament, indicate connections with Lima

SCULPTURE , rather than with Cuzco. They do not cor- quake of 1746 brought an outburst of new , respond, however, in general composition activity. The French rococo took the scene —

to the school of Joseph de Castilla. with a show of force which was soon to Documents of some nonextant sculpture sound the death knell of the Hispanic of Arequipa have been published by Padre Baroque.

Barriga. The high altar of the cathedral The armless bust-length caryatid placed

, (1733) by Antonio de Torres and Joseph upon voluted pilasters is one of the most Flores was lost in the fire which destroyed striking new rococo ornamental devices of

the whole church in 1844.” Padre Barriga the third quarter of the eighteenth cenhas discovered contracts for several altars tury. The lateral altar of St. Anthony of

by Antonio de Torres who died in 1732. Padua (Fig. 329) in the church of San | Perhaps the man named Flores, of Arequipa, Francisco de Paula Nuevo is a work of

was related to the family of sculptors high quality which represents the new known in Lima. One of the latter, Antonio style at its best. An inscription (Fig. 330)

| Flores, left a signed inscription upon a side on the predella gives the date, 1764, and , altar (1764) in San Francisco de Paula in the name of the sculptor, Antonio Flores.

the capital. The altar is painted white with polychromy

| Ramifications of the workshops of Are- limited to the statues. This feature marks quipa could be traced throughout the the abandonment of the Spanish tradition neighboring provinces. A side altar in the of gilded wood sculpture, which began to church at Yanaquiqua, known to me by disappear in Spain itself after the succession photograph, is an indication of the exist- of the French Bourbons to the throne in the ence of others unseen and unpublished. early eighteenth century. The general com- . This particular example has been badly position of the altar in two stories, the daubed with white paint, an all too fre- niches and their pediments still retain a quent custom in southern Peru and Bo- semblance of the style of the first half of

livia. the century. The details, however, are The mid-eighteenth century in Lima rococo, with numerous cartouches surheralds the last phases of colonial art. The rounded by crisp rippling leaves, spar-

| chastened design and the reversion to kling shells, and the lattice motive. These Renaissance clusters of fruit in the tomb sculptors of Lima must have owned books of Bishop Morcillo Rubiéd de Aufién hold of engraved ornament published by French , new portents. The treatment of the broken architects, such as Francois Cuvilliers’ Livre. pediments recalls, however, the school of de Cartouches.”

Joseph de Castilla. This monument of A whole series of small altars, in which wood and plaster is very much like a re- bust caryatids without arms strike a new table, the work of a certain Felipe San- note, appears throughout Peru. A charm-

tiago Palomino in 1743.” ing small work of this type in La Merced The rebuilding of Lima after the earth- at Lima is dedicated to Nuestra Sefiora de

| , MN 226 &

, RETABLES - la Antigua. The painting, a copy of the the waist. This category will be called the

celebrated cult picture, as well as the atlas group. These figures occupy the upcarved ornament, displays an eighteenth- per part of the columns in the large recentury grace and naiveté.” In Lima the table of San José in La Merced at Lima. churches of San Marcelo, Santa Rosa de Otherwise the composition is still Hispanic, las Monjas, Sagrados Corazones, and the although rococo ornamental themes inter-

Iglesia del Prado all have altars of the type vene. A dark mahogany stain of nine- , dating from the third quarter of the cen- teenth-century origin now gives a gloomy

tury. The finest carving of the period is, cast to the wood which once was gilded. a however, the woodwork of niches enclosing | The atlantes on the high altar (Fig. 332)

Augustinian saints in the sacristy of San of San Carlos (circa 1758-1766) swing ~ Agustin (Fig. 333). A mask in the cen- about in energetic contrapposto and their ter of the pilasters and an urn at the bot- arms rise up, as if to support the capitals. , tom create a gay and fantastic mood. Most The major shafts are giant spiral columns original of all are the flame-like rococo set diagonally. Influence of Italian Baroque tympana over the niches and the hand- altars and of José Churriguera’s retable in some rococo chests for ecclesiastical vest- San Esteban in Salamanca, Spain, may be

ments. : suspected here. The altar with colossal The Carmen of Trujillo possesses a lat- columns rather than with the three-storied eral altar (Fig. 331) of this category, dedi- division was adopted, however, not only

cated to the Infant Christ (circa 1759- by José Churriguera but by numerous - 1773). The custom of gilding is still main- masters throughout Spain in the eighttained here. The bust caryatid without eenth century. Its appearance at Lima is arms was at the height of its popularity in retarded on comparison with the mother the sixties and seventies, although the fash- country. To all of these features are added

ion did persist later with some retarded rococo ornament. The altar of San Carlos, , masters. The altar to the Marriage of the in truth, should be recognized as a highly Virgin (1782) in La Merced at Trujilloand original work of considerable merit. Its another devoted to Santo Toribio (1790) chief blemish is the ugly and lugubrious in the cathedral exemplify that fact. The mahogany stain. The four caryatid maidlatter’s chief claim to fame lies in the fact ens of the tabernacle are Neoclassic, falling

that the donor was the famous bishop, entirely out of the style of the original Martinez Compafién. Although of no structure, and the Madonna belongs to

great importance, the names of the artisans the twentieth century. | were Diego Fernandez Brisefio, sculptor, The simple type of atlas retable was and Inocencio de Heredia, architect.“ found in the old church of El Belén at

Just as common as the armless bust Lima, and still exists in La Merced at

_ caryatid is another type in which the hu- Ica and elsewhere.“ Cuzco, surprisingly | man torso with arms is displayed down to enough, possesses three fine retables of the

A 227 R | -

SCULPTURE atlas group, all of them unmistakably by niche of a retable with a frame of mirrors is the same workshop. They are strictly im- widespread in Andean Peru and Bolivia in

, portations from Lima, planted on foreign the second half of the eighteenth century. soil. The best stands against the end wall Large individual mirrors, as though taken of the cathedral behind the sanctuary. The from a boudoir, were often scattered about. others are side altars in La Compafiia and Witness the high altar of Ayacucho CatheJesus Maria. The cathedral altar (Fig. 334) dral and the altar of San Blas in Cuzco

| strikes one as strangely out of key, itis so (Fig. 314), both of the seventeenth cenalien to the Cuzco environment. High tury and given these later embellishments. quality, however, meets with approval at After this digression we return to Lima any time or place. The architectural set- and to the third category of caryatid and ting can be described as Hispanic, overlaid atlas retables. In this case the full-length with the new French rococo fashion of figure, sometimes female and other times the third quarter of the eighteenth cen- male, is employed. The first of these, the tury. For some reason, probably financial, retable of Nuestra Sefiora de la Luz in the wood was left in natural cedar. The San Francisco at Lima, has a dated in7 really superior statues of apostles and saints scription of 1761. It combines full-length did reach the stage of polychromy which and half-length caryatids. The mediocrity is beautifully preserved and unmolested. of the sculpture is not improved by the More or less as an aside, while still in garish pink, blue, white, and gold paint of Cuzco, it is fitting to speak of the superb recent times. The retable of San Diego in array of mirror altars in Santa Clara (Fig. the same church has the twelve apostles as _ 59). The most extraordinary of its kind atlas figures. It is of slightly later date, but anywhere is the high altar, composed en- the quality shows no improvement. These tirely of mirrors, and arranged in two and works mark the lowest ebb of Peruvian one-half stories. The side altars and the colonial art.” central section of another, added to an altar The last monument in Lima which must of circa 1675, are all contemporary. This be recorded in this group is the high altar latter is the only one which has a dated of San Marcelo, painted black in the nineinscription. It is recorded twice for good teenth century but regilded in our times. measure and reads thus: Este retablo se The spiral columns and the composition of dedico haser la devota sor Isadora Baca el the early century were brought up to date ano 1779. The pilasters of green enameled (circa 1770) by four apostles in the first glass are rather curious. The two mermaids story and four angels in the second. Some playing the charango on the lower ledge other details, such as the urns beneath the are unique in Cuzco altars, and a reminder columns, identify a conservative master that the lake region where they flourish is who was forced to adopt some of the ideas

not far to the south. of his contemporaries. How late the fullThe habit of decking out the principal length caryatids and atlantes persisted in MN 228 &

RETABLES | _ the provinces can be judged by the large The altar in the church of La Concep_ retable of Nuestra Sefiora de las Mercedes cidn is drier, plainer, and less spirited in in San Pedro at Lambayeque. An inscrip- design, scarcely more than mediocre. Nution tells of the completion of the gilding merous modern repaintings and various rein 1796. The rococo is in evidence through- visions, such as the heart-shaped moldings out, as it is likewise in other altars of related which hold electric light bulbs, have. not

- style in the same church. However pro- improved matters. Here too, trees, foun-

-vincial the workmanship, the general im- tains, and towers are peculiarly placed upon ,

pression is sumptuous. the columns. — ,

Caryatid or atlas figures are not re- The church of Santo Cristo de los Mila- :

stricted to eighteenth-century retables in gros, supposedly designed by the viceroy Peru. They are also common in Mexico. It Amat, is the most complete surrender to — will suffice to mention those in San Agustin French taste in Lima. Throughout, the walls

at Guanajuato and in the church of the are painted to suggest marble and the high same order at Salamanca, not far away.” altar too is given the same appearance. In _ The last bloom of the Hispanic rococo in the unity of the structure (1766-1771) Lima arrives with the high altars of San lies its greatest charm.” The high altar Sebastidn and of La Concepcién (Figs. 335, (Fig. 97) still clings to one feature of local 336). The sculptor, Llorente, completed origin, the large fine shell tympanum which the latter in 1783." Both works are painted acts like a halo to the angels and flaming

light gray with gilding limited to a few urns at the top. The latter in truth disaphigh spots. The curious bulging urn-shaped point any careful observer by their ugly columns, the broad proportions of the two bulging shapes. Compared with the gilded stories, and the deep recesses also character- salomonic retables of earlier days, this altar ize the two monuments. In detail, however, is cold and dull. The keynote is simplifica-

the former is more rococo in the fine rol- tion by the use of plain shafts and walls of licking play of the moldings and the crisp simulated marble. Nonetheless, the great _ flowing cartouches. These cartouches recall broken pediments of the attic and the rothe earlier retable of Antonio Flores in San coco moldings put the design in a category Francisco de Paula, but such patterns are as yet far removed from the Neoclassic. so popular in the period that an attribution Altogether surprising results came into to him on that basis alone would be un- being in the altars of the church at Surco,

justified. Strangest of all are the wheeled a suburb of Lima. There a local yet daring cartouches upon the lower columns and the provincial master bent columns and even

unexplained symbols in the second story. turned niches aslant in his desire to create Inasmuch as the church has been concealed rococo movement. It is doubtful whether by the restorer’s scaffolds since the earth- anyone except a modern fantastic architect quake of 1940, the work could be studied like the Catalan, Gaudi, ever sought such

only by way of a photograph. _ unconventional effects. Co 7

A 229 BR |

SCULPTURE , Beyond the borders of colonial art lie all 321) than works of the school of Lima. In

| of the revivalisms of the nineteenth cen- this respect the circular paintings in sub| tury. Not much enthusiasm can be aroused ordinate positions are unusual, a feature in the various transitions to the Neoclassic, which was to become a characteristic of the as exemplified by the interior of the church school of Ayacucho. Points of contact with of La Trinidad. The cathedral at Lima, alas, Lima (Fig. 327) will also be observed in

was subjected to much rehabilitation at the lacelike complexity of ornament, the that time. French academic Baroque, re- shell niches, and their beaded moldings. plete with musical instruments and tasseled Untilsome documentary information about curtains, is the style of an altar dedicated the workshops is forthcoming, however, the to the Madonna, and, according to the in- school of Ayacucho must be regarded as a

| scription, made in 1796 and painted in separate entity although it certainly drew 1802. Soon Matias Maestro was to start from the fountainhead at Lima and pos-

bonfires of colonial art, and replace it with sibly somewhat from Cuzco. a his own sterile Neoclassic efforts. The three-part divisions in the upper —

| center of the Carmelite retable are unusual , and they established a precedent which

— AYACUCHO 7 was often followed within the city. Grapes HE large number of magnificent reta- and vines entwine the spiral columns which T bles of the eighteenth century in Aya- are also decorated with occasional rosettes

cucho, a small village of eight thousand and birds. The statues of the cloth and inhabitants, serves to remind us of the plaster variety have been garishly retreasures which have been lost elsewhere. painted. Otherwise the condition of the Because she fell into decline in the first altar is excellent. The round mirrors are century of independence, Ayacucho es- nineteenth-century intrusions, and the reccaped the destructive forces of that period. tangular mirror at the top occupies the | Serious earthquakes, too, have been spared niche formerly given to a saint. The high

her. Preservation, then, is the reason why altar of Santa Teresa is one of the most her riches in this field are much greater important works of art of colonial Peru, in quantity than those of Lima, the vice- far superior to a better-known monument,

regal capital. such as the Carmelite altar in Trujillo.

- The huge high altar of Santa Teresa (Fig. The next step chronologically in Aya-

, 337), dated 1703, inaugurates the century cucho leads to the high altar (1712) of San with splendor.” It is constructed in three Francisco.” Unmistakable dependence upon high stories in a combination of paintings the altar of Santa Teresa is betrayed in the and statues amid a lavish architectural set- tripartite composition of the center in all

, ting. Its size and the arrangement of its three stories. Another master must have components more closely resemble Lorenzo been active here, however, for his architecde Vega’s altar in San Pedro at Cuzco (Fig. ture is blunter and harder, especially no-

AS 230K

| RETABLES : ticeable in the angular terraced arrange- Most astounding of all is Ayacucho Cament of the crowning. Various other in- thedral with its eight retables of the eighteptitudes are noticeable in the rings placed eenth century including the two gigantic _ almost in the center of the spiral shafts. structures in the transepts. The latter (Fig. The entablatures.and. columns are now 338) were donated by Bishop Romani y somewhat askew, in spite of recent recon- Carrillo in 1764, according to the inscrip-

ditioning and the fortunate removal of an tions upon plaques near them. Both are so , ugly tabernacle of the nineteenth century. similar in style to the earlier retable in The statues, on the other hand, are excep- Santa Teresa (1703) that I was at first intionally good, their contemporary dress clined to discredit the Carmelite document

notwithstanding, | ! and to believe that this high altar should be | Mention should be made of the principal placed nearer 1750. However, it seems more | retable of La Merced, if for no other reason likely that a remote school like that of than that it is dated by an inscription in Ayacucho was less subject to changes of

the year 1718.” Simpler than the others fashion than the capital at Lima. For that , and less expensive, it is still a fine gilded reason, the sculptors of Ayacucho trod © structure. The tripartite center and the the same path without marked deviation

medallions of the local school continue here. for a matter of seventy-five years. | The ugly canopy in the center isa modern | The monument in the left transept is intrusion out of scale with the original dedicated to the Immaculate Conception

composition. = | and its companion piece in the right _ The first approach to the study of Aya- transept to the Christ of Burgos.” They _ cucho’s sculpture is easy, thanks to dated are almost identical except that the Ma-

monuments. Thereafter the situation be- donna is placed within a closable taber- | comes very complex. Here we can do no _nacle and the crucifix is not. Both combine

more than record the existence of an unex- painting and sculpture and have the same | plored mine of eighteenth-century sculp- architectural composition. Essentially they

ture. Indeed, the altars of the cathedral continue the style first introduced in the , deserve a volume in themselves. _ church of Santa Teresa (Fig. 337). _- The church of Santo Domingo alone pos- The altar of the Assumption located be- , sesses an excellent high altar and five side side the Christ of Burgos is also identified

altars of the eighteenth century.” The in the inscription as the gift of Romani principal retables of La Compafiia and San y Carrillo (1764). This right wall of the Francisco de Paula, the latter now painted church holds an incredible array of superb

_ white and blue, and many smaller works sculpture. Among the best are the altars — | have passed unnoticed. The main altar of of St. Joseph with a fine relief of the San Santa Clara is a production of 1650 upon Ildefonso miracle in the upper center and

A 231 R

which an eighteenth-century center has that of the Madonna with the splendid

been engrafted. , - . statue of St. Peter Nolascus at the top. —

TRUJILLO SCULPTURE

see wasproduction one of the leading ish possessions in Peru1670-1675. approximately in: of retable in centers the seventhe years teenth and eighteenth centuries. Many The retable of the Virgen del Carmen |

: withstood the earthquake of 1759, and the (Fig. 339) in San Francisco provides a Neoclassic wrought little damage, probably good example of the swag-bedecked shaft, because of lesser economic prosperity than although much remade and now painted in Lima. Small retables in the Merced, San with a brown stain. The same fate of reAgustin, and Santo Domingo have been peated modifications has befallen another, reconstructed out of fragments of different dedicated to the Sagrado Corazén in San periods. The worst are those of the Merced, Agustin. Somewhat related but without

badly wrecked by neglect and by white fluting on the shafts are the disastrously paint over the gold. On the whole, how- dilapidated altars of the Crucifix and the ever, the large altars are in excellent con- Virgen del Carmen in La Merced. | dition, and with the present renewed re- Early adoption of the spiral column

| spect for colonial art, they have very good marks two lateral altars in Trujillo Cathe-

prospects for the future. dral, one devoted to paintings of the four Among the earliest are several small al- Evangelists and the other dedicated to St. tars whose style is distinguished by a cer- John the Baptist. The latter is accompanied tain type of column which flourished about by paintings of the four Fathers of the

1650-1670. This column has a band carved Latin Church. The spiral shafts carry no with a cartouche in the lower section. The carved ornament and they rise from a band

, | remainder of the shaft is channeled and is with cartouche similar to the works just draped with swags of cloth filled with fruit. discussed. This early stage, really one of The draped woman’s head, so familiar on transition, probably occurred about 1665. choir stalls, is part of the ornamental reper- The columns in the second story are iden-

tory, and is often placed upon the shaft. tical with those of the choir stalls in the , At times a cherub’s head supplants it. Vari- same cathedral and without swags. This ations of this column and the same motives combination of two sorts of columns in embellish the splendid choir stalls of Tru- different stories is typical of retables of the jillo Cathedral (Fig. 265) which, on styl- period everywhere, and does not imply that istic grounds, seem contemporary with the the separate stories were pieced together building of the cathedral, hence about from different structures.™ 1660. The best-known monument where — No one seems to have noticed that the the draped column is used is the main por- life-sized statue of St. John the Baptist in tal (Fig. 107) of San Francisco at Lima the central niche of his altar is a good work (1669-1674). Wood sculpture with these of the Andalusian school of the mid-sevenfeatures slightly precedes the sudden adop- teenth century, by a follower of Martinez — tion of the spiral column all over the Span- Montafiés. The brutal daubing of the statue

A 232K

RETABLES | by a recent house painter has obscured the Lima, for instance in the altar of San Franimportance of this sculpture. The bust of cisco Xavier, in San Pedro (Fig. 325), and

the Dolorosa on the predella is lovely and in several others. To repeat, the striking undamaged. The rose of her robe and the distinction from the school of Lima is the blue and gold of her cope maintain the best broad flat surface of the Trujillian compo- |

technique of polychromed sculpture. sition. Just possibly, there were decorative | _ The relative flatness in the design of the shields upon the cornices in San Francisco | eighteenth-century retables of Trujillo isa at Trujillo which might have been defeature which distinguishes them from stroyed in the earthquake of 1759. The other works of the type in Peru. From the very large deep central niche with the Ma- .

broad flat wall of the structure, columns donna is without precedent in Peru. A , are set forth, and niches are stepped back similar arrangement exists in the high altar

in recess. By contrast, in Lima, Cuzco, and of the Compafiia at Quito. The whole elsewhere the planes shift constantly. The middle section has been subjected to modcenter may project, and numerous transi- ern alterations in neocolonial style, includtions are established by the moving back ing the tabernacle which is new. Hence, to and forth of cornices and subordinate col- draw final conclusions is dangerous. The umns. This flatness of the basic design is top region has been somewhat pieced to-

then a local feature of Trujillo. The broad gether, but it certainly never had a third exposed surfaces are cut with repeated pat- story, local speculations notwithstanding, terns which add again to the general effect for the vault of the sanctuary is too low.

of single plane. The two Franciscans in the upper niches Chronology is the most difficult problem are fine colonial statues; the rest are either '

in the Trujillian school of sculpture. Only modern or much redressed.

two monuments are dated: the high altars In far better condition is the high altar of Santa Teresa (1759) and of San Lorenzo of Santo Domingo, a church which has | (1774). Hence a provisional chronology is been reopened to the cult after years of in-

established here on the basis of comparison activity. Fluted spiral columns are sepa- , - with the schools of Lima and Cuzco. By rated in the lower third from the leafthe discovery of documents, later historians covered upper section by a crown. The

may prove it to be erroneous in part, since composition builds up effectively to St. | , local conditions often vary radically. Wit- Dominic over the tabernacle and to the

ness the great gap in the dates of the re- meeting of Saints Dominic and Francis at

tables at Ayacucho. — the top. Three identical figures of the The high altar of San Francisco may be Trinity complete the iconography. The two

placed in the first quarter of the eighteenth saints in the upper niches are excellent, | century, although it could be slightly ear- whereas, as usual, the saints in the first row |

| | MN 233 A |

lier. The division of the spiral shafts into of niches have been badly repainted and

four registers (Fig. 340) has precedent at decked out in real clothes, , |

SCULPTURE Many details of the altar are excellent, as entation in the Temple, the Annunciation,

for instance, the charmingly naive Ma- the Visitation, her Assumption. With the donna of the Rosary at the lower left (Fig. exception of the Assumption, the composi- _ 341). Splendid as it is, and interesting in tions are unmistakably of late-Gothic oridetail, the composition of the whole mani- gin. Again engravings were undoubtedly fests provinciality, placing the altar well the source, indicated by iconography and

below the best of Lima, Cuzco, Ayacucho, composition. |

and even smail cities. These two retables are by the same masTwo large retables in the transept of San ter. His provincialism is still more apparent

Francisco are without parallel in other in the reliefs than in the architecture. In schools of Peru. Instead of statues or paint- Spain they would be vaguely classified as ings, they contain series of carved reliefs. Hispano-Flemish, circa 1510, although the Precedent for this treatment exists com- iconography of some scenes is later. Flat_ monly in Spain in the Gothic, Renaissance, ness and lack of Baroque exuberance again and Baroque periods.” The closest ana- impress the spectator. The grape and vine logues in Spanish art of the eighteenth cen- upon the surfaces as well as upon the spiral

| tury are the splendid retables with spiral columns might have been copied from _ columns and elliptical reliefs at Arenys de books or prints. They are neither pictorial

Mar, Palafugell, and Cadaquers in Cata-. nor sculptural, and rather halting and lonia.* Whatever other works of the type _ stilted. It may sound as though these monuwere produced in Peru have passed into the ments were being consigned to a contempt-

_ great beyond. Hence, if for no other rea- ible category. They are not. They are im-

| son, the Franciscan altars are worthy of pressive decorative structures when seen in note. The one in the right transept is dedi- their setting. They are not important works

| cated to the Passion of Christ (Fig. 342). of art. The crucifix hangs in the principal niche The same workshop produced the high of trefoil shape. The Last Supper, Christ altar of Santiago de Huaman, a suburb of Before Pilate, the Flagellation, the Ecce Trujillo. Four reliefs of the Passion (Arrest — Homo, and the Via Dolorosa are the sub- of Christ, Christ Before Pilate, Ecce Homo, jects of the reliefs. Prints may have pro- Gethsemane) have been placed in a modvided the compositions, some of which are ernized setting. ‘The original salomonic tabarchaic enough to have been late Gothic. ernacle now embellishes a lateral altar.” The Last Supper is Mannerist, more or less The masterpiece of the Trujillian school

! in the period of Ribalta’s painting in the is the high altar of the cathedral (Fig. Colegio del Patriarca, Valencia.” 160), very ingeniously composed to suit its _ The retable in the right transept, dedi- elevated location in a sanctuary which has cated to the Madonna, presents her statue a transverse aisle behind it. The altar rises in the tabernacle. Her life is told by the like a screen at the end of a vista, in two

| A 234K

conventional episodes: her Birth, her Pres- stories of open arches, the statues silhouet-

: RET ABLES ted against the light of day at the rear the bad repaint of pink and blue on the (Figs. 343, 344; frontispiece, plate sec- statues. The lower part has been regilded tion). Below on either side of the taber- and some pieces replaced, but they match nacle are Saints Peter and John the Evange- __ the original. These two altars in Santa Clara | list. Above them is the Purisima, accom- are by the same master and of very high panied by St. Rose and St. Stephen. The quality. The rosette type of spiral column bodies of the first two saints in fine blue, was the one preferred by him, and he disgold, and red polychromy sway and swing plays originality in the handling of the in an ecstatic outburst of Baroque emotion. background, consisting of the stylized leaf For this type of art, they have no equal in ina rectangle, placed in repeated rows.

Peruvian colonial sculpture. They are in- The fine crucifix is older than its setdeed unforgettable, and are in good condi- ting, for it resembles the model established

tion except for some repaint on the head of by Martinez Montafiés in the early seven- | St. Peter. Among the other statues, the teenth century. It is not a creation of the Purisima seems to be the only one which famous Spanish sculptor, but one influ-

might be contemporary with the original enced by his work. | altar. The architectural setting is beauti- The master of Santa Clara is also the au- |

fully conceived and with great originality. thor of a large retable in the right transept The slim spiral columns have the familiar of La Merced. Only the architectural set- , grape-and-vine decoration. Here some of ting and one colonial relief in the upper the gilding has been retouched but with center still exist. An inscription, the last discretion. The beholder must, of course, cipher of which is missing, places the altar discount the electric-light bulbs, the plants, in the seventeen forties. Hence this bit of paper flowers, and other regalia. Through evidence helps corroborate a dating of the

these he must penetrate to comprehend one Santa Clara retables and similar works in | of the finest expressions of Baroque genius the fifth decade of the century. The con-

in Hispanic colonial art. vent of Franciscan nuns was founded in The exact date for the high altar of the 1743.° That fact and the style of the

cathedral is difficult to establish. It might sculpture leave no problems about the have originated at any time during the first chronology unanswered. Another altar re-

half of the eighteenth century. Very pos- lated to those under discussion is the one in , sibly it was part of the extensive restoration La Merced, dedicated to the Madonna, and

and redecoration of the church in 1738.” now painted black. | , Although the victim of refurbishings A very beautiful retable, with some sugand pseudoclassical additions, the high altar gestions of primitivism in the hard precise

of Santa Clara could be returned to its outlines of the ornament, is that of Nuesoriginal state without much difficulty. The tra Sefiora del Rosario (Fig. 345) in Santo altar of the Crucifixion (Fig. 346) at the Domingo. It has a lavish splendor about it, side is in good condition, if one discounts and is rather bizarre with its large voluted

A 235 A

SCULPTURE cupolas over the three niches of the first themes are well correlated. The candelabra story. The reticulated background is more upon the columns provide an unusual prominent here than in the case of the Cru- touch, and one wonders if they ever ran the cifixion in Santa Clara. The sections alter- risk of placing lighted tapers there, hownate between grapes and leaves. The statues ever lovely would have been the effect. The

comprise the Baptist, Saints Joseph and borders of open patterns which run above Elizabeth in the upper register, with Joa- the entablatures are broad and florid, as chim, Mary, and Anna below. St. John the they are in Lima and Ayacucho in the first Baptist represents an attempt to copy the half of the century. As for the statues, only fine prototype in the cathedral, formerly those in the two upper niches have es-

discussed. The altar of the Rosary is hard caped replacement. |

to place, although in certain technical fea- Collao’s style can also be traced in some tures it most closely resembles the transept of the lateral altars in the church of Santa retables of San Francisco. For some reason, ‘Teresa. Of far greater import is the probait makes a more vivid impression than any bility that he was also the author of the , work of its type in Trujillo. Photographs high altar of San Agustin. The composition

do it little justice. is the same as that of Santa Teresa, par-

, The high altar of Santa Teresa (Fig. ticularly in the arrangement of the main

347) is signed and dated by an inscription and subordinate niches. Details of ornacut in the predella. It was carved by aman ment in the rosette type of spiral column with an Indian name, Fernando Collao, and and in the moldings are closely akin, alcompleted in 1759.” Collao is the guechua though not identical (Figs. 348, 349). No designation for the region of Puno, and this comparison can be made between the cenmay signify that he came from there, al- tral sections of the two works in view of its though his art gives no indication of that nonexistence in the Carmelite church. That fact. The whole middle section has been portion surrounding St. Augustine in the ruined by the insertion of a neoclassic silver other instance breaks with the common-

tabernacle and a gilt niche above, as re- place. The statue of the founder of the cently as 1920.” The original tabernacle is order is set forth with dramatic emphasis said to be the one now located in the high as the curving pediments and the large altar of San Lorenzo and to judge by the central space act like a large frame about style and the presence of the Carmelite him. The Purisima in the tabernacle is the

shield, it must be so. only modern intrusion, the Augustinians —

Fernando Collao’s art is accomplished being, one and all, fine statues of poly, and mature, not unlike contemporary crea- chromed wood. Among the large retables tions in Lima, Arequipa, and Ayacucho. in the city, these of Santa Teresa and San | His design is richly laden with an interplay Agustin are very significant. of stepped moldings, and leaf-and-rosette The most original, next to the cathesalomonicas. Dominant and subordinate dral’s high altar, is, however, the principal AM 236 A

RETABLES | retable of San Lorenzo (Figs. 350, 351). for the most part mediocre, and they have Here, at a time when the rococo began to already been mentioned in connection with

sweep away the Hispanic tradition, is a the appearance of the type in Lima.” a | highly ingenious and original creation which proves the exception to the general

rule. Instead of a dull and misunderstood CAJAMARCA AND THE REGION adaptation of a foreign style, it is alto- § OF LAKE TITICACA gether charming. The columns are com- NE other work which even surpasses posed of rows of urns, and upon the face () the altar of San Lorenzo at Trujillo of each a shell or formalized plant. Similar in originality and imagination at a period

effects in the high altars of San Sebastian of creative decline is the high altar of oe and La Concepcién at Lima (Figs. 335, Cajamarca Cathedral (Figs. 352, 354). It 336) were uninteresting. The large closed should be dated contemporary with the tabernacle enshrining the dedicatory statue consecration of the church in 1762, and is the dominant note in the structure. hence in the heyday of rococo influence. Rococo motives are subordinated to a ‘The French style blends into the Hispanic well-organized and comparatively quiet tradition with extraordinary success to pro-

scheme. The Carmelite shield on the taber- duce a retable of great beauty. Most un- | _ nacle indicates that it was transferred here usual and spirited ornaments are the pilas- from Santa Teresa. The spiral columns very ters resembling musical notes. The rococo _ clearly do not belong to this altar. The non- curves are light and gay. The same mood descript statues have been collected together carries throughout the swinging rippling

without much regard for the size of the movement of the attic story and in the flat niches. St. Lawrence at the lower left is the patterns about the niches. The excellent

exception, and he is the patron of the gilding adds to the brilliance of this fine | church. The statue is very expressive from piece of decorative architecture. The only the emotional point of view, notwithstand- colonial statue still remaining in the altar ing the cloth vestments. The saint is well is that of San Francisco Solano to the upper posed, and the head and the face have an_ right. The original tabernacle has been re-

intense expression of spiritual exaltation. placed by a poor thing in imitation of

Surprises such as the originality displayed marble. oe

in this altar are rare and appreciated. An Few retables have been preserved in the inscription upon the lower section states region of Lake Titicaca. Those of belated

that it was the gift of Bishop Francisco Renaissance style in La Asuncién at Juli Xavier de Luna Victoria and that Manuel have already been studied. A monument

Garcia gilded it in 1774.” , for which no extant parallel exists is the The bust-caryatid altar, a favorite me- high altar of San Juan at Juli (Fig. 356). dium of the rococo style, enjoyed consider- Undoubtedly others of similar type have able popularity in Trujillo. These works are been lost in earthquakes at Lima, Arequipa,

AS 237 A

SCULPTURE and Cuzco. Hence this Jesuit altar has these wood sculptures in neighboring vil-

, more than usual interest because it is the lages upon the shores of Lake Titicaca. The unique representative of a body of lost long coiling body of the serpent or whale is works. The columns have plain gilded intertwined with grapes, papaya, and pomeshafts, and they are surmounted by a pro- granates at each side of the retable at Povincial Corinthian capital having three mata. Only the monkeys and birds, which rows of acanthus leaves instead of the or- the sculptors of stone at Juli and Pomata thodox two. The voluted hoods and beaded introduced with such gay decorative aban-

pilasters of the niches are handled in a don, are missing here. The other features of _ , restrained manner suggestive of the period the retable are more conventional, although about 1650. In addition to the dignified the twisted column rising from a beaded architectural setting, the polychromed re- spiral base is of a type common fifty years liefs of wood maintain a superior level of earlier. The tabernacle of the Madonna is quality. The sculptor must have been one modern and some colonial alterations are of the leading artists of his day and possibly detected in the attic story. Again the su-

, Spanish by birth. The Apparition of Christ periority of the architectural and decorato St. Ignatius reveals a highly skilled tech- tive design to the pictures is consistent with

| nician in the modeling of the bodies of general conditions of colonial art. Christ and the cherubs. The figure of St. | The retables of colonial Peru are set in Ignatius is competent, but not inspired. On luxuriant richness against the sober intethe opposite side of the retable, the relief riors of Baroque churches. In Cuzco parportrays the Apparition of the Madonna to ticularly, the stern Andean stone and the the Jesuit founder. Three figures, grouped severe Herreresque architectural traditions in simple poses, tell the story with the di- provide a restrained setting for the splendor rect naturalism of Spanish Baroque art. of gilded altars and ecclesiastical furniture. The mestizo style has left its mark upon This combination of power and sobriety in

7 one important retable, that of the famous the architecture with sensuous richness in church dedicated to Santiago at Pomata decoration is unforgettable in churches (Figs. 353, 355). By good fortune a docu- such as the cathedral, La Compajia, El ment exists showing that it was completed Belén, and La Merced in Cuzco. | in 1722.” Most exotic of all are the capitals The decorative handling of an architecof serpent heads whose snouts turn into vo- tural interior is rare in Peru, far less frelutes. The scale motive decorates their quent than in Spain or Mexico. The mudénecks. This predilection for the fantastic is jar ornament upon the walls of San Frannative to the Indian mind, as the art of the cisco and La Merced at Lima, the diamond

. pre-Columbian period so vividly displays. points within El Belén at Cajamarca, and | The same capitals recur upon the pulpitand the lavish mestizo ornament of stone in the the high altar of La Asuncién at Yunguyo. churches at Pomata and Juli are the excep-

One master was active in the creation of tion rather than the rule. In all of these

A 238 R

FIGURE SCULPTURE | | cases the gilded retables are correspond- the statues of saints and the reliefs rarely

ingly less significant than elsewhere. equal the quality of their setting. The The unity established between archi- statues of the high altar of La Compafia tectural decoration and the altars of gilded at Cuzco (Figs. 318, 319) are exceptional

wood, so noteworthy in Mexican churches in that respect.

like Santa Prisca at Taxco and the Jesuit The medium of colonial sculpture is usu- : church at Tepozotlin, has no exact coun- ally polychromed wood, thus continuing

terpart in Peru. The interior of Santo Cristo the Spanish medieval and Baroque tradide los Milagros at Lima was designed as a_ tions. Upon the coat of plaster applied to complete and harmonious whole, but in the the wood, gold leaf and flesh tints are laid.”

rococo style, and hence not comparable Red, blue, and green constitute the basic with the lavish decoration of the late colors of the costumes except those of the Mexican development. The eighteenth-cen- monastic saints. In these cases the habit of tury altars in which the pilasters take the the order established the scheme to be fol-

- shape of an inverted pyramid (estipite) lowed. Even so, some latitude is allowed the __

originated in Andalusian Spain, and they artist. The Jesuit saints in Cuzco, for in- | became the established type in Mexico dur- stance, are partly gilded, to add brilliance

ing that century. Peru, on the contrary, to their black frocks. shifted from the late Baroque altar with A second type of statue is that in which spiral columns to the rococo phase in the garments of cloth, reénforced with plaster _ mid-eighteenth century, never partaking in (tela enyesada), are superimposed upon the

the estipite development. There in the first wooden image. This technique was widely | half of the century the richly laden salo- adopted in the Spanish colonies. It fulfilled monic altars of Ayacucho, Lima, and Tru-_ the realistic mood and had the virtue of jillo are the final stage of a style which liability. When well designed and well —

began in Spain about 1650. The last painted, works of this sort may be almost

seventy-five years of the colonial period as effective as others in a more durable , brought a decline from the previous high medium. The statue of St. Anne (Fig. 357)

standards. Rococo ornament and white in San Francisco de Paula at Ayacucho is paint marked a change in taste which ulti- very lovely in color. She wears a rose dress

mately led to the Neoclassic and the final and a gold mantle. If not carefully proabandonment of the Hispanic Baroque. tected, however, the cloth may become.

, , torn and deteriorated in general. Poly-

| chromed statues of wood and heavy cloth

. FIGURE SCULPTURE are not new to the Spanish colonies, but 1GURE sculpture never attained an im- are, on the contrary, a medieval survival. ,

FF portance in Peru comparable with the Some Romanesque and Gothic sculptures

| A 239 AK | |

decorative effect of retables, pulpits, and of the type have come down to the present choir stalls. In these monuments themselves day. A superb Spanish work of the four-

SCULPTURE | teenth century, in the museum at Worces- seventeenth century. The saint meditates ter, Massachusetts, still retains its fine gold upon the crucifix and upon death, symbol-

| polychromy upon the heavy cloth and _ ized by the skull. The robe of costly em| wood. Even great Spanish masters of the broidered velvet, made fifty years ago, and seventeenth century like Martinez Mon- the later halo are superior to the usual. How tafiés occasionally used this medium. much more effective, nevertheless, an origiMost common of all in Hispanic America nal statue unadorned can be, is seen by a

| are dressed images (imdgenes de vestir). comparison with the kneeling St. Francis in The great vogue for them reached its height La Compafiia (Fig. 359). The fact is that in the mother country and the colonies in the robes of dressed images fall outside of the seventeenth century. The heads, hands, the realm of plastic art, however interesting and feet of these works are carved in wood. they may be as costume. The rest of the statue is a clothes model Harder materials such as stone are almost upon which real garments are placed. The unknown in Peru except in architectural custom developed from the great popular- sculpture. Sepulchral monuments, so imity of religious processions in which statues portant in Spain and other European counare driven through the streets upon floats or tries in the Baroque period, were not de-

| carried upon the backs of men. A favorite veloped in the colonies. The kneeling effigies cult image had and has a large wardrobe in Lima Cathedral are exceptions and withwhich includes costumes for various occa- out particular artistic significance.”

sions, Since the wardrobe is constantly re- A local school at Ayacucho produced furbished throughout the centuries, the quantities of small objects both secular and ‘costumes worn by these images today rarely religious in the soft stone of the region.” are more than one hundred and fifty years Huamanga, the colonial name of the dis-

old. | trict, is still used to distinguish the school The passion for reality in contemporary and the stone. These works are numerous in

Hispanic Catholicism is so great that the private collections and occasionally in tendency is to put real clothes on all statues. churches. An interior chapel of the FranGood works of art are thus disguised. Cru- ciscan monastery at Ocopa contains an incifixes are generally dressed with long teresting series of small reliefs. These Hua-

| skirts, and wigs of false hair are placed manga carvings belong in the realm of the upon the heads. No complete study of colo- minor arts and cannot be regarded in the nial sculpture can be made until some en- same category as monumental sculpture. terprising scholar is able to secure permis- A number of ivory crucifixes, averaging |

sion to divest images of their robes and about two feet in length, demonstrate the photograph them. The statue of St. Francis conviction among colonial peoples as among

| (Fig. 358) in the sacristy of his church at Europeans that this medium was particuCuzco is a fine example of the ecstatic and larly suitable to the subject. Most of them contemplative mood of religious art of the are carved and designed with primitive

AN 240 K

: FIGURE SCULPTURE rigidity.” The small group in the parish Apparition of the Virgin at Sunturhuasi, a church at Ica includes the Madonna and _ relief in Santa Clara at Cuzco is naive, and

St. John the Evangelist (Fig. 365). The yet the figure of the Virgin is pleasantly | curve in the body of Christ and the distor- handled. The event concerns the miraculous tion of the arms make for a somewhat more intercession of the Virgin to save the Span-

brutalized version than usual. The poly- ish at Cuzco during an Indian revolt in chromy heightens that impression still 1536. The relief has lost some of its charmore. The decorative richness of the eight- acter by the modern repaint of recent years.

eenth-century niche demonstrates the lav- At the opposite pole from popular cult ishness of the age, although much has been images are the works imported from Spain.

lost in covering the gold with black paint. The altar of St. John the Baptist (1607— | | Other crucifixes follow more closely the 1612) in La Concepcion at Lima, as previBaroque sophistication of European tradi- ously noted, was shipped to the New World tions.” Because of their ready transporta- by the famous Sevillian sculptor, Martinez

bility, crucifixes have also found their way Montafiés. Many works in Lima and else- , into foreign collections and hence have be- where have been attributed to him, solely come familiar to peoples of other lands, because he is the best-known Spanish sculpwhereas far more important products of tor of the Baroque period.” In addition to

colonial culture still remain among the un- the altar of St. John, he may also be the

known. Oo author of the statue of St. Francis Xavier _ Cult images, venerated for centuries, ex- in San Pedro in Lima. The discovery of the | ist in abundance throughout Peru. Most of documentation of it by Padre Vargas them lack artistic significance and what- Ugarte was discussed earlier in the present

ever they may possess is hidden under heavy chapter.

robes and false hair. The Christ Bearing The modern gray paint and various , the Cross in Santa Clara at Ayacucho restorations on the retable of St. John the © gives the impression of being a splendid Baptist have diminished greatly but have work, because of the strength of the face not destroyed its effectiveness. The crucifix and hands, the only parts of the sculpture has suffered most, for the loin cloth, usually

_ which are visible. In remote regions very handled by the artist in a decorative ar-

primitive objects, often dressed in the rangement, has been almost entirely cut | clothes of native Indians, exist in abun- away. Padre Vargas Ugarte succeeded in dance." They have attained a popularity convincing the nuns of the present generatoday entirely out of relation to their true tion that the Christ should not be dressed

artistic worth, because of the world-wide in a skirt. |

interest in the expression of primitive peo- Another splendid crucifix in La Merced | ples and because they appeal to the jaded (Fig. 360) at Lima has passed almost unpalate. They are amusing in their ingenu-~ noticed. Known as Nuestro Sefior del

| AS 241 R

ousness, but often no more than that. The Auzxilio, it hangs in the center of a nine- |

SCULPTURE teenth-century altar in which are included Cross, Christ on Gethsemane, and the Pieta. five other figures of the Passion of Christ Except for the last, they are single figures. from a retable of the seventeenth century.” The sculptor’s style is more pictorial and

| The crucifix is Sevillian, and ] believe from at the same time qualitatively far inferior the hand of Martinez Montafiés. In the to that of Martinez Montafiés. He must contract of 1603 for the crucifix of Vaz- have been a local Hispanic artist of the - quez de Leca, now in the sacristy of Seville first half of the seventeenth century. On

_ Cathedral, the artist agreed to deliver a the contrary, the statues of St. John the

| work better than the one which he had Baptist and the Mater Dolorosa in Trurecently shipped to the Indies. The Mer- jillo Cathedral, already mentioned above,

ced statue must be, it seems to me, that must have been imported from Seville, , very work. It is characteristic of the master since they betray the style of some folin the type of Christ, the disposition of the lower of Martinez Montafiés. The latter’s

drapery, and even in the unusual crossed St. John the Baptist in Santa Clara at position of the feet. This latter icono- Seville served as prototype. | graphic detail he repeated in the image he Another fine Spanish crucifix of polycarved for Vazquez de Leca. At first in- chromed wood, in this case small in size clined to attribute the Lima sculpture to (.86 cm.), stands in the sacristy of La Juan de Mesa, I changed my opinion com- Recoleta at Cuzco. Only the crown of pletely after doing research upon the prob- thorns is modern. The style suggests that lem in Seville. The observations of An- it may have been carved in Seville in the tonio Sancho Corbacho were most help- second half of the seventeenth century. ful in reaching what appears a convincing ‘The mood is one of intense suffering and solution. It is also probable that this same agitation, unlike the calm resignation char- _ statue is the one which Padre Cobo said acteristic of Martinez Montafiés and Juan existed in La Merced at Lima in his day de Mesa. The feet are transfixed by two and was known to have come from the nails instead of one, following the practice

hand of the most famous sculptor in approved by Francisco Pacheco.” Even Spain.” Today it is finer than the Con- though it is much calmer, the crucifix at | cepcién crucifix, because it has suffered less Mollepata near Cuzco (Fig. 361) strikes maltreatment, in spite of the modern the observer as a work inspired by that in painting of the head and the daubing of the Recoleta. The Mollepata artist was a the body with painted streams of blood. colonial and not a native Spaniard. He stylThis sculpture of polychromed wood is ized the anatomy, and handled the loin

/ life-sized. Dignity and tragic poignancy cloth with an almost Gothic linear grace. combine with fine decorative treatment in The state of preservation of this seven- | the modeling of the body and loin cloth. teenth-century sculpture is good, and only The other sculptures of the altar of La the modern wig and crown of thorns mar

| A 242 & a , Merced at Lima comprise the Christ at the its effectiveness. |

Column, Ecce Homo, Carrying of the |= The famous cult image in Cuzco Cathe-

| | FIGURE SCULPTURE | dral, known as Christ of the Earthquakes, claim to completeness in the present dis-— is reputed to be a Spanish crucifix pre- cussion of figure sculpture. I have intended sented to the city in the sixteenth century only to call attention to a few interesting

by Charles V of Spain. That legend is not works which are not entirely hidden by substantiated by the sculpture itself, for heavy modern garments. The life-sized ©

it is a provincial colonial statue without Christ at the Column in the Jesuit church

any particular artistic significance. __ at Ayacucho (Fig. 363) unites a feeling | _ The chapel of St. Joseph in Lima Cathe- for beauty with a spirit of religious resigdral contains a splendid life-sized group nation, which is deeply moving. The poof the Holy Family in polychromed wood sition of the arms and the slight turn of sculpture (Fig. 362). The Madonna’s cos- body still carry a suggestion of Renaissance

tume is painted in rose and gold. St. Joseph contrapposto, although the sculpture must | wears a red and gold cope over a blue and date from the first half of the seventeenth _ gold tunic. The Holy Family is composed century. The understanding of anatomy to

with dignity and restraint, represented as such a degree as that displayed here indithough walking, with the Christ Child in cates an artist of Spanish background. The the middle. The iconography, familiar in beard of Christ has been badly painted in Hispanic art of the seventeenth and eight- recent times. In photographing the work, , eenth centuries, became especially popular it was impossible to remove the wig and

in the painting of the school of Cuzco.” the brocaded loin cloth. | To identify this work with a retable or- The superiority of the Ayacucho Christ — dered of the sculptor, Martin de Oviedo, is evident on comparison with the sadisin 1602, is tempting but untenable.” The tically bruised Christ at the Column which

terms of the contract demonstrate clearly stands in a passageway to the choir of. San oe that it was not the same retable which Francisco at Cuzco. The latter work does Echave y Assu mentioned in 1688." The possess, however, some formal organization latter speaks of a life-sized group composed in its composition, a quality altogether

of Joseph, Mary, and the Christ Child in lacking in the grotesquely ugly statue of. | the central compartment. His description the same subject in San Agustin at Lima.”

and the style of the sculpture identify the The nude figure is rarely represented in extant figures as the sole survivors of the colonial art, and then without much suclarge monument which existed in his time. cess. The statue of St. Sebastian in the , The naturalism and the general technical church of that name at Cuzco is mannered expertness of the work suggest a Spanish- in body and in spirit, shallow and devoid

born master active in the second quarter of dignity. In spite of its technical flaws, | of the seventeenth century. The Christ the St. Jerome in Penitence in San Pedro | Child is surprisingly inferior to the other Méartir at Juli achieves far greater distincfigures, and it should be remembered that tion. The seriousness of his mood is unmis-

the crowns and halos are later additions. takable. | , As previously explained, there is no . ‘The persistence of the medieval liturgi- : AS 243 A

SCULPTURE , cal play took on a national character in few works more successfully fulfill the Spain, where sculptured scenes of the Pas- aims of religious Baroque art. Another St. sion of Christ were carried through the Francis in El Belén at Cuzco achieves in a streets during Holy Week. The altar of the mood of contemplation something of the Descent from the Cross in San Juan at Juli same dramatic emphasis. is one of these colonial pasos, although it is In Chapter XI the famous Indian sculp-

stationary and hence apparently never tor and architect, Juan Tomas Tuyru transported in procession. The medium is Tupac, was briefly discussed. His statue polychromed wood and plastered cloth. of the Madonna, dated 1686 and known _ Discounting the loss of parts of the cos- as Nuestra Sefiora de la Almudena (Fig.

tumes by the women in the center, the 364), is surprising in its pure and unaction constitutes a highly dramatic and diluted Hispanicism without suggestion of vividly stirring presentation. No claim for the author’s race or environment.” Despite the altar as a great work of art can be its small size (1.25 m.), the statue is com-

| proposed. Living reality was the aim of the posed with the breadth and monumentalChurch in order that the faithful might ity of a life-sized figure. The traditions of experience the suffering of Him who died the Sevillian Baroque school are fostered

for them. here by a man reputedly of noble Indian The Jesuit saints in the high altar of lineage. The charming statuette of the

| La Compafiia at Cuzco (Fig. 319) mark Immaculate Conception (Fig. 366) in | a high point in achievement in colonial Santa Catalina at Lima with its flounced sculpture, a fact already remarked. They and billowing cope is gay beside Juan are designed in broad, tall proportions and Tomas’ grave Madonna. The change of the draperies are arranged in heavy deep mood from the seventeenth to the eightfolds. The artist unhesitatingly exaggerated eenth century is responsible for the conbreadth and depth in the knowledge that trast in the two works, far more than any the statues were to be located at a great difference in the temperaments of the two

height and distance from the spectator. To masters. | dignity of bearing is added an expression

of intense spiritual life in the burning fer- The Hispanic colonial age was one of vor of the faces. In the realm of religious great luxury for the church and the landed ecstasy of the Counter Reformation, the gentry. Because of the almost inexhaustikneeling St. Francis (Fig. 359) in the tran- ble mineral wealth of the New World and

' sept altar of the same church is the the cheapness of Indian labor, few were most memorable in Peruvian colonial art. the limitations placed upon the embellish_ The saint is transfixed in a state of rhap- ment of her churches. That was a society sodic exaltation which mounts to a climax which sought splendor, and splendor it

as at the conclusion of a symphony. Very achieved.

AS 244.

oo - Appendix

LIMA: CATALOGUE OF MONUMENTS

(Arranged alphabetically) PRINCIPAL MONUMENTS

Cathedral of Lima San Carlos |

Colegio de Santo Tomds ~ San Francisco

: Corazén de Jestis (Los Huérfanos) San Pedro (La Compaiiia) |

Jesus Maria , Santa Teresa San Agustin Santo Domingo

La Merced Santo Cristo de los Milagros (Las Nazarenas) SECONDARY MONUMENTS

Descalzas de San José Recoleta Dominica

Descalzos Franciscanos San Andrés Desemparados San Francisco de Paula Nuevo

| Espiritu Santo San Francisco de Paula Viejo Magdalena la Vieja San Ildefonso

Mercedarias San Lazaro , Nuestra Sefiora del Belén San Lorenzo Nuestra Sefiora de la Buena Muerte ~ San Marcelo

Nuestra Sefiora de la Cabeza | San Pedro Nolasco

Nuestra Sefiora del Carmen San Sebastian , | , Nuestra Sefiora de Cocharcas Santa Ana | Nuestra Sefiora de la Concepcidn Santa Catalina

Nuestra Sefiora de Copacabana Santa Clara Nuestra Sefiora de la Encarnacién Santa Liberata

Nuestra Sefiora de Guadalupe Santa Rosa de las Monjas | , Nuestra Sefiora de Guia Santa Rosa de los Padres

, ‘Nuestra Sefiora de Montserrat Santiago del Cercado Nuestra Sefiora del Patrocinio Surco

Nuestra Sefioradeldel PradoLas LaTrinitarias Trinidad || Nuestra Sefiora Rosario

, LIMA: CATALOGUE OF PRINCIPAL

MONUMENTS

Cathedral of Lima | -

Historically the cathedral of Lima holds first portance that it will be necessary to digress place among the churches of the city, but the to discuss it.

present edifice has very slight architectural . Among all of the Spanish architects who , worth, much less than many humble village came to the New World in the sixteenth cenchurches in the mountains which still retain tury, Francisco Becerra had the most notable their colonial beauty. It is necessary, however, career. Only Claudio de Arciniega in Mexico ~

to recount the long and tedious story of the might be considered a near rival. Documents first cathedral of Peru, to enumerate the re- relating to him were first mentioned by Cean peated earthquakes which have so often de- Bermudez well over a hundred years ago,’ and stroyed it and the still more numerous rebuild- recently his biography has been much amplified ings and restorations which have been scarcely by Marco Dorta, Padre Vargas Ugarte, and

less disastrous.” Harth-terré.* Knowledge of his life rests chiefly

The first small church which stood upon this upon the documents presented in court at site was inaugurated in 1540, only to be raised Lima when he sought the title of chief archito the rank of cathedral. three years later. A tect of the kingdom of Peru in 1585. The orighumble structure of wood and adobe, it gave inals preserved in the Archivo de Indias at way to the second building in 1551. Still small Seville were published in some detail by Marco | and of a single nave, it was provided with a Dorta. Becerra was born at Herguijuela near capilla mayor of stone which was built with Trujillo in Spain of a family of architects, his funds donated by Francisco Pizarro’s daughter. father having practiced that profession as well The kingdom of Peru was growing apace, how- as his grandfather, who had been maestro mayor

ever, and soon a colossal church of three naves of Toledo Cathedral. When still young he

- was projected to rival the most celebrated ca- worked on the church of Santa Maria, the , thedrals of Spain. Alonso Beltran, the maestro chapels of Santa Isabel in Trujillo and later mayor, presented the plan in 1565, and on an built a chapel in the cloister of the famous unspecified date between 1569 and 1575 the monastery of Guadalupe. In 1573 he obtained |

first stone was laid by the first archbishop, permission to go to the New World, and set Jerénimo de Loayza, in the presence of the sail for Mexico accompanied by his wife. There famous viceroy, Francisco de Toledo.” Very lit- he appears as maestro mayor of the cathedral tle seems to have been accomplished, and soon of Puebla in 1575, and according to his own Beltran’s plans were replaced by those of an- testimony given in Lima ten years later, he

| A 247 A

other architect, whose career is of such im- designed and began that church. Diego Angulo '

APPENDIX is probably right, however, that the plan is title of maestro mayor of Lima Cathedral was more likely by Claudio de Arciniega who officially confirmed, but the following year worked in Puebla and made the plan of the Becerra failed in his attempt to be called chief

, cathedral of Mexico City.” The two churches architect of Peru. He did, however, secure the are very nearly twins. Becerra also was em- office of architect of the city, and in that ployed in Puebla on the churches of San Fran- capacity he worked on the viceregal palace and cisco, Santo Domingo, San Agustin, and the the fort at Callao. Other official opportunities Colegio de San Luis. He mentions activities on still on record include the plan for the church the church of Santo Domingo, Mexico City, of San Sebastian, many times rebuilt since, and and in the villages of Teotimehuacan, Cuautin- the portal of the house of a man named Ferrer chan, Tlalneplantla, in Cuernavaca, and in the de Ayala.’ —

““Marquesado de Tepoztlan.” It is reasonable To return to Lima Cathedral, although Beto suspect that many of these projects were of cerra took charge in 1582, very little had been no great significance, but they make an im- accomplished until the new viceroy, Luis de

, posing list. Dr. Kubler holds that none of the Velasco, finally ordered a reduction of its size Mexican churches as they stand today, ex- to about half that originally intended. New cept Puebla Cathedral, shows any vestiges of plans (Fig. 8) were drawn for both Lima and Becerra’s intervention.® About 1580 Becerra Cuzco in 1598, and by 1604 half of the church turned up in Quito, Ecuador, as architect of at Lima was ready for dedication.® Santo Domingo and San Agustin, the ground This church of Becerra’s had groined vaults plans of which are undoubtedly his. The latter without any decoration, on the word of Padre

has a Latin-cross plan with side chapels and Cobo to whom is due the major part of our

, _ the former a nave and two aisles with project- knowledge of the religious architecture of ing transept. In both cases the elevated choir Lima in the early seventeenth century. The is used and Santo Domingo preserves its mag- arches were pointed and all of equal height, a nificent mudéjar ceiling of the sixteenth cen- scheme sarcastically derided as bad constructury. Becerra also built three bridges and lived tion by a rival architect Fray Jerénimo de |

a year in Pichincha. Villegas.’ A very old tradition holds that the

, The next and important step in Becerra’s plan of Lima Cathedral is modeled on that of

career came in the year 1582 when the viceroy Seville, a completely erroneous notion still fre-

Martin Enriquez, whom he had known in quently repeated.*° As a matter of fact the Mexico, called him to Lima from Cuzco where court, called the Patio de los Naranjos, on the he had been residing. By his own testimony we right side at Lima is the only imitation of know that Becerra made plans for two cathe- Seville Cathedral. The hall type and the disdrals, Cuzco and Lima, at the specific command position of the floor plan are derived from the

of the viceroy. Whoever studies without bias cathedral of Jaén, a problem discussed in

the ground plans and type of pier of the two greater detail in Chapter IV. oe churches can arrive only at one conclusion: Hardly had the church been opened for worthat they are the creation of the same architect ship when the earthquake of 1606 damaged the and that despite numerous modifications and vaults severely, as Padre Cobo relates. It was ’ reconstructions, the original project of Becerra followed by still another in 1609. Several archi-

| A 248 Re

| survives in both cases. On June 17, 1584, the tects were consulted for their opinions as to

- LIMA MONUMENTS _ the best way to reconstruct and complete the Baroque but with a strong classic flavor in the edifice. Among them were Alonso de Arenas, handling of the Corinthian columns. The design Pedro Blasco, Juan del Cerro, Juan del Corral, of the niches and the peculiar tongued orna-

Clemente de Mansilla, Antonio Mayordomo, ment, however, belong to Baroque vocabu-— |

and Jerénimo de Villegas.** Becerra is not lary. The second story of the portal is clearly , among them, since he had died four years pre- dated by inscription (Reedificdse ano 1722). viously, on April 29, 1605.” Villegas sub- Although the style of its rusticated walls and mitted a denunciation of Francisco Becerra’s lavishly ornamented center does not correspond church and haughtily rejected the suggestion to the lower section, the general effect is satisof wooden vaults, the solution which finally factory. The entablature of the first as well as had to be accepted for all limefo architecture. of the second story dates from this period. Little Juan Martinez de Arrona, the maestro mayor, can be said for the dull neoclassic statues in favored Gothic ribbed vaults of brick in his - the niches which were imported from Europe

report of 1613. , about 1870 (Figs. 104, 105).”°

_ At length it was decided to reduce the height =A major catastrophe was the great earthof the piers and employ Gothic vaults in the quake of 1687 when nearly all of the city fell hope they would better withstand the earth- in ruin. A plan with date 1696 which is prequakes.** Construction then went forward served in the Archivo de Indias and a report

_ rapidly and Padre Cobo was able to report in of 1704 show that the vaults of the capilla ~ 1629 that the church had been finished in mayor and neighboring bays collapsed, but dam1622, the towers in 1624, and that the por- age was not as extensive as first accounts

tals and choir stalls were in progress. This seemed to indicate. The vaults of the crossing , building which in its plan exists today involved and three adjoining bays even at this time were a complete modification of Becerra’s vaults but made of wood, possibly dating from 1630."

retained his floor plan. The second story of the main portal, as pre-

Vazquez de Espinosa, who lived in Lima in viously stated, was rebuilt in late Baroque style, 1619-1620, describes the church, mentioning corresponding to the date, 1722, inscribed in its Gothic vaults and Ionic piers, and Cérdoba the center of it. To the same period belong the

Salinas in an unpublished manuscript specif- rear portals of San Cristébal and Santa Apo- , ically refers to the same features.1* Hence it lonia on both of which are inscribed the name can be assumed that the extant church is a of the viceroy, the Marqués de Castellfuerte,

faithful reproduction of this monument of and the year 1732 (Fig. 113). , 1613-1622, reérected in wood and plaster after The final coup de gréce was given to the

the earthquake of 1746. _ seventeenth-century cathedral in the great Seven portals of the cathedral were projected earthquake of 1746. The towers fell, the vaults

in 1626 by Juan Martinez de Arrona whose of the nave and of some of the chapels,* and drawing for the main entrance on the plaza was so complete was the destruction that only the , discovered by Harth-terré in the notary’s con- outside walls could be utilized. The main por-

tract.” The interesting fact is that the first tal had to be dismantled and rebuilt with the story except for the entablature still preserves same stones. This time they decided to use the design of 1626 in spite of repeated rebuild- wood of Guayaquil for the piers, arches, and ,

MN 249K | -

ings, the latest in. 1942-1945. The style is early vaults,*” but work was not begun until 1751

APPENDIX - with a Jesuit from Bohemia, named Juan de main from the seventeenth century only the Rher, in charge.” Four years later the build- choir stalls, the Apostolado in the sacristy, and ing had sufficiently advanced to permit its re- a sculptured group of the Holy Family. turn to religious services, an event celebrated The exterior of Lima Cathedral has suffered with great festivity.” Fortunately a plan of less than the interior, although it too has been the church and a report by Salvador de Villa frequently restored: In 1895-1897 the winare preserved in the Archivo de Indias with ex- dows were pointed to suit the Gothic mania. plicit information about the progress of the re- Earlier the portal in the Calle de Judios had construction and also drawings for the towers been redressed in neo-Renaissance fashion. After by Pedro Antonio de Molina, dated 1794." The the severe earthquake of 1940, the restoration

_ jatter were added in 1794-1797. completed in 1945 included resurfacing of the Thus the present fabric of the cathedral of entire exterior and a replacement of all of the Lima (Figs. 91, 103, 104) belongs entirely to masonry and sculpture of the main portal with the second half of the eighteenth century, bar- modern replicas.

| ring numerous subsequent restorations. In The facade of the cathedral which stands on 1895~1897 the wood of the vaults was re- the plaza is frankly in very bad scale, due to newed and presumably painted in the manner the oversized towers and their extraordinarily

a which prevails at present, the ribs gilded and ugly profile. The story of Lima Cathedral is a the surface of the vaults in blue and rose. The sad one, rich in history, but the building is now worst damage was done, however, in the de- utterly impoverished of architectural merit.

struction of the frascoro and transference of The Sagrario, which stands at the left of the the choir stalls to the sanctuary. This change cathedral, is a church of single nave and resulted in the disappearance of the chapel of slightly projecting transept, with dome over St. Bartholomew by its inclusion in the capilla the crossing. It was begun in 1663 under the

| mayor. The retables today are in the main direction of a Dominican, Fray Diego Maroto, , works of the nineteenth century with the only then maestro mayor of the cathedral, and comnotable exception that of the Inmaculada. Sev- pleted in 1684. Although it withstood the eral were destroyed in the earthquake of 1746, earthquake of 1687, damage was severe in and many others were burned by the Neo- 1746. The present barrel vaults and dome are

classicists.?* wooden, like all others in Lima. In 1945 the

, The interior of Lima Cathedral today is a facade of the Sagrario underwent reconstrucdismal sight with its painted wooden vaults, its tion to return it to its pre-nineteenth-century wood and plaster piers topped by gilded semi- design. The church has suffered too many al-

Ionic volutes, its dreary neo-Gothic confes- terations to hold a place of importance as a

sionals of oak, and its mediocre retables. There colonial monument.

is scarcely a suggestion, save in ground plan, * Angulo, Domingo, “La metropolitana de la shape of piers and Ionic capitals, of that mag- ciudad de los Reyes,” in Monograftas histdricas sobre

nificent edifice described in great detail by 4 ciudad de Lima (Lima, 1935), II, 3-88, is the most Echave y Assu just prior to the earthquake of CO™P lete history of the church; Cobo, Padre Bernabe,

24 : ; Historia de la fundacién de Lima, written about

1687.* Of the lavish array in retables and 1629-1630, and published in Monograftas historicas, sculpture little has survived the fury of na- I, is the most important early literary source; Mendi-

| AJ 250 R

ture and the stupidity of man. Today there re- buru, Diccionario, VII (1933), 437-453. |

| LIMA MONUMENTS — 2 Angulo, Domingo, op. cit., pp. 10-12. Vargas the portals was presumably continued by Pedro de

Ugarte, Ensayo de un diccionario, p. 61. Noguera after Martinez de Arrona’s death in 1635. ®Llaguno y Amirola, Noticias de los arquitectos, The stone was quarried at Cafiete in 1625 and not con Adiciones de Ceén Bermidez (Madrid, 1829), imported from Panama as usually stated. Vargas

III, 56-58. Ugarte, “Notas,” p. 287. ,

*Marco Dorta, Enrique, “Arquitectura colonial, 16 Garcia Irigoyen, Manuel, Historia de la catedral |

Francisco Becerra,” Archivo espafiol de arte, XVI de Lima (Lima, 1898), p. 70. a (1943), 7-15; Vargas Ugarte, “Notas para un dic- 7 Angulo, Diego, Planos de monumentos, pl. 25, cionario de artifices virreinales,” Cuaderno de Es- PP. 652-658; Angulo, Domingo, El terremoto del

tudios, Universidad Catdlica, Lima, II (1942), 152, afio de 1687,” Revista del Archivo Nacional del | 185; Harth-terré, “Francisco Becerra,” Comercio de Peru, XU (1939); 10, 141. The ar chitects in charge of

la tarde (Lima), April 26, 1944; Comercio de la the reconstruction when it began in 1693 were Fray

matiana, Jan. 1, 1945; Artifices, pp. 69-87. Cristébal Caballero, Juan Ifigo de Eraso, and Alonso 5 Angulo, Diego, “Las catedrales mexicanas del Pérez. Harth-terré, “La catedral de Lima,” Argui-

siglo XVI,” Bol. Real Acad. de His., Madrid, CXIII tecto peruano, May, 1941. — (1943), 137-81; also Historia del arte hispano-ameri- Mendiburu, Diccionario, article on Manso de

cano, I, 429-438 | Velasco, ed. 1935, VU, 169; Odriozola, Terremotos - SKubler, George, Mexican Architecture of the (Lima, 1863).

Sixteenth Century, pp. 123-124. 19 Memorias de los Virreyes (Lima, 1859), IV, " Cabildos de Lima (Lima, 1942), X, 82; Scho- 174012? Letter of wane de Velasco. field, Sophy, Indices, 1535-1601, p. 451; Harth-terré, 1 Vargas Ugarte, “Notas,” pp. 193-194.

Artifices, pp. 73-74. | Angulo, Domingo, op. cit., pp. 75-76.

8 Cobo, op. cit., p. 145; Marco Dorta, Archivo “ Angulo, Diego, Planos, pls. 202-204, pp. 738- , espattol de arte. XVI (x9 43) 14. ° | 747. The ground plan was first published by Torre ® Vargas Ugarte “Notas i p. 185; Martinez de Revello, “De arquitectura colonial,’ Revista Azul,

Arrona also opposed the retention of the hall plan; U (x 931)» 55: a , .

Angulo, Domingo, “La metropolitana,” p. 67 ~ Angulo, Domingo, op. cit., pp. 83 ff., gives in 19 fF ch ave v A stl Estrella de Lima (An twer considerable detail the numerous changes which 1688), pp 9-483 Mo ntalvo. Francisco Antonio fa have taken place in the cathedral; also Garcia Irisol del Nuevo Mundo (Rome, 1683), p. 44; Angulo, AE 7 Ones pp. 68 ff,

Domingo, op. cit., pp. 9» 17 : oy pohave y Assu, op. cit., Pp. 44-123.

11 Vargas Ugarte, “Notas,” pp. 161, 165, 169, 174, ; Vargas Ugarte, Notas,” p. ed , Angulo, Do-

177, 185; both Villegas and Juan del Corral in 1609 ond mae - P Ene Mga ae oe nin

named Becerra as the author of the cathedral. The 3D. 1051 sy eas; y , latter said, “A los demas reparos que se deben en- : :

mendar a la traza que hizo Francisco Becerra que : esta ya plantada en superficie,” Harth-terré, Com- ,

ercio de la tarde (Lima), April 26, 1944; Vargas Colegio de Santo Toméds Ugarte, Ensayo de un diccionario, pp. 281-282. — The Dominican college of St. Thomas of 12Tohmann Villena, Historia del arte dramitico Aquinas. since its establishment in the mid-

en Lima durante el virreinato (Lima, 1941), p. 98. 4 ° !

18 Vargas Ugarte, “Notas,” p. 176; Cobo, op. cit., seventeenth century, has undergone many p. 146. Vargas Ugarte, Ensayo de un diccionario, transformations. In recent years it served as

Pp. 199-200. a prison for women, and at present it is under a Vazquez de Espinosa, op. cit., Pp. 430-431; restoration after the earthquake of 1940 with Cérdoba Salinas, Teatro de la Santa Iglesia metro- ihe intention of converting it into a museum

politana ... Lima,” folio 8 reverse (manuscript dated 1650 in New York Public Library). of colonial art. This extremely unusual and in-

15 Harth-terré, “Imafronte de la catedral de teresting structure certainly merits preservaLima,” Arquitecto peruano, June, 1941. Work on __ tion. .

MN 251K

APPENDIX The original manuscript of the constitution lished by Harth-terré.” The photograph (Fig.

of the college, which is to be found in the 126), taken during the restorations, shows a archives of Santo Domingo, Lima, is dated section of the circular walk with wall pilasters 1650, and it states that the foundation of the which have capitals surmounted by an entab-

| institution was effected by Andrés Cintero, a lature block. The arrangement, although awk, miner of Potosi, in his testament dated Feb- ward here, is more successfully used on the | ruary 8, 1643." Among the interesting clauses court side and within the church. It must of the constitution is the provision that pro- be regarded as a strange case of adaptation fessors of the University of San Marcos should from the entablature-block scheme of the sixbe allowed the privilege of living in the col- teenth century which still survives in replica

lege. in Lima Cathedral. As usual, cane and plaster The present buildings are not those originally vaults, placed upon brick and plaster walls and

erected, for they suffered destruction in the piers, prevail throughout the edifice. The adcatastrophe of 1687.” In the small circular room justment of the groined vaults of the cloister which connects church and cloister, there is a walk is achieved with obvious effort and dislarge inscription on the upper wall under the tortion, not easily judged in the examination dome which reads, “This work was constructed of the floor plan. The volutes, used decoratively | in the year 1783” (Se edificd esta obra el aio on the court side of the cloister piers, are typical

1783). Whether this date refers to the entire of the second half of the seventeenth and the establishment including church and cloisters, eighteenth century.

or just to the room in which it appears, is a Only part of the walls of the library and moot question. The style of architecture shows second cloister serve as skeletons upon which no notable variation throughout, and the work to rebuild these sections of the colegio. The. as a whole must belong in large part to the jporteria or entrance of the monastery too will

mid-eighteenth century. be entirely resurfaced and modern when com-An enormous circular cloister (Fig. 17) pleted. gives the Colegio de Santo Tomas a unique The exterior of the church lacks interest due position architecturally. Circular churches, so to its nineteenth-century facade and the virmuch in vogue in Renaissance Italy and still tual ruin of the side portal. Within, the elemore so later in the Neoclassic period, are un- vated choir is reached by steps rising from the known in Peru. Spain itself took up the cir- circular room between the church and the cular church with some degree of seriousness cloister. The disposition of the space of the

, from the time of the Jesuit college of St. Igna- single nave, with the crossing and sanctuary tius (1689) in the founder’s birthplace, Az- occupying nearly half the length, has no exact peita, and thereafter.° Cloisters in that form parallel. Unconventional too is the arrangement are rare indeed, Spain presenting only two of just a few large side chapels. The arches of analogues, the circular courts of the castle of the chapels and the supporting arch of the Bellver and of Charles V’s unfinished palace at choir have a very flat profile. That feature,

Granada.* the entablature-block scheme of the pilasters, The large circular cloister of single story and the other peculiarities already noted prodominates the buildings of Santo Tomas as can duce a novel interior for which I know no easily be seen in the plan, drawn and first pub- exact counterpart. The vaults and dome of

| MN 252 4B

| LIMA MONUMENTS cane and stucco were under reconstruction in It must be regarded as belonging, however, to

1945 the later phase of the mid-eighteenth century

1“Miscelanea, Papeles pertenecientes al antiguo in Spain, represented by a number of elliptical , Colegio de Santo Tomas”: “Constituciones del and circular churches.* Still closer in ground colegio,” 12 pp., archives of Santo Domingo, Lima. plan were the church of Santa Brigida (1740- ,

* Revista del Archivo Nacional del Peru, XII . , -

(1930), 33: | 1745) in Mexico City and the Hospicio at San 8 Schubert, Otto, Historia, p. 308. Vicente (1765) in Salvador.* The relationship

_ *Ldmperez y Romea, Arquitectura civil espatiola, of the Peruvian plan to those in Central and

I, 336, 374. North America is one more piece of evidence Harth-terré, “El colegio de teologia de Santo oF the cultural unity of the Hispanic colonies.

Tomas," Arquitecto peruano, August, 1940. The interior of El Corazén de Jesus (Fig. ,

, , 95) is divided into equal units by molded pilasters placed vertically upon the walls. A

Corazon de Jesus (Los Huérfanos) molded cornice topped by a balustrade proNext to Santo Cristo de los Milagros, this vides the eye with the usual feeling of supchurch is the most interesting ecclesiastical port for the vaults. The corbel in the middle building of rococo tendency in Lima. A con- of each bay of the cornice, so typical of Lima in temporary report affords fairly complete docu- the eighteenth century, is effectively used here.

mentation of the edifice." The site was pur- Neither imagination nor architectural skill, chased in 1742 and work begun immediately however, was displayed in the treatment of the under the direction of the ‘“‘master architect sanctuary which a Bernini would have handled Cristébal de Vargas, Juan de Matamoros, and with indirect theatrical lighting. The archway Manuel de Torquemada.” Judging by the use which opens into the apse is particularly weak of the term “master architect,” it is probable and ineffectual. The high altar itself (1765) by that the originator of the design was the famous Joseph Manuel Palomares,’ even discounting architect, Cristébal de Vargas, but the passage restorations and modern statues, is badly delacks clarity.” It may also be interpreted so signed, and in every respect an inferior work.

that the man last mentioned would be the The vaulting of the church is handled in

architect. - the form of semidomes at the ends of the ellipse Work on the church, interrupted by the and barrel vaults with triangular penetrations | great earthquake of 1746, was suspended for over the main body of the nave. Even though twelve years. The building as it now stands of cane and plaster, they collapsed entirely in dates from 1758 to 1766, the consecration 1940, and the whole church was restored and taking place in the latter year. Whether the rededicated in 1943. Green and white paint on plans underwent modification from those orig- the walls replaces the former imitation mar- inally prepared in 1742 is an open question. The ble, and the vaults now have a conservative long elliptical shape of the church (Fig. 18) cream color. The pulpit of 1765 remains intact, has no parallel in Peru, although it is common while the side altars have been much modified,

enough in European churches of the seven- and the confessionals are neo-Gothic. , , teenth and eighteenth centuries. Well-known A number of rococo motives supply the most Spanish examples are the Bernardas in Alcala interesting and successful aspects of the church. _ de Henares and the Desamparados in Valencia. The raised choir, for example, takes the form

| MN 253 ©

| APPENDIX | of two reversed S-curves. Notably characteris- cuyos cordeles y demarcacién se delignid por el tic of Lima in the period are the large and maestro alarife Cristobal de Vargas, por Juan de highly decorative shell vaults which here add Matamoros, y por Manuel de Torquemada que hizo

; un mapa en que delignidé todo el sitio, dando en él

luster to the inner part of the front and side 4, gma y planta que ha de tener . . .”

portals. Great charm results from the diminu- * Schubert, Otto, Historia del barroco en Espafia,

tive shell tympana over the two small door- pp. 140, 293, 400, 405-433. _ ways at each end of the ellipse. The best in . Fernandez, Justino, “Santa Br igida de México,”

| . | . .the Congreso internacional historia de América church: is the chapel ofdethe Baptistry (Fig. . ; (Buenos Aires, 1938), III, 438-454; Angulo, Diego,

, 96) to the right on entering. Here a small pyanos de monumentos, pl. 174, | dome rests on pendentives which are gaily deco- 5 Revista del Archivo Nacional del Pert, X

rated with the flourishing rocaille ornament. (1937), 71. ,

An oculus window in the main wall is set in a ° Harth-terré, Emilio, “La iglesia del Corazén de ~ large flamboyant rococo shell with scalloped Jestis,” Arquitecto peruano, January, 1942; Eguigu-

Calles de Lima, pp. 210 ff. edges, and in the cornersren,ofL. A., the chapel caryat- , ids appear to support the vault. The caryatids consist of four bodies, two above two, instead ,

of the usual single figure, and they are manipu- Jesdés Maria lated in a frankly decorative way. This chapel Jesis Maria is included among the principal was by far the most original part of the build- monuments of Lima, not because of architecing. The past tense is used advisedly. It was tural importance but because it preserves comruined in the recent restorations, when the plete and unspoiled its Hispanic Baroque inwalls and stucco ornaments were plastered terior. This fortunate circumstance is due not over with cement and the quality of the work solely to its escape from serious damage in

thus lost forever. earthquakes. It also escaped destruction at the

, The fagade of the church is provincial, hands of nineteenth-century renovators. The

chiefly because of the short, ugly, octagonal magnificent unity of the interior, with its salotowers. The portal, although satisfactory, can- monic retables of gilded wood, its side altars, not redeem the composition as a whole. Above pulpit (Figs. 292, 327, 328), and the walls _ the first story in restrained Doric style rises hung with good colonial pictures, has no supethe rococo second story whose pilasters with rior in central and northern Peru. In Lima the corbel capitals, shell niche, and curvilinear hood small contemporary church of Magdalena la are signatures of the limefo school of the mid- Vieja is also splendid, but not the equal of eighteenth century. The portal of San Carlos, Jesis Maria.

, which is dated 1766 and stands a short dis- Architecturally the church of Jesis Maria is tance away, is similar enough in style to be modest and small, a Latin-cross type without the work of the same architect, as Harth-terré chapels, with an elevated choir over the enhas suggested. Nonetheless, there seems to be trance, and a lower choir at the left of the no reason to attribute them to Juan de Rher.® sanctuary. Double pilasters, double transverse **Relaci6n ...1a compra del sitio y fabrica bands, and. molded cornice separate the space de la nueva iglesia de los Huérfanos,” in Revista %™*0 bays with the usual barrel vault now del Archivo Nacional del Pert, X (1937) » 53-76. made of wood. Scroll ornaments decorate the *Ibid., p. 56, “Se hizo el desefio de la iglesia wall beside the windows of the sanctuary, as

NM 254K

! LIMA MONUMENTS _ they do in other churches of the period. The About 1614 the architect, Andrés de Eswalls are pleasantly painted in rose color with pinoza, rebuilt the capilla mayor and capilla

the vaults and pilasters gray. | de la Piedad, and in 1621 he signed a contract The history of Jess Maria is well known, to erect anew the rest of the church. In the _ thanks to the excellent documented study of same year, however, he went off to Arequipa

Santiago Antunez de Mayolo.* Subsequent to as architect of the new cathedral. In consethe foundation of the convent in 1698, work quence, a Mercedarian friar, Pedro Galeano, progressed rapidly and the church was in- took his place with new plans in 1628. Work augurated in 1721. In recent years the exterior continued for at least a decade. The floor plan of, the church has suffered severely by drastic of nave and lateral aisles is still preserved torestoration. The picturesque atrium disappeared, day, but the original elevation differed conand the walls of the church were covered with siderably. In addition to the documents we have a coat of cement. This lamentable practice, the word of Cobo who describes the building more than anything else in recent years, has as made of brick and mortar. Most interesting destroyed colonial monuments. Not even the of all, the vaults were Gothic, thus following ornamental details of the portal were respected, the general trend in Lima from wooden ceilings

and the exterior of the church is now an in- of the sixteenth century to the Gothic vaults

accurate cement copy of a former colonial of the following century. .

work. , In 1687 the church fell in ruins, and when 1 Antiinez de Mayolo, Santiago, “Iglesia de Jest it arose again, the materials were brick, wood Maria,” in Lima precolombina y virreinal, pp. 181- and stucco with barrel vaults of wood and

224, oo plaster replacing the earlier Gothic vaults of | brick. Although by 1706 the church was com-

, , | plete, the cells and cloisters were still in a ruinous condition. The present edifice, with its

La Merced , patterns of rectangles and ellipses which decoNext to San Francisco, the Merced is the rate the vaults and piers, is the third church of best preserved monastic house in Lima. The 1688—1706 (Fig. 93). Not only the chain or-

complex history of its architecture has been nament but the rusticated wall surfaces are , completely revealed by the splendid publica- stucco veneer, not masonry. Most interesting . tion of Padre Victor Barriga in a thick volume and unusual are the trefoil arches which cut _ of documents. I shall give only an outline of across the corners in each arm of the transept.

the main course of events. The main body of the church has been fre-

The Mercedarians established their house with quently repaired in subsequent years, but exthe very foundation of the city in 1535. Their cept for the destruction of many Baroque alfirst large church was begun in 1541-1542. tars, it has suffered no drastic modification _ According to Padre Cobo it had a vaulted sanc- other than the imitation curtain suspended be- | tuary, a single nave roofed with wooden panels low the cornice.

_ and chapels at the sides. The contract for the The facade (Fig. 110) has had an excep_ first tower of brick was let to Alonso de tionally checkered career even for Lima. It Morales in 1589 and, on Cobo’s testimony, fin- was originally erected in so-called Churriguer-

A 255 A | :

ished ten years later. a esque style about 1697-1704, judging by the

, APPENDIX , fact that they began to collect the stone for mainly brick and stucco, and it is spanned by it in the former year and that in the latter a wooden vault and dome. Large pedimented the funeral eulogy of Fray Luis Galindo de San niches alternate with scrolled and voluted Ramén included words of praise for his activity niches in abundance to produce flourishing in raising funds for the facade. Slightly dam- sumptuousness. A curious plaited motive decoaged in a revolution in 1895, it was demolished rates the soffit of the arches in the ground story, a few years later and replaced by a pseudo- the same device which occurs in the wooden

Renaissance affair. Very recently in 1941 a ceiling in the porferia of San Agustin. modern copy of the Baroque facade, correct The second cloister is called that of the but cold in execution, was reconstructed under Doctors after busts of Doctors of the Church

the direction of Harth-terré. in the spandrels of the second story. The first The side portal, called the Puerta de los gallery of brick and stucco in rusticated deGuitarreros, is dubiously attributed by Padre sign has a coat of red paint, and the upper galBarriga to Ventura Coco on the ground that lery of wood and stucco is bright blue and the architect constructed two vaults in the white. The effect is extraordinarily ugly. The | church near the portal in 1765—1768. This por- elliptical openings between the arches recall, of tal (circa 1740), a splendid example of Lima’s course, the main cloisters of San Francisco and

_ rococo with prominent shell motive, built of Santo Domingo. The present construction is cane and stucco, was damaged in the earth- surely post-1746, but it may repeat a sevenquake of 1940. It was thereupon demolished teenth-century original, a fact suggested by the and replaced by a copy in cement, tragically ellipses and the mudéjar stucco patterns which the present method of “restoring” colonial resemble those within the church of San Fran-

monuments in Lima. cisco. The small third patio, its second story

As for the cloisters, three remain of the five rebuilt in the nineteenth century, lacks any which existed in the seventeenth century. The interest. contract for the main cloister under date of The sacristy is a completely charming prod1592 called for eight danzas de arcos in con- ‘uct of French rococo influence, dating in its — trast to the nine arches to a side now present. woodwork chests, and fashionable episodic The cloister is large and very lovely (Fig. 123), paintings on glass, from the period imme-

its brick piers and round arches faced with diately following its destruction by fire in stucco in the lower gallery. In the upper gal- 1773. The small domes, mentioned in the Libro lery (1777-1780) the dark brown Doric col- de Gastos in 1765-1768, have been replaced umns of wood are distinguished by an exag- at least twice and as recently as 1912 when

gerated entasis in the shafts. The arches in the mudéjar ornament was omitted! These trefoil shape with smaller trefoil arches alter- suspended domes are indeed a curious rebirth

, . nating between the large are clearly derived of medieval Islamic beehive construction in

from the charming mudéjar patio of the Torre America. — on ,

Tagle palace, the only other edifice in Lima Barriga, Padre Victor, El templo de la Merced de

which has precisely this feature. Lima, Documentos para la historia del arte (AreThe grand stairway between the two clois- quipa, 1944); Fuentes, Manuel A., Estadistica de

ters, which was reconstructed in 1759-1762, is Lima (Lima, 1858), p. 361.

AS 256 B

LIMA MONUMENTS ,

San Agustin | BS a a

The first church and convent of the Augus- that time. Such is the change of fashion even ,

tinians were erected shortly after their arrival in architecture. , |

in 1551 on the site of the church of San Mar- The main cloister of San Agustin is precelo. The community moved to the present served as rebuilt in brick after 1687. The allocation in 1573, and the following year the ternating large and small arches in the upper. new church was begun. This fine structure, gallery suggest that the design of the late sixdescribed by Calancha, consisted of nave and teenth century, described by Calancha, is still two aisles roofed with a mudéjar ceiling of maintained. A small inner cloister of square wood. It was richly furnished with fourteen piers has been modernized in cement beyond retables and a fine set of choir stalls. The main all interest. The other two cloisters now serve , cloister, in stone and of two stories, had alter- as the seminary and both consist of two gal- | nately large and small arches in the upper gal- _ leries, the lower carrying round arches on square

lery. That feature persists today despite many piers and the upper trefoil arches. In one case

rebuildings. small square columns of cane and stucco are Vazquez, the first church was torn down in columns of wood. | |

. According to the chronicler, Padre Juan used in the upper story, and in the other Doric

1681 in order to build an entirely “modern” The most important parts of the monastery structure. Very shortly the great earthquake of of San Agustin are the sacristy and ante- , 1687 laid the convent and church in ruins. Ap- sacristy for which the contract of 1643 with , parently the lower gallery of the main clois- an architect, Luis Fernandez Lozano, was re-

ter, the ante-sacristy, the tower though badly cently published in full. Absolutely intact, the , ruined, and part of the church survived. The ante-sacristy has a fine carved wooden ceiling

presbytery was restored with cedar covering of coffers, the work of Diego de Medina in | in 1693-1697, whereas the remainder of the 1643-1651. The dado of Sevillian tiles was , church progressed slowly in the succeeding bought from the monks of San Francisco in years, coming to a conclusion with the big 1661. The large shell tympana over the main facade (Fig. 111) which is dated by inscrip- door and the windows are, however, alteration Avo 1720. The earthquake of 1746 once tions of the eighteenth century. -

again caused considerable damage which was The sacristy proper no longer preserves the slowly repaired in the second half of the cen- -artesonado of 1643, but is covered by a bartury. Finally the church and tower were de- rel vault of the second half of the eighteenth

molished in 1903 to build the present ugly century which was restored after the earthstructure of pseudo-Romanesque-Gothic style, quake of 1940. Here too the characteristic shell

completed in 1908. _ motive appears over the doorways, and the In the year 1945 the walls of the transept cornice repeats the familiar motive of the eightand apse of the church built at the end of the eenth century: the corbel used ‘as a decorative ,

seventeenth and at the beginning of the eight- device. , ,

| M257 A

eenth century still stood. A project was under ‘Thirty statuettes of Augustinian saints are consideration to destroy the edifice of 1903— arranged in niches of the second half of the 1908 and reconstruct the one demolished at eighteenth century around the hall. A contract

APPENDIX for twenty-eight statuettes was made with 1903 who left only the trefoil door and the Diego de Medina in 1643. The woodwork or- fine artesonado ceiling within it. dered of Asencio Salas ten years later must Calancha, Antonio de, Cronica moralizada (Barcehave been lost in the earthquake of 1746, since ona, 1638), I, 247-250; Vazquez, Juan Teodoro, the style of the existing niches with their bust- “Crénica continuada de esta provincia del Peri de length caryatids and flamboyant rocaille tym- N, P. S. Agustin,” dated 1721 (unpublished manu-

learly bel to about 1760-1770 (Fi script preserved in the Museo Prado, Lima). The (Pana clearly Deonss ° apour 37 77 5: most important references to the church and con-

| 333). The Sala Capitular, although at least yent are quoted in the following: Monasterio, Jaof the seventeenth century, has less architec- cinto, Recuerdo de la inauguracién del templo de San tural character, being notable chiefly for its 4gustin (Lima, 1908); Montes, Fray Graciano, “Los ribbed Gothic vaults. The tiles, benches, and 28UStINOS en el Pert,” in the periodical, Expresion,

if of th h I (1939), 55-60; Vargas Ugarte, “Notas,” pp. 152, century are worthy of note. “La portada de la iglesia de San Agustin,” Argui-

tribune of the first half of the seventeenth , 56, 159, 173, 181-182, 188, 294; Angulo, Domingo,

The facade of San Agustin, the only original tecto peruano, January, 1938; Lohmann Villena, retable-facade in Lima, luckily has a dated in- “Noticias inéditas,” Revista histérica, XU (1940),

| oo, tion including the vear 1720. It is dis- 16; Santibafez Salcedo, Alberto, “La restauracién

scrip ; & y 720° de la sacristia del templo de San Agustin,” Cultura

cussed in Chapter IV. Domingo Angulo quoted peryana, vol. V (1945) no. 22; Montes, Padre Padre Vazquez’ chronicle as authority in stat- Graciano, La sacristia del templo de San Agustin

ing that the facade was the work of the sculp- (Lima, 1944). tor, Diego de Aguirre. Padre Vazquez says that Aguirre carved the high altar in 1673,

; San Carlos

but he makes no further reference to him. The |

tower to left, which was tornnovitiate down dedicated in ; . oo eeethe . The church of the Jesuit 1903, has an inscription in its base, with the , , ;architect, to St. Anthony Abbot became partthe of ;the Real name of the José de la Sida, and ; | | . date Colegio de photograph San Carlos in 1770 after the expul1637. The published by Jacinto -~ . _of . . sion of the Jesuits. The University Monasterio shows the materials of cane and i San —_ Marcos now functions in the cloisters, and the stucco andeodecorative details consisting ofpantheon church has been made the national

rolled brackets which indicate that the ofbelfry f independence. . or heroes the war of In 1924 was reconstructed after the earthquake of .4 é87. Th ; £ the £ it was remodeled for that purpose by sinking

4 ne © senera’ Prop ortions of the facade 4 well in the floor of the crossing in imitation

with its enormous two-storied towers were very of Napoleon’s tomb in the Invalides, Paris. similar to those of San Francisco, which 1s later Large neocolonial windows were introduced in

in date (1657-1674). Hence the inscription of the transept, and the side altars were trans1637 in the base of the left tower of San Agus- ferred to the church of San Marcelo.

tin proves that José de la Sida was the orig- The first stone of the present church of | inator of this type of structure in Lima. Ac- San Carlos was laid in 1758, and the year of cording to Padre Vazquez (vol. II, p. 337), completion is indicated by an inscription over

, who wrote in the year 1721, the porteria was the lower niches of the facade, Azo 1766. This made in that year. Unfortunately its lavish facade (Fig. 114) with its small twin towers baroque portal fell victim to the restorers of and its two-storied portal is one of the best

M28 AR

| LIMA MONUMENTS | eighteenth-century works in Lima. Stylistically haustive history of the church and monastery. the portal closely resembles that of the Corazén Consequently only a brief résumé of his findde Jesus, although immeasurably superior. The ings will be given here. Although the first upper story, broader by four pilasters and the Franciscans came to Lima in 1535, the actual

side niches, expresses the gaiety of the rococo foundation of the monastery delayed until — | in a restrained and highly successful manner. 1546, when they took possession of the site Decorative shell niches, the curious limefo still occupied by their vast precincts. The first , volute capitals, and the swinging curves of church was humble, equipped with adobe seats

the cornice build up a pleasing composition built along the wall, an arrangement still seen — , which is loaded at the top by large vases stepped in sixteenth-century churches such as San Cris- .

upward. The material of the second story is tdbal at Ayacucho and La Asuncién at Chu- |

brick and plaster. The first story, on the con- cuito. , trary, in sober Doric style with plain frieze A large new church was begun in the time

and dentils in the cornice, is stone, and the only of the Marqués de Cafiete (1556-1561), acpart of the edifice in this more durable mate- cording to Padre Cobo, a statement confirmed

rial. The Doric design of the lower facade is by a royal decree (1555) in favor of the closely repeated in the side portal. The dome, church.* This church was basilican in type with

very tastefully planned, suffers from the su- nave, two aisles, transept, and sanctuary. The perposition of an ugly modern lantern, entirely paneled wooden ceilings of the body of the out of harmony with the exterior of the church church, constructed by Juan de Grajales and as a whole. A secondary dome covers an ad- Francisco de Xuara in 1560, were later replaced

joining chapel. _ _ by new artesonado ceilings under the Marqués _ The small interior, in the form of a Latin de Montesclaros (1607-1615). At the same cross without lateral chapels, has good pro- time the domed transept and sanctuary were portions and a simple, pleasing design. Barrel rebuilt. Valuable descriptions by Padre Cobo 2 vaults and a dome over the crossing, molded and Padre Cordoba Salinas* give us an excelpilasters and cornice with the limefio bracket lent idea of this church. The latter in 1651 in the center of each bay are familiar elements mentions a dome over the sanctuary as well as in contemporary churches of Lima. Equally over the crossing, the arms of which were covcharacteristic shell vaults surmount the main ered with decorated Gothic vaults. The domes portal and the side door within the church. Re- had been reconstructed in 1638-1645.* building of the nave vault was necessary sub- In 1656 the capilla mayor collapsed and resequent to the earthquake of 1940, at which building began the following year upon plans

time general repairs took place. , prepared by a Portuguese, Constantino de Vasvie oncoslomabine y vinreinal, pp. o0~3r8. concellos. The architect died some time before

| - , 1671 leaving the completion of the project to 7 Manuel de Escobar whose name appears upon

SO | the side portal of the church.> Work was com-

San Francisco , pleted up to the transept by 1664, and the The splendidly documented monograph on final impetus came from Padre Luis de CerSan Francisco which was recently published by vela who spent five years in Lima (1669Fray Benjamin Gento Sanz provides an ex- 1674), as comisario general of the order. When

| AS 259 R

APPENDIX Padre Cervela returned to Spain, he left a superior, in design and in their scale relations new church (Fig. 10) with its magnificent to the portal, than the structure as completed. portals, one tower already erected, and numerous Some details of the print show carelessness and gilded retables. Moreover, the porteria, the ante- inaccuracies on the part of the engraver. The porteria and the Capilla de la Soledad had been position of the side portal of the church, de-

built anew. The solemn consecration of the tails of the buttresses and dome, and the drawchurch had taken place in 1673 with Manuel ing of the monastery entrance are inexact. The de Mollinedo, the famous bishop of Cuzco, who _ side portal (Fig. 106), which is very vague in

, had just arrived from Spain, officiating.® the print, is dedicated to St. Louis of Toulouse. A very rare book which describes the col- It has an inscription cut in its stone spandrels lapse of the church, its rebuilding, and the containing the architect’s name and the year: | progress achieved under the enthusiastic guid- E. Manuel de Escobar Fabciebat ano 1674 [sic]. ance of Fray Luis de Cervela provides the major The interior of San Francisco (Fig. 92) prepart of the new documentation. This book, sents a disappointing aspect today for it has which was first brought to light by Sanchez lost its great array of Baroque retables, silver Cantén,” was independently discovered in man- altars, and ecclesiastical furnishings, the very

uscript form by Padre Gento Sanz when he description of which dazzles the imagination. searched the Franciscan archives at Lima. The Rodriguez Guillén’s account of the church in

, descriptions of the portals and above all the 1735 makes the wanton destruction of such engraving of the exterior, dated 1673, which beauty in 1803-1805 all the more painful.® is included in the printed work are invaluable Yet Matias Maestro, who directed the tearing

as irrefutable proof that the facade of the out and burning of colonial treasures, has his church, the monastery entrance, and the facade followers today in those who destroy churches

of the Soledad all belong to this period. The like Santa Teresa in order to widen a street. towers and upper center of the Soledad were The Capilla de la Soledad met the same fate restored in 1815, as both style and the print of of “restoration” in 1815. The Capilla del Mila-

1673 confirm. gro was reérected after a fire in 1835.

Of major interest is the portal of the church The previously mentioned book of the seven(Figs. 107-109) which both the print and the teenth century by Suarez de Figueroa and Benaverbal description reveal in its present status. vides contains an engraving of the new cloister Thus any theory that it is a composite of six- of the time of Luis de Cervela (1669-1674). teenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth-century re- Some slight variations occur, the mudéjar frieze

, buildings is disproven. The major variation and the volute decorations of the corbels being between church and print is found in the replaced in the print by simple rectangles in the towers, which in the latter have three stories, frieze and a pyramidal hood motive in the spanand are smaller in relation to the portal than drels. Probability speaks for inaccuracy on the the building as it exists today. There is no part of the engraver. The original ground plan reason to believe in a subsequent reconstruction of the cloister (1556-1561) was not disof the towers, and Sénchez Cantén may be turbed in the rebuilding. Cérdoba Salinas in correct in suggesting that the engraver followed 1651 speaks of eighty-eight stone columns apan architect’s drawing which was not put into parently in the upper gallery.? That would sug-

effect. The towers of the engraving are far gest an arrangement contemporary with and

MN 260 &

LIMA MONUMENTS similar to the Franciscan cloister in Cuzco. risty in the year 1729. Thus is provided a date In the new structure the oval openings and the for the sacristy portal which in general style : alternating large and small arches are note- resembles numerous contemporary works, such , worthy. Both features had previously been in- as the rear entrances of Lima Cathedral. troduced in Lima. The oval shapes of the sec- The cloister of the infirmary of San Franond story probably appeared first in the main cisco Solano is small, single storied with square cloister of the Dominicans. This problem is. piers, and is largely reconstructed. The chapel more fully discussed in the general section of in this cloister has an interesting elliptical dome

ChapterIV. ©. of the eighteenth century. The small patio The magnificent tile revetment in the lower (Fig. 125) of the Casa de Ejercicios (1777) walk of the principal cloister is one of the is restricted, likewise, to a single story. Its

finest in the world. The date 1620 occurs re- Doric columns of wood and its tiles, already - peatedly, and an inscription discloses that it transformed into rococo patterns, contribute. was imported from Seville: Fray J. Gémez y to the charm of one of the finest corners of

sus bienbechores de Lima enviaron por estos colonial Lima. : : azulejos a Sevilla: Another inscription reads: The present seminary of Santo Toribio occuNuevo oficial trabaxa que todos gustan de pies the two latest sections of the Franciscan veros, estar haciendo pucheros del barro de por properties. The best is the former cloister of acd. It is repeated several times above or near San Buenaventura (1734), distinguished by the the tiles which contain grotesque atlantes. The alternation of large and small arches, the same usual interpretation has been that these tiles arrangement used in the main cloister of San were manufactured in Lima, a theory difficult Agustin. The second cloister, formerly that of to accept because of their high quality and San Francisco Solano (1732-1734), is another thoroughly Sevillian techniques. Another set of | good example of the type in which trefoil arches

lovely tiles revets the lower wall of the entrance in the second story stand above round arches in | hall (porteria) of the monastery, these dated the lower gallery. An attractive stairway has 1643 by inscription and the gift of a certain arabesque ornamentation recalling the tranMenacho. The latest date, 1749, is located be- septs of La Compafiia at Pisco. The chapel low the tile portrait of St. Francis on one of attached to this section is bizarre but interesting the piers of the main cloister. It apparently in the curious ribbed barrel vault of the nave, refers to restoration done on the figure after and a huge shell vault of limetio type expanded

the earthquake of 1746. © , to support ‘the elevated choir. ,

The extraordinary array of tile dados was not - - ,

the only mudéjar feature of the Franciscan _ . Cento Sanz, Benjamin, San Francisco de Lima |

. oo : uction by Harth-terré, p. vi.

cloister. Another was the magnificent cupola of (rims, 1945)» PP. 7374s TIO“EI3s 174-1775 intro-

wood with typical Moorish star-shaped inter- 2Cobo, op. cit., pp. 240-241. laces. Unfortunately it collapsed in the earth- + *Cérdoba Salinas, Diego, Crénica franciscana

quake of 1940. _ | 7 (Lima, 1651), Libro Il, pp. 173-183. 7

The portal of the sacristy has an inscription 7" Gento Sanz, op. cit., p. 120. . ,

_ including the name of the architect: Alférez p, ee PP. ees wore fenton de, Santa

Lucas Meléndez me: fecit. On the opposite Pa - Var “ Vonste ¢ vida (Madrid, )s PP. 7; Vargas Ugarte, Ensayo de un1671 diccionario,

wall is a bronze plaque which dates the sac-. pp. 158-159, 275-277. , .

| MN 261 A

APPENDIX | , €Gento Sanz, op. cit., p. 144; Mugaburu, Diario, between San Pedro in Lima, as it looked in the

I, 36-37, 104; II, 27, 36, 40, 143. seventeenth century, and the Gest of Rome. ‘Sanchez Cantén, “El Convento de San Fran- 7, description of Padre Cobo, who lived in cisco de Lima,” Revista de Indias, IV (1943), 527- ;

est, the Jesuit monastery, when he wrote his famous §Gento Sanz, op. cit., p. 163. history of Lima in 1629, precisely mentions

® Cérdoba Salinas, Crénica, Libro Il, p. 181. Gothic ribbed vaults (cruceria) in the nave —

| and cupolas in the aisles. The materials were brick, stone, and mortar.’ The present barrel —

., vault of cane and plaster in the nave must

San Pedro (La Compania) date from the early nineteenth century, judgWith the arrival of six Jesuits in Peru on ing by style and materials. It will be under-

March 28, 1568, the newest of the great monas- stood, therefore, that San Pedro in Lima, when

tic orders first set foot in the New World. first built, resembled the Gest in Rome even. They were led by a zealous missionary, Padre less than it does today. The ground plans of Jerénimo Ruiz del Portillo. The small chapel the two churches differ considerably. The Gest _

, which they built almost immediately is de- has a single nave with intercommunicating latscribed by Padre Anello Oliva, writing in 1598. eral chapels, a broad transept, and a single That chapel was replaced by a fine church as_ semicircular apse. The plan of San Pedro (Fig. early as 1575." A large broad structure of sin- 9) consists of nave and two aisles (not chapels) — gle nave, according to Cobo,” probably covered with niche chapels for retables flanking the with a wooden roof, it gave way fifty years aisles, a transept much narrower in proportion. later to the church, which with modifications than in the Gesu, and a rectangular apse with still exists today. The first stone was laid in sacristies at each side. The features which San 1624 and the dedication took place in 1638.5 Pedro and the Gest: have in common are the Padre Nicolas Duran Mastrilli, arriving in large dome over the crossing and cupolas over Lima in 1623, brought with him the plans of the side bays. This usage in the vaults of the the Casa Profesa of Rome, according to hisown aisles appears in Lima for the first time in San statement.* Similar dependence on the Gesii Pedro (1624) whence it passed to San Francisco of Rome is claimed for the Jesuit church at (1657) and to La Merced (1687), as well as to Quito.° Navarro has asserted, however, that the Arequipa and in modified form to Trujillo.

latter was modeled upon Sant’ Ignazio in It is my belief that the floor plan and elevaRome whose foundations were laid in 1626. tion of San Pedro in Lima were influenced by Such a belief is chronologically impossible, since the Jesuit church in Quito whose inception the Compaifiia in Quito antedates Sant’ Ignazio anticipates that of Lima by. nineteen years. The |

by twenty-one years, having been begun in former was begun in 1605, the body of the 1605 and the main body of the church com- church completed in 1616, and the crossing in pleted by 1616.° The truth is that the churches 1616-1634." The two churches have exactly at Quito and Lima were influenced by the the same general disposition, a basilica with Gesti of Rome, but are in no sense replicas of it. domes over the aisles, a large dome over the |

Little attention has been given to a con- crossing, and a rectangular apse. The use of

AS 262 AR |

sideration of what true resemblances there were domes passed from the Gest in Rome to the

LIMA MONUMENTS a | Jesuit houses in America. The second great wall surface along with insets of oil paintings Jesuit church in Rome, Sant’ Ignazio, reverted on canvas. A large rectangular picture occupies

_ to the basilican plan, although built under the the upper part of the wall, not visible in the : influence of the Gest in respect to vaulting. photograph, while long narrow pictures flank Sant’ Ignazio with its basilican disposition the arches below, and the composition is comstands closer to the churches in Lima and Quito pleted by the symmetrical placing of three small

but could not have influenced them, since it paintings just beneath the cornice. The lovely - was begun in 1626, subsequent to the South tile dado completes the decoration which has

American structures. , , no superior in all Peru for richness combined |

It is possible, of course, that Lima and Quito with good taste. Nor is there any exact parallel arrived at the same plan independently under for this combination of gilded wood carving | _ the influence of the Gest vaults. The indis- and pictures. The closest analogy is to be found putable priority in date of the Compafiia in in the crossing of La Merced in Sucre, Bolivia,

Quito tends, nonetheless, to invalidate such a where the pictures of the Life of San Pedro supposition. Moreover, Martin de Aizpitarte, Nolasco and the Birth of the Virgin bear the architect and Jesuit brother in Lima, who di-. signature of the famous Bolivian painter, Pérez rected the construction of San Pedro until his Holguin. Another contemporary series of picdeath in 1637, had passed his novitiate in the tures signed by the same artist in the same

Jesuit college at Quito.” He was transferred . church bears the date 1710. from Quito to Lima in 1604, proof enough, if A magnificent example of the investiture of proof were needed, that relations between vari- walls with gilded wood carving, but without ous houses of the same order in America were pictures, is the chapel of Jerénimo de Sola y

intimate. Fuente in Santo Domingo at Huancavelica. The Granting that Padre Nicolas Duran Mastrilli inscription on the donor’s portrait there carries

brought the plans of the Gest to Lima in 1623, a date of 1744 in the legend, the approximate , as documents show, the facts prove that they period of the chapel. Other stylistic comparisons

were not used. The basilican plan was too firmly can be made with the stucco ornament in the entrenched in Lima to allow for the adoption upper walls of the Jesuit church in Pisco of the Gesi’s single nave. Only the sixteenth- (1687-1723). The combined evidence points century Merced was of that type, to be aban- to the early eighteenth century as the period

doned by the Mercedarians too in 1628. The of the exquisite wall decoration of the aisles

Jesuits of Peru understandably wanted their of San Pedro in Lima. ,

church no less large and impressive than the Another and more radical transformation of basilican structures of their rivals, the Fran- the interior of the church was the substitution

_ciscans, Augustinians, and Dominicans. —of-_ the original Gothic ribbed vaults (1624- | Modifications of the Jesuit church at Lima 1638), no doubt of the ornate type, for a barrel

have been frequent and drastic. The first of vault of cane and wood which is covered by a oe these was the redecoration of the aisles about cloth painted to imitate stone coffers. No rec- __

1700 (Fig. 94), perhaps in the wake of slight ord has been discovered to indicate when the

| — A 263 AR | | | repairs after the earthquake of 1687. Gilded brick vaults gave way to plaster. The official panels of arabesques carved in wood cover the report of the damage caused by the earthquake

APPENDIX , of 1687 says that the main vault of San Pedro Velarde, and without reference to its colonial withstood the shock, although the dome of the predecessor.** The new scheme is part of the crossing and the towers fell.*° Immediate re- campaign of repairs, necessitated by the damage building of the towers and repairs in the church caused by the earthquake of 1940. It must be took place under the direction of Padre Blas confessed that the colonial facade, whose towers

Ferrando.” collapsed with every earthquake, is by far the The condition of San Pedro after the great most interesting of the three, to judge by the encatastrophe of 1746 is less explicitly told. As graving published by Manuel Fuentes.** The usual the towers collapsed.” The present barrel main features of the first story, including the vaults of cane and plaster seem to be subsequent portals, still survived in 1896-1897, but the to 1746, since it is known that the brick vaults cement surfacing and: the exclusion of niches withstood the earthquake of 1687.. Judging by and statues of the original destroyed its effecthe style, the nave must have been redecorated tiveness. The rusticated upper story and the entirely at the turn of the nineteenth century low colonial towers were infinitely superior to — and probably by Matias Maestro. In fact, Ber- the 1896 edition, for they at least had the virtue mudez, in his eulogy of the latter, states, with- of stylistic authenticity. What a pity that the out giving details, that Maestro restored San atrium wall too was demolished. Thus was lost

Pedro one more bit of the charm of old Lima, now al-. Of pure Neoclassic taste are the Doric pilas- most vanished entirely and forever.

, ters and Doric frieze of nave and transept, Adjoined to San Pedro is a small church, surely not part of the seventeenth-century de- known as the Penitenciaria, and said to be losign. The disposition of the crossing with the cated upon the site of the first chapel of the

, setbacks in the piers under the dome and the Jesuits in Lima. It gives the appearance of a hall placing of two niches in each are an academic church, although the elliptical domes of the derivation from the crossing of St. Peter’s in nave are slightly higher than the cupolas of the Rome. The barrel vault, covered with cloth and aisles. The plan is a perfect rectangle with two _ painted in imitation of stone coffers, is an un- rows of small square piers bearing molded capi-

, adulterated piece of Neoclassic stage scenery. tals. The church suffers from ugly blue wall | The gallery over the aisles, often found in Jesuit paint, and its chief interest lies in a fine series

churches, disappeared in the remodeling of of mural paintings. oc 1894-1897..* The woodwork of the tribunes | Padre Cobo makes no mention of the Peniand the trefoil arches at the sides of the sanctu- tenciaria in 1629, from which fact it must be ary are of modern facture, neocolonial ina Neo- concluded that it was built in the mid-seven-

classic setting. Oo teenth century. Reference is made to the colThe. original facade of San Pedro fell before lapse of its vaults in 1687 which, having been the executioner’s axe in 1896-1897, and was re- rebuilt, had the strength to survive the earth-

placed by the dull academic work which still quake of 1746.7 oe :

existed in 1945. The inscription, prominently The sacristy of San Pedro (Fig. 99) with its placed at the entrance, recorded the names of superb array of carved and gilded niches and

7 pious donors and dates. At the present time, the frames is one of the most fabulous remains of intention is to alter the facade again, upon the colonial Lima. It appears to have been redecodesign of a contemporary architect, Héctor rated at the beginning of the eighteenth century

AS 264 R |

LIMA MONUMENTS at the same time as the aisles of the church. *® Fuentes, Manuel A., Estadistica general de

Certain details of ornament, such as the long Lima (Lima, 1858), p. 389.

, 1 Odriozola, Manuel, Terremotos, p. 37; Mendi- _

crisp leaves, have close analogues on the facade buru, op. cit., VIL, “Manso de Velasco.”

of the Merced (1697-1704), a fact which is ~ oo further indication of a date at the turn of the - a .

century. , 7 oe |7

Santa Teresa I :

1 Anello Oliva, Juan, Historia del Pertt y varones The convent of Santa Teresa set something

insignes de la Compania de Jesés (Lima, 1895), of a record for speed in construction and de- : pp. 164, 204-205. The editors, Pazos Varela and struction. Its first stone laid in 1683, it was

Varela y Orbegoso, date the manuscript 1598. . d ly b Vargas Ugarte in Historia del Peru, Fuentes (Lima, inaugurate December 21, 1686, only to c 1939), p. 250, dates it 1628. Mateos, F., Historia ruined within ten months by the earthquake of ,

20-27. a, ' . . . . * oe . |

general de la Compania de Jestis en la provincia del_ October 28, 1687. Of the original structure the

°g

P ert Crénica anénima de 1600 (Madrid, 1944), 1, Jarge cloister must have been salvaged or imme-_

“2Cobo, op. cit, p. 246. | diately rebuilt, and it had the distinction of

3 Vargas Ugarte, Los jesuitas del Pert (Lima, being the finest of the nunneries.

1941), pp. 169-170. . | _ In the beauty of its cloister (Figs. 121, 122) .

_ *Mendiburu, op. cit., VII, “Mastrilli.” Padre Var- it stood second only to San Francisco and La gas Ugarte gave me the following quotation from Merced. Its charm and picturesqueness was in-

Padre Mastrilli’s AnuaThe del afio 1638. . | |had , ; ;Duran . ferior to noneCarta of them. large court Speaking of the newly inaugurated Jesuit house in ; :

Spain. | . . .

Lima Padre Durdn says: “es un modelo del de la Seven trefoil arches to a side carried on small Casa Profesa de Roma cuya planta traje yo.” The square piers in the first story. Stucco over brick , original manuscript is in the Jesuit archives at Rome, gave the impression of rustication which was and a copy exists in the Jesuit archives at Toledo, giatitully designed on the wall surface and in * Navarro, José Gabriel, La iglesia de la Compaiiia the frieze. A peculiar feature was the pilaster

en Quito (Madrid, 1930), p. 65. suspended on a leaf corbel in the spandrels of | Navarro, Religious Architecture in Quito (New the arches. The handling of the four corners of York, 1945), p. 16; Furlong and Buschiazzo, “Ar- the cloister was manipulated in highly success-

(Buenos a religiosa ' colonial | Revista’ Archivum ty) fashion, particularly the elliptical openings ,

~ TCobo, op. ‘cit, pe 208. in the ‘piers and the dexterous placing of two

® Furlong and Buschiazzo, op. cit., p. 22. shells at the base of the arches. | , ’Vargas Ugarte, “Notas,” pp. 159-160;—, En- The second story in brown wood had a post-

sayo de un diccionario, PP. 120-122, _ . and-lintel construction with fine zapata capitals,

Angulo, Domingo, “El terremoto del afio_ de long and beautifully carved. The open balus- . 1687,” Revista del Archivo Nacional del Pert, Xl ; . (1930), 31, 154. , ) trade added to the horizontality of the upper oe

, Vargas Ugarte, Notas, p. 171. oe gallery which, with its contrasting color, acted * Angulo, Domingo, op. cit., p. 31; Mendiburu, as a foil to the white rusticated arches below.

Pe vy Manso de orga ne The basis of the style is, of course, mudéjar, . 1805) "DX cI Jos€ Manuel, Fama péstuma (Lima, altogether delightful in its interpretation here. ,

~ Vargas Ugarte, Los jesuitas del Perti, p. 180. The vaults of Santa Teresa collapsed in the

| | A 265 A

Velarde, Héctor, “Algo sobre la reconstruccién ¢at thquake of 1940, and the church, left in

de San Pedro,” Arquitecto peruano, March, 1944. ruinous condition, was demolished in 1946 to ,

APPENDIX , widen a street. So far as the interior was con- vent of the Nazarenas, inaugurated in 1730, cerned, it was no great loss, and the mediocre met with destruction in the great earthquake eighteenth-century altars were moved to San only sixteen years later. Finally the viceroy Sebastian. It was a single-naved building with Amat turned good angel to the nuns and ordered molded pilasters, molded cornice, barrel vaults, the church rebuilt in 1766. Its consecration in and domical vault over the crossing. The facade 1771 and other data are recorded in a volume (Fig. 115), however, was the best rococo exte- published in commemoration thereof." Amat is rior in Lima and in all Peru for that matter. Its accredited as architect of the church, a tradi-

loss is greatly to be regretted, and it is one tion based upon the inscription contained in a

: more proof of the disregard of the civic authori- famous portrait of him dated 1771, which the ties for the preservation of their artistic herit- nuns, the Nazarenas, possess. The legend reads: age. The two small towers with volute capitals to him “are due the fabric of their church which

on the rusticated pilasters and their domical he designed and directed from the first stone turrets were very similar to the towers of San which he placed in its foundations to its total Marcelo, before the facade of that church was completion with the beauty and strength which. destroyed to give way to the present mon- it possesses.”” I am somewhat skeptical about

strosity (Fig. 116). the literal accuracy of the above statement. No The portal of Santa Teresa was completely doubt Amat supplied funds and used his allcharming, a masterpiece of Peruvian rococo. powerful influence to expedite the project. No

, The curious volutes were used not only as capi- other evidence except this laudatory inscription » tals but also at the bottom of the pilasters in is forthcoming, as yet, to shed light upon his some cases. Lovely shell ornaments appeared be- excursions into the practice of architecture. As side the doorway as well as in the niche over- a military engineer, however, he took an impor-

head. Three stories of diminishing height cul- tant part in the fortification of the coast of

minated with a window of rococo curves which Peru and Chile.* were interrelated with the calligraphic flow of The church (Fig. 97) is small with a large the volutes below and over the sides. A magnifi- dome over the crossing which is given the prin-

cent iron grille and gates enclosed the small cipal emphasis in the spatial design. At the enatrium before the church. The facade of Santa trance, a narthex occupies the space below the Teresa must have been rebuilt in totality about upper choir and gives into the nave through

1750, after the devastation of 1746. three openings. The nave itself, very short in , | Mugaburu, Dzario, II, 147, 191-192; Revista del rwe bays with ne he chapels, prepares the wey Archivo Nacional del Perd, XIl (1939), 32-33. to the large crossing and the rectangular sanctuary. The climactic feature is the great high

. altar which is topped by an enormous shell like a semidome. At each side of the sanctuary a

Santo Cristo de los Milagros magnificent wooden grille (Fig. 98) with typi-

(Las Nazarenas) cal rocaille ornament in the upper section screens

The Milagros is the finest rococo church in the lower choir and an inner room of the conPeru and the most complete representative of vent. Definitely rococo is the treatment of the _ this style which dominated Lima in the sec- crossing which projects slightly beyond nave ond half of the eighteenth century. The con- and apse. A diagonally placed wall across the

MN 266 4

LIMA MONUMENTS corners provides the transition to the penden- six lateral altars and the high altar, the rococo

tives of the dome. Two half columns on high pulpit, the confessionals, and every detail of bases meet the transverse arches on the four decoration are integral in the composition and corners of the crossing, and the same half col- plan of the whole church. Fortunately, the deumns of the Corinthian order separate the bays structive fury of the nineteenth century spared of the nave. A molded cornice finishes off the its hand here, and so the church fostered by composition at the springing of the vaults. Amat remains as a perfect representative of his Niches in the angles of the crossing and small age in Lima. _ doors below provide scale, giving an impression The facade of the church in no way measures

of greater height than would otherwise be sug- up to the interior. Its two towers, oft rebuilt , gested. Over the narthex the upper choir is following earthquakes, terminate in flat tops shielded from the body of the church by a fine instead of the cupolas which can be seen in the | wooden screen divided into a three-part scheme church as it appears in the background of which corresponds to the arches below. Mold- Amat’s portrait. The portal shows the rococo , ings throughout are rococo in profile with char- tendency to multiply small motives in compoacteristic reversed curves. Charming rococo pat- sition. On the whole, the facade is conservative ,

terns, likewise, serve as over-door decorations on and rather dull. : ,

the four lateral doors of the crossing. _ The cloisters, which have recently been amBarrel vaults of cane and plaster cover the putated to widen a street, are known to me only

nave and sanctuary and are painted in a re- in photographs published by Ismael Portal.* strained rectilinear pattern. Light-colored, They are single-storied structures of wood, arslightly marbleized paint decorates the walls caded and without architectural significance. of brick and P. laster. This case is the only one 1Colmenares Fernandez de Cérdoba, Felipe, E/ known to me in which imitation marble walls 7, goseado (Lima, 1771), pp. 29-56.

are done with restraint and good taste, and 2 Exposicién de cuadros y objetos de arte vt-

give no offense. rreinal (Lima, 1942), unpaged. Portrait and inscrip-

_ The Cristo de los Milagros represents the tion reproduced. ,

oe . . . an el gobierno del virrey Amat (Seville, 1947),

transplantation of a new style and a complete 1 Rodriguez Casado and Perez Embid, Memoria reaction against the Hispanic Baroque tradition. pp. Ixiii-lxxi; —, Construcciones del virrey Amat

-Salomonic retables of gilded wood which were (Sevilla, 1949). ,

universal in the eighteenth century give way *Portal, Ismael, Lima religiosa (Lima, 1924), here to white marble (in this case imitation) PP- 226-228.

with gilding limited to capitals, moldings, and . ,

a few ornaments. Spiral and other Baroque col- umns are discarded for plain shafts and Corin- S4#to Domingo ,

thian capitals. To me the Hispanic colonial ver- The first Dominicans entered Lima in the _ sion of the French rococo in no way equals the year of the city’s foundation, 1535, and five beauty or originality of Hispanic Baroque. years later their monastery was made a priory. Nevertheless, it is interesting as a stylistic phe- The chronicler, Lizarraga, writing circa 1602, , nomenon, and an example of change of taste. provides valuable information about the first The beauty of the church of the Cristo de los church, the plan of which still exists. He states Milagros is its unity of design throughout. The that a church of three “naves” was begun in the

DS 267 A

APPENDIX | time of the provincial, Fray Tomas de San _ the nave, imitating the Gothic ribbed construcMartin (1540-1552), and that the church, tion of the cathedral, were erected then or after cloister, and porteria were finished under Salva- the earthquake of 1687, replacing the mudéjar dor de Ribera (1582—-1586).’ The magnificent artesonado which was still in existence when coffered wooden ceiling of the porteria follows Meléndez wrote in 1681. Domingo Angulo’s at-

a design reproduced in Villalpando’s edition of tribution of this imitation Gothic vault to Serlio. The contract for the crossing and two Martinez de Arrona in the early seventeenth vaulted chapels was awarded to an architect century is contradicted by the testimony of named Gerénimo Delgado in 1547.” Meléndez’s Cobo and Meléndez, previously cited.’ Harthexcellent description of the church in 1681 in- terré’s recent statement that the present vaults _

, cludes the information that the nave had a_ replaced the original mudéjar ceiling in 1660— wooden ceiling of interlaces, that is, in mudéjar 1669 is also difficult to reconcile with Melén- —

, style. Still more important, he published an ex- dez’s words.* This problem remains unresolved cellent floor plan (Fig. 5) of the entire mon- until fuller documentation is available. = , astery which leaves no doubt that the exact dis- . The next major alteration in the church came position of today already existed then.* Padre with the new tower of 1774-1775, which reCobo, writing still earlier in 1629, characterized placed the old structure seen in the prints pubthe church as very large and mentioned the lished by Meléndez (Fig. 102). The latter tower wooden roof of the nave, Gothic vaults in the had collapsed in the earthquake of 1746. There “chapels,” and the “vaulted” capilla mayor.“ persists a romantic legend that the amorous viceThe terminology which Padre Cobo used has led roy Amat drew the plans and left their execupeople to believe that the plan in his day was tion to an engineer Juan de la Roca. The truth _ that of a single nave with noncommunicating of any of this has yet to be established.” The chapels, and Domingo Angulo has even stated tower of 1774-1775 is characterized by rococo that an alteration was made, opening them into influence in the moldings, the style which apthe aisles circa 1683-1684." Both Meléndez’s pears all over Latin America in the second half plans of 1681 (Fig. 5) and the testimony of of the eighteenth century, but the polygonal Lizérraga prove beyond question that the plan shape of the tower as shown in the engraving of Santo Domingo has always been the same published by Meléndez is preserved. The tower, since its inception in the fifth decade of the damaged in the earthquake of 1940, was resixteenth century. Moreover, a careful observa- paired under the direction of Harth-terré in tion of Padre Cobo’s descriptions of churches 1942-1944, and the cupola at the top, altered will show that his architectural terms are fre- in the nineteenth century, was returned to its

quently confusing. He also refers to the aisles of original design. , , : the Jesuit church of 1624 as “chapels.” The worst damage befell the colonial church An important change in the church of in the nineteenth century, first in the early years Santo Domingo took place in 1683, when a under the Neoclassicist Matias Maestro.*° Then contract was let for the rebuilding of the tran- the large half columns with Ionic capitals must , sept. The dome over the crossing is said to have been put in place. The famous camarin of have been the work of the Dominican architect, the Virgin, all done in Neoclassic style, with its Diego Maroto. It seems reasonable to suppose paintings in the second story by José del Pozo

that the present vaults of cane and plaster in dated 1798, has a lower chamber in which are

NM 268 &

, LIMA MONUMENTS found exactly the same Ionic pilasters as those 1807; the interior otherwise refurbished 1898-— - in the nave. Moreover, this modification of the 1901 and 1942-1944; the tower of 1773-1775 orders is specifically mentioned in an epic poem nd the portals restored in 1942-1944. which was published in 1807 to celebrate and to © The history of the monastery is somewhat extol the complete renovation of the church.” less depressing. The Chapter House is a magnifiThe renovation brought the wanton destruc- cent room with two deep windows. The niche

tion of three centuries of colonial art, known to of the tribune and two doors are covered by us now only by Meléndez’s description. How large shell vaults, superbly decorative, and a many magnificent Baroque retables were dis- signature of their eighteenth-century date. The , mantled and burned at that time, it is difficult style of this period is also pronounced in the to say. Not one exists today. Maestro covered large volutes which are applied as decoration the vaults with his own oil paintings which in below the cornice. The banded barrel vault their turn were consigned to the flames in the with smooth white surface furnishes a good modernization of 1898-1901. Then the wooden contrast in textures to the rusticated walls. ribbed vaults of the church were once more re- Materials, as usual, are brick and stucco for the

vealed to an astonished public. The vaults of the wall, cane and stucco in the vaults. aisles were, however, replaced by wooden cupo- The main cloister in the time of Meléndez las with imitation Gothic ribs, destroying the (Fig. 102) boasted stone construction in both former groined vaults. Pointed windows were galleries, but today the upper story of wood let into the nave, and the dome was rebuilt and with stucco ornaments must belong to the

redecorated.” All of the altars of the church eighteenth century, after the earthquake of | were brought up to date by an Italian named 1746. The general disposition and the elliptical , Francesco Scicale whose reputation is pro- openings, nevertheless, retain the original design claimed on the basis that he had worked in pal- shown in Meléndez’s print of 1681, another aces of Egypt and Constantinople, as well asin proof that reconstructions were frequently the Opera House in Paris. Hence he was emi- made without change of style. The lovely Senently qualified to construct altars a la porce- villian tile dado (Fig. 127) shines as resplend-

lana in Lima, Peru! ently as when first installed. The date 1606 oc- | | The very latest modification in Santo Do- curs in the tiles repeatedly, 1604 on two occa- , mingo took place in 1942-1944 when false ribs sions, and 1620 once. In the north wall is the

were added to the choir vaults to give them the name of the artist, probably a Moor: Me fecit same appearance as the rest of the nave. These Garrido 1606. The tiles along the stairway vaults had been burned in 1834, and, when re- which mounts to the choir are unusual in that made in wood, the ribs had been omitted. they contain pictures, naturally enough scenes In recapitulation, the sad tale of the church of the life of St. Dominic. of Santo Domingo ends with the present state The striking feature of the second cloister is of the edifice as follows: floor plan of about the appearance of trefoil arches, even though 1540; the bay within the side portal including often rebuilt. That they were so designed in the pointed arches and some ribs, probably of this second half of the sixteenth century is doubt- _ period; the imitation Gothic vaults of the nave ful. At any event they existed in the time of of the second half of the seventeenth century; Meléndez (1681), for they can easily be disthe Ionic half columns of the nave added in tinguished in the engraving in his book. This

, MN 269 & | ,

| APPENDIX , testimony suggests that the trefoil cloisters of Lizarraga, Descripcién de las Indias (Buenos Santo Domingo were erected in the early seven- ae 1916), pp. 92-104; List of the provincials with

oe teenth century. If that be true, they were the op. 1 nb in Corona centenaria (Lima, 1921), earliest of a type which became very popular in 2 Angulo, Domingo, “La iglesia de Santo Do-

Lima. mingo,” Revista del Archivo Nacional del Pera,

, The cloisters of the novitiate, first built under XII (1939), 221-228.

Domingo de Valderrama (1586~1590)” now 8 Meléndez, Juan, Tesoros verdaderos de las Indias form part of the Colegio de Santo Tomas. With ~°; orden de p redicadore s (Rome, 1681), I, 53-59.

-de of th ‘rely demolished and Cobo, Bernabé, op. cit., pp. 237-239.

one side of the structure entire y demolished an 5 Angulo, Domingo, op. cit., p. 222.

the rest drastically modified, the only features 6 Ibid. of interest are a few trefoil arches in the second * Angulo, Domingo, “La torre de Santo Dostory. A handsome arrangement is the composi- mingo,” Arquitecto peruano, March, 1938.

tion of repeated arches over the stairway and Har th-terr c Emilio, Una capilla muy galana,

, th den d€;Woo déiar in 8 d El Comercio (Lima), June 9, 1948. “n ome; also mudejar in lavor, ue *Idem., “agDibuj6 realmente el virrey Amat?”

.

to the strips which suggest a melon vault (Fig. Cultura peruana, vol. I (1941), no. 1. Juan de la

120). Roca’s activity on the church of the Buena Muerte

, Another attachment to the monastery of is documented. See p. 272.

Santo Domingo is the chapel of the Vera Cruz, Angulo, Domingo, El primitivo estilo de

Santonave Domingo de Lima,” Archivo Naa small church of. .single with seven —; Revista ,Il (1921),del ; cionalbays del Pert, 527-530; Flores Araoz,

, of barrel vaults and a dome over the crossing. José, “La iglesia de Santo Domingo,” Cultura peruThe style of its Doric pilasters and cornice be- ama, vol. III (1943), no. 13. | longs to the seventeenth century, but it has 11 Gento Sanz, Padre Benjamin, San Francisco de

been restored on many occasions, the last time Lima, pp. 160-163. 7

in 1942-1944. A document recently discovered Rasgos conmemorativos de la inauguracion del . j templo de Santo Domingo, octubre de 1901 (Lima, by Harth-terré establishes the severe and clas- 1901), pp. 15-22.

, sical portal as the work of the architect, Diego 18 Tizdrraga, op. cit., p. 102.

Guillén, in 1613. “4 Harth-terré, Artifices, p. 89.

AS 270 R

LIMA: CATALOGUE OF SECONDARY , ,

| | MONUMENTS | | Descalzas de San José | | ,

The church is in ruinous condition subse- although it had suffered badly in the remodeling

- quent to the earthquake of 1940. It preserves a of 1894-1897. } mediocre side portal of the late seventeenth Torre Revello and Noél, Arquitectura virreinal, pp. century, and perhaps the floor plan of the origi- ,, i oo So, Garcia, Simén, 123 , , Huaura, 87 | eet -| : Garicochea, 306 Huaylas, 10g. oe Garrido, 93, 269 , : , Huejotzingo (Mexico), 184, 211 oo Gaudi, 229 re ' Huerta, Fray Miguel de la, 7;:see also Guerra‘: Gerona (Spain),Rodrigo, Cathedral, oo97. - }Sn coSe Gil de Ontafién, 123 45 . Ica,

Gémez, Juan, 315 . . lave © oo Gémez, Fray Pedro, 196 San Miguel, 12, 35-38, Figs. 51-54.

Grajales, Juan de, 259 , : CS Santa Barbara, 163, 166-167,° 6 ,

Granada (Spain), 71 - imdgenes de vestir, 240 . ae Archiepiscopal Palace, 74. __ a iron grilles, 24 pos, a

La Compafifa, 74. a ee,

Cathedral, 13, 42, 44,59, 72. > foot Isabellan Gothic, 13-14, 29,72 2 © 9 | : Nuestra Sefiora de las Angustias, 74 oe Jaén Cathedral (Spain), 13, 43, 44, 72,248 |

Palace of Charles V, 252 Jerez de la Frontera (Spain) | ee |

Guadalajara (Mexico), Cathedral, 43, 44 | _ San Lucas, 74 a ne Guadalajara (Spain), Palacio del. Duque del In- San Miguel, 74 a |

, _ fantado, 1340 , Jesuit missionaries, 6, 34 __ co , , Guadalupe (Mexico), Capilla del Pocito, 20 Jiménez de Sigtienza, Francisco, 14 _

Guadalupe (Peru), 14, 15, 120-121, Fig. 171 Juan Tomés: see Tuyru Tupac | Guadix (Spain), Cathedral, 44 _ Juli , _ : Guanajuato (Mexico), 138 | domestic architecture, Casa Zavala, 165

Guerra, Fray Miguel de la, gigas ecclesiastical architecture Guillén, Diego, 15, 80, 270 La Asuncién, 35-38, 163, Figs. 48, 233-234 Gutiérrez, Juan, 47 7 San Juan, 21, 35-38, 160-162, Figs. 1, 47, 219,

| :Herrera, 44,Juan227 de, 9, 44 | 7 an ,

Gutiérrez, Pedro, 315 a | 225-226 CO Gutiérrez Sencio, Miguel, 8, 47-43, 46, 55, 293 . _ San Pedro Martir, 18, 34-37, 162-163, Figs. 2,

Havana (Cuba), Cathedral, 43 | Santa Cruz, 21, 163-165, Figs, 228-229, 231-232

Heredia, Inocencio, 227 , - Juliaca, 171-172, Figs. 247-249 ,

NM 324K

: Herreresque,Q — 7 Kondori, José, 8 mo,

INDEX , : Lambayeque, 126, Fig. 28 Oe - Nuestra Sefiora del Patrocinio, 76, 86,274 . Lampa, 17, 167-168, Figs. 239, 241, 243, 245. Nuestra Sefiora del Prado, 81-82, 92, 274 —

La Paz (Bolivia) ee a Nuestra Sefiora del Rosario, 275 oo

La Merced, 116 , 4, Penitenciaria, 264 a San Agustin, 205°. a Recoleta Dominica, 73, 275 os San Francisco, 21,155,159 ©. | = Sagrario of Lima Cathedral, 250. oe

Santo Domingo, 160, 295 : San Andrés, 275 | a

La Plata, archbishopric, 155. a San Agustin, 17, 19, 29, 72, 77-79, 84-85, 90-91,

lectern, Cuzco, San Francisco, 196-197, Fig. 272 257-258, Fig. 115 - | : Lemos, Conde de, 5, 53. | | _ . San Carlos, 19, 86, 88, 258-259, Fig. 114 tit

Lima | _ San Cosmé y Damian, 71 Cs , domestic architecture’ _ i ee San Francisco, 17, 18, 29, 73-74, 78-83, 91-93, Casa de Pilatos, 69,80 , --—-- 222, 259-262, Figs. 10, 92, 101, 106-109, 124-7

Casa del Virrey,69 = = = © 125

Paseo de Aguas, 24,69 ©. OS San Francisco de Paula Nuevo, 75, 89, 275

Plaza Mayor, 22, 69 . San Francisco de Paula Viejo, 275. 7 Portada de las Maravillas, 89° , _ San Ildefonso, 73, 92, 275 BS

Torre Tagle Palace, 23, 69, Figs. 24-26 San Lazaro, 275 , ee earthquakes, 69 : San Lorenzo, 275 rs ecclesiastical architecture — San Marcelo, 86, 87, 276, Fig. 116 =. 65. } Cathedral, 13, 15, 16, 29, 41-44, 71-72, 77, 80, ‘San Pedro (La Compafiia), 13, 17-18, 71, 73;

86, 247-251, Figs. 8, 91, 103-105, 113 74, 75, 78, 262-265, Figs.9,94,909 .

Colegio de Santo Tomés, 4, 92-93, 251-253, San Pedro Nolasco, 276. oe

Figs. 17,1260 © 7 ts San Sebastidn, 72, 248,276 sg tt

La Compaiiia; see San Pedro Santa Ana, 71,276 ° Be Corazén de Jestis, 20, 76, 86, 88, 253-254, Figs. Santa Catalina, 71,277 re Oe

18, 95-96 | , | : Santa Clara, 71, 92, 277 po a FS |

Descalzas de San José; 271 ES Santa Liberata; 277° 0 5.

_ Descalzos Franciscanos, 92, 271 + Santa Rosa de las Monjas, 19, 75, 85, 87, 90,277

Desemparados, 271 ee Santa Rosa de los Padres, 86-87, 277-278...

Dominican Novitiate, 89, 270, Fig. 120 . Santa Teresa,.19, 86, 87-90, 265-266, Figs. 115,

Espiritu Santoj:90,:27% 02000 121-122 a Jestis Maria, 75, 91; 254-255 Santiago del Cercado, 278 ; :

La Magdalena la Vieja, 271-272) =. > :.. |’ ~~. +~Santo Cristo de los Milagros: (Las Nazarenas), La Merced, 13, 17, 19, 72-74, 78-79, 84, 87, 90, - 19, 20, 76-77, 86, 88, 92, 266-267, Figs. 97-08

92, 255-256, Figs. 93, 110, 123° | Santo Domingo, 15, 19, 29, 30, 72, 73, 79-80,

Mercedarias, 92, 272.-° sw | 88-89, 91-93, 267-270, Figs. 5, 100, 102, 119-

Nazarenas; see “Santo Cristo de.los Milagros . : 120, 127 ag |

. Nuestra Sefiora del Belén, 272, = 32°. .:~— ;_~—,, |. Seminario de.Santo Toribio, 75, go-91, 261

Nuestra Sefiora de la Buena Muerte, 272.) Trinidad, 73, 230, 278 ,

_ Nuestra Sefiora de la Cabeza, 272. | : Trinitarias, 76, 86, 87, 278 | | a Nuestra Sefiora de la Caridad, 85, 86 La Vera Cruz, Chapel of, 15, 75, 80, 270 ,

Nuestra Sefiora del Carmen, 75, 272. | Viceregal Palace, chapel of, 87° oe

Nuestra Sefiora de Cocharcas, 85, 86, 87, 272-273: Llorente, 229 _ } 4 | Nuestra Sefiora de la Concepcién, 71, 86, 273, Lépez, Cristdbal, 276 a

a a: Fig, YI2 . - _ eo ; : . Lupiana (Spain), I2, 50 ve DO, Nuestra Sefiora de la Encarnacién, 71, 92,.273 poe Oo -

_ Nuestra Sefiora de Copacabana, 85, 273 Luna Victoria, Bishop, 118, 237, 303 ee

Nuestra Sefiora de Guadalupe, 273 —- » Madrid (Spain), Provincial Hospital, 16 a Nuestra Sefiora de Guia, 89,274... _ Maestro, Matias, 20, 77, 89, 260, 264, 268,275 >

M325 |

Nuestra Sefiora de Montserrat, 15, 75, 274 Malaga (Spain), Cathedral, 44 a we ,

INDEX

: Mamara, 111, Figs. 156-157 . mudéjar | ae Mansiche, 118-119 ceilings, 11, 71, 72,268 = > - .

Mansilla, Clemente de, .249 definition, 10, 29, 157 a Manuel Pablo, Fray, 47 domes, 153, 157, 159 ,

Martin, Diego, 6 | : Oo | Maroto, Diego, 15, 17, 19, 112-113, 250, 268 ornament, 17, 23, 73, 74, 77, 95,134,146

marquetry (mestizo), 156, Fig. 230 — see also tiles, trefoil arches, zapata capitals

Martinez, Sebastian, 186 a Nazario, picapedrero, 307 | Martinez Compaiion, 5, 113, 227 | Naz |

Martinez “c Arron, Juan, 7,. 1° 183, 195, 273, 249 San José, 19, 86, 95-96, Figs. 118, 128-130

Martinez de ov O, Diego, 189, 200-201, 202, 210, San Xavier, 96-97, Figs. 131-134 | ,

| ET RTO Neoclassic period, 20; see Maestro, Matias —

: 24t -242, Fig. 360 a Noort, Juan de, 217 . Matamor os, Juan de, 253. Noriega, Evaristo, 118 | So , Martinez Montafies, Juan, 213, 217, 223, 232, 235, Noguera, Pedro de, 7, 83, 181-185, 194, 210, 221

matriz, 107, 122, 128, 303 .7 Mayordomo, Antonio, 249 Oo yoo / ee Medina, Diego de, 78, 222, 257-258 Océn, Bishop Alonso, 5, 41, 42, 46, 67 Meléndez, Baltasar, 315 , So Ocopa, 110 a . Meléndez, Lucas, “8, 261 ae Olanda, Guillen de, 185 oo Menacha, Fray Lucas, Miguel, 64 Olney (Spain), ta juan Mejorada, 159,29 Fig. -222 Méndez, 217 Mos, Ae, Mercedarian missionaries, 6 Open Chapel, 13, 52, 127, 171 | : | Mérida (Mexico), Cathedral, 43 Orellana, Blas de, 120, 122 | | , mermaids, 21, 119, 142, 158, 166, 168, 174, 215, 228, Oropesa oo

307 _Juan | parish cure737, 65 Mesa, de, 242 oe Ermita, | Mesa, Martin Alonso de, 181, 221 Ortiz de Vargas, Luis, 181-182 mestizo Orue, Antonio de, 32,33. definition, 8, 20, 21, 156 | Oviedo, Martin de, 243

- style, 136, §40, 141, 145, 148,.750, 155-157, 171, So , : : | 174, 238 Palomares, Joseph Manuel, 253,315 Mexico City, 248 | Palomino, Felipe Santiago, 226 :

Cathedral, 43,44 co Panama City, Cathedral, 43. | ‘ .retable facades, 138 pasos,244 . | | SO Santa Brigida, 20, 76,253 Pastorelo, Joseph, 212. miradores; see balconies Paucarcolla, 12, 34-37, Fig. 45 !

Mollinedo, Andrés de, 61, 62 Paucarpata, 14, 149, 153, Fig. 202

Mollinedo, Bishop Manuel de, 5, 61, 62, 63, 67, 167, Pavia, Carlos, 222 _ ee

168, 170, 201, 202, 204, 216 : Paz, Antonio de, 186 monkeys, 164,174 | Pérez, Alonso,.251. | Montes, Fray Luis, 186 |» oe Pérez de Guzman, Diego, 86, 273

Montes, Fray Pedro, 309 ee _ Pérez del Cuadro, 151, 305 : ee

Monya, Francisco, 56 - PérezMatias, Holguin, 263 /: / Moquequa, 8 Pérez Palomino, 129 © Morales, Alonso de, 255 oo : ~ Pisco, La Compafiia, 18, 19, 75, 86, 93-95, Figs. 6,

Morales, José, 130 | 7 117 - et _

Morcillo Rubié de Aufion, 5, 226, 305 - Pizarro, Francisco, 3, 5, 29, 33, 39, 69, 127 | |, Morén Morgan, Henry, 121 : plans; see floor plans : de-Carmona, Felipe, 225 ~ _ plateresque, 9,33 Oo oe

Moscoso, 141 co | pointed arches, 9, .34, 72; 124, 144,248 ~ AN 326 KR

| INDEX |

Pomata | on Santo Domingo, 203, Fig. 284 : San Miguel, 35-38, 166, Fig. 235 © : Seminario de San Antonio Abad, 201

224 ee Huaras, 312

Santiago, 14, 21, 157-160, Figs, 215-218, 220-221, Huaman, 311 So ,

Pontones, Juan de, 292° , oe Juli, San Pedro, 205 |

Potosi (Bolivia), 3, 101, 155-156, 160 Lampa, 204 ee,

Pozo, José del, 268 si oe Lima : Pozzo, Andrea, 224 a | Colegio de los Sagrados Corazones, 199, Fig. 277 , pre-Columbian art, 96, 142, 149, 150, 156, 164, 165 Corazén de Jestis, 209 en

primitivism, 156, 159, 165 : Jests Maria, 206-207, Fig. 292 Pucara, 169-170 BO , . La Magdalena la Vieja; 207 : Puebla (Mexico), 248 Bc Nuestra Sefiora del Prado, 207i Cathedral, 43, 44, 217, 247, 248 , San Agustin, 199, 312 a, , : . Puno Cathedral, 21, 773-175, Figs. 3, 250-254 | San Carlos, 209, Fig. 303 : _

pulpits : . an Santa Rosa de las Monjas, 207 | Andahuaylas, 311 , Santo Cristo de los Milagros, 209, Fig. 304.

Arequipa So205, Mansiche, _a La Compaiiia,. Fig. 291 _ 208: Nazca,7207

Ayacucho oe Trujillo a —

'. San Francisco, 198-199, Fig. 276 , Pisco, 207, Fig. 294 | Cathedral, 205, 210, Fig. 293, SO , El] Belén,.311- an re

La Compajfiia, 206, Fig. 295 , Cathedral, 311

San Francisco, 311 So , , La Merced, 311 —

San Francisco de Paula, 206, 311, Fig. 296 San Agustin, 208, Fig. 300 - | San Juan de Dios,.311 , San Francisco, 207~208, Figs. 297-298 |

Santa Ana, 311... os Santa Clara, 208, 311, Fig. 301

Santa Clara, 197-198, Fig. 274 © _. Santa Teresa, 208-209, Fig.302-s—t—

Santa Maria Magdalena, 205-206 Santo Domingo, 208, Fig. 299 oo

Santa Teresa, 205 | Yunguyo,. 238 2.—_ 7Santo Domingo, 311 a Pupuja, 171 a 7 Cajamarca : re : | SO, Co , El Belén, 312 , , — Quispe, Lucas, 47 7 a Cathedral, 208205 | ©. Quito (Ecuador) co San Antonio, ©... 5. Cathedral, 12, 34 Checacupe, 203-204, Fig, 289 | La Compaifiia, 18, 73, 74, 224, 233, 262-263 Copacabana (Bolivia), 199 - ee La Merced, 295 re , Cuzco rr San Agustin, 90,248,295 5 La Almudena, 202, Fig. 286 : a San Francisco, 34, 90, 295 . , . | El Belén, 204, Fig. 290. - Santo Domingo, 248 Cathedral, 198, 202-203, Figs. 282-283. re Colegio de Educandas, 198 i Ramirez, Toribio, 113 rn La Compafiia, 199-201, Fig. 280 | recessed portal, 66, 109, 159, 168.

La Merced, 199-201, Fig. 279, = st - - Renaissance, 9 - ,

San Agustin, 200 oo , ~ Rengifo, Marcos, 8 i

San Blas, 203, Figs. 287-288 . retable facade, 19, 83, 135, 138 | San Francisco, 196-197, Fig. 273 . | retables ,

San Pedro, 202,204 Fig.OC 285Cathedral, ne Arequipa a mo San Sebastian, 226 Santa Catalina, 199-201, Fig. 278 La Compafiia, 225-226

Santa Clara, 204 | ~~ Ayacucho So , Santa Teresa, 200-201, Fig. 281 oe Cathedral, 216, 231, Fig. 338 AS 327K

INDEX Oo , retables (Continued) - San Francisco, 221-222, 225,228 it 7 Ayacucho (Continued) ... . San Francisco de Paula Nuevo, 226, Figs. 329-

La Compafiia, 215-216, 231, Fig. 316 BBO La Merced, 231 San Marcelo, 222, 227, 228, 258 -

: San Francisco, 213, 230-231 . a San Pedro, 223-224, 315, Figs. 325-326

: San Francisco de Paula, 231 oo. San Sebastidn, 229, Fig. 336 a

Santa Ana, 216 . Santa Rosa de las Monjas, 227 | Santa Teresa, 230, Fig. 337i; : Oropesa, 220. . - re

- Santa Clara, 231, 313 | - Santo Cristo de los Milagros, 229, Fig. 97

Santo Domingo, 231238, , Pisco, 225 , 355 |: | Cajamarca Be Pomata, Figs. 353, Cathedral, 237, Figs. 352, 354. oo San Jerénimo (Huancayo), 211, Fig. 306 , . , San Antonio,211, 313 220 a ; Sucre (Bolivia)212 = =©=| |: Checacupe, , a Cathedral, . Copacabana (Bolivia), 212,.219, Figs. 308, 320 La Merced, 312 , |

Cuzco. : San Lazaro, 312 oe Cathedral, 214, 220, 227-228, Figs. 310, 334 * ———- Surco, 229 , La Compafifa, 189, 214, 215, 218-279, 228, Figs. Trujillo a

. 318-319, 359 So 3 Cathedral, 227, 232,. 234-235, Frontispiece of

Jesus y Maria, 220, 228 Ba plates, Figs. 343-344

La Merced, 214-215, 218, Figs. 311-312 La Merced, 227, 232,235 7

San Agustin, 214 So , San Agustin, 232, 236; Fig. 348 7 San Blas, 201, 216-217, 220, Figs. 307, 314 . San Francisco, 232, 233, Figs. 339, 340, 342.

San Francisco, 220-221, Fig. 322 | San Lorenzo, 236-237, Figs. 350-351 ,

San Pedro, 220, Fig. 321 - Santa Clara, 235, Fig. 346. : nn San Sebastian, 218 - Santa Teresa, 227, 236, Figs. 331, 347, 349

_ Santa Catalina, 45, 214, 215, 221, Figs. 313, 323 Santo Domingo, 233-234, 235-236, Figs. 341, 345

Santa Clara, 217, 228° , Yanaquigua, 226.0 = a

- Santa Teresa, 189, 200, 277-218, Fig. 317. Yunguyo, 238 oe oo Santo Domingo, 211, Fig. 305 _ | retablo, definition, 10 re Seminario de San Antonio Abad, 220 Rher, Juan de, 250, 254 .

Huamén, 234 st) _... Rio Ribera, Pedro, 16110 SO ee , Huaro, 211 Mantaro, Ica, 227 es Roca, Juan de la, 88,266,:268 268, 272| ae So Juli. oo, ne rococo, 9, 19, 77, , ~ La Asuncién, 211-212, 215, Fig. 315 : Rodriguez, Miguel, 2735 — ,

San Juan, 237-238, Fig. 356 © °°. :.> Rodriguez, Tomas, 113 ' Lambayeque, 228-229 : Rome , Se Lima ec Gest, 18, 74,5 262-263 a7,

E] Belén, 224, 225, 227 Sant’ Ignazio, 224, 262-263 tt | Cathedral, 213, 222, 230, Figs. 309,324 St. Peter’s, 217, 222 re

Colegio de Sagrados Corazones, 224, 225, 227 Rosales, Santiago, 8,.183, 184 | oo

Corazén de Jestis, 315 Rosapata, 110 coe | Jestis y Marfa, 224-225, Figs. 327, 328 | '. Royal Patronage, 3-5 ,

La Magdalena la Vieja, 225. , Rivas, Antonio de, 69, 316 7

La Merced, 226-227 ©... Rivas, Francisco: de, .316 | Nuestra Sefiora de la Concepcién,. 213, 229, Ruiz, Padre Juan,7 |= , Fig. 335 . : Ruiz del Portillo, Padre Jerénimo, 57, 262°

: Nuestra Sefiora del Prado, 227 a oe ge ae San Agustin, 222, 227, Fig. 333 Sahuaraura, Manuel, 63 an oe San Carlos, 227, Fig. 332 , Salamanca (Spain), 18° a NM 328 RK

INDEX Casa de las Conchas, 134. : Silédee, Diego, 13, 42, 44 oo Cathedral, 44 _ Soto, Salvador, 307 ._ oo San Esteban, 18, 138, 227. a | spiral column; see salomonica | |

Salas, Asencio, 221, 258 sun face, 160 | Salinas de Yocalla (Bolivia), 155 Sucre (Bolivia) , ce : |

saloménica Arafia Collection, 21, 156, Fig. 230 , definition, 10, 84 Le ecclesiastical architecture

origins, 217, 314 _ Cathedral, 290, 305 7 usage, 19, 192, 220 So a _ La Merced, 46, 116, 263 oe

Samanés, Juan, 296 = San Agustin, 290, 295 : ,

— 88-89 : | San Francisco, 46 - a

San Jerdénimo, parish church, 11, 12, 37, 65-66, Figs. ‘San Felipe Neri, 76 oe -

San Luis Potosi (Mexico), 138 - , Santo Domingo, ‘116, 290, 295.

San Martin, Fray Tomas de, 5, 33, 268 Surco, 87,278 © , San Pedro de Lloc, 121) a ne oo San Vicente (El Salvador), Hospicio, 20, 76,253. Tapia, Francisco de, 129 ' Safia , . : Tapia, José Manuel de, 129 | | matriz, 122, Fig. 166 - «Taxco (Mexico), 138, 239 , La Merced, 122, Fig. 174 : : Tepozotlan (Mexico), 239 ee San Agustin, 14, I5, 122-123, Figs. 167-170 tiles, 23, 75, 92-93, 261, 277 . I

San Francisco, 122 OoTiquillaque, - - Tiobamba, 66| oa fo Oo San Joaquin, 12 Be 56. San Juan de Dios, 121 : Toledano, Juan, 296 |

Santa Lucia, 12m Toledo (Spain), Santa Cruz, 12, 16, 45, 50, 136, 212 | Santo Toribio, 122 | _ Toledo, Francisco de, 5, 34, 40, 61, 62, 63, 106, 147, | _ Santa Lucia (Bolivia), 155. oe..." 'Poledo, Juan Bautista de, 44 te

Sanbandia, 1533 So 247 Oo

, Santa Ménica (Mexico), 134 tombs, 240 BO Santo Domingo (Dominican Republic), Cathedral, Toribio, Santo, 5, 122 pie

44Santo Torquemada, Manuel de, 253 © , me Tomas, 111 ee ae Torres, Antonio de, 226 |

Santo Tomas, Fray Domingo de, 34,114 © Torres, Cristébal.de, 314... 00°- st =

Scicale, Francesco, 269 Torres, Diego de,6 © ©... | Z

, retables | : a trascoro, definition, 10 a ; : 313 : arches, 23, 74, 89-90, 256-258, 261, 265, 269-270, sculpture techniques, 239-240 271, 277 Segovia (Spain) niches, 204, 208, 218 ,. -

sculpture; see choir stalls, figure sculpture, pulpits, Torres, Martin de, 198, 203, 214, 296

sculpture, Spanish imported, 213, 232-233, 241-243, _ trefoil oo oo

Casa de los Picos, 134 | shape, 59, 94, 141, I7I, 274

Cathedral, 44 | | window, 22 Seville (Spain) , architecture Trujillo | Cathedral, 43 domestic Omnium Sanctorum, 72 Casa de los Arana, 24

Serlio, 20 _ | triangular penetrations, definition, 14

San Andrés, 72 , oo Casa Ganoza Chopitea, 24, Fig. 27

San Lorenzo, 72 , Casa de los Herrera, 24, Fig. 29

San Clemente, 11, 71, 93 Casa Obregoso, 24 Santa Clara, 11, 71, 93, 242 ecclesiastical architecture ,

‘Santa Paula, 11, 71 , - E] Belén, 19, 777

Sida, José de la, 17, 18, 82, 85, 258 Capilla de la Union, 118

WN 329

INDEX

| Trujillo (Continued) | Vasconcellos, Constantino, 7, 81, 222, 259

ecclesiastical architecture (Continued) vaults a , Cathedral, 15, 17, 172-113, Figs..158, 160 ashlar, 14, 24, 105-106, 129, 167, 172 _ cloisters, 116 | brick, 14, 44, 72, 120, 129 ©

La Compafiia, 116, 177 cane and plaster, 11, 14, 17, 20, 73, 120 |

La Merced, 18, 776, Figs. 163-164 domical, 44 , San Agustin, 11-12, 18, 174, 116, Figs. 159, 162 Gothic, 44, 72~73, 144 on San Francisco, 18, 75, 116 wooden, 15, 73, 106-107

San Lorenzo, 118 Vega, Lorenzo de, 220, 230

Santa 118 Ana,Velasco, 118 ; Velasco, Luis de, 40, 72, 248 | , Santa Clara, Mateo Vitores. de, 118 a Santa Rosa, 118 7 So Velazquez, Francisco, 180 Santa Teresa, 117-118, Fig. 20 Vélez, Francisco, 304 |

Santo Domingo, 15, 18, 175-216, Fig. 161 Vera, Juan Manuel Cristdbal de, 303 : Seminario de San Carlos y San Marcelo, 118 Veramendi, Francisco de, 40 —_

religious orders, 114 | Veramendi, Juan Miguel de, 40 :

towers, I17 Villa, Salvador de, 250 a

Tunja (Columbia) a Villegas, Fray Jerénimo de, 248-249

Cathedral, 41, 53 | | Vilque, 170 Oo ,

Santa Clara, 34 , . 203, 216, 244 : Upper Peru (Bolivia), 10, 67, 155 Xaura, Francisco de, 259 | urbanization, 22 7 : Urcos, 65 Yanahaura, 20, 150-152, Figs. 204, 206

|

_ Tuyru Tupac, Juan Tomas, 8, 16, 62, 62, 201-202, Worcester Museum, 240 a | |

Urubamba Yucai, 66 : , San José, 66 | ,

Urquillos, 67 , -Yanaquigua, 154 , parish church, 65 Yunguyo, La Asuncién, 291

, Zacatecas (Mexico), 138

Valencia (Spain), Desemparados, 253 zapata capitals, 23, 24, 90, 92, 95, 265 Valladolid (Spain), Nuestra Sefiora de las Angus- Zepita

tias, I5 San Pedro, 165-166, Figs. 236-238

Valverde, Fray Vicente, 5, 29, 127, 130 San Sebastian, 35-36 oo. Vargas, Cristébal de, 97, 113, 253, 272 | Zvifiga, Pedro, 47 — oo | oo

AN 330K

Illustrations a -

BLANK PAGE |

‘ je. | aa ‘ i a 6iaSe(ESE et he OR 4 ¢ pe ¢

atf F7: Ps aeFin,» ere yi :| rc;.; .iae] , Ss om : Me *. : ie ae eet fsaga eSy re‘°aa o ie — Nite Fe ss Sern yy F ;a ‘“ :. Xe “. i on OEE 6 EER ox Wg . "4

a Se ete, a oe he ie a ' ” mol @ é ae s

Sw Po Ny ae re * 3. © “*f‘'‘~. *- Pm ~m‘ eo 4% am3?‘sae . *.4= #2 sé . jeae st aa. si {weer Soret, eg i ae a F % 7 he. nee : ¥i ag F wi ; © * e.. ~w te +? 4 a allt aii * eee ae Lote Nees aie x-_: ie oP 3Pa sates, Fetes Rees ti4 é. ir?Rae Ts 1eesaat a Nee aei iaia : my Z ;wv if L% Be:see ;

LSS i.¢ eer “oe :Esra “ta ®, er, Ts +.Sk wae » i} An Pm /TSP AN ee ye GE Lae Ss Belo ght | fe ag a ree fii. pF a. Vode

. ave :A “aaaAes .. —_ heey oeSc. meRe (‘Ax A-s5Be (4 c)" *— eeaSa ‘on ma — ee « | A Oe Me =" “4 *,‘ .4te;v~