The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400-1750 [1 ed.] 9788891306654, 9788891306661

Citation preview

The Site of Rome

Edited by David R. Marshall

Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400 –1750

The Site of Rome Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400 –1750 Edited by David R. Marshall

DAVID R. MARSHALL (ED.) THE SITE OF ROME

«L’ERMA»

ISBN 978-88-913-0666-1

«L’ERMA» di BRETSCHNEIDER

The Site of Rome

Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

1

2

The Site of Rome Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750 

Melbourne Art Journal 13

Edited by David R. Marshall

«L’ERMA» di BRETSchnEiDER 3

Published by

Melbourne Art Journal

«L’ERMA» di BRETSchnEiDER

Editorial Board University of Melbourne

Robert W. Gaston

University of Melbourne

Alison inglis

University of Melbourne

Margaret Manion

Melbourne Art Journal and this volume have been supported by the School of culture and communication, the University of Melbourne

University of Melbourne

David R. Marshall

University of Melbourne

Richard Read

University of Western Australia

Richard E. Spear

The support of christie’s, London is gratefully acknowledged

University of Maryland

Via cassiodoro, 11 - 00193 Roma [email protected]

© 2014 «L’ERMA» di BRETSchnEiDER All rights reserved. no part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopy, recording, or any other information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher.

Mark Stocker

University of Otago

Gerard Vaughan

iSBn: 978-88-913-0666-1 (paper edition) iSBn: 978-88-913-0665-4 (digital edition)

University of Melbourne

Editor David R. Marshall

Proofreaders Denise Taylor Adam Bushby

Design and Layout David R. Marshall Melbourne Art Journal employs an anonymous peer review process.

This volume constitutes Melbourne Art Journal no. 13. iSSn 1329-9441 Printed in italy

cover: Giovanni Paolo Panini, Capriccio of Roman Ruins with a Sibyl Preaching, 1740s. Private collection. First Frontispiece: claude Lorrain, Landscape with the Marriage of Isaac and Rebecca, 1648, detail. Oil on canvas, 152.3 x 200.6 cm. London, national Gallery, nG 12. (© The national Gallery, London 2013.) Second Frontispiece: Giovanni Battista cingolani dalla Pergola, Topografia geometrica dell’Agro Romano: overo la misura pianta, e quantita di tutte le tenute, e casali della campagna di Roma con le citta terre, e castelli confinanti ..., Rome, 1704, detail. (British School at Rome Library.)

4

Contents 6

introduction

Chapter 1 8

Julie Rowe

Rome’s Mediaeval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

Chapter 2 28

Joan Barclay Lloyd

Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia from Piazza di Porta Capena to Porta S. Sebastiano

Chapter 3 52

Louis cellauro

Roma Antiqva Restored: The Renaissance Archaeological Plan

Chapter 4 76

Donato Esposito

The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

Chapter 5 108 Lisa Beaven

Claude Lorrain and La Crescenza: The Tiber Valley in the Seventeenth Century

Chapter 6 140 David R. Marshall

The Campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

Chapter 7 162 Arno Witte

Architecture and Bureaucracy: The Quirinal as an Expression of Papal Absolutism

Chapter 8 178 Tommaso Manfredi

Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti. The Urban Theatre of Maria Casimira and Alexander Sobieski in Rome

Chapter 9 218 John Weretka

The ‘Non-aedicular Style’ and the Roman Church Façade of the Early Eighteenth Century

256 contributors and Abstracts

5

6

Introduction This volume, number 13 in the Melbourne Art Journal series, brings together nine scholars who each explore an aspect of the art and architecture of Rome situated within the topography—or map—of Rome in the Renaissance and Early Modern periods. These are studies of sight and site: about how the appearance of different regions or aspects of the city intersect with complex systems of political, economic, social and artistic institutions and customs. Beginning with the marble slabs of the fish market, and ending with the elegant facades of its eighteenth-century churches, the topography of Rome is explored through time and space. in the first chapter Julie Rowe explores the functioning of the medieval fish market at S. Angelo in Pescheria, an area dominated by the ruins of the Portico of Octavia. it is a site that was a nodal point on the medieval road networks, and close to the principal artery of Rome, the Tiber River. A different road system is explored by Joan Barclay Lloyd: the stretch of one of the Roman consular roads, the Via Appia, between the Servian and Aurelian walls. here inscriptions, place names, ruins (such as the Baths of caracalla), medieval monasteries (such as S. Sisto) and churches (including S. cesareo and SS. nereo ed Achilleo, restored during the counter-Reformation) are set in a green and spacious valley, the legacy of the nineteenth-century vision of an archaeological park. Louis cellauro looks at the sixteenth-century cartographic recreation of the image of Rome as a whole, which oscillated between attempts to correlate early lists of the Antique regions with the reality of the Renaissance city, and the skilful use of the device of the bird’s-eye view by artist-antiquarians like Pirro Ligorio to show what the whole of ancient Rome might have looked like. A more conceptual map of Rome is explored by Donato Esposito, who looks at the response of an artist who visited Rome—Sir Joshua Reynolds—not through his diaries, recollections or sketchbooks, but through those works in his extensive collection that are associated with many of the most famous works of Roman art of the Renaissance and Baroque periods. Lisa Beaven, too, sees Rome through the eyes of an artist, but this time an artist who devoted his life to observing and recording the countryside around Rome and who used this data to create images of places that seemed both physically real and historically remote. She follows claude

Lorrain’s favourite itinerary up the Tiber Valley north of Rome from the Porta del Popolo to the farmhouse of La crescenza, asking what the conditions were actually like there during the seventeenth century, a time when environmental degradation was an acute issue. Also addressing the question of the relationship between the ideal and the real is David R. Marshall, who examines the tradition of the representation of antique columns, capitals and entablatures in architectural painting, arguing that artists began by employing sixteenth-century treatises describing the classical orders but learned to respond to real ruins, particularly the ruins in the Roman Forum, with the help of the visual tricks of scene painters. The next chapters consider the way Roman sites were used. Arno Witte examines the structures and spaces of the Quirinal hill, the seat of papal secular power in the eighteenth century. he argues that the papal government was in many respects ahead of other European states in the innovation of political and bureaucratic structures, not lagging behind them as is usually supposed. Tommaso Manfredi looks at another of Rome’s heights, the Pincio near the church of Trinità dei Monti above Piazza di Spagna, a site not of papal authority but of international diplomacy, where Maria casimira, widow of John iii Sobieski of Poland, and her sons performed lavish musical spectacles in the early eighteenth century. Manfredi shows how she reconfigured this area by the restoration of the Villa Torres (later Villa Malta) and the Palazzo Zuccari, including the construction of a bridge across the modern Via Sistina and the loggia of Palazzo Zuccari. Finally, John Weretka addresses the question of how ecclesiastical institutions projected their presence in Rome by way of their church facades. Through an analysis of six church façades erected in the city of Rome in the 1720s and 30s, he argues that buildings of this period can be read as providing a lively commentary on one of the most persistent norms of architectural organisation in the Baroque church façade, the aedicule. This volume is dedicated to Marchesa Alberta Serlupi crescenzi, who has done so much to welcome foreign visitors to Rome. David R. Marshall Daylesford, January 2014

7

8

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 1 Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria Julie Rowe

Fish featured regularly in the diet of medieval Romans. it was cheap and plentiful and, for the overwhelmingly christian majority of the population, a readily available alternative to meat which religious observances forbade for close to a third of the year.1 Fish was caught in the Tiber, or brought to market from the coast and freshwater lakes in the campagna. The main distribution point was the fish

market (pescheria) at the church of S. Angelo, built into the ruins of the Porticus of Octavia (Fig. 1). here fish was auctioned at the city’s only wholesale fish market and sold at retail stalls much the same as those Félix Benoist saw outside S. Angelo late in the nineteenth century (Fig. 2). This chapter begins by outlining the reasons why the fish market’s location at S. Angelo was a particularly

Fig. 1. Giovanni Maggi (draughtsman and etcher), Giuseppe de Rossi (publisher), ‘S Templum S. Angeli in foro piscario …’, 1618. From Aedificiorum et ruinarum Romae ex antiquis atque hodiernis monimentis, 1618. (© Bibliotheca hertziana U.Fi. c 17 b 31.)

Fig. 2. Félix Benoist, Portico of Octavia and the Pescheria, 1870. Lithograph, 365 x 250 mm. After Philippe Benoist and Félix Benoist, Roma: opera grafica di Philippe Benoist e Félix Benoist, Biella: Sandro Maria Rosso Editore, 1987, plate 15.

Frontispiece: E. Roesler Franz, Fish Slabs at the Portico of Octavia. Detail of Fig. 18.

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

9

favourable one. Exactly when the market became established there is unknown; it is mentioned in the historical record for the first time only in 1192. Two major archival sources, however, provide detailed information about its organisation and operation during the Middle Ages. These are the statutes of the fishmongers’ guild (Statuta ars pescivendulorum) and the records of notaries Antonio Scambi and his son who prepared numerous legal documents for S. Angelo and fishmongers (pescivendoli). Drawing on these records, i will focus on how fish was supplied to the market, and how its retail and wholesale sectors operated. Special attention will be given to the roles of the two major players in the market, the church of S. Angelo in Pescheria and the fishmongers’ guild. The

10

chapter concludes by examining the activities of selected pescivendoli families and how their commercial interests expanded beyond the fish market. in antiquity, Rome’s fish market lay north-east of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina in the Forum Romanum, probably moving to a location near today’s S. Giorgio in Velabro (Figs. 3 and 4 [1]) late in the empire.2 By the high Middle Ages, however, a flourishing fish market was operating in the tiny open space in front of the church of S. Angelo (later S. Angelo ‘in Pescheria’) (Figs. 3 and 4 [2]), within easy reach of the main body of Rome’s population which had gradually consolidated into the Tiber bend earlier in the Middle Ages.3 The church (DiV S AnGELi) and the market place in front of it are clearly seen in Bufalini’s map of 1551 (Fig. 3 [2]). They were at

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

the heart of medieval Rome’s commercial quarter. not far away downstream, the cattle market (the Forum Boarium) (Figs. 3 and 4 [3]), continued to operate as it had done for centuries, and farmers from the nearby Alban hills sold their produce in Piazza Montanara (Figs. 3 and 4 [4]). A short distance upstream was another market place, Piazza Giudea (Figs. 3 and 4 [5]). Like the fish market it too had developed during the Middle Ages, and was the focus of Rome’s medieval Jewish quarter, which was situated along the left bank of the Tiber immediately upstream of Pons Fabricius (Figs. 3 and 4 [6]). it had begun to develop late in the tenth century or early in the eleventh as the city’s Jewish community gradually transferred across the river from their traditional base in Trastevere, almost certainly

(Left) Fig. 3. Leonardo Bufalini, Map of Rome, Rome: Antonio Blado, 1551 (detail, with additional labelling and orientation changed to correspond to the nolli map.) London, British Library, Maps S.T.R. [1]. (© British Library.) (Right) Fig. 4. Giambattista nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. (Detail, with additional labelling.) 1. S. Giorgio in Velabro 2. S. Angelo in Pescheria 3. Forum Boarium 4. Piazza Montanara 5. Piazza Giudea 6. Jewish Quarter (later Ghetto) 7. Pons Fabricius (Ponte Fabricio, Ponte Quattro capi) 8. Pons Sanctae Mariae (Ponte Palatino, Ponte Senatorio, Ponte Rotto) 9. Theatre of Marcellus 10. campidoglio

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

11

drawn by the employment possibilities the area offered.4 it was a neighbourhood of small businessmen and artisans, where Jews constituted close to half the population, their concentration giving rise to several popular names: contrada giudea for the district (Figs. 3 and 4 [6]), and pons giudea for the nearby bridge, Pons Fabricius (Figs. 3 and 4 [7]), as well as the name of the market place itself. The fish market site at S. Angelo was no doubt chosen because it was relatively central and accessible. it was close to the Tiber, source of some of its products; it was near the reliable river crossing provided by the Tiber island

12

Fig. 5. View of Portico of Octavia today from the front. (© David R. Marshall.)

bridges for delivery of fish catches off-loaded at Rome’s port in Trastevere or brought in by road from the campagna; and it connected directly with one of the main thoroughfares of Rome that ran directly past the church (Fig. 3 [2]). The location was considered a healthy place in which to sell foodstuffs: the 1481 Addendum to the 1405 Statuta pescivendulorum Urbis states that ‘near S. Angelo is a clean place, sheltered from the heat of the sun, where

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 6. Baccio Pontelli, View of the Pons Fabricius and the Tiber Island, c. 1493. Madrid, The Escorial, codex Escurialensis, f. 27v. After Egger, 1905–6, vol. 2, fol. 27v. (Below) Fig. 7. Map of Rome showing the Einsiedeln itinerary. After Bauer, 2004, fig. 9, p. 20. (Right) Fig. 8. Remnant columns of the ancient Porticus Octaviae leading into and through its propylaeum, 2008. (© Julie Rowe 2013.)

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

13

meat, fish and other things … are well preserved from spoilage, which is not possible in campo de’ Fiori and all other markets’.5 The church of S. Angelo had been established around the middle of the eighth century, built into the southern monumental entrance (propylaeum) of the ancient Porticus Octaviae (Fig. 5).6 The propylaeum then functioned as an entrance porch for the church and was approached from both sides along what remained of the portico’s colonnade (Fig. 8). The porch and colonnade continued to be used as a public street (via publica) throughout the Middle Ages, just as the propylaeum and colonnade had formed a section of the ancient Via Tecta in the imperial era.7 Early in the Middle Ages, Via Tecta became known as via peregrinorum because it linked Saint Peter’s with S. Paul’s outside the Walls (Fig. 7), and later, via mercatoria, because it connected Rome’s main markets.8 The views of Rome by Pietro del Massaio (1469) (Fig. 9) and Alessandro Strozzi (1474) (Fig. 10) in the second half of the fifteenth century show via mercatoria quite clearly. it began at the market area in front of S. celso at the head of Ponte S. Angelo [1] and passed through places that Massaio called Campus floris [2] and Area iudea [3] before reaching S. Angiolo ove si vende il pesce [4] and, finally, the capitol [5]. Strozzi’s view has similar labels: S. Cielso [1], Piacia di Campo di fiore [2], [Piazza] Giudea [3], and S. Agnolo dove si vende il pesce [4]. (S. celso remains today as SS. celso e Giuliano, totally rebuilt and with a different orientation to the medieval church: see the chapter by Weretka in this volume.) S. Angelo’s porch also served as a key connecting point for traffic arriving from a major overland route through the Porta Aurelia on

14

the Janiculum or from the main river port in Trastevere across the Tiber island bridges. On exiting Pons Fabricius (Fig. 6, left, and Figs. 9 and 10 [6]), pedestrians and vehicles would follow the narrow street leading off into the neighbourhood on the river’s left bank. it quickly deviated first left and then right to reach the tiny piazza before the church (Figs. 3 and 4 [2]). Exactly when the fish market was established at S. Angelo is unknown, but recent excavations have uncovered a much earlier presence of fish sellers on the site than had previously been suspected.9 in the south-west inner corner of the porch, built straight onto the Roman paving, the walls and doorway of a small fish shop were uncovered (Fig. 11, left).10 The shop faced directly onto the thoroughfare across the porch and was identified as a fish seller’s by a large quantity of mollusc shells still sitting in a tub connected through a hole in its base to Rome’s sewer system.11 The discovery has moved documented fish selling at S. Angelo back at least three centuries and significantly closer to construction of S. Angelo, when use of the porch was evidently divided between commercial activities in the west half and the church in the east.12 A few decades after the church was founded, an anonymous monk from Einsiedeln referred to the church (Sanctum Angelum) in his guide book but made no reference to a fish market.13 it appears for the first time in the historical record only some four centuries later, when cencio camerarius used it to identify the church—sco. Angelo piscium ven(a)lium—in his 1192 list of Rome’s churches.14 The term’s use in an official document suggests that, by then the market was well established.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Far left) Fig. 9. Pietro del Massaio, Map of Rome, 1469, detail of the via mercatoria (see text for labelling). Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, ms. lat. 4802, f. 133r. (Left) Fig. 10. Alessandro Strozzi after Pietro del Massaio, Map of Rome, 1474, detail of the via mercatoria (see text for labelling). Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Ms. Redi 77, fols. ViivViiir. (Biblioteca nazionale centrale di Firenze, Servizio di Fotoriproduzione.) (Right) Fig. 11. Archaeological plan of the propylaeum of the Porticus Octaviae showing the eighth-century fish shop in the lower left corner and in the diagonally opposite corner the entrance to the church. (Photograph of an on-site information panel).

While almost nothing is known about the fish market’s origins, a good deal is known about its operation in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries (and by extension, in the earlier Middle Ages) thanks to the fortunate survival of two groups of records: the 1405 statutes of the fishmongers’ guild, the Ars pescivendulorum, with several sets of addenda,15 and the invaluable records of notary Antonio di Stefanello Scambi and his son, Lorenzo, which cover a forty year period between 1363 and 1409.16 These records reveal much about the extent and nature of the involvement of the two major players in the market’s operation: the guild and the church of S. Angelo in Pescheria. The guild statutes begin by outlining its administrative organisation (office bearers and the like), but then are devoted almost exclusively to the rules and regulations governing the wholesale selling of fish (coctigium). in the process, they provide other informative details, such as the types of fish sold in the market.17 The Scambi records, on the other hand, deal more with the supplying of fish to the market, and retail selling. Scambi and his son lived and worked in rione S. Angelo, preparing documents of lease, sublease, sale and loan for the dayto-day dealings of many of those associated with the retail market. Their records show the types of contracts, purchases, payments and loans fishmongers made in order to supply fish to the city and the supply networks established within Rome and beyond. They also reveal how some pescivendoli were able to expand their activities and supply game and birds to the market through the purchase or lease of forests and woodlands, or diversify

into raising beef, sheep and crops on leased or owned farmlands. in this way they generated wealth and power for themselves and their families.

Supplying the Market Fish arrived at the fish market in front of S. Angelo in Pescheria from three sources: fisheries in the Tiber, freshwater lakes and waterways in the campagna, and the seas along the coast of Lazio north and south of Rome. Freshwater fish were trapped in fisheries (pescarie), often called loci ad piscandum in the documents.18 A pescaria was a fixed installation immersed in the waters of a river or lake, an enclosure made with a stone base and sides of wood and rush lattice that allowed easy entry for fish but no exit.19 One can be seen in the lower left foreground of Gaspar van Wittel’s view of the Tiber upstream of Ponte Sisto (1682) (Fig. 12). Baccio Pontelli’s earlier view of the Tiber from the Aventine (1493) (Fig. 13) features a number of these rectangular enclosures, some in front of a tower on the bank to the left of the drawing, and others near the rectangular church S. Maria Egiziaca and the Marmorata, the ancient port facility, on the opposite bank.20 This stretch of river downstream of Pons Sanctae Mariae (today Ponte Rotto), between the bridge and remains of the ancient Pons Sublicius (in the foreground of Fig. 13), was particularly favoured for fisheries,21 and continued to be so until construction of the embankments late in the nineteenth century. Roesler Franz’s view painted four centuries later, looking downstream rather

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

15

(Above) Fig. 12. Gaspar van Wittel, View of Ponte Sisto, 1682, detail. 1682. 26 x 47.5 cm. Rome, Pinacoteca capitolina, inv. 82. (Pinacoteca capitolina.)

(Right) Fig. 13. Baccio Pontelli, View of Rome from the Aventine, c. 1493 (detail). Madrid, The Escorial, Codex Escurialensis, fol. 57v. After Egger, 1905–6, vol. 2, fol. 56v.

than upstream, shows two boys sitting on a remnant of Pons Sublicius to the left with a group of fishing structures similarly anchored in this location (Figs. 14, 15). Known as giornelli, each is a wooden platform with an attached rotary fishing device, consisting of scoop nets mounted at the end of paddles, and powered by the river’s flow.22 An Anderson photograph (c. 1860) of the same location illustrates well their construction (Figs. 16, 17). The fisheries on the Tiber belonged mostly to churches which, lacking the resources to manage or maintain them, leased them out to others. Leases were generally for a minimum of five years and maximum of twelve, with agreed rents of either a monetary sum, or combination of money and ‘in kind’ provisions in the form of fish.23 Thus, in 1363, Antonio Scambi prepared a lease agreement in which Benedetto, rector of S. Lorenzo de Pisciola (probably S. Lorenzo in Piscinula), agreed to rent out for ten years a fishery located at the foot of a tower named Polçelle on the Trastevere river bank, between a fishery belonging to Annibaldo di cecco and a water mill also owned by the church.24 The annual rent would be three florins, plus two shad with roe (lacce ovate) and two tender male shad (lacce lattinate).25 Similarly, across the Tiber, a third of a jointly-owned fishery beside the Marmorata was rented out to a fishmonger in 1369 for five florins to be paid at

christmas as well as two lacce ovate and two lacce lattinate delivered during Lent and again at Easter.26 here in this location was also one of the few privately-owned fisheries on the Tiber, called Maltiempo.27 its position is precisely defined in a document as ‘below the church of S. Sabina, beside Pons Fractus, with on one side the fishery called la Posta, on the side towards said church the river bank and a public way, in front the Marmorata port’, in much the same position therefore as those in Baccio Pontelli’s view (Fig. 13).28 in the late 1300s the fishery was in the hands of a lay consortium, but by the beginning of 1400s it had passed to the monastery of S. Alessio.29 in this section of the Tiber between the Marmorata and Trastevere, the Savelli, one of the prominent non-pescivendoli families of rione S. Angelo, owned at least three fisheries. They sold a half-share in these, 42 houses and one of the other productive structures on the Tiber, a floating grain mill, in 1368 for 800 florins.30 A fishery alone could be an item of considerable and enduring value. in the eleventh century, two fisheries were donated to S. Maria in Trastevere. Four centuries later at least one of them still belonged to the church and in 1446 was generating 75 florins a year in rent.31 Fisheries on the Tiber could not provide enough fish to supply the city, and sources outside Rome were more im-

16

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

portant. churches and pescivendoli were jointly involved in freshwater fisheries in places like Lago di Fogliano and near Torre Astura on the coast south of Rome, under the same sorts of ownership and lease arrangements as applied to the Tiber fisheries. in the 1360s, for example, the Roman churches of S. Eufemia and S. Giovanni in Laterano owned, or part-owned, fisheries in Lago di Fogliano, as did well-known Roman families such as the caetani and Annibaldi and pescivendoli such as the Gibelli and Ponziani. The interlinked deals involving these groups are well illustrated by an agreement negotiated late in 1368 between the Annibaldi, the monastery of S. Eufemia and the Roman pescivendolo, Pietro Paolo Ponziani. On 9 november the Annibaldi sold a fishery and the use of other fisheries or fishing positions in Lago di Fogliano, half to S. Eufemia and half to Ponziani.32 Two weeks later, S. Eufemia leased its half to Ponziani for a yearly rent of 45 florins and two deliveries of fish directly to their monastery in Rome—one during Lent and the second during Advent.33 As well, the parties agreed that if either wanted to sell their half-share at the end of the seven-year lease they had agreed to, they would offer it first to the other for a slightly lower price than might otherwise be possible on an open market.34

Roman pescivendoli were also dealing directly with marine fishermen in towns such as nettuno, Terracina, Ostia, Sperlonga, Gaeta and naples on the coast.35 They made loans to them and bought fish from them. Some of the loans may have been advance payments for future catches to be supplied to the pescivendolo, and all had strict conditions attached.36 Although such transactions involved non-Roman residents, the legal documents covering them were drawn up by Scambi and were often signed at S. Angelo.37 From the statutes of the Ars pescivendulorum, and to a lesser extent from Scambi’s records and proclamations issued by the city authorities (bandi),38 come the names of the fish arriving on the fish market benches. Most popular were shrimp, sardines, clams and small, silver fish called argentarielli.39 Brown meagre (umbrina), coastal leer fish (leccia), and even dolphins, were also available as well as highly-prized sturgeon and eels.40 The guild statutes also reveal that birds and small game were sold in the fish market—hares, pheasants, grey partridges, starlings and pigeons41—and that youths or servants (garzoni sive famulos) were paid an annual salary by pescivendoli to sell thrushes and blackbirds.42

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

17

S. Angelo in Pescheria and the Market The intimate bonds between S. Angelo in Pescheria and the fish market must have existed from the time when the piazza in front of the church developed into a market place, since the church held ownership of the basic infrastructure and facilities used by the market. According to ancient rights, the space in front of any church, up to a distance of thirty paces from the church façade, was considered an integral part of the building.43 consequently the piazza, the well at its centre, and the ancient propylaeum which had become the church porch were all deemed to be part of the church, and this was where the fish market was established. The fact that the piazza was called piazza di S. Angelo rather than piazza di Pescaria, the name by which it was known from the seventeenth century onwards,44 suggests that the church continued to hold firm rights over the piazza throughout the Middle Ages. The covered church porch was where many of the fish retailers’ marble display slabs were set out. These were pieces of marble retrieved from what would have been an abundant supply left over from the many ancient public buildings that once stood in the area. A typical one set

18

Fig. 14. E. Roesler Franz, Fishermen’s giornelli on the ruins of the Sublician Bridge near the Ripa Romea or port of Ripa Grande, before January 1883. Watercolour, 536 x 757 mm. Rome, Museo di Roma in Trastevere, MR24. (comune di Roma.) Fig. 15. Fishermen’s giornelli. Detail of Fig. 14.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 16. James Anderson, Panoramic view of the Tiber from the Aventine, c. 1860, detail. Photograph, albumen print, 182 x 253 mm. Museo del civiltà Romana, AF 1843, n. 640. (comune di Roma.) Fig. 17. Fishermen’s giornelli. Detail of Fig. 16.

upon a masonry base appears in a Roesler Franz watercolour (Fig. 18 and Frontispiece). The fish seller’s brass scales are laid out on top of it, with baskets of fish at its base and a simple wooden bench displaying fish beside it. The church owned the display slabs which was unusual because in other italian cities, slabs were traditionally owned by the fishmongers’ guild.45 isabella Salvagni has used archival sources to reconstruct the placement of stones in the church porch, along the narrow approach street via mercatoria (today via di Portico di Ottavia) and around the well during the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (Fig. 19).46 The stones hugged the church façade, the inner and outer surfaces of the porch, and both sides of via mercatoria. They were also placed on three sides of the well, the fourth being left free, presumably to permit access to the well. Over the course of the three centuries there was almost no change in the placement of benches, which probably occupied the same sites in the medieval period. As was the case with fisheries, although the canons of the church owned the display stones, they did not manage them. instead, they leased them to fishmongers who then frequently sublet them to small retailers. A large

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

19

(Left) Fig. 18. E. Roesler Franz, The Portico of Octavia, looking left, 1887. Watercolour, 783 x 562 mm. Signed lower right: ‘E. Roesler Franz – Roma 1887 ’. Rome, Museo di Roma in Trastevere, MR 37. (comune di Roma.) (Right) Fig. 19. Plan of bench placements in the sixteenth century. After Salvagni, 1997, fig. 6a.

number of these contracts survive from the fourteenth century, prepared once again by Antonio Scambi. Some state that the stones were to be let only to members of the Ars pescivendulorum, although this was not always the case in practice.47 The leases were initially for one year, but there was always the possibility of extension and they often rolled over from year to year.48 The right to the lease could also be handed on from father to son, as happened after the death of Pietro Çorre in 1363. his son, cecco, was given the lease of a stone his father had been using

20

which was adjacent to two stones he himself already had from the church.49 The rent for each stone was different: higher for the one whose lease he took over from his father (three florins, and a congio (16.42 l) of oil), and money alone for the other stones.50 cecco also paid an entratura (admission fee) of nineteen florins on entering into the lease.51 The factors which influenced the different rental prices charged for stones, in this case and generally in the market, must have been much the same as they would be in similar circumstances today: position, demand, and size.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

in addition, the price increased when the pope and curia were resident in Rome.52 Within the terms of a lease, however, fish sellers had some freedom in how they managed the stones. They could sell their right to manage a leased stone, reorganise or renovate their sale position, build and add other slabs, but could not cover their stall with a roof.53

The Ars Pescivendulorum and the Fish Market The origins of the fishmongers’ guild, the Ars pescivendulorum, are lost in history, but its formation was no doubt part of a pattern widespread throughout italy and Europe from the late twelfth century onwards, as tradesmen and businessmen banded together to protect and control their interests.54 The earliest reference appears in a Scambi record of 1363, where the notary referred to the recent election of the Ars consuls, Lello Gibelli and Giacomo della Balestra, by their fellow members.55 The Ars was organised in much the same way as other guilds of the time.56 it was headed by four elected officers—two consuls, a treasurer (camerlengo) and a collector of dues (cultor)—working with a notary, an executive officer (mandatarius), and a scriptor artis whose job was to record the daily movement of products through the market.57 Within the guild, there were two categories of members—the pescivendoli (fishmongers) involved in retail selling and the coctiatores, charged with conducting wholesale auctions (coctigium)—and there were clear rules on who could be admitted: in essence, only family members of those who already belonged.58 Anyone outside that circle needed the support of an existing member, and was required to pay a substantial entry fee.59 Membership was therefore exclusive, and closely controlled. The guild statutes have little to say about pescivendoli and the retail selling of fish, no doubt because the guild played little part in controlling it—other groups did. The canons of S. Angelo owned the retailers’ marble slabs and the location where the market operated, and city statutes (Statuta Urbis) ensured that the business of catching and selling fish was almost totally without restriction. They stated that anyone could fish anywhere, and that wholesale and retail selling could take place at any time in any place, except that the wholesale auction on Saturdays must be held in a public place.60 Retailers had no other expenses other than the rental cost of their marble slab, and only cartloads of fish were subject to tax upon entry into the city.61 This freedom suggests that a plentiful supply of fish was reaching the city.62 The guild did impose some constraints on the price of some of the most popular types of seafood, such as sardines

and clams.63 it also attempted to control the number and locations of fish markets in the city, although apparently with limited success. Fish arrived in Rome at places other than S. Angelo and the market locations approved by the guild in 1405 were at S. Angelo and at S. celso, in piazza di ponte at the head of Ponte S. Angelo.64 in 1481, the guild also approved a number of other locations, including at S. Maria ad Martyres.65 But this market had already been mentioned in a city proclamation in 1448.66 The guild pronouncement of 1481 therefore seems only to be acknowledging formally something which had been in place for considerable time. The role of the coctiatores was completely separate from that of the pescivendoli and emerges much more clearly from the guild statutes. The coctiatores held a central position in the organisation of the market, taking full responsibility for the daily selling of wholesale quantities of goods and for the proper conduct of bargaining and sales. Their role was not related to the system of supply, which the statutes do not mention at all, but began only when goods were received for auction. Then, they were obliged to auction all products worth more than three libri provisini among pescivendoli who were members of the guild.67 The coctiatores were to record goods received in an appropriate register,68 and convey the information to the scriptor artis before any auction took place.69 Such tasks suggest they worked as officials of the guild to oversee distribution to retailers.70 conduct of the auc-

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

21

tion itself was closely controlled, with the aim, it seems, of guaranteeing retail traders a fair and stable supply of goods.71 The coctiatores could not sell without the consent of the owner;72 fishmongers were to participate personally in auctions73 and could not act on anyone else’s behalf.74 The auction was to be held in public and there were to be no behind-the-counter deals, with the single exception that representatives of the pope were able to by-pass the auction and buy direct.75 From guild statutes emerges other information about the fish trade and commerce. There are references to an apprenticeship system for pescivendoli (novi scolares), although little detail is given.76 Many of the species of fish, birds and game that were offered for sale are named, and mention made of the little-known role of the bird-selling garzoni.77 it is apparent, too, that the guild was mindful of maintaining standards in the market setting down requirements that only those qualified could operate there;78 curbing handling operations around the time of feast days, when delays caused by religious observances might lead to the fish going bad and endangering public health;79 and banning night markets because of the danger posed to

22

public safety by the candles needed for illumination.80 The statutes also set down one important members’ obligation beyond the fish market—to participate, along with members of all other Artes in Rome, in the annual procession from the oratory of S. Lorenzo ad Sancta Sanctorum de Urbe to S. Maria Maggiore on 15 August, the feast of the Assumption of the Virgin.81

Pescivendoli Families and their Networks in 1363, Lello Gibelli and Giacomo della Balestra were elected consuls of the Ars pescivendulorum; among the guild members eligible to vote were three members of the Ponziani family, a second Gibelli and a Grassi.82 The same family names appear in the 1405 Statutes. Saba Grassi (Sabbas Petrutii Grassi) was then serving as a consul, his brother nucio (Nutius Petrutii Grassi) was one of the elected officials, and a Gibelli and a Ponziani were among the guild members. By now, though, the Tozoli family was becoming prominent, providing, like the Grassi, a consul and elected official as well as three ordinary members.83

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Left) Fig. 20. Ettore Roesler Franz, The Portico of Octavia, looking right, 1887. Watercolour, 530 x 754 mm. Signed lower left ‘E. Roesler Franz – Roma 1887 / Portico d’Ottavia’. Rome, Museo di Roma in Trastevere, MR 36. (comune di Roma.) The entrance door of the Grassi tower, framed with re-used marble pieces, is visible immediately beyond the arch. The fish slab is probably the one mentioned in Merilia’s 1363 will. (Right) Fig. 21. The former Grassi tower, October 2010. (© Julie Rowe 2013.)

The longstanding involvement of families such as these in the rione and in fish selling is well illustrated in Scambi’s records. The connections of the pescivendolo Pietro Paulo di iacobello de Paolo Grassi are typical. A Scambi document of 1363 deals with betrothal arrangements being made on Pietro’s behalf by his mother, Francesca, widow of pescivendolo iacobello.84 Around the same time, Pietro’s paternal grandmother, Merilia Pantaleoni, from another prominent pescivendoli family, was having Scambi draw up her will.85 Merilia was the widow of Paolo Grassi, also a pescivendolo. She lived in rione S. Angelo near the church of the same name in premises beneath the tower where her grandson Pietro and his brother lived. The building was provided with a fish seller’s slab in front of it, and direct access to a public thoroughfare.86 The entrance door of the Grassi tower, framed with re-used marble pieces, is visible immediately beyond the arch in another view by Roesler Franz (Fig. 20) where the fish slab is probably the one mentioned in Merilia’s 1363 will.87 The tower is still recognisable at Via di Portico di Ottavia no. 25 (Fig. 21). Like many others in pescivendoli families, Merilia also made provision for ten florins to be given to S. Angelo in Pescheria when she died so that prayers could be offered for her soul.88 By 1363, the Grassi family had been involved in the rione, church and fish market for two generations, and was continuing into a third through Pietro. his name is on the list of pescivendoli electors in 1363,89 and he brought as part of his dowry agreement a half-share in the fishery called ‘lo Capitello’ and rights over three marble fish slabs placed at S. Angelo, as well as houses, vineyards and the family tower house already mentioned.90 Two of the three slabs at S. Angelo are perhaps the same ones which, the following year, became the subject of litigation between Pietro Paolo’s widowed mother Francesca and her husband’s great nephew, Petruccio di nucio Macthutti Pauli Grassi.91 it was a decade before Petruccio won out over Francesca and secured leases for the two slabs from the church for his own lifetime and those of his sons, born

and yet to be born.92 Two of these sons are the Saba and nucio who appeared in the preamble to the 1405 Statutes as consul and elected official respectively, continuing into at least a fifth generation the involvement of the Grassi in the fish market of Rome. Like Grassi family members, many other pescivendoli leased stones from S. Angelo in Pescheria: Pietro Paolo Ponziani, for example, had rights over a number.93 They leased fisheries in Rome and elsewhere, and the Ponziani and Gibelli families, in particular, were involved in the financial side of fish supply, offering loans and advance payments to marine fishermen.94 in 1363, Lello Gibelli was a consul of the Ars pescivendulorum, and his son, Andreozzo among the eligible electors.95 While obviously busy with business in Rome, these two were also actively sourcing fish and making deals outside the city, in the process expanding their family’s wealth and influence. in December 1367, Lello took out a two-year lease of two pescarie in Lago di Fogliano; a month later, he sublet them to a resident of Sermoneta and his nephew from nettuno, almost certainly a fisherman.96 A decade later, Lello was signing off on a deal in Astura, buying the product and annual income of a fishery from Giordano Orsini’s agent, together with access to a river and a footbridge across it.97 Meanwhile, Andreozzo was also managing a fishery in Lago di Fogliano positioned next to one of the pair leased by his father. This he sublet in 1369 for ten years to some fishermen from Sermoneta. There were also Ponziani

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

23

interests at Lago di Fogliano. Pietro Paolo de Andreozzo Ponziani bought a half share in a fishery there in 1368; the other half, owned by the monastery of S. Eufemia in Rome, he was able to lease less than a month later.98 Around the same time, Lello de nucio Ponziani in 1367 acquired rights to seaside opportunities from the Universitas del rione Arenula: a three-year lease of fisheries and sea access (piscaries et plagiis maris) in and around Civitas Vetula (civitavecchia).99 The Ars pescivendulorum statutes allowed for the selling of birds and small game in the fish market. These licenses were supplied through the same sorts of networks as fish, with the pescivendoli controlling hunting and hunters in much the same way as they did fishing and fishermen, by purchasing woods and forests, or leasing rights for hunting and fowling.100 Thus, Andreozzo Gibelli leased out for the Lenten period woodlands and bird hunting rights he held at Portus,101 and Petrucio di nucio Grassi signed a lease for bird hunting in the woods at Maccarese, castel di Guido, Leprignano (now capena) and Testa di Lepre, a lease he managed to take up after Lello Gibelli had relinquished it.102 in the same period, the late 1360s, Lello and his Gibelli family’s interests had already gone beyond the fish market. he leased a farm (casale) called ‘l’Arnarocco’ from S. Saba, part of which he rented out for wheat cropping,

24

(Left) Fig. 22. S. Angelo in Pescheria, cappella di S. Andrea. (Right) Fig. 23. S. Angelo in Pescheria, cappella di S. Andrea, arms of the Ars pescivendulorum. (Wikimedia commons.)

and part as winter pasture to a butcher for which he received in return ten florins and a steer.103 Lello’s brother, nuccio, was more interested in sheep breeding. in 1367 nuccio joined with a Trasteverine butcher to winter 1500 sheep ‘nel territorio del comitto di Celano’. The following year, he acquired winter pasture from the Bishop of Porto on a farm outside Porta Portuense.104 These three pescivendoli families—the Grassi, Gibelli and Ponziani—offer typical examples not only of the continuity of family involvement in Rome’s fish trade, but also the multi-faceted nature of some pescivendoli family interests.

Conclusion The fish market continued to operate at S. Angelo in Pescheria until the late nineteenth century when it was relocated to make way for construction of the embankments and for the clearing of the adjacent Jewish area

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

which, for four centuries from 1555, had been turned into Rome’s ghetto. creation of the ghetto had served to strengthen the bonds between church and market because the Ars pescivendulorum church, S. Leonardo, was one of several churches deconsecrated as the area was given over to Jewish residents.105 Late in the sixteenth century, on 25 February 1579, the canons of S. Angelo granted the Ars a perpetual lease over the right aisle of their church in which to establish a new chapel (Fig. 22). This was fittingly dedicated to St Andrew the fisherman, their patron saint, and decorated with painted and relief depictions of the fish offered for sale and with the arms of the Ars set into the marble floor (Fig. 23).106 Around the middle of the nineteenth century, the English traveller Sir George head was in Rome recording, in lively detail, all he was seeing and experiencing. The fish market at S. Angelo in Pescheria was one of the places he visited. head begins his commentary by pointing out the many advantages of the market’s location, its proximity to the Tiber, and the importance of fish in the Roman christian diet because it was ‘a main article of food on fast-days’.107 Then, not without some distaste, he describes its atmosphere and the typical, everyday activities he witnessed: no matter what the season of the year, the ground, whether the weather be wet or dry, is covered almost continually, owing to the traffic with the river, with a uniform layer, ankle-deep, of black mud, and the fish are exposed for sale under disadvantages not to be equalled in any other civilised country. Upon temporary stalls, or rather upon a temporary substitute for stalls, of slabs to lay fish upon, such as the lid of an ancient sarcophagus, or a monumental tablet of a later period, propped up by a capital of an ancient column, or a hewn block of travertino belonging to some ancient building, the fish, even of the best quality, brought to market, are exposed unwashed, in the most revolting condition; and there is frequently a public sale in the middle of the piazza, where dog-fish, cat-fish, &c. are sold to the lower classes, first being shot to the ground from the boats on the banks of the river, assorted into lots, in scores or more, fastened, by twigs passed through the gills, together, and dragged to the place of auction,—arrive there in precisely the same filthy state as if they had passed through the kennel.108

The ‘temporary stalls’ may not have been nearly as temporary as head thought but otherwise little seems to have changed from when the fish market was first established. The location was still seen as favourably close to the Tiber, and fish remained important in the diet of Rome’s mostly christian population; it was still sold in wholesale

and retail quantities in front of and around S. Angelo in Pescheria. There is no doubt that the riverbank activity, the sorting into lots, the mud and the unwashed state of the fish, however unpleasant for the nineteenth-century English visitor, would also have been common sights in Rome’s fish market during the Middle Ages. La Trobe University, School of Humanities

Notes 1. Pini, 1975, pp . 330–31; Lanconelli, 1985, pp. 90–91, 93 and note 28; Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, pp. 83, 92. consumption of meat was proscribed during Lent and Advent; on Fridays (a tradition which survives) and Saturdays; on the eve of the main feast days; and on Wednesdays in June, September and november to ensure that the months’ harvests of grain, grapes and olives respectively would be bountiful (Pini, 1975, p. 331). 2. Marcus Terentius Varro (116–27 BcE), De lingua latina quae supersunt, V.146–47; Titus Livius (59 BcE–cE 17), Ab urbe condita, XXVi.27.2; capogrossi-Guarna, 1877–78, pp. 421–28; Salvagni, 1997, p. 91; Terlizzi, 1949, p. 137. 3. Proia and Romano, 1935, pp. 20–21; Krautheimer, 1980, pp. 271–72 and figure 193a. 4. Esposito, 1999, p. 51. 5. 1481 Addendum to the 1405 Statuta pescivendulorum Urbis (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 125). 6. Krautheimer, 1937, pp. 66–76. The Porticus Octaviae was built around 27 BcE and dedicated by Augustus to his sister Octavia. it was a rectangular colonnaded structure enclosing temples, Greek and Latin libraries, public sculpture and the curia Octaviae where the Senate is believed to have met (Platner and Ashby, 1929, p. 427; Richardson, 1992, pp. 317–18; coarelli, 2007, pp. 271–72). 7. coarelli, 2007, p. 262; Richardson, 1992, p. 419. 8. coarelli, 2007, p. 262; Fagiolo and Madonna, 1985, pp. 26–27. 9. ciancio Rossetto, 2008, where the author presents initial findings from archaeological campaigns in 1995–96 and 2003–4. 10. ciancio Rossetto, 2008, p. 421–22. 11. ciancio Rossetto, 2008, note 10 on p. 421. 12. ciancio Rossetto, 2008, p. 421–22. 13. ‘et per porticum usque ad Sanctum Angelum et templum Iovis’. (Valentini and Zucchetti, 1940–53, vol. 2, p. 170). The ‘porticum’ was a remaining section of the southern colonnade of the Porticus of Octavia (cf. Fig. 7). 14. ‘S. Angelo where fish are sold’: hülsen, 1927, p. 196. 15. The Statuta pescivendulorum Urbis and Addenda of 1473, 1475, 1477 and 1481 are published in Lanconelli, 1985, pp. 105–31. 16. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, S. Angelo in Pescheria, 1, i–XXii. The Scambi records consist of 22 registers of Antonio and 3 of his son, Lorenzo (Lori Sanfilippo, 1994, pp. 241–42). For dates of coverage, see Lanconelli, 1985, note 25 on p. 90. 17. Statute 36 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 117). See also Re (1928, p. 88) for a list of various types of fish available in the city in 1447. 18. For example, ‘usum piscarie … seu lacum piscandi positam in lacu Fogliani’ (1368 Scambi record in Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 98). 19. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 82 on p. 94. 20. The name, still in use today, is a reference to the vast quantities of marble which were offloaded there (Richardson, 1992, p. 244; coarelli, 2007, p. 335). 21. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 85.

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

25

22. Roesler Franz, 2007, p. 48, pp. 232–33. 23. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, pp. 94–95. 24. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 95. S. Lorenzo in Piscinula stood at the head of Pons S. Mariae on the Trastevere bank (Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 86 on p. 95). The water mills, powered by the flow of the Tiber, remained a feature of the river from their first use in the sixth century until the embankments were built at the end of the nineteenth (cf. Fig. 4). 25. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 95. identification of fish from Brentano 1990, p. 44. Shad are members of the herring family. 26. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 96.

many aspects of a given occupation: training and entry, working conditions, competition from within and outside the community, and relations between those associated in the guild and higher feudal, civic, or ecclesiastical authorities.’ 55. See Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 28 on p. 84 for a list of Ars members in Scambi’s document. 56. Byrne, 2004, p. 477; Lanconelli, 1985, p. 94. 57. Ars pescivendulorum Statutes 1–4 (Lanconelli, 1985, pp. 106–7). 58. Statute 11 (Lanconelli, 1985, pp. 109–10). On the derivation of ‘coctigium’, see Lanconelli, 1985, note 39 on p. 92; Salvagni 1997, note 30 on p. 100. 59. Statute 11 (Lanconelli, 1985, pp. 109–10).

27. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 95 on p. 96. Fisheries, like mills, were named, and a decade earlier Maltiempo had been called Marmorata. 28. ‘suptus ecclesiam S. Sabine, iuxta pontem Fractum, cui ab uno latere est piscaria que dicitur la Posta, ab alio versus dictam ecclesiam est ripa fluminis et via publica’; ‘ante est portus Marmorata’ (Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 95 on p. 96). in this period, ‘Pons Fractus’ referred to Pons Theodosius, the southernmost ancient bridge spanning the Tiber. it was partially destroyed in the eleventh century, hence the name, and then almost entirely obliterated late in the fifteenth century under Sixtus iV (Richardson, 1992, pp. 298-299) 29. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 96. 30. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, pp. 96–97. 31. Robbins, 1989, p. 252 and document 39 (p. 450). The rent for this fishery was equal to that received from some of the church’s more important rural properties (Robbins, 1989, p. 252).

60. ‘Quilibet civis Romanus et de eius districtu possit libere piscari in cursu fluminis et in mari et in aliis quibuscunque locis Urbis et eius districtu’ (Re, 1880, statute 123, p. 79); ‘quod coctigium piscium et emptio de die et de nocte fieri possit ubicunque … in die autem sabbati non possit vendi nisi in foro publico durante.’ (Re, 1880, statute 125, p. 80) and ‘Quilibet possit vendere absolute in Urbe in qualibet parte Urbis pisces, palumbos salvaticina et omnes aves’ (Re, 1880, statute 124, p. 80). 61. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 93. 62. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 93. This conclusion is supported by the fact that, in the city statutes of 1363, the year in which Scambi first recorded the existence of the Ars pescivendulorum, there are few references to fish and fish selling, a notable absence in a city where ensuring adequate food supplies was of constant concern (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 92). 63. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 102.

32. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, pp. 98–99: ‘piscariam et usum piscarie seu lacum piscandi positam in lacu Fogliani’.

64. Statute 43 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 118).

33. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 99.

66. Re, 1928, p. 97. The record also confirms that the wholesale market was still, and only, being held at S. Angelo.

34. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 99. 35. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, notes 73–75 on p. 92, note 78 on p. 93. 36. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 93. 37. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 93. 38. Re, 1928, p. 88, p. 95. 39. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 102, and Statute 25 (p. 113), Statutes 33–34 (p.116), and Statute 36 (pp. 116–17), and the 1473 Addendum (p. 130). See also Re, 1928, p. 88, p. 95.

65. 1481 Addendum (Lanconelli, 1985, pp. 126 and 129)

67. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 96 and Statute 38 (p. 117). The Roman Senate adopted the denier provinois (minted in the market town of Provins in champagne) in the mid-twelfth century. it issued its own copy, the denaro provisino (senatus), once a Roman mint was established in 1184. Two hundred and forty denari provisini equalled one libro provisino. (Postan and Miller, 1987, pp. 866-867; holstein, 2006, p. 36). 68. Statutes 6 and 7 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 108). 69. Statute 51 (Lanconelli, 1985, pp. 120–21).

40. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 102 and notes 75 and 76.

70. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 97.

41. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 102 and Statute 38 (p. 117) and the 1481 Addendum (p. 126).

71. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 95.

42. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 100, the 1473 Addendum (p. 129) and 1481 Addendum (p. 126).

73. Statute 14 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 110).

43. Salvagni, 1997, p. 100. The archival evidence uses the term ‘dieci canne’ which Salvagni equates to forty paces (Salvagni 1997, p. 100 and note 27 on p. 100). The canna is an old measure of length which differed according to the locality in which it was used. in medieval Rome, one canna architettonica was equal to 2.234 m (Zupko, 1981, p. 63). 44. Salvagni, 1997, p. 100.

72. Statute 8 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 109). 74. Statute 13 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 110). 75. Lanconelli, 1985, note 53 on p. 95 and Statutes 48 and 49 (p. 120). 76. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 100 and Statute 11, pp. 109-110. 77. Addendum of 5 December 1481 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 126, and p. 100). 78. Statute 15 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 110–11). 79. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 101 and 1475 Addendum (p. 122).

45. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 99. 46. Salvagni, 1997, figs. 6a–c. 47. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 87 and Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 46 on p. 87.

80. Statute 37 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 117) and 1477 Addendum (Lanconelli, 1985, pp. 123–24).

49. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, pp. 87–88. The stone in question was described as being beside a church buttress on which a figure of S. christopher was painted.

81. Statute 21 (Lanconelli, 1985, p. 112) and Lanconelli, 1985, note 66 on p. 98. See also Pavan 1978 for discussion of the confraternity of the Raccomandati del Salvatore a Sancta Sanctorum (and its Statutes) under whose auspices the procession took place.

50. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 88. A congio at this time was equal to 16.42 litres (Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 50 on p. 88).

82. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 28 on p. 84. 83. Lanconelli, 1985, p. 105.

51. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 88.

84. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 83.

52. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 89.

85. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 83 and note 61 on p. 90.

53. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, pp. 90–91. At this time the propylaeum roof was still intact, making individual roofs in many cases unnecessary, but by the end of the sixteenth century it had become unstable and was removed rather than repaired.

86. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 83.

48. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 91.

54. Byrne, 2004, p. 476: ‘By joining together members of guild could regulate

26

87. Pietrangeli, 1976, p. 38. According to Pietrangeli, it is a thirteenth-century construction, but Tomassetti places it in the fourteenth (Francesco Tomassetti, ‘Le torri medievali’, unpublished manuscript cited by Katermaa-Ottela, 1981, p. 58).

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

88. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 24 on p. 83. 89. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 28 on p. 84. 90. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 86. 91. cf. the Grassi family tree in Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 61 on p. 90. 92. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 90. 93. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, pp. 91–92, 98–99. 94. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 93. 95. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 28 on p. 84. 96. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 97. 97. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 97.

Katermaa-Ottela, 1981: Aino Katermaa-Ottela, Le casetorri medievali in Roma (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum, 67), helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica, 1981. Krautheimer, 1937: Richard Krautheimer, Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae: Le basiliche Cristiane antiche de Roma (Sec. IV–IX), vol. 1, città del Vaticano: Pontificio istituto di Archeologia cristiana, 1937. Krautheimer, 1980: Richard Krautheimer, Rome: profile of a city, 312–1308, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980. Lanconelli, 1985: Angela Lanconelli, ‘Gli Statuta pescivendulorum Urbis (1405). note sul commercio del pesce a Roma tra XiV e XV secolo’, Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria, vol. 108, 1985, pp. 83–131. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992: isa Lori Sanfilippo, ‘Per la storia delle arti a Roma (da una ricerca sui protocolli notarili). i. L’Ars Pescivendulorum nella seconda metà del XiV secolo’, Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria, vol. 115, 1992, pp. 79–114.

98. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, pp. 98–99. 99. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 100. 100. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 102. 101. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 102. 102. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, note 119 on p. 102. 103. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 103. 104. Lori Sanfilippo, 1992, p. 103.

Lori Sanfilippo, 1994: isa Lori Sanfilippo, ‘Un “luoco famoso” nel medioevo, una chiesa oggi poco nota: notizie extravaganti su S. Angelo in Pescheria (Vi–XX secolo)’, Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria, vol. 117, 1994, pp. 231–68. Pavan, 1978: Paola Pavan, ‘Gli Statuti della Società dei Raccomandati del Salvatore ad Sancta Sanctorum (1331–1496)’, Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria, vol. 101, 1978, pp. 35–96.

105. Salvagni, 1997, p. 113. 106. Salvagni, 1997, p. 115. 107. head, 1849, vol. 1, p. 403.

Pietrangeli, 1976: carlo Pietrangeli (ed.), Rione XI—S. Angelo, third ed. (Guide rionali di Roma, 11), Rome: Fratelli Palombi Editori, 1976.

108. head, 1849, vol. 1, p. 403.

Pini, 1975: Antonio ivan Pini, ‘Pesce, pescivendoli e mercanti di pesce in Bologna medievale’, Il Carrobbio, anno 1, 1975, pp. 329–49.

Bibliography

Platner and Ashby, 1929: Samuel B. Platner, and Thomas Ashby, A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, London: Oxford University Press, 1929.

Bauer, 2004: F. A. Bauer, Das Bild der Stadt Rom im Frühmittelalter: Papststiftungen im Spiegel des Liber Pontificalis von Gregor dem Dritten bis zu Leo dem Dritten (Palilia, vol. 14), Wiesbaden: L. Reichert, 2004. Byrne, 2004: Joseph P. Byrne, s.v. ‘Guilds’ in c. Kleinhenz (ed.), Medieval Italy: an encyclopedia, new York and London: Routledge, 2004, vol. 1, pp. 476–79. Capogrossi-Guarna, 1877–78: Baldassarre capogrossi-Guarna, ‘il mercato del pesce a Roma. cenni storici’, Il Buonarrotti, series ii, vol. 12, nos. 11–12, 1877–78, pp. 421–40. Ciancio Rossetto, 2008: Paola ciancio Rossetto, ‘Portico d’Ottavia— Sant’Angelo in Pescheria: nuove acquisizioni sulle fasi medievali’, Rivista di archeologia cristiana, vol. 84, 2008, pp. 415–37. Coarelli, 2007: Filippo coarelli, Rome and Environs: an archaeological guide, Berkeley: University of california Press, 2007. Egger, 1905–6: hermann Egger, with christan hülsen and Adolf Michaelis, codex Escurialensis: Ein Skizzenbuch aus der Werkstatt Domenico Ghirlandaios, 2 vols., Vienna: A. hölder, 1905–6 (reprint Soest, Davaco Publishers). Esposito, 1999: Anna Esposito, ‘Gli ebrei e l’isola Tiberina’, L’Acqua, no. 3, pp. 51–53. Fagiolo and Madonna, 1985: Marcello Fagiolo and Maria Luisa Madonna (eds.), Roma 1300–1875. La città degli anni santi. Atlante, Milan: Arnoldo Mondadori, 1985. Head, 1849: George head, Rome: a tour of many days, 3 vols., London: Longman, Brown and Longmans, 1849. Holstein, 2006: Alizah holstein, ‘Rome during Avignon: myth, memory, and civic identity in fourteenth-century Roman politics’, PhD diss., cornell University, 2006. Hülsen, 1927: christian hülsen, Le Chiese di Roma nel Medio Evo: cataloghi ed apunti, hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1927.

Postan and Miller, 1987: Michael M. Postan and Edward Miller (eds.), The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, second ed., vol. 2, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 1987. Proia and Romano, 1935: Alfredo Proia and P. Romano, S. Angelo (XI Rione), Roma: Tipografia Agostiniana, 1935. Re, 1880: Emilio Re, Statuti della città di Roma, Roma: Tipografia della Pace. Re, 1928: Emilio Re, ‘Bandi Romani’, Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria, vol. 51, 1928, pp. 79–101. Richardson, 1992: Lawrence Richardson, A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, Baltimore and London: The Johns hopkins University Press, 1992. Robbins, 1989: Deborah K. Robbins, A Case Study of Medieval Urban Process: Rome’s Trastevere (1250–1450), PhD Diss., University of california, Berkeley, 1989. Roesler Franz, 2007: Ettore Roesler Franz, Paesaggi della memoria: gli acquerelli romani di Ettore Roesler Franz dal 1876 al 1895 / Landscapes of Memory: the Roman watercolours of Ettore Roesler Franz, 1876–95, exh. cat., Florence: Mandragora, 2007. Salvagni, 1997: isabella Salvagni, ‘La Pescaria presso il Portico d’Ottavia a Roma: il propileo severiano, la chiesa di Sant’Angelo, la cappella di Sant’Andrea, l’oratorio dei Pescivendoli’, Rivista storica del Lazio, no. 7, 1997, pp. 91–133. Terlizzi, 1949: Mario Terlizzi, ‘Mercato del pesce a Roma’, Capitolium, vol. 24, nos. 5/6, 1949, pp. 137–44. Valentini and Zucchetti, 1940–53: Roberto Valentini and Giuseppe Zucchetti (eds.), foreword by Pietro Fedele, Codice topografico della cità di Roma, 4 vols., Rome: Tipografia del Senato, 1940–53. Zupko, 1981: Ronald E. Zupko, Italian Weights and Measures from the Middle Ages to the Nineteenth Century, Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1981.

Julie Rowe: : Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria

27

28

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 2 Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia from Piazza di Porta Capena to Porta San Sebastiano Joan Barclay Lloyd

There have been many historical and topographical studies of the city of Rome. Some writers have focused on the ancient city;1 others have described medieval Rome;2 and still others have viewed the city’s development in Renaissance, Baroque, and modern times.3 The approach here is different. instead of concentrating on the city at a particular time, this study looks in detail at a particular place—the short stretch of the Via Appia from Piazza di Porta capena to Porta San Sebastiano. Structures dating from antiquity to the present time stand along this section of the ancient road, which has itself been transformed over the centuries. Built at different times, these monuments reflect varied aspects of the city’s past. This study begins by looking at the late nineteenth and early twentieth-century attempt to enhance the archaeological aspects of this area for discerning visitors, so that they could stroll down the road as in a Passeggiata Archeologica. it then concentrates on the interplay of memory, myth, and meaning in this particular place associated with ancient monuments, medieval nunneries, and Baroque restorations of early christian and medieval churches (for example at SS. nereo ed Achilleo, left). it seeks to reveal interesting traces of Rome’s past that survive in buildings and ruins, or are known only from early literature, inscriptions, old images, and place-names. Today from Piazza di Porta capena the ancient Via Appia (now named ‘Viale delle Terme di caracalla’) runs to a road junction called Piazzale numa Pompilio, and then, as ‘Via di San Sebastiano’, to Porta Appia (now called ‘Porta San Sebastiano’) (Figs. 6 and 8 [3] [21] [23]). Until recently the first part of the road was called the ‘Passeggiata Archeologica’, since it was part of the ‘archaeological walk’, laid out in the early years of the twentieth century.4 The idea of having an archaeological garden-park in Rome, extending from the capitoline hill to Porta Appia goes back to the Frenchman, camille de Tournon, who was in the city in 1810 during the napoleonic occupation. he Frontispiece: Rome, SS. nereo ed Achilleo, interior. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

envisaged a large area where foreign visitors could stroll among the ruins, experiencing the grandeur of the ancient city and the beauty of a southern Mediterranean garden with umbrella pines and other typical trees and shrubs. After the unification of italy, Guido Baccelli in 1883 promoted his own vision of this park within the Master Plan (Piano Regolatore) of Rome as an area free of modern buildings, where one could visit ancient sites such as the Palatine, the circus Maximus, the Baths of caracalla, and the Via Appia as far as the Porta San Sebastiano (Figs. 2 and 4).5 A law passed on 14 July 1887 sanctioned the project, although no funding was provided to execute it. in the meantime Rome had become the capital of italy, and was expanding rapidly, as its population doubled in size, but the area defined by Baccelli would not be covered with new buildings. Eventually, the government provided money to finance the archaeological park in July 1907, and in May 1908 the work was placed under the direction of Baccelli, Giacomo Boni and Rodolfo Lanciani. The latter had recently completed his archaeological map of ancient Rome, his Forma Urbis Romae (Fig. 6). One can contrast this with Giambattista nolli’s eighteenth-century map of

Fig. 1. View of umbrella pines along the Via Appia today, part of the Passeggiata Archeologica. (© Joan Barclay Lloyd 2013.)

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

29

Rome (Fig. 8). numbers superimposed on these maps indicate the main points along the Via Appia discussed here. Lanciani, in an article in the Athenaeum dated 7 October 1911, tried to justify the scheme for the archaeological park by assuring his readers that ‘the object of the law is to secure—for archaeological, historical, aesthetic and artistic reasons—as much classic ground as the six and a half million lire placed at our disposal will allow us to rescue within certain limits of space set down by Parliament.’6 he noted that the archaeological park would include ‘groves of classic trees, and avenues and shady lanes’. indeed, more than 6,000 trees were transplanted (Fig. 1), and a garden, ‘cut in squares by a network of paths crossing each other at right angles and lined with walls of laurel, myrtle and box’, was laid out within the precincts of the Baths of caracalla.7 Lanciani outlined the geographical

30

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Opposite above) Fig. 2. Piano Regolatore of Rome, 1887. Detail of proposed archaeological park, from the Palatine and colosseum (top) to the Baths of caracalla and Porta S. Sebastiano (bottom). (Opposite below) Fig. 3. The restructured ‘Casino Vignola’ at the modern Piazza di Porta capena. (© Joan Barclay Lloyd 2013.) (Above) Fig. 4. Panorama of the City of Rome, fourth plate. View from the Palatine towards SS. Giovanni e Paolo, S. Gregorio Magno, with the Baths of Caracalla, S. Sisto and Porta S. Sebastiano beyond, London, S. and J. Fuller, 1827. Etching and aquatint with hand colouring. London, British Museum, 1907,1217.1. (Below) Fig. 5. The house of cardinal Bessarion on the Via Appia. (© Joan Barclay Lloyd 2013.)

extent of this planned archaeological showpiece (Figs. 2, 4): ‘The Passeggiata Archeologica, as the Park is popularly called, includes the whole length of the Sacra Via, from the capitol to the colosseum, the imperial Fora, the Palace of the caesars, the Baths of Titus and Trajan, the northern and western slopes of the caelian, the eastern and southern slopes of the lesser Aventine, and the valley between these hills, from the circus Maximus to the three gates of the Aurelian Wall, the Metronia, the Latina and the Appia ...’.8 The ancient monuments included those on the Roman Forum, the Temple of claudius, the Servian Walls, the nymphaeum of Juturna, the crypt of the Scipios, the columbarium of hylas, the tombs of the Vigna codini and the great gates of Aurelian and honorius.9 in the midst of these vestiges of ancient Rome there still rose the historic churches of SS. Giovanni e Paolo and S. Gregorio Magno on the caelian hill, as well as SS. nereo ed Achilleo, S. cesario and S. Sisto Vecchio along the Via Appia, which would remain.10 Lanciani thought ‘future explorers’ of the park might make surprising discoveries by unearthing ancient and later buildings in the area. A major constraint, however, was the existing road network, with its heavy traffic, a perennial problem in Rome.11 Finally, after prolonged planning and labour, on 21 April 1917 the Passeggiata Archeologica was officially opened. From the start the scheme drew lots of criticism, especially when it became apparent that many medieval and later buildings would be demolished—such as the sixteenth-century casino Vignola at the foot of the Aventine hill. This was later reconstructed at Piazza di

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

31

Porta capena, where the present monument is rather a strange reminder of the earlier structure, and appears to have no modern function (Fig. 3). Giuseppe Tomassetti complained in 1910 that mines and dynamite had been used to destroy historic structures for the archaeological zone envisaged by Baccelli.12 Besides the casino Vignola a famous Osteria at Porta capena was demolished (Figs. 6 and 8 [11] [15]). Besides, it seemed to Tomassetti that the area had merely been converted into a modern park, like those in Vienna and Paris. in 1924, the archaeologist Giuseppe Lugli echoed Tomassetti’s evaluation, when he remarked that a walk had certainly been created, but it was not very archaeological: ‘che si era realizzata una passeggiata si, ma poco archeologica’.13 To give the planners their due, however, some unsightly modern buildings, such as the gasometro, or gasworks, which had been erected in the middle of the circus Maximus, were also removed, and the fifteenth-century ‘house of cardinal Bessarion’ along the Via Appia was restored to its historical form (Fig. 5).14 it must be acknowledged that the appearance of the urban section of the ancient Via Appia was changed through the interventions of Baccelli, Boni and Lanciani. There is also even more traffic now than Lanciani complained about. Despite all this, it is still worth examining the Via Appia from Piazza di Porta capena to Porta San

32

(Above) Fig. 6. Rodolfo Lanciani, Forma Urbis Romae, 1893–1901, plates 35-36, 41–42, with additional labelling (see Fig. 8). (Below) Fig. 7. Map of the Augustan Regions of Rome, detail, showing Region i, Porta Capena; Region ii, Caeliomontium; and Region Xii, Piscina Publica.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Sebastiano, as it runs along the valley between the caelian hill and the southern spur of the Aventine hill, also known as the ‘Little Aventine’ (Figs. 2 and 3). The ancient Via Appia began at the city gate, called Porta capena, in the Republican ‘Servian’ city walls near the curved end of the circus Maximus (Figs. 6 and 8 [3] [1]); the gate no longer exists, but J. h. Parker uncovered some parts of it in 1867–68.15 Within the late antique city the road ran to Porta Appia (later renamed ‘Porta San Sebastiano’) in the Aurelian city walls, originally built in 271–75 cE and modified later (Figs. 6 and 8 [23]). From there the road eventually went to Taranto in one branch, and in another all the way to Brindisi at the southern tip of italy. The carriageway was originally only about 14 Roman feet (4.12 m) wide, with additional space for pedestrians on either side.16 The surface at first was made of gravel, but in 296 BcE it was paved from Porta capena to the temple of Mars, which stood just beyond the present Porta San Sebastiano.17 it appears that from about the early first century the road from the city to the temple was also provided with covered colonnaded porticoes to protect pedestrians from the weather.18 Later, in the early third century the Emperor caracalla built a new road, the Via nova, parallel to part of the Via Appia, which was almost three times as wide, and led to the baths he

Fig. 8. Giambattista nolli, Map of Rome, 1748, detail, oriented to correspond with Fig. 6, with additional labelling. 1. Ancient Porta capena 2. Via nova 3. Via Appia 4. Baths of caracalla 5. Modern Piazza di Porta capena 6. Temple of honos et Virtus and altar to Fortuna Redux 7. Approximate site of mutatorium 8. Septizonium 9. Modern Piazzale numa Pompilio 10. Fons camenae 11. casina Vignola (original site)

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

12. Marrana (Mariana) 13. SS. Giovanni e Paolo 14. S. Gregorio Magno 15. Osteria at Porta capena 16. S. Maria ad Tempulo 17. S. Sisto 18. SS. nereo ed Achilleo 19. S. cesareo 20. house of cardinal Bessarion 21. Junction of Via S. Sebastiano and Via S. Giovanni Latina 22. Mill on the property of S. Sisto 23. Porta S. Sebastiano (nolli only)

33

was constructing (Figs. 6 and 8 [2] and [4]).19 Today the urban part of the Via Appia, with six lanes of traffic, is called ‘Viale delle Terme di caracalla’ from Piazza di Porta capena to Piazzale numa Pompilio, and then ‘Via di San Sebastiano’, with a much narrower track of only two lanes, up to the gate of that name (Figs. 6 and 8 [5] [9] [23]). At Piazzale numa Pompilio it separates from the ancient Via Latina, now ‘Via di Porta Latina’ (Fig. 9). The place where the Via Appia began is remembered in the name of the modern intersection, called ‘Piazza di Porta capena’, at the foot of the Palatine and caelian hills (Figs. 6 and 8 [5]).20 Evidently, two early aqueducts, the Appia and the Marcia, were carried over the ancient city gate here. (They apparently leaked, making the gate notorious for its humidity.) Besides, the Porta capena lent its name to the first of the fourteen regions into which Augustus (27 BcE–14 cE) divided Rome for administrative purposes in 7 BcE (Fig. 7).21 These regions continued to be important in late antiquity, when they were described in the so called Regionary catalogues, the Notitia Urbis Romae Regionum XIIII and the Curiosum Urbis Romae Regionum XIIII, written in the mid to late fourth, and

34

Fig. 9. carlo Labruzzi (c. 1765–1818), The Separation of the Via Appia from Via Porta Latina (left) and S. Cesareo (right), c. 1794. Engraving. Rome, British School at Rome Library, TA[PRi]-Mis03-018.

mid fourth to early fifth centuries respectively.22 close by on the caelian hill was the second Augustan Region, ‘caelimontium’, while on the other side of the Via Appia to the west was the twelfth Augustan Region, called ‘Piscina Publica’ after the public swimming pool.23 in the mid-third century, Pope Fabian (236–50 cE) is reported to have divided the city into seven completely different ecclesiastical regions, each served by a deacon.24 The Latin poet Statius (45–c. 96 cE) called the Via Appia, the ‘queen of roads’, regina viarum (Statius, Silvae. ii.2.12).25 The highway was named after the Roman censor in 312 BcE, Appius claudius caecus (‘the Blind’), who constructed the initial part of the route from Rome to capua.26 in its name the Via Appia differed from other early Roman roads, which were either called after their economic function, as was the case with the Via Salaria (the ‘salt route’), or after their destination, like the Via Ostiensis (the main thoroughfare from Rome to the port of Ostia).27 By 190 BcE the Via Appia had been extended

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

to Benevento, and eventually the highway, now c. 540 km long, reached the port of Brindisi, where one could take ship for the eastern Mediterranean. Two monumental columns stood at the harbour, marking the end of the journey by land, and the beginning of the voyage by sea. historical sources show that in antiquity many altars and memorial monuments stood along the first, urban stretch of this road. Some recorded ceremonies of departure (profectio), while others commemorated the return (reditus) to the city of victorious generals and emperors. For example, just outside the Porta capena there was the temple of honos and Virtus, built by M. claudius Marcellus, on his victorious return to Rome after conquering Syracuse; beside it he also built a family tomb (Figs. 6 and 8 [6]).28 nearby there was an altar to ‘Fortuna Redux’, commemorating the return of Augustus from his tour of the Eastern Empire in 19 Bc.29 The Regionary catalogues record a mutatorium (Figs. 6 and 8 [7]), usually a place for changing horses, but in this case perhaps also a place for changing one’s clothes, to a paludamentum or military cloak for travelling, or a toga for returning to the city.30 The Notitia Urbis referred to this building as the ‘mutatorium Caesaris’, indicating its use by the imperial family.31 not far away the same source indicated an ‘area carruces’, a place for leaving country vehicles not permitted inside the city—a kind of ancient parking lot.32 Later, in the sixteenth century, the ancient Roman custom of making ceremonial entries into the city along the urban stretch of the Via Appia was revived, with the triumphal entry of charles V in 1536,33 and Augustus hare wrote that it was at the Porta San Sebastiano ‘that the senate and people of Rome received the last triumphant procession which has entered the city by the Via Appia, that of Marc Antonio colonna, after the victory of Lepanto in 1571’.34 At the beginning of the Via Appia, just within the Republican city limits at the foot of the Palatine stood the Septizonium (also called the Septizodium), built by Septimius Severus (193–211 cE) (Figs. 6 and 8 [8]). While the name suggests this building may have had religious connotations connected with the seven planetary gods that governed the seven days of the week, the structure was essentially a three-storeyed colonnaded facade built to impress visitors arriving in Rome along the Via Appia, especially those from the emperor’s home in Africa; it probably also incorporated a monumental fountain, or nymphaeum.35 nothing survives of this monument today, but artists like Antoine Lafréry (1512–77) sketched it (Fig. 10), before Pope Sixtus V (1585–90) raided it for columns and other architectural elements that he used for his chapel at S. Maria Maggiore.

Fig. 10. Antoine Lafréry (1512–77), The Septizonium of Septimius Severus, 1546. Engraving. 480 x 325 mm. Rome, British School at Rome Library, Ashby collection, TA[PRi]-Mis 10-063.

About half way along the urban stretch of the Via Appia, in the early third century the Via nova led to the Antonine Baths, or the Baths of caracalla, the central part of which was built between 211 and 216 (Figs. 6 and 8 [2] [4]; and Figs. 12 and 13).36 Today the names of two nearby streets, the Viale Terme di caracalla and the Via Antoniniana, refer to this building complex. The baths were able to accommodate 1,600 bathers at a time, and formed the biggest and most splendid imperial bathing establishment in the city, until the even larger Baths of Diocletian were built. They followed the design of the Baths of Trajan in having the large swimming pool, and the hot, tepid, and cold rooms along a central axis, while subsidiary chambers and palestrae were located on either side. in a surrounding peribolos, built by caracalla’s successors Elagabalus (218–22 cE) and Alexander Severus (222–55 cE), were located two libraries and other meeting rooms.37 Vast cisterns and passageways were situated beneath the main rooms of the baths, for the storage of water, and the movement of slaves. Besides the huge monumental

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

35

Fig. 11. claude Duchet, The Farnese Bull (the Punishment of Dirce), 1581. Engraving. 395 x 275 mm. London, British Museum, 1947,0319.26.122.

buildings, several important pieces of sculpture were dug up in the sixteenth century and passed into the Farnese collection; they are now in the national Archaeological Museum of naples, and include the Farnese Hercules, the Flora, and the group of figures portraying the Punishment of Dirce (also called the ‘Farnese Bull’) (Fig. 11). in 1824 mosaics of athletes were discovered on the floor of the exedrae in the palestrae of the baths and are now in the Vatican Museums.38 in the early twentieth century a huge mithraeum was excavated on the site.39 not far from the Baths of caracalla is a busy modern intersection, at Piazzale numa Pompilio, which has become the hub of several roads (Figs. 6 and 8 [9]). These are: Via Druso, coming from the Lateran; Via Valle delle camene, which skirts the caelian hill; Via Antoniniana, south of the Baths of caracalla; Viale Terme di caracalla, which starts at Piazza di Porta capena and then veers south to meet Viale cristoforo colombo; Via di San Sebastiano, which continues the route of the ancient Via Appia to Porta San Sebastiano; Via Latina, which branches

36

off the ancient Via Appia; and the cul de sac, Viale claudio Marcello. Most of these names date from the early twentieth century, but many of them refer to the ancient history or mythology of the area. As today’s traffic roars along these thoroughfares, however, few motorists recall the mythological meaning and historical associations in the names of the streets. For instance, the ‘Via Valle delle camene’ recalls the nymphs (the ‘camenae’) who came for water at a spring located in a sacred wood just outside Porta capena, also frequented by the Vestal Virgins (Figs. 6 and 8 [10]).40 The spirit of the place was the nymph Egeria, who instructed her lover, numa Pompilius, one of the earliest Roman kings, on the forms of worship due to the gods. The modern names reflect these classical associations. Piazzale numa Pompilio also marks the place where the Via Latina separates from the Via Appia in the direction of Porta Latina (Figs. 6 and 8 [21] and Fig. 9). Three churches stand directly along the urban stretch of the Via Appia: S. Sisto Vecchio, SS. nereo ed Achilleo and S. cesareo (Figs. 6 and 8 [17] [18] [19]).41 Early maps (Fig. 8 [17]) and photographs clearly indicate a wing of the S. Sisto convent extending to and along the ancient Via Appia,42 but in 1910 this was demolished to make way for the new road system. The original church of S. Sisto has been identified as the ‘basilica Crescentiana’ built by Pope Anastasius i (399–401) in the second region of Rome.43 herman Geertman has argued that the author of the Liber Pontificalis, who recorded this edifice, was referring to S. Sisto, and that it stood in the second Ecclesiastical Region, and not the Augustan one.44 This building is believed to have been the first christian basilica on the site. it was known as titulus Sancti Sixti from at least 595 onwards, for the church came to be associated with Pope Saint Sixtus ii (257–58), who was martyred during the persecution of Valerian, with six of his deacons in the catacomb of Praetextatus on 6 August 258, and was then buried in the catacomb of callixtus along the Via Appia outside the city.45 A few days later, the seventh Roman deacon, Saint Lawrence, was put to death by the Roman authorities, and he was buried in the cemetery along the Via Tiburtina, where the church of S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura now stands. Both Saints Sixtus and Lawrence were among the most popular saints in Rome, especially on account of their love for the poor. Pope hadrian i (772–95) renovated the church of S. Sisto, while Pope innocent iii (1198–1216) totally rebuilt it on a higher level, to form part of a nunnery, which was completed by his successor, Pope honorius iii (1216–27) (Figs. 14 and 15), who arranged for Saint Dominic to found this religious house.46 Renovations in 1936 showed that the thirteenth-century church and bell-tower occupied only

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 12. Louis Ducros and Giovanni Volpato, Interior of the Baths of Caracalla, 1748–1810. Watercolour over an etched outline, 507 x 740 mm. London, British Museum, 1952,0403.10.

(Below) Fig. 13. Rome, the Baths of caracalla today. (© Joan Barclay Lloyd 2013.)

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

37

(Right) Fig. 14. Rome, S. Sisto Vecchio, with medieval campanile and facade by Filippo Raguzzini, 1725. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Below) Fig. 15. Woodcut of S. Sisto Vecchio in the sixteenth century, from Le cose maravigliose dell’alma città di Roma, Venice: Girolamo Francino, 1588.

the central nave and apse of the earlier basilica, which had a nave, two aisles, an apse and an atrium. Geertman excavated the atrium in front of the church and part of the side aisles in 1968–69,47 and both he and Richard Krautheimer offered reconstructions of the early building.48 in the late thirteenth or early fourteenth century the nuns’ church was decorated with frescoes by followers of Pietro cavallini; fragments of this programme survive, behind a fifteenth-century restructuring of the chancel, in what was originally the medieval apse: they illustrate scenes from the infancy of christ, as well as a large painting of Pentecost.49 About a hundred years later, above these frescoes images were added of saints, including the Dominican Blessed catherine of Siena, who had not yet been canonised.50 Although densely populated in antiquity, the region where S. Sisto is located was almost deserted from the early thirteenth century onwards. Only ancient Roman ruins and a few churches and monasteries stood amid fields and vineyards. By this time the site was in what came to be called the disabitato, the uninhabited area of Rome, far from the populous centre of the city, but still within the third-century Aurelian Walls.51 Yet, to the northeast, the church was within an hour’s walk of the Lateran, where the

38

papal palace and curia were located in the Middle Ages. not far away was the site of the early medieval nunnery of S. Maria in Tempulo.52 christian hülsen identified as the remains of that convent a building with part of a medieval bell-tower, which still stands between S. Sisto and the circus Maximus (Figs. 6 and 8 [16] and Fig. 16).53 When Saint Dominic founded S. Sisto, S. Maria in Tempulo was closed down, and the nuns from that convent went to join the new community. They brought with them their icon, now known also as the Madonna of S. Sisto, as well as significant real estate.54 Besides these nuns, there were others from the Roman convent of S. Bibiana and a few from the Dominican house at Prouille in France in the new community at S. Sisto. in the twelfth century a small river known as the Marrana (or Mariana) was brought to this area (Figs. 6 and 8 [12]). it began as the River Almo and flowed originally from a source near Grottaferrata to the River Aniene, but Pope callixtus ii (1119–24) diverted it towards the Lateran region in Rome, where it provided water for the settlement adjoining the medieval papal palace, including a pond for watering horses, vineyards and orchards.55 This river flowed through the property of S. Sisto, following a

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

course along the valley between the caelian and the Little Aventine hills, and then through the circus Maximus, to empty into the Tiber near the great drain of ancient Rome, the cloaca Maxima.56 callixtus ii also built mills for grinding corn along its course: two outside the Aurelian Walls near the Porta Asinaria close to the Lateran; two on the property of S. Sisto—the ‘upper’ and the ‘lower’ mill, which still in part survive (Figs. 6 and 8 [22]); one in the circus Maximus guarded by a tower (Fig. 17), which still stands near the curved end; and two near S. Maria in cosmedin, which no longer exist.57 During the pontificate of Pope Urban iV (1261–64), the canons of the Lateran diverted some of the Marrana water, which caused a dispute with the nunnery.58 in the early twentieth century the stream disappeared, its water channelled underground in cast iron pipes.59 With the Marrana running through their property, it is likely that the grounds of the nunnery were very damp, a perfect breeding ground for mosquitoes that carried malaria, although at the time the disease was attributed to a miasma that arose in bad air. From the late fourteenth century cases of malaria were reported in the community. in her seventeenth-century Chronicle of the convent, Sister Domenica Salomena recorded that Sister caterina Boccamazzi lived only one year at the convent, for she died in 1372 of malaria,60 an early case of the disease whose continual ravages would result in the removal of the nuns from S. Sisto to the new convent of SS. Domenico e Sisto at Largo Magnanapoli (on the Quirinal hill not far from Piazza Venezia) in 1576.61 When the nuns left, the complex was ceded to cardinal Filippo Buoncompagni (1572–86), who turned

(Left) Fig. 16. Rome, S. Maria in Tempulo. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Right) Fig. 17. Rome, medieval tower in the circus Maximus that formerly guarded a mill on the Marrana. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

it into a home for the poor of Rome. The sanctuary ceiling of the church was redecorated with stucco and paintings, attributed to Bartolomeo Spranger and dated c. 1576–78.62 On the left there is a scene of Saint Sixtus in Prison Baptising the Poor, who crowd outside the window of his cell; and on the right, Saint Sixtus in Prison Instructing Saint Lawrence to Give Alms to the Poor, who are grouped on either side of the saintly deacon.63 These narrative paintings were appropriate for the new function of the buildings. The cardinal’s uncle, Pope Gregory Xiii (1572–85) was keen to help the indigent, as was Saint Filippo neri (1515–95), who for this reason had founded the confraternity of SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini, to which direction of the new house for the poor was entrusted. contemporaries recorded a colourful procession from SS. Trinità alla Regola to S. Sisto on 27 February 1581, of 850 mendicants, led by prelates and aristocrats, and accompanied by choirs singing hymns and psalms.64 in the procession all the blind people had a companion to help them along, and those who were not able to walk were conveyed in fourteen carts. At the end of the procession came the officials of the confraternity and a large crowd of people amazed at the sight and hoping to gain an indulgence granted by the pope. The poor, however, did not stay at S. Sisto for long, and soon returned to begging in the centre of the city.

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

39

Pompeo Ugonio recorded that Pope Sixtus V in 1588 provided another place for Rome’s mendicants near the Tiber at Ponte Sisto.65 The new hospice was also called after Saint Sixtus, so the church along the Via Appia became known from then on as ‘S. Sisto Vecchio’. in the seventeenth century S. Sisto Vecchio was ceded to the Dominican friars, and in 1677 it became part of the collegio SS. Sisto e clemente of the irish province.66 The Dominican Pope Benedict Xiii (1724–30) had the church refurbished in 1725 by Filippo Raguzzini.67 With the suppression of religious houses by the italian state in 1873, the convent became a parking lot for funerary carriages, while the gardens were taken over by the Roman commune to form a plant nursery, which remains to this day. The convent, however, was later transferred to the Dominican teaching sisters founded by Mother Lalía in 1893, and they still run a girls’ school there.68 cardinal Leinart had the church restored in 1936, and another restoration was carried out in the 1990s. Opposite S. Sisto stands the church of SS. nereo ed Achilleo (Figs. 6 and 8 [18] and Fig. 18).69 This, too, was a very early foundation of the fourth century, originally called the titulus Fasciolae (of the ‘Bandage’). The name relates to an early legend, which claimed that, as Saint Peter fled Rome to escape martyrdom, a bandage fell from his

40

Fig. 18. SS. Rome, nereo ed Achilleo (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

leg at this site. (Shortly after that, he encountered christ further along the Via Appia. When he asked the Lord where he was going, ‘Domine, quo vadis?’ the Saviour told him he was entering the city to be crucified in Peter’s place, after which the apostle returned to face his martyrdom.) By 595 the name of the church had been changed to the ‘titulus sanctorum Nerei et Achillei’ after two Roman soldiers who gave up their military duties after their conversion to christianity and who were martyred for their faith.70 A Latin poem by Pope Damasus (366–84) commemorating their conversion was inscribed on a marble plaque and placed on their grave in the catacomb of Domitilla: nereus and Achilleus, Martyrs They had given their allegiance to military service and were performing their savage duty with equal zeal, heedful of the tyrant’s orders, ready under the hand of fear to obey his instructions. Wondrous is the tale: Of a sudden, they put off their madness, with a change of heart they flee, they abandon the unholy barracks

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

of their commander. They cast away their shields, decorations, and bloody arms. confessing christ, they rejoice to bear his triumphs. Believe on the authority of Damasus what the glory of christ can effect.71

The legendary Acts of Saints nereus and Achilleus claimed (erroneously) that they were eunuchs, who took care of Flavia Domitilla after her mother died.72 Flavia Domitilla was believed to be a niece of the Flavian Emperor Domitian (81–96 cE), and she gave her name to the catacomb where nereus and Achilleus were buried.73 in 814 the church of SS. nereo ed Achilleo on the Via Appia was totally rebuilt on higher ground, perhaps some distance from the original edifice, with a nave, two aisles, galleries above the aisles, and an apse. Around the apsidal arch there are still traces of medieval mosaics from the pontificate of Pope Leo iii (795–816) made at that time. They depict the Transfiguration, and on either side, the Annunciation and the Madonna and Child with an attendant Angel (Fig. 19). On the wall above the mosaics is a sixteenth-century fresco of God the Father with a gesture of blessing, and a painted inscription: ‘hic EST FiLiUS MEUS DiLEcTUS’ (this

Fig. 19. SS. nereo ed Achilleo, apsidal arch mosaics (795–816): The Annunciation (left), The Transfiguration (centre), and Madonna and Child with an Attendant Angel (right). (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

is my beloved Son), which is related to the Gospel narrative of the scene of the Transfiguration below (Mt 17:5; Mk 9:7) (Frontispiece).74 The early medieval galleries over the aisles of this church disappeared in a renovation sponsored by Pope Sixtus iV (1471–84) in 1475; the colonnades now have octagonal piers, and capitals typical of fifteenth-century buildings in Rome (Frontispiece and Fig. 21). Two large rectangular windows on either side, which illuminate the church, were opened in the sixteenth century, when further changes were made. When cesare Baronio (1538–1607) became titular cardinal of SS. nereo ed Achilleo in 1596, it was in a state of disrepair.75 Baronio, who was a member of the Oratory founded by Saint Filippo neri and a great historian of the church wanted to revive it in an early christian manner. To this end he brought to his titular church a magnificent candelabrum to serve as the paschal candlestick and a large piece of porphyry on which to base the pulpit (Frontispiece: left, pulpit and right, paschal candlestick). The marble plaques for the chancel

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

41

(Left) Fig. 20. SS. nereo ed Achilleo, throne composed of ancient Roman columns, thirteenth-century elements, and sixteenth-century features, dating to cardinal Baronio’s restoration after 1596, with inscription in niche at the back of the throne recording the homily of Gregory the Great. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Right) Fig. 21. nave of SS. nereo ed Achilleo, showing fifteenth-century piers and capitals and frescoes by il Pomarancio commissioned by cardinal Baronio after 1596. Left of window: Saints Theodora and Euphrosyne, who were Converted by Flavia Domitilla, are Baptised. Right of the window, left scene: Flavia Domitilla and her Companions are Burned to Death in their Room. Right scene: Deacon Caesareus Orders their Burial, and then Buries Them. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

screens and the altar frontal, decorated with medieval marble and glass inlay, he obtained from the abbot of S. Paolo fuori le Mura. he used these liturgical furnishings to copy the raised chancel arrangement in Old St Peter’s, with a fenestella confessionis under and in front of the altar, and a baldacchino on four columns above it (Frontispiece).76 Stairs were placed on either side of the altar, leading to two lecterns for reading the Epistle and Gospel. Around the apse were installed a clergy bench and an episcopal throne (Fig. 20). On the back of the throne, which is framed by ancient spiral fluted columns and medieval stone lions, Baronio had inscribed a sermon (homily 28) given by Pope Gregory the Great (590–604) at the tombs of Saints nereus and Achilleus (in the catacomb of Domitilla, where there was another early basilica dedicated to the two martyrs, but Baronio probably assumed that the sermon was given in his titular church). Around the apse runs a cornice made up of finely carved ancient Roman pieces of marble. On either side of the church there is a side altar, on the right one dedicated to the Blessed Virgin Mary, on the left to Saints Flavia Domitilla, nereo and Achilleo,

42

each with an altarpiece depicting the patrons. Both of these altars also have inscriptions giving a date of 1599, the eighth year of the pontificate of Pope clement Viii Aldobrandini (1592–1605). The paintings in the apse, the aisles, the nave, and the inner facade of the church are generally attributed to il Pomarancio.77 in the centre of the apse is painted a jewelled cross, similar to the mosaic one formerly in this church, and one still in the mid seventh-century east chapel in S. Stefano Rotondo; this is like the crux gemmata which Theodosius ii erected c. 420 cE at calvary, where christ died outside Jerusalem.78 Above the cross in SS. nereo ed Achilleo is an image of the holy Spirit as a dove (Frontispiece and Fig. 19). Ten named martyrs are grouped on either side of the jewelled cross, with men on the left and women on the right: on the left stand nereus, Achilleus, Simplicius, Servilianus, and caesareus; on the right there are Flavia Domitilla, Teodora, Eufrosina, Felicola and Plautilla (Domitilla’s mother).79 Below the apse conch, Baronio had an image painted of Saint Gregory the Great preaching his homily 28 in the presence around the apse of seated bishops and clergy (Frontispiece). in the aisles of the church, there are depictions of the martyrdom of each of the twelve apostles. The series begins on the left at the altar end of the aisle wall with the crucifixion of Saint Peter, and ends on the wall to the right of the sanctuary with the beheading of Saint Paul (some of these scenes are visible behind the nave arcade in Fig. 21).80 On the wall to the left of the sanctuary there is a portrait of Saint Filippo neri, added in the eighteenth century. in the clerestory of the nave Baronio had images painted of episodes from the lives of Saints Flavia Domitilla, nereo and Achilleo, with an inscription under each to explain its content (Fig. 21).81 From the altar, on the right, or Epistle side, one sees in the first fresco Saint Peter baptising Plautilla, as her little daughter, Flavia Domitilla, as well as nereus and Achilleus, await their

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

turn to be baptised; in the second scene, Flavia Domitilla, now a young woman, takes a vow of virginity and is veiled by Pope Saint clement, who was also reputed to be a member of the Flavian house; and in the third painting Flavia Domitilla, nereus and Achilleus are condemned to exile on account of their christian faith in the reign of the Emperor Domitian. On the left, on the Gospel side, from the entrance towards the altar, there is a scene of Flavia Domitilla, nereus and Achilleus arriving at Terracina, where the two soldiers were martyred; in the middle scene Saints Theodora and Euphrosyne are converted by Flavia Domitilla, and they are baptised; and in a third scene Flavia Domitilla and her companions are burned to death, after which the Deacon Saint caesareus buries their bodies. in the spandrels of the nave arcades stand angels, indicating the martyrs’ victory by holding palms and crowns, although the two angels flanking the scene of Plautilla’s baptism are dressed in liturgical vestments as a deacon and an acolyte.82 On the inner facade are painted saints seated in a row. Behind each one there is an angel, proffering a crown. The names of the saints are given as caesareus, nereus,

Achilleus, Theodora, Euphrosyne, and Flavia Domitilla. An inscription at the top reads: ‘GLORiA hAEc EST OMniBUS SAncTiS EiUS’ (This glory is for all his saints). On either side of the central window above this painting are depicted the apostles of Rome, Saints Peter and Paul, while down below on either side of the central doorway there are images of the two holy popes, Saints clement and Gregory the Great. The two popes appear in other parts of the church: Saint clement in the veiling scene in the nave, and Saint Gregory delivering his sermon in the apse. Saint clement also reminds one of the reigning pontiff, Pope clement Viii, while Baronio considered Gregory the Great a personal patron. Ottavio Panciroli noted that Baronio had taken care to restore his church as far as possible to the ancient form in which the memorials of the martyrs were built.83 in a letter to Father Antonio Talpa, Baronio himself explained how he had transformed the building into a worthy resting place for the martyrs, nereus, Achilleus and Domitilla.84 A later painting, attributed to Rubens, commemorated these three saints in the apse of the chiesa nuova, the main church of the Oratory in the centre of Rome.

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

43

in the early thirteenth century, the relics of the three martyrs nereus, Achilleus and Domitilla had been translated to the church of S. Adriano on the Forum.85 now Baronio brought them to his titular church in a solemn, triumphal procession, on their feast day, 11 May 1597.86 The relics were first placed in a noble and rich casket and taken to the Gesù, where a triumphal torchlight procession began at about 8.00 pm. The first stop was on the capitoline hill, where in antiquity Roman triumphs had ended after the execution of enemy prisoners and after sacrifices had been made to the gods.87 Josephus (37 cE–after 93) reported such a climax at the end of the triumph of the Flavian Emperors Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian in 70 cE.88 From there the relics were solemnly carried through the Forum along the ancient Via Sacra, under the ancient triumphal arches of Septimius Severus, Titus, and constantine, before the procession reached the Via Appia, and halted in the small piazza in front of Baronio’s church, where temporary arches had been erected in honour of the martyrs as well as a commemorative column.89 At significant points along the way one could read Latin inscriptions, purposely composed for the event, proclaiming that these saints had brought glory and peace to Rome by shedding

44

(Left) Fig. 22. Rome, S. cesareo, facade on Via Appia/Via S. Sebastiano. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Opposite above) Fig. 23. high altar and confessio of S. cesareo showing thirteenth-century furnishings installed in 1601–3. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Opposite below) Fig. 24. Medieval pulpit modified in 1601–3 in S. cesareo. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

their blood for christ.90 Finally, the relics were laid to rest under the altar in the renovated church, where they could be venerated at the fenestella confessionis. This was a ‘Roman triumph’, celebrated at night rather than in the morning, with hymns rather than military music, going in the opposite direction to most ancient triumphal processions—but especially meaningful for the two former Roman soldiers, and the Flavian princess, who as martyrs were much appreciated in counter Reformation Rome.91 After Piazzale numa Pompilio beside the Via Appia (now named ‘Via di San Sebastiano’) is the church of S. cesareo (Figs. 6 and 8 [19]; Fig. 22), another Roman martyr who also featured in the iconographic programme in Baronio’s church of SS. nereo ed Achilleo.92 Excava-

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

tions in 1936 revealed Roman mosaics with marine scenes in two rooms beneath the nave of this building, suggesting that it stands on the site of a Roman bath.93 The church is first documented in 1192 as ‘S. cesareo de Appia’.94 This building also has very fine thirteenthcentury liturgical furnishings (Fig. 23), placed there in 1601–3, when it was renovated under Pope clement Viii, whose coat of arms appears on the ceiling. The restoration echoes that at SS. nereo ed Achilleo, and possibly the medieval pieces also came from S. Paolo fuori le Mura.95 it seems the work of cardinal Baronio was imitated at S. cesareo, and it has even been suggested that Baronio was behind the project, supplying liturgical furnishings left over from SS. nereo ed Achilleo.96 The liturgical arrangements are very similar. Under the high

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

45

altar at S. cesareo is a fenestella confessionis and above the altar is a baldacchino. The medieval pulpit, now in effect dismantled and relegated to the side wall, was decorated with figures of lions, sphinxes, and caryatids supporting twisted colonnettes (Fig. 24). All the liturgical furniture is colourful, with inserted pieces of purple porphyry and green serpentine, and framed by friezes in glass mosaic with red, gold, and blue tesserae. Further along the Via Appia (now Via di San Sebastiano) near the city gate one finds the ancient Tomb of the Scipios (Fig. 25) and the Arch of Drusus (Fig. 27). The Tomb was first opened in modern times in 1614, and later investigations in 1780 and in 1926–27 revealed that is belonged to the famous ancient Roman family of the cornelii Scipiones, famous for their military exploits in italy, Africa and Asia Minor.97 The burials were by inhumation in stone sarcophagi, rather than cremation. The sarcophagus of Lucius cornelius Scipio Barbatus (Fig. 26), who was consul in 298 BcE, is made of tufa, and is now in the Vatican Museums: besides its inscriptions,

46

(Top left) Fig. 25. Rome, Tomb of the Scipios. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Top right) Fig. 26. carlo Labruzzi (c. 1765–1817), Entrance to the Tomb of the Scipio Family discovered in 1780 with the Sarcophagus, Inscription and Busts found in it, 1794. Engraving, 430 x 555 mm. British School at Rome Library, Ashby collection TA[PRi]-Mis11-071. (Botom left) Fig. 27. carlo Labruzzi, The Porta S. Sebastiano with the Arch of Drusus, before 1794. Watercolour over graphite. 482 x 640 mm. London, British Museum, 1955,1210.10.17. (Bottom right) Fig. 28. Rome, Porta S. Sebastiano. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

it is decorated with a Doric frieze along the top of the coffin, and ionic volutes on the lid. Other sarcophagi of members of the same family (but not that of P. cornelius Scipio Africanus, who defeated hannibal) are placed in the tomb, which seems to have been used until the second century BcE. By Roman law, burials had to be outside the city limits, which was true of the Tomb’s location until the Aurelian wall was constructed in 271–75 cE.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

This sepulchre differs from the nearby columbarium of hylas, along the Via Latina, and the columbarium of Vigna codini, which consisted of rows of small niches for cinerary urns, rather than sarcophagi.98 near Porta San Sebastiano the ‘Arch of Drusus’ (Fig. 27) is not a triumphal monument, but an early-third century arch connected to the aqueduct ‘Aqua Antoniniana Iovia’, built by the Severans to supply water to the Baths of caracalla. The name comes from another commemorative arch built in 9 BcE in honour of Drusus, the father of the Emperor claudius, which no longer exists.99 When honorius renewed the Porta Appia in 401–2 cE, the aqueduct arch formed part of a vantage courtyard on the city side of the gate. The Porta Appia (Fig. 28) is one of the most impressive gateways in the Aurelian Walls.100 The gate is now called Porta San Sebastiano, because it leads to the church and catacomb of the martyr Saint Sebastian further along the Via Appia, outside Rome. The gate as it stands today was built and restored in five phases. Under Aurelian (271–75) the towers were semi-circular and only two stories high, the upper floor lit by round arched windows. Two arches gave entry and exit to the gate. At a later time, the towers were enlarged and their upper story was given a horseshoe plan. At this stage a vantage court was constructed on the inner side of Porta Appia, with the Arch of Drusus as the inner gateway. in 401–2 honorius restored the Porta San Sebastiano, reducing the openings to only one, and adding square bastions to the towers, now faced with marble, which may have come from the temple of Mars.101 After internal changes had been made to the towers, the gateway and the towers

Fig. 29. inscription on the inner keystone of Porta S. Sebastiano thanking God, Saint conon and Saint George for the successful completion of the building. (© Joan Barclay Lloyd 2013.) Fig. 30. inscription on the Porta S. Sebastiano recording the defence of Rome against Ludwig of Bavaria in 1327 and incised Archangel Michael triumphing over evil, symbolised by a dragon. (© Joan Barclay Lloyd 2013.)

were raised again. Today the 28 m high towers that flank the arched entrance are crowned with crenellations. A passageway for sentinels runs along the inner side of the gate.102 A Greek inscription on the inner keystone thanks God, Saint conon and Saint George for the successful completion of the edifice, probably in 401–2 (Fig. 29). Another Latin inscription records the defence of the gateway against Ludwig of Bavaria in 1327 (Fig. 30). An English translation of the inscription reads, ‘in the year of the Lord 1327, in the eleventh indiction, on the last day but one of the month of September, on the feast of Saint Michael, a foreign race entered within the city and was defeated by the Roman people, iacopo de’ Ponziani being caporione.’103 An image of Saint Michael standing above a dragon is incised beside it, indicating that the archangel has triumphed over evil and is the guardian of the gate; in a similar way, the icon of the Pantokrator protected the Golden Gate in constantinople. close to Porta San Sebastiano there are now several chic modern residences of diplomats and film stars with walled gardens bordered by the Aurelian wall or the Via Appia. Most of the time, these dwellings are not open to view.

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

47

The urban section of the Via Appia, from Piazza di Porta capena to the Porta San Sebastiano, reveals fascinating aspects of the city’s past, as the late nineteenth and early twentieth-century archaeologists and city planners who laid out the Passeggiata Archeologica wanted to emphasise. As in many other parts of Rome, buildings that still exist, or are known from literary, pictorial, and historical sources, manifest the changing physical features of this particular place from ancient to modern times. Amid the amazing remains of ancient gates, baths, and tombs, one finds medieval convents, and early christian basilicas transformed into Baroque churches. Memories of ancient military heroes, early christian martyrs, medieval mendicants, and sixteenth-century cardinals transform this place into a very meaningful part of Rome. La Trobe University, School of Humanities

Tecta’ in Ovid, Fasti, vi. 191–92, which was ‘probably applied to the Via Appia between the Porta capena and the temple of Mars because it was bordered by some kind of colonnade’. Ovid’s dates are 43 BcE–17 cE. 19. Platner and Ashby, 1929, p. 568. 20. For Porta capena, see Platner and Ashby, 1929, p. 405; coarelli, 1996, p. 325. 21. Platner and Ashby, 1929, pp. 444–47; claridge, 2010, p. 14 and fig. D. 22. Jordan, 1871, vol. 2, pp. 539–61; Valentini and Zucchetti, 1940, vol. 1, pp. 63–192. 23. Platner and Ashby, 1929, pp. 391–92, locate the piscina publica on the northeast slope of the Little Aventine, which was later partly occupied by the Baths of caracalla. 24. LP, vol. 1, p. 148. 25. Statius, 2003, pp. 122–23: ‘Appia longarum ... regina viarum’, actually ‘Appia, queen of long highways’. 26. Platner and Ashby, 1929, pp. 559–60; Quilici, 1977; Genovesi, 1992, pp. 7–48, especially 12–14; Spera and Mineo, 2004, pp. 9–10; claridge, 2010, pp. 356–71, especially 356–57. Augustus included a statue of Appius claudius caecus among the illustrious Romans in his Forum, with an inscription praising him as having paved the Via Appia, ‘in censura viam Appiam stravit’, as noted by Quilici, in de Rosa and Jatta, 2013, p. 77. 27. coarelli, 1994, p. 350; later consular roads, like the Via Flaminia, Via cassia and Via Aurelia, were also named after the magistrates who built them, see Quilici in de Rosa and Jatta, 2013, p. 77. 28. coarelli, 2007, p. 367. 29. claridge, 2010, p. 356.

Notes

30. coarelli, 1996, p. 325.

1. For example, Platner and Ashby, 1929; coarelli, 1994; coarelli, 2007; claridge, 2010. 2. For example, Krautheimer, 1980. 3. Blunt, 1982, concentrates on Baroque Rome, for example. 4. Tomassetti, 1979, pp. 16–41; Liveriani, 1968, pp. 255–98; ciancio Rossetto, 1983, pp. 75–88; Lanciani, 1988, pp. 425–26; Gallavotti cavallero, 1989, pp. 124–34; coates-Stephens, 2009, p. 28; Quilici in de Rosa and Jatta, 2013, p. 86. 5. Gallavotti cavallero, 1989, p. 126 quotes Baccelli: ‘in un perimetro di otto/ nove chilometri avrebbero dovuto essere preclusi alle costruzioni moderne i siti archeologici del Palatino, del Circo Massimo, delle Terme di Caracalla e dell’Appia Antica fino alla porta S. Sebastiano’. 6. Lanciani, 1988, p. 425. 7. Lanciani, 1988, p. 426 for the number of trees and the garden in the Baths of caracalla; see Anonymous, 1939, pp. 338–42, on the continued transplanting of various kinds of trees in Rome.

31. Valentini and Zucchetti, vol. 1, 1940, p. 90. 32. Valentini and Zucchetti, vol. 1, 1940, p. 91; the explanation is that given by Geertman, 2004, p. 132. 33. Koudelka, 1961, p. 23; Spera and Mineo, 2004, p. 11. 34. hare, 1913, pp. 272–73; see also Spera and Mineo, 2004, p. 11. 35. Ammianus Marcellinus (c. 330–93 cE), History, XV. 7.3, Loeb ed., 1935, vol. 1, pp. 160–61, implies this: ‘ad Septizodium ... celebrem locum, ubi ambitiosi Nymphaeum Marcus condidit imperator’ (to the Septizodium ... the frequented spot, where the emperor Marcus Aurelius [that is, caracalla] erected a nymphaeum of pretentious style). coarelli, 2007, p. 155, calls it a ‘facade-nymphaeum’. 36. Delaine, 1998; Platner and Ashby, 1929, pp. 520–24; claridge, 2010, pp. 357–65. The name is either ‘Antonine Baths’ or the ‘Baths of caracalla’, because the patron’s name was Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, his nickname being caracalla. 37. coarelli, 1994, pp. 327–30; Lugli, 1929, p. 376.

8. Lanciani, 1988, p. 425.

38. Lugli, 1929, pp. 380–81.

9. Lanciani, 1988, p. 425.

39. coarelli, 1994, p. 327; Lugli, 1929, pp. 390–94, with a plan and a photograph of the mithraeum.

10. Lanciani, 1988, p. 426. 11. Lanciani, 1988, p. 426. 12. Tomassetti, 1979, pp. 16–24. 13. Quoted in ciancio Rossetto, 1983, p. 86. The English version of Lugli’s work, gives a less incisive version of his comment: ‘The so-called Passeggiata Archeologica is a kind of archaeological park, handsome as a park, but not particularly archaeological’. Lugli, 1929, p. 369. 14. For the gasometro, see coates-Stevens, 2009, p. 22, fig. 8, and catalogue entries 15 and 37; for the house of cardinal Bessarion see cecchelli, 1925, pp. 9–14, especially p. 12. 15. Platner and Ashby, 1929, p. 405; coarelli, 1994, p. 351; claridge, 2010, p. 356–57. 16. claridge, 2010, p. 357; Quilici in: de Rosa and Jatta, 2013, p. 77, with a width of 4.2 m. 17. coarelli, 2007, p. 365. 18. Platner and Ashby, 1929, p. 568, mention that the name of the street is ‘Via

48

40. The camenae are mentioned in the Regionary catalogues, see Valentini and Zucchetti, vol. 1, 1940, pp. 89 and 164. According to Platner and Ashby, 1929, p. 88–89, the camenae were ‘originally fountain deities, afterwards identified with the Muses, who gave their name to the place where their cult was located ... at the foot of the southern extremity of the caelian hill ....The grove was around the spring, and the vallis extended north-east from this point along the south-east side of the caelian, and was traversed by the vicus camenarum ... which joined the via Appia.’ 41. Matthiae, 1969, pp. 149–62. 42. Most early modern maps, including the nolli Map illustrated here (Fig. 3), show the location of S. Sisto, such as those of A. Strozzi (1474) (Frutaz, 1962, vol. 2, Tav. 159); Bufalini (1551) (Tav. 204); Pirro Ligorio (1552) (Tav. 222); Mario cartaro (1576) (Tav. 242); DuPérac-Lafréry (1577) (Tav. 248); Antonio Tempesta (1593 (Tav. 267); M. Greuter (1618) (Tav. 288); Maggi-Maupin-Losi (1625) (Tav. 311); Falda (1676) (Tav. 360); and nolli (1748) (Tav. 403). One can also see it in a nineteenth-century plan by F. cicconetti, c. 1869, Parker Photograph, British School at Rome Parker 220.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

43. LP, vol. 1, p. 218. 44. Geertman, 2004, pp. 127–32. Krautheimer thought the scribe had mistakenly placed it in the second rather than the first Augustan Region, cBcR, vol. 4, 1970, p. 174, which would be understandable, given that the church stood on the border between the two regions. 45. Farmer, 2004, pp. 481–2, who mentions only two deacons; Saint cyprian, writing from north Africa at the time mentioned four deacons, while LP, vol. 1, p. 218 names six. The legendary ‘Passio’ of Saint Sixtus says he was martyred near the temple of Mars, which was just outside the Porta Appia, and hence not far from the church of S. Sisto. See Kirsch, 1918, p. 23. 46. See Koudelka, 1961; Bolton, 1995, number XVi, pp. 101–15; Boyle, 1977, pp. 1–5; Spiazza, 1992; and Barclay Lloyd, 2003, with additional bibliography.

ed Achilleo, but he may not have completed the work for cardinal Baronio, as he died in 1597. Perhaps his son finished it. cristoforo Roncalli painted the altarpiece of Saints Flavia Domitilla, Nereus and Achilleus over the side altar along the left aisle of the church. it is possible that all three of these painters combined in decorating this church. 78. herz, 1988, pp. 606–7. 79. The names are legible in the apse fresco, and are given in Lais, 1880, p. 44. 80. herz, 1988, p. 607, comments that these scenes of martyrdom are similar in kind to those the Jesuits commissioned in S. Stefano Rotondo in the 1580s. 81. Lais, 1880, pp. 43–44 identifies these scenes. 82. herz, 1988, pp. 612–15.

47. Geertman, 1968–69, p. 226; Geertman and Annis, 2004, pp. 517–19.

83. Panciroli, 1600, p. 63.

48. cBcR, vol. 4, 1970, pp. 163–77, especially 174.

84. The letter is discussed in detail in Krautheimer, 1967, pp. 174–78. The original is Epistola LXiii in Albericus, 1770, pp. 79–80.

49. Barclay Lloyd, 2012, with further bibliography. 50. Barclay Lloyd, 2012, pp. 223–30. 51. The term ‘disabitato’ was coined in the sixteenth century. 52. For the name of the nunnery, also referred to as ‘S. Maria qui vocatur tempuli’, see Koudelka, 1961, pp. 1923, 1928–32; see also Ferrari, 1957, pp. 225–27. 53. huelsen, 1927, p. 368. 54. For the icon see, Bertelli, 1961, pp. 82–111; Belting, 1994, pp. 72, 314–16. 55. LP, vol. 2, p. 379; Platner and Ashby, 1929, pp. 4 and 23–24, who connect the springs with the ancient Aqua iulia; Koudelka, 1961, p. 22; Krautheimer, 1980, p. 322; coates-Stephens, 2009, p. 23. 56. Koudelka, 1961, p. 22 and map on p. 24. 57. Koudelka, 1961, pp. 22–23. 58. Referred to by Sister Domenica Salomonia, in Spiazzi, 1993, p. 97.

85. This church was laid out in the ancient Senate building. 86. The procession was described by Panciroli, 1600, p. 625, and is discussed in Lais, 1880, pp. 56–61 and Krautheimer, 1967, pp. 174–78. 87. Beard, 2007, pp. 94, 128–32, who also notes that sometimes prisoners were spared. 88. Josephus, vol. 3, 1961, pp. 548–51. 89. herz, 1988, pp. 594–97. 90. The text of the inscriptions is transcribed by Krautheimer, 1967, pp. 176–78, from Biblioteca Vallicelliana, G. 99, Antonio Gallonio, Vitae Sanctorum et alia diversi generis. it was an ancient Roman custom at triumphs to display spoils of war, captives, and images of places and battles, with explanatory placards, according to Beard, 2007, pp. 12, 109.

59. Tomassetti, 1979, pp. 16–24.

91. Beard, 2007, pp. 244–49, discusses the role of soldiers in the Roman triumphal parade.

60. Domenica Salomonia, in Spiazzi, 1993, p. 160.

92. Matthiae, 1969; herz, 1988, pp. 616–18; claussen, 2002, pp. 269–98.

61. For SS. Domenica e Sisto, see Bernardini et al., 1991.

93. claussen, 2002, p. 270; coarelli, 2007, p. 367.

62. Anonymous, 1991, p. 78.

94. claussen, 2002, p. 270, referring to Fabre and Duchesne, 1889, p. 272.

63. Anonymous, 1991, pp. 47, 78–82.

95. claussen, 2002, p. 294.

64. Pisano, 1928, pp. 241–58.

96. Krautheimer, 1967, p. 176. Another theory, in Matthiae, 1969, pp. 149–62, is that the furnishings came from the transept of S. Giovanni in Laterano, which was being ‘modernised’ and redecorated at the time. herz, 1988, 590–620 assumes that Baronio was responsible for the restoration of S. cesareo.

65. Ugonio, 1588, p. 170–71. 66. Boyle, 1977. 67. Blunt, 1982, p. 142. in his entry on S. Sisto, Blunt erroneously dates the change to a single nave to the sixteenth century, whereas it was part of the early thirteenth-century rebuilding.

97. coarelli, 2007, pp. 367–71; claridge, 2010, pp. 365–68. 98. coarelli, 1994, pp. 361–63.

68. Boyle, 1977, pp. 252–58.

99. claridge, 2010, p. 370.

69. Krautheimer, 1967, pp. 174–78, cBcR, vol. 3, 1967, pp. 135–52; Blunt, 1982, pp. 124–25; herz, 1988.

100. Richmond, 1930, pp. 121–42; Pisani Sartorio, 1996, pp. 299–300; coarelli, 2007, pp. 24–26.

70. Farmer, 2004, p. 382, gives the date of their martyrdom early in the second century; charlet-Guyon-carletti, 1986, pp. 13–16, give the later date of c. 304. cardinal Baronio accepted the first of these dates.

101. Platner and Ashby, 1929, p. 403.

71. charlet-Guyon-carletti, 1986, pp. 13–16; the English translation of the Latin poem is from Lansford, 2009, p. 211. 72. herz, 1988, p. 610, note 121. 73. Farmer, 2004, p. 382. Baronio referred to this version in his dedicatory inscription in the church, transcribed in Lansford, 2009, pp. 204–7.

102. Pisani Sartorio, 1996, p. 300, says that in 1942–43 Ettore Muti, the Secretary of the italian Fascist Party, made ‘improvements’ to the interior of the towers and the passageway between them, by adding fake Roman black and white mosaic floors, made by Luigi Moretti. 103. For the inscription and the translation given here, Lansford, 2009, p. 209. See also Gardner, 1987, pp. 199–213, especially pp. 202, 213 and fig. 8. coarelli, 2007, p. 25 identifies the angel as Gabriel, which is clearly a mistake.

74. herz, 1988, p. 607. 75. Ugonio described it as almost totally abandoned and ruined, ‘deserta penitus et diruta’, before Baronio restored it, as noted by Lais, 1880, p. 24; see also Krautheimer, 1967, pp. 174–78. 76. See herz, 1988, pp. 590–620, esp. pp. 597–602 for the liturgical arrangements and their relation to those at Old St Peter’s. 77. There were three artists in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century, who were given the nickname ‘il Pomarancio’, which was related to their place of origin: nicolò circignani, his son Antonio, and cristoforo Roncalli. nicolò did the paintings of martyrdom scenes in S. Stefano Rotondo in the 1580s, and hence his name could be linked to the programme in the aisles of SS. nereo

Bibliography Albericus, 1770: Raimondo Albericus, Venerabilis Cesaris Baronii ... Epistolae et Opuscula, Rome, 3 vols., 1770. Ammianus Marcellinus, 1935: Ammianus Marcellinus, John c. Rolfe (trans.) (Loeb classical Library), 3 vols., cambridge, MA: harvard University Press, 1935.

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

49

Anonymous, 1939: Anonymous, ‘come avviene il cambiamento di Domicilio degli Alberi’, Capitolium 14, 1939, pp. 338–42.

Gardner, 1987: Julian Gardner, ‘An introduction to the iconography of the Medieval italian city Gate’, Dumbarton Oaks Papers, vol. 41, 1987, pp. 199–213.

Anonymous, 1991: Anonymous, San Sisto all’Appia, Rome, 1991.

Genovesi, 1992: F. Genovesi, ‘La Zona di Porta capena sull’Appia’ in R. Spiazzi (ed.), La Chiesa e il Monastero di San Sisto all’Appia: raccolta di studi storici, Bologna: Edizioni Studi Domenicani, 1992.

Barclay Lloyd, 2003: Joan Barclay Lloyd, ‘The architectural planning of Pope innocent iii’s nunnery of S. Sisto in Rome’, in A. Sommerlechner (ed.), Innocenzo III: urbs et orbis, Rome, 2003, pp. 1292–1311. Barclay Lloyd, 2012: Joan Barclay Lloyd, ‘Paintings for Dominican nuns ... in the medieval apse of S. Sisto Vecchio in Rome’, Papers of the British School at Rome, vol. 80, 2012, pp. 189–232. Beard, 2007: Mary Beard, The Roman Triumph, cambridge, MA: harvard University Press, 2007. Belting, 1994: hans Belting, Likeness and Presence: a history of the image before the era of art, chicago: University of chicago Press, 1994. Bernardini, Draghi and Verdesi, 1991: V. Bernardini, A. Draghi and G. Verdesi, SS. Domenico e Sisto (Le chiese di Roma illustrate, n.S. 26), Rome, 1929. Bertelli, 1961: carlo Bertelli, ‘L’immagine del “Monasterium Tempuli” dopo il restauro’, Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum, vol. 31, 1961, pp. 82–111. Bolton, 1995: Brenda Bolton, ‘Daughters of Rome: all one in christ Jesus!’ in Brenda Bolton, Innocent III: studies on papal authority and pastoral care, Aldershot, 1995. Boyle, 1977: Leonard E. Boyle, The Community of SS. Sisto e Clemente in Rome, 1677–1977 (San clemente Miscellany, i), Rome, 1977. Blunt, 1982: Anthony Blunt, A Guide to Baroque Rome, London: Granada, 1982. CBCR: Richard Krautheimer (et al.), Corpus Basilicarum Christianarum Romae, 5 vols., Vatican city, 1937–77. Cecchelli, 1925: carlo cecchelli, ‘nuove sistemazione della zona monumentale: passeggiata archeologica e colle Oppio’, Capitolium, vol. 1, 1925, pp. 1–14. Charlet-Guyon-Carletti, 1986: J.-L. charlet, J. Guyon and c. carletti, Damase et les Martyrs Romains, Vatican city, 1986. Ciancio Rossetto, 1983: Paola ciancio Rossetto, ‘La “passeggiata archeologica”’, in L’Archeologia in Roma Capitale tra sterro e Scavo, Venice, 1983. Claridge, 2010: Amanda claridge, with contributions by Judith Toms and Tony cubberley, Rome (Oxford Archaeological Guides), second ed., Oxford, 2010.

Geertman, 1968–69: herman Geertman, ‘Ricerche sopra la prima fase di S. Sisto Vecchio in Roma’, Atti della Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia 41, 1968–69, pp. 219–28. Geertman, 2004: herman Geertman, Hic fecit basilicam, Studi sul Liber Pontificalis e gli edifici ecclesiastici di Roma da Silvestro a Silverio, Sible de Blaauw (ed.), Leuven, 2004. Geertman and Annis, 2004: h. Geertman and M. B. Annis, ‘San Sisto Vecchio: indagini topografiche e archeologiche’, in Lidia Paroli and Laura Vendittelli (eds.), Roma dall’Antichità al medioevo II: contesti tardoantichi e altomedioevali, Milan, 2004. Hare, 1913: Augustus J. c. hare, Walks in Rome, 19th ed., Welbore St. clair Baddeley (ed.), London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner, 1913. Herz, 1988: Alexandra herz, ‘cardinal cesare Baronio’s Restoration of SS. nereo ed Achilleo and S. cesareo de’ Appia’, The Art Bulletin, vol. 70, no. 4, 1988, pp. 590–620. Hülsen, 1927: christian hülsen, Chiese di Roma, Florence, 1927. Jordan, 1871: henri Jordan, Topographie der Stadt Rom im Altertum, vol. ii, Berlin, 1871. Josephus, 1961: Flavius Josephus, The Jewish War, h. St. J. Thackeray (ed.) (Loeb classical Library), 9 vols., cambridge, MA: harvard University Press, 1961. Kirsch, 1918: Johan P. Kirsch, Die römische Titelkirchen im Altertum (Studien zur Geschichte und Kultur des Altertums, iX, 1–2), Paderborn, 1918. Koudelka, 1961: Vladimir J. Koudelka, ‘Le “Monasterium Tempuli” et la Fondation dominicaine de San Sisto’, Archivum Fratrum Praedicatorum, vol. 31, 1961, pp. 5–81. Krautheimer, 1967: Richard Krautheimer, ‘A christian Triumph in 1597’ in Essays in the History of Art Presented to R. Wittkower, London: Phaidon, 1967, pp. 174–78. Krautheimer, 1980: Richard Krautheimer, Rome: profile of a city, 312–1308, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980.

Claussen, 2002: Peter cornelius claussen, Die Kirchen der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter, 1050–1300, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 2002.

Lais, 1880: Giuseppe Lais, Memorie del Titolo di Fasciola e discussione sul valore storico degli atti de’ SS. MM. Flavia Domitilla, Nereo Achilleo, Roma, 1880.

Coarelli, 1994: Filippo coarelli, Roma (Guide Archeologiche Mondadori), second ed., Milan, 1994.

Lanciani, 1988: Rodolfo Lanciani, Notes from Rome, A.L. cubberly (ed.), Rome, 1988.

Coarelli, 1996: Filippo coarelli, s.v. ‘Porta capena’ in LTUR, vol. 3, p. 325.

Lansford, 2009: Tyler Lansford, The Latin Inscriptions of Rome: a walking guide, Baltimore: John hopkins University Press, 2009.

Coarelli, 2007: Filippo coarelli, Rome and Environs: an archaeological guide, Los Angeles: University of california Press, 2007. Coates-Stephens, 2009: Robert coates-Stephens, Immagini e Memoria: Rome in the photographs of Father Peter Paul Mackey 1890–1901, London, 2009. De Rosa and Jatta, 2013: Pier Andrea de Rosa and Barbara Jatta, La Via Appia nei disegni di Carlo Labruzzi alla Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican city, 2013. Delaine, 1998: Janet Delaine, The Baths of Caracalla (Journal of Roman Archaeology, Supplement 25), Rhode island, 1998. Fabre and Duchesne, 1889: Pierre Fabre and Louis Duchesne (eds.), Le Liber Censuum de l’église romaine, 3 vols., Paris, 1889–1952. Farmer, 2004: David h. Farmer, Oxford Dictionary of Saints, new York: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Liveriani, 1968: P. G. Liveriani, ‘Un’impresa che onora una generazione. La Passeggiata Archeologica’, Capitolium, vol. 43, 1968, pp. 255–98. LP: Louis Duchesne (ed.), Le Liber Pontificalis de l’Eglise Romaine, Paris, 3 vols., 1886–1957. LTUR: Eva Margareta Steinby (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae, Rome, 3 vols., 1996. Lugli, 1929: Giuseppe Lugli, The Classical Monuments of Rome and its Vicinity, trans. G. Bagnani, vol. 1, Rome, 1929. Matthiae, 1969: Guglielmo Matthiae, ‘Tre chiese all’inizio dell’Appia’, Capitolium, vol. 44, 1969, pp. 149–62. Panciroli, 1600: Ottavio Panciroli, Tesori Nascosti ..., Rome, 1600.

Ferrari, 1957: Guy Ferrari, Early Roman Monasteries (Studi di Antichità cristiana, 23), Vatican city, 1957.

Pisani Sartorio, 1996: Giuseppina Pisani Sartorio, ‘Porta Appia’, in LTUR, vol. 3, pp. 299–300.

Frutaz, 1962: Amato P. Frutaz, Le Piante di Roma, Rome, 3 vols., 1962.

Pisano, 1928: Giulio Pisano, ‘L’ospizio-ospedale di San Sisto e la compagnia dei Mendicanti di S. Elisabetta’, Roma, vol. 6, 1928, pp. 241–58.

Gallavotti Cavallero, 1989: Daniela Gallavotti cavallero, Rione XXI, San Saba (Guide Rionale di Roma), Rome, 1989.

50

Platner and Ashby, 1929: Samuel B. Platner and Thomas Ashby, A Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, London: Oxford University Press, 1929.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Quilici, 1977: Lorenzo Quilici, La Via Appia da Roma a Bovillae, Rome, 1977. Richmond, 1930: ian A. Richmond, The City Wall of Imperial Rome, Oxford, 1930. Spera and Mineo, 2004: Lucrezia Spera and Sergio Mineo, Via Appia I—da Roma a Bovilla (Antiche Strade. Lazio), Roma, 2004. Spiazzi, 1992: Raimondo Spiazzi (ed.), La Chiesa e il Monastero di San Sisto all’Appia: Raccolta di studi storici, Bologna, 1992. Spiazzi, 1993: Raimondo Spiazzi (ed.), Cronache e Fioretti, Bologna, 1993. Statius, 2003: Publius Papinius Statius, Silvae, D. R. Shackleton Bailey (ed. and trans.) (Loeb classical Library, 206). cambridge, MA: harvard University Press, 2003. Tomassetti, 1979: Giuseppe Tomassetti, La Campagna Romana antica, medioevale e moderna, L. chiumenti and F. Bilancia (eds.), vol. 2, Florence: Olschki, 1979. Ugonio, 1588: Pompeo Ugonio, Historia delle stationi di Roma, Rome, 1588. Valentini and Zucchetti, 1940: Roberto Valentini and Giuseppe Zucchetti, Codice topografico della città di Roma (Fonti per la Storia d’italia), 4 vols., 1940–53.

Joan Barclay Lloyd: Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia

51

52

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 3 Roma Antiqva Restored: The Renaissance Archaeological Plan Louis cellauro

images of ancient Rome in the form of topographical maps or panoramic bird’s-eye views were published in increasing numbers from the mid sixteenth century onwards and are representative of the general concern with ancient architecture and topography among architects, antiquarians and humanist scholars, paralleling the Renaissance interest in the classical past.1 These maps include Bartolomeo Marliani’s topographical map of 1544, the three maps of modern and ancient Rome by the neapolitan painter, architect and antiquarian Pirro Ligorio (1552, 1553 and 1561), the map by the historian and antiquarian Onofrio Panvinio (1565), the small archaeological plan and the large bird’s-eye view by the French architect and antiquarian Étienne Dupérac (1573 and 1574), the map made by the engraver, draughtsman and dealer in prints Mario cartaro (1579) and the two images designed by the Milanese printmaker, painter and poet Ambrogio Brambilla (1582 and 1589–90).2 These maps are of two different types that correspond to two different approaches to the imaging of the ancient city. The first is the small archaeological plan representing such features as the seven hills, the geographic boundaries of the fourteen Augustan regions and a few major ancient monuments originating with Marliani’s simplified plan of 1544. The second type was the large-scale panoramic bird’s-eye view of the fully reconstructed ancient city and originated with Ligorio’s 1561 map. Antiquarians, including Ligorio, Dupérac and Brambilla, often produced both types of maps, the first of which emphasised ancient topography, while the second presented an imaginative interpretation designed to stress the magnificence of the long-vanished imperial capital and visualise its splendour and monumentality. These maps complemented each other by providing the viewer with information about the topography and appearance of the ancient city respectively. Scholars have tended to conflate these two traditions of

the representation of Roma Antica, and in this article i shall give an account that draws out their differences in format and content.

The Representation of Ancient Rome and the Humanist Tradition The interest manifested by Renaissance architects and antiquarians in a graphic reconstruction of Roma Antica was an outcome of an archaeological method that originated in the middle of the fifteenth century with the work of the humanist Flavio Biondo (1392–1463), the pioneering scholar of the topography of ancient Rome.3 his Roma Instaurata (begun probably in 1444 and completed in 1446) was the first comprehensive guide to the buildings of the ancient city. The recovery, ‘restoration’ and imaginative recreation of the culture and literature of the ancient world had been a central concern from the time of Petrarch onwards, based on the collection and collation of literary references and the investigation of written testimonies on inscriptions and coins.4 Biondo, in his Roma Instaurata, applied these methods to the study of the topography of the city of Rome itself. As Burns has observed, he virtually defined this branch of study and his work went through many printed editions.5 Biondo, however, did not present his findings in graphic form and neither did Leon Battista Alberti (1404–1472) in his De Re Aedificatoria (completed 1452), although Biondo took the first steps towards the creation of a properly surveyed map of the modern city in his unillustrated Descriptio Urbis Romae (c. 1445).6 The immediate precedent of the later sixteenthcentury maps of ancient Rome is Raphael’s project of the late 1510s to make a reconstruction of the ancient city. it is mentioned in a famous letter to Pope Leo X, written in collaboration with Baldassare castiglione, of which

Frontispiece: Pirro Ligorio, Map of Ancient Rome, 1552. Detail of Fig. 7.

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

53

Fig. 1. Marco Fabio calvo, Plan of Rome, from Antiquae Urbis Romae Cum Regionibus Simulachrum, Basle, 1558. Washington Dc, national Gallery of Art.

three different versions are known.7 in this letter Raphael outlines the principles of his archaeological method: an intimate knowledge of the antique monuments, a thorough study of them by means of scientific techniques of surveying and representation, a critical reading of relevant antique texts and the combination of all these.8 Raphael’s explicit aim was to: draw ancient Rome, or as much of it as one can know from what can be seen today, with those buildings which show sufficient preservation to enable infallible reconstruction on true principles of their original state, making those elements which are entirely ruined or barely visible correspond to those still standing and visible.9

in this endeavour, Raphael writes, he has drawn on a number of ancient textual sources to complement the physical evidence of the buildings themselves. Among these he singles out the author ‘P. Victore’ for giving particular insight into the ancient regions and ‘some antique marbles [probably classical inscriptions] on which the same are described’.10 ‘Publius Victor’ was a name invented in the Renaissance that assigned single authorship to several of the late-antique ‘regionary catalogues’, or lists of ancient buildings in each of the fourteen Augustan regions, known to the Renaissance through corrupt transcriptions. The misconception that these catalogues were the work of the

54

fictitious Publius Victor had been perpetuated by Pomponio Leto’s printed edition, first published in 1503 with the title P. Victoris de Legionibus Urbis Romae.11 Raphael’s project was unfortunately interrupted by his death in 1520 and we know from Marcantonio Michiel that only one of his projected reconstructions of the fourteen regions of ancient Rome was finished at that time.12 Although Raphael’s reconstruction has not survived, it was sufficiently well reported at the time for it to be clear that it was the original stimulus for all subsequent attempts to achieve a graphic restoration of the city. his project is partly preserved in Andrea Fulvio’s Antiquitates Urbis and in Marco Fabio calvo’s reconstruction of the ancient city, Antiquae Urbis Romae cum Regionibus Simulachrum, both works published immediately before the Sack of Rome in 1527 (Fig. 1). Both Fulvio and calvo had been closely associated with Raphael and acted as humanist advisors on his project. Although unillustrated, the Antiquitatis Urbis is a topographical guidebook of the city that, like Raphael’s project, is organised geographically, but according to the seven hills rather than the Augustan regions.13 The aim of Fulvio’s handbook, however, did not extend to architectural documentation and his study fell in line with an older tradition of topographical guides such as Biondo’s Roma Instaurata. calvo’s Simulachrum consisted of a brief text and 24 woodcuts by Tolomeo Egnazio da Fossombrone, illustrating the historical stages of the development of

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 2. Marco Fabio calvo, The Fourteen Augustan Regions, from Antiquae Urbis Romae Cum Regionibus Simulachrum, Basle, 1558. Washington Dc, national Gallery of Art.

the ancient city from its origins (Roma Quadrata) to the eras of Servius Tullius and Pliny the Elder.14 calvo refers to Raphael and the letter to Leo X in his text and he also uses historical periods of ancient Rome as well as the ancient regionary catalogues to frame his study, producing a schematic circular map of the fourteen Augustan regions (Fig. 2). calvo’s illustrations, however, are schematic and without measurements, and unlike Raphael, he did not attempt to provide a comprehensive map of the whole city. The publishing programme of the Rome-based Accademia della Virtù—the most important contributor to the study of Vitruvius and of extant archaeological remains in the late 1530s and 1540s—may have included in its programme the publication of a map of ancient Rome.15 The Academy included distinguished members such as Marcello cervini (the future Pope Marcellus ii), claudio Tolomei, Luca contile, Francesco Maria Molza, Guillaume Philandrier and Giacomo Barozzi da Vignola, among others. its known goals are attested to in a letter of 14 november 1542 from claudio Tolomei to count Agostino de’ Landi, in which the group of scholars contemplates the publication of material on ancient architecture and architectural theory. According to the letter, the Academy had formulated an eight-point programme that included the publishing of an up-to-date italian translation of Vitruvius and a comprehensive corpus of the ancient buildings of Rome and of Rome’s sculpture, medals

and works of hydraulics and military engineering.16 The letter enunciates many ideas similar to Raphael’s project only in a more elaborate form, so that Tolomei must have been familiar with the earlier enterprise. (This enterprise was certainly known to one of the Accademia’s members, Francesco Maria Molza, who paraphrases in a poem Raphael’s celebrated letter on antiquities.)17 The graphic restoration of ancient Rome as a city-plan is thus likely to have been envisaged by the Academy and may have stimulated Ligorio’s endeavours in the following decades.

Maps of Ancient Rome versus Maps of Modern Rome The problem of depicting Rome involved the division of ancient and modern into separate representations, with very different expectations for each. Whereas images of the modern city tended to emphasise accuracy, verisimilitude and adherence to the most recent information, those of ancient Rome were characterised by informed invention through the use of textual sources (the late-antique regionary catalogues) and archaeological evidence (ruins, coins and inscriptions) combined with both an interpretive vision of the past and a good measure of sheer imagination. Although the reconstruction of ancient Rome encouraged both erudite and empirical inquiries, antiquarians were often compelled to rely on fantasy when archaeological

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

55

and philological evidence was limited. Therefore imagination played as great a role in the invention of antiquity as the study of ancient texts and monuments. Even if many artists and engravers looked back to the ancient city, modern Rome attracted a great deal of attention and publishers frequently produced maps of both ancient and modern Rome to be purchased together. Occasionally, these were even published on the same scale and with the same dimensions in order to be displayed as

56

some sort of comparative pair. Thus we learn from cartaro’s address to the reader in his map entitled Celeberrimae Urbis [Romae] Antiquae Fidelissima Topographia, published in 1579, that both his maps of ancient and modern Rome were of equal dimensions (duabus tabellis eiusdem magnitudinis), so that it would be easy to identify (ictu oculi facillime cognoscere) which ancient buildings have been replaced by modern ones. Similarly, Ambrogio Brambilla’s Antiquae Urbis Perfecta Imago of 1589–90 matched almost

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Left) Fig. 3. Leonardo Bufalini, Map of Rome, Rome: Antonio Blado, 1551. London, British Library, Maps S.T.R. (1). (Right) Fig. 4. Leonardo Bufalini, Baths of Caracalla, detail of Fig. 3.

exactly the dimensions of his ‘newest’ map of Rome, Novissimae Urbis Roma Descriptio, published in 1590 by the Belgian printer nicolas van Aelst. This enabled a close comparison between the two Romes and drew attention to the gap between the splendour and magnificence of the ancient city and the comparatively modest appearance of her younger twin. images of modern Rome necessarily reflected the dramatic contraction of the population from one million inhabitants of the imperial era to only about 30,000 in 1530. Although by the end of the sixteenth century the population had expanded to approximately 100,000,18 much of the area inside the walls appears as little more than open pasture in contemporary maps of modern Rome. While those images privileged the urban fabric as a whole, maps of ancient Rome were focused on distinct monumental architectural landmarks.19

The Dual Nature of Bufalini’s Plan of Rome of 1551 The first Renaissance attempt to represent the city on a large scale was the map simply entitled Roma, published in 1551 by the otherwise obscure military engineer and amateur scholar, Leonardo Bufalini (Fig. 3).20 The map was printed from woodblocks on 24 sheets and measures 200 x 188 cm. it was the first large-scale map of Rome to have been made since antiquity, and recorded a city changing under the urban schemes of successive popes. Bufalini depicted as complete many ancient monuments that survived only as ruins and included others that had vanished entirely. consequently it was a radically new image type; modern Rome shared centre stage with her ancient ‘twin’ in such a way that the dual nature of the map was emphasised. At the same time, by overlaying the modern city on a plan of ancient Rome at the height of its power, Bufalini’s plan enabled the viewer to compare the antique and the contemporary in a fresh and novel way. his idea of producing the map as an ichnographic plan rather than as a bird’s-eye view overlaid one vision of the city over another. in general, ancient monuments are disproportionately large in relation to medieval and Renaissance landmarks, so that the map tended to favour the ancient city, even though Bufalini was also interested in representing the latest urban transformations.

As noted by Jessica Maier, Bufalini’s general tendency was to complete the plans of buildings that survived only in a fragmentary state and sometimes to recreate entirely monuments of which all traces had vanished.21 The most elaborate ancient monuments Bufalini portrayed on his plan, and those displaying the greatest degree of imaginative reconstruction, are the Roman bath complexes. This is particularly evident in his treatment of the Baths of caracalla. Bufalini makes the bath complex the centre of a series of square chambers by doubling the rooms around it, thereby making it symmetrical and better filling the space within the outer walls of the compound. he also lengthens these outer walls so that the external exedrae are centred, thus imposing upon the whole complex a regularity it never had in antiquity (Fig. 4).22 The close resemblance between Bufalini’s map and the fragmentary early third-century cE monumental marble plan of Rome known as the Forma Urbis Romae23 is a coincidence; the first fragments of the plan were discovered a decade after the publication of Bufalini’s plan in 1551. Thereafter, images of the city were produced in ever-increasing numbers and updated more rigorously, and the Bufalini plan seems to have been used as a constant reference for designers in developing their own images of Rome. Most of them adopted the orientation of Bufalini’s plan, with north to the left, so that the Vatican area appears at the lower left. The small Marliani plan, published in 1544, also shared this orientation, but the Bufalini plan was probably more influential in establishing it as a standard. in the sixteenth century this was the geographical orientation adopted in most views of modern

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

57

and ancient Rome. Exceptions showed no consensus in terms of an alternative orientation.24 The preference for placing north to the left in views of Rome became even greater in the following century, and remained prevalent for two hundred years until the important nolli plan of 1748, entitled Nuova pianta di Roma, broke decisively with the tradition.

(Above) Fig. 5. Bartolomeo Marliani, Small Archaeological Plan of Rome, from Urbis Romae Topographia, Rome, 1544. Washington Dc, national Gallery of Art. (Below) Fig. 6. Bartolomeo Marliani, Colosseum and Baths of Caracalla, detail of Fig. 5.

The Renaissance Tradition of the Small Archaeological Plan The origins of the tradition of the small archaeological plan in the second half of the sixteenth century can be traced to the relatively simple topographical plan of imperial Rome by the archaeologist and topographer Bartolomeo Marliani (1488?–1560 or 1566), first included in the second edition of his Urbis Romae Topographia, published in Rome in 1544.25 The first three illustrations in his book—preceding those which show buildings and monuments in plan, elevation and section—are maps of Rome as it appeared in successive stages in its ancient history. The first is a small plan showing Roma Quadrata, the city in the time of Romulus, already illustrated by calvo in 1527; the second is a full-sheet map showing a composite image of the city as it appeared under various emperors;

58

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 7. Pirro Ligorio, Plan of Modern Rome, Rome: Michele Tramezzino, 1552. London, British Library, Maps* 155. (5.) (Below) Fig. 8. Pirro Ligorio, Forum of Trajan, Capitol and Theatre of Marcellus, detail of Fig. 7.

the third is a double-sheet map of the city at the height of the imperial period. Marliani’s project was much like Raphael’s initial project for a ‘universal plan of Rome’ in that it was accompanied by individual representations of ancient buildings. it culminates in a small plan measuring 30.6 x 46.4 cm that includes the Tiber, the Aurelian walls and the seven hills in strict ichnographic projection, and also provides a scale in Roman stadia at the lower left (Fig. 5).26 in his map, Marliani emphasised ancient topography rather than architecture or the general urban fabric, but included ground plans of a few notable structures such as the Baths of caracalla (Fig. 6) and Diocletian, the colosseum, the columns of Trajan and Marcus Aurelius and hadrian’s Mausoleum, as well as several ancient roads. in open conflict with Marliani (they attacked each other in writings widely circulated among scholars),27 the neapolitan artist and antiquarian Pirro Ligorio (c. 1510–83) produced, in collaboration with the Roman printer Michele Tramezzino, no fewer than three images of Rome over the course of ten years.28 in his image of modern Rome of 1552 (Fig. 7) Ligorio was the only one to follow Bufalini in showing the city as a blend of ancient and modern; the campidoglio, S. Maria in Aracoeli and S. Angelo in Pescheria are shown alongside Trajan’s column and the circus Flaminius (Fig. 8).29 This single-sheet print

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

59

proclaims itself as ‘Urbis Romae situs cum iis quae adhunc conspiciuntur veter. monument. reliquiis’ (the layout of the city of Rome, along with those remains of old monuments that are to this day still visible). One year later in 1553, Tramezzino published Ligorio’s Pianta piccola of ancient Rome (39 x 54 cm), which may be considered a considerably improved version of Marliani’s plan, whose fold-out engraving had been reissued by Johann Oporinus in Basel as recently as 1551.30 According to its caption, Ligorio’s 1553 map explicitly showed Rome with ‘the ancient and modern buildings’ (veterum novorumque aedificiorum) (Fig. 9).31 This map is, however, considerably more skewed to the ancient and is sometimes mistaken for a pendant to the putative map of modern Rome of the previous year, which is actually an idiosyncratic mixture of ancient and modern historical periods (Fig. 7). The 1553 map favours textual indications rather than actual reconstructions of ancient buildings, to the extent that its legibility, as both text and image, is compromised, particularly in the area of the city centre. Despite its caption, which states that it is a mixture of ancient and modern Rome, it is almost entirely dedicated to the former. The only real exception is St Peter’s, rising as a proud anachronism in its Michelangelesque form at lower left (Fig. 10). Otherwise, temples, circuses and bath complexes share centre stage along with the names of numerous long-vanished buildings derived

60

(Above) Fig. 9. Pirro Ligorio, Plan of Ancient Rome, Rome, 1553. London, British Library, Maps* 155 (35.) (Right) Fig. 10. Detail of Fig. 9.

from the late-antique regionaries: the Notitia Urbis Regionum XIIII and the Curiosum Urbis Romae Regionum XIIII attributed to ‘Publius Victor’ and ‘Sextus Rufus’. Ligorio also used the names of ancient streets from the so-called ‘Base Capitolina’ dedicated by the Vicomagistri—the inspectors of the streets of the fourteen regions—to the Emperor hadrian in 136 cE, of which Ligorio has left a manuscript copy.32 compared with Marliani’s plan, Ligorio’s reconstruction had the advantage of delineating for the first time the geographic boundaries of the fourteen Augustan regions and including numerous place names of ancient buildings. The map of ancient Rome by the Augustinian monk Onofrio Panvinio (1529–68), published in Venice in 1565 and entitled Anteiquae Urbis Imago (33 x 44.5 cm), also belongs to the tradition of the small archaeological plan in the representation of the ancient city (Fig. 11).33 it owes a debt to Ligorio’s 1553 map, although the few references to modern Rome have been suppressed. it does not follow the tradition of placing north to the left, and the Vatican

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

61

appears here at the upper right. The engraving includes a table with 89 keyed ancient buildings or place names to facilitate its intelligibility. Many of the familiar monuments are reconstructed, such as the colosseum and the bath complexes and other prominent structures known through fragmentary remains or written accounts, such as the circus of nero (Fig. 12) and various naumachiae. As antiquarian advisor to cardinal Alessandro Farnese, Panvinio was well placed to produce a map of ancient Rome as he had published in 1558 his own edition of the late-antique regionaries of ‘Publius Victor’ and ‘Sextus Rufus’.34 A reprint of Panvinio’s map was inserted in his book De Ludis Circensibus (On the Games of the circus) but the date was changed to 1580 and was dedicated to Pope Gregory Xiii (Venetiis Anno Salutatis DLXXX Gre. XIII Pontifice Maximo).35 A similar small archaeological plan of the ancient city was produced by the French engraver, architect, painter and antiquarian Étienne Dupérac (c. 1535?–1604) (Fig. 13).36 it measures 45.5 x 59.5 cm and was published in 1573 by his countryman Antoine Lafréry, one of the

62

(Above) Fig. 11. Onofrio Panvinio, Anteiquae Urbis Imago, Venice, 1565. Los Angeles, The Getty Research institute. (Below) Fig. 12. Onofrio Panvinio, Circus Agonalis, Mausoleum of Hadrian, Circus of Hadrian and Circus of Gaius and Nero, detail of Fig. 11,

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 13. Étienne Dupérac, Small Archaeological Plan of Rome, Rome: Antoine Lafréry, 1573. Los Angeles, The Getty Research institute. (Below) Fig. 14. Étienne Dupérac, Circus of Nero, Circus of Hadrian, Mausoleum of Hadrian and Circus Agonalis, detail of Fig. 13.

foremost Roman print publishers of the mid sixteenth century37 (in 1577, Lafréry also published Dupérac’s large map of the modern city, entitled Nova Urbis Descriptio).38 Like the maps already mentioned, Lafréry’s small archaeological plan includes just a handful of monuments in reconstruction. At lower left, the vanished circus of nero occupies the Vatican hill; above it, the castel Sant’Angelo is restored to its original form as the Mausoleum of hadrian (Fig. 14). The colosseum appears fully reconstructed toward the upper right, above the circus Maximus. The imperial bath complexes, accompanied by long stretches of aqueducts, sprawl across the hills. Dupérac seems to have used Panvinio’s map as a starting point for his own image, and like his predecessor includes a table on the lower right, but with 100 keyed ancient buildings or place names instead of 89. The importance of this type of representation in the print market of the second half of the sixteenth century is emphasised by the fact that Dupérac’s 1573 map was copied by the engraver and cartographer Ambrogio Brambilla and re-issued in 1582 by claude Duchet, Lafréry’s nephew and successor.39

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

63

Fig. 15. Pietro del Massaio, Manuscript Plan of Rome, 1452, Ms. Redi 77, fols. Viiv-Viiir. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana. (Biblioteca nazionale centrale di Firenze, Servizio di Fotoriproduzione.)

Panoramic Bird’s-eye Views of Ancient Rome: Ligorio, Dupérac, Cartaro and Brambilla

These small archaeological plans share the common feature that the major Roman landmarks appear disproportionately large, isolated from each other and standing as independent structures in the urban fabric. They are thus representative of the ‘monument-island’ type of representation, which, as has been noted by Jessica Maier,40 appeared in ideogrammatic representations of the Middle Ages, continuing through the fifteenth century with images of Rome by Pietro del Massaio, Alessandro Strozzi and others (Fig. 15).41 This type remained highly popular in the sixteenth century as demonstrated by Panvinio and Dupérac’s images. The tradition persisted into the seventeenth century with Joan Blaeu’s 1663 Roma Vetus.42

in 1561, eight years after the publication of Ligorio’s small bird’s-eye view of ancient Rome, Tramezzino published his second and more fantastic reconstruction of the ancient city, the Anteiquae Romae Imago, radically different from his two previous plans and from any Renaissance maps of ancient Rome published up to that date (Fig. 16).43 in contrast with the tradition of the small archaeological plan, Ligorio provided for the first time an image of the fully reconstructed ancient city. The Anteiquae Romae Imago shows a multitude of monumental architectural landmarks, although these appear almost lost in a vast network of streets and private houses. Marked by a certain horror vacui, this new image departed significantly from previous archaeological plans, which were mostly focused on a few major monuments. commonly referred to in the literature

64

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

as the Pianta grande di Roma antica, Ligorio’s engraving, printed on twelve sheets and measuring in total 129 x 145 cm, approaches the dimensions of the Bufalini plan. it has been identified as a particularly notable contribution to cartography because of the melding of Ligorio’s broad and detailed knowledge of Roman archaeology and antiquity with his graphic skill.44 he focused, almost exclusively, on the reconstruction of the monuments in the city centre delimited by the third-century Aurelian walls, excluding the representation of extra-urban Rome and its numerous funerary monuments. The most novel aspect of Ligorio’s plan is the way the empty spaces are filled with fantastic buildings surrounding the more famous and well-known ancient monuments to give an impression of the urban fabric. For the vast majority of structures, Ligorio had no physical evidence to use as a point of departure, despite his assertion in the title that his image was based on archaeological and philological evidence. in the inscription at the

Fig. 16. Pirro Ligorio, Anteiquae Urbis Imago, Rome: Michele Tramezzino, 1561. London, British Library, Maps c. 25. d. 9. (1).

upper left of the map, Ligorio lists his alleged sources to include ancient texts, coins and inscriptions, in addition to the remains of buildings. inscriptions further helped him to determine the location of ancient structures, and coins sometimes provided iconographical clues about their appearance. For example, if we look closely at his representation of the Forum of Augustus (Fig. 17), we can see the irregular wall (which survives today) that was intended to prevent a fire in the Suburra from destroying the imperial temples. Against it is set a building that Ligorio labels as the Basilica of Augustus, but which was in fact the Temple of Mars Ultor. To the left of this he shows one of the hemicycles that flanked this temple, while in front of this ‘basilica’ he depicts a round temple identified as the Temple of Mars Ultor.

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

65

Fig. 17. Pirro Ligorio, Temple of Mars Ultor in the Forum of Augustus, detail of Fig. 16.

Fig. 18. Augustan Denarius showing the Temple of Mars Ultor in the Forum of Augustus, London, British Museum, BMcRE 373.

Ligorio’s source for the form and identification of this round temple was the reverse of a denarius of the time of Augustus, which was issued by a mint of uncertain location, traditionally placed in Spain (Fig. 18).45 The temple in the coin, which is domed and apparently circular in plan, has six columns and a podium of three steps and is accompanied by the legend ‘MAR[TiS] VLT[ORiS]’.46 The evidence of this coin prompted Ligorio to identify the actual temple as a basilica, and to insert one based on the coin, this reconciling, to his own satisfaction, the evidence of the site with the coin. Moreover, Ligorio has chosen to depict this fanciful complex not in Renaissance one-point perspective, but in a parallel perspective that evokes ancient representational techniques.47 in this way, Ligorio contributed significantly to the rise of a new approach to the imaging of ancient Rome, which would subsequently influence Dupérac and cartaro’s panoramic bird’s-eye views of the ancient city. A similar large map of ancient Rome, entitled Urbis Romae Sciographia, was produced by Dupérac a decade later (Fig. 19).48 it consists of eight sheets measuring in total 104 x 156 cm. A copy in the British Museum bears an inscription stating that it was published by the printer and etcher Francesco Villamena and the date 1574. in the dedication to charles iX, King of France (1560–74), Dupérac explains that the map was the fruit of fifteen years of study of the ruins and monuments of ancient Rome and

of related literary texts, indicating that the project began in 1559. however, according to Giovanni Baglione, Villamena only came to Rome during the papacy of Sixtus V (1585–90), where he studied under cornelis cort and worked for Agostino carracci.49 Villamena’s first dated engravings illustrate campani’s Pompa Funerale of Sixtus V of 1591. it is therefore unlikely that the edition of 1574 was published by Villamena. The British Museum copy with the inscription referring to Villamena must therefore be a second state. There are, however, no known copies of a first state, but in the 1614 catalogue of the French printer Lorenzo de la Vacherie (also known as della Vaccheria or Vaccaria) we find mention of a map of ‘ancient Rome consisting of eight sheets, engraved by Etienne Dupérac of Paris’ (Roma antica d’otto fogli reali, intagliata per mano di Stefano Duperach Parisino),50 which suggests that the first state was published by this de la Vacherie. in 1574 Dupérac was working on his Vestigi dell’antichità di Roma, an influential series of engravings of ancient monuments, which would be published in 1575 by this printer.51 Dupérac’s large archaeological map of Rome clearly uses Ligorio’s 1561 map for many of its reconstructions of ancient monuments, but instead of focusing, like Ligorio, on the city centre alone, he expanded the representation to include part of the surrounding Roman campagna outside the Aurelian walls and the many roads leading to the capital city, labeled with their ancient names. On

66

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 19. Étienne Dupérac, Urbis Romae Sciographia, Rome: Francesco Villamena, 1574. London, British Library, Maps 155. (7).

(Below) Fig 20. Étienne Dupérac, Pyramid of Cestius and Tombs along Via Ostiense. London, detail of Fig. 19.

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

67

Fig 21. Étienne Dupérac, Ludus Magnus, detail of Fig. 18.

Fig. 22. Ludus Magnus, fragment 006bcdf from the Forma Urbis Romae, Rome, Antiquarium comunale. (Rome, Soprintendenza ai Beni culturali, Musei capitolini.)

each side of these roads are numerous fantastical funerary monuments (Fig. 20). in the dedication cartouche, Dupérac claimed to have incorporated information from the Severan Marble Plan, the Forma Urbis Romae, in making his own representation (vetus eiusdem urbis ichnographia in tabulis marmoreis). Although it is unlikely that he had any special insight into the early third-century cE Severan Marble Plan, there was obviously some intellectual cachet in making such an assertion. hülsen and Frutaz have argued that fragment 006bcdf (formerly 4) of the marble plan has been used by Dupérac for the reconstruction of the Ludus Magnus, the largest of the gladiatorial training arenas in Rome, which was built by the emperor Domitian in the valley between the Esquiline and the caelian hills (Figs. 21–22).52 The fractured panels of the marble plan had been unearthed behind the church of SS. cosma e Damiano in the garden of Torquato de’ conti by the architect and antiquarian Giovanni Antonio Dosio during the summer of 1562, one year after the publication of Ligorio’s 1561 map.53 Even in its ruined and incomplete form, every antiquarian recognised the enormous importance of this discovery. it was clear that the marble fragments were but small pieces of a much larger work, a monumental ichnographic map of the entire city, now estimated to have measured about 18 x 13 m, with plans of all buildings, down to the most humble structure, drawn to scale.54 competing with Dupérac and Lafréry in the 1570s in the production of engravings was the printmaker, print dealer and cartographer from Viterbo, Mario cartaro (active 1560–1620). in 1575 and 1579 he produced two

maps of modern Rome and in 1579 a large panoramic bird’s-eye view of ancient Rome, the Celeberrimae urbis [Romae] Antiquae Fidelissima Topographia, measuring 91.15 x 113 cm (Fig. 23).55 cartaro was in Rome by 1560, the date of his first known engraving, an Adoration of the Shepherds after heinrich Aldegrever.56 Bartsch records 28 prints by him, to which Passavant has added a further 27.57 Until 1577 cartaro collaborated with Lafréry, providing illustrations for the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae and Le tavole moderne di geografia (c. 1580). After this he turned increasingly to the more profitable activity of print selling. he spent his last years in naples making drawings for printed maps of the Kingdom of naples with the help of the mathematician niccolo Antonio Stelliola (1547–1623). cartaro’s map of ancient Rome is clearly based on that of Dupérac, as it includes large stretches of the Roman campagna in the surroundings of the city centre. cartaro, however, replaced several of the individual reconstructions of buildings found in Dupérac’s map with those of Ligorio, such as the Collis Hortulorum (Figs. 24–26). in the address to the reader in the upper right, he recalls his own map of modern Rome of 1575, the recourse he made to many humanist and antiquarian advisors, the on-site study of ancient monuments, their measurements with appropriate instruments, and the study of the prints in which they were illustrated, alluding to the engravings of the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae. The ancient place-names are located within the map itself, and a table of concordance between the ancient and modern place names with 68 numbers is provided.

68

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 23. Mario cartaro, Celeberrimae Urbis Antiquate Fedelissima Topographia, Rome, 1579. Rome, Biblioteca di archeologia e storia dell’arte. (Below left) Fig. 24. Pirro Ligorio, Collis Hortulorum, detail of Fig. 16.

(Below centre) Fig. 25. Etienne Dupérac, Collis Hortulorum, detail of Fig. 19. (Below right) Fig. 26. Mario cartaro, Collis Hortulorum, detail of Fig. 23.

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

69

The last major sixteenth-century map of ancient Rome is the work of the painter, engraver and poet from Milan, Ambrogio Brambilla (active 1575–90).58 On 14 June 1579 he was admitted as a member of the congregazione dei Virtuosi del Pantheon and was later described as Ambrosius Brambilla mediolanensis pictor in Urbe.59 Over the course of ten years he produced three maps of modern Rome (in 1582, 1587 and 1590) and two maps of ancient Rome; these last include the already mentioned copy of Dupérac’s small archaeological plan of 1573 (1582) and a bird’s-eye view of ancient Rome entitled Antiquae Urbis Perfecta Imago (41.2 x 54.5 cm), published in 1589–90 by nicolas van Aelst (Fig. 27).60 Brambilla is first documented in Rome on 14 January 1575 and in the same year he made his first known engraving entitled Le Sette Chiese di Roma for Lafréry’s Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae. Brambilla engraved several prints for his nephew and heir, claude Duchet, The earliest of these are two engravings dated 1579 of the Vatican Palace and Gardens (a copy of cartaro’s view of the same dated 1574) and Castel S. Angelo with the Girandola. Brambilla subsequently produced nu-

70

Fig. 27. Ambrogio Brambilla, Antiquate Urbis Perfecta Imago, Rome: nicholas van Aelst, 1590. London, British Museum, 1947,0319.26.4.

merous other prints for Duchet including those of topical subject matter, numerous maps, engravings of antiquities, modern architecture and sculpture, a book of portraits of emperors (1582) and a further book of portraits of popes (1585).61 however, after 1582 the addresses of other printers are found in Brambilla’s prints. in 1583, for example, his engraving of the Baths of Agrippa was printed by Paolo Graziani and Pietro de nobili. in 1584 he engraved for de nobili the frontispiece of the Vita et Miracula Santi Francesci de Paula. After Duchet’s death, on 5 December 1585, Brambilla occasionally worked for his heirs, engraving, for example, a map of Pozzuoli in 1585. in 1587 he produced his second map of modern Rome, Nova Urbis Descriptio, for the publisher Girolamo Francini. Brambilla’s earliest prints for van Aelst date from 1588–89. it is likely that his panoramic bird’s-eye view of ancient Rome was published at that time as a pendant

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

to his ‘newest’ map of modern Rome (his third map of the modern city), published by the same printer in 1590 as Novissimae Urbis Romae Descriptio. Brambilla’s Antiquae Urbis Perfecta Imago differs significantly from other sixteenth-century panoramic bird’s-eye views of ancient Rome in that his image is focused on monumental architectural landmarks that are isolated from each other and from any uniting structural matrix, such as roads. This map with its multitude of arbitrary and fantastical miniature reconstructions of buildings of ancient Rome is still representative of the ‘monument island’ type of representation that we find, for example, in Pietro del Massaio’s fifteenth-century plan of Rome (Fig. 15), and in the second half of the sixteenth century in the small archaeological plans of Ligorio, Panvinio and Dupérac.62 Many circular domed buildings like the Pantheon populate Brambilla’s image while the few funerary monuments represented outside the Aurelian walls are pyramidal, borrowing their pointed shape from the Pyramid of caius cestius near the Porta San Paolo (c. 18–12 BcE) (Fig.

Fig. 28. Pyramid of Gaius cestius near Porta San Paolo, Rome, c. 18–12 BcE. (© Louis cellauro 2013.)

28). Brambilla’s rendition is more fanciful and amateurish compared with Ligorio’s, while Dupérac’s not only holds more artistic value but also more archaeological value, as he was able to use the fragments of the Forma Urbis Romae in addition to traditional literary and archaeological sources.

Conclusion The maps of ancient Rome were most likely not only directed at an audience of princely patrons, humanist scholars, artists, architects and antiquarians, but also at the many pilgrims who visited the Eternal city. Many travellers to Rome relied on the flourishing print trade to preserve their memories; once returned home, they generally applied themselves to assemble their souvenirs in book form as a memento of their pilgrimages. These collectors’ albums, entitled Speculum Romanae Magnifi-

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

71

centiae, provided maps of ancient and modern Rome and recorded ancient and modern buildings, ruins, obelisks, ancient statues, bas-reliefs, ornament, paintings, gems, portraits and historical events.63 All the known examples of the Speculum vary from one another in their contents, although there is a standard order. A great number of the prints composing the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae albums were published by Lafréry. he himself published no fewer than three maps of Rome for the Speculum albums, and designers of maps of ancient Rome, such as Dupérac, cartaro and Brambilla, all worked in close association with Lafréry at various times in the production of prints. Most of the surviving albums open with a sequence of printed maps intended to provide the overarching context of the Eternal city to visitors. Although the small archaeological plans of the ancient city found their way into many of these albums, the large-scale panoramic bird’s-eye views, particularly those produced by Ligorio, Dupérac and cartaro, would have been purchased as the natural complement to the small-scale maps in the Speculum. There is no doubt that Ligorio’s Anteiquae Urbis Imago resonated with audiences in a way that other maps of ancient Rome by his contemporaries did not. it was the most important map of ancient Rome produced during the sixteenth century and the prototype for most of the maps of ancient Rome for the next two centuries, as can be seen in the countless reprints and copies. Ligorio’s image is known to have been reprinted from the same plates at least five times before the end of the eighteenth century and in at least nine reduced-size versions.64 The seventeenth century witnessed almost exclusively derivative representations of the Renaissance plans of the ancient city; it was only from the second half of the eighteenth century with the archaeological work of Giovanni Battista Piranesi that the graphic reconstruction of ancient Rome found a new impetus. Marie Curie Fellow Deutsches Studienzentrum in Venice

Notes 1. This study has been made possible thanks to a three-week J. B. harley Trust fellowship in the history of cartography at the British Library (24 May–15 June 2011). i am most grateful to Dr catherine Delano-Smith and to Dr Peter Barber, head Librarian of the Maps Department of the British Library, for their support and insightful suggestions. My gratitude also goes to my friends John newman, henry and Judith Millon and Michael Kauffmann who read an early draft of this paper and made a number of corrections and suggestions. 2. Many sixteenth-century maps of the ancient city have yet to be fully discussed and still lack a detailed study, including those by Étienne Dupérac (1574), Mario cartaro (1579) and Ambrogio Brambilla (1589–89). Our knowledge of Roman cartography and topography today remains based on christian hülsen’s Saggio di bibliografia ragionata delle piante iconografiche e prospettiche di Roma dal 1551 al 1748 (hülsen, 1915) and on the comprehensive three-volume catalogue of all extant maps of Rome by Amadeo Pietro Frutaz (Frutaz, 1962). Other significant publications include Scaccia Scarafoni, 1939 and De Seta, 2005. Among the more recent contributions to the subject are the insightful studies by howard Burns on Pirro Ligorio’s 1561 map of ancient Rome (Burns, 1988) and by Jessica Maier (Maier, 2007), which is based on her PhD dissertation (Maier, 2006) that deals primarily with Leonardo Bufalini’s plan of 1551 and its sources and its influence on other maps of the later sixteenth century. 3. On Biondo, see Weiss, 1963; Jacks, 1993 and Mazzocco, 1982. 4. See Burns, 1988, pp. 19–20. 5. Burns, 1988, pp. 20–21. 6. See Vagnetti, 1968, pp. 25–80 and especially Alberti, 1999. 7. The secondary literature of the Letter to Leo X is vast. See especially Rowland, 1994, Thoenes, 1986, pp. 373–81 and Bonelli, 1978, pp. 459–84. 8. See nesselrath, 1986, p. 357–71 (particularly p. 364). 9. Translation from Rowland, 1994. For the original italian text (Munich MS), see Shearman, 2003, pp. 519–20: ‘che io ponessi in disegno Roma anticha, quanto conoscier si può per quello che oggidì si vede, con gli edifici se dimostrano tal reliquie, che per vero argumento si possono infallibilmente ridure, ne si veggono punto, correspondenti a quelli che restano in piedi e che si veggono.’ 10. Shearman, 2003, p. 520: ‘E benché io habbia cavato da molti auctori Latini quello che intendo di dimostrare, tra gli altri nondimeno ho principalmente seguito P. Victore el qual, per esser stato degli ultimi, può dar’ più particolar notitia delle ultime cose, non pretermettendo anchor’ le antiche, e vedesi che concorda nel scriver le regioni con alcuni marmi antichi nelle quali medesimamente son descripte.’ 11. See Jacks, 1993, pp. 93–95, 189 and 356–58. 12. See Golzio, 1936, p. 113. 13. On Fulvio, see Weiss, 1959, pp. 1–44. 14. For the Simulachrum, see especially Jacks, 1990, pp. 453–81. See also Pagliara, 1976, pp. 65–87. 15. On the Accademia della Virtù, see Valone, 1972, pp. 109–14 and Pagliara, 1986, vol. 3, pp. 67–74. 16. For the letter, see Tolomei, 1563, fols. 105v–106v (the first edition was published in Venice in 1547). 17. See nesselrath, 1986, pp. 357, 365. Molza’s poem is entitled In Morte Raphaelis Urbinatis pictoris et architecti ad Leonem X. Pontificem Maximum. See also Shearman, 1977, p. 145. 18. For the population of Rome in the early sixteenth century, see Gnoli, 1894. 19. Maier, 2006, pp. 272–75. 20. See especially Maier, 2007. 21. Maier, 2006, p. 199. 22. Maier, 2007, p. 15. 23. Also referred to as the Severan Marble Plan, the Pianta Marmorea, or as the Forma Urbis Marmorea. 24. They include images by nicolas Béatrizet (1557), Giovanni Antonio Dosio (1561), Onofrio Panvinio (1565) and Etienne Dupérac (1577). 25. For Marliani, see Bertolotti, 1880 and Jacks, 1993, pp. 206–14. 26. Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 56–57, map Xii.

72

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

27. For the animosity between Marliani and Ligorio, see Jacks, 1993, pp. 214–18.

and 14 June 1579. E. Lincoln, Printing and Visual Culture in Italy, 1470–1575, PhD diss., Berkeley, 1994, p. 188, cited in Bury, 2001, p. 223.

28. For a comprehensive account on Ligorio’s career, see coffin, 2004.

60. Frutaz, 1962, i, pp. 69–70, map XXiV.

29. For Ligorio’s 1552 map of modern Rome, see Maier, 2006, pp. 306–7.

61. it contains 135 small portraits of emperors from Julius caesar to Rudolf ii engraved by Brambilla with the title ‘OMniUM iMPERATORVM A c. iVLiO cAESARE VSQUE AD AnnVM PRAESEnTEM iccOnES’. The book of popes is entitled ‘OMniVM POnTiFiciVM A S. PETRO VSQUE AD PRAESEnTEM’. The earliest edition known to christian hülsen is dated 1585 and contains 237 small portraits of popes from Saint Peter to Sixtus V (elected in 1585).

30. Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, p. 59, map XV. On this map, see also Bagrow, 1935, pp. 33–34. 31. Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 60–61, map XVi and hülsen, 1915, pp. 30–32, 43–45, no. 16 and Piante dipendenti della piccola pianta archeologica del Ligorio: no. 16a, Paolo Merula, 1600; no. 16b, Alessandro Donati, 1695; and no. 16c, J. von Sandrart, 1679. 32. For these three sources, see Valentini and Zucchetti, 1940, pp. 37–47, 63–192 and 193–258. 33. Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 65–66, map XX; hülsen, 1915, pp. 33, 57, no. 47, no. 48 (re-issue), p. 58. See haeckens, 1961. For Panvinio, see Perini, 1899 and Ferrary, 1996. 34. See Jacks, 1993, p. 216. 35. Panvinio, 1580, p. 7. 36. Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 66–67, map XXi; hülsen, 1915, pp. 58–59, n.51, pp. 59–62; nos. 52–55 (re-issues and derivatives). On Dupérac, see Bury, 2001, p. 60, no. 37; Wittkower, 1963; Zerner, 1963; Zerner, 1965. See also the comprehensive study by Lurin, 2006. 37. For further details on Lafréry, see Erhle, 1908, pp. 11–25; Roland, 1910; Masetti Zannini, 1980, passim and Parshall and Landau, 1994, pp. 304–9. 38. For a detailed study of this map, see Ehrle, 1908. 39. Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, p. 70, map XXV; hülsen, 1915, note 53 on p. 59. For a short biographical account with bibliography on Duchet, see Fox, 1992. 40. Maier, 2006, p. 298. 41. See Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 137–38, map LXXXVii (Pietro da Massaio) and Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 140–2, map LXXXiX (Alessandro Strozzi). 42. Frutaz, 1962, vol. i, pp. 215–16, map cLiii. 43. The exact title of the map is ‘AnTEiQVAE – VRBiS – iMAGO – AccURATiSSiME – EX – VETERiBVS – MOnVMEnTEiS – FORMATA’ (image of the ancient city, made most accurately from (evidence provided by) the ancient monuments). For this map, see the detailed analysis in Burns, 1988. 44. coffin, 2004, p. 25 and Burns, 1988. 45. Burns, 1988, p. 35. 46. Rich, 1998, especially pp. 79–81. 47. Burns, 1988, pp. 25, 53. 48. The exact title of the map is: ‘VRBiS – ROMAE – SciOGRAPhiA – EX – AnTiQViS – MOnUMEnTiS – AccURAT[iSSiME] – DELinEATA’. For this map, see Frutaz, 1962, XXii, i, pp. 67–68. 49. hülsen, 1915, pp. 60–61; Baglione, 1642, pp. 392–93. 50. Quoted by hülsen, 1915, p. 61. 51. For the Vestigi see Ashby, 1915, pp. 401–21. For de la Vacherie as a print publisher, see Masetti Zannini, 1981 and more recently Witcombe, 2004, pp. 138–39. 52. hülsen, 1915, pp. 323; Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, p. 68. 53. For the discovery of the Forma Urbis Romae, see Jacks, 1993, pp. 218–19. 54. On the Forma Urbis Romae, see especially, Almeida, 2002; Almeida, 1981 and Maier 2006, pp. 317–22 with full bibliography. 55. Frutaz, 1962, vol. 1, map XXiii, pp. 68–69; hülsen, 1915, pp. 33, 68–70 and note 76. The exact title is ‘cEBERRiMAE VRBiS AnTiQVAE FiDELiSSiMA TOPOGRAPhiA POST OMnES ALiAS AEDiTiOnES AccURATiSSiME DELinEATA’.

62. On Alessandro Strozzi’s plan, see Scaglia, 1964. 63. The most important study on the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae is hülsen, 1921, pp. 12–70. See also McGinniss and Mitchel, 1976. Useful information is also provided in the manuscript compiled by the staff of the Department of Special collections of the University of chicago, chicago, 1973 and in Zorach, 2007. 64. For a list of copies of Ligorio’s map, see hülsen, 1915, pp. 53–57 and Karrow, 1993, pp. 354–56.

Bibliography Alberici, 1971: c. Alberici, ‘Brambilla, Ambrogio’ in Dizionario biografico degli italiani, Rome: Treccani, 1971, vol. 13, pp. 729–30. Alberti, 1999: Mario carpo and Martine Furno (eds.), Leon Battista Alberti, Descriptio urbis Romae: Edition Critique, Traduction et Commentaire par Martine Furno et Mario Carpo, Geneva: Librairie Droz, 1999. Almeida, 1981: Emilio Rodriguez Almeida, Forma urbis marmorea: aggiornamento generale (1980), Rome: Quasar, 1981. Almeida, 2002: Emilio Rodriguez Almeida, Forma urbis antiquae: le mappe marmoree di Roma tra la Repubblica e Settimio Severo, collection de l’École française de Rome 305, Rome: École française de Rome, 2002. Ashby, 1915: Thomas Ashby, ‘Le diverse edizioni dei Vestigi dell’antichità di Roma di Stefano Du Pérac’, La Bibliofilia, vol. 16, nos. 11–12, 1915, pp. 401–21. Baglione, 1642: Giovanni Baglione, Le vite de’ pittori, scultori et architetti. Dal pontificato di Gregorio XIII del 1572 in fino a’ tempi di papa Urbano Ottavo nel 1642, Rome, 1642. Bagrow, 1935: Leo Bagrow, ‘Ein Plan vom altem Rom’, Imago Mundi. Jahrbuch der alten Kartographie, vol. 1, 1935, pp. 33–34. Bartsch, 1854–76: Adam Bartsch, Le peintre graveur, 21 vols., Leipzig : J. A. Barth, 1854–76. Bertolotti, 1880: Antonino Bertolotti, ‘Bartolomeo Marliano archeologo nel secolo XVi’, Atti e memorie delle RR. Deputazioni di storia patria per le provincie dell’Emilia, n.s. vol. 4, no. 2, 1880, pp. 107–38. Bonelli, 1978: Renato Bonelli (ed.), ‘Lettera a Leone X’, in Arnaldo Bruschi et al., Scritti rinascimentali di architettura, Milan: Edizioni il Polifilo, 1978, pp. 459–84. Burns, 1988: howard Burns, ‘Pirro Ligorio’s Reconstruction of Ancient Rome: the Anteiquae Urbis Imago of 1561’, in Robert W. Gaston (ed.), Pirro Ligorio: Artist and Antiquarian, Villa i Tatti Studies, 10, Florence: Silvana, 1988, pp. 19–92. Bury, 2001: Michael Bury, The Print in Italy, 1550–1620, London: The British Museum Press, 2001.

56. On cartaro, see Federici, 1898; Masetti Zannini, 1981; cattaneo, 1998; cattaneo, 2000a and cattaneo, 2000b.

Cattaneo, 1998: Annalisa cattaneo, ‘Mario cartaro, incisore viterbese del XVi secolo’, Grafica d’Arte, vol. 9, no. 35, 1998, pp. 2–9.

57. Bartsch, 1854–76, vol. 15, pp. 520–32; Passavant, 1860–64, vol. 6, pp. 157 ff.

Cattaneo, 2000a: Annalisa cattaneo, ‘Mario cartaro: catalogo delle incisioni, i parte’, Grafica d’arte, vol. 11, no. 41, 2000, pp. 6–14.

58. On Brambilla, see Alberici, 1971 and Witcombe, 2004, pp. 274–76.

Cattaneo, 2000b: ‘Mario cartaro: catalogo delle incisioni, ii parte’, Grafica d’arte, vol. 11, no. 42, 2000, pp. 3–11.

59. See Orbaan, 1914–15, p. 28. Brambilla appears in the virtuosi on 12 April

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

73

Cellauro, 2006–7: Louis cellauro, ‘MONVMENTA ROMAE: an alternative title page for the Duke of Sessa’s personal copy of the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae’, Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome, vols. 51–52, 2006–7, pp. 277–95. Coffin, 2004: David R. coffin, Pirro Ligorio: the Renaissance artist, architect and antiquarian, University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2004. De Seta, 2005: cesare De Seta (ed.), Imago urbis Romae: l’immagine di Roma in età moderna, exh. cat., Musei capitolini, Rome, Milan: Electa, 2005. Ehrle, 1908: Francesco Erhle, Roma prima di Sisto V. La pianta di Roma DupéracLafrery del 1577, Rome: Danesi, 1908. Federici, 1898: V. Federici, ‘Di Mario cartaro incisore viterbese del secolo XVi’, Archivio della Società romana di storia patria, vol. 21, 1898, pp. 535–52. Ferrary, 1996: Jean-Louis Ferrary, Onofrio Panvinio et les antiquités romaines, collection de l’Ecole française de Rome 214, Rome: Ecole française de Rome, 1996. Fox, 1992: S.P. Fox, s.v. ‘Duchet (Duchetti, Duchetto), claude (claudio)’ in Dizionario biografico degli italiani, Rome: Treccani, 1992, vol. 41, pp. 755–56. Frutaz, 1962: Amato Pietro Frutaz Le piante di Roma, 3 vols., Rome: istituto di studi romani, 1962. Gnoli, 1894: Domenico Gnoli, ‘Descriptio urbis o censimento della popolazione di Roma avanti il sacco Borbonico’, Archivio della R. Società Romana di Storia Patria, vol. 17, nos. 1–2, 1894, pp. 454–66. Golzio, 1936: Vincenzo Golzio, Raffaello nei documenti, nelle testimonianze da contemporana e nella letteratura del suo secolo, Vatican city: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1936. Haeckens, 1961: T. haeckens, ‘Circus Florae’, L’Antiquite Classique, vol. 30, 1961, pp. 130–45. Hülsen, 1915: christian hülsen, Saggio di Bibliografia ragionata delle piante iconografiche e prospettiche di Roma dal 1551 al 1748, Rome: Reale Società Romana di Storia Patria, 1915. Hülsen, 1921: christian hülsen, ‘Das Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae des Antoine Lafreri’, in Collectanea Varie Doctrinae Leonis S. Olschki, Munich: J. Rosenthal, 1921, pp. 121–70. Jacks, 1993: Philip Jacks, The Antiquarian and the Myth of Antiquity: the origins of Rome in Renaissance thought, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 1993. Jacks, 1990: Philip Jacks, ‘The Simulachrum of Fabio calvo: a view of Roman architecture all’antica in 1527’, Art Bulletin, vol. 72, 1990, pp. 453–81. Karrow, 1993: Robert W. Karrow Jr., Mapmakers of the Sixteenth Century and Their Maps: bio-bibliographies of the cartographers of Abraham Ortelius, 1570, chicago: Published for The newberry Library by Speculum Orbis Press, 1993.

McGinniss and Mitchel, 1976: Lawrence R. McGinniss and herbert Mitchel, Catalogue of the Earl of Crawford’s Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae, new York: The Library, columbia University, 1976. Nagler, 1839: Georg K. nagler, Neues allgemeines Kunstlerlexicon, Munich, 1839, vol. 11, p. 86. Nesselrath, 1986: Arnold nesselrath, ‘Raphael’s Archaeological Method‘, in christoph Luitpold Frommel and Matthias Winner (eds.), Raffaello a Roma: il convegno del 1983, Rome: Edizioni dell’Elefante, 1986, pp. 357–71. Orbaan, 1914–15: J. A.F. Orbaan, ‘Virtuosi al Pantheon, archivalische Beitrage zur romischen Kunstgeschichte’, Repertorium fur Kunstwissenschaft, vol. 37, 1914–15, pp. 17–52. Pagliara, 1976: Pier nicola Pagliara, ‘La Roma antica di Fabio calvo. note sulla cultura antiquaria e architettonica’, Psicon, vol. 8, 1976, pp. 65–87. Pagliara, 1986: Pier nicola Pagliara, ‘Vitruvio da Testo a canone’, in Salvatore Settis (ed.), Memoria dell’antico nell’arte italiana, 3 vols., Turin: Einaudi, 1986, vol. 3, pp. 67–74. Panvinio, 1580: Onofrio Panvinio, De Ludis Circensibus, Rome, 1580. Parshall and Landau, 1994: Peter Parshall and David Landau, The Renaissance Print, 1470–1550, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 1994. Passavant, 1860–64: Johann David Passavant, Le peintre graveur, 6 vols., Leipzig, 1860–64. Perini, 1899: Davide Aurelio Perini, Onofrio Panvinio e le sue opere, Rome: Tipografia poliglotta della Sacra congregazione de Propaganda Fide, 1899. Rich, 1998: J. W. Rich, ‘Augustus’s Parthian honours: the Temple of Mars Ultor and the arch in the Forum Romanorum’, Papers of the British School at Rome, vol. 66, 1998, pp. 71–128. Roland, 1910: François Roland, ‘Un Franc-comtois editeur et marchand d’estampes à Rome au XVie siècle: Antoine Lafréry’, Memoires de la Societe d’Emulation du Doubs, n.s. vol. 7, no. 5, 1910, pp. 320–78. Rowland, 1994: ingrid D. Rowland, ‘Raphael, Angelo colocci and the genesis of the architectural orders’, Art Bulletin, vol. 76, 1994, pp. 81–104. Scaccia Scarafoni, 1939: camillo Scaccia Scarafoni, Le piante di Roma possedute dalla Biblioteca dell’Istituto e dalle altre biblioteche governative della città, Rome: Libreria dello Stato, 1939. Scaglia, 1964: Giustina Scaglia, ‘The origin of an archaeological plan of Rome by Alessandro Strozzi’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. 27, 1964, pp. 137–63. Shearman, 1977: John Shearman, ‘Raphael, Rome and the codex Escurialensis’, Master Drawings, vol. 15, 1977, pp. 107–45. Shearman, 2003: John Shearman, Raphael in Early Modern Sources, 1483–1602, 2 vols., new haven: Yale University Press, 2003.

Lurin, 2006: Emmanuel Lurin, ‘Étienne Dupérac, graveur, peintre et architecte (vers 1535?–1604). Un artiste-antiquaire entre l’italie et la France’, PhD diss., Université Paris Sorbonne, 2006.

Thoenes, 1986: christof Thoenes, ‘La “Lettera” a Leone X’, in  christoph Luitpold Frommel and Matthias Winner (eds.), Raffaello a Roma: il convegno del 1983, Rome, 1986, pp. 373–81.

Maier, 2006: Jessica Maier, ‘imago Romae: Renaissance visions of the Eternal city’, PhD diss., new York, columbia University, 2006.

Tolomei, 1563: claudio Tolomei, Lettere, Venice, 1563.

Maier, 2007: Jessica Maier, ‘Mapping Past and Present: Leonardo Bufalini’s plan of Rome, 1551’, Imago Mundi, vol. 59, no. 1, 2007, pp. 1–23. Masetti Zannini, 1980: Gian Ludovico Masetti Zannini, Stampatori e librai a Roma nella seconda metà del Cinquecento, Rome: Fratelli Palombi, 1980. Masetti Zannini, 1981: Gian Ludovico Masetti Zannini, ‘Rivalità e lavoro di incisori nelle bottegne Lafréry-Duchet e de la Vacherie’, in G. Brunel et al. (eds.), Les Fondations nationales dans la Rome pontificale, collection de l’École française de Rome 52, Rome: École française de Rome, 1981, pp. 547–66. Mazzocco, 1982: Angelo Mazzocco, ‘Rome and the humanists: the case of Biondo Flavio’, in P. A. Ramsay (ed.), Rome in the Renaissance. The City and the Myth: papers of the thirteenth annual conference of the Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, Binghamton, n.Y.: center for Medieval & Early Renaissance Studies, 1982, pp. 185–96.

74

Vagnetti, 1968: Luigi Vagnetti, ‘La Descriptio urbis romae, uno scritto poco noto di Leon Battista Alberti’, Quaderni dell’Università degli studi di Genova. Facoltà di architettura. Istituto elementi di architettura e rilievo dei monumenti, vol. 1, 1968, pp. 25–80. Valentini and Zucchetti, 1940: Roberto Valentini and Giuseppe Zucchetti, Codice topografico della città di Roma (Fonti per la storia d’italia, 81), vol. i, Rome: R. istituto storico italiano per il medio evo, 1940, pp. 37–47, 63–192 and 193–258. Valone, 1972: carolyn Valone, ‘Giovanni Antonio Dosio and his Patrons’, PhD diss., chicago, northwestern University, 1972. Weiss, 1959: Roberto Weiss, ‘Andrea Fulvio Antiquario Romano’, Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, series 2, vol. 28, 1959, pp. 144. Weiss, 1963: Roberto Weiss, ‘Biondo Flavio archeologo’, Studi romagnoli, vol. 14, 1963, pp. 335–41.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Witcombe, 2004: christopher L. c. E. Witcombe, Copyright in the Renaissance: prints and the privilegio in sixteenth-century Venice and Rome, Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2004. Wittkower, 1963: Rudolf Wittkower, Disegni de le ruine di Roma e come anticamente erano, Milan: Amilcare Pizzi, 1963. Zerner, 1963: henri Zerner, ‘Étienne Dupérac en italie’, PhD diss., Paris, École Pratique des hautes Etudes, 1963. Zerner, 1965: henri Zerner, ‘Observations on Dupérac and the Disegni de le ruine di Roma e come anticamente erano’, Art Bulletin, vol. 48, 1965, pp. 507–12. Zorach, 2007: Rebecca Zorach (ed.), The Virtual Tourist in Renaissance Rome: printing and collecting the Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae, exh. cat., chicago: University of chicago Press, 2007.

Louis cellauro: Roma Antiqva Restored

75

76

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 4 The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds Donato Esposito

Joshua Reynolds’ arrival in Rome in 1750 was marked by a palpable sense of excitement. in a letter sent soon after May 1750 to the patron who partly funded his trip, Richard, 1st Baron Edgcumbe (1680–1758), he wrote: ‘i am now (thanks to your Lordship) at the height of my wishes, in the midst of the greatest works of art that the world has produced’.1 it was important for him to be in Rome because, as a London journal noted three years earlier, a successful portraitist ‘must have the name of having travelled to Rome’.2 Unfortunately, few letters written by Reynolds from Rome survive; just three are known, including the one cited. From his sketchbooks worked upon in italy, and letters written later, we know that he visited many of the prominent private art collections, including those in the Palazzo Altieri, Palazzo Bolognetti-Torlonia, Palazzo Borghese, Palazzo corsini, Palazzo Doria Pamphilj, Palazzo Pallavicini-Rospigliosi, Palazzo Spada, Palazzo Verospi and Villa Medici, as well as the Vatican collections.3 Reynolds noted the ‘famous Aurora of Guido’ in the casino dell’Aurora at the Palazzo Pallavicini-Rospigliosi.4 From the surviving documented painted copies that Reynolds made in the Vatican after Raphael’s Stanze, we know that he must have spent some time there.5 in May and June 1750 Reynolds is known to have visited the church of S. Maria della concezione where he made a life-sized copy after the famous painting Saint Michael by Guido Reni, perhaps as an intended gift for Lord Edgcumbe, now in the Royal collection.6 Later, after having returned home, in a letter of 1769 to the irish painter, James Barry (1741–1806) who was then studying in Rome, Reynolds stated that a period of study there was essential for an artist: the Sistine chapel displayed the ‘production of the greatest genius that ever was employed in the arts’,7 while the Vatican offered the ‘advantage which Rome can give above all other cities in the world’ since there one may study in close proximity the frescoes by both Michelangelo and Raphael.8

Reynolds would probably have been guided in his path around Rome by An Account of Some of the Statues, Basreliefs, Drawings and Pictures in Italy, &c. with Remarks, published in London in 1722 by Jonathan Richardson the Elder (1667–1745) and his son, Jonathan Richardson the Younger (1694–1771), which described the primary artistic landmarks of italy, including Rome. Reynolds was well acquainted with the many publications of Richardson the Elder and he was inspired to become an artist from reading at an early age An Essay on the Theory of Painting (1715), the first significant work of artistic theory in English. (Reynolds proudly signed his copy of the book ‘J. Reynolds Pictor’.) Reynolds also read Richardson the Elder’s elaboration of this seminal work in his 1719 An Essay on the Whole Art of Criticism as it Relates to Painting and An Argument in Behalf of the Science of a Connoisseur. Richardson’s writings inspired Reynolds in both his painting practice and his theorising. But it was the Richardsons’ prominent status as important collectors of Old Master prints and drawings that drew Reynolds to them. The sale in 1747 of Richardson the Elder’s collection dispersed a thousand drawings, many of which would enter Reynolds’ own collection, by various routes. carol Gibson-Wood records the feverish response to the release onto the market of Richardson the Elder’s collection, and the competition among collectors to add choice specimens to their cabinets.9 in turn, Richardson the Younger formed his own second, smaller, collection following the dispersal of his father’s, some of which came from this source. The fact that Reynolds was living in London and had personal connections with both men meant that he must have known the contents of the cabinets of both Richardsons well. Thomas hudson (1701–79) provided a personal link between the young Reynolds and the ageing Richardson the Elder, who was both hudson’s master and his fatherin-law. Reynolds was hudson’s apprentice in 1740–43, and would have had direct access to hudson’s collection.

Frontispiece: Raphael, Studies of a Kneeling Woman for The Expulsion of heliodorus. Detail of Fig. 18.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

77

Moreover, hudson may have arranged for him to have access to Richardson’s collection to further his education. hudson placed great emphasis on the study of Old Master drawings and asked Reynolds to make slavish copies of some examples in his collection, particularly sheets by the Bolognese artist Guercino (1591–1666).10 The Richardsons owned many works with a Roman connection that Reynolds may have seen during his apprenticeship under hudson. Many of these were for Roman decorative schemes that Reynolds would come to know at first hand in Rome between 1750 and 1752, and his own collection would subsequently include drawings associated with some of the same schemes. These include drawings for carlo Maratti’s altarpiece in the cybo chapel in S. Maria del Popolo and frescoes by Raphael in S. Maria della Pace, as will be discussed below. Richardson the Elder also owned works documenting the Renaissance fascination with ancient Rome and its material culture, including a drawing by Girolamo da carpi (1501–56) after a Roman sarcophagus in the Palazzo Giustiniani, which passed from Richardson into the collection of one of Reynolds’ friends, the customs official charles Rogers (1711–84).11 Reynolds knew at least some of the works in the Richardson collection as he made an explicit reference to one in one of his italian sketchbooks. in a list of the principal works of art he admired during a visit to the Palazzo Pallavicini-Rospigliosi he referred to a painting by carlo Maratti (1625–1713): ‘An excellent Portrait of a cardinal by carlo Marat of which Mr. Richardson had a copy’.12 But while the Richardsons invariably annotated their drawings on the verso of their mounts with the schemes or locations with which the sheets are connected, this was a practice Reynolds himself very rarely followed. in addition to the collections of the Richardsons and hudson, Reynolds would have had access to other collections of Old Master prints and drawings in London formed by fellow Royal Academicians. Foremost among these were those of Richard cosway (1742–1821) and Benjamin West (1738–1820), both of whom had drawings related to Roman projects,13 as did the sculptor Thomas Banks (1735–1805), who owned drawings related to the Roman works of Raphael and Michelangelo.14 cosway owned, for example, a study of two figures in black chalk in the upper part of Michelangelo’s The Last Judgement fresco in the Sistine chapel.15 Banks’ drawings included an early multi-figured copy in black chalk of the section showing the Fall of the Damned in the same fresco, which can be dated between its unveiling in October 1544 and the alterations that ‘censored’ the fresco, ordered by Pius V in 1567.16 Banks also owned a copy of a study by Raphael for the fresco of The Finding of Moses in the

78

Vatican Logge17 and a sixteenth-century copy of one of a pair of ancient Roman statues depicting Dacian captives that during Reynolds’ time in Rome were in the Palazzo Farnese and hence were known as the Farnese Captives.18 The Royal Academician Paul Sandby (1731–1809) also had a collection of Old Master drawings that has received little attention. Sandby, like Reynolds, had an avowed love of Michelangelo and owned a sheet by him in red chalk of the figure to the right of the Libyan Sibyl in the Sistine chapel ceiling.19 Accordingly, on his arrival in Rome Reynolds would have already been familiar with many of the greatest monuments of pictorial art that Rome had to offer through drawings. he would also have known printed books and single prints about the city. Most English visitors to Rome made such purchases during their time there, but since Reynolds’ income at this point was modest (he lived frugally on a small allowance from his family and Lord Edgcumbe),20 he would not have acquired much while he was there. in a sketchbook in the British Museum we get a glimpse of his potential activity as a collector, for there is a short memorandum to himself, in which Reynolds mentions, among more domestic chores, a call he made to a ‘Bookseller’.21 no inventory was made of Reynolds’ library and art collection, and the catalogues of numerous posthumous auctions remain the primary source for reconstructing his holdings in these areas, and consequently there is no way of knowing when an item was acquired.22 These catalogues tell us that at the end of his life Reynolds owned many volumes of prints after Roman antiquities, which is to be expected, since, like most of his contemporaries, he believed that art from the time of Raphael to the present was based on the art of antiquity. For example, he owned two volumes of prints by François Perrier (1594–1649), one of which was his Segmenta nobilium signorum e statuarum published in Rome in 1638, which consisted of 101 plates after antique sculpture (the other may have been another copy of the Segmenta).23 he also owned three volumes dealing with the collections of the capitoline Museums, which discussed a number of famous antique sculptures, including the Spinario and the Dying Gaul (then known as the Dying Gladiator).24 One of these publications was more fully described in a later sale in 1816, after it had passed through the hands of the Liverpool collector William Roscoe (1753–1831), and matches the Musei Capitolini Philosophorum Poetarum, published by de Rossi in Rome in 1750.25 The dispersal of the art collection and extensive library formed by the poet Samuel Rogers (1763–1855) in 1856 revealed previously undocumented items from Reynolds’ collection. This included an interesting lot in which

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 1. Giambattista nolli, Map of Rome, 1748, showing some of the Roman sites associated with drawings owned by Reynolds. 1. Raphael Stanze and Sistine chapel 2. S. Maria della Pace 3. S. Pietro in Montorio 4. Trinita dei Monti 5. S. Maria in Vallicella 6. S. Maria del Popolo 7. S. Maria del Suffragio 8. Palazzo Farnese 9. Palazzo Barberini 10. Palazzo Ricci 11. Palazzo Gaddi 12. Palazzetto chermandio 13. Palazzo Giustiniani

three Roman publications were bound together into one volume, including Giovanni Pietro Bellori’s publication of ancient Roman triumphal arches Veteres Arcus Augustorum Triumphis Insignes Ex Reliquiis quae Romae (1690) and Giovanni Domenico de Rossi’s enormous 12-plate map of Rome, engraved by Antonio Tempesta (1555–1630), and first published in 1593.26 The depth and range of Reynolds’ collection allowed him to geographically locate the many documents he had relating to both ancient and modern Rome, and to form an informed sense of the changing topography of the evolving urban landscape. Reynolds also owned a copy of Galleria Giustiniana del Marchese Vincenzo Giustiniani, which is now in Sir John Soane’s Museum, London.27 The Richardsons had remarked that the Palazzo Giustiniani (where some of the statues recorded in the Galleria Giustiniana were still housed) ‘is one of the largest palaces in Rome, and has the greatest number of antiques’, and that the volumes of the Galleria Giustiniana were ‘scarce, and of things very valuable upon one account, or the other, bear a great price’.28 Reynolds visited the Palazzo Giustiniani on the evening of 3 August 1751, combining it with a visit to the Villa negroni on the Esquiline hill.29 Modern Roman architecture was represented by, among others, the five volumes of the Nuovo teatro that began with Giovanni Battista Falda’s Il nuovo teatro delle fabriche, et edificii, in

prospettiva di Roma moderna, sotto il felice pontificato di N. S. Papa Alessandro VII (1665). Reynolds’ copies of these publications are today also in the Soane Museum.30 Similarly, as far as individual prints and drawings are concerned, it is hard to know when they were acquired, or whether in every case he knew the particular churches or palaces they were associated with. Many would have been collected for their own sake, on the basis of style, quality or the artist’s reputation. Few works were by contemporary artists: one was a painting, The Interior of the Pantheon at Rome by Giovanni Paolo Panini (1691–1765), which was probably acquired for its antique subject matter or because the Pantheon was the final resting place of Raphael.31 Although Reynolds’ collection of Roman material was mainly acquired after his return, the works he chose must at least in part have been prompted by his experiences in Rome. Reynold’s collection was different from the collections of aristocratic Grand Tourists in that it was more than a collection of souvenirs: rather, it was an attempt to creatively engage with those artists he most admired by continuing to acquire works associated with them and their projects as the memories of his experience of their work in Rome was fading. For this reason it was strong in drawings, since these brought Reynolds closer to the creative process. Leafing through his collection, he would have been engaging in a ‘virtual’ tour of the Rome

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

79

he had known in 1750–52. For this reason it is useful to examine Reynolds’ collection of Roman drawings topographically, corresponding to the way in which he would have experienced Rome (Fig. 1).

(Above left) Fig. 2. Giovanni Lorenzo Bernini, Plan and Elevations of the Colonnade of Saint Peter’s, 1659. Pen and brown ink, with brown wash, over black chalk, 522 x 841 mm. London, British Museum, Oo,3.5.

The Vatican and Saint Peter’s

(Above right) Fig. 3. Giovanni Guerra, Saint Peter’s Basilica, c. 1586–87. Pen and brown ink, 248 x 245 mm. London, British Museum, 1916,0503.1.

The Richardsons had urged an attentive study of the Vatican complex, which is ‘to Rome, which Rome is to all the world’.32 Reynolds seemed to have followed their advice, since the largest group of his Roman drawings relate to the Vatican area. These include a preparatory drawing by Giovanni Guerra (1544–1618) (Fig. 3), celebrating the consecration of the bronze cross surmounting the obelisk erected by Pope Sixtus V in Piazza S. Pietro in 1586, published the following year as a print by natale Bonifacio (1537–1592) (Fig. 4).33 The drawing depicts Michelangelo’s project for the façade of Saint Peter’s, which was built in its present form on an extended nave to the designs of carlo Maderno (1556–1629). This was one of a number of drawings related to iconic Roman landmarks that were the models, or modelli, for prints that would have reached a wide audience. The largest of these modelli in Reynolds’ collection with a Roman connection was the design by Giovanni Lorenzo Bernini (1598–1680) and his workshop for the ground plan and elevations of the colonnade at the Piazza S. Pietro, now in the British Museum (Fig. 2).34 This drawing was the model for an engraving by Giovanni Battista Bonacina dated 1659.35 This large drawing was at some point kept folded, judging from the vertical crease marks still visible, especially the marked central fold. Reynolds could boast other drawings connected with Vatican. in the Metropolitan Museum of Art in new York is a sheet by Giovanni de’ Vecchi (1536–1615) bearing

80

(Right) Fig. 4. natale Bonifacio after Giovanni Guerra, Piazza S. Pietro, 1587. Etching, 505 x 370 mm. London, British Museum, 1947,0319.26.79.

a study for St John the Evangelist (Fig. 5) one of the four mosaics of the four evangelists for the pendentives of Michelangelo’s dome.36 Another is the verso of a sheet by Taddeo Zuccaro related to an overdoor fresco in the Sala Regia, immediately beside the Sistine chapel.37 in addition, Reynolds’ library contained a set of engravings by Pietro Sante Bartoli (c. 1615–1700) after drawings by Giovanni Lanfranco (1582–1647) for his unrealised decorations of the Benediction Loggia, entitled Disegno della Loggia di San Pietro in Vaticano dove si da la Benedizione (1665).38 The frescoes had been commissioned by Pope Paul V but owing to his death in 1621 were never executed. Reynolds’ collection included many drawings by or attributed to Raphael and Michelangelo related to their work at the Vatican; these are the highlights of his collection.39 Reynolds was in raptures over both artists’ work. in his Discourses delivered to students at the Royal Academy of Arts in London between 1769 and 1790 and published soon afterwards, he often compared the one to the other.40 in Discourse V, delivered in 1772, Raphael was considered ‘pure, regular, and chaste’, compared to Michelangelo’s ‘extraordinary heat and vehemence’.41 Reynolds consid-

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 5. Giovanni de’ Vecchi, Saint John the Evangelist. Pen and brown ink, heightened with white, over black chalk; squared in black chalk, 265 x 252 mm. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 64.295.3. Purchase, Joseph Pulitzer Bequest, 1964. (Right) Fig. 6. Raphael, Studies for the Left-hand Section of the Disputa, c. 1509–11. Pen and brown ink over black chalk, 311 x 208 mm. Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum, 84.GA.920 recto.

ered Raphael to be ‘cool-headed’ and ‘had more taste and fancy’, while the ‘hot-headed’ Michelangelo had ‘more genius and imagination’. Raphael’s Stanze at the Vatican deserved nothing short of veneration: Reynolds considered them to be ‘divine performances’. in Rome, he ‘proceeded to copy some of those excellent works. i viewed them again and again’.42 When Reynolds visited the Sistine chapel to view the frescoes by Michelangelo, he arrived ‘in the morning, and remained there the whole day’.43 The Richardsons, however, were less even-handed: they considered the work of Raphael to be greater than that of Michelangelo, and singled out the former’s work in the Vatican, where one may find ‘the most, and the most celebrated works of Raffaele, the Apollo of painting’.44

Raphael at the Vatican Reynolds owned a double-sided drawing by Raphael with preparatory studies for the left-hand section of the Disputa (Dispute of the Sacrament) in the Stanza della Segnatura in the Vatican, painted c. 1509–11 (Figs. 6, 7).45 The sheet displays a ‘remarkable graphic economy’, as was noted

soon after its acquisition by the J. Paul Getty Museum in 1984.46 Reynolds would acquire it from Richardson the Younger’s collection at his sale in February 1772. in Rome Reynolds sketched different figures from the same section of the fresco in a sheet now at the Yale center for British Art (Fig. 8).47 in two other drawings, also now at Yale, Reynolds has extracted interesting individual figures, or groups of figures, from Raphael’s Disputa, clarifying them in the process (Figs. 7, 9, 12).48 Reynolds is already beginning to show a keen interest in complex figural arrangements that would be useful for his future portrait practice. One of these sheets has an interesting sketch that Reynolds re-used later when back in London in the 1760s (Fig. 12).49 The lower left corner of the sheet has a sketch of a figure with fluttering drapery—which Reynolds has partially erased—taken from a group of two interlocked female figures, from the group of Muses to the right of the figure of Apollo taken from another fresco in the same room, the Parnassus (Fig. 13). Reynolds incorporated this elegant grouping in his double-portrait, painted in 1766–67, of Emma crewe and her sister Elizabeth, now in a private collection (Fig. 15).50 Although Reynolds first noticed this grouping from his time in Rome, he derived

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

81

(Above) Fig. 7. Raphael, Disputa, c. 1509–11, detail left side. Fresco. Vatican, Stanza della Segnatura.

the actual poses seen in the painting, not from the fresco itself or from his sketch, but from the contemporary engraving after the fresco by Marcantonio Raimondi, a close associate of Raphael, which matches more closely the poses seen in Reynolds’ double-portrait (Fig. 14).51 The engraving (which was based on a lost drawing supplied directly by Raphael) treats this group slightly differently from the fresco, so the actual source for the interlocking portrait must therefore have been the print.52 Reynolds owned at least three impressions of this engraving, which, being highly valued in the late eighteenth century, were twice put up for sale after his death as individual lots in 1798.53 Reynolds’ collection included some of Raphael’s best drawings, including a red chalk drawing Alexander Committing to Safety the Writings of Homer, now in Oxford (Fig. 10).54 This was related to the grisaille of the same subject below and to the left of the Parnassus (Fig. 11). Reynolds also owned the engraving after it by Marcantonio Raimondi, now untraced.55 The finest of these autograph Raphaels is undoubtedly the double-sided black chalk drawing in the Ashmolean, both sides of which relate to The Expulsion of Heliodorus from the Temple in the Stanza di Eliodoro (Figs. 17, 18).56 The recto (Fig. 17) depicts two studies of a kneeling woman, with her back to the viewer, at the left of the composition. The studies are variations of her pose, with the head in the upper study turned slightly more towards the viewer, while in the margins are pentimenti where Raphael explores the form of her hands and feet. The verso (Fig. 18) depicts a nearby group of a mother sheltering her child; the modelling of the upper part of the woman’s torso is particularly fine, and contrasts with looser passages below. Beside the woman’s head is a pentimento in which her head is strained further upwards.

82

(centre) Fig. 8. Sir Joshua Reynolds, Sheet of Figure Studies after Raphael’s Disputa. Black chalk and graphite, 502 x 394 mm. new haven, Yale center for British Art, Paul Mellon collection, B1975.4.1576. (Right) Fig. 9. Sir Joshua Reynolds, Sheet of Figure Studies after Raphael’s Disputa. Black chalk and graphite, 502 x 416 mm. new haven, Yale center for British Art, Paul Mellon collection, B1975.4.1578. (Below) Fig. 10. Raphael, Alexander Committing to Safety the Writings of Homer. Red chalk, 243 x 413 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1935.152. (Bottom) Fig. 11. School of Raphael, Alexander Committing to Safety the Writings of Homer. Fresco. Vatican, Stanza della Segnatura.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Top left) Fig. 12. Sir Joshua Reynolds, Sheet of Figure Studies after Raphael’s Disputa. Black chalk and graphite, 502 x 387 mm. new haven, Yale center for British Art, Paul Mellon collection, B1975.4.1577. (Top right) Fig. 13. Raphael, Parnassus (detail). Fresco. Vatican, Stanza della Segnatura. (Middle centre) Fig. 14. Marcantonio Raimondi after Raphael, Parnassus, c. 1515, detail. Engraving, 357 x 467 mm. London, British Museum, 1895,0915.119.

(Middle right) Fig. 15. John Dixon after the painting of 1766–67 by Sir Joshua Reynolds, Portrait of the Misses Crewe, with Elizabeth on the right embracing her sister, Emma, 1782. Mezzotint, 501 x 353 mm. London, British Museum, Aa,10.43. (Bottom left) Fig. 16. Francesco Faraone Aquila after Raphael, The Expulsion of Heliodorus, from Picturae Raphaelis Sanctij Urbinatis, plate 6, 1722. Etching and engraving, 478 x 684 mm. London, British Museum, 1925,0605.4. (Bottom centre and right) Figs. 17 and 18. Raphael, Studies of a Kneeling Woman for The Expulsion of heliodorus. Black chalk, 395 x 259 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.198 recto and verso.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

83

Reynolds also owned a drawing by an anonymous pupil of Raphael recording an earlier idea by Raphael for the composition of the Mass at Bolsena, also in the Stanza di Eliodoro (Fig. 19).57 The drawing has been cut along the curved framing line of the lunette-shaped space, and shows the doorway beneath. The fame of Raphael meant that his works were avidly studied, and copied, by a variety of both anonymous and celebrated hands. Reynolds owned a drawing by ‘Raphael’, now untraced and probably a copy, of ‘Two male figures— from the Stanza di Eliodoro, in the Vatican, red chalk’, which had come ‘from the collections of T. Hudson and Sir J. Reynolds’, and so may have been seen by Reynolds before his trip to Rome.58 Between the School of Athens and the Disputa were two windows facing each other whose deep embrasures featured decorative panels with grotesques, nude male and female figures, and mythical creatures. Reynolds had a seventeenth-century anonymous copy, in pen and wash, of one of these panels, probably taken

84

(Top left) Fig. 19. Pupil of Raphael, The Miraculous Mass at Bolsena. Pen and brown ink, with grey wash, heightened with bodycolour, 265 x 410 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.273. (Top right) Fig. 20. claude Lorrain, Figures after Raphael’s School of Athens and Battle of Ostia, 1640. Pen and brown ink, with grey and brown wash, over graphite, 200 x 256 mm. London, British Museum, Oo,6.93 recto. (Above left) Fig. 21. Probably after Étienne Baudet (1638–1711), A Decorative Panel with Grotesques, Male and Female Nudes and Mythical Creatures. Pen and brown ink, grey wash, over some black chalk, 404 x 250 mm. London, British Museum, 1998,0214.7. (Above centre) Fig. 22. Anonymous after Raphael, Woman Carrying Two Water Jars, seventeenth century. Black chalk, 547 x 361 mm. Art institute of chicago, 1922.3794. The Leonora hall Gurley Memorial collection. (Above right) Fig. 23. Raphael, The Fire in the Borgo, detail of the woman carrying two water jars. Fresco, Vatican, Stanza dell’incendio.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Left) Fig. 24. Anonymous after Raphael and school, Battle of Constantine and Maxentius. Engraving, 358 x 314 mm. Melbourne, The University of Melbourne, Baillieu Library Print collection, 1959.4489.000.000. Gift of Dr J. Orde Poynton 1959. (Right) Fig. 25. Raphael and school, Battle of Constantine and Maxentius, detail. Fresco. Vatican, Sala di costantino.

from a print by Étienne Baudet (1638–1711), which was acquired by the British Museum in 1998 (Fig. 21).59 in the Art institute of chicago is an anonymous black chalk drawing that Reynolds owned dating from the seventeenth century (Fig. 22), after a figure of a woman carrying jars of water, from The Fire in the Borgo (Fig. 23).60 This had also belonged to hudson and, again, Reynolds might have seen it before his trip to Rome. The same fresco was the source of a sheet by the Venetian painter Palma Giovane (c. 1548–1628) in Reynolds’ collection, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum.61 Though Palma was known to have visited Rome in his youth and to have made many drawings after works of art he saw there, this example was probably made in his fifties, judged from the handling.62 it copies the figure of a man hanging from a wall in the Fire in the Borgo, making his hasty escape from the conflagration. Reynolds also owned a drawing by claude Lorrain (1603–1682), on the verso of which is a record of two figure groups taken from different frescoes in the Stanze (Fig. 20):63 one is copied from two figures in the centre of the Battle of Ostia in the Stanza dell’incendio, and the other from the figure of Diogenes in the School of Athens in the Stanza della Segnatura. Reynolds owned painted copies after Raphael in addition to drawn ones. One such work described in one of the sales, from his collection in 1795, was a ‘MOUnT PARnASSUS, a very fine copy after RAPhAEL’ painted by Domenichino (1581–1641), now in a private collection.64 The subject of Mount Parnassus was one that he had in a variety of media, which complemented his own drawings made from the fresco when in Rome.

Reynolds also had prints after many of the Stanze of Raphael, including (as we have seen) several impressions of Mount Parnassus. he had prints after The Battle of the Milvian Bridge in the Sala di costantino, designed by Raphael but executed after his death in 1520 by a team of assistants (Fig. 25).65 One other (untraced) large print of the same subject, made up of four sheets, was probably the large print almost two metres wide, by Pietro Aquila (1650–92), which was published in 1683.66 he also owned an anonymous print after the right-hand section of the fresco, directly in front of the figure of Emperor constantine on a rearing horse, whose head and legs are cropped at the left edge, which was acquired by the Baillieu Library at the University of Melbourne in 1959 (Fig. 24).67 in a number of ways the print in Melbourne has simplified the complex fresco with its teeming, clashing figures: the background hillscape of the print is different from that in the fresco, and the number of combatants is much reduced, focusing instead on the foreground figures alone. Reynolds’ collection of Raphael material was rounded off with volumes of prints after his biblical designs for the Logge, including ‘A volume containing Raphael’s Bible, by different engravers, and his works in the Vatican’68 and Sacrae historiae acta a Raphael Urbin in Vaticanis xystis ad picturae miraculum expressa (1649) with prints by nicolas chaperon, consisting of 52 numbered plates after Raphael’s Logge.69 he also owned a pen and ink drawing after Raphael, with wash on blue paper, which the previous owner, Richardson the Elder, had given to Raphael and so annotated the mount ‘Raffaelle’.70 it depicts God Showing Noah the Rainbow after the Flood, and derives from the decorations for the basamento of the Logge in the Vatican.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

85

Raphael at S. Maria della Pace

(Left) Fig. 26. Rome, S. Maria della Pace, Raphael frescoes in the chigi chapel of the Prophets and Sibyls.

Reynolds’ collection of Raphael material extended beyond his many papal commissions at the Vatican to a rich group of drawings related to the church of S. Maria della Pace. here in c. 1510–14 Raphael had been commissioned to decorate the chigi chapel with four prophets, and below them in a separate register immediately above the altar, four sibyls receiving divine instruction (Fig. 26). The Richardsons had also owned drawings for this scheme: Jonathan Richardson the Younger owned a study by Raphael in black chalk for the prophet isaiah,71 while his father owned a drawing connected to the grouping of the prophets David and Daniel at the right of the upper register (Fig. 27).72 Recent scholarship on this red chalk drawing has established that it was drawn by an anonymous sixteenth-century draughtsman and was later owned by Peter Paul Rubens (1577–1640), who extensively reworked it, as was his practice, in brush with dark red wash and white heightening in order to re-explore the drawing’s contours and modulation.73 Richardson had annotated on the verso of the mount the salient aspects of the drawing: ‘Rubens from Raffaële / in the Madonna della Pace at Rome, ’tis a part of the famous work…’.74 Richardson the Elder also owned a superb pen and brown ink study, with brown wash, of the prophets hosea and Jonah for the same scheme, now in the national Gallery of Art, Washington, Dc.75

(Right) Fig. 27. Anonymous sixteenth-century draughtsman, reworked by Peter Paul Rubens (1577–1640), The Prophets David and Daniel. Red chalk, brush and red and pink wash, bodycolour, heightened with white, 341 x 286 mm. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1995.401, Purchase, harris Brisbane Dick Fund and Mr. and Mrs. christopher Rupp Gift, 1995.

86

Reynolds owned a magnificent study for an early design of the Phrygian Sibyl, which flanks the curvature of the archway at the right of the lower register (Fig. 28).76 in this early drawing the figure is turned to the right, her gaze downward. Raphael subsequently switched the turn of her head and the focus of her gaze to the left in the final form of the figure, and made other modifications. Reynolds was therefore able to witness the creative evolution of this figure. The drawing had come from Richardson the Elder, who had also owned a study for same figure now in the British Museum and which is extremely close to the executed work.77 Both drawings had therefore been in London before Reynolds had set off for italy in late 1749. This original Raphael was complemented by copies by other artists after other figures from the same chapel. Bernardino Poccetti (1548–1612) made a fine study of the Tiburtine Sibyl, which is located beside the Phrygian Sibyl to the right in the fresco, which is now in the indianapolis Museum of Art (Fig. 29).78 This drawing is in reverse with respect to the figure on the chapel wall,

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

which is best explained by the hypothesis that the drawing is a counterproof of a lost chalk drawing having the same orientation as the fresco, but with added penwork to strengthen the modelling.79 The drawing might have been made from a print of the fresco but this seems unlikely given the relatively large size of the drawing. Reynolds also owned a study by Gaudenzio Ferrari (c. 1470–1546) from the late 1510s of an angel addressing the Phrygian Sibyl in the fresco (Figs. 31, 32).80 The chigi chapel decoration inspired a more creative response in a sheet by Lattanzio Gambara (c. 1530–73/74) now in Oxford.81 it is a study of a seated female figure for Gambara’s fresco in the nave of the cathedral in Parma in northern italy. The modelling of the figures is derived from the Phrygian Sibyl, and, like its sources, displays a marked contrapposto.82 Reynolds also owned works representing the exterior of S. Maria della Pace: an external view of Pietro da cortona’s façade of the church is in G. B. Falda’s first book of the Nuovo Teatro, of which Reynolds owned a copy.83

(Left) Fig. 28. Raphael, The Phrygian Sibyl, study for the chigi chapel, c. 1510–14. Red chalk, with some black chalk, 363 x 189 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.203. (Top centre) Fig. 29. Bernardino Poccetti after Raphael, The Tiburtine Sibyl from the Chigi Chapel, S. Maria della Pace. Black and red chalk, with pen and brown ink, 214 x 160 mm. indianapolis Museum of Art, 47.16, Gift of Mrs. William h. Thompson. (Top right) Fig. 30. Raphael, The Tiburtine Sibyl, c. 1510–14. Fresco. Rome, S. Maria della Pace, chigi chapel. (Above centre) Fig. 31. Raphael, Angel Holding a Tablet. Fresco. Rome, S. Maria della Pace, chigi chapel. (Above right) Fig. 32. Gaudenzio Ferrari after Raphael, An Angel Holding a Tablet from the Chigi Chapel, S. Maria della Pace, Rome, 1516–19. Pen and brown ink, with brush and brown and grey wash, heightened with white on grey-green paper, 308 x 210 mm. Austin, Blanton Museum of Art, University of Texas at Austin, 1988.12. Archer M. huntington Museum Fund, 1988.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

87

Michelangelo in the Sistine Chapel and Cappella Paolina Reynolds admired Michelangelo’s art and encouraged students to study him. For Reynolds, the ‘personification of the Supreme Being in the centre of the capella Sestina, or the figures of the Sibyls which surround that chapel’ were of a sublime order (Discourse XV).84 he wished that the name of the ‘truly divine man’ be the last word he should utter at the annual Royal Academy lecture in 1790.85 naturally, Reynolds had many drawings attributed to Michelangelo in his collection, many of which were connected with the frescoes on the vault of the Sistine chapel. Perhaps Reynolds’ greatest treasure was a red chalk drawing for the figure of Adam in The Creation of Man (Figs. 33, 34).86 Reynolds had obtained the drawing from Richardson the Elder, probably at his sale in 1772. neither of their collectors’ marks can be seen today because the drawing was cut down at some point after Reynolds’ death.87

88

(Top) Fig. 33. Michelangelo, Studies of a Reclining Male Nude for The creation of Adam, 1511. Dark red chalk over some stylus underdrawing, 193 x 259 mm. London, British Museum, 1926,1009.1. (Above) Fig. 34. Michelangelo, The Creation of Adam, detail, 1511. Vatican, Sistine chapel.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above left) Fig. 35. copy after Michelangelo, The Sleeping Adam from the creation of Eve. Black chalk, 134 x 236 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.103. (Above right) Fig. 36. Michelangelo, The Creation of Eve. Vatican, Sistine ceiling. (Left) Fig. 37. copy after Michelangelo, Detail of the Libyan Sibyl and an écorché of a male leg. Black chalk, 219 x 150 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.102 recto. (Right) Fig. 38. copy after Michelangelo, Saint John the Baptist. Pen and brown ink on pale buff paper, 278 x 114 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1863.769.

numerous copies after Michelangelo were to be found in Reynolds’ collection. On the art market in 1938 was a red chalk drawing, 12 by 10 inches in size, described generically as ‘Michael Angelo (after): Study of a figure in the Sixtine chapel’.88 in the Ashmolean Museum are three anonymous sheets after different parts of the Sistine chapel. The first, in black chalk, was obtained by Reynolds from Richardson the Elder.89 On the recto is a copy after the head of the Libyan Sibyl (Fig. 37), juxtaposed with an écorché of a male leg, while on the verso is a copy after a boy, also from the Sistine chapel

ceiling. The second is a black chalk copy after the sleeping figure of Adam in The Creation of Eve (Figs. 35, 36).90 The third is a pen and ink copy of the figure of Saint John the Baptist from The Last Judgement, which displays a curious method of intense cross-hatching (Fig. 38).91 Reynolds also owned another copy in black chalk after a figure from The Last Judgement (Fig. 39), now in the British Museum, which acquired it in 1799.92 Another drawing after Michelangelo is a sensitive study in black chalk after a cowering figure on the lower right-hand side of The Conversion of Saint Paul in the cappella Paolina (Fig. 40).93 The mount bears an attribution (no longer accepted) to cavalier d’Arpino (c. 1568–1640): ‘cav: Giusippe / apresso Michelangelo’. Other works connected to the cappella Paolina was present in eighteenth-century London collections that

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

89

(Left) Fig. 39. After Michelangelo, Head and Left Shoulder of a Man from The Last Judgement. Black chalk, 95 x 105 mm. London, British Museum, 1895,0915.520. (Opposite above) Fig. 40. After Michelangelo, Head of a Man in Profile to the Left, from The conversion of Saint Paul in the Cappella Paolina. Black chalk, 102 x 83 mm. London, British Museum, Ff,1.13.

Reynolds would have known. The collection formed by John Barnard (1709–1784) was sold in February 1787 and was attended—judging by the many purchases made there—by Reynolds. included in the sale was a study by Federico Zuccaro (1540–1609) of two allegorical figures, one male and one female, for the vault in the chapel, which are nearly identical to the final scheme.94 Many drawings by the painter Jacopo da Pontormo (1494–1557), who was much impressed by the Sistine ceiling, were for a long time thought to be so Michelangelesque in their robust handling, especially of the male form, that they were given to Michelangelo himself. One example was acquired by the national Gallery of canada, Ottawa in 2004 (Fig. 41).95 it is connected with the sleeping Adam in The Creation of Eve (Figs. 35, 36), but the pose is not identical and so it was supposed to be an early preparatory drawing by Michelangelo. it retained the attribution to Michelangelo for at least two centuries until it was published in 2005 by David Franklin as a work by Pontormo. Franklin notes that the rather soft, exploratory handling of the black chalk and the elongated, almost segmented treatment of the human form can be paralleled

90

with other secure Pontormo drawings. Reynolds would probably have known the drawing as a Michelangelo and connected it with the Sistine chapel. Other copies after Michelangelo are also by known hands. Giulio clovio (1498–1578) made many drawings after Michelangelo, including one in black chalk of the Libyan Sibyl in the north-east end of the Sistine chapel ceiling that Reynolds’ owned.96 Of particular interest are drawings Reynolds thought were by Giorgio Vasari. in Reynolds’ 1798 sale was a group of drawings, perhaps bound into an album, of ‘The works of M. Angelo (except the Last Judgement) in the capella Sistina, [drawn] by Vasari’.97 Subsequently, they were acquired by the artist John Linnell (1792–1882)—who like his friend William Blake (1757–1827) was a fan of Michelangelo—from the estate of the poet Samuel Rogers (1763–1855) in 1856. in the sale catalogue the drawings were described as: A collection of the frescoes and ceiling of the Sistine chapel, after M. Agnolo, by G. Vasari, thirty-seven, in a bookbox—[bound in] russia [leather]. From Sir P. Lely’s and Sir J. Reynolds’s collections.98

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Linnell had earlier made prints after the drawings that he published as Michael Angelo’s frescoes in the Sistine Chapel: facsimiles of original drawings, of the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, made at the time of the paintings, and before the execution of the Last Judgment (London: John Linnell, 1834), where he reattributed them to Perino del Vaga.99 They reappeared at christie’s in 1918 as: Thirty-seven designs for the Sistine chapel, Rome, by Perino del Vaga—in a box; and a book of engravings, of the same, by J. Linnell, Senr. From the collection of Sir J. Reynolds, PRA. From the collection of Samuel Rogers, Esq.100

Although these ‘Vasari’ drawings of the Sistine chapel did not include The Last Judgement, Reynolds owned fifteen prints of the fresco by unknown printmakers, the subject of which was, unusually, specified in the sale catalogues.101

(Below) Fig. 41. Jacopo carucci da Pontormo, Reclining Male Nude, c. 1530–40. Black chalk, 251 x 383 mm. Ottawa, national Gallery of canada, 41370 recto.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

91

(Left) Fig. 42. Rome, S. Pietro in Montorio, Borgherini chapel. (Above) Fig. 43. Sebastiano del Piombo, A Prophet Addressed by an Angel, 1516–17. Black chalk, with grey and brown wash, heightened with white on blue paper; squared in red chalk, 319 x 251 mm. Washington Dc, national Gallery of Art, 1985.40.1. Gift of Robert h. and clarice Smith.

Sebastiano del Piombo and Raphael in S. Pietro in Montorio Reynolds’ admiration of the muscularity and vigour of Michelangelo’s art led him to turn his attention to his close associates, including Sebastiano del Piombo (1485–1547), whose work was based in part on designs supplied to him by Michelangelo, who was his friend, as Vasari informs us in his Life of Sebastiano.102 Sebastiano’s masterpiece was his work in the Borgherini chapel in the church of S. Pietro in Montorio (Fig. 42). Reynolds might have seen original work by Sebastiano in London, since hudson’s collection included a stupendous study for a prophet addressed by an angel for the left-hand section of the fresco above the entrance archway to the Borgherini chapel, now in the national Gallery of Art, Washington Dc (Fig. 43).103 Reynolds might have noticed the powerful sheet before he went to Rome in 1750 or (again) decades later at hudson’s posthumous sale, at which occasion he bought heavily to add to his own collection.104 The sheet, though, went to a buyer other than Reynolds. in any case Reynolds certainly paid a visit to the church during his stay in Rome.105

92

The centrepiece of the chapel is the fresco of the Flagellation, with christ bound to a column forming the poignant focal point (Fig. 42). Reynolds owned two drawings based upon the work. The first, now attributed to Adamo Scultori (1530–c. 1587), in brown wash, heightened with white on blue paper, is in the chazen Museum of Art (Fig. 44).106 The sheet bears an old attribution to ‘Bastiano del Piombo’, and Reynolds might have sided with this historic designation. Scultori was a printmaker who made many engravings after Michelangelo’s work in the Sistine chapel, and made a print of The Flagellation which forms the main basis for the present attribution.107 however, recent opinion favours the drawing by Scultori being itself a copy of a ‘nowmissing anonymous copy [after Sebastiano]’. The influence of Sebastiano’s The Flagellation can also be seen in a black chalk drawing by the Master of the Ghislieri Apse (fl. 1575–1600), now in a private collection in the USA.108 The drawing adapts the fresco and, judging from the meticulous shading of the chalk, appears to be based on finished drawings for the scheme, either by Michelangelo or Sebastiano himself.109 The background

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

architecture is different from that in the fresco; notably, the column behind christ has been removed in favour of a more open setting, crowded with more figures. nonetheless the copy retains Sebastiano’s coiling energy, focused around the figure of the stoic christ. Reynolds would have enjoyed owning and comparing both these ‘copies’, revealing the wide influence of Michelangelo upon his near contemporaries. however, he also owned genuine drawings by Sebastiano, including a large preparatory drawing, now in Berlin, for his altarpiece The Birth of the Virgin for the chigi chapel in the church of S. Maria del Popolo.110 This joined other drawings for the same church that Reynolds had in his collection (see below). The depth of Reynolds’ collection was such that he had other material related to S. Pietro in Montorio. Raphael’s The Transfiguration—famously his last work—was until the end of the eighteenth century the church’s high altarpiece, before being transferred to the Vatican, where it remains. The work was ‘universally admir’d’, claimed the Richardsons, and Reynolds followed suit, admiring the painting for preserving the ‘correctness of form, which is so perfect and admirable’ which he thought was usually evidenced only in Raphael’s frescoed work (Discourse V).111 Reynolds owned a copy (now in Oxford) of the composition, in pen and brown ink, with brown wash, heightened with white, on blue-grey paper (Fig. 45).112 Reynolds had obtained his anonymous copy from an un-

(Above left) Fig. 44. Adamo Scultori after Sebastiano del Piombo, The Flagellation of Christ, after 1550. Pen and ink, with brown wash on bluegrey paper, 355 x 280 mm. Madison, University of Wisconsin-Madison, chazen Museum of Art, 64.15.8. Gift of Miss charlotte c. Gregory. (Above right) Fig. 45. copy after Raphael, The Transfiguration. Pen and brown ink, with brown wash, heightened with white, on blue-grey paper, 248 x 267 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1863.671.

known source but it had once belonged to Richardson the Elder, before his collection was dispersed in 1747. Reynolds’ executors must have known the drawing was a copy and after his death duly stamped his collector’s mark on the verso, being of ‘inferior merit’, indicating a lower monetary value than those stamped on the recto.113 in addition, Reynolds owned an anonymous copy after expressive hands belonging to two separate apostles in the foreground of The Transfiguration, a late acquisition made by him from the sale of Jan van Rymsdyk in 1790 and purchased by the British Museum in 1895 (Fig. 46).114

Fig. 46. Partial copy of a drawing by Raphael, Hands of Two of the Apostles in The Transfiguration. Black chalk, 269 x 368 mm. London, British Museum, 1895,0915.635.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

93

(Far left) Fig. 47. Giacomo Rocca, The Descent from the Cross. Red chalk, 313 x 208 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1863.631. (Left) Fig. 48. Daniele da Volterra, The Deposition, 1540s. Oil on canvas. Rome, SS. Trinità dei Monti, Orsini chapel. (Above) Fig. 49. Perino del Vaga, Pucci Coat of Arms. Fresco. Rome, SS. Trinità dei Monti, Pucci chapel. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

Daniele da Volterra and Perino del Vaga at SS. Trinità dei Monti Reynolds had a particularly rich cache of drawings relating to the church of SS. Trinità dei Monti that commands the summit of the Spanish Steps, overlooking Piazza di Spagna. This was near where Reynolds lodged for a time during his stay in early 1750 and again in 1752, in rooms in the palace formerly occupied by Queen Maria casimira of Poland (1641–1716), the Palazzetto Zuccari at the intersection of via Gregoriana and via Sistina (see the chapter by Manfredi in this volume).115 Reynolds also lived for a time in 1750–51 on the third floor of the English coffee house in Piazza di Spagna.116 he would therefore have known the area particularly well. The church was decorated during the sixteenth century by a succession of artists and contains works by Perino del Vaga (1501–47), Battista naldini (1537–91), and Daniele da Volterra (c. 1509–66), a close associate of Michelangelo. Daniele’s altarpiece The Descent from the Cross, commissioned in the 1540s to decorate the Orsini chapel, was one of the most celebrated works in the church, and was much praised by Vasari (Fig. 48).117 Reynolds owned a red chalk drawing which he believed to be a preparatory

94

study for this altarpiece (Fig. 47).118 On the front of the mount, below the drawing, is the attribution (not in Reynolds’ hand) to ‘Daniello da Volterra’. There is no recorded provenance before Reynolds, so we do not know whose hand this is. On the verso, in red ink, is the lot number when the drawing was sold from Reynolds’ collection after his death.119 Since individual sheets were seldom put up for sale alone, this suggests that a high value was placed on this drawing in the late eighteenth century. indeed, Reynolds believed that Michelangelo himself might have made it. On the verso of the mount he wrote: Danielle da Volterra painted this subject for a chapel in the Trinita del Monte at Rome for which this is a study either by himself or by Michael Angelo who is said to have assisted him in that work

in fact, the drawing is a study by Giacomo Rocca for his fresco of the same subject, painted around 1575, in the Oratorio del Gonfalone, Rome. Rocca was a pupil of Daniele, and transformed one of his master’s most lauded works into one of his own. Reynolds also had a drawing for other work in SS. Trinità dei Monti, a study by Perino del Vaga of two putti

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Right) Fig. 50. Perino del Vaga, Study for the Pucci Coat of Arms. Red chalk, 163 x 257 mm. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1936.179. (Bottom left) Fig. 51. carlo Maratti, Madonna and Child with Saints Ignatius of Loyola and Charles Borromeo, 1680–90. Oil on canvas. Rome, S. Maria in Vallicella, Spada chapel. (Bottom right) Fig. 52. carlo Maratti, Study for Madonna and Child Enthroned with Angels and Saints, 1680–90. Pen and brown ink, with brown wash, 367 x 206 mm. Paris, Musée du Louvre, RF 43393.

for the Pucci coat of arms above the entrance to the Pucci chapel (Fig. 49).120 The drawing was modified a little in execution (Fig. 50). Reynolds had bought it rather late in life at the sale of John Barnard (1709–1784) held by John Greenwood, London in February 1787.

Federico Barocci and Carlo Maratti in S. Maria in Vallicella The church of S. Maria in Vallicella, known as the chiesa nuova, has two masterpieces by Federico Barocci (c. 1535–1612) commissioned from Filippo neri (1515–1595): The Visitation (c. 1583–86) in the Pozzomiglio (or Pizzamiglio) chapel and The Presentation of the Virgin (1593–1603) in the left transept.121 Both works were copied in black chalk sketches in a sketchbook in the Sir John Soane’s Museum, London.122 Reynolds owned a sheet of studies by Barocci, in pen and brown ink with brown wash, for the smaller and less complex of the two works, The Visitation, and now in the Fondation custodia (Lugt collection) in Paris.123 The Richardsons also owned drawings for works here, which Reynolds might have seen in London in their collections before or after his trip to italy. They owned two drawings by carlo Maratti for his altarpiece The Madonna and Child with Saints Ignatius of Loyola and Charles Borromeo in the Spada chapel (Fig. 51). One was owned by Richardson the Younger and, drawn

in pen and brown ink with brown wash, represents a late design of the whole altarpiece (Fig. 52).124 The second, owned by his father, a late drawing in red and white chalk for the imploring figure of Saint charles Borromeo, appears exactly as executed in the final painting.125 Though Reynolds did not, it seems, own any drawings by Maratti for this Madonna and child group, he certainly knew the work and recorded it in a sketch in the same sketchbook as his studies after Barocci in the same church.126

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

95

Carlo Maratti at the Cybo Chapel, S. Maria del Popolo carlo Maratti (1625–1713), the chief exponent of late Roman Baroque art, was particularly well represented in Reynolds’ collection, judging from the high number of surviving drawings by him that can be identified, now scattered all over the world. Reynolds considered Maratti, along with his master Andrea Sacchi (1599–1661), to be the last of the long line of great Roman artists, and referred to them in his Discourse XiV from 1788, as the ‘ULTiMi ROMAnORUM’ (last of the Romans).127 Reynolds’ Maratti drawings include a number with a Roman connection, including an attractive study in red chalk on blue paper of Saint John the Evangelist for his altarpiece Saint John the Evangelist Disputing the Subject of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin with the Church Fathers, Saints Gregory, John Chrysostom and Augustine (Fig. 53).128 This altarpiece, one of Maratti’s most celebrated, was commissioned in 1686 by cardinal Alderano cybo for his chapel in the church of S. Maria del Popolo, Rome, and executed the same year (Fig. 56).129 The chapel faced Raphael’s famous chigi chapel, for which Reynolds had a

96

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Opposite left) Fig. 53. carlo Maratti, Study for a Figure of Saint John the Evangelist, in profile to right, with separate studies for his raised right hand, 1686. Red chalk on blue paper, 394 x 255 mm. London, British Museum, 1938,0611.7. (Opposite right) Fig. 54. carlo Maratti, Studies for the Head of St Gregory and the Eagle of Saint John the Evangelist, 1686. Black chalk on blue paper, 403 x 256 mm. London, British Museum, 1927,0518.6. (Opposite below) Fig. 55. Attributed to carlo Maratti, The Virgin with Female Attendant Appearing to Four Male Saints, 1686. Pen and brown ink, with brush and grey wash, over red chalk, 250 x 150 mm. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 64.295.2. Purchase, Joseph Pulitzer Bequest, 1964. (Right) Fig. 56. carlo Maratti, Saint John the Evangelist Disputing the Subject of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin with the Church Fathers, Saints Gregory, John Chrysostom and Augustine, 1686. Rome, S. Maria del Popolo, cybo chapel.

preparatory drawing for the imposing altarpiece by Sebastiano del Piombo, discussed above. in Maratti’s drawing, which corresponds to the finished painting, Saint John’s body is slightly turned towards the viewer and his head is in profile. he points towards the seated Saint Gregory with his left hand, and with his other points heavenwards. Reynolds visited the church and specifically noted the cybo chapel with its altarpiece by Maratti, referring to the Virgin as ‘a fine figure’.130 Reynolds would probably have known two preparatory compositional drawings for the altarpiece that belonged to Richardson the Younger. The first, a pen and ink drawing with brown and grey wash over red chalk, records early thoughts for the entire altarpiece, and includes seven figures in total (Fig. 55).131 it was acquired by the Metropolitan Museum of Art in 1964. The disposition of the figures in this sketch is different from the final form of the altarpiece: in particular, the figure of Saint John was originally planned with his back partly to the viewer, rather than gesticulating emphatically. The work was annotated by Richardson in a manner that left no doubt as to the artist and intended subject: Study for the im[m]aculate conception, the great altarpeice [sic] of the / chappel of card. Alderano cibo in y[e] ch[urch] of the Madonna del Popolo. / The Picture was finish’d 1686, when carlo was 61 y.r[s] Old.132

The second work from Richardson the Younger’s collection has the figures of Saint John and Saint Gregory in the same placement as the sketch in new York, but other figures are differently arranged, and Maratti has reduced their number from seven to six. Richardson annotated this drawing with almost the exact wording as on the mount in new York.133 it appeared in his London sale, in February 1772, soon after his death. Reynolds also owned a study for the attentive head of Saint Gregory, which had previously belonged to hudson, and was acquired after his death at one of his sales in 1779 (Fig. 54).134 The drawing, executed in black chalk and also on blue paper, has an auxiliary study of an eagle that Maratti has placed on the sheet—somewhat comically— immediately above the saint’s head. The eagle’s body in the final work is partly concealed by the figure of Saint John the Baptist. Reynolds therefore united his two drawings for the same project from different sources (no previous provenance is known for the drawing of Saint John the Evangelist). Reynolds also owned a study in the British Museum for Maratti’s painting The Death of the Virgin in the Villa Albani, Rome.135 This, another late addition to Reynolds’ collection, had come from the sale of John Barnard’s collection in 1787, and was snapped up at the same time as Perino del Vaga’s drawing connected with SS. Trinità dei Monti.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

97

(Above left) Fig. 57. Taddeo Zuccaro, Study for a Sibyl for the Mattei Chapel, S. Maria della consolazione, Rome, c. 1553–56. Pen and brown ink, with brown wash, heightened with white (partly oxidised), with some black chalk, on blue paper, 232 x 232 mm. London, British Museum, Pp,2.127. (Above right) Fig. 58. Rome, S. Maria della consolazione, Mattei chapel, with frescoes by Taddeo Zuccaro.

Other Roman Churches Reynolds owned various other prints and drawings connected with Roman churches. These include an engraving by Bartolomeo Passarotti (1529–92), after the fresco of The Visitation in the Oratory of S. Giovanni Decollato, painted in 1538, one of the masterpieces of Mannerist painting.136 The print is reversed with respect to the fresco (Fig. 60). Another is a drawing by the late Mannerist painter Taddeo Zuccaro (1529–66), a study for a sibyl on the left-hand side of the lunette above the altar in the Mattei chapel in the church of S. Maria della consolazione, Rome (Figs. 57, 58).137 The drawing—annotated in red ink on the verso ‘Lot 1060’—appeared in a mixed lot with five other drawings, indicating that it was not considered important enough to be put up for sale on its own.138 nonetheless, the blue paper with white heightening makes for an attractive sheet. Richardson the Elder also owned a drawing for the same space, a study of a seated onlooker in the Last Supper on the vault of the Mattei chapel.139 Reynolds also had a preparatory chalk study of the Virgin for the fresco Assumption of the Virgin in the church of S. Maria del Suffragio in Rome by Giovanni Battista Beinaschi (1636–1688), now in the national Gallery of canada, Ottawa (Fig. 59).140

98

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Oppposite centre) Fig. 59. Giovanni Battista Beinaschi, The Assumption of the Virgin, 1678–80. Black chalk heightened with white on blue paper, 567 x 432 mm. Ottawa, national Gallery of canada, 9970 recto. (Opposite bottom) Fig. 60. Bartolomeo Passarotti after Francesco Salviati (1510–63), The Visitation of the Virgin to Saint Elizabeth, 1550–60. Engraving, 318 x 484 mm. London, British Museum, 1865,1014.337. (Right) Fig. 61. Taddeo Zuccaro, Study for The Foundation of Orbetello in the Sala dei Fasti Farnesiani, Palazzo Farnese. Pen and brown ink, with brown wash, 270 x 424 mm. London, British Museum, 1947,0412.154 recto.

Palazzo Farnese and Palazzo Barberini Reynolds also owned drawings related to decorative schemes in Roman palaces. These include a double-sided sheet of preparatory studies by Taddeo Zuccaro in the British Museum. The recto is a study for the fresco depicting The Foundation of the City of Orbetello (Fig. 61) which is situated between the doors on the wall opposite the windows in the Sala dei Fasti Farnesiani in the Palazzo Farnese.141 Reynolds also owned another sheet related to the same room, a copy after Taddeo Zuccaro’s fresco which had formerly belonged to hudson, The Capture of Tunis, now in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London.142 Pietro da cortona (1596–1669) was an artist that Reynolds collected in some depth, and he owned a black chalk preparatory study, now in Ottawa, for Pietro da cortona’s The Triumph of Divine Providence in the salone

(Above left) Fig. 62. Pietro da cortona, Study for Moral Knowledge and Minerva Forsaking the Drunken Silenus and Venus, c. 1633. Black chalk, 278 x 419 mm. Ottawa, national Gallery of canada, 6134. (Above right) Fig. 63. Pietro da cortona, The Triumph of Divine Providence. Fresco. Rome, Palazzo Barberini.

of the Palazzo Barberini, commissioned by Pope Urban Viii in 1633 (Fig. 63). The Ottawa drawing is a preparatory study for the figure of Moral Knowledge guided by the helmeted figure of Divine Assistance on the righthand cove when facing the windows (Fig. 62).143 it came from the collection of hudson and was acquired after his death at one of his sales in 1779. Evidence for Reynolds having visited the Palazzo Barberini is found throughout his sketchbook in the Metropolitan Museum, so his purchase of the drawing was undoubtedly prompted by his familiarity with the fresco.144

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

99

(Left) Fig. 64. After Polidoro da caravaggio, Seated Prisoners Sleeping, from a Frieze on the Façade of the Palazzo Ricci. Brush and brown wash, heightened with white, 142 x 193 mm. Princeton University Art Museum, 1948-665. (Below left) Fig. 65. Polidoro da caravaggio, Seated Prisoners Sleeping, detail. Fresco. Rome, Palazzo Ricci, façade. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Below right) Fig. 66. Andrea Boscoli after Polidoro da caravaggio, Study of Figures with a Bull, from a Frieze on the Façade of the Palazzo Gaddi. Pen and brown ink, with brown wash, 148 x 137 mm. Leiden, Universiteit Leiden, PK-1969-T-49.

Façade Decorations on Palazzo Ricci, Palazzo Gaddi and Palazzetto Chermandio Reynolds also owned several drawings by Polidoro da caravaggio (c. 1499–c. 1543), highly praised by Vasari for his knowledge of antique Roman artefacts and architecture.145 none can be connected with his Roman work, or with the monochrome façade decorations all’antica imitating bas-reliefs that he supplied for numerous buildings throughout the city. he did, however, possess renderings of some of them by other artists. he owned an anonymous copy after the façade of the Palazzo Ricci,

100

now in Princeton University Art Museum (Fig. 64).146 The drawing is a detail of two Barbarian prisoners seated before a trophy of arms over the main doorway to the left, between the ground and first floors, in the façade decoration painted in chiaroscuro (Fig. 65).147 The main cycle, between the first and second floors, depicts the arrest of Mucius Scaevola. Reynolds was the first recorded owner

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

of the sheet, so we do not know where he got it from, but it still has its historic mount which is annotated in a hand that predates Reynolds: ‘Di Polidoro da Caravaggio’ (By Polidoro da caravaggio).148 indeed, Reynolds’ fellow collector, Richardson the Elder, had an anonymous copy of the same sleeping couple, in pen and brown ink, with brown wash and white heightening on blue paper, which Reynolds might have known.149 Reynolds also owned a drawing of a panel by Polidoro on the first floor of the Palazzo Gaddi between two windows, by Andrea Boscoli (c. 1560–1608), now at Leiden (Fig. 66).150 Richardson the Elder also owned a copy of another section of this façade decoration, now at the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford.151 Reynolds also owned material relating to the façade decoration by Federico Zuccaro (c. 1542/43–1609) for the façade of the Palazzetto chermandio in Piazza S. Eustachio. The fresco depicts The Vision of Saint Eustace, and was painted in c. 1559 (Fig. 68).152 The drawing (Fig. 67) is the modello for the scheme to guide the artist in

(Above left) Fig. 67. Federico Zuccaro, Study for the Vision of Saint Eustace, c. 1559. Brush and brown, grey, green, yellow, and red wash, heightened with white, over traces of red and black chalk; squared in black chalk, 341 x 202 mm. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 62.76. Rogers Fund, 1962. (Above right) Fig. 68. Federico Zuccaro, The Vision of Saint Eustace, c. 1559. Rome, Palazzetto chermandio, façade. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

his project and, importantly, might have been shown to the prospective client. Vasari quotes from the commission in his Lives, of which Reynolds owned a copy, so he may have been familiar with it. The drawing passed from Richardson the Elder to Richardson the Younger, and was sold in 1772 after the latter’s death. it is not known when it was acquired by Reynolds. The drawing retains its historic mount, annotated in red ink with the lot number in Reynolds’ sale in 1798: ‘Lot 554’.153 Unlike the façades by Polidoro, Zuccaro’s schemes were often brightly coloured, as here.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

101

Fig. 69. Samuel William Reynolds after carl Frederik von Breda, Portrait of Sir Joshua Reynolds, 1796. Mezzotint, with engraved lettering, 505 x 353 mm. London, British Museum, Aa,1.16.

Conclusion Rome formed an important component of Reynolds’ collection of books, prints, paintings and drawings. The depth and range of the collection meant that he had a particularly informed sense of its legacy. items in his collection came for the most part with a British provenance before his acquisition of them, and the young artist might have amassed very little beyond some prints and books while abroad in italy, and purchased his collection primarily through auction houses in London. Therefore Reynolds’ Roman prints and drawings serve as both ‘virtual’ visual and topographical surrogates for the city, its numerous landmarks and decorative schemes, and as ‘souvenirs’ of his italian sojourn that proved the foundation of the young artist’s many future successes. indeed, a late portrait of Reynolds from 1791, by carl Frederik von

102

Breda (1759–1818) (Fig. 69) places him beside a plaster cast of the Belvedere Torso.154 This portrait of Reynolds in his academic gown of the honorary doctorate he received from the University of Oxford in 1773 was painted as Breda’s diploma picture for the Royal Swedish Academy of Arts in Stockholm. The portrait has been described as a ‘worthy interpretation of the ageing’ head of the Royal Academy and the British school of painting, and was disseminated in mezzotints by Samuel William Reynolds and James Watson.155 Breda makes an explicit link between the elderly patrician and the foundation of these successes: the fruitful study spent in Rome four decades earlier.

Andrew W. Mellon Fellow in the Department of Drawings and Prints, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (2012–13)

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Notes i would like to thank the following for their invaluable help and assistance: Maggie Allen, carmen c. Bambach, Jan Blanc, Stephanie coane, Giovanna Perini Folesani, Richard Stephens, Kerrianne Stone, Meredith Sutton, Sarah Thomas, Lawrie Thorne, and catherine Zinser. 1. Untraced letter from Reynolds to Edgcumbe, after May 1750 in ingamells and Edgcumbe, 2000, p. 9, no. 6. For the relationship between Reynolds and the Edgcumbe family, see Richard Stephens in Smiles, 2009, pp. 30–36. 2. Robert campbell, The London tradesman, being a compendium of all the trades, professions, arts, both liberal and mechanic, now practised in the Cities of London and Westminster, London, 1747, p. 97, cited in Postle, 2005, p. 19. 3. See new York, Morgan Library and Museum, 1996.140: fols. 52v–53r (Palazzo Bolognetti-Torlonia); fols. 61v–64r (Palazzo Spada); fol. 66v (Palazzo Altieri); fols. 79v, 80v, 81v (Palazzo Pallavicini-Rospigliosi); fols. 83v–86v (Palazzo Borghese); fol. 86r (Palazzo Verospi); fol. 90v (Villa Medici); fol. 92r [inside cover] (Palazzo corsini); copland-Griffiths collection, 64/3: fols. 19r, 45r, 185r (Palazzo Borghese); fol. 190r (Palazzo Doria Pamphilj). new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, inv. 18.121, fols. 82–84 (Palazzo corsini). London, Sir John Soane’s Museum, fol. 94v (Vatican). Some references to these locations were also made after his italian sojourn. The Galleria Doria Pamphilj, for example, is mentioned in a letter from 1786; ingamells and Edgcumbe, 2000, p. 161, no. 152. For surveys of some of Reynolds’ italian sketchbooks pertaining to Rome see Perini, 1988, pp. 141–68; Perini, 2008 and Perini Folesani, 2012, pp. 451–77, who publishes in full a sketchbook in the British Museum (inv. 1859,0514.305). Some of the drawings near the end of this sketchbook may have been made in gardens in or near Rome (fols. 73v–r, 75v, and 77v). Fol. 76v is identified by Perini as being made after one of the stuccoes of sphinxes in Bernini’s Scala Regia in the Vatican. 4. new York, Morgan Library and Museum, 1996.140, fol. 80v. 5. Mannings, 2000, nos. 2223–229. All are now untraced except for no. 2223, which was on the London art market in 1951, and no. 2228, which was on the London art market in 1982, both now in private collections.

15. Sale, christie’s, London, 12–14 May 1902, lot 212 as ‘TWO STUDiES, for ascending figures in the upper part of the ‘Last Judgment’: fresco in the Sistine chapel—black chalk. From the R. Cosway, R.A., Collection. Exhibited at the Guildhall [London], 1895’. 16. Sale, Sotheby’s, new York, 28 January 1998, lot 103. This large drawing, which measures 330 by 476 mm, had been kept folded, judging by the prominent centre fold. 17. Sale, Sotheby’s, London, 23–24 April 1929, part of lot 81 (with three others). The drawing is a copy of a drawing in the Victoria and Albert Museum, London, now attributed to Giovanni Francesco Penni, one of Raphael’s pupils and who is known to have assisted him with the Vatican Logge (Dyce 185; Ward-Jackson, 1979, vol. 1, p. 122, no. 245). 18. Sale, Sotheby’s, London, 9 July 2003, lot 12; Bober and Rubinstein, 1986, pp. 197–98, nos. 165A–B; haskell and Penny, 1981, pp. 169–70, no. 17, fig. 87. Banks’ copy depicts the slave bound at the wrists (no. 165B). in 1790 they were transferred to naples, and are now in the city’s Museo Archeologico nazionale. 19. Sale, christie’s, London, 26 July 1929, lot 12. 20. Lists of expenses are encountered among his surviving italian sketchbooks. 21. London, British Museum, inv. 1859,0514.305, n. p. [inside cover]; Perini Folesani, 2012, p. 191. 22. See, for example, sale, Phillips, London, 20 March 1798, lot 1324 as ‘1 [book of prints], collectanea Antiquitatum Romanarum’. 23. Sale, Phillips, London, 16 March 1798, lot 1044 as ‘1 [book of prints] signorum et staturum [sic], F. Perrier, Romæ 1638’ and 17 March 1798, lot 1150 as ‘1 [book of prints], containing 100 planches d’estampes des Antiques par F. Perrier, Roma, 1638’. 24. Sale, Phillips, London, 23 March 1798, lot 1641 as ‘Musei capitolini, 3 tom.’. 25. Sale, Thomas Winstanley, Liverpool, 19 August–3 September 1816, lot 1586 as ‘Museum capitolinum, (antique Statues and Busts). Fol. 2 tom. Rom. 1750’.

6. inv. Rcin 405712; Mannings, 2000, no. 2235 (2.9 x 1.92 m). For Reni’s painting see Pepper, 1988, p. 281, no. 145, pl. 135 (2.93 x 2.02 m).

26. Sale, christie’s, London, 28 April–20 May 1856 [Seventeenth day], lot 1671 as ‘Rossi’s Plan of Rome; M. Angelo’s Prophets, &c.; and Bellori Veteres Archus [sic] Augustorum, bound together, with autograph of Sir J. Reynolds—h[alf]. b[ound]. russ[ia leather]’.

7. Untraced letter from Reynolds to Barry, before May 1769 (ingamells and Edgcumbe, 2000, p. 30, no. 22). Barry was in Rome 1766–70.

27. London, Sir John Soane’s Museum, London, pressmark AL 27D; sale, Phillips, London, 22 March 1798, lot 1547 as ‘Galleria Giustiniana’.

8. Untraced letter from Reynolds to Barry, before May 1769 (ingamells and Edgcumbe, 2000, p. 30, no. 22).

28. Richardson and Richardson, 1722, p. 153.

9. Gibson-Wood, 2000, p. 96. 10. These elaborate copies were executed ‘with such skill, that many of those early productions [of Reynolds…] are actually considered as masterly originals by Guercino himself ’ (northcote, 1819, vol. 1, p. 18). 11. Sale, Sotheby’s, new York, 14 January 1987, lot 35. Richardson also owned an anonymous seventeenth-century red chalk copy after a statue of ‘Bacchus’ formerly in the Villa Martinori, Rome. Sale, Sotheby’s, new York, 8 January 1991, lot 23; Bober and Rubinstein, 1986, pp. 107–8, no. 71. The statue is now in the ny carlsberg Glyptotek, copenhagen.

29. copland-Griffiths collection, 63/3, fol. 17r. One of the drawings in one of the British Museum sketchbooks (inv. 1859,0514.305, fol. 75v) has been tentatively identified as a view of the Villa negroni (Perini Folesani, 2012, p. 348). 30. London, Sir John Soane’s Museum, London, pressmark AL 44A; Sale, Phillips, London, 19 March 1798, lot 1246 as ‘1 [book of prints], Fabriche et Edificii in Roma par Da Val Duggia’. The printmaker Falda was sometimes known as ‘Falda da Valduggia’ from his birthplace of Valduggia in northern italy. 31. Sale, christie’s, London, 14 March 1795, lot 37; Broun, 1987, vol. 2, p. 299, no. 2 (Panini). it is unclear whether this is one of the extant versions of this subject.

12. new York, Morgan Library and Museum, 1996.140, fol. 81v.

32. Richardson and Richardson, 1722, p. 193.

13. cosway owned, for example, a study by Giovanni Lanfranco for the fresco Chinese Ambassadors in the Sala Regia in the Palazzo del Quirinale, Rome (London, British Museum, 1963,0209.2; Pouncey and Gere, 1962, vol. 1, p. 229, no. 373 (as Polidoro da caravaggio), vol. 2, pl. 364; Turner, 1999, pp. 108–9, no. 148). it had formerly belonged to Richardson the Younger. For a general survey of cosway’s collection see Lloyd, 2011, pp. 65–73. West owned, for example, a study by Battista Franco for the fresco Arrest of Saint John the Baptist in the Oratorio of S. Giovanni Decollato, Rome (London, British Museum, Pp,2.121; Gere and Pouncey, 1983, vol. 1, pp. 83–84, no. 121, vol. 2, plates 116[r], 117[v]) and a fragment of a cartoon by Raphael for the head of the putto attending the figure of Poetry in the frescoed vault in the Stanza della Segnatura in the Vatican (London, British Museum, Pp,1.76; Pouncey and Gere, 1962, vol. 1, p. 25, no. 28, vol. 2, pl. 33; Joannides, 1983, p. 194, no. 249). The former had previously belonged to Richardson the Elder.

33. London, British Museum, 1916,0503.1; Gere and Pouncey, 1983, vol. 1, p. 111, no. 189, vol. 2, pl. 180. The drawing is badly damaged, with many losses, especially at the edges, and before the end of the eighteenth century—judging from the careful placement of Reynolds’ collector’s mark—was laid down onto a backing sheet (see Esposito, 2011b, pp. 59–60 for other examples of this practice). his mark was carefully applied to the remaining intact sheet, in order to preserve the mark (and the valuable attendant provenance) should the drawing at some future time be removed from this backing. Added to the original mount, now dismembered, was an inscription that read ‘… per S. Pietro di Roma …’.

14. The Banks collection remains to be reconstructed but for a recent study see Bryant, 2005, pp. 56–58.

34. London, British Museum, Oo,3.5; Turner, 1999, p. 15, no. 21. 35. Turner, 1999, p. 15. 36. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 64.295.3; Bean, 1982, pp. 260–61, no. 266. 37. See note 141 below.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

103

38. Sale, Phillips, London, 21 March 1798, lot 1450 as ‘Loggia di T. Pietry [sic] in Vaticano di Lanfranco’.

69. Sale, Phillips, London, 21 March 1798, lot 1433 as ‘Raphael’s Bible engraved by chapron’. Dominique Jacquot in Laveissière et al., 1999, pp. 159–64.

39. For a survey of Reynolds and Raphael see Perini, 2005, pp. 261–75, especially pp. 273–75.

70. Sale, Sotheby’s, London, 3 July 1996, lot 3 as ‘Follower of Raphael’.

40. See for example, Wark, 1975, pp. 15–16 [Discourse i; delivered 1769], pp. 83–84 [Discourse V; delivered 1772] and p. 273 [Discourse XV; delivered 1790]. 41. Wark, 1975, p. 83. 42. Leslie and Taylor, 1865, vol. 1, p. 43. 43. RA, REY 3/28; Leslie and Taylor, 1865, vol. 1, p. 41; hilles, 1936, p. 226. 44. Richardson and Richardson, 1722, p. 193. 45. Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum, 84.GA.920; Joannides, 1983, p. 183, no. 203; Julian Brooks in Franklin, 2009, pp. 77–79, no. 4; Jacoby and Sonnabend, 2012, pp. 140–42, no. 18. 46. Goldner, 1988, p. 97. 47. new haven, Yale center for British Art, B1975.4.1576. i am grateful to Giovanna Perini Folesani (Università di Urbino carlo Bo) for bringing this drawing and its companions in new haven to my attention, and identifying the sources. 48. new haven, Yale center for British Art, B1975.4.1577–78. 49. new haven, Yale center for British Art, B1975.4.1577. 50. Mannings, 2000, no. 450. 51. Bartsch, 1803–21, vol. XiV, p. 200, no. 247. 52. Penny, 1986, p. 236; Mannings, 2000, no. 450. See Landau and Parshall, 1994, pp. 120–31 for a discussion of Raphael’s supply of drawings to his printmakers, especially Marcantonio Raimondi. 53. Sale, Phillips, London, 20 March 1798, lot 1311 as ‘1 [print], Mount Parnassus, from Raphael, by M. Antonio’, lot 1314 as ‘2 [prints], Mount Parnassus, and the Slaughter of the innocent [sic], from Raphael, by M. Antonio’ and 21 March 1798, lot 1416 as ‘1 [print], Mount Parnassus from Raphael by M. Antonio’.

71. Sale, christie’s, London, 12–14 May 1902, lot 298 as ‘Raffaelle Santi. isaiah: Drawing for one of the Prophets, for the frescoes of the ‘Sibyls’ and ‘Prophets’, in Santa Maria della Pace at Rome—black chalk—see inscription on back of mount. From the Cavaliere Ghezzi, J. Richardson, Jun., Bouverie, and Warwick Collections’. 72. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1995.401; Logan and Plomp, 2005, pp. 305–07, no. 114. 73. Logan and Plomp, 2005, p. 306. The white heightening is now partly discoloured. 74. Logan and Plomp, 2005, p. 305. 75. Washington, Dc, national Gallery of Art, 1991.217.4; Joannides, 1983, pp. 21, 207, no. 297. 76. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.203; Parker, 1956, pp. 305–6, no. 562, pl. 139; Joannides, 1983, p. 208, no. 301. 77. London, British Museum, 1953,1010.1; Pouncey and Gere, 1962, vol. 1, pp. 31–33, no. 36, vol. 2, pl. 42 [r]; Jacoby and Sonnabend, 2012, pp. 212–15, no. 38. Richardson the Elder also owned a ‘contemporary copy’, in metalpoint on grey prepared paper, after Raphael’s Phrygian and Tiburtine sibyls (Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1943.47; Parker, 1956, p. 348, no. 653). 78. indianapolis Museum of Art, 47.16; Robert Munman in Olszewski, 2008, vol. 1, pp. 334–35, no. 271. 79. Robert Munman in Olszewski, 2008, vol. 1, p. 335. 80. Austin, Blanton Museum of Art, University of Texas at Austin, 1988.12. 81. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1938.90; Parker, 1956, p. 115, no. 240, pl. 60. 82. Parker, 1956, p. 115. 83. See note 30 above.

54. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1935.152; Parker, 1956, pp. 312–13, no. 570, pl. 147; Joannides, 1983, p. 197, no. 259.

84. Wark, 1975, p. 275.

55. Sale, Phillips, London, 26 March 1798, lot 1878 as ‘1 [print], Alexander discovering the MSS. of homer, from Raphael, by M. Antonio’; Bernini Pezzini, Massari and Prosperi Valenti Rodinò, 1985, p. 37, no. 1; Bartsch, 1803–21, vol. 14, p. 168, no. 207.

86. London, British Museum, 1926,1009.1; Wilde, 1953, pp. 23–24, no. 11, pl. 21 (r); chapman, 2005, pp. 129–30, no. 25.

56. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.198; Parker, 1956, pp. 300–1, no. 557, pl. 136; Joannides, 1983, pp. 94–95, plate 31[r]; pp. 96–97, plate 32[v]; p. 216, no. 333.

88. Sale, Sotheby’s, London, 25 May 1938, part of lot 29.

57. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.273; Parker, 1956, p. 342, no. 641; Macandrew, 1980, p. 281, no. 641 (Appendix 2). 58. Sale, Sotheby’s, London, 16 november 1949, part of lot 38 with three others. 59. London, British Museum, 1998,0214.7. 60. chicago, Art institute of chicago, 1922.3794; Mccullagh and Giles, 1997, pp. 377, 379, no. 633. 61. Dyce 253; Ward-Jackson, 1979, vol. 1, pp. 109–10, 112, no. 226. 62. Ward-Jackson, 1979, vol. 1, pp. 109–10. 63. London, British Museum, Oo,6.93; Röthlisberger, 1968, vol. 1, p. 162, no. 330. 64. Sale, christie’s, London, 13 March 1795, lot 68; Broun, 1987, vol. 2, p. 305, no. 2 (Raphael), vol. 3, pl. 89. Richard E. Spear does not list the work in his catalogue raisonné of Domenichino’s works (Spear, 1982). Therefore the attribution to Domenichino may be doubtful. 65. Sale, Phillips, London, 12 March 1798, lot 612 as ‘2 [prints] from Raphael, the Battle of constantine, &c’. 66. Sale, Phillips, London, 5 March 1798, lot 66 as ‘1 [print], the Battle of constantine, from Raphael, on 4 sheets’. 67. Anonymous, Battle of Constantine and Maxentius, after the fresco by Raphael and school in the Sala di costantino. Engraving, 358 x 314 mm. Melbourne, University of Melbourne, Baillieu Library Print collection, inv. 1959.4489.000.000. Gift of Dr J. Orde Poynton. 68. Sale, Phillips, London, 20 March 1798, lot 1329.

104

85. Wark, 1975, p. 282.

87. Esposito, 2011b, p. 59. Wilde had noted that the sheet had been ‘trimmed on all sides’ (Wilde, 1953, p. 23). 89. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.102; Joannides, 2007, pp. 350–52, no. 87. 90. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1846.103; Joannides, 2007, pp. 352–53, no. 88. 91. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1863.769; Joannides, 2007, pp. 360–61, no. 94. 92. London, British Museum, 1895,0915.520. 93. London, British Museum, Ff,1.13; Gere and Pouncey, 1983, p. 232, no. 386. 94. Julian Brooks in Mccullagh, 2012, pp. 98–99, no. 46. 95. Ottawa, national Gallery of canada, 41370; Franklin, 2005a, pp. 180–82. See also David Franklin in Franklin, 2005b, pp. 217–19, 347, no. 73. 96. Sale, christie’s, London, 9 July 1982, lot 292. 97. Sale, Phillips, London, 26 March 1798, lot 1944. 98. Sale, christie’s, London, 28 April–20 May 1856 [Tenth day], lot 1274. 99. Linnell in his introduction to the volume of plates wrote that: ‘These drawings once formed part of the collection of Sir Peter Lely, afterwards of that of Sir Joshua Reynolds, and are now in the possession of Samuel Rogers, Esq. by whose permission they are engraved. While in the possession of Sir Joshua Reynolds, they were thought to be by Vasari; but it has been found, by a careful comparison of dates, that he was too young at the time to have executed them. The best critics, however have judged them to be (if not by Michael Angelo), by Perino del Vaga; though some late artists of eminence have thought they were by Michael Angelo himself; and there is much internal evidence to support this opinion, such as deviations from the design of the frescoes, sketches of ornaments upon the mouldings, &c. &c. They were highly esteemed by the

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

late President of the Royal Academy [Sir Thomas Lawrence], by Mr. [henry] Fuseli, Mr. [John] Flaxman, and particularly by Mr. [Thomas] Banks, the sculptor […] The engraver, in thus speaking of the excellence of this work, begs to be understood as speaking only of the drawings, the only merit he claims being that of making as nearly as he could facsimiles of them’. 100. Sale, christie’s, London, 15 March 1918, lot 130. 101. Sale, Phillips, London, 16 March 1798, lots 1008 as ‘10 [prints], the last Judgement, from ditto [Michelangelo]’, lot 1010 as ‘2 [prints], the last Judgement, from ditto [Michelangelo]’, 22 March 1798, lot 1524 as ‘1 [print], the last Judgement’ and 1526 as ‘2 [prints], the last Judgement, from M. Angelo’.

133. Sale, christie’s, London, 2 July 1996, lot 63: ‘carlo Maratti / Study for the immaculate conception, the Great Altarpiece of y / chappel of card. Atocrano cibo in y ch[urch] of y Madonna del Popolo. / The picture was finished in 1686 when carlo was 61 yr. Old’. 134. London, British Museum, inv. 1927,0518.6; Turner, 1999, pp. 136–37, no. 191. 135. London, British Museum, inv. 1938,0611.8; Turner, 1999, p. 137, no. 192. 136. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1863.5787; Bartsch, 1803–21, vol. 18, p. 3, no. 2.

102. Bettarini and Barocchi, 1966–87, vol. 5, pp. 89–90.

137. London, British Museum, Pp,2.127; Gere, 1969, p. 162, no. 98, pl. 64; Gere and Pouncey, 1983, vol. 1, p. 205, no. 328, vol. 2, pl. 312.

103. Washington, Dc, national Gallery of Art, 1985.40.1; Paul Joannides in Strinati, 2008, pp. 268–69, no. 73. it was sold from hudson’s collection at Langford’s, London, 17 March 1779, part of lot 44.

138. Sale, Phillips, London, 16 March 1798, lot 1060 as ‘6 [drawings], F. Mola, P. Veronese, &c’.

104. Sale, Langford’s, London, 17 March 1779, part of lot 44 as Pellegrino Tibaldi. 105. London, Sir John Soane’s Museum, fol. 87v. 106. Madison, chazen Museum of Art, 64.15.8; Robert Munman in Olszewski, 2008, vol. 2, pp. 441–42, no. 351. 107. Bartsch, 1803–21, vol. 15, p. 417, no. 2; Robert Munman in Olszewski, 2008, vol. 2, p. 442. 108. Turner, 2009, pp. 136–37, 309–10, no. 52. 109. Turner, 2009, p. 137. 110. Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett, KdZ 5055; costanza Barbieri in Strinati, 2008, pp. 298–99, no. 88. 111. Richardson and Richardson, 1722, p. 313; Wark, 1975, p. 82. 112. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1863.671; Macandrew, 1980, pp. 63–64, no. 665B. 113. See Esposito, 2011b, pp. 57–63 for the posthumous stamping of Reynolds’ graphic collection. 114. London, British Museum, 1895,0915.635; Pouncey and Gere, 1962, vol. 1, p. 41, no. 52. 115. John hayes in ingamells, 1997, p. 809. 116. John hayes in ingamells, 1997, p. 809.

139. Rhoda Eitel-Porter in Bear et al., 2011, pp. 82–84, no. 25. 140. Ottawa, national Gallery of canada, 9970; Franklin, 2003, pp. 122–23, 170, no. 50. 141. London, British Museum, 1947,0412.154; Gere, 1969, pp. 167–68, no. 108, pls 160 (r), 158 (v); Gere and Pouncey, 1983, vol. 1, pp. 209–10, no. 334, vol. 2, pls 326 (r), 321 (v). 142. London, Victoria and Albert Museum, 2312; Ward-Jackson, 1979, vol. 1, p. 199, no. 433. 143. Ottawa, national Gallery of canada, 6134; Franklin, 2003, pp. 84–85, 167–68, no. 32. 144. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 18.121, fols. 32–33, 35, 37–41, 43. 145. Bettarini and Barocchi, 1986, vol. 4, p. 457. 146. Princeton, Princeton University Art Museum, 1948-665; Gibbons, 1977, p. 27, no. 69. 147. Leone de castris, 2001, pp. 136, 138, fig. 148. 148. Other copies of this section of the episode are known. Ravelli, 1978, pp. 312–17, nos. 521, 528, 531, and 533–37. This copy in Princeton was unknown to Ravelli. 149. Sale, Sotheby’s, new York, 6 December 1980, lot 155.

118. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1863.631; Parker, 1956, p. 42, no. 69 (as ‘? Livio Agresti’). Turner, 1990, pp. 268–74.

150. Andrea Boscoli after Polidoro da caravaggio, Study of Figures with a Bull, from a Frieze on the Façade of the Palazzo Ricci, Rome. Pen and brown ink, with brown wash, 148 x 137 mm. Leiden, Universiteit Leiden, PK-1969-T-49; Brooks, 1999, p. 219. This copy in Leiden was unknown to Ravelli. Other copies of this section are known. See Ravelli, 1978, pp. 347–50, nos. 619–21.

119. Sale, Phillips, London, 21 March 1798, lot 1475 as ‘1 [drawing], D. da Volterra’.

151. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1936.2; Parker, 1956, p. 242, no. 485; Ravelli, 1978, p. 364, no. 659.

120. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum, WA1936.179; Parker, 1956, p. 390, no. 728, pl. 164; Parma Armani, 1986, p. 55, fig. 46.

152. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 62.76; Bean, 1982, pp. 268–69, no. 273; Brooks, 2007, pp. 52–55, no. 41; Julian Brooks in Franklin, 2009, pp. 256–57, no. 71.

117. Bettarini and Barocchi, 1966–87, vol. 5, pp. 540–42; Valone, 1990, pp. 79–87.

121. Lingo, 2008, pp. 84–89; Gillgren, 2011, pp. 149–61. 122. Fols. 21r, 22r. 123. Paris, Fondation custodia (Lugt collection), 5483; Byam Shaw, 1983, vol. 1, pp. 109–10, no. 101, vol. 3, pls 124 (r), 125 (v); Lingo, 2008, pp. 86–87; Gillgren, 2011, pp. 153–55; Mann and Bohn, 2012, p. 199–200, no. 10.2. 124. Paris, Musée du Louvre, RF 43393; catherine Loisel in Loisel, 2006, pp. 140–41, no. 58. 125. Private collection; Avnet, 1968, n. p., no. 68. 126. Fol. 20r.

153. Sale, Phillips, London, 10 March 1798, lot 554 as ‘11 [drawings] from Raphael and others, by F. Zuccaro, Polidoro [da caravaggio], &c’. 154. Mannings, 2000, p. 591, no. R8. Reynolds’ favoured pupil and biographer, James northcote (1746–1831) included the Belvedere Torso in his portrait of the sculptor Thomas Banks painted in Rome (c. 1777–79; Private collection); See Bryant, 2005, p. 22, no. 1. northcote made a similar connection with the artistic pedagogy of Rome as von Breda in his portrait of Reynolds. 155. Asplund, 1943, p. 300.

127. Wark, 1975, p. 249. 128. London, British Museum, 1938,0611.7; Turner, 1999, pp. 135–36, no. 190. 129. Mezzetti, 1955, p. 337, no. 110. 130. new York, Morgan Library and Museum, inv. 1996.140, fol. 53v. 131. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 64.295.2; Bean, 1979, pp. 215–16, no. 282. 132. Richardson identified the patron as cardinal Alderano cybo (1613–1700). The annotation has been newly transcribed from the original and is slightly different from that published in Bean, 1979, p. 215.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

105

Bibliography

Gere, 1969: John Gere, Taddeo Zuccaro, His Development Studied in His Drawings, London: Faber & Faber, 1969.

Asplund, 1943: Karl Asplund, ‘carl Fredrik von Breda’, The Burlington Magazine, vol. 83, 1943, pp. 296–301.

Gere and Pouncey, 1983: John Gere and Philip Pouncey, Italian Drawings in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum: artists working in Rome, c. 1550 to c. 1640, 2 vols., London: British Museum Publications, 1983.

Avnet, 1968: Old Master Drawings from the Collection of Mr. and Mrs. Lester Francis Avnet, new York: American Federation of Arts, 1968.

Gibbons, 1977: Felton Gibbons, Catalogue of Italian Drawings in the Art Museum, Princeton University, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977.

Bartsch, 1803–21: Adam Bartsch, Le Peintre Graveur, 21 vols, Vienna, 1803–21.

Gibson-Wood, 2000: carol Gibson-Wood, Jonathan Richardson: art theorist of the English Enlightenment, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000.

Bean, 1979: Jacob Bean, Seventeenth-Century Italian Drawings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, new York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1979.

Gillgren, 2011: Peter Gillgren, Siting Federico Barocci and the Renaissance Aesthetic, Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2011.

Bean, 1982: Jacob Bean, Fifteenth- and Sixteenth-Century Italian Drawings in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, new York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1982.

Goldner, 1988: George Goldner, European Drawings 1: catalogue of the collections, Malibu: J Paul Getty Museum, 1988.

Bear, 2011: Jordan Bear et al., Mannerism and Modernism: the Kasper collection of drawings and photographs, new York: Morgan Library and Museum, 2011.

Haskell and Penny, 1981: Francis haskell and nicholas Penny, Taste and the Antique: the lure of classical sculpture 1500–1900, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 1981.

Bernini Pezzini, Massari and Prosperi Valenti Rodinò, 1985: Grazia Bernini Pezzini, Stefania Massari and Simonetta Prosperi Valenti Rodinò, Raphael Invenit: stampe da Raffaello nelle collezioni dell’Istituto Nazionale per la Grafica, Rome: Quasar, 1985.

Hilles, 1936: Frederick Whiley hilles, The Literary Career of Sir Joshua Reynolds, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 1936.

Barolsky, 1979: Paul Barolsky, Daniele da Volterra: a catalogue raisonné, new York and London: Garland, 1979.

Ingamells, 1997: John ingamells, A Dictionary of British and Irish Travellers in Italy 1701–1800: compiled from the Brinsley Ford Archive, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 1997.

Bettarini and Barocchi, 1966–87: Rosanna Bettarini and Paola Barocchi (eds.), Le Vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori, nelle redazioni del 1550 e 1568 [di Giorgio Vasari], 8 vols., Florence: Sansoni, 1966–87.

Ingamells and Edgcumbe, 2000: John ingamells and John Edgcumbe (eds.), The Letters of Sir Joshua Reynolds, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000.

Bober and Rubinstein, 1986: Phyllis Pray Bober and Ruth Rubinstein, Renaissance Artists and Antique Sculpture: a handbook of sources, London and Oxford: harvey Miller Publishers and Oxford University Press, 1986.

Jacoby and Sonnabend (eds.), 2012: Joachim Jacoby and Martin Sonnabend (eds.), Raphael Drawings, Munich: hirmer, 2012.

Brooks, 1999: Julian Brooks, ‘The Drawings of Andrea Boscoli (c. 1560–1608)’, Ph.D diss., University of Oxford, 1999. Brooks, 2007: Julian Brooks, Taddeo and Federico Zuccaro: artist-brothers in Renaissance Rome, Los Angeles: J. Paul Getty Museum, 2007. Broun, 1987: Francis Broun, ‘Sir Joshua Reynolds’ collection of Paintings’, 3 vols., Ph.D diss., Princeton University, 1987. Bryant, 2005: Julius Bryant, Thomas Banks 1735–1805: Britain’s first modern sculptor, London: Sir John Soane’s Museum, 2005. Byam Shaw, 1983: James Byam Shaw, The Italian Drawings of the Frits Lugt Collection, 3 vols., Paris: institut néerlandais, 1983. Chapman, 2005: hugo chapman, Michelangelo Drawings: closer to the master, London: British Museum Press, 2005. Ciardi and Moreschini, 2004: Roberto Paolo ciardi and Benedetta Moreschini, Daniele Ricciarelli: Da Volterra a Roma, Milan: Motta, 2004. Czére, 2004: Andrea czére, Seventeenth-century Italian Drawings in the Budapest Museum of Fine Arts: a complete catalogue, Budapest: Szépművészeti Múzeum, 2004. Esposito, 2011a: Donato Esposito, ‘The Print collection of Sir Joshua Reynolds’, Print Quarterly, vol. 28, 2011, pp. 376–81. Esposito, 2011b: Donato Esposito, ‘What’s in a Mark, or What Marks can Tell Us: the use and abuse of the collector’s mark of Sir Joshua Reynolds (1723–1792)’, in Peter Fuhring (ed.), Les Marques de Collections: II, Dijon: L’Echelle de Jacob, 2011, pp. 57–63. Franklin, 2003: David Franklin, Italian Drawings from the National Gallery of Canada, Ottawa: national Gallery of canada, 2003. Franklin, 2005a: David Franklin, ‘A newly Discovered Drawing by Pontormo’, The Burlington Magazine, vol. 147, no. 1224, 2005, pp. 180–82. Franklin, 2005b: David Franklin (ed.), Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo, and the Renaissance in Florence, Ottawa; new haven and London: national Gallery of canada and Yale University Press, 2005. Franklin, 2009: David Franklin (ed.), The Art of Papal Rome, from Raphael to Carracci, Ottawa: national Gallery of canada, 2009.

106

Joannides, 1983: Paul Joannides, The Drawings of Raphael, with a Complete Catalogue, Oxford: Phaidon, 1983. Joannides, 2007: Paul Joannides, The Drawings of Michelangelo and his Followers in the Ashmolean Museum, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 2007. Landau and Parshall, 1994: David Landau and Peter Parshall, The Renaissance Print, 1470–1550, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 1994. Laveissière, 1999: Sylvain Laveissière et al., Nicolas Chaperon, 1612–1654/55, Arles; nîmes: Actes Sud and Musée des Beaux-Arts de nîmes, 1999. Leone de Castris, 2001: Pierluigi Leone de castris, Polidoro da Caravaggio: l’opera completa, naples: Electa, 2001. Leslie and Taylor, 1865: charles Robert Leslie and Tom Taylor, Life and Times of Sir Joshua Reynolds, with Notices of Some of his Contemporaries, 2 vols., London: John Murray, 1865. Lingo, 2008: Stuart Lingo, Federico Barocci: allure and devotion in late Renaissance painting, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008. Lloyd, 2011: Stephen Lloyd, ‘“The Fix’d Landmark of Art”: Richard Cosway RA (1742–1821) as a collector of Old Master drawings’, in Peter Fuhring (ed.), Les Marques de Collections: II, Dijon: L’Echelle de Jacob, 2011, pp. 65–73. Logan and Plomp, 2005: Anne-Marie Logan and Michiel c. Plomp, Peter Paul Rubens: the drawings, new York; new haven and London: Metropolitan Museum of Art and Yale University Press, 2005. Loisel, 2006: catherine Loisel et al., Rome à l’apogée de sa gloire: dessins des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles (Le dessin en Italie dans les collections publiques Françaises), Montreuil: Gourcuff Gradenigo, 2006. McCullagh, 2012: Suzanne Folds Mccullagh (ed.), Capturing the Sublime: Italian drawings of the Renaissance and Baroque, chicago; new haven and London: Art institute of chicago and Yale University Press, 2012. McCullagh and Giles, 1997: Suzanne Folds Mccullagh and Laura M. Giles, Italian Drawings before 1600 in the Art Institute of Chicago: a catalogue of the collection, chicago: Art institute of chicago, 1997. Macandrew, 1980: hugh Macandrew, Catalogue of the Collection of Drawings in the Ashmolean Museum: volume III (Italian school: supplement), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Mann and Bohn, 2012: Judith W. Mann and Babette Bohn, Federico Barocci: Renaissance master of colour and line, Saint Louis; new haven and London: Saint Louis Art Museum and Yale University Press, 2012.

Turner, 2009: nicholas Turner, Drawn to Italian Drawings: the Goldman collection, chicago; new haven and London: Art institute of chicago and Yale University Press, 2009.

Mannings, 2000: David Mannings, Sir Joshua Reynolds: a complete catalogue of his paintings, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000.

Valone, 1990: carolyn Valone, ‘Elena Orsini, Daniele da Volterra, and the Orsini chapel’, Artibus et Historiae, vol. 11, no. 22, 1990, pp. 79–87.

Mezzetti, 1955: Amalia Mezzetti, ‘contributi a carlo Maratti’, Rivista dell’Istituto Nazionale d’Archeologia e Storia dell’Arte, vol. 4, 1955, pp. 253–354.

Ward-Jackson, 1979: Peter Ward-Jackson, Italian Drawings: Victoria and Albert Museum catalogues, 2 vols, London: h. M. Stationery Office, 1979.

Northcote, 1819: James northcote, The Life of Sir Joshua Reynolds, 2 vols., London: henry colburn, 1819.

Wark, 1975: Robert R. Wark (ed.), Discourses on Art [by Sir Joshua Reynolds], new haven and London: Yale University Press, 1975.

Olszewski, 2008: Edward J. Olszewski (ed.), A Corpus of Drawings in Midwestern Collections: sixteenth-century Italian drawings, 2 vols., London and Turnhout: harvey Miller, 2008.

Wilde, 1953: Johannes Wilde, Italian Drawings in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum: Michelangelo and his studio, London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1953.

Parker, 1956: Karl T. Parker, Catalogue of the Collection of Drawings in the Ashmolean Museum: volume II (Italian school), Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1956. Parma Armani, 1986: Elena Parma Armani, Perin del Vaga: l’anello mancante, Genoa: SAGEP, 1986. Penny, 1986: nicholas Penny (ed.), Reynolds, London: Royal Academy of Arts and Weidenfeld and nicolson, 1986. Pepper, 1988: D. Stephen Pepper, Guido Reni: l’opera completa, novara: istituto Geografico de Agostini, 1988. Perini, 1988: Giovanna Perini, ‘Sir Joshua Reynolds and italian Art and Art Literature: a study of the sketchbooks in the British Museum and in Sir John Soane’s Museum’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, vol. 51, 1988, pp. 141–68. Perini, 2005: Giovanna Perini, ‘Raphael’s European fame in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries’, in Marcia B. hall (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Raphael, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 2005, pp. 261–75. Perini, 2008: Giovanna Perini, ‘I taccuini di Sir Joshua Reynolds: storia, identificazione, circolazione, fortuna’, in Maurizia Migliorini and Giulia Savio (eds.), Souvenir d’Italie. Il viaggio in Italia nelle memorie scritte e figurative tra il XVI secolo e l’età contemporanea, Genoa: De Ferrari, 2008, pp. 395–431. Perini Folesani, 2012: Giovanna Perini Folesani, Sir Joshua Reynolds in Italia (1750–1752). Paesaggio in Toscana. Il taccuino 201 a 10 del British Museum, Florence: Olschki, 2012. Postle, 2005: Martin Postle, ‘“The Modern Apelles”: Joshua Reynolds and the creation of celebrity’, in Martin Postle (ed.), Joshua Reynolds: the creation of celebrity, London: Tate Publishing, 2005, pp. 17–33. Pouncey and Gere, 1962: Philip Pouncey and John Gere, Italian Drawings in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum: Raphael and his circle, 2 vols., London: British Museum Publications, 1962. RA: Royal Academy of Arts, London. Ravelli, 1978: Lanfranco Ravelli, Polidoro Caldara da Caravaggio: studio e catalogo, Bergamo: Monumenta Bergomensia, 1978. Richardson and Richardson, 1722: Jonathan Richardson the Elder and Jonathan Richardson the Younger, An Account of Some of the Statues, Bas-reliefs, Drawings and Pictures in Italy, &c. with Remarks, London: 1722. Röthlisberger, 1968: Marcel Röthlisberger, Claude Lorrain, the Drawings, 2 vols., Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of california Press, 1968. Smiles, 2009: Sam Smiles (ed.), Sir Joshua Reynolds: the acquisition of genius, Bristol: Sansom & company, 2009. Spear, 1982: Richard E. Spear, Domenichino, 2 vols., new haven and London: Yale University Press, 1982. Strinati, 2008: claudio Strinati et al., Sebastiano del Piombo, 1485–1547, Milan: Federico Motta Editore, 2008. Turner, 1990: nicholas Turner, ‘A Drawing Attributed to Giacomo Rocca’, Master Drawings, vol. 28, 1990, pp. 268–74. Turner, 1999: nicholas Turner, Italian Drawings in the Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum: Roman baroque drawings, c. 1620 to c. 1700, London: British Museum Press, 1999.

Donato Esposito: The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds

107

108

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 5 Claude Lorrain and La Crescenza: The Tiber Valley in the Seventeenth Century Lisa Beaven La crescenza is a large fortified casale (farmhouse) situated near the Tiber river between the Via Flaminia and the Via Salaria in the Roman campagna north of Rome.1 The campagna is an undulating plain of volcanic tuff, crisscrossed by fossi or small creeks, that extends from Lake Bolsena in the north to the Astura river in the south.2 it was claude Lorrain’s particular subject, and hundreds of his drawings attest to his extensive sketching trips there, particularly during the 1640s. As Joachim von Sandrart observed, claude ‘embarked upon a difficult, arduous apprenticeship that lasted years, going into the countryside each day and making his long way home afterwards’.3 While it is apparent from the large number of these drawings that claude saw open air sketching as an end in itself, he also drew on these drawings for his paintings, so that the topography of the campagna is embedded in his pictorial works.4 Yet because of their ideal qualities, his paintings have been seen as having more in common with pastoral poetry and literary texts than the topography of the campagna.5 it may therefore be useful to attempt to map them onto the actual social and climatic conditions of the seventeenth century campagna that claude experienced. claude’s extensive trips into the campagna coincided with a dramatic worsening of social conditions, one factor of which was climate change. The years from 1300 to 1700 was a period of global cooling known as the Little ice Age. Between 1500 and 1700 the winters were often very cold, the summers cool and there was increased rainfall.6 Things came to a head in the middle of the seventeenth century: the years from 1639 to 1643 and from 1646 to 1650 were particularly cold, ushering in what was to be the coldest half-century of the Little ice Age.7 The Tiber flooded frequently during the 1640s, and famine followed: there were catastrophic crop failures in 1643–44, 1649–50 and 1652–53.8 During the second half of the century much of the agricultural land in the campagna was abandoned or worked only seasonally.

Another factor was malaria. Although documented in the campagna from classical times, by the end of the sixteenth century it had worsened to such an extent that by the second half of the seventeenth century large parts of the region were depopulated.9 in a treatise published in 1677, but written earlier in the century, Giovanni Battista Doni argued that the countryside around Rome was almost completely empty of inhabitants and that those peasants that remained were sick from mal’aria (‘bad air’) and from the ‘earth on which they sleep’.10 Some idea of the extent of the problem of malaria and the desperate situation of the countryside can be gained from edicts isFig. 1. Plaque for alms on the façade of S. Maria dell’Orazione e Morte, Rome. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

Frontispiece: claude Lorrain, La Crescenza. Detail of Fig. 33.

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

109

Fig. 1. Eugène von Guérard, Tower Hill, 1855. Detail. Oil on board, 68.6 x 122.0 cm. Warrnambool Art Gallery, Acc. no. 06/ 003. On loan from the Department of Sustainability and Environment. Gift of Miss Effie Thornton 1966. Reproduced with permission from the Warrnambool Art Gallery. (Photograph: John Brash.) Fig. 1. Eugène von Guérard, Tower Hill, 1855. Detail. Oil on board, 68.6 x 122.0 cm. Warrnambool Art Gallery, Acc. no. 06/ 003. On loan from the Department of Sustainability and Environment. Gift of Miss Effie Thornton 1966. Reproduced with permission from the Warrnambool Art Gallery. (Photograph: John Brash.)

sued by ecclesiastical and civic authorities in the 1660s and 1670s concerning the treatment of workers who fell sick in the countryside.11 Other edicts forbad the plundering of bodies left in the fields or beside roads and the casual burying of dead bodies instead of notifying the local priest so that they could be buried with the proper rites.12 Further evidence of rural illness is found in the Elenco dei morti, a list of the dead compiled by the confraternity of S. Maria dell’Orazione e Morte, whose mission was to collect unburied corpses, particularly from the campagna.13 The members of the confraternity recovered as many bodies as they could from the fields, as well as those that had been thrown into wells or into the Tiber by overseers anxious to avoid bureaucratic complications.14 The role of the confraternity is vividly conveyed in the plaque for alms displayed on one side of the entrance to the church of S. Maria dell’Orazione e Morte (Fig. 1). in one busy week at the end of May 1637 the confraternity

110

collected 47 corpses in the zone of Maccarese, Palidoro and castel di Guido, the area north of Fiumicino, not far from the mouth of the Tiber.15 in the holy Year of 1625 the brothers reported a lower than normal number of bodies collected—66 in the country and 50 in Rome— noting that in other years the number collected ranged from 200 to 250, and often exceeded 300.16 Some of these were victims of violence, but many of those described as having died ‘naturalmente’ would have died from malaria. This is evident from the symptoms displayed by those who were still alive when found by the members of the confraternity: many are described as ‘morobundo’—that is, in a coma—which is one of the symptoms of advanced malaria.17 For example, an entry dated 5 April 1630 reads: ‘in the same place [the landholding of Vallerano, 7 miglia outside Porta S. Paolo] was found a poor farm worker in a coma on little straw inside a cave, who was called Ludovico n. from Pesaro’.18

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

it was this countryside filled with disease that was drawn by claude. To be sure, his favourite site was Tivoli, which was high enough to be healthy, but another favourite was the banks of the Tiber north of Rome.19 This section of the Tiber valley, where the river slowly coils its way through a wide, flat alluvial plain, presented views that were both deep and panoramic and, combined with the occasional medieval tower, picturesque as well.20 This area is carefully recorded in the cingolani map of 1704 (there was an earlier edition in 1692) (Fig. 2) and the Ameti map of 1693 (Fig. 3). claude’s drawings frequently show the course of the Tiber, beginning at the bridge that carries the Via Flaminia (Figs. 2 and 3 [1]) over the Tiber, the ancient Pons Milvius, known as Ponte Molle or Ponte Milvio [4], and including the area around a fountain on the left bank known as the Acqua Acetosa [6], a ruined medieval tower on the opposite side near the Via Flaminia known as the Tor di Quinto [8], and the casale of La crescenza [9].

(Opposite) Fig. 2. Giovanni Battista cingolani dalla Pergola, Topografia geometrica dell’Agro Romano: overo la misura pianta, e quantita di tutte le tenute, e casali della campagna di Roma con le citta terre, e castelli confinanti, Rome, 1704 (first ed. 1692), with additional labelling. (British School at Rome Library.) (Above) Fig. 3. Giacomo Filippo Ameti, Il Lazio con le sue piu cospicue strade antiche, e moderne ..., Rome, 1693, with additional labelling. 1. Via Flaminia 2. Porta del Popolo 3. Building near the Tiber 4. Ponte Milvio/Ponte Molle 5. Torre Lazzaroni 6. Acqua Acetosa 7. Fortified farmhouse near Acqua Acetosa 8. Tor di Quinto 9. La crescenza 10. Osteria di Grotta Rossa 11. Osteria di Malborghetto 12. Acqua Traversa 13. S. Giuliano 14. Bridges over the Fosso dell’Acquatraversa and the Fosso della crescenza 15. Fosso della crescenza 16. Vigna Madama

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

111

claude also drew extensively in the grounds of the Vigna Madama [16], from where there was a view across the Ponte Molle up the Tiber valley to the Apennines (Fig. 4).21 This view was described by the French writer Maximilian Misson as: a beautiful landskip of little hills well cultivated. Over-against it the Tiber creeps thro’ the Fields and Meadows; and the farthest off from the Sight, the snowy Tops of the Apennine do insensibly mingle with the clouds. Behind it is a shady Wood of tall Trees [the Vigna Madama], adorned with cool and solitary walks, which are incomparably charming …22

it is no exaggeration to say that claude’s painting style from the 1640s onwards was grounded in his experience of this territory. Typically his compositions consist of a foreground space, and then a sweeping view of a wide valley, based on this stretch of the Tiber valley, through which we follow the meandering curves of a river into the distance, where it is crossed by a weir or a bridge with a series of arches inspired by the Ponte Molle (Fig. 5).

112

Fig. 4. claude Lorrain, The Tiber from Monte Mario looking North (RD 356). Brush drawing in dark brown wash on white paper, 18.5 x 26.8 cm. London, British Museum, Oo.7-212.

Via Flaminia and Ponte Molle For his sketching trips claude would leave the city by the Porta del Popolo and walk up the Via Flaminia to Ponte Molle. This was a well-trodden route, frequently described a century later by Grand Tourists travelling in the other direction. For example Monsieur de Blainville, whose travels were published in 1757, wrote that: [a]fter passing the Ponte Molle [4] we travelled for a Mile and half along the Flaminian Road, which is here relaid with modern Pavement, amidst Gardens, Taverns, and country Seats; at length we entered the famous city of Rome by the Porta del Popolo [2], formerly Porta Flumentana.23

William Beckford called the Via Flaminia ‘an avenue between terraces and ornamented gates of villas, which leads to the Porta del Popolo’.24 The villas and ‘country seats’ noted by Misson and Beckford included the Villa

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Odescalchi, on the right on leaving the Porta del Popolo, followed by the Vigna Giustiniani, where claude made sketches and, according to Sandrart, also painted pictures of ‘large trees, landscapes and cascades’.25 claude would follow the Via Flaminia until it almost met a bend in the river about half way to Ponte Molle (Figs. 6, 7). he often drew the view from this spot, carefully recording its high, stepped bank, and the dome of Saint Peter’s in the distance (Fig. 9).26 The terraced appearance of the bank here was caused by the force of past floods that had cut into it at various levels depending on the height of the floodwaters. While the Tiber valley north of Rome had been subject to flooding since ancient times, the increased rainfall of the Little ice Age had caused floods to become more frequent and intense.27 Exceptional floods, defined as a rise in the level of the Tiber above 16 metres, occurred five times during the seventeenth century: in 1606, 1637, 1647, 1660 and 1686.28 At times of exceptional floods the Tiber would spread out to occupy the entire valley, causing widespread devastation and loss of life. Gigli reports on the exceptional flood that began on 6 December 1647, when many people were drowned

Fig. 5. claude Lorrain, Landscape with the Marriage of Isaac and Rebecca, 1648. Oil on canvas, 152.3 x 200.6 cm. London, national Gallery, nG 12. (© The national Gallery, London 2013.)

in their houses and the damage was such that a number of houses had to be demolished.29 More regular flooding, when the river rose a still substantial 10–13 metres, occurred in most years and could still be destructive. For example Gigli reports that in a flood that occurred in June 1653, not otherwise recorded, fields were flooded and sheep and shepherds were washed away. This was followed in August by an outbreak of an unspecified illness, almost certainly malaria, and Roman hospitals were filled to overflowing with the sick.30 in October 1653 there was evidently another epidemic of malaria, since Gigli noted that many of those who were dying had spent periods of time outdoors or in the campagna.31 in november 1653 and november 1655 there were more outbreaks of what Gigli calls a ‘febre maligne’.32 As early as 1603 the Via Flaminia near the point where claude made his drawing (Fig. 9) was in need of repair, and in the next twenty years its condition deteriorated as

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

113

it was encroached upon by the erosion of the river bank by floodwaters. This is vividly illustrated in an etching by herman van Swanevelt dating to c. 1652–53 looking downstream towards S. Andrea in Via Flaminia (Fig. 8).33 in 1669 carlo Fontana wrote that the violence of the water had consumed a number of vineyards and carved great holes in the banks of the river.34 in 1696 Eschinardi stated that travelling along the Via Flaminia was dangerous as the road was in a ruinous state, due to the erosion caused

(Top) Fig. 6. G. B. Falda after cornelio Meyer, Via Flaminia and the Tiber. From cornelio Meyer, L’Arte di restituire a Roma la tralasciata navigatione del Tevere, Rome, 1685, p. 27. (Left) Fig. 7. G. B. Falda after cornelio Meyer, Plan of the Tiber passetto near Via Flaminia and the Tiber. From cornelio Meyer, L’Arte di restituire a Roma la tralasciata navigatione del Tevere, Rome, 1685, p. 28. (Below) Fig. 8. herman van Swanevelt, S. Adriano in Via Flaminia. Etching. From Diverses veuës dedans et dehors de Rome, 1652–53. Etching, 115 x 179 mm. London, British Museum, F,2.227. (Opposite top) Fig. 9. claude Lorrain, View of the Tiber at Rome (RD 101). Pen and brown wash, 202 x 265 cm. Kansas city, The nelsonAtkins Museum of Art, William Rockhill nelson Trust, 33-99 A. (Robert newcombe.) (Opposite bottom) Fig. 10. herman van Swanevelt, Vinnia Papa Iulio in Via Flaminia. Etching. From Diverses veuës dedans et dehors de Rome, 1652–53. Etching, 115 x 179 mm. London, British Museum, F,2.225.

114

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

115

by the river, as can be seen in another Swanevelt print, looking upstream towards the Villa Giulia (Fig. 10).35 in 1675 the banks had been eroded to such an extent that clement X hired cornelius Meyer, a Dutch engineer, to construct a passonata (a barrier made of palings), to protect the road from the river. Meyer described how the very swift currents and powerful waves caused by the floodwaters were feared by boatsmen, and did great damage to the buildings of the city, ‘assailing’ the inhabitants inside their homes.36 Two engravings probably designed by Gaspar van Wittel included in Meyer’s publication show the damage to the banks of the river next to the Via Flaminia and depict in detail the passonata (Figs. 6, 7).37 While the passonata may have succeeded in stabilising the river bank—apparently at the expense of navigability, since the work did not please all the boatmen on the river38—the presence of stagnant water behind the barrier made this stretch of road even more unhealthy in summer.39 Even without this the banks of the Tiber had long been recognised as being unhealthy: in 1625 an edict was issued banning hunting along the banks of the Tiber from the

116

Ponte Milvio to the Osteria of Acquatraversa (the Aqua Traversa was a creek that crossed the Via Flaminia between the Tor di Quinto and La crescenza, see Figs. 2, 3 [12]) and further north from March to the end of August in order to prevent hunters from succumbing to malaria.40 claude would then continue to the Ponte Molle, which also features in several of his drawings, almost always seen from the left bank.41 Some show small boats, while others include long rafts in the foreground, the method of transport for cargoes of timber that would be unloaded downstream at the Porto di Ripetta.42 The flood of 1647 swept away the wooden section of the bridge on the left bank, which can be seen in a drawing attributed to Jan Both of the 1640s43 and in an etching of the view from the left bank by Gomar Wouters that illustrates Meyer’s volume in 1685 (Fig. 11).44 This section was replaced and finally removed in the restoration carried out by Giuseppe Valadier in 1805. Meyer refers to floodwaters having critically eroded the approaches on the right bank, threatening access.45 At this point claude’s route split into two. Either he would cross the Ponte Molle and make his way to La crescenza along the right bank (or along the Via Flaminia), or he would continue along the left bank on a well-worn path as far as the Acqua Acetosa. There were several significant landmarks in this section of the Tiber valley: the Torre Lazzaroni (Figs. 2 and 3 [5]), an ancient tower converted into a farmhouse by the river just beyond the Ponte Molle, the Acqua Acetosa itself, a spring marked by a monumental fountain [6], a fortified casale nearby [7],46 and on the right bank opposite the Acqua Acetosa, the Tor di Quinto [8]. This area was fascinating not only to claude Lorrain, who also painted it,47 but also to herman van Swanevelt. Given the presence of several almost identical drawings and prints by these artists, it seems that on occasion they would make the expedition together and draw from the same spots.48 According to a nineteenth-century tradition, this itinerary was also a favourite of nicolas Poussin, to the extent that it was known as the promenade de Poussin, and French plein-air painters such as Achille-Etna Michallon re-named La crescenza la Fabrique du Poussin.49 Yet Poussin’s involvement with this area seems to have been slight. Félibien mentions his habit of withdrawing alone to the vineyards & the places farthest from Rome, where he was free to contemplate antique statues, agreeable prospects, & to observe nature’s finest sketches of the things he came across, either by way of landscapes, such as terraces, trees, or beautiful light effects; or for his history compositions.50

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Opposite top) Fig. 11. Gomar Wouters, Ponte Molle. From cornelio Meyer, L’Arte di restituire a Roma la tralasciata navigatione del Tevere, Rome, 1685, p. 26. (British School at Rome.) (Opposite bottom) Fig. 12. herman van Swanevelt, Sopra la ripa del fiume vicino a Ponte Molle. Etching. (Right) Fig. 13. claude Lorrain, A Farmhouse by the Tiber, (RD 12). Pen and brown ink with brown wash, 11.9 x 9.2 cm. London, British Museum, Oo.6-27.

But compared with the large quantity of landscape drawings by claude, there are relatively few by Poussin. none of the securely attributed Poussin landscape drawings demonstrate that he walked upstream from Rome along the banks of the Tiber sketching as he went as claude did. The only drawings that show the same part of the Tiber valley favoured by claude are no longer accepted by Rosenberg and Prat as autograph works by Poussin.51 This means that the association of Poussin with this part of the Tiber valley depends almost entirely on his painting Landscape with Saint Matthew (Berlin, Gemäldegalerie) in which the landscape closely resembles the bend of the Tiber at the Acqua Acetosa.52 in place of the Tor di Quinto, however, Poussin inserts the Torre delle Milizie, actually in Rome, and idealises the setting, both aspects of that work that suggest that we should be wary of believing too closely in its topographic fidelity.

The Torre Lazzaroni The first structure that claude would have seen as he progressed up the left back of the Tiber was the Torre Lazzaroni, erected in the eleventh century, in part from spoglie taken from nearby tombs (Figs. 2 and 3 [5]).53 This was situated on the right bank of the Tiber, close to the Ponte Molle and before the Tor di Quinto. it can be seen in a drawing by claude from the 1630s (Fig. 13) and in an etching by Swanevelt (Fig. 12).54 claude’s drawing shows a short round tower with a squat farmhouse attached to it, built very close to the bank of the river, while in the distance the Tor di Quinto is visible.55 The Torre Lazzaroni can also be seen in a much later drawing by Francis Towne, which also shows the path along the left bank followed by claude (Fig. 15).56

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

117

S. Giuliano continuing along the left bank, the next feature that claude came across was the little chapel of S. Giuliano (Fig. 3 [13]). This was perched on a rocky outcrop, and is just out of sight to the right of the watercolour by Towne (Fig. 15). it can be seen in a watercolour by Thomas Jones looking the other way, with the Torre Lazzaroni beyond (Fig. 17).57 it can clearly be seen in another watercolour by Towne, with the broad curved back of the Acqua Acetosa fountain visible beyond near the water level, with a fortified farmhouse above it (Fig. 16).58 The same view was drawn by claude but from a lower position, nearer the water, with the cliff below S. Giuliano in the right foreground (Fig. 14).59

(Above right) Fig. 14. claude Lorrain, Tiber Landscape (RD 172r). Pen, brown wash, 192 x 270 mm. London, British Museum, Oo. 6-124, h. 17. (Below) Fig. 15. Francis Towne, The Banks of the Tiber, Looking Upstream, 1780. Pen and grey ink with grey wash and watercolour, 207 x 269 mm. London, British Museum, nn,2.3.

118

(Opposite top) Fig. 16. Francis Towne, The Banks of the Tiber, with S. Giuliano, Looking Upstream, 1780. Grey and brown wash with watercolour and pen and grey ink outlines, 206 x 401 mm. London, British Museum, nn,2.4. (Opposite bottom) Fig. 17. Thomas Jones, The Banks of the Tiber, Looking Downstream, 1777. Watercolour, pen and brown ink, 215 x 277 mm. inscribed: ‘9 / above Ponte Mola [overwritten to read ‘Molle’] 4 March 1777 / near the Aqua cetosa Evening scene / TIBER’. London, British Museum, 1981,0516.18.9.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

119

The Acqua Acetosa

(Above) Fig. 18. herman van Swanevelt, Veduto daqua assuttosa for di Roma, from Diverses veuës dedans et dehors de Rome, 1652–53. Etching, 115 x 179 mm. London, British Museum, F,2.219. (Below) Fig. 19. claude Lorrain, View of the Acqua Acetosa (RD 874). Present whereabouts unknown, from the Wildenstein album. (Sotheby’s, London.) (Opposite top) Fig. 20. Giovanni Battista Falda, Fontana celebre d’Acqua Acetosa, 1665. Engraving, from G.B. Falda, Le Fontane di Roma nelle piazze, e luoghi publici della città, con il loro prospetti, Rome, 1675, vol. 1, plate 33. (Opposite bottom) Fig. 21. J. A. Koch, Acqua Cetosa, from Die Römischen Ansichten, 1810. Etching, 168 x 224 mm. London, British Museum, 1983,0305.21.

120

The Acqua Acestosa marked the point where the vigne surrounding Rome came to an end and the Agro Romano began, as can be seen in the cingolani map (Fig. 2 [6, 7]). it was a mineral spring that became very popular with Romans at the beginning of the seventeenth century because of its purported benefits for the digestive system, the liver and a multitude of ailments.60 Many Romans walked there along the same route as the one taken by claude in order to drink the water. in summer the crowds could be considerable, and even in mid-winter claude shows a number of people there, walking and enjoying the views out over the river (Fig. 19).61 claude might also have met on this walk the acquacetosari, the men who carried water from the spring to different parts of the city.62 he may also have stumbled on dead bodies, since in addition to the malarial epidemics that resulted in the victims dying in large numbers on the roads like this in some years, the Acqua Acetosa was also the site of drownings in the summer months and the occasional murder.63 in 1613 Pope Paul V had built a fountain with an inscription to enclose the spring. At the time when

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

claude knew the fountain the Tiber floods were causing it to deteriorate, so that in 1661 it had to be restored by Pope Alexander Vii. The result was a new, more monumental design with three arches designed by Andrea Sacchi, recorded in 1665 in an engraving by Falda (Fig. 20).64 An etching by Joseph Anton Koch from a high viewpoint shows the fountain from the side in the centre middle ground, and on the far bank the Tor di Quinto with Mt Soracte in the distance (Fig. 21).65 claude made a drawing from a similar high viewpoint, showing clearly the fortified farmhouse on the hill above the fountain that was visible in the views upstream by claude (Fig. 19) and Towne (Fig. 15).66 As part of the restoration by Alexander Vii in 1661 many trees were planted at the Acqua Acetosa to help maintain the integrity of the Tiber banks, which, as we have seen, were being eroded by floodwaters.67 The forces at work to cause this damage can be inferred from claude’s drawing of the site made in mid-winter ‘on the last day of 1662’ immediately following the restoration of the fountain (Fig. 19). The drawing shows strange shapes carved in the banks on either side of the fountain by the force of the water.68 Just how eroded the banks were can be seen in an etching by Swanevelt, dateable to 1652–53

(Fig. 18), which takes a low view from near the water up to the fortified farmhouse that stood on the rise above the fountain.69 This etching shows the way the banks have been deformed by the floodwaters to the extent that they appear carved and eaten into in a series of uneven curves with small bays and shoals forming in the water. These shoals and a line of sandbanks in the water are also visible in another drawing by claude taken from further downstream looking towards the fortified farmhouse.70

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

121

The Tor di Quinto The Tor di Quinto was a defensive tower located beside the Via Flaminia, on the right bank of the Tiber, a short distance upstream from the Ponte Molle and opposite the Acqua Acetosa (Figs. 2 and 3, [8]). it was clearly visible from the spring, which was the favoured viewpoint: close views, such as one by Eugène von Guérard in 1831, are rare (Fig. 23).71 The name is said to be derived from ‘ad Quintum Lapidem’, that is, at the fifth milestone from the pre-Aurelian gates of Rome.72 Another explanation was that it was so named because of its proximity to the Campi Quintij. however, the tower originates in the medieval period, probably the eleventh century, at the same time as the Torre Lazzaroni, when extensive fortifications were being erected in the area, including additions to the ancient Ponte Molle. Rossi has suggested it may have been built to defend the medieval domusculta of S. Leucio located there.73 The tower rests on rocky foundations that may have originally formed part of an ancient tomb.74 At the time claude was drawing it, the tower formed part of the tenuta di Tor di Quinto, consisting of 84 rubbia (121.67 hectares) of territory belonging to the Borghese family (Fig. 22).75 Several of claude’s sketches show that his preferred viewpoint for drawing this landmark was the opposite bank, near the Acqua Acetosa. One drawing shows several figures standing on the edge of the bank looking out on the river, with several small boats moored there (Fig. 24).76

122

As claude’s drawings show, the area around the Tor di Quinto was then completely deforested, and was rented out to others for pasture and the production of hay. 77 Fortified casali like the one on the opposite bank (Fig. 2 [7])—which were more common in the Agro Romano than villages or hamlets—and towers like the Tor di Quinto and Torre Lazzaroni were by the seventeenth century occupied only by seasonal workers or formed the central administrative points for farms. This form of land use gave the Roman campagna a distinctive appearance that was commented on by eighteenth-century English travellers, to whom, accustomed to a different kind of agriculture, it appeared barren. William Beckford, writing in 1780, described the approach to Rome through this area as ‘dreary flats thinly scattered with ilex and barren hillocks crowned by solitary towers, [which] were the only objects we perceived for several miles’.78 By the nineteenth century, however, towers like the Tor di Quinto prompted more positive reflections, as they appeared to speak eloquently of the campagna’s medieval past. Augustus hare in 1907 referred to them as ‘tall towers of brick and stone, relics for the most part of Frangipani, Orsini, and colonna feuds, and erected as refuges for the shepherds of one of the great proprietors …’79 Fig. 22. Carta Topografica del Suburbano di Roma, commissioned by cardinal Giovanni Francesco Falzacappa, Rome, 1839. Detail of the Tenuta di Crescenza and associated landholdings.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 23. Eugène von Guérard, Tor di Quinto near Rome, 1831. Oil on paper, 16.0 x 23.7 cm. Private collection, UK. inscribed, ink, verso ‘Meine erste studi nach der Natur/ Torre del Quinto bei Rom / 1831’.

(Below) Fig. 24. claude Lorrain, Tiber Landscape (RD 172r). Pen, brown wash, 192 x 270 mm. London, British Museum, Oo. 6-124.

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

123

La Crescenza On a number of occasions, claude went up the right bank of the river from Ponte Molle along the Via Flaminia to the fortified casale of La crescenza. On the way he crossed twin bridges that crossed two creeks—the Fosso dell’Acquatraversa and the Fosso della crescenza (Figs. 2, 3 and 26, [15])—near where they joined [14].80 After the bridge came La crescenza itself, occupying a commanding position on the high ground with the valley below [9] (Fig. 25).81 The landholding (tenuta) of La crescenza adjoined those of the Tor di Quinto, Muratella, inviolata and Valchetta (Fig. 22).82 The extent to which the river affected these landholdings can be seen in a description of Valchetta dating from 1600, where the tenuta is described as ‘da precoio, ma è soggetto al Tevere’ (a large animal farm, but it is subject to the Tiber (i.e. it is liable to be flooded)).83 The name La crescenza derives from the crescenzi family, who owned it from the early fifteenth century until 1813 when it was sold to the Buoncompagni.84 Much of its structure dates from c. 1480–90, although it incorporates a thirteenth-century tower. 85 it appears with the title ‘La Crescenza’ on Eufrosino della Volpaia’s 1547 map86 and is drawn as a tower with a small dwelling built around it in the catasto Alessandrino (Figs. 26, 27). Belli Barsali has

124

argued that originally it consisted of a small building with a loggia reached by an external staircase.87 in the fifteenth century an ambitious building campaign transformed it into a castle, with an impressive merloned façade with two low towers at the corners.88 By 1600 La crescenza and the adjoining property of inviolata were both owned by the crescenzi family, with a total extent of 147 rubbia (212.92 ha), of which 51½ rubbie (74.59 ha) consisted of fields or pasture described as the best in Rome.89 numerous claude drawings record both the building and the surrounding landscape, indicating that it was one of his favourite destinations. The first of these, RD 514, is from the Tivoli sketchbook, and dates to the early or mid 1640s (Fig. 29).90 This drawing shows the rambling fortified building on high ground surrounded by trees, and a small stream above. A figure (probably added later)

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Opposite top) Fig. 25. Edward Lear (draughtsman), h. Fussell (engraver), Casale della Crescenza.. Engraving, from Edward Lear, Illustrated excursions in Italy, London, 1846, vol. 2, p. 37. (Opposite bottom) Fig. 26. catasto Alessandrino, map of the tenuta of La crescenza by Marco Antonio Qualeatti, dated 28 May 1656. Rome, Archivio di Stato, Presidente delle Strade 433/7. (Right) Fig. 27. Detail of fig. 26 showing the casale of La crescenza. (Below) Fig. 28. claude Lorrain, Trees, with La Crescenza in the Distance (RD 515). London, British Museum, Oo.6-44.

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

125

reclines in the foreground and two travellers can be seen in the middle distance. RD 515 (Fig. 28), dateable to 1640–45, also shows La crescenza on the far right on top of a rise, with the tangle of trees in the foreground.91 Another drawing in Budapest (R589), which Kitson recognised as being of La crescenza (Fig. 30), is a close-up view along the side of the castle revealing the left-hand corner tower.92 The figures consist of several women in classical dress carrying spears and chasing deer. Röthlisberger noted that the classical figures and the stag could have been added later, and dates the drawing to the first half of the 1640s. in spite of his observation that the drawing is carefully composed, suggesting it was put together in the studio, the distribution of trees, dotted around the casale, correspond well to other drawings of the site by claude. Another drawing in the British Museum (RD 672), datable to 1645–50, shows cows descending to a stretch of water in the foreground, and in the background hills are dotted with trees (Fig. 32).93 At the far left through a gap in the trees the roofline of La crescenza is visible. Much the same view can still be seen today (Fig. 31). claude Lorrain’s painting, the View of La Crescenza (Fig. 33), now in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, was

126

(Above) Fig. 29. claude Lorrain, View of La Crescenza (RD 514). cream coloured paper, chalk, light brown wash. 200 x 302 mm. harlem, Teylers Museum, S 43. (Below) Fig. 30. claude Lorrain, Landscape (RD 589). Brown and grey wash, 22.3 x 32.9 cm. Budapest, Museum of Fine Arts, no. 2849. (Opposite top) Fig. 31. View of La crescenza today. (© David R. Marshall.) (Opposite bottom) Fig. 32. claude Lorrain, View at La Crescenza (RD 672). 195 x 317 mm, chalk, pen, brown wash. London, British Museum, Oo 6-91.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

127

painted around the same time (between 1648 and 1650) and is closely related to the drawing just discussed (Fig. 29).94 The painting has darkened but the drawing in claude’s Liber Veritatis (Fig. 34) reveals that the cows are accompanied by a cowherd sitting under the trees.95 The drawing is inscribed ‘faict ill[ustrissi]mo sig[no]re monsigneur di masso’, which Röthlisberger identified correctly as camillo Massimo. That Massimo commissioned the painting was rejected by Röthlisberger who argued that the inscription postdates the drawing, which suggested to him that Massimo may have bought the painting later.96 Sutherland harris goes further, suggesting that Massimo saw the work in claude’s studio and asked him for it.97 in comparison with the Liber drawing for the earlier painting Massimo commissioned from claude, Coast View with Apollo and The Cumaean Sibyl, which was inscribed ‘quadro facto per Ill[ustrissi]mo Monsig[ignor] di Massimo’, the wording on the Liber drawing for La crescenza is less explicit. And yet in 1968 Röthlisberger noted how rare it was for claude in his maturity to include a specific building in his work of his own accord: ‘By the time of claude’s maturity, such an introduction of an extant building into a painting is extremely uncommon and may be owing to the

128

Fig. 33. claude Lorrain, View of La Crescenza, LV 118, 1648–50. Oil on canvas, 38.7 x 58.1 cm. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1978.205. (© Artstor and the Metropolitan Museum of Art.)

explicit instruction of the patron, about whom nothing is known so far’.98 claude had clear links both with the crescenzi family and with camillo Massimo in the 1640s. in the early part of the decade he painted The Rest on the Flight into Egypt for one of the crescenzi family, probably Francesco crescenzi, the owner of La crescenza,99 and in 1644–45 he painted two landscapes for camillo Massimo.100 Furthermore, a strong case can be made for Massimo’s links to the crescenzi through his mother Giulia Serlupi and his grandmother, Livia crescenzi (the Serlupi and crescenzi families were closely linked throughout the seventeenth century, and merged in the eighteenth). it is possible that Massimo visted La crescenza on occasion. he may therefore have commissioned the work because of family connections. The internal evidence of the painting, however, to some extent contradicts this plausible hypothesis. The painting is small, very different from the monumental landscapes claude produced for Francesco crescenzi

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 34. claude Lorrain, View of La Crescenza (RD 669, LV 118). Pen and in on paper, c. 1648–9. London, British Museum, 1957,1214.124.

and camillo Massimo,101 and its apparent spontaneity of execution has led some scholars to suppose that it was painted directly from nature.102 Most intriguingly, the casale is placed in the distance, screened by a grove of trees and viewed from the side. As Richard Rand has pointed out, the device of screening a distant view with trees is more commonly found in claude’s drawings than his paintings,103 and gives it an informal character. in spite of its central position in the painting the casale’s inclusion appears almost incidental, much as it does in his drawings of this area, as if it is the site itself which is the subject of the painting.104 The building also appears much less formidable than it does in several later renderings, such as Edward Lear’s watercolour (Fig. 36).105 Part of the reason for including it may have been precedent: it is probable that claude was aware of Pietro Paolo Bonzi’s fresco of the casale (Fig. 35), which at the time he was visiting the site decorated a lunette in the courtyard.106 On balance it is unlikely that the painting was commissioned by Massimo or anyone else, and, as Röthlisberger and Sutherland

harris argued, it may therefore have been an initiative of the artist. in the middle ground of the picture, resting under the trees, is a diminutive cowherd, watching while his cows make their way down the bank to the stream, more easily seen in the Liber Veritatis drawing (Fig. 34).107 it is an idyllic scene, but one that takes on a more sinister quality when combined with the information from the Elenco dei morti. On 19 September 1649—probably the same year that claude painted La Crescenza—the brothers on the comfraternity were called out to collect the body of a 25 year-old vaccaro (cowherd), who had died suddenly, probably of malaria, in a hut on the ‘tenuta detta la Crescenza’.108 Both 1648 and 1649 were bad years for malaria epidemics in the country. On one day in April 1648 the members of the confraternity found four boys dying in different parts of the campagna, a sure sign of a malarial epidemic.109 1649 was the one of the worst years of the seventeenth century for such deaths, with the Elenco dei morti recording that the brothers collected 184 bodies during the year.110 in 1662, claude returned to La crescenza and made several more drawings of the area, one of which is inscribed ‘vista de la crecinsia Claudio fecit / Roma 1662 7etem.bre’

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

129

(view of La crescenza made by claude / Rome 7 September 1662) (Fig. 37).111 in other words, claude was there at the end of summer, when the danger of falling ill from malaria was still high. This drawing shows the panoramic view from outside the building looking across the valley, a view that is being enjoyed by two groups of people in the fore- and middle grounds. A closely related drawing, R870a, in the same panoramic format, shows the view in the other direction, towards La crescenza with Mount Soracte beyond (Fig. 38).112 La crescenza appears as a rambling fortified house, surrounded by a bare plain. in these panoramic drawings claude uses the casale either as an observation point from which to view the landscape, or as an accent set deep within that landscape, rather than rendering it as the working farm that it actually was. As Röthlisberger observed of an earlier drawing of similar breadth and sensibility (Panorama from the Sasso near Rome, 1649), ‘distance is the true subject’.113 claude loved La crescenza less for its qualities as a building than for its raised position that allowed him to scan the surrounding countryside of the Tiber valley. This was the same reason that he was attracted to the Villa Madama on the slopes of Monte Mario.

130

A further drawing from this same expedition in 1662 (RD 871) (Fig. 40) shows the cliffs of the Grotta Rossa, or Saxa Rubra, just beyond La crescenza with two travellers in the foreground and behind them two more figures with a laden donkey.114 The Saxa Rubra, named for the

(Above) Fig. 35. Pietro Paolo Bonzi, La Crescenza. Fresco, Geneva, Les Musées d’art et d’histoire. (© Les Musées d’art et d’histoire.) (Below) Fig. 36. Edward Lear, Casale della Crescenza, 1867. Watercolour, with pen and brown ink, 292 x 499 mm. London, British Museum, 1929,0611.69.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

red colour of the tufo rocks of which it is composed, has caves with ancient ruins, possibly of Etruscan origin, some of which later adapted for housing.115 claude had recorded these cliffs in an earlier drawing made in 1640 (RD 422) (Fig. 39) described by Röthlisberger simply as a landscape, which shows the Saxa Rubra in the background, with several arched openings representing the entrances to the caves.116 The wooded grove in the foreground of this drawing (with a draughtsman seated in the shade) may have been near La crescenza. The 1662 drawing (Fig. 40) functions as a close-up of this view, made from a point nearer the escarpment. The same view can be seen in a photograph taken by Peter Mackey between 1890 and 1905 (Fig. 42).117 in the 1662 drawing is a dome-shaped object in the background, identified by Röthlisberger as a haystack,118 but probably a Roman tomb later photographed by Thomas Ashby,119 and visible in a nineteenth-century watercolour by Albert Venus (Fig. 42). An inn, the Osteria di Grotta Rossa, was located at the base of the cliffs near here (Figs. 2, 3 [10]).

(Top) Fig. 37. claude Lorrain, View from La Crescenza, RD 870. Pen and brown wash, 93 x 275 mm. London, British Museum, Oo. 8-243. (Above) Fig. 38. claude Lorrain, View of La Crescenza, RD 870a. Pen and brown wash, 104 x 275. London, British Museum, Oo. 6-125.

Grotta Rossa, like La crescenza and Valchetta, features regularly on the itinerary of the compagnia della morte as a place to retrieve bodies, some of which were found lying in the fields, and others collected from the Osteria.120 For example, on 7 August 1645 the brothers collected from the Osteria the body of an 18 year-old campagnolo (field worker), who had died while trying to reach Rome.121 he would have been one of the workers hired to harvest the hay in summer.122 They were divided into categories such as mietitori (reapers), and falciatori (scythers).123 Unlike the shepherds and woodcutters who descended into the campagna from higher ground in autumn and winter

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

131

132

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Opposite top) Fig. 39. claude Lorrain, Landscape (Saxa Rubra from La Crescenza), RD 422r, 1640. chalk, brown wash, heightened in the foreground, 214 x 235 mm. London, British Museum, Oo. 7-221. (Opposite bottom) Fig. 40. claude Lorrain, View of the Red Rocks near the Crescenza, RD 871, 1662. Pen, shades of brown wash, 175 x 242 mm. Paris, Louvre, 26,695. (Réunion des Musées nationaux.) (Top) Fig. 41. Albert Venus, Saxa Rubra from La Crescenza,1869. Watercolour over graphite, 330 x 626 mm. Los Angeles, J. Paul Getty Museum, 2009.74.2. (Above left) Fig. 42. Peter Paul Mackey, Via Flaminia and adjacent regions, cliff above Aquatraversa at Due Ponti. Gelatin silver photographic print, 80 x 110 mm. Rome, British School at Rome Library, Mackey Photographic Archive. (Above right) Fig. 43. Detail of Fig. 41 showing Roman tomb.

and left before the weather became too hot, the summer workers were in the fields during the most dangerous and hottest months of the year, often sleeping in the open.124 it was these workers, usually referred to generically as campagnoli, who made up the bulk of the mortalities from malaria during the period. These mortalities also occurred in winter: on 18 January 1647 the compagnia della morte collected another corpse of a campagnolo from the same inn.125 The nature of malarial illnesses meant that those infected in the summer could survive in a weakened state into the winter months only to be struck down by a minor ailment. Another labourer, simply described as farm worker (lavorante di campagna), who died naturalmente on the adjoining landholding of Valchetta, was collected by the

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

133

brothers in 1649.126 La Valchetta’s proximity to the Tiber made it unhealthy, while the landholding of La crescenza lay between two creeks, the Fosso della crescenza (Figs. 2 [15], 25) and the Fosso dell’Acquatraversa, that flowed into the Tiber floodplain. The irony was that the river that made this valley so picturesque for claude could, in times of flood, leave large areas of the valley underwater, providing perfect breeding grounds for mosquitoes.

Conclusion claude Lorrain’s drawings of the Roman campagna provide a fascinating record of the Tiber Valley at a time when significant changes were taking place as a consequence of climate change. As a result of increasing rainfall, ecological conditions in the Tiber Valley were deteriorating rapidly, with disastrous consequences for those who frequented it in summer. Paintings like La Crescenza, with its idyllic pastoral setting and soft suffused sunshine, camouflage a far grimmer reality. School of Letters, Arts and Media, The University of Sydney

8. Sereni notes that reports of reclaimed land returning to swamp become more frequent in both archival documents and in the literature from the 1550s onwards (Sereni, 1997, p. 206.) 9. See Almagià, 1929, p. 534, who noted that contrary to perceived opinion, the most desolate period in the history of the Roman campagna was not the medieval period, but the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. 10. Doni, 1667. 11. The first edict concerning the treatment of sick workers in the campagna was issued by cardinal Gaspare carpegna on 20 June 1672. On 5 June 1675 he issued another edict directing overseers to look after sick workers and to transport them to the nearest inn or to hospital rather than abandoning them (Tomassetti, 1979, p. 182). 12. That this was commonplace can be seen in the report of the Segretario del Tribunale, Archivio Vicariato, tomo. 3, f. 103: ‘Il Signor Pannagalli venendo da S. Marinella ne ha trovati due morti per strada, et un’altro, che stava per morire’. 13. Elenco dei morti. 14. Rossi, 1985, p. 243. if it was not possible to establish identification of the body, sometimes the Compagnia della morte would display it in a public place in Rome in the hope that someone would come forward and identify it. For example the drowning victim retrieved on 16 December 1645 was displayed at the church of Saint Anthony Abbot, near S. Maria Maggiore, and was quickly recognised (Elenco dei morti, p. 228). 15. Rossi, 1985, p. 243. 16. Bevignani, 1910, p. 133, citing Archivio dell’arciconfraternità, Libro de’ Morti, 1625, c. 20 and Relazione dell’anno Santo, 1625, busta 101, fol. 2). The confraternity was just one of several confraternities and parishes collecting bodies in the countryside so the actual number of victims of malaria was higher than this. 17. The advanced stages of P. falciparum malaria (also called aestivo-autumn malignant), which was often fatal, included neuralgia, delirium and coma and sometimes seizures.

Notes 1. This article forms part of a larger project to study the landscape imagery of the area around Rome (the Roman campagna) from 1550–1850 in the context of the ecology, topography and social history of the region. 2. Tomassetti describes the geographical limits of the campagna as: ‘dal nord ad est: il monte Sant’Oreste [Mount Soracte], il fiume Correse; i monti corniculani; il Monte Gennaro, i monti Tiburtini, i monti Prenestini. Da est ad ovest, i confini sono: i monti Laziala, monte Cavo; monte Lariano; il fiume Astura, il Mare Tirreno, i monti della Tolfa e i monti Sabitini’ (Tomassetti, 1910–26, vol. 1). Lanciani defines it as ‘the gently undulating plain, forty miles long and thirty wide, inclosed by the Sabatino-ciminian belt of craters on the north, the foreApennines on the East, the Alban hills on the south, watered and drained by the Tiber’ (Lanciani, 1909, p. 8). Martinori defines its limits as from north and east as Mount Soracte, the river correse, and the Monti cornicolani, Tiburtini and Prenestini; and from east to west the group of the Monti Laziale, the river Astura and the Tyrrean Sea; and from west to north the Monti della Tolfa and the group of the Sabbatini (Martinori, 1932–34, p. 7). 3. Sandrart, 1925, p. 209. 4. cf. Röthlisberger, 1968, vol. 1, p. 8: ‘From a purely functional point of view, most drawings reach beyond the target. They are works of art in their own right. Unlike the majority of drawings by carracci and even Poussin, there are hardly any sketchy or unfinished looking drawings by claude’. 5. See, for example harris, 1982. 6. Matthews and Briffa, 2005, p. 20. Lamb refers in particular to the marked variability of the weather in the seventeenth century, with some very severe winters but also periods of great heat. The winter of 1607–8 in England saw severe frosts that killed many trees by splitting their trunks (Lamb, 1977, vol. 2, note 2 on p. 465) and in 1608 it was recorded that the sea froze in Scotland allowing people to walk out on ice to ships in the Firth of Forth (Lamb, 1977, vol. 2, p. 466).

134

7. Le Roy Ladurie, 1972, p. 56, using the evidence of tree rings. Gigli in his diaries mentions the unseasonal cold that lasted from 10 to 17 April 1643 (Gigli, 1994, vol. 1, p. 390) and a destructive hailstorm in June 1643 (Gigli, 1994, vol. 1, p. 391).

18. ‘Nel luogo medesimo fu trovato un povero Campagnolo moribondo sopra poca paglia dentro una grotta, quale aveva nome Ludovico N. di Pesaro.’ Elenco dei morti, p. 136. 19. For a discussion of claude’s excursions into the Tiber valley see Whiteley, 1998, pp. 28–30. My account is indebted to his close observation of the drawings. 20. it is interesting, as Whiteley notes, that claude was less interested in the Tiber downstream from Rome, but repeatedly visited the Tiber valley upstream. 21. claude Lorrain, The Tiber from Monte Mario looking South (RD 356). Dark brown wash on white paper, 185 x 268 mm. London, British Museum, Oo.7-212. 22. Misson, 1688, pp. 74–75. 23. Blainville, 1767, p. 321. 24. Beckford, 1986, p. 110. 25. Röthlisberger, 1961, vol. 1, p. 51, quoting from Sandrart’s autobiography: ‘[he] also painted—instead of drawing—large trees, landscapes and cascades from nature in the garden of Prince Giustiniani’. 26. claude Lorrain, View of the Tiber at Rome (RD 101). Pen and brown wash, 202 x 265 mm. Kansas city, nelson Gallery–Atkins Museum, nelson Fund. claude drew this view of this particular section of the Tiber riverbank several times and all of these drawings show this overhang stepping down in inverted terraces, caused by floodwaters (RD 1, RD 89, RD 115). The villa on the far side of the river appears frequently in drawings and is probably the villa mentioned by Strother Smith as one where claude once lived (Smith,1877, p. 123): ‘Appena ci si lascia alle alle spalle la cinta muraria della città gli edifici lungo le sponde del Tevere cedono il posto al pascolo delle pecore e al canto degli uccelli tra la vegetazione. Una sola villa si nota sulla sponda sinistra [per chi risale]: si vuole che sia stata un tempo abitata da claudio Lorenese. in effetti non v’è altro luogo doveil tramonto possa produrre un effetto superiore. È possible

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

che claudio abbia osservato questi tramonti fino a compoenetrarne la propria anima per poi riprodurli nelle sue tele con tutta la forza della sua ispirazione.’.

interfering with the ‘passonata fuori Porta del Popolo’, suggesting that some were sabotaging it (nardi, 1989, p. 73).

27. A flood of the Tiber in 69 cE made the Via Flaminia impassable for twenty miles (Ashby and Fell, 1921, p. 129).

39. Sallares, 2002, p. 64. Doni, 1667.

28. Di Martino and Belati, 1980, p. 89. The worst exceptional flood was that of 1598 when the waters rose to 19.56 m (Di Martino and Belati, 1980, p. 55).

41. See RD 167, RD 426 (1640s), RD 427 (1640s), RD 736 (1650s), RD 859 (1660), RD 860 (1661). The Ponte Molle was derived from the Latin name, Pons Mulvius, which was first mentioned by Livy in 207 BcE (Ashby and Fell, 1921, p. 137 and cardilli and Fagiolo, 2010, p. 20). The bridge was fortified in the fifteenth century, acquiring several small guard towers and in 1458 a larger tower was built. After an exceptional flood in 1805 which damaged the bridge Giuseppe Valadier was commissioned to restore it (cardelli and Fagiolo, 2010, p. 20).

29. ‘A di 13 di Decembre rovinorno tre Case al Monte d’Oro, per il danno recevuto dal fiume, e poichè fu calato ne rovinorno (circa vinti altre, al Popolo, all’Orso, et in altri lochi, et quelli, che morirno in diverse maniere furno infiniti, et in diverse maniere, si affogorno carrozze a sei cavalli piene di gente, carrette et huomini a cavallo …)’ (Gigli, 1994, vol. 2, p. 509). 30. Gigli, 1994, vol. 2, p. 687 (August 1653): ‘Moriva di molte gente, et li Hospedali erano pieni d’Ammalati, et fu osservato, che in piazza Navona moriva di molta gente, tanto che alcune case rimasero vuote di habitori’. Floods in the summer months were much more unusual, most occurred between november and February. Gigli, 1994, vol. 2, pp. 680–81 (4 June 1653): ‘In questi giorni cominciò a piovere, et la notte delli 4. di Giugno fu una grande Acqua con tuoni et grandine, che fece molto danno in più luoghi; et il Tevere ingrossato, allagò molti campi, et portò via i fieni, et uccise le pecore, et altri animali, et i loro Custodi, che ne furno raccolti vicino a Ponte Sisto doi Homini morti, et tre porci. Et per le nebbie, che furno, et per l’ardor del Sole, che seccava il grano; molti prevedevano la carestia’. 31. Gigli, 1994, vol. 2, p. 688 (October 1653): Li ammalati erano assaissimi, et morivano in sette giorni di febre maligna, per ogni poco di disordine che si faceva. Et tra gli altri morirono a dì 8 et 9 di Ottobre il Marchese Alfonso Theodolo, et l’Abbate suo Fratello, et il cocchiere, perchè erano andati a caccia, et altri per haver dormito doi notte alla Vigna, et simili’. 32. Gigli, 1994, vol. 2, p. 689 (november, 1653): Moriva molta gente di febre maligna in pochi giorni, et per lo più morivano i giovani’. Gigli, 1994, vol 2, p. 750 (november 1655): In questo tempo in Roma si ammalava gran gente di febre maligna, et morivano molti in pochi giorni’. 33. it is not clear whether this was caused by flooding or simply lack of maintenance. Somma, citing documentation from the Presidenza delle strade e della congregazione del Buon Governo, states that ‘accomodare la strada fuori di Porta del Populo. Essendo la Strada … fatta quasi impraticabile in più luoghi per essere rotta & guasta’ (Somma, 2001, p. 175). 34. Fontana was commissioned in 1669 to suggest solutions for the repair of the banks caused by the Tiber floods, but this treatise was only published in 1696: ‘É necessario che precedano le notizie dello stato dell’Acque, le quali con il proprio spirito chiamato da’ Naviganti Filone, che dal Ponte Milvio investisce il Terreno verso Capo Prati, si rigetta con velocità, & impulso à dannificare il luogo delle Ripe del sopracitato sito, ingoiandosi il Terreno con gran facilità, causato dal quel corpo ripercotente, e dalla qualità del Terreno, che si rilassava in libertà dell’Acque, che in pochi anni si vidde’ assorbire buona parte di quelle Vigne, e scavare li fondi grandi’ (Fontana, 1696, p. 16). The number of manuscript treatises on how to protect the city from flooding in the seventeenth century clearly indicate the extent of the problem and as they often also address the problem of making the Tiber navigable, they suggest too that deforestation of higher alpine areas was leading to the river silting up. See Scavizzi, 1979, pp. 237–313. 35. Eschinardi, 1696, pp. 290–91: ‘Correva pericolo questa strada di rovinare, per la corrosione del vicino Tevere; mà sotto Clemente X fù rimetterlo nel suo antico luogo, per opera del Signor Cornelio Mayer Olandese celebre Ingegnero’. Eschinardi seems to be referring to the state of the banks prior to Meyer’s works. 36. Meyer, 1685, p. 29: ‘la rapacità delle sue onde non solo intimorisce i naviganti all’hore di pratticarlo, mà anche à guisa di publico crassatore assassina la Città Santa, abbattendo gli edificij et assediando gli abitanti nelle proprie case’. Also D’Onofrio, 1970, p. 24. 37. There are also two other drawings of the passonata which are linked to Meyer’s treatise and which have been attributed in the past to van Wittel: The Tiber outside Porta del Popolo (pen, brown ink and brown wash, 165 x 429 mm, with an inscription at lower left: ‘maniera francese’; Gabinetto nazionale delle Stampe, inv. F.c. 125247), and The Tiber outside Porta del Popolo (pen, brown ink and wash, 277 x 494 mm, with an inscription on lower right: ‘V. Vittel’; Gabinetto nazionale delle Stampe, F.c.125173). For a good summary of the work undertaken on the passonata by Meyer, and other proposals for improving navigation on the river see Lagunes, 2004, pp. 171–89. 38. An edict was issued on 22 December 1695 forbidding any boatmen from

40. De cupis, 1922, p. 108.

42. For example, RD 736 (Ponte Molle, whereabouts unknown) shows a raft in the foreground, while RD 426 (1640s) (Ponte Molle, Ottawa, national Gallery of canada, no. 4905) and RD 859 (1660) (London, British Museum, Oo. 6-64) show boats. 43. Gigli, 1994, vol. 2, p. 508: ‘Ruppe il Ponte Molle, la parte che è di legno, portò via quattro mole’. Di Martino and Belati estimate this flood to have reached the height of 16.41 m (Di Martino and Belati, 1980, p. 100). Jan Both (formerly attributed to), View of the Ponte Molle across the river Tiber, c. 1640, pen and brown ink, brown wash, 100 x 257 mm. London, British Museum, Oo,6-33. 44. Gomar Wouters, Ponte Molle, in Meyer, 1685, plate 26. 45. Meyer, 1685, no page numbers: ‘Il caso è in termine nel Tevere in vicinanza di Ponte Molle, ove havendo il fiume corrosa, & in parte abbattuta la ripa destra, mostrava di voler lasciare isolato il detto Ponte; onde fù di mestiere ricorrere alle consulte de Periti per porvi pronto rimedio’. 46. in the seventeenth century this fortified farmhouse belonged to the Boncompagni family. See Eschinardi, 1696, p. 289: ‘un come Castello, che domina sopra l’Acquacetosa, è de’ Signori Buoncompagni’. 47. claude’s most faithful representation of the Torre Lazzaroni and Ponte Molle is Landscape with the Ponte Molle, 1645. Oil on canvas, 74 x 97 cm. Birmingham city Art Gallery. 48. For the relationship between claude Lorrain and herman van Swanevelt, and the close stylistic parallels between their work, see Röthlisberger, 1968, vol. 1, p. 31, Whiteley, 1998, pp. 22–23 and Steland, 2010, p. 15. This relationship was probably at its closest between 1630 and 1635. Plomp also argues for a close relationship between Pieter van Laer and claude during this time, citing the stylistic similarity of their drawings and prints of cows, sheep and goats (Plomp, 2011, pp. 34–35). 49. Achille-Etna Michallon, The Building called ‘la Fabrique du Poussin’, 1820. Pencil on translucent paper, 215 x 263 mm. Paris, Musée du Louvre. JeanBaptiste-camille corot painted a view of this part of the Tiber and entitled it La Promenade du Poussin, 1826–28. Oil on paper, mounted on canvas, 330 x 510 mm. Paris, Musée du Louvre. As late as 1993, authors were still commenting on the relationship between La crescenza and Poussin (e.g. Messineo and carbonara, 1993, p. 19: ‘Castello della Crescenza … caro soprattutto a Nicolas Poussin’.) 50. Félibien, 1688, vol. 2, Huitème Entretie, pp. 318–19: ‘se retirer seul dans les vignes & dans les lieux les plus écartez de Rome, où il pouvoit avec liberté considerer quelques Statuès antiques, quelques veûes agréables, & observer les plus beaux effets de la Nature. C’estoit dans ces retraits & ces promenades solitairesqu’il faisoit de legeres esquisses des choses qu’il recontroit propes, soit pour le paisage, comme des terrasses, des arbres, ou quelques beaux accidens de lumieres; soit pour des compositions d’histoires’. English translation from Brugerolles and Guillet, 2002, p. 139. 51. Rosenberg and Prat included only 22 landscape drawings as being by Poussin in their catalogue (Rosenberg and Prat, 1994). in 1960 and again in 1963 John Shearman had excluded a group of 42 sheets which had been included as Poussin drawings in his catalogue of Poussin’s landscape drawings (the socalled ‘G’ group) (Blunt and Friedlaender, 1963). There is no agreement among scholars concerning who drew these, although Gaspar Dughet, claude Lorrain, Pier Francesco Mola, and Pietro Testa are among the artists names put forward by scholars. Rosenberg has recently argued that these drawings are in fact by a number of different hands. See Rosenberg, 2008, pp. 343–45. 52. nicolas Poussin, Landscape with Saint Matthew, 1640. Oil on canvas, 99 x 135 cm. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin, Gemäldegalerie. This painting was owned by Abbot Giovanni Maria Roscioli who acquired it directly from Poussin.

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

135

53. Martinori, 1932, p. 287.

document of 1366 (Messineo and carbonara, 1993, p. 101).

54. claude Lorrain, A Farmhouse by the Tiber, RD 12. Pen and brown ink with brown wash, 11.9 x 9.2 cm. London, British Museum, Oo.6-27. herman van Swanevelt, Sopra la ripa del fiume vicino a Ponte Molle, from Diverses veuës dedans et dehors de Rome, 1652–53. Etching, 115 x 179 mm. London, British Museum. claude drew it again in the 1660s, from different angles (RD 908 and 909).

72. This was the view of Rodolfo Venuti, who dismissed another tradition that it was named after Quintus cincinnatus, who was recalled from retirement on his farm at a time when Rome was threatened: ‘Traversato il piccolo Ponte d’Acqua Traversa si trova a sinistra della Flaminia una vecchia Torre denominata da tempo immemorabile Tor di Quinto. Vogliono molti che questo nome sia derivato celebre Quintio Cincinnato, il quale da molti fatto egregj in serzio [sic] della Repubblica si ritirò con Racilia sua moglie in questo suo predio per dodervi la quiete. Ma giunsero gli Ambasciatori di Roma, che gli dichiarano i Romano averloi eletto per Dittatore contro i Sanniti. Onde egli rivestitosi dell’armi per barca tornossene in Roma. Per quello che riguarda per altro questo luogo, se devo dire il mio sentimento, credo che questa Torre acquistasse il nome di Quinto dalla distanza di Roma ad Quintum Lapidem, che misurato dalle Porte dell’antica Roma prima dell’aumento di Aureliano, quasi interamente corrisponde’ (Venuti, 1766, part 2, chapter 3, p. 91). Tomassetti (1979, vol. 3, p. 321) rejects also the tradition that it comes from the sepulchre of Quintus nasonius.

55. The Tor di Quinto is correctly identified by Whiteley in his discussion of this drawing although it looks squatter here (Whiteley, 1998, cat. 2, p. 41). 56. Francis Towne, On the Banks of the Tiber, near Ponte Molle, 1780. Pen and grey ink with grey wash and watercolour, 207 x 269 mm. London, British Museum, nn,2.3. 57. Thomas Jones, Above Ponte Molle, 1777. Watercolour, pen and brown ink on paper, 215 x 277 mm. London, British Museum, 1981,0516.18.1. This chapel is marked on Ameti’s map downstream of the Acqua Acetosa as ‘S. Giuliano’. See also hornsby (hornsby, 2002, p. 192) who states that ‘The area near this chapel south of Ponte Milvio was at one time referred to by the name of S. Giuliano’. 58. Francis Towne, On the Banks of the Tiber, near Ponte Molle, 1780. Brush drawing in grey and brown wash with watercolour and pen and grey ink outlines, 206 x 401 mm. London, British Museum, nn,2.4. 59. claude Lorrain, Tiber Landscape (RD 172r). Pen, brown wash, 192 x 270 mm. London, British Museum, Oo.6-124, h. 17. A similar viewpoint is found in Tiber Landscape (RD 165r). Pen, grey wash, 205 x 325 mm. Saint Petersburg, hermitage, 15,928. 60. Tomassetti notes that there was no mention of the fountain before the seventeenth century (Tomassetti, 1910–26, vol. 3, p. 225). in spite of its name, Eschinardi claimed in the 1690s that this fountain was ‘less acid’ than another ‘Acqua Acetosa’, which was located near S. Paolo fuori le mura (Eschinardi, 1696, p. 288). The original fountain, constructed in 1613 carried an inscription citing its health benefits: ‘QUEST’ACQUA SALUBRE RISANA RENI E LO STOMACO LA MILZA E IL FEGATO E GIOVA A MILLE MALE’ (this salubrious water makes healthy the kidneys, the stomach, the spleen and the liver and works for a thousand illnesses). in 1608 the camera Apostolica instituted the office of the custodian of the Acqua Acetosa, headed by Pietro Paolo Quartieri (Rendina, 2003, p. 180). in part the purpose of this position was to ensure that any debris carried there by flooding would be swiftly removed (D’Onofrio, 1970, p. 52). 61. claude Lorrain, View of the Acqua Acetosa (RD 874). Whereabouts unknown, from the Wildenstein album. This bears an inscription by claude saying that it was made on 31 December 1662: ‘Claudio fecit / Roma 1662 le dernier / iour de l’ané le iour de S.t Silvestre alla acetosa’. 62. Rendina, 2003, p. 180. The Ameti map of 1693 (Fig. 3) shows a small path beginning just outside the Porta del Popolo at right angles to the Via Flaminia and leading directly to the Acqua Acetosa. The Acquacetosari may have taken this route as it was the most direct. 63. The Compagnia della morte picked up murder victims at Acqua Acetosa in 1618, 1625, 1630 and 1632 and bodies of those dying of natural causes there in 1621, 1622 and 1623. 64. Giovanni Battista Falda, Fontana celebre d’Acqua Acetosa, 1665. Engraving, from G.B. Falda, Le Fontane di Roma nelle piazze, e luoghi publici della città, con il loro prospetti, G. G. de Rossi (ed.), Rome, 1675, vol. 1, plate 33. 65. J. A. Koch, Acqua Cetosa, from Die Römischen Ansichten, 1810. Etching, 168 x 224 mm. London, British Museum, 1983,0305.21. 66. claude Lorrain, Tiber Valley at Acqua Acetosa (RD 876). Vienna, Albertina, no. 11,525. 67. Rendina, 2003, p. 181. ironically Meyer in his treatise on how to make the river more navigable suggests felling existing trees along the banks as timber for the various palisades he suggests be built into the river to guide the current. 68. See note 61 above. Röthlisberger states the fountain was about to be transformed at the time claude painted it, but in fact this drawing post-dates the reconstruction. Röthlisberger, 1968, vol. 1, p. 326. 69. herman van Swanevelt, Veduto daqua assuttosa for di Roma, from Diverses veuës dedans et dehors de Rome, 1652–53. Etching, 115 x 179 mm. London British Museum, F,2.219. 70. claude Lorrain, Tiber Landscape (RD 172r). London, British Museum, Oo. 6-124. 71. Tomassetti, 1979, vol. 3, p. 321. The Tor di Quinto was recorded in a

136

73. Rossi, 1969, p. 101. 74. Martinori, 1932–34, vol. 2, p. 333. 75. Eschinardi, 1696, p. 293. in 1612 Marcantonio Borghese bought the fields and the tenuta of Tor di Quinto for the sum of 24,000 scudi (Martinori, 1932–34, vol. 2, p. 333). 76. claude Lorrain, Tiber Valley (RD 424). Brown wash, pen, chalk, 245 x 398 mm. Paris, Musée du Louvre. The tower opposite perched on its rocky outcrop is definitely the Tor di Quinto although Röthlisberger does not state this (Röthlisberger, 1968, vol. 1, p. 187). See also Van Tuyll van Serooskerken, Plomp and Mancini, 2011, pp. 158–59, cat. 43. 77. cingolani’s map of 1692 estimated that of the total landholdings of the Agro Romano, consisting of 109,039 rubbia, only 11,967 rubbia was forest. This is on the accompanying index of the numbers. On hay production, see coste, 1969, p. 87, who cites a manuscript describing the casali of the campagna dated 1600: ‘no. 374 QUINTO, del Signor principe Borghese, fora di Porta del Popolo, discosto da Roma miglia tre. Sono tutti prati e sono rubba cinquanta, affittati a mastro Tulio, contatore de pecora, per anni nove, a scudi dicinove il rubbio a tutta erba, cioè fieni, erba d’inverno e d’estate; cominciò l’affitto l’anno 1613’. 78. Beckford, 1986, p. 109. Beckford was crossing the campagna in autumn, on 29 October 1780. 79. hare, 1907, p. 3. 80. This bridge is called the Ponte di Quinto on Euphrosino della Volpaia’s La Campagna Romana al tempo di Paolo III, 1547. 81. Edward Lear, Casale della Crescenza. Engraving, from Lear, 1846, vol. 2, fig. 37. 82. nibby, 1849, vol. 3, p. 363. 83. coste, 1969, p. 100: ‘Valca e Valchetta, del r. Capitolo di S. Pietro, discosta da Roma miglia cinque, fuor di Porta del Popolo. Sono rub[bie] 700, compresoci rub[bie] 80 di prati; luogo da precoio, ma è soggetto al Tevere; fu affittato a s[ign]or Mario Fano, a di 13 d’agosto 1601; l’istromento a m[on]s[ignor] Quintiliano Gargano’. A rubbia is 14,484 square metres, so 80 rubbia of pasture is 115.88 hectares. 84. in the division of belongings between Francesco crescenzi and the son of Giacomo crescenzi, made in 1413, it was described as ‘la tenuta di torre dei Crescenzi’. The crescenzi family owned it until 1813, when it passed to the Buoncompagni and then to the celebrated tenor Marconi, in 1890 (Martinori, 1932–34, p. 212). 85. The tower is still visible encased in the wall of the main courtyard (De Rossi, 1969, p. 102). 86. Eufrosino della Volpaia, La campagna Romana al tempo di Paolo III mappa della campagna Romana del 1547. See Ashby, 1914. 87. Belli Barsali, 1983, p. 370. 88. Tomei (1942, p. 156) dates the building to 1460, while Belli Barsali (1983, p. 370) dates it to 1480–90. 89. coste, 1969, no. 527, p. 67. The document coste publishes appears to be an appraisal of various properties in the campagna, possibly prepared for a patron interested in purchasing them. The entry under ‘crescenza’ reads ‘Crescenzi, delli sig[no]ri Crescenzi, alias la Violatella, fuor di Porta del Popolo’. The entry under ‘Violatella’ (p. 100) reads: ‘VIOLATELLA, delli sig[no]ri Crescenzi, vicino

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Ponte Molle. Sono rub[bie] 110 [159.32 ha], compresoci rub[bie] 45 e scorzi sei [65.57 ha] di prati, quali si affittano scudi sei il rubbio, e sono li meglio prati di Roma. Il casaletto d’Acqua Traversa, attaccato al detto del medemo: sono rub[bie] 37 [53.59 ha], compresoci rub[bie] sei e mezo [9.41 ha] di prati. Sono tutti buoni paesi e si trovano a dare a risposta a erba; sotto sopra sene cava in tutto scudi dieci il rubbio con li fieni; in tutto sono rub[bie] 147 [212.91 ha], compresoci rub[bie] 51½ [74.59 ha] di prato.’ 90. claude Lorrain, View of La Crescenza (RD 514). cream colored paper, chalk, light brown wash, 200 x 302 mm. harlem, Teylers Museum, S 43. At bottom left is the inscription ‘CLAV / Ro IV’ in red chalk. This comes from the Tivoli book and is dated by Röthlisberger to between 1640 and 1645. 91. claude Lorrain, Trees, with La Crescenza in the Distance, RD 515. cream paper, chalk, light gray-brown wash, 185 x 222 mm. London, British Museum, Oo.6-44. inscribed at the lower edge ‘faict a foro di Roma’. 92. claude Lorrain, Landscape (RD 589). Brown and grey wash, 223 x 329 mm, enlarged later. Budapest Museum of Art, 2849. Kitson, 1978, p. 127, cat. 118. 93. claude Lorrain, View at La Crescenza (RD 672). 195 x 317 mm, chalk, pen, brown wash. British Museum, Oo.6-91. inscribed on the verso ‘Clau / la Crecensia’. 94. claude Lorrain, View of La Crescenza (LV 118), 1648–50. new York, Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1978.205. 95. claude Lorrain, View of La Crescenza (RD 669, LV 118). Pen on paper, c. 1648/9. London, British Museum, 1957,1214.124. 96. Only Kitson assumes the painting was commissioned rather than bought later: ‘assuming that the patron commissioned the painting directly from claude and that he specified the subject, rather than bought the painting ready made, he must have had some connection with the crescenzi family’ (Kitson, 1978, p. 127, cat. 118). 97. Sutherland harris, 1985, p. 135, cat. 19. 98. Röthlisberger, 1968, vol. 1, p. 260 (RD 669). 99. claude Lorrain, The Rest on the Flight into Egypt, oil on canvas, 208 x 152.5 cm, cleveland Museum of Art. See Röthlisberger, 1961, vol. 1, pp. 243–44. The inscription on the drawing reads ‘quadro faict per ill.mo Conte Crescence. Claudio fecit in V’. Röthlisberger speculates that the painting could have been commissioned by either Francesco crescenzi or Giovanni Battista crescenzi, on the grounds that Giovanni Battista was known as the Marquess de la Torre, and claude may have got the foreign title wrong. certainly in terms of composition it relates closely to claude’s Finding of Moses, one of his vommissions for the King of Spain. 100. For these landscapes see Röthlisberger, 1961, vol. 1, pp. 239–41 and 243–44, and Beaven, 2010, pp. 107–10 and 113–16. 101. it measures 387 x 581 mm. 102. Russell stated: ‘The painting is a very remarkable one and in splendid condition. it gives the impression, as Kitson has pointed out, of having been made from nature’ (Russell, 1982, p. 161). 103. Rand, 2007, p. 77. 104. Russell also comes to this conclusion, arguing that the painting was made by claude for himself (Russell, 1982, p. 162). 105. Edward Lear, Casale della Crescenza. Watercolour, with pen and brown ink, 292 x 499 mm. inscribed ‘Crescenza. March 17 1847’. London, British Museum, 1929,0611.69. 106. Pietro Paolo Bonzi, La Crescenza. Fresco. Geneva, Les Musées d’art et d’histoire. Bonzi died in 1636, so the fresco must have been in situ by then, and could have been seen by claude when made his regular trips to the site in the 1640s and 1660s. it would be interesting to know whether or not claude ever visited the interior of the casale, certainly it is likely he would have had access to the courtyard. For the attribution of the fresco to Bonzi see natale et al., 1976, p. 334. 107. Russell noted how small the figures are in this work in relation to the landscape (Russell, 1982, p. 161). 108. Elenco dei morti, 19 September 1649: ‘Morto in Campagna Tommaso N. Di Cosenza, vaccaro di anni 25 circa, improvisamente in una capanna nella tenuta detta la Crescenza, miglia 6 [8.94 km] fuori di Porta del Popolo, per la via di Tor di Quinto, e sepolto nella Capella di S. Andrea al Ponte Milvio’. ‘La Crescenza’

appears a number of times in the Elenco dei morti as the collection point for the bodies of agricultural workers. 109. Elenco dei morti, 25 April 1648, p. 243: ‘Furono ancora presi quattro poveri Monelli gravemente malati, quali furono rivenuti in diversi punti di quelle Campagne, di nome Carlo N. di S. Elgidio = Gio Battista N. Romano = Giovanni di Domenico N. di Ancona = e Giacomo Sabali di Imola = quali furono alla meglio sistemati, e condotti in Roma all’Ospedale di S. Spirito, ove dai Fratelli prodigate gli vennero tutte le cure possibili’. 110. in 1649, 4497 people died in the hospitals of Rome, almost double the usual death rate (Ferrero, 1972, p. 137). 111. claude Lorrain, View from La Crescenza (RD 870). Pen and brown wash, 93 x 275 mm. London, British Museum, Oo.8-243. 112. claude Lorrain, View of La Crescenza (RD 870a). Pen and brown wash, 104 x 275 mm. London, British Museum, Oo.6-125. Röthlisberger has suggested that these two sheets (RD 870 and RD 870a) may once have formed a single sheet. 113. claude Lorrain, Panorama from the Sasso near Rome, 1649. Pen and brown ink, brush and brown wash, with white gouache over black chalk and graphite on buff paper, 168 x 410 mm. Art institute of chicago, helen Regenstein collection. Röthlisberger, 1985, p. 106. 114. claude Lorrain, View of the Red Rocks near La Crescenza (RD 871). Pen, shades of brown wash, 175 x 242 mm. inscribed at the bottom right is ‘La crescenzio clau[dio]/ Roma 1662’. Paris, Louvre, 26,695. 115. As recorded by Eschinardi, 1696, p. 295: ‘Circa un miglio più sù si trova Grotta Rossa in altra Rupe, con Osteria al piede; in questa Rupe, calandosi per un Pozzo, fù scoperto pochi anni sono un antico Ergastolo, dove erano tenuti li Schiavi; questo luogo fù detto latinamente ad Saxa Rubra, e si stima fosse una Città: Cicerone nella seconda Filippica dice di M. Antonio; cum ad saxa Rubra venisset, delituit in quadam Cauponula, atque perpotavit ad Vesperum & si vede à sinistra il Procoio del Ven Capitolo di S. Pietro, detto la Valchetta’. These cliffs extended along the left of the Via Flaminia as far as Prima Porta (Ashby and Fell, 1921, p. 139). The ruins include tombs and villas (Messineo, 2007). 116. claude Lorrain, Landscape (Saxa Rubra from La Crescenza) (RD 422r). chalk, brown wash, heightened in the foreground, 214 x 235 mm. London, British Museum, Oo.7-221. inscribed ‘Claudio Gelle / 1640’. Röthlisberger describes this as ‘an important nature drawing with a pictorially framed view on a river valley’ without mentioning the location, but Whiteley (1998, p. 109, no. 49) and the cataloguer of the drawing in the British Museum identify the distant hills as the Grotta Rossa. 117. Peter Paul Mackey, Via Flaminia and Adjacent Regions, Cliff above Aquatraversa at Due Ponti. Gelatin silver photographic print, 80 x 110 mm. Rome, British School at Rome Library, Mackey Photographic Archive. 118. Röthlisberger refers to two haystacks in this drawing (Röthlisberger, 1968, vol. 1, p. 325). haystacks are extremely rare in claude drawings; the only other drawing in Röthlisberger’s catalogue that includes a haystack is RD 955 (c. 1666). The scarcity of such drawings suggests that claude did not make excursions into the campagna in the height of summer. 119. it bears a close visual relationship to an ancient tomb that was photographed by Ashby more or less in the same location. See Mari et al., 1986, cat. no. 180, p. 217, where it is described as a tomb at the Grotta Rossa. The tomb appears in the map of Eufrosino della Volpaia with the caption ‘Torrone’. it also appears in a drawing by corot, reproduced in Julien and Julien, 1982, fig. 3b, p. 182, which shows the very close relationship between the tomb and the Grotta Rossa. The Juliens also include a modern photograph of the tomb, now next to the railway station at Grotta Rossa (Julien and Julien, 1982, p. 182). 120. The confraternity collected between one and three bodies in most years either directly from the inn at Grotta Rossa, or from the nearby fields. Although most were farm workers, some were pilgrims, and one was a naval officer. 121. Elenco dei Morti, p. 227, 7 August 1645: ‘Morto in Campagna N. N. Incognito, di anni 18 circa, povero Campagnolo, naturalmente nell’Osteria di Grotta Rossa mentre veniva a Roma ammalato, miglia 5 fuori di Porta del Popolo, per la strada di Prima Porta e sepolto nella Cappella di S. Andrea al Ponte Milvio’. 122. The first harvest was usually in May, with another at the end of summer. 123. Ago, 1981, p. 61. See also coste, 1978, p. 171. 124. Much of the seasonal work was winter-based, so that the population of

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

137

rural settlements would increase dramatically in autumn and winter. chestnuts, the staple of peasant diets, were collected in autumn, and the chestnut leaves were fed to the livestock. it appears that for many of the aziende of the Roman campagna the permanent domestic servants would leave during the summer months, while the poorest seasonal workers would arrive, thus again swelling the population numbers. The demography of the Roman campagna was therefore quite complex, with influxes of people in winter and summer. For more on this see Rossi, 1985, p. 101. 125. Elenco dei Morti, p. 232, 18 January 1647: ‘Morto in Campagna N. N. Incognito, povero Campagnolo, naturalmente all’Osteria detta di Grotta Rossa, miglia 5 fuori di Porta del Popolo, per la via di Tor di Quinto, e sepolto nella Capella di S. Andrea al Ponte Milvio’. 126. Elenco dei Morti, p. 250: ‘Morto in Campagna Domenico di Bartolomeo N. di Bacanati, di anni 40 circa, lavoranti di Campagna, naturalmente nel Casale della Valchetta, miglia 6 fuori di Porta del Popolo per la via di Tor di Quinto, e sepolto nella Cappella di S. Andrea al Ponte Milvio’.

Connors and Rice, 1991: Joseph connors and Louise Rice (eds.), Specchio di Roma Barocca: una guida inedita del XVII secolo, Rome: Edizioni dell’Elefante, 1991. Coste, 1969: Jean coste, ‘i casali della campagna di Roma al inizio del Seicento’, Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria, 1969, vol. 92, pp. 41–115. Coste, 1978: Jean coste, ‘Missioni nell’Agro Romano nella primavera del 1703’, Ricerche per la Storia Religiosa a Roma, vol. 2, 1978, pp. 165–223. De Cupis, 1922: cesare De cupis, La Caccia nella Campagna Romana secondo la storia e i documenti, Rome: nardecchia, 1922. De Rossi, 1969: Giovanni Maria De Rossi, Torri e castelli medievali della Campagna Romana, Rome: De Luca, 1969. Di Martino and Belati, 1980: Vittorio di Martino and M. Belati, Qui Arrivò il Tevere: Le inondazioni del Tevere nelle testimonianze e nei ricordi storici, Rome: Multigrafica Editrice, 1980. Doni, 1667: Giovanni Battista Doni, De restituenda salubritate agri Romani, Florence, 1667. D’Onofrio, 1970: cesare D’Onofrio, Il Tevere e Roma, Rome: Ugo Bozzi, 1970.

Bibliography Ago, 1981: Renata Ago, ‘Braccianti, contadini e Grandi Proprietari in un villaggio Laziale nel primo Settecento’, Studi Romani, vol. 46, 1981, pp. 60–87. Almagià, 1929: Roberto Almagià, ‘The Repopulation of the Roman campagna’, Geographical Review, vol. 19, no. 4, 1929, pp. 529–55. Ashby, 1914: Thomas Ashby, Campagna romana al tempo di Paolo II. Mappa della Campagna romana del 1547 di Eufrosino Della Volpaia riprodotta dall’unico esemplare esistente nella Biblioteca Vaticana, Rome: Danesi, 1914. Ashby and Fell, 1921: Thomas Ashby and R. A. L. Fell, ‘The via Flaminia’, Journal of Roman Studies, vol. 11, 1921, pp. 125–90. Beaven, 2010: Lisa Beaven, An Ardent Patron: Cardinal Camillo Massimo and his antiquarian and artistic circle, London: Paul holberton Publishing and cEEh, 2010. Beckford, 1986: William Beckford, The Grand Tour of William Beckford: selections from Dreams, Waking Thoughts and incidents, Elizabeth Mavor (ed.), harmondsworth: Penguin, 1986.

Elenco dei morti: F. de Rossi, Elenco dei morti di campagna associati dalla Venerabile Arciconfraternita di Santa Maria dell’Orazione e Morte di Roma nelle Campagne del territorio Romano dell’anno 1552 a tutto il 31 Decembre 1699, MS 4978 Biblioteca casanatense. Eschinardi, 1696: Francesco Eschinardi, Espositione della carta topografica cingolana dell’Agro Romano, Rome, 1696. Félibien, 1666–88: André Félibien, Entretiens sur les vies et sur les ouvrages des plus excellens peintres anciens et modernes, 5 vols., Paris, 1666–88. Ferrero, 1972: Fabriciano Ferrero, ‘La conciencia moral en la campiña Romana durante los siglos XVii y XViii’, Spicilegium Historicum, vol. 20, 1972, fasc. 1, pp. 71–157. Fontana, 1696: carlo Fontana, Discorso del cavaliere Carlo Fontana architetto sopra le cavse delle inondationi del Tevere antiche, e moderne à danno della città di Roma, e dell’insussistente passonata fatta auanti la villa di papa Giulio III. per riparo della via Flaminia ..., Rome: Stamparia della Rev. camera Apostolica, 1696. Gigli, 1994: Giacinto Gigli, Diario di Roma, M. Barberito (ed.), 2 vols., Rome: colombo, 1994.

Belli Barsali, 1983: isa Belli Barsali, Ville di Roma. Lazio 1, Milan: Rusconi immagini, 1983.

Hare, 1907: Augustus hare, Days Near Rome, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & co. Ltd., 1907.

Bentivoglio, 1977: Ernesto Bentivoglio, ‘La crescenza: una dimora borghese del XV secolo’, Studi Romani, vol. 25, 1977, pp. 66–70.

Hornsby, 2002: clare hornsby, Nicolas-Didier Boguet (1755–1839): landscapes of suburban Rome, Rome: Artemide, 2002.

Bevignani, 1910: Augusto Bevignani, ‘L’arciconfraternità della Morte in Roma’, Archivio della Reale Società Romana di Storia Patria, vol. 33, 1910, pp. 5–176.

Julien and Julien, 1982: André and René Julien, ‘Les campagnes de corot au nord de Rome (1826–1827)’, Gazette des Beaux-Arts, vol. 99, 1982, pp. 179–202.

Blainville, 1767: Monsieur de Blainville, Travels through Holland, Germany, Switzerland and Italy. Containing a Particular Description of the Antient and Present State of Those Countries … Interspersed with Various Remarks on Montafucon, Spon, Mabillon, Misson, Bishop Burnet, Mr. Addison, and Other Eminent Authors by the Late Monsieur De Blainville, Secretary to the Embassy of the States-General, at the Court of Spain. Translated from the Author’s Manuscript (Never Published), by Dr. Turnbull, Mr. Guthrie, and Others, Printed for J. Johnson and B. Davenport, in Pater-Noster-Row, London, 1767.

Kitson, 1978: Michael Kitson, Claude Lorrain: Liber Veritatis, London: British Museum, 1978. Lamb, 1977: hubert horace Lamb, Climate: present, past and future, 2 vols., London and new York: Methuen & co., 1977. Lanciani, 1909: Rodolfo Lanciani, Wanderings in the Roman Campagna, London and Boston: constable and houghton Mifflin, 1909.

Blunt and Friedlaender, 1963: Anthony Blunt and Walter Friedlaender, (eds.), The Drawings of Nicolas Poussin, vol. 4, London: The Warburg institute, 1963.

Lear, 1846: Edward Lear, Illustrated Excursions in Italy, 2 vols., London: T. M’Lean, 1846.

Brugerolles and Guillet, 2002: Emmanuelle Brugerolles and David Guillet, Poussin, Claude and their World, Paris: École nationale Superieure des BeauxArts, 2002.

Le Roy Ladurie, 1971: Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie, Times of Feast, Times of Famine: a history of climate since the year 1000, London: Allen and Unwin, 1971.

Buckingham, 1847: James Silk Buckingham, Piedmont, Italy, Lombardy, the Tyrol and Bavaria, 2 vols., London: Peter Jackson, Late Fisher, Son, and co., 1847. Cardelli and Fagiolo, 2010: Luisa cardelli and Marcello Fagiolo (eds.), La Fontana dell’Acqua Acetosa a Roma: la storia, il restauro e il nuovo parco, Milan: Silvana Editoriale, 2010. Celli, 1933: Angelo celli, A History of Malaria in the Roman Campagna from Ancient Times, Anna celli-Fraentzel (ed.), London: Bale and Danielsson, 1933.

138

Mari et al., 1986: Zaccaria Mari, Maria Sperandio, Rita Turchetti, Beatrice Gelosia and Valerie Scott, Thomas Ashby: un archeologo fotografa la campagna romana tra ‘800 e ‘900, exh. cat., British School at Rome, 18 April–7 May 1986, Rome: De Luca, 1986. Martinori, 1932–34: Edoardo Martinori, Lazio Turrito, Rome: Presso l’autore, via Flaminia, 29, 1932–34. Matthews and Briffa, 2005: John A. Matthews and Keith R. Briffa, ‘The “Little ice-Age”: re-evaluation of an evolving concept’, in Geografiska Annaler.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

.

Series A, Physical Geography, vol. 87, no. 1, Special issue: climate change and Variability, 2005, pp. 17–36.

Steland, 2010: Anne charlotte Steland, Herman van Swanevelt (um 1603– 1655): Gemälde und Zeichnungen, Petersberg: Michael imhof, 2010.

Messineo and Carbonara, 1993: Gaetano Messineo and Andrea carbonara, Via Flaminia, Rome: istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, 1993.

Sutherland Harris, 1985: Ann Sutherland harris, Landscape Painting in Rome 1595–1675, exh. cat., new York: Richard L. Feigen and co., 1985.

Messineo, 2007: Gaetano Messineo (ed.), Saxa Rubra, Rome: istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato and Archivi di Stato, 2007.

Tomassetti, 1910–26: Giuseppe Tomassetti, La campagna romana antica, medioevale e moderna, 7 vols., Rome: Loescher and co, 1910–26.

Meyer, 1685: cornelio Meyer, L’Arte di restituire a Roma la tralasciata navigatione del Tevere, Rome, 1685.

Tomassetti, 1979: Giuseppe Tomassetti, La campagna romana antica, medioevale e moderna, 7 vols., Florence: Olschki, 1979.

Misson, 1688: Maximilien Misson, Nouveau voyage d’Italie fait en l’année 1688, 2 vols., The hague: Koninklijke Bibliotheck, 1691.

Tomei, 1942: Piero Tomei, L’Architettura a Roma nel Quattrocento, Rome: Palombi, 1942.

Natale et al., 1976: Mauro natale, Dominique Queloz-iacuitti, Anne Rinuy and François Schwezer, ‘Les Fresques de la Villa la crescenza: histoire et restauration’, Musée d’Art et d’Histoire, new series 24, 1976, pp. 323–38.

Van Tuyll van Serooskerken, Plomp and Mancini, 2011: carel van Tuyll van Serooskerken, Michiel c. Plomp, and Federica Mancini, Claude Gellée, dit le Lorrain, exh. cat., Paris: Louvre Éditions and Somogy Editions d’Art, 2011.

Nardi, 1989: carla nardi, Il Tevere e la Città: L’antica magistratura portuale nei secoli XVI–XIX, Rome: Multigrafica, 1989.

Venuti, 1766: Rodolfo Venuti, Accurata, e succinta descrizione topografica e istorica di Roma moderna. Opera postume dell’abate Ridolfini Venuti Cortonese …, 2 vols., Rome, 1766.

Nibby, 1849: nibby, Analisi Storico-topografico-antiquaria della carta de’ dintorni di Roma, second ed., 3 vols., Rome: Tipografia delle Belle Arti, 1849. Nicolò, 2012: Rossana nicolò, ‘Lungo la via cassia: paesaggio storico e vestigia architettoniche nella tenuta della Sepoltura di Nerone’, in Vistoli, 2012, pp. 123–48. Plomp, 2011: Michiel c. Plomp, ‘Des maîtres de tous les horizons’, in Van Tuyll van Serooskerken, Plomp and Mancini, 2011, pp. 24–39.

Vistoli, 2012: Fabrizio Vistoli (ed.), Tomba di Nerone: toponimo, comprensorio e zona urbanistica di Roma Capitale. Scritti tematici in memoria di Gaetano Messineo, Rome: nuova cultura, 2012. Whiteley, 1998: Jon J. L. Whiteley, Claude Lorrain: drawings from the collections of the British Museum and the Ashmolean Museum, London: Trustees of the British Museum, 1998.

Rand, 2007: Richard Rand, Claude Lorrain: the painter as draughtsman, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 2007. Rendina, 2003: claudio Rendina, Guida isolita del Tevere, Rome: newton and compton, 2003. Rosenberg, 2008: Pierre Rosenberg, ‘catalogue’, in Rosenberg and christiansen, 2008, pp. 127–373. Rosenberg and Christiansen, 2008: Pierre Rosenberg and Keith christiansen (eds.), Poussin and Nature, exh. cat., new haven and London: The Metropolitan Museum of Art and Yale University Press, 2008. Rosenberg and Prat, 1994: Pierre Rosenberg and Louis-Antoine Prat, Nicolas Poussin 1594–1665, Milan: Leonardo Editore, 1994. Röthlisberger, 1961: Marcel Röthlisberger, Claude Lorrain: the paintings, London: Zwemmer, 1961. Röthlisberger, 1968: Marcel Röthlisberger, Claude Lorrain: the drawings, 2 vols., Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of california Press, 1968. Röthlisberger, 1985: Marcel Röthlisberger, ‘A Panoramic view by claude Lorrain’, Art Institute of Chicago Museum Studies, vol. 11, no. 2, 1985, pp. 102–15. Rossi, 1985: Giorgio Rossi, L’Agro di Roma tra ‘500 e ‘800: condizioni di vita e lavoro, Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1985. Russell, 1982: h. Diane Russell, Claude Lorrain 1600–1682, exh. cat., Washington: national Gallery of Art, 1982. Sallares: 2002: Robert Sallares, Malaria and Rome, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002. Sandrart, 1925: Rudolf Arthur Peltzer (ed.), Joachim von Sandrart’s Academie der Bau-Bild und Malery-Künste von 1675, Munich: G. hirth, 1925. Scavizzi, 1979: Paola c. Scavizzi, ‘Fonti per uno studio sulla regolazione del Tevere dal cinquecento al Settecento. Fra teoria et pratica’, Archivio della Reale Società Romana di Storia Patria, vol. 102, 1979, pp. 237–313. Segarra Lagunes, 2004: Maria Margarita Segarra Lagunes, Il Tevere e Roma: storia di una simbiosi, Rome: Gangemi, 2004. Sereni, 1997: Emilio Sereni, History of the Italian Agricultural Landscape, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997. Smith, 1877: Smith, Strother A., The Tiber and its Tributaries, London: Longmans, Green, and co., 1877. Somma, 2001: c. Somma, ‘L’assetto viario della cassia tra XVii e XiX secolo’, in i. Fosi and A. Recchia (eds.), Strade paesaggio territorio e missioni negli anni santi fra medioevo e età moderna, Rome: Gangemi, 2001, pp. 173–241.

Lisa Beaven: claude Lorrain and La crescenza

139

140

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 6 The Campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi David R. Marshall

Palladio’s L’antichità di Roma di M. Andrea Palladio, raccolta brevemente da gli auttori antichi, & moderni (1554) is a guidebook to Rome written by an architect. As a guidebook it focuses on identifying antiquities and associating them with snippets of information derived from antique authors, such as Pliny, and modern authors, such as Flavio Biondo. At the time he was writing it, Palladio was drawing Roman antiquities, and these drawings fed into the Quattro libri dell’architettura, published in 1570. The first book of the Quattro libri was devoted to the orders; that is, systems based on column, capital, and entablature which, while based on antique models, are presented as architectural components of universal appplicability. The fourth book deals with antique temples, mostly in Rome, and presents measured plans and elevations which, while based on empirical investigation of particular ruins, are drawn as Palladio believed them to have been in antiquity. Palladio, therefore, although immersed in the fragmentary particularity of the ruins of ancient Rome, constantly sought to look beyond them in order to present an image of the way Rome had been, and, by extension, the way contemporary architecture ought to be.

The Antichità di Roma is an expression of the same mind-set, and in reading this guidebook we learn nothing about the ruinous particularity of its subject. instead it reads more like Pliny or the hypnerotomachia Poliphili: a series of descriptions of what a particular building would have been like in its heyday. hence, in reading about the Mausoleum of Augustus (Fig. 1), we—and the sixteenth, seventeenth or eighteenth-century visitor—standing before this confused, but clearly circular, mass of masonry learn that it was decorated with white marble, porphyry, huge columns, obelisks and beautiful statues. it had 12 doors, three rings of walls and was circular in form. it was 250 cubits tall and at the top there was a statue of Augustus in bronze.1

in describing the Basilica of Maxentius and constantine (Fig. 2), identified by Palladio with Vespasian’s Temple (Below left) Fig. 1. Rome, Mausoleum of Augustus. (© David. R. Marshall 2013.) (Below right) Fig. 2. Rome, Basilica of Maxentius and constantine. (© David. R. Marshall 2013.)

Frontispiece: Giovanni Paolo Panini, Capriccio of Roman Ruins with a Sibyl Preaching, 1740s. Private collection.

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

141

of Peace, one of the largest buildings in the Forum, and one of the most conspicuously ruined, only the fact of its ruinousness is acknowledged: The Temple of Peace was a great deal bigger than all the others [temples], rectangular in shape, and ornamented with vast a very beautiful columns and statues. it was built by Vespasian 80 years after the coming of christ and it burnt down without warning in the reign of commodus—its ruins can still be seen near the church of Santa Maria nuova—and it did not fall into ruin on christmas Eve (as people believe).2

Today, we expect more diversity of information. The recent hart and hicks edition of Palladio’s guidebook tells readers today much more than Palladio did. A sample spread, on the Pantheon (pp. 76–77) (Fig. 3), shows a modern photo, the woodcut elevation and section from the Quattro Libri, and a drawing nearly contemporary with Palladio, by Marten van heemskerck of c. 1532. The first gives us the fact of the Pantheon, a building existing in the presents of both Palladio and hart and hicks. The second presents Palladio’s real interest, the reconstructed Pantheon of Palladio’s idealising mindset. The third, however, shows us what is absent in the Antichità or anywhere else in Palladio: the imperfect Pantheon, encrusted with a medieval campanile, encroached upon by housing, fronted by antique fragments, silted up, and an object of indifference to people and animals going about their daily business. it is this last, un-Palladian Rome that was the territory of northern draftsmen like Maerten van heemskerk, and the vast array of printmakers and painters that succeeded him. By the eighteenth century such images had modulated into a new pictorial genre, the topographical view, or veduta. While some vedutisti, such as Gaspar van Wittel or canaletto, and, of course, their patrons, were happy with what purported to be dispassionate, heemskerck-like presentation of the facts, the ruin-painter and vedutista Giovanni Paolo Panini and his patrons seem to have been constrained by the idealising cultural climate of Rome to resist this, in painting at least. hence a typical mature Panini from the 1740s onwards would present a monument like the Pantheon recontextualised (Fig. 4). in Panini there remains a lingering tension between the ideal and the factual Roman monument. The rendering of the Pantheon itself is as factual, and as full of architectural and human accidents as one could wish, as in another example (Fig. 5); but the imaginary setting, the relocation on a new, imaginary site of monuments quite separated in their actual location, serves to conceptualise the Pantheon and

142

(Above) Fig. 3. Vaughan hart and Peter hicks, Palladio’s Rome: a translation of Andrea Palladio’s two guidebooks to Rome, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006, pp. 76–77. (Opposite top) Fig. 4. Giovanni Paolo Panini, Capriccio with the Pantheon and the Preaching of a Sibyl, signed and dated 1743. Oil on canvas, 48 x 120 cm. Private collection.

present it as something universal, in a way that is analogous to Palladio’s woodcut in the Quattro Libri. Another of Panini’s subgenres was the ruin piece with little or no topographical reference at all (Frontispiece). Such works served to present a distillation of the essence of that ruinousness that Palladio so studiously avoided. Therefore it is at the opposite extreme from the Antichità di Roma. While being overtly a representation of the kind of ruins over which Palladio clambered, it resists any crystalline Palladian description of its shape, or its number of columns, or any attempt to attach to it some snippet of Plinian history. Although Palladio, obviously, never saw a Panini capriccio, i suspect he would have hated it, or found it empty of interest. The capriccio embodies, and glorifies, everything that Palladio was trying to look beyond in order to see the perfect building that once stood here. he would have retreated, baffled, on realising that the building of which this appeared to be a fragment did not make sense. And yet Palladio, or what he stood for, underpinned such images rather more than he would have realised. For the genre of architectural painting, of which Panini was a late practitioner, grew out of treatises like the Quattro libri, by way of the genre of quadratura (Fig. 6). Quadratura, or illusionistic painted architecture, demanded both a thorough understanding of perspective and the detailed

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

understanding of the precise forms and proportions of the parts of column, capital, and entablature. it required no observation of real columns, but mastery of the three dimensional linear geometry of a possible column, and of the means of rendering this linear armature with light and shade. The procedure of a quadraturista was analogous to that of modern 3-dimensional graphics software, in which structures are built from the conceptual ground up, from points located mathematically in virtual space. Quadraturisti therefore based their art on the architectural treatises, the architectural graphics software of the day. in the second quarter of the seventeenth century, at a moment of expansion and diversification of pictorial genres, painters with a quadratura background branched out into easel painting. Easel paintings, whether of figures, genre, or landscape, were based, ultimately, on observation of the real world, usually beginning with a drawing. Such drawings are analogous to digital photographs, which the artist then ‘photoshopped’ in paint on canvas. The architectural painters hybridised these two ways of working, in the way some digital cinematic genres today are hybrids of digital construction from first principles and digital filming of real actors. hence, a particular architectural painting always presents us with a problem of establishing where it is situated on a line drawn between the extremes of the constructed architecture of quadratura on the one hand, and descriptive realism—the tame delineation of a given spot—on the other. in this chapter, therefore, i want to look at the Rome of the architectural painters, in terms of this constructed/ observed polarity. The issues can best be developed by looking at the elements that are common to both: the column, capital, and entablature, and then move to the site that was at the epicentre of rovinismo: the campo Vaccino, the ancient Forum Romanum.

(centre) Fig. 5. Giovanni Paolo Panini, Capriccio with the Pantheon, 1740s, detail. Private collection. (Above) Fig. 6. colonna and Mitelli, Quadratura Ceiling. Florence, Palazzo Pitti. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

143

Architectural Painting and the Orders if we look at the pioneer of architectural painting, Viviano codazzi, it soon becomes apparent that, even though the meticulous realism of his renderings serves to convince one of the reality of the structures he depicts, most are actually imaginary, and heavily reliant on the sixteenth-century conception of the five orders—Tuscan, Doric (Fig. 7), ionic, corinthian, composite (Fig. 8)—as drawn and described by Serlio, Vignola, Palladio, Scamozzi and others. codazzi uses all five orders, often playing one off against another. his source seems to have been not so much Palladio, although he almost certainly knew the Quattro libri, but rather Vignola’s

144

(Above left) Fig. 7. Doric Order. Detail of Viviano codazzi and Filippo Lauri, The Arsenal at Civitavecchia, 1668. Oil on canvas, 118 x 173 cm. Private collection. After Marshall, 1993, cat. Vc 193. (Above right) Fig. 8. composite Order. Detail of Viviano codazzi and Domenico Gargiulo, Round Temple with Offerings to a Goddess, mid 1640s. Oil on canvas, 175 x 230 cm. Private collection. After Marshall, 1993, cat. Vc 33. (Below left) Fig. 9. Tuscan Order. From Andrea Palladio, I Quattro libri dell’architettura, Venice: D. de’ Franceschi, 1570, p. 19. (Below centre) Fig. 10. Doric Order. From Palladio, Quattro libri, p. 23. (Below right) Fig. 11. Tuscan Order. From Giacomo Barozzi da Vignola, Regola delli Cinque Ordini d’Architettura, Siena: Bernardino Oppi, 1635, plate 4.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Regole delli cinque Ordini, first published in 1562, which remained the canonical presentation of the orders well into the twentieth century. Vignola’s greater influence may have something to do with the fact that Palladio’s presentation of the orders was a little too well-informed archaeologically. For example, his Tuscan order has an architrave of timber (Fig. 9) and the intercolumniations are correspondingly wider than for his Doric order (Fig. 10).3 A painter with a similar archaeological spirit, nicolas Poussin, might use it as his model in the Louvre Massacre of the Innocents,4 translating timber into stone and so missing Palladio’s point,5 but a distinction based on differences of building materials went against the spirit of the orders as Vignola conceived them: as a universal formal vocabulary, not a set of materials-specific variations. consequently Vignola presents a Tuscan order (Fig. 11) with an architrave implicitly of stone, and the intercolumniations are correspondingly narrower. it is readily identifiable from its base, which has a single torus, and its unornamented frieze, and this demonstrably Vignolan type is used by codazzi (Figs. 12–13).

(Above left) Fig. 12. Tuscan base. Detail of niccolò codazzi, Colonnaded Interior with Pool and Round Window, early 1670s. Oil on canvas, 72 x 97 cm. Aix-en-Provence, Musée Granet, 849.1.341. After Marshall, 1993, cat. nc 75. (Above centre) Fig. 13. Tuscan base. From Vignola, Regola, plate 7, detail. (Above right) Fig. 14. Doric base. From Vignola, Regola, plate 12. (Below left) Fig. 15. Mutular Doric Order. From Vignola, Regola, plate 14. (Below centre) Fig. 16. Denticular Doric Order. From Vignola, Regola, plate 13. (Below right) Fig. 17. Doric Order. From Palladio, Quattro libri, p. 27.

According to a distinction made by Vignola, the Doric order is divided into two types, the mutular (corresponding to Vignola’s plate Xiiii) (Fig. 15), the denticular (corresponding to Vignola’s plate Xiii) (Fig. 16), the names referring to the presence of mutules or dentils on the cornice. A slightly different type is drawn by Palladio, with neither dentils nor mutules (Fig. 17). codazzi uses elements of all three types, but not in fixed combinations.

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

145

Another revealing detail is the treatment of the column bases. During the Renaissance it was known from existing remains—such as the Theatre of Marcellus—that the Doric order need not have a base.6 Palladio acknowledged this, even devoting one plate to the baseless Doric (Fig. 10), but, like Bramante and Serlio, he expressed a clear preference for the Attic base ‘which adds very much to its beauty’.7 The Attic base consisted of two tori separated by a scotia and fillets (Fig. 19).8 Vignola, however, disliked the Attic base, drawing it only in a plate at the end of the book devoted to uncanonical forms, lamenting that

146

(Above left) Fig. 18. Asiatic base in the portico of the Pantheon. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above right) Fig. 19. Attic base. From Giacomo Barozzi da Vignola, Regola, plate 30. (Below left) Fig. 20. Viviano codazzi, Coffered Apse, c. 1655–60. Rome, Galleria Spada. After Marshall, 1993, cat. Vc 90. (Below right) Fig. 21. corinthian order. From Vignola, Regola, plate 36.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

‘alli nostri tempi è in uso metterla in opera sotto il Corintio, Composito, Ionico, et Dorico indiferentemente’ (today it is employed beneath the corinthian, composite, ionic and Doric orders indifferently).9 his response was to invent for the Doric order a base based on the Tuscan, to which was added an astragal or narrow torus (tondino overo bastoncino) (Fig. 14).10 For the other three orders—ionic, corinthian, and composite—Vignola favoured the Asiatic base, of which the best-known example was found on the portico of the Pantheon (Fig. 18). codazzi showed his awareness of Vignola’s plates by using his distinctive Doric type occasionally,11 but for the most part used the Attic base sotto il Corintio, Composito, Ionico, et Dorico indiferentemente. indeed, even in his otherwise archaeologically correct Sectioned View of the Pantheon, codazzi substitutes the Attic base for the correct Asiatic base.12 This kind of analysis serves to demonstrate how closely codazzi studied his Vignola, and how dependent he was on the treatises. Even in what are presented as views of Roman ruins, rather than scenes of imaginary architecture, he constructs the details according to Vignola. An example is the Coffered Apse in the Galleria Spada (Fig. 20), which is based on the central bay of the Basilica of constantine and Maxentius (Palladio’s Temple of Peace). The last of its nave columns had been removed in 1613 to be re-erected in front of S. Maria Maggiore, so codazzi had no choice but to look to the treatises for his columns. The entablature is an almost exact rendering of the corinthian entablature in Vignola’s plate XXXVi (Fig. 21) (which Vignola tells us is ‘cavata da diversi luoghi di Roma, ma principalmente dalla rotonda’), the only changes being the omission of the reliefs on the friezes, the lions heads on the cyma of the cornice, and the beads between the first and second fasciae, as well as the alteration of a bead-and-reel astragal immediately above the frieze to a fillet. codazzi even shows the pineapples at the corners.

Alberto Carlieri (1675–c. 1720) codazzi’s way of working, in which the constructive mode employing architectural treatises prevailed over the observational mode of drawing from life, continued well into the eighteenth century, although by then the preferred treatise was Andrea Pozzo’s Perspectiva pictorum et architectorum.13 Pietro Giannone tells the story of how the neapolitan rovinista Gennaro Greco taught himself to paint architectural pieces by studying it. Another such painter, Alberto carlieri, was in fact a pupil of Pozzo, and was active from the 1690s to c. 1720. he had painted figures in Pozzo’s quadratura frescoes in Trinità dei Monti

Fig. 22. ionic capital (top) and composite capital (bottom), from Alberto carlieri, Saint Peter Healing: Porphyry Vase, Ruined Composite Colonnade, and Ionic Arcade. Oil on canvas, 97.8 by 73.4 cm. Private collection.

as well as, no doubt, helping with the architecture. Pozzo’s elaborate scenographic constructions are often echoed in his work.14 however, his capitals are not so closely based on Pozzo as we might expect from this, and they reveal a lack of reverence for the canonical orders perhaps commensurate with a century and a half having elapsed since the great days of the sixteenth-century treatises.15 he showed little interest in the austerities of the Doric order, and none at all in the Tuscan. he preferred instead to play variations on the fancy orders—ionic, and especially corinthian and composite (Fig. 22)—and his rendering of them is quite personal. At the same time, they display no evidence of an independent observation of Roman ruins.

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

147

(Above) Fig. 23. Giovanni Ghisolfi, Preaching of an Apostle: Ruined Corinthian Colonnade, Ionic Arcade, and the Vatican Chiton Torso. Private collection (formerly Milan, Galleria Pontremoli). (Right) Fig. 24. Roman, Male Torso Wearing a Chiton. Vatican, Museo Pioclementino, Vestibolo Rotondo. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

Giovanni Ghisolfi 1623–83 Slightly earlier than carlieri, however, was an architectural painter who was more interested in ruins. This is Giovanni Ghisolfi, a Milanese painter active in northern italy, who based his figure style on the prints and paintings of Salvator Rosa.17 his best known pictures are medium-sized canvases showing ruined architecture, usually with a narrative subject of some kind, but he also did more monumental work, including quadratura (Fig. 23). in spite of this, in his easel paintings he was less treatise-dependent than the other painters i have considered, and he seems to have actually drawn at the antiquities of Rome. For example, a motif that appears in his work but rarely in the work of others is the Male Torso Wearing a Chiton in the Vestibolo Rotondo in the Museo Pio-clementino in the Vatican (Fig. 24).18 Although engraved in two plates in the first volume of Jan de Bisschop’s Signorum Veterum Icones in 1668,19 Ghisolfi seems not to have used this source, as he

148

depicts it from a different angle. he probably he drew it for himself. Similarly, his representation of the orders seem to have been based on the direct observation of monuments in the Forum, in particular the Temple of Saturn, then identified as the Temple of concord (Fig. 30 [1]), and the Temple of Vespasian, then identified as the Temple of Jupiter Tonans (Fig. 30 [2]). The columns of the Temple of Saturn employ an ionic order (Fig. 25) and date from the fourth-century rebuilding of the temple,20 which explains a number of elements—such as the rope moulding where one would expect a bead-and-reel astragal beneath the ovolo—that can be considered unclassical. Moreover, the volutes are placed on diagonals, making all four sides the same. neither Vignola nor Palladio use this type for their canonical ionic order, preferring to follow Vitruvius and show the type that has two distinct sides. Palladio, nonetheless, feels compelled to address so conspicuous a monument in his

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above left) Fig. 25. capitals and entablature of the Temple of Saturn in the Forum Romanum. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above right) Fig. 26. ionic capital based on the Temple of Saturn, from Giovanni Ghisolfi, The Ruins of Carthage. Dresden, Gemäldegalerie. (Below right) Fig. 27. ionic order of the Temple of Saturn. From Palladio, Quattro libri, book 4.

fourth book (Fig. 27). Taking notice of the conspicuous inscription ‘S.P.Q.R. incEnDiO cOnSUMPTUM RESTiTUiT’ (the Senate and People of Rome rebuilt this temple after it had been consumed by fire) he notes that it was destroyed by fire and rebuilt. ‘hence i believe that it was not restored to the beauty and perfection it had at first.’21 he considered the capitals to be a mixture of Doric and ionic, although he did admit that they were well made.22 consequently the type does not normally appear in the work of the architectural painters who were dependent on the treatises, but it is frequent in Ghisolfi’s work (Fig. 26).23 Ghisolfi simplified the moulding beneath the ovolo into a ring of knobs, eliminated the leaf moulding on the cyma, and rendered the volutes as a decorative double spiral of ridge and groove. There is no echo of Palladio, which suggests that Ghisolfi had drawn it for himself, in the soft black chalk manner that he favoured, focusing on cast shadows rather than linear geometry. Moreover, his rosette is the orthodox type, not the curious square form that Palladio shows.24 Ghisolfi’s paintings often distinguish between the colours of capital and shaft, as here, a response to the fact that the Temple of Saturn has granite columns with marble capitals, a point that Palladio fails to mention.

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

149

This shift of attention from the ideal order of the treatises to the observation of real capitals is also evident in his treatment of the capitals and entablature of the Temple of Vespasian (Fig. 28; Fig. 30 [2]). As Piranesi’s Veduta del Tempio di Giove Tonante demonstrates (Fig. 29), these ruins were highly accessible, if not quite so big as Piranesi shows them. Although they were then not quite so wrecked as they are today, their interest for Ghisolfi seems to have resided in their ruinousness.

150

(Above left) Fig. 28. Rome, Ruins of the Temple of Vespasian in the Forum Romanum. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above right) Fig. 29. Giambattista Piranesi, Veduta del Tempio di Giove Tonante, 1760–78. Etching, London, British Museum, 1886,1124.35. (Below) Fig. 30. Giambattista nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail, the Forum Romanum (campo Vaccino) with additional numbering. 1. Temple of Saurn (Temple of concord) 2. Temple of Vespanian (Temple of Jupiter Tonans) 3. Temple of Antoninus and Faustina 4. Basilica of Maxentius and constantine (Temple of Peace) 5. Temple of castor and Pollux

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

The composition with the chiton torso (Fig. 23), which was was imitated endlessly by carlieri, is a typical piece of fictive architecture, in that the arcade in the middle plane is invented and ultimately goes back to the treatises, while the structure in the foreground is a confection of columns disposed on a free-form plan. At the same time the column and ruined entablature is clearly based on the Temple of Vespasian, since the frieze is unique and the capital has distinctive channels in the volutes. While these features are found in Palladio, Ghisolfi’s rendering shows a clear awareness of the ruined state of the monument, apparent in the treatment of the cornice and the wedge of damage at the neck.

The Tradition of the Representation of Damage Ghisolfi’s painting seems to represent the point in the history of architectural painting at which the balance shifts from prioritising the architectural ideals of the cinquecento to a Settecento prioritising of the ruined fragment. The fragment and the representation of damage had long gone hand in hand. it is no coincidence that the first painter to be seriously interested in the representation of damage was one more interested in sculptural fragments than in ideal architecture: Andrea Mantegna. in his Vienna Saint Sebastian, the column to which the saint is tied belongs to a ruined arcade—the core of which consists of strangely angled courses of brick—while sculptural fragments and partially destroyed walls abound (Fig. 31). As Roger Jones observes, ‘the way stout brick walls decay or are uprooted is precisely documented, as is the staining and cracking of marble and its ill-treatment

(Above left) Fig. 31. Detail of Andrea Mantegna, Saint Sebastian, 1456–59. Panel, 68 × 30 cm. Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum. (Above right) Fig. 32. Detail of Andrea Mantegna, Transporting of the Body of Saint Christopher, 1448–57. Padua, Ovetari chapel (destroyed).

by man—as when a fine carved frieze is pierced by a wooden trellis’.25 The latter detail appears in the Martyrdom of Saint Christopher and the Transporting of the Body of Saint Christopher in the Ovetari chapel (Fig. 32), where it forcefully makes the point that damage to antiquities is not simply the consequence of disembodied forces like ‘time’, but is the consequence of practical humanity’s lack of concern for antique perfection. As Jones points out, Mantegna’s representations of damaged stone grow out of a long-standing tradition of the representation in paint of coloured marbles. it was but a step from representing in paint some exotic coloured marble to representing the way they had been damaged. And it was only a short step from representing an identifiable coloured marble to making a swirling marble-like pattern that represented a marble that might have been, but never was. in other words the representation of marble is rhetorical: skilfully designed to convince the viewer, but with an elastic relationship to observable fact. But by the eighteenth century the masters of pictorial rhetoric were not the painters of fictive marble, but theatre set painters, who were often also quadraturisti and architectural painters. What concerned the scene painter was not whether he had represented damage accurately, but whether his confection gave the effect of ruinousness.

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

151

(Left) Fig. 33. Damaged marble on the base of Trajan’s column. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above) Fig. 34. Detail of Fig. 33 compared to a detail of Mantegna’s Vienna Saint Sebastian. (Below top) Fig. 35. Detail of Viviano codazzi, Ruins with a Hermit, 1655. Oil on canvas, 34 x 40 cm. Private collection. After Marshall, 1993, cat. Vc81. (Below centre) Fig. 36. Detail of niccolò codazzi, Colonnaded Interior with Pool and Round Window. After Marshall, 1993, cat. nc 75. (Below bottom) Fig. 37. Detail of Monogrammist GAE, Saint Philip Baptising the Eunuch of Queen Candauces. Oil on canvas, 81.5 by 98.5 cm. Poland, nieborów Palace.

The Wedge and Tail in Mantegna the rhetoric of damage is already to be found. For example, in the Saint Sebastian we also find a feature that will be used by later architectural painters: the wedge cut out of the architrave and frieze. it is roughly triangular in shape, divided into shadowed and highlit halves which interlock with jigsaw puzzle-like tongues. A crack forming a fine tail extends from the vertex of the wedge through what little remains of the architrave. Does damage like this actually occur in Roman ruins? if we look at the torus of the base of Trajan’s column (Fig. 33), and with a little visual rhetoric of our own, in the form of cropping and flipping, we can see that it does (Fig. 34). in codazzi we find the wedge and tail as part of his standard vocabulary (Fig. 35). it was useful for rendering the damaged edges of blocks of masonry, the wedge of the chipped part bleeding into the tail of the join-line. in this example we see at the lower right, now a little worn, a dark brown wedge with multiple tails spreading out from it and onto the side face of the voussoir. There was no need to model in a more intricate way the broken face, as Mantegna had done; all he needed was to draw the dark wedge and crack over the paint surface representing the surface of the stone, and the viewer gets the message. A variant used by both Viviano and niccolò codazzi indicates damage to Roman brickwork in much the same way (Fig. 36). A more robust variant is used by the Monogrammist GAE, a painter sometimes confused with the early Ghisolfi (Fig. 37).26 his style is more plastic and he enjoys rendering the chipped face of the wedge with gouty highlights; he even models the crack with highlight as well as shadow.

152

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

The Gaping Wound Another such device is the Gaping Wound. This is found often in the work of Viviano codazzi’s son niccolò. he had a taste for simplified, Leger-like column shafts, rendered with an even, continuous modelling and long gleaming highlights. he seems to have been reluctant to impair the machine-like perfection of these columns, and so concentrated his attention at the point where one column drum joined another (Fig. 38). normally the joints were invisible, but by cutting away part of the drum (usually with a two-stage cut) an interesting effect could be achieved by playing this off against the elliptical shape of the intact drum above. in the centre of the damaged face is usually a darker core, which one might read as a cast shadow were it not for the fact that at the right in Fig. 39, where both drums are damaged, it is still to be found. it now reads as a bloody wound, or some other organic form. The same effect is applied to the damaged corner of a pier in Fig. 38, where it reads like the inkblot of a Baroque Rorschach test. Does this effect have a basis in observation? Displaced and damaged column drums are not uncommon in real life, and more were to be found then than today, when such signs of structural instability are likely to have been tidied up. A ‘wound’ formed by different means is to be found on one of the columns of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina in the Forum (Fig. 41). These columns are made of carystian green marble,27 and have weathered differently from the usual marble or granite, flaking off in oval layers. On the left column this forms a ‘wound’ (Fig. 40). That niccolò codazzi might have been attentive to damage to these columns is supported by his view of this temple painted c. 1685–90 (Fig. 42).28 his column shafts are smooth and simplified as was his custom, except for a series of parallel lines in the upper part of the shaft (Fig. 44). These are in fact grooves made possibly in 1430 to attach a makeshift roof, and are visible today (Fig. 43).29

(Top) Fig. 38. Detail of nicolò codazzi, Ruined Arches with the Holy Family, c. 1685. Oil on canvas, 132 x 92 cm. Bloomington, indiana, indiana University Art Museum, 74.46. After Marshall, 1993, cat. nc 49. (Above) Fig. 39. Detail of niccolò codazzi, Ruined Palace Portico, c. 1685–93. Oil on canvas, 129 x 94 cm. Prague castle Picture Gallery. After Marshall, 1993, cat. nc 67. (Left) Fig. 40. ‘Wound’ on the leftmost column of the portico of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina in the Forum Romanum.

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

153

(Top left) Fig. 41. Rome, Temple of Antoninus and Faustina in the Forum Romanum. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Top right) Fig. 42. niccolò codazzi, Temple of Antoninus and Faustina, c. 1685–90. Oil on canvas, 71 x 96 cm. Private collection. After Marshall, 1993, cat. nc 44**. (Bottom left). Fig. 43. Damaged column of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Bottom right) Fig. 44. Detail of Fig. 42 showing damaged columns.

he does not, however, show the ‘wound’ itself (which is on the left-hand column) although Piranesi does. Probably, therefore niccolò’s gaping wound is simply the consequence of the mirroring of the effect of a cast shadow on a broken column, since these tongues also appear, more naturalistically, in Panini. By a simple mirroring of a naturalistic effect—in Photoshop, so to speak—niccolò creates a wholly different effect, where cast shadow becomes a colour change, which demands to be read as a stain or wound: all of which serves to demonstrate how rhetorical the ruin-painter’s effects could be.

154

Giovanni Paolo Panini With Giovanni Paolo Panini, active in Rome from 1711 to 1765, the rhetoric of ruinousness reaches a peak. if we look at his capricci we can sense that the concern with the five orders with which we began has faded (Frontispiece). The sources of particular components have become less obvious, and the whole is handled more fluently. his works generally have columns and entablatures inspired by the examples of the Temple of Vespasian, Temple of Saturn, or the Temple of castor and Pollux, which Panini depicted in a number of topographical vedute (Fig. 45). The corinthian capitals of the capriccio in the frontispiece seems to be of the Temple of Vespasian type, and the frieze is clearly inspired by it, but is too free to have been based on a drawing of the monument made at a particular time and place, and if it were it was at an early moment and numerous painted variants have intervened. At the same time there is no trace of the pedantry of the treatises. Similarly the ionic order in The Archaeologist in the Accademia di S. Luca (here represented by a copy, Fig. 46) is the canonical two-sided form approved by the

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

treatises; yet it is not Ghisolfi’s temple of Saturn type, even though the monument gives the impression of being inspired by that ruin (visible at the right of Panini’s View of the Forum (Fig. 45), which is a true veduta, where he accurately records the form of the actual capitals). The frieze of putti holding swags appears in Palladio only on the Temple of Fortuna Virilis (Fig. 46),30 but Panini’s putti are more muscular and energetic. That makes this temple a better source, given that its order is ionic, but the shafts are fluted, not plain as in Palladio. in short, Panini understands the canons established by the treatises, both generic (as with Vignola) and particular (as with Palladio’s fourth book on the temples), but is not concerned with these canons as such. his columns and capitals are an evidence of the way these canons had been fully assimilated, and Panini did not really have to think about them very much. (i am reminded here of Gombrich’s classic account of the assimilation of the style all’antica by Raphael and Giulio Romano, an assimilation so complete that these artists could create convincing new inventions in the antique style that had no antique source.)31 But if Panini did not need to think about the orders, what did he think about? The answer should be evident from these examples: painterly devices that give the effect of ruinousness. he is really doing what the Trecento painters of fictive marbles were doing, except that rather than painting panels of marble veneer, he is painting column shafts and entablatures. i single out these elements advisedly, because it is these that form the true subject of his pictures, not the form of capitals or mouldings. his orders are no longer statements of canonicity, enlivened by incidents of damage; they are simply fields over which pictorial effects of damage may play.

(Above) Fig. 45. Giovanni Paolo Panini and workshop, View of the Forum. Oil on canvas, 56 x 136 cm. Rome, cesare Lampronti Antiquario. From the right: Temple of Vespasian, Temple of Saturn, Temple of castor and Pollux, with the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina on the left. (Below) Fig. 46. Palladio, Quattro libri, book 4, p. 130, detail of the frieze of the Temple of Fortuna Virilis. (Bottom). Fig. 47. copy after Giovanni Paolo Panini, The Archaeologist, 1746, in the Galleria dell’Academia di San Luca (Arisi 388). Private collection.

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

155

it will also be apparent that Panini has a whole new repertory of damage effects. Where did they come from? if we look at the columns in The Archaelogist (Fig. 48) they already seem to be somewhat familiar. i stated earlier that the columns of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina were unusual in being of green carystian marble and in the way they had weathered. As can be seen in an oblique view (Fig. 49), its surface has an irregular, swirling texture, at times like wood grain, with elliptical shapes and tortured veining. Panini’s columns are strikingly similar, if more richly coloured. in particular the column at the far right of the temple seems to have inspired the equally convoluted texture of the rightmost column in the Panini.

The Shrapnel Pit Panini’s unfluted columns employ another device which seems to have been invented by him. This i call the shrapnel pit, since it most resembles the pitting resulting from bombing in World War ii that one can still see in London or Berlin. it assumes an unfluted shaft, and is modelled simply in dark and light shapes, only occasionally being as elaborate as the example in Fig. 50d. Although common in Panini’s works, this effect is surprisingly uncommon in real life. it is mostly found in granite columns, which are all but indestructible, such

156

(Above left) Fig. 48. Detail of the columns in the copy of The Archaeologist. (Above right) Fig. 49. Detail of the columns of the Temple of Antoninus and Faustina.

as the Egyptian granite columns from the Pantheon (Fig. 50a). Looked at closely we find here pits like those in Panini’s paintings, although they are relatively much smaller. Enlargement strengthens the similarity, so much so that there can be little doubt that such pitted granite columns are Panini’s source for the motif (Fig. 50a–c). in reality pits or holes as large as those shown by Panini are usually the result of people in the past having cut holes to support timber beams, but the effect is different (Fig. 51a). Therefore i would read Panini’s shrapnel pits as rhetorical exaggerations of observed details designed to convey quickly and effectively the idea of ruinousness.

Damaged Fluting Finally, Panini’s treatment of fluted columns. A painter like codazzi had modelled fluted columns systematically and logically, in the way described by the treatises and used by quadraturisti. Panini, however, as we have now come to expect, went to real columns, and extracted from them a painterly formula that conveyed a vivid effect of ruinousness. in an early work we see how he

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

rendered a fluted marble column which has most of the flutes knocked off (Fig. 51b). At the bottom we see the column modelled in blackish shadow (the flutes), pink middle tone (the arrises), and highlight (the edges of the arrises), over a dark ground. in the lower middle section the pink middle tone spreads out, obliterating the ridges, while a splash of highlighting serves to give the column as a whole its roundness. Towards the top the highlights and shadows become more impressionistic as the ridges come and go. in a somewhat later work (Fig. 51c) this has become more formulaic, the highlight and middle tones tending to alternate patchily, and the effect is now that the flutes have been filled with cement rather than that the arrises have been knocked off.

(Top) Fig. 50. ‘Shrapnel pits’. (a) column in the portico of the Pantheon (b) Detail of Giovanni Paolo Panini, The Preaching of Saint Paul, 1737 London, Apsley house. Arisi, 1986, cat. 235 (c) Detail of Giovanni Paolo Panini, Capriccio of Roman Ruins with a Sibyl Preaching, 1740s. Private collection. (See frontispiece) (d) Detail of Giovanni Paolo Panini, Capriccio. Private collection. (See frontispiece) (Above) Fig. 51. Fluting. (a) Fluted column in the Forum Romanum with pit for beam (b) Detail of Giovanni Paolo Panini, Marius in the Ruins of Carthage, c. 1720. Bath, holbourne of Menstrie Museum. Arisi, 1986, cat. 111 (c) Detail of Giovanni Paolo Panini, Diogenes Throwing Away His Bowl, c. 1745. Oxford, Ashmolean Museum. Arisi, 1986, cat. 369

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

157

Piranesi i want to conclude with Piranesi. i have been using Piranesi’s images so far as topographical controls, as evidence of what a building was like in the eighteenth century. This is right, because Piranesi was an intensely realistic artist, far more realistic than almost any artist of his day, let alone those that have been considering. But Piranesi began as the creator of architectural pieces that belonged to the same genre that i have being considering, except that they employ the medium of etching: that is, the Prima Parte. But he quickly evolved into an intense realist, a practitioner of the observational mode. his manipulations of lighting and scale are frequently noted, but he never let effect compromise the accuracy of his descriptions. Because he observed so widely and so closely, in representing ruins he could not rely on Panini’s rhetorical tricks developed from the observation of columns. he saw ruins as they really were: for the most part heaps of eroded concrete encased in brick tile shuttering. Earlier codazzi had developed a clever, if literal, formula for rendering Roman brick arches (Fig. 36) consisting of long rounded strokes of brick-red over a darker ground, but Piranesi went further. his new vision

158

(Top) Fig. 52. Giovanni Battista Piranesi, Veduta interna della Villa di Mecenate (interior view of the so-called Villa of Maecenas at Tivoli), 1760– 78. Etching, 477 x 625 mm. London, British Museum, 1914,0216.132. (Above) Fig. 53. Giovanni Battista Piranesi, Tavolozza triangolare martellinata delle mura d’Aureliano (triangular tilework of the Aurelian walls), 1756. Etching, from Le Antichità Romane, vol. 1.

of the Roman ruin is exemplified by a didactic plate, the Tavolozza triangolare martellinata delle mura d’Aureliano … (triangular tilework of the Aurelian walls) from the

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Left) Fig. 54. Giovanni Battista Piranesi, Variae in Architectura graecanica rationes (various Greek columns taken from ancient monuments), Della Magnificenza ed Architettura de’ Romani (1761), Tav. Vi. Etching, 600 x 395 mm. (Above) Fig. 55. Giovanni Battista Piranesi, Parere (imaginary palace facade), from Osservazioni sopra la lettre de M. Mariette (1765), Tav. iX. Etching, 410 x 645 mm.

Antichità di Roma, Book i (Fig. 53). Between the neat courses of tile emerges the rubble (tavolozza) core like a picturesquely crumbling biscuit. Other prints are symphonies of eroded brick, opus mixtum, opus reticulatum, and other textures of actual Roman construction (Fig. 52). But what about the other side of ruin representation with which we began—the orders? Piranesi does not illustrate a set of canonical orders, although on occasion he does represent the order of a particular structure, as with the Ordine Toscano del Tempio di Giove Laziale in the Antichità di Albano e di Castel Gandolfo (1764), tav. ii, because he was only interested in particulars, in fragments. in the Della Magnificenza ed Architettura de’ Romani (1761) he represents an array of diverse columns actually to be found in Rome, as if mocking the universality and abstraction of the Vignolan or Palladian systems (Fig. 54). By then, Ancient Greece had replaced Rome and Vignola as the place where the universal orders were to be found, and in the best-known plate from this volume (Tav. XX) he polemically opposed ionic capitals actually to be found in Rome with the Greek types being promoted by Le Roy. This plate makes an intriguing comparison with the plate

in Vignola referred to earlier (Fig. 19) where Vignola feels compelled to represent, but not to approve of, forms that he knew existed but which he considered to be uncanonical, namely the Attic base and some fancy figured capitals. Piranesi, by contrast, is saying it is only these fancy, inventive, original forms that matter; the universal orders can be dispensed with. But this left him with a problem. if there are only a multitude of diverse fragments, and no system of the orders, how was one to compose a building? We have seen how architectural painters were dependent on the treatises of the orders to provide the three-dimensional graphics software for their invented structures. if Piranesi dispensed with this, how was he to compose? his answer was provided in the Parere su l’Architettura (1765) (Fig. 55). These extraordinary plates, which support a text in which Piranesi’s expresses his hostility towards the emerging neoclassical ideas of Laugier and Winckelmann, are rightly seen as being anti-Vitruvian and anti-Palladian, but also as neo-Mannerist. But i do not see these as being particularly concerned with reviving anything in the cinquecento. i see them as an attempt to provide a new syntax for the architectural capriccio when faced with the Death of the Order; an exploration of possible ways or rules with which to assemble the architectural fragment to create a new order without the orders. Art History Discipline, School of Culture and Communication, The University of Melbourne

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

159

Notes

21. Palladio, 1570, Book iV, chapter XXX.

A version of this article was presented at the symposium, Before and after Palladio’s Rome: antiquarianism from antiquity to the nineteenth century, Rome, British School at Rome, 20 February 2007.

23. E.g. Busiri Vici, 1992, cat. 48.

22. Palladio, 1570, Book. iV, chapter XXX.

1. Palladio, 1554, fol. 22v; hart and hicks, 2006, p. 73. 2. Palladio, 1554, fol. 23r; hart and hicks, 2006, p. 76.

24. Ghisolfi demonstrably derived the corinthian order in the Killing of Cicero (Busiri Vici, 1992, cat. 10) from this source, which probably lies behind most other instances as well (e.g. Busiri Vici, 1992, cats. 32, 36, 45). 25. Jones, 1987, p. 75.

3. Palladio, 1570, Book i, chapter XiV.

26. Marshall, 1996.

4. nicolas Poussin, The Rape of the Sabine Women. 1637–38. Oil on canvas, 159 x 206 cm. Musée du Louvre, Paris.

27. claridge, 1998, p. 107. 28. Marshall, 1993, cat. nc 44.

5. As Blunt (1967, p. 236) writes: ‘the temple in the background of the Louvre Sabines is of a primitive type with heavily proportioned Tuscan columns with enormous intercolumniations’. he observes (note 59) that it ‘conforms to many types recorded by Sebastiano Serlio and Palladio, but the wide intercolumniation may have been suggested by the plate in Daniele Barbaro’s edition of Vitruvius, Book iV, chapter 7 (Venice, 1567, p. 196). Barbaro’s plate is roughly the same as Palladio’s, and is clearly of timber, with coarse ‘mutules’. Serlio neither draws nor describes the intercolumniations nor the materials (although he mentions stone at one point) (hart and hicks, 1996, pp. 256–59, fols. 127v–129r). Frommel (1996, pp. 122–23), identifies the temple as the Temple of neptune, in honour of which Romulus had organised the games. he observes (p. 123) that the basilica at right is of wood (‘anche nella basilica a destra con entrambi i piani a pilastri e il tetto ovviamento ligneo, Poussin rievocò il periodo arcaico e l’origine dell’architettura antica da costruzioni lignee’) and (p. 122) that ‘il tempio etrusco era stato ricostruito fin dal primo Cinquecento con ordine tuscanico, con larghi intercolumni e un intercolumnio centrale anche più largo.’

29. claridge, 1998, p. 107.

6. E.g. Serlio, 1996, Book iV, plate XViir; hart and hicks, 1996, p. 281: ‘Again some think, with reference to many ancient buildings, that Doric columns did not have bases. For example, in that most beautiful work, the theatre of Marcellus in Rome, which from the middle down is doric work, the colums of that theatre have no bases whilst the trunk can be seen resting upon a step with no further members. … What is more, in the Tullian prison there are the remains of a Doric temple whose columns are without bases. A triumphal arch of Doric work can be seen in Verona where the columns are baseless.’ 7. Palladio, 1570, Book i, chapter XV, p. 17. 8. Serlio considered the Attic base described by Vitruvius to be the true Doric base, citing Bramante. Serlio, Book iV, fol. 139r; hart and hicks, 1996, p. 281. 9. Vignola, 1635, plate XXX. 10. Vignola, 1635, plate Xii. 11. E.g. Marshall, 1993, cat. Vc 186. 12. Marshall, 1993, cat. Vc 69. As far as the Doric entablature is concerned, Vignola uses a plain architrave for his denticular order (Plate Xiii), while his mutular type has two fasciae, the upper one deeper than the lower (Plate Xiiii). Palladio uses two fasciae and neither dentils nor mutules, while Scamozzi combines two fasciae with dentils. in codazzi’s work most possible combinations of these cornice and architrave forms are found, but he follows Vignola, rather than Palladio or Scamozzi, consistently in using an unbroken taenia. he is conscientious in matters of detail, always showing the correct number of guttae (six), unlike other architectural painters, who are often cavalier in such details. But whereas Vignola’s guttae are conical, codazzi’s are pyramidal. 13. Pozzo, 1693, 1700. 14. E.g. Alberto carlieri, Palace Courtyard, Marshall, 2004, cat. Ac 70, pp. 86, 105. Pozzo, 1707, fig. 71.

30. Palladio, 1570, Book iV, pl. XXXiii. There is no frieze today but it is visible in old views. 31. Gombrich, 1971.

Bibliography Arisi, 1986: Ferdinando Arisi, Giovanni Paolo Panini e i fasti della Roma nel ’700, Rome: Ugo Bozzi, 1986. Blunt, 1967: Anthony Blunt, Nicolas Poussin, 2 vols., Washington, Dc and London: Phaidon, 1967. Busiri Vici, 1992: Andrea Busiri Vici and Flaminia cosmelli, Giovanni Ghisolfi (1623–1683): un pittore Milanese di rovine romane, Rome: Ugo Bozzi, 1992. Claridge, 1998: Amanda claridge, Rome: an Oxford archaeological guide, Oxford and new York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Frommel, 1996: christoph L. Frommel, ‘Poussin e l’architettura’ in Olivier Bonfait, christoph Frommel, Michel hochmann and Sebastian Schütze, Poussin et Rome. Actes du colloque à l’Académie de France à Rome et à la Bibliotheca Hertziana 16–18 novembre 1994, Paris: Réunion des Musées Français, 1996, pp. 119–34. Gombrich, 1971: Ernst h. Gombrich, ‘The Style All’antica: imitation and assimilation’, in Norm and Form: studies in the art of the Renaissance, London and new York: Phaidon, 1971, pp. 122–28. Hart and Hicks, 1996: Vaughan hart and Peter hicks, Sebastiano Serlio on Architecture. Volume One. Books I–V of ‘Tutte l’opere d’architettura et prospettiva’, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 1996. Hart and Hicks, 2006: Vaughan hart and Peter hicks, Palladio’s Rome: a translation of Andrea Palladio’s two guidebooks to Rome, new haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006. Jones, 1987: Roger Jones, ‘Mantegna and Materials’, I Tatti Studies, 1987, pp. 71–90. Marshall, 1993: David R. Marshall, Viviano and Niccolò Codazzi and the Baroque Architectural Fantasy, Rome: Jandi Sapi, 1993. Marshall, 1996: David R. Marshall, ‘Giovanni Ghisolfi or “Monogrammist GAE” at Stourhead?’ Burlington Magazine, vol. 138, 1996, pp. 685–90. Marshall, 1997: David R. Marshall, ‘Early Panini Reconsidered: the Esztergom Preaching of an Apostle and the relationship between Panini and Ghisolfi’, Artibus et Historiae, vol. 18, no. 36, 1997, pp. 137–99. Marshall, 2004: David R. Marshall, ‘Ruin Painting in 1700: Alberto carlieri, pupil of Andrea Pozzo’, Artibus et Historiae, no. 50, 2004, pp. 39–126.

15. Marshall, 2004, p. 46. 16. Busiri Vici, 1992. 17. Giovanni Ghisolfi, Ruin Piece with Chiton Torso, formerly Milan, Galleria Pontremoli. See Marshall, 1997, passim.

Palladio, 1554: Andrea Palladio, L’antichità di Roma di M. Andrea Palladio, raccolta brevemente da gli auttori antichi, & moderni, Rome, 1554.

18. This torso, together with the Vatican Meleager, was in the early eighteenth century probably in the Palazzo Pighini in the Piazza Farnese. See Marshall, 1997, pp. 165–69.

Palladio, 1570: Andrea Palladio, I Quattro libri dell’architettura, Venice: D. de’ Franceschi, 1570.

19. Van Gelder and Jost, vol. 1, pp. 110–11.

Palladio, 1965: Andrea Palladio, The Four Books of Architecture, new York: Dover, 1965 (facsimile of 1738 edition).

20. claridge, 1998, pp. 80–81.

160

Palladio, 1621: Andrea Palladio, Le Antichità dell’alma città di Roma, 1621.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Pozzo, 1693, 1700: Andrea Pozzo, Perspectivae Pictorum et Architectorum / Prospetiva depittori ed Architetti, vol. 1, Rome, 1693; vol. 2, Rome, 1700. Pozzo, 1989: A. Pozzo, Perspective in Architecture and Painting: an unabridged reprint of the English-and-Latin Edition of the 1693 ‘Perspectiva Pictorum et Architectorum’, new York: Dover Publications, 1989. Originally published: London: J. Senex and R. Gosling, 1707. Van Gelder and Jost, 1985: J. G. van Gelder and ingrid Jost, Jan de Bisschop and his Icones and Paradigmata, ed. K. Andrews, 2 vols., Doornspijk, 1985. Vitruvius, 1556: I dieci libri dell’architettura di M. Vitruvio, tradutti et commentati da Monsignor Barbaro, Venice: Marcolini, 1556. Vignola, 1635: Giacomo Barozzi da Vignola, Regola delli Cinque Ordini d’Architettura, Siena: Bernardino Oppi, 1635.

David R. Marshall: The campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi

161

162

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 7 Architecture and Bureaucracy: The Quirinal as an Expression of Papal Absolutism Arnold Witte

The Quirinal palace is often overlooked. Few studies deal with the complex as a whole,1 and when it is discussed, the focus is invariably on particular aspects of its history, architecture or interior decoration.2 This is partly because the complex is too vast to deal with in its entirety, and partly because of the haphazard nature of the complex as it stands today, with additions and changes made by diverse artists and architects over a long period of time.3 But there is a third reason for the scholarly neglect of the Quirinal. historical discussions of the political situation of the catholic church and the Papal States in the early modern period habitually ignore the complex in favor of the Vatican, which became the synonym for the church from the nineteenth century onwards. Authors often talk about ‘the Vatican’ when referring to the papal administration, which diverts attention away from the Quirinal.4 in conjunction with this, some historians perceived a decline of papal influence on secular matters in Europe during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, due to the rise of absolutist states—France and Spain—and the abolition of fiscal exemptions for ecclesiastical institutions in several countries that led to a decline in revenues for the church.5 This led to general conclusions exemplified by the historian A. D. Wright, who highlights the attempt of the church to increase its control in spiritual matters over the attention paid to the temporal government, stating that Rome did not ‘develop as a political capital of a state’ comparable to Madrid and Paris, and the economic and political situation ‘impeded any progress towards a more ‘enlightened’ administration’.6 however, other historians suggest that papal power was less outshone by other European states during the first half of the seventeenth century than previously thought.

For example, Paolo Prodi conjectured in The Papal Prince (1987) that in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century the prestige of the popes did not dwindle, but rather became an example to other absolutist states in Europe.7 According to Prodi, this was a result of exemplary innovations in papal government, where bureaucratic expansion and specialisation led to the growth of the state apparatus. This phenomenon, labeled as ‘going out of court’ by historians, at the same time led to a limitation of the classical court to the personal household servants of the ruler, as all the other courtiers became civil servants and were gradually housed in new parts of the papal palace or buildings in its vicinity.8 All this did not predominantly happen at the Vatican, as the main residence of the papacy was gradually transferred to the Quirinal from Sixtus V onwards. While the Quirinal Palace may not represent a culmination of Seicento art (for it was not the creation of one single genius or a coherent group of artists), it is not unimportant in the context of Seicento history and politics. in fact, it is the only building that was almost uninterruptedly worked on by nearly all the popes of the early modern period, and it therefore reflects in its architecture this phenomenon of papal absolutism and ‘going out of court’. in this article, then, i will discuss the gradually evolving residence on the Quirinal hill, focusing above all on the way this reflects the changes in its bureaucratic organisation. To what extent does the historical concept of ‘going out of court’ correspond with the physical changes taking place in the Quirinal residence, and how can this explain the present architectural form of the Quirinal and its immediate surroundings?

Frontispiece: Giovanni Paolo Panini, Piazza del Quirinale. Detail of Fig. 15.

Arnold Witte: Architecture and Bureaucracy

163

The Prehistory of the Quirinal The Quirinal palace originated around 1470 as a summer residence for cardinal Oliviero carafa (Fig. 1 [1]). During this period, the Quirinal hill was an uninhabited part of town due to the lack of water supply, but its location guaranteed cool and salubrious air. From the Renaissance onwards, villas were laid out for that reason along the road that in 1560 became the Via Pia (Fig. 1 [4]). cardinal carafa donated the property to his brothers in 1502, and they rented out the villa in 1545 to cardinal Orazio Farnese, and after 1550 to cardinal ippolito d’Este. This led to frequent visits of popes and also to changes in the complex. Paul iii Farnese (1534–1549) was a regular guest who commissioned the renovation of the eastern wing of the casino.9 he even considered buying the villa from the carafa, but this came to nought. Gregory Xiii, after having been hosted at the villa during the summers of 1572 and 1573, again considered buying the premises but decided against this as he did not expect to live long enough in order to justify the expense of 50,000 scudi.

164

(Above) Fig. 1. Etienne Dupérac, Bird’s-eye View of Rome, 1577. Engraving. Detail of the Quirinal and Via Pia, with additional numbering. 1. Palace of cardinal d’Este (cardinal of Ferrara) 2. Eastern wing of casino renovated by Paul iii 3. Garden of Palace of cardinal d’Este 4. Via Pia (Below) Fig. 2. courtyard of the Quirinal Palace showing the loggia by Mascarino. (© David R. Marshall.)

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

instead, he had the northern casino expanded between 1583 and 1585 by Ottavio Mascarino (Figs. 5, 6 [4]), still spending the respectable amount of 22,000 scudi on that.10 This adapted the villa for specific needs of the papal court, with a pavilion that housed a papal apartment and halls for receptions and consistories.11 A significant detail of the new pavilion is that Mascarino shifted its orientation away from the garden. A loggia on the first floor giving onto the cortile (Fig. 2, Figs. 5, 6 [1]) was modeled after the benediction loggias of St John Lateran and St Peter’s, and this turned the courtyard into a ceremonial space, making it the central architectural element of the villa. it was architecturally emphasised by the altana or roof terrace on top of the new casino, visible both from the courtyard itself and from the surrounding city.12 Plans were also made for the immediate surroundings of the restructured villa in order to heighten its representational nature: a new road was designed to connect the complex to the lower part of the city. This road was meant to lead to a newly laid out square in front of the new Quirinal pavilion.13 Even though these grand plans were not realised at the time, the adaptations under Gregory

(Above) Fig. 3. Giovanni Paolo Panini, The Piazza del Quirinale, detail. Rome, Banca di Roma. (Simon Dickinson.) The statues of the Dioscurides are on the left, the Salita di Montecavcallo and the Dataria are in the centre, and the gallery on the second floor of the Quirinal Palace is at the right. (Below) Fig. 4. Antonio Salamanca (publisher), The Horsetamers of Monte Cavallo (The Dioscurides), 1538–46. Engraving from Speculum Romanae Magnificentiae. London, British Museum, 1856,0712.1036.

Arnold Witte: Architecture and Bureaucracy

165

Xiii constituted the start of a gradual transformation of the villa into a formal residence.

The Development of a Formal Residence in the late 1580s, Pope Sixtus V persuaded the carafa to sell the villa and had it converted to a semi-permanent residence. Before starting his intervention in the palace, however, he had the Roman aqueduct, subsequently called Aqua Felice, restored so that it furnished water for the large fountain at the Piazza delle Terme, not far from the Quirinal palace. This aqueduct was part of the urbanistic project which aimed to turn the Quirinal hill and its surroundings into a habitable quarter. Part of the water from the Aqua Felice was led to the Quirinal gardens and to the fountain flanked by the two colossal statues of the Dioscuri in the newly levelled square in front of the palace (Figs. 3, 4 and Fig. 5 [15]). At the same time, the Benedictine monastery next to the palace was confiscated—this was to be torn down for the expansion of the piazza, a plan that was, however, not realised during Sixtus’ pontificate. Still other premises were acquired in order to lay out the Salita di Montecavallo, leading up to the new square in front of the palace (Figs. 5, 6 [7] and Fig. 7). These interventions

166

(Above) Fig. 5. G. B. nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail of the Quirinal. (Opposite above) Fig. 6. Matteo Greuter, Perspective View of the Papal Palace on the Quirinal at the End of the Reign of Paul V, 1618. Engraving. Rome istituto di Archeologia e Storia dell’Arte collezione Lanciani, inv. 90. (© Bibliotheca hertziana U.Pl. D 50005.) 1. Mascarino Loggia and Altana. 2. cappella Paolina 3. Sala Regia (Salone dei corazzieri) 4. courtyard of Papal Palace 5. Entrace and Bernini portone 6. Long Gallery (Gallery of Alexander Vii) 7. Salita di Montecavallo 8. Palazzo della Dataria 9. Wing of the Swiss Guards 10. caffeaus (site of caffeaus) 11. Via Pia (Strada Pia) 12. Manica Lunga 13. Palazzetto of the Segretario delle cifre 14. Papal Stables (Scuderie del Quirinale) 15. horsetamers (Dioscuri) 16. Palazzo della consulta 17. Palazzo of Scipione Borghese (later Palazzo Rospigliosi-Pallavicini) 18. Quattro Fontane

linked the Quirinal up with the new structure of roads laid out through Rome by Sixtus V, including the Via Sistina that crossed the Via Pia at Quattro Fontane (Fig. 5 [18]) and connected Trinità dei Monti to S. Maria Maggiore and ultimately the Lateran. in fact, the Quirinal was in

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

the exact geographical centre of this new urbanistic plan. it was for this reason that the Quirinal became so attractive as an alternative new residence for the pope, as the Lateran and the Vatican were both situated at the very periphery of Rome. The urban interventions under Sixtus V were only a prelude to planned extensions to the Quirinal itself, as building accounts indicate. in 1589, the wing for the Swiss Guard along the Via Pia was extended (Figs. 5, 6 [9]). This indicates that the pope’s personal guards responsible for public access to ceremonies and spaces in the Vatican also began to perform their tasks at the Quirinal, suggesting that this palace became regarded as an official residence, and no longer only as a place for occasional retreats during the summer months.14 At the same time, the south side of the complex was provided with a long gallery along the Piazza del Quirinale (Figs. 5, 6 [6] and Fig. 8). This addition reinforced the shift in orientation of the complex that had begun with Mascarino’s intervention; it also resulted in a more regulated and uniform facade towards the square and thus the city (Fig. 3).15 Domenico Fontana, Sixtus V’s architect, did plan a number of further interventions, but the pope’s brief pontificate prevented their realisation. it was only Paul V who decided to complete the palace

along the lines set out by Fontana; and it was during his pontificate that the Quirinal, apart from being a papal residence, also started to acquire the form and structure of a government centre.16 The first administrative office being housed in a building recognisable as such was added to the Quirinal in 1615, in the form of the wing along the Salita di MonteFig. 7. View of the Salita di Montecavallo leading up to the Quirinal Palace with the Dataria on the left. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

Arnold Witte: Architecture and Bureaucracy

167

cavallo.17 This building adjacent to the palace proper (Figs. 5, 6 [8] and Fig. 8) was bought and transformed for the Dataria, a part of the curia—the administrative office, not the papal court as a whole—that was responsible for the granting of absolutions, benefices and pensions from ecclesiastical possessions, and matrimonial dispensations. The receiving party had to pay for the administration of these favours, and the Dataria therefore represented a major source of income for the papal court. This was increasingly so in the late sixteenth century when the contributions from France and Spain to the catholic church began to diminish as a result of increasing state control over church benefices.18 Furthermore, the Dataria had grown in administrative importance as a result of the reform of the curia by Sixtus V. Apart from this practical aspect, there was also a more pressing reason for relocating the Dataria to the Quirinal. The large sums of money handled in this office meant that corruption presented a serious risk, and therefore the Dataria was traditionally located close to the pope’s quarters. This became especially important when the offices in the Dataria began to be sold to the highest bidder. As a result, the majority of the officials were laymen who were even more susceptible for bribery and theft—indeed, it became an urgent problem. From 1608 onwards, Paul V had all governmental church offices screened for corruption by

168

Fig. 8. Alessandro Specchi (etcher) and Domenico de’ Rossi (publisher), Palazzo Pontificio sul Quirinale detto Monte Cavallo, architettura di Ottavio Mascarini et altri. From Il nuovo teatro delle palazzi ... di Roma moderna, 1699, Book iV, plate 4. Etching, 207 x 329 mm. London, British Museum, 1928,0713.38.

a special congregation. The result was laid down in the Bull Universi Agri of 1612, which intended the complete reform of all curial offices in order to fight corruption and bribery.19 The decision to move the Dataria offices, first to rooms in the Quirinal palace and then to a separate wing adjacent to it demonstrates that Paul V considered immediate papal supervision over the changing state apparatus to be of the utmost importance. At the same time it indicates that the Quirinal was turning into a major centre of government, slowly but surely replacing the Vatican. The most important sign around 1600 that the Quirinal was replacing the Vatican as primary papal residence can be found in the building of the cappella Paolina (Figs. 5, 6 [2] and Fig. 9). An avviso of 1614 stated that ‘he [Pope Paul V] thought of building at the palace at Monte cavallo a chapel similar to that of Sixtus in the Vatican for the convenience of the popes, when they live in that place ...’.20 indeed, the dimensions and spatial arrangements of the Pauline chapel at the Quirinal are similar to those of the Sistine chapel at the Vatican.21 By means of this ad-

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 9. Agostino Tassi, Agostino Tassi, Urbano VIII Invests Taddeo Barberini as Prefect of Rome in the Cappella Paolina, 1631–33. Oil on canvas. Rome, Palazzo Braschi, Museo di Roma. (Museo di Roma.) Fig. 10. Agostino Tassi, Giovanni Lanfranco and carlo Saraceni, Fictive Loggia with Oriental Ambassadors, 1616. Fresco. Rome, Palazzo del Quirinale, Salone dei corazzieri. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

dition, even on important occasions such as the holidays during Lent, the pope no longer had to go to the Vatican as he could now read mass for a larger audience at the Quirinal.22 The extension also included the construction of the Sala Regia (Figs. 5, 6 [3]), where official receptions of ambassadors and heads of state could be staged, and also this hall was an equivalent to the various reception halls in the Vatican. The fresco decoration of the Sala Regia, executed by Agostino Tassi, Giovanni Lanfranco and others, illustrates the political function of the space;23 in comparison with various halls in the Vatican, the predominance of secular imagery in the Sala Regia is significant. The upper part of the walls of the Sala Regia is adorned with illusionistically painted balconies from which ambassadors of various countries look down into the hall (Fig. 10). Their attire and position suggest that they partake in the ceremonies taking place in the real space. A preparatory drawing for another, unexecuted, fresco for this hall by Giovanni Lanfranco even suggests that the secular position of the pope here came to dominate his ecclesiastical image, as it depicts the pope seated on a canopied throne, receiving the honours shown to him by representatives of several people.24 The iconography of this scene does not

markedly distinguish itself from representations of official receptions by secular italian rulers. This further illustrates that the changes introduced in the Quirinal complex by Paul V supported all three levels of papal power, that of ruler of the Papal States, head of the catholic church, and bishop of Rome. it also underlines that the pope was no longer tied to either Saint Peter’s or the Lateran in order to exert his secular and religious powers, but had created a new location for this at the Quirinal.25 The moving of governmental and bureaucratic functions to the Quirinal, and the increasing amount of time spent there by the pope himself, also meant that a growing number of papal officials had to be housed in the vicinity. The Benedictine monastery originally confiscated by Sixtus V for the extension of the piazza was therefore refurbished for the use by the papal entourage. Paul V also had a part of Sixtus’ new gallery in the Quirinal turned into a winter apartment.26 Four rooms were constructed, facing west and receiving the evening sun, so that these were comfortable during the cold season.27 Especially this last decision is a clear sign that during the pontifcate of Paul V, the Quirinal was essentially taking over the function of the Vatican as a permanent papal residence.

Arnold Witte: Architecture and Bureaucracy

169

Urbanistics of the Quirinal Hill

(Left) Fig. 11. Rome, Palazzo del Quirinale, Benediction Loggia, designed by Gianlorenzo Bernini in 1638, detail of Fig. 15.

Paul V’s plans not only affected the Quirinal palace itself, but also had an impact on its immediate surroundings. One of the projects spurred by the new permanent residence was the construction of the Palazzo for Scipione Borghese, the cardinal-nephew. From 1608 onwards, Borghese acquired plots of land, amongst which was the former villa of Fabio Biondo; Urban Viii also gave him property belonging to the Palazzo di Vercelli, which was owned since 1588 by the camera Apostolica. Scipione then arranged for a concession of water from the Aqua Felice to be diverted to fountains planned in the gardens of his new residence. in 1611, the construction started with extensions built onto the Biondo casino, and the layout of the surrounding gardens; in 1613, a new palace was erected next to the casino (Fig. 5 [17]). These works were protracted until 1616, when the project was deserted in favour of the still grander villa outside the Porta Pinciana, the present Villa Borghese.28 Scipione’s villa on the Quirinal was intended as an official residence, and should therefore be seen as part of the governmental complex surrounding the papal palace. As cardinal-nephew, Scipione handled state affairs for the

(centre) Fig. 12. Benediction Loggia today. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

170

(Right) Fig. 13. Benediction Loggia, detail of Fig. 3.

pope; he was his official representative in international politics, and also head of the administration of the Papal States.29 Scipione did have a private apartment in the Quirinal palace itself; he did indeed reside there in the years around 1615.30 however, his increasingly representative role required another, grander residence where official guests could be received and entertained, but with the explicit message that these high officials were received by the pope’s representative, not a private individual. The construction of the villa across the street from the Quirinal should therefore be considered as a further instance of the process of ‘going out of court’, in this case not of an administrative organ but of a highly positioned courtier functioning as a ‘prime minister’; it also introduced the expansion of state departments beyond the confines of the original villa complex over the rest of the Quirinal hill.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Left) Fig. 14. Giovanni Domenico campiglia and Giuseppe Vasi, Palazzetto e Quartieri per la Famiglia Pontificia Annessi al Palazzo Apostolico di Monte Cavallo. Architettura del Cav.re Ferdinando Fuga. From Il Quinto Libro del Novo Teatro delle Fabbriche, Rome, 1739, plate 9. Etching, 200 x 290 mm. At the right is the building for the Segreteria delle cifre, followed by the manica lunga. (Right) Fig. 15. Giovanni Paolo Panini, Piazza del Quirinale, 1733. Rome, Palazzo del Quirinale, caffeaus. Oil on canvas. (©Vasari/David R. Marshall.)

The changes introduced from 1625 onwards, during the papacy of Urban Viii, on the one hand confirmed the new political and administrative importance the Quirinal had gained over the decades, on the other also deviated completely from the interventions of his predecessors, as the works undertaken were related to the improvements in the strategic defense of Rome. The pope not only had the castel Sant’Angelo turned into a fortress and the city walls strengthened, but also had the Quirinal surrounded by fortifications. On the western side of the complex, houses were demolished for the building of a defense wall, and on the opposite side, facing the Piazza del Quirinale, a bastion was erected at the point where the palace facade intersected with the Dataria wing. The ground floor windows on the Via Pia were all walled up and the barracks for the Swiss Guard at the back of the gardens were doubled in size.31 Another, seemingly insignificant alteration introduced during the papacy of Urban Viii underlined this attention to security matters that was related to the transformation of the Quirinal towards a government centre, to which access was increasingly restricted. The balcony above the main entrance of the palace (Figs. 5, 6 [5], Figs. 11–13), designed in 1638 by Gianlorenzo Bernini, had as its main function the benediction of the people—this had originally been performed in the courtyard of the Quirinal as designed during the pontificate of Gregory Xiii. The new balcony on the main facade expressed that this ceremony was no longer to be staged inside the complex, but in front of it—thereby drawing new demarcation lines between the public, private and administrative spaces of the residence.

The location of the Dataria and other offices outside the palace proper neatly fit into this development; the palace became an exclusive space for the head of state and his personal servants, while the subjects were increasingly received in administrative offices that were spatially independent of the main palace, and staffed by civil servants instead of courtiers. The extension of the state apparatus and its relocation in and around the Quirinal continued during the rest of the seventeenth century. The election of the Sienese pope Alexander Vii especially furthered this process because at first he decided against appointing a cardinal-nephew or involving other family members in papal government.32 This radical decision led to an increasing importance of bureaucratic officials and civil servants. This process was not even countered by the eventual elevation of Flavio chigi to the cardinalate, and his subsequently taking up the role of papal nephew, because Alexander Vii imposed many restrictions on his legal competences. Meanwhile, the increasing number of bureaucrats led to a shortage of space in the Quirinal, and this in turn led to further extensions. Alexander Vii had the wing along the Via Pia, occupied by the Swiss Guards since the time of Sixtus V, refurbished into an apartment for the maggiordomo, the head of the papal household. Between 1655 and 1657, this wing was also topped up by a third floor for members of the papal famiglia. Only two years later, this wing was extended towards the back of the complex, and from this time on was called the manica lunga or ‘long sleeve’ (Fig. 5 [12] and Fig. 14).33 All these interventions imply that

Arnold Witte: Architecture and Bureaucracy

171

ever more parts of papal government were moved from the Vatican to the Quirinal, and the latter irreversibly became the main papal residence. This is clearly reflected in the fluctuations in the number of inhabitants of the two complexes: while the number of inhabitants of the Quirinal gradually increased, the number of people living in the Vatican slowly went down, and moreover, increasingly consisted of women and children.34 Also, the urban context of the Quirinal Palace was increasingly affected by these changes. For example, new stalls were needed for the horses and carriages of the pope and his retinue; this complex was planned in the late Seicento but only realised in the early eighteenth century. Bernini was also commissioned by Alexander Vii to improve the street layout around the palace; the Salita di Montecavallo had to be given an architectonic conclusion that should direct the beholder’s view towards the palace and the preceding square. Alexander was also said to have requested, just like Paul V, an extension of the Via del Babuino (which offered access to the city from the Piazza del Popolo) and the Via Due Macelli towards a new, western, entrance to the Quirinal. A magnificent new portal was to be constructed in the fortification walls of

172

(Above) Fig. 16. Giovanni Paolo Panini, Papal Stables (Scuderie del Quirinale), architect Alessandro Specchi, 1722–30. Detail of Fig. 15.

Urban Viii, in order to create a new main entrance to the palace grounds.35 This grandiose project was never realised, but even in the form of a plan it makes abundantly clear that the Quirinal had not only become the new political centre of Rome, but should also constitute its visual and urbanistic focus in order to underline the new, absolutist papal authority.

Bureaucratisation and New Courtly Rituals The outline of the Quirinal complex as it had been defined during the papacy of Alexander Vii remained essentially unaltered until the present day; changes were only made to its interior during the napoleonic era, and during the subsequent occupation of the complex by the Savoy kings of united italy after 1870. Only the immediate surroundings of the palace continued to be affected by the increasing bureaucratic centralisation of the Papal States,

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

as recorded in a painting by Panini of 1733 (Fig. 15). in the eighteenth century, this expressed itself most clearly in the form of three new buildings. First, Pope innocent Xiii realised the plans made under Alexander Vii for new stables, opposite the Piazza del Quirinale: the present Scuderie del Quirinale were designed and constructed by Alessandro Specchi in 1722, and finished by Ferdinando Fuga in 1730 (Fig. 5 [14] and Fig. 16). The colour scheme of this building in light blue and travertine in Panini’s painting seems accurate, but as the adjacent Palazzo del Quirinale and especially the consulta were provided with darker colours, the Scuderie would have made less of an impact in the urbanistic context.36 not only were these intended for horses and carriages, but the complex also contained dwellings for a regiment of soldiers, who had been housed in temporary barracks in the same spot since they had been relocated from the manica lunga. Second, clement Xii ordered the Palazzo di Vercelli on the south side of the Piazza del Quirinale to be replaced by a new structure, designed by Ferdinando Fuga (Fig. 5 [16] and Fig. 17). The old building had been used by horsemen of the papal guard and by officials of the congregation of the consulta.37 The latter institution, a papal advisory board, had been created in 1557 by carlo carafa, cardinal-nephew of Pius Vi, as a secretarial office that operated in his name when he was absent from Rome. When carafa fell into disgrace, the consulta suddenly

(Above) Fig. 17. Giovanni Paolo Panini, Palazzo della consulta, architect Ferdinando Fuga, 1732–35. Detail of Fig. 15.

became autonomous and its clerks unexpectedly gained an important position in papal affairs. in 1559, the consulta was turned into an advisory body for secular state policy, and in 1588 it was reformed again in conjunction with the institution of cardinal congregations by Sixtus V. At that occasion it was given the name of ‘congregazione sopra le consultazioni dello stato ecclesiastico’, and was in daily usage referred to as the consulta.38 its tasks where then clearly defined as supervising civil and criminal justice in the Papal States, and overseeing taxation in its provinces. The combination of legal and financial power made the consulta into one of the central offices of the papal administration. From the papacy of clement Viii onwards, the sessions of the consulta were therefore attended (and not much later presided over) by the cardinal-nephews who tightened their control over this important body. These meetings were held at the papal residence for the same reason.39 The increase in sessions, a result of the growing bureaucratisation of papal government, necessitated special quarters for these officials, and these were arranged from the early seventeenth century in the old Palazzo di Vercelli, adjacent to the Quirinal. Later on, the growing importance of the office called for an architectural

Arnold Witte: Architecture and Bureaucracy

173

expression of its increased status and therefore, in 1737 the highest incumbents of the consulta were provided with lodgings and office spaces in a new building designed by Fuga. They shared this new building with the mounted papal guards who were housed on the ground floor, and the officers of the Secretaries of the Briefs, who administrated the papal briefs, on the upper floor. Fuga’s architecture was intended to underline the importance of the papal administrative offices in this new building, again using architecture in order to express the prestige of a papal ministry, while using the urbanistic orientation of the building towards the Quirinal to underline its adherence to papal authority. Third, clement Xii and Benedict XiV continued to expand the office spaces towards the back of the Quirinal complex; they ordered Ferdinando Fuga to fill in the last open plots of the wing along the Via Pia. This extension was intended for administration, and at its end, at the corner with the present Via dei Giardini, Fuga replaced the casa del capitano de’ Svizzeri with a separate house for the prelate responsible for the encryption of the papal communication, the Segretario delle cifre (Fig. 5 [13] and Fig. 14).40 This functionary was also part of the Segretaria di Stato, which at the end of the seventeenth century was placed beyond the control of the cardinal-nephew (a position that was formally suppressed in 1692), which led to its inclusion in the papal bureaucracy.41 The location of the apartment for the Segretario delle cifre within the Quirinal grounds but outside of the proper residence is an indication of centralisation, and at the same time of the growing division between papal court and curia, and therefore again an instance of moving ‘out of court’. The bureaucratisation of papal affairs also determined a new balance between public and private, and another division between protocol and informal receptions. This was reflected in the Quirinal itself in its function as residence: in 1741, the first addition was made to the complex that served a new ceremony in which the pope as a person played a more prominent role. This building was the so-called coffee house (caffeaus), designed and built by Ferdinando Fuga, which followed the recent English vogue of coffee drinking in an informal situation. it created a form of sociability in which a new notion of privacy became defined.42 in accordance with this vogue, the Quirinal coffee house served the pope for (semi-) private receptions of important guests.43 The painting by Giovanni Paolo Panini depicting Benedict XiV receiving charles iii of Bourbon, king of naples and Sicily, in 1744, indeed illustrates this (Fig. 18).44 The addition of the coffee house had signaled the reduction of the Quirinal to the personal space of the ruler, as all the other functions

174

had been relocated elsewhere, and this freed the pope and his guests, once inside the residence, from protocol—exactly as we see in Panini’s depiction of the event, where all participants seem to move uninhibited through the space around the coffee house, and differences in status are no longer expressed in hierarchical positions. Again, the Quirinal seems to have reflected early on another innovation that was to be followed at other courts in Europe, that of the private escape—and this had only become possible by the complete division between state apparatus and the person of the sovereign.

Conclusion: the Quirinal as an Expression of Papal Absolutism The building activities in and around the Quirinal palace from the sixteenth to the eighteenth century can be taken as a measure of the developments in papal bureaucracy and administration during this period. it shows how the papal court and curia—conflated into a coherent system during the twelfth century—gradually became distinguished again.45 indications of these changes can be found in numerous publications for foreign ambassadors.46 One of the first ‘guides’ to the bureaucratic structure of the Papal States, the Relazione della corte di Roma by Girolamo Lunadoro, published for the first time in 1641, continued to be republished well into the eighteenth century in several updated versions, with the altered title Lo stato presente della corte di Roma. A careful study of the successive editions of this book offers insight into the shifting positions of ministries and departments of the curia, confirming the indications found in the architecture of the Palazzo del Quirinale and its immediate surroundings. But the question still remains whether the popes were losing their influence and prestige in Europe as a result of backward political and administrative structures. Did the papal states only follow the political innovations that had sprung up elsewhere? A comparison of the Quirinal with Versailles shows how precocious and innovative the centralisation and specialisation of the Papal States was in a European context. Versailles was, just as the Quirinal, an expansion of a former rustic villa into a proper residence for the Sun King and the counterpart of the administrative offices housed in other royal palaces in Paris. Moreover, the structure of the courts in Paris and Rome in the seventeenth century were similar in the increasing division between the personal entourage of the ruler and the non-courtier status of administrative officers.47 however, Versailles was only started in 1661, and the division between court and

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

administrative officers seems to have occurred later in France (and elsewhere in Europe) than in Rome, which again supports Prodi’s thesis of the papal government being ahead of other states.48 Finally, the construction of the Quirinal complex also led to a loss of importance of the Vatican. it literally and virtually offered the necessary space for an expanding and increasingly secularising bureaucracy, as it was not connected to a church, as the Lateran and the Vatican palaces were. Alexander Vii’s decision to provide Saint Peter’s with a sumptuous monument for the throne of Saint Peter, Bernini’s Cathedra Petri, can be interpreted as a clear confirmation of this shift.49 The apse decoration was not meant to strengthen the pope’s prestige in answer to his supposed fading power, but instead conveyed the claim of the pope to be spiritual successor of Saint Peter at the very moment he relocated his centre of temporal power to the Quirinal, where the construction of a new and more secular state apparatus was not hampered by ecclesiastical traditions. Therefore, the Quirinal does not present an empty shell of sumptuousness to counterbalance a presumed loss of political influence, it was a proper palace used by

Fig. 18. Giovanni Paolo Panini, Charles III of Naples Visiting Pope Benedict XIV at the Caffeaus, 1746. Oil on canvas, 198 x 297 cm. naples, Museo e Gallerie nazionali di capodimonte, inv. no. 205. (© Luciano Pedicini.)

most successive popes as main residence.50 Even if the Quirinal cannot be deemed an artistic masterpiece created by a single genius, each and every extension reflects the changes in papal governmental and political structures. The construction of a new residence and the ‘going out of court’ of all administrative offices therefore agrees with Prodi’s hypothesis that the early modern papal authority and prestige rivaled that of other European rulers, and anticipated the innovations in the age of Absolutism. The Quirinal became an image of a centralised, effective, secularising government that vied the other European rulers for its modernised apparatus, and its urbanistic position in the city turned all of Rome into the expression of papal Absolutism.

Arnold Witte: Architecture and Bureaucracy

Universiteit van Amsterdam

175

Notes 1. Briganti, 1962; Wasserman, 1963, pp. 205–44, Borsi, 1991 and Oy-Marra, 2007. 2. See for example Frommel, 2002; Guerrini and Gasparri, 1993 and natoli and Scarpati, 1993. Attention has been paid to the relation of eighteenth-century architecture and urbanistics around the Quirinal Palace by Minor, 2010 and christopher Johns, forthcoming, but these do not include the fundamental Seicento developments in their discussions. 3. See Krautheimer, 1985 and habel, 2002. 4. Mai, 2010, especially pp. 365–407. 5. Delumeau, 1977, pp. 26–28 and caravale and caracciolo, 1978. 6. Wright, 2000, p. 264. 7. Prodi, 1987. See also the historiographic discussion given in Visceglia, 1995, pp. 11 ff. 8. See Burke, 1991, p. 103 and Emich, 2001, p. 18 for the Roman situation. 9. Wasserman, 1963, p. 209 and coffin, 1979, p. 189. 10. coffin, 1979, p. 209. 11. Wasserman, 1963, pp. 214–15 and habel, 2002, p. 16 for the attribution of this project to Mascarino. 12. Gregory Xiii also commissioned the so-called Torre dei Venti which probably served a comparable function; see courtwright, 2003, pp. 61–68. 13. habel, 2002, p. 16.

Swiss Guards); in 1679, about 320 persons (mainly women) were counted as living in the Vatican; apart from that, the number of cortigiani, or ‘escorts’ of ecclesiastical officials, sunk to almost zero in the eighteenth century. 35. Krautheimer, 1985, pp. 93–99. 36. See Sangiovanni, 1984 and Minor, 2010, p. 182 for the colour scheme of the Scuderie and the surrounding buildings. 37. Agosteo and Pasquini, 1959, pp. 23–24; De Feo, 1973, p. 45; Borsi, 1975, pp. 64–65 and Menniti ippolito, 2004, p. 59. 38. See Moroni, 1840–70, vol. 16, pp. 181ff. and Agosteo and Pasquini, 1959, p. 64. 39. Agosteo and Pasquini, 1959, pp. 67 and 71. 40. See Sangiovanni, 1984, p. 56 for Fuga’s building for the Segretario delle cifre. 41. Del Re, 1998, pp. 79, 88–89. 42. habermas, 1989, pp. 30–36 and Klein, 1996, pp. 35–36. 43. Briganti, 1962, p. 62. 44. For Panini’s depiction of the meeting between charles iii and Pope Benedict XiV at the coffee house, see Marshall, 2007, pp. 136–39. 45. Moroni, 1840-79, vol. 17, p. 296. 46. Mennini ippolito, 2004, pp. 152–55 and Moroni, 1840-79, vol. 17, pp. 296–98. 47. Reinhardt, 2006, pp. 292–93. 48. Duindam, 2003, especially pp. 3-21. 49. Schütze, 2008.

14. habel, 2002, p. 20. 15. Wasserman, 1963, p. 227–28. 16. Macioce, 1990 and Devoti, 2006, pp. 189–212. 17. Wasserman, 1963, p. 233 and Menniti ippolito, 2004, p. 55.

50. Moroni, 1840–79, vol. 50, pp. 203–55 provides, on the basis of Gigli’s Diario di Roma (1994) a list of popes who from 1716 onwards resided in the Quirinal and the Vatican, which illustrates that the majority lived most of the time in the former palace.

18. Del Re, 1998, p. 449. For the growing importance of revenues from the Dataria as a result of less income from other sources, see Reinhard, 1979, p. 45 ff. 19. See Pastor, 1886–1933, vol. 12, p. 61 on the general reform of the legal apparatus between 1608 and 1612, and the bull Universi agri which proclaimed the intended reforms.

Bibliography

20. Orbaan, 1920, p. 230: ‘si e pensato di fabricare nel palazzo di Monte Cavallo una cappella simile a quella di Sisto nel Vaticano per commodità dei Pontefici, quando habitano in quel luogo’. See also Wasserman, 1963, p. 236.

Agosteo and Pasquini, 1959: Aldo Agosteo and Aldo Pasquini, Il Palazzo della Consulta nell’arte e nella storia, Rome: Palombi, 1959.

21. Menniti ippolito, 2004, p. 55. 22. For the liturgical function of the Sistine chapel in the Vatican, see Bosch, 1999, with a list to other references. There is no modern study on the particular liturgical function of the Pauline chapel at the Quirinal, 23. Vodret, 2008. 24. Schleier, 1970. 25. According to an avviso of 1616, the spaces below the Sala Regia were also intended for the Tribunali della Rota and the camera Apostolica, in other words, the expanding bureacracy; see Menniti ippolito, 2004, p. 56 referring to Del Piazzo in Il Palazzo del Quirinale, 1974, p. 253. 26. Menniti ippolito, 2004, p. 56. 27. Wasserman, 1963, pp. 233–36 and habel, 2002, pp. 26–28. 28. negro, 1996, pp. 18–32. 29. Reinhard, 1975, p. 172; Wright, 2000, pp. 113–14 and hsia, 2005, pp. 101–3. 30. Orbaan, 1920, pp. 13, 21 and 30. 31. The pope even installed a special congregation of cardinals in 1627 that had to try and reduce the number of armed conflicts at the borders of the Papal States, so that military engineering was supported by additional administrative measures. See Pastor, 1886–1933, vol. 13, 2, p. 860. 32. Pastor, 1886–1933, vol. 14, 1, pp. 314–16. 33. habel, 2002, pp. 40-41. 34. Menniti ippolito, 2004, pp. 192–97. Around 1689, the number of inhabitants of the Quirinal was oscillating between 300 and 350 (not counting the 150

176

Borsi, 1975: Franco Borsi (ed.), Palazzo della Consulta, Rome: Editalia, 1975. Borsi, 1991: Franco Borsi (ed.), Il Palazzo del Quirinale, Rome and Milan: Editoriale Lavoro and Electa, 1991. Bosch, 1999: Lynette M. F. Bosch, ‘Genesis, holy Saturday, and the Sistine ceiling’, Sixteenth Century Journal, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 643–52. Briganti, 1962: Giuliano Briganti, Il Palazzo del Quirinale, Rome: istituto Poligrafico dello Stato, 1962. Burke, 1991: Peter Burke, ‘The courtier’, in Eugenio Garin (ed.), Renaissance Characters, chicago and London: University of chicago Press, 1991, pp. 113–18. Caravale and Caracciolo, 1978: Mario caravale and Alberto caracciolo, Lo Stato Pontificio da Martino V a Pio IX (Storia d’Italia), Turin: UTET, 1978. Coffin, 1979: David R. coffin, The Villa in the Life of Renaissance Rome, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979. Courtwright, 2003: nicola courtwright, The Papacy and the Art of Reform in Sixteenth-Century Rome: Gregory XIII’s Tower of the Winds in the Vatican, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 2003. De Feo, 1973: Vittorio De Feo, La Piazza del Quirinale: storia, architettura, urbanistica, Rome: Officina Editori, 1973. Del Re, 1998: nicolò Del Re, La Curia Romana: lineamenti storico-giuridici, città del Vaticano: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 1998. Delumeau, 1977: Jean Delumeau, Catholicism between Luther and Voltaire: a new view of the Counter-Reformation, London and Philadelphia: Burns and Oates and Westminster Press, 1977.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Devoti, 2006: Luigi Devoti, ‘Villa Belvedere Aldobrandini di Frascati’, in Le Ville nel Lazio, Rome: Anemone Purpurea, 2006. Duindam, 2003: Jeroen Duindam, Vienna and Versailles: the courts of Europe’s dynastic rivals, 1550–1780, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 2003. Emich, 2001: Birgit Emich, Bürokratie und Nepotismus unter Paul V (1605–1621): Studien zur frühneuzeitlichen Mikropolitik in Rom, Stuttgart: hiersemann, 2001. Frommel, 2002: christoph Luitpold Frommel, ‘il palazzo del Quirinale tra il XV e il XVii secolo’ in Maurizio caperna and Gianfranco Spagnesi (eds.), Architettura: processualità e trasformazione (Quaderni dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura, n.s. 34–39, 1999–2002), Rome: Bonsignori, 2002, pp. 275–84. Gigli, 1994: Giacinto Gigli, Diario di Roma, 2 vols., Rome: colombo, 1994. Guerrini and Gasparri, 1993: Lucia Guerrini and carlo Gasparri, Il Palazzo del Quirinale: catalogo delle sculture, Rome: L’Erma di Bretschneider, 1993. Habel, 2002: Dorothy Metzger habel, The Urban Development of Rome in the Age of Alexander VII, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 2002. Habermas, 1989: Jürgen habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society, translated by Thomas Burger and Frederick Lawrence, cambridge, MA: MiT Press, 1989. Hsia, 2005: R. Po-chia hsia, The World of Catholic Renewal 1540–1770, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 2005. Klein, 1996: Lawrence E. Klein, ‘coffeehouse civility, 1660–1714: an aspect of post-courtly culture in England’, Huntington Library Quarterly, vol. 59, no. 1, 1996, pp. 30–51. Krautheimer, 1985: Richard Krautheimer, The Rome of Alexander VII, 1655–1667, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985. Macioce, 1990: Stefania Macioce, Undique Splendent: aspetti della pittura sacra nella Roma di Clemente VIII Aldobrandini (1592–1605), Rome: De Luca, 1990. Mai, 2010: Klaus-Rüdiger Mai, Der Vatikan: Geschichte einer Weltmacht im Zwielicht, Mühlheim: Lübbe, 2010.

Reinhard, 1975: Wolfgang Reinhard, ‘nepotismus. Der Funktionswandel einer papstgeschichtlichen Konstanten’, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte, vol. 86, no. 2, 1975, pp. 145–85. Reinhard, 1979: Wolfgang Reinhard, Freunde und Kreaturen: ‘Verflechtung’ als Konzept zur Erforschung historischer Führungsgruppen Römischer Oligarchie um 1600, München: Vögel, 1979. Reinhardt, 2006: Volker Reinhardt, ‘Rom, Paris/Versailles—ein hof-Vergleich’, in Pablo Schneider and Philipp Zitzlsperger (eds.), Bernini in Paris: das Tagebuch des Paul Fréart de Chantelou über den Aufenthalt Gianlorenzo Berninis am Hof Ludwigs XIV, Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 2006, pp. 291–303. Sangiovanni, 1984: Ornella Sangiovanni, ‘Bicromie settecentesche dei palazzi della Piazza del Quirinale’, Ricerche di Storia dell’Arte, no. 24, 1984, p. 55. Schleier, 1970: Erich Schleier, ‘Les projects de Lanfranc pour le décor de la Sala Regia au Quirinal et pour la loge de Benedictions a Saint Pierre, Revue de l’Art, vol. 7, 1970, pp. 40–67. Schütze, 2008: Sebastian Schütze, ‘“Werke als Kalküle ihres Wirkungsanspruchs”: die cathedra Petri und ihr Bedeutungswandel im konfessionellen Zeitalter’, in Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze (eds.), Sankt Peter in Rom 1506–2006, Munich: hirmer, 2008, pp. 405–25. Visceglia, 1995: Maria Antonietta Visceglia, ‘Burocrazia, mobilità sociale e patronage alla corte di Roma tra cinque e Seicento: alcuni aspetti del recente dibattito storiografico e prospettive di ricerca’, Roma Moderna e Contemporanea, vol. 3, no. 1, 1995, pp. 7–55. Vodret, 2008: Rossella Vodret, ‘Agostino Tassi e il fregio della Sala Regia nel palazzo del Quirinale’, in Patrizia cavazzini (ed.), Agostino Tassi (1578–1644): un paesaggista tra immaginario e realtà, Rome: iride per il Terzo Millenio, 2008, pp. 127–50. Wasserman, 1963: Jack Wasserman, ‘The Quirinal Palace in Rome’, Art Bulletin, vol. 45, 1963, pp. 205–44. Wright, 2000: A.D. Wright, The Early Modern Papacy from the Council of Trent to the French Revolution 1564–1789, harlow: Pearson, 2000.

Mandel, 1994: corinne Mandel, Sixtus V and the Lateran Palace, Rome: istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, 1994. Marshall, 2007: David R. Marshall, ‘Giovanni Paolo Panini as Architectural critic: the competition for the façade of S. Giovanni in Laterano in 1732 and the Quirinal caffeaus’, in David R. Marshall (ed.), Art, Site and Spectacle: studies in early modern visual culture, Melbourne: Fine Arts network, 2007, pp. 120–42. Menniti Ippolito, 2004: Antonio Menniti ippolito, I papi al Quirinale: il sovrano pontefice e la ricerca di una residenza, Rome: Viella, 2004. Minor, 2010: heather hyde Minor, The Culture of Architecture in Enlightenment Rome, University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2010. Moroni, 1840-79: Gaetano Moroni. Dizionario di erudizione storico-ecclesiastico. 104 vols., Venice: Tipografia Emiliana, 1840–79. Natoli and Scarpati, 1989: Marina natoli and Maria Antonietta Scarpati, Il Palazzo del Quirinale: il mondo artistico a Roma nel periodo napoleonico, Rome: istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, 1989. Negro, 1996: Angela negro, Il giardino dipinto del Cardinal Borghese. Paolo Bril e Guido Reni nel Palazzo Rospigliosi Pallavicini a Roma, Rome: nuova Argos, 1996. Orbaan, 1920: Johannes A.F. Orbaan, Documenti sul barocco in Roma, Rome: Società Romana di Storia Patria, 1920. Oy-Marra, 2007: Elisabeth Oy-Marra, ‘Quirinalspalast (Palazzo del Quirinale)’ in christina Strunck (ed.), Rom: Meisterwerke der Baukunst von der Antike bis heute: Festgabe für Elisabeth Kieven, Studien zur internationalen Architektur- und Kunstgeschichte 43, Petersberg: imhof, 2007, pp. 395–98. Pastor, 1886–1933: Ludwig von Pastor, Geschichte der Päpste seit dem Ausgang des Mittelalters, 16 vols., Freiburg im Bresgau.: herder, 1886–1933. Prodi, 1987: Paolo Prodi, The Papal Prince. One Body and Two Souls: the papal monarchy in early modern Europe, cambridge: cambridge University Press, 1987.

Arnold Witte: Architecture and Bureaucracy

177

178

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 8 Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti. The Urban Theatre of Maria Casimira and Alexander Sobieski in Rome Tommaso Manfredi

On the evening of 9 August 1703, a serenade, Dialogo tra Amor Divino e la Fede (Dialogue between Divine Love and Faith) was performed on the summit of the Trinità dei Monti in Rome. The text for the music was written by cardinal Vice-chancellor Pietro Ottoboni in honour of Maria casimira Sobieski (born Marie casimire Louise de La Grange d’Arquien), widow of the king of Poland, Jan iii Sobieski (Fig. 1) at that time resident in Palazzo Zuccari.1 Serenades were musical compositions for two or three voices, put on by nobles for nobles. They were generally similar to cantatas, except that performances were confined to summer evenings in the open spaces of piazzas or palace courtyards.2 Being the most publicly visible and most publicly resonant of all musical performances, they were often subject to exploitation as political statements by those who commissioned them, and, on occasion, also by the personalities to whom they were dedicated. Dialogo tra Amor Divino e la Fede was conceived by cardinal Ottoboni in direct consultation with the queen of Poland as a sumptuous transposition into the public arena of serenades usually performed in the private enclosure of the Palazzo della cancelleria, the cardinal’s residence as Vice-chancellor, where the piece had been rehearsed the previous evening.3 This exceptional event had two objectives beyond the declared one of ‘gladdening the people’ who had been deprived of the festivities of carnival because of bans on profane entertainments instituted by clement Xi Albani. On the one hand the spectacle openly sanctioned the predilection shown by the queen for the cardinal from the beginning of her Roman exile in 1699,4 and on the other it celebrated the fact that she was establishing her residence in that quarter of the city with the strongest connection with France, as a nationalistic assertion of her French origins and to demonstrate her adherence to

the politics of Louis XiV during the wars of Spanish and Polish succession.5 in the presence of the ambassadors of France and Spain—Forbin-Janson and de Uceda—who were allies because Philip V had been made king of Spain by his uncle Louis XiV,6 Maria casimira repudiated the anti-French stance she had pursued after the death of her husband, in order to improve the chances of her three sons—Jakub (James), Aleksander (Alexander) and constanty (constantine)—and of her son-in-law Maximilian of Bavaria to be elected to the kingship of Poland, a sovereignty presided over after Sobieski’s death by the Saxon, Augustus ii.7

Fig. 1. Giovanni Battista Falda, Bird’s-eye View of Rome, 1676. Detail of the slope and summit of Trinità dei Monti. 1. Tassi houses 3. casa Stefanoni 4. Palazzo Zuccari 5. Slope of the Pincio before the construction of the Scalinata di Spagna 6. Piazza della Trinità dei Monti 7. Villa Medici 8. church of Trinità dei Monti

Frontispiece: claude Lorrain, A View of Rome, 1730. Detail of Fig. 13.

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

179

Although the space in front of Palazzo Zuccari was in the very heart of Rome, it lacked the regular geometry of the monumental courtyard of the Palazzo della cancelleria. The ‘piazza della Trinità dei Monti’ (so called only after the placing of the Sallustian obelisk there in 1786) was in Maria casimira’s time an unformed and unpaved widening of the street (Figs. 2–4). Two sides were defined by the end of Palazzo Zuccari where Via Gregoriana and Via Felice (now Sistina) met, and by the long façades of the church and convent of the Trinità dei Monti of the French Minims (or Paolotti) extending to the monumental façade of the Villa Medici. The length of the open area formed an extended panoramic terrace, as can be seen in views by Gaspar van Wittel (Figs. 5, 7). Even the façade of the church, alluding to the typology of French Gothic cathedrals, was not coordinated with the space in front of it,8 from which it was separated by a steep slope with an almost rustic air and no clearly defined descent. instead, the tall church façade was aligned on the axis of Via dei condotti below, which ran due south from the base of the slope. The canted alignment of the façade of Trinità dei Monti with respect to the Via Felice limited the visual field of a person standing in front of the church on the side towards Palazzo Zuccari to a narrow funnel. This was created by the façades of the two houses belonging to the Minims

180

(Above) Fig. 2. Giovanni Battista nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail of Trinità dei Monti area. (Opposite top) Fig. 3. Catasto Urbano Pio Gregoriano, 1818–1824, Rione iV campo Marzio. Detail of Trinità dei Monti area. 1. Tassi houses 2. Building between casa Tassi and casa Stefanoni 3. casa Stefanoni 4. Palazzo Zuccari 5. church of the Benedictine nuns 6. convent of the Benedictine nuns 7. Probable site of the theatre 8. connecting passageway across Via Felice (Sistina) 9. Entrance to Villa Torres from Via di Porta Pinciana 10. Tower of Villa Torres 12. Main garden of Villa Torres 13. Secondary garden of Villa Torres (Opposite bottom) Fig. 4. c. clutterbuck, View of Palazzo Zuccari, 1829. Watercolour, 262 x 372 mm. Austria, Private collection. (© Bibliotheca hertziana U.Pl. D 48238.) The Palazzo Zuccari is at the centre and the two Tassi houses are at the left.

(and let to Prince Tassi, the Spanish Postmaster-General) (Figs. 1–4 [1]) that extended up the hill, and faced the irregular edge of the slope defining the outer edge of the piazza. The queen had had this dangerous outer perimeter of the piazza structurally consolidated before the serenata in order to prevent carriages plunging over the edge.9 it was therefore inevitable that the spectacle, which was designed

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

181

(Left) Fig. 5. Gaspar Van Wittel, View of Rome from Trinità dei Monti towards Piazza del Popolo, 1713. Gouache on paper, 265 x 330 mm. Rome, private collection. (After Briganti, 1996, p. 140, fig. 24.) (Above) Fig. 6. Wenceslas hollar after David Beck, Portrait of Queen Christina of Sweden, 1650. Etching.

to be enjoyed from the comfort of carriages without their occupants having to set foot on the ground,10 would be disrupted by logistical traffic problems,. These problems were chronicled in contemporary reports together with the inevitable artistic criticisms of the performance, which cardinal Ottoboni lamented.11 Such difficulties were one of many instances of the hostility of the more traditional Roman circles towards a new poetic genre that was both edifying and refined which was being tenaciously pursued by the Venetian cardinal as an active patron of music and poetry.12 This genre largely corresponded to the approach of the Accademia degli Arcadi (Arcadian Academy), founded in 1690 in memory of the recently deceased Queen christina of Sweden (1626–89) (Fig. 6), of whom Ottoboni was protector and supporter. it was under the standard of the Arcadians that after her arrival in Rome, Maria casimira had earned the protection of Ottoboni in order to sustain the burdensome but inevitable comparison with the great Swedish sovereign.13 christina, who had arrived in Rome in 1655 with the high status of a young unmarried queen exalted by her abdication and conversion to the catholic faith, had voluntarily chosen the papal city to settle in for the rest of her life. As a queen she had installed a true and proper court in Palazzo Riario in Via della Lungara, giving the site permanent artistic and cultural associations, which

182

in 1702 had inspired cardinal Ottoboni to found there a revolutionary arcadian academy of the arts called the Accademia Albana, in honour of Pope clement Xi.14 Maria casimira (Fig. 7), for her part, had reached Rome in 1699, with her ageing father, the dissolute libertine cardinal d’Arquien, and her young namesake niece, following the failure of her manoeuvres to arrange the election of the successor to her husband by the Diet of Polish nobles. in Rome, her fame as the widow of the celebrated bulwark of christianity, Jan iii Sobieski, overcame her reputation as a former sovereign involved in intrigues, one who was inconstant and capricious and who was disliked in all European courts.15 in the expectation that in due course she would be able to move to Paris, preserving at least the semblance of royal dignity, Maria casimira saw her Roman sojourn as a long interlude before her return to her native land, where, in anticipation, she had moved the greater part of her inheritance.16 She passed her first three years in Rome as the guest of Prince Livio Odescalchi, in an apartment provided for her in the Palazzo chigi in Piazza SS. Apostoli designed by Bernini (Figs. 9, 10). While there she was occupied mainly with family scandals and an ostentatious exhibition of religious devotion, all the while operating under the protection of innocent Xii and clement Xi, claiming from both the same ceremonial privileges that had been given to Queen christina by Alexander Vii.17

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Right) Fig. 7. Gaspar Van Wittel, View of Rome from Trinità dei Monti towards Piazza el Popolo, 1713. Gouache on paper, 265 x 330 mm. Rome, private collection. (After Briganti, 1996, p. 137, fig. 19). (Above) Fig. 8. hubert Vincent after Antonio Odazzi, Portrait of Maria Casimira Sobieska, Queen of Poland, 1699. Engraving. From Bassani, 1700, p. 226.

Surrounded by works of art belonging to the deceased Swedish sovereign that had been acquired en bloc by Odescalchi a little before her arrival, Maria casimira tried to emulate christina socially, taking into her service christina’s secretary and artistic adviser, count Giacomo d’Alibert.18 Both a detailed description of these works of art that was placed at the end of the celebratory volume of Maria casimira’s voyage to Rome written by Abate Bassani,19 and a short guide to the city written for her use by canon Pisani,20 brought to the Polish queen’s attention much information about the public and private contexts of the Swedish queen, and about the arcadian vision of the glories of Rome that christina had energetically promoted in art and poetry. it was surely not surprising, therefore, that Maria casimira’s decision to pass the second part of her Roman stay at Trinità dei Monti in Palazzo Zuccari and in the nearby Villa Torres (half-hidden beyond a gate on the Via di Porta Pinciana in a painting by Gaspar van Wittel (Fig. 11; see also Figs. 2 and 3 [9])), derived in large part from her desire to recreate in a place with ancient memories of the horti Luculliani (the Gardens of Lucullus) a personal and secret arcadia that echoed the pastoral world evoked by the arcadian academy founded on the slopes of the Janiculum in memory of christina of Sweden.

Fig. 9. G. B. Falda, Palazzo Chigi, Piazza SS. Apostoli. Engraving. From Palazzi di Roma, 1655. Fig. 10. Pierre Étienne Monnot, Prince Livio Odescalchi receives the Queen of Poland in her Palazzo in Rome. Paris, Musée du Louvre, Département des Sculptures, legacy of count claude du Mesnil de Marigny, 1881, inv. camp. 93.

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

183

Un Sito Stravagantissimo in 1590, Federico Zuccari had undertaken the construction of his house and studio on Trinità dei Monti primarily because of financial incentives introduced by Sixtus V to encourage building along the extension of the Via Sistina towards the Villa Medici.21 A contemporary commentator, however, recorded that it had also been ‘poetic caprice’ that prompted the painter to build ‘a big palace without a worldly reason, on an extravagant site that only in a picture could succeed as a beautiful thing …’. 22 Forty years later, the view of Trinità dei Monti idealised by claude Lorrain (Fig. 9), demonstrated all the potent pictorial suggestion of Zuccari’s ‘caprice’, depicting the

184

(Above) Fig. 11. Gaspar Van Wittel, View of Strada di Porta Pinciana, 1685–90. Oil on canvas, 49 x 99 cm. Rome, Museo di Roma, MR 763. (Museo di Roma.) The Villa Torres is at the right, the Quirinal palace in the distance. (Below) Fig. 12. Anonymous, Palazzo Zuccari, Plan of the Piano Nobile, with labelling by the author. Pen and brown ink, black chalk, grey wash, 533 x 420 mm. Rome, Museo di Roma, Gabinetto comunale delle Stampe, Disegni e Fotografie, MR 16854. (Museo di Roma.) a. Studio b. Dining room or Sala di Ganimede on ground floor c. Salone di rappresentanza on piano nobile d. church of the Benedictine nuns e. convent of the Benedictine nuns f. Garden g. Garden entrance on Via Gregoriana, with grotesque mask h. casino for the famiglia

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

palazzo as the culmination of a mythological landscape. More concretely, a plan of the building dating from the beginning of the eighteenth century (Fig. 10) documents the ‘extravagance’ of its position and the reason why it was referred to as a ‘palazzotto’ (little palace). constrained by the unusual site, which was in the form of an elongated trapezoid, Zuccari’s complex was far removed from the usual typology of a city palazzo. This is apparent in the way the design combines three distinct sections diminishing in height: the casa grande, accessible from the piazza, which formed the studio (Fig. 12 [a]); with the dining room (sala da pranzo) or Room of Ganymede (sala di Ganimede) on the ground floor (Fig. 12 [b]); the salone di rappresentanza on the piano nobile (Fig. 12 [c]); the casino accessible from Via Felice, destined to become the residence for his famiglia (Fig. 12 [h]), and the giardino (Fig. 12 [f ]), with an entrance in Via Gregoriana (Fig. 12 [g]). This entrance was distinguished by grotesque masks (mascheroni), evidently borrowed from the Villa Orsini at Bomarzo, which emphasised the rustic and heterodox character that Zuccari gave to the whole project (Figs. 14–15). The complex was, however, somewhat compromised by the subsequent elevation of the central body, a

Fig. 13. claude Lorrain, A View in Rome, 1632. Oil on canvas, 60.3 x 84.0 cm. London, national Gallery, nG1319. (© national Gallery Picture Library.)

project undertaken by Girolamo Rainaldi for Marcantonio Toscanella, the first tenant who subsequently acquired the building from the heirs of the painter, who had died in 1609 (Figs. 14–15).23 in his will, Zuccari had expressed the desire that the palazzo would become an academy for indigent foreign painters, developing their artistic vocation on the Trinità dei Monti site where, in successive decades, various painters would live, including Salvator Rosa and Gaspar van Wittel. Subsequently in 1660, in order to consolidate the French identity of the site, Antonio Barberini, cardinal protector to the French crown at the papal court, proposed to the then prime minister of France, Giulio Mazzarini (Jules Mazarin), that ‘the houses of the late Toscanella’ be turned into the residence of the ambassador of Louis XiV in order to create with the neighbouring complex of the Minims what amounted to a small extraterritorial city.24

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

185

Although this extraordinary proposal was not taken up, Antonio Barberini’s astute diplomatic pitch reflected the politics of the territorial claims of the French crown on the Pincio that had begun at the end of the fifteenth century with the establishment of the Minims there, and which had always been strongly obstructed by the popes.25 To the same end, several grandiose projects for the reorganisation of the staircase were proposed. One, which was to have been permanent, was proposed by Elpidio Benedetti on behalf of Louis XiV and was to have been dominated by the statue of the king. The project—probably reproducing a model by Gian Lorenzo Bernini—survives (Fig. 16). Others were ephemeral projects recorded in engravings, such as the extraordinary apparatus in honour of the birth of the Dauphin of France conceived in 1662 by Bernini for Antonio Barberini (Fig. 17), or the one realised in 1687 to give public thanks for Louis XiV’s return to health (Fig. 18). The engraving of the 1687 apparatus (Fig. 18) constitutes the most realistic image of the urban context of Trinità dei Monti before the arrival of the queen of Poland. The only buildings visible to the right of the church are the two houses later inhabited by Prince Tassi26 that constituted the last section of the projection of the Via Felice beyond which developed a triangular lot almost entirely occupied by the Villa Torres. This had been founded by the Orsini on part of the horti Luculliani and is already

186

(Above) Fig. 14. Giuseppe Maria Perrone, Palazzo Zuccari, Façade on Via Gregoriana, before 1904. ink, 282 x 618 mm. Rome, Bibliotheca hertziana. (© Bibliotheca hertziana U.Pl. D 10204.) (Right) Fig. 15. Pietro Paolo coccetti, Palazzo Zuccari, Façade on Piazza Trinità dei Monti, 1721–31. Vienna, Albertina, Atlante Stosch, n. 1236 (© Bibliotheca hertziana U.Pl. D 10220.)

visible in the bird’s-eye view of Rome of Antonio Tempesta of 1593 (Fig. 19). Acquired by the Minims in 1611 with a contribution from the regent of France Maria de’ Medici, in 1628 the villa was conceded to the de Torres on a long lease.27 De Torres patronage probably accounts for the unrealised project for the enlargement of the villa anticipated in the 1676 bird’s-eye view of Rome by Giovanni Battista Falda (Fig. 20).

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Right) Fig. 16. Elpidio Benedetti, Project for the slope of Trinità dei Monti, after Gian Lorenzo Bernini, 1660. Drawing. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, chigi P.Vii, 10, ff. 30v–31. (Below left) Fig. 17. Philip Schor and Dominique Barrière, after Gian Lorenzo Bernini, Festival Apparatus in Honour of the Birth of the Dauphin of France, 1662. Engraving. Rome, Museo di Roma MR 40511. (Below right) Fig. 18. Simon Felice Delino, Festival Apparatus for the Healing of Louis XIV, 1687. Engraving.

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

187

in 1701 the de Torres sublet the villa to Maria casimira, when its configuration cannot have been very different from that represented in Tempesta’s view (Fig. 19), with a main block adorned with a high tower [10] (perhaps derived from the campanile of the medieval church of S. Felice in Pincis), and other secondary buildings set between a large garden on the side towards the convent of the Minims [12] and another smaller one on the other side [13], distinguished by the presence of a tall Roman pine [11] that gave rise to the name ‘Villa del Pino’ (villa of the pine tree). in comparison to the suitably regal accommodation enjoyed by Maria casimira in the noble apartments of the Palazzi chigi, linked to those of her father in nearby Palazzo cybo by an elevated passageway,28 the Villa Torres was clearly inadequate as the permanent residence of the sovereign, the cardinal and the two princes Alexander and costantine, who had joined the queen after a prolonged stay in Paris (Figs. 18–19).29 According to reports in the Diario di Roma of Francesco Valesio (which still constitute the most detailed historical source for where Maria casimira resided in Rome), it seems that on 7 July 1701 the queen wanted to use the property on the Pincio for villeggiatura, along with two adjoining houses made vacant by the pope to house her large entourage.30 These were the houses facing Via Felice, adjacent to those occupied by the Tassi, clearly visible in the bird’s-eye view of Falda (Fig. 20 [3]), one of which belonged to the Stefanoni family and had noble connotations in that it comprised stables and carriage houses. 31 But already by 10 July, Valesio, referring to a visit of the queen and her familiars to the ‘small new little palace of Porta Pinciana’, claimed rather that it had been ‘taken to be lived in’ by the queen.32 That this was the true intention of Maria casimira is demonstrated by the frenetic activity to ‘beautify the casino and garden’ reported on 15 July 170133 and still continuing on 25 June of the following year, when ‘one hundred men’ were engaged in ‘enlarging the apartments’.34 The radical structural transformations carried out at the Villa Torres from the second half of the nineteenth century onwards, make it difficult to understand the layout of the site at the end of Maria casimira’s building campaign, apart from the indications of the nolli map of 1748, which shows the expansion of the sixteenthcentury core of the building (Fig. 2). The description of the villa’s form closest to the time when the queen of Poland resided there is found in the pages of the Römisches Leben by Friedrike Brun (Leipzig, Brockhaus, 1833). The Danish poet, referring to his stay in the central apartment under the small tower in 1802, refers to ‘several other panoramic apartments’ served by ‘many stairs both external

188

(Top) Fig. 19. Antonio Tempesta, Bird’s-eye View of Rome, 1593, detail of the area of the Villa Torres. (Above) Fig. 20. Giovanni Battista Falda, Map of Rome, 1676, detail of the area of the Villa Torres. 1. Tassi houses 3. casa Stefanoni 4. Palazzo Zuccari 10. Tower of Villa Torres 11. Pine Tree 12. Main garden of Villa Torres 13. Secondary garden of Villa Torres

and internal’ and ‘small and lovely gardens’.35 The same apartments, separated from each other and enlivened with green spaces, which were then used as painters’ studios, had served Queen casimira a century before to house her own court. She reserved the central block for herself—the one inhabited by Brun—which boasted a living room

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

overlooking the gardens of the Quirinal, recognisable in some paintings of the first half of the nineteenth century (Figs. 21–22). Given the lack of adequate representational spaces—these would only be added later—the casino Torres was characterised by the picturesque arrangement of the surrounding green spaces, as well as for the impressive panoramic views that, together with the extreme privacy of its position, would attract illustrious residents until the middle of the nineteenth century.36 That the villa’s situation was the basis for the decision by the queen to reside there is demonstrated by the fact that in november 1701, when the work of reorganisation was still ongoing, Maria casimira had erected an illuminated apparatus made up of ‘painted canvases’, which could be enjoyed from a distance by clement Xi from his palace on the Quirinal hill.37 Sited just inside the city walls, the Villa Torres served the function of a villa of delights (villa di delizie) for Maria casimira to complement her apartment in Palazzo chigi. When the queen had to vacate her apartments in the Palazzo chigi for reasons of diplomatic expediency, the residential scope and purpose of the villa suddenly had to be reconsidered. The news, reported by Valesio on 15 July

Fig. 21. Domenico Quaglio (1787–1837), View of the Villa Malta in Rome, 1830. Oil on canvas, 62.2 x 82.0 cm. Munich, neue Pinakothek WAF 784. (bpk | Bayerische Staatsgemäldesammlungen.)

1702, concerning the failed attempt by Maria casimira to purchase from the Minims some houses adjacent to the villa overlooking Via Felice (perhaps those inhabited by the Tassi) in order to accommodate her court, must be connected with the decision to move herself permanently into the Villa Torres.38 Only after facing the impossibility of adapting the villa to her own needs, especially with regard to the representational spaces, did she also rent Palazzo Zuccari, located opposite the houses already placed at her disposal by the pope in Via Felice. This took place in October 1702, as is apparent from a retrospective contract signed on 2 January 1703 by Giacomo Zuccari, a descendant of Federico, who had reacquired ownership of part of the property.39 Already on 28 September 1702 the queen obtained a license from the tribunale delle strade to construct a bridge that connected the Palazzo Zuccari to the casa Stefanoni where her father was to be housed,

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

189

recreating the same sort of living arrangements as had prevailed at Piazza Santi Apostoli (Fig. 23).40 According to what Valesio reported on 30 September 1702, even before her application to the pope was accepted, Maria casimira was in the process of creating within the Zuccari properties a small private convent for the cloistered French order of Benedictines of the Perpetual Adoration of the holy Sacrament, which would be consecrated in haste on 12 October 1702 while the work was still in progress.41 The convent, installed ‘in the last of the Zuccari houses’,42 that is, the modest building facing Via Felice beyond the garden of the palazzo, and not inside the palazzo as previously thought (Figs. 2 and 3 [6]),43 was only able to accommodate the eight nuns already arrived from France at the end of november of that year.44 At the same time the queen, her family and her whole court moved in, as is attested to by the parish censuses of 1703, in which, however, the two Sobieski princes do not appear, as they had already left Rome to join their brother James to fight against Augustus ii on the Polish front of the northern War.45 When, in May 1703, the queen bought a vigna outside the Porta Pia that had formerly belonged to the Mignanelli from Marco Antonio Grazioli, she was finally fully settled in Rome.46 This, however, was still only a provisional living arrangement, which could have been revoked at any

190

Fig. 22. Franz Ludwig catel, Villa Malta in Rome, c. 1840. Munich, Staatliche Graphische Sammlungen.

time within the six years of the duration of the lease of Palazzo Zuccari. it was modelled on the traditional real estate system of the Roman nobility: an urban palace, a suburban villa, a villa outside the walls, and a church or noble chapel. The queen’s particular set-up, concentrated in one small district, consisted of two conjoined palazzetti, a villa next to a city gate, a vigna with rustic farmhouse just a few minutes away by carriage, and even a convent with a tiny private church entirely dedicated to her personal devotion to the Blessed Sacrament. Each component of this system was interconnected and it all was functionally dependent on the bridge connecting the two buildings facing Via Felice. An unpublished view of the Spanish Steps and Via Sistina in the hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg is the only visual evidence known of this structure, and makes it possible to realise its considerable urbanistic impact and its architectural features that only in part correspond with the drawing of the design that accompanies the building permit (Fig. 23).47 it was a true bridge in wood forming a rectilinear passageway with balustrades supported by massive corbels embedded in the walls of the Zuccari and

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 23. Building permit (lettera patente) for the constriction of the wooden bridge from Palazzo Zuccari to casa Stefanoni, 28 September 1702. ASR, notai della Reverenda camera Apostolica, notaio Astolphus Galloppus, vol. 853, f. 494. (Archivio di Stato di Roma.)

Fig. 24. Route of the visit of clement Xi to Queen casimira, commencing at the gateway of the Villa Torres in Via di Porta Pinciana (9), through Villa Torres (10) and its gardens (12, 13) to casa Stefanoni (3), across the bridge over Via Felice/Sistina (8) to Palazzo Zuccari (4). (See also Figs. 2 and 3.)

Stefanoni buildings, and was much more splendid than the masonry passageways that the Tribunale delle Strade tended to authorise reluctantly and only on secondary streets.48 When distinguished guests of the queen of Poland arrived from Via di Porta Pinciana, they would descend from their carriages at the gate of Villa Torres (Fig. 24 [9], and Fig. 11), and from the vast atrium would proceed on foot across the formal garden (Fig. 24 [12]), passing also the little garden (Fig. 24 [13]), and the back entrance of the casa Stefanoni (Fig. 24 [3]). They would then climb a flight of stairs to the second floor, go out on the bridge and over it (Fig. 24 [8]), cross the threshold of the second floor of the Palazzo Zuccari (Fig. 24 [5]), and after two antechambers would finally arrive at the reception room of Maria casimira.49 According to an account written by the painter and director of the French Academy in Rome François Poerson, this was precisely the route followed by clement Xi in June 1714 to pay homage to the queen before her departure from the holy city.50 it is not known whether the pope’s

decision to get back into his carriage in order to descend the ‘narrow’ (anguste) staircase of Palazzo Zuccari was due to a desire to avoid the ‘unhealthy air’ of the garden, or in order to avoid returning by this complicated route.51 Poerson believed that the old chateau of Blois, where the queen was planning to move in France, would have been a much better residence than Palazzo Zuccari and its outbuildings, where, evidently thinking of the higher standard of comfort expected by the French, he believed her to be ‘very badly housed’ while spending a great deal of money.52 But even by Roman standards the residence at the Trinità dei Monti had serious deficiencies, so that in 1706 the queen was forced to resort to the hospitality of Prince Odescalchi in Palazzo chigi in order to celebrate the rite of homage to the newly appointed cardinals.53 The complex at Trinità dei Monti was not comparable in terms of comfort, nor in terms of suitability as a representational site, to the magnificent residence of Wilanów (i.e. ‘Villa nova’ or ‘new Villa’), set up by Jan iii as a modern suburban palace in the italian manner to meet

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

191

Fig. 25. Giovanni Paolo Panini, Scalinata di Trinità dei Monti (Spanish Steps), 1756–58, Pen and black ink, brush and gray wash, watercolour, over graphite, 348 x 293 mm. The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Rogers Fund, 1971.63.1.

the special needs of Maria casimira, who was notoriously averse to long stays in the Polish countryside.54 in Rome there was no lack of palaces or villas to rent that could fulfill these needs, but none of them responded to the aesthetic and symbolic features that had evidently guided the queen’s choice of the establishment ‘distributed’ between the piazza of the Trinità dei Monti and the slopes of the Pincio. The Palazzo Zuccari compensated for these functional deficiencies with the originality of its conception as an artist’s house. The casa Stefanoni, later the agreeable residence of the painters Anton Raphael Mengs and Angelika Kauffman,55 besides guaranteeing dignified accommodation for the aged cardinal d’Arquien, constituted the entrance to the picturesque areas of Villa Torres, subsequently celebrated by poets and artists as a true arcadia in the heart of the city.56 The ‘domestic’ convent of the Benedictine nuns at once joined the list of Roman curiosi-

192

ties,57 and even the vigna outside the Porta Pia seemed at any moment to be capable of revealing precious treasures, judging by the haste with which the queen went there on hearing news of the discovery of some ancient coins in excavations made there shortly after she had acquired it.58 Given that her stay at Trinità dei Monti would be relatively short, the intangible value of the site that was the consequence of its exceptionally evocative landscape and urban setting, with its ancient memories of Rome and its present associations with French royalty, prevailed over pragmatic and functional considerations for the queen. in this context, the establishment of the convent had a special symbolic value insofar as it was assigned to the same order of Benedictine nuns of royal French origin that had been imported in 1688 to Warsaw by Maria casimira herself in order to fulfil a vow for the victory of her husband Jan iii at the Battle of Vienna.59 With the pope’s approval of her convent, Maria casimira was able to confirm her own

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

dignity in Rome and throughout Europe as the widowed queen of the great catholic hero in a moment when her political strategies and those of her children were in abeyance. And it was in this context that, on 10 June 1703, three days after clement Xi had made a private visit to the ‘small church’ of the convent (adorned only by the altarpiece depicting the image of the holy Saviour),60 the queen organised what would remain the most spectacular religious and political public testimony of her presence in Rome.61 For this event, the façades of the convent and church of Trinità dei Monti were adorned with tapestries (gifts from her son-in-law the Duke of Bavaria) celebrating the triumphs of war achieved in the name of christianity by the late Jan Sobieski. Fixed to the windows of the mezzanine of casa Stefanoni were carved wood letters spelling the name ‘M. casimira’, illuminated by torchlight. Further down the street from piazza Trinità dei Monti, at the crossing of Via Felice and Via di Porta Pinciana—a strategic point between the two residential poles of the queen—a large ephemeral arch designed by Giacomo Alibert was set up, supported by four bundled pilasters to form pillars on either side and decorated with the papal coat of arms flanked by statues of Faith and Mercy.62 in the continuous interplay between religious and worldly demonstrations that characterised the first part of her stay in Rome, on 4 August and 2 September 1703, Maria casimira arranged to have two serenades performed on the bridge over Via Felice.63 This time it was the queen who addressed the spectacle to the people of Rome, using the bridge as an attractive elevated podium facing the piazza della Trinità dei Monti and the long rectangle of Via Felice. Subsequently, the serenades patronised by the queen of Poland became a highly anticipated event of the Roman summer and the bridge over Via Felice acquired the name of ‘arco della Regina’ (the queen’s arch). it survived until 1799 as a resonant echo of the ephemeral events that were held there, but also of the identification of the area with the name of Maria casimira.64 An urban rumour picked up by Valesio on 23 February 1704 is certainly attributable to the renewed interest in the Trinità dei Monti area catalysed by the presence of the queen. This rumour concerned the intention of clement Xi to finally build stairs at the foot of the church of the Minims, forcing the Order to use the legacy of cardinal Mazarin (in reality the legacy of the ambassador Gueffier) as a payment for the grand urban project,65 even if the insurmountable requirement to place the statue of Louis XiV at the centre of the staircase would delay for a further twenty years the monumental construction of the famous scalinata (grand

staircase) which radically and permanently altered the nature of the site (Fig. 25). From carnival of 1704 onwards, according to the Roman chroniclers, the queen of Poland also began to appear personally as a promoter of theatrical spectacles that reflected the more private and domestic side of her way of life, expressed in the language of Arcadia that she had decided to adopt in order to sustain the comparison with Queen christina of Sweden.

The Queen’s Theatre The Arcadian poet carlo Doni (cesennius Asunteo) wrote a hagiographic biographical portrait of the queen, who had been received by acclamation at the Arcadian Academy on 26 September 1699 with the name of Arimisca Telea.66 he describes Maria casimira exactly in the way she had wanted to appear since her arrival in Rome: as a clever, resourceful and stalwart French noblewoman, the figure behind the successes of her husband Jan Sobieski (whom she had married in a second marriage for love) and the driving force in his ruthless rise to the throne and his glorious military campaign against the Turks. But she was also lauded as a godly woman, a frequent visitor of churches and monasteries with a very special dedication to visiting sacred sites where the Blessed Sacrament was exposed. With regard to her relationship with the Arcadians as Arimisca Telea, Doni tells us only that Maria casimira promised at the time of her admission to the Academy to host annually in her palace an academy or one of those performances of cantatas or sonnets frequently promoted in the Palazzo della cancelleria by her protector cardinal Ottoboni. Although she only delivered on her promise a few times, the queen certainly figured as an Arcadian icon.67 This status derived from the close link established since her arrival in Rome with the two most prominent supporters of the academy (which was directed by Giovanni Mario crescimbeni): cardinal Ottoboni, in the dual roles of patron and poet, and clement Xi in the role of patron of the arts and letters, both of whom had been protagonists in the circle of Queen christina of Sweden.68 For the proud Maria casimira, clement Xi was the benevolent guarantor of the many diplomatic privileges granted her by his predecessor innocent Xii, almost in counterpoint to those previously enjoyed by christina of Sweden. however, Ottoboni, rather than clement, was the only person able to evoke the splendour of a great princely court, and the only figure who shared her exuberant social appearances and supported her in the family misfortunes

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

193

brought about by the intemperance of her younger son constantine.69 Ottoboni had invested in the cultural and artistic heritage of christina, with the help of some of the key people of her circle, including the count d’Alibert, who had accompanied christina’s beginnings in the world of theatrical spectacles and who set about doing the same for Maria casimira.70 if Prince Odescalchi undertook the onerous task of ‘amusing’ the queen by dedicating to her performances of various kinds, it was certainly Ottoboni and d’Alibert who encouraged her to personally commission theatrical works.71 These began in 1701 with the hiring of a proper company of singers and musicians who were constantly active for the duration of carnival in the palazzo in Piazza SS. Apostoli,72 a practice which continued even after the queen’s transfer to Trinità dei Monti, notwithstanding the ban on all profane spectacles issued by clement Xi in 1702 and repeated in 1703. Following an unsuccessful attempt to obtain special dispensation from the pope to ‘perform honest comedies in her house’ for carnival of 1703,73 Maria casimira repeated the request for carnival of 1704. Taking advantage of an ambiguous answer,74 she was already at the beginning of the year in the process of ‘preparing in her own palazzo a place in the form of a theatre’ in order to entertain ‘the ladies of Rome ... in the forthcoming carnival with various cantatas, and some operettas in music’.75 Leaving a detailed discussion of the nature and location of the queen’s theatre to follow, it is important to note at this juncture that the venue was almost complete on 22 January 1704, when news arrived that none of the planned plays could be performed there due to the papal ban.76 This news, however, did not discourage Maria casimira, who, fully expecting the pope to change his mind, set about the following day ‘with no sign of joy’, but intent on ‘her own diversion’ to produce ‘impromptu comedies’, with musical interludes (intermezzi), ‘but on the ground and not in the theatre, there being no other sets than room screens’.77 The queen’s ‘impromptu plays’ were versions of the commedia dell’arte, or commedia all’italiana with a plot to which were added musical intermezzi in the French manner.78 Because of their flexibility these plays could be performed even in the absence of sets and costumes. For this reason they were very popular in the Roman palaces, where even during the bans they could be performed clandestinely by nobles and gentlemen attendants, although this strained papal tolerance. For Maria casimira, always careful not to upset relations with clement Xi, it was a sign of particular distinction that she could legitimately host plays for ‘her own

194

amusement’ and especially the possibility to extending such diversions to the ‘ladies of Rome’,79 particularly at a time when her own difficulty in receiving money from abroad was eroding the special status she had carefully nurtured upon her arrival in Rome and her early years cocooned at Palazzo chigi. So when, in February 1704, clement Xi finally granted leave (grazia) for three or four performances of ‘the specified comedy’ to take place at the queen’s theatre,80 it is significant that the choice fell on Il Tebro fatidico (The Fateful Tiber). This was not a traditional opera, but a ‘composition for music, and introduction to the dance of Aurora’ (componimento per musica, e introduttione al ballo dell’Aurora), an evolution from an ‘impromptu’ comedy with musical interludes, with the ‘most beautiful costumes in heroic style’, which served to showcase the queen’s young niece, the Princess Maria casimira, as a ballerina. indeed, the text was dedicated to the princess by the author, the poet and playwright, carlo Sigismondo capeci.81 capeci had recently been hired by the queen formally as her ‘secretary of italian and Latin letters’, but he was essentially the curator of the literary parts of the performances and spectacles of her little court.82 The fact that he was a member of the Arcadian Academy signifies that such projects would be carried out employing the more intimate pastoral themes—as is already clearly evident in the text of Il Tebro fatidico—and conveniently this type of entertainment also would be wholly consistent with the climate imposed by the ban and the proximity of a cloistered convent. Devotion and temperate performances, which were closely interlinked, seem to have been the key to the queen’s cultural presence at Trinità dei Monti. The private devotion of the Blessed Sacrament within the walls of the little convent would have balanced the discreet entertainment within the domestic walls, while religious and worldly aspects would merge on the occasion of the public serenades from the bridge over Via Felice, choreographed by d’Alibert. however, in March 1704 the news of the capture and imprisonment of James and constantine Sobieski by Augustus ii dramatically altered their mother’s plans.83 indoor theatre performances were suspended, while the public shows from the bridge became increasingly political in tone in support of the strategies implemented by Maria casimira addressed to the pope, France and Austria for the liberation of the two princes. The queen turned first to Louis XiV, celebrating the birth of his great-grandson the Duke of Brittany, which took place on 25 June 1704, with the cantata Applausi del sole e della Senna (Applause from the Sun and the Seine).84 She then turned to Leopold i of habsburg, the pope and all the christian princes, com-

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

memorating on 12 September the liberation of Vienna ‘in which King John of Poland her husband played such a part’ by way of ‘prayers in music’ (orazioni in musica), executed in the context of the ‘beautiful view’ formed by the palace and the illuminated piazza.85 in 1705, having returned from a mysterious trip to Padua that was certainly connected with her family crisis, Maria casimira continued to put on serenades.86 however, in 1706 every type of entertainment was suspended, pending developments in the situation created by the temporary defeat of Augustus ii by charles Xii of Sweden and the advent of Stanislas Leszczyński as the new king of Poland. These events led to the two Sobieski princes being transferred to the fortress of Graz under the protection of the emperor, and later to their release in early 1707.87 After spectacular celebratory displays, both religious and secular, and a trip to naples for the ceremony of the liquefaction of the blood of Saint Januarius,88 the queen resumed her theatrical activities in February 1707 in the same form as three years earlier. in fact, L’Amicizia d’Hercole, e Theseo (The Friendship of hercules and Theseus), a composition for music that formed the introduction to the Ballo della Gloria (Dance of Glory), which was inspired by the release of her two sons, functioned also as the coming-out ball celebrations for Princess Maria casimira, but ‘for the first time with the invitation of ladies and gentlemen’.89 The death of cardinal d’Arquien on 24 May 1707 led to the suspension of these performances, which, in spite of his advanced age, he had enjoyed with his daughter to the end.90 During carnival of 1708, in a climate unsettled by a call to arms against the imperial party in Romagna that had induced clement Xi to pursue offenders against the ban on performances with unusual harshness, Maria casimira was restricted to having her own gentlemen perform an impromptu play in French.91 however, in anticipation of a programme of serenades for the summer, she asked the pope for permission to hire two ‘female singers’ (canterine) to be employed also in the works that she intended to put on in the winter to divert her niece and herself ‘from the continuing anxieties’ that oppressed them.92 Once again, the private enjoyment of the queen became the pretext for a not insignificant concession, given that employing female singers in plays was formally prohibited in Rome for the benefit of the castrati.93 With these new singers a full programme of serenades was mounted in the summer. On 10 July and 7 September 1708 La pastorella rigidetta e poi amante (The Resisting and then Amorous Shepherdess)94 and Corone amorose (Loving crowns) were performed, the latter dedicated to Maria casimira but written to celebrate the birthday of her son

Fig. 26. Portrait of Maria casimira Sobieski, from the commemorative tablet in the Palazzo dei conservatori erected by clement Xi. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

Alexander, who had just joined his brother constantine in Rome.95 On 12 September followed La vittoria della fede (The Victory of Faith), yet another musical celebration of the victory of Vienna associated with a religious ceremony that connected the small church of the convent to the entire summit of Trinità dei Monti, when the piazza was decorated as an open air gallery of commemorative ‘paintings’, perhaps the usual tapestries.96 Lastly, during the carnival of 1709, an old opera by capeci, Il figlio delle selve (The child of the Woods), revised by the author to serve as an introduction for the ‘balli di Diana’ (Dances of Diana) dedicated to the Princess Sobieski, was trotted out, with the young princess participating in the dancing.97 By the time that capeci’s work was performed, the queen had long abandoned her earlier intention to leave Rome, a sudden urge which had manifested itself on 30 July 1708 with a public notice addressed to her creditors.98 Even so, she continued to prepare the ground for her eventual return to France. The closing of the Benedictine convent in the queen’s complex at Palazzo Zuccari in September 170899 and the extension of the rent of the Palazzo without a fixed expiry date a month later,100 were sure signs of her gradual withdrawal from the Roman scene, where, instead, her son Alexander would soon emerge as a powerful presence.

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

195

Fig. 27. circle of hyacinthe Rigaud, Portrait of Alexander Sobieski, c. 1696, Oil on canvas, 112 x 89 cm, Wilanów Palace Museum, Wil. 5932.

Fig. 28. circle of hyacinthe Rigaud, Portrait of Constantine Sobieski, c. 1696. Oil on canvas, 112 x 89 cm. Wilanów Palace Museum, Wil. 5931.

The Prince’s Theatre

the genius of the poet with that of the composers and musicians’.103 From the evidence of crescimbeni and Martello, it is apparent that Alexander was the true architect of the radical change of direction of the theatrical spectacles at Trinità dei Monti that coincided with Domenico Scarlatti becoming the permanent choirmaster to the queen and an assiduous collaborator of capeci.104 The prince, in fact, coordinated all creative and executory aspects of the works produced in his mother’s name, beginning with the choice and elaboration of the themes of capeci, replacing the elder d’Alibert, who was relegated to a more backseat position in the court.105 All this must have taken place before the first work signed by capeci and Domenico Scarlatti, the oratorio La conversione di Clodoveo Re di Francia (The conversion of clovis, King of France),106 which alluded to the hoped-for conversion to catholicism of Frederick iV of Denmark. According to Valesio, already by the end of February 1709, theatrical spectacles at Trinità dei Monti were being planned for Frederick’s proposed visit to Rome.107 After celebrating his birthday on 7 September 1709, with a serenade with the emblematic title La gloria in-

Alexander Sobieski (Fig. 27), unlike his brothers, had renounced forever his political ambitions at the same time that he refused the crown of Poland offered him by charles Xii of Sweden, in order to not put himself ahead of his imprisoned older brother James. This noble gesture, respectful of blood ties, allowed him to maintain his dignity in the world of power, in the same way that his erudition in Latin poetry accredited him in the world of culture. The image that Alexander loved to present in Rome was that of the peaceful and erudite hero, an image exalted in the posthumous biography dedicated to him by crescimbeni.101 Moreover, this image was fully congruent with Arcadian ideals, thanks to the proximity of capeci, who knew how to engage the passion for the theatre that Alexander had developed on his travels between Poland, Paris, Venice and Rome.102 According to the Bolognese poet and playwright Pier Jacopo Martello (the Arcadian Mirtillo Dianidio, who had moved to Rome in 1708), Alexander was ‘very intelligent’ in poetry and music and ‘made the poetry of capece serve the music’ in the works staged on behalf of his mother, and knew how to ‘temper

196

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 29. Filippo Juvarra, Countryside with Bridge and Tower. Drawing for the sixth scene of Orlando. Pen, brown ink, grey and sepia watercolour, 151 x 162 mm. Biblioteca nazionale di Torino, Ris. 59.4, f. 86r.3. (Biblioteca nazionale di Torino.)

namorata (Glory in Love),108 and within a few days having attended the usual celebration of the victory of Vienna,109 the first true public appearance of Alexander coincided with the full recovery of the Roman carnival following the bans. On 3 March 1710 Alexander was the male lead of the masquerade on the theme of the Trionfo della bellezza (Triumph of Beauty) taking the role of Valour alongside Beauty, a part performed by Duchess cesarini.110 The ‘crown prince of Poland’ presented himself ostentatiously in Rome as a hedonistic man, just as his mother flaunted her piety and religious devotion showily. in the climate of renewed enthusiasm that marked the resumption of public performances, Alexander proffered himself a protagonist of noble society, revelling in the uninhibited behaviour that had already marked his first youthful stay in the capital.111 in contrast to the almost seventy-year-old Maria casimira, plagued by constant illness and increasingly determined to return to France,112 the thirty-year-old Alexander seemed to have found in Rome the ideal environment to cultivate his own passions, sheltered by his prudent and retiring politics.113 in this context, Alexander’s entry into the Arcadian Academy, which took place by acclamation on 19 May 1710, was not merely a formal homage, but a true commitment to the cultural agenda of the academy, manifested also in his assiduous visits to some of the Academy’s members.114 in the world of the Roman theatre

the young Sobieski prince presented himself in the role of poet and patron, roles represented at the highest levels by cardinals Ottoboni and Benedetto Pamphilj, rather than as a passionate prodigal, as embodied by princes Livio Odescalchi (died 1713) and Francesco Maria Ruspoli. Already in carnival of 1710, because of the late opening of the capranica and Ruspoli theatres, Alexander found himself managing, with Ottoboni, a temporary monopoly on theatrical programming.115 he presented the pastoral drama Silvia, with lyrics and music by capeci and Domenico Scarlatti,116 as well as the heroic opera Costantino Pio, written and staged by Ottoboni.117 Silvia could not compete with Costantino Pio in terms of scenography, as this was almost non-existent, but only for the quality of the text and music.118 A special synergy between poetry and music, identified by the historical sources as Alexander’s personal contribution was critical to the success of the works that he promoted. Although the scenographic aspects acquired increasing importance, little by little pastoral themes acquired overtones of heroic themes drawn from classical drama skillfully interwoven with the history of the Sobieski family and the difficulties facing European politics. These political circumstances had repercussions for the very existence of the Academy, which had already been shaken up by the secession in 1711 of Giovan Francesco

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

197

Gravina, under the auspices of the pro-imperial party represented by Prince Odescalchi.119 Already in 1711 the drama in music Tolomeo e Alessandro overo la Corona disprezzata (Ptolemy and Alexander, or the crown Despised),120 and l’Orlando overo la gelosa pazzia (Orlando, or Jealous Madness),121 fully represented all these political aspects. The first, according to the eloquent subtitle, extolled the renunciation of the Polish throne by the virtuous Alexander in favor of his brother James,122 while the second, prepared outside the carnival season in honour of the same James, who was expected in Rome for a visit to his mother and niece,123 played on the themes of jealousy, family reconciliation and the laying down of arms in favour of Arcadian peace.124 On the contrasting themes of war and Arcadia followed Tetide in Sciro (Tethys in Skyros) in 1712,125 and in 1713 Ifigenia in Aulide (iphigenia in Aulis)126 and Ifigenia in Tauri (iphigenia in Taurus).127 These last two operas, employing related themes taken from the tragedies of Euripides, monopolised a theatre season128 marked by the absence of cardinal Ottoboni in respect for mourning at the court of France, an event blatantly ignored by Alexander.129 Finally, in 1714, came Amor d’un ombra e gelosia d’un’aura (Love of a Shadow and Jealousy of a Gentle Breeze).130 And it seems that, also in 1714, in spite of the worsening of an

198

illness that had debilitated him for some time,131 Alexander also had a part to play in staging the operas Tito e Berenice (Titus and Berenice) and Lucio Papirio (Lucius Papirius), which were put on by Ottoboni in the Teatro capranica as a reconciliatory poetic challenge between the Arcadian Arcademy of crescimbeni and the Arcadia nuova of Gravina, renamed the Accademia dei Quirini.132 it was in the context of the close alliance between the prince and the cardinal that at the end of 1710, on the occasion of the staging of Tolomeo e Alessandro, Filippo Juvarra temporarily entered into the small group of Alexander’s virtuosi. Juvarra was the official scenographer of Ottoboni, and was considered by Poerson to be the greatest architect in italy. in the biography of Juvarra written by Scipione Maffei, it is Alexander, and not the queen, who is cited as Juvarra’s direct contact for the staging of operas performed on behalf of his mother.133 The arrival of Juvarra at Trinità dei Monti formed the watershed between two distinct phases of theatrical activity promoted by Alexander. The first phase consisted of the private diversions of the queen in the form of performances within her court that focussed on cantatas and serenades directed by d’Alibert with the regular collaboration of capeci and the occasional collaboration of poets and musicians, such as Alessandro Scarlatti. The second phase consisted of

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Opposite left) Fig. 30. Filippo Juvarra, Ruined Wood with Hut (‘Boscho rotto con capa[n]na’). Drawing for the first scene of Orlando. Pen, brown ink, and sepia, grey, ochre, blue and green watercolour, 287 x 214 mm. London, Victoria and Albert Museum, DT 33b, f. 108. (© Victoria and Albert Museum.) (Opposite right) Fig. 31. Filippo Juvarra, Countryside with Rocks. Drawing for the sixth scene of Tetide in Sciro. Pen and sepia, grey, ochre, blue and green watercolour, 287 x 214 mm. London, Victoria and Albert Museum, DT 33b, f. 112. (© Victoria and Albert Museum.) (Right) Fig. 32. Filippo Juvarra, Countryside with Coastline. Drawing for the seventh scene of Tetide in Sciro. Pen, brown ink, and sepia, grey, ochre, green, blue and pink watercolour, 287 x 214 mm. London, Victoria and Albert Museum, DT 33b, f. 109. (© Victoria and Albert Museum.)

a festival of operas aimed at the noble public of Rome, created and managed directly by Alexander, in close collaboration with capeci, Domenico Scarlatti and Juvarra, independent of other forms of entertainment such as balls, which continued to be promoted by the queen though they were still formally prohibited by the pope.134 Before this time, Maria casimira and Alexander had shown little interest in other artistic disciplines outside music,135 and their only important artistic contacts were mediated by Ottoboni, who, in addition to Juvarra, placed at their disposal the painter Francesco Trevisani for a number of family portraits that were probably commissioned as gifts to the pope.136 in Tolomeo e Alessandro, which was characterised by very few scene changes, the intervention of Juvarra was limited, probably because of his concurrent commitments to Ottoboni.137 however, as early as the Orlando Juvarra achieved more complex scenographic compositions which conferred on Alexander’s operas unprecedented visual qualities, translating into visual form the simplicity and poetic suggestiveness of the pastoral themes evoked by capeci’s texts. in the summer of 1712, these scenographic and design successes opened the doors of Arcadia to him— he was only the second architect after carlo Fontana to be received by the Academy—with the evocative name of Bramanzio Feesseo.138 Out of this refined literary, artistic and musical context, Juvarra was able, within a few years, to offer his patrons and their distinguished guests a wide range of landscape sets that transposed the relationship between architecture and nature that had been experimented with in the Teatro Ottoboni into an Arcadian realm. his stage designs present settings that are almost ‘claustrophobic’, documented in preparatory drawings that do not always correspond to the sets indicated in unillustrated libretti. For Orlando he designed woods with huts, bridges and towers in the countryside (Figs. 29–30)139 and for Tetide in Sciro he provides glimpses of rocky seascapes (Figs.

31–32).140 he also created more complex perspectives with a strong poetic impact such as the port with ships for Ifigenia in Aulide (Fig. 33) and the temple on the lake for Ifigenia in Tauri (Fig. 34). This last drawing, more than any other set design by Juvarra, succeeds in evoking the poetic abstraction of the paintings of claude Lorrain, above all the Landscape with Aeneas at Delos (national Gallery, London), which, in turn, was a source of inspiration for William Kent, who was probably a guest at one of the special evenings dedicated by the queen and the prince to nobles, artists and writers.141 it was the triumph of the ‘scene as painting’, modulated by Juvarra through the soft and gentle colour palette associated with the Arcadians that was experimented with by his friend Francesco Trevisani at the Ottoboni court, and enhanced by the close-up view imposed on the public by the limited dimensions of the Sobieski theatre.142 A technical analysis of the scenography of Juvarra’s drawings reveals that the stage did not allow the presence of more than five channels for sliding wings to articulate the long scenes, with two channels plus background for the short scenes, resulting in extensive use of the ‘carretto matto’ (crazy wagon), a theatrical device that allowed sets to be positioned in spaces of different sizes.143 however, the considerable ceiling height of the Sobieski theatre allowed

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

199

Fig. 33. Filippo Juvarra, Harbour with Ships. Drawing for the first scene of Ifigenia in Aulide. Pen, brown ink, grey and sepia watercolour, 150 x 178 mm. Biblioteca nazionale di Torino, Ris. 59,4, f. 69r.3. (Biblioteca nazionale di Torino.)

for the re-use of stage machinery which the architect had already devised in 1712.144 Also, since there must have been, in addition to the stage, sufficient space to accommodate a full-strength orchestra and a suitably sized audience,145 it is probable that the theatre, although small, was not tiny, and comprised an adequate pit and possibly even boxes. The fact that at the beginning of 1704 the construction of ‘a place in the form of a theatre’ was ongoing,146 suggests that the structure built for the queen’s musical compositions, variously defined by Valesio between 1707 and 1708 as a ‘theatrette’ (teatrino), ‘small theatre’ (piccolo teatro), and ‘beautiful theatre’ (bel teatro),147 corresponded to the one that, according to the same chronicler, was at the end of February 1709 being embellished to entertain Frederick iV of Denmark.148 This was definitely the same structure that in the middle of the month of December 1709, on the occasion of the rehearsals of Silvia, Valesio called the ‘most beautiful and small theatre in the casino that she [Maria casimira] inhabited on Trinità de’ Monti, which is the one belonging to the Zuccari’.149 however, just as surely, in carnival of 1711 the Tolomeo e Alessandro was not performed in Palazzo Zuccari, but in the Villa Torres. Relevant here is the unequivocal testimony, published in the same year by crescimbeni at the Arcadian Academy, which

200

described in panegyrical and allegorical terms the context of the special performance of an opera that was offered to him, together with a large group of Arcadians, by Alexander in his pastoral guise as Armonte calideo.150 According to crescimbeni’s account, he and his fellow Arcadians were greeted by Armonte in ‘his hut’ (sua Capanna), erected in a place ‘not far from the walls of the city’, in the form of a military ‘pavilion’ with ‘many similar smaller huts communicating with it’.151 After crossing the hall of the pavilion decorated with tapestries depicting the ‘most beautiful stories’ dealing with the sovereign parents of Prince Armonte, the spectators encountered the same prince (Armonte/Alexander) in the act of refusing the crown of Poland. After stopping in the nearby rooms for ‘sumptuous refreshments’ (sontuoso rinfresco),152 all the guests made their way to the ‘theatre building in the countryside outside the pavilion, but so well covered above and around, that it appeared that even this was enclosed within the pavilion’.153 in crescimbeni’s account, the pavilion nestled in the countryside is the casino Torres with its tower rising above the attached buildings, immersed in the almost rural atmosphere of the Villa Torres, and certainly not the compact Palazzo Zuccari flanked by a small garden.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 34. Filippo Juvarra, Countryside with Temple. Drawing for the first scene of Ifigenia in Tauri. Pen, brown inl, grey and sepia watercolour, 156.5 x 167.5 mm. Biblioteca nazionale di Torino, Ris. 59,4, f. 85r.1. (Biblioteca nazionale di Torino.)

consequently, the site of the theatre (which was probably constructed of wood) is to be found in one of the buildings near the core of the casino still visible in the nolli map. Perhaps it was the block that forms a trapezoid (Fig. 2 [7]), which had already disappeared by the time of the catasto urbano (urban land register) map of 1818–24 (Fig. 3). This represents the situation described by Brun, following alterations made by the Ambassador of the Order of Malta, Jacques Laure Tonneriel de Breuteil, who lived in the house from 1774 to 1777, leaving it with its present day designation, Villa Malta. The hypothesis that the prince’s theatre was located in the Villa Torres, already cautiously advanced on the basis of crescimbeni’s testimony of 1711, has until now come up against the previously incontrovertible indications of Valesio concerning the location of the queen’s theatre in Palazzo Zuccari.154 What has not been considered is that the same theatre may have existed in two different places. On the occasion of the performance of Tolomeo e Alessandro on 19 January 1711, Valesio no longer refers to the site of the theatre being in Palazzo Zuccari, calling it simply the ‘domestic theatre’ (teatro domestico). This generic definition from then onwards appeared in the official

libretti of all works formally commissioned by the queen. The adjective ‘domestic’, which up until now was understood to refer to the close integration of the Palazzo Zuccari and Villa Torres, is instead fully consistent with the location of the theatre in the villa, especially considering that the formal access to Palazzo Zuccari was through the gate of Villa Torres on Via di Porta Pinciana, and that the same villa had already been the scene of two carnivalesque ‘giudiate’ (ironic spectacles directed at Jews) performed to large audiences in its courtyard in 1707 and 1710.155 it is quite possible that, given the performance of Tolomeo e Alessandro, the small theatre of Palazzo Zuccari, which was suitable for hosting the musical compositions of the queen, but which lacked scenic props and boxes,156 had been replaced by that of the Villa Torres which was suitable for the opera performances staged by the prince, with a fully-equipped stage and probably boxes. But this does not mean that the Villa Torres theatre was a new build. in fact, it is highly likely that the ‘beautiful and small theatre’ (bellissimo e piccolo teatro) of the queen was able to be dismantled, like that of Prince Ruspoli in Palazzo Bonelli,157 and from time to time was reinstalled in a larger space in Palazzo Zuccari, perhaps in the salone on the piano nobile.158 When, during the course of 1710, it

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

201

Facade, 1721–31. Vienna, Albertina, Atlante Stosch, n. 1236.

(Left) Fig. 35. Building permit (lettera patente) for the loggia of Palazzo Zuccari, 16 August 1711. ASR, Arciconfraternita della Santissima Annunziata, vol. 235, f. 317 (Archivio di Stato di Roma.) (Above) Fig. 36. View of of Piazza della Trinità dei Monti towards Palazzo Zuccari. Photograph. (Opposite left) Fig. 37. Sobieski arms in the loggia of the main doorway of Palazzo Zuccari within the porticoed loggia of 1711. (© Tommaso Manfredi 2013.) (Opposite right) Fig. 38. Alessandro Specchi, Delineatio funebris Pompae exhibitae Romae In Ecclesia RR. PP. Cappuccinorum dum cli: me Principi Regio Alexandro Sobiescki iussu Clementis XI Pont. Max … die 22 Novembre 1714. Engraving by Francesco Aquila, 1714.

became necessary to have a space of greater dimensions, it may have been reassembled and expanded within a suitable structure, while maintaining its original proportions, as is confirmed by the term ‘small theater’ still applied to it even after 1711.159 The original design of the theatre can be attributed to count d’Alibert, who was expert in the field, while its transformation would have been effected by Juvarra when creating the sets for Tolomeo e Alessandro and other works commissioned by the prince. Juvarra can be tentatively identified as the architect of the porticoed loggia built at the front of Palazzo Zuccari corresponding to the piano nobile windows which bears the Sobieski arms over the doorway (Fig. 37). This project was authorised by a building permit issued on 6 August 1711 (Fig. 35), immediately after the conclusion of a series of serenades performed in the same place on a ‘balcony erected for this purpose’.160 Given that accounts of the serenade do not specify that this ‘balcony’ (ringhiera) was ephemeral, it is possible that the porticoed loggia today still in situ was the same ‘balcony’ used for the serenades, and that it was constructed in anticipation of the issuing of the

202

permit.161 This would explain the scenographic nature of its curvilinear plan (Fig. 35), with a central convex section extending like a podium towards the urban ‘pit’ that it faces (Figs. 36), clearly reflecting the designer’s intention to reduce to a more theatrical scale the distance between singers and public that prevailed during the serenades from the bridge on Via Felice. The transfer of the serenades from the bridge to the loggia, repeated in 1712,162 was probably an initiative of the prince, in the context of the progressive stepping away of the queen from the public limelight resulting from the deterioration of her relations with the ecclesiastical hierarchy.163 Two years later, Maria casimira’s overwhelming desire to leave Rome for France, notwithstanding her precarious state of health, overcame the opposition of her son, who was determined not to follow her for political reasons, and that of the italian members of her court, who were ill-disposed to transfer to a foreign land.164 On 29 May 1714 Maria casimira had already embarked a large part of her entourage and her best possessions on two galleys placed at her disposal by the pope at the port of civitavecchia,165 from where she left in the middle of June.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

none of the cardinals, not even Ottoboni, followed the example of the ageing pope in farewelling her in person.166 After the departure of Maria casimira, followed shortly thereafter by Juvarra who entered the service of Victor Amadeus ii of Savoy, Prince Alexander decided to move to Germany, bringing to a close the brief but exciting Sobieski theatre season at Trinità dei Monti in Rome. his premature death on 19 november 1714, however, halted these projects.167 The solemn funeral celebrated three days later in the church of S. Maria della concezione, the home of the capuchins so dear to the royal family, was the last spectacle of which the prince was the protagonist.168 The apparatus set up by Alessandro Specchi by order of clement Xi, which gave Alexander the honours due to a cardinal chamberlain (Fig. 38), was focused on his corpse lying on a simple but monumental bier, wearing the dress of a cavaliere dello Spirito Santo (knight of the holy Spirit). his tomb monument, commissioned by the pope from camillo Rusconi and erected in S. Maria della concezione to the left of the main altar (Fig. 39), remains the only artistic testimony of the Roman presence of Alexander Sobieski. he is shown wearing the same dress of a civic hero that is glorified in the commemorative sonnet dedicated to him by the poet Domenico Rolli.169 in a testament to the importance of Queen Maria casimira’s exile in Rome and in a ceremonial sense of continuity with her predecessor Queen christina, the city’s senators had legislated in 1700 to affix a commemorative plaque in her honour in the great hall of the conservators in the campidoglio, similar to that dedicated to the Swedish queen (Fig. 40). This honour was bestowed upon Maria casimira in order to emphasise her husband’s

influential role in the liberation of Vienna and therefore her equality with christina in terms of royal dignity.170 Maria casimira had constantly reminded clement Xi of this royal dignity, and it was of this same sovereign status that she wrote to Louis XiV, in her entreaties to him to be received at Versailles before her death, a desire never to be fulfilled.171 Università ‘Mediterranea’ di Reggio Calabria Translated by David R. Marshall and Karin Wolfe

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

203

Fig. 39. camillo Rusconi, Funerary Monument of Prince Alexander Sobieski. Rome, S. Maria della concezione.

Fig. 40. commemorative tablet to Maria casimira Sobieska in the Palazzo dei conservatori erected by clement Xi. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

Notes

voci, facendo eco alla musica delle carrozze quattro altri cori posti su le loggie delle case circonvicine. Le parole erano state composte dal medesimo cardinale, sì come la musica era del famoso Scarlatti’. The rehearsal of the performance took place in the courtyard of the Palazzo della cancelleria on 8 August 1703 (Staffieri, 1990, note 274 on p. 154).

1. Regarding the subject matter for the queen of Poland’s serenade, see chirico, 2007. Marie Louise de la Grange d’Arquien, born at nevers in 1641, lived from the age of five in Warsaw, where in 1665 she married in her second marriage Jan Sobieski, elected king of Poland in 1672. For the biographical aspects see especially Waliszewski, 1898; Komaszynski, 1983, 1995a and 1995b. For the biography of Jan iii Sobieski see Walawender-Musz, 2013 (with earlier bibliography). 2. Griffin, 1983. 3. The serenade dedicated by Ottoboni to Maria casimira constituted one of the main cultural events of the year in Rome as one can see from the accounts of the various chroniclers: Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, cod. ital. 197, f. 86 (cited in Griffin, 1983, p. 402); Giornale del pontificato di papa Clemente XI principiando dall’anno 1700 ..., BAV, Vat. Lat. 13667, f. 140r–v (cited in Matitti, 1995, p. 205, doc. 206); BAV, Ottoboniano Lat, 2731, f. 102v (cited in chirico, 2007, p. 433) and especially, Valesio, i, pp. 670–71: ‘alle 2 della notte il cardinale Ottoboni fece una nobile serenata alla regina di Polonia avanti la di lei habitatione del casino sul Monte della Trinità. Venivano gli musici e sonatori condotti in una muta a sei scoperta, alla quale facean da cavalcante e cocchiere li dui conti Spada, maestro di camera e coppiere di detto cardinale, con habiti sontuosi di campagna e con piuma bianca al cappello. Erano con questa d’accompagnamento cinque altre carrozze a due similmente scoperte ripiene di musici e suonatori, le quali carrozzavano li gentilhuomini di S. Eminenza venendo rischiarata la notte dal lume di settanta torcie di cera bianca ... . La serenata fu copiosissima di istromenti e

204

4. On Maria casimira’s trip to Rome undertaken on 2 October 1698 and her first years in Rome see especially Bassani, 1700; Platania, 1985, 1990, 1995 and 2002, pp. 61–97; De caprio, 2004, 2005 and 2008. 5. ‘Giovedì 9 agosto 1703—Per rallegrare il popolo fù permesso all’Em.mo sig.r Cardinale Ottoboni di poter far fare alla regina di Polonia una superba serenata, non solo per l’eccellenti voci, che vi cantavano quanto per la dolce melodia de suoni, e vaga comparsa, concorrendovi tutta la nobiltà di Roma’ (BAV, Vat. lat. 13667, Giornale del Pontificato di Papa Clemente XI, f. 140r–v, 9 August 1703, cited in Matitti, 1995, p. 205, doc. 206). The ban on every kind of profane spectacle was imposed by clement Xi in 1700 for the jubilee, and confirmed in 1702 because of the War of Spanish Succession, and again in 1703 when it was extended for the next five years as a sign of penitence following the violent earthquake that struck Rome in February of that year. 6. Toussaint de Forbin-Janson, as extraordinary ambassador of Louis XiV to the Polish diet, had contributed to the election of Jan iii Sobieski, who supported his creation as cardinal. Also assisting at the serenade was cardinal Andrea Santacroce, formerly apostolic nuncio to Warsaw in the time of Jan Sobieski (1690–96). 7. On the often contradictory role played by Maria casimira in the complicated circumstances of the succession to the throne of Poland after the death of Jan

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

della Regina di Polonia di tutte l’antichità di Roma (BAL, vol. 143, ff. 198–23). On this manuscript see Platania 1995, pp. 19–26; De caprio, 2005 and 2008.

iii, see the references in note 1 above. 8. Manfredi, 1997. 9. The rental of the Minim’s houses (still visible today as separate architectural entities but now engulfed in the façade of the hotel hassler Rome) to Prince Tassi is registered with an annual rent of 208 scudi in the prince’s property tax declarations (assegne dei beni) of 1708 (ASR, congregazioni economiche, b. 54, n. 297). Work involving structural consolidation is signalled by Valesio on 6 August 1703: ‘La regina di Polonia fa formare una barricata di travi sulla cima del monte della Trinità si per riparare la terra ... come per ovviare che ... concorrendovi quantità di carrozze, non corra qualchuna pericolo di precipitare’ (Valesio, ii, p. 669). 10. According to Valesio’s chronicle (see note 3 above), the orchestra was disposed on six carriages driven by gentlemen of the Ottoboni court, while four choirs were placed ‘on the loggias of the surrounding houses’ (su le loggie delle case circonvicine). These are to be identified with the houses of Prince Tassi, who, in the diplomatic role of Spanish Postmaster-general, hosted the Spanish ambassador de Uceda. 11. ‘Poisonous pens’ (penne velenose) spread a vicious satire on the performance provoking the ‘complaints’ (doglianze) of Ottoboni ‘no less than the pope, and the governor’ (non meno al Papa, che al Governatore). Avvisi of 18 August, BAV, Ott. lat., 2731, ff. 108r–109 (cited in Griffin, 1983, p. 408; Volpicelli, 1989, pp. 738–39). 12. Manfredi, 2010a, pp. 318–22. 13. insofar as the comparison with Queen christina was perceived on the popular level there is the testimony of the celebrated satirical verses dedicated to Maria casimira: ‘Nacqui da un gallo semplice gallina / vissi tra li pollastri e fui regina / venni a Roma cristiana e non cristina’ (Valesio, i, p. 32, 28 August 1700). 14. On the conception of the Accademia Albana by Ottoboni and the architectural project by carlo Fontana, see Manfredi, 2007 and 2008. 15. Among the many eighteenth-century biographical publications on the queen, of particular importance is the little known ‘portrait de la reine Louise–casimire’ (in Curiosités historiques, 1759, pp. 216–32), which includes a lively description of her appearance and character (pp. 227–28): ‘Elle étoit fort agréable, quoiqu’elle n’eut pas les dents belles: ses yeux étoient si vifs, & si brillans, que j’ai oui dire, qu’aucun peintre n’avoit pu les attraper parfaitement. Elle avoit la plus jolie taille du monde, l’air grand, quelque chose de gracieux dans visage & dans la bouche, que ses ennemis appelloient minauderie. Elle avoit beaucoup d’esprit, infiniment de manége, mais elle n’étoit point dissimulée: elle ne sçavoit point cacher ce qu’elle avoit dans le coeur. Ce défaut lui a fait beaucop de tort. Elle etoit bonne amie, quand on avoit sçu lui plaire; mais c’étoit une dangereuse ennemie quand elle se croyoit outragée.’ Marquis henri de la Grange d’Arquien (1613–1707), father of the queen, notwithstanding his notoriety, had been created cardinal deacon in the concistory of 12 December 1695, thanks to the influence of Maria casimira, but only received the red cap and the diaconate of S. nicola in carcere on 11 April 1699, a few days after his arrival in Rome with his daughter on 24 March, without ever having taken holy orders (Curiosité, 1759, pp. 221–22; Platania, 1989). As a French cardinal he enjoyed an annual pension of 20,000 lire assigned to him by Louis XiV. 16. On Maria casimira’s earlier stay in France between July 1670 and the first months of 1672, which was directed towards the objective of preparing the way for the elevation of her husband to the throne and the hasty transfer of his substantial inheritance, see Waliszewski, 1898, pp. 231–43, 346. 17. An exponent of the pro-imperial party, Livio Odescalchi, the extremely rich nephew and heir of Pope innocent Xi, led an enterprising political action at the European level, coming to stand among the top contenders for the Polish throne after the death of Jan iii. he met Maria casimira on the threshold of Palazzo chigi (formally purchased by the Odescalchi only in 1745); the scene is immortalised in heroic fashion by the sculptor Pierre Étienne Monnot (Fig. 8), who also created a companion piece depicting the triumph of Jan iii in Vienna. On the figure of the prince, see costa, 2009. For the description of the event of the meeting and of the apartments assigned by Odescalchi to the queen and her large entourage see Bassani, 1700. 18. On d’Alibert, who was born in Paris in 1626 and who moved to Rome in 1656, see Simonetti, 1960. 19. Bassani, 1700, pp. 189–202. 20. Relazione fatta dall’Illustrissimo Signor Canonico Pisani alla Sacra Maestà Reale

21. On Palazzo Zuccari see Körte, 1935, pp. 48–52; Frommel, 1982; Frommel, 1986, and most recently the summary description in Ebert-Schifferer, 2007 (with earlier bibliography). After completing this article there have come to my attention contributions on the building history and function of the palazzo by Francesca curti (curti, 2009 [but 2012]; curti, 2013) and by Elisabeth Kieven and hermann Schlimme (Kieven and Schlimme, 2013), which i have not been able to take into consideration. 22. ‘Il Federico Zuccaro (come V.A. haverà forse inteso da altri) s’è imbarcato in un suo capriccio poetico, il quale sarà facilmente la rovina de suoi figlioli, esssendosi posto à fabricare un palazzotto senza un proposito al mondo, in un sito stravagantissimo che in pittura potrebbe riuscire una bella cosa, et gli assorbisse facilmente quanto fin’ qui ha fatto di capitale, oltre l’haverlo disviato quasi in tutto dalla sua professione, perché adesso non lavora se non qualche cosa in casa sua solo per necessità de danari. Havendoli dunque io parlato del Crocifisso che V.A. desidera di sua mano ….’. (Letter to the Duke of Urbino Francesco Maria ii, sent by his agent in Rome Grazioso Graziosi, 21 July 1593, ASF, Fondo Urbino, Fa. 169, f. 2152, cited in Körte, 1935, appendix 7). 23. Körte, 1935, p. 81. 24. Letter from Elpidio Benedetti to cardinal Mazarin: ‘Il s. card. Antonio sarebbe di parere che là su alto ove sono le case del morto Toscanelli si accomodasse con 40 o 50 mila scudi una nobile habitatione per un ambasciatore che con la vicinanza di quel convento e per il sito verrebbe ad havere in Roma come una cittadella che rimanerebbe sua et haverebbe in vicinanza le mure della città. Il pensiero merita essere considerato e veramente starebbe bene alla Francia haver qui un palazzo regio.’ Larain-Portemer, 1968, p. 291 note 60; see also d’Onofrio, 1974, p. 280; and Wolfe, 2008, for a full discussion of cardinal Antonio’s francophile diplomacy, and especially note 63 on p. 124. 25. Manfredi, 1997. 26. See notes 9 and 10 above. 27. Pecchiai, 1938; Pecchiai [1965]; caprile, 1999. in 1634 cardinale cosimo De Torres succeeded in extending the lifetime lease taken out in his name six years earlier in favour of his heirs until the third generation. in 1708 the Minims declared that they had extracted 240 scudi from the ‘Casino, e Giardini attorno a’ canto al d.o Convento locato a’ tre generazioni all’Ill.ma Casa Torres p. annua prestat.e di scudi duecento quaranta, come nel Istrumento fatto dalla bo: me: del Card.l Cosimo Torres li 23: 9bre 1634 p. gli atti del Cesi oggi Angelini not. dell’E. mo Vicario’ (ASR, congregazioni economiche, b. 54, n. 297). 28. Bassani, 1700, pp. 196–97. The passageway is visible in a view of Palazzo Odescalchi by Giuseppe Vasi (Delle Magnificenze di Roma antica e Moderna Libro IV che contiene i palazzi e le vie più celebri di essa Roma, Rome: niccolò e Marco Pagliarini, 1754, plate 64). 29. concerning the Paris sojourn of the two young princes Alexander (1677–1714) and constantine (1680–1726) after the death of their father, see Waliszewski, 1898, pp. 346, 348–49. Le Curiosité (1759, p. 252) dwells on the nature of this stay: ‘Ils étoient fort bien faits, mais ils avoientété mal élevés. Ils vinrent à Paris, après la mort du roi leur pére; ils s’amusèrent à y prendre un air de libertinage au lieu d’aller à la cour, où on les vit presque jamais. C’est sous leur nom que furent constitués les deux millions que la reine avoit envoyés à Paris, peu après la mort du roi son mari, ils leur rapportoient cinquante mille écus au denier treize. On s’attendoit que le roi, pendant leur séjour en France, leur donneroit le cordon du Saint-Esprit, que le roi leur père avoit eu, mais ils évitèrent peut-être d’avoir cet honneur, pour ne pas déplaire à la maison d’Autriche [in reality they both received these honours].’ After a short stay in Venice, Alexander and constantine are recorded in Rome for the first time at the beginning of April (ASV, Fondo Avvisi, vol. 63, Relations Veritable, 3 April 1700, pp. 331, 338b, cited in Platania, 1995, note 35 on p. 18) and then on the 24th of the same month were on the point of visiting naples with their mother (Avvisi Marescotti, 789, f. 480r–v, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 241 on p. 143). 30. ‘La Maestà della regina di Polonia ha preso per villeggiare il casino de’ Torres, posto sul monte Pincio con giardino contiguo all’altro de’ Medici e tal casino ha l’entrata appresso l’ultima casa posta su la sinistra per andare alla porta Pinciana e, perciò riesce angusto per la numerosa famiglia, ha tolto in affitto due case contigue havendo ottenuta da N. S. facoltà di far sgombrare dalle case stimate a proposito per il suo servizio e poste in quei contorni gl’habitatori delle medesime’ (Valesio, i, p. 432, 7 July 1701).

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

205

31. The casa Stefanoni was already recorded in 1611 at the time of the Minims’ acquisition of the villa, then belonging to the Mattei (Pecchiai, 1938, p. 27; Pecchiai [1965], p. 219). 32. ‘hoggi sono andati a vedere il nuovo palazzino di porta Pinciana, preso per habitarlo, la regina di Polonia in carrozza con il cardinale suo padre alla sinistra et incontro ad esso dalla banda del cocchiere il prencipe don Alessandro et appresso a lui la principessina sua nipote, figliola del prencipe Giacomo’. (Valesio, i, p. 436, 10 July 1701). 33. ‘Ha havuta hoggi udienza da S. Santità, con la quale si è trattenuta per lo spazio di tre hore, la Regina di Polonia, la quale ora fa abbellire il casino e giardino comprato dal marchese Torres situato sul monte Pincio’ (Valesio, i, p. 439, 15 July 1701). 34. ‘Si è restituita a questa corte la regina di Polonia, che era passata alla villeggiatura di Castel Gandiolfo, e si trattiene nel suo casino sul monte Pincio che, riescendo angusto per l’abitazione di una regina, vi si fa da sua Maestà lavorare continuamente per l’accrescimento d’appartamenti cento huomini’ (Valesio, ii, p. 196, 25 June 1702). A permit issued on 3 June 1702 to Giovanni Guidi on behalf of the queen refers to these works for the reconstruction of the boundary wall of the vigna situated ‘nella strada che da Capo le Case va a Porta Pinciana’ (ASR, Presidenza delle strade, Lettere patenti, reg. 56, f. 31v, 3 June 1702). 35. ‘un’alta torre si eleva al di sopra dell’appartamento in cui noi abitiamo. Nel complesso edilizio ... provvisto di molte scale esterne e interne, costruite con ammirevole perizia, e circondato da piccoli e deliziosi giardini, ci sono oltre al nostro, parecchi altri appartamenti. In uno di questi abita un signore inglese malato, sir Knight. con le sue due sorelle; più di un pittore ha qui il suo studio che si apre su un balcone panoramico. Dalle mie stanze una scala conduce a un ampio e arioso salone, che costituendo da solo un’ala dell’edificio, si affaccia come un verone in mezzo al verde ed è provvisto da tre lati di ampie finestre. La mia stanza di soggiorno si affaccia sui giardini del Palazzo Quirinale; è provvista di un caminetto marmoreo. Un cortile mi separa da un giardinetto in cui si trovano piccole vasche con zampilli d’acqua, arberelli di arancio, viti, acacie, allori e cactus’ (italian translation from the German, in caprile, 1999, pp. 49–50). Subsequently Johann nicolas Byström, tenant of the villa from 1818, wrote: ‘Non può dirsi una villa vera e propria, ma è un alloggio conveniente e comodo, con due ridenti giardini che producono frutta e verdura per tutto l’anno. Ho tutta Roma sotto i miei occhi e dalla torre posso abbracciare con la mia vista tutta la campagna …. Dentro ci fa un gran freddo, non essendoci stufe: e se si ha la fortuna di avere un caminetto, ci si affumica tutti perché da queste parti non si conosce la canna fumaria’ (italian translation from the Swedish in caprile, 1999, p. 58). 36. Pecchiai, 1938, p. 31; Pecchiai, [1965], pp. 225, 227; caprile, 1999, pp. 22–116. 37. According to Valesio, the festival apparatus that the queen commissioned for her garden, which was intended to be viewed from afar by the pope when in residence at the Quirinal Palace, was later put in storage when the pontiff made his seasonal move from the Quirinal to the Vatican palace: ‘Havea destinato la regina di Polonia di fare per questa solennità una vaga illuminazione al suo casino del monte Pincio, che si sarebbe goduta da Monte Cavallo et a tale effetto havea fatte di già dipingere molte tele da pittori, che dovevano illuminarsi, ma essendo passata S. Beatitudine a S. Pietro, ha stimato supefluo il far questa spesa’ (Valesio, i, p. 559, 7 December 1701). 38. in the middle of July 1702 the adherence of the queen to the FrancoSpanish party evidently had created an embarassment to the pro-imperial Prince Odescalchi: ‘proseguiva la regina di Polonia la fabrica del casino sul monte Pincio forse per abandonare il palazzo di Don Livio Odescalchi, reso diffidente de’ francesi e spagnuoli, et havea posta in campo la compra di alcune case che sono sotto detto giardino in strada Felice per habitazione della famiglia; ma volendo essa liberare il medesimo dal rigoroso canone a che è soggetto, gli padri minimi di nome ma massimi di ricchezze, della Trinità de’ Monti, proprietari del luogo, pretendono un fondo libero di gran spesa, onde pare si sia raffreddato l’ardore del fabricare’ (Valesio, ii, p. 215, 15 July 1702). in the parish census of 1702 the garden of the Villa Torres was already called ‘Giardino della Regina’ (ASVR, Stati delle Anime, Sant’Andrea delle Fratte, vol. 81, 1702, f. 17v, n. 109). 39. On 2 January 1703 Giacomo Zuccari, ‘dell’Isola di Sora’, and Giacomo d’Alibert, on behalf of the queen, stipulated a rental agreement valid for six years to expire on 1 October 1702 for an annual rent of 112 scudi for the ‘appartamento nobile … con la sua grotta, cantina, cucina sotterranea, con tutte le sue dependenze, e pertinenze’, with clauses giving the queen full freedom to ‘di fare quanto li pare in detto appartamento et in quello di D. Lorenzo Zuccari suo

206

Zio, e in tutto d.o Palazzo, il d. S.re Giacomo Zuccari si contenterà solo, che gli meglioram.ti di d.i appartamenti, e Palazzo restino à beneficio di esso S.re Giacomo Zuccari, senza che nessuno possa astringerlo al pagamento di essi, perché in altra forma non haverebbe locato, dichiarandosi troppo fortunato dell’honore che Sua Maestà si compiace farli di habbitare nella sua casa’ (ASR, notai dell’Auditor camerae, notaio Giuseppe Pelosius, vol. 5642, ff. 12r–v, 2 January 1703). Eighteen days later, an annotation was added that specified that with respect to improvements made and yet to be made (‘tanto a quelli fatti, quanto a quelli da farsi’) entirely by the queen, Zuccari would have to pay for possible structural repairs ‘nel caso che minacciassero rovina li muri di d.a casa, ò tetto’ (ff. 17r–v, 20 January 1703). An analogous contract (not found) must have been drawn up by the queen with Lorenzo Zuccari for the remaining part of the palazzo, that is, the ‘secondo appartamento, con l’altro superiore à tetto, con cantina, già goduto da detta Real Maestà in tempo, che è vissuto il q. S.re D. Lorenzo Zuccari e che al presente gode’, as indicated in the deed of renewal drawn up with Zuccaro’s nephew Giacomo for the annual rent of 118 scudi, coming into force on 28 September 1706 (ASR, Notai dell’Auditor Camerae, notaio Giuseppe Pelosius, vol. 5661, ff. 34r–61v, 11 October 1707). in this contract the queen exempted Zuccari of the expenses for ‘tutti, e singoli miglioramenti tanto utili, che necessari, fatti e da farsi in tutti li sud.i appartamenti … come anche s’intendano condonati al sud.o S.re Giacomo Zuccari li travi già messi nelli luoghi di d.i appartamenti dove ven’era il bisogno, et in questo tanto maggiormente la Maestà sua si è mossa di far fare molti miglioramenti, et ornamenti, secondo la sua Real munificenza, e generosità, quanto che la Maestà sua hà inteso di beneficiare il sud.o S.re Giacomo Zuccari Padrone al presente del d.o Palazzo; dichiarando dall’altra parte il sudetto S.re Giacomo Zuccari di non pretendere cosa alcuna sopra il ponte posto in strada in tutto, ò in parte, benché sua murato in una parte del muro della sud.a casa’. in the assigning of goods signed by Giacomo Zuccari on 27 August 1708, it followed that he drew from the ‘Casa posta sù la SS.ma Trinità de Monti … al presente appigionata alla Sacra Real Maestà della Regina di Polonia’ 230 scudi, from which 23.50 scudi had to be deducted ‘di canone annuo del quale la med.a Casa è aggravata’ (two annual sums of 11.75 scudi in favour respectively of Abbate Francesco nazzari and the brothers Giovanni Battista, Francesco and Bartolomeo Stefanoni) (ASR, Congregazioni economiche, b. 46, n. 769). On 1 July 1709 the queen of Poland named Giacomo Zuccari as ‘uno dei Nobili Famigliari attuali della Nostra Corte’ (Körte, 1935, doc. 29). 40. The permit was issued to count Giacomo d’Alibert in the name of the queen: ASR, Presidenza delle strade, Lettere patenti, reg. 56, f. 56; ASR, Notai della Reverenda Camera Apostolica, notaio Astolphus Galloppus, vol. 853, f. 494, ‘Exhibitio Plante pro Ser.ma Maria Casimira Regina Poloniae’, 2 October 1702 (original letter patent of 28 September 1702, attached to f. 496, already published by Re, 1948, p. 32). 41. The order of the Benedictine nuns of the Perpetual Adoration of the holy Sacrament (L’ordine delle Benedettine dell’Adorazione Perpetua del Santissimo Sacramento), founded in France by catherine de Bar (Mère Mectilde du Saint-Sacrement) with the support of the queen of France, Anne of Austria, in 1653, was approved by innocent Xi in 1676. ‘E nel cortile [of the church of S. Stanislaus] fra la maestà sua e S. Beatitudine vi fu un longo congresso, e circa la fondazione del nuovo monastero secondo l’intenzione di S. Maestà …’ (Valesio, ii, p. 245, 6 August 1702). 42. ‘Fa la regina di Polonia fabbricare con ogni celerità il monastero che intende fondare nell’ultima casa de’ Zuccari, che su la piazza della Trinita’ de’ Monti forma le due strade Gregoriana e Felice et, operandosi in questa da’ muratori con incrostarla di calce al di fuori, è giunto da Sora il Zuccari padrone di detta casa, che non sapeva nulla di tal fatto e, fattane lamentazioni appresso S. Maestà, è stato assicurato che gli ne sarà pagato puntualmente l’affitto. Ha ottenuta anco S. Maestà licenza da’ maestri delle strade di formare sulla strada Felice un ponte scoperto per passare dal casino già de Torres, comprato et habitato da S. Maestà, alle case contigue et a quella de’ Zuccari, che si convertiranno in monastero’ (Valesio, ii, p. 292, 30 September 1702). 43. contrary to what has been believed hitherto, the convent was not located within the interior of the palazzo, which would not have guaranteed clausura, but in the portion of the building beyond the courtyard (Fig. 12 [e]). Adjacent was a house belonging to the painter Salvator Rosa, later called the Casa dei preti, in memory of the Salesians who had acquired it in 1756 in order to create a school. On the Casa dei preti see Moroni, 1853, p. 83. On the plan of the piano nobile of the complex, made just after these building works, is clearly visible, at the southern extremity, the narrow hall on the Via Felice side destined for

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

a church (Fig. 12 [d]), joined subsequently to the rooms of the convent and then connected to a little cloister, placed between those of Palazzo Zuccari and the house of the heirs of Rosa. carlo Doni in his biography of the queen (see note 66 above) wrote that the convent of the French Benedictine nuns founded by her was ‘contiguo al Palazzo, in cui ella abitava’. As a final confirmation, the convent also included a small apartment, perhaps destined as a retreat for the queen, which temporarily housed the wife of charles François Poerson at the time when it was feared that imperial troops would invade Rome: ‘Madame Poerson, qui est fort dans l’estime de la Reine de Pologne, eut un petit apartement dans le Couvent qui se trouve dans son Palais, et cette Reinne avoit, outre son monde, une Garde que le Pape luy avoit donnée de 200 hommes. Nous avions quitté l’Académie’ (Correspondance, iii, p. 207, n. 1287, Poerson a M. de Marigner, 5 July 1707). The internal chapel of the palazzo adjacent to the salone, until now believed to have been part of the convent, instead was probably already absolved of this function at the time of Federico Zuccari and was only adorned by the queen with her monogram, still visible, in order to adapt it to everyday devotional uses, distinct from the regular exposition of the Sacrament in the little church of the Benedictine nuns. it was looked after by its own chaplain, the Bishop of Livonia nicola Poplawski (died 1711). 44. The works in the convent were still underway on 4 november 1702, when the nuns, who had just arrived from France in the expectation of going there, were living provisionally in Palazzo chigi: ‘Si proseguisce dalla regina di Polonia con ogni sollecitudine la fabrica dell’accennato monastero e le monache peranco si trattengono appresso S. Maestà, divertendosi con l’andare a carrozze chiuse a visitare le chiese e monasteri della città. Si è osservato che la detta Maestà, forse per non prendere più impegnio, si porta verso le 4 della notte alla visita del Venerabile con non poco incommodo della sua corte e de’ ministri delle chiese dove si fa l’esposizione’ (Valesio, ii, p. 320). At the end of the month the question of the convent was not yet settled: ‘La regina di Polonia si portò alle 23 hore all’udienza di S. Santità trattando dell’erezzione del nuovo monastero’ (Valesio, ii, p. 341). in the Easter parish census in 1703 there are eight sisters in the convent, and in following years only six (ASVR, Stati delle anime, Sant’Andrea delle Fratte, vols. 82–84). 45. On 1 June 1701 Valesio reports the news of constantine’s departure direct to Kraków: ‘Il prencipe Don Costantino Subieschi, figliolo maggiore [sic] della regina di Polonia, è partito in questo giorno alla volta di Cracovia’ (Valesio, i, p. 393). Ten days later he again gives news of the departure of the ‘figliolo’ of the queen, referring perhaps to Alexander: ‘Essendo partito in questa sera il figliolo della regina di Polonia, S. Maestà, per non soffrire il dolore della partenza, è restata per questo a dormire nel monastero delle Vergini’ (Valesio, i, pp. 393, 416, 1 and 10 June 1701). however Alexander was still in Rome at the end of July: ‘Si sono questa notte fatte due lautissime colazioni doppo la mezzanotte, l’una dal card. F. Barberini ... e l’altra dal prencipe don Livio Odescalchi al suo casino fuori Porta del Popolo alla principessa di Scavolino, prencipe don Alessandro figliolo della regina di Polonia e conte Borromei et altre dame e cavalieri.’ (Valesio, i, p. 451, 30 July 1701). it is not clear where the serenade dedicated by Antonio d’Alibert, son of Giacomo, to the queen of Poland on 27 August 1702, with many instruments and the participation of the famous Faustina Perugini, took place (Pagano, 1985 [2006], pp. 150–51); ‘Verso la mezza notte il figliolo del conte d’Aribert fece una serenata alla regina di Polonia nel casino della Trinità di Monti con quantità d’istromenti e vi cantò la celebre cantarina Faustina Perugini’ (Valesio, ii, p. 264, 27 August 1702). in any case the move of the queen to Trinità dei Monti occurred between the end of 1702 and the beginning of 1703, as can be concluded from the news of her father vacating the Palazzo cybo: ‘sgombra dal palazzo che teneva in affitto dai Cibo su la piazza dei SS. Apostoli, contiguo all’altro di Don Livio Odescalchi e passerà ad abitare sul Monte Pincio nel casino della regina sua figliola.’ (Valesio, i, 30 December 1702). in the parish census of 1703 (ASVR, Stati delle anime, Sant’Andrea delle Fratte, vol. 82, 1703, ff. 14–15, 18) going up Via Felice on the left side, in the ‘Monastero della regina’, are indicated eight nuns and two novices, and next, in the palazzo, Maria casimira, her young niece of the same name, and another 57 people, including the bishop of Livonia, Desforges, the commander of her body guard, and count Giacomo Alibert, her secretary. On the other side of the street, in the casa Stefanoni and in another house adjacent to it and united with it, lived cardinal d’Arquien and his entourage consisting of 37 people, including count Fiume his maestro di camera. On the Via di Porta Pinciana the Villa Torres was practically uninhabited, apart from the gardener, the personal confessor of the queen (the capuchin monk Ludovico d’Amsterdam, carlo Eugenio Schmidt) and his companion Fulgenzio da Parigi (Fulgenzio Francuz), an unequivocal sign that the casino was used as a complementary residence for the queen. Other members of her court were

distributed around nearby houses between Via Felice, Via Gregoriana and Via capo le case (ff. 9, 15–16). On the composition of the entourage of the queen see Bassani, 1700, pp. 219–20; De caprio, 2005, pp. 196–98. 46. The contract for the purchase of the ‘Vigna con casa, e mobili … posta in Roma fuori di Porta Pia presso li Beni da tre lati del Collegio de Maroniti, la strada pubblica dagl’altri salvi altri’ for the sum of 1350 scudi, was signed on 11 May 1703 in the name of the queen by Giacomo d’Alibert, delegated by her on the same day with an attached written agreement (ASR, Notai dell’Auditor Camerae, Paulus Fatius, vol. 2634, ff. 243–49v, 270r–76r). The property, formerly belonging to Girolamo Mignanelli, had been acquired by the Grazioli on 16 October 1699, three-quarters from the congregazione di Propaganda Fide (the creditor of Pietro Paolo and Alessandro Mignanelli for the sum of 1000 scudi) and one quarter from Abbate Filippo Mignanelli (for 350 scudi). 47. The painting in the hermitage (inv. 8215), cited for the first time in the catalogue of the collections of the hermitage in 1974 with the dubious attribution to Giuseppe Valeriani, cannot be published at present because of its poor state of conservation. i would like to thank Tatiana Bushmina, curator of italian paintings at the museum, for having permitted me to study it in digital form. The view in the hermitage establishes with certainty that the bridge was placed in correspondence with the third column of windows on the top floor of the casa Stefanoni. considering the uncertain date of execution of the painting, it is not possible to establish whether it represents the original bridge built by Maria casimira, or the one restored in 1743 by cardinal carlo Maria Marini, who on 16 December of that year obtained a permit from the Tribunale delle strade. (ASR, Presidenza delle strade, Lettere patenti, reg. 63, ff. 145r–v, 16 December 1743: Manfredi, 2003, p. 61). 48. On the typology of the flyover bridge, see Bentivoglio, 2007. 49. On the internal organisation of the casa Stefanoni, see note 55 below. 50. ‘La Reine de Pologne est partie de Rome samedi au matin [16 October 1714] pour s’embarquer sur les Galères du Pape à Civita-Vecchia …. Deux jours avant son depart, le Pape lui fut dire adieu. La Reine le fut recevoir à une grille au delà de ses jardins où Sa Sainteté sortit de sa chaise et à pieds, la Reine le suivant; il traversa les jardins, passa sur un pont qui communique les deux petits Palais, puis entra dans le Cabinet de la Reine, où étoit tendu le dais du Pape, que l’on y avoit porté, et, après une heure et demie de conversation, l’on introduisit les Femmes de la Reine, qui baisèrent la pantoufle et eurent bon nombre d’Indulgences. Puis le St-Père s’en retourna, se faisant porter par l’escalier, quoique très petit. La chaise n’y passoit qu’à peine, mais, comme il estoit tart et que l’air du soir est très malsain, il n’osa pas passer par les jardins comme il avoit fait en venant.’ (Correspondance, iV, pp. 313–14, n. 1800, Poerson to d’Antin (Surintendant des Bâtiments) 19 June 1714). According to another source the pope visited the queen on 12 June 1714, and she welcomed him on her knees in the gate of the garden ‘et essendosi trattenuta circa un’ora con la medesima nel sortire non volle permettere che l’accompagnasse oltre la seconda anticamera’ (BAV, Barb. Lat. 6430, Avvisi di varie città principali d’Europa, Roma, 16 June 1714, f. 337v, cited in Platania, 1995, p. 47 note 122). 51. Another example of the functional use of the bridge for visitors over Via Felice is furnished by the Valesio’s chronicle: ‘il p. Coronelli, generale de’ padri di SS. Apostololi ... nel passare il ponte che è sopra la strada Felice per portarsi al cardinale [della Grange], che era nell’appartamento della regina di Polonia sua figliola.’ (Valesio, iii, p. 74, 1 May 1704). 52. ‘Je dois bien des remerciements à votre Grandeur de ce qu’elle a la bonté de me marquer qu’elle a donné ses ordres à ce que le Château de Blois soit mis en estât pour loger la Reine de Pologne. Ce généreux procédé est bien différent de celui de cette Cour, où l’on ne lui a jamais fait de plaisir et où elle étoit très mal logée, quoiqu’il lui en coûtât beaucoup.’ (Correspondance, iii, p. 327, n. 1812, Poerson to d’Antin, 14 August 1714). 53. ‘Il doppo desinare gli nuovi cardinali andarono uniti a visitare la basilica Vaticana, indi il cardinale Acciaioli vicedecano e la regina di Polonia, quale, benché habiti nel casino alla Trinità de’ Monti, gli ricevé nel palazzo di don Livio Odescalchi dirimpetto a’ SS. Apostoli.’ (Valesio, iii, pp. 606–7, 20 May 1706). This passage concerns the audience room of Palazzo chigi minutely described by Bassani (1700, pp. 191–93). in 1706, however, the queen made improvements to the palazzo in anticipation of the visit, (which never took place) of her daughter Teresa cunegonda, who was ruling the Duchy of Bavaria in place of her exiled consort Maximilian ii: ‘Essendosi partita da Venezia la duchessa di Baviera per venirsene costà appresso la regina di Polonia sua madre, gli ha questa preparato un

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

207

vago appartamento nel casino dove habita alla Trinità de’ Monti.’ (Valesio, iii, p. 692, 7 november 1706). ‘La regina di Polonia ha spedito corriero incontro la duchessa di Baviera sua figlia, che si aspetta costì a momenti’ (p. 692, Monday 8 november 1706); ‘Giunse questa mattina gentilhuomo spedito dalla duchessa di Baviera alla regina di Polonia sua madre con avviso che, doppo essersi abboccata in Faenza con la gran prencipessa di Toscana, sua cognata, era stata sopraggiunta da un corriero speditoli di Fiandra dal duca di Baviera suo marito, con il quale gl’imponeva il desistere dall’intrapreso viaggio di Roma e ritornarsene di nuovo a Venezia’ (pp. 693–94, 10 november 1706).

entrarvi, onde fece solo il piccolo giro della piazza avanti la chiesa della Trinità de’ Monti. Era la processione composta della famiglia di S. Maestà e del cardinale suo padre e alcuni preti polacchi. Portava il Venerabile, custodito in un ostensorio d’oro tempestato di gioie di gran valore, il vescovo di Varmia, dietro al quale erano con torcie S. Maestà et il cardinale suo padre. Doppo le 24 hore fu illuminato l’arco con più di 5.000 lumini, si con un concorso d’infinito popolo e quantità grande di carrozze, per il che vi seguì qualche inconveniente al cocchiero della Ghirlandarii fu tagliato il naso con spada e molte persone restarono offese dalle carrozze’ (Valesio, ii, pp. 617–19, 10 June 1703).

54. On Wilanów and the artistic patronage of Jan iii, see Arciszewska, 2006; Fijałkowski, 2009. On the dislike of the queen for the other country residences of the Sobieski, see Waliszewski, 1898, pp. 240–41.

62. ‘Questa mattina si è fatto guastare l’arco fatto nella strada Felice per la festa della sera precedente, quale era stato costruito con disegno di poco buon gusto del Conte d’Aribert e gli critici, per essere stata tal festa fatta con soli lumini ad oglio, hanno detto che è stata una festa da fruttaroli’ (Valesio, ii, p. 620, 11 June 1703).

55. For the description of the house, inhabited by Mengs from 1752 until 1757 and by Kauffman from 1782 to 1807, the year of her death, see Roworth, 2009, pp. 157, 159–71. The building consisted of a ground floor with a mezzanine and two upper floors. From the piano nobile it was possible to reach the rear garden which was raised with respect to the level of the Via Felice; the rear garden was enclosed by a boundary wall that gave access to the carriage houses and stables. On the piano nobile there were three large reception rooms, two salons and a dining room, one of which corresponded to the ‘Sala di S. Em.nza’, cited in the parish census of 1703 (ASVR, Stati delle anime, Sant’Andrea delle Fratte, vol. 82, f. 14v). nothwithstanding the fact that the building permit specified that the bridge would have to be destroyed at the end of its period of use by the queen, it continued to be used frequently by the inhabitants of the houses on either side, who included Johann Joachim Winckelmann, who at the time of his residence in Palazzo Zuccari frequently crossed it to visit Mengs. 56. For impressions of Villa Torres by its residents between the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, see caprile, 1999, pp. 29–86. 57. ‘Appresso è il palazzo, e giardino dove suole habitare per diporto la Maestà di Maria Casimira Regina di Polonia la di cui religiosa pietà vi ha istituito un monastero il di cui istituito si è l’assistere perpetuamente all’adorazione del SS. Sacramento dell’Eucharistia’ (Martinelli, 1707, p. 114). 58. ‘Avvisata S. Maestà la regina di Polonia che nella cava che fa fare nella vigna da essa presa fuori di porta Pia erano state ritrovate alcune medaglie, spinta dalla curiosità vi si volle immediatamente portare in muta a sei, non havendo né pure voluto aspettare che si attaccasse la seconda muta per la famiglia, che poi l’andò a ritrovare colà’ (Valesio, ii, p. 620, 11 June 1703). 59. See note 66 below. 60. ‘[Sua Santità] passò alla Trinità de’ Monti alla chiesa del nuovo monastero eretto nella casa de’ Zuccheri dalla regina di Polonia. V’era nella piccola chiesa l’esposizione del Venerabile in un ostensorio tutto tempestato di gioie, sopra il quale v’era la corona similmente composta di gioie di gran valore et in cima la famosa perla di S. Maestà detta ‘la pellegrina’, molto più grossa di qualsivoglia gran nocchia, e nel prospetto un quadro con l’imagine del Salvatore con festoni pendenti da’ lati della cornice composte da gioie la stima delle quali stimasi da’ periti ascendente alla somma di più di 600.000 scudi …. Fece sua Maestà in questa sera illuminare con lumini la facciata di quel monastero et illuminazione copiosa è stata differita a domenica, non essendosi potuto terminare l’arco che S. Maestà fa fare nella strada Felice …’ (Valesio, ii, p. 615, 7 June 1703). 61. ‘Il doppopranzo concorse un numero grande di popolo sul monte Pincio per vedere la processione del venerabile da farsi dalla regina di Polonia. Era già questo esposto all’adorazione nella piccola chiesa del nuovo monastero fra varii ornamenti di gioie di prezzo inestimabile, come di sopra si è scritto. Ornavano di fuori quel monastero e chiesa molti arazzi di S. Maestà nuovamente tessuti e donatili dal duca di Baviera, in cui si rappresentavano al vivo molte azzioni di guerra, come zuffe, imboscate, assedii etc; nelle fenestre de’ primi mezzanini del palazzo di contro l’habitazione della famiglia del cardinale d’Archien, padre di S. Maestà, ad ogni fenestra sporgevano in fuori due lettere grandi di legno contornato, che tutte insieme formavano ‘M. Casimira’, che nella sera si illuminarono. Nella strada medesima Felice appresso dove questa è intersecata da altra strada che da S. Gioseppe tende alla porta Pinciana, scorgevasi un arco sostenuto da quattro colonne traforate di tal struttura: v’era nel mezzo il trave maestro dipinto a fogliame, che serviva di principale sostegno, dal quale erano in eguale distanza quattro altri travicelli minori pur dipinti, intorno a’ quali si ravvolgevano a spira alcuni cerchi di botte similmente, ripieni di lumini a oglio. Sopra il capitello et architrave poggiava l’arco dipinto a gioie finte, in mezzo del quale v’era l’arme del papa con due figure a’ fianchi che rappresentavano la Fede e la Clemenza. Alle 22 hore si diede principio alla processione ma, per essere tutta la strada ripiena di carrozze a due e tre file, riuscì impossibile che potesse

208

63. ‘Nella sera sopra il Ponte di comunicazione dalla Casa della Regina à quella che và al Giardino, vi fù una virtuosa serenata cantata dalla famosa Nina cantarina del Sig.re D. Livio Odescalchi [the celebrated caterina Lelli Mossi], e da Giulietta, e da Giuseppino Castrato di sua Maestà, che tirò la curiosità delle Dame di Roma, e gran numero di Popolo’, 4 August 1703 (BAV, Ottob. Lat. 2731, Avvisi di Roma, f. 94ss.; BcR, Avvisi di Roma, ms. 35.A.15, f. 61v, cited in Franchi, 1997, p. 16). This serenade was repeated on 8 August after three days in which the ‘invidious breezes’ (invidiosi Zefiri) had taken away the voice of the virtuosa nina, while the performance of 2 September had music composed by Paolo Lorenzani, the maestro di cappella of S. Pietro (Valesio, ii, p. 687; BAV, Vat. Lat. 13667, Giornale del Pontificato di Papa Clemente XI, f. 31r, cited in Franchi, 1997, p. 16). 64. cancellieri, 1811, p. 194. 65. ‘Terminata che sarà la fabbrica del Porto di Ripetta, pare che le nobilissime idee di N.S. pensino a rendere nelle grandezze delle sue fabbriche sempre più amirabile Roma all’occhio del Passegiere, coll’obligare i Padri della Trinità de’ Monti a fare la scalinata di marmo, che dalla piazza di Spagna dovrà ascendere alla loro Chiesa, stante l’essere in pronto tutto il denaro per questa impresa, lasciato dalla glor. me. del Sig. Card. Mazzarini, in faccia della quale secondo la disposizione del legato deve erigersi la statua del Re Luigi XIV’ (BAV, Ott. lat. 2732, f. 38v, 23 February 1704, cited in curcio, 2010, pp. 90–91). 66. carlo Doni, Maria Casimira regina di Pollonia, in crescimbeni, 1720, pp. 1–9. 67. The first academy promoted by the queen was held in Palazzo Odescalchi on 9 October 1699 (Avvisi Marescotti, 789, f. 424v, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 232 on p. 140). 68. ‘La prefata regina [widow of Poland], invaghitasi delle cortesi maniere dell’E. mo Ottoboni, si portò l’altra sera à prenderlo nella sua Carrozza, ove si trattenne ... e lo condusse seco al fresco sino alla mezza notte’ (Avvisi Marescotti, 789, 28 February 1699, f. 399, cited in Matitti, 1995, p. 199). 69. On the scandal that exploded in the summer of 1700 caused by the amorous rivalry between constantine and Gaetano Sforza cesarini over the courtesan Tolla, in which Ottoboni intervened as mediator, see, among others, Platania, 1995, pp. 38–45. 70. D’Alibert had helped cardinal Ottoboni in the staging of the first operas he composed at the Teatro Tordinona - constructed by D’Alibert at the behest of christina of Sweden and demolished twice by the popes, the second time in 1697 (Simonetti, 1960). 71. For an overview of the many spectacles, mainly musical, promoted by Ottoboni in honor of Maria casimira in the cancelleria, in Palazzo chigi and elsewhere between 1699 and 1701, see chirico, 2007, pp. 426–31. 72. For a summary of the principal musical events connected with the presence in Rome of the queen of Poland, see Żórawska-Witkowska, 2007. Already during the carnival of 1701, on the occasion of the partial reopening of the theatre season after the ban of 1700, Maria casimira seemed to play an active role in the performances dedicated to her by Prince Odescalchi. ‘Restano rigorosamente proibiti li festini, onde la città si divertisce con le comedie, facendosene molte nelle case private, questa regina di Polonia fa andar ogni sera nel suo palazzo hor una, hor l’altra delle compagnie che recitano, et hoggi si è aperto il carnevale con le maschere, e solita corsa de barbari’ (Avvisi Marescotti, 790, f. 13, 29 January 1701, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 252 on p. 147). ‘Ha il duca di Bracciano [Livio Odescalchi] fatto cantare un bellissimo oratorio [La Fede trionfante nel Martirio di S. Agapito, Rome, Ercole, 1701] nel suo palazzo per trattenimento di essa regina [di Polonia]’ (Avvisi Marescotti, 790, f. 19v, 19 February 1701, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 254 on p. 147). ‘La regina di Polonia martedì sera si trattenne con un divertimento

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

musicale [probably Aminte, pastorale en musique i dedieìe a Sa Majesté la Serenissime Reine de Pologne, Rome, chracas, 1701] al quale furono invitate molte dame, et havendo messo nel rollo della famiglia con provisione mensuale 8 recitanti, si deduce lontana la sua sparsa partenza di ritorno in Polonia’ (Avvisi Marescotti, 790, f. 27r–v, 19 March 1701, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 255 on pp. 147–48). 73. The first request for a repeal on the part of the queen, which remained without an outcome, is documented in an autograph letter to the pope conserved in the British Museum, dated 1702: ‘Mestant fait une loi, Saint-Père, de ne rien fayre qui nus la probation de Votre Sinteté, ie la supplies de me mander sil auret agréable que ie fisse iouer des comédie honeste dans ma maison par une troupe de comediens que ie guage’ (Waliszewski, 1898, p. 354). The lack of assent by the pope caused the queen to withdraw from the staging of the play: ‘Havendo S. Santità poca soddisfazione stante gli correnti emergenti, che si faccia la comedia dall’ambasciatore cesareo, glie ne fece dare qualche tocco dal cardinale Paolucci, al che rispose l’ambasciatore che era troppo impegnato a farla e che già altre volte ne haveva parlato a S. Santità, ma che, havendo l’anno scorso fatte allegrezze gli francesi, in quest’anno toccava farle alli tedeschi. Anco la regina havea desiderato fare per suo divertimento la comedia all’improviso, ma essendole stato notificato il poco genio che al fare tali ricreazioni in questi tempi ha S. Santità, ha prontamente dismesso di farla’ (Valesio, ii, p. 24, 10 January 1702). 74. ‘dicesi che detta regina essendosi portata all’udienza di Sua Santità dopo varij discorsi gli havesse dimandata licenza di far comedie nel proprio palazzo in questo prossimo carnevale, e che sua Beatitudine gli rispondesse di non havere bisogno di tal licenza in propria casa, mà se havesse da consigliarla l’esortarebbe ad astenersene in questi presenti congiunture’ (Avvisi Marescotti, 790, ff. 289v–290r, 22 December 1703, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 276 on p. 154). 75. ‘Queste Dame di Roma pare che cominciano a domesticarsi cola Regina di Polonia … ella per corrisponderle fa preparare nel proprio Palazzo un luogo in Forma di Teatro p[er] divertirle nel futuro Carnivale con varie Cantate, e qualche operetta in musica’ (BSM, cod. ital. 197, f. 129v–r, 1 January 1704, cited in Griffin, 1983, p. 422; Franchi, 1997, p. ciV). 76. ‘La Regina di Polonia c’hà già terminato di fare alzare il teatro nel suo Palazzo non potrà fare le Comedie che haveva intentione’ because of the ban by the pope (BSM, cod. ital. 197, f. 134r, 22 January 1704, cited in Griffin, 1983, p. 423; Franchi, 1997, p. ciV). 77. ‘Approssimandosi il carnevale, ma senza segno alcuno d’allegria, questa regina di Polonia fa per suo divertimento recitare la sera comedie all’improviso, ma in terra e non sul teatro, non essendovi altre scene che semplici paraventi da camera’ (Valesio, iii, p. 19, 23 January 1704). ‘La regina di Polonia continua per suo divertimento a far recitare comedie all’improviso con intermezzi in musica’ (Valesio, iii, p. 23, 31 January 1704). 78. On the French theatre at the court of Jan iii Sobieski, see Targosz, 1995 (with earlier bibliography). 79. See the preceding notes. 80. ‘havendo questa regina di Polonia replicate le sue istanze al Papa per la concessione di poter far recitare nel suo palazzo l’avvisata comedia, ne ha finalmente ottenuta la gratia, et acciocché riesca di maggiore vaghezza, e sodisfatione degli astanti fa adesso apparecchiare de bellissimi habiti all’heroica colli quali si reciterà solo 3 o 4 volte in questo carnevale’ (Avvisi Marescotti, 790, f. 301v, 2 February 1704, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 278 on p. 155); ‘Continua questa regina di Polonia a fare comedie all’improviso per suo divertimento con intermezzi in musica’ (Valesio, iii, p. 24, 3 February 1704). 81. Tebro fatidico. Componimento per musica, & introduttione al ballo dell’Aurora dedicato all’Altezza Sereniss. della principessa Maria Casimira di Polonia, Roma, Mascardi, 1704. 82. On capeci’s (or capece’s) service to the queen of Poland, see cametti, 1931. 83. James and constantine Sobieski were captured in an ambush on 29 February 1704. The news arrived in Rome on 18 March: ‘giunse la sera la posta di Venezia e la regina di Polonia hebbe littere com le quali era avvisato che il cardinale primate con gli principi suoi figluioli havevano fatta una dieta con gli palatini loro aderenti, in cui havevano detronizzato il re Sigismondo Augusto con fare pro interim governatore della repubblica, nell’interregno, il prencipe Giacomo Subieschi, ma che appresso Vratislava il medesimo prencipe Giacomo con l’altro prencipe Costantino, suoi figlioli, erano stati assaliti da quaranta cavalli sassoni e nel volersi difendere era restato ferito il prencipe Giacomo in una mano et, essendo arrestati, venivano condotti prigioni in Sassonia. Per la qual nuova resasi sua Maestà inconsolabile, fu sorpresa da accidente et immediatamente mandò a darne parte a S. Santità’ (Valesio,

iii, p. 48, 19 March 1704). ‘Mandò in questo giorno la regina di Polonia per diversi monasteri a lei ben affetti avviso di pregare il Signore Iddio per un affare a lei spettante di gravissimo rimarco e si crede sia perché devesi da’ palatini di Polonia malcontenti venire all’elezione del nuovo re, e trattandosi alle strette per il prencipe Alessandro suo figliolo, il re Sigismondo Augusto non procedesse per tal elezzione contro la vita del figliastro prencipe Giacomo e del figliolo prencipe Costantino, che ritiene prigioni’ (Valesio, iii, pp. 105–6, 19 June 1704). 84. Applausi del sole e della Senna. Cantata a 2 voci per la felicissima nascita del Sereniss. Duca di Bretagna, Roma, Antonio De Rossi, 1704, testo di carlo Sigismondo capeci (cametti, 1931, p. 59; Franchi, 1997, p. 25). Applausi del sole e della Senna. Cantata a 2 voci per la felicissima nascita del Sereniss. Duca di Bretagna, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1704, text by carlo Sigismondo capeci (cametti, 1931, p. 59; Franchi, 1997, p. 25). 85. Despite popular expectation (‘si vede che la regina di Polonia darà quanto prima principio à fare qualche serenata come praticava l’anno passato’: Avvisi Marescotti, 790, 19 July 1704, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 282 on pp. 156–57), the serenade of August did not take place, replaced instead by the ‘comic divertimento’ (divertimento comico) made by the ‘virtuosi’ of the queen of Poland for cardinal de Forbin-Janson in the ‘vigna del Pizzi appaltatore della neve fuori Porta del Popolo di là dell’Arco Oscuro’: 2 August 1704, BAV, Ottob. Lat. 2732, Avvisi di Roma, f. 153, 2 August 1704 (cited in Franchi, 1997, pp. 21–22). Subsequently, notwithstanding financial difficulties (‘Essendo mancati a questa regina di Polonia gli suoi assegnamenti per le risoluzioni di quel regno, ha cessato di dare la paga a gli gentiluomini, gli quali nulla di meno continuano a servirla gratis’, Valesio, iii, 1704, p. 159, 29 August 1704), Maria casimira concentrated all her efforts in a performance with strong political overtones: ‘La regina di Polonia questa sera, in memoria della liberazione di Vienna dall’assedio de’ turchi, nella quale hebbe tanta parte il re Giovanni di Polonia suo marito, fece una bellissima illuminazione al suo casino e monastero sul monte Pincio di tutti lumini da oglio havendovi posti anco a tre fila sopra e da ambidue le bande del riparo di legnami fatto sul monte del suo palazzo sin avanti la chiesa della SS. Trinità. Doppo le campane, sul ponte che traversa la strada Felice e guida dal monastero al suo palazzo furono cantate in musica diverse orazioni con numeroso concorso di popolo’ (Valesio, iii, p. 168, Friday 12 September 1704). in the Avvisi Marescotti it is stressed that ‘La Regina haveva fatto illuminare tutta la piazza della Trinità dei Monti e le finestre del di lei Palazzo, una bellisima veduta’ (Avvisi Marescotti, 790, f. 366, 13 September 1704). This may have been the occasion when S. Casimiro re di Polonia was performed, an oratorio for five voices with anonymous text and music by Alessandro Scarlatti, undated but almost certainly from 1704, and probably commissioned by Maria casimira (Lindgren, 1985, p. 50; Franchi, 1997, p. 22). The contract for this oratorio may have been, in part, sponsored also by donations from the queen’s father, who increased the staff of musicians in his service at this time: ‘Il cardinale della Grange, padre della regina di Polonia, quantunque sia nella estrema decrepità, nulla di meno si diletta tanto della musica che ha presa allo stipendio di cantarina la figliola di Massimo Ugolinucci beccamorto’ (Valesio, iii, p. 179, 22 September 1704). 86. On 13 February 1705 the queen was present at the performance of an ‘operetta in musica’ in Palazzo chigi at SS. Apostoli at the invitation of Prince Odescalchi (Valesio, iii, p. 313; Franchi, 1997, p. 28). After the return to Rome of his daughter, cardinale d’Arquien dedicated a serenade to her: ‘alle 22 hore ritornò in questa città la regina di Polonia e nella sessa sera il decrepito cardinale della Grange, padre di S. Maestà, dalle sue cantarine gli fece recitare in musica un serenata aludente al di lei ritorno. S. beatitudine mandò a complimentarla ad un’hora e mezza di notte da monsignor Rasponi’ (Valesio, iii, p. 369, 20 May 1705; see also BAV, Ottob. Lat. 2733, Avvisi di Roma, f. 5, cited in Franchi, 1997, p. 29, where some ‘canterine di S.M.’ are referred to). Finally the queen herself put on two serenades, the first on 25 August: ‘Questa sera sul monte della Trinità la regina di Polonia fece cantare una nobile serenata’ (Valesio, iii, 25 August 1705, p. 442); the second on 25 September with the involvement of ‘celebri cantarine’ and music by Paolo Lorenzani the maestro di cappella of St Peter’s with a ‘large crowd’ (numeroso concorso) in attendance (BAV, Vat. Lat. 13667, Giornale del pontificato di Papa Clemente XI, f. 41, cited in Franchi, 1997, note 37 on p. 30). 87. The news of the release of the Sobieski princes, which took place in September 1706 following a temporary acccord between charles Xii of Sweden, August of Saxony and the new king of Poland, Stanislas Leszczyński, officially reached Rome on 2 January 1704 (Valesio, iii, p. 748). 88. ‘Hoggi nella chiesa della Trinità de’ Monti fece la regina di Polonia cantare

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

209

solenne Tedeum con bellissima musica e quantità d’istromenti alle 22 hore per la liberazione de’ prencipi suoi figlioli’ (Valesio, iii, p. 749, 4 January 1707). ‘Fece hoggi alle 22 hore la regina di Polonia cantare solenne Te Deum per la liberazione de’ prencipi Subieski suoi figlioli e per la pace di Polonia nella chiesa nazionale di S. Stanislao de’ polacchi con musica e quantità d’istromenti, havendovi assistito S. Maestà medesima. Era la chiesa nobilmente apparata di damaschi e velluti trinati d’oro con gli ritratti del pontefice, del defunto re Giovanni, marito di S. Maestà, e de’ tre prencipi figlioli Giacomo, Costantino et Alessandro, assistendo alla porta gli svizzeri della regina. Al di fuori la facciata era apparata di damaschi et arazzi con l’arme del pontefice, del nuovo re Stanislao inquartata con l’arme del regno, et era una testa di bufalo con anello al naso tutto negro in campo bianco, havendovi lassato alla sinistra la solita arma del defonto cardinale carlo barberino, già protettore del regno di Polonia. E la sera nel casino di S. Maestà alla Trinità de’ Monti si fecero illuminazioni con suoni di tamburi e trombe’ (Valesio, iii, p. 751, 9 January 1707). ‘Il cardinale d’Archien, padre della regina di Polonia, ha hoggi fatto un lautissimo banchetto per l’allegrezza della liberazione de’ prencipi Subieski suoi nepoti’ (Valesio, iii, p. 753, 12 January 1707). ‘Nella chiesa di S. Isidoro fece la regina di Polonia cantare solenne Te deum per la liberazione de’ prencipi suoi figlioli’ (Valesio, iii, p. 755, 17 January 1707). ‘La Reine de Pologne a fait des réjouissances pour la liberté des Princes ces fils, qu’elle a sçeue par un Courier extraordinaire. La paix du Roy Auguste a fort consterné cette Cour; les Allemans font rage par toute l’Italie et ne laisse pas d’estre aymé de tout le peuple et de bonne partie des Grands’ (Correspondance, iii, p. 201, n. 1278, Poerson a de Marigner (Premier commis de Bâtiments), 1 January 1707). On the pilgrimage to naples begun on 2 May 1707, ‘per vedere il miracolo della liquefazione del sangue di S. Gennaro’ e ‘per sodisfare un suo voto fatto in tempo della prigionia de’ figli’, see Valesio, iii, pp. 801–3, 30 April and 2 May 1707. 89. L’amicizia d’Hercole, e Theseo. Componimento per Musica, et introduzione al ballo della Gloria dedicato all’Altezza ... della Prencipessa Maria Casimira di Polonia, Roma, Antonio De Rossi, 1707, text by capeci. ‘In questa sera per la prima volta con invito di dame e cavalieri la regina di Polonia nel suo teatrino alla Trinità dei Monti, dove essa habita, diede principio al divertimento della comedia all’improviso’ (Valesio, iii, p. 768, 13 February 1707). ‘Continuano a farsi le comedie all’improvviso nel teatrino della regina di Polonia’ (Valesio, iii, p. 755, 28 February 1707). ‘La suddetta regina ha dato un nobile divertimento [domenica 27 febbraio] a questa nobiltà con havere fatto ballare alcune volte nel suo picciolo teatro la principessa sua nipote preceduta con una bella introduttione in musica al ballo in che hà meravigliosamente spiccata la vivacità e lo spirito di sua altezza’ (AM, 5 March 1707, cited in Staffieri, 1990, note 322 on p. 170). ‘nella passata domenica la regina di Polonia aveva dato nel suo teatrino una festa da ballo preceduta da bella introduzione in musica’ (Foglio di Foligno, no. 10 of 11 February 1707, cited in Franchi, 1997, p. 51). On the allegorical significance of the opera see Markuszewska, 2013, p. 188–89. 90. ‘Giunse questa sera da Napoli a Frascati, sollecitata dalla malattia sopraggiunta al cardinale della Grange suo padre, questa regina di Polonia’ (Valesio, iii, p. 813, 21 May 1707). The cardinal died on 24 May, at the age of 95 (p. 813). On 26 May his funeral was celebrated in the church of S. Luigi dei Francesi (‘con poco intervento di porporati a causa della pioggia e la sera il cadavere del medesimo fu trasportato alla chiesa della Madonna della Vittoria, per esservi tumulato secondo la sua disposizione’ (p. 815)). The bust and epitaph of the cardinal, carved c. 1725 by Pierre Lestache was erected in the church of S. Luigi dei Francesi in Rome (D’Armailhacq, 1894, p. 140; Lavalle, 1981, p. 279). 91. ‘Questa sera la regina di Polonia fece recitare nel bel teatro del suo palazzino alla Trinità de’ Monti una comedia all’improviso in lingua francese da’ suoi gentilhuomini’ (Valesio, iV, p. 28, 13 February 1708). Other nobles who personally presented recitations at Villa Barberini or had performed with singers were severely punished (Manfredi, 2010a, p. 360). 92. ‘pour chanter apressant dans le cerenade [serenades] et lhiver dans des operas que iay dessin de fayre pour divertir ma petit fille et moi ancore quelques fois des continuels chagrin dont je suis acablée’ (cited in Boyd, 1986, p. 23). 93. Even the queen maintained in her permanent service a soprano castrato, variously called Giuseppino, Pippin, and Pippo. This same ‘Pippo Soprano della Regina’ appeared on 8 April 1708 in the recitation at Palazzo Bonelli of the Oratorio per la Risurrettione di Nostro Signore Giesù Cristo, put on by the Marchese Ruspoli with music by Georg Friedrich händel and the libretto by capeci (Deutsch, 1955 [1985], p. 34). 94. For La pastorella rigidetta e poi amante, a serenade in three voices with a text by Giovanni Domenico Bonmattei Pioli (the queen’s accountant) and music

210

by Domenico Scarlatti and Pietro Franchi (Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1708; see Franchi, 1997, notes 69, 58 on p. 54). The serenade was performed at least twice: ‘Ha questa sera la regina alla Trinità de’ Monti fatta una cantata con gran concorso di popolo’ (Valesio, iV, p. 110, 10 July 1708), ‘Questa sera, facendosi dalla regina di Polonia una serenata nel suo casino con grandissimo concorso di popolo alla Trinità de’ Monti …’ (Valesio, iV, p. 111–12, 11 July 1708). 95. Le Corone Amorose. Serenata a 3 voci (Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1708), with text by carlo Sigismondo capeci, and music by Anastasio Lingua, was composed for the birthday of Alexander Sobieski. The first indication of a return to Rome by constantine is on 29 April 1708: ‘Giunse questa sera appresso la regina di Polonia sua madre il prencipe Costantino Sobieski’ (Valesio, iV, p. 75). Valesio refers to constantine’s brother Alexander for the first time on 13 July 1708; this reference has to do with Alexander being suspected of authorising an attack perpetrated by his guards against some ‘sbirri’ (police spies) in retaliation for an arrest executed ‘appresso la porta del casino di S. Maestà, che è quello de’ Zuccari’ during the serenade performed on 11 July (see previous note). On 17 July, Valesio again mentions Alexander, on the occasion of another arrest made on his guards in Via Gregoriana of ‘saltar fuori con l’armi e con la famiglia armata, e se la sbirraria fosse passata avanti il palazzo’ (Valesio, iV, pp. 113, 115). 96. La Vittoria della Fede. Componimento per Musica di Carlo Sigismondo Capeci fatto Cantare nel Palazzo della Regina di Polonia la Sera delli 12 Settembre 1708 [with music probably by Alessandro Scarlatti], Rome, Antonio De Rossi (Griffin, 1983, pp. 550–52; Kirkpatrick, 1983, p. 46; Franchi, 1997, p. 59). ‘Fece questa sera la regina di Polonia festa straordinaria alla piccola chiesa del suo monastero, havendo anco illuminato il monte della Trinità con candelabri di legno contornato di dipinti in memoria della liberazione di Vienna, nella quale hebbe tanta parte il re Giovanni suo marito’ (Valesio, iV, p. 153, 12 September 1708). On the allegorical significance of the opera see Markuszewska, 2013, p. 189. 97. Il Figlio delle Selve. Dramma per Musica di Carlo Sigismondo Capeci Nuovamente dal Medesimo Corretto, & in più luoghi mutato, per introduttione & accompagnamento a i balli di Diana: nel Teatrino Domestico della Regina Maria Casimira di Polonia, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1708. ‘La regina di Polonia fa recitare in musica nel suo teatrino del palazzo da lei habitato alla Trinità de’ Monti il dramma vecchio del Capece intitolato Il figlio delle Selve’ (Valesio, iV, p. 221, Thursday, 17 January 1709). The rehearsal took place on 17 December 1708, the first public performance on 17 January 1709 (Franchi, 1997, note 79 on p. 65). The attribution of the music to Alessandro Scarlatti is not universally agreed upon, cfr. (Lindgren, 1985, p. 54). 98. ‘Fece questa regina di Polonia affiggere notificazione con la quale fa sapere a’ mercanti et altri che hanno crediti con S. Maestà portare gli loro conti alla congregazione del real casino alla Trinità de’ Monti, che resteranno sodisfatti, havendo la medesima risoluto partire da Roma’ (Valesio, iV, p. 125, 30 July 1708). 99. ‘Le monache fatte venire di Francia anni sono dalla regina di Polonia, che hanno per istituto l’adorazione perpetua del Venerabile e collocate dalla medesima alla Trinità de’ Monti appresso il suo palazzo, non havendo sin hora ritrovato donzelle italiane che volessero entrare nel loro monastero, questa sera furono a baciare il piede a N.S. per ripassarsene in Francia sopra due galere francesi’ (Valesio, iV, p. 159, 21 September 1708). Also Doni in his biography of the queen (see note 66 on p. 5) refers to the foundation of the convent: ‘la quale benchè avesse col suo valido patrocinio un felice principio, tuttavia non permise la calamità de’ tempi, che si proseguisse’. 100. See note 55 above. According to Minims’ sources reported by Padre Martin, already in 1706 the queen had tried to take over the long lease of their villa on the Pincio, replacing the de Torres: ‘Le 29 dit mois (avril 1706) la communaté refusa à la Reine douairière de Pologne le Plais du Pin—c’est le palais dit de Malte aujourd’hui—q’elle fit demander en emphytéose, comme l’avait le Marquis de Torrès: dans la crainte d’être privée toujours de ce local et du retour de l’eau qui était absolument nécéssaire au jardin d’en y faire quelque nouvel établissement, comme elle avait déja fait en appellant de France les Filles du Sacrement; de qui était diamétralment opposé à la fin qu’on eu leurs ancêtres dans l’achapt de ce palais, auquel ils ont fait contribuer en partie la couronne de France’ (Histoire fu convent royal de la très sainte Trinité sur le Mont Pincius à Rome, Book i, note 110 on p. 44, manuscript attributed to Padre Martin in the Archivio degli Stabilimenti Francesi a Roma, cited in Pecchiai, 1938, p. 30). 101. Giovanni Mario crescimbeni, Alessandro Principe di Pollonia, in Notizie istoriche, 1720, pp. 82–87. ‘Di questa finezza poi egli fece in Roma, ove dimorava appresso la Regina sua Madre, amplissima mostra, non pure nell’ottima scelta de’ Drammi Musicali, che con regal magnificenza, e con applauso, e meraviglia di

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Roma tutta fece più volte rappresentare nel suo Teatro domestico: sapendo noi di certo, che egli era il più rigoroso, giudizioso, e savio Censore, che quelli avessero: ma anche nella qualità della Musica, e del rimanente apparato per la rappresentazione di quelli: dimanierachè infino a gli abiti, e a gli abbigliamenti dell’Interlocutori, e alla lor proprietà, e vaghezza si estendeva la vigilanza del suo buon gusto, della quale ben lungamente noi favelliamo nel libro VII della nostra Arcadia, spezialmente alla Prosa XIV dove appunto de’ Drammi suddetti tenghiam proposito. Un genio così purgato, e scelto nelle materie letterarie, non è da esprimere con parole quanto gradisse d’essere acclamato tra gli Arcadi, siccome seguì l’anno 1710. col nome d’Arconte Calidio: anzi tanto fu l’affetto, che concepì verso l’Adunanza, che non solamente gli Arcadi erano sempre contraddistinti da tutti gli altri nell’essere introdotti a godere le mentovate rappresentazioni de’ Drammi e , ovunque glie n’era porta occasione, e’ li favoriva, e proteggeva con inesplicabil sollecitudine, ed efficacia; ma ne ammetteva ben sovente alle sue private conversazioni; e particolarmente questo onore il goderono tra’ defunti l’Avvocato Giovan Battista Zappi e tra’ viventi l’Avvocato Antonio Colloreti; co’ quali comunicava alla volte anche i suoi componimenti poetici di sopra enunciati. Era oltre acciò sì vago de’ letteratj esercizj, che noi sogliam fare la state nell’aperta campagna, che ben sempre gli onorava della sua Real presenza; e se talora dalle sue frequanti indisposizioni gli era impedito l’intervenirvi, del dispiacere, che ne provava, faceva con eccesso di gentilezza passar notizia alla Ragunanza’ (pp. 84–85). crescimbeni had already dedicated the third volume of his Commentari intorno alla istoria della volgar poesia, published in 1711, to Alexander Sobieski (Rome, Antonio De Rossi). 102. Alexander in particular had gleaned much about the culture of French theatre, first as a teenager through the permanent company of actors and musicians active in the French court of Jan iii, then directly in Paris during his youthful stay there with his brother constantine, but he was also able to attend the italian theatre during his subsequent stay in Venice, as well as in Rome during the carnival of 1701. An indirect testimony to his interest in the world of the theatre during his stay in Paris comes from a letter written by Maria casimira to her two sons cited by Waliszewski (1898, p. 349): ‘J’ai enfin reçu une lettre de vous autres après trois mois de silence, ce qui est fort contre ce que vous me devez. Mais Dieu me prend par tous mes endroits sensibles. Votre voyage en France est bien malheureux. qu’il n’ait été que pour vous faire du tort et qu’au lieu de vous étre avantageux, il vous ait perdu de réputation. Des gens qui donnaient espérance dìétre parfaits, hélas! comment revenez-vous? Ayant presque oublé, vous abandonnant à une vie scandaleuse, débordée, plutôt en compagnie téte à téte de comédiens, de chanteurs, de brelandiers que d’honnétes gens! ...’. A vivid testimony to the youthful adventures of Alexander was manifested on 11 October 1702, when the queen presented the ‘beautiful Mademoiselle de Tournelle’ (bellissima madamigella di Tornelle) who brought with her a child that she had borne to the prince, which was entrusted to the care of the count d’Alibert: ‘Giunse fin da mercordì alla regina di Polonia la bellissima madamigella di Tornelle da Venezia con un piccolo bambino havuto dal prencipe Alessandro suo figlio allora che passò per quella città: S. Maestà ne ha data la cura dell’educazione al conte di Aribert, in casa del quale si trattiene la medesima madamigella’ (Valesio, ii, pp. 307, Saturday 14 October 1702); ‘è partita di ritorno a Venezia la bellissima madamigella di Tornelle, che fin hora è stata nel palazzo di monsù Aribert, dirimpetto il Collegio Clementino, dove tutta la sera v’erano suoni e canti con un concorso incredibile di cavalieri forastieri e del paese intenti a vagheggiare sì bella dama’ (Valesio, ii, p. 311, Friday 20 October 1702). 103. ‘Qualcheduno di meno ne avrà chi compone in servigio di qualche Principe, che, non per guadagno, ma per gala, e per liberalità vuol dar alla nobiltà più, che al popolo, un’illustre, e graziosa rappresentazione con musica; e allora anche il verseggiatore può esser Poeta, ma guai a lui, se non recede dalle massime regolari, e severe della tragedia. Allora i suoi drammi si potran leggere, e lodare ancora fuor del teatro. Così è avvenuto in Roma a quelle di un’Eminentissimo Autore, che ha voluto per proprio nobil divertimento, e per ricreazione de’ Principi, e Cavalieri nel suo privato teatro più di una rappresentarne. Così è riuscito al principe Real di Polonia Alessandro, che ha fatto servir la poesia del Capece alla musica delle scene di Sua Maestà la Regina sua madre, liberamente aperte al piacere de’ più conspicui Personaggi della gran Corte Romana. Questo amabilissimo Principe ha saputo così temperare il genio del Poeta con quello de’ compositori, e de’ musici (come quegli, che dell’una, e dell’altra facoltà è intelligentissimo) che gli è sortito espor melodrammi, i quali poi senza nausea han potuto passar sotto gli occhi di questo stesso Aristotile’ (Martello, 1715, pp. 171–72). On Alexander Sobieski as patron of the theatre, cfr. Roszkowska, 1980. 104. On Domenico Scarlatti at the court of Maria casimira, see Kirkpatrick, 1983, pp. 45–55.

105. Although he had other houses, from 1706 to 1709 Giacomo d’Alibert lived with his family in a house in Via di Porta Pinciana near Villa Torres (where in 1708 he was joined by his son Antonio). capeci and his family lived from 1712 to 1713 in the casa Stefanoni, which, following the death of cardinal d’Arquien, had increasingly become a dependency of the Palazzo Zuccari, and in 1714 in the rooms of the former Benedictine convent (ASR, Stati delle anime, Sant’Andrea delle Fratte, vols. 83–86). 106. La Conversione di Clodoveo Re di Francia. Oratorio di Carlo Sigismondo Capeci, posto in Musica da Domenico Scarlatti, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1709 (dedicated to its patron Maria casimira: Franchi, 1997, note 23 on pp. 67–68). 107. ‘Fa questa regina di Polonia abbellire il suo teatro piccolo nel casino della Trinità de’ Monti dove habita, credendosi vi farà rappresentare qualche opera per trattenimento del re di Danimarca, che si tratterrà per qualche tempo in questa città’ (Valesio, iV, p. 242, 28 February 1709). Even though news arrived on 26 March that the king of Denmark had decided, in the end, not to come to Rome, ‘per ovviare a’ sospetti de’ suoi popoli che fosse per abbracciare la religione cattolica, verso la quale vedesi molto inclinato’ (Valesio, iV, p. 253), the performance had to go ahead. 108. La gloria innamorata, composition for music, text by Giacomo Buonaccorsi, music by Quirino colombani, for the birthday of Alexander, Rome, chracas, 1709: Franchi, 1997, p. 67. ‘Fece questa sera la Regina di Polonia al suo casino alla Trinità de’ Monti una nobile serenata con gran concorso di popolo’ (Valesio, iV, p. 328, 7 September 1709). ‘Questa sera la Regina di Polonia ha fatto una vaghissima serenata in mezzo alla piazza situata avanti il suo palazzo, con il concorso delle più qualificate dame e nobiltà di questa corte’ (ASF, Archivio del Principato, A.M. Fede, Lettere e minute, f. 3426, 7 September 1709, cited in Roszkowska, 1984, note 31 on p. 251). The Arcadian Buonaccorsi was one of the men of letters closest to Alexander (see note 152 below). On the allegorical significance of the opera see Markuszewska, 2013, p. 190. 109. ‘Per la memoria della liberazione di Vienna dall’assedio dell’armi turchesche, nel che v’hebbe tanta parte il re Giovanni IV di Polonia suo marito, questa regina vedova di Polonia fece questa sera bellissima illuminazione nel casino che essa habita alla Trinità de’ Monti e nel monte medesimo, essendovi stato gran concorso ad udire una bella cantata in musica fatta nel luogo consueto del ponte che attraversa la strada Felice’ (Valesio, iV, p. 330–31, 12 September 1709). 110. Valesio, iV, p. 390, 3 March 1710. The masquerade also passed in front of the ‘casino della regina di Polonia alla Trinità de’ Monti’ (p. 391). See also Correspondance, iii, p. 373, n. 1410, p. 373, Poerson to d’Antin, 8 March 1710. 111. See note 29 above. 112. ‘La Reine de Pologne parle toujours daller en France, mais l’on a peine à croire qu’elle le fasse, parceque les Princes sont bien aises de ménager l’Empereur, et que quelques uns de sa Cour feront ce qu’ils pourront pour l’en empescher’ (Correspondance, iii, p. 277, n. 1343, Poerson to d’Antin, 4 May 1709). Also in 1710 Poerson communicated on various other occasions to d’Antin the firm resolve of the queen to leave Rome for France: Correspondance, iii, p. 379, n. 1415, 5 April 1710; p. 385, n. 1422, 3 May 1710; p. 387, n. 1423, 10 May 1710; p. 405, n. 1443, 9 August 1710. 113. Alexander is not present in the Lenten census of 1709, but is recorded as being in Rome by Poerson already at the beginning of May (Correspondance, iii, p. 278, n. 1343, Poerson to d’Antin, 4 May 1709). On 3 August 1709 he announced that he would soon return to Olawa in Silesia, where his brother James resided (Roszkowska, 1980, p. 312), but he is still documented in Rome at the beginning of March 1710 (see note 110), where he was presumably to be found for several days (although he does not appear in the parish census). Subsequently it seems that Alexander lived continuously in the city (ASVR, Stati delle anime, Sant’Andrea delle Fratte, vol. 85, 1711 (f. 11), 1712 (f. 12v); vol. 86, 1713 [where the residents of Palazzo Zuccari are not listed], 1714 (f. 12)). 114. BA, Archivio dell’Arcadia, Fatti di Arcadia, t. ii, p. 365; catalogo degli Arcadi, ii Ragunanza 102, f. 4, ‘Il principe Alessandro di Pollonia, e di Lituania Armonte Calidio’, n. 1133. The acclamation in the Arcadian Academy of Prince Alexander with the name of Armonte calidio on19 June 1710 is also reported in crescimbeni 1711, p. 37. Roszkowska (1980, p. 313) states instead that the acclamation took place in 1709. in autumn 1712 the presence of Alexander is recorded in the third meeting of the season at the Bosco Parrasio (BA, Fatti degli Arcadi anno IV Olimpiade DCXXII (1712), f. 18). in confirmation of his pro-imperial sympathies it is significant that after his death his vacant place in the Arcadian Academy ‘fu assegnato per Acclamazione al conte di Galasso (Gallas)

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

211

ambasciatore dell’Imperatore’ (f. 181). 115. Referring to this circumstance an avviso on 4 January reported that ‘La Reine de Pologne et le card.l Ottoboni y suppleront on travaillera forte pour mettre en execution les pieces qui ont este choisies a cet effet S. Em.ce’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 503, f. 40v, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, p. 363). On 1 February the opening of the Teatro capranica still seemed a long way off. hence, according to an avviso sent to the court of Versailles, ‘La reine et le Card.l Ottoboni foint l’unique plaisir de la ville les opera que se recitant dans leurs Palais on un concours estreme’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 503, f. 126, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, p. 364). 116. La Silvia: dramma pastorale per il teatro domestico di Sua Maestà la regina Maria Casimira di Polonia, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1710, text by carlo Sigismondo capeci, music by Domenico Scarlatti (it is pointed out in the dedication that the drama ‘è stato nello stesso tempo abozzato, e finito’). ‘La regina di Polonia ha già fatto dar principio alla recita d’un dramma nel suo teatro del palazzo dove habita alla Trinità de’ Monti’ (Valesio, iV, p. 377, 27 January 1710). ‘Si principiò Domenica sera a recitare nel picciol Teatro della Regina di Polonia una bell.ma Pastorale’ (Foglio di Foligno, nn. 5, 31 January 1710, 6 and 7 February). 117. On 21 February, again according to Poerson, the performance of Costantino had been dedicated to the queen of Poland and to her court and two days later to the ‘Generaux Religeux, avec les principaux de chaque Ordre ...’ (correspondance, iii, p. 371, n. 1407, Poerson to d’Antin, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, p. 365). 118. in the libretto only ‘le campagne d’Argo’ are cited and there were no scene changes (Viale Ferrero, 1970, p. 54; Roszkowska, 1984, p. 247). 119. Manfredi, 2010a, pp. 354–57. 120. Tolomeo et Alessandro, overo la Corona disprezzata. Dramma per musica da rappresentarsi nel Teatro Domestico della Regina Maria Casimira di Polonia, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1711. ‘Le Prince royal de Pologne dispose pour Lundy de faire paroistre l’Opera de la Reyne sa mere’ (AMAEP, i, Rome, vol. 515, f. 52v, 17 January 1711, cited in Manfredi 2010a, note 87 on p. 385). ‘Questa sera per la prima volta nel teatro domestico della regina di Polonia si recitò il dramma intitolato il Tolomeo, composizione di Carlo Capece, assai stimato et ottimamente recitata, e vi fu l’invito del cardinale Ottoboni e prencipe Ruspoli, che v’andarono con tutti li loro musici, detti abusivamente virtuosi’ (Valesio, iV, p. 425, 19 January 1711). ‘Lunedi la Regina di Polonia diede principio alla sua opera intitolata il Tolomeo, et Alessandro, che riuscì con grande applauso’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 511, f. 108, 24 January 1711, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, note 77 on p. 384). On 21 February Michel Ange de la chausse wrote to Versailles that ‘La reyne de Pologne a donné des bals apres son opera, don la jeune Princesse Sobieski a fait les honneurs . Il y a eu un gran concours de dames, et de cavaliers’ (f. 53). The opera was performed by six singers, as always in the operas of capeci for the Sobieski, four sopranos and two contraltos, among whom were Paola Alari ‘la virtuosa di S. Maestà’ (in the role of Dorisbe) and Anna Maria Giusti, ‘virtuosa del prencipe reale Alessandro di Polonia’ in the role of Seleuce (cfr. Żórawska-Witkowska, 2007, p. 288). Maria casimira, on 3 February 1711, likewise requisitioned the entire Teatro capranica in order to attend the modest Ingerberta (Engelberta o sia La forza dell’Innocenza, dramma per musica, Rome, Rocco Bernabò 1711)11, f. 170, 7 February 1711; vol. 515, f. 76v, 11 February 1711, cited in Manfredi 2010a, p. 386). in the same season at the Teatro capranica, the Dorisbe was dedicated to Princess Maria casimira: Dorisbe, overo l’amor volubile, e tiranno, drama per musica di Gio. Domenico Pioli da recitarsi nella sala de’ Sig. Capranica nel carnevale dell’anno 1711. Dedicata all’altezza serenissima della principessa Maria Casimira nipote di Sua Maestà, Rome, Rocco Bernabò, 1711 (with music by Alessandro Scarlatti). The fact that Dorisbe was a secondary character in Tolomeo e Alessandro makes one suppose that even in the staging of this opera Prince Alexander may have played a part. 121. L’Orlando, overo La Gelosa Pazzia. Dramma. Da rappresentarsi nel Teatro Domestico della Regina di Pollonia. Composto, e dedicato alla Maestà Sua da Carlo Sigismondo Capeci Suo Segretario fra gli Arcadi Metisto Olbiano, e posto in Musica dal Sig. Domenico Scarlatti, Maestro di Cappella di Sua Maestà, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1711. 122. The plot of Tolomeo et Alessandro, based on a historical idea taken from Justinus, was substantially reinvented in hagiographic fashion and set in cyprus circa 120 BcE. 123. James Sobieski’s planned visit to Rome is recorded for the first time by Poerson on 28 February 1711: ‘La Reine de Pologne attend dans peu le Prince Jacques, son fils aine, qui, appréhendant les malheurs dont la Pologne est menacée, a demandé permission à l’Empereur de venir à Rome, sous prétexte de voir la Reine

212

M.me sa mère, et venir reprendre une jeune Princesse, sa fille, qui, depuis dix ans, est auprès de la Reine sa grand-mère. L’on croit que le Prince Constantin, le plus jeune des trois Princes, pourra bien venir aussi, ne se croyant pas trop en seureté en Pologne’ (Correspondance, iii, p. 450, n. 1491, Poerson to d’Antin, 28 February 1711). By 7 March the opera in his honour was already in preparation: ‘On attend icy le Prince Jacques Sobieski, et la Reyne de Pologne fait preparer un opera pour le divertir pendant le sejour, qu’il fera in cette ville qui sera peut etre plus long, qu’on ne croit, s’il est vray qu’il veuille laisser apparser les troubles, qui semblent se preparer en Allemagne’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 511, ff. 239v, 285, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, p. 386). By 14 March the prince was already in Venice: ‘Le Prince Jacques est à Venize, et on l’attend dans peu de jours à Rome, où la Reine de Pologne, sa mère, lui fait préparer un magnifique Opéra’ (p. 455, n. 1497, 14 March 1711). however although he himself had engaged and sent to Rome the famous Maria Domenica Pini called Tilla (Boyd, 1986, pp. 49ff.), scarcely one week later the trip seems to have been abandoned: ‘L’on croit que le Prince Jacques, fils de la Reine de Pologne, qui est à Venize, ne viendra point icy; mais l’on soupçonne qu’il est chargé de quelques commissions secrètes pour l’Empereur auprès de la République, et qu’il s’en retournera sans voir Madame sa mère’ (Correspondance, iii, p. 456, n. 1499, 21 March 1711), and again on 4 April: ‘Le Prince Jacques reste à Venize, et l’on ne croit pas qu’il vienne à Rome’ (Correspondance, iii, p. 459, n. 1501, Poerson to d’Antin, 4 April 1711). On 2 March 1711 he was still in Venice, where, considered to be ‘fort Autrichien’ he was presumably much saddened by the death of the Emperor Joseph i, which took place on 17 April (an avviso attached to a letter by Poerson to d’Antin of 2 May 1711, Correspondance, iii, p. 469, n. 1509). in any case, the staging of the opera followed quickly: ‘Cependant on prepare des opera chéz la Reyne, les poets et le musiciens tout est en action’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 511, f. 383, 28 March 1711, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, p. 386). Easter having passed (5 April), the queen had asked the pope to allow the opera to be performed later than the canonical period of carnival (Boyd, 1986, pp. 49ff.), and on 18 April Prince Alexander was busy in preparing the first performance which was expected to take place the following month: ‘Continuano sempre più le discordie del principe Pamfilio con la sua sposa circa la prattica et amicizia di detta principessa con il sig. principe Alessandro di Polonia il quale intanto si diverte(?) a preparare l’opera in musica che ver..(?) fare recitare nel prossimo maggio’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 515, f. 205v, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, note 100 on p. 386). The first performance of Orlando took place on 23 May, but the production aroused strong controversy, because the queen and her family had not previously been seen to sufficiently mourn the deaths of Joseph i and the Dauphin, Louis of France: ‘i caldi che cominciano fortemente, li quali fra tanto non impediscono questa Regina di Polonia di far recitare la sua opera, alla quale si da principio questa sera, con maraviglia universale di tutti tanto francesi quanto Alemanni vedendo mal volontieri l’uno et altro partito che questa maesta non habbia dato verun segno di dolore per la morte non tanto dell’imperatore [Joseph i, died 17 April 1711] come del Delfino [Louis of France, died14 April 1711], non havendo ne anche fatto mettere l’abiti di duolo alla sua famiglia’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 515, f. 255v, 23 May 1713, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, p. 386). Although poorly attended by cardinals and priests, the opera nonetheless was a success, since by 6 June, according to de la chausse, it was being performed three times a week ‘On a remarqué, que jusqu’a present aucun cardinal ny prelat n’asssié a l’opera de la reyne de Pologne, qui continué a estre representé trois fois la semaine’ (vol. 511, f. 322v, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, note 102 on p. 387). 124. The plot of Orlando faithfully followed Ariosto’s poem, except for a variant derived from Boiardo. 125. Tetide in Sciro. Dramma per Musica da rappresentarsi nel Teatro Domestico della Regina Maria Casimira di Pollonia. Composto, e dedicato alla Maestà Sua da Carlo Sigismondo Capeci Suo Segretaio, fra gli Arcadi Metisto Olbiano, e posto in Musica dal Sig. Domenico Scarlatti, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1712. The opera must have been in an advanced stage of preparation on 12 December 1711, and, according to Poerson, like the Ciro staged by Ottoboni, promised marvels (Correspondance, iV n. 1565, 12 December 1711, Poerson to d’Antin). See also anche BcR, Avvisi di Roma, ms. 35.A.21, 9 January 1712; Foglio di Foligno, n. 4, 22 January 1712 (cited in Franchi, 1997, p. 93). if as was usual the programming of repeat performances of the operas of cardinal Ottoboni and the queen of Poland were coordinated, in the case of the Ciro and the Tetide in Sciro they were indeed complementary: ‘La Reyne et le card.l Ottoboni se sont donné la Comedie alternativement celle de la M.té surpasse l’autre tant par la beauté de la Musique que per l’execution mais le Theatre du Card.l est Incomparable. Il n’y a

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

pas de decoration qui ne meritat p ... cordure’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 518, f. 90v, 23 January 1712, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, p. 394). 126. Ifigenia in Aulide, Dramma per musica da rappresentarsi nel Teatro Domestico della Maestà di Maria Casimira Regina Vedova di Pollonia composto, e dedicato alla Maestà Sua da Carlo Sigismondo Capeci suo Segretario fra gli Arcadi Metisto Olbiano e posto in Musica dal Sig. Domenico Scarlatti Maestro di Cappella di Sua Maestà, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1713. For the queen’s opera season ‘due famose Cantarine’ appeared that were brought there expressly (Foglio di Foligno, n. 50, 9 December 1712); for the Ifigenia in Aulide a ‘sommo applauso per la parità delle voci’ was not lacking (n. 3, 20 January 1713). Other notices are in BcR, Avvisi di Roma, ms. 36.A.1, 21 January 1713, f. 5v, e 28 January 1713, f. 8r, cited in Franchi, 1997, p. 100). 127. Ifigenia in Tauri, Dramma per musica da rappresentarsi nel Teatro Domestico della Maestà di Maria Casimira Regina Vedova di Pollonia composto, e dedicato alla Maestà Sua da Carlo Sigismondo Capeci e posto in Musica dal Sig. Domenico Scarlatti, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1713. Foglio di Foligno, n. 8, 24 January 1713: ‘riesce di sommo applauso la recita delle seconde Opere in questi Teatri di Capranica e della Regina di Polonia, ma quella della Maestà sua supera l’altra di Capranica, si per la compositione delle Parole, che della Musica, e degl’Abiti’. 128. For the peculiar coordination of the compositions of the two operas see Boyd, 1986, p. 54. 129. On 6 April 1712 it was noted that on the occasion of the death of the Dauphin of France and the Duke of Burgundy, Ottoboni had declined to stage plays in his theatre and had dismissed musicians (Correspondance, iV, p. 87, n. 1590, Poerson to D’Antin, 6 April 1712; AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 518, ff. 261, 285v (cited in Manfredi, 2010a, note 145 on p. 401)). 130. Amor d’un ombra e Gelosia d’un’aura. Dramma per Musica da rappresentarsi nel Teatro Domestico della Maestà di Maria Casimira Regina Vedova di Pollonia composto, e dedicato alla Maestà Sua …, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1714. The Nouvelles de Rome on 13 January 1714 refers to the Tito e Berenice at the Teatro capranica and to a commedia at the theatre of the queen of Poland: ‘Lundy commencera celle que la Reine donne à son petit Théâtre domestique. Le Carneval est court on veut profiter du temps’ (Correspondance, iV, pp. 271–72, n. 1762). The same source on 29 January refers to the role of Alexander Sobieski: ‘La Reine de Pologne commance a se mieux porter d’un violent rhume qui a fait craindre pour la vie de Sa M.té. On represente cependant chez elle le petit Opéra qui le Prince a fait préparer pur son Théatre’ (Correspondance, iV, p. 276, n. 1767). The poor health of the queen is confirmed also in the avvisi in the Biblioteca corsiniana: ‘non la ha potuto godere per due volte per trovarsi obligata al letto dal raffreddore’ (BcR, Avvisi di Roma, ms. 36.A.2, 27 January 1714, f. 6, cited in Franchi, 1997, p. 103). however in the cited avvisi the ‘sempre maggiore applauso’ generated by the opera is always recorded, confirmed by the short account of the current carnival written by de la chausse on 13 February 1714 to Marquis de Torcy: ‘Les divertissemens du Carnaval sont enfin terminez. Ils n’ont été ny si grands ny si universels que les années précédentes, et, si les Cavaliers Romains n’avoient craint d’oublier le métier de cocher, qui est leur unique vertu, le Cours n’auroit pas été si remply qu’il l’a été. L’Opéra de la Reyne de Pologne a été le plus estimé; cette Princesse y a assisté peu de fois à cause de son indisposition, que la crainte fomente’ (Corrispondance, iV, p. 280, n. 1772). 131. news of the gout that afflicted Prince Alexander and the unhappy cures that compromised his health are reported in the letters of Poerson to d’Antin (Correspondance, iii, p. 385, n. 1422, 3 May 1710; iV, p. 324, n. 1809, 31 July 1714; p. 326, n. 1811, 7 August 1714; p. 327, n. 1812, 14 August 1714; p. 341, n. 1826, 16 October 1714; p. 343, n. 1828, 13 november 1714; pp. 344–45, n. 1829, 20 november 1714; V, pp. 56–57, n. 2027, 2 February 1717).

teneva al suo servizio, alla riserva del figlio del Sig. Alessandro Scarlatti, et i due Pasqualini’ (AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 496, f. 335, 8 June 1709). On the activity of Juvarra for the Sobieski see Viale Ferrero, 1970, pp. 54–56; Roszkowska, 1964, pp. 148–49; Roszkowska, 1984; Manfredi, 2010a, pp. 384–88, 402–6, 448–49. 134. ‘Voilà, grâces au Ciel, les folies du Carnaval finies, qui cependant n’ont pas été si nombreuses que l’année passée, parcequ’il a fait des pluies froides et que l’on se ressent de la misère en ce pais, comme ailleurs, joint à ce que le Pape a deffendu que l’on fût à aucuns bals; en sorte que la Reyne de Pologne, en ayant fait un pour la Princesse sa petite-fille, elle n’a pu avoir de Noblesse Romaine, qui appréhendoit d’être arrestée en y allant ou en en revenant, le Pape étant très ferme sur ces sortes d’affaires’ (Correspondance, iV, p. 75, n. 1579, Poerson to d’Antin, 13 February 1712). 135. nothing is known of contacts between the queen and the architect Domenico Martinelli, who around 1690 had drawn up magnificent ideal projects for Jan iii and who, from 1705, settled definitively in Rome (Lorenz, 1991, pp. 216–20); nor is it known whether the queen had dealings with the young Pole Benedykt Renard, many times a prizewinner in the concorsi clementini of the Accademia di San Luca (contardi, 1991). 136. in the inventories of the Albani collection various portraits of the Sobieski are registered, attributed to Trevisani: ‘Ritratto di Giovanni III Re di Polonia a cavallo, dipinto da Francesco Trevisani’, ‘Ritratti di due re di Polonia, dipinti da Trevisani’, ‘Ritratto di un altro re di Polonia; ‘Ritratto di una Regina di Polonia, eseguito dal Trevisani’ (nardini, 1931, pp. 16, 19). in the bedroom of the queen in the chateau of Blois, there were ‘deux pièces de tappisserie de Monseigneur l’Electeur’, ‘une bataille du feu Roy de Pologne’, and portraits of her sons Alexander and constantine and a nephew, one of the nine children of Teresa cunegonda, wife of the Elector of Baviera. Listed in the anticamera are: ‘le restant de la tapisserie de Monseigneur l’Electeur’, a battle of Jan iii and portraits of the other two nephews (Komaszynski 1995, pp. 56–57). For the Trevisani portraits, see the monograph on Trevisani currently in preparation by Karin Wolfe. 137. crescimbeni (1711, p. 324) cites only a ‘vaga Boschereccia’ as the setting of Tolomeo e Alessandro. 138. BA, Atti arcadici, vol. iii, ff. 12–13; BA, Catalogo, vol. ii, f. 53, n. 1295, cited in Manfredi, 2010a, p. 354. 139. Viale Ferrero, 1970, pp. 54–56; Manfredi, 2010a, pp. 386–88. 140. Viale Ferrero, 1970, pp. 54–57, 326–28, 363; Manfredi, 2010a, p. 402. 141. Viale Ferrero, 1970, pp. 5457, 327–28, 340, 349–53, 359, 365; Manfredi, 2010a, pp. 405–6; Grant, 2011, pp. 227–30. 142. Viale Ferrero, 1970, pp. 55-56; Roszkowska, 1984, pp. 253–54. 143. Roszkowska, 1984, pp. 251–53. 144. Roszkowska, 1984, p. 252. 145. For example, cardinal Ottoboni and Prince Ruspoli were among the audience of Tolomeo e Alessandro with all of their musicians ‘con tutti li loro musici’, notoriously numerous (see note 120 above). 146. The building of the theatre was begun no earlier than the middle of December 1703 and was complete about one month later (see notes 75, 76 above). 147. See notes 89, 91 above. 148. See note 107 above. 149. ‘Ha questa regina di Polonia dato principio alla recita d’un melodramma nel bellissimo e piccolo suo teatro nel casino che ella habita alla Trinità de’ Monti, che è quello de Zuccari’ (Valesio, iV, p. 203, 17 December 1709).

132. Manfredi, 2010a, pp. 412–18.

150. Giovanni Mario crescimbeni, L’Arcadia, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1711, libro Vii, prose Xii–XiV, pp. 310–26.

133. ‘Di lui si valse anche il principe Alessandro Sobieski per le scene dell’Opere, che la Regina di Polonia facea rappresentare nel suo Palazzo, e ne riportò universale applauso’ (Maffei, 1738, p. 196). Although in the biography of his brother Filippo, Francesco Juvarra does not refer to work for Maria casimira, it is referred to in the title of the list of Juvarra’s drawings after 1714 drawn up by Giovanni Battista Sacchetti: ‘... e ciò oltre li disegni fatti prima del 1714 sì per la sua Maestà Cesarea L’Imperator Giuseppe che altri per S. Altezza Reale il Delfino di Francia, per la Regina di Pollonia, che per l’Em.mo Cardinal Ottoboni’ (cited in Marabottini, 1981, p. 289). it is significant that the arrival of Juvarra in the service of Prince Sobieski followed the reduction in the number of artists in the service of Maria casimira: ‘La regina di Polonia non potendo soffrire alle esorbitanti spese, ha dato licenza à diversi musici, e virtuosi di suono, che essa

151. ‘Come dopo i Giuochi le Ninfe furono invitate alla Capanna d’Armonte ... Le nostre Ninfe insieme coll’altre, che in Elide avevano ritrovate, unite tutte in drappello, doppo la terminazione de’ Giuochi, andavano meditando, ove, e come avessero quella sera potuto impiegarla festevolmente; quando uno de’principali Acclamati d’Arcadia appellato Armonte (Il Principe Alessandro di Pollonia, e Lituania P.A. Acclam.), Pastore, e per nascita, e per ricchezze; ma molto più per propria virtude, per la quale anche tra i suoi eguali ben si distingue, e sovrasta, si fece loro cortesemente all’incontro; e con inesplicabile affabilità invitolle alla sua Capanna fuori della Città alteramente piantata; e con esso loro invitò anche tutti quelli, che erano del loro seguito. Di questa impensata occasione goderono elleno grandemente: perciocchè, per quanto avessero ricerco, non avrebbero mai saputo rinvergarne una migliore per ciò, che desiderano. Tennero adunque l’invito ben

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

213

volentieri; e immantinente guidate dal valoroso Armonte s’incamminarono al destinato luogo non guari discosto dalle mura della Città. Era questa gran Capanna fabbricata a guisa di quei padiglioni, che s’adoperano ne’ marziali Campi; ed era così vasta, ed alta, e tante simili minori capanne con essa comunicanti, le facevano corona dintorno, che regal magione più, che pastorale albergo assembrando, dava a divedere, che dentro da se v’aveva abitazioni comode per ricevere tanta moltitudine di riguardevoli Personaggi’ (Giovanni Mario crescimbeni, L’Arcadia, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1711, libro Vii, prose Xii–XiV, pp. 319–20). 152. Giovanni Mario crescimbeni, L’Arcadia, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1711, libro Vii, prose Xii–XiV, pp. 320–23. it was the shepherd Astilo, in fact the Abbate iacopo Buonaccorsi, in virtue of the ‘benigna parzialità’ with which he was ‘continuamente riguardato dal grand’Armonte’, who explained the subjects of the tapestries: those representing the heroic deeds of Jan iii from his ascent to the throne until the liberation of Vienna (evidently the same as those displayed during the festival of the queen), and another two representing respectively the ‘magnanime prerogative’ demonstrated by the widow queen Maria casimira in Rome and ‘lo stesso Armonte in atto di rifiutare una real corona, che appresso locata aveva’. 153. ‘Come Armonte intrattenne le Ninfe con un nobilissimo Dramma Musicale. ... sopraggiunse quel Magnanimo anzi Eroe, che Pastore, il quale frattanto era stato altrove con Metisto (Carlo Sigismondo Capece) delle Poetiche cose peritissimo, e grandemente a lui caro, a metter’ordine a ciò, che meditato aveva per divertimento degl’Invitati; ed egli non volle in alcun conto, che la spiegazione seguisse, allegando per iscusa la tardanza dell’ora; ma a dire il vero e’ ne fu sola cagione la sua incomparabil modestia, che fugge per suo podere di far pompa delle proprie generose azioni. Passò adunque, così piacendo ad Armonte, la brigata tutta nelle vicine stanze, ove dopo averle fatto godere di sontuoso rinfresco, invitolla a ricrear l’udito, e la vista coll’intrattenimento d’un Dramma Musicale, che appunto a questo fine, da lui ben preveduto, aveva fatto apparecchiare da’ suoi stessi Famigliari. Era il Teatro fabbricato nella campagna fuori del Padiglione, ma così ben coperto al disopra, e dintorno, che pareva anch’esso racchiuso in quello. Indicava questo una vaga Boschereccia, nella quale, per opera dell’ingegnosissimo Metisto (Questo Dramma intitolato Tolommeo, ed Alessandro è stato rappresentato nel Teatro Domestico di S.M. la Regina di Pollonia in Roma nel passato Carnevale con reiterato invito degli Arcadi), si vide rappresentato il famoso fatto de’ Figli di Cleopatra Regina d’Egitto, che come le Storie narrano, mal sofferendo per compagno del soglio Tolommeo suo Figliuolo, sollevogli contra il Popolo ... Vaghissimo era il Teatro, né più proporzionato, né più confacevole alla bisogna poteva desiderarsi: grate le voci: egregia l’azione: legiadrissimi gli abiti, e lavorati con maraviglioso disegno: ottima la musica: singolare l’orchestra de’ suoni; e sopra il tutto degna di stima sì fu la composizione Poetica: di maniera che ognuno di poi giudicò, che questo trattenimento fosse ben degno del Real Genio, che l’aveva ritrovato, e né più né meno avevav sopranteso a tutto ciò, che faceva di mestoeri per la buona riuscita; e non pochi degli astanti Pastori anche l’autenticarono con bellissimi componimenti Poetici improvvisamente prodotti (S’allude alla Raccolata di Poesie stampata in questa occasione, nella quale si leggono varij Componimenti di Pastori Arcadi) (Giovanni Mario crescimbeni, L’Arcadia, Rome, Antonio De Rossi, 1711, libro Vii, prose Xii–XiV, pp. 323, 325–26). 154. Roszkowska, 1984, pp. 250–51. Roszkowska discusses the greater likelihood of the theatre described by crescimbeni as being located in the Villa Torres, but finally proposes the hypothesis of a permanent structure inserted between Palazzo Zuccari and the neighbouring garden. consequently she rejects earlier proposals that the theatre could have been installed in the interior spaces of the Palazzo Zuccari, such as the salone, because they were inadequate for the moving of the scenic apparatus in the operas represented from 1711 onwards. 155. ‘Nel cortile del casino della regina di polonia alla Trinità de’ Monti dalla parte di Porta Pinciana si recita la sera un carro o sia giudiata, con gran concorso di persone, et altro carro si recita alla Longara appresso il palazzo dell’em.mo Grimani’ (Valesio, iii, p. 771, 24 February 1707). ‘Quelli recitavano gli carri nel cortile della regina di Polonia et alla Longara appresso il palazzo del cardinale Grimani hanno havuto dal governo, sotto rigorose pene, precetto d’astenersi di recitarvi’ (p. 775, 1 March 1707, p. 775). ‘Tra i molti carri che si sono preparati in diversi rioni per recitarsi in questo carnevale, gli pescivendoli ne havevano fatto uno intitolato “la cassaccia”, nel quale rappresentavano ridicolosamente tutte le funzioni che sogliono fare gl’ebrei nel sepelire li loro morti, per il che, havendo gli medici ebrei fatto ricorso non solo al cardinale vicario, ma anco alla congregazione del S. Officio, era stato proibito a’ medesimi di farlo sotto gravi pene; ma havendo il prencipe Alessandro, figliolo di questa regina di Polonia, desiderio di vederlo ottenne di poterlo questa sera far rappresentare nel giardino del palazzino habitato da S. Maestà alla Trinità dei Monti, dove fu grandissimo il concorso di persone che v’andarono per vederlo’ (Valesio, iii, p. 381, 9 February 1710). it is significant that the ‘musici’ Giuseppe

214

Lupparini Becari, perhaps the above-mentioned ‘Pippo soprano della Regina’ (1709–1713), Floriano Flori (1709–1711), also a castrato soprano then in the service of Prince Ruspoli (1709–1711), and the composer Anastasio Lingua (1711–1712) all lived inside Villa Torres from 1709. The lutenist Sylvius Leopold Weiss, documented in the service of Prince Alexander from 1712 to 1713, also lived near the villa (Vacca, 2000, pp. 24–25; Żak, 2000, p. 12). 156. The lack of boxes in the queen’s theatre would seem to be confirmed by the misunderstanding that arose from the offer of a chair ‘meno decorosa’ to a cousin of the pope, as told by the Tuscan agent Antonio Maria Fede, on 20 January 1709 (ASF, Archivio del Principato, A.M. Fede, Lettere e minute, f. 3426, cited in Roszkowska, 1984, p. 250) evidently on the occasion of the performance of Il figlio delle Selve (see note 97 above). 157. Manfredi, 2010a, p. 375; Manfredi, 2010b, pp. 324–25. in 1710, Ruspoli had engaged in a friendly contest with cardinal Ottoboni and the Sobieski that involved nearly all the musicians and singers available in Rome, so as to require the queen of Poland to import foreign artists at a high price: ‘Le P. Ruspoli a son exemple a fait faire dans la vaste sale du palais Bonelli qu’il habite un theatre qui se doit demonter e resmonter au besoin Ces deux seigneurs ant engagé pour leurs orquestre tout qui s’est trouvé d’Instruments demaniere que la Reine de Pologne qui est en possession de donner la comedie de toute les espece n’a pas pû trouver dans la ville qui ait voulu la servir tant a chanter qu’a joûer S. M.té a fait proposer au card.l et au Prince in successivement l’alternative pour portayer les joueurs avec eûse, mais outre que ceux qui la servirent l’an passé ne son pas contents de sa liberalité, Il s’en sont excusez, somesment sans toutes fois contenter cette princesse qui est obligeé de recourir a Florence et ailleurs pour des voix et des instruments elle se trouve ... lipiqueé au jeu qu’elle a offers pour une seule voixe usq’a 600 ecus quosq’il n’y ait que deux mois qu’elle fit payer tous les gens en lettres de change sans avoir egard a la perte qu’ils y furent et a la petite vergogne de voir salvireé porter chez tous le ve l’areband? auplus affrant S. M.te rent avec tout celix’, AMAEP, Correspondance politique, Rome, vol. 506, f. 264v (cited in Manfredi 2010a, p. 375 note 56). 158. This is the salone on the piano nobile identified by most scholars as the site of the queen’s theatre from 1704 to 1714, which, however, lacked the functional characteristics necessary for the staging of the operas after 1710 (see note 154 above). 159. See note 130 above. 160. On the building permit (published for the first time by Re, 1926, pp. 162, 165–66) and on the question of attribution of the loggia of Palazzo Zuccari, see Manfredi, 2010a, pp. 448–49. A serenade for three voices was staged on 3 August by the queen of Poland ‘sopra la loggia della sua abitazione’: it was ‘nuova di parole, e di musica’ and was repeated on 16 August with the participation of the famous Tilla, recently engaged, which risked diplomatic incidents (Foglio di Foligno, n. 33, del 14 August 1711; Griffin, 1983, pp. 624–26; Franchi, 1997, p. 81). A notice from the Tuscan agent, Antonio Maria Fede, probably refers to the second serenade: ‘La Maestà della Regina di Polonia fece una vaga serenata sopra una ringhiera eretta a tal effetto ad un balcone del suo palazzo ... con sodisfazione di tutte le dame e cavalieri di quest’alma città’ (ASF, Archivio del Principato, A.M. Fede, Lettere e minute, f. 3426, 8 August 1711, cited in Roszkowska 1984, p. 251). According to other sources it was Prince Alexander who organised the serenade of 3 August, while on 12 September two ‘cantarine’ and other musicians with orchestral accompaniment perfomed another serenade, evidently linked to the anniversary of the victory of Jan iii Sovieski at Vienna (Boyd, 1986, pp. 104ff.; Żórawska-Witkowska, 2007, p. 290). 161. The permit here published is a copy (without the names of the functionaries of the Tribunale delle strade apart from that of the president, Fabrizio Augustini), and strangely, without reference in the registers of the Lettere patenti for the corresponding date (ASR, Presidenza delle strade, Lettere patenti, reg. 57). 162. Again ‘nella ringhiera di sua abitazione’ on 12 September 1712 the queen of Poland had performed the Applauso devoto al nome di Maria Santissima (Ronciglione, Toselli, 1712), the much repeated cantata in three voices that commemorated the liberation of Vienna that ‘Riuscì universalmente applaudita tanto per la Compositione delle parole, che della musica’, managed by capeci and Scarlatti, and which was repeated a week later ‘per appagar il desiderio di molti che non l’avevano sentita’ (BcR, Avvisi Di Roma, ms. 35.A.21, 17 and 24 September 1712; Foglio di Foligno, n. 39, 23 September 1712, Franchi, 1997, pp. 89, 93; Żórawska-Witkowska, 2007, p. 290; Markuszewska, 2013, p. 189–90). 163. ‘L’on travaille avec chaleur dans l’église de St-Pierre pour le préparatif de la canonisation des quatre Saints qui se doit faire le jour de la Ste Trinité. La Reyne de Pologne n’assistera pas à cette cérémonie, parceque l’on ne lui a pas voulu accorder les mêmes distinctions qui furent accordées en pareille occasion à la Reyne de

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Suède’ (Correspondance, iV, p. 95, n. 1595, D’Antin to Poerson, 8 May 1712). ‘Le Pape fit enfin mercredy [27 April] une Promotion de onze Cardinaux … La Reyne de Pologne ne fit illuminer son Palais comme il se pratique ordinairement, pour deux raisons, la première parcequ’il n’y en avoit point pour le Roy Auguste, et la seconde parceque les nouveaux Cardinaux ne veulent point luy oster leur calotte’ (Correspondance, iV, p. 97, n. 1597, Poerson to d’Antin, 21 May 1712).

Bibliography

164. in this respect, once again the news given by Poerson to d’Antin is particularly illuminating: ‘La Reyne de Pologne, qui se porte toujours de mieux en mieux par les soins de Monsieur Garnier, Médecin François, né à Paris, me fit l’honneur de me dire, devant hier, qu’elle espéroit aller en France vers la fin du mois de may, et, quoique la plus part de ceux qui l’environnent tâchent de l’en détourner, elle eut la bonté de m’assurer qu’estant persuadée, comme elle est, que l’air de France servira à la prolongation de ses jours, ayant envie de vivre le plus que faire se pourra, elle est absolument résolue de faire ce bienheureux voyage. Elle ajouta encore que l’idée d’avoir le bonheur de s’approcher de notre grand Monarque lui faisoit d’avance un bien infini’ (Correspondance, iV, n. 1785, 3 April 1714).

ASR: Archivio di Stato di Roma

165. ‘La Reine de Pologne, qui persiste à vouloir s’en aller en France, a déjà fait emballer tout ce qu’elle a de meilleur, et se dispose ù partir dans quinze jours sur les Gallères du Pape … Le Prince Alexandre, fils de la Reine de Pologne, est, dit-on, très mécontent de ce voyage’ (Correspondance, iV, pp. 308–9, n. 1795, 29 May 1714). ‘La Reine de Pologne paroît devoir seurement aller en France dans peu de jours; la plus grande partie de ses Domestiques sont desjà embarquéz sur les gallères du Pape, aussi bien que toutes ses hardes, et elle a pris son audience de congé du St-Père …’ (Correspondance, iV, p. 312, n. 1798, 12 June 1714). 166. ‘La Reine de Pologne est partie de Rome samedi [16 June] au matin pour s’embarquer sur les Galères du Pape à Civita-Vecchia. M. le Prince Alexandre, son fils, l’a précédée dans une chaise de poste pour luy faire ses derniers adieux; car il ne paroît pas qu’il veuille aller en France. … Les Cardinaux ont envoyé complimenter la Reine sur son départ. Pas un ne l’ont été voir; l’on dit qu’elle quitte cette Cour sans regret, où l’on n’avoit pas les égards que l’on devoit à son rang’ (Correspondance, iV, pp. 313–14, n. 1800, Poerson a d’Antin, 19 June 1714). ‘La Reine de Pologne, qui est partie de Civita-Vecchia, il y a huit Jours, n’a pas encore fait sçavoir de ses nouvelles, et l’on craint fort que les mauvais tems, qui durent toujours, ne rendent sa navigation très dangereuse ou du moins bien difficile’ (Correspondance, iV, p. 316, n. 1801, Poerson to d’Antin, 26 June 1714). 167. Only several months later did Maria casimira learn the details of her son’s last days from the capuchin monk Timotheé de la Flèche, her trusted theologian, in her residence in the chateau of Blois (Komaszynski, 1995a, p. 71). According to Poerson Prince Alexander’s illness, as well as the poor treatment he had received in the two preceding years, had been aggravated by a depressive state caused by his separation from his mother (see note 131 above). 168. Relazione dell’infermità e morte del real principe Alessandro Sobieski figlio della glo.me di Giovanni III, Rè di Polonia, e della maestà della regina Maria Casimira, sua consorte: accaduta in quest’alma città li XIX novembre: e del funerale, ed esquie con solenne pompa celebrate nella chiesa de’ RR. PP. Cappuccini presente il di lui cadavere nel dì 22 di detto mese dell’anno MDCCXIV, Rome, Gio. Francesco chracas, 1714. The funeral apparatus designed by Alessandro Specchi is represented in a drawing by the architect engraved by Francesco Aquila (Polonia, 1975, note 210 on p. 215; Sferrazza, 1997). Even Poerson reports exhaustively on the funeral of the prince, whose body, before being buried in a capuchin habit according to his wishes, had been exposed in the dress of a knight of the holy Spirit (cavaliere del Santo Spirito), the only ceremonial dress available to him in Rome, after having sent his baggage ‘in Germania’ in anticipation of his definitive move there (Correspondance, iV, pp. 345–46, n. 1831, 27 november 1714; pp. 344–45, n. 1829, 20 november 1714). Moreover, Poerson believed in the months before his death that the prince’s creation as cardinal was imminent (Correspondance, iV, p. 327, n. 1812, 14 August 1714; p. 334, n. 1818, 11 September 1714). 169. Rolli, 1728, p. 42.

AMAEP: Archives du Ministere des Affaires Étrangeres, Paris ASF: Archivio di Stato di Firenze ASV: Archivio Segreto Vaticano ASVR: Archivio Storico del Vicariato di Roma BA: Biblioteca Angelica, Roma BAL: Biblioteca Alessandrina, Roma BAV: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana BCR: Biblioteca corsiniana, Roma BSM: Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich Arciszewska, 2006: Barbara Arciszewska, ‘A golden age for a changing nation: Polish national identity and the histories of the Wilanów residence of King Jan iii Sobieski’, Architectural History, vol. 49, 2006, pp. 101–28. Avvisi Marescotti: Avvisi di Roma al cardinale Galeazzo Marescotti, Biblioteca nazionale centrale, Fondo Vittorio Emanuele, n. 789 (1695–1700), no. 790 (1701–7). Bentivoglio, 2007: Enzo Bentivoglio, ‘Roma: il “Ponte di Pietra sopra la strada” tra palazzo colonna e il giardino e i “pontes per vias publicas transversi” da documenti dell’Archivio di Stato di Roma e di Reggio nell’Emilia’, Quaderni del Dipartimento Patrimonio Architettonico e Urbanistico, vol. 17, 2007–8, no. 33–34, pp. 9–18. Boyd, 1986: Malcom Boyd, Domenico Scarlatti: master of music, London: Weidenfeld and nicolson, 1986. Briganti, 1996: Giuliano Briganti, Gaspar van Wittel, Laura Laureati and Ludovica Trezzani (eds.), Milan: Electa, 1996. Cametti, 1931: Alberto cametti, ‘carlo Sigismondo capeci (1652–1728), Alessandro e Domenico Scarlatti e la regina di Polonia in Roma’, Musica Oggi, vol. 13, no. 2, 1931, pp. 55–64. Cancellieri, 1811: Francesco cancellieri, Il mercato, il lago dell’acqua vergine, ed il Palazzo Panfiliano nel Circo agonale, detto volgarmente piazza Navona, Roma: Francesco Bourlié, 1811. Caprile, 1999: Giovanni caprile, Villa Malta, dall’antica Roma a ‘Civiltà Cattolica’, Roma: La civiltà cattolica, 1999. Chirico, 2007: Teresa chirico, ‘L’inedita serenata alla regina Maria casimira di Polonia: Pietro Ottoboni committente di cantate e serenate (1689–1707)’, in nicolò Maccavino (ed.), La serenata tra Seicento e Settecento: musica, poesia, scenotecnica. Atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Reggio calabria, 16–17 May 2003), conservatorio di Musica ‘Francesco cilea’, Supplementi Musicali, vol. 1, no. 9), vol. 2, Reggio calabria: Laruffa, 2007 pp. 397–449. Contardi, 1991: Bruno contardi, ‘Benedykt Renard’, in Bruno contardi and Giovanna curcio (eds.), In Urbe Architectus. Modelli, disegni, misure, Rome: Árgos, 1991, p. 432. Correspondance: Correspondance des directeurs de l’Académie de France à Rome avec les surintendants des bâtiments, Anatole de Montaiglon (ed.), Paris: charavay Frerès, vol. iii [1699–1711], 1889; vol. iV [1711–16], 1893. Costa, 2009: Sandra costa, Dans l’intimité d’un collectionneur: Livio Odescalchi et le faste baroque, Paris: cThS, 2009.

170. Re, 1926, pp. 160, 163. 171. Komaszynski, 1995a, p. 69. When she was still in Rome, Maria casimira had defined all the questions of inheritance and emotional bonds in discussions with relatives and numerous members of her entourage—French, Polish and italian—in a lucid will in two parts, dated 20 April 1713 and 23 February 1714 (Testament, 1869). Among the members of her court that followed the queen to France were Antonio d’Alibert (Komaszynski, 1995a, p. 120) and, perhaps, capeci, who, however, were both still active in Rome after her death, which took place on 30 January 1716.

Crescimbeni, 1711: Giovanni Mario crescimbeni, L’Arcadia, Rome: Antonio De Rossi, 1711. Crescimbeni, 1720: Giovanni Mario crescimbeni, Notizie istoriche degli Arcadi morti, vol. 3, Rome: Antonio De Rossi, 1720. Curcio, 2010: Giovanna curcio, ‘Architettura in guerra: Roma 1704’, in Paolo cornaglia (ed.), Michelangelo Garove. 1648–1713, un architetto per Vittorio Amedeo II, Roma: campisano, 2010, pp. 75-92.

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

215

Curiosités historiques, 1759: Curiosités historiques ou recueil de piecés utiles a l’histoire de France et qui n’ont jamais paru, vol. 1, Amsterdam, 1759. Curti, 2009: Francesca curti, ‘nuovi documenti su palazzo Zuccari: proprietà e ristrutturazioni edilizie dal XVii al XiX secolo’, Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana, vol. 39, 2009/10, pp. 329–89. Curti, 2013: Francesca curti, ‘Adel, Künstler und Gelehrte die Eigentümer und Bewohner des Palazzo Zuccari (1660–1904)’, in E. Kieven (ed.), Der Palazzo Zuccari und die Institutsgebäude 1590–2013, Munich: hirmer, 2013, pp. 50–71. D’Armailhacq, 1894: Albert D’Armailhacq, L’Eglise Nationale de St. Louis del Français à Rome. Notes historiques et descriptives, Roma: Philippe cuggiani, 1894. D’Onofrio, 1974: cesare D’Onofrio, Scalinate di Roma, Rome: Staderini, 1974. De Caprio, 2004: Francesca De caprio, ‘notarelle sul viaggio d’esilio a Roma di Maria casimira Sobieska’, in Francesca De caprio et al., Saggi vari, Viterbo: Sette città, 2004, pp. 67–109. De Caprio, 2005: Francesca De caprio, ‘Maria casimira si fa turista’, in nadia Boccara and Gaetano Platania (eds.), Viaggio e paesaggio,Viterbo: Sette città, 2005, pp. 35–52. De Caprio, 2008: Francesca De caprio, ‘Una guida manoscritta per il seguito di Maria casimira Sobieska’, in Vincenzo De caprio (ed.), Compagni di viaggio, Viterbo: Sette città, 2008, pp. 81–107. Deutsch, 1985: Otto Erich Deutsch, Händel: a documentary Biography, London 1955, German translation in Händel-Handbuch, vol. 4, Dokumente zu Leben und Schaffern, Kassel: Barenreiter, 1985. Ebert-Schifferer, 2007: Sybille Ebert-Schifferer, ‘Palazzo Zuccari’, in christina Strunck (ed.), Rom. Meisterwerke der Baukunst von der Antike bis heute: Festgabe für Elisabeth Kieven, Petersberg: imhof, 2007, pp. 274–78. Fijałkowski, 2009: Wojciech Fijałkowski, ‘Jan iii Sobieski’s Villa nova and its Artistic Programme’, in Barbara Arciszewska (ed.), The Baroque Villa: suburban and country residences c. 1600–1800, Wilanów: Wilanów Palace Museum, 2009, pp. 105–20. Franchi, 1997: Saverio Franchi, Drammaturgia Romana (vol. 2): annali dei testi drammatici e dei libretti per musica a Roma e nel Lazio dal 1701 al 1750, Rome: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 1997. Frommel, 1982: cristoph Luitpold Frommel, Der Palazzo Zuccari und seine wechselvolle Geschchte, Munich: MPG-Spiegel, 1982. Frommel, 1986: cristoph Luitpold Frommel, ‘il Palazzo Zuccari e gli edifici dell’istituto’, in Bibliotheca Hertziana Max-Planck-Institut [Roma]: storia, edifici, attività, Munich: Bierig, 1986, pp. 35–50. Grant, 2011: Katrina Grant, ‘Planting “italian gusto” in a “Gothick country”: the influence of Filippo Juvarra on William Kent’ in David R. Marshall, Susan Russell and Karin Wolfe (eds.), Roma Britannica: art patronage and cultural exchange in eighteenth-century Rome, London: The British School at Rome, 2011, pp. 225–39. Griffon, 1983: Thomas E. Griffin, The late Baroque Serenata in Rome and Naples: a documentary study with emphasis on Alessandro Scarlatti, Ph.D diss., Ann Arbor (Mi): University Microfilms international, 1983. Kieven and Schlimme, 2013: Elisabeth Kieven and hermann Schlimme, ‘Palazzo Zuccari: Bau, Geschichte, Funktionen’, in E. Kieven (ed.), Der Palazzo Zuccari und die Institutsgebäude 1590–2013, Munich: hirmer, 2013, pp. 72–137.

Larain-Portemer, 1968: Madaleine Larain-Portemer, ‘Mazarin, Benedetti et l’escalier de la Trinité des Monts’, Gazette des Beaux-Arts, vol. 72, no. 6, 1968, pp. 273–94. Lavalle, 1981: Denis Lavalle, ‘Une decoration à Rome, au milieu du XViii.e siècle: le choeur de l’église Saint-Louis-des-Français’, in Les fondations nationales dans la Rome pontificale, conference Proceedings, Rome, May 1978, Turin: La Bottega d’Erasmo, 1981, pp. 249–331. Lindgren, 1985: Lowell Lindgren, Il dramma musicale a Roma durante la carriera di Alessandro Scarlatti, in Bruno cagli (ed.), Le Muse galanti: la musica a Roma nel Settecento, Roma: istituto della Enciclopedia italiana, 1985, pp. 35–57. Lorenz, 1991: hellmut Lorenz, Domenico Martinelli und die österreichische Barockarchitektur, Vienna: Verlag der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1991. Maffei, 1738: Scipione Maffei, ‘Elogio del Sign. Abate Filippo ivara Architetto’, in Osservazioni letterarie che possono servire di continuazione al Giornale de’ Letterati d’Italia, vol. 3, Verona: Stamperia del Seminario per Jacopo Vallarsi, 1738, pp. 193–204. Manfredi, 1997: Tommaso Manfredi, ‘il problema della facciata “gotica” della Santissima Trinità dei Monti a Roma’, in G. Simoncini (ed.), Presenze medievali nell’architettura di età moderna e contemporanea, Atti del XXV congresso di Storia dell’Architettura, Rome 7–9 June 1995, Milan: Guerini, 1997, pp. 126–35, 361–62. Manfredi, 2003: Tommaso Manfredi, ‘casino di Maria casimira Sobiewski (già de Torres) e palazzo Zuccari’, in Tommaso Manfredi e Paolo Micalizzi (eds.) Schede, in Paolo Micalizzi (ed.), Roma nel XVIII secolo, Roma: Kappa, 2003, vol. 2, p. 61. Manfredi, 2007: Tommaso Manfredi, ‘il cardinale Pietro Ottoboni e l’Accademia Albana. L’utopia dell’artista universale’, in Gregory Barnett, Antonella D’Ovidio, Stefano La Via (eds.), Arcangelo Corelli fra mito e realtà storica nuove prospettive d’indagine musicologica e interdisciplinare nel 350° anniversario della nascita, Atti del congresso internazionale di studi, Fusignano, 11–14 September 2003: Florence: Olschki, 2007, pp. 117–37. Manfredi, 2008: Tommaso Manfredi, ‘carlo Fontana e l’Accademia Albana: arte e architettura in Arcadia’, in Marcello Fagiolo and Giuseppe Bonaccorso (eds.), Studi sui Fontana: una dinastia di architetti ticinesi a Roma tra manierismo e barocco, Rome: Gangemi, 2008, pp. 171–80. Manfredi, 2010a: Tommaso Manfredi, Filippo Juvarra: gli anni giovanili, Roma: Árgos, 2010. Manfredi, 2010b: Tommaso Manfredi, ‘Mecenatismo e architettura per la musica nel primo Settecento romano: il cardinale Ottoboni, la regina di Polonia e il principe Ruspoli’, in Sabine Ehrmann-herfort and Matthias Schnettger (eds.), George Friedrich Händel a Roma, conference rroceedings, Rome, istituto Storico Germanico di Roma, 17–20 October 2007, Analecta musicologica, 44, Kassel: Bärenreiter, 2010, pp. 307–29. Marabottini 1981: Alessandro Marabottini (ed.), Filippo Juvarra, in Vite de’ Pittori, Scultori ed Architetti viventi, dai manoscritti 1383 e 1743 della Biblioteca Comunale “Augusta” di Perugia, edizione critica, Treviso: canova, 1981, pp. 257–350. Martello, 1715: Pier Jacopo Martello, ‘Dell’opera in Musica’, in Della tragedia antica e moderna. Dialogo, Rome: Francesco Gonzaga, 1715.

Kirkpatrick, 1983: Ralph Kirkpatrick, Domenico Scarlatti, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983.

Martinelli, 1707: Fioravante Martinelli, Roma ricercata nel suo sito è [...] di nuovo corretta, e accresciuta, Rome: Gaetano Zenobi, 1707.

Komaszynski, 1983: Michel Komaszynski, Maria Kazimiera d’Arquien Sobieska królowa Polski 1641–1716, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie, 1983.

Markuszewska, 2013: Aneta Markuszewska, ‘Music to the Glory of Jan iii at the Roman court of Marie casimire Sobieska’, in Dominika WalawenderMusz (ed.), Primus Inter Pares. The First Among Equals: the story of King Jan III, Warsaw: Wilanów Palace Museum, 2013, pp. 187–91.

Komaszynski, 1995a: Michel Komaszynski, Marie Casimire, reine de Pologne dernière résidente royale du Château de Blois, Katowice: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego, 1995. Komaszynski, 1995b: Michel Komaszynski, Piekna królowa Maria Kasimiera d’Arquien-Sobieska, Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie, 1995. Körte, 1935: Werner Körte, Der Palazzo Zuccari in Rom. Sein Freskenschmuck und seine Geschichte, Leipzig: Keller, 1935.

216

Matitti, 1995: Flavia Matitti, ‘il cardinale Pietro Ottoboni mecenate delle arti: ronache e documenti (1689–1740)’, Storia dell’Arte, no. 84, 1995, pp. 156–243. Moroni, 1953: Gaetano Moroni, Dizionario di erudizione storico-ecclesiastica da San Pietro sino ai nostri giorni, 103 vols., Venice: Tipografia Emiliana, 1840–1861, vol. 63, 1853.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Nardini, 1931: Luigi nardini, ‘Palazzo dei Principi Albani. catalogo della Galleria e della Biblioteca’, Urbinum, vol. 5, 1931, 2, pp. 15-19.

Staffieri, 1990: Gloria Staffieri, Colligite Fragmenta: la vita musicale romana negli ‘Avvisi Marescotti’ (1683–1707), Lucca: Libreria Musicale italiana, 1990.

Notizie Istoriche, 1720: Notizie istoriche degli arcadi morti, vol. 2, Rome: Antonio De Rossi, 1720.

Strhom, 1976: Reinhard Strhom, Italienische Opernarien des frühen Settecento (1720–1730), Analecta Musicologica 16, 2 vols., cologne: Arno Volk Verlag, 1976.

Pagano, 2006: Roberto Pagano, Scarlatti Alessandro e Domenico: due vite in una, Milan: Mondadori, 1985 (English edition Alessandro and Domenico Scarlatti: two lives in one, hillsdale nY: Pendragon Press, 2006). Pecchiai, 1938: Pio Pecchiai, ‘La Villa delle Rose’, L’Urbe, vol. 3, no. 1, 1938, pp. 23–33. Pecchiai, 1965: Pio Pecchiai, ‘La villa del Pino (poi detta di Malta o delle Rose)’, extract from La Trinità dei Monti, print proof, Rome, n.d. [1965], pp. 215–29 (Rome, Bibliotheca hertziana, Dv 2070-5650 raro). Platania, 1985: Gaetano Platania, ‘Viaggio in italia e soggiorno romano di una famiglia reale polacca: i Sobieski’, in ciRVi: centro interuniversitario di Ricerche sul ‘Viaggio in italia’, vol. 6, parts 1–2, 1985, pp. 67–144. Platania, 1989: Gaetano Platania, Lettere alla corte di Roma del cardinale Enrico de la Grange d’Arquien, suocero di Giovanni Sobieski, Udine: Del Bianco, 1989. Platania, 1990: Gaetano Platania, Gli ultimi Sobieski a Roma: fasti e miserie di una famiglia reale polacca tra Sei e Settecento (1699–1715): studi e documenti, Quaderni polacchi di storia, testi e studi, Manziana and Rome: Vecchiarelli, 1990. Platania, 1995: Gaetano Platania, ‘Maria Sobieska a Roma: alcuni episodi del soggiorno romano di una regina polacca’, in Gaetano Platania (ed.), Il viaggio, Rome: istituto nazionale di Studi Romani, 1995, pp. 7–48. Platania, 2002: Gaetano Platania, Viaggio a Roma sede d’esilio (sovrane alla conquista di Roma. Secoli XVII–XVIII), Rome: istituto di Studi Romani, 2002. Platania, 2009: Gaetano Platania, La regina e il cardinale: corrispondenza di Maria Casimira Sobieska regina di Polonia con Carlo Barberini protettore del regno (1681–1699), Rome: istituto nazionale di Studi Romani, 2009. Polonia, 1975: Polonia: arte e cultura dal medioevo all’illuminismo, Florence: centro Di, 1975. Re, 1926: Emilio Re, ‘La Dimora Romana di Maria casimira Regina di Polonia’, Capitolium, vol. 2, no. 3, 1926, pp. 160–67. Re, 1948: Emilio Re, ‘L’arco della regina’, L’Urbe, vol. 11, no. 4, 1948, pp. 31–33. Rolli, 1728: Domenico Rolli, Raccolta delle Belle Arti, Rome 1728, p. 42. Roszkowska, 1964: Wanda Roszkowska, ‘Polskie dzieje Palazzo Zuccari i Villa Torres-Malta w Rzymie’, Kwartalnik Architektury i Urbanistyki, vol. 9, no. 2, 1964, pp. 139–53. Roszkowska, 1977: Wanda Roszkowska, ‘Maria casimira Sobieska a Roma’, in Polonia e Italia: rapporti storici, scientifici e culturali, Rome: Editori Riuniti, 1977, pp. 43–46.

Targosz, 1995: Karolina Targosz, ‘Dwór królowej Marysiénki Sobieskej ogniskiem recepcji teatru francuskiego’, Barock: Historia-Literatura-Sztuka, vol. 2, part 1, section 3, 1995, pp. 59–72. Testament, 1869: ‘Testament de Marie-casimire de La Grange-d’Arquien, reine de Pologne’, Bulletin de la Société nivernaise des Sciences, Lettres et arts, second series, vol. 3, nevers: Paulin Fay, 1869, pp. 394–403. Vacca, 2000: Francesca Vacca, ‘Weiss in Rome (1712–1713): first archival findings’, Journal of the Lute Society of America, vol. 33, 2000, pp. 13–31. Valesio, I: Francesco Valesio, Diario di Roma, G. Scano (ed.) with G. Graglia, vol. 1, 1700–1, Milan: Longanesi, 1977. Valesio, II: Francesco Valesio, Diario di Roma, G. Scano (ed.) with G. Graglia, vol. 2, 1702–3, Milan: Longanesi, 1977. Valesio, III: Francesco Valesio, Diario di Roma, G. Scano (ed.) with G. Graglia, vol. 3, 1704–7, Milan: Longanesi, 1978. Valesio, IV: Francesco Valesio, Diario di Roma, G. Scano (ed.) with G. Graglia, vol. 4, 1717–28, Milan: Longanesi, 1978. Viale Ferrero 1970: M. Viale Ferrero, Filippo Juvarra: scenografo e architetto teatrale, Turin: Pozzi, 1970. Volpicelli, 1989: M. L. Volpicelli, ‘il teatro del cardinale Ottoboni al Palazzo della cancelleria’, in Il teatro a Roma nel Settecento, Rome: istituto della Enciclopedia italiana, 1989, vol. 2, pp. 681–782. Walawender-Musz, 2013: Dominika Walawender-Musz (ed.), Primus Inter Pares. The First Among Equals: the story of King Jan III, Warsaw: Wilanów Palace Museum, 2013, pp. 187–91. Waliszewski, 1898: Kazimierz Waliszewski, Marysienka, Marie de la Grange d’Arquien, reine de Pologne, femme de Sobieski, Paris: Plon, 1898. Wolfe, 2008: Karin Wolfe, ‘Protector and Protectorate: cardinal Antonio Barberini’s art diplomacy for the French crown at the papal court’, in Jill Burke and Michael Bury (eds.), Art and Identity in Early Modern Rome, Aldershot: Ashgate 2008, pp. 113–32. Żak, 2000: Jerzy Żak, ‘The Sobieskis in Silesia and in Rome: Weiss’s first royal patrons’, Journal of the Lute Society of America, vol, 33, 2000, pp. 1–12. Żórawska-Witkowska, 2007: Alina Żórawska-Witkowska, ‘Teatro e musica alla corte della regina vedova di Polonia Maria casimira Sobieska a Roma’, in Rosy Moffa e Sabina Saccomani (eds.), Musica se extendit ad omnia: studi in onore di Alberto Basso in occasione del suo 75° compleanno, Lucca: Libreria Musicale, 2007, vol. 1, pp. 281–92.

Roszkowska, 1980: Wanda Roszkowska, ‘Mecenat królewicza Aleksandra: Teatr Armonte calidio (1709–1714)’, Sobótka, conference proceedings, Ród Sobieskich. Materialy z Konferencij Wroclaw-Olawa, 22–23 September 1979, 1980, vol. 2, pp. 311–21. Roszkowska, 1984: Wanda Roszkowska, ‘Filippo Juvarra al servizio dei Sobieski’, in Vita teatrale in Italia e Polonia fra seicento e settecento. Atti del Vi convegno di Studi promosso ed organizzato dall’istituto d’Arte dell’Accademia Polacca delle Scienze e dalla Fondazione Giorgio cini di Venezia, Warsaw, 14–17 October 1980, Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo naukowe, 1984, pp. 245–63. Roworth, 2009: Wendy Wassyng Roworth, ‘“The residence of the arts:” Angelica Kauffman’s place in Rome’, in Paula Findlen, Wendy Wassyng Roworth and catherine Sama (eds.), Italy’s Eighteenth Century: gender and culture in the Age of the Grand Tour, Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 2009, pp. 151-171. Sferrazza, 1997: Agnese Sferrazza, Scheda, in Marcello Fagiolo (ed.), Il Settecento e l’Ottocento: corpus delle feste a Roma, vol. 2, Rome: De Luca, 1997, p. 33. Simonetti, 1960: Silvana Simonetti, s.v. ‘Giacomo d’Alibert’, in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, vol. 2, Rome: istituto della Enciclopedia italiana, 1960.

Tommaso Manfredi: Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti

217

218

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

chapter 9 The ‘Non-aedicular Style’ and the Roman Church Façade of the Early Eighteenth Century John Weretka

Wedged between the architectural projects of Gianlorenzo Bernini and Francesco Borromini in the middle of the seventeenth century and the triumph of the neoclassical style signalled by the award of the Lateran façade commission to Alessandro Galilei in 1732, Roman architecture of the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries has suffered an uneven critical reception. This stems from the polemical reception of Borromini’s work, on which much of it was based. Virgilio Spada, writing in Borromini’s name in the Opus architectonicum (1725), referred to Borromini’s architecture in positive terms as bizzarro and fantastico (bizarre and fantastic).1 A Trinitarian apologist for Borromini’s design for S. carlo alle Quattro Fontane (S. carlino) wrote that ‘non si trova altra [opera] simile nello artificioso et capriccioso, raro, et estraordinario, in tutto il mondo’ (one cannot find another work similar in its artifice and caprice, [as] rare and extraordinary, in the whole world) as the design for the church.2 By the first decades of the eighteenth century, and with the advocacy of Juvarra’s teaching at the Accademia di S. Luca, Borromini’s designs had attained canonical status in the eyes of some academicians. The publication of Domenico de’ Rossi’s Studio d’architettura civile in the first decades of the eighteenth century encouraged further the growth of what Francesco Milizia called the delirante setta Borrominesca (delirious Borrominian sect).3 By 1732, adherence to or deviation from Borrominian norms could be grounds for assessment of architectural worth, as the judgements of the Lateran façade competition show. Giovanni Paolo Panini opposed Alessandro Galilei’s anti-Borrominian design for the façade, calling it an ‘idea assai facile e semplice … un contorno troppo quadro, e senza interrompimento o risalto’ (a very facile and simple idea … a very square outline and without projections or accents).4 criticism of Borromini’s style was, however, not lacking even in his own day. Giovanni Pietro Bellori, in a mar-

ginal note to Baglione’s Vite, referred to S. carlino as brutto e deforme (ugly and deformed) and Borromini himself as ‘gotico, ignorantissimo e corruttore dell’architettura, infamia del nostro secolo’ (a Goth, most ignorant and the corruptor of architecture, the infamy of our century). This criticism reached the point of hysterical stridency in the wake of the Lateran façade competition. Giovanni Battista contini, acccording to Lione Pascoli’s 1736 life of the architect, upbraids an architectural student over his extravagant designs for a church by asking the student whether he would ‘presume to indulge in borrominello in the chief city of the world’.5 But the most vitriolic anti-Borromini criticism poured forth from the pen of Francesco Milizia: ‘credendosi [i.e. Borromini] sorpassare il Bernini colle novità uscì fuori di regole, e cadde in un precipizio di stravaganze’ ([Borromini], believing that he could surpass Bernini in novelty, departed from the rules and fell into an abyss of extravagance).6 When, according to Milizia, Borromini had all of his drawings burnt in a fit of jealousy, Milizia acidly remarks: ‘Fece bene’ (he did well).7 More recent architectural criticism, firmly shackled to Milizia’s polemics, has also tended to see the first half of the eighteenth century as a period of extended struggle between the legatees of Bernini (the berninisti) and of Borromini (the borroministi). As John Varriano has formulated it, Roman architecture in the early eighteenth century was of two temperaments: one stern, formal, and rather officious—the legacy of Bernini and Fontana—and the other sprightly, flexible, and, though ornate, more modest in its intentions—the outcome of a renewed interest in Borromini. This second style is usually known as Rococo.8

The battles over the legacy of the second half of the Seicento are perhaps most strongly cast into relief by the most celebrated architectural querelle of the first half of

Frontispiece: Rome, S. Paolo alla Regola, relief on façade.

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

219

(Left) Fig. 1. Rome, S. Giovanni in Laterano, façade, begun 1732. Architect: Alessandro Galilei. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Below) Fig. 2. Ludovico Rusconi Sassi, Project for the façade of S. Giovanni in Laterano. Wood. Destroyed.

the eighteenth century: the competition held in 1732 for the design of the façade of S. Giovanni in Laterano (Fig. 1).9 The competition saw a range of architectural ‘answers’ posed to the ‘questions’ raised by the problems of the basilica itself and the legacy of Borromini, whose designs for the façade, then recently rediscovered, had ignited a very public debate about the completion of the city’s cathedral. Galilei’s classically severe design won the competition, as much because he was a Florentine architect living in the reign of a Florentine pope as for its quality, but its classically severe style was not the only one represented in the submitted designs. Luigi Vanvitelli and nicola Salvi’s designs share Galilei’s classical orientation, but the designs submitted by Ludovico Rusconi Sassi (Fig. 2) and Ferdinando Ruggieri, emphasising wave-form walls, the scenic distribution of surface ornament and the inclusion of subsidiary structures such as the ‘tempietto’ in Sassi’s modello, seem to speak of an entirely different stylistic outlook. here, in a nutshell and in the same year, is the nub of the architectural ‘crisis’ of the first half of the eighteenth century. According to this bifurcated view of the ‘crisis’, berninismo prospered thanks to the institutional support it received at the Accademia di S. Luca where it formed the architectural style of a succession of principi—Giovanni Battista contini, Mattia de’ Rossi and, most especially carlo Fontana, whose successful internationalisation of the style made him perhaps the most significant architectural teacher of his period. This style, which is often seen as precursory to the neoclassicism of cosimo Morelli’s

220

Palazzo Braschi and Valadier’s plans for the Piazza del Popolo, has variously been called ‘late Baroque classicism’,10 ‘academic classicism’11 and ‘proto-neoclassicism’.12 Borrominismo is less well studied and the lineaments of its efflorescence even in academic circles in the first few decades of the eighteenth century remain little understood.13 The post-Borromini manifestations of the Borrominian style are also yet to win an agreed formal denomination. Several writers have referred to this style as Rococo;14 others, seeking to reserve that stylistic term for a particular kind of decorative art in France, have used the term ‘Baroque’ to cover everything from Vignola to Vittone.15 The term barocchetto has also been used by scholars,16 but

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 3. G. B. nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail, with churches discussed in this article marked. 1. SS. celso e Giuliano (nolli 575) 2. Oratory of the Filippini (nolli 657) 3. S. Maria della Quercia (nolli 710) 4. SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini (nolli 726) 5. S. Paolo alla Regola (nolli 734) 6. S. carlo ai catinari (nolli 759) 7. il Gesù (nolli 902) 8. S. Maria sopra Minerva (nolli 844) 9. S. ignazio (nolli 847) 10. S. Marcello al corso (nolli 286) 11. SS. Bartolomeo ed Alessandro (nolli 316) 12. S. Maria Maddalena (nolli 334) 13. S. Apollinare (nolli 515) 14. SS. Biagio e cecilia de’ Materassari (chiesa del Divio Amore). (nolli 450) 15. SS. Ambrogio e carlo al corso (nolli 461) 16. SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli (nolli 423) 17. SS. Vincenzo ed Anastasio (nolli 247) 18. S. Andrea al Quirinale (nolli 177) 19. S. carlo alle Quattro Fontane (nolli 180) 20. SS. Domenico e Sisto (nolli 131) 21. S. caterina a Magnanapoli (nolli 130) 22. S. Andrea dei Rigattieri (nolli 70) 23. S. Maria in campitelli (nolli 989) 24. S. Maria in cosmedin (nolli 1086) 25. S. Pasquale Baylon (nolli 1139)

caveats about its use have been raised by others including Johns and Mallory.17 The term borrominismo itself has been used on occasion.18 At least one scholar has tried to mount a case for the complete avoidance of broad terms of stylistic discrimination in the discussion of sculpture, preferring to regard each sculptor, indeed each sculpture, as representing an individual achievement: one which cannot be fully understood without an awareness of what else was being done at the time, and what had been done before, but as something that gains little from being forced into the straitjacket of a period name.19

There can be scarcely any doubt that the use of broad style terms creates as many problems as it solves. By their very nature, broad style terms tend to obscure the material with which they propose to deal, schematising

and simplifying the character of that material even to the point of misrepresenting it. Broad style terms also tend to subordinate or eliminate material that does not conform to dominant paradigms, often cloaking its significance by casting it as retrogressive or statistically insignificant in the definition of those paradigms: paradigms become paradigmatic precisely because they create categories of historiographic marginalisation. The historiography of the early eighteenth century has suffered particularly in this regard; a period read as transitional must almost of necessity be understood as filled with minor traditions inviting marginalisation. in this article, i want to revisit the issue of the style of the architecture of selected church façades erected between 1721 and 1741. i wish to do this not by critically examining the parameters of berninismo or borrominismo specifically, but by reconsidering once more the very notion of style itself.

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

221

Style and the Façade

(Opposite left) Fig. 4. Marino, S. Maria del Rosario (1712), façade. Architect: Giuseppe Sardi. (© John Weretka 2013.)

Although the concept of ‘style’ has been with art history at least since Giorgio Vasari’s unflattering and unsympathetic attempts to characterise the style of Byzantine art, style criticism remains firmly wedded to the Morellian identification of such fingerprints as ear shapes. certain recent attempts in English to chart the territory of Roman architecture in the early eighteenth century, including nina Mallory’s Roman Rococo Architecture from Clement XI to Benedict XIV (1700–1758), do precisely this, enumerating as the fingerprints of the style Mallory identifies as ‘Rococo’: ‘ear’ frames for windows and doors, the use of the ‘pagoda’ pediment type, the use of ‘light, linear type[s] of moulding, which can adopt with ease all manner of novel and bizarre forms’, the invention of new capital types, and ‘the frequent introduction into the design of frames of many floral and vegetal ornamental motifs and other natural or man-made forms such as shells or ribbons’.20 While there is little dispute that these features do occur in buildings of this period, reduction of the concept of style to the enumeration of decorative features falls short of illuminating the style of the building. More recent analyses of the concept of style have emphasised that, while gathering individual data from works of art is critical to understanding style, it does not in itself constitute stylistic analysis, nor does it ultimately permit the positing of style-period terms. in the formulation of the musicologist Leonard Meyer’s, style is:

(Opposite right) Fig. 5. Marino, S. Maria del Rosario (1712), interior. (© David R. Marshall 2013)

A replication of patterning … in the artefacts produced by human behaviour, that results from a series of choices made within some set of constraints.21

Meyer’s phenomenological understanding of style accepts as its point of departure the necessity of the identification of ‘Morellian’ characteristics of a work but insists that the critical work of the scholar of style is the delimitation of the set of paradigms within which artists make choices. James Ackerman similarly observes that: A style … may be thought of as a class of related solutions to a problem—or responses to a challenge—that may be said to begin whenever artists being to pursue a problem or react to a challenge which differs significantly from those posed by the prevailing style or styles.22

Meyer and Ackerman’s conception of stylistic criticism acknowledges that the principal data of style are the art works that encode the decision-making process of artists and that the principal work of the style critic—work that is

222

intrinsically speculative—is the inference from these works of the questions with which the artist dealt during the process of artistic creation. The assembly of what Meyer calls the ‘brute facts’ of stylistic analysis (the enumeration of the data set on which the style critic proposes to rely) constitutes merely the starting point for the real work of stylistic analysis. Genuine stylistic analysis consists in the development of hypotheses about the way in which ‘brute facts’ co-ordinate with each other; what Meyer refers to as ‘institutional facts’ or ‘the rules of the game’. For Meyer, stylistic description is not the enumeration of the characteristic elements of a single artist’s vocabulary. Rather, he demands the examination of the deployment of an ornamental vocabulary, constructive principles and so forth within a system. Style analysis is a synthetic, interpretative, metafactual exercise based on discretely observed data but discussions of style should not stop at the enumeration of these characteristic fingerprints. it is the role of style critic to hypothesise the identity of the system within which the fingerprints are deployed. Style is this system. in this article, i consider six churches façades erected in the period before the ‘triumph of neoclassicism’, during which exploration of the legacy of Borromini was at its height. With dates of construction ranging from 1721 to 1741, these façades were erected to front both new buildings as well as those that had been under construction for some time. This group of six provides an utterly characteristic snapshot of the state of church façade design in these years. This article commences with a consideration of the ‘brute facts’ of each façade, examining architectural structure, ornamental pattern, topographical situation, colouristic value and other characteristics. in each case, basic information about the building history and architect, otherwise not readily accessible in English, is provided. in the second section, i hypothesise the ‘institutional facts’ betrayed by the ‘brute facts’. in situating these façades within the persistent design logic of the aedicule, inherited from architectural designers of the high Baroque, i hope to show that many façade designers of the early eighteenth century were radically rethinking the aedicule as an organisational unit, replacing it with the values of motility, surface vibration and colourism that the favoured medium of stucco could provide. These façades form a discrete group that future research might show widespread enough to be considered an independent style.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

The Churches: The ‘Brute Facts’ S. Paolo alla Regola (1721)23 S. Paolo alla Regola is often identified as having been built on the site of St Paul’s preaching base among the Romans in what was then a Jewish quarter of the city.24 Ownership of this church was vested in the sixteenth century in the Università dei Vaccinari; by 1566 the altar was considered ‘mediocremente tenuto’ (poorly maintained) and the church itself ‘ombrosa, assai humida et mal lastricata’ (dingy, very humid and badly paved).25 The parish status granted in 1539 was suppressed by clement Viii in 1594 and the building entrusted to the Eremiti Scalzi di S. Agostino. in 1619, the church was ceded to the Padri del Terzo Ordine di S. Francesco of the Province of Sicily. in 1687 they petitioned innocent Xi for permission to rebuild ‘their church of S. Paolo alla Regola called by reason of its smallness S. Paolino … [and] ruined by age’.26 Permission was granted and, shortly afterwards, the new church was erected to the design of Frate Giovanni Battista Bergonzoni (c. 1628–92), a teacher of theology at the collegium Siculum attached to the church.27 The piazza in front of the church was opened in 1705 after the acquisition of houses for demolition in 1694. The façade of the church (Fig. 6) was not completed until 1721, and the building consecrated in 1728.28 The identity of the architect is contested. Vasi says that ‘[the Franciscan tertiaries] rebuilt the church in 1704 and adorned it with a façade according to the design of cavalier Giovanni Battista contini’,29 while Titi notes that ‘the façade is by ciaomo [sic] ciolli and Giuseppe

Sardi’.30 A chapter record of 25 August 1721, on the other hand, states that ‘the façade of our church, which at present is old and run down, [will be erected] according to the design already made for it by the architect Giacomo cioli, and at around the price already agreed upon by the stonemason Giuseppe Sardi’,31 it seems assigning the role of designer to cioli and the role of the executant to Sardi. The capomastro and sometime architect Giuseppe Sardi is largely remembered for the contribution he is believed to have made to the façade of S. Maria Maddalena.32 Pedroli has suggested that the upper part of the façade should be given to Sardi and the lower to cioli.33 On the other hand, Mallory has suggested that while cioli should continue to be credited with the overall conception of the façade, certain of the decorative features bear such a strong relationship to Sardi’s securely attributed work at S. Pasquale Baylon and S. Lorenzo in Lucina that the decorative programme should be attributed at least in part to him.34 As an artistic personality, cioli is known primarily through material submitted for the concorsi clementini, the annual design competition held under the auspices of the Accademia di S. Luca. Any attribution to him thus rests on this slender foundation.35 Three works may be given to Sardi with absolute certainty.36 his first commission, the fascinating S. Maria del Rosario at Marino (Figs. 4–5), was erected to his sole design in 1712. in 1718 he constructed the façade for S. Maria in cosmedin, barbarously pulled down in 1896–99 in order to allow Giovenale to erect a neomedieval façade. certain details of Sardi’s façade, fortunately recorded in a Vasi engraving (Fig. 7) and photographs, seem redolent of the façade of S. Paolo alla Regola and, indeed, the

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

223

façade of S. Maria in cosmedin has formed the principal stylistic concordance allowing an attribution of the façade of S. Paolino to Sardi. Sardi’s final church commission, the church of S. Pasquale Baylon (SS. Quaranta Martiri) erected for the Minori Scalzi Riformati, was built between 1736 and 1739 (Fig. 9). Fasolo speculated that the figure of Sardi the architect never existed, and a comparison just of these three securely attributed works reveals how this was possible.37 S. Maria del Rosario, S. Maria in cosmedin and S. Paolino, if it be attributed to Sardi, are marked by the sinuous, vibrating kind of wall surface that formed part of the common parlance of the generation of 1700–20, but the façade of S. Pasquale Baylon is a hard, prismatic façade that seems to have been conceived as a retardataire reading of Francesco Fontana’s c. 1708 façade for S. Andrea dei Rigattieri (Fig. 10). Architectural design remained a peripheral activity for Sardi. he came from that artisanal background that had given rise to figures like Borromini and dos Santos and he is encountered more often as a capomastro than as an architect, working at S. Maria in Trastevere (under Recalcati in 1714), S. Maria in

224

(Above) Fig. 6. Rome, S. Paolo alla Regola (1721), façade and piazza. Architect: Giuseppe Sardi (attributed). (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Below) Fig. 7. Giuseppe Vasi, S. Maria in Cosmedin. Etching and engraving, from Delle Magnificenze, 1761. Detail.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Monticelli (under Sassi in 1715), SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini (under de Sanctis in 1722-1723) and elsewhere. The vaghissima38 façade of S. Paolo alla Regola is disposed across five bays and two storeys (Figs. 6, 8). The architect’s choice of the five-bay, two-storey design, traditionally linked to and dependent upon the basilical

(Above) Fig. 8. Giuseppe Vasi, S. Paolo alla Regola. Etching and engraving, from Delle Magnificenze, 1761. (Below left) Fig. 9. Rome, S. Pasquale Baylon, façade (1736–39). Architect: Giuseppe Sardi. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Below right) Fig. 10. Rome, S. Andrea dei Rigattieri (c. 1708). Architect: Giuseppe Sardi. (© John Weretka 2013.)

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

225

ground plan, shows how, at one level, façade design was highly conventionalised: this façade type, generally found fronting basilical ground plans, actually fronts a Greek cross plan church. Free-standing members are entirely avoided in this façade, with pilasters in the corinthian order used in the lower storey, and composite order pilasters in the upper (Fig. 12). An examination of the use of the membering in this façade shows that, like its archetype, the ‘counterReformation façade’, the architect appears to have made some attempt to create planar recession. The rearmost plane of the façade comprises an extended ‘screen wall’, enlivened through the use of light-relief wall panels (in the outer bays of the lower storey) (Fig. 11) or cartouches (central bays of the lower storey) (Fig. 13).39 Two forward planes are applied to this background. Although these applied layers achieve a measure of individuation at the extremities of the central bay, their presence betrayed by the stacked pilasters at the ends of the entablature in each storey, there is scarcely any attempt at the level of structural independence to characterise these two separate layers— the intention is to create a uniplanar organism to which the membering has been applied decoratively in paperthin layers. A more monumental version of the structural rationale of S. Paolo alla Regola appears at SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini, while aspects of the architectonic conception, including the same timpano flesso, adumbrate motifs at SS. celso e Giuliano, constructed over a decade later. Although the core of the structure is actually a flat screen wall, the lightly concave-convex-concave entablature of the lower storey (Fig. 14) and the responding concave-concave-concave shape of the entablature of the upper storey impart a subtle movement to the organism. The frisson of this movement is heightened by the

226

(Top left) Fig. 11. S. Paolo alla Regola, panel on ground floor. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Top centre) Fig. 12. S. Paolo alla Regola, composite capitals on upper story. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Top right) Fig. 13. S. Paolo alla Regola, cartouche on lower story. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above) Fig. 14. S.Paolo ala Regola, oblique view of main entablature. (© David. R. Marshall 2013.)

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

multiplication of mouldings throughout the façade, a motif we will encounter at Filippo Raguzzini’s S. Maria della Quercia in particular. At the level of the structure, the multiplication of mouldings is the direct result of the decorative reiteration of the membering; the effects of it are carried through to the level of the bordering of the wall panels, the cartouches and the ‘floating’ pediment above the door in the lower storey. This is the only church in this study for which a piazza would or could be opened in the eighteenth century (1705). The façade nonetheless wears its allegiance to eighteenth-century conceptions of urbanism on its sleeve: it is not the space of the piazza that the façade is intended to order, but the experience of the passerby, who will be swept along in the eddy of the vibrating façade and the waveform entablature.

SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini (1721)40

Fig 15. G. B. nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail of SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini (720) and S. Paolo alla Regola (734).

The current church of SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini is built on the site of the church of S. Benedetto in Arenula (de Scottis, Scottorum), a mediaeval foundation believed to date from the early twelfth century. The church was transferred to the custody of the Arciconfraternita della SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini e convalescenti in 1558 and it became a major centre of hospitality for pilgrims. The erection of a completely new building to a design of Martino Longhi the Elder was contemplated soon after the archconfraternity assumed control of the church.41 in 1603, the archconfraternity decided to engage Giovanni Paolo Maggi in succession to Longhi. Maggi continued construction of the church, taking over Longhi’s plan for it almost without change.42 The façade of this church seems to have been by Giacomo Mola, although the exact design of it is unknown and the oblique-projection maps drawn up after its completion only hint at it.43 For unknown reasons this façade was demolished and a new façade, to the design of Francesco de Sanctis, erected in its place.44 Work on this façade commenced on 5 March 1722, when the Piedmontese merchant Giovanni Battista de Rossi was given permission to erect it, and terminated in June 1723. Before winning the concorso for the erection of the Scalinata di Spagna, Francesco de Sanctis is attested as a peritus in the provision of misure e stime for a variety of clients. De Sanctis won both the 1717 and 1723 concorsi for the Scalinata di Spagna, and was active on the project from 1723 until its completion in 1726. in 1721, de Sanctis was named with contini as the successor to Bizzaccheri to the position of architect of the Archiconfraternità della Trinità dei Pellegrini. it was in this capacity that he

oversaw the erection of the new façade in 1722–23, for which the capomastro was Giuseppe Sardi. De Sanctis’ public commissions evaporated almost immediately upon the collapse of a section of the left-hand side of the Scalinata in 1728. The projects of his later life are nearly all connected with religious organisations, but the failure of the Scalinata project dogged him until the end of his life. Only his death in early 1731 put a stop to legal action initiated by the Minims of the Trinità dei Monti against him for the collapse of the staircase. The façade of SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini (Fig. 16), fronting a simple single-naved building with side chapels, short ‘transept’ and deep presbytery, is disposed on the usual two storeys, in a five-bayed design arranged on a symmetrical rhythm.45 The organism is best understood as a system of three superimposed planes. The rearmost plane forms a screen-wall in light relief upon which two further planes are placed. The rear plane is terminated by corinthian pilasters that support the two volutes that connect the lower storey to the upper. The next plane was evidently conceived as a large aedicular structure, articulated in both storeys with corinthian columns. At the centre of the façade, the topmost plane has been ‘cut away’ to reveal the principal entrance, upper-storey window and relief of the Trinity (originally an ovoid window) that belong to the second plane. As Vasi’s engraving shows (Fig. 17), the unity of this plane was emphasised at the line of entablature through the use of segments at the extremities, framing the triangular pediment, and removed during the course of nineteenth-century restorations.46 The foremost plane is

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

227

that of the statuary niches, capped with arcs in the upper storey and ‘chinese hats’ in the lower. commentators have routinely drawn attention to the dependence of the façade of SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini on Fontana’s influential façade for S. Marcello al corso (Fig. 18) and its progeny including Juvarra’s S. cristina in Turin.47 The façade of SS. Trinità is relatively unusual in the Roman context of the early eighteenth century in adopting a relatively unitary, vertically organised façade. Most façades of the mid- to late Seicento and early Settecento tend to spread laterally in order to create the three bays over five, double-storied structure typical of the ‘counter-Reformation façade’. SS. Trinità, on the other hand, is reminiscent of the type of Seicento façade exemplified by G. B. Soria’s 1640 structure for S. caterina a Magnanapoli or the façade of SS. Domenico e Sisto (Fig. 21), which reached its definitive form in the period of Vincenzo and Felice della Greca’s superintendence (1646–63) of that church. When he designed SS. Trinità de Sanctis evidently had in mind the way in which carlo Quadri had modified this basic idea in his 1690s façade for S. Maria Maddalena (Figs. 19, 20). Quadri took

228

the ‘screen façade’ idea of these Seicento churches and subjected it to the force of concavity while flaring out the upper corners of the façade, producing an inverted triangular shape. De Sanctis altered Quadri’s idea in two important ways. First, by tripling the number of planes, he was able to increase the degree of relief of the orders, yielding a strong central accent that counterbalances the dynamic vertical thrust. Secondly, he clearly wished to achieve a synthesis of the ‘counter-Reformation façade’ type by uniting its organisation into three bays over five with the ‘screen façade’ type. As at S. Maria Maddalena, SS. Trinità forges a dominant relationship with its piazza almost out of proportion to the pretensions of the façade (Fig. 16).48 But while the façade of S. Maria Maddalena tends towards evanescence as one reads vertically—an ideal canvas for the applied stucco decoration (Fig. 19)—SS. Trinità achieves an impressive vigour unmatched elsewhere in the city. As we have seen already at S. Paolo alla Regola and will see in the churches discussed below, this desire to organise urban space subordinatively is increasingly shunned in the churches of the early eighteenth century.49

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Opposite) Fig. 16. Rome, SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini, façade (1721). Architect: Franceco de Sanctis. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Top left) Fig. 17. Giuseppe Vasi, SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini, detail. Etching and engraving, from Delle Magnificenze, 1761. (Top right) Fig. 18. Giuseppe Vasi, S. Marcello, detail. Etching and engraving, from Delle Magnificenze, 1761. (Above left) Fig. 19. Rome, S. Maria Maddalena, upward view of façade (1690s). Architect: carlo Quadri. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above right) Fig. 20. SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini, upward view of façade. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Left) Fig. 21. Giuseppe Vasi, SS. Domenico e Sisto (left) and S. Caterina a Magnanapoli (right). Etching and engraving, from Delle Magnificenze, 1761.

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

229

(Far left) Fig. 22. Rome, S. Maria della Quercia, façade (1727). Architect: Filippo Raguzzini. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above) Fig. 23. S. Maria della Quercia, view of piazza. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Left) Fig. 24. G. B. nolli, Map of Rome, 1748, detail. S. Maria della Quercia (710).

S. Maria della Quercia (1727)50 A ‘Hauptwerk des Rokoko im Rom’ (masterpiece of the Rococo in Rome),51 the church of S. Maria della Quercia is, with the Piazza S. ignazio, perhaps the most significant major public commission of Filippo Raguzzini (1690–1771), the beloved architect of Benedict Xiii.52 A church dedicated to Saint nicholas stood on this site in the early mediaeval period and is first mentioned in the catalogue of Turin (1313–39). The current dedication to Our Lady of the Oak derives from the start of the sixteenth century, when the church was renamed as part of Julius ii’s campaign to popularise the cult of the Madonna della Quercia, a miraculous image in Viterbo to which he had made a pilgrimage in 1505.53 in 1507, the Pope conferred the church on the Università dei Macellai (the guild of butchers), dominated by natives of the cities of Viterbo, Orvieto and Siena.54 The exact state and ground plan of this early church are unknown.55

230

Plans to rebuild the church, mooted at the start of the eighteenth century, were brought to fruition on 21 September 1727 when Benedict Xiii presided at the prima pietra ceremony for the construction of the new church, designed by Raguzzini.56 Work continued under Raguzzini’s direction until Benedict Xiii’s death, and the church was finally consecrated in 1738 after Raguzzini’s replacement by an architect now known to have been Gregorini.57 A jewel of early eighteenth-century architecture, S. Maria della Quercia is one of the major works of Benedict’s ‘parsimonioso pontificato’ (parsimonious pontificate).58 Raguzzini’s brief but stellar public career was intimately tied to the fortunes of Pietro Francesco cardinal Orsini, whom he served in Benevento before transferring to Rome with ‘una schiera di imprenditori, muratori e artigiani beneventani’ (a host of building contractors, masons and Beneventan artisans)59 upon Orsini’s election to the papacy in March 1724 as Benedict Xiii.60 Through Benedict’s patronage Raguzzini held virtually every major public architectural office in Rome. Although credited with many minor projects during Benedict’s pontificate, he is remembered for a smaller number of larger public commissions, including the erection of the Ospedale di S. Gallicano (1726), the systematisation of the Piazza S. ignazio (1727–35), perhaps his masterpiece and a masterpiece of early eighteenth-century urban planning, and the erection of S. Maria della Quercia, one of his very

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

few wholly authored Roman ecclesiastical projects. Upon Benedict’s death in 1730 a general purge of the Beneventan ‘schiera’ saw Raguzzini briefly imprisoned and stripped of his major offices.61 While the subsequent restoration of some of them, and his admission to the congregazione dei Virtuosi al Pantheon in September 1749, helped to rehabilitate his career, he never again oversaw a major public project. nonetheless, as Martini put it, ‘today we can affirm that this artist had a determinant role in the architecture of the eighteenth century, especially in Rome, where he may be considered the initiator of our Rococo’.62 changes made in 1938 to the urban fabric that destroyed the original scenography have made a true appreciation of the façade of S. Maria della Quercia difficult for today’s visitor. The church originally terminated the narrow piazza formed between two isole (Fig. 24), and the façade now appears too high and narrow for its setting (Figs. 22, 23).63 Raguzzini’s design, typically for him, was evidently intended to be read within an entire urban framework, and the graceful decrescendo of the outer components of the façade were intended to provide a muted transition into the surrounding urban complex. Built over two stories, with the lower storey approximately two times larger than the upper storey, the façade is designed on a strongly convex ground plan (Fig. 22). A three-bay design is hinted at, with the protrusion of the middle ‘bay’ acting as a synecdoche for the effect of massing traditional towards the centre of the counterReformation façade, while the lightly concave wings stand in for outer bays. Although a weak amphibrachic rhythm is thus established, Raguzzini clearly intended to diminish the structural significance of the membering; the membering is, in fact, a slightly more heavily accented version of the wall panelling itself: the orders have been reinvented as applied ornament of reduced architectonic significance. The membering is reduced to low-relief corinthian pilasters in the lower storey, continued through the entablature into the upper storey, where the pretence of functionality is dropped and the pilasters achieve only slightly more relief than the flanking wall panels. The reduction in the functional significance of the orders reduces the legibility of the organism as a bayconceived design and, indeed, the aedicular type typical of the counter-Reformation façade has almost studiously been ignored. in its place, Raguzzini gives us a novel and highly personal version of the ‘screen-wall’ façade, enlivened through the movimentato ground plan and through a considered deployment of multiple mouldings at the level of the entablature (particularly in the lower storey) that imparts a subtle vibration to the wall surface. A lively use of apertures, with a responding square window in the upper

Figs. 25–27. S. Maria della Quercia, upward views of cornice. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

storey and square door in the lower storey separated by a lobate window above the entry64 enhances the sense that the façade is diaphanous and diaphragmatic, somehow expressive of forces in the urban texture. The decorative use of textured light-relief wall panels between the members is painterly in conception and, as applied ornament of any kind is avoided, the decorative charm of the façade is entirely dependent on the delicate chiaroscuro of raised and flat surfaces, the serrations of the cornice and membering (Figs. 25–27), and the calligraphy of the mouldings.65

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

231

232

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro (1728)66 The façade of the national church of the Bergamasques in Rome, SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro, has been the subject of debate for almost three centuries (Fig. 28). The façade remained unattributed in contemporary sources until the 1750 edition of Roisecco’s Roma antica, e moderna, the first to mention the authorship of the Roman architect carlo de Dominicis. names including those of contini and Raguzzini have been mentioned in connection with this church, but recent scholarship seems definitively to have settled the matter in de Dominicis’ favour.67 As Mortari has noted, de Dominicis’ name is ‘legato a poche date e non numerose opere, incertemente attribuite’ (joined to few dates and a small number of works, uncertainly attributed).68 The architect was born in Rome, the son of a capomastro muratore. he first came to attention in 1716 as the winner of the first prize in the third class of the concorso clementino for his plan and elevation of the gate of the Orti Farnesiani. his first commission, the tomb of cardinal Bichi in S. Agata dei Goti, dates from between 1718 and 1725. he is mentioned again in 1727 in connection with Raguzzini’s remodelling of the Piazza S. ignazio and in 1733 is identified as the giovane of the architect. De Domincis’ star rose during the 1730s, particularly under the patronage of the corsini pope; in 1735, he was admitted to the congregazione dei Virtuosi al Pantheon.69 in 1730 he was named architect to the Minims of SS. Trinità dei Monti in succession to Raguzzini and in 1739 he became titular architect of the Ospedale di S. Maria della Pietà. he is known principally for the construction of S. Eligio delle Gensole (1741–44), the fascinating church of the Università dei Sellai that was regrettably sacrificed to the Tiber embankment works of the late nineteenth century. he was also responsible for restoration works at S. Salvatore delle coppelle (1743) and SS. Orsola e caterina (1745–47). his latter years were consumed with minor projects, including the design of the pavement of S. Maria della Vittoria (1743–44) and the mensa of the high altar and other works at S. Francesco a Ripa (1746). The area in the southwest corner of Piazza colonna was acquired towards the middle of the sixteenth century by the confraternità dei Poveri Forastieri, a group attached to the early Jesuit movement (Fig. 29). This group established the Ospedale dei Pazzarelli in this area and, in 1562, attached to it an oratorio, which was transformed in 1569 into a church of three bays with rectangular tribune by Francesco da Volterra. in 1725, at Benedict Xiii’s direction, the Bergamasques ceded S. Macuto, at that time their national

(Opposite) Fig. 28. Rome, SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro, façade (1728). Architect: carlo de Dominicis. (Above) Fig. 29. G. B. nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail with SS. Bartolomeo ed Alessandro (316); Piazza di Pietra (315); S. Macuto (323); S. ignazio (847).

church, to the Jesuits.70 As compensation, S. Maria della Pietà was gifted to them by a papal brief in 1726 and the church was rededicated to the Bergamasque national saints. The transfer of the inmates of the Ospedale to the Via della Lungara occurred on 7 December 172871 and the demolition of the old hospital on 5 July 172972 as part of the general reconfiguration of the site. The initial plans of the confraternity of the Bergamasques appear to have countenanced the construction of an entirely new complex of buildings, including a new church.73 Benedict Xiii seems to have forced Raguzzini on the Bergamasques as the architect of this project. however, when he was disgraced temporarily after the Pope’s death, the confraternity resorted to another architect to bring its plans to fruition. This architect appears to have been carlo de Dominicis (1696–1758), at that time architect to the confraternity.74 De Dominicis drafted at least five variant designs for the church based on an ovoid plan with radiating chapels, an evident adumbration of his later executed design for SS. celso e Giuliano. Two of the designs, those marked ‘X’ and ‘Xi’, proposed leaving the church with its façade on Piazza colonna, while two others (‘Xii’ and ‘Xiii’) considered restructuring the entire isola so that the church would face the Piazza di Pietra.75 Ultimately, presumably for reasons of economy, the confraternity elected not to proceed with any of these designs. Rather, the basic shape of the church as it had been designed by Francesco da Volterra

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

233

(Left) Fig. 30. SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro, prothryon and lunette. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above) Fig. 31. Piazza Colonna, with De Dominicis’ façade of SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro. Etching. From G. Roisecco, Roma Antica e Moderna, 1750.

was retained. The interior was renovated in a reasonably comprehensive way, and a modest façade, seemingly of de Dominicis’ conception, erected between June 1729 and August 1731.76 Although de Dominicis’ unexecuted plans all make use of the same basic ovoid plan, the architect provided a number of different solutions to the problem of the façade. Designs ‘X’ and ‘Xi’, subtle variations of each other, both contemplated a concave-convex-concave waveform façade that would have been similar to that realised by Raguzzini at S. Maria della Quercia just a few years earlier. Design ‘Xii’, the first oriented to the Piazza di Pietra, appears to have contemplated a deeply concave façade, reminiscent of that used at S. Agnese in the Piazza navona (1650s) and at S. caterina da Siena (1766-1768). Design ‘Xiii’, also facing the Piazza di Pietra, but with the orientation of the congregational hall reversed from that shown in Design ‘Xii’, shows two façade variants, each responding to different ingress spaces directly behind the façade: evidently the semi-circular variant of this space would have allowed the use of a concave façade (similar in conception to that shown in Design ‘Xii’), while the rounded-corner rectangular variant would have demanded a flatter façade. it was to be almost a decade before de Dominicis could paint his grand ideas on the canvas they deserved at SS. celso e Giuliano (see below). At SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro de Dominicis was evidently instructed to make do with da Volterra’s façade which, as the Piazza colonna

234

fresco in the Biblioteca Vaticana (1588) and Felice della Greca’s drawing of 1659 show,77 was of a large-scale trabeated shape probably with terminal pilasters, enclosing a thermal window in the upper part of the façade and a aedicular formation in the lower that incorporated the door to the church, reached by a short flight of steps.78 A small bellcote was placed at roof level to the right as one faced the façade. As della Greca’s drawing in particular shows, the façade was practically flush with the surrounding buildings; the effect must therefore have been something like da Volterra’s roughly contemporary work at S. Macuto. One might be mistaken for thinking that de Dominicis found himself constrained by his patrons’ desire to retain the old façade of their church but, in fact, he turned this constraint to good effect by attempting an extremely innovative blend of his typically early-eighteenth century ideas with the cinquecento da Volterra façade. As an examination of the elevation from below shows, the façade manages to retain a dim echo of the waveform design de Dominicis had originally intended (Fig. 32). This is best legible at the level of the entablature, which bulges slightly between the terminal Tuscan pilasters; the repercussions of this bulge are carried on through into the mixtilinear pediment (Fig. 33), evidently derived from Borromini’s Oratorio dei Filippini (Fig. 34).79 De Dominicis’ most striking contribution to the façade was the erection of the prothyron that dominates

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

the centre of the façade (Fig. 30). Gargano has identified antecedents for this motif in the work of Francesco da Volterra, Bernini and Pietro da cortona; equally significant, in my opinion, is the ‘tabernacle façade’ that Giuseppe Sardi gave the remarkable church of SS. Rosario in the colonna feudo of Marino (Fig. 4). The prothyron is, in fact, a miniature version of the kind of façade governed by the principles of planar recession found at SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini. The foremost plane is that of the freestanding ionic columns. The segments they carry are part of mixtilinear pediment, a kind of response to the ‘Oratory’ pediment at the top of the building, that has been disrupted by the introduction of the bas-relief of the Pietà in the roundel beneath the thermal window and by the outward canting of the entire aedicular unit. One plane back, we encounter lower-relief ionic pilasters that, had they not too been canted outwards, would have stood behind or slightly to the side of the freestanding columns. The rearmost plane is the screen-wall of the façade proper. What is important about this ‘tabernacle’ is not the array of decorative detail that a scholar such as Mallory would identify as typical of the ‘Rococo’ style of architecture—the stylisation of the neck of the columns and pilasters, the cherubs in the panel directly above the door, the garlands that cascade from the top of the ‘pediment’ of the door aedicule down the sides of the bas-relief, and the bas-relief itself—but rather the characteristic way in

(Top) Fig. 32. SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro, upward view of superstructure. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above left) Fig. 33. SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro, pediment. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above right) Fig. 34. Rome, Oratory of the Filippini, pediment. Architect: Francesco Borromini. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

which it seeks to disrupt architectural unities, atomising them and reassembling them in referential but novel combinations; and the way in which it understands the façade’s place in the urban texture. The prothyron appears not to have cracked open under the pressure of the accumulation of tensions within the façade itself; rather, the terminal pilasters of the façade, allowing transition to the buildings on either side, act as a diaphragm through which the forces of the entire southern streetscape of the Piazza colonna can collect themselves in the prothyron, which breaks open like a ripe pomegranate. The prothyron thus appears not so much as the projecting expression of forces localised with the façade itself, but instead as an eruption from within an urban membrane that stretches the length of the Bergamasque precinct. in other words, the façade of the church is intended to be read within the urban fabric, rather than competing with it or dominating it, as in the typical counter-Reformation façade.80

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

235

236

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

SS. Celso e Giuliano (1736)81 The church of SS. celso e Giuliano (Fig. 35), on the via di Banco di S. Spirito, has a long and distinguished history. The current church, completed in 1736, is the third on this site. The first church is documented from 1008. By the twelfth century it had become highly significant, due to its location in what was then the heart of the city, its position on a major pilgrimage route to Saint Peter’s, and the location of a fish market in front of its north-facing portico. SS. celso e Giuliano was a dependent church of S. Lorenzo in Damaso but in 1198 was erected as a cappella papale by innocent iii, one of eleven churches in the catalogue of Turin to be accorded this honour. This first church is represented in several early sources, including Alessandro Strozzi’s map of 1474 and Benozzo Gozzoli’s Milan fresco of 1465. The destruction of the mediaeval church commenced around 1509 on the orders of Julius ii, who intended to alleviate congestion on the Via di Banco di S. Spirito, the principal approach road to the Ponte Sant’Angelo, by broadening the road at the expense of the church. Julius commissioned Bramante to design a new church, the costs of the construction of which were to be underwritten by the Pope. Upon the death of Julius ii in 1513, construction of this church halted and ultimately the capitolo Vaticano declined to offer the funds that would have been necessary to complete it. in 1535, the chapter of SS. celso e Giuliano decided to cut its losses and converted the only part of Bramante’s building to have been completed, the north-western chapel, into the church proper. Work to convert this chapel had evidently been completed by 1551, when it was represented on the Bufalini map (Fig. 36). The extremely simple façade of this single-naved church was oriented to the west, with the congregational hall aligned parallel to the Via di Banco di S. Spirito. By the first decades of the eighteenth century, the church threatened to fall into ruin and the chapter looked to its papal protector, clement Xii, to rebuild the complex. clement appointed carlo de Dominicis, possibly on the strength of a recommendation from Monsignor Giuseppe Alessandro Furietti,82 as architect to the project charging him with building a church, oratory and case for the clergy. On 12 May 1732, the gift of 10,000 scudi from the lottery that clement had relicensed in December 1731 permitted the construction to commence;83 the rebuilding of the church had already been mooted in the July of the previous year.84 notices to vacate were distributed to residents of buildings adjoining on 21 May 1733.85 Demolition of the housing on the Piazza di Ponte to allow the construction of the new church commenced on

(Opposite) Fig. 35. Rome, SS. celso e Giuliano, façade (1736). Architect: carlo de’ Dominicis. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Top) Fig. 36. Leonardo Bufalini, Map of Rome, Rome: Antonio Blado, 1551. Detail showing the original SS. celso e Giuliano. London, British Library, Maps S.T.R. (1). (© British Library.) (Above left) Fig. 37. G. B. nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail. SS. celso e Giuliano (575). (Above right). Fig. 38. Rome, S. Andrea al Quirinale, plan. Architect: Gianlorenzo Bernini.

11 June 1733.86 The old church was pulled down on 22 October 1733,87 and the demolition continued through november, when large pieces of travertine, supposed to be from the Arch of Theodosius, were among other remains discovered in the foundations.88 construction was essentially complete in February 1736 and the consecration by cardinal Vicar Giovanni Guadagni on 11 March 1736 was reported in the Diario Ordinario.89 As S. Eligio remained incomplete and was subsequently destroyed, SS. celso e Giuliano remains de Dominicis’ most significant contribution to the urban fabric of Rome, and must have been a major coup for a little-tested architect. christof Thoenes has characterised the church as ‘a gracious example of the ‘barocchetto’ in the Rome of the early eighteenth century’.90 in the absence of any compositional material relating to the church, scholars such as Gargano have pointed to the precedent of Bernini’s S. Andrea al Quirinale for the ovoid ground plan (Figs. 37, 38), although this shape gained increasing importance

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

237

in the Roman ambit from the first years of the eighteenth century, had been contemplated by de Dominicis himself for SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro and, indeed, was reused by him at S. Eligio.91 The façade, on the contrary, has been seen to draw on specifically Borrominian models. As Gargano notes, the façade unites: diverse motifs of essentially Borrominian derivation, [which are] inserted into a composition valorising scenography and chiaroscuro, modulated with a graceful delicacy.92

As an organism, the façade of SS. celso e Giuliano, identified even in its own day as ‘vaga’ (charming),93 explores the same themes encountered in the tiny ‘tabernacle’ of SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro on a grander canvas. De Dominicis here truncates the usual three-bays-over-five plan of the counter-Reformation façade into a one-bayover-three plan he must have felt more suitable for the ovoid congregational room behind and which matched the pretensions of a papal commission. As at the Bergamasque church, the transition in the lower storey from the surrounding urban texture is made through low relief pilasters, here of the more complex composite order. The façade builds in intensity, as had the ‘tabernacle’ of SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro, through the progressive liberation of the orders towards the centre, moving through semi-engaged columns to the fully free-standing columns

238

(Top) Fig. 39. SS. celso e Giuliano, superstructure. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above) Fig. 40. Rome, S. carlo alle Quattro fontane, upper part of façade. Architect: Francesco Borromini. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

that frame the slightly bulging central bay (Fig. 39). And here too, as at the earlier church, the aedicular unit that would have ordered the central bay is riven apart, here through the intrusion of a ‘tempietto’ of the kind encountered above the doorways both of Borromini’s S. carlino (Fig. 40) and collegio di Propaganda Fide. This tempietto encloses an arched window that is the counterpart of the thermal window that de Dominicis was forced to keep at SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro (Fig. 30) but, read through

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 41. Giuseppe Vasi, Chiesa dei SS. Celso e Giuliano. Etching and engraving, from Delle Magnificenze, 1761. (Right) Fig. 42. SS. celso e Giuliano, heading of ground floor niche. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Far right) Fig. 43. Rome, S. Maria dei Sette Dolori, window framing. Architect: Francesco Borromini. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

the experience of Raguzzini at S. Maria della Quercia, this and the window aligned directly below contribute to that sense of diaphragm that Raguzzini had achieved at the earlier church. The upper storey is capped with an even more movimentato version of the Oratory pediment (Fig. 34). The central concavity of this pediment, responding to the apertures through the pediment of the lower storey and of the tempietto itself, allows a sense of unimpeded vertical ascent, emphasised by the extremely light relief of the pilasters and wall panelling of the upper storey, that the removal of the papal stemma shown in Vasi’s engraving (Fig. 41) has actually accentuated. The use of very low relief wall panelling through the whole façade is to be remarked, setting into relief the delicate applied decoration, derived from the Borrominian vocabulary of sources

including the cappella dei Re Magi (the cherub at the base of the tempietto) and S. Maria dei Sette Dolori (the cowled heads of the lateral niches) (Figs. 42, 43).94 The façade can be read as the centralised expression of forces gathered from the whole streetscape, which is managed with superb ingenuity and finesse given the constraint of working with the narrow via di Banco di S. Spirito. in fact, as Vasi’s engraving shows but later additions have obscured, the buildings either side of the façade were intended to be read as a whole ensemble (Fig. 41). if urban renewal projects such as Raguzzini’s Piazza S. ignazio remain the most important contributions of the early eighteenth century to Roman urbanism, minor projects such as this ‘de Dominicis precinct’ remind us that the compelling stamp of more minor masters on the urban texture can be found elsewhere in the city.

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

239

240

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli (in via Condotti) (1741)95 One of the most striking church façades built in Rome during the first half of the eighteenth century is that of SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli on via condotti, a church Gizzi identifies as forming part of that ‘ristretto gruppo dei capolavori settecenteschi in stile barocchetto o rococò’ (restricted group of eighteenth-century masterpieces in the ‘barocchetto’ or ‘rococo’ style’) (Fig. 44).96 The complex of buildings on the via condotti was built for the Padri Trinitari della Redenzione degli Schiavi. This group had been based originally at S. Stefano in Trullo and then at S. Francesca Romana dei Padri del Riscatto. The latter church was their base immediately before the largesse of Diego Morcillo y Auñon (1649–1739), Archbishop of Lima and Viceroy of Peru, allowed the construction of the new buildings to proceed. 97 The Trinitari calzati petitioned clement Xii for permission to construct a hospice, convent and church on the via condotti ‘solamente [per] li Religiosi Figli di detta Provincia, nati della medesima, la quale oggidì comprende li Regni di Castiglia, León e Navarra’ (solely for the religious sons of the said Province, born in the same, which today comprises the kingdoms of castile, León and navarre).98 The Pope’s authorisation for the project contained several restrictions regarding the siting of the buildings and, in July 1733, the Trinitari calzati commenced construction of the hospice on the corso.99 The foundation stone of the church was laid on 29 September 1741100 but work on the façade was not completed until 1746. The architect of the entire complex was Emanuele Rodriguez dos Santos (c. 1702–64).101 Dos Santos appears to have been active as an architect from at least 1721, and in 1727 he created ephemeral decorations for S. Maria in Aracoeli for the canonisation of the Franciscan saints Giacomo della Marca and Francesco Solano. SS. Trinità appears to have been his first major public project.102 Dos Santos’ involvement in the construction of the hospice, church and convent is documented from 1732, but his relationship with the Trinitari calzati seems to have turned sour since, in 1746, Fuga was called upon to provide perizie on the project and a legal suit against Dos Santos commenced.103 Dos Santos was eventually replaced by José hermosilla y Sandoval, although his involvement was primarily limited to the interior decoration of the church.104 Dos Santos also worked as the architect for the fathers of the church of S. Antonio dei Portoghesi from 1733 until 1750, mostly on ephemeral architecture and the provision of perizie and stime. As nothing is known of his activities between 1750 and his death in 1764, SS. Trinità must be regarded as his masterpiece.

(Opposite) Fig. 44. Rome, SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli (1741). Architect: Emanuele Rodriguez dos Santos. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above) Fig. 45. G. B. nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail, SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli (423).

Dos Santos’ conception bears comparison with de Dominicis’ SS. celso e Giuliano; like de Dominicis, dos Santos had the opportunity to shape the entire urban texture, weaving the church into a complex that was to include a hospice and convent.105 Both share an ovoid ground plan with radiating chapels, and both architects had to work with a narrow street that could not be widened to include an anteposed piazza in order to enhance the view of the facade. Dos Santos seems to have been keenly aware of the limitations that the narrow via condotti forced on him, and the first predicate of his thinking about his façade seems to have been to opt for a concave ground plan. in this choice, he will have had in mind the example of Fontana’s S. Marcello al corso (Fig. 18), perhaps the most compelling concave façade built in the city and one, like SS. Trinità, that allowed for an active distribution of columns, entablature breaks and the attendant planar progression across the façade. Dos Santos’ design valorises monumentality and symmetry in a way that became entirely typical after the triumph of Galilei’s protoneoclassical Lateran façade in 1732 (Fig. 1). imposed on a massive socle, the façade is divided into five bays in lower and upper stories. Rising from the muted accents of the terminal pilasters, through semi-engaged columns and then into free-standing columns, the façade gathers a subtle momentum towards its centre that is legible at the level of the breaks in the lower storey’s entablature.

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

241

increasing the sense of monumentality is the fact that two aedicular units are created only at the level of the entablature of the upper storey, as though the orders disposed across two stories were really meant to be read as a single giant order. The central bay’s aedicule is capped with a triangular pediment and the two bays either side form the outer limits of an enclosing aedicule capped with a segmental pediment (Fig. 47), a variation of the same motif Ferdinando Fuga used at S. Apollinare (1742, Fig. 48), both derived by inversion from Pietro da cortona’s S. Maria della Pace. indeed, S. Apollinare, of an ever-soslightly later date than SS. Trinità, is scarcely more than a bloodlessly ‘classicising’ version of SS. Trinità. Dos Santos’ SS. Trinità façade shares with Raguzzini’s S. Maria della Quercia façade (Fig. 22) a desire for synthetic design, legible over the entire structure and predicated on the use of a single, simple curve. however, the way in which they attempt to achieve this effect is markedly different: at the level of principle, Raguzzini engages with extreme reductionism in which surface movement becomes the active principle, while dos Santos experiments with the traditional vocabularies of orders-based organisation and partition of architectural space. The delicate decorative delight that enlivens SS. celso e Giuliano (Fig. 35), a structure in many ways similar both urbanistically and architectonically to SS. Trinità, is largely absent here.

242

(Above) Fig. 46. Giuseppe Vasi, Chiesa della SS. Trinità e Convento dei PP. Trinitarij. Etching and engraving, from Delle Magnificenze, 1761. (Top) Fig. 47. SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli, upward view of façade. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

Like the eighteenth-century equivalent of the partitioned shadow box, dos Santos’ façade provides an inert backdrop for the customary static display of figurative sculpture, and the need for low-relief wall panels or calligraphic, vibrating mouldings is accordingly obviated. Dos Santos’ façade, in some ways, forms an unhappy compromise between the desire for the multi-bayed, two-storeyed, heavilymembered façade that dominated Roman ecclesiastical architecture for most of the seventeenth century and the convex ground plan forced on the church by the demands of the narrow via condotti.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Left) Fig. 48. Rome, S. Apollinare, façade (1742). Architect: Ferdinando Fuga. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above) Fig. 49. Rome, il Gesù, façade (1570), with bays numbered. Architect: Giacomo della Porta. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

The Church Façade in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries

The Style of Church Façades: the ‘Institutional Facts’ having set out the ‘brute facts’ of six representative Roman church façades in the period before the ‘triumph of neoclassicism’, i now intend to hypothesise the nature of some of the ‘institutional facts’, or characteristics of the paradigms, within which these façades were generated. it is thus the purpose of the present section of this chapter to show that a subset of these façades represents a ‘replication of patterning’ conditioned by constraints that included, most significantly, a decision to mute or eschew entirely the norms of aedicular organisation that formed a core concern of the ‘counter-Reformation façade’. This section of this chapter thus begins by considering the traditions and characterising the history of the ‘counterReformation façade’ before examining the implications of the rejection of aedicular organisation for certain Roman church façades of the early eighteenth century. i will argue finally that these façades in fact represent the kernel of a Roman architectural style hitherto unrecognised in the critical literature of this period.

As nathan Whitman has shown, the architectural context of the church façade in the early eighteenth century was dominated by a debate about the legacy of the aedicular format.106 Whitman has shown that the dominant form of the counter-Reformation church façade, intended for the basilical ground plan, was a design in which an upper storey of three bays surmounted a lower storey of five bays, the two storeys joined by volutes. As represented by the example of the Gesù (Fig. 49), the outer two bays of the lower storey (Bays 1 and 5) form supports for the volutes and correspond to the space allotted to the chapels flanking the nave (in the pre-counter-Reformation church, these would have been side aisles of the church). Bays 2–4 of the lower storey form the supports for the bays of the upper storey of the façade and are capped by a triangular pediment at the top of the structure. Bays 2–4 correspond to the entire width of the nave of the basilica behind the façade and contain the three main entrances to the church. Finally, the central bay of the lower storey itself forms a subsidiary aedicular unit (b), capped in the case of the Gesù by a triangular pediment (echoing the one at the top of the structure) enclosed within a segmental pediment (a, c). This subsidiary aedicule (b) houses the ‘west door’ of the church, its principal entrance. indeed,

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

243

it can be argued that it is the presence of this door that marks the façade as a façade: this door is laid out axially with the respect to the defining feature of the church, the high altar at which the Mass is celebrated and upon which the tabernacle, containing the reserved consecrated host so critical to Tridentine spirituality, stands. Although the touchstone of this design is the façade of the Gesù in Rome, its origins are to be found in façades such as Alberti’s for S. Maria novella in Florence (1470). A wider glance at the façade culture of S. Maria novella reveals the state of flux in which it found itself prior to the start of the sixteenth century: Alberti’s own façade for S. Andrea at Mantua (from 1472) and Bernardo Rossellino’s façade for the Duomo of Pienza (1459–62) form two variations on the theme of a pedimented triumphal arch, fronting churches to quite different ground plans. Alberti’s façade for the Tempio Malatestiano (from 1450) reveals yet another way of ideating the church façade. Early classic expressions of what came to be the ‘orthodox’ church façade, the aedicular façade, are encountered in Rome in Della Porta’s Gesù (1570s, Fig. 49), Giudetti’s S. caterina dei Funari (1560–64) and Rughesi’s S. Maria in Vallicella (1575–1606) (Fig. 50). These early manifestations of the aedicular format are essentially screenfacades in which minimal attention is focussed on planar recession; they are essentially ‘flat’. An important change in orientation within the aedicular tradition occurred in

244

(Above left) Fig. 50. Rome, S. Maria in Vallicella, façade (1575–61). Architect: Giacomo della Porta. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above right) Fig. 51. Rome, S. Susanna, façade (1596–1603), with bays numbered. Architect: carlo Maderno. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

Maderno’s façade for S. Susanna (1596–1603, Fig. 51). Although it retains the same basic plan as those of the second half of the sixteenth century, this façade boldly projects towards the centre of the design, exaggerating a characteristic that Maderno will have observed at the Gesù. Maderno’s façade shares the organisational logic of Della Porta’s, but in place of a liberal use of pilasters, Maderno opts to create planar progression in the façade by migrating from pilaster (the extremities of Bays 1 and 5) through engaged columns (Bays 2 and 4) to full columns (Bay 3). This plastic, even painterly, conception is underlined further by attendant breaks in the entablature of the lower storey. The lower storey is to be read as comparatively more intense than the upper storey, although the upper storey, articulated merely by pilasters, also masses towards the centre of the design. The result is a shape, particularly in the lower storey, that thrusts forward into the urban space in front of it, claiming it for the church (Figs. 52, 54, 55). needless to say, this concept utterly changed the nature of that space. in the early medieval period, the anteposed

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

(Above) Fig. 52. S. Susanna, façade, oblique view. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Above right) Fig. 53. Rome, SS. Ambrogio e carlo al corso, façade (1682). Architect: Luigi Alessandro cardinal Omodei. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) (Below left) Fig. 54. G. B. nolli, Map of Rome, 1748. Detail, showing S. Susanna and piazza in front. (Below centre) Fig. 55. Diagram showing relationship of the façade of S. Susanna and piazza. (© John Weretka 2013.) (Right) Fig. 56. Rome, S. carlo ai catinari, façade (1636–38). Architect: G. B. Soria. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

245

(Left) Fig. 57. Rome, S. Maria in campitelli, façade (1662). Architect: carlo Rainaldi. (© David R. Marshall.) (Above) Fig. 58. Rome, SS. Vincenzo ed Anastasio, façade (1646–50). Architect: Martino Longhi the Younger. (© David R. Marshall.)

piazza had been something of a ‘neutral’ space, used in some cases (for example, the piazza in front of the first SS. celso and Giuliano) for a market. With the advent of the aedicular façade, façade and piazza become part of an organic unity, but with the façade decidedly having the upper hand: the piazza exists because the façade must be seen, and its intrusion into the urban fabric felt.

The Church Façade in the Seventeenth Century The aedicular principles crystallised at the Gesù and at S. Susanna proved enduring, giving rise in the seventeenth century to designs such as those of Giovanni Battista Soria at S. carlo ai catinari (1636–38, Fig. 56). Façades such as that of Luigi Alessandro cardinal Omodei for SS. Ambrogio e carlo al corso (1682, Fig. 53) or that of S. nicola dei Prefetti by an unknown architect (c. 1674) continue to rely on the aedicular rationale, monumentalising it over a giant order. The seventeenth century also saw more radical schemes develop. Rainaldi’s S. Maria in campitelli (1662, Fig. 57) carries forward the investigation of the liberation of the orders commenced by Maderno at S. Susanna. Bays 1 and

246

5 of the lower storey are bordered with pilasters at their outer edges, engaged columns at their inner edges. Bays 2 and 4 of the lower storey, reiterated in the upper storey, are bordered with engaged columns are their outer edges and the full columns of the central aedicule at their inner edges. Emphatic entablature breaks underline the almost aggressive punctuation of this façade. The deep recession of bays and the liberal use of columns—at 32, the greatest number of any façade in the city—lend colouristic values to this design. Martino Longhi the Younger’s façade for SS. Vincenzo e Anastasio (1646–50, Fig. 58) uses the order almost decoratively, bay organisation sublimated to the rich patterning of columns, pilasters, entablature breaks and nested pediments. indeed, in this façade the logic of trabeated organisation is partially abrogated: if the function of a column is to support and entablature and a pediment, what then is the functional significance of the central pair of columns in the lower storey, which support an entablature but no pediment? The seventeenth century witnessed more radical solutions than these: none of Bernini’s, cortona’s, or Borromini’s church façades, for example, uses the rationale of aedicular organisation obviously and even in cases in which

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

aedicular organisation forms a conceptual background, architects often mask its presence. The novel formal solutions posed by architects such as Bernini, cortona and Borromini to the ‘façade question’ appear to have allowed architects of the early eighteenth century to conceive the façade as a design unit separable from questions of its functional relationship to the building behind it. This liberation of the façade from functional significance in turn allowed the reconfiguration of the façade with regard to its relation to the urban space before it.

The Façade Post-Borromini By the second half of the seventeenth century architects were thinking creatively about the mobile values of church façades. The stimulus for this thought evidently came from the investigation of the principle of planar progression to which Maderno had shown the way through his façade at S. Susanna. Maderno’s control of differing levels of columnar engagement and attendant entablature breaks produced effects of mass, movement and even colour that provided impetus for the architects of the later century. Another stimulus also evidently came from the growing interest in centrally planned churches. The ‘counter-Reformation façade’ expresses the generally basilical ground plan of the church behind it in unequivocal terms. As the memory of Borromeo’s invective against centrally-planned churches in the Instructiones fabricae et supellectilis ecclesiasticae (1577), a product of Tridentine reform, faded, however, centralised planning again began to form a focus of attention. As the non-aedicular façade designs of Borromini’s S. ivo and S. carlino, Bernini’s S. Andrea al Quirinale and cortona’s SS. Martina e Luca alone show, centralised planning seems to have liberated architects’ thinking about the parameters of façade design and the connection of the façade to the interior of the church. in the early eighteenth century, an unusual solution to the question of the façade was reached by Francesco Fontana in S. Andrea dei Rigattieri (Fig. 10) as early as 1708. This design eschews practically all the norms of the architectural design of its time: giant ‘pilasters’ with capitals of indefinite identity, layered aedicules and vast wall surfaces left largely unarticulated by surface design. Although this church, now a byway of Roman architectural history, seems to have inspired only one further building directly (Sardi’s S. Pasquale Baylon, Fig. 9, practically plagiarised S. Andrea), the questions it asked about aedicularity were being asked more widely in its context.

The Church Façade before the ‘Triumph of Neoclassicism’ Many of the façades discussed in detail above continued the investigation of the ‘aedicular problem’ inaugurated in the seventeenth century into the early eighteenth century. Rethinking of the ‘aedicular problem’ is particularly evident in S. Maria della Quercia, SS. celso e Giuliano, S. Paolo alla Regola and SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro. Significantly, none of these churches is in the standard counter-Reformation basilical format: S. Maria della Quercia and S. Paolo alla Regola, both new constructions, are Greek crosses; SS. celso e Giuliano, also a new construction, is in the then-fashionable ovoid format; SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro, where de Dominicis added a façade to a pre-existing structure, is a simple, single-naved structure. The façades of these churches each attempt to diminish the strength of aedicular organisation, principally by reducing the orders-based legibility of the façade. The reduction of the significance of orders-based organisation has several major consequences. Those facades that choose to retain some form of membering often opt for the pilaster as the basic unit of articulation but reduce its significance by casting it in very light relief, especially at the extremities of the façade. This means, particularly as in SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro and S. Maria della Quercia, that the onset of the façade is muted through the use of light terminal pilasters. The architects of façades such as these aggregate mass at the centre of the façade through strategies including the use of convex flexion of the façade (both cases) or the use of prominent subsidiary structures (SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro), producing a single amphibrachic accent. Understood urbanistically, the weak onset of the façade ensures that the façade must be read within a larger urban framework. As archival documents consistently show, the designers and patrons of the great counter-Reformation basilicas went to considerable lengths to ensure that ample piazzas were carved from the city before these basilicas; the façades of these churches form thus not only frontispieces to the churches themselves, but also the juncture between the space outside the church and that inside. Mostly reflective of the ground plan behind them, these façades extend the space of the church into the piazza, controlling that space. indeed, the piazza forms a kind of parterre to the spectacle of the façade’s scaenae frons.107 Rather than dominating a piazza as the great counter-Reformation churches often do, façades such as that at S. Maria della Quercia, SS. celso e Giuliano or SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro centralise the forces of larger urban planes created by adjoining houses or ancillary buildings and ‘emerge’, often seemingly under pressure,

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

247

Fig. 59. (Above) Rome, SS. cecilia e Biagio in campo Marzio (1729), now the chiesa del Divino Amore. Architect: Filippo Raguzzini. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) Fig. 60. (Left) Rome, S. Sisto Vecchio, façade (1725–27). Architect: Filippo Raguzzini. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

248

from a contiguous membrane with no disjunctive accent between the onset of the façade and the buildings nearby. The degree of respect paid to aedicular traditions varies even within this group of four churches. The earliest façade of the group (S. Paolo alla Regola) is the most reliant on the standard patterns of aedicular organisation, although it attempts to mute them. The most radical solution, Raguzzini’s S. Maria della Quercia, eschews it almost entirely. The need for narrative legibility that had previously been afforded by orders-based organisation is nonetheless privileged in these façades, distant as they often are from the standard aedicular pattern. S. Paolo alla Regola, although closest to the pattern, attempts to strengthen its narrative legibility through its waveform plan. S. Maria della Quercia reduces this idea to principle and utilises a single curve as the organisational paradigm. SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro and SS. celso e Giuliano gather the ‘energy’ of the façade in a prominent mid-façade structure, providing the momentum towards the centre and often yielding a single amphibrachic accent. The desire to diminish the power of aedicular organisation is also felt in the use of strategies of disruption, for example the timpano flesso or spezzato (SS. celso e Giuliano, SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro), the tempietto (SS. celso e Giuliano), the window (S. Maria della Quercia, S. Paolo alla Regola), or the stucco roundel (SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro, S. Paolo alla Regola). The removal of the order as the standard articulatory unit had profound consequences for the possibilities for planar recession. As the orders had provided the means of articulating planar recession, their removal introduced the danger of large areas of flat, undifferentiated wall surface. As a means of addressing the lack of tension that would have been present in a façade without planar recession, the architects of the façades in this group of four churches resorted to two main devices: the use of light-relief wall panelling in order to introduce contrasts of light and shade, and the rippling vibration of multiple mouldings. These devices are used in all churches in the group. Applied decoration does indeed play an important role in façade design in this style but, SS. celso e Giuliano aside (and pace Mallory), decoration of this kind does not generally provide the necessary visual dynamism in the façade, the play of mouldings and wall panelling being considered sufficient to activate the wall surface. in these churches, membering has been reconceived as applied decoration used to articulate wall surface. Raguzzini’s buildings are touchstones of this style. While S. Maria della Quercia carries non-aedicularity to its logical conclusion, several of his other buildings investigate the potential of limited orders-based organisation.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Fig. 61. (Above) Rome, S. Gregorio a Ponte Quattro capi (1729). Architect: Filippo Barigioni. (© David R. Marshall 2013.) Fig. 62. (Right) Rome, canonry of S. Maria in Trastevere (c. 1700–10). Architect: Angelo Onorio Recalcati. (© David R. Marshall 2013.)

These include the façade of S. Sisto Vecchio (1725–27, Fig. 60), SS. cecilia e Biagio in campo Marzio (1729; now the chiesa del Divino Amore, Fig. 59) and his churches in Benevento (including S. Filippo neri and S. Maria del carmine/S. Anna). in each of these buildings the role of the orders in articulating the façade is muted, low-relief panels are used to articulate the wall surface, and windows and mouldings are used to activate the surface of a wall-membrane. Other Roman structures also seem to fit within this style, particularly de Domincis’ now-destroyed church of S. Eligio dei Sellai (1741–44), with its vast areas of unadorned wall surface, light-relief pilasters and nonaedicular format; Francesco Ferrari’s cloister of S. Gregorio al celio (second half of the 1720s) with its applied mouldings foreshadowing the style of Vaccaro’s Palazzo Abbaziale di Loreto in Avellino (1734–49), Angelo Onorio Recalcati’s canonry of S. Maria in Trastevere (first decade of the eighteenth century, Fig. 62), and Filippo Barigioni’s S. Gregorio a Ponte Quattro capi (completed 1729, Fig. 61). As SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini and SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli reveal, however, the legacy of the aedicular façade was hotly contested. De Sanctis’ church still relies on aedicular logic; indeed, for all inventiveness, it represents the ‘re-aedicularisation’ of Quadri’s thirty-year-old façade

for S. Maria Maddalena. The very evident link between dos Santos’ façade and Fuga’s for S. Apollinare shows that, in the wake of the Lateran competition, champions of the aedicular style found new courage. The sharp decline in the construction of non-aedicular façades in the period after the Lateran competition—one thinks of S. croce in Gerusalemme (1741–45), the almost mocking nonaedicular rereading of the Lateran façade by architects whose heyday had been precisely that of the non-aedicular experiments, as perhaps the most significant example—is to be remarked. The non-aedicular style seems to have risen and fallen with Raguzzini and, although it may have drawn on his neapolitan heritage, it was undoubtedly a product of local conditions in Rome.108 This paper has shown the first outlines of a hitherto unrecognised architectural design style in the Roman church façade, one that was deeply cognisant of the traditions of aedicular design (often thought of as belonging to the classicising traditions championed in Bernini’s name at the Accademia di S. Luca) as well those represented in Borromini’s conceptions of architecture-as-sculpture and of decorative design (often gathered under the single rubric of ‘Rococo’). Further study should identify many more examples of this design

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

249

style, which enjoyed a vigorous flowering in Rome in 1710s and 1720s, albeit in ‘minor’ and often overlooked buildings. Recovery of this style will open our eyes to some of the most charming, but little appreciated, works in the Eternal city.

24. Buchowiecki has investigated at length whether the traditional association of St Paul with the church can be justified (Buchowiecki, 1974, p. 536–37; see also Bartolomei, 1858). Vasi notes that the church is ‘molto antica’ and that, were one to believe tradition, ‘quivi il s. Apostolo si sia per qualche tempo trattenuto a catechizzare e battezare quei, che volevano abbraciare la Religione Christiana’ (here the holy Apostle stayed for some time in order to catechise and baptise those who wished to embrace the christian religion) (Vasi, 1756a, p. 46). The dedication to St Paul has remained unchanged from the time of Urban iii’s bull of 1186, a relatively unusual occurrence in Roman churches.

Notes

25. Relazione della sacra visita of 1566, cited in Armellini, 1887, p. 499.

Offered in kind friendship to David Marshall and Lisa Beaven.

27. See contardi and curcio, 1991, p. 321, for further information regarding this architect.

26. cited in Buchowiecki, 1974, p. 535.

1. Borromini, 1999, pp. 112 and 172 respectively. 2. Pollak, 1928, vol. 1, p. 40. 3. De Rossi, 1702, 1711, 1721; Milizia, 1781, vol, 2, p. 211. 4. cerrotti, 1860, p. 36; for further information on Panini as an architectural critic, see Marshall, 2007. 5. Pascoli, 1736, vol. 2, p. 558. 6. Milizia, 1781, vol. 2, p. 205. 7. Milizia, 1781, vol. 2, p. 189. 8. Varriano, 1986, p. 159. 9. The pareri of the Lateran concorso judges are published in cerroti, 1860. The conduct of the 1732 concorso itself and its significance in Roman architectural thought of the time are examined in Kieven, 1991, p. 78–123 and hager, 1971. 10. Wittkower, 1999, vol. 3, p. 5. 11. Varriano, 1986, p. 7. 12. Kieven, 1987, p. 261. 13. Among the important attempts that have been made to chart the impact of Borromini’s work in the decades after his death is that of Aloisio Antinori (Antinori, 2000). 14. Mallory, 1977; norberg-Schulz, 1980. 15. Blunt, 1973. The essays emanating from three recent Borromini conferences and exhibitions—Borromini e l’universo barocco (2000), Francesco Borromini (2000) and Il giovane Borromini (1999)—mostly touch on the issue of borrominismo only tangentially. important contributions have been made by Elisabeth Kieven (‘il borrominismo nel tardo barocco’ in Borromini e l’universo barocco), and Alessandro Antinori (i primi “imitatori” di Borromini: Roma 1650–1675 in Francesco Borromini). Despite its title, Spagnesi’s ‘Alessandro Specchi: Alternativo al borrominismo’ (Spagnesi, 1997) actually has little directly to do with the phenomenon of borrominismo. Treatments of the subject in more general surveys of architectural history resort to the identification of fingerprints transferred from Borromini to various followers: even Antinori is effectively a study of this kind. My principal contention here is that one cannot characterise a style merely by identifying fingerprints and that sustained analysis is critical to providing a justifiable style identity. 16. Enggass, 1970; Enggass, 1976; Marshall, 2007; casali Pedrielli, 1991. 17. Johns, 2000, p. 18; Mallory, 1977, p. 2, note 3. 18. Debenedetti, 1999; Antinori, 2000. 19. Montagu, 2001, p. 42. 20. Mallory, 1977, pp. 5–7, 8, 10, 11, 15 respectively. 21. Meyer, 1979, p. 3; Meyer, 1989, p. 3. 22. Ackerman, 1962, p. 236. 23. Literature, S. Paolo alla Regola: Armellini, 1887, p. 499; Bartolomei, 1858; Buchowiecki, 1974, pp. 534–44; contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 336 and 441; Gizzi, 1995, p. 54; Mallory, 1967, pp. 87–88; Mallory, 1977, pp. 58–61; Mariani, 1963, pp. 202 and 220; Martinelli, 1725, p. 43; Matteucci, 1995, pp. 21–27; Pietrangeli, 1980, pp. 32–36; Posterla, 1707, p. 213; Portoghesi, 1982, pp. 376–77; Proia and Romano, 1935, pp. 171–72; Roisecco, 1775, p. 47; Titi, 1763, pp. 99–100; Vasi, 1756a, pp. 46–47 (including Plate 131); Vasi, 1794, vol. 2, p. 610; Vitale, 1993, p. 218. As in all such places throughout this study, this list is selective.

250

28. Diario Ordinario, 2 October 1728 (Fasc. 1741), p. 7. 29. Vasi, 1756a, p. 46. 30. Titi, 1763, p. 100. For further information regarding cioli, see contardi and curcio, 1991, p. 336 (with attached bibliography). 31. cited in Buchowiecki, 1974, p. 536. 32. The attribution of the façade of S. Maria Maddalena to Sardi is given in Roisecco, 1750. Other eighteenth-century sources, including Posterla, 1707 and Vasi, 1756 give the façade to carlo Quadri. Mallory queried on the basis of an analysis of Sardi’s admittedly diffuse style whether the attribution to Sardi was tenable (Mallory, 1978 and Mallory, 1967). Most recently, Alessandra Marino (Marino, 1992) has proposed that Emanuele Rodriguez dos Santos, architect of SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli, be credited with the application of surface ornamentation to an older superstructure, relying on the evidence of his association with the church and noting that his training with Mastro calegni, an ebanista, would have been invaluable in providing the repertoire of decorative forms on this façade. 33. Pedroli, 1981; contardi and curcio follow this attribution (contardi and curcio, 1991, p. 336). 34. Mallory, 1977, pp. 58–61. Buchowiecki’s assertion that ‘der Aufbau der Fassade [of S. Paolo alla Regola] gemahnt etwas an die Schauseite von S. Maria Maddalena des gleichen Meisters’ (the composition of the façade [of S. Paolo alla Regola] is somewhat reminiscent of the façade of S. Maria Maddalena by the same master) relies on the misapprehension that the façade of S. Maria Maddalena is the work of Sardi. it is, in fact, a structure of about 40 years prior (Buchowiecki, 1974, p. 539). 35. no executed design of his is known beyond the putatively attributed S. Paolo and what can be known of his style must be deduced form the preserved designs for the concorsi clementini of 1704, 1706, and 1709 (see hager, 1982). in 1704 he won the first prize in the third class of the competition with his elevation and plan of the altar of the Madonna in the church of SS. Sisto e Domenico. in 1706, he was the equal second place getter with Ferdinand Reif in the second class; the soggetto for this was a drawing of a public fountain, clearly intended to address a continuing desire for a design to complete the Trevi Fountain. in 1709, he won the first prize in the first class for the design of an oval salon for an academy. insofar as comparisons between a church façade, a fountain and an oval salon can be drawn, neither the fountain nor the salon gives any intimation of the interest in curvilinear forms present at S. Paolo. certain aspects of the fountain design remind one of the youthful Juvarra; the elevation of the academy building shows a pilaster-articulated quadrilateral design again potentially dependent on Juvarra, then at the height of his Roman activity and fame. Before his death at what must be presumed an early age in 1734, cioli had been a professor at the Accademia di S. Luca. Most of his attested professional activity, however, was in the provision of misure and stime for clients including the carmelitane Scalze. 36. Literature, life and work of Giuseppe Sardi: contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 441–42; Debenedetti, 1999, pp. 85–89; Fasolo, 1949, pp. 110–19; Portoghesi, 1982, pp. 373–90; Mallory, 1967; Mallory, 1977, pp. 53–75. 37. Fasolo 1949, pp. 117–18. 38. Martinelli, 1725, p. 43. 39. Vasi’s Plate 131 (Fig. 8) shows that the recesses of the lower storey and the niches of the upper storey have never carried statuary. This plate also shows that sculptural ornament was originally present under and over the segmental

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

pediment above the principal entrance. These appear to be stemme in Vasi’s engraving, presumably those of Philip iV of Spain, who placed the collegium Siculum (the foundation of the Sicilian Franciscan Tertiaries) under the protection of the Spanish crown in 1646. The stemma at the top of the façade is that of the Sicilian Franciscan Tertiaries themselves. The crown surmounting the stemma of the Tertiaries and the sculpture ornamenting the principal entrance have all been removed. i have been unable to locate any reference to the sculptural programme for this façade, and contemporary guides appear to make no reference to it. 40. Literature, SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini: Armellini, 1887, pp. 152–53; capecelatro, 1894, Vol. 1, pp. 435–40; contardi and curcio, 1991, p. 360; Gallonio, 2005, pp. 19–22 and 22–24; Gizzi, 1994, pp. 61–62; Kuhn–Forte, 1997, pp. 123–47 (with bibliography); Lemoine, 1994; Luciani and Termini, 1995, pp. 6–13; Mallory, 1977, pp. 78–83; Maroni Lumbroso and Martini, 1963, pp. 425–30; Martinelli, 1725, p. 38; Pietrangeli, 1980, pp. 26–32; Portoghesi, 1982, p. 357; Posterla, 1707, pp. 214–18; Proia and Romano, 1935, pp. 134–40; Rocca, 1979; Roisecco, 1775, pp. 45–46; Titi, 1763, pp. 103–4; Vasi, 1759, pp. 40–41 (including Plate 176); Vasi, 1794, vol. 2, p. 606–9; Vitale, 1993, p. 206. 41. The plan of the mediaeval church, which remained wholly intact until 1587, was a nave and two aisle basilical format with shallow apse. This is the form shown on the cartaro map (1576) and in three drawings, one by Maggi (1597), one attributed to Ottaviano Mascherino and one anonymous. The last two, drawn c. 1603, are in the archive of the Accademia di S. Luca (KuhnForte, 1997, p. 123 and reproduced in Rocca, 1979). The complicated building history of this church in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which can only be summarised here, is given in Rocca, 1979, pp. 24–26. The considerable debate over the authorship of the new church has been summarised in Kuhn-Forte, 1997, p. 125. 42. Kuhn-Forte, 1997, p. 126; as Kuhn-Forte notes, Titi (1686) is the first source to name Maggi as the architect. 43. These are the Maggi-Maupin-Losi map of 1625 (which may show the façade design preserved in Archivio di Stato di Roma reproduced as Rocca’s fig. 11); the de Rossi reprint of the Tempesta map (1593, reprinted 1693) and the Falda map of 1676. The pertinent sections of these maps are reproduced as Rocca’s figs. 6, 7, and 8 (Rocca, 1979, pp. 27–29). 44. Literature, life and work of Francesco de Sanctis: contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 360–61 (with bibliography); Debenedetti, 1999, pp. 73–77; Mallory, 1977, pp. 76–101; Portoghesi, 1982, pp. 355–63. 45. Mallory’s analysis rightly draws attention to the conservative nature of the basic scheme (Mallory, 1977, pp. 80–83). Rocca’s assessment is more generous: ‘All’elaborazione dei grandi esempi barocchi che informa la struttura generale del prospetto, con il riferimento a Pietro da Cortona nel rapporto nicchia-colonna, si aggiungono infatti certi particolari decorativi—le graziose cornici, il coronamento della finestra od i festoni di foglie—che rispondono alle nuove tendenze artistiche settecentesche’ (To the elaboration of the great Baroque exemplars that inform the general structure of the façade, with reference to Pietro da cortona in the relationship between niche and column, certain decorative features are added— the gracious cornices, the tops of the windows, or the festoons of leaves—which respond to new eighteenth-century artistic tendencies) (Rocca, 1979, p. 69). 46. Rocca, 1979, p. 51. 47. Portoghesi, 1982, p. 357; hager, 1971, p. 57. Wittkower, 1999, vol. 3, p. 110, note 27, acknowledges the legacy of S. Marcello, but notes that SS. Trinità shows de Sanctis moving away from the model offered by Fontana towards that of Juvarra’s S. cristina in Turin ‘but probably without knowledge of the latter’. 48. Piazza della Trinità reached its definitive form only in the eighteenth century (Rocca, 1979, p. 21), although permission had been obtained from Urban Viii in 1639, at the height of the high Baroque desire for scenographically conceived piazzas, to acquire houses for demolition in order to extend it (Rocca, 1979, p. 26). 49. This is effectively the conclusion reached by Mallory: ‘De Sanctis’ design shows a combination of the use of typical Rococo ornament in the frames with a vigour and boldness in the treatment of wall and articulation that is still Baroque. in conceiving a church façade, de Sanctis seems to have felt tied to the traditional insistence on monumentality, and his solution is not therefore characteristic of the Roman Rococo style … Stylistically, the Trinità façade straddles instead the gap between the extremes of purely Rococo design and of Late Baroque architecture’ (Mallory, 1977, pp. 82–83). For a concurring

opinion, see also Debenedetti, 1999, p. 73. 50. Literature, S. Maria della Quercia: Armellini, 1887, pp. 424–25; Buchowiecki, 1974, pp. 172–79; contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 427–29; Diario Ordinario, 27 September 1727 (Fasc. 1582), pp. 2–5 (planting the cross and laying of the foundation stone), 31 March 1731 (Fasc. 2131), p. 3 (benediction of the new church), p. 5 (translation of the image of the Virgin), 31 March 1738 (Fasc. 3250), pp. 11–12 (consecration), 7 June 1738 (Fasc. 3253), p. 4 (consecration of side altars); Gizzi, 1995, pp. 45–47; Mariani, 1963, pp. 226–28; Maroni Lumbroso and Martini, 1963, pp. 288–92; Martinelli, 1725, p. 39; Martini, 1961; habel, 1998, p. 64; Pietrangeli, 1976, pp. 114–16; Posterla, 1707, p. 241; Portoghesi, 1982, p. 393; Rotili, 1951, pp. 43–49; Rotili, 1982, pp. 19–20; Sponzili, 1995, pp. 2–5; Titi, 1763, p. 108; Valesio, 1978, p. 857; Valesio, 1979, p. 204; Varriano, 1986, pp. 166–167, Vasi, 1794, vol. 2, p. 631; Vitale, 1993, pp. 216–17. 51. Buchowiecki, 1974, p. 176. 52. The discovery of the exact date of Raguzzini’s birth, 19 July 1690, is due to Daniela Stroffolino and is reported in Stroffolino, 2006, p. 28. 53. The change in the name of this church is believed to have occurred between 1532 and 1555, when the appellation ‘S. Mariae de Quercu’ appears for the first time in a catalogue (Buchowiecki, 1974, p. 175). 54. The history of the Università is traced in Martini, 1961, pp. 5–24. By the mid-sixteenth century most members of the Università lived in the vicinity of the campo de’ Fiori, and thus in the neighbourhood of this church (Martini, 1961, pp. 34–35). 55. Rotili suggested that what he understood to be the unusual plan of Raguzzini’s church may have been inspired by the design of S. nicola de curte but, in the absence of any clear evidence of what the ground plan of this church was, this is impossible to confirm. it is arguable that the Greek cross plan of S. Maria della Quercia is any way unusual for the period. For discussion, see Buchowiecki, 1974, pp. 176–77 and Martini, 1961, p. 53. 56. Martini has suggested that some of the funding from this building may have come from Benedict himself, although there is no documentary evidence for this assertion. Benedict’s Dominican order was a strong proponent of the cult of the Madonna della Quercia and the church is located with the corte of Benedict’s own family, the Orsini (Martini, 1967, p. 37). 57. The consecration of the church is noted in the Diario Ordinario, 31 May 1738 (Fasc. 3250). Valesio (entry of 26 March 1730) noted that an unnamed architect had been engaged to ‘fa guastare molte cose nella chiesa della Madonna SS.ma della Quercia a Capo di Ferro fatte dal primo d’una pessima architettura’ (ruin many things in the church of the Madonna Sanctissma della Quercia a capo di Ferro erected in the first place to a terrible architectural design). This architect was identified in habel, 1988. 58. Portoghesi, 1982, p. 392. 59. Martini, 1961, p. 39. 60. Literature on the life and work of Filippo Raguzzini: contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 427–29 (with bibliography); Debenedetti, 1999, pp. 79–83; Di Battista, 1988; Mariani, 1963, pp. 222–31; habel, 1987; habel, 1988; Portoghesi, 1982, pp. 391–404; Rotili, 1951; Rotili, 1982; Strofolino, 2006; Varriano, 1986, pp. 163–67. 61. The dramatic circumstances of Raguzzini’s arrest after the death of Benedict Xiii are recorded in an annotation that Pier Leone Ghezzi made to a caricature of the architect. in the same annotation, Ghezzi notes that Raguzzini, a ‘Gotico e Benevantano’ (he was in fact neapolitan), ‘[h]a rovinato Roma con la sua architettura’ (ruined Rome with his architecture). Valesio, too, had little time for Raguzzini’s architecture (see, inter alia, the diary entry of 26 March 1730 cited above, note 57). 62. Martini, 1961, p. 40. For a concurring assessment, see Rotili, 1951, p. 104. 63. commentary and a photograph showing the church before the barbarous destruction of isola to the southwest are provided in Martini, 1961, p. 49. 64. This window is a beloved type of Raguzzini and recurs at S. Sisto Vecchio and S. Anna in Benevento; for the attribution of the latter to Raguzzini, see Stroffolino, 2006, p. 36. 65. Martini writes that ‘i principii architettonici del Raguzzini lo spingono sovente alla ricerca di effetti ornamentali che, tendendo ad accentuare i valori plasticopitorico, portano come conseguenza l’alleggerimento delle strutture murarie’ (the

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

251

architectural principles of Raguzzini often drive him towards the investigation of ornamental effects that, tending to accentuate plastic and pictorial values, have as a consequence the lightening of the wall structure) (Martini, 1961, p. 50). it is in the sense of the search for plastic and pictorial values that some scholars have seen Raguzzini’s architecture as ‘strettamente interdipendente dalla falegnameria’ (closely dependent upon woodwork) (Martini, 1961, p. 50). 66. Literature, SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro: Armellini, 1887, p. 426; Bertozzi, 1995, pp. 58–63; Bosio, 2006; Buchowiecki, 1974, pp. 97–102; contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 348–49 (discussion of the dispute over the authorship of the façade in note 8 on p. 349) and p. 343 (as a work of contini); Diario Ordinario, 21 September 1726 (Fasc. 1424), p. 12 (sale of S. Macuto to the Jesuits), 11 December 1728 (Fasc. 1771), pp. 6–7 (transport of the insane from S. Maria della Pietà to the new hospital on the via della Lungara); Fasolo, 1951; Gargano, 1973, pp. 88–94; Gizzi, 1995, pp. 21–23; Lombardi, 1998, p. 141; Mallory, 1977, pp. 114–24 (in the section dealing with Valvassori’s erection of the neighbouring collegio cerasoli) and pp. 131–32 (as a work of de Dominicis); Pietrangeli, 1977, pp. 28–32; Posterla, 1707, pp. 390–92 (the plate shows S. Macuto); Portoghesi, 1982, pp. 407–8 (as a work of Valvassori); Roisecco, 1750, vol. 2, pp. 206–11; Roisecco, 1775, p. 194; Tencajoli, 1928, pp. 21–24; Titi, 1763, pp. 355–56; Vasi, 1752, Plate 22 (the church is shown at the rear of Piazza colonna but not mentioned further); Vitale, 1993, pp. 131–32. Roisecco’s guide was evidently issued at least twice in 1750. The earlier edition (exemplar in the Bibliotheca hertziana, Dg 450-3450/2 raro; photo U.Fi. c 176 c 63) showed an idealised view of piazza colonna as it had appeared during the seventeenth century. Although S. Paolo alla colonna (destroyed in May 1659) still stands in this image, and construction of Palazzo Ludovisi has not commenced, the isola that once stood in the centre of the northern edge of Piazza colonna (destroyed november 1659) has been torn down. This image shows S. Maria della Pietà roughly in the form shown in Felice della Greca’s drawing. in the second edition of Roisecco in 1750 (reproduced here as Fig. 31), the image of Piazza colonna has been updated. it is clear from the position of certain of the figures in the square among other details that the older image has been used as the basis for the newer one, but an attempt has been made to modernise the appearance of the square. S. Paolo alla colonna has been overdrawn, the exterior of Palazzo Aldobrandini has been modernised, Palazzo Ludovisi is shown in the form it reached towards the end of the seventeenth century in the hands of carlo Fontana, and Palazzo del Bufalo has also been modernised. Most importantly, as the timpano flesso makes clear, some attempt has been made to show SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro with its new de Dominicis façade, just under twenty years after its construction. As this image dates from two years before Vasi showed it in Plate 22 of Le piazze principali di Roma, the image in the second edition of the 1750 Roisecco should be seen as among the first representations of the new façade. 67. contini’s authorship of the façade, championed in capriotti, Frascarelli and Testa, 1989, appears to have rested on a misreading of documentation regarding his involvement with the retrofaçade of the church. The controversy is summarised in Scotti, 2009. 68. Segui, Thoenes and Mortari, 1966, p. 53. The limited amount of information about de Dominicis’ life and work is summarised in contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 348–49 (with bibliography); Fasolo, 1949, pp. 54–59; Fasolo, 1951; Gargano, 1973; habel, 1988. 69. contardi and curcio, 1991, p. 348 (relying on Gargano, 1973, note 95 on p. 101) give the year as 1716, but this was revised in Bonaccorso and Manfredi, 1998, p. 107. 70. Further information on this is to be found in Pietrangeli, 1978, pp. 22–24. 71. Valesio, 1978, p. 1026. 72. Valesio, 1979, p. 82. 73. The plans for this church were published in Fasolo, 1951. See also Gargano, 1973, p. 90. 74. De Dominicis is identified as the architetto titolare of the Ospedale di S. Maria della Pietà o dei Poveri Dementi in 1739 but ‘probabilmente ricopriva già da anni’ (probably already had fulfilled the duties for some years) (contardi and curcio, 1991, p. 348). 75. Design ‘XiV’ is a variant of Design ‘X’. it shows a partial interior section of the building according to the plan of Design ‘X’. 76. Gargano, 1973, p. 93.

252

77. Felice Della Greca, Piazza Colonna, 1656, drawing (BAV, Arch. chigi, iii, 25058, già 159). 78. Gargano, 1973, p. 90. Although de Dominicis was unable to bring his projected elliptical church to fruition in the plan for the Bergamasques, relationships established at SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro seem to have led directly to its implementation at SS. celso e Giuliano, according to Gargano (Gargano, 1973, p. 93). Monsignor (later cardinal) Giuseppe Alessandro Furietti, protector of the Bergamasque confraternity at the time of the renovations to the Bergarmasque precinct, appeared again in de Dominicis’ life as the countersignatory of the accounts for SS. celso e Giuliano, and it may have been he who introduced the work of the then largely unknown architect to clement Xii. The suggestion that Furietti was instrumental in de Dominicis’ obtaining the commission for SS. celso e Giuliano is discussed by Buchowiecki (Buchowiecki, 1974, p. 99) and Gargano. 79. There was something of a vogue for this kind of pediment; it recurs at the practically contemporary S. Maria dei Fornaci, by an unknown architect. 80. Gargano has noted the ‘diverso e più penetrante significato [che] assume la facciata che, nonostante la modestia delle dimensioni, stabilisce un non trascurabile rapporto con la piazza e le fabbriche circonstanti’ (different and more intense significance that the façade assumes which, notwithstanding the modesty of its dimensions, realises a not unimportant relationship with the piazza and the surrounding buildings) (Gargano, 1973, p. 93). 81. Literature, SS. celso e Giuliano: Armellini, 1887, pp. 184–85; Buchowiecki, 1967, pp. 519–25; contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 348–49; Diario Ordinario, 17 March 1736 (Fasc.) 2906, pp. 3–4 (solemn consecration); Gaddi, 1736, p. 81; Gargano, 1973, pp. 94–101; Gizzi, 1995, pp. 24–25; Mallory, 1977, pp. 136–40; Mariani, 1963, p. 218; Marti, 1997; Martinelli, 1725, p. 40; Pietrangeli, 1974, pp. 36–42; Portoghesi, 1982, pp. 417–21; Posterla, 1707, p. 270; Roisecco, 1750, vol. 2, pp. 63–64; Roisecco, 1775, p. 36; Segui, Thoenes and Mortari, 1966; Titi, 1763, pp. 426–27; Valesio, 1979, pp. 492, 595, 597, 598, 603, 640, 648; Vasi, 1756b, pp. 28–29 (and Plate 29); Vasi, 1794, vol. 2, pp. 462–63; Vitale, 1993, p. 176. 82. See note 78 above. 83. Valesio, 1979, p. 525. 84. Valesio, 1979, p. 492. 85. Valesio, 1979, p. 597. 86. Valesio, 1979, pp. 597–98. 87. Valesio, 1979, p. 640. 88. Valesio, 1979, p. 648. 89. Diario Ordinario, 17 March 1736 (Fasc. 2906), pp. 3–4. 90. Segui, Thoenes and Mortari, 1966, p. 29. 91. Segui, Thoenes and Mortari, 1966, p. 50. Gargano provides a partial list of contemporary ovoid churches that may have had some bearing on de Dominicis’ design, including Michetti’s parish church at Zagarolo (1712–22), Sardi’s SS. Rosario at Marino (1712), the church of the Assumption at Valmontone or the chiesa della Morte at civitavecchia, Fuga’s S. Maria della Orazione (1733–37) and Dérizet’s SS. nome di Maria in the Foro Traiano (1736–38), the last two with radiating chapels (Gargano, 1973, pp. 97–98). 92. Gargano, 1973, p. 99. 93. Roisecco, 1750, vol. 2, p. 64. 94. The palmate volutes linking the stories may be a reference to another source of inspiration, Fontana’s highly regarded façade for S. Marcello al corso. 95. Literature, SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli: Armellini, 1887, p. 649; Blanco, 1932; Kuhn-Forte, 1997, pp. 149–62 (with bibliography); colonna, 1995, pp. 58–63; contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 433–34; Gizzi, 1995, p. 59; Mariani, 1963, pp. 211–13; Portoghesi, 1982, p. 428; Roisecco, 1750, vol. 2, p. 167; Vasi, 1756a, pp. 34–36 (incuding Plate 128); Vitale, 1993, p. 167. 96. Gizzi, 1995, p. 59. 97. The details of the funding of the complex are given in Blanco, 1932, p. 6. 98. citation from the decree of royal protection issued by Philip V in 1734, cited in Blanco, 1932, p. 8. 99. The restrictions required that ‘in quella parte che guarda il Corso si fabbrichi l’Ospizio per i secolari fino all’altezza de prossimo Palazzo dei Manfroni, appresso

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

la Chiesa tra Via dei Condotti e Via Borgognona, e poi, nella parte più lontana dal Corso, il Convento pei Religiosi’ (in that part that overlooks the corso, the hospice for the lay is to be erected to the height of neighbouring palazzo of the Manfroni family, near the church between via dei condotti and via Borgognona, and then, in the other part further from the corso, the convent for the religious) (cited in Blanco, 1932, p. 7). For the involvement of the Pope in the negotiations for the construction of the complex (with documents), see Blanco, 1932, pp. 6–7. 100. Diario Ordinario, 30 September 1741 (Fasc. 3771), pp. 9–10. 101. Literature, life and work of dos Santos): contardi and curcio, 1991, pp. 433–34; Mariani, 1963, pp. 211–14; Marino and Donò, 1989. 102. Dos Santos’ earliest artistic formation was evidently in the bottega of the ebanista Mastro calegni. This artisanal background served dos Santos well; he is said to have been personally continuously in attendance at the worksite of SS. Trinità (a highly unusual practice at the time), and moulded models of several decorative details of the church, including the lavamano and stemma for the façade, in clay himself. Dos Santos represents one of the last of those architects who came up through the artisanal trades before becoming an architect. These included Raguzzini (‘scultore di marmi’) and Specchi (an engraver) in the early eighteenth century. 103. As Daria colonna has discussed, part of the suit against dos Santos evidently hinged upon concerns that dos Santos, an ebanista, had not received the training necessary to be a ‘professional’ architect. This episode represents a key moment in the growing professionalisation of architectural practice in early modern Rome (colonna, 1995, p. 61). 104. hermosilla, the translator of Vitruvius into Spanish and later lecturer at the Academy in Madrid, was responsible for the stucco work of the interior and the construction of the altars (Kuhn-Forte, 1997, p. 150). Giuseppe Sardi was also active on the building site in his customary role of capomastro muratore. 105. The ground plan of the church is similar to that of SS. celso e Giuliano (elliptical with radial chapels), although Tarfuri (see Kuhn-Forte, 1997, p. 150) has proposed that the design is more likely to be dependent on Fuga’s S. Maria dell’Orazione e Morte (1732). 106. Whitman, 1970; see also Wittkower, 1971 and Varriano, 1986, pp. 20–43. 107. The reorganisation of Piazza S. ignazio by Raguzzini in the 1720 and 1730s shows how an eighteenth-century architect could be aware of and subvert the hegemonical position the church façade occupied in urban planning in Rome in the early seventeenth century: rather than the piazza being the ideal place from which to view Orazio Grassi’s façade (the restriction on space makes this almost impossible, with the façade now disproportionately large for the space available), the ‘west door’ of the church itself now forms the ideal place from which to view Raguzzini’s little miracle of urban planning, the three case d’affitto of Piazza S. ignazio and the access roads that thread through them. 108. The foundations for a study of the neapolitan influence in Raguzzini’s work were laid in habel, 1987, pp. 235–36. Much architecture of Seicento and Settecento naples is in fact marked by the lightening of the membering and the concomitant use of applied wall panelling.

Bibliography Ackerman, 1962: James Ackerman, ‘A Theory of Style’, Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, vol. 30, 1962, pp. 227–37. Antinori, 2000: Aloisio Antinori, ‘i primi ‘imitatori’ di Borromini: Roma 1650–1675’, in Francesco Borromini. Atti del convegno internazionale, Roma, 13–15 gennaio 2000, Milan: Electa, 2000, pp. 431–39.

Blanco, 1932: P. c. Blanco, La SS.ma Trinità dei Domenicani Spagnoli, Rome: Danesi Editori, 1932. Blunt, 1973: Anthony Blunt, Some Uses and Misuses of the Terms Baroque and Rococo as Applied to Architecture, London: Oxford University Press, 1973. Bonaccorso and Manfredi, 1998: Giuseppe Bonaccorso and Tommaso Manfredi, I Virtuosi al Pantheon 1700–1758, Rome: Àrgos, 1998. Borromini, 1999: Francesco Borromini, Opus Architectonicum: Erzählte und dargestellte Architektur, trans. Monika Küble, Zürich: niggli, 1999. Bosio, 2006: Lino Bosio, Egidia coda, Luciano Garella, and Marco Setti, La chiesa dei SS. Bartolomeo e Alessandro dei Bergamaschi in Roma, Rome: Gangemi, 2006. Buchowiecki, 1967: Walter Buchowiecki, Handbuch der Kirchen Roms: Die vier Patriarchalbasiliken und die Kirchen innerhalb der Mauern Roms: S. Agata dei Goti bis S. Francesco Saverio, Vienna: Brüder hollinek, 1970. Buchowiecki, 1970: Walter Buchowiecki, Handbuch der Kirchen Roms: Die Kirchen innerhalb der Mauern Roms: Gesù Crocifisso bis S. Maria in Monticelli, Vienna: Brüder hollinek, 1970. Buchowiecki, 1974: Walter Buchowiecki, Handbuch der Kirchen Roms: Die Kirchen innerhalb der Mauern Roms: S. Maria delle Neve bis S. Susanna, Vienna: Brüder hollinek, 1974. Capecelatro, 1894: Alfonso capecelatro, The Life of St Philip Neri, Apostle of Rome, 2 vols., London: Burns and Oates, 1894. Capriotti, Frascarelli and Testa, 1989: Adriana capriotti, Dalma Frascarelli and Laura Testa, L’arciconfraternita dei Bergamaschi 450 anni di vita: aspetti storici artistici di una sodalitas romana, Rome: 1989. Casali Pedrielli, 1991: cristina casali Pedrielli, Vittorio Maria Bigari: affreschi, dipinti, disegni, Padua: nuova Alfa, 1991. Cerroti, 1860: Francesco cerroti, Lettere e memorie autografe ed inedite di artisti tratte dai manoscritti della Corsiniana, Rome: Stabilmento Tipografico, 1860. Colonna, 1995: Daria colonna, ‘SS. Trinità degli Spagnoli’, Roma sacra, Primo itinerario, 1995, pp. 58–63. Contardi and Curcio, 1991: Bruno contardi and Giovanna curcio (eds.), In urbe architectus: modelli, disegni, misure. La professione dell’architetto Roma 1680–1750, Rome: Àrgos, 1991. Debendetti, 1999: Elisa Debenedetti, Borrominismo, Rome: Lithos, 1999. De Rossi, 1702: Domenico de’ Rossi, Studio d’architettura civile sopra gli ornamenti di porte e finestre tratti da alcune fabbriche insigni di Roma con le misure piante modini, e profili. Opera de più celebri architetti de nostri tempi, Rome, 1702. De Rossi, 1711: Domenico de’ Rossi, Studio d’architettura civile sopra varj ornamenti di cappelle, e diversi sepolcri tratti da più chiese di Roma colle loro facciate, fianchi, piante, e misure. Opera de’ più celebri architetti de’ nostri tempi, Rome, 1711. De Rossi, 1721: Domenico de’ Rossi, Studio d’architettura civile sopra varie chiese, cappelle di Roma, e palazzo di Caprarola, et altre fabriche con le loro facciate, spaccati, piante, e misure. Opera de’ più celebri architetti de’ nostri tempi, Rome, 1721. Di Battista, 1998: Rosanna Di Battista, ‘il progetto di Filippo Raguzzini per le case dell’Università di S. Maria della Quercia’, in Roma, le case, la città, Rome: Bonsignori, 1998, pp. 169–78. Diario Ordinario: Diario Ordinario, Rome: chracas, various years. Enggass, 1970: Robert Enggass, ‘Tiepolo and the concept of the Barochetto’, Atti del convegno internazionale di studi sul Tiepolo, Milan: Electa, 1970.

Armellini, 1887: Mariano Armellini, Le chiese di Roma dalle loro origini sino al secolo XVI, Rome: Tipografia Editrice Romana, 1887.

Enggass, 1976: Robert Enggass, Early Eighteenth-Century Sculpture in Rome: an illustrated catalogue raisonné, University Park and London: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2 vols., 1976.

Bartolomei, 1858: Luigi Bartolomei, Memorie autentiche sulla chiesa di S. Paolo alla Regola, primo ospizio dell’apostolo in Roma, Rome: Tipografia Salviucci, 1858.

Fasolo, 1949: Furio Fasolo, Le chiese di Roma nel ‘700 volume 1: Trastevere, Rome: Scuola Tipografica Missionaria Domenicana, 1949.

Bertozzi, 1995: Francesca Bertozzi, ‘Santi Bartolomeo e Alessandro dei Bergamaschi’, Roma sacra, Secondo itinerario, 1995, pp. 19–21.

Fasolo, 1951: Furio Fasolo, ‘Disegni inediti di un architetto romano del Settecento’, Palladio, new Series 4, 1951, pp. 186–89.

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

253

Gaddi, 1736: Giovanni Battista Gaddi, Roma nobilitata nelle sue fabbriche dalla Santità di N.S. Clemente XII, Rome: 1736.

the Quirinal Caffeaus’, in Art, Site and Spectacle: studies in early modern visual culture, Melbourne: Fine Arts Network, 2007, pp. 120–43.

Gallonio, 2005: Antonio Gallonio, The Life of Saint Philip Neri, San Francisco: ignatius Press, 2005.

Martini, 1961: Antonio Martini, S. Maria della Quercia, Rome: Marietti, 1961.

Gargano, 1973: Maria Gabriella Gargano, ‘Carlo de Dominicis’, Storia dell’arte, 17, 1973, pp. 85–112.

Maroni Lumbroso and Martini, 1963: Matizia Maroni Lumbroso and Antonio Martini, Le confraternite romane nelle loro chiese, Rome: Fondazione Marco Besso, 1963.

Gizzi, 1994: Federico Gizzi, Le chiese barocche di Roma, Rome: Newton Compton, 1994.

Matteucci, 1995: Daniela Matteucci, ‘San Paolo alla Regola’, Roma sacra, Tredecesimo itinerario, pp. 21–27.

Gizzi, 1995: Federico Gizzi, Le chiese di Roma del sette e ottocento, Rome: Newton Compton, 1995.

Meyer, 1979: Leonard Meyer, ‘Towards a Theory of Style’, in The Concept of Style, University Park PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1979.

Habel, 1987: Dorothy Metzger Habel, ‘Filippo Raguzzini, the Palazzo and Casino Lercari in Albano, and the Neapolitan Ingredient in Roman Rococo Architecture’, in Hellmut Hager and Susan Scott Munshower, Light on the Eternal City: observations and discoveries in the art and architecture of Rome, 2 vols., Dexter: Pennsylvania State University, 1987, vol. 2, pp. 231–54.

Meyer, 1989: Leonard Meyer, Style and Music: theory, history, and ideology, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.

Habel, 1988: Dorothy Metzger Habel, ‘Filippo Raguzzini, Carlo de’ Dominicis and Domenico Gregorini: new documentation’, Paragone, vol. 39, 1988, pp. 62–67

Montagu, 2001: Jennifer Montagu, The Aesthetics of Roman Eighteenth Century Sculpture: ‘late Baroque’, ‘barochetto’ or ‘a discrete art historial period’?, Baarn: De Prom Publishers, 2001.

Hager, 1971: Hellmut Hager, ‘Il modello di Ludovico Rusconi Sassi del Concorso per la facciata di San Giovanni in Laterano (1732) ed i prospetti a convessità centrale durante la prima metà del settecento in Roma’, Commentari, 22, 1971, pp. 36–67.

Norberg-Schulz, 1980: Christian Norberg-Schulz, Late Baroque and Rococo Architecture, Milan: Electa, 1980.

Hager, 1982: Hellmut Hager, Architectural Fantasy and Reality: drawings from the Accademia di San Luca in Rome. Concorsi Clementini 1700–1750, University Park, PA: Museum of Art, The Pennsylvania State University, 1981.

Pedroli, 1981: Maria Pedroli, ‘Cioli (Ciolli, Chioli)’, in Dizionario biografico degli italiani, vol. 25, Rome: 1981, p. 665.

Johns, 1993: Christopher Johns, Papal Art and Cultural Politics: Rome in the age of Clement XI, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Johns, 2000: Christopher M. S. Johns, ‘The Entrepôt of Europe: Rome in the Eighteenth Century’, in Joseph J. Rishel and Edgar Peters Bowron (eds.), Art in Rome in the Eighteenth Century, London: Merrell, 2000, pp. 17–45. Kieven, 1987: Elisabeth Kieven, ‘Rome in 1732: Alessandro Galilei, Nicola Salvi, Ferdinando Fuga’, in Light on the Eternal City: observations and discoveries in the art and architecture of Rome, 2 vols., Dexter: Pennsylvania State University, 1987, vol. 2, pp. 225–76. Kuhn-Forte, 1997: Brigitte Kuhn-Forte, Handbuch der Kirchen Roms: Die Kirchen innerhalb der Mauern Roms: Die Kirchen von Trastevere, Vienna: Brüder Hollinek, 1997. Lemoine, 1994: Annick Lemoine, ‘Le vicende costruttive della chiesa della SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini a Roma dal 1572 al 1690’, Bolletino d’arte, nos. 86–87, 1994, pp. 111–32. Lombardi, 1998: Ferruccio Lombardi, Roma: le chiese scomparse. La memoria storica della città, Rome: Fratelli Palombi, 1998. Luciani and Termini, 1995: Roberto Luciani and carla Termini, ‘SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini’, Roma sacra, Tredecesimo itinerario, 1995, pp. 6–13. Mallory, 1967: Nina Mallory, ‘The Architecture of Giuseppe Sardi and the Attribution of the Façade of the Church of the Maddalena’, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, vol. 26, 1967, pp. 83–101.

Milizia, 1781: Francesco Milizia, Memorie degli architetti antichi e moderni, 2 vols., Parma: Stamperia Reale, 1781.

Pascoli, 1736: Lione Pascoli, Vite de pittori, scultori ed architetti moderni, 2 vols., Rome: Antonio de’ Rossi, 1736.

Pietrangeli, 1974: carlo Pietrangeli, Guide rionali di Roma: Rione V: Ponte (parte terza), Rome: Palombi, 1974. Pietrangeli, 1976: carlo Pietrangeli, Guide rionali di Roma: Rione VII: Regola (parte seconda), Rome: Palombi, 1976. Pietrangeli, 1977: carlo Pietrangeli, Guide rionali di Roma: Rione III: Colonna (parte prima), Rome: Palombi, 1977. Pietrangeli, 1978: carlo Pietrangeli, Guide rionali di Roma: Rione III: Colonna (parte seconda), Rome: Palombi, 1978. Pietrangeli, 1980: carlo Pietrangeli, Guide rionali di Roma: Rione VII: Regola (parte prima), Rome: Palombi, 1980. Pollak, 1928: Oskar Pollak, Die Kunsttätigkeit unter Urban VIII, 2 vols., Vienna: Benno Filser Verlag, 1928. Portoghesi, 1982: Paolo Portoghesi, Roma barocca, Rome: Laterza, 1982. Posterla, 1707: Francesco Posterla, Roma sacra e moderna, Rome: Francesco Gonzaga, 1707. Proia and Romano, 1935: Alfredo Proia and Pietro Romano, Roma nel Rinascimento: Arenula, Rome: Tipgorafia Agostiniana, 1935. Rocca, 1978: Sandro Vasco Rocca (ed.), Guide rionali di Roma: Rione XV: Esquilino, Rome: Palombi, 1978. Rocca, 1979: Sandro Vasco Rocca, SS. Trinità dei Pellegrini, Rome: Palombi, 1979.

Mallory, 1977: Nina Mallory, Roman Rococo Architecture from Clement XI to Benedict XIV (1700–1758), New York: Garland, 1977.

Roisecco, 1750: Gregorio Roisecco, Roma antica e moderna, o sia nuova descrizione, 4 vols., Rome: Stamperia Puccinelli, 1750.

Mariani, 1963: Valerio Mariani, Le chiese di Roma dal XVII al XVIII secolo, Rocca San Casciano: Capppelli, 1963.

Roisecco, 1775: Gregorio Roisecco, Nuova descrizione di Roma antica e moderna, Rome: Giovanni Zempel, 1775.

Marino and Donò, 1989: Alessandra Marino and Augusto Donò, ‘Note su Emanuele Rodriguez dos Santos, architetto lusitano in Roma’, in L’architettura da Clemente XI and Benedetto XIV, Rome: Multigrafica, 1989, pp. 97–129.

Rotili, 1951: Mario Rotili, Filippo Raguzzini e il rococò romano, Rome: Palombi, 1951.

Marti, 1997: Liccia Marti, ‘Santi Celso e Giuliano’, Roma sacra, Undecesimo itinerario, 1997, pp. 22–25.

Rotili, 1982: Mario Rotili, Filippo Raguzzini nel terzo centenario della nascità, naples: Società Editrice napoletana, 1982.

Martinelli, 1725: Fioravante Martinelli, Le magnificenze di Roma antica e moderna, Rome: Bernabò, 1725.

Scotti, 2009: Assunto Tino Scotti, La grande storia di una piccola chiesa: guida alla scoperta della chiesa dei Santi Bartolomeo e Alessandro a Piazza Colonna in Roma, Rome: 2009.

Marshall, 2007: David R. Marshall, ‘Giovanni Paolo Panini as Architectural Critic: the competition for the façade of S. Giovanni in Laterano in 1732 and

Segui, Thoenes and Mortari, 1966: Gabriele Segui, cristof Thoenes and Luisa Mortari, SS. Celso e Giuliano: Collegiata e Cappella Papale, Rome: Marietti, 1966.

254

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Spagnesi, 1997: Gianfranco Spagnesi, Alessandro Specchi: alternativa al borrominismo (Universale di architettura, 25. Gli architetti), Turin: Testo & immagine, 1997. Sponzili, 1995: Maria Rita David Sponzili, ‘S. Maria della Quercia’, Roma sacra, Tredecesimo itinerario, 1995, pp. 2–5. Stroffolino, 2006: Daniela Stroffolino, Benevento, città d’autore: Filippo Raguzzini e l’architettura nel XVIII secolo, naples: Electa napoli, 2006. Tencajoli, 1928: Oreste Ferdinando Tencajoli, Le chiese nazionali italiane in Roma, Rome: Desclée and company, 1928. Titi, 1763: Filippo Titi, Descrizione delle pitture, sculture e architetture esposte al pubblico in Roma, Rome: Marco Pagliarini, 1763. Valesio, 1978: Francesco Valesio, Diario di Roma: libro settimo e libro ottavo, Milan: Longanesi, 1978. Valesio, 1979: Francesco Valesio, Diario di Roma: libro nono e libro decimo, Milan: Longanesi, 1979. Varriano, 1986: John Varriano, Italian Baroque and Rococo Architecture, new York: Oxford University Press, 1986. Vasi, 1752: Giuseppe Vasi, Le piazze principali di Roma con obelischi, colonne, ed altri ornamenti (Delle magnificenze di Roma antica e moderna, libro secondo), Rome: Eredi Barbiellini, 1752. Vasi, 1753: Giuseppe Vasi, Le basiliche e chiese antiche di Roma (Delle magnificenze di Roma antica e moderna, libro terzo), Rome: Eredi Barbiellini, 1753. Vasi, 1756a: Giuseppe Vasi, I conventi e case dei chierici regolari (Delle magnificenze di Roma antica e moderna, libro settimo), Rome: niccolò e Marco Pagliarini, 1756. Vasi, 1756b: Giuseppe Vasi, Le chiese parrochiali (Delle magnificenze di Roma antica e moderna, libro sesto), Rome: niccolò e Marco Pagliarini, 1756. Vasi, 1759: Giuseppe Vasi, I collegj, spedali, e luoghi pii (Delle magnificenze di Roma antica e moderna, libro nono), Rome: niccolò e Marco Pagliarini, 1759. Vasi, 1794: Mariano Vasi, Itinerario istruttivo di Roma o sia Descrizione generale, 2 vols., Rome: Luigi Perego Salvioni, 1794. Vitale, 1993: Gaetono Vitale, Le chiese di Roma scomparse (e non), Rome: Legatoria Artistica, 1993. Whitman, 1970: nathan T. Whitman, ‘Roman Tradition and the Aedicular Façade’, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, vol. 29, 1970, pp. 108–23. Wittkower, 1999: Rudolf Wittkower, Art and Architecture in Italy 1600–1750: Late Baroque and Rococo, 1675–1750, revised Joseph connors and Jennifer Montagu, 3 vols., new haven: Yale University Press, 1999.

John Weretka: The non-Aedicular Style

255

Abstracts and Biographies Chapter 1 Julie Rowe

Rome’s Medieval Fish Market at S. Angelo in Pescheria Rome’s main fish market was firmly established at the church of S. Angelo ‘in Pescheria’ (‘in the fish market’) by 1192. Fish was sold there in both wholesale and retail quantities. it was a good location close to the Tiber River and other city markets, and fish could be delivered there from Rome’s port in Trastevere and from the campagna by way of the Tiber island bridges. The site also connected directly to a major city thoroughfare for distribution purposes. A clear picture of how fish were sourced and how the market was organised and operated emerges from archival records. Key players were the canons of S. Angelo (in the retail market), the fishmongers’ guild (in the wholesale market) and the fishmongers (pescivendoli) whose involvement was spread across all facets of the market operations. Julie Rowe submitted her doctoral thesis in Art History in the School of Humanities at the La Trobe University in December 2013. Her thesis uses Baccio Pontelli’s three Tiber views (c. 1493) as primary evidence for an investigation of Rome’s Tiber-bank neighbourhoods during the Middle Ages, in order to reconstruct their distinctive urban character.

Chapter 2 Joan Barclay Lloyd

Memory, Myth and Meaning in the Via Appia from Piazza di Porta Capena to Porta S. Sebastiano This is a topographical and art historical study of the urban section of the Via Appia, which ran from the Servian to the Aurelian Walls, from modern Piazza di Porta capena to the Porta S. Sebastiano (Porta Appia). historical records, inscriptions, place names, monuments, ruins, churches and monasteries reflect the rich heritage of this part of Rome, from antiquity to the present. in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries this area became part of a vast archaeological park, which here focused on the ancient consular road and a series of ancient Roman buildings, such as the Baths of caracalla. in the Middle Ages churches and convents, like the Dominican nunnery of S. Sisto, were built in this region on the edge of the city, where the population had gradually dwindled. Renaissance remodelling of churches along the Via Appia culminated in the counter-Reformation renovation of SS. nereo ed Achilleo and S. cesareo by cardinal cesare Baronio and Pope clement Viii (1592–1605). These churches contain medieval mosaics, re-used liturgical furniture, and sixteenth-century paintings of the early christian martyrs. This paper recalls the historical significance of this place, as reflected in the art and architecture of the monuments along the road.

256

Joan Barclay Lloyd, originally from Zambia, studied at University College London and at the Warburg Institute. After working in Rome as Research Assistant to Richard Krautheimer, she taught Art History at La Trobe University in Melbourne from 1980–2006. She remains an Honorary Research Associate of La Trobe and is a member of the Australian Academy of the Humanities. Her books include African Animals in Renaissance Literature and Art (Oxford, 1971); The Medieval church and canonry of San clemente in Rome (Rome, 1989); Our Story so far… (Melbourne, 1998); SS. Vincenzo e Anastasio at Tre Fontane near Rome: history and architecture of a Medieval cistercian Abbey (Kalamazoo, 2006); and with Karin Bull-Simonsen Einaudi, SS. cosma e Damiano in Mica Aurea: architettura, storia e storiografia di un monastero romano soppresso (Rome, 1998). She has published shorter studies on early Christian and medieval churches, monasteries, frescoes and mosaics in Rome, as well as papers on Australian churches, in international and Australian journals.

Chapter 3 Louis cellauro

Roma Antiqva Restored: The Renaissance Archaeological Plan images of ancient Rome, published from the mid sixteenth century onwards, constituted an important antiquarian phenomenon, which was representative of the general concern with ancient architecture and topography among architects, antiquarians, and humanist scholars. This chapter investigates Bartolomeo Marliani’s topographical map of 1544, the two maps of ancient Rome of the neapolitan painter, architect, and antiquarian Pirro Ligorio (1553 and 1561), the map of the historian and antiquarian Onofrio Panvinio (1565), the small archaeological plan and the large bird’s-eye view of the French architect and antiquarian Etienne Dupérac (1573 and 1574), the map made by the engraver, draughtsman, and dealer in prints Mario cartaro (1579), and the two images designed by the Milanese printmaker, painter, and poet Ambrogio Brambilla (1582 and 1589/90). These maps are of two different types, which correspond to two different approaches to the imaging of the ancient city. The first is the small archaeological plan representing such features as the seven hills, the geographic boundaries of the fourteen Augustan regions, and a few major ancient monuments. The second type was the large-scale panoramic bird’s-eye view of the fully reconstructed ancient city. Antiquarians, including Ligorio, Dupérac and Brambilla, often produced both types of maps, the first of which emphasised ancient topography, while the second presented an imaginative interpretation designed to stress the magnificence of the long-vanished imperial capital and visualise its splendour and monumentality. Scholars have tended to conflate these two traditions of the representation of Roma Antica, and this chapter draws out the their differences in format and content.

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750

Louis Cellauro studied Architecture at the École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Lyon and History of Art at the Université Lyon-Lumière before moving to London, where he received his MA and PhD from the Courtauld Institute of Art. He has been the recipient of many post-doctoral fellowships in the USA, and in 2006 was awarded a habilitation à Diriger des Recherches from the Université François-Rabelais in Tours. He has published numerous articles in international academic journals, as well as a book on the seventeenth-century French architect Antoine Desgodets and his preparatory manuscript for his Edifices Antiques de Rome (Paris, 1682). He is currently affiliated at the Deutsches Studienzentrum in Venedig (2012–14) as a Marie-Curie Fellow of the Gerda Henkel Stiftung. He is working on a book on the Venetian architectural theorist Carlo Lodoli (1690–1761).

Chapter 4 Donato Esposito

The Virtual Rome of Sir Joshua Reynolds Sir Joshua Reynolds (1723–1792) was in Rome from 15 April 1750 to 3 May 1752. he was there to form, in his own words, ‘an idea of what is to be seen here, the remains of antiquity, the sculpture, paintings, architecture etc.’. in due course Reynolds assembled a large collection of works of art—paintings, prints and drawings— associated with Rome, its ancient history, numerous landmarks and decorative schemes. Reynolds’ many Roman artworks both serve as ‘virtual’ surrogates of the city and as ‘souvenirs’ of his italian sojourn, which was the foundation of the young artist’s future success. Donato Esposito was formerly a curator in the Department of Prints and Drawings at the British Museum. In 2009–10 he co-curated for Plymouth City Museum and Art Gallery the exhibition Sir Joshua Reynolds: the acquisition of genius. Recently, he completed a 12-month Andrew M. Mellon Fellowship at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, researching their holdings of former Reynolds items, focusing on graphic art. He is currently completing a monograph on the art collection assembled by Reynolds.

Chapter 5 Lisa Beaven

Claude Lorrain and La Crescenza: the Tiber Valley in the Seventeenth Century claude Lorrain’s paintings have been associated more with pastoral poetry and literary texts than with the topography of the campagna, partly because of their idealisation. Yet he spent much time in the campagna and the Tiber Valley, where he made hundreds of drawings (especially during the 1640s). This chapter examines claude’s depictions of the Tiber Valley from the Porta del Popolo in Rome north to La crescenza, a fortified casale (farmhouse), in relation to the social and climatic conditions of the seventeenth-century campagna. claude was drawing the banks of the Tiber at a critical time for the river

and the surrounding landscape, when the environment was unhealthy and the ecology precarious. Lisa Beaven is lecturer in Early Modern Art history in the School of Letters, Arts and Media at The University of Sydney. her research interests are concentrated on seventeenth-century italian art, patronage and collecting and she has published in journals including Burlington Magazine, Journal of the History of Collections, Master Drawings, Storia dell’Arte and (with Dagmar Eichberger) Art Bulletin, and in edited books including Possessions of a Cardinal: politics, piety, and art, 1450–1700 (University Park, PA, 2010) and Art and Identity in Early Modern Rome (Farnham, 2008). her book, An Ardent Patron: Cardinal Camillo Massimo and his artistic and antiquarian circle: Claude Lorrain, Nicolas Poussin and Diego Velázquez, was published by Paul holberton Press, London and cEEh, Madrid, in 2010. her current projects include a book on claude Lorrain and the Roman campagna, a research project (with Angela ndalianis) funded by the Australian Research council on the Baroque and neo-Baroque, and a digital mapping project of the Roman campagna in partnership with the British School at Rome.

Chapter 6 David R. Marshall

The Campo Vaccino: Order and the Fragment from Palladio to Piranesi This chapter explores the relationship between the authority of the cinquecento treatises on the orders (especially Vignola and Palladio) and the representation of Roman ruins in architectural painting and engraving from Viviano codazzi (c.1604–70) to Piranesi (1720–78), by way of niccolò codazzi (1642–93), the Monogrammist GAE, Giovanni Ghisolfi (1623–83), Alberto carlieri (1672–after 1720) and Giovanni Paolo Panini (1691–1765). it is argued that the conceptual foundations of architectural painting lay in the five orders, but these were undermined by a combination of naturalistic observation of actual ruins, especially the ruins of the Forum Romanum (then known as the campo Vaccino) and scene-painters’ tricks designed to give the effect of ruinousness. Piranesi, it is argued, represents the point at which the naturalism of ruin-representation peaks, in parallel with a collapse of faith in the orders, causing Piranesi to seek new ways of composing the ruinous fragment. David R. Marshall is Principal Fellow, School of Culture and Communication, the University of Melbourne and a member of the Australian Academy of the Humanities. He has published widely on seventeenth and eighteenth-century painting and architecture, and is the author of Viviano and niccolò codazzi and the Baroque Architectural Fantasy (1993) and articles in journals including Art Bulletin, Burlington Magazine, and Storia dell’arte. He has edited several collections, including ‘The italians’ in Australia: Studies in Renaissance and Baroque Art (2004) and Art, Site and Spectacle: Studies in Early Modern Visual culture (2007).

Abstracts and Biographies

257

Chapter 7 Arno Witte

Architecture and Bureaucracy: The Quirinal as an Expression of Papal Absolutism The Quirinal Palace, nowadays mostly regarded as the seat of italy’s republican government, was built between the late sixteenth and late eighteenth century as the new seat of papal power. it started out as a summer retreat, but soon was provided with all the necessary spaces for official receptions, state meetings and ministerial offices. This continuing architectural expansion shows how a unified court located at the periphery of Rome, on the Vatican hill, was transformed into an absolutist state apparatus situated in the centre of the expanding city, in a new and predominantly secular residence. The Quirinal palace therefore shows us how the papal government was in certain respects ahead of other European states in the innovation of political and bureaucratic structures, not lagging behind in comparison with France and other countries, as often has been suggested in historical studies. Arnold Witte is Associate Professor in Cultural Policy at the University of Amsterdam. He studied art history at the Radboud University Nijmegen and wrote his PhD at the University of Amsterdam on the patronage of Cardinal Odoardo Farnese (1573–1626). He is the author of The Artful hermitage: the Palazzetto Farnese as a counter–Reformation ‘diaeta’ (Rome, 2008) and he has published on Italian Baroque painters such as Elsheimer, Lanfranco and Domenichino and on the historiography of the field around 1900.

Chapter 8 Tommaso Manfredi

Arcadia at Trinità dei Monti. The Urban Theatre of Maria Casimira and Alexander Sobieski in Rome On 9 August 1703 the serenade Dialogo tra Amor Divino e la Fede, dedicated by cardinal Pietro Ottoboni to Maria casimira, the widow of John iii Sobieski, King of Poland, was performed in the piazza between the church of Trinità dei Monti and the Palazzo Zuccari above the slope where the Spanish Steps would be built in 1727–38. This chapter explores the way this area served as an ‘urban theatre’ that was subject to transformations that were both real and ephemeral, and which were dense with political and diplomatic implications. in particular, this chapter examines the way the upper part of this area was reconfigured by the restoration of the Villa Torres and the Palazzo Zuccari by Maria casimira, which included the construction of a bridge across the modern Via Sistina and the loggia of Palazzo Zuccari that faces the piazza in front of the church of Trinità dei Monti.

with G. Bonaccorso), La costruzione dell’architetto. Maderno, Borromini, i Fontana e la Fomazione degli architetti ticinesi a Roma (Rome 2008), Filippo Juvarra. Gli anni giovanili (Rome, 2010) and of numerous articles which have appeared in national and international journals. His particular interests are Juvarra and Borromini, the Roman formation of the European architects of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the urban history of Rome and the architectural treatises of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. He has participated in numerous international conferences.

Chapter 9 John Weretka

The ‘Non-aedicular Style’ and the Roman Church Façade of the Early Eighteenth Century Architectural historical criticism has characterised the early eighteenth century as torn between the works and styles of the borroministi and the berninisti. These style-historical terms have been often been used in a simplistic way, utilising ‘Morellian’ characteristics such as the forms of mouldings and applied ornament as synecdoches for the style as a whole. Furthermore, the use of these terms has obscured the rich give-and-take that took place between these supposedly opposed stylistic positions. Through an analysis of six church façades erected in the city of Rome between 1721 and 1741, this chapter moves beyond the ‘brute facts’ presented by these façades towards hypotheses concerning their ‘institutional facts’, and shows that buildings of this period can be read as providing a lively commentary on one of the most persistent norms of architectural organisation in the Baroque church façade, the aedicule. The liberation from the aedicule present in some of these buildings forms the operating rationale for a distinct style of architectural conception typical in Rome at the start of the eighteenth century. John Weretka holds qualifications in medieval history, musicology, art history and theology and is currently a PhD student in architectural history at the University of Melbourne. He has taught on the art, architecture and urbanism of Rome, and counterpoint, harmony, and the history of music in the Renaissance and Baroque at the University of Melbourne. His research focuses on the design process of the church facade in Rome from the start of the eighteenth century until the erection of the Lateran facade in 1732. His published work includes a study of the iconography of the guitar and the musette in the paintings of Watteau.

Tommaso Manfredi is an architect and researcher at the University ‘Mediterranea’ at Reggio Calabria, where he teaches the History of Architecture and Urbanism and the History of the Region. He is the author of i Virtuosi al Pantheon. 1750–1758 (Rome, 1998,

258

The Site of Rome: Studies in the Art and Topography of Rome 1400–1750