University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Touching the divine: mobility, devotion, and the display of religious objects in early modern Rome

(USC Thesis Other)

Touching the divine: mobility, devotion, and the display of religious objects in early modern Rome

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content TOUCHING THE DIVINE: MOBILITY, DEVOTION, AND THE DISPLAY OF RELIGIOUS OBJECTS IN EARLY MODERN ROME by Linda Ann Nolan A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (ART HISTORY) May 2010 Copyright 2010 Linda Ann Nolan ii Dedication In memory of Terry Rossi Kirk iii Acknowledgements The research and writing of this dissertation would not have been possible without the generous assistance of fellowships from the Borchard Foundation, the Samuel H. Kress Foundation, and the American Association of University Women. A Borchard Foundation Fellowship assisted in the early phases of my research and exploration of sites and libraries in Rome. A two-year Samuel H. Kress Fellowship in residence at the Bibliotheca Hertziana in Rome provided the extended time to access sites multiple times and discover and utilize research materials not found elsewhere. And finally, a fellowship from the American Association of University Women provided the autonomy to write the manuscript. Many thanks must be extended to the staff of the libraries and archives I frequented during my time in Rome, in particular those at the Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana (especially during the months leading up to the closure in summer 2007), Archivio Secreto Vaticano, the Dominican Archive at S. Sabina, Bibliotheca Angelica, Bibliotheca Marco Besso, Bibliotheca Alessandrina, Bibliotheca Casanatense, and the libraries at the American Academy and the British School. Before arriving in Rome, as well as during holiday visits back to Los Angeles, I benefited from the excellent resources at the J. Paul Getty Research Institute and the helpful staff in the Special Collections reading room. I would like to give special thanks to the scholars and staff at the Bibliotheca Hertziana in Rome. For two years I was part of their community and benefited greatly from conversations I had with other fellows and senior researchers. I am grateful to the iv directors, Sybille Ebert-Schifferer and Elizabeth Kieven, for providing me this opportunity. I would especially like to acknowledge the individuals who enriched my time at the Hertziana, in particular, Paul Anderson, Walter Cupperi, Ralph-Miklas Dobler, Damian Dombrowski, Meredith Fluke, David Freedberg, Claire Guinomet, Ingo Herklotz, Dagmar Holste, Joseph Imorde, Bram Kempers, Suzanne Kubersky, Maria Izabella Lehmann, Juergen Müller, Heather Nolin, Anna Seidel, Erik Thunø, Paola Vitolo, Erik Wegerhoff, and Karolina Zgraja. After a presentation of my research for the external review committee of the Max- Plank-Institute at the Bibliotheca Hertziana, I received encouraging, critical comments from members of the committee, especially Elizabeth Cropper, Horst Bredekamp, and Salvatore Settis. As is the case in Rome, a place I first experienced as an undergraduate, each encounter brought new friends and reunions with people from the past, especially Jennifer Montagu, Marcello Barbanera, and Jan Gadeyne. I extend my gratitude for the enjoyable exchanges with Fabio Barry, Caroline Goodson, Ingrid Rowland, Andrew W. Moore, Livio Pestilio, Elizabeth Bartman, Lisa Marie Mignone, and Martin Beckmann. Research on two objects from this project were presented publicly and benefited from the feedback of listeners. In particular, on the Bocca della Verità as a works-in- progress talk at the Bibliotheca Hertziana, Rome; and a revised version of that talk during a session at the annual meeting of Archaeological Institute of American. And on the bronze St. Peter at an interdisciplinary conference on sculpture and touch held at the Courtauld Institute, London. I would like to thank especially Sybille Ebert-Schifferer, v Andreas Thielemann, Michael Schmitz, Geraldine Johnson, James Hall, and Peter Dent for their helpful criticisms and encouraging comments. In the U.S., a number of people inspired my research during its nascent stages, in particular former colleagues and visiting scholars at the J. Paul Getty Center, especially Bruce Boucher, Brigitte Bourgeois, Peggy Fogelman, Carolyn Hilmér Miner, Alex Potts, Rudolph Preimesberger, Sandy Rodriguez, and Anne Taylor. I express profound gratitude to my advisor Todd P. Olson. During his graduate seminars and advisement of this dissertation, I learned how to be a creative researcher and writer about art and material culture. Many thanks to my committee members, John Pollini, Malcolm Baker and Karen Pinkus. An additional vote of thanks to another committee member, Sean Roberts, who provided essential critical feedback during the final phase of writing. I thank Martin Beckmann and Sean Roberts for catching errors in translations, and especially Chiara Sulprizio for last minute help with Latin. On a personal note, while coming to the end of this project the loss of a mentor and friend made finishing the dissertation a haunted task. Terry Rossi Kirk introduced me to many of the monuments discussed herein when I was an undergraduate. He welcomed me back to Rome as a graduate student, encouraged me when I felt overwhelmed, questioned me when I strayed too far afield, and even marveled at my discoveries. It is to him that I dedicate this work. vi Table of Contents Dedication ii Acknowledgements iii List of Figures viii Abstract xiv Introduction 1 Chapter Breakdown 4 Real Touch 9 Whose reception: Sources 13 Reception of Art 19 An Embodied Reception of Art: Touch and Sculpture 25 Represented Touch 29 Conclusion 34 Chapter 1: Reforming Sacred Behavior, Space, and Objects 36 Sacred Behavior 37 Sacred Space 42 Women’s Bodies and Sacred Sites 44 Rebuilding St. Peter’s Basilica 47 Sacred Objects 49 i. Relics, Brandea, Rosaries, Touchstones 49 ii. Paintings and Sculpture 54 Conclusion 61 Chapter 2: St. Peter 62 Two Basilicas at Once 63 St. Peter’s Basilica: Veter.Basil.Sub.Paulo.V.Demolitae 69 Christian Archaeology 72 Giacomo Grimaldi at St. Peter’s 74 Paul V and the confessio of St. Peter: in ambitu sacrae confessionis 77 The confessio at St. Peter’s 78 Imagining the Tomb of St. Peter 81 Installing the Bronze St. Peter 85 Triumph of Christianity over Pagan Antiquity 91 St. Peter’s Presence in Rome 92 Touching the Bronze St. Peter 95 The Marble St. Peter and the Grotte Vaticane 100 Conclusion 105 vii Chapter 3: The Virgin and Antiquity 108 The Icon of St. Luke at S. Agostino 111 Installing the Icon 113 The model for the high altar tabernacle at S. Agostino 114 The Madonna del Parto 117 Tactile devotion and the Madonna del Parto 124 Female Devotion at S. Agostino 125 S. Maria in Cosmedin: the Bocca della Verità and the Virgin 131 The Bocca della Verità in the 17 th century 134 Parceling out Old St. Peter’s Basilica 137 Women and the Bocca della Verità 142 Testing Stones 147 Conclusion 148 Chapter 4: Christ 150 Transforming S. Maria sopra Minerva 153 Marta Porcari and Michelangelo’s Risen Christ 155 Installing the sculpture of Christ 159 The location: mano destra, cornu Evangelorum, or cornu Epistola? 162 Christ and the Golden Rose 168 Christ and the Confraternities at S. Maria sopra Minerva 173 i. Christ and the Annunciation 174 ii. Christ and the Rosary 176 iii. Christ, the Rosary for Christ, and the S. Salvatore 179 Transporting the Image of Christ 182 The Minerva Christ and the church of Domine quo Vadis? 184 The Bronze Foot and Antonio Cloche (1628-1720) 196 Conclusion 199 Conclusion 201 Comprehensive Bibliography 207 i. Archival and Manuscript Sources 207 ii. Published Sources 208 Appendix: Figures 235 viii List of Figures (fig. 1) St. Peter. Bronze. Nave, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican 235 (Source: Author) (fig. 2) St. Peter. Bronze, looking east. Nave, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican 236 (Source: Author) (fig. 3) St. Peter. Marble. 2 nd century A.D. Entrance to Grotte Vaticane, 237 Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 4) Jacopo Sansovino. Madonna del Parto. Marble. 1516-21. Martelli 238 Chapel, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 5) Bocca della Verità. Marble. 2 nd cen. A.D. (?). Portico, S. Maria in 239 Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 6) Bocca della Verità, with visitors. Marble. 2 nd cen. A.D. (?). Portico, 240 S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 7) Michelangelo Buonarroti. Risen Christ. Marble. 1521. S. Maria sopra 241 Minerva, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 8) Giovanni Lanfranco. St. Peter Healing Agatha. Oil on canvas. c. 1614. 242 Parma, Galleria Nazionale (Source: Schleier 2001) (fig. 9) Taddeo Landini. Christ Washing St. Peter’s Feet. Marble. 1578-79. 243 Formerly located in Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican. Currently in Quirinal Palace, Sala Regia, Rome (Source: Rice 1997) (fig. 10) Gian Lorenzo Bernini. Christ Kissing the Feet of St. Peter, detail from 244 the Cathedra Petri. 1657-66. Bronze. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Wittkower 1955) (fig. 11) Marcello Venusti. Noli me Tangere. Oil on canvas. 1577-79. Chapel 245 of the Baptismal Font, S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig.12) Caravaggio. The Incredulity of St. Thomas. Oil on canvas. 1601-02. 246 Sanssouci, Potsdam (Source: Internet) (fig. 13) Gian Lorenzo Bernini. Tomb of Alexander VII, detail of the figure of 247 “Truth”. Marble with bronze painted attachment. 1671-78. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Internet) ix (fig. 14) Gian Lorenzo Bernini, attrib. De Sylva Chapel, detail of virtue, 248 without drapery. Marble. S. Isidoro, Rome (Source: Negro 2002) (fig. 15) Guglielmo della Porta. Tomb of Pope Paul III. 1549-75. Marble 249 and bronze. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 16) Martin van Heemskerck. View of Nave of Old St. Peter’s Basilica. 250 1538. Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett 79 D 2a, fol. 52r (Source: Kinney 2006, 20, fig. 8) (fig. 17) Martin van Heemskerck. View of Crossing of New St. Peter’s Basilica. 251 1538. Statens Konstmuseer, Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, Coll. Ankersvärd 637 (Source: Kinney 2006, 20, fig. 9) (fig. 18) Giacomo della Porta. Tabernacle of the Madonna del Soccorso. 252 1578. Cappella Gregoriana, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Ostrow 1996, 154, fig. 114) (fig. 19) Sarcophagus of Junius Bassus, detail view installed in the Grotte 253 Vaticane, before 1954. Marble. c. 359 A.D. Currently installed in Sacristy Museum, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 20) View of Clemetine ambulatory of Grotte Vaticane, before 1954. 254 Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 21) Confessio, view from nave. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: 255 Author) (fig. 22) Confessio, view through 20 th century glass wall in Grotte Vaticane. 256 Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 23) Giambattista Ricci da Novarra. Pope Paul V Praying before the 257 Confessio. Fresco. 1617-19. Confessio, north-wall, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Lanzani 2003, 31, fig. 56) (fig. 24) Pieter de Bailliu. Pilgrims Adoring the Shrine of St. Peter. 258 Engraving. 1635. Noted first in BAV, Stampati, Cicognara XII.541, pl. 11 (Source: Internet) (fig. 25) Anon. List of Popes. Woodcut. Le Cose maravigliose dell’alma 259 citta di Roma. Roma, Francesco Cavalli, 1636, 86 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) x (fig. 26) Anon. Seated St. Peter and St. Paul Conversing. Woodcut. 260 Le Cose maravigliose dell'alma città di Roma. Rome, Mauritio Bona, 1620, title page (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 27) Matthaeus Greuter. Longitudinal Section of St. Peter’s Basilica. 261 Engraving. c. 1615 (?). Herzog-August Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 28) Domenico Tasselli, with notes by Giacomo Grimaldi. Organ of 262 Alexander VI with bronze St. Peter. c. 1605-1607. BAV, Barb. Lat. 2733, fol. 27v (Source: Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 64). (fig. 29) After Tiberio Alfarano. Superimposed Plan of Old and New 263 St. Peter’s Basilica, detail. 1590 (Source: Rice 1997, fig. 3) (fig. 30) Workshop of Carlo Maderno. Project for Staircase of the Confessio. 264 Vienna, Albertina, It. AZ, Rom 768 (Source: Bellini 1999, 51) (fig. 31) Francesco Borromini. Design for Inner Façade of St. Peter’s basilica. 265 1628. BAV, Vat. Lat. 11257, fol. 3 (Source: Thelen 1967, pl. C 38) (fig. 32) Design Papiro Bartoli. Engraving Matthaeus Greuter, Project for the 266 Coro of St. Peter’s Basilica in the Form of the Navicella. Engraving. Early 17 th century. "Discorso sopra una forma di Coro…” Biblioteca Nazionale, Rome, Vol. X, vol. 3808 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 33) Design Papiro Bartoli. Engraving Matthaeus Greuter. Project for the 267 Coro of St. Peter’s Basilica in the Form of the Navicella, detail. Early 17 th century. "Discorso sopra una forma di Coro…” Biblioteca Nazionale, Rome, Vol. X, vol. 3808 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 34) Column of St. Peter. Carcere Mamertino, below the church of 268 S. Giuseppe dei Falegnami, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 35) Face print stone of St. Peter. Carcere Mamertino, below the 269 church of S. Giuseppe dei Falegnami, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 36) Knee print stones of St. Peter. S. Francesca Romana, Rome (Source: 270 Author) (fig. 37) St. Peter, on feast day of the saint, June 29. Bronze. Nave, Basilica 271 di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) xi (fig. 38) Domenico Tasselli. Marble St. Peter over entrance to Old St. Peter’s 272 Basilica. After 1605. BAV, Barb. Lat. 2733 (Source: Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 180, fig. 73). (fig. 39) Cappella della Bocciata, early photo, full view of marble St. Peter 273 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 40) Cappella della Bocciata, early photo, looking towards altar (Source: 274 Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 41) St. Luke Icon of the Virgin and Child. High altar, S. Agostino, Rome 275 (Source: Author) (fig. 42) High altar tabernacle, containing St. Luke Icon of the Virgin and 276 Child.1620’s. S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 43) Adoration of the Magi, fragment. Mosaic. 8 th century. From the 277 Oratory of Pope John VII, Old St. Peter’s Basilica. Sacristy, S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 44) La Theotókos. S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Massimi 1989) 278 (fig. 45) Jacopo Sansovino. Madonna del Parto, setting in a niche on the 279 inner façade of the church. Marble. 1516-21. Martelli Chapel, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 46) Jacopo Sansovino. Madonna del Parto, detail of bronze attachment. 280 Marble. 1516-21. Martelli Chapel, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 47) Modern poster for feast day of the Madonna del Parto, October 2006. 281 S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 48) Votives at the Madonna del Parto. S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) 282 (fig. 49) Andrea Sansovino. Virgin Mary,Christ and S. Anne. Marble. 1510-10. 283 Altar of S. Anne, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 50) Votive hearts. West aisle, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) 284 (fig. 51) Martin van Heemskerck. St. Luke Painting the Virgin. c. 1553. 285 Oil on panel. Musée des Beaux-Arts, Rennes (Source: Internet) (fig. 52) Icon tabernacle in central apse. Giovanni Mario Crescimbeni. L’istoria 286 della Basilica Diaconale, Collegiata, e Parrocchiale di S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma. Roma: Antonio de Rossi, 1715, 148 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) xii (fig. 53) Bocca della Verità, detail of mouth. Marble. 2 nd c A.D.(?). Portico, 287 S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 54) Façade of S. Maria in Cosmedin. Giovanni Mario Crescimbeni. 288 L’istoria della Basilica Diaconale, Collegiata, e Parrocchiale di S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma. Roma: Antonio de Rossi, 1715, 61 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 55) Francesco de Hollanda. Bocca della Verità, detail. 1539-40 (Source: 289 Tormo 1940) (fig. 56) Ancient Roman Patrician Woman. Francesco de' Ficoroni. Le vestigia 290 e rarità di Roma antica. Ricercate, e spiegate da Francesco de' Ficoroni. Rome: Girolamo Mainardi, 1744. (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 57) Michelangelo’s Risen Christ. Woodcut. Le cose maravigliose dell'alma 291 città di Roma… Rome, Franzini 1600, 71 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 58) Marcello Venusti. S. Giacomo Apostolo. 1570. Chapel of 292 S. Giacomo Apostolo, S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 59) Taddeo Landini. Copy after Michenalgeo’s Risen Christ. Marble. 293 1579. S. Spirito, Florence (Source: Author) (fig. 60) Jacob Matham. Michelangelo’s Risen Christ. Engraving (?). 1590’s. 294 Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (Source: Schmidt 2003, fig. 8) (fig. 61) Carlo Maderno. Section drawing for the choir of S. Maria sopra 295 Minerva. c. 1610’s or 1620’s. Albertina, Vienna, It. AZ Rom 606 (Source: Palmerio and Villetti 1989, fig. 33) (fig. 62) Carlo Maderno. Section drawing for the choir of S. Maria sopra 296 Minerva, detail. c. 1610’s or 1620’s. Albertina, Vienna, It. AZ Rom 606 (Source: Palmerio and Villetti 1989, fig. 33) (fig. 63) Gian Lorenzo Bernini. Golden Rose. Gold, copper, and bronze 297 with sapphire. 1658. Museo dell’Opera del Duomo, Siena, inv. n. OA 3297 (Source: Author) (fig. 64) Antoniazzo Romano. Annunciation with “zitelle” and Juan de 298 Torquemada. Tempera on panel. 1500. Chapel of the Annunciation, S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Author) xiii (fig. 65) Perugino, attributed. Formerly attributed to Raphael. Christ. Oil on 299 panel. Late 15 th century. Chapel of the S. Salvatore (Maffei Chapel). S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 66) Anon. View of Michelangelo’s Risen Christ. Early 19 th century. Casa 300 Buonarroti, Florence. (Source: de Tolnay 1967, 43, fig. 1) (fig. 67) Giacomo Fontana. View of S. Maria sopra Minerva. Engraving. 301 Raccolta delle migliori chiese di Roma e suburbane. Rome, Marini: 1838, vol. II, Tav. LII. Interior view looking across transept (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 68) Anon. Vera e Miracolosa Effigie del Ss.mo Salvatore che si conserva 302 nella Sacra Cappella detta Sancta Sanctorum trasfportata di notte privatamente nella Chiesa di S. Maria sopra Minerva il di primo Gennaio 1709…. Engraving. Rome, Dom. Art. Ercole, 1709 (Source: Getty Research Institute) (fig. 69) Footprint stone of Christ, substitute, view from above. Marble. 1616. 303 Church of Domine quo Vadis?, or S. Maria in Palmis, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 70) Footprint stone of Christ, substitute, general view. Marble. 1616. 304 Church of Domine quo Vadis?, or S. Maria in Palmis, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 71) Footprint stone of Christ, substitute, detail. Marble. 1616. Church of 305 Domine quo Vadis?, or S. Maria in Palmis, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 72) Footprint stone of Christ, original. Marble, in bronze and wood relic 306 case. S. Sebastiano fuori le Mura, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 73) Reliquary cabinet. 1625 (?). S. Sebastiano fuori le Mura, Rome 307 (Source: Author) (fig. 74) Copy of Michelangelo’s Risen Christ. 1637-39 (?). Church of Domine 308 quo Vadis?, or S. Maria in Palmis, Rome. (Source: Wallace 1997, fig. 14) (fig. 75) Michelangelo Buonarroti. Risen Christ, early photo, detail of bronze 309 attachment on foot. Marble. 1521. S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 76) Michelangelo. Risen Christ, early photo, full view, with bronze foot, 310 halo and larger cloth. Marble. 1521. S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) xiv Abstract The embodied experience of objects was a historically specific mode of reception formed by the transformations of sacred spaces, rededication of sacred objects, and the continuation of customary religious behavior in early modern Rome. At the end of the 16 th century, sacred spaces and art were being reformed as new St. Peter’s Basilica emerged as a devotional space meant to glorify the archaeological evidence of the origins of the Church, providing a model for others to follow. This dissertation focuses on the early modern period, in particular the late 16 th - and early 17 th -century reception of a selection of ancient, medieval and Renaissance objects, including a bronze sculpture of St. Peter (Basilica di S. Pietro in Vaticano), a marble sculpture of St. Peter (Grotte Vaticane), the Madonna del Parto by Jacopo Sansovino (S. Agostino), the Bocca della Verità (S. Maria in Cosmedin) and a marble sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo Buonarroti (S. Maria sopra Minerva). Some of the objects are quite well known both in the history of art and to the casual visitor to the Eternal City. In bringing together these seemingly unrelated objects, it is my goal to underscore how ancient, medieval, and Renaissance material culture intersected in the sacred spaces of early modern Rome. The dramatic material and spiritual changes at St. Peter’s brought about a moment in which the pagan undercurrents of devotion still lingered on even in the wake of the Counter Reformation. 1 Introduction “Whose relics I saw and touched one by one...” 1 In the quote above, Francesco Maria Torrigio, Canon of the church of S. Nicola in Carcere in the early 17 th century, noted his personal experience with relics: the bones of Sts. Peter and Paul. The sacred fragments were unexpectedly found concealed inside an opening in the thick stone slab upon which the bones were divided centuries earlier. Torrigio saw and touched the relics of the two saints. His personal note is found within a guidebook he wrote on the sacred sites of St. Peter in Rome, I Sacri Trofei Romani (1644). Torrigio turned his attention to this stone on more than one occasion. In the edition of 1618 of Torrigio’s guidebook to the Grotte Vaticane, the expansive crypt of new St. Peter’s Basilica, he mentioned how the stone was once located in the wall near the Porta Santa of Old St. Peter’s. 2 In 1644, the stone moved yet again. “The stone by 1 Francesco Maria Torrigio. I Sacri Trofei Romani del Trionfante Prencipe degli Apostoli San Pietro Gloriosissimo. Rome: Moneta, 1644, 136. “Masi è giudicato essere alcune ossa di SS. Pietro, e Paolo, e di St. Silvestro perche detta pietra stava anticamente (come si è detto) all’Altare antichissimo de ossibus Apostolorum. Le quale Reliquie io ho visto, e toccato ad una ad una minutamente. Vi furono poi riposte d’ordine dell’istesso, per maggior riverenza, & honore.” 2 The term grotte is used specifically to describe the exceptional, subterranean crypt of St. Peter’s basilica, named the Grotte Vaticane. St. Peter’s crypt is exceptional because it was accessible, albeit primarly to men, and filled with more than just tombs. The corridors of the Grotte Vaticane evoke the catacombs or the buried rooms of ancient Roman palaces filled with fanciful wall paintings. Francesco Maria Torrigio. Le Sacre Grotte Vaticane: cioé Narratione delle Cose piu Notabili, che Sono Sotto il Pavimento della Basilica di St. Pietro in Vaticano in Roma. Viterbo: I Discepoli, 1618, 43, “Si conserva anco sotto queste Sacre Grotte la pietra di porfido sopra la quale furono spartite queste sante ossa à di 7. di Luglio, come dice Guglielmo Durando, da St. Silvestro, la qual pietra è lunga quattro palmi, e longa tre, & è cancellata di grata di bronzo, e si leggono ivi tali parole in lettera assai difficile. Super isto lapide porphiretico fuerunt divisa, ossa Sanctorum Petri, & Pauli, & ponderata, per B. Silvestrum Papam sub anno Domini, C.C.C.XIX quando facta fuit in Ecclesia. Stava già tal pietra vicino la porta Santa a mano sinistra, affissa al muro.” In Torrigio’s 2 nd edition of the Le Sacre Grotte Vaticane (1639), 50, he notes the same information with some additions. 2 order of Cardinal Barberini was transferred on October 21, 1639, from the Grotte of the basilica to upstairs near the Altar of the Crucifixion.” 3 It was during the transfer of the stone from the Grotte Vaticane to the chapel of the Crucifixion that Torrigio had the opportunity to touch the sacred objects of the past, an exceptional experience that warranted the personal note. After recording his intimate encounter with the relics, he explained that they were replaced inside the stone with “reverence and honor.” Torrigio’s personal encounter reminds the modern beholder of the exceptional experience of being present in Rome in the first half of the 17 th century when the sacred spaces of the city were being dramatically transformed. At the end of the 16 th century, sacred spaces and art were being reformed with new St. Peter’s Basilica providing a model for others to follow. The moving and parceling out of ancient and medieval objects, the covering of nudity, the scraping of inappropriate details in frescoes, the return of paintings by famous artists to the heirs of patrons, and the installation and veneration of ancient, sacred objects attest to a return to tradition at the expense of innovation. 4 During the Counter Reformation, customary 3 “Tal pietra fù d’ordine del Card. Barberino adi 21 di Ottobre 1639 trasferita dalle dette Sacre Grotte di sopra nella Basilica presso all’Altar del Crocefisso…” Torrigio 1644, 135-36. The Altar of the Crucifix (Crocefisso) is located in the Chapel of the same name, which is the first chapel in the north side aisle upon entering the basilica. Today this is the Chapel of the Pietà, which contains Michelangelo’s famous sculpture of the same name. Because of limited access to the chapel, I was unable to note if the stone is still located there. Louise Rice. The Altars and Altarpieces of New St. Peter's: Outfitting the Basilica, 1621-1666. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997, 182-186, does not note the dividing stone, which suggests it is no longer present in the chapel. It possibly was removed when the Colonna Santa was removed to the Sacristy in the 20 th century. 4 I elude here to the moving of Michelagnelo’s Pietá, the covering of nude figures, including the Christ by Michelangelo and Giustizia on the Tomb of Paul III, the removal of the nude figures from Michelangelo’s Last Judgment fresco, especially the scrapping of the figure of St. Catherine of Alexandria, the return of Raphael altarpiece from S. Maria in Aracoeli to the heirs of the patron, which is then replaced by an icon of the Virgin and Christ believed to be painted by St. Luke. These examples are noted in Chapter One. 3 practice was deemed superstition. 5 The ancient practices of the Church were being rediscovered in the physical remains of the catacombs and in early theological texts. Despite these reforms, the concealing of inappropriate images, and the proliferation of guidebooks to help curb behavior in sacred spaces, old habits died hard when the Catholic Church in fact depended on vernacular devotion for enticing new followers. Torrigio’s desire to touch the sacred persisted. A mass-produced 17 th century prayer book dedicated to receiving the Holy Sacrament reveals that despite attempts to reform behavior, the desire to touch had to be acknowledged. 6 The book addressed the want to touch the blessed body of Christ. The author likely took into account the real behavior of devout people who extended pleading hands towards holy people such as the Pope and sacred objects such as relics and devotional images. But the reader is advised against touching, that the body of Christ is “touched by God,” and must be considered a consecrated relic, the Holy Sacrament. 7 A contradiction existed in the early modern period when advice was given by one person not to touch, while another was allowed to handle sacred objects. It is this complicated, 5 I allude here to Charles Borromeo’s treatise on sacred architecture. See Chapter One. 6 Gaspare Loarte. Instruttioni, per Meditare i Misterij del Rosario della Ss. Vergine Madre. Rome: B. Zannetti, 1610, 204-219. “Considerationi Quindici Del P. Fulvio Androtio: per eccitar divotione innanzi ricevere il Santiss. Sacramento.” 7 Loarte 1610, 209, “Sesta consideratione. Che la carne dell’huomo è toccata dalla carne di Christo benedetto. Se potesse vedere il Nostro Sign. in forma humana, come prima si vedeva, haverebbe per gran favore poterli toccare, & baciar la mano, anzi l’insima parte della sua veste: Che dirà vedendosi toccare la carne sua fragile, & caduca dalla carne, & dal corpo di Christo Signo suo immortale, impassibile, & glorioso?” “Aviso. Essendo, che la carne sua é toccata da Dio, la deve conservare per Dio, amarla per Dio; nè permettere, che da altri mai sia malamente toccata tenendola come una reliquia, & come una cosa consecrata a Dio.” 4 contradictory history of the embodied devotional reception of objects and the mobility of the objects in sacred spaces that I take into consideration in this dissertation. I am concerned with the embodied experience of objects as a historically specific mode of reception formed by the transformations of sacred spaces, rededication of sacred objects, and the continuation of customary religious behavior. This dissertation is focused on the early modern period, in particular the late 16 th - and early 17 th -century reception of a selection of ancient, medieval and Renaissance objects, including a bronze sculpture of St. Peter (Basilica di St. Pietro in Vaticano), a marble sculpture of St. Peter (Grotte Vaticane), the Madonna del Parto by Jacopo Sansovino (S. Agostino), the Bocca della Verità (S. Maria in Cosmedin) and a marble sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo Buonarroti (S. Maria sopra Minerva). Some of the objects are quite well known both in the history of art and to the casual visitor to the Eternal City. In bringing together these seemingly unrelated objects, it is my goal to underscore how ancient, medieval, and Renaissance material culture intersected in the sacred spaces of early modern Rome. The dramatic material and spiritual changes at St. Peter’s that led to the transformation of devotion brought about a moment in which pagan undercurrents still lingered on even in the wake of the Counter Reformation. Chapter Breakdown In Chapter 1, “Reforming Sacred Behavior, Space, and Objects,” I bring to the reader’s attention the reforms of the late 16 th through the early 17 th century. Guidebooks were written to inform the pilgrim about appropriate behavior in sacred spaces in Rome, even if their conduct contradicted that of the clergy. What becomes clear from looking at 5 early sources is that behavior was changing according to the transformations of sacred space and rituals around the people. Instructions for behavior were sometimes directed specifically towards female worshippers whose problematic status prohibited them from entering certain sacred areas. As the churches of Rome were being renovated in light of the reforms put forth by the Council of Trent, St. Peter’s Basilica led the way by providing the prime example of the new form of pilgrim basilica for the appropriate display of relics and sacred art. Other churches followed this example in the 17 th century. Relics and other sacred objects were being shifted around, rededicated, and criticized at the same time that pilgrims were wishing to access them. When denied the most important relics, pilgrims, especially female ones, turned with new enthusiasm towards accessible sacred art and durable legendary touchstones, the ancient stones that retain the traces of Christ and saints. Mosaics, paintings, and sculptures of sacred people were being reformed by means of new displays as well as the addition of draperies to cover up inappropriate, tempting nudity. The pilgrimage experience to the most important sacred sites in Rome was changing quickly before the devotional gaze and grasp of the thousands of pilgrims who came to the holy center in the early modern period in search of salvation. In Chapter 2, “St. Peter,” I focus on customary devotion at what would become in the 17th century the most important site of the Roman Catholic Church, the new basilica of St. Peter. While the old 4 th -century basilica dedicated to the Apostle was being destroyed and the new one was being completed in the early 17 th century, appropriate sites of devotion were created in the new space. The sites met the needs of the increasing number of pilgrims who visited the basilica since the Holy Year of 1575. While the 6 church was in transition, a period of just over one hundred years, key devotional objects were installed in temporary, accessible displays which inspired devotion towards the quickly disappearing remains of the old basilica. Eventually certain monuments, fragments of frescoes, mosaics, and sculptures were installed in new, often physically inaccessible locations or given as gifts to churches, private noble collections, and important churches outside Rome. Attention was drawn away from relics and objects of artistic value, with access even denied to the masses, and placed within large-scale, spectacular sculptural monuments and awe-inspiring architecture. The bronze St. Peter sculpture (figs. 1-2), still currently at the northeast pier of the crossing of St. Peter’s Basilica, serves as the primary case study to note the creation of a site of tactile devotion in the midst of the aggrandizing of devotional space at the new basilica. The statue of St. Peter, believed by some to have been cast from the bronze of the ancient cult statue of Zeus from his Capitoline temple, received conspicuous tactile devotional attention from the clergy in the early 17 th century. Pilgrims, especially women who were denied access to the most sacred areas of the basilica, also venerated the apparently ancient pagan statue transformed into the image of the first pope. Because of the increase in attention, the object was ensured its prominent position. The marble St. Peter (fig. 3) in the Grotte Vaticane of the basilica also served as a similar important intimate site of devotion in a space accessible almost exclusively to men. In becoming the central site for the Catholic Church, St. Peter’s Basilica was parceled out to churches in Rome as a model for the construction of new monuments of appropriate devotion and disseminating material fragments of its ancient past. 7 In Chapter 3, “The Virgin and Antiquity,” I investigate how new St. Peter’s Basilica affected two discrete sites in Rome, the churches of S. Agostino and S. Maria in Cosmedin. Both sites house important early Christian objects as well as monuments with prominent histories of tactile devotion and reception related to the Virgin and female lay devotion. At S. Agostino, a sculpture of the Virgin known as the Madonna del Parto (fig. 4) is considered in relation to the changes in access to a highly prized icon representing the Virgin and Christ. Traditionally believed to be painted by St. Luke, the icon was installed in an inaccessible monumental tabernacle at the high altar of S. Agostino in the early 17 th century following a new type of altar tabernacle employed at St. Peter’s Basilica. The new display of the icon, with its limited access, forced pilgrims and female members of religious orders to look for another site to express their physical forms of devotion to the Virgin. The Madonna del Parto, located on the inner façade of the church, met that need. Originally a monumental dedication to show the devotion of a man from Florence buried at the church, the sculpture was rededicated as a devotional site for women seeking blessing in childbirth. I trace the origins of the still vitally active tactile devotion towards the sculpture to the early modern period. Changes in access to the St. Luke icon and the increase in pilgrims who were familiar with the veneration shown to the bronze St. Peter, discussed in Chapter Two, led to a physical form of devotion inspired by traditional, still persistent pagan associations with Christian objects. At S. Maria in Cosmedin, the so-called Bocca della Verità (figs. 5-6), or Mouth of Truth, the famous ominous gapping-mouth faced stone, installed in the portico of the church in the early 17 th century, was dedicated to the Virgin as a testament to the triumph of Christianity over the false pagan religions. The portico of the church, built directly 8 into an ancient Roman structure, was filled with a mix of ancient pagan and Christian objects and inscriptions, all of which served as powerful reminders of the devotion to the Virgin at the site and the triumph of Christianity over paganism. Just before the installation of the Bocca in the portico, S. Maria in Cosmedin’s titular icon of the Virgin and Christ was installed in the central apse of the church in an inaccessible tabernacle like the icon at the church of S. Agostino. Around the same time, the church received an important 8 th -century mosaic of the Virgin and Christ from Old St. Peter’s Basilica. The mosaic, formerly located in an oratory near the Holy Door (Porta Santa) of Old St. Peter’s, was installed not far from the Bocca della Verità, an object with a powerful legendary-turned-real history of tactile interaction for the testing of the virginity of unmarried women. The reform of sacred space and access to devotional objects made manifest at new St. Peter’s Basilica had a ripple affect upon churches throughout the city. The new basilica led the way in coming to terms with the ancient pagan and early Christian material remains. In Chapter 4, “Christ,” I demonstrate how an object by a famous Renaissance artist was affected by the reforms of sacred space and devotion embodied by St. Peter’s Basilica. The Risen Christ (fig. 7) by Michelangelo Buonarroti at S. Maria sopra Minerva is discussed in terms of the way the hands and lips of devout visitors passed over the object in the church beginning in the 16 th century until the 20 th century. Initially a dedicatory, commemorative monument for an important noble Roman woman, the Risen Christ was divested of its original display, and hence function, when it was reinstalled for the last time in the 19 th century. In the early modern period, the sculpture was moved from its originally setting in an elevated niche, which led to it being venerated, 9 rededicated, and prized by a diverse group of people at the church, which included various priors and members of the congregation. The marble sculpture received an honorific halo in addition to bronze additions, which brought attention to the statue’s foot and protected it, but did not prevent the tactile form of devotion shown to the object for centuries. I also note how a sacred object, the Golden Rose, which was given as a gift to the church by a pope in the early 17th century, possibly displaced the sculpture. Other gifts from St. Peter’s and the popes were given to the Minerva, including the transfer of the tomb of a pope who founded an important confraternity at the Minerva, and renovations at the high altar. The transformations in display not only affected Michelangelo’s Risen Christ, but also an important miracle-granting icon after the access to similar objects at St. Peter’s Basilica had been restricted. Michelangelo’s sculpture, like the Madonna del Parto and the bronze St. Peter, was a constant site of devotion, the expression of which was the continuous presence of votive candles and objects, as well as the touching and kissing of the foot of the sculpture. Real Touch When we enter a church or a chapel, there are many moments when our bodies come into contact with the materials of the space. Our hands and arms push on heavy wood doors and rest on cold marble balustrades or equally cold bronze gates blocking entrance to side chapels. We might place our hand into a cold holy water basin to anoint ourselves as we enter. If admitted entrance to a chapel, we might feel the more forgiving wood under our knees as we kneel before an altarpiece, or sigh with relief as our bodies settle into the creaky wooden pews of the church. Hands hold and lips kiss bibles, 10 rosaries, and prayer cards. Steps, bases, niches, iron grates, and other display devices mediate between the beholder and the devotional object. We are given and denied access. Bodily aspects of the tactile experience and assessment of objects is fundamental for this project. 8 Changes in displays, such as moving a sculpture to a new base, or moving a painting to a completely new, intimate setting, transformed the interaction people had with objects. In this project, I note how changes in displays have determined interaction with sacred objects in churches. 9 Several sculptures addressed in this dissertation entail such changes in display. At the church of S. Maria sopra Minerva, the Christ sculpture by Michelangelo was displaced from its original setting in a niche set into a pier to a freestanding base. Moving the sculpture forward in space facilitated the accumulation of devotional, votive objects and allowed access by the devout. At St. Peter’s Basilica, the bronze sculpture of the Apostle Peter was placed in an accessible spot in the nave of the old structure during the simultaneous destruction of the old basilica and construction of the new one, which brought popular attention to the statue. The newfound veneration led 8 For the effects of lighting, and even smell, see Paul Davies. "The Lighting of Pilgrimage Shrines in Renaissance Italy." The Miraculous Image in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance. Eds. Erik Thunø and Gerhard Wolf. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2004, especially 79-80 for the vivifying as well as distorting power of candle light and oil lamps in sacred spaces. At the shrine at Loreto, he quotes an early pilgrim who observed that lamps create, “a huge breathless heat that, when mixed with the bad fumes from the oil and the bad breath of the pilgrims, resulted in dizziness and fainting fits and similar things.” 9 Stephen Bann’s essay on the origin of the cabinet of curiosities, the sacristy filled with relics and reliquaries, emphasizes the interdependence of vision and touch, and how installations and cases determine experience with objects. Stephen Bann. "Shrines, Curiosities, and the Rhetoric of Display." Visual Display: Culture Beyond Appearances. Eds. Lynne Cooke and Peter Wollen. Seattle: Bay Press, 1995, 14- 29. See also Kees van der Ploeg. "The Spatial Setting of Worship." Images of Cult and Devotion: Function and Reception of Christian Images in Medieval and Post-Medieval Europe. Ed. Søren Kaspersen. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2004. 149-60; Cynthia Hahn. "Seeing and Believing: The Construction of Sanctity in Early-Medieval Saints' Shrines." Speculum 72.4 (1997b): 1079-106. 11 to the object’s prominent installation in front of a pier at the crossing of the new basilica. At the same time, a marble sculpture of the same saint was taken from its setting over the central entrance to Old St. Peter’s and set within an intimate devotional space in the new Grotte Vaticane beneath the new crossing. In the case of the marble St. Peter, access was limited almost exclusively to men, while the bronze St. Peter was situated in the space of the nave, open to all, including women. Touching and kissing the foot of a statue is the main tactile response to the sculptures discussed in this dissertation. It is commonly noted that today people continue to touch and kiss the foot of a sacred statue as a sign of devotion and humility. 10 But there are biographical as well as historical and liturgical reasons behind the desire to touch St. Peter the man and in turn, the statue, which is directly linked to his connection with Christ. St. Peter, as one of the twelve apostles, was considered Christ’s favorite, to whom Christ entrusted his kingdom on earth. In this sense, the primacy of Peter is self- evident. Like Christ, Peter had the ability to heal by means of touching. 11 The most ephemeral touch of his shadow healed the sick and lame in the portico of the temple of Jerusalem. In St. Peter Healing Agatha (fig. 8), a painting by the seventeenth-century painter Giovanni Lanfranco, St. Peter appeared to the early Christian martyr when she 10 Willem Frijhoff. "The Kiss Sacred and Profane: Reflections on a Cross-Cultural Confrontation." A Cultural History of Gesture: From Antiquity to the Present Day. Ed. Jan N. Bremmer. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1994, 210-36, who notes that his modern anthropological study of the sacred and profane kiss was inspired by viewing the modern practice of people kissing the bronze St. Peter. See Chapter Two. 11 Geoffrey Parrinder. "Touching." The Encyclopedia of Religion. Ed. Mircea Eliade. Vol. 14. New York: Collier Macmillan, 1987, 578, notes numerous stories about the healing power of Christ and St. Peter. 12 was in jail. 12 Suffering from the pain of having her breasts cut off, Peter heals her wounds through touch. St. Peter’s favored status and close proximity with Christ gave the body of the Apostle extraordinary rank among the relics of early Christian saints. Christ, in an act of humility, washed the feet of St. Peter, as rendered in the relief sculpture Christ Washing St. Peter’s Feet by Taddeo Landini (fig. 9), originally from new St. Peter’s Basilica. 13 The humble act made by Christ towards his apostles is the origin of the act of the pope washing the feet of cardinals as well as reverent pilgrims during the ritual of the possesso, the ceremony when the new pope takes possession of the church as St. Peter’s successor. 14 It became customary for the pope to wash the feet of holy pilgrims and for the pilgrims to kiss the feet of the pontiff. 15 The relief sculpture Christ Kissing the Feet 12 Made between 1613-14, the painting is known in two versions, one is Parma (Galleria Nazionale) and one in Rome (Galleria Corsini) with slight variations in the composition. See Schleier, Erich. Giovanni Lanfranco: Un Pittore Barocco tra Parma, Roma e Napoli. Milan: Electa, 2001, 110. 13 Made between 1578-79, the relief was originally located over a door leading to the Papal Palace from St. Peter’s Basilica, in the east wall of the Cappella Gregoriana. It is now located in the Quirinal Palace, Sala Regia, where it was installed in the time of Paul V. See Rice 1997, 26. Regarding the meaning of the story, Rice notes: “The story exemplifies Peter’s special status among the twelve apostles, because it was Peter who was the first to have his feet washed by Christ, Peter who tried to prevent Christ from performing this menial task, and Peter to whom Christ offered his explanation, saying, ‘If I then, your Lord and Master (Dominus et Magister), have washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I have given you an example, that ye should do as have done to you.’” 14 On the ritual of the possesso, see Irene Fosi. "Court and City in the Ceremony of the Possesso in the Sixteenth Century." Court and Politics in Papal Rome, 1492-1700. Eds. Gianvittorio Signorotto and Maria Antonietta Visceglia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002, 31-52. Another tactile part of the induction of the new pope is the legendary ceremony in which the sex of the pope is “tested” in a papal testing chair (by touch) because of the fear of a woman becoming pope. See (1575) Le Cose…Rome, Valerio Dorico, unpaginated, who notes, “Et Quelle due sedie di porfido, che sono fuori della capella di St. Silvestro per quanto si dice, furono ordinate, dopo che quella femina fu Papa, per toccare li testicoli de i nuovi Pontefici, & l’oltimo Diacono da questo uffitio.” See Alberto Caldana. Le Guide di Roma: Ludwig Schudt e la sua Bibliografia. Lettura Critica e Catalogo Ragionato. Rome: Palombi, 2003, 66, for an early image of the testing chair. 15 Found in the official description of pope Clement VIII’s pontificate, the author notes the dignitaries and noble people who wished to kiss the feet of the pope. BAV, Urb. Lat. 1060, 216/258r. In antiquity, kissing 13 of St. Peter by Gian Lorenzo Bernini (fig. 10) found on the Cathedra Petri, instead of showing Christ washing the feet of the apostle, it shows him kissing St. Peter’s foot. The shift from washing to kissing the foot of St. Peter is not surprising given the customary practice of kissing the real and represented foot of the pope. 16 Whose reception: Sources In this study of the embodied reception and the changes in display of sacred objects, I try to distinguish the types and reliability of sources employed and to make connections between the sources and objects. By bringing together diverse sources (both vernacular texts, such as guidebooks, religious treatises, pamphlets and journals, and official documents, such as official early histories and accounts of sacred visits to churches), it is possible to provide a sense of the conduct in sacred spaces. Some authors provide explicit, satisfactory descriptions of behavior, noting people touching and kissing objects. 17 Other sources are less explicit, but nonetheless point to important contextual information, such as the celebration of important feast days and rituals. When the literary sources are less forthcoming, the objects themselves provide the forensic information the foot of the Roman Emperor was considered degrading. See Michael Philip Penn. Kissing Christians. Ritual and Community in the Late Ancient Church. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005, 14. 16 It is possible that the behavior of people in St. Peter’s and other sacred sites had an impact on Bernini’s choice to represent Christ kissing St. Peter’s foot rather than just washing it. 17 My interest in the embodied, devotional reception of objects is inclusive of tactile interaction with one’s hand and body, which includes kissing objects. I take care to distinguish when a source notes touching rather than kissing, but it is difficult to determine from the objects which was the more common form of interaction. On kissing objects, and especially on the Christian sacred kiss, see Penn 2005, especially 12- 15, 22, and 78-79; Michael Philip Penn. "Performing Family: Ritual Kissing and the Construction of Early Christian Kinship." Journal of Early Christian Studies 10 2 (2002): 151-74; Frijhoff 1996. 14 necessary for a history of tactile devotion. At times, the archaeological evidence (including inscriptions, votive objects, changes in display, and the weathering of objects) is more convincing than the literary evidence. Through a critical examination of material and written sources, I draw out the devotional embodied behavior of people from the past. One must take care to specify whose reception and what kind of history of reception. An elite, educated poet’s musings on a sculpture, informed by the paragone debate and other early versions of art theory, should not be put on the same level with the memories of a young man’s visit to the eternal city. To illustrate the problem, it is worth pointing out two sources on Rome in the early modern period, John Evelyn and Michel de Montaigne. The accounts of John Evelyn, a young man from England who was unimpressed at best with the practices of the Catholic Church, took a tour of Italy and later expanded upon his experiences by culling anecdotes and information from guidebooks in his library. 18 When the Gallic-Catholic humanist Michel de Montaigne went to Rome, he was skeptical of the sanctity of displaying the Volto Santo, or Veronica’s Veil, in St. Peter’s Basilica and was more impressed by the prostitutes in the city. 19 18 Evelyn, John. The Diary of John Evelyn, 1620-1649. Ed. E. St. De Beer. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955. The commentary by De Beer notes when Evelyn is culling from other sources and when he appears to be making personal observations. 19 Michel de Montaigne. Montaigne’s Travel Journal, trans. Donald M. Frame. San Francisco: North Point Press: North Point Press, 1983, 74-75, practically in the same breath notes the Christmas mass at St. Peter’s basilica, the private audience to kiss the pope’s foot and receive blessing, and that the prostitutes are the prettiest women in Rome. Elizabeth Cohen. "Seen and Known: Prostitutes in the Cityscape of Late- Sixteenth-Century Rome." Renaissance Studies 12.3 (1998): 392-409, who notes Montaigne’s observations about prostitutes in Rome. 15 As antidotes to cynicism, the diaries of Giacinto Gigli and Gregory Martin are offered. Gigli, educated in both Roman and Canon law, lived in the Pigna region of Rome, and wrote about events in the 17 th century with an even tone. Gigli was not a superstitious man and so does not account (as earlier chroniclers did) for bad occurrences as the Wrath of God. He was more interested in religious processions than works of art, and for that reason, art historians may not have found this source of use. 20 English recusant Jesuit Gregory Martin, who was in Rome from 1576 to 1578 in the wake of the extraordinary Holy Year of 1575, wrote with great enthusiasm about his experience with the sacred sites. 21 Because I take seriously the history of the devotion of objects in the early modern period, the likes of Gigli and Martin receive more space in this dissertation. In their diaries, descriptions of processions are filled with people dressed in costumes, carrying rosaries or other sacred objects, kissing and kneeling as a bodily response to sites and objects. They recorded what they saw because they were impressed by the highly conspicuous expressions of devotion. Another exceptional voice from the early 17 th century, already noted at the beginning of this introduction, has informed the writing of this dissertation. Francesco 20 P. Rietbergen. Power and Religion in Baroque Rome: Barberini Cultural Policies Leiden: Brill, 2006, 19-60, for an excellent and even discussion of the importance of Gigli’s diary, with reference (21, fn. 1) to past unnecessarily critical treatments. Rietbergen notes the difference between a diary such as Gigli’s and those of John Evelyn and Samuel Pepys, the later of which are filled with anecdotes and personal accounts. Gigli notes only a few works, in particular, a painting by Pietro da Cortona in S. Maria Maggiore and the St. Veronica sculpture by Francesco Mochi in St. Peter’s basilica. 21 See Gregory Martin. Roma Sancta (1581). Ed. George Bruner Parks. Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1969, xxiii, the editor of which notes that Martin’s book was “the product of strong feeling, as nearly every page bears witness. Martin was profoundly moved by the religious satisfactions which Rome offered, and which were especially intense to an exile for his faith who had now come home to its centre…The memory of the holy year of 1575 was still fresh at the end of 1576 when he arrived, and the lay confraternities which particularly impressed him by their devotion still basked in the afterglow of their great endeavors of that year.” 16 Maria Torrigio has proven to be an invaluable source, and even pleasant ally, in the rediscovery of the early modern devotion surrounding sites related to Christ and St. Peter. He provides invaluable observations about the tactile veneration of objects such as the bronze St. Peter and marble St. Peter sculpture at St. Peter’s Basilica, as well as the various touchstones, which retain the miraculous impressions and traces of Christ and St. Peter. It was during my research in the Vatican Library (Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana) that I came across a copy of Torrigio’s unpublished manuscript of a discorso on the bronze St. Peter sculpture. 22 The discorso appears to be an earlier version of the long exegesis Torrigio publishes in 1644 in his I Sacri Trofei Romani. It was during the weeks leading up to the closure of the Vatican Library in the summer of 2007 that I began to realize the importance of his work for my project. Precious little is written on Torrigio as a man or as a source, and much of what we know about him must be gathered from his writing. 23 Torrigio was the Canon of the church of S. Nicola in Carcere and esteemed historian of St. Peter’s Basilica. He was best known for writing the first detailed guide to the new Grotte Vaticane of St. Peter’s Basilica (Le Sacre Grotte Vaticane), first published in 1618, and then again in a greatly expanded edition in 1635, and revised again in 1639. 24 He also wrote a number of pilgrimage guidebooks, including a revised version of the popular Le Cose Maravigliose 22 See Chapter Two. 23 Hannes Roser. "Sankt Peter in den 'Sacri Trofei Romani' des Francesco Maria Torrigio." Sankt Peter in Rome 1506-2006. Eds. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 2008. 257-73; Antonio Ferrua. "Visite del Torrigio alla Catacomba di St. Saturnino." Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana 58 (1982): 31-45. 24 Caldana 2003, 253, notes that many confuse the publication of 1618 as the first edition preceding the 1639 second edition. There is a 1635 first edition. I rely primarily on the 1639 second edition, unless when making a point about the differences between Torrigio’s observations over time. 17 (1619), an instructional guidebook to the four most sacred basilicas entitled Sacro Pellegrinaggio cioè instruttione per i pellegrini e forastieri (1625), and I Sacri Trofei Romani (1644), a guidebook dedicated to the relics and sacred sites of St. Peter. 25 His method of research and writing is close to the modern scholarly practice of synthesis and observation. He gathered together quotes from early sources, which speaks of his respect for and knowledge of the authors before him. He added his own observations, which include references to inscriptions found at the sites, as well as personal records of people interacting with the objects. Some of the most encouraging observations on devotion for modern scholars derive from his accounts. Torrigio’s motivations for writing about devotion in Rome are clearly expressed in his books. As he states at the beginning of I Sacri Trofei Romani, he is writing about the sites related to St. Peter for two reasons: “to put down those with the gall to deny that St. Peter ever was in Rome, and the other is to excite the sense of devotion in the hearts of the faithful towards the first Roman Pope.” 26 Torrigio’s motivation and meaningful relationship with the sites and objects are what make his accounts stand out from other early sources. Torrigio was a witness to the changes at St. Peter’s Basilica from ancient pilgrim basilica with great accessibility to its relics and sacred objects to a spectacular monument with sacred objects hidden away and commemorated by impressive monumental sculpture. Torrigio records the important traces of the past traditions in 25 See Comprehensive Bibliography for further references to Torrigio’s published writings. 26 Torrigio 1644, 1-2. “Per due cagioni principalmente mi sono mosso à raccorre insieme, e dar’ in publico l’antiche Romane memorie del Santissimo Pietro, Protettore in specie della Città di Roma. L’una é per abbattere le temerità di quei, che negano, che St. Pietro sia stato in Roma; l’altra e per eccitare la devotione ne’ petti de’ fedeli verso questo primo Pontefice Romano…” 18 Rome and the potential loss of those traditions in the face of the monumentalization and specularization of devotion at St. Peter’s. 27 I am interested in a historically specific reception of art, rather than an academic history of the reception of 16 th - and 17 th -century writing about art. 28 As such, it is at odds with the goal of this dissertation to discuss early art theoretical literature that certainly has bearing on this topic. Other scholars have already provided excellent studies on early art theoretical writing for the status of touch and devotional practices, discussing Alberti, Varchi, and Vasari, as well as sources from the 18 th century. 29 The artist’s brief, from Alberti to Vasari, which often sided with the top-down model of culture, largely conflicts 27 I allude to the projects under Pope Urban VIII (1623-1644) at the crossing of new St. Peter’s basilica for the construction of the bronze canopy designed by Bernini and the four monumental marble sculptures. The marble sculptures, also by Bernini and three of his contemporaries, are related to the most important relics at the basilica. The relics are safely kept in a cabinet high above the floor, in the southwest pier of the crossing. See Irving Lavin. Bernini and the Crossing of Saint Peter’s. New York: New York University Press, 1968, who emphasizes the optical and conceptual unification of the design of the crossing, an idea that reappears in Lavin’s subsequent studies on Bernini. See Irving Lavin. Bernini and the Unity of Visual Arts. New York: Pierpont Morgan Library and Oxford University Press, 1980. See more recently Ralph- Miklas Dobler. "Die Vierungspfeiler Von Neu-Sankt-Peter Und Ihre Reliquien." Sankt Peter in Rom 1506 - 2006. Eds. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze. Munich: Hirmer, 2008. 301-23; William Chandler Kirwin. Powers Matchless: The Pontificate of Urban VIII, the Baldachin and Gian Lorenzo Bernini. New York: Peter Lang, 1997. 28 Although not overtly discussed as such, much of Art History’s method of writing (the collecting of past scholarship, synthesizing and critiquing) is a history of reception, but a reception of scholarship about objects, rather than the objects themselves. It is no wonder that Michael Baxandall noted that, “We do not explain pictures: we explain remarks about pictures.” Michael Baxandall. Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986, 1. See also David Carrier. "Erwin Panofsky, Leo Steinberg, David Carrier: The Problem of Objectivity in Art Historical Interpretation." The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 47.4 (1989): 333-47. 29 James Hall. "Desire and Disgust: Touching Artworks from 1500 to 1800." Presence: The Inherence of the Prototype within Images and Other Objects. Eds. Robert Maniura and Rupert Shepard. London: Ashgate, 2006; Geraldine A. Johnson. "Touch, Tactility, and the Reception of Sculpture in Early Modern Italy." A Companion to Art Theory. Eds. Paul Smith and Carolyn Wilde. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002a. 61-74; Körner, Hans. "Der Fünfte Bruder. Zur Tastwahrnehmung Plastischer Bildwerke Von Der Renaissance Bis Zum Frühen 19. Jahrhundert." Artibus et historiae 21.4 (2000): 165-96; James Hall. The World as Sculpture: The Changing Status of Sculpture from the Renaissance to the Present Day. London: Chatto & Windus, 1999, especially Chapter 4. 19 with the historical descriptions of vernacular practices. 30 I am deliberately choosing to use other sources for this project as a way to give another version of the story of devotion to art. Rather than finding fault in missing sources, which are well known, such as Vasari, I hope the reader will take the time to appreciate these other perspectives. A different voice from the past, such as Francesco Maria Torrigio, took the time to draw upon other early sources or made observations of his own to give the modern scholar a rare personal glimpse of a powerful moment of change in the history of devotion. Reception of Art Owing to a major revitalization during the 1970s, art historians started to think more broadly about how art historians interpreted objects. The New Art History sought to distinguish the difference between vision as a purely physiological process of viewing art and visuality as the social construction of viewing. The field of visual culture studies came about as an antidote to Art History’s privileging of certain artists, media, and time periods. 31 The terms of the discourse of visual culture also placed an emphasis on the 30 Johnson 2002a, 66, notes Borghini’s critique of women kissing and touching objects. For De Hollanda recording Michelangelo’s disparaging view of Northern Renaissance art appealing to women and the clergy, see Joanna E. Ziegler. "Michelangelo and the Medieval Pieta: The Sculpture of Devotion or the Art of Sculpture?" Gesta 34.1 (1995): 32. Following Vasari’s own lengthy exegesis on the mastery of Michelangelo’s carving of the Moses statue, he refers to the devotion shown to the statue by the Jewish community in Rome, who adored the sculpture as if it were “divine” not a “human thing” which suggests Vasari’s bemusement with their display of devotion. 31 The critique has been made in various publications, especially by Thomas Crow, who in the The Intelligence of Art (1999) defends the practice of art history from the dangers of being reduced to mere visual culture. In the book he dives into three texts exemplifying the best of the field as places to look for valid methodologies for future art historians. One in particular is Michael Baxandall's The Limewood Sculptors of Renaissance Germany (1980). For a more explicit voicing of his opinion on the relationship between Art History and Visual Culture, see Thomas Crow. "Visual Culture Questionnaire", October 77 (Summer 1996): 34-6; David Joselit. "Crow's Nest: David Joselit Talks with Thomas Crow." Art Forum (Summer 2000): 41-2. See also the review, Tara Hamling. "Another 'Turn' in the Art History Versus Visual Culture Debate?" Art History 30.5 (2007): 757-91. 20 optical over the tactile experience of material culture. It is not my intent here to provide an entire discourse on art history versus visual culture, nor to debate whether or not the tactile, embodied mode of experiencing art is higher than the visual. 32 The debate has certainly made many art historians reconsider their motives and methods for writing about objects from historically distant pasts as well as the objects of inquiry. What is necessary in this section is to address briefly the origins of my method. I have particular debts to pay to Michael Baxandall’s concept of the Period Eye and David Freedberg’s nonjudgmental discussion of subjective responses to images. Baxandall’s construction of the “Period Eye” as “cognitive style” has given me much fruit for thought. The idea of the “Period Eye” was first put forth explicitly in Baxandall’s profoundly influential and engaging Painting and Experience in Fifteenth Century Italy (1972). Baxandall explored the social practices that have bearing on visual understanding. Vernacular activities such as sermons, dance, and commercial transactions (albeit restricted to elites) provide sources for understanding the way Florentine 15 th -century mercantile men viewed objects. At the time of its publication, the book was not received with open arms by art history, while other fields, such as anthropology, were more receptive. 33 For Baxandall, social and cultural experiences 32 Regarding the relationship between touch and vision, Robert Maniura and Rupert Shepard, eds. Presence: The Inherence of the Prototype within Images and Other Objects. London: Ashgate, 2006, 14, point out that “touch neither has conceptual precedence over sight as a way of establishing the ontological status of a depicted thing, nor is it secondary to sight in a hierarchy of the senses: it is just another way of apprehending depicted things.” Although what could be noted is that there are not many studies which address touch. 33 Baxandall implicitly discusses the concept of the Period Eye first in Giotto and the Orators: Humanist Observers of Painting in Italy and the Discovery of Pictorial Composition, 1350-1450. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972. For a review of the critical reception of Baxandall’s Period Eye, see Allan Langdale. "Aspects of the Critical Reception and Intellectual History of Baxandall’s Concept of the Period Eye." About 21 inform a person’s Period Eye, providing the interpretive skills to see images in culturally specific ways. 34 In a history of reception, reconstructing the beholder is the most difficult, yet urgent part of the project. This is not to say that I am throwing away the patron. Not in the least. In fact, there are patrons who still need rediscovering, especially in the case of women who paid for monuments and endowed chapels and altars to show their devotion. The social history of art strives to recover the conditions for viewing art, or beholding art. Art history’s rich literature on patrons, artist biographies, and iconography, do not always provide agile tools for the researcher interested in vernacular reception. Although the majority of literature on early modern art in Rome has been directed towards a single monument and monographic studies dedicated to a single artist, important exceptions have influenced this project. The work of Rose Marie San Juan on the urban fabric of early modern Rome, which employs prints and early guidebooks, served as a point of departure for my selection of sources. While at the same time, the exemplary work of Louise Rice on the altars of St. Peter’s Basilica provides a rigorous example and wealth of practical information until then not fully examined. Inspired by the work of social historians, I attempt to bridge the gap between the viewers of the present and the beholders of the past. The approaches of Peter Burke, Michael Baxandall. Ed. Adrian Rifkin. Oxford: Blackwell, 1999, 17-35, who notes in particular that E. H. Gombrich saw the Period Eye as a reincarnation of the Zeitgeist, and T. J. Clarke criticized Baxandall for not addressing class, ideology and power (18). 34 Langdale 1999, 26. The difference between the individual and the group Period Eye, as if they are one in the same, is a problem addressed by Baxandall later. See Baxandall’s illuminating Chapter IV of Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986, for his explicit discussion about the difference between the viewers of today and the viewers of the past exemplified by his discussion of the term “commensurazione” (111-115), but also between different types of viewers of the past (107). 22 Thomas and Elizabeth Cohen, and Rose Marie San Juan serve as examples of the way the archive and vernacular sources can be employed to bring past beholders to life. 35 Descriptions of processions of unmarried young ladies and feast day rituals celebrated by confraternities serve as one form of evidence for the presence of women at key sites. The convent of St. Caterina dei Funari processed unmarried wards to the church of S. Maria sopra Minerva to participate in ceremonies. Unmarried ladies received dowries from the confraternity of the Annunciation on its annual feast day, as well as other feast days at the Minerva. The young women were some of the people who showed their devotion to Christ and no doubt contributed to the continuous devotion present at a sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo, the focus of Chapter Four of this dissertation, by means of candles, votive offerings, and kissing the foot of the sculpture. The devotion prompted one of the rectors of the church to affix a bronze shoe to the sculpture, which protected the marble sculpture, but did not prevent the tactile devotion of the sculpture. The sculpture is a powerful example of a Renaissance object, which served for centuries as the site of devotion, the history of which was physically removed starting in the late 19 th century. For the modern visitor to S. Maria sopra Minerva, the sculpture of Christ shows no trace of its rich history of devotion. 35 Thomas V. Cohen. Love and Death in Renaissance Italy. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2004; Thomas V. Cohen. "Reflections on Retelling a Renaissance Murder." History and Theory 41.4 (2003): 7- 16; Peter Burke. Eyewitnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2001; San Juan, Rose Marie. Rome: A City Out of Print. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2001; Elizabeth Cohen. "Seen and Known: Prostitutes in the Cityscape of Late-Sixteenth- Century Rome." Renaissance Studies 12.3 (1998): 392-409; Peter Burke. "The Language of Gesture in Early Modern Italy." A Cultural History of Gesture: From Antiquity to the Present Day. Ed. Jan N. Bremmer. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1994. 71-83; Elizabeth Cohen. "Honor and Gender in the Streets of Early Modern Rome." Journal of Interdisciplinary History 22.4 (1992): 597-625; Peter Burke. The Historical Anthropology of Early Modern Italy: Essays on Perception and Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. 23 Bridging the gap between visual and bodily beholding is the profoundly influential study by David Freedberg, The Power of Images (1989). 36 As Freedberg noted in 1989, there was a general unease about discussing personal topics such as the erotic and the spiritual powers of art objects in Art History, but especially in Medieval and Early Modern studies. To discuss the power of a sacred image such as the Sudarium (Veronica’s Veil, an ancient cloth which holds the imprint of Christ’s face), the viewer must believe in (or at least understand how such a belief can exist) the power of the miraculous object. Freedberg implicitly reminded the reader that many of the objects central to art history have functions often elided or simplified for the sake of intellectual discussion. These groundbreaking observations are now so familiar in Art History that the argument is assumed. Although we are familiar with Freedberg’s contribution in expanding the visual field, the questions proposed to vernacular objects are still not frequently asked to canonical works of art by artists such as Michelangelo. Although specialists have treated prints and devotional objects extensively, they have not been exhaustively employed to bring new understanding to familiar objects of art history. In the same way Francis Haskell and Nicholas Penny pointed to the critical fortune and 36 David Freedberg. The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1989. Freedberg’s interest in the reception of art can be traced back to his earliest work, including an essay on Johannes Molanus and the critique of nudity in religious art in the wake of the Council of Trent. David Freedberg. "Johannes Molanus on Provocative Paintings. De Historia Sanctarum Imaginum Et Picturarum, Book II, Chapter 42." Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 34 (1971): 229-45. Freedberg’s work has given rise to the commonly held interest in the reception and power of art. For examples, see the collection of essays in Presence: The Inherence of the Prototype within Images and Other Objects (2006), edited by Robert Maniura and Rupert Shepard. 24 changes in the history of the taste for antique sculptures, this dissertation returns to well- known objects the chronologically specific history of their devotional use. 37 In this project, each object has its own ideological and physical conditions of beholding. Yet, there are shared conditions at each site, which unite the objects in terms of devotional response. The bronze St. Peter sculpture in St. Peter’s Basilica, Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture at S. Maria sopra Minerva, a footprint stone of Christ in the church of Domine quo vadis?, Sansovino’s Madonna del Parto at S. Agostino, and the Bocca della Verità at S. Maria in Cosmedin all elicited responses in Rome at roughly the same time. I try to evoke the sense of the unity between objects located in Rome despite their chronologically and typologically unrelated definitions. Although it is certainly important to understand the original function of the object in the time it was made, this study approaches the objects at the moments of their reception rather than creation. For a project on devotion and reception, the typological breaking apart does not ‘make sense’ for these objects. Art historical classifications burden objects with associations to which not all past beholders were privy. The bronze St. Peter sculpture at St. Peter’s Basilica, the main focus of Chapter Two, provides a powerful example of a conspicuously devotional object that has been discussed mainly by art historians in terms of its dating and attribution. This unique sculpture in the nave is not on or before a consecrated altar, but figured prominently in the ceremony to consecrate the altars of the new basilica. 38 Because the object is outside 37 Francis Haskell and Nicholas Penny. Taste and the Antique: The Lure of Classical Sculpture, 1500- 1900. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1981. 38 BAV, Barb Lat. 2974, unpaginated, a document entitled “Ristretto di tutto quello di dovrebbe fare nella consacrat[ion]e della nova Basilica Vaticana,” bound with letters written by Michel Lonigo, who was made 25 of a typologically sacred space, it is not included in the exhaustive, excellent study of the altarpieces of St. Peter’s Basilica by Louise Rice. 39 But in the case of Michelangelo’s marble sculpture of the Risen Christ at S. Maria sopra Minerva, the object has been exhaustively discussed in terms of its iconography despite its original function as an altarpiece near the tomb of a woman and its subsequent removal from it original setting, which led to its rededication and appropriation by various people. The transformation of the altar, at the center of the Counter Reformation controversy, brought attention to these objects in extra-liturgical spaces and required the Church to address the way people were interacting with objects. Vernacular practices were codified precisely when the destruction of Old St. Peter’s Basilica made the risk of the loss of devotional traditions apparent. An Embodied Reception of Art: Touch and Sculpture The term “beholder” is certainly not new. 40 It did not appear as a response to the concept of the viewer, but it certainly has taken on nuanced meaning in the face of head of the Vatican archive during the time of Paul V. One letter in particular, “Se l’Altare fatto da Paolo V…” (303r-304v),” is discussed by Ingo Herklotz. "Michele Lonigo als Kunstkritiker: zu einer Historistischen Rezeption der Altarbilder von Sacchi und Passignano in St. Peter." Ars Naturam Adiuvans: Festschrift für Matthias Winner zum 11. März 1996. Eds. Victoria v. Flemming and Sebastian Schütze. Mainz am Rhein: von Zabern, 1996. 413-29; and Rice 1997, 268-69. See Chapter Two. 39 Although Rice 1997, 100, fn. 77, and 290, does include interesting references to the sculpture. More recently, Rice has noted the bronze St. Peter when discussing the fabled use of the bronze from the Pantheon for the making of Bernini’s Baldachino. Rice 2008, 346, fn. 28. 40 The term is used by E. H. Gombrich, Sveltlana Alpers and Michael Fried, all of whom have brought their own nuanced approaches to art history. Alpers in particular is often credited as being the origin of a more inclusive form of art history, in particular, in her inventive study The Art of Describing: Dutch Art in the Seventeenth Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983, which includes the use of prints and other vernacular sources. Fried broke new ground with his book Absorption and Theatricality: Painting and Beholder in the Age of Diderot. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980, in which he discusses the negation of the beholder by paintings that contain impervious figures. 26 viewing as the main mode of experience. I prefer the term beholder because of its more inclusive way of describing the experience with an object. The beholder views with her entire body, even when not touching an object. And when touching an object, the beholder is engaged with an object through vision and touch. Without touch, actual and remembered, the beholder is a disembodied eye. Because touch and tactile experience are the most physical of the senses, we are aware of it at all times. 41 Touch is the one sense not exclusively associated with a single bodily organ. 42 The hand touches, but so do lips, cheeks, tongues, arms, torsos, legs, and feet. The topic of touching sculptures has not gone unnoticed. A number of scholars, especially Alex Potts, Malcolm Baker, and Nicholas Penny, note the special qualities of the medium that invite a bodily response. 43 The material properties of sculpture call attention to themselves in a manner different from painting. The presence of an object within three-dimensional space makes the beholder aware of her body. One of the earliest sources to discuss the topic of sculpture and touch systematically is Johann Gottfried Herder. It is not within the scope of this dissertation to note the impact of 41 Susan Stewart. Poetry and the Fate of the Senses. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2002, 162. 42 Although sometimes touch is represented by a disembodied hand. Carl Nordenfalk. "The Sense of Touch in Art." The Verbal and the Visual: Essays in Honor of William Sebastian Heckscher. Ed. Karl-Ludwig Selig. New York: Italica Press, 1990a, 109, who notes, “Touch alone has no particular sensory organ, since the nerves which give rise to the sensation of touch are distributed all over the body.” 43 Alex Potts. The Sculptural Imagination: Figurative, Modernist, Minimalist. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000; Malcolm Baker. Figured in Marble: The Making and Viewing of Eighteenth- Century Sculpture. Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 2000; Nicholas Penny. The Materials of Sculpture. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1993, 91. 27 Herder’s writing, as it has been treated elsewhere, but it is worth noting a few points. 44 Written in the third quarter of the 18 th century, Herder’s treatise on sculpture was inspired by a pervasive optical bias in aesthetics that led to a neglect of what it is that distinguishes sculpture from painting, namely tactility. For Herder, sculpture awakens the memory of touch and tactility through looking in a way that painting does not. The viewer must attend to real mass, volume, solidness, and extensions. Herder was concerned with touch within “our psychological and imaginative engagement with three- dimensional objects. Literal touching of cold marble or bronze would destroy the constitutive illusion of animate life on which figurative sculpture depends.” 45 For Herder, the eye touches. 46 Drawing upon a wide range of Classical and early modern texts, Geraldine A. Johnson and James Hall take seriously the question of touch in relation to sculpture in the early modern period. 47 It is thanks to their research that one can begin to explore further 44 Johann Gottfried Herder. Sculpture: Some Observations on Shape and Form from Pygmalion’s Creative Dream (1778). Ed. Jason Gaiger. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2002. What is noted herein draws upon the useful introduction to Herder’s treatise written by Jason Gaiger. Also, Herder argues for a discontinuous theory of history, one that is dependent on an understanding of the differences in social- religious environment. See also Potts 2000; and Hall 1999, 92. 45 Herder 2002, 18. 46 Herder 2002, 19. Herder’s work is part of a larger newly emerging writing on aesthetics, or the story of the senses in relation to the arts. Important to Herder is John Locke’s discussion of Molyneax’s Problem, a study of “the experience of a blind person who gains the use of sight.” (11). For Herder, the isolation of touch from sight is important because it shows that each sense reveals the world in special ways. 47 Hall 2006; Johnson 2002a; Hall 1999, 80-103. Cesare D'Onofrio. Un Popolo di Statue Racconta: Storie Fatti Leggende della Città di Roma Antica Medievale Moderna. Roma: Romana Società Editrice, 1990, in a series of case studies, brings together early sources related to objects with histories of tactile veneration. His contributions are noted at appropriate points in the chapters to follow. Johnson and Hall also note the paragone debate and the representation of the senses in art. For further on the paragone, see Peter Hecht. "The Paragone Debate: Ten Illustrations and a Comment." Simiolus 14 (1984): 125-36. For further reference on the five senses in art, see also örner, Hans. "Der Fünfte Bruder. Zur Tastwahrnehmung Plastischer Bildwerke von der Renaissance bis zum frühen 19. Jahrhundert." Artibus et historiae 21.4 28 specific moments and subjects. 48 Johnson in particular takes a systematic approach in which she explicates the different types of touching in the early modern period. All touching is not equal. She notes the connoisseur’s examining touch while holding a small statuette or coin, the religious devotee’s touch when confronted with a devotional object, as well as the artist’s hand in inspecting ancient sculptures that amaze the eye when pulled from the ground. 49 Johnson and others have dedicated important attention to the tactile allure of devotional sculpture. 50 In one exceptional study, Johnson addresses the devotional and talismanic function of a group of early modern Italian relief sculptures representing the Virgin and Child. 51 She draws upon texts that emphasize the importance of meditating on the sentiments and experience of Christ’s mother, as well as descriptions of women experiencing the miracle of mystic pregnancies. 52 Within this framework, when early (2000): 165-96; Nordenfalk 1990a; Carl Nordenfalk. "A Unique Five-Senses Cycle of the 1620's." Konsthistorisk tidskrift 59 (1990b): 183-89; Craig Felton. "Ribera's Early Years in Italy: The 'Maryrdom of St. Lawrence' and the 'Five Senses'." The Burlington Magazine 133.1055 (1991): 71-81. 48 I benefited from reading the work of Johnson and Hall in the early stages of my research, especially for their references to religious devotion, and Johnson’s discussion of women and devotion. 49 Johnson 2002a. Johnson is currently completing a book project on touch and the beholder in early modern Italy. 50 Geraldine A. Johnson. "Beautiful Brides and Model Mothers: The Devotional and Talismanic Functions of Early Modern Marian Reliefs." The Material Culture of Sex, Procreation, and Marriage in Premodern Europe. Eds. Anne L. McClanan and Karen Rosoff Encarnacion. New York: Palgrave, 2002b; Geraldine A Johnson. "Art or Artefact?: Madonna and Child Reliefs in the Early Renaissance." The Sculpted Object, 1400-1700. Eds. Stuart Currie and Peta Motture. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997. 1-24; Joanna E. Ziegler. "Michelangelo and the Medieval Pieta: The Sculpture of Devotion or the Art of Sculpture?" Gesta 34.1 (1995): 28-36; Joanna E. Ziegler. Sculpture of Compassion: The Pietà and the Beguines in the Southern Low Countries, c.1300-c.1600. Studies over Kunstgeschiedenis, 6. Bruxelles and Rome: Institut Historique Belge de Rome, 1992. 51 Johnson 2002b, derived in part, as the author notes, from Johnson 1997. 52 Johnson 2002b, 138-39. 29 modern women were confronted with powerfully emotional images of the Virgin and Christ by artists such as Donatello and Michelozzo, it is not surprising that they would behold objects with their entire being, not just their eyes. 53 Represented Touch The dialogue between artists, works of art, and beholders makes it necessary to briefly note how sacred works of art can reveal certain mentalities about touch in relation to people and objects. In early modern Rome, the churches were being filled with eye- catching altarpieces and costly tomb monuments dedicated to important noble families and popes. As Peter Burke points out, sacred objects tell us about people and mentalities when employed as cult objects, for meditation, as sites of controversies, and for indoctrinating people. 54 The sacred object is the evidence for a history of people and a history of religion, not solely a history of images. 55 Keeping this premise in mind, I find it useful to include a brief discussion about how images representing touch could have informed behavior in sacred spaces discussed in this dissertation. 56 Paintings such as the 53 Johnson 2002b, 138, fig. 8.2, illustrates the moving Pazzi Madonna by Donatello in the Dahlem Museum, Berlin. The power of this object is found in the intimacy between the Madonna and Child, in which the Virgin presses her forehead to the rotund little head of Christ as his left arm reaches for his mother’s face. 54 Burke 2001, see especially the chapter “The Sacred and the Supernatural.” 55 Yet, it is interesting to place Burke next to the equally interesting, but different arguments of Herbert Kessler, who notes the transformation of vision by works of art. Works of art offered views to the invisible world “out there” as Kessler notes. “In other words, the very reality and accessibility that made them so appealing and, to Christians, dangerous, was countered by the notion that pictures were not destinations, but bridges, spanning the gap between illiterate and literate and the chasm between humans and the invisible God.” Herbert L. Kessler. Spiritual Seeing: Picturing God’s Invisibility in Medieval Art. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2000, 104. 56 Only a handful of images will be noted which are powerful representations of touch relevant for the project at hand, keeping in mind location and access to viewing. A comparison will be drawn between 30 story of the Doubting Thomas and the Noli me tangere project the currency of the contrasting gendered meaning of male inquisitive touch against the polluted nature of female touch. In S. Maria sopra Minerva, the main site discussed in Chapter Four, there was a chapel simultaneously dedicated to the Resurrection of Christ and Mary Magdalene. 57 Contained in the chapel was the painting Noli me Tangere representing the story of the same name, Noli me tangere, or “touch me not” (fig. 11). 58 The painting is by Marcello Venusti, close friend and follower of Michelangelo, and dates to 1577-79. The story represents the moment in which Mary Magdalene encounters the resurrected Christ in the guise of a gardener. 59 At first, the Magdalene does not recognize Christ. Upon hearing objects in sacred spaces versus private collections. For allegorical representations of touch, see especially Nordenfalk 1990a; Nordenfalk 1990b; Nordenfalk 1985. 57 For the history of the chapel, in particular, the changes in patrons see Giancarlo Palmerio and Gabriella Villetti. Storia Edilizia di S. Maria Sopra Minerva in Roma, 1275-1870. Roma: Viella, 1989, 169-70. 58 The painting is oil on canvas and is cm 250 x 160. It is currently located in the first chapel in the south side aisle upon entering the church, the chapel of the Baptismal Font (formerly Presepio). The painting was commissioned for the Maccarani Chapel, formerly the Porcari Chapel, the first chapel in the north side aisle upon entering the church, endowed by Marta Porcari, the same woman who commissioned (via her will) the Christ sculpture by Michelangelo, discussed in Chapter Four. On the painting by Venusti see Capelli in Daniela Matteucci, ed. Ercole Ramazzani de la Rocha: Aspetti del Manierismo nelle Marche della Controriforma. Venice: Marsilio, 2002, 86-88. Venusti completed a number of paintings for Minerva, including a fresco cycle of the Mysteries of the Rosario for the Capranica Chapel. On Venusti at the Minerva, see Simona Capelli. "Marcello Venusti: Un Pittore Valtellinese Della Controriforma." Archivio Storico della Diocesi di Como 14 (2003): 304-05; and in the Capranica Chapel, see Simona Capelli. "Marcello Venusti e la Volta della Cappella Capranica in Santa Maria Sopra Minerva in Roma." Bollettino d'Arte 87.117 (2002): 73-80; Claudio Strinati. "Espressione Figurativa E Committenza Confraternale Nella Cappella Capranica Alla Minerva (1573)." Ricerche per la Storia Religiosa di Roma 5 (1984): 395-428. 59 The story is told in the Gospel of John 20:11–18. On the Noli me Tangere story, its meaning, and systematic collection of images representing the story in 15 th and 16 th century Italian paintings, see the Ph.D Dissertation by Lisa Marie Rafanelli. "The Ambiguity of Touch: Saint Mary Magdalene and The "Noli Me Tangere" In Early Modern Italy." PhD Dissertation, New York University, 2004. In the 17 th century, the story would continue to live as an important motif. In sculpture, the story is rendered by Antonio Raggi, c. 1649, after designs by Bernini, for the Alaleona Chapel in another Dominican church, St. Domenico e Sisto. The chapel was paid for by Sister Maria Alaleona. See Jacopo Curzietti. "Antononio Raggi Oltre Il Barocco: Il Settecento Romano Rivisto Attraverso Lo Stile E Il Gusto Delle Scultore Ticinese." Giovanni Studiosi a Confronto: Ricerche Di Storia Dell'arte Del Xv Al Xx Secolo. Ed. Alessia 31 his voice, she extends a disbelieving hand to confirm his presence. Her request is denied. Images of the Magdalene point to her simultaneously privileged and problematic status as the first witness to the resurrected Christ. Mary Magdalene sees Christ, yet she was denied physical contact with his body. 60 For viewers at the Minerva, the Noli me Tangere painting, placed in the chapel also dedicated to the Resurrection of Christ, literally acts as witness to the Resurrection. 61 The painting reminds the viewer of the denial of access to Christ’s body by female beholders. 62 In striking contrast to the image of the Noli me tangere is the representation of Doubting Thomas, the story in which the male apostle lost his faith and regains it through the tactile interrogation of Christ’s resurrected body. 63 In 1625, a painting of the story of Fiabane. Rome, 2004, 121-23; See Rudolph Wittkower. Gian Lorenzo Bernini: The Sculptor of the Roman Baroque. London: Phaidon Press, 1955, 271-72, for Bernini’s design. Wittkower also notes that “Maria Alaleona may have chosen the subject in order to atone for the sins, long past, of a nun in the same family, whose sinister love affair in 1636 is reported by the diarist Gigli.” (271) 60 Rafanelli 2004, explores these ideas in her dissertation. 61 Rafanelli 2004, plate 46, illustrates an image which represents both the Noli me tagnere and the Resurrection at the same time, by Girolamo da Santacroce, 1525, oil on Panel, 55.2 x 83.8 cm, Sarah Campbell Blaffer Foundation, Houstin (1983.104). 62 AGOP, Res Historica, XI.2890a, 31: “L’Ultima Cappella da questa parte e dedicata a Gesú Christo che in forma di Ortolano apparisce alla Madalena ove si vede dipinto in tela l’Altre…” Rafanelli 2004, 195-96, notes the setting for the story of the Noli me Tangere, the Hortus Conclusus. She notes that in the 15 th century artists began to consciously add reference to the garden as part of the rise of naturalism in Renaissance art. Rafanelli does not discuss the Venusti painting in the Minerva. Unfortunately, nothing of the early decoration of the chapel survives after the renovations from the the time of the Orsini pope Benedict XIII (1724-30). The chapel passed to the convent in 1855 and is now dedicated to the Sacred Heart. Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 184. 63 John 20: 24-29. The Doubting Thomas has been appropriated as an allegory in intellectual discourse about the hierarchy of the senses, in particular, which sense is best employed to gain knowledge. The story was also transformed into the fundamental story for the entire notion of “blind faith.” See Glenn W. Most. Doubting Thomas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005, who traces the interpretation of the story of the Doubting Thomas from the early sources to the early 17th century by looking at both texts and images. He includes a discussion of the Verrocchio’s sculpture in Florence and Caravaggio's painting in Potsdam. On Verrocchio’s sculpture, see also Kristen Van Ausdall. "The Corpus Verum: Orsanmichele, Tabernacles, and Verrocchio's Incredulity of Thomas." Verrocchio and Late Quattrocento Italian Sculpture. 32 Doubting Thomas was installed in the south transept, at one of the seven privileged altars, of St. Peter’s Basilica. 64 The altar itself was endowed and under the jurisdiction of the important Chief Penitentiary, the pope’s personal confessor and the person who oversaw the group of multilingual priests who heard confessions at St. Peter’s Basilica. The story of Doubting Thomas illustrated the importance of faith and that even an apostle of Christ could lose his faith temporarily. At St. Peter’s, as elsewhere, the story served as a parable for confession and penitence. The story of Doubting Thomas is also represented on a smaller scale in paintings for private collections in which the artist focuses on the action of the story by pushing the viewer close to the dramatic details of St. Thomas plunging his finger into the side of Christ. A striking example from the early 17 th century is Caravaggio’s The Incredulity of St. Thomas (fig. 12) from the Giustiniani collection, now in Potsdam. 65 Made for private consumption and close inspection, Caravaggio shows Christ guiding the hand of Thomas to his wound. 66 Thomas appears blind, either a blindness that is visual disbelief or Eds. Steven Bule, Alan Phipps Darr and Fiorella Superbi Gioffredi. Florence: Casa Editrice le Lettere, 1992. 33-49. 64 The painting is by Domenico Cresti, called Passignano, and dates to 1624-26. The original painting was replaced by a mosaic of the same subject and the original is kept in the Sacristy (Sala Capitolare). See Rice 1997, 241-44, cat. 13. 65 See Nicola Suthor. "Bad Touch?: Zum Körpereinsatz in Michelangelo/Pontormos "Noli Me Tangere" und Caravaggios "Ungläubigem Thomas." Der Stumme Diskurs der Bilder: Reflexionsformen des Ästhetischen in der Kunst der Frühen Neuzeit. Eds. Valeska von Rosen and Klaus Krüger. Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. 261-81, with bibliography. For the collecting history of the object, see Silvia Danesi Squarzina. "The Collections of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani, Pt. I." The Burlington Magazine 139.1136 (1997): 773. 66 Another pleasurable, private viewing experience with the representation of touch are the Apollo and Daphne and the Rape of Persephone sculptures by Bernini in the Borghese Gallery. I restrict mentioning the sculptures here because their mythological subject and their placement in the Borghese villa do not warrant them a central place in the present discussion. In Bernini’s sculpture representing Apollo and Daphne, touch narrates the story. Andrea Bolland. "Desiderio and Diletto: Vision, Touch, and the Poetics 33 momentarily blind with shock, unable to believe what his eyes see, but his hand realizes. 67 What is striking in the comparison of the altarpiece for St. Peter’s and the relatively small painting from the Giustiniani collection is the different types of emphasis placed on touch. In the public space, at the privileged altar, Thomas’ touch is acceptable, albeit controlled. In private, Thomas’ touch is turned into a bodily experience that makes the viewer recoil with unease. How early modern people understood and viewed these images is difficult to determine. Having a painting of the story of Mary Magdalene’s encounter with Christ after the Resurrection did not necessarily dissuade women from touching images of the Savior. In fact, the painting could have inspired the same awe and response as the Magdalene when encountering Christ. Instead of fearing reprimand, women extended a confirming hand. Translated to real experience, the amazement of seeing a life-size, semi-nude sculpture of Christ in a church certainly must have excited the imagination enough to move the soul and the hand. But what is clear is that a shift took place in making images of the Magdalene in the 17 th century. In the 16 th century and earlier, it was common to see the story of the Noli me tangere. But in the 17 th century, Mary Magdalene was represented more commonly as penitent, throwing aside her material possessions for an austere life. Mary Magdalene’s role as the first witness to the Resurrection of Christ was replaced by the lonely image of the guilt ridden woman. But of Bernini’s Apollo and Daphne." Art Bulletin 82.2 (2000): 313, notes that Apollo realizes the transformation of Daphne through touch rather than vision as his left hand reaches around her torso and is greeted with bark. The surprise mixed with disappointment is registered in Apollo’s face. Never does his hand meet the soft flesh of his beloved. 67 Stewart 2002, 159-60, makes the same observation. 34 another figure of witness to Christ appeared to replace the Magdalene. As I will show in Chapter Four, the Petrine image of the Domine quo vadis?, the story of St. Peter’s encounter with Christ on the Via Appia, by contrast, asserted the authority of the male witness, Peter, in a miraculous resurrection-like apparition of Christ in Rome. The displacement of women in art, Peter for Mary Magdalene, hinted towards the real displacement and shuffling of women in sacred spaces in the holy city. Conclusion As will become clear in the following chapters, I move away from the primary focus of most scholarship dedicated to the commissioning of altars and monumental tombs in sacred spaces in Rome. Rather, I focus on the reception of the monumental sculpture and devotional objects in the liminal spaces. Attached to walls and protected by metal grates, but also safely located on impressive bases, sacred objects invited the hands and lips of pilgrims and devout people in early modern Rome when important sacred icons and relics were mobilized for permanent display in the growing spectacular spaces of the 17 th century city. The sources I employ even point to an unexpected taste for non-figurative, devotional objects. Treatises and diaries record sacred events and behavior that speak of the changes in mobility of sacred material culture, but also the dynamic nature of the pilgrim experience in Rome. My emphasis on the embodied experience of objects as a historically specific mode of reception seeks to show how the dramatic transformation of sacred spaces in the 16 th and 17 th century, the reinstallation and rededication of pagan and Christian sacred objects, and the persistence of vernacular behavior and customary religious belief was part of the dynamic moment of change in the 35 early modern period. Within the whirlwind of reform, devotion and sites were altered. The impact of these changes is what I examine in the chapters to follow. 36 Chapter 1: Reforming Sacred Behavior, Space, and Objects The reformation of art, sacred space, and devotion occupied the Catholic Church throughout the 16 th century. The implementation of the changes put forth by the Council of Trent (1545-63), the series of meetings conducted to formally address the Protestant heresies, began with enthusiasm during the third quarter of the 16 th century and continued into the 17 th century with the completion of new St. Peter’s Basilica. The dissemination of the new rules for pilgrims, male and female alike, was done through inscriptions in churches, new forms of displays, but most importantly, devotional guidebooks. In this chapter, I consider the instructions given to pilgrims in popular devotional guidebooks that reveal the urgency to have people behave appropriately in sacred spaces. The guidebooks were written especially for uninitiated foreigners, but also local men and women alike. Women were a special concern, and as such, some guidebooks stress the limited access granted to women in sacred spaces. Because of the prohibition in access, female worshippers turned to the accessible spaces of churches, the side aisles and the nave, the extra-liturgical spaces, for devotional objects. Yet, these accessible spaces and their monuments were also being reformed by means of new installations and protective additions. The pilgrims and monuments alike experienced dramatic reform, which signaled the concerns about decorous images and appropriate behavior in early modern Rome. 37 Sacred Behavior Those attending [Filippo Neri’s pilgrimage], who by the 1570s frequently numbered over 1,000 people, were asked to meditate on scenes from Christ’s passion between each of the seven principal basilicas of early Christian Rome and sustained by means of the communal singing of laudi and the promise of a spare but, by all accounts, rather jolly picnic at the half-way point, usually in the park of the Villa Mattei on the Caelian hill. In this way, the universal Christian message of redemption was grafted onto the particular topography of Rome. 68 Simon Ditchfield’s spirited account of visiting the seven most important pilgrim basilicas, a ritual restored by St. Philip Neri in 1559, gives us a sense of not only the popularity of pilgrimage but also its social and spatial dynamic. 69 People walked the entire city, covering miles of dirt roads, sometimes barefoot, in an attempt to visit the most important basilicas in one day. Time and space were filled with sacred sites, contemplation, a picnic in a lovely setting, and the promise of salvation. Much has been written on pilgrimage, on the origins reaching back to the Late Antique period. 70 And much has been noted on the origins of tourism in pilgrimage. 71 Yet, little has been said 68 Simon Ditchfield. "Reading Rome as a Sacred Landscape, c. 1586-1635." Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe. Eds. Will Coster and Andrew Spicer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005, 172, with reference to the Filippo Neri’s pilgrim visits to the seven major pilgrim churches, as an antidote for the unrestrained behavior of Carnivale. 69 The seven main churches include S. Giovanni in Laterano, S. Pietro in Vaticano, S. Paolo fuori le Mura, S. Maria Maggiore, S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura, S. Croce in Ger Giovanni usalemme, S. Sebastiano, and then, the two additions bringing the total to nine, l’Annunziata and l’Abbazia delle Tre Fontane. For the history of the number and selection of the pilgrim churches, see Barroero in Giovanni Baglione. Le Nove Chiese Di Roma. Ed. Liliana Barroero. Rome: Archivio Guido Izzi, 1990, 6, fn. 5. 70 Brouria Bitton-Ashkelony. Encountering the Sacred. The Debate on Christian Pilgrimage in Late Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005, with extensive bibliography. 71 The literature on the Grand Tour, as well as the origin of it and modern tourism in pilgrimage, is vast. See Rose Marie San Juan. Rome: A City Out of Print. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2001, for pilgrimage guides in early modern Rome. See Jeremy Black. Italy and the Grand Tour. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003; John Eade and Michael J. Sallnow, eds. Contesting the Sacred: The Anthropology of Christian Pilgrimage. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2000. 38 about how on a very practical level these early modern pilgrimages helped reform vernacular behavior in sacred spaces, which is later imitated by tourists. Pilgrimage guidebooks were easily transformed into guidebooks with art and artists replacing relics and feast days. 72 Guidebooks are typically mined for bits of information about locations, authorship of works of art, or special events in history. However, the guidebook is also useful for providing evidence for the human activity of interacting with art, including the history of the beholder’s response to objects and the ephemeral histories of objects during religious festivals and temporary displays. 73 The guidebooks discussed herein illustrate the traditions and the novel approaches to leading the visitor when confronted with sacred objects and spaces. The history of early modern guidebooks of Rome is often traced to early Christian pilgrim guides of sacred sites, called in modern scholarship Indulgentiae, and the even earlier guides to ancient Roman ruins of the city, called Mirabilia. 74 Indulgentiae served as the sacred guides while the Mirabilia served as secular guides to Rome. The division between ancient Roman religion and Christianity, and ancient and modern monuments, proved an artificial divide in the early modern period. Visitors to the city and inhabitants 72 On guidebooks, see the excellent study, with catalogue, by Alberto Caldana. Le Guide di Roma: Ludwig Schudt e la sua Bibliografia. Lettura Critica e Catalogo Ragionato. Rome: Palombi, 2003, a modern update of Schudt’s indispensable study of guidebooks from 1930. 73 E. S. De Beer. "The Development of the Guide-Book until the Early Nineteenth Century." The Journal of the British Archaeological Association 15 (1952): 35, notes how guidebooks provided important information about the life of a monument in different moments, social behaviors, economic trends and ways of viewing the world. 74 De Beer 1952, 39. On the history of the Mirabilia, see Cristina Nardella. Il Fascino di Roma nel Medioevo: La Meraviglie Di Roma Di Maestro Gregorio. Rome: Viella, 1997. 39 experienced a wide chronological and typological range of material culture. Although some publishers continued to print revised editions of the older pilgrimage guidebooks well into the 17 th century, publishers began to circulate guidebooks to the city that integrated a diverse range of accessible monuments. 75 By bringing together the ancient and the modern in the same book authors such as Pietro Felini and Fioravante Martinelli were reconciling an early modern social problem regarding how people were using and experiencing art in religious spaces. 76 In the late 16 th and 17 th century, the sequence of visiting the churches was determined by how you entered the city. The important pilgrim route from S. Maria del Popolo to St. Peter’s Basilica is well attested and practical for its orientation, as well as acquiring needed guidebooks (near Piazza Navona), or rosaries (along the Via dei Coronari), and leading the pilgrim to St. Peter’s. 77 Then, once settled into the city in his accommodation, the pilgrim would sit down with a guidebook and see how the main churches were organized. Traditionally though S. Giovanni in Laterano, the Cathedral of Rome and the old papal palace, was the first basilica listed in early pilgrim guidebooks. In the early 17 th century, guidebooks started to begin with St. Peter’s Basilica. With the 75 Just to note one 17 th century example, the 1636 edition of the Le cose Maravigliose dell’alma citta di Roma, the title page states that the book includes “Chiese, Stationi, Reliquie, & Corpi Santi.” This edition is derived from earlier editions of the Le Cose. Entries on the popular pilgrim churches to the city focus on the relics and include practical information such as the day the relic is displayed to the public. The first two sections of the guidebook (“Le sette chiese principali” and “Le stationi delle chiese di Rome,” the later of which is a calendar of the saint’s feast days and where the feast will take place, shows the importance given to the religious sites and events. 76 John Evelyn. The Diary of John Evelyn, 1620-1649, Ed. E. S. De Beer. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955. Evelyn’s Diary of his visit to Rome includes valuable information about the reception and use of the guidebooks, including Felini and Martinelli, which he mines for information. See below for further references to Felini and Martinelli. 77 Pamela M. Jones. Altarpieces and their Viewers in the Churches of Rome from Caravaggio to Guido Reni. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008, 78-79. 40 completion of the new basilica, the Petrine message was emphasized over the importance of the historical cathedral. Within the guidebooks, churches were also grouped by area, so one visits S. Caterina dei Funari, then il Gesu, then S. Maria sopra Minerva, then the Pantheon (S. Maria ad Martyrs), and then S. Agostino, and so on. Found within guidebooks were also warnings to foreigners, and especially instructions to pilgrims, designed specifically to regularize movement and perception when visiting the Eternal City for the first time. 78 The most illuminating of these is a letter to pilgrims written by Cardinal Charles Borromeo, Archbishop of Milan, included with the popular guidebook Le Cose maravigliose dell’alma città di Roma, which also included a copy of Palladio’s L’antichità di Roma for the Holy Year of 1575. 79 The letter by Borromeo served to indoctrinate the pilgrim. Borromeo’s use of language carefully singled out the senses best suited for the pilgrim’s experience with sacred places. Borromeo emphasized the two least physical senses for experiencing the divine: vision and hearing. When Borromeo encouraged pilgrims to visit the sites of the martyrs, it was “to see” the relics, not touch. He notes that pilgrims should “open their eyes” to see the errors of the past and “open their ears” to hear the divine presence which will cleanse their internal senses (“purificati i sensi interiori”). By contrast to the ethereal presence of the divine, the sinister, ensnaring embodiment of the devil is in the form of hands 78 San Juan 2001, 60; Marcello Fagiolo. "Il Pellegrinaggio a Roma: Strutture E Simboli Nella Città Degli Anni Santi." Roma Dei Grandi Viaggiatori. Ed. Franco Paloscia. Rome: Abete, 1987, 35-36. 79 The letter is first published in 1574 in Venice, and is then included in versions of the Le Cose, in particular, a version of 1575 published in Rome. The full title of the letter is Lettera Pastorale di Monsignor Illustrissimo et Reverendissimo Card. [Carlo] Borromeo. Arcivescovo di Milano scritta al suo Popolo. Nella quale diffusamente si dichiara, che cosa sia l'anno Santo del Giubileo, la Indulgenza, che si acquista, & quale preparatione si debba fare per pigliarlo con profitto spirituale. Other versions of the 1575 Le Cose…were published without the letter. I consulted a version of the 1575 edition preserved in the BAV, where the 1574 original is also preserved. 41 (“incatenato nelle mani del demonio”). 80 The irony of this warning to pilgrims is that Borromeo did not follow it. We know from various sources that Borromeo indulged in sacred experiences which included touching and kissing sacred objects, including the column of the flagellation kept in S. Prassede and the bronze St. Peter statue in St. Peter’s Basilica, discussed in Chapter Two. Customary behavior of pilgrims and privileged sacred experience of the clergy were sometimes at odds with each other. Pietro Martire Felini, prior of S. Maria in Via from 1606-1610, was a mindful guide and writer when he noted recent church reforms and the importance of appropriate behavior at sacred sites. 81 He recommended to his readers a book called the Guida Spirituale for those who wished to climb the Scala Santa, the holy stairs at S. Giovanni in Laterano, so that they might do so according to the correct ritualistic guidelines. 82 The stairs were believed to be those that Christ ascended on his knees in the palace of Pontius Pilate and thought to be sprinkled in areas with drops of Christ’s blood. At the top of the stairs resides the Sancta Sanctorum, the pope’s private chapel at the Lateran, containing 80 Borromeo 1575, 67v “…gli siano aperto gli occhi a vedere gli errori passati, la bruttezza, & danni del peccato, la vanità dell speranze di questo mondo, & la grandezza, & l’eternità de i beni dell’altra vita, gli siano aperte l’orecchie a sentire vivamente le sante inspirationi, & divine voci, gli siano risanati, & purificati i sensi interiori a discernere gli inganni del mondo, ad aborrire i suoi diletti, & guidare le cose di Dio…” and ibid., 68r “…però non stia incatenato nelle mani del demonio, ma si risolva senza piu dimora a restituire a legittimi padroni quelche tiene d’altri, & restituire se medesimo a Dio vero Signor nostro…” 81 On Felini, see Caldana 2003, 52. Felini (1565-1613) was from Cremona, and although his guides are later critiqued for art historical mistakes, the information about sacred activities at the various sites was copied by later authors. 82 Of course, the Guida Spirituale is written by Felini. Pietro Martire Felini. Trattato Nuovo Delle Cose Maravigliose Dell’alma Città Di Roma. Rome: Per Bartolomeo Zannetti, 1610, 4. “Chi desidera un modo breve & divotissimo per fare la detta Scala, ricerchi un libro chiamato Guida Spirituale…composto da Frà Pietro Martire Felini da Cremona dell’ordine de’ Servi…” In 1658, Martinelli includes the twenty-eight orations necessary to climb the stairs. See Martinell 1658, 418. Another guidebook includes a special section on “Method of Visiting the Scala Santa.” See also San Juan 2001, 70, fn. 42. 42 an important sacred image of Christ. 83 Felini’s guide provided the prayers devout visitors were to say on each step while ascending on knees in imitation of Christ. Felini underscored the importance of the experience with the site itself by stressing the need to abide by the rules. The necessity of reminding the reader (in some cases uninitiated foreigners) of this custom reveals the anxieties of the clergy to regulate behavior in the early modern period. The recommendations in the guidebook hoped to prevent someone from desecrating the sacred traces of Christ. Sacred Space As pilgrims were flooding the city in 1575 and again in 1600, the sacred spaces of Rome were dramatically changing. 84 The urban renewal projects were abundant and necessary for the social well being of the city. But the renewal of sacred spaces in Rome was instrumental in reaffirming the centrality of Rome as the center of the Catholic Church. The directives of the Council of Trent demanded changes to liturgy, but also the spaces in which the liturgy was performed. After the Council of Trent, systematic official sacred visits to the churches in Rome were introduced to ensure that masses were being said accordingly and the correct physical state of altars was maintained. 85 Some of 83 Hans Belting. Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era of Art, Trans. E. Jephcott. Trans. Edmund Jephcott. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1994, 64. 84 Yates Nigel. Liturgical Space: Christian Worship and Church Buildings in Western Europe 1500-2000. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008; Will Coster and Andrew Spicer, eds. Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Both provide useful overviews to changes in early modern sacred spaces through out Europe. 85 On the Sacred Visits, see Louise Rice. The Altars and Altarpieces of New St. Peter's: Outfitting the Basilica, 1621-1666. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997, 62, fn. 5, with bibliography. Rice notes that the Sacred Visits begun after the Council of Trent, but were rare until the time of Clement VIII. 43 these changes were for practical reasons such as cleaning up the city after the traumatic flood of Rome in 1598. 86 Changes in lieu of disaster allowed opportunities for the appropriation of space and monuments, which included cleansing the altars and extra- liturgical spaces by removing the accumulations of the past. 87 Charles Borromeo’s treatise Instructiones fabricae et supellectilis ecclesiasticae (1577) is certainly one of the most important documents for the proposed changes to sacred spaces after the Council of Trent. 88 Borromeo’s ideas of church reform placed emphasis on the high altar as the site of the Eucharist, moving altars off the pavement to higher, elevated position, and removing superstitious objects. 89 The changes reflected the clear dictates put forth by the Council of Trent, which emphasized the papal control over the understanding of the difference between devotion and piety versus superstition and false belief. 90 Borromeo’s renovations of his cardinalate church in Rome, S. Prassede, demonstrate the negotiation of church dogma and vernacular devotional Sacred visits continued during the pontificate of Paul V, but then picked up momentum again during the time of Urban VIII. The descriptions of Sacred Visits are held in the ASV, Armadio VII. 86 For the effects of the floods of Rome, see Chapter Four. 87 Rice 1997, 20, notes Tiberio Alfarano’s description of old St. Peter’s and the problem in identifying certain altars (“ignotum”) and noting their disuse, which as Rice notes, led to the “convenient opportunity for their suppression” with the building of new St. Peter’s basilica. 88 Robert Sénécal. "Carlo Borromeo’s Instructiones Fabricae Et Supellectilis Ecclesiasticae and its Origins in the Rome of his Time." Papers of the British School at Rome (PBSR) LXVIII (2000): 241-67; Maurizio Caperna. "San Carlo Borromeo, Cardinale Di S. Prassede, E Il Rinnovamento Della Sua Chiesa Titolare a Roma." Palladio 6.12 (1993): 43-58; Evelyn Carole Voelker. "Charles Borromeo’s Instructiones Fabricae Et Supellectilis Ecclesiasticae, 1577: A Translation with Commentary and Analysis." PhD Dissertation, Syracuse University, 1977. 89 Voelker 1977, 15-16. An example of the superstitious objects included the such as the bronze serpents from a church in Milan that were popularly believed to date from the time of Moses. Voelker notes the physical changes that occurred to the church of S. Ambrogio in Milan as a prime example of Borromeo’s ideas. 90 Voelker 1977, 16. 44 practices. Under Borromeo, the high altar and the relics were elevated and appropriately made inaccessible to the public. 91 Yet, Borromeo recognized the vernacular tradition as a sign of the sanctity of the site and its objects. As such, the cardinal retained popular devotional objects at his church, including the stone slab on which St. Prassede slept and the legendary column of the Flagellation of Christ, at which Borromeo was known to have prayed. 92 At the same time, the popular objects were not given prominent positions near the high altar. The column of the Flagellation remained in its traditional space, a small medieval chapel referred to as the “Garden of Paradise” and the stone slab was installed in an aedicule on the inner façade. These objects would be determined superstitious in the 18 th century, but in the 17 th century, they were still held, thanks to Borromeo, as important relics of the Christian past, visited by devout pilgrims and clergy, and even used by artists as archaeological place markers for images of sacred history in the late 16 th and early 17 th century. Women’s Bodies and Sacred Sites Gender figured prominently in the discussion of access to objects and spaces, most prominently when the space contained important relics of a saint or of Christ. Women were limited or entirely deprived of access to Rome’s chief sites of devotion, such as making confession at the site of St. Peter’s tomb, and the just mentioned “Garden of Paradise” containing the column of Christ’s flagellation in the church of S. Prassede. 91 See Caperna 1993, 45-46, figs. 7-9, the relic cabinets high above the floor in the triumphal arch over the high altar. 92 Sénécal 2000, 244; See also Jones 2008, Chapter 3. 45 Women were entirely prohibited from entering the Sancta Sanctorum, mentioned above. Early modern guidebooks to Rome note these examples of limited access for women to specific sacred sites, but give no explanation why. 93 Although not stated, it was understood that women were prohibited from entering these sacred spaces because of the polluted nature of their bodies. Leviticus explains that women’s bodies were impure due to original sin, and women’s blood was the transmitter of the tainted essence, especially while menstruating and after childbirth. 94 To cite one popular story that helped to disseminate the idea, the story of the “bleeding woman” provides a clear narrative for the prohibition of women from sacred sites and from handling the Eucharist. 95 A woman who was menstruating for twelve years without stop touched Christ’s rob without permission and was miraculously healed. But when the women touched him, Christ felt his power leave. The woman’s negative, tainted touch selfishly takes power. It is a potent story underscoring both the negative power of a woman’s touch, but also the healing power of things that have come into contact with 93 Felini 1610, 4, notes, as many do before and after him, that the chapel is not accessible to women, but gives no explanation why. 94 Joan R. Branham. "Sacred Space under Erasure in Ancient Synagogues and Early Churches." The Art Bulletin 74.3 (1992): 375-94; Leonie J. Archer "'in Thy Blood Live': Gender and Ritual in the Judaeo- Christian Tradition." Through the Devil's Gateway: Women, Religion, and Taboo. Ed. Alison Joseph. London: SPCK, 1990. 22-49, 37-40, for the meaning of blood in the Judaeo-Christian tradition, and especially the positive cleansing power of male blood in opposition to the polluted nature of female blood. Archer notes the textual origin in Leviticus 15.19-32. See Adrian Randolph. " Regarding Women in Sacred Space." Picturing Women in Renaissance and Baroque Italy. Eds. Geraldine A. Johnson and Sara F. Matthews Grieco. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997, 18, for the banning of women from sacred spaces while menstruating and after giving birth during the Renaissance. 95 Matthew (9:20-22), Mark (5: 24-34) and Luke (8: 43-48). See Branham 2002. 46 Christ’s body, verifying the power of contact relics. 96 Thus, to prevent the defiling of the power contained within sacred sites and objects women were banned. It is no wonder that pilgrims, especially female ones, turned to objects within arm’s reach of the collective spaces of a church. The side aisles and the nave of a church were spaces in which women were allowed relative freedom of movement, especially before and after mass and other ceremonies. The objects within these spaces were available to tactile appropriation by worshippers, sometimes inadvertently causing an affront to the concerns of the clergy. In the church of S. Maria sopra Minerva, an important miracle-granting painting of Christ, noted in Chapter Four, garnered so much attention in the side aisle that it was moved to an inaccessible tabernacle of a private side chapel. The icon was located in the south side aisle, or the “Epistle” side of the church, the side that women were required to use when passing through the Minerva in the early modern period. The abundance of attention from people, especially women, in the uncontrolled space of the side aisle led to the removal of the image to a more secure space on the north side of the church, the side aisle used primarily by men. 96 A statue was erected of the woman and of Christ at her house in Caesarea Philippi. Victor M. Schmidt. "Statues, Idols and Nudity: Changing Attitudes to Sculpture from the Early Christian Period to the Counter- Reformation." Antiquity Renewed: Late Classical and Early Modern Themes. Eds. Zweder von Martels and Victor M. Schmidt. Leuven: Peeters, 2003, 212, noting Eusebius. The power of contact relics are told in numerous accounts. Gerhard Wolf. "Holy Face and the Holy Feet: Preliminary Reflections before the Novgorod Mandylion." Eastern Christian Relics. Ed. Aliex Lidov. Moscow, 2003: 282, notes a footprint stone of Christ in Jerusalem that people touched for healing. The true Cross of Christ, upon being found by St. Helen, was touched to a blind boy who was healed of his ailment. In later centuries, stories of miracles were collected in guidebooks, and one will commonly reads descriptions such as “and many miracles happened” to attest to the power of the objects contained within the church. For the canonization of saints, the widely believed three miracle minimum has some truth, but the more miracles, the better. In a manuscript from the BAV, a list of thirty-six miracles are presented as evidence for the canonization of Pope Pio V. BAV, Barb. Lat. 4603, fol. 68r-73v, “Miracoli piú provati nelli processi fatti sopra la santità della vita della santa mem.a di Pio V in Roma, et in altri luoghi (1627).” 47 Rebuilding St. Peter’s Basilica Rome was changing at a steady pace in the early modern period, as new façades appeared on old churches, new buildings cropped up throughout the city, roads were widened, and obelisks were erected as visual markers. 97 The transformation of the ancient city into the modern Christian capital had a tremendous impact on people. The dramatic changes, destruction and construction, to the city that so impressed people allowed for the appropriation of old monuments. At the heart of Horst Bredekamp’s innovative study of St. Peter’s Basilica is the formative power of destruction during the building of the new structure. 98 While additions to buildings and chapels required respect for the material past, the complete destruction of a church or chapel allowed for the new patron to begin with the literal tabula rasa. It provided freedom in design and it empowered the new patron. Destruction has the power to translate ownership. Suddenly, as monuments were being hacked apart and bodies respectfully moved and reburied, paintings and sculptures were appropriated by new owners in the name of devotion and respect. The sacred object was rendered transcendental and prestigious. St. Peter’s provided a contradictory, but powerful exemplum. At St. Peter’s, the old building was not preserved, but the objects and the customs were. In the late 16 th and early 17 th century, much energy was put into creating an alternate plane of existence for the old monuments, namely the Grotte Vaticane, the expansive series of corridors 97 On the changes to urban fabric of Rome in the 16 th and 17 th century, especially in the Campus Martius, see Joseph Connors. "Alliance and Enmity in Roman Baroque Urbanism." Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 25 (1989): 207-94. 98 Horst Bredekamp. La Fabbrica Di San Pietro. Il Principio Della Distruzione Produttiva, Trans. E. Broseghini. Turin: Einaudi, 2005. 48 comprising the crypt of the new basilica. Within the space of the grotte the old monuments were renewed and showcased with relevance again. And the word that rebounds in inscriptions throughout the space is renovatio. In the name of necessary renovations for the sake of preserving the fabric of the ancient building, monuments were transferred, removed, destroyed, and appropriated. At the end of the 16 th and through the 17 th century, cardinals were taking their cue from St. Peter’s Basilica and renovating old, dilapidated sacred building in the city. Some of the patrons and sites included: Charles Borromeo at S. Prassede (c.1575), 99 Cesare Baronio at SS. Nereo ed Achilleo and S. Cesaro de’Appia, 100 Benedetto Giustiniani at S. Prisca (1600), 101 and Scipione Borghese at S. Sebastiano fuori le Mura (1607-14) and S. Crisogono (1618-28). 102 In his book on the responsibility of a Cardinal, published in 1599, Giovanni Botero asserted that restoring old churches to their former glory is a noble duty because “old churches are the mothers of Christian Piety, nurturers of devotion, masters of rites, conservators of the bodies of saints, memorials of antique piety.” 103 Restoration of sacred old buildings is made a moral obligation, but also a right and means to attain dignity. 99 Sénécal 2000; Caperna 1993. 100 Alexandra Herz. "Cardinal Cesare Baronio's Restoration of Ss. Nereo ed Achileo and S. Cesare de' Appia." The Art Bulletin 70 (1988): 590-620. 101 Alessandro Zuccari. "Benedetto Giustiniani e i Pittori di S. Prisca." Caravaggio E I Giustiniani: Toccar Con Mano Un Collezione Del Seicento. Ed. Silvia Danesi Sqaurzina. Milan: Electa, 2001. 81-86; J. A. F. Orbaan. Documenti sul Barocco in Roma. Miscellanea Della R. Società Romana Di Storia Patria. Rome: Biblioteca Vallicelliana, 1920, 97. 102 Michael Hill. "The Patronage of a Disenfranchised Nephew: Cardinal Scipione Borghese and the Restoration of San Crisogono in Rome, 1618-1628." Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 60.4 (2001): 433-49. 103 Giovanni Botero. Dell’uffito del Cardinale Libri II. Rome: Nicolò Mutii, 1599, 30. “Le quali Chiese vecchie sono le madri della Pietà Christiana, balie della divotione, maestre de i riti, conservatrici de i corpi santi, testificatrici della virtù de i martiri, rammentatrici della Pietà antic. Onde molto più nobile, e più pia 49 Sacred Objects i. Relics, Brandea, Rosaries, Touchstones An understanding of the cult of relics, the veneration of the fragmented and sometimes whole bodies of saints and other holy people, proves invaluable for understanding the tactile veneration of sculpture in early modern Rome. Stories about the miracles brought forth by relics imbue the objects with power, re-enact miracles, and in turn form the basis of a highly constructed reality surrounding objects that are not necessarily “real” or “truthful” according to post-Enlightenment ideas of fact. 104 Despite the critique of relics made by a number of Reformation detractors, the most famous of which is the one written by Jean Calvin, the relics were the primary objects of interest to pilgrims in Rome. 105 By means of the relics, the sacred past was made manifest, and also miracles and blessing could be obtained. The relationship between the relics of saints, the sculptures representing the same saints, and relic containers is of consequence. 106 Relic holders, or reliquaries, functioned opera si deve stimare il racconciar una Chiesa antica, che il fabricarne una nuova.” Noted first in Hill 2001, 434. 104 See Lucy Grig. Making Martyrs in Late Antiquity. London: Duckworth, 2004 Much scholarship has emerged since Peter Brown’s groundbreaking studies on the cult of relics of saints that primarily decribes the origins of the cult of relics, as well as the origin, authenticity, and significance of reliquaries. Peter Brown. The Cult of the Saints: its Rise and Function in Late Christianity. Chicago, 1981. 105 See Jean Calvin’s Traité des reliques (1534), in which he discusses the validity of relics and presents lists of locations of various relics in Rome and elsewhere in Europe to make the arguments against the provenance of the objects. At the heart of Calvin’s critique is the problem of devotion to fraudulent relics, such as venerating the brain of St. Peter when in fact it is just a pumice stone, as was discovered at Geneva. 106 Sally J. Cornelison, Sally J. "When an Image Is a Relic: The St. Zenobius Panel from Florence Cathedral." Images, Relics, and Devotional Practices in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Eds. Sally J. Cornelison and Scott B. Montgomery. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006. 95-113; Robert Maniura. "Image and Relic in the Cult of Our Lady of Prato." Images, Relics, and Devotional Practices in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Eds. Sally J. Cornelison and Scott B. 50 in a number of ways. Some are versions of the relics contained within, such as an arm or head reliquary to hold that particular piece of the saint. These types of relic holders are described as “speaking reliquaries” or “body-part reliquaries.” At a certain point, sculptures began to be produced which represent a saint, the Virgin, or Christ, and that sculpture was placed near a related relic. The sculpture was not made to hold the relic. 107 But somehow the sculpture takes on a special status that became problematic for two main groups. The Catholic Church, who in the wake of the Reformation exercised some restraint over the visible expression of devotion to sculpture, was concerned about idolatry. And also collectors and connoisseurs of art viewed tactile veneration and customary devotion towards a high quality object as an uncouth way to appreciate fine art. Pilgrims also created their own contact relics. Taking pieces of cloth, usually in strips, they would touch pieces of fabric to sacred objects and then bind them to ailing body parts for healing purposes. 108 The practice of creating contact relics or brandea Montgomery. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006. 193-209; Timothy B. Smith. "Up in Arms: The Kinghts of Rhodes, the Cult of Relics, and the Chapel of St. John the Baptist in Siena Cathedral." Images, Relics, and Devotional Practices in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Eds. Sally J. Cornelison and Scott B. Montgomery. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006. 213-38; Signe Horn Fuglesang. "Christian Reliquaries and Pagan Idols." Images of Cult and Devotion: Function and Reception of Christian Images in Medieval and Post-Medieval Europe. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2004. 7-32; Caroline Walker Bynum and Paula Gerson. "Body-Part Reliquaries and Body Parts in the Middle Ages." Gesta 36.1 (1997): 3-7. 107 Of course, there are exceptions of works of art later adopted as relic holders, or sometimes made with relics embedded inside. Pompeo Ugonio. Historia delle Stationi di Roma che si Celebrano la Quadragesima, Dove Oltre Le Vite De Santi Alle Chiese De Quali È Statione... Rome: Bonfadino, 1588, un-paginated, section on relics, notes that relics were embedded into a mosaic in the church of S. Clemente. The sculpture of St. Foix is a famous example of a sculpture used to hold a relic of the saint, which was discussed in early literature for the problems in venerating the sculpture; and the Gero crucifix, Cologne, has a place for holding a relic. For both, see Schmidt 2003, 213-14. 108 Wolf 2003, 282. For the origin of brandea, see Molly Teasdale Smith. "The Development of the Altar Canopy in Rome." Rivista di archeologia cristiana 50 (1974): 412; and Maniura 2006, 206, who notes 51 predates rosary beads, which were introduced by the Dominicans, especially the Confraternity of the Rosary. 109 Not far from the seat of the Confraternity of the Rosary in S. Maria sopa Minerva, rosary beads could be bought along the Via dei Coronari en route to St. Peter’s Basilica. The ancient word for a rosary, which is a type of “corona” or wreath made from rose buds and then later made from rose wood, gives the object the name “rosario.” The fragrance released from the rose wood is evocative of the miraculous stories of the pleasant fragrances that came from the bodies of saints upon the opening of their tombs. 110 Rosary beads figured prominently in the experience of pilgrims in Rome in the early modern period. In Gregory Martin’s text describing pilgrims in Rome following the Holy Year of 1575, he marveled not only at the sacred value of rosaries which received blessing from the pope, but also those that had touched important relics and sacred spots. Martin’s observations confirm the belief in touch to transfer to objects a valued yet Gregory of Tours, noting pilgrims lowering brandea, or strips of cloth, into the altar above St. Peter’s tomb. 109 For the origin of the devotion to the Rosary, see Anne Winston. "Tracing the Origins of the Rosary: German Vernacular Texts." Speculum 68.3 (1993): 619-36. For the Confraternity of the Rosary, founded in 1481, see Matizia Maroni Lumbroso and Antonio Martini. Le Confraternite Romane nelle Loro Chiese. Rome: Fondazione Marco Besso, 1963, 346. See further, Chapter Four. 110 The smell of sanctity was always sweet. Paolo Aringhi. Roma Svbterranea Novissima: In Qva Post Antonivm Bosivm Antesignanvm, Io. Severanvm Congreg. Oratorii Presbytervm, Et Celebres Alios Scriptores. Rome: Vitalis Mascardi, 1651, 115.9, “Eius corpus post martyrium aromatibus perfunditur,” notes the pleasant smell that came from St. Peter’s body after his martyrdom. A print by Pieter de Bailliu (or Balliu) from the 1630s, in the BAV, Stampati, Cicognara XII.541 (int. 21), pl. 108, shows the second translation of the body of St. Peter, and notes at the bottom of the print “Corpus B.i Petri aromatibus conditum.” In the case of the saint-like artist Michelangelo, he did not smell sweet when they opened his coffin, but it was recorded, “non si senti odore alcuno cattivo…” Lisa Pon. "Michelangelo's Lives: Sixteenth-Century Books by Vasari, Condivi, and Others." The Sixteenth Century Journal 27.4 (1996): 1022, fn. 37, noting Giunta, Esequie. 52 unquantifiable power. 111 In the late 16 th century, devotional experience with the sacred sites in Rome included various portable holy talismans used to bring away the power of relics and the sites. When the relics and miraculous objects were removed from access, pilgrims shifted their attention (with rosary beads in hand) to the next best things: sculptures and touchstones that represented or retained the traces of the sacred person. As Christ left virtually no physical remains on earth after his ascension, certain objects, images, and sites that came into contact with Christ’s body took on the status of relics. 112 Contact relics, such as the crown of thorns, the lance, nails, and blood were well known to pilgrims. The Mandylion and the Veronica, pieces of cloth that touched Christ’s body and preserved his image, were even more prized relics because they record his likeness. 113 In early modern studies, when art historians turned to discuss such important sacred objects, they were drawn to the relics that represented the image of 111 Gregory Martin. Roma Sancta (1581). Ed. George Bruner Parks. Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1969, 49, Book 1, ch. 15, he notes, “…then at the high aultar before the principal Relikes, where there stand al the day one or two in surplises, to take the beades of them that wil (and who wil not?) and with them to touche al the Relikes; and if the name of the Relike be not written (through comenly it is) or can not be redde of the ignorant, they also inform them that aske, what every Relike is. Which being done everie Station day throughout the yeare, imagine what precious beades they are, which byside the popes benediction (which S. Gregorie calleth S. Peters blessing) and the indulgences annexed, have also touched so manie Relikes, as are thus shewed in Rome in a yeare and therfore manie to this purpose being litle bundles tied together, to send afterward to their friends.” 112 Hans Belting. "In Search of Christ's Body." The Holy Face and the Paradox of Representation. Eds. Herbert Kessler and Gerhard Wolf. Bologna: Nuova Alfa, 1998. 1-12; Wolf 2003. 113 Belting 1998, notes that the search for Christ’s image is a paradoxical one. It is a search for a body which according to Christian theology will reappear in the future. Recent literature on the “volto santo” is quite substantial. Herbert Kessler and Gerhard Wolf, eds. The Holy Face and the Paradox of Representation. Bologna: Nuova Alfa, 1998; Giovanni Morello and Gerhard Wolf, eds. Il Volto di Cristo. Milano: Electa, 2000; Wolf 2003; Christoph L. Frommel and Gerhard Wolf, eds. L'immagine di Cristo: dall'acheropita alla Mano d'artista, dal Tardo Medioevo all'età Barocca. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2006. 53 Christ since the relic was used as a source for his image and replicated in art. 114 What is more rare is the impact that relics had on artists and their involvement in designing monuments to house them. The exceptional studies by William Wallace note these topics and confront the problem in art history, especially in studies on Michelangelo, of the lack of attention given to the devotional aspects of famous works of art and devotional monuments made by well-known artists. 115 In Chapter Four of this dissertation, I derive inspiration from Wallace’s study of the Risen Christ in S. Maria sopra Minerva, especially his astute observations about the connection between the sculpture and the footprint stone of Christ, a contact relic found on the Via Appia. 116 To emphasize the culture which inspired the devout in the early modern period to behold sculptures, in this Dissertation, I include a group of objects best described as touchstones, which are contact relics that are durable, architectural elements, such as 114 Irving Lavin. "Il Volto Santo Di Claude Mellan: Ostendatque Etiam Quae Occultet." L'immagine Di Cristo: Dall'acheropita Alla Mano D'artista, Dal Tardo Medioevo All'età Barocca. Eds. Christoph L. Frommel and Gerhard Wolf. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2006. 449-91. The study of the relation between relics, pilgrims sites, and art is better represented by medieval art historians and historians. Sally J. Cornelison and Scott B. Montgomery, eds. Images, Relics, and Devotional Practices in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006; Erik Thunø and Gerhard Wolf, eds. The Miraculous Image in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2004; Erik Thunø. Image and Relic: Mediating the Sacred in Early Medieval Rome Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2002; Jeffrey F. Hamburger. "Seeing and Believing: The Suspicion of Sight and the Authentication of Vision in Late Medieval Art and Devotion." Imagination Und Wirklichkeit: Zum Verhältnis Von Mentalen Und Realen Bildern in Der Kunst Der Frühen Neuzeit Eds. Klaus Krüger and Alessandro Nova. Mainz: von Zabern, 2000. 47-69; Stephen Lamia. "Souvenir, Synaesthesia, and Sepulcrum Domini: Sensory Stimuli as Memory Stratagems." Memory and the Medieval Tomb. Eds. Elizabeth Valdez del Alamo and Carol Stamatis Pendergast. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2000. 19-41; Cynthia Hahn. "The Voices of the Saints: Speaking Reliquaries." Gesta 36.1 (1997a): 20-31; Cynthia Hahn. "Seeing and Believing: The Construction of Sanctity in Early-Medieval Saints' Shrines." Speculum 72.4 (1997b): 1079-106. 115 William E. Wallace. "Friends and Relics at San Silvestro in Capite, Rome." Sixteenth Century Journal 30.2 (1999): 419-39, in which he focuses on a tabernacle monument designed by Michelangelo to house the head of St. John the Baptist. 116 William E. Wallace. "Michelangelo’s Risen Christ." Sixteenth-Century Journal 28.4 (1997): 1251-80. 54 columns or stone slabs. Examples include the just noted stone containing the footprints of Christ and the knee print and face print stones of St. Peter. In the late 16 th and 17 th century, these durable relics were rededicated, copied, and emphasized in pilgrim guidebooks. The objects became meaningful as witnesses to sacred events by retaining the intangible healing and beneficial traces of the divine. Because of their power as markers of Christ and St. Peter, the objects became powerful sites of tactile devotion. These non-figurative objects help provide an explanation for the rise of the physical devotion shown to sculptures. An easy transition was made from touching marble fragments and architectural objects to marble and bronze statues. The durability of the touchstones lent the impression of permanence and antiquity to the objects. The same permanence is perceived of statues. Marble and bronze ancient sculptures survived throughout the city, hence, the medieval and Renaissance statues would no doubt survive the devout caresses of pilgrims ii. Paintings and Sculpture Encountering the image of Christ, the early modern beholder’s experience depended on how familiar she was with other images of Christ. His body and face were represented in art for centuries, and a certain amount of familiarity with traditional image typologies was expected. These images reproduced or followed closely the Urbild for Christ’s face, in particular, the Mandylion and the Veronica. 117 Artists continued to 117 The Mandylion and Veronica, the contact relics which retain the image of Christ’s face, have received much attention, especially from Gerhard Wolf and Herbert Kessler . Wolf 2003; Kessler 2000; and other essays and the catalogue in Morello, ed. 2000; and Kessler and Wolf, eds. 1998. 55 produce typical images derived from the Veronica image, while at the same time other artists (or even the same) produced innovative images of Christ. 118 Sometimes, innovation replaced tradition. As just noted above, a miracle-granting painting of Christ was venerated by noble people at an altar in the south side aisle of S. Maria sopra Minerva until it was transferred to the Maffei Chapel in the late 16 th century. The painting is described in an early modern source as an “antica immagine del Salvatore,” while just pages later the author notes that the painting is believed to be one made by Raphael. 119 This is an example in which the modern qualities of Raphael’s style replaced the traditional images of Christ, or at least inspired devotion among a group of young noble people. 120 The power of innovation is difficult to resist. The newly rendered naturalism and psychological elements placed in the visage of Christ and other sacred people produced by early modern Italian artists deeply moved, possibly stunned, and at times shocked the beholder upon first encounter. 118 Michael W. Cole. "Response: Nihil Sub Sole Novum." The Art Bulletin 87.3 (2005): 421, noting a recent study by Gerhard Wolf. Schleier und Spiegel: Traditionen des Christusbildes und die Bildkonzepte der Renaissance. Munich, Wilhelm Fink, 2002, 174. 119 AGOP, Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol. 32v. “…alcuni fanciulletti nobili e divoti con l’occasione d’una antica imagine del Salvatore ch’era sopra l’Altare della SS. Agata e Lucia alla quale aveva cominciato á concorrere il Popolo con gran divozione per molte grazie da loro ricevute.” And then a couple pages later, the author notes “L’immagine del Salvatore ad onore del quale fù instituita questa Compagnia, si crede sia opera di Raffaello d’Urbino…” (fol. 34r) 120 Cole 2005, 422, noting the distinctions made by Hans Belting in his landmark study Likeness and Presence (originally, Bild und Kult), he also notes Klaus Krüger’s recent discussion of the language used to describe the painting (“quadro”) made by Rubens to encase the sacred icon (“immagine”) for the Oratorians in the Chiesa Nuova, Rome. Klaus Krüger. Das Bild als Schleier des Unsichtbaren: Ästhetische Illusion in der Kunst der frühen Neuzeit in Italien. Munich, Wilheml Fink, 2001, 146. The transfer was part of the Counter Reformation return to veneration of traditional sacred images rather than innovative ones. See Sylvia Ferino Pagden. "From Cult Images to the Cult of Images: The Case of the Raphael's Altarpieces." The Altarpiece in the Renaissance. Eds. Peter Humfrey and Martin Kemp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990, 165-89. 56 Inventive styles of art were deemed inappropriate during the reform of sacred art in the middle to late 16 th century. Modern, naturalistic displays of nudity proved especially problematic in sacred spaces. Objects received cloth and metal additions to prevent people from not just seeing, but also from touching certain parts of the sculptures. Frescoes (Michelangelo’s super-human figures in the Last Judgment) and a number of sculptures (both ancient and relatively modern) received additions to cover offensive nudity. 121 In the 17 th century and later, several of Bernini’s sculptures received drapery to conceal distasteful nudity. The allegory of Truth on the Tomb of Alexander VII (fig. 13) in St. Peter’s Basilica received a cleverly disguised bronze drapery (painted white) just when the monument was being completed. 122 A sculpture of a virtue cheerfully squeezing milk from her breasts, as well as her companion, designed by Bernini for the De Sylva Chapel (fig. 14) in the church of S. Isidoro, also received bronze draperies. 123 121 Bernadine Barnes. "Aretino, the Public, and the Censorship of Michelangelo’s Last Judgment." Suspended License: Censorship and the Visual Arts. 1997: 59-84. In addition to the famously discussed draperies added both by Michelangelo while working on the Last Judgment, but also by a later artist, one could possibly add Michelangelo’s David. The David received a garland to honor the sculpture, but possibly to conceal the nudity. Aretino notes the garland attached to the David was to cover the nudity. See Francesco Caglioti. Donatello e i Medici. Storia del David e della Giuditta, 2 Vols. Florence: Leo S. Olschki Editore, 2000, 334-338, who discusses the Aretino letter as well as the opposing interpretations of the garland, including Johnson’s interpretation that Aretino’s reference is ironic in light of the well-known immodesty of Florentine art. Also discussed by Schmidt 2003, 219-220. 122 Rudolph Wittkower. Gian Lorenzo Bernini: The Sculptor of the Roman Baroque. London: Phaidon Press, 1955, 240, cat. 77 noting Baldanucci. The drapery was added 1678 at the request of pope Innocent XII. See also Pinelli ed. 2000, vol. 4., 593, noting Domenico Bernini, La Vita del Cavalier Gio. Lorenzo Bernini, Rome, 1713, 167, that it was done with “una grandissima difficoltà, convenendogli accomodare una cosa sopra un’altra fatta con diversa intenzione.” 123 Wittkower 1955, 228, cat. 66, who notes generally that the additions are later. Recently, Angela Negro. Bernini e il 'Bel Composto': La Cappella De Sylva in Sant'Isidoro. Rome: Campisaano Editore, 2002, 43- 47, with images showing before and after the removal of the later additions. Negro notes that the additions were added in the 19 th century based on a letter noted in a guidebook from 1971, which does not clearly note the origin of the information. A. Daly Sant’Isidoro. Rome, 1971, 54. 57 A well-known example from new St. Peter’s Basilica is a nude female sculpture on the Tomb of Pope Paul III by Guglielmo della Porta (fig. 14). Pope Clement VIII deemed three of the four statues of virtues inappropriate when he viewed them during an official visit to the basilica in 1592. 124 The nudity of the young female figure, Giustizia, was particularly offensive because her complete nakedness rendered the sculpture too pleasing. As a result, Teodoro della Porta, the son of Guglielmo della Porta, created a bronze garment for the statue, which was then painted white to make it blend in with the rest of the sculpture. 125 The clothing of the figure is the most physical sign of the reform of art. In later centuries, as people appreciated the beautifully carved figures from the tomb of Paul III, a rumor started about the reason for the drapery. Early guidebooks noted that the sculpture was clothed to prevent people from being tempted by the beautiful nude woman. A story circulated that a young Spanish sculptor who came to Rome snuck into the basilica to be alone with the sculpture. 126 The next morning, the 124 The pope noted that “siano levate oppure vengano ricoperte quanto prima in modo più decente.” Antonio Pinelli, ed. La Basilica Di San Pietro in Vaticano, 4 Vols. Modena: Panini, 2000, vol. 4, 614. During the official visit, the tomb of Paul III was still located in the southeast niche of the crossing. It would be moved to the south side of the central apse between 1627-29, to make room for Duquesnoy’s monumental sculpture of St. Andrew. Two of the four original statues of virtues still remain on the tomb, one of Giustizia and the other of Prudenza, as well as the attachment added to the figure of Giustizia in the late 16 th century. The other two, Abbondanza and Pace were removed for the early 17 th century installation and the two sculptures are now in the Palazzo Farnese. 125 Pinelli 2000, vol. 4, 614. 126 The story is retold in various ways, at first as just a young Spaniard, and then later as a Spanish artist, no doubt to defame the Spanish artists competing with the locals artists. Hans Körner. "Das Hemd der „Justitia“. Rompilger und Romtouristen vor dem Grabmal für Papst Paul III. in St. Peter." Pilgerreisen in Mittelalter und Renaissance. Eds. Barbara Haupt and Wilhelm G. Busse. Vol. Studia humaniora. Düsseldorfer Studien zu Mittelalter und Renaissance Bd. 41. Düsseldorf, 2006. 163-212. John Evelyn notes the story in his journal of Rome, but as De Beer notes, Evelyn is probably drawing upon his copies of Totti or Raymond for the story. De Beer, ed. 1955, 264, fn. 6. 58 artist was found dead on the floor before the tomb, the evidence of his sinful act visible to all. Such a disparaging nationalistic story is not new in regard to the way people interacted with art. The diary of Bernini’s trip to France is rife with digs against the French and the Spanish for the way they judged art. The French were noted for beginning their interaction with art through touch. 127 When the Spanish ambassador visited Bernini’s Pluto and Proserpina, he declared Proserpina “pretty” after he touched her. 128 Going back even further, the xenophobic slurs about how people interact with art can be traced to the ancient story of inappropriate sexual acts with Praxiteles’ Cnidian Venus, in which the perpetrator is foreign, sometimes a sailor, but certainly never Greek. 129 In these instances, temptation from lovely forms which activated touch as a mode of experiencing art, was illicit, uncouth, something done by a foreigner, and at times even deadly. But covering the nudity of Christ and concealing the nudity of an enticing female figure, especially one who is reclining seductively on the tomb of a pope, or another who is squeezing milk from her bountiful breasts in a family chapel, are certainly different. The cloaking of Christ’s nudity because of outwardly sexual connotations is a topic discussed in art historical literature. The most controversial is the argument presented by 127 Paul Fréart de Chantelou. Diary of the Cavaliere Bernini's Visit to France. Ed. Anthony; trans. Margery Corbett; Blunt. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1985, 184-85, notes that it is difficult to prevent people from touching sculpture because that is the way that French people begin to look at sculpture. See Hall 1999, 88, also, who quotes from this as well, but page 186 of Chantelou, about “when there is something new to see, they touch it.” 128 Chantelou 1985, 23. He then goes on to make the fatal suggestion that the sculpture could be improved if the eyes were painted. Again, also noted by Hall 1999, 87. 129 See Eva-Bettina Krems. Der Fleck auf der Venus: 500 Künstleranekdoten von Apelles bis Picasso. Munich: Verlag C. H. Beck, 2003, 56-58, for a brief discussion of the sexual responses to statues. I thank Juergen Müller for this reference. 59 Leo Steinberg in his book on Christ’s sexuality. 130 By charting dozens of examples of representations of Christ’s nudity, from when he is an infant to when he is an adult, Steinberg argues that Christ is without sin, and thus is without shame. 131 Steinberg goes on to note Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture in S. Maria sopra Minerva. 132 The Christ sculpture is an expression of Michelangelo’s understanding of the sinless nature of nudity during the antique period, but also Christ’s exempt status from sin in general. 133 In the minds of humanists, as evidenced from the abundance of nude statues popping up from the ground, the ancients were not ashamed or disgraced by the nudity of their bodies. 134 Yet, the nudity of the Christ by Michelangelo elicited a strong response. Viewing the Christ sculpture was certainly shocking for at least one friar at the Minerva. The nudity of the novel, life-size marble sculpture showing a powerful male body agitated the 130 Leo Steinberg. The Sexuality of Christ in Renaissance Art and in Modern Oblivion, 2nd Ed Revised and Expanded. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. 131 Steinberg 1996, 19, presents an argument based on theological writings and asks “How then could he who restores human nature to sinlessness be shamed by the sexual factor in his humanity?” 132 Steinberg 1996, 19-24; 146-47. 133 Schmidt 2003, 221, notes that Steinberg’s argument is “too clever and, if anything, only works on paper.” But then Schmidt’s final conclusion about the Christ sculpture, about the meaning in early modern sources of the word “ignudo” not always meaning completely nude (225) appears to be taken from Steinberg without noting him. Steinberg 1996, 146. 134 Steinberg 1996, 19, is referring to humanist writer Piero Valeriano, who seems to be waxing nostalgic for the halcyon days of antiquity when nudity was not a problem. Sadly, during the height of the Roman Imperial period, nude statues of real people (such as the Emperor) placed in the capitol, would not have been appropriate. Nudity of Roman people, both men and women, attached to idealized nude bodies, in Rome it took time to accept, and was helped along by the adoption of Greek taste and the addition of attributes of gods and goddesses. Images of nude gods and goddesses were less an issue because of their immortal status. Christopher H. Hallett. The Roman Nude: Heroic Portrait Statuary 200 Bc-Ad 300. Oxford Studies in Ancient Culture and Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005a; Tom Stevenson. "The 'Problem' with Nude Honorific Statuary and Portraits in Late Republican and Augustan Rome." Greece & Rome 45.1 (1998): 45-69. 60 friar so much that he struck the sculpture, breaking off the genitalia, and then covered the sculpture with a piece of drapery. 135 In a similar apocryphal anecdote recorded by a Sicilian chronicler, Francesco Baronio, the author further expounds on the story: When Michelangelo Buonarroti, in Rome, had carved a Christ our Lord and had made him with his male parts unencumbered [laid bare or set free – humanis patribus assolvisset], it befell that when he placed the statue on view…a certain man, indignant at seeing Christ Jesus covered by no human garment, girded him with a linen cloth, so that he might not seem indecorous. Michelangelo, unable to endure this, snatched it away. The man put another back; again he [the artist] in vain tore it to pieces… 136 Steinberg notes that the fable is problematic because we know that Michelangelo made the sculpture in Florence and then was not present when it was installed at S. Maria sopra Minerva. As tempting it may be to imagine that Michelangelo, living not far from the Minerva, stopped in to see his work, as far as we know the older Michelangelo did not 135 Gaspare Celio. Memoria Fatta Dal Signor Gaspare Celio Dell'habito Di Christo. Delli Nomi Dell'artefici Delle Pitture, Che Sono in Alcune Chiese, Facciate, E Palazzi Di Roma. Napoli: Scipione Bonino, 1638, 65-66. “Il Christo di marmo in piede, che tiene la Croce alla destra dell’Altare Maggiore, di Michelangelo Buonaruoti un Frate per scrupulo li ruppe il membro, ancora che vi stasse del continuo un panno.” The story is noted repeatedly in modern literature on Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture by means of Celio’s account in his guidebook to Rome, written by 1620, but only published in 1638, 65-66. Regarding the cloth, see the discussion in Schmidt 2003, who specifically discusses the problem of nudity and notes that the sculpture was no doubt covered very soon after installation. Schmidt calls attention to the earlier prints after the sculpture, including Nicolas Beatrizet’s engraving, from the 1540s, the earliest known print, which includes a cloth. The small scale bronze copies, in particular, Pietro Barga’s version in the Museo Nazionale Bargello, inv. 70 Bronzi, dated to 1576, also includes a small drapery. Lucilla Bardeschi Ciulich and Pina Ragionieri, eds. Vita di Michelangelo. Florence: Mandragora, 2001, 55-56. The image of Christ by Francino from the 1588 edition of Le Cose also includes a drapery. In a revised version of Fioravante Martinelli’s guidebook to Rome, know only in manuscript form in the Bibliotheca Casanatense, the author makes additions to the entry on S. Maria sopra Minerva and with specific reference to Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ. He notes, "Il Christo di marmo in piedi, che tiene la Croce, alla destra dell'altar maggiore è di Michel'Angelo Bonarota fatto ad istanza di Metello Varode Porcari, del quale è l'altare. Un frate per scrupolo li ruppe il membro, ancorche vi stesse di continue un panno." (BC) ms 4984 fol. 142/143-147. See also the modern publication of the manuscript, Cesare D'Onofrio. Roma nel Seicento. I Volti di Roma. Florence: Vallecchi, 1968, 108-111. 136 Steinberg 1996, 147, noting Francesco Baronio, De Panormitana majestate,Llibri IV, Leiden, 1630, III, 96, p. 102. 61 seem to show much interest in his earlier sculptures. Yet, the story gives us an idea of the reception of the covering of the statue of Christ and a vivid account of one person’s imagining of how the artist might have reacted to such an event. Conclusion The customary behavior of pilgrims at sacred sites changed along side the changes to sacred spaces. Guidebooks outlined the reforms and served as directives for movement, behavior, and attention. The sincere voices of the clergy remind the modern scholar of the profound belief in relics and sanctity that inspired a physical form of devotion in Rome. Yet, the reforms of behavior, sacred spaces, and art placed a negative emphasis on women’s bodies. The real bodies of women were prohibited from entering certain sacred areas, which led to a new attention to monuments outside proper liturgical spaces, such as in the side aisles and nave. Images of female nudity were also reformed because of the way in which the female body could engender sinful thoughts and real actions, in particular sexual touch. The reform of both behavior and monuments sets the background for the presentation of a group of objects known for their rich histories of tactile veneration. The following chapters provide powerful examples of the tradition of tactile devotion in the early modern period when devout beholders witnessed the removal of familiar icons and relics from hand’s reach. Turning away from the high altar, the devout person found objects with pagan associations, but clearly Christian functions inviting their embodied expression of devotion. The persistence of vernacular practices was best focused on durable touchstones and marble and bronze statues to be found in important reformed sacred sites in Rome. 62 Chapter 2: St. Peter In the early 17 th century, as the last vestiges of the old 4 th -century basilica were disappearing, the new basilica of St. Peter became the most important site of the Catholic Church. The slow destruction of the old basilica allowed for the productive intervention of a new sacred space according to the new directives of the 16 th -century Council of Trent. It took just over one hundred years to construct the new basilica, while decorating the space would occupy the Church for the centuries to follow. As Old St. Peter’s Basilica disappeared, important devotional objects, including relics, icons, and sculptures, were moved to temporary locations or storage. Some of the locations provided new access to objects formerly inaccessible to pilgrims and even the clergy. The temporary displays of objects led to permanent displays of objects during the finishing of the basilica in the early 17 th century. In this chapter on St. Peter’s Basilica, I focus on two legendary statues of St. Peter: the well-known bronze St. Peter (fig.1-2) located in the nave near the northeast pier of the crossing; and a marble sculpture of St. Peter (fig. 3) presently located at the north entrance to the Grotte Vaticane. Both objects were located in Old St. Peter’s, moved during the destruction, and eventually reinstalled in the new basilica in conspicuous spaces with different access during the pontificate of Pope Paul V (Camillo Borghese, May 16, 1605-January 28, 1621). In the early 17 th century, the statues were mobilized as familiar objects that met the needs of customary devotion despite their problematic pagan associations at the shockingly new basilica dedicated to the first apostle. 63 Two Basilicas at Once The artist Martin van Heemskerck provides the modern viewer evocative images of St. Peter’s Basilica during the simultaneous destruction and construction of the basilica (figs. 16-17). The drawings represent the state of St. Peter’s Basilica before the erection of the muro divisiorum, the dividing wall constructed in 1538 between the remaining parts of Old St. Peter’s Basilica and the new construction site. 137 The images facilitate a return to the world of the existence of the two basilicas and the transitory state of this massive construction and archaeological site. 138 Dated to around 1536, the two drawings bring before the eyes a surprisingly different image of St. Peter’s, which show the unusual physical state of the basilica as it was known to people for the major part of the 16 th century. 139 In the first drawing View of Nave of Old St. Peter’s Basilica (fig. 16), the artist gives us a view of the new basilica emerging from the dismantled remains of old St. Peter’s. Looking west, the barrel vaults at the new crossing loom above the space. The Tegurium, a symmetrical temporary structure built to shield and define the space of the high altar and site of St. Peter’s tomb, sits protectively amidst the inactive construction 137 For Heemskerck’s drawings of St. Peter’s, see Christof Thoenes, "St. Peter Als Ruine: Zu Einigen Veduten Heemskercks." Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 49 4 (1986): 481-500. See also Horst Bredekamp, La Fabbrica Di San Pietro. Il Principio Della Distruzione Produttiva, Trans. E. Broseghini. Turin: Einaudi, 2005, 70-72, 124-25. For the muro divisiorum, see Christof Thoenes. "Alt- und Neu-St.-Peter unter einem dach: zu Antonio da Sangallos ‘Muro Divisorio’.”Architektur und Kunst im Abendland: Festschrift zur Vollendung des 65. Lebensjahres von Günter Urban. Ed. Michael Jansen. Rome: Herder, 1992, 51-61. 138 Bredekamp 2005 notes the unusual yet generative nature of the simultaneous destruction and construction at St. Peter’s. The façade was finished first in 1612, while the new nave was not connected to new crossing until 1615 when the muro divisiorum was taken down. Bredekamp 2005, 146; Christof Thoenes. La Fabbrica di San Pietro nelle Incisioni dal Cinquecento all'Ottocento. Milan: Il Polifilo, 2000, 28-29, 110. 139 Louise Rice. The Altars and Altarpieces of New St. Peter's: Outfitting the Basilica, 1621-1666. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997, 17, notes the fact that essentially two basilicas stood side by side for the bulk of the 16 th century. 64 site. 140 In the second drawing, View of Crossing of New St. Peter’s Basilica (fig. 17), the artist provides an intimate, poetic impression of the crossing of new St. Peter’s, showing a side view of the Tegurium from the north transept. Plants grow wildly in the transept and people stroll down a well-worn path more reminiscent of the Roman campagna than what would become the most important sacred site of the Catholic Church. The artist provides a framed view of the mix of new structures and the disappearing ancient vestiges of Old St. Peter’s Basilica. A pair of columns from the nave of the old basilica (not yet fully dismantled) serves as a framing device. A twisting column is clearly visible to the left of the column quarantined off with a tall fence. It is during this dramatic moment of change that Heemskerck captured the extraordinary presence of two objects of popular devotion amidst the simultaneous existence of the two basilicas: the bronze sculpture of St. Peter and the Colonna Santa, the column at which Christ leaned and preached in the Temple of Solomon. 141 In the first drawing (fig. 16), on the right hand side sits the organ of Alexander VI with the bronze 140 William Tronzo. "Il Tegurium di Bramante." L’architettura della Basilica di San Pietro. Storia e Costruzione. Ed. Gianfranco Spagnesi. Rome: Bonsignori Editore, 1997, 161-66. Built by the architect of St. Peter’s basilica, Bramante, the tegurium was most likely constructed between Pentecost of 1513 and Easter of 1514, as Tronzo notes (161). There is disagreement about whether or not the structure was intended as a permanent or temporary building. Tronzo argues that the structure was not created for the protection of the high altar from the natural elements (the lack of a roof is important physical evidence), but that the structure possibly had more ideological and liturgical function, which emphasized the paleo- Christian link between the ancient past and the present (164). The tegurium was destroyed in 1592. 141 See recently, Dale Kinney. "Spolia." St. Peter's in the Vatican. Ed. William Tronzo. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005: 35-36, who notes the presence of the Colonna Santa in the Heemskerck drawings. Referring to Grimaldi, Kinney also cites the 15 th -century inscription. Giacomo Grimaldi. Descrizione della Basilica Antica di St. Pietro in Vaticano: Codice Barberini Latino 2733. Ed. R. Niggl. Ed. Reto Niggl. Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1972, 145. The Colonna Santa was located near the transept of the old basilica. Missing from the drawing is the 15 th -century marble balustrade that enclosed the column and contained an inscription noting the relationship between the column, Christ, and its function as an apotropaic device. 65 St. Peter placed at ground level. 142 In the same drawing, a small grid pattern in the right foreground represents the fence surrounding the Colonna Santa. The drawing shows us a rare image of the bronze St. Peter sculpture in one of its former contexts in the old basilica. 143 Objects were being moved with unprecedented frequency during the construction of new St. Peter’s Basilica. The work on the new basilica stopped and started at equally alarming regularity. During the 16 th and early 17 th century, objects with histories of profound devotion were being removed, sold into 142 Aloisio Antinori. "La Cantoria Con Organo Di Alessandro Vi E La ‘Cappella Del St. Pietro Di Bronzo." L’architettura Della Basilica Di San Pietro. Storia E Costruzione. Ed. Gianfranco Spagnesi. Rome: Bonsignori Editore, 1997, 129-36, for the organ of Alessandro VI, and especially pages 130 and 134 for the bronze St. Peter. Antinori dates the transfer of the organ and the bronze St. Peter to the nave of the old basilica to just before 1536, based on the drawings by Heemskerck and the date of the installation of the muro divisiorum (1538). Also, Antinori notes two additional drawings of the organ showing the bronze St. Peter: one by Domenico Tasselli from the Album del Capitolo di. St. Pietro (BAV, ACSP, A 64 ter., fol. 34r), and the other from Grimaldi’s Descrizione (BAV, Barb. Lat. 2733, fol. 27v). Antinori 1997, 130-32, fig. 2 and fig. 3. "Arnolfo di Cambio nella Basilica di St. Pietro." L’architettura della Basilica di San Pietro. Storia e Costruzione. Ed. Gianfranco Spagnesi. Rome: Bonsignori Editore, 1997, 59-60. Margherita Guarducci. San Pietro e Sant'ippolito: Storia di Statue Famose in Vaticano. Rome: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, 1991, 26-27, notes the same. Rice 1997, 233, notes that the old oratory was destroyed in 1548 to make way for the new building, but places the movement of the contents to the same time. It is likely that the contents were moved by 1536, as confirmed by the Heemskerck drawing, but the actual structure of the oratory was not demolished until 1548. Grimaldi 1972, 63-64, does not give a date for the transfer of the relics and the bronze St. Peter from the oratory to the organ; only the date of the transfer of the relics from the organ to their new chapel in the new basilica in 1605. Grimaldi does note a dedicatory inscription related to the fresco fragment placed under the organ, dated to 1534. 143 For the various (and at times opposing) early histories of the bronze St. Peter, see Romanini 1997, 45- 47; Margherita Guarducci. "Ancora sulla Statua Bronzea di San Pietro nella Basilica Vaticana." Xenia Antiqua 3 (1994): 16, fn. 2; Guarducci 1991, 10-39; D'Onofrio, Cesare. Un Popolo di Statue Racconta: Storie Fatti Leggende della Città di Roma Antica Medievale Moderna. Roma: Romana Società Editrice, 1990, 59-65. Guarducci 1991, 2-23, notes the oldest textual reference to the statue is from the 15 th -century humanist Maffeo Vegio (De rebus antiquis memorabilibus Basilice Sancti Petri Rome) who states that the sculpture had formerly been located in the monastery of San Martino before it was transferred to the oratory in the old basilica. For a recent discussion of Vegio, see Tino Foffano. "Il "De Rebus Antiquis Memorabilibus Basilice Sancti Petri Rome" di Maffeo Vegio e i Primordi dell'archeologia Cristiana." Il Sacro nel Rinascimento: Atti del XII Convegno Internazionale (Chianciano-Pienza, 17-20 Luglio 2000). Ed. Luisa Secchi Tarugi. Florence: Cesati, 2002, 719-29. According to early modern sources, the statue was in the monastery of San Martino, located to the south of the old basilica, before being moved to the oratory of Sts. Processo and Martiniano during the time of Pope Paschal I (817-24). 66 private collections, moved into temporary storage, or transferred to other churches. 144 At the same time, objects were coming into the purview of pilgrims by means of temporary displays. When the bronze St. Peter was placed on the lower tier of the organ of Alexander VI, the sculpture was widely accessible for the first time in the open space of the nave of the old basilica. 145 Its former installation in a small, enclosed oratory in the south end of the transept provided rather limited access. 146 Only men were permitted to enter the oratory. Women were prohibited from entering the space because it was considered of “great veneration” since it contained the bodies of Sts. Processo and Martiniano, the jailers of St. Peter. 147 Once removed from the oratory, the sculpture and 144 See Silvia Danesi Squarzina. "Frammenti dell'antico St. Pietro in una Collezione del Primo Seicento." Arte d'occidente: Temi e Metodi. Studi in Onore di Angiola Maria Romanini, Vol. 3. Ed. Antonio Cadei. Rome: Edizioni Sintesi Informazione, 1999, 1187-98. For the transfer of mosaic fragments to other churches, see Chapter Three. 145 Antinori 1997, 134, notes in passing that the installation of the bronze St. Peter under the organ of Alexander VI probably inspired devotion due to the increased access to the sculpture in the quasi-open chapel in the nave of the remaining part of the old basilica. Confirming the new found veneration of the bronze statue, Grimaldi notes “deinde collocata sub organis ad pedum oscula exposita,” which clearly makes the connection between the devotional kissing of the sculpture and its new, but temporary location under the organ. Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 63. Grimaldi is writing at the very beginning of the 17 th century. 146 In the oratory, the statue was kept behind an iron-grate, indicating the value and importance of the object, but also the limited access. Torrigio, Francesco Maria. I Sacri Trofei Romani del Trionfante Prencipe degli Apostoli San Pietro Gloriosissimo. Rome: Moneta, 1644, 152, stating that “fuit olim in Monasterio St. Martini ad ferratam retro Basilicam.” For a hypothetical reconstruction of the installation of the bronze St. Peter in the oratory of Sts. Processo and Martiniano, see Romanini 1997, 59-60. For the location of the oratory, see the plan by Tiberio Alfarano in Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 506-07, fig. 310, and the legend which notes, “42. Altare di St. Processo e Martiniano con la statua di St. Pietro in bronzo trasportata da suo luogho in […].” See also Rice 1997, 355, fig. 3. Thoenes 2001, 42-43, notes that Alfarano’s manuscript remained unpublished; the print was included in 1620 in Ferrabosco and Costaguto, dedicated to Paul V. On the Alfarano plan, see also Enzo Bentivoglio. "Tiberio Alfarano: le Piante del Vecchio St. Pietro sulla Pianta del Nuovo Edita dal Dupérac." L’architettura della Basilica di San Pietro. Storia e Costruzione. Ed. Gianfranco Spagnesi. Rome: Bonsignori Editore, 1997: 247-54. 147 “Hoc delubrum magnae venerationi fuit semper habitum praesertim a mulieribus ad quod intrare minime licebat.” Tiberio Alfarano. De Basilicae Vaticanae Antiquissima et Nova Structura: Pubblicato per la Prima Volta, Ed. Michele Ceratti. Graz, 1953, 44. I thank Caroline Goodson for this reference. The relics of Sts. Processo and Martiniano were removed from their altar in the nave of the old basilica in October 21, 1605 and taken to the sacristy. They were officially translated on December 28, 1605 to their new altar, 67 the relics, transferred together, was free to take on a new accessible devotional function available to women. The temporary display of the St. Peter statue under the organ led to the object being expressly installed as a site of devotion for pilgrims and the clergy in the new basilica during the dramatic destruction of the old basilica. The mass translation of relics and older monuments was initiated with urgency after pope Paul V’s decision to destroy the remaining part of the nave of Old St. Peter’s in October of 1605. At the same time as these translations, other familiar sacred objects that were not part of tomb monuments or consecrated altars were transferred from the old basilica. The reinstallation of the bronze statue was part of the project to suitably relocate the relics and man-made vestiges of old St. Peter’s in order to allow the appropriate level of access to objects deemed suitable for customary devotion. Although a vast quantity of scholarship exists on the dating of the bronze St. Peter, the goal of my project is not to take to task already well worn arguments on attribution. 148 Instead, I present new evidence for the dating of the installation of the St. one of the seven, privileged altars in the central niche of the north arm of the transept. Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 75. For the new altar and its altarpiece showing the martyrdom of the two saints by Valentin, 1629- 30, see Rice 1997, 232-238. 148 The dating and attribution of the sculpture is divided. In most scholarship, the object is attributed to Arnolfo di Cambio or someone close to him. Margherita Guarducci dates the sculpture to the late antique period, roughly the beginning of the 5 th century A.D. Guarducci 1994, 6. Guarducci 1994, 5, also notes that the attribution of the sculpture to Arnolfo di Cambio is the work of Franz Wickoff based on stylistic comparison with other works by the 13 th century artist. Wickoff’s hypothesis was received by a number of scholars both in Italy and abroad, and in particular by Angiola Maria Romanini, who does not acknowledge Guarducci’s work. See especially Romanini 1997, 45, but also Angiola Maria Romanini. "Nuovi Dati sulla Statue Bronzea di San Pietro in Vaticano." Arte Medievale 2.Ser. 4, No. 1 (1990): 1-50; Angiola Maria Romanini. "Le Statue di San Pietro in Vaticano " La Basilica Di San Pietro. Ed. Carlo Pietrangeli. Florence: Nardini, 1989: 57-61. Romanini’s work, especially the 1997 essay, convincingly positions the object within the context of the project made by Arnolfo di Cambio for Boniface VIII. Romanini 1990 provides a systematic breakdown of the evidence which convincingly argues that the bronze St. Peter statue was made in the time of Arnolfo di Cambio (13 th century). Although, the subject of the material used has 68 Peter sculpture based on an unpublished manuscript. I argue that the moving of the bronze statue during the beginning of the pontificate of Pope Paul V was part of a response to preserve specific sites of popular devotion at the new basilica, demands for which were pressed upon him for being the destroyer of the ancient basilica of St. Peter. Pope Paul V linked the vacuous space of the new basilica to the destroyed past structure by means of a multipartite project aimed at codifying popular devotion. The project included creating visual access to the confessio, the most sacred area of St. Peter’s Basilica, constructing devotional chapels in the new grotte with popular devotion objects as centerpieces, and installing iconic popular objects of St. Peter in prominent locations (near the new central crossing and in the grotte near the confessio). Before entering a discussion of the objects at hand, it is necessary to discuss the physical and cultural changes occurring at St. Peter’s Basilica, in particular, the destruction of Old St. Peter’s, the emergence of Christian archaeology, the changes to the confessio, and the physical proof of Peter’s presence in Rome, in order to have a full appreciation of the two sculptures’ placements as objects of tactile devotion. The dramatic destruction of Old St. Peter’s Basilica in lieu of the construction of the new basilica occurred simultaneouly with the reform of devotional behavior and stress placed on the priveled altars. It is before this backdrop that the bronze St. Peter statue should be understand in order to never been taken up, the story about the statue being made from bronze of an ancient sculpture, maybe not the Capitoline Zeus, could prove true. See also D’Onofrio 1990, 58-68, for a synthesis of the early references to the sculpture. Regarding the early modern artistic allusions to the bronze St. Peter, see the brief but interesting discussion in Sebastian Schütze. "Urbano Inalza Pietro, E Pietro Urbano: Beobachtungen zu Idee und Gestalt der Ausstattung von Neu-St. Peter unter Urban VIII." Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 29 (1994), 265-66, in which he discusses the relevance of the bronze St. Peter for the design of Bernini’s tomb of Urban VIII. 69 appreciate its newly formed status as an essential ancient relic of Christianity for vernacular devotion. St. Peter’s Basilica: Veter.Basil.Sub.Paulo.V.Demolitae 149 Destroying Old St. Peter’s Basilica was not an easy decision to make. 150 The protests were many. The debate about the destruction of Old St. Peter’s and the controversy and turmoil surrounding the building of the new St. Peter’s has received much attention in modern scholarship. 151 One of the most important of the ancient basilicas was slated for demolition. A pressing concern was how to handle appropriately the dismantling of the old basilica, while respecting the sacred contents and site. Rather 149 From an inscription in the Cappella della Bocciata located beneath the fresco showing the inside of the remaining half of old St. Peter’s. The full inscription reads: “Contignatio. Tectis. Partis. Veter. Basil. Sub. Paulo. V. Demolitae.” 150 On St. Peter’s basilica, see especially Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze, eds. Sankt Peter in Rome 1506-2006. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 2008; William Tronzo, ed. St. Peter's in the Vatican. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005; Antonio Pinelli, ed. La Basilica di San Pietro in Vaticano, 4 Vols. Modena: Panini, 2000; Gianfranco Spagnesi, ed. L'architettura della Basilica di St. Pietro: Storia e Costruzione. Rome: Bonsignori, 1997. Lex Bosman. "The Dilemma of Pope Julius II: How to Preserve the Old St. Peter's While Building a New St. Peter's." Aux Quatre Vents: A Festschrift for Bert W. Meijer. Ed. Anton W. A. Boschloo. Florence: Centro Di, 2002, 61, points to the problem of entering into the highly specialized debate about the destruction of old St. Peter’s and the building of new St. Peter’s. The field is dominated by scholars who give importance to the generative power of the architects by means of plan- drawing-designs for the new basilica. Bosman notes the deficiency of attention to the role played by Julius II and his court in the process, and points to the excellent study by Bram Kempers. Bram Kempers. "Diverging Perspectives – New Saint Peter's: Artistic Ambitions, Liturgical Requirements, Financial Limitations and Historical Interpretations." Mededelingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome 55 (1996): 213-51. 151 For the debate about Julius II’s intentions to destroy old St. Peter’s basilica, see Bredekamp 2005; Lex Bosman. The Power of Tradition: Spolia in the Architecture of St. Peter’s in the Vatican. Hilversum: Uitgeverij Verloren, 2004, 60-61; Bosman 2002; Christof Thoenes. "S. Pietro: Storia e Ricerca." Quaderni dell'Istituto di Storia dell'Architettura 25/30 (1995-1997): 17-30; Kempers 1996; and Christoph L. Frommel. "La Chiesa di San Pietro sotto Papa Giulio II alla Luce di Nuovi Documenti." San Pietro che non c'è: da Bramante a Sangallo il Giovane. Ed. Cristiano Tessari. Milan: Electa, 1996. 23-49. I thank Professor Kempers for discussing with me his persuasive argument about Julius II’s intentions to preserve the old basilica as a relic within the new basilica. Some literature places emphasis on Pope Paul V as the villain in the story of the destruction of St. Peter’s. The quote, “Non Petro sed Paulo dicata est domus”, from the Pasquinades, is often evoked to note the way in which Paul V placed his family name on the façade of the new basilica. 70 than attempting to uncover the moment of the decision to destroy old St. Peter’s, I find it beneficial to look at how the needs of devotion were met in the midst of destruction and moments of dramatic change. There was a sense of urgency concerning the handling and repositioning of the sacred remnants of the old basilica. The sculptures, paintings, mosaics, tombs, and religious furnishings are the physical testament of the old basilica. The appropriate relocation of revered objects from Old St. Peter’s demonstrates the importance of meeting the needs of the multitude of pilgrims who were visiting the quickly vanishing remains, as well as the sense of responsibility of the Church to preserve the material presence of the ancient basilica. Complexity exceeds intentionality. Paul V’s decision to dismantle the remaining nave of old St. Peter’s was met by protest, and as such, needed careful justification. Sources from 1620s trace the origin of the idea to the late 15 th century project of Nicolas V, noting that Paul V had little choice in the matter. 152 Justification withstanding, the regrets still circulated. The most striking document protesting the destruction of Old St. Peter’s Basilica is a letter written by the Chapter of St. Peter’s Basilica to Pope Paul V. 153 The letter noted the loss of tombs and monuments not only of popes, but also other important benefactors of the church. A major concern was the destruction of chapels of long-standing devotion, which led to a disruption in tradition and erased the memory of devotion at the site. The Chapter of the 152 Kempers 1996, 238-239, who is referring to Ferrabosco’s careful account of Paul V’s actions. Further, Kempers notes that “In 1696, Buonanni is the first author of a printed book to assign, explicitly and clearly, the initiative for a completely new church to Julius II.” 153 The Chapter of St. Peter’s basilica is the govering group of Canons who are legally responsible for the Basilica and various elections, including the temporary vicar during the Sede Vacante. BAV, Reg. Lat. 2100, fol. 104r-104v. See also Bosman 2004, 127; Kempers 1996, 239. 71 Basilica condemned the full-scale destruction of the building, but given that it was already underway, turned to suggesting ways to ensure the continuity of devotion. The uncertain future of a miraculous image of the Madonna venerated by pregnant women, called the Madonna delle Partorienti, or Pregnantium, formerly located in a chapel in old St. Peter’s, concerned the Chapter of the Basilica. 154 During the dismantling of the old basilica, the sacred image was transported to an “unknown room.” The Chapter of the Basilica suggested the image should be properly installed at an altar to return the object to its former status as a site of devotion. They note the precedent of another miraculous image of the Virgin, the Madonna del Soccorso, which was installed in a monumental tabernacle in the Cappella Gregoriana (fig. 18) of the new basilica in the northeast corner of the north transept. 155 In light of such concerns about the break in continuity of tradition and loss of the sites of devotion, it is no wonder Paul V had the fresco fragment installed in a chapel in a new area of the grotte beneath the new basilica, in October 1616, creating the first chapel there dedicated to the Virgin. The destruction of the old basilica displaced many objects. Through the responses of the clergy 154 BAV, Reg. Lat. 2100, fol. 104r “Terzo, nella detta parte vecchia era una devotissima imagine di N.ra Signora, quale per molti miracoli che Dio operava per detta imagine in beneficio de i parti delle donne, fù intitolata Santa Maria Pregnantium, essendo hora stato demolito detto Altare, quella imagine é stata portata incerta stanza della fabrica, si dovra riporre in un’altare proprio per conservare la medesima devotione; come l’altra imagine che si chiamava Sancta Maria de Succurso fù transferita et locata nella capella Gregoriana da Gregorio XIII.o fe.me.” The author makes several other suggestions, including the creation of a “portico dei Pontifici” (fol. 104v) to house the tombs of all the popes who were being disinterred from the old basilica. See also Grimaldi, ed. Niggl, 66-68. For brief histories of the chapel and the transfer of the image, see Vittorio Lanzani, ed. The Vatican Grottoes. Napoli: Elio de Rosa, 2003, 84-86. The fresco is attributed to Antoniazzo Romano. Unfortunately, the remodeling of the chapel in time for the 1950 Holy Year cleared out signs of the early devotion. 155 For the Cappella Gregoriana, see Rice 1997, 24-25. 72 observing the popular devotion displayed to venerable objects from Old St. Peter’s, the remnants of the history of devotion at the site were saved. Christian Archaeology Although the beginning of the end of old St. Peter’s started a full century before Paul V’s pontificate, the long-lasting affect of the actions taken to disassemble, enshrine, and replace old St. Peter’s with a new fabric brought forth a field of inquiry of central importance to the late 16 th -and 17 th -century understanding and evolution of sacred spaces, devotion, and church history. As the topic of destroying old St. Peter’s moved between the domains of architects, theologians, historians of the church, and patrons, the field of Christian archaeology arrived in the wake of and as a way to address the concerns about destroying the old basilica. 156 The demolition of old St. Peter’s provided the perfect opportunity for the full rehabilitation of a sacred space according to the recently promulgated ideas of the Council of Trent. The central concerns of the council included the cult of relics, devotion to miraculous objects, and reforming superstitious devotion to 156 Thoenes 1995-1997, 23. On Christian archaeology, see Paolo Liverani. "Der Bau der Basilika St. Peter und die Anfänge der Christlichen Archäologie." Barock im Vatikan: Kunst und Kultur im Rom der Päpste: 1572-1676. Ed. Jutta Frings. Leipzig: Seemann Henschel, 2005, 427-35; Ingo Herklotz. "Excavations, Collectors and Scholars in Seventeenth-Century Rome.” Archives & Excavations: Essays on the History of Archaeological Excavations in Rome and Southern Italy from the Renaissance to the Nineteenth Century. Ed. Ilaria Bignamini. Vol. 14. Archaeololgical Monographs of the British School at Rome. London: British School in Rome, 2004. 55-88; Cornelis Schuddeboom. "Research in the Roman Catacombs by the Louvain Antiquarian Philips Van Winghe." Archives & Excavations: Essays on the History of Archaeological Excavations in Rome and Southern Italy from the Renaissance to the Nineteenth Century. Ed. Ilaria Bignamini. London: British School in Rome, 2004. 23-32.; Jörg Martin Merz. "Pietro da Cortona und das Frontispiz zu Antonio Bosios 'Roma Sotterranea'." Marburger Jahrbuch für Kunstwissenschaft 30 (2003): 229-44; Simon Ditchfield. "Text before Trowel: Antonio Bosio's Roma Sotterranea Revisited." The Church Retrospective Ed. R.N. Swanson. Studies in Church History, 58. Woodbridge, UK: Boydell Press, 1997. 343-60; Ingo Herklotz. "Historia Sacra und Mittelalterliche Kunst Während der Zweiten Hälfte des 16. Jahrhunderts in Rom." Baronio e L'arte: Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi. Eds. Romeo De Maio and Agostino Borromeo. Sora, 1985. 21-74. 73 objects. Charles Borromeo expressly states the same concerns in the Council informed treatise on constructing and renovating sacred buildings. 157 Furthermore, the history of the church as known thought the material culture of the early Christians played an essential role by informing the way the material remains of St. Peter’s were treated. As construction at the site progressed, it was necessary to engage in exploratory archaeological investigations, much to the discomfort of the Canons and the pope. One example includes the accidental discovery of a small tomb of a child in the ancient necropolis below the old basilica. The tomb was quickly examined and promptly reburied and sealed. 158 A more lasting impression was made in the 1590s during digging to lower the floor of the ambulatory near the Clementine chapel when a monumental carved Roman sarcophagus was found. The Sarcophagus of Junius Bassus (fig. 19), is famously covered with high relief scenes showing key Old and New Testament stories. 159 Although other sarcophagi were found during the building of the grotte, this exceptional example warranted its installation in the central niche of the Clementine ambulatory (fig. 20), directly facing the Cappella Clementina built at the site of the western face of the tomb monument of St. Peter. 160 The justification for its 157 See Maurizio Caperna. "San Carlo Borromeo, Cardinale di St. Prassede, e il Rinnovamento della sua Chiesa titolare a Roma." Palladio 6.12 (1993): 43-58; Evelyn Carole Voelker. "Charles Borromeo’s Instructiones Fabricae Et Supellectilis Ecclesiasticae, 1577: A Translation with Commentary and Analysis." PhD Thesis, Syracuse University, 1977. See also Chapter One. 158 Lanzani 2003, 14-15. The plan of Benedetto Drei notes the location of the tomb. 159 The date of the discovery of the sarcophagus is not certain. According to Pompeo Ugonio, it was found in October of 1597. According to Antonio Bosio, it was found in April of 1585. See Pinelli, ed. 2000, vol. 4, 913. The inscription on the sarcophagus states that it was made for Lucio Clodio Giunio Basso, a noble Roman who was prefect of Rome in 359. 160 For three early Christian sarcophagus found at St. Peter’s before 1632, see the catalogue entries in Jutta Frings, ed. Barock im Vatikan: Kunst und Kultur im Rom der Päpste: 1572-1676. Leipzig: Seemann 74 prominent placement and its veneration can be found in an unpublished manuscript written in 1626, in which the imagery on the sarcophagus is called “sacred stories”. 161 The narrative representations of stories from sacred texts as well the ancient physiognomic representations of saints Peter and Paul, and more importantly of Christ, made the object an important relic of the early Christian period. Giacomo Grimaldi at St. Peter’s On October 3, 1605, Pope Paul V issued an order for the Canons of the basilica to document all the translations of relics and bodies, and the conditions of monuments in the old basilica before they were dismantled and moved. 162 The archivist of St. Peter’s Basilica, Giacomo Grimaldi created a manuscript to meet this order. 163 Grimaldi’s document contains written and visual descriptions of monuments prior to their transfer to the grotte and elsewhere. At the same time, the manuscript includes notations of the translations of relics. Within these descriptions are histories that attest to the authenticity of the relics. To cite just one example, ample space is given to the translations of the Henschel, 2005, 438-40. The sarcophagus of Junius Bassus was removed from its early modern setting in 1954 when it was moved to one of the new Archaeology Rooms near the southern entrance/exit of the grotte to make room for the tomb of Pope Pius XII. In was moved again in 1974 to the Sacristy of the Basilica. See Pinelli, ed. 2000, vol. 4, 912-13. 161 BAV, Barb. Lat. 4344, Francesco Maria Torrigio. Discorso dei corpi trovati intorno al sepolcro di St. Pietro, scritto l’anno 1626, 2r: “…di Giunio Basso, in cui bellissimo sepolcro di finissimo marmo di sacre historie intagliato di relievo vedesi di rimpetto all’Altare di St. Pietro nelle dette Grotto, e fù al tempo di Liberio p.° nel 359.” 162 Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, XI-XII. 163 The manuscript, BAV, Barb. Lat. 2733, was published in a modern edition, edited by Reto Niggl in 1972. The manuscript, commonly dated to 1619-1620 based on the dates included in the manuscript, was likely begun soon after 1605 and finished by 1620, in time for the official presentation of the manuscript to Paul V on May 29, 1620, the sixteenth anniversary of his coronation. 75 relics of Sts. Processo and Martiniano, the jailers of St. Peter, both of who were converted and baptized by Peter. The relics had already been translated earlier to the nave of the old basilica, as already noted, kept together with the bronze statue of St. Peter under the organ of Alexander VII. 164 Grimaldi notes that the relics were first translated on October 21, 1605, removed from their altar, placed in a porporphy urn, and deposited in the sacristy. 165 On December 28, 1605, the relics were ceremoniously translated to their new altar in the central niche of the north arm of the transept. They were left exposed on the altar until the next night due to the number of people who showed up to attend the translation in order to receive the plenary indulgence. 166 Grimaldi’s description of the event is remarkable for his eyewitness account, noting even the names of the members of the clergy who attended. The entry fully underscores how Grimaldi’s text is an important document of the sacred translations of relics and sacred rituals coinciding with such events. In his account, he does not describe the former location of the relics, the contents of the space, that included the bronze statue of St. Peter, or a fresco fragment of the Virgin by Giotto. 167 Instead, the emphasis is on 164 The relics and the bronze St. Peter were kept in the oratory named after SS. Processo and Martiniano until the time of Paul III. Based on the argument presented in Antinori 1997, they were likely translated with the bronze St. Peter sculpture before the construction of the muro divisorum in 1538. 165 Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 75. “…sub die XXI octobris anni supradicti per acta mei ete. elevata fuerant de concha porphyretica ac in sacrario ad hanc usque diem, xxvii decembris, inter sacras reliquias dictae basilicae diligenter custodita…” 166 Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 75. “…sacra corpora ad aram apsidis vergentis ad septentrionem processionali pompa transtulit, ibique populi devotioni ut plenariam indulgentiam consequeretur usque ad <horam noctis secundam> steterunt exposita.” 167 The bronze St. Peter and the Giotto fresco fragment are mentioned in a separate section that is a strict physical description of the contents of the chapel under the organ. Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 63. Cap. 31: “Descriptio sacelli sub organis, in quo corpora eorundem sanctorum iacebant e priori loco translata ob deturbatam basilicam sub Iulio 2°.” “De altare iam dictum est supra. Imago Deiparae Virginis, quae hodie sub fornice novi pavimenti asservatur in ambitu sacrae Confessionis, est manu Iotti egregii Pictoris. Statua 76 the relics. An annotated copy of a plan of new St. Peter’s Basilica included with Grimaldi’s manuscript also points to the function of the text. 168 The annotations on the plan are suggestions to Paul V of where to translate the corporeal relics from the old to the new basilica. 169 Without question, Grimaldi’s manuscript is the single most important document employed by modern architectural and art historians for the appearance of Old St. Peter’s Basilica before the monuments were transferred as well as for the format of dismantled monuments. Yet, the motivation behind the creation of Grimaldi’s manuscript is an important aspect to keep in mind when turning to it as a source. 170 In the early modern period, the manuscript served as an archaeological document containing the history, provenance, and translations of relics and monuments related to sacred bodies. It is a type of document of an unprecedented nature for an equally unparalleled endeavor. 171 aenea sancti Petri olim erat in ecclesia Sancti Martini retro basilicam, in qua canonici degebant choro Sancti Petri servientes, atque ex dicta ecclesia delata fuit in antiquum sacellum sanctorum Processi et Martiniani, cuius <meminit> Maffeus Veggius, deinde collocata sub organis ad pedum oscula exposita, habet marmoream basim cum stemmate Riccardi memorati cardinalis Constantiensis, ut hodie cernitur iuxta Gregorianam. Paries cui imago ipsa aenea adhaerebat illustribut picturis Perini Vagiae clari obscuris <naviculae sancti Petri> et cardinalium virtutum ornatus erat.” 168 The plan is a copy by Matthaeus Greuter, based on Carlo Maderno’s design dated 1613. Copy with annotations in the BAV, Barb. Lat. 2733, ff. 490v-491. Thoenes 2001, 41-42 and fig. 24; Rice 1997, fig. 6; Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 502-03, fig. 308. 169 Christof Thoenes. La Fabbrica di San Pietro nelle Incisioni dal Cinquecento all'Ottocento. Milan: Il Polifilo, 2000, 41-42. Thoenes states that the annotations are suggestions, not documentation of the translation of the relics. 170 See Ann van Dijk. "The Afterlife of an Early Medieval Chapel: Giovanni Battista Ricci and Perceptions of the Christian Past in Post-Tridentine Rome." Renaissance Studies 19.5 (2005): 686-98, for a critical discussion of the Grimaldi’s description and the drawings of the oratory of Pope John VII in relation to frescoes of the same oratory made by Giovanni Battista Ricci (after 1615) in the Cappella della Bocciata, Grotte Vaticane. 171 Although, it is not unprecedented in its attention to relics since Borromeo’s treatise on sacred architecture dedicates considerable space to the installation and display of relics. I am emphasising Grimaldi herein because of the unprecedented site-specific nature of his text. For Borromeo’s treatment of 77 When we return to Grimali for information about certain man-made objects, such as Michelangelo’s Pietá and the bronze St. Peter, we should not be surprised to find only passing references. 172 Paul V and the confessio of St. Peter: in ambitu sacrae confessionis Central to the authority of the church and the basilica is the body of the first pope, St. Peter. The site of the burial of that body is essential for the power of the building. It was the site of numerous miracles that attested to its power. 173 The numinous quality at the site inspired pilgrims to take soil from the piazza of St. Peter’s Basilica as a relic before the smooth, black “sanpietrini” filled the space. The reason is confirmed in an early modern account that notes that “all the earth of the Vatican is sprinkled (“aspersa”, from “aspersorio”, a holy-water sprinkler) with the blood of many martyrs,” and the feet and lips of thousands of devout pilgrims touched the soil. 174 Since the piazza of St. relics, see Voelker 1977, 184-85, 207-220. Borromeo was instramental for setting out the form of the altars and when translations would take place, for example, on the feast day of the saint and not without the permission of the Holy See. Also, Borromeo describes a type of altar, no doubt derived from the confessio of old St. Peter’s basilica, which includes an iron grate that allowed pilgrims to push their hands through to touch the container of the relics of the saint. 172 Grimaldi only notes briefly the installation history of the bronze St. Peter, and as noted above already, he states that people started kissing the foot of the sculpture once it was placed under the organ in the old nave. Grimaldi 1972, 63. 173 Franceso Maria Torrigio. Le Sacre Grotte Vaticane: nelle Quali si Tratta di Corpi Santi, Sepolchri de' Pont., Imperatori, Ré, Cardinali, Vescoui, Chiese, Statue, Imagini, Inscrittioni, Epitaffij e d'altre Cose Memorabili si Dentro Roma, Come Fuori. Seconda Impressione con Aggiunta di Correttione e d'indice Copiosissimo. Rome: Vitale Mascardi, 1639, 2nd ed., 105, notes various miracles that happened near the confessio. From 1618-19, Giovan Battista Ricci da Novara painted frescoes of the miracles in the southern and northern corridors of the confessio. Lanzani 2003, 62-64, 81-84. 174 Pius V gave the Ambassador of Poland soil from the piazza of St. Peter’s wrapped in a napkin. Pius V notes that the earth from St. Peter’s is a relic because the ground of the site is so soaked with the blood of martyrs. A fulfilling miracle then occurred. The napkin containing the soil became soaked with blood. See Barb Lat. 4603, fol. 68r-73v, Miracoli piú provati nelli processi fatti sopra la santità della vita della santa 78 Peter’s was held in such esteem, it is no surprise to find the clergy coveting the soil near the tomb of St. Peter. The clergy of the basilica transported the soil from near the tomb of St. Peter, as if a relic, to an alternate space in the grotte in order to preserve it. 175 The sacrosanct nature of the site is not without political significance. The primacy of the tomb of St. Peter is not to be underestimated since the function of the body of St. Peter provided proof of the legitimacy of the succession of popes who followed Peter as well as the authority of the Catholic Church. The urgency of retaining the site of the tomb was so crucial that when Julius II was presented by the architect Bramante with the idea of moving the tomb of St. Peter, Julius declined. 176 The confessio at St. Peter’s The confessio, or the confessional area, in a basilica is the most sacred and important area. It is the space that provides the visitor with the most intimate access to mem.a di Pio V in Roma, et in altri luoghi (1627). See especially fol. 68r-68v, “Miracolo 4°. Havendo Pio V promesso di dare delle reliquie all’Ambasciatori di Polonia, il quale era di partenza da Roma, andò de Amb.re a Palazzo per haverle, et incontrò il Papa che usciva, nella piazza di San Pietro, il quale havendolo fatto chiamare, e divendogli che cosa voleva, rispose l’Ambas.re, che desiderava havere le reliquie che sua St.ta gli haveva promesse; all hora il Papa disse: Daterci il fazzoletto, e pigliatolo smontò di lettiche, e piglio due manciate della polvere di detta piazza, e postala nel fazzoletto, lo legò, e diede al detto Amb.re dicendo queste sono reliquie (perche Pio V diceva che tutta quella terra del Vatican é [fol. 68v] aspersa di sangue di tanti martiri, che cosà sono stati martirisati, e perciò subito fatto Papa, levò il corso delli Palij che si faceva al Carnovale sino a St. Pietro, e lo pose nel corso di San Marco, dicendo che non conviene, ch’ il luogo dove i martiri hanno spasso il sangue serva per il Baccanali del Carnovale e perciò diede questa polvere al detto Amb.re il quale essendo andato a casa guardò nel fazzoletto, e lo trovò tutto in sanguinato.” See also Ditchfield 1997, 343, who also notes the same story, but by means of its recapitulation in another source. 175 Torrigio 1639, 344. On Benedetto Drei’s plan of the grotte, he includes the two arcasolia to which the dirt was transported on the south side of the grotte (the first two), which is the current location of the tomb of Pius XI. 176 Thoenes 1995-1997, 18. Thoenes points to the central problem when he notes that “Per il papa [Julius II] era il momento della verità: non poteva e non voleva scambiare il terreno consacrato dalla memoria con la tabula rasa dell’architetto.” 79 the most important relics of the church’s name saint. The space is usually below the main floor of the nave, accessible by means of a staircase. The subterranean experience of visiting the relics of saints is evocative of the tradition of visiting the catacombs. 177 In the case of St. Peter’s Basilica, the confessio (figs. 21-22) provides limited access to the tomb of St. Peter. The side facing east, visible from the nave of the new basilica as well as the grotte level, opens to the niche of the pallia. 178 The other face, which now has a 20 th century bronze grate or fenestella, allows visual as well as tactile passage to the marble altar installed by Clement VIII. The altar surrounded the earlier monuments which further encased an earlier monument and the tomb of St. Peter. 179 During the first year of the pontificate of Clement VIII (Ippolito Aldobrandini, January 30, 1592 to March 3, 1605), the new dome of St. Peter’s Basilica was finished, Bramante’s Tegurium and the central apse of the old basilica were destroyed, and the area around the new high altar, installed exactly above the tomb of St. Peter, was remodeled. By 1594, the exterior of the high altar was redecorated with marble to conceal the joins between the new and old altar. The modification led to severe limitations on access to the confessio below the new pavement on the east side of the altar, which had just been 177 See the recent literature on Bosio, forthcoming after the numerous conferences held in 2007. 178 Lanzani 2003, 100. The present glass window that provides visual access to the niche of the pallia is the result of Vatican Council II. The new opening, flanked by lions from the tomb of Urban VI, which in turn were part of the setting of the marble St. Peter sculpture in the Cappella della Bocciata, and angels from the tomb of Boniface VIII, was inaugurated on November 2, 1979, under Pope John Paul II. Although the new access provides visual access to the confessio, it prevents physical entry. 179 The layers of the tomb are discussed best in the studies by Ward-Perkins, J. B. "The Shrine of St. Peter and its Twelve Spiral Columns." The Journal of Roman Studies 42 (1952): 21-33. Ward-Perkins, J. B., and Jocelyn M. C. Toynbee. The Shrine of St. Peter and the Vatican Excavations. London and New York: Longmans, 1956, which immediately followed the mid-20 th century excavations. See also the recent exhibition catalogue, Maria Cristina Carlo-Stella, Paolo Liverani, and Maria Luisa, eds. Petros Eni/Pietro È Qui: Catalogo Della Mostra. Monterotondo: Edindustria, 2006. 80 consecrated on June 26, 1594. 180 Access to the confessio was limited to a staircase leading into the subterranean chapel built by Clement VIII on the west side of the altar. 181 In the wake of the Holy Year of 1600, the lack of a passageway caused considerable practical problems that necessitated the installation of an iron grate to allow ventilation in the confessio, in particular, in the votive lamp filled area in front of the niche of the pallia. Although Clement VIII made considerable changes to the area around the tomb of St. Peter, it was not until the time of Paul V that access to the confessio would be increased dramatically. 182 Under Paul V, the pavement in front of the east side of the high altar was opened up to provide visual and physical access to the confessio from the nave of the new basilica. The walls of the confessio were decorated with frescoes, and one wall, Pope Paul V Praying before the Confessio (fig. 23), depicts Paul V praying accompanied by cardinals, including the future Pope Urban VIII, Cardinal Maffeo Barberini. Yet, the new entry came with limitations. Women could only visit the Grotte Vaticane (and in turn the confessio), one day each year, on the Monday after Pentecost. On that single day, men were not allowed to enter the grotte. To prevent any confusion about access, an inscription explaining the rules of access was posted near the staircase in the northeast 180 For the consecration of the high altar, see Grimaldi 1972, 204-06; William Chandler Kirwin. "Bernini's Baldacchino Reconsidered." Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 19 (1981): 144-48. 181 When Clement XIII made the ambulatory on the west side of the tomb of St. Peter, it was a throw back to an earlier model of church building in which there is emphasis on the access to the shrine/tomb of the saint. The new St. Peter’s in this respect has a strong ancient tradition, in particular, a physical structure that supports pilgrimage devotion. 182 The idea to allow increased access to the confessio came about during the time of Clement VIII when a staircase was proposed to grant access from the nave to the Cappella Clementina from the westside of the high altar. Alfredo Maria Pergolizzi, ed. La Confessione nella Basilica di San Pietro in Vaticano. Cinisello Balsamo: Silvana Editoriale, 1999. 81 pier of the crossing. The inscription notes that rule breakers of the gender prohibition would be excommunicated. 183 Imagining the Tomb of St. Peter Modern visitors to St. Peter’s Basilica have the extraordinary opportunity to visit the ancient necropolis under the basilica that includes a visit to the tomb of the first Apostle, excavated in the middle of the 20 th century. In the early modern period, the tomb of St. Peter was inviolable. For this reason, the wish to know and to be near the tomb was great. Representations and descriptions of the tomb of St. Peter were produced to satisfy the desires of pilgrims and the faithful. Descriptions of the confessio are found in various guidebooks. In particular, Francesco Maria Torrigio’s guide to the Grotte Vaticane and his Sacri Trofei provide summaries of the decorations at the confessio, as well as the history of the translation of the body of the saint to the site. 184 The limited descriptions provided by Torrigio leave the reader wanting to know what is behind the iron gates, how the images of saints appear, and where are located numerous bodies of popes buried in the area. Satisfying 183 Francesco Maria Torrigio. Le Sacre Grotte Vaticane: cioé Narratione delle Cose piu Notabili, che Sono Sotto il Pavimento della Basilica di St. Pietro in Vaticano in Roma. Viterbo: I Discepoli, 1618, 12; and Torrigio 1639, 17, in the section “Donne quando possono entrare nelle Grotte Vaticane,” records the following no longer exatant inscription which was located at the staircase at the northeast pier (the current pier of St. Longinus) when the Colonna Santa was still installed in the niche. Torrigio notes that the staircase and inscription were installed in 1617. Huc mulieribus ingredi non licet nisi unico die lunae post pentecostem quo vicissim viri ingredi prohibentur qui secus faxint anathema sunto. 184 Torrigio 1639, 50-52, 56-57; Francesco Maria Torrigio. I Sacri Trofei Romani del Trionfante Prencipe degli Apostoli San Pietro Gloriosissimo. Rome: Moneta, 1644, 11-16. 82 the longing of the reader is a manuscript written by Michel Lonigo describing the confessio with more details regarding the appearance of the tomb itself, as well as the translations of the body of the saint. 185 When describing the appearance of the ancient confessio, he notes that it was quite different from the current one built by Paul V, that one could enter the room of the tomb, and that inside first a silver case and then a bronze case “rests the body of the prince of the Apostles.” 186 It is a rather meager description for the modern reader, but for the early modern pilgrim, the details provided an image of this inaccessible site. Prints more fully met the needs of those wanting to see the site of the tomb of the first Apostle. A rare visual description, or artistic imagining, of the tomb of St. Peter is found in an engraving by Pieter de Bailliu, Pilgrims Adoring the Shrine of St. Peter (fig. 24). The print is one of three by the artist that shows the tomb of St. Peter and a translation of his body. 187 One shows the mid 3 rd -century translation of St. Peter that 185 BAV, Barb. Lat. 4516. Breve Relazione del Sito, Qualità et Forma Antica della Confessione di St. Pietro, dove si raccontano ancora molti ornamenti fatti in quella in varij tempi da diversi Sommi Pontefici. Di Michel Lonigo da Este. 17 th -century, dedicated to Urban VIII. Barb Lat. 2969 includes a letter version of the same text with minor changes. Noted in Herklotz 1985; and Schütze 1994. Torrigio writes a manuscript on who was found buried near the tomb of St. Peter. BAV, Barb. Lat. 4344. Francesco Maria Torrigio. Discorso dei corpi trovati intorno al sepolcro di St. Pietro, scritto l’anno 1626. 186 BAV, Barb. Lat. 4516, fol. 4v. “V’era nel mezzo un’Altare, et nella [4v] fronte di quella una picciola fenestrella, che si nomivana la confessione dell’Altare, le quale rispondeva dentro l’Altare istesso sopra un certo forme fatto nel pavimento, che risguardava in un’altra camera piu profonda, entro la quale in una cassa d’argento rinchiusa in una maggior cassa di bronzo, che da niuna parte si puo apririe, riposa il corpo del Prencipe de gli Apostoli…Era dunque cosi fatto anticam.te questa Confessione famosiss.a di St. Pietro, differentissima in tutto da quello che era prima che da Paolo V di St.ta mem.a ella fosse cosi notabilm.te abbellita ed ornata.” BAV, Barb. Lat. 4516, fol. 5r. “Che la Confessione era un luogo anticamente dove entrar si poteva,” a section which rings of regrets for the loss of the ancient confessio area. 187 BAV, Stampati, Cicognara XII.541, plates 108 (undated), 109 (1637), 110 (1635). The prints are loose prints attached to the pages of a bound volume of unrelated prints ranging in subject from Classical sculpture, views of Rome, and sacred history. The artist, Pieter de Bailliu, was an engraver from Antwerp. There are various spellings of his name on the prints, including “Bailliu,” “Balliu,” and “Ballui”. 83 brought the saint’s body from the catacomb to the Vatican. The print renders the perfectly preserved body of the dead saint being carried by a pope and an additional figure. Three other figures accompany the scene, two holding torches, and one holding the cape of the pope. The setting is inside a round, tumulus-like structure, the imagined underground space of the catacomb. 188 Another print shows Constantine overseeing the building of the old basilica at the site of the tomb. 189 A man swings a pick-ax, another man carries away dirt with baskets, and a man holds a plan of the old basilica (visible are the two rows of columns) and architects calipers. At the center of attention is the shrine of St. Peter, a small niche-shaped structure holding a seated sculpture of St. Peter above an altar which contains a fenestella and votive lamp. Constantine kneels before the sculpture and shrine as a sign of devotion. The third print, Pilgrims Adoring the Shrine of St. Peter (fig. 24), shows a group of pilgrims in venerative poses before the same shrine of St. Peter as shown in the print Regrettably, I am unable to illustrate all three images. The one I am able to illustrate was obtained on-line when the print was listed post-auction, summer 2007. 188 BAV, Stampati, Cicognara XII.541, plates 108 (n.d.), 317x232mm. The legend reads “Corpus B.i Petri aromatibus conditum, et in hac Vaticani parte propè locum ubi crucifixus est, magnificentissime regio more sepelitur. Hinc a Fidelibus Orientis ablatum, et ad Catacumbas velatum a Romanis inventum, in hunc locam reponitur. Denuo ad Catacumbas translatum, a Cornelio noctu sua sedi restituitur. Ex actis Lini ep.a Greg.” In the shadow of the tomb, the artist signed the print: “D de Balliu Sculp.” BAV, Barb Lat. 4516, fol. 2v-3r, Lonigo notes the story of the translation represented in the print. “Non instettero pero molto tempo quei preziosissimi tesori in tal luogo nascosti, perche circa gli’anni di Christo CCLIV sendo forse cessata in parte la persecuzione, ò non potendo più li fedeli, scoperti da nemici, nelle catacombe sicuram.te congregarsi, furono da St. Cornelio Papa à i luoghi di prima riportati, et il corpo di St. Pietro in ispecie fù riposto in Vaticano sia quei santi Pontifici nominati di sopra, i corpi de quali non erano stati in conto alcuno mossi ne tocchi, all’hora, che alle catacombe fu il corpo del Prencipe de gli Apostoli trasportato.” 189 BAV, Stampati, Cicognara XII.541, plates 109 (1637), 317x 245mm. “Constantinus Augustus octava die sui Baptismi venierns ad Confessionem B.i Petri Apostoli ablatoq.e diademate capitis, humi iacens, vim lacrymarum profundit, ac exuens se chlamyde, et accipiens bidentem, terram primus aperunt ad fundamenta Basilicae construendae. Deinde ob numerum duodecim Ap.or duodecim cophinos terra plenos suppositis humeris baiulanus asportavit. Ex actis Silvetri et Breviar.o Rom.o Imag. ex florum materia fabrefactam à P. Paulo Dreo ante B.i P.i Confessionem P. de Balliu sculp. Roma sup. per. 1637.” 84 dedicated to the time of Constantine. 190 Again we see the niche-shaped, half-dome covered shrine, which includes an altar faced with a fenestella and a statue of a seated St. Peter sitting atop the altar. But this time the shrine and the statue are aged to demonstrate the passage of time. The edges of the shrine are crumbling and plants have grown up around the structure. The print presents an early modern group of pilgrims visiting the shrine of St. Peter. A woman is set in the back of the group, with a veiled head, a dark robe, and eyes lowered with hands in prayer. The men look up in admiration, fixated on the sculpture. Two men at the left even appear to be surprised as if filled with awe in seeing the shrine of the saint. But when one reads the inscription on the print, it is clear we are seeing history, in particular, the shrine of St. Peter constructed by Pope Anacletus in antiquity. The image provides an unusual collapsing of time and space. The ancient shrine marking the tomb of St. Peter is made present to the 17 th -century viewers of the print who would have identified with the contemporary images of pilgrims. The artist renders for the early modern viewer the past that is no longer accessible. And a statue of St. Peter, reminiscent of both the bronze and the marble St. Peter sculptures, sits on top of the shrine, putting the image of the saint before the pilgrims. In guidebooks from the early 17 th century, the image of a seated St. Peter appears at the beginning of a list of the popes and on title pages. The seated bronze St. Peter 190 BAV, Stampati, Cicognara XII.541, plates 110 (1635), 325x272 mm. “S. Anacletus ad hoc Presbyter memoriam Beati Petri construxit. Ex libro de Romanis Pont.bus.” “Christiani ex omnibus Orbis terrae partibus ad St.ti Petri confessionem, tanquam ad fidei petram et Ecclesia Fundamentum convenienter, locum principis Apostolorum sepulchro consecratum summa Religioni ae pietati Venerabantur. Ex Breviario Romano Imaginem ex Florum material fabre factam a Petro Paulo Dreio ante B.i Petri. confessionem Petrus de Ballui sculpsit Romae 1635 Sup. per.” 85 appears at the beginning of the List of Popes (fig. 25) in the 1636 edition of the Le Cose maravigliose pilgrimage guide. The image clearly represents the statue, shown on a base, holding the keys, set against an honorific backdrop. The artist took a few liberties in rendering the statue, but the connection between image and object is unmistakable. While in another image, the seated St. Peter statue is brought to life. On the title page of the 1620 edition of the popular Le Cose maravigliose pilgrimage guidebooks appears Seated St. Peter and St. Paul Conversing (fig. 26). 191 St. Paul sits subdued with his sword resting on his lap. St. Peter is animated, seated in a throne, raising the keys that he received from Christ in the air, looking towards St. Paul as if claiming rightful authority over him. Put before the readers of the popular guidebooks is the idea of saint Peter as a living, active presence. By means of prints, we are introduced to the idea of the bronze St. Peter as a physical manifestation of the saint, near his tomb and also as the person who passes authority to each pope. Installing the Bronze St. Peter The bronze St. Peter was installed in its current setting in the early 17 th century, at the beginning of the pontificate of Pope Paul V. At the time, new St. Peter’s Basilica was being constructed while the remnants of old St. Peter’s were being carted away. In a print from the early 17 th century, we see the bronze St. Peter and the Colonna Santa positioned near the rather empty crossing of the basilica, represented in Longitudinal 191 Franceso Maria Torrigio, Le Cose…1619, title page; Le Cose… 1620, title page; Le Cose… 1636, title page. Torrigio 1639, title page. Torrigio’s 1619 edition of Le Cose…is the earliest edition I have found with the title page image of the seated St. Peter and St. Paul. 86 Section of St. Peter’s Basilica (fig. 27). The print by Matthaeus Greuter shows a brief moment of the physical fabric of the new basilica, the crossing of which had just been joined with the newly built nave in 1615. 192 It is this precise moment that most interests me, the moment of the codification of the tactile veneration of the bronze St. Peter. In 1606, while the bronze statue of St. Peter still sat beneath the organ of Alexander VI in the nave of the old basilica, seen in Domenico Tasselli’s drawing Organ of Alexander VI with bronze St. Peter (fig. 28), the high altar recevied the new baldacchino commissioned by Paul V. 193 In 1607, the bronze St. Peter was moved, with little notice, near the northeast pier of the crossing (fig. 29). 194 Beginning at that time, the 192 Greuter was active in Rome from 1605 until his death in 1638, working for Pope Paul V and Pope Urban VIII. See Frings 2005, 240, for a plan of Rome from the BAV (1300 x 2147 mm, Inv. Nr. St. Georg. I.199). The plan includes Greuter’s print of the crossing of new St. Peter’s as one of many views of monuments from the reign of Pope Paul V. The catalogue entry dates the entire map to 1618, while the map includes a title which dates it to 1634, suggesting Greuter reused earlier images while he continued to work under the patronage of Urban VIII, for whom he made other prints for the Lincei Academy including the famous print of the three views of the Barberini bees, made for Francesco Stelluti’s Melissographia, 1625, published in honor of Urban VIII. See Frings 2005, 470-71; David Freedberg. The Eye of the Lynx: Galileo, His Friends, and the Beginnings of Modern Natural History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002, 272-75. In addition to the number of festival and architectural prints he produced, he was one of the artists who worked on the engravings for the famous Galleria Giustiniana publication, as well as Giovanni Maggi’s Praecipua urbis Romanae templa. On the Galleria Giustiniana, see Elizabeth Cropper, and Charles Dempsey. ""Vincenzo Giustiniani’s Galleria: A Taste for Style and an Inclination to Pleasure"." Nicolas Poussin: Friendship and the Love of Painting. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1996: 64-105; and the essays in Giulia Fusconi, ed. I Giustiniani e l'Antico. Rome: Erma di Bretschneider, 2001. See Sabina De Cavi, "Le Incisioni di Mattäus Greuter per le Epistole Heroiche di Antonio Bruni (1627/28): Ipotesi di una Collaborazione Editoriale al Principio del Seicento." Annali dell'Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Storici 15 (1998): 94-285, for images of prints produced by Greuter to illustrate the Epistole Heroiche by Antonio Bruni. 193 The baldacchino of Paul V was replaced by the bronze baldacchino commissed by Urban VIII of Bernini. See William Chandler Kirwin. Powers Matchless: The Pontificate of Urban VIII, the Baldachin and Gian Lorenzo Bernini. New York: Peter Lang, 1997. 194 BAV, Barb. Lat. 4342 (fol. 24r-26v), “Discorso del Torriggio circa la statua di Bronzo di St. Pietro,” (c. 1622?), fol. 24v. “Nel Pontificato di Paolo V° nella demolitione della Basilica vecchia, fù trasportata nella nave nel 1607 appresso la Cappella Gregoriana, dove stà sino al presente…” Torrigio notes that the sculpture was placed in its current location in 1607, which was just two years after the election of the new pope, who it is well known, began work on the destruction of old St. Peter’s and the building the of new nave within just months of his election. The manuscript cited above is an unpublished manuscript written by Francesco Maria Torrigio. On Torrigio, see “Introduction”. 87 bulk of objects from the old basilica were moved into the new grotte beneath the crossing. The bronze St. Peter is one of the few sculptural objects to remain in the new basilica. 195 The bronze remained in the basilica because it was the material manifestation of a devotional project that intended to meet the needs of the multitude of pilgrims who were visiting the quickly vanishing building. The value of the object’s age resolved the problem of the shockingly new monumental space. 196 Torrigio 1939, 126, includes a brief section on the bronze St. Peter. Torrigio 1644, 149-61, includes a lengthy essay on the bronze St. Peter. The Sacri Trophei is dedicated to Urban VIII during the last year of his pontificate. The essay about the statue appears at the end of the book, and is similar to the manuscript discorso from the Vatican Library. It is much expanded from the earlier essay, but also includes a number of significant changes. To pay homage to the new pope, Torrigio makes minimal reference to Paul V, even changes the dates of some key events related to the bronze, and puts the emphasis of Urban VIII’s role in honoring the bronze St. Peter rather than Paul V. The manuscript clears up a problem about the dating of the installation of the bronze St. Peter in the new basilica. The discorso does not mention Urban VIII. Based on the reference to the canonized people noted below, it dates probably to 1622. Francesco Caglioti in Pinelli, ed. 2000, 767, suggests that the bronze St. Peter was installed in its current location during the pontificate of Urban VIII (“negli anni venti avanzati”), based on the documents presented in Rice 1997, 100, fn. 77, and a reference in Baglione 1639, 27. Unfortunately, Caglioti uses the document in Rice out of context. In the document, the “altarista,” Angelo Giorio, asks pope Urban VIII what to do with the bronze St. Peter. He does not indicate the location of the object, but no doubt the concern had to do with the future installation of the monumental sculptures at the crossing. Guarducci 1991, 59-60, assigns the dating of the installation to the end of the reign of Pope Paul V, around 1620-21 based on Grimaldi, who includes a drawing of the bronze St. Peter under the organ in his manuscript, presented to Pope Paul V on May 29, 1620 (Guraducci 1991, 59) and that the moving of the bronze sculpture was part of Pope Paul V’s last thoughts before he died (“Il trasferimento fu fatto, o per lo meno deciso, prima che Paolo V morisse (28 gennaio 1621). Fu questo, dunque, uno dei suoi ultimi persieri.” Guarducci 1991, 60. The dates from Torrigio’s manuscript suggest that the moving of the bronze was in fact part of the early phase of transferring objects from the nave of the old basilica. And regarding the dating of the drawings in Grimaldi, Guarducci’s claim presumes that the drawings included in the manuscript were done within a brief time. In October of 1605, Paul V had ordered the removal of monuments from the old basilica to the grotte and peribolo. Within a year of this declaration, objects were moved into the grotte and drawings made. The tomb of Nicholas V was the first tomb of a pope moved on September 11, 1606. Based on this evidence, the drawings were no doubt begun well before the 1620 presentation of the volume, no doubt as soon as the transfers begun in 1606. 195 The others include, but are not limited to Michelangelo’s Pieta, the Colonna Santa, the bronze tombs of Sixtus IV, and the bronze tomb of Innocent VIII. 196 On the signifance of the age-value of a monument for its esteem and preservation, see Alois Riegl’s influential essay. Alois Riegl. "The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin,” [1903], Trans. Kurt Forster and Diane Ghirardo." Oppositions 25 (1982): 21-51. 88 After the bronze St. Peter was installed at the crossing, circulating proposals imagined the sculpture in different locations. One such project emerged from the workshop of Carlo Maderno, the architect in charge of building the new nave, recorded in the drawing Project for Staircase of the Confessio (fig. 30). 197 Maderno was assigned to create a double staircase to connect the nave with the confessional area. In the drawing, the artist proposed to place the bronze St. Peter and a statue of St. Paul on the balustrade at the entrance to the staircase leading down into the subterranean confessio. The project maintained the accessibility of the statue for the women not allowed to enter the confessio. The inclusion of the bronze St. Peter, as well as one representing St. Paul, no doubt seemed a logical choice given the location of the bones of the two apostles under the high altar. 198 The idea to place the bronze St. Peter at the entrance to the confessio reinforces the idea of the relationship between the object and the real body of the saint. The bronze St. Peter again appears in two other projects. One from Maderno’s workshop is a drawing attributed to Francesco Borromini, Design for Inner Façade of St. Peter’s Basilica (fig. 31), the bronze St. Peter is placed on the inner façade of the basilica. 199 Another design, Project for the Coro of St. Peter’s Basilica in the Form of the Navicella (figs. 32-33), proposed by Papiro Bartoli and engraved by Mattheaus Greuter, shows a boat-shaped monument intended for the crossing of new St. Peter’s. A 197 For the drawing, see Schütze 1994, 221-22, and fn. 27, with further bibliography. Schütze notes that the drawing showing St. Peter and St. Paul placed at the front of the confessio is from the time of Pope Paul V. He also states that the addition of the Paul statue is appropriately fitting given the pope’s name. 198 On the translations of the bones of St. Peter and St. Paul, as well as the celebration of their feast day, see Margherita Guarducci. "Il 29 Giugno: Festa degli Apostoli Pietro e Paolo." Rendiconti LVIII (1987): 115-27. 199 Heinrich Thelen. Francesco Borromini: Die Handzeichnungen. Graz: Akademische Druck-u. Verlagsanstalt, 1967, 51-53. 89 untraced statue of St. Paul sits at the east end, and the bronze St. Peter statue sits at the west end, behind the throne of the pope. 200 The highly inventive drawing refers to the navicella, the ship of the church, with the fisherman St. Peter behind the pope commanding the vessel filled with the congregation as spiritual passengers. 201 Instead of becoming part of Maderno’s project for the confessio, placed on the inner façade of the basilica, or the captain of the ship of the church, the bronze St. Peter remained at the northeast pier. The sculpture is visible in the print by Mattheaus Greuter, the earliest image I have found of the crossing of new St. Peter’s after the destruction of the dividing wall in 1615 (fig. 27). 202 Greuter’s print reminds us of how empty the new basilica appeared. The main monuments at the new crossing were Paul V’s baldacchino (to be replaced later by Bernini’s monumental bronze baldacchino), the bronze St. Peter, and the colonna santa. Not shown, though, is the tomb of Paul III, then located in the southeast niche of the crossing. At the same time as the destruction of the dividing wall, the bronze St. Peter received a baldacchino, no doubt in celebration of the momentous occasion of the joining 200 Schütze 1994, 273-74, fn. 182. 201 The iconography for Bartoli was certainly inspired by the mosaic fragment of the navicella story by Giotto from old St. Peter’s basilica. Pinelli, ed. 2000, vol. 4, 874-75. 202 Torrigio’s text notes the installation of the “sopracielo” or the baldacchino that designated the sculpture a sacred object, in 1615. The baldacchino is visible in the 1704 print by J. Blaau while it is not visible in the print by Greuter. J. Blaau (1704). “Longitudinal section of St. Peter’s basilica.” Nouveau théâtre d'Italie ou Description exacte de la ville de Rome, ancienne, et nouvelle. Amsterdam, Mortier, IV, tav. 67. If we can trust these two early images of the sculpture in situ, the bronze St. Peter is seen still set upon the base from the time of Sixtus IV, as noted by Torrigio in the BAV manuscript. “Al tempo poi di Sisto 4° fù posta sopra una Base di Marmo, et ornata dal Cardinal Riccardo Oliviero di Angiò. Arcivescovo di Costanza, et Arciprete di St. Pietro circa l’Anno 1470; la cui Arme ivi si vede scolpita…” Barb. Lat. 4342, fol. 24r. The sculpture was placed upon a marble throne and base made by Domenico Giovannini and assistants in 1756- 57. Pinelli, ed. 2000, vol. 4, 761-62. 90 together of the nave and the crossing. 203 But another important opening was celebrated in 1615, in particular, the newly opened confessio was officially dedicated and inaugurated. By cutting through the pavement of the new basilica to create a physical connection between the nave and the confessio, Paul V created a spiritual connection between the presence of the relics of the saint beneath the high altar and the venerable bronze representation of the saint situated just meters from the stairs. For the next few years, Paul V continued to work on other parts of the new basilica to allow access to other sites of popular devotion. This included a staircase in the northeast pier, which allowed entry to the grotte from the nave, and the installation of a marble statue of St. Peter in the grotte. But the access provided to the grotte was installed with limitations. An inscription placed at the staircase in the northeast pier, already noted above, states that the confessio was accessible to women only one day each year. Rule breakers would be excommunicated. For the female worshippers coming to St. Peter’s basilica, their access to St. Peter was by means of the visual access over the balustrade delineating the cut in the pavement and the tactile access provided by the venerable bronze St. Peter statue just meters from the confessio. In 1617, the same year as the opening of the staircase in the northeast pier and the installtion of the marble St. Peter in the grotte, the bronze St. Peter received a gold star encrusted red cloth backdrop, a votive lamp which was to remain lit at all times, and an assortment of silver and wax votive offerings placed on the wall near the statue. 204 The outpouring of attention to the 203 BAV, Barb. Lat. 4342, fol. 24v. “…e nel 1615 vi fù fatta il sopracielo…” 204 BAV, Barb. Lat. 4342, fol. 24v. “…et una Coltre di dietro di drappo rosso a stelle d’oro et nel 1617 vi fù assegnata l’entrata per una lampada da ardersi continuam.te et altri per riverenza vi fanno ardere altre lampade [d]e’ cerei, adornandola di vasi di fiori, et appendendovi per gratie ricevute Voti d’argento, di 91 old metal statue attests to its popularity among the clergy and lay visitors to the church, male but especially female. 205 In order to fully understand the appeal of the St. Peter statue for the visitors to the new Basilica, it is necessary to explore another aspect of the statue’s history particular to the early modern period, in particular, its association with an ancient cult statue from an important Roman temple. Triumph of Christianity over Pagan Antiquity Part of the meaning of the St. Peter statue in the early modern period was related to the popular belief about its origin. A commonly repeated legend notes that it was made from a bronze cult statue of Zeus from his temple on the Capitoline Hill, one of the most important cult statues in ancient Rome. 206 According to early pilgrimage tavolette, e simili.” The current baldacchino and mosaic imitating the cloth backdrop is the result of the event in 1871 to commemorate Pope Pius IX’s 25 th year as pontiff, equal to the length of time St. Peter was pontiff. The 19 th -century setting imitates the early 17 th -century brocade cloth backdrop and baldacchino. Francesco Caglioti in Pinelli, ed. 2000, vol. 4, 762. Neither the baldacchino nor the backdrop are visible in the Greuter print which suggests dating the print to around 1615, but especially during the time of Pope Paul V, rather than dating the print to c. 1625 and the time of Urban VIII. Cf. Rice 1997, 392, fig. 61. See Frings 2005, 240. 205 Attesting to the popularity of the statue with female lay visitors in later centuries, prints and watercolors of the statue typically show more female devout people than men. See Guarducci 1991; D’Onofrio 1990. 206 Numerous early guidebooks note that the bronze St. Peter was made from the cult statue of Capitoline Zeus. Francesco Maria Torrigio. Sacro Pellegrinaggio, cioè Instruttione per i Pellegrini e Forastieri che Visiteranno le Quattro Chiese Deputate in Roma il Presente Anno del Santissimo Giubileo 1625. Rome: B. Zanetti, 1625a, 7, “L’imagine di St. Pietro di bronzo (che già era del favoloso Giove)…”. Torrigio notes in details the complicated early history of the object. “Era già questa statua di Giove Capitolino sedente, col piè sinistro sporto in fuori (il che si vede nelle medaglie antiche) tenente con la destra alzata il fulmine, e con la sinistra un Asta, porta nel Campidoglio, dov’era il suo superbo Tempio. Ma da Pontefice (il cui nome non ho trovato) fù fatta rifondere, per rapresentare l’Apostolo St. Pietro tutt’al contrario del favoloso Giove. Son stati [fol. 25r] alcuni di parere che l’autore ne sia stato Papa Honorio primo, che fù nel 616 come quello, che anco levò le tavole di bronzo del Tempio di Romolo, o di Roma, che era dove hoggi é la Chiesa dei Cosmo e Damiano in Campo Vaccino, e ne coprì il detto di St. Pietro, come scrive il Bibliotecario. Altri più naturamente han detto, che sia stato Greg.or che fù nel 705, con occasione di abbattere l’heresia, che all’hora si solevava delli Iconomachi e di questa Imagine dicono che intese l’empio Imperatore Leone Isauro, quando scrisse al detto Gregorio mittam Roman, et Imaginem St. Petri 92 guidebooks, the bronze St. Peter was made from the material of the former religion to recast a more appropriate image of faith. The antiquity of the physical material is powerful, but so is the idea of the conquest over the ancient image for the purpose of modeling the first Pope. 207 It is not surprising to find such an interpretation in the 16 th and 17 th centuries. In the midst of the Reformation and the writing of the history of the Church, objects were discussed and defined in terms of their legitimacy as vestiges of faith and for their usefulness in telling the history of Christianity. The bronze St. Peter, viewed as born from the melted or reworked bronze of the Zeus cult statue, serves as a powerful emblem of the singular triumph of Christianity over the multiplicity of ancient Roman religions. St. Peter’s Presence in Rome Despite the building of the Constantinian basilica at the site of the tomb of the saint, the presence of St. Peter in Rome was denied by the Protestants. The Roman Catholic Church responded to the reformers’ attacks through the simultaneous strategy of the centralization and veneration of historical sites associated with the physical presence of St. Peter. One response to this critique was written by Francesco Maria Torrigio, author of the guidebook to the Grotte Vaticane and the discorso about the bronze St. confringam, a cui il santo Pontefice rispose, di quem piam ad eccertendam Imaginem sanct Petri miseris, vide protestamur tibi…” BAV, Barb. Lat. 4342, fol. 24v-25r. 207 It is interesting to note that the bronze St. Peter sculpture was kept with the relics of SS. Processo and Martiniani, who are represented in the altarpiece by Valentin as being martyred before a statue of Zeus. Rice 1997, 234, notes the barely visible statue of Zeus in the painting. 93 Peter statue, who wrote a guidebook to the sacred sites in Rome related to St. Peter. 208 Sacred places such as the site of his crucifixion on the Janiculum Hill, his imprisonment in the Carcere Mamertino near the Roman Forum, and sites containing touchstones of the saint provided the material evidence to counter the skeptics, but also served as markers for the pilgrims to follow in the footsteps of the saint. 209 Ancient sacred history was made present to the pilgrims. These locations outside the basilica of St. Peter provided a physical narrative of the saint’s stay in Rome, and in particular, preserve objects with histories of tactile devotion. The sites attest to the currency of touch as a vernacular mode of experience with sacred sites. It is from this tradition that touching the St. Peter bronze and marble sculptures derives. The place of the crucifixion and the imprisonment of St. Peter proved to be the most debated and the most venerated in the early modern period. 210 The first architect of new St. Peter’s Basilica, Bramante, was commissioned by the Spanish to create an 208 Torrigio 1644, 1-2. “Per due cagioni principalmente mi sono mosso à raccorre insieme, e dar’ in publico l’antiche Romane memorie del Santissimo Pietro, Protettore in specie della Città di Roma. L’una é per abbattere le temerità di quei, che negano, che St. Pietro sia stato in Roma; l’altra e per eccitare la devotione ne’ petti de’ fedeli verso questo primo Pontefice Romano: che però con tanto studio, e diligenza si son conservate da suoi Successori le di lui sacre Memorie, delle quali gravissimi Autori antichi, e moderni hanno con gran pietà scritto, fondati nella inveterata, e continuata traditione, la quale chi volesse oppugnare, si potrebbe dir di lui quel, che scrisse St. Agostino.” In the same text, pages 3-5, Torrigio notes the various people who were involved in the debate. 209 There are more objects that are signs of St. Peter’s presence in Rome than will be discussed in this section, for the sake of space. I focus on the sites that are best preserved and have not gone under major later period renovations. In addition to the site of his execution, the prison, and the knee print stones, there are also the chains from his enprisonment, located in St. Pietro in Vincoli, a column at which he was whipped, in S. Maria Traspontina, and others. See Torrigio 1644. 210 See J. M. Huskinson. "The Crucifixion of St. Peter: A Fifteenth-Century Topographical Problem." Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 32 (1969): 135-61, for a review of the early literature on the site of St. Peter’s crucifixion. Huskinson discusses the location of the crucifixion in relation to a panel representing the scene on the bronze doors by Filarete on new St. Peter’s Basilica, which were transferred from the old basilica. 94 ancient temple-like structure, commonly called the Tempietto, to mark the site of St. Peter’s crucifixion. 211 Inside the structure, visitors are greeted on the first level by a seated marble St. Peter set above the altar. A relief on the altar face shows the scene of the inverted crucifixion, a common image found on various surfaces in and outside of St. Peter’s Basilica. In the lower level, a subterranean crypt-like structure, the visitor is presented with another altar as well as a hole in the middle of the pavement, marking the precise site of the crucifixion. 212 The location of the imprisonment of St. Peter, the Carcere Mamertino, located beneath the church of S. Giuseppe dei Falegnami, was noted in pilgrimage guidebooks for its antiquity, its proximity to the Roman Forum, as well as the powerful vestiges of St. Peter’s presence. The Column of St. Peter (fig. 34) at which St. Peter was chained is still located in the prison room proper encased in an iron cage. The Face print stone of St. Peter (fig. 35) retains the profile print of St. Peter’s face from when he was pushed against the wall by the Roman guards on the staircase that leads down into the prison room. 213 The face print stone also has an iron grate covering it to prevent theft, but does not prevent pilgrims from touching the stone through its wide square openings. 214 In the 211 Mark Wilson Jones. "The Tempietto and the Roots of Coincidence." Architectural History 33 (1990): 1- 28. 212 Fig. 5 of Jones 1990 shows a longitudinal section of Bramante’s building, clearly showing the multileveled structure, which is not visible from the front view of the building when one enters the courtyard. The longitudinal section also shows the hole in the floor of the subterranean level. 213 On the Carcere Marmertino and the veneration of St. Peter there, see Patrizia Fortini. "Nuovi Documenti sul Carcere Mamertino (Cercer-Tullianum) Quale Luogo di Culto Cristiano." Ecclesiae Urbis. Eds. Federico Guidobaldi and Alessandra Guiglia Guidobaldi. Vol. 1. Vatican: Pontificio Instituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 2002, 503-32, who notes that the iron grate and inscription date from 1720. 214 See Chapter Four for the the footprint stone of Christ. 95 lower-level room is also the well, which according to tradition sprung from the ground while St. Peter was in jail providing him water to baptize his jailers, Sts. Processo and Martiniano, who relics are discussed above. Not far from the Carcere Mamertino is the church of S. Maria Nuova (now commonly known as the church of S. Francesca Romana), located behind the Temple of Venus and Rome in the Roman Forum, which contains the Knee print stones of St. Peter (fig. 36). The stones are the physical signs of St. Peter praying on the Aventine Hill after witnessing Simon Magnus carried into the air by demons. Torrigio notes the various early accounts of the story and the legitimacy of the objects. 215 They are still located in the church in the south transept of the crossing and appear to be basalt ancient Roman pavement slabs with deep concave impressions. There are iron grates across the stones, and an inscription explains that they are the knee prints of St. Peter. 216 The right one is heavily cracked and both have deep impressions recording the knee prints, but also centuries of pilgrims touching the objects with their hands and rosaries. The sites that contain these touchstones and markers of St. Peter in Rome were described and defended by Torrigio as the physical proof of St. Peter’s presence in the holy city. He records that people expressed their devotion to the saint by means of touching and kissing the stones and sites. The tradition of tactile veneration to the objects and sites related to St. Peter testifies to the currency of touch as a form of devotion. As 215 Torrigio 1644, 77-90. 216 “In queste pietre pose le ginochia St. Pietro quando i demonii port. Simon Mago per aria.” Torrigio 1644, 78, who further states that the stones are “fin’ad hora si honorano da Fedeli.” Further on the same page, Torrigio also refers to the original location of the stones in the church of S. Maria Nova (currently S. Maria Antiqua, on the slope of the Palatine) which was partly destroyed during the time of Paul III (1530s) and that the stones were subsequently transported to their current location. 96 such, when the bronze and marble St. Peter sculptures were moved to more accessible locations, pilgrims were prepared to venerate the saint with the same hands and objects that touched the other sites. Touching the Bronze St. Peter The changes to the fabric of St. Peter’s Basilica, simultaneous desctruciton and construciton, led to changes in visual and physical access to monuments. When the bronze St. Peter statue was moved to the nave of the old basilica during the construction of the new crossing, the statue was accessible. It was during the transition from old basilica to new that the tradition of touching the bronze St. Peter sculpture started. The object was appropriated by pilgrims and received new attention from the clergy and women when it was removed from the largely inaccessible oratory containing the relics of Sts. Processo and Martiniano. When the statue was first installed in its current location near the northeast pier of the crossing in 1607, it stood there alone without an altar, niche, baldacchino, backdrop, or any other significant markers. But within just a few years, the statue received noticeable attention from the clergy and honorific decorations and votive offerings, I believe, inspired by the vernacular devotion shown to the object by pilgirms during its temporary stay in the nave of the old basilica. The most conspicuous, official form of veneration shown to the statue was performed on the feast day of St. Peter. On that day, the sculpture stood in for the saint and accepted the touches and kisses of pilgrims, but also important members of the clergy, including St. Carlo Borromeo, St. Ignatio, St. Filippo Neri, and cardinals Baronio 97 and Belarmine. 217 The St. Peter statue was dressed in garments and a tiara donated to the statue, a tradition that still continues to the present day (fig. 37). 218 By placing the bronze St. Peter at the crossing of the new basilica, continuing the tradition of dressing the statue on the saint’s feast day, and having the clergy conspicuously participate in the customary devotion more common to pilgrims, the devotion to the statue was codified for all. An important early source already noted above points out that the sculpture is a unique object. Francesco Maria Torrigio, the author of the discorso about the bronze St. Peter, states that there is no other sculpture of St. Peter as old in the entire city. He is amazed (“stupore”) to see the devotion shown to both feet of the object and the continuous presence of pilgrims who touch objects (such as books and rosaries) to the statue, kiss the statue, and even lovingly caress (“tenute care”) the object. 219 Torrigio underscores its popularity by noting that few people enter the church that do not show devotion to the statue (“che non vada a riverirla”). It is a pity he is not more specific in this instance about who the people are showing the devotion. For him it is enough to note generally the pilgrims, the masses of faithful, which undoubtedly included women, who flocked to the church. The age-value of the bronze St. Peter ameliorates the new 217 BAV, Barb. Lat. 4342, fol. 24v. “Nel giorno di St. Pietro, si veste d’un Piviale antico donatovi da Clemente 6° circa l’Anno 1350. mentre stava in Francia, e vi si pone in testa una bella Mitra Vescovale, e vi si spargono fronde, e fiori, e dal fedel popol vi si bagia il piede, e vi si sotto pone il Capo come fecero St. Carlo, St. Ignatio, St. Filippo Nerio, il B.o Felice Capuccino, et i due gran Cardinali Baronio e Belarminio, et altre segnalate persone.” For the history of the feast day, see Guarducci 1987. 218 When the statue is not wearing the garments, they are kept on view in the museum of the sacristy of the basilica. 219 BAV, Barb. Lat. 4342, fol. 25r. “In Roma non si trova altra statua antica di bronzo di St. Pietro, se non questa, e tal sia antichità la manifesta l’essere ambedue i piedi talmente dal continuo tatto luoghi, che é un stupore, poi che sempre da Pelegrini vi si toccano corone, medaglie, Cordoni, libri, borboni & che poi con gran devotione son bagiate, e tenute care, ne alcuno ordinariam.te entra in St. Pietro, che non vada a riverirla.” 98 building. The familiar customary devotion shown to an old, revered object fills the astoundingly modern site with the persistence of past traditions. The bronze St. Peter has a special, even unusual status in the basilica. It is not one of the seven privileged altars. 220 The sculpture is not in a chapel proper. Instead, in the new basilica, in the time of Urban VIII, the sculpture took on a new liturgical role, in particular, on the consecration of the basilica on November 18, 1626, exactly 1,300 years after the consecration of the Constantinian basilica. 221 Michele Lonigo wrote the instructions for the consecration of the new basilica. 222 Within these instructions, there is a reference to the bronze St. Peter sculpture. At a certain point in the ceremony, the priest is instructed to move towards the venerable sculpture to include the statue in the ceremony, as if the bronze St. Peter is the saint himself present at the consecration of his new basilica. 223 The liturgical function of the statue as a by-proxy presence underscores the extraordinary status gained by the object at the crossing of the new basilica. It was no 220 Although, the bronze St. Peter was placed at a privileged altar when it was located in the oratory of Sts. Processo and Martiniano. Rice 1997, 233. 221 Rice 1997, 73. 222 Herklotz, Ingo. "Michele Lonigo als Kunstkritiker: zu einer Historistischen Rezeption der Altarbilder von Sacchi und Passignano in St. Peter." Ars Naturam Adiuvans: Festschrift für Matthias Winner zum 11. März 1996. Eds. Victoria v. Flemming and Sebastian Schütze. Mainz am Rhein: von Zabern, 1996, 414, and fn. 11, cites the document. I thank Ingo Herklotz for discussing the document with me. It appears to be an instructional sheet for the ceremony, which includes physical directions, which way to turn, how many times, and when to say different prayers. 223 BAV, Barb. Lat. 2974, unpaginated. "Ristretto di tutto quello di dovrebbe fare nella consacrat[ion]e della nova Basilica Vaticana.” About half way through the text, although not ncessarily half way through the ceremony, Lonigo notes: “Girato al lat[o] dest[r]o in mezzo la chiesa, d[a] porta la mitra, ginocchiato intonerà il Veni creator, detti i primi versi, levato in piedi lo leggerà tutto scalza mitra; in questo mentre li Card.i di St. Pietro feceva l’areole di cerere p[er] scrivessi l’Altari: no[v]a signatro[?] dalla parte sinistra nel entrare fino alla statua di St. Pietro di bronzo et 23. dall’altra parte destra al entrare fino rincontro la d[ett]a statua.” 99 doubt the outpouring of devotion, the tender caresses and kisses of pilgrims noted by Torrigio, which led to the object’s exceptional status in the basilica. During an official, documented Sacred Visit to the basilica, dated May 19, 1624, the author observes the devout people who kiss the feet, as well as touch the head, as a sign of their devotion. 224 The profound displays of devotion no doubt had an impact on Pope Urban VIII’s decision not to remove the bronze St. Peter from the nave when the project moved forward to fill the colossal niches in the piers of the new crossing. 225 In the following centuries, when popular guidebooks and prints show the St. Peter statue, they refer to this powerful expression of devotion towards the sculpture, as if the tradition had always been in place. 226 224 ASV, Sacra Congregazione della Visita Apostolica, vol. 2. Document No. 3, Date: May 19, 1624. Noted in Rice 1997, p. 289-91. “[f.52v] Die Dominico 19 [Maij 1624] Domini Visitatores ad eamdem Basilicam redierunt […]”“Ibi prope est aenea statua Principis Apostolorum in Pontificia sede super basem marmoream collocata, ad cuius sacros pedes deosculandos, atque eis Caput humiliter supponendum frequens Populus devote accedit.”[f.55r] “Ad euisdem statuae basem adest marmorea Capsula ad reponendem eleemosinas, quae pro cultu Sanctissimi Sacrimenti offeruntur, eaque duplici clave est munita, quarum una penes Camerarium Societatis, altera penes virum deputatum ad eadem Societate manent.” 225 See Rice 1997, page 100, fn. 77, for reference to the Angelo Giorio, the “altarista” of St. Peter’s, asking Pope Urban VIII what he wanted to do with the bronze St. Peter. Rice does not note a response, if one even still survives. Obviously, the bronze was not moved. But the Colonna Santa was removed from the northeast niche to make room for Bernini’s St. Longinus sculpture. 226 Pauli de Angelis. Basilicae Veteris Vaticanae Descriptio Auctore Romano [Petrus Manlius]. Cum Notis Abbatis Pauli De Angelis, Quibus Accedit Descriptio Brevis Novi Templi Vaticani, Necnon Utriusque Ichnographia. Rome: Bernardini Tani, 1646, title page, reproduces an image of the bronze St. Peter and notes, “Venient ad te curui filii eorum, qui humiliaverunt te, et adorarunt vestigia pedum tuos omnes.” A number of 18 th and 19 th century prints of views of St. Peter’s basilica show people bowing before or touching the foot of the statue. 100 The Marble St. Peter and the Grotte Vaticane At the entrance to the Grotte Vaticane sits a marble sculpture of St. Peter (fig. 3). 227 The form of the statue is reminiscent of the bronze statue of St. Peter found just upstairs in the nave. Similar to the bronze St. Peter, the foot of this statue also exhibits the traces of tactile veneration. With marble, the signs of tactile veneration are different from bronze. Marble is less susceptible to the affects of touch as the oils in human hands that consumes bronze are less vicious. Over time, the surface details grow less distinct while the marble glows whiter. Eventually, the oils that become embedded in the marble collect dust from the air. This marble St. Peter sculpture has not always been in its current location. The inscription on the base explains that in 1979 Pope John Paul II placed the sculpture at the entrance to the grotte. Contained further in the inscription is the reference to its mid-20 th 227 Without major controversy, the body of the marble sculpture of St. Peter is dated to the Classical period, to the 2 nd -3 rd century A.D., although the dating of the restoration is debated. D’Onoforio 1990, 73- 74, dates the head to the 5 th century. Guarducci 1991, 2-93; and 103-105, notes that in 1565 the sculptor Nicolò de Longhi da Viggiù was paid to restore the sculpture, adding the head and the hands, while the right hand was later replaced in 1752 by the sculptor Giovanni Paolo Pasta. Romanini 1990 notes that the hands are the restoration of Giovanni Paolo Pasta (1752), but that the head is by Arnolfo di Cambio. Romanini states that the documents published by Cardoni 1980 referring to the de Longhi restoration most likely refer to another sculpture of St. Peter. Francesco Caglioti. "Da Alberti a Ligorio, Da Maderno a Bernini E a Marchionni: Il Ritrovamento Del ‘San Pietro’ Vaticano Di Mino Da Fiesole (E Di Niccolo Longhi Da Viggiù)." Prospettiva 86 (1997): 37-70, picks up the de Longhi documents about the restoration and convincingly argues that they record the restoration of a 15 th century marble, standing sculpture of St. Peter created by Mino da Fiesole, located presently in the Sala Capitolare, in the Palazzo of the Sacristy, St. Peter’s Basilica. The marble sculpture of St. Peter in the grotte is adapted from the common seated philosopher-type sculpture popular in the ancient Roman world. For discussion of the adaptation of the seated philosopher-type by early Christians, see the exhibition catalogue, Bottini, Angelo, ed. Musa Pensosa: l'Immagine dell'Intellettuale nell'Antichità. Milan: Electa Mondadori, 2006, 173-89, 238 (cat. 21) and 253 (cat. 51); Paul Zanker. Die Maske des Sokrates: das Bild des Intellektuellen in der Antiken Kunst. Munich: Beck, 1995, 221, fig. 126, 54, fig. 145, and 255, fig. 146. 101 century installation at the east end of the grotte. 228 Prior to the middle of the 20 th - century, the sculpture was installed in a chapel near the confessio of St. Peter. It is this history of installation upon which I focus to provide another powerful example of the creation of a site of popular devotion in new St. Peter’s Basilica in the early 17 th century. Similar to the bronze St. Peter, the marble St. Peter was located in the old basilica, possibly over the door of the main entrance, as seen in a drawing by Domenico Tasselli (fig. 38). 229 After the demolition of the old portico, the sculpture was moved into 228 See Giovanni B de Tóth. Grotte Vaticane. Città del Vaticano: Rev. Fabbrica di St. Pietro in Vaticano, 1955, 119, for image of marble St. Peter from 1949 until 1979. The niche is richly decorated with mosaics and the sculpture is flanked by bronze wreaths containing the XP and bronze votive lamps, each with three flames. The inscription on the base read as follows: “Pius XII Pont. Max.; Perantiquam Principis Apostol Statuam; Hac in sede; Ad novam Dignioremque Formam Redacta; Collocari iussit; A MCMXXXXIX” The current inscription reads as follows: “Ioanne Paulo II Pontifice Maximo; Haec Perantiqua Principis; Apostolorum Statua; Quam Pius PP. XII A. MCMXXXXIX Restauraverat; Hac in sede ad novam; Dignioremque formam redacta; Collocata est; A. MCMLXXIX.” 229 Grimald, ed. Niggl 1972, 180, fig. 73. For the earlier history and installation of the marble St. Peter, see Guarducci 1991, 87-109; and D’Onofrio 1990, 69-79. Guarducci 1991, 92-93, notes that the sculpture was moved from the Borgo Vecchio into the old basilica in 1565. Guarducci states that the marble St. Peter remained in the portico even after the removal in 1588 of the bronze doors that were used to make the statue of St. Paul for the column of Marcus Aurelius. There it remained above the empty doorway until it was installed in the grotte in 1617 with possibly a brief time in storage just before (1991, 99). Guarducci also provides a complicated story of the swapping of the marble and bronze St. Peter sculptures during the mid-16 th century (1991, 95-98). D’Onofrio on the other hand notes that the marble St. Peter was removed at the same time as the bronze doors and was moved immediately into the grotte, although does not note where, despite including a partial transcription of a document (D’Onofrio 1990, 78, fn. 18) which clearly states that the marble was moved from the old grotte to the new grotte. “…per aver levato il St. Pietro a sedere dalle Grotte vecchie e portatolo alle nove Grotte dove sta il corpo di St. Leone…” A.F.S.P., 1° piano, serie 1, vol. 3, f. 375-375v. Rice 1997, 31, fn. 71, referring to Siebenhüner, 1962, 258-59, notes that a marble sculpture of St. Peter brought to the basilica in 1565 is not the same one now situated at the entrance to the grotte. As Rice notes, the sculpture was installed in the south transept, at least until 1609, when Michelangelo’s Pietà was moved to the central niche. Romanini 1990 notes that the sculpture was moved to the grotte sometime in 1605-06, much in-line with D’Onofrio, but does not note where it was placed. Official publications of the Fabbrica of St. Peter’s records the following installation history. From 1607 until 1949, the marble Peter was located in the Chapel of the Bocciata (so-called since 1631). Before 1607, the sculpture was located in a “hanging tabernacle” which was located above the central gateway of the old basilica’s portico, located directly in front of the central door (called “Argentea”) of the basilica. In 1616, the chapel with the marble St. Peter was dedicated by Paul V. The installation of the sculpture on a podium flanked by a pair of kneeling lions with reused Cosmatesque elements was the work of Benedetto Drei, master-mason of the Fabbrica. During the renovation of the grotte in 1949, in time for the 1950 Holy Year and the papacy of Pius XII, the statue was removed and reinstalled in the niche across from the confessio under the advisement of Gustavo Giovannoni. Lanzani 2003. 102 the grotte, and finally in 1617, the marble sculpture of St. Peter was installed in an elaborate devotional setting in a newly built chapel in the grotte of the new basilica, still visible in early photographs of the chapel (figs. 39-40). The chapel is now called the Cappella della Bocciata, named after the miraculous image of the Madonna placed in the chapel in 1631 during the pontificate of Urban VIII. 230 Prior to 1631, the chapel was dedicated to St. Paul and housed a mosaic fragment of the saint from the central apse of the old basilica. 231 Grimaldi specifically records that Paul V ordered the preservation of veneration of the marble St. Peter “at the edge of the holy confessio of Blessed St. Peter.” 232 Writing at the same time as the installation of the marble St. Peter in its newly renovated chapel in 1617, Torrigio describes the early appearance of the object and the devotion surrounding it in the chapel. 233 Torrigio notes a space decorated with various 230 Pinelli, ed. 2000, vol. 4, 869-70, although the earlier dedications of the chapel are not noted. 231 The chapel was dedicated to St. Paul in 1607, during the pontificate of Paul V. The mosaic fragment of St. Paul is from the time of Innocent III. The mosaic is now located in the Fabbrica di San Pietro. Before that, the chapel was dedicated to St. Sebastian and was part of the oratory of the popes Leo I, II, III and IV. Lanzani, ed. 2003. 232 Grimaldi, ed Niggl 1972, 180: “…instar tabernaculi fabrefactum, sub quo statua marmorea antiquissima beati Petri benedicentis ac sedentis in supercilio portae ibi inter columnas albas marmoreas porticus basilicae populi venerationi erat exposita, nunc Pauli V iussu non minore cultu asservatur in ambitu sacrae Confessionis beati Petri…” 233 Torrigio 1618, 66-67. The entry in the second edition from 1639, 73-74, is nearly identical. “Qui doppò si vede un un luogo abbellito di varij marmi, & opere di mosaico con statuette in piedi similmente di marmo, con due leoni giacenti, come si usava porsi nell’entrare delle Chiese anticamente per mostrare la Vigilanza, ma questi stavano al sepolcro di Urbano VI. una bella, & antica statua di St. Pietro sedente, che con la destra stà in atto di benedire, e con la sinistra tiene due chiavi: la sedia ove siede stava nella Basilica vecchia, e vi si vedeva star à sedere Benedetto XII. Stà con un piede sporto in fuori, con la scarpa all’Apostolica, detta sandali, cioè con la suola solamente sotto, & alcune fibbie di sopra; & nel mezo vi è una pietra nera per ornamento, & il popolo pietoso gli và à baciar quel piede, costume antichissimo di baciar il piede al Papa in segno d’obedienza, riverenza, e soggettione alla St. Madra Chiesa, e Vicario di Christo. Torrigio 1618, 67-68, provides the origin of the kissing of the foot of the pope. “Onde leggiamo, che creato, che fù Pontefice Valentino nell’anno 827. tutti nel Laterano gli andavano á baciar i piedi. Il 103 marbles, mosaics, and statues, a pair of resting lions which come from the dismantled tomb of Urban VI, and the “beautiful and ancient statue of a seated St. Peter, with the right hand in the act of blessing, and with the left holding two keys…he sits with a foot put forward…” Torrigio goes on to discuss the “the most ancient garment…the Apostolic shoe” (“la scapa all’Apostolica”), a type of sandal worn by the holy Apostle, the symbolism of which is central to the ceremony of kissing the slipper of the pope in the early modern period. And Torrigio notes that “pious people come to kiss” the feet of the statue as “a sign of obedience, reverence, and awe to the Holy Mother Church and the Vicar of Christ.” What is extraordinary about Torrigio’s description is that within the space of a year, people came to venerate physically this formerly inaccessible object. Placed above the entrance of Old St. Peter’s, as Grimaldi and Torrigio both note, the sculpture was venerated, but was more or less inaccessible. Once located in the grotte, in a setting that invites interaction, located near the confessio of St. Peter, the statue was brought to life simile si fece á Leone Quarto, quando dalla Chiesa di SS. Quattro, dove stava, fù contro sua voglia condotto nel Laterano, e con grand’allegrezza eletto Sommo Pontefice. Il medesimo fecero gli avversarij di Benedetto III. che fu nel 855. Et il Bibliotecario scrive che Giustiniano 2.Imp. baciò il piede a papa Constantino nel 708. dicendo, Augustus Christianissimus cum Regno in capite fese prostravit, pedes osculans Pontificis. E Siginolso Prencipe di Benevento fece l’istesso atto d’humiltà a Sergio II. circa l’844. Quem (dice Anastagio) Presul cum suscepisset solo prostratus pretiosos ipsius pedes humiliter osculates. Stava già questa statua avanti la porta grande della Chiesa sopra una porta, e si soleva il giorno di St. Pietro addobbare pontificalmente col Piviale, che donò il Cardinale Cornaro alla Sagrestia di St. Pietro, si come anco si fa in questo luoco, ponendovi anco in testa una bella mitra piena di gioie. Vi sono scritte sopra tali parole. S. Petri Apostolorum Principis statua mar- morea antiquissima, quae erat inter co- lumnas porticus veteris Basilicae supra valuas aereas huc translata Paulo V. Pont. Max.” 104 for pilgrims as the manifestation of the saint. Kissing the foot of the marble St. Peter near the confessio completed the pilgrimage to the new grotte of St. Peter’s Basilica. Worshipers could leave the site knowing they had shown their devotion as close to the tomb of St. Peter as possible. The installation of the sculpture in the small chapel inspired the installation of other devotional objects, in particular, a rededication of the chapel to an object with a miraculous history. As already noted, the chapel was originally dedicated to St. Paul with the mosaic fragment representing the saint from the old central apse. Eventually, the mosaic was removed, and in 1631, the fresco fragment called the Madonna della Bocciata was installed at the altar. The fresco is called della Bocciata after the story about a drunken Spanish soldier who threw a “bocce” (ball) at the face of the painting and made it bleed. 234 The pavement stones from the portico of the old basilica, upon which the blood from the painting fell, as well as the wooden ball that hit the painting, are preserved in the chapel. 235 The pavement fragments are installed in the altar wall, protected by iron grates, but accessible for people to touch the fragments of that miraculous event. In the grotte beneath the new basilica, the marble St. Peter statue set within a 234 See Serena Romano. "La Madonna Della Bocciata." Fragmenta Picta: Affreschi e Mosaici Staccati del Medioevo Romano. Rome: Argos, 1989, 147-52. The fresco was installed in the chapel on February 21 st , 1631. The current installation is the third and final installation of the object. The painting has undergone a number of restorations. The mark on the right cheek of the Virgin is the legendary wound caused by the ball. The current state of the painting is largely the result of the 1980 restoration by Gianluigi Colalucci and the most recent 2002 restoration of the entire chapel. The fresco fragment derives from the portico of the old Basilica and was initially attributed to Simone Martini based on a note in Vasari. For the history of the earlier installations, see Romano 1989, 147. See also Pinelli, ed. 2000, 869-70, although it is mistakenly noted that the painting cried rather than bled. 235 The fresco fragment and the pieces of the pavement stones are still preserved in the chapel today. 105 chapel containing other fragments of old St. Peter’s Basilica, including an image of the Madonna that miraculously responded to an albeit drunken iconoclastic attack. Significantly, the site was almost exclusively for male pilgrims. As noted earlier, access to the grotte, which led to the confessio, was limited to only men except one day each year. During that one day when women could enter the grotte, one can imagine the intensity of the experience, heightened by the rarity of the event, allowing female devout visitors to visit not only the confessio, the marble St. Peter, but also an icon of the Virgin that bled when attacked, of which the fragments of the miracle were there to be touched. Limits in access in the nave of the basilica pushed female visitors to find accessible objects to which they could show their devotion, such as the bronze St. Peter statue. But limits in access also remind the modern reader of the specialness of the extraordinary experience of that one day each year when they were allowed to enter the most sacred space of the basilica. Conclusion The primacy of the pilgrim visit to St. Peter’s Basilica was established in the early modern period with the completion of new St. Peter’s Basilica. The guidebooks of the time reveal the shift in importance of St. Peter’s Basilica from just one of the main pilgrim basilicas to the first pilgrim basilica noted in lists which normally started with St. Giovanni in Laterano, the cathedral of Rome. Yet, the innovative, grand scale of St. Peter’s erased the accumulation of centuries of devotion. Older, venerated objects were retained in St. Peter’s Basilica to satisfy the needs of the visitors in the shockingly vacant, 106 modern space. 236 Old objects helped familiarize visitors and facilitate a material connection between the new structure and the old one. When confronted with the disappearance of the old basilica, pilgrims clung to the statues of the apostle and expressed their devotion. With the on-going destruction of Old St. Peter’s causing limited access to the high altar as well as the confessio of St. Peter (due to the presence of the Tegurium) pilgrims likely were further drawn to the bronze statue of St. Peter. It served as the visual reminder of the importance of the site as well as a spiritual consolation amid the disorder. On a devotional level, the ancient objects met the needs of pilgrims in a space where few sites of popular devotion remained. The statues of St. Peter, both bronze and marble, served as substitute bodies for veneration by means of kissing and touching the feet and other parts. Contact relics, relics of saints, and the confessio at St. Peter’ tomb, all of which were past sites of tactile devotion, were conceptually, liturgically, and devotionally linked to the sculptures of St. Peter. Yet, it was not until the bronze sculpture was moved from its original location in the oratory to the nave of the old basilica, thus separated from important relics, that it was conspicuously, but by chance, accessible to the clergy and pilgrims, especially female pilgrims who were not allowed to enter the grotte except one day each year. It is then no coincidence that in the early 17 th century the bronze sculpture of St. Peter was installed at the crossing of the new basilica, rather than at the entrance to the confessio. In the grotte, an analogous installation takes 236 Rice 1997, 18-20, notes that old St. Peter’s was over crowded, especially once monuments were moved from the destroyed portion of the basilica into the remaining 1/3. Even the people in charge of the maintenance and saying the masses found it difficult to remember them all, while other altars had fallen out of use due to lapse in payment of the endowments for saying the mass. The destruction of old St. Peter’s led to the “convenient opportunity for their suppression” (20) and dismantling of the old altars. 107 place when the marble St. Peter is installed in a small chapel to the south of the confessio in the Clementine ambulatory. The paleo-Christian objects were declared important traces of the Christian past at St. Peter’s Basilica. Yet, in light of their formal qualities and histories related to ancient Roman cult statues and the lack of proper dedications at consecrated altars, the objects could have easily fallen into the Counter-Reformation category of superstitious objects. To prevent such a negative association, the statues were placed in appropriately accessible places not directly connected to consecrated altars, were publicly venerated by the clergy, given honorific decorations, and received wide spread attention in guidebooks and prints. The pagan, potentially superstitious associations was employed as a powerful aspect of the history of each statue, to prove the triumph of Christianity over the ancient Roman religions in the heart of the fallen Roman Empire. 108 Chapter 3: The Virgin and Antiquity In the 1630s, a full century after the writing of Jean Calvin’s treatise critiquing the Catholic practice of the cult of relics, new St. Peter’s Basilica was being outfitted with monumental sculptures to assert the importance of the chief relics at the crossing. 237 As outlined in Chapter Two, the centrality of St. Peter was carefully projected in guidebooks and prints, while ancient, medieval and Renaissance objects were re-evaluated for their suitability and spiritual value in churches. At new St. Peter’s Basilica, the principal message projected by the unprecedented scale was a form of devotion meant to glorify the archaeological evidence of the origins of the Church, the relics of Christ, and the tomb of St. Peter. The most important archaeological evidence for the foundations of Christianity in Rome were quite literally suspended above and hidden below Protestant critique at new St. Peter’s. Yet, the remnants of old devotional practices could not be ripped completely from the hands of the devout. In this chapter dedicated to the Virgin and antiquity, I look at two distinct sites for the ways the changes in building at St. Peter’s Basilica had a ripple effect in Rome. Pieces of the old basilica of St. Peter were parceled out to not only private collections in the city, but also churches. 238 New forms of installing important icons stimulated the reinstallation of similar images throughout the 237 See Chapter Two. Calvin’s treatise on relics was published in French in 1534. It would continue to be evoked, published and translated into various languages for centuries. Of note, a 19 th century translation was inspired by the forms of popular devotions spreading throughout Europe in the mid-19 th century, such as the devotion to the “winking Madonna of Rimini” and a variety of recently discovered relics, as the translator notes, “…we seem to be fast returning to a state of things similar to the time when Calvin wrote his Treatise.” Count Valerian Krasinski, ed. A Treatise on Relics by John Calvin...With an Introduciton Dissertation on the Miraculous Images, as Well as Other Superstitions, of the Roman Catholic and Russo- Greek Churches. Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1854, vii. 238 Silvia Danesi Squarzina. "Frammenti dell'antico S. Pietro in una Collezione del Primo Seicento." Arte d'occidente: Temi e Metodi. Studi in Onore di Angiola Maria Romanini, Vol. 3. Ed. Antonio Cadei. Rome: Edizioni Sintesi Informazione, 1999. 1187-98. See also Chapter Two. 109 city. Devout people responded to the physical changes around them as objects were removed from access or repositioned. At the church of S. Agostino near Piazza Navona in the Campus Martius, the church dedicated to the founder of the Augustinian order and well known for its charity to women in Rome, an important icon of the Virgin and Child (fig. 41) believed to be painted by St. Luke is currently located in an early 17 th -century tabernacle on the high altar (fig. 42). At the other end of the nave, an early 16 th -century marble sculpture of the Virgin and Child, commonly called the Madonna del Parto (fig. 4), by the artist Jacopo Sansovino, sits in its original location near the main entrance on the inner façade of the church, commemorating a Florentine man’s devotion to the Virgin. The marble sculpture of the Virgin is still to this day a major site of lay devotion for women who seek help in childbirth, as shown by the numerous votive offerings left to say thanks for successful births. I trace the history of this devotion to the early modern period when the St. Luke icon of the Virgin and Child was removed from the devotional access of women at the church. The icon was installed in a tabernacle inspired by a similar one at St. Peter’s Basilica. 239 Frequented by women who were members of confraternities dedicated to the Virgin and lay devout pilgrims, the monumental sculpture appealed to the still lingering 239 Scholars have already noted the modern day display of devotion to the sculpture. I thank Bruce Boucher for bringing this sculpture to my attention and recommending literature. See especially Alexander Nagel. Michelangelo and the Reform of Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, 248, fn. 84.; Bruce Boucher. The Sculpture of Jacopo Sansovino. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1991; Mary D. Garrard. "Jacopo Sansovino's Madonna in Sant' Agostino: An Antique Source Rediscovered." Journal of the Warburg and the Courtauld Institutes 38 (1975): 333-38; Edgar Lein. "Jacopo Sansovinos Sogennante ''Madonna Del Parto'' in Rom und ihre Beziehung zur Florentiner Skulptur der zweiten hälfte des 15.Jahrhunderts." Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 35.2-3 (1991): 193-210; Gino Corti. "Iacopo Sansovino's Contract for the Madonna in Sant' Agostino, Rome." The Burlington Magazine 113.820 (1971): 395-96. 110 tradition of physical devotion and provided a suitable substitute for the icon no longer within their reach. Across town, at the site of the ancient Forum Boarium, in the sacristy of the church of S. Maria in Cosmedin, an 8 th -century mosaic fragment of the Virgin and Child representing the Adoration of the Magi (fig. 43) hangs in a wooden frame. A dedicatory inscription from the 1630s explains that the mosaic is a piece of Old St. Peter’s Basilica presented as a gift. In the portico of the basilica, the large Phrygian marble disc called the Bocca della Verità (fig. 5) is pinned to a wall, perched upon an ancient Corinthian capital. The Bocca della Verità (fig. 6) is visited by thousands of visitors yearly who pause to have their photo taken as they place a hand into the weathered gapping mouth of the pagan god. 240 In the 17 th century, an inscription in the portico explained that the Bocca della Verità was dedicated to the Virgin as a reminder of the triumphs of Christianity over paganism. The church of S. Maria in Cosmedin has a significant history of devotion to the Virgin, inspired by a legendary 4 th -century miracle-granting icon of the Virgin and Child, called La Theotókos (fig. 44), placed in the central apse of the church in the early 17 th century, a now lost early medieval fresco of the Virgin and Child, and the above mentioned 8 th -century mosaic of the Virgin and Child which formerly hung over the main door. Inscriptions in the the portico also explained the tradition from antiquity of placing a hand in the mouth of the Bocca to take an oath. In literary accounts, stories 240 I thank Fabio Barry for sharing his forthcoming article on the Bocca della Verità with me. In his essay he provides a wealth of evidence to support the idea that the face represents Oceanus, based on the crab- claw horns which sprout from his head, and that it was indeed used as a drain cover in antiquity, pointing out that the disc is thicker at the edges and concave towards the mouth, through which the water passed to return to the ocean. Barry notes that if it were used as a fountain, the water would have unattractively passed through the eyes, nose, and mouth of the god. 111 circulated that support the idea that young women showing their devotion to the Virgin were brought to the stone to test their virginity, possibly before getting married. I restore to the Bocca della Verità a history that mobilized the stone in the early 17 th century as a testament to the triumph of Christianity over paganism. Its close physical and devotional proximity to valued ancient devotional images of the Virgin and Child only further underscores the complicated relationship between the Counter Reformation Church and the conspicuous material remains of the pagan past. The Icon of St. Luke at S. Agostino “…and one of the images of the Virgin Mary painted by St. Luke, which in the time of Innocent VIII made many miracles happen…” 241 In the church of S. Agostino is one of the four most famous and revered icons of the Virgin and Child (fig. 41) believed to have been painted by St. Luke in Rome. 242 Today, the painting is securely located in the imposing high altar tabernacle (fig. 42) designed in the 1620s. 243 The ancient image is elevated high above the altar floor. The 241 Le Cose… 1625, 43.”…& una dell’imagini di Maria Vergine di quelle che dipinse s. Luca, la qual al tempo d’Innocenzo VIII. fece molti miracoli…” Innocent VIII was pope from 1484-92. 242 Kirstin Noreen. "The Icon of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome: An Image and Its Afterlife." Renaissance Studies 19.5 (2005): 669. Jean Calvin notes the four icons of the Virgin believed to have been painted by St. Luke in his treatise on relics (1543). In addition to the icon in S. Agostino, the other icons are found in S. Maria Maggiore, S. Maria in Aracoeli, and S. Maria in Via Lata. See also Steven F. Ostrow. Art and Spirituality in Counter-Reformation Rome: The Sistine and Pauline Chapels in S. Maria Maggiore. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996, Chapter Three; Sylvia Ferino Pagden. "From Cult Images to the Cult of Images: The Case of the Raphael's Altarpieces." The Altarpiece in the Renaissance. Eds. Peter Humfrey and Martin Kemp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990, 182-89; Dorothy Metzger Habel. "Bernini's D'Aste Family Tombs in S. Maria in Via Lata, Rome: A Reconstruction." The Art Bulletin 79.2 (1997): 293. 243 For the history of the commission and construction of the high altar, see Anna Maria Pedrocchi. "Giovan Lorenzo Bernini e Santi Ghetti: L'altare Maggiore in Sant'Agostino a Roma ; Nuovi Documenti e Precisazioni." Bollettino d'arte 6, Ser. 90.2005.133/134 (2006): 115-26; Barbara Savina. "Bernini, Finelli e l'altare di S. Agostino." Storia dell'arte 100 (2000): 117-22. 112 object is visible to all upon entering the nave but safe from prying hands. However, before the early modern installation, the icon’s function and reputation (fama) were associated with its mobility. Early guidebooks attest to the miracles that occurred after requests were made before the painting, and when it was presented during processions. Furthermore, a series of relief sculptures that formerly decorated the high altar represented the miraculous history. 244 The sculptures narrated the miracles granted in the time of Innocent VIII and its history of interactive, mobile devotion. The display of this precious ancient and portable icon was transformed in the early 17 th century when it was removed from processions and the decorative setting narrating its history. The permanent, altar display created for the icon at S. Agostino followed a new model derived from new St. Peter’s basilica. The history of the mobility of sacred objects in the early modern period confronts the seemingly fixed current displays of well-known and highly venerated objects. In the past, the installation and display of objects were marked by moments of dramatic historical change. When the St. Luke icon was withdrawn from a mobile, processional identity, the beholder was redirected to other objects in the church. At S. Agostino, other sites of devotion were open to the visitor in the early modern period, in particular a statue of the Virgin and Child located on the inner façade, now commonly known as the Madonna del 244 The relief sculptures were removed from the high altar during the renovation in the 1620s. They were donated to the church of S. Matteo on Via Merulana, which was destroyed in the late 19 th century. At that time, the sculptures were lost. Pedrocchi 2006, 115. 113 Parto. 245 The sculpture, much like the bronze St. Peter discussed in Chapter Two, is still a site of tactile devotion. In this chapter, I wish to point to the factors that led to the embodied, vernacular form of devotion directed towards this Renaissance sculpture. As the precious ancient icon was cloistered away in an appropriate display, another object received attention from pilgrims. At the church of S. Agostino in Rome, the sculpture known of the Madonna del Parto was one such object appropriated to satisfy the devotional needs of beholders. Installing the Icon A final procession for the legendary icon of the Virgin and Child by St. Luke at S. Agostino took place to mark ceremoniously its installation in a new protective home. On the fourth Sunday during Lent, April 2, 1628, the icon departed from S. Agostino and was carried through the Campus Martius before returning to the same church to be installed in its new home at the high altar tabernacle. The procession was composed of friars from the Augustinian order, priests, youths dressed as saints, prophets, sibyls, and angels, and five Cardinals. Musicians played, torches and candles were carried. And the icon was comfortably carried on a “thalamo,” a small cushioned bed, covered with “the most beautiful white canopy.” 246 The icon from S. Agostino was mobilized during a 245 The name of the sculpture comes from a combination of the 16 th century inscription on the architrave above the sculpture and the tradition that by touching the foot of the sculpture, the beholder receives blessing in having children. 246 Giacinto Gigli. Diario Di Roma (1608-1670). Ed. Manlio Barberito. Rome: Colombo, 1994, 171-72. “A di 2. di Aprile [1628], che fu la 4. Domenica di Quaresima fu portato in processione il Ritratto della Madonna SS.ma dipinto da S. Luca Evangelista, che si conserva nella Chiesa di Santo Agostino, con l’occasione di collocarlo nella’Altare che si era fabricato di novo in detta Chiesa, et fu fatto ciò in questo giorno della 4. Domenica, nel quale si suole scopire la detta Imagine sino all’ottava di Pasqua……seguivano una quantità grande di giovanetti vestiti con diversi habiti, che rappresentavano diversi Santi, et in particolare li Profeti, et Sibille, che havevano profetato della Madonna, tutti con il suo 114 procession, its “santo viaggio” to celebrate its new home. 247 At the end of the procession when the icon was placed in its new tabernacle, glimmering with gilding and candlelight, the image was finally decorously venerated, a sign of esteem. 248 Yet, at that moment, its relationship with the beholder dramatically changed from a mobile devotional object whose display narrated its power into a silent, inaccessible relic of Christian archaeology. The model for the high altar tabernacle at S. Agostino The high altar tabernacle at S. Agostino was not novel. 249 The other well-known icons painted by St. Luke (at S. Maria in Araceoli, S. Maria Maggiore, and S. Maria in Via Lata) also received new permanent installations in the early modern period. 250 And like others to follow, the altar tabernacle at S. Agostino shares striking visual similarities with an altar tabernacle for the Madonna del Soccorso (fig. 18) found at new St. Peter’s motto in mano…Da poi venivano alcuni Sacerdoti in havito Sacerdotale con Pianeta, et Piviali bellissimi, et un coro di musici, et poi una quantità di giovani vestiti da Angeli et appresso era portata, sotto un bellissimo baldacchino bianco, l’Imagine della Madonna Santissima accomodata sopra un bellissimo thalamo, dietro la quale seguivano a piede cinque Cardinali con numero infinito di gentilhomini et popolo di ogni sorte.” 247 Ostrow 1996, 118-20, notes the detailed description of the procession, what one anonymous author called a “santo viaggio” for the installation in 1613 of the Salus Popoli Romani in the Pauline Chapel at S. Maria Maggiore. 248 Ostrow 1996, 156, notes the symbolic value of the decorative elements as paying homage to the Virgin. 249 See Ostrow 1996, 151-58, for examples of late 16 th - and early 17 th -century altar tabernacles. 250 The renovation of the altar tabernacle at S. Maria in Aracoeli dates to 1561-68. The altar formerly held an altarpiece by Raphael. See Pagden 1990, 177-78. For the installation in 1613 of the icon at S. Maria Maggiore, see Barbara Wisch. "Keys to Success: Propriety and Promotion of Miraculous Images by Roman Confraternities." The Miraculous Image in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance. Eds. Erik Thunø and Gerhard Wolf. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2004: 161-84; and Ostrow 1996, Chapter Three. For the icon at S. Maria in Via Lata, see Metzger 1997, 293-94. 115 Basilica in the Cappella Gregoriana. 251 It is for practical reasons that they share similar formal qualities. The same architects working at St. Peter’s Basilica in the 1620s were also paid to create the altar tabernacle at S. Agostino. 252 Both monuments share richly colored marbles, a pair of Corinthian columns, the broken pediment, and a prominent space in the attic level for the dedicatory inscription, which is topped by a rounded pediment, flanked by angels. The icon was fitted high above eye level, between the columns of the tabernacle, surrounded by other architectural details to fill in the empty space. The Cappella Gregoriana at new St. Peter’s Basilica was the first chapel built in the arms of the crossing with a monumental marble tabernacle designed to house a large, up to twenty foot tall, altarpiece. But on February 12, 1578, a small fresco fragment from Old St. Peter’s Basilica named the Madonna del Soccorso because of the miraculous “assistance” (soccorso) it brought, was installed - an example of being in the right place at the right time. 253 The fresco of the Virgin, believed to have been commissioned by Pope Pascal II (1099-1118) for the altar of St. Leo in the transept of the old basilica, was 251 The altar tabernacle from the Cappella Gregoriana also served as an example for other churches, including the important altar tabernacle to hold the Salus Popoli Romani at S. Maria Maggiore, installed in the new Pauline Chapel in 1613, the mortuary chapel of Pope Paul V. See Ostrow 1996, Chapter 3, especially 154-55, who notes the importance of the form for other examples of Marian tabernacles. 252 Pedrocchi 2006 and Savina 2000 both note various payments made to Benedetto Drei and Bernini, both of whom worked at St. Peter’s in the 1620s. In particular, Benedetto Drei was responsible for installing monuments and objects from old St. Peter’s in the Grotte Vaticane and worked on the remodeling of the confessio. He also created an annotated plan of the Grotte. See Chapter Two. 253 Louise Rice. The Altars and Altarpieces of New St. Peter's: Outfitting the Basilica, 1621-1666. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997, 24-25, for the history of the installation of the Madonna del Soccorso. The chapel was dedicated to the Virgin and St. Gregory of Nazianzus by Pope Gregory XIII. Rice makes the important observation that the tabernacle was designed to hold a much larger altarpiece. See also Antonio Pinelli, ed. La Basilica di San Pietro in Vaticano, 4 Vols. Modena: Panini, 2000, vol. 4, 672. 116 detached from it original location in 1543-44 and placed at a temporary altar on the dividing wall between old and new St. Peter’s. The temporary altar was later destroyed to make room for a door into the Cappella Gregoriana, and the fresco found a new home in the just finished tabernacle, instead of being given as a gift to another church or acquired for a private collection. Similar to the story of the bronze St. Peter statue, discussed in Chapter Two, the Madonna del Soccorso was transferred to a temporary location during the construction of new St. Peter’s Basilica, and no doubt its temporary location allowed for increased access and attention, bringing new fama to the image. One can imagine the attention it received in the remaining part of the old basilica during the Holy Year of 1575, just a few years before it was installed in the Cappella Gregoriana. Coupled with the antiquity of the image, it was important to find an appropriate but safe home for the fragment when its temporary altar was destroyed. Also noted in Chapter Two, the Madonna del Soccorso was cited by an early source in reference to the importance of preserving the ancient devotional icons and remnants of Old St. Peter’s Basilica. A letter written to Pope Paul V from the Chapter of St. Peter’s, the legal governing group of the basilica, pointed to the installation of the Madonna del Soccorso in the Cappella Gregoriana as an excellent solution for honoring the dismantled devotional images from the old basilica. 254 With recommendations from the Chapter of the basilica, it is not surprising that the installation of the miracle-granting fresco installed in the monumental altar tabernacle became a model for later monuments. Yet, it was by chance that its installation in a tabernacle 254 BAV, Reg. Lat. 2100, fol. 104r. Text quoted in Chapter Two. 117 designed for a much larger altarpiece created a devotional space glorious in scale, but inaccessible for intimate devotional connection. The miracles granted by the icon would continue, but the close proximity granted by its former installation did not. Like the Madonna del Soccorso at new St. Peter’s Basilica, the setting for the legendary icon by St. Luke at S. Agostino placed an insurmountable distance between the beholder and the object. Placed high above the pavement and behind the high altar table, the icon is unavailable to the devout person who seeks the comfort of an intimate devotional space when requesting divine help. The monumental installation also takes part in the general aggrandizing of architecture and sculpture at St. Peter’s, which removed access to objects that had fallen victim to Protestant attacks while still honoring them. The monumental tabernacle, clearly following the designs of a tabernacle meant to hold a large altarpiece, dwarfs the icon. Decorative elements, including a small pediment, fill in the empty space. Yet, the decoration and installation certainly brings dignity to the icon even if it diminishes the connection with the beholder. Filled with the desire to be close to the Virgin and Child in S. Agostino, the beholder must look elsewhere. The Madonna del Parto Jacopo Sansovino’s Madonna del Parto (fig. 4) in S. Agostino, still sits in its original setting in a niche on the inner façade of the church (fig. 45), a short distance from the tomb marker of the man from Florence for whom the sculpture was dedicated. 255 255 For the commission of the sculpture by the heirs of Giovanni Francesco Martelli, see Corti 1971. 118 The curving wall and the scalloped edges of the shell-form niche encases the marble sculpture like a jewel. Flanking the niche are fluted Corinthian columns. The columns support a classical looking architrave carrying an inscription that reads “Virgo tua Gloria Partus”(Virgin, your glory is giving birth). 256 The image of the Virgin is strong and solid, a woman who easily holds up a twisting infant Christ with one arm. Her right hand holds a small book that is slightly open. The mother has taken an unexpected break from reading to grab hold of her dynamic child. Christ’s legs are spread apart, but planted firmly on the leg of his mother and the edge of the seat upon which the Virgin sits. Heavy drapery that covers the seat and the Virgin’s body adds monumentality to the sculpture. It is an image of the Virgin filled with unassuming dignity. Crowning her head is a circle of gold stars. Just below her breasts, a tarnished silver band with hints of gold encircles her torso. A similar tarnished garment etched with decorative tendrils, repoussé fringe and double braid borders, is draped across the child’s abdomen. With the exception of the bronze additions, a newly faced base, and a 19 th -century inscription, the setting of the Madonna del Parto has changed little, making it an ideal Renaissance object to study for its original context. 257 Attesting to its reception as a devotional object, an early 19 th -century inscription on the base, written in Italian, states that all those who “devoutly kiss the foot of this sacred image while reciting an Ave 256 Anon. Cenni Storici del Simulcro, del Culto, dei Miracoli e della Conornazione di Maria Ssma. del Parto Venerata in S. Agostino di Roma. Rome: Marco and Lorenzo Aureli, 1853, 16. 257 The base was changed in the 18 th century, when the saying of the Mass at the altar ceased. Anon. Cenni Storici 1853, 24-25, notes a Sacred Visit to S. Agostino, in which the Renaissance altar was reduced in depth, as there was no longer the need for the saying of the Mass. At that time, other changes occurred, but the records of Vanvitelli’s renovations at S. Agostino are lost, yet some notes are recorded in Tommaso Bonasoli, Notizie della relgione Agostinian, ms. [1780], A.G.A., vol. 1, noted in Virginia Anne Bonito. "The Saint Anne Altar in Sant' Agostino: Restoration and Interpretation." The Burlington Magazine 124.950 (1982): 268-76, 805, fn. 2. 119 Marie” will receive one hundred days of indulgences. 258 A source from the 19 th century notes that the bronze attachment, which is actually in the form of a foot wearing a sandal, was already worn out and replaced. 259 The worn-down bronze attachment on the foot of the Madonna del Parto (fig. 46) stands as a testament to a tradition that started before the addition of the inscription to inform uninitiated visitors about the devotion at the site. The Madonna del Parto sculpture in S. Agostino is still open to devotional access. On any given day, the visitor is able to enter the space in front of the sculpture, to rest upon a small wooden kneeler, to touch, kiss, and pray before the sculpture. The space is intimate and welcoming. Dark colored wooden kneelers are used to create a defined space in front of the sculpture with chairs set just outside. Donation boxes are placed at the two corners. Yet, on the modern feast day to the Madonna del Parto, celebrated during the first week of October and announced through a modern poster (fig. 47), access is limited and the act of touching the object is turned into a special ritual for the pregnant women attending the celebration. 260 The women about to give birth touch, or kiss, the foot of the statue to receive blessing for a successful and less painful delivery. Pink and blue satin and lace votives (fig. 48) left by mothers at the Madonna del Parto cover the walls near the niche. A photo album placed near the sculpture collects the images of newborn babies. 258 The full inscription reads as follows: “N.S.Pio.PP.VII.concede.in.perpetuo.100.giorni.d’indulgenza.da.lucrarsi.una.volta.il.giorno.da.tutti.quelli.c he.divotamente.baceranno.il.piede.di.quest.s.immagine.recitando.un.ave.maria.per.il.bisogni.di.s.chiesa.7.gi ug.mdcccxxii.” 259 Anon. Cenni Storici 1853, 75-76, “Al piede di bronzo già logoro pei continui baci, un nuovo si sostituì.” 260 The feast day of the sculpture is not included in the official calendar of feast days of saints. It is typically celebrated on the second Sunday of October. 120 Across from this display of Renaissance sculpture and popular devotion, a freestanding sign sits near the holy water font, holding a didactic placard with information about the object. 261 The visitor learns about iconography and formal qualities shared between the sculpture of the Madonna and an ancient sculpture of Apollo, now found in the Naples Archaeological Museum, which formerly was in a collection in Rome. A connection is made between the name of the collection (Sassi) and how the sculpture was called the Sasso Madonna and was widely worshiped. Collection names and formal associations are coupled with the statement that the object was “widely worshiped,” which alludes to the past and present day devotion to the object. Formal similarities shared between objects can lead to devotional practice and meaning, but the association with the god Apollo is not the one that seems most meaningful to the history of the devotion of this object. Art history and devotional practices are not entirely in agreement regarding the display of this sculpture. The didactic underscores the inconsistency in art historical writing about famous objects that are sites of active devotion. 262 261 The panel is located across from the chapel, near the first pier of the central nave. The panel also describes the holy water font at the first pier. “Counterfacade. To the right of the main portal: Jacopo Tatti, known as Sansovino, Madonna with Child (1516-21), carved marble. A 16 th century altar here was perhaps demolished in the mid-18 th century. The upper part remains. It is a niche with a shell design, bordered by columns. A triangular tympanum is located above. Inside is the famous group by Sansovino, commissioned in 1516 by the heirs of the Florentine merchant G. F. Martelli, who gave impulse to the construction of the chapel. Inspiration for the work comes from an ancient model, perhaps a porphyry sculpture of Apollo Seated now in the Archaeological Museum of Naples, but originally in the Palazzo Sassi in the Roman district of Parione, where some 16 th century drawings attest to this fact. It was originally known as the Sasso Madonna and widely worshipped. This image is considered the protector of women in labour and hence is called The Madonna of Childbirth.” The didactic was created as part of the initiative of the Soprintendenza Speciale per il Polo Museale Romano to improve the sites in the area called “Il Tridente,” the area between Piazza del Popolo and Piazza Venezia, Via Leonina (Via di Ripetta), Via Paolina (Via del Babuino) and Via Trinitatis (Via Condotti) and along Via del Corso. 262 To underscore the inconsistency in treatment of objects even further, another panel in the same church in front of a chapel dedicated to the Crucifixion boasts that St. Filippo Neri prayed before the anonymous 121 The disagreement between art history and the history of devotion is certainly difficult to reconcile. Scholars reveal their pains to address the problem when endeavoring to complete their own projects on related topics with different ends. Alexander Nagel points to the striking difference in appeal between Jacopo Sansovino’s Madonna del Parto and a sculpture of the Virgin, Christ, and S. Anne (fig. 49) by Andrea Sansovino, also located in the church of S. Agostino. Nagel observes that a split emerged between the way the two sculptures were received by humanists in the Renaissance who favored the Virgin, Christ and S. Anne sculpture by Andrea over the explicitly Classical and hence popular Madonna del Parto by Jacopo. He notes: What was projected as a revival of the antique under sophisticated Christian humanist auspices was, at a lower social level, taken up into living cult practices. The [Madonna del Parto’s] popular audience responded with familiar forms of Christian worship, and it is likely that the overt references to antique models touched a still-vital pagan undercurrent latent in popular piety. By contrast, Andrea Sansovino’s S. Anne group, with its more contrived artistic references and involved figural structure, does not seem ever to have made much of an impression on popular audiences. Conceived in a sophisticated scholarly and artistic ambient, it remains the concern of scholars to this day. 263 Nagel’s implicit argument about the two different responses to these sculptures is based on outward formal qualities. As far as we know, the “contrived artistic references and involved figural structure” of the S. Anne group did not elicit the same devotional and visceral response as the “overt references to antique models” found in the Madonna del 15 th -century painted, wooden sculpted image of the crucified Christ. In this case, anonymous devotional art is made meaningful through its veneration by a well-known theologian. 263 Nagel 2000, 248, fn. 84. Nagel’s book is important for pointing out the novelty of the formal qualities of Michelangelo’s sculptures within the context of 16 th -century art. 122 Parto. 264 The overt Classical reference noted above is to a sculpture believed during the Renaissance to be a personification of Rome then in the Sassi collection, the same sculpture mentioned in the didactic as a sculpture of Apollo. 265 Beyond a group of humanists familiar with Classical sculpture collections, it is difficult to determine who would have understood the specific reference to the ancient sculpture located in the courtyard of a palace. 266 Yet, pilgrims visiting the church were likely drawn to the object because of a general familiarity with Classical sculpture as known through the various monuments found throughout the city. The power of ancient religious traditions still lingering among the lay community of Rome, the “pagan undercurrent latent in popular piety” rightly noted by Nagel, certainly drew people to the marble sculpture. 267 The Madonna del Parto was associated with yet another Classical work, in 264 Further supporting Nagel’s observation that the St. Anne group was accepted by the more erudite of people in Rome. Cesare D'Onofrio. Un Popolo di Statue Racconta: Storie Fatti Leggende della Città di Roma Antica Medievale Moderna. Roma: Romana Società Editrice, 1990, 56, fn. 36, cites the tradition of Renaissance Humanists posting verses and poems in Latin at the St. Anne group on St. Anne’s feast day (July 26). This is not surprising given that the patron of the sculpture was the humanist and Apostolic Protonotary, Johann Goritz. For Goritz and an interpretation of the sculpture in relation to a Raphael fresco also located in the church, see Bonito 1982. 265 The sculpture, an over-life size seated Apollo made of porphyry, entered the Farnese Collection in the middle of the 16 th century and was noted by Aldrovandi. It is now part of the Naples Archaeological Museum, inv. 6281. The current restorations were carried out in 1796 by Albacini, thus changing the appearance of the object from its 16 th century state when it had a female head. See Garrard 1975, 50, fig. B, and 334-36. 266 Hubertus Günther. "Michelangelo's Works in the Eyes of His Contemporaries." The Beholder: The Experience of Art in Early Modern Europe. Eds. Thomas Frangenberg and Robert Williams. London: Ashgate, 2006, 53-85, raises the question about contemporary viewers understanding erudite references in Michelangelo’s sculptures, and concludes that it would have been precious few. If guidebooks of the time are any indication, objects are typically identified by their clear, traditional subjects. 267 For the idea of marble sculpture as a material specific to antiquity and “art” in the early modern period, see Joanna E. Ziegler. "Michelangelo and the Medieval Pieta: The Sculpture of Devotion or the Art of Sculpture?" Gesta 34.1 (1995): 28-36. See also Leonard Barkan. Unearthing the Past: Archaeology and Aesthetics in the Making of Renaissance Culture. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1999, especially Chapter Five. 123 particular, a sculpture representing Agrippina and the infant Nero. Early authors note that the Madonna del Parto sculpture was carved from a marble statue of a Roman emperor’s wife holding one of the most ill fated emperors as an infant, Nero. 268 As was the case at St. Peter’s Basilica with the bronze St. Peter sculpture believed to have been made from the bronze of an ancient sculpture of Zeus, so too did the Madonna del Parto receive a similar triumphant origin story. The association is reiterated in a 19 th century history of the church of S. Agostino. The 19 th century author states that the early association with an ancient pagan sculpture is sacrilege. 269 Yet, for the 16 th - and 17 th century beholder, such an association between the pagan and Christian subject helped to cancel the authority of the ancient object. Creating the image of the most important Christian mother and son from an image of a mother and son who could not have been more opposite provides a powerful example of the triumph of Christian over pagan motherhood. Moreover, cutting an image of the Virgin from an ancient sculpture had its precedent. One is found in the church of S. Domenico in Orvieto. 270 The early modern reuse of ancient sculptures was not uncommon, and its meaning was not read as sacrilegious so much as part of a process of Christianization, which made the former homes of ancient Roman gods and goddesses inhabitable. 271 268 Anon. Cenni Storici 1853, 20, who cites the early sources. Garrard notes that modern scholars elude to an Agrippina sculpture as the Classical source for the Madonna del Parto’s formal qualities, but not that it came from early sources or that it was actually carved from an ancient sculpture. Garrard 1975 334 and fn. 10. 269 Anon. Cenni Storici 1853, 20. 270 Angiola Maria Romanini. "Arnolfo Architectus." Revue de l'Art 105 (1994): 9-18. Romanini also attributes the bronze St. Peter to Arnolfo di Cambio. 271 See Peter Scott Brown. "As Excrement to Sacrament: The Dissimulated Pagan Idol of Ste-Marie d'Oloron." The Art Bulletin 87.4 (2005): 571-88, for the reuse, by means of concealment, of an image of 124 Tactile Devotion and the Madonna del Parto Although the history of tactile veneration at the Madonna del Parto is not well documented before the 18 th century, there is much inferential evidence suggesting that the devotion to the sculpture started sometime in the early 17 th century. 272 Just a few years after the installation of the St. Luke icon in the high altar tabernacle, the Madonna del Parto received her own honorific attention. According to the endowment left by Count Alessandro Sforza-Pallavicini, the Madonna del Parto received a crown, made of fifty ounces of gold and five diamonds. 273 In 1636, Count Sforza-Pallavicini provided crowns for the most important images of the Virgin in Rome. 274 The Virgin from Michelangelo’s Pietà was one of the other images that received a crown from the same patron. 275 By the early 17 th century, two Renaissance sculptures were being honored by a second party, as a sign of his conspicuous public devotion to the Virgin. Offering crowns to sculpted images of the Virgin followed the tradition of giving crowns to miracle-granting icons, Mars for a relief sculpture representing the Virgin in the portal of the 12 th century Cathedral of Ste-Marie d’Oloron in France. 272 Pursuing further archival research on the Madonna del Parto could provide such evidence and a more full understanding of the beginning of the devotion surrounding this sculpture. See Anon. Cenni Storici 1853, 26-43, for the history of the devotion to the sculpture. The author notes that it is not documented before the 18 th century, but no doubt started before then. The official cult to the sculpture was founded in 1822. Garrard 1975, accepts that the tradition of kissing the foot of the statue did not begin until the 19 th century, which is based on the inscriptional evidence which officially announces the giving of papal indulgences. 273 Count Sforza-Pallavacini’s heirs followed up on this legacy and provided the Madonna del Parto with a crown made of “lastra tirata a martello, risaltata in tutto, complessivament del peso di once cinquanta e denari cinque, di bontà carati ventidue.” Anon. Cenni Storici 1853, 75. The current crown was added in 1851, during a solemn ceremony overseen by Carindal Mario Matteio. Anon. Cenni Storici 1853, 84. 274 Anon. Cenni Storici 1853, 75. “E ciò in adempimento del pio legato nel 1636 lasciavagli il conte Sforza- Pallavicini, da erogare per le corone delle più illustri immagine di Maria.” 275 The Pietà received her crown from Count Sforza-Pallavicini in 1637. Rice 1997, 219, fn. 26, noting Tolnay 1947, 147. The crown and other attachments are still visible in early 20 th century photographs. 125 which included the important icons of the Virgin painted by St. Luke. 276 The icon at S. Maria Maggiore already received a crown in 1597. 277 Old venerated icons and Renaissance sculptures were being layered with sponsored devotion for holy acknowledgement. But these private sponsorships in turn brought renewed attention to the object through dazzling crowns and eye-catching gold and bronze halos and angels. Female Devotion at S. Agostino The continuous history of female devotion at S. Agostino is evidence for the origin of the tactile devotion to the Madonna del Parto. Even though the church was cleared in the 18 th century of the altars and votive offerings covering the piers, the traces of a long history of devotion at the site are still discernible. 278 Hundreds of silver and other metal votive hearts (fig. 50) are visible in wood-framed glass display cases on the east wall of the side aisle. 279 The abundance of silver and other metal votives that are left in S. Agostino remind the modern visitor that churches collected the costly offerings of male and female pilgrims saying thanks for blessing received, the reason for their long journeys. Pilgrims passed the church after entering Rome at Porta del Popolo, following the Via di Ripetta, en route to the late 15 th -century Via dei Coronari, the street where 276 Rice 1997, 184, referring to the Madonna della Febbre, a 14 th -century fresco fragment from the old St. Peter’s Basilica, now located in the Sacristy, notes the tradition of giving crowns to images which were known to be miraculous. The Madonna della Febbre received its crown in 1631. 277 See Wisch 2004, 182-83; Ostrow 1996, 130. 278 Bontio 1980, 805, fn. 2. 279 R. W. Lightbown. "Ex-Votos in Gold and Silver: A Forgotten Art." The Burlington Magazine 121.915 (1979): 354-55, especially for the votives hearts from Loreto. 126 pilgrims could navigate easily through the Campus Martius, buy their rosaries (corone), be led to the Ponte Sant’Angelo, and arrive at the final destination, St. Peter’s Basilica. 280 The traces of female devotion are found in the histories of the confraternities at the church. The Augustinians were major patrons of women in need, especially new mothers, and celebrated a feast day to St. Monica, the mother of the order’s founder, whose body and coffin were translated from Ostia to Rome in 1430. 281 The confraternity of St. Monica, founded in 1140, was an order of only women, which later joined with the Arch-Confraternity of the Girdle (Cintura) of the Blessed Virgin. 282 The Arch- Confraternity of St. Monica provided dowries for unwed women. Their devotion at the site is described already in the 16 th and 17 th centuries. Masses, continuously lit candles, 280 On the pilgrim route passing S. Agostino, see Pamela M. Jones. Altarpieces and their Viewers in the Churches of Rome from Caravaggio to Guido Reni. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008, 78-79. Fig. 22 includes a map of the pilgrim route. Jones’ chapter entitled “The place of poverty in Seicento Rome: bare feet, humility, and the pilgrimage of life in Caravaggio’s Madonna of Loreto (ca. 1605-06) in the church of S. Agostino,” is an ideal case study for the understanding the painting by Caravaggio as a successful example of devotional art dedicated by the Cavaletti, a member of which organized pilgrimages to the Holy House at Loreto, and to the pilgrims who would have identified with the painting by Caravaggio. 281 The date is recorded on the inscription below the sarcophagus, installed during the renovation of the church in 1760. The body was initially translated to the Augustinian church of S. Trifone, and then was transferred to the newly built S. Agostino in the first chapel on the Evangelical (west) side of the high altar. The tomb that is visible in the church was made in the mid-15 th century, was modified in 1566, and then again in 1760. The changes to the installation of the tomb were significant in the 18 th century, in particular, the raising of the tomb to far above the viewers head. Also, the body of the saint was moved to an urn inside the altar of the chapel. Barnaby Robert Nygren. "The Monumental Saint's Tomb in Italy: 1260 - 1520." PhD Thesis, Harvard University, 1999., unpaginated catalogue. 282 Willy Pocino. Le Confraternite Romane. Rome: Marco Besso, 1999, 108, noting S. Monica and the Arciconfraternita della Cintura della B. V. Maria. Carlo Bartolomeo Piazza. Opere Pie di Roma Descritte Secondo lo Stato Presente, e Dedicate alla Santita di Nostro Signore Innocenzo Xi. Rome: Gio: Battista Bussotti, 1679, 407-410, for the Arch-Confraternity of the Cintura; and 512-14, for the Arch-Confraternity of S. Monica at S. Agostino. In many images of the Virgin’s ascension, St. Thomas can be seen holding the sacred cintura of the Virgin. The most famous example from the Renaissance is Raphael’s painting of the Madonna del Parto now located in the Musei Vaticani. 127 and a bi-weekly procession with St. Monica’s head were part of the highly visible signs of veneration produced by the Arch-Confraternity of women. 283 The Arch-Confraternity of the Girdle is dedicated to the Virgin and the importance of the tradition of wearing the sacred cintura. In the 17 th century, Carlo Bartolomeo Piazza, author of one of the most complete early histories of confraternities in Rome, noted the Arch-Confraternity of the Girdle and the origin of wearing a belt, which goes back to Adam and Eve and the Apostles. He tells the story of when St. Peter, released from jail, asked the angel to tie a belt around him in order to bind his loins, to restrict the body, as a sign of his servitude to God. As visual evidence for the practice of wearing the girdle, Piazza offers the presence of the cintura in the image of the Virgin and Child (fig. 41) painted by St. Luke from S. Agostino, attesting to the antiquity of the tradition to bind the body. Although the sinless nature of the Virgin was doctrine for the Augustinian order by the 17 th century, the tradition of her wearing the cintura in ancient and more recent images held significant currency on the local level at the church of S. Agostino. The Virgin was the ultimate role model for the women of the order, binding her body to preserve her virginity and as a sign of penance. 284 Because the patron of the Madonna del Parto sculpture was from Florence, a connection between the sculpture and the veneration of the cintura is likely. 285 And the sculpture itself supports the connection. An active veneration of the contact relic of the 283 Piazza 1679, 513. “Provede questa alla detta Cappella di tutto ciò, che spetta al culto divino; mantenendovi perpetuamente al sacro, a sontuoso deposito della Santa varie lampadi accese. Ogni seconda Domenica del mese fanno una divota processione, con la reliquia della Santa, che è la di lei testa.” 284 Piazza 1679, 407-08. 285 Corti 1971, 395-96. 128 girdle of the Virgin existed at the nearby town of Prato. 286 The girdle was (and still is) venerated for help in delivering children, which is the same reason people touch the foot of the Sansovino sculpture. On the sculpture, one later attachment is a bronze gilded strap below the breasts of the Virgin, possibly alluding to the local veneration of the relic. For members of the Arch-Confraternity of the Girdle, the sculpture serves as a surrogate for the relic as well as an accessible devotional image of the Virgin. If one could not have the real relic, or access the icon painted by St. Luke, a sculpted object that represents the original owner wearing a surrogate of the relic could suffice. 287 Certainly lay visitors to S. Agostino were drawing connections between the icon of the Virgin and the Madonna del Parto sculpture already in the 16 th century. One visual piece of evidence is found in the painting St. Luke Painting the Virgin (fig. 51) by Martin van Heemskerck, painted in the c. 1553. The easel picture shows St. Luke painting the portrait of the Virgin and Child. The source for the Virgin and Child, sitting 286 The girdle of the Virgin is the small band which is usually depicted in paintings as a rope or belt worn over the Virgin’s dress and under her breasts. This is not a special article of clothing, but one that can be found in ancient Greco-Roman sculptures of women. For images of the Madonna del Parto and its popularity in Florence, see Brendan Cassidy. "A Relic, Some Pictures and the Mothers of Florence in the Late Fourteenth Century." Gesta 30.2 (1991): 91-99. For the relic in Prato, its chapel, and its veneration, see Robert Maniura. "Image and Relic in the Cult of Our Lady of Prato." Images, Relics, and Devotional Practices in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Eds. Sally J. Cornelison and Scott B. Montgomery. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006, 193-209. For the veneration of cult images in late medieval Florence, see Richard C. Trexler. "Florentine Religious Experience: The Sacred Image." Studies in the Renaissance 19 (1972): 7-41. 287 For the relationship between art and relics, see Erik Thunø. Image and Relic: Mediating the Sacred in Early Medieval Rome. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2002, 14-15. As the cult of relics grew, and monuments were being created as “signs” of the relics in the early modern period, it is easy to understand how a devotional object would take on the status of a relic. For further examples of images functioning as relics, see Sally J. Cornelison. "When an Image is a Relic: The St. Zenobius Panel from Florence Cathedral." Images, Relics, and Devotional Practices in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Eds. Sally J. Cornelison and Scott B. Montgomery. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006, 95-113. 129 as models within the painted image, is the Madonna del Parto in S. Agostino. 288 Heemskerck made a connection between the miraculous icon painted by St. Luke in S. Agostino and the Renaissance sculpture. 289 The sculpture, because of its three- dimensional form, lends itself to be interpreted as the physical manifestation of the Virgin and Child, which is the source of the miraculous image in Heemskerck’s painting. In Heemskerck’s image, a Renaissance object is rendered as the living proto-type for an ancient icon confirming the active role of the sculpture and its close relationship with the sacred image in the church. 290 At S. Agostino, among the numerous feast days celebrated, two feast days are worth mentioning. The feast of the Annunciation, celebrated on March 25, was celebrated at S. Agostino, in conjunction with the feast at the main seat of that confraternity at S. Maria sopra Minerva. The chapel dedicated to the Holy House of Loreto at S. Agostino would also give reason for this celebration, because the Holy House is believed to be the location in which the Virgin was born, lived, and experienced the 288 The connection between Martin van Heemskerck’s painting and the sculpture was made by Garrard 1975, 336, within an article about the antique source for the Madonna del Parto. 289 Another enticing connection is between the Heemskerck painting and the Bocca della Verità, a form of which is actually shown in the background of the painting on the ground of the courtyard. The background scene is derived from a drawing made by Heemskerck of the Della Valle collection courtyard, which at the time apparently had a drain cover in the center of the courtyard which looked like the Bocca della Verità. The presence of the Bocca-type drain is noted by Fabio Barry in a forth-coming essay on the identity and use of the Bocca della Verità in antiquity. For the Della Valle collection and the Hemskerck drawings, see Kathleen Christian. "Instauratio and Pietas: The Della Valle Collections of Ancient Sculpture." Collecting Sculpture in Early Modern Europe. Eds. Nicholas Penny and Eike Schmidt. Studies in the History of Art, 70. Symposium Papers, Xlvii. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008, 33-65. 290 A man in the background appears to be carving a statue of a male pagan god. See James Hall. The World as Sculpture: The Changing Status of Sculpture from the Renaissance to the Present Day. London: Chatto & Windus, 1999, 58-59, who notes the sculptor, possibly a reference to Michelangelo, is placed in the background, while the painter in the foreground is chosen to render the sacred Christian image. 130 Annunciation. 291 And in honor of the Virgin’s mother, St. Anne, a High Mass was sung at her altar on her feast day, July 26, at the request of the patron of the Sansovino St. Anne sculpture group in the central nave. 292 With all the celebrations to sacred Mothers, devotion from young women who were planning to get married and become mothers, and the female members of the confraternities and pilgrims venerating the site, it is no wonder that the Madonna del Parto became such an important devotional object. The object took on a significant devotional function appropriated by the women who were members of the Arch- Confraternities at S. Agostino as well as the thousands of pilgrims who stopped at the church en route to St. Peter’s Basilica. When denied access to the miracle-granting icon by St. Luke, the sculpture of the Virgin and Child served as a suitable substitute for women whose devotion to the Virgin was bound up in the veneration of the relic of her girdle as well as her veneration as the ideal mother. Devotion to the entire cycle of the life of Virgin, from her birth in the Holy House at Loreto, to the Annunciation at the same house, the birth of Christ, and then her fulfillment as Mother of God, makes the church of S. Agostino an important returning point for devout women throughout the year. The feast days also help to connect the church of S. Agostino with other churches in the city, which either took part in the feast days or have chapels and confraternities 291 Jones 2008, 84, for the Holy House. See also Giuseppe Santarelli. Tradizioni e Leggende Lauretane. Ancona: Edizioni Aniballi, 2007. 292 Bonito 1980, 805 and 810, for a note about the singing of the High Mass to St. Anne on her feast day, but also two weekly masses for her, three weekly for the Virgin, and five each week for Goritz’s soul, designated friends and his family. 131 devoted to the Annunciation and the Madonna of Loreto, such as S. Maria sopra Minerva and S. Maria in Cosmedin, which is the focus of the following section. S. Maria in Cosmedin: the Bocca della Verità and the Virgin In 1618, at the most important church for the early Christian Greek community of Rome, S. Maria in Cosmedin, a miracle-granting icon of the Virgin and Child, called in Greek the Theotókos (fig. 44) was installed in the central apse. 293 An 18 th century print, Icon tabernacle in central apse (fig. 52), shows the no longer extant tabernacle with its heavily decorated and inaccessible cabinet set above an old marble bishop’s chair. 294 The tabernacle was set in a marble aedicule, decorated by winged cherub heads, the dove of the Holy Spirit above, and an image of the Crucifixion topping the monument. The icon was hidden behind a pair of doors used to preserve the power of the object for when it was ceremoniously unveiled to worshippers. Before the 18 th century, the painting was believed to have been a 4 th -century icon brought from Greece during the first iconoclasm in 726-87, the traumatic moment in which images of the Virgin, Christ and Saints were destroyed in the Eastern church because of associations with pagan devotional 293 Giovanni Mario Crescimbeni. L’istoria della Basilica Diaconale, Collegiata, e Parrocchiale di S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma. Roma: Antonio de Rossi, 1715, 147-52, provides the history of the icon. Giuseppe Massimi. La Chiesa di S. Maria in Cosmedin (in Schola Greca). Rome, 1989, 58-61, completes the 18 th - through 20 th -century history of the icon. The icon was first installed in 1618 in the central apse and received subsequent additions to honor the icon in 1649 and 1758. In 1672, the icon was honored with crowns for the Virgin and Child from the Capitolo Vaticano, responsible for bestowing crowns upon icons which have brought about miracles. In 1798, the crowns were stolen, but were subsequently replaced. 294 The major renovations to the church at the end of the 19 th century stripped all the major additions of the 17 th and 18 th century, including the façade. Giovanni Battista Giovenale. La Basilica di S. Maria in Cosmedin. Rome, 1927. 132 practices. 295 The icon is dated by one 18 th century source to the time of the Council of Ephesus, where the early Church officially declared the Virgin the Mother of God. 296 Before the installation of the icon in the early 17 th century, its precise location is not recorded. It has been suggested that the icon was mounted on the architrave of the screen dividing the high altar from the choir in the nave. 297 But it is possible that the icon was in a wall of the old church that had been renovated and expanded under pope Hadrian I (772-95). As the titular image of the church, the icon was so deeply revered already in the 17 th century that it received a costly and prominent placement in the church. A lost inscription from the portico, dating to sometime in the early 17 th century, brings an unexpected relationship between the icon and an ancient marble stone known commonly as the Bocca della Verità (fig. 5). The inscription reads: [This is] a statue devoted to the sacred gods of the pagans, the horror of evil spirits. After the impiety of this place was rooted out, the Christian religion presented it to the Virgin Mother of God as an offering to prevent humans from cursedly forgetting their faith. Her own image was rescued from those hostile to icons in rage, and now accessible here, perpetually venerated by the faithful. An inscription underneath it, [notes] that it stands as a witness to this event, from the ancient wall but now in this new one, so that it may endure for posterity. 298 295 The first iconoclasm is followed by a second phase in 815-43. Separating the two phases of iconoclasm was the Council of Nicaea II (787) which briefly reinstated the veneration of icons. David Turner. "The Politics of Despair: The Plague of 746-747 and Iconoclasms in the Byzantine Empire." The Annual of the British School at Athens 85 (1990): 419-34, 420. 296 John L. Osborne. "Early Medieval Painting in San Clemente, Rome: The Madonna and Child in the Niche." Gesta 20.2 (1981): 303. 297 Massimi makes his suggestion based on the hypothetical early installation of the Salus Populi Romani icon at S. Maria Maggiore. Massimi 1989, 61. 298 Crescimbeni 1715, 58. Simulacrum. Diis Gentium Sacris devotum Horrore Cacodemonum Impietate loci averuncata 133 The inscription notes that the Bocca was dedicated to the Virgin as a sign of the strength of the Christian faith to triumph over the false ancient Roman religions. The impiety of the Roman religions had to be “rooted out” of a dangerous relic of the Pagan past by being made into a relic of Christian faith. Instead of being destroyed, re-carved or in some way physically reworked, like the legend associated with the Madonna del Parto, the object was left intact. The Bocca della Verità was dedicated to the Virgin as a reminder to not lose faith and was set up in the portico of her church. Within this specific context, destroying the stone would have been reminiscent of the destruction of the Christian images during the iconoclasm to which the inscription alludes. The inscription records that the titular image of the church was rescued from “those hostile to icons”. A now missing inscription from underneath the icon referred to its role as a “witness” to the events of the iconoclasm. The church of S. Maria in Cosmedin fostered its important position as a church in the Greek community in Rome that preserves icons of devotion. 299 Obtulit Christiana Religio In Anathema oblivionis Virgini Matri Dei Cuius Icona ab Iconomacorum Furore subrepta Hic perpetuo fidelium cultui patet. Facti testem explicat subiecta Inscriptio Ex antiquo pariete in hunc novum Ut Posteris perennet I thank Chiara Sulprizio for help translating this inscription. 299 The S. Maria in Cosmedin complex housed the Schola Greca. Its origin dates back to at least the 6 th century when a diaconia, an early Christian welfare center, was founded in an ancient Roman portico, which now comprises part of the current portico, sacristy and nave. Frances J. Niederer. "Pagan Monuments Converted to Christian Use: The Roman "Diaconiae"." The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 12.3 (1953): 3-6; Jan Gadeyne. "Function and Dysfunction of the City: Rome in the Fifth Century A.D." PhD dissertation. Catholic University of Leuven, 2009, 63. 134 An ancient stone representing a pagan god and an icon of the Virgin and Child may appear unseemly acquaintances. But the stories which circulated about the Bocca della Verità and those who touched the Bocca will make it clear that during the 17 th century it was related to the veneration of the Virgin, and in turn, served as a stone to test faith as much as truthfulness. In this section, I return the Bocca to a moment in which ancient stones were employed by the church to serve as proof of the power of faith and the triumph of Christianity over paganism. Objects were appropriated as sites of devotion, and in particular, tactile devotion. When they turned to the cherished Christian icons of the Virgin and Child physical devotion was denied the beholder in light of Counter Reformation reforms that discouraged this behavior in relation to legendary icons. At the church of S. Maria in Cosmedin the presence of the ancient Roman past surrounded the early devotional site to the Virgin. Roman temples transformed into churches and the visible ruins of other sacred buildings and political monuments reminded the early modern person of the powerful sacred history in the ancient Forum Boarium. 300 The Bocca della Verità in the 17 th century The Bocca della Verità (figs. 5-6) rests upon a Corinthian capital in the portico of the church of S. Maria in Cosmedin. A gapping mouth, large shadow-filled holes for 300 The discovery of an over life-size bronze, gold-gilded cult statue of Hercules from the area of the church of S. Maria in Cosmedin in the time of pope Sixtus IV (1471-84) must have served as a powerful reminder of the importance of the cult of Hercules in the area. The sculpture was placed in the Palazzo dei Conservatori by 1510 in the newly founded Capitoline Museum. In 1578 the sculpture was given a new base during the Pontificate of Pope Gregory XIII and then was moved to a new room named after the sculpture in 1627. Francis Haskell and Nicholas Penny. Taste and the Antique: The Lure of Classical Sculpture, 1500-1900. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1981, 228-29. 135 eyes, and the weathered mess of lines surrounding the face give an unsettling quality to the god. The large marble disc, made of purple veined Phrygian marble, leaned against the front of the church until 1632, when the stone was rolled into the portico, attached to the wall, and soon after two inscriptions were installed nearby, one of which I have already noted above. 301 Although the placement of the Bocca della Verità has changed little since the 17 th century, its surroundings were transformed several times. 302 The two inscriptions originally placed near the Bocca are no longer found in the portico. The brick wall against which the stone was attached is visible through the open mouth of the Bocca della Verità (fig. 53) yet the surrounding wall surface is covered with stucco. An 18 th century print, Façade of S. Maria in Cosmedin (fig. 54), the façade of the church includes simple brick walls filling the empty spaces between pilasters, which today are open. Formerly, small arched windows pierced the austere walls and one large window with a heavy grate opened onto the sacristy. The entrance to the church was sunken below the 18 th century ground level, which had risen from the accumulation of sediment left behind after the frequent inundations of the nearby Tiber River. Entering the portico in the 17 th century must have been reminiscent of a semi-subterranean experience with light entering above 301 Tempesta included the Bocca on his Map of Rome, leaning against the façade. The second inscription will be noted later in the chapter. The Bocca della Verità was installed by the Canon of the church, Ottavio Placidi. Crescimbeni 1715, 27. 302 Crescimbeni 1715, 27-37, and 58-59, is the earliest published history of the church which refers in detail to the history and installation of the Bocca della Verità. He notes that the Bocca was placed at the head of the portico on a small step (“scalino”) made of marble (58). The Bocca currently sits on a Corinthian capital. 136 one’s head. The ambiance must have bestowed an ominous quality to the ancient stone placed at the north end of the portico. Medieval frescoes, dating to the time of Pope Hadrian I (772-95) were still visible in a small niche-shaped chapel in the wall adjacent to the Bocca della Verità during the 17 th century. In view of the Bocca della Verità was a life-size painted image of a seated Virgin with Child on her lap, flanked by saints Peter and Paul. 303 Other parts of the fresco, including the symbols of the evangelists Mark and John, suffered the affects of time or were whitewashed. By the 18 th century, the use of the small frescoed chapel in the portico had been forgotten and it stood only as a testament to the “very old manner” of painting and an old tradition of placing devotional images in the porticoes of churches, as was still visible in the 17 th century at S. Cecilia in Trastevere and S. Lorenzo fuori le Mura. 304 Other fragments from antiquity appeared in the portico of S. Maria in Cosmedin providing examples of how the ancient past was adapted for Christian purposes. This type of re-use of ancient building materials is certainly not novel to this particular site as many other examples exist in Rome and throughout central Italy. 305 The entrance to the 303 By the 18 th century, the image of Paul had been replaced by a doorway. Crescimbeni 1715, 57-58. 304 The author suggests that the portico was used by penitents who could not enter the church. Crescimbeni 1715, 58. “…che tutto questo Portico fosse anticamente ornato di pittore, secondo l’uso di que’ tempi…del quale si veggono tuttavia in Roma i vestigi , spezialmente nel Portico di S. Lorenzo fuori della Mura, e in quello della bellissima Chiesa di S. Cecilia.” Some of the frescoes still remain in the portico at the church of S. Lorenzo, but only small transferred fragments remain at the church of S. Cecilia. For the frescoes at S. Cecilia, see M. Righetti, “Pasquale I e la fondazione carolingia,” in Carlo La Bella, et al., ed. Santa Cecilia in Trastevere. Rome: Palombi, 2007, especially pages 68-70, which notes that the remaining fragments were transferred in 1785 to a wall in the right nave. 305 The reuse of ancient materials in the Middle Ages has received more attention than any other period. On the re-use of ancient building materials in Christian monuments, commonly referred to as spolia, see Dale Kinney. "Spolia." St. Peter's in the Vatican. Ed. William Tronzo. Cambridge: Cambridge University 137 portico reused ancient columns made of smooth granite and fluted Phrygian marble. The central doorway of the church has a doorjamb made from the architrave of an ancient structure, broken into sections. The face of the architrave was re-carved with Christian imagery, including the symbols of the four evangelists. An ancient marble stone slab traditionally associated with St. Valentine was located in the portico with an inscription explaining the origin of the non-decorated, ancient marble stone. 306 And just inside the door, set within small niches at chest height, were placed two round black stones turned glossy from being touched, believed to have been used to torture martyred saints. 307 In the 17 th century, the portico and the environs of S. Maria in Cosmedin were brimming with the traces of the ancient pagan and Christian past. Parceling out Old St. Peter’s Basilica A mosaic fragment of the Adoration of the Magi (fig. 43) from Old St. Peter’s Basilica was ceremoniously transferred to the church of S. Maria in Cosmedin on September 2, 1636. By 1639, the mosaic was installed over the central door of the Press, 2005: 16-47; Maria Fabricius Hansen. The Eloquence of Appropriation. Prolegomena to an Understanding of Spolia in Early Christian Rome. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2003; Ann Marie Yasin. "Displaying the Sacred Past: Ancient Christian Inscriptions in Early Modern Rome." International Journal of the Classical Tradition 7.1 (2000): 39-57. 306 Crescimbeni 1715, 81-101, discusses at length the stone, which was donated to the church in 1625 by Pope Urban VIII. The relics of St. Valentine were already by that time found at the church of S. Maria in Cosmedin owing to the destruction of his own nearby church. The stone of St. Valentine was already moved to the pavement of the sacristy of the church in the 18 th century. 307 The stones are currently located on the inner façade of the church in small niches which retain some traces of decorative fresco. Crescimbeni 1715, 146, does not believe the association between the stones and the martyring of early Christians. Instead, he thinks they are ancient weights. Other examples survive in S. Maria in Trastevere and S. Cosma e Damiano. 138 church on the inner façade. 308 The mosaic fragment comes from the important 8 th - century oratory of Pope John VII (705-707), located at the north end of the inner façade of Old St. Peter’s until January 25, 1606, when the oratory was dismantled to make room for the nave of the new basilica. 309 The oratory was dedicated to the Virgin and included a series of mosaics showing New Testament scenes from the Annunciation to the Last Supper. The story represented in the mosaic donated to S. Maria in Cosmedin is a fragment of the scene showing the Epiphany, the manifestation of Christ to the world through the adoration of the three Magi. Christ is visible on the lap of his mother, extending a small, but powerful hand towards the gift being presented to him by the disembodied arm of one of the Magi. 308 The mosaic was transferred to its current location in the Sacristy of the basilica in 1767 to make way for the renovations of the portico and façade of the church. When installed in the Sacristy, it was placed above an altar with its 17 th -century inscription. The inscription notes the following: Urbano VIII.P.M. Vetustissimas.has.musivas.imagines.in.oratorio.d.dei Genitricis.intra.b.Petri.basilicam.a.ioanne.VII.ad.annum.dccv Ex.aedificato.olim.extantes.et.in.eius dem basilicae.sub.Paulo.V Amplificatione.pie.servatas.hic.ad.perpetuum.rei.sacrae Monumentum.io.ant.Ghezzius.Rom.huius.diaconiae.canonicus Donavit.et.affigendas.curavit.an.sal.mdcxxxix Currently, the Sacristy is used as the gift shop of the church and the altar table is used to display souvenirs. 309 For the history of the destruction of the oratory of John VII and its surviving mosaic fragments, see Pinelli, ed. 2000, vol. 4, 887-90. See Ann van Dijk. "The Afterlife of an Early Medieval Chapel: Giovanni Battista Ricci and Perceptions of the Christian Past in Post-Tridentine Rome." Renaissance Studies 19.5 (2005): 686-98; Per Jonas Nordhagen. "The Mosaics of John VII (705 - 707 A.D.): The Mosaic Fragments and Their Technique " Acta ad archaeologiam et artium historiam pertinentia Series in 4°, 2 (1965): 121- 66; See Squarzina 1999, for the rediscovered fragments which were in the collection of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani in the 17 th century, and are currently in the Pushkin Museum. Three other fragments were given to the Bibliotheca Angelica at the church of S. Agostino in the 17 th century, but have been lost. A fragment was given to another (then) Agostinian church, the Duomo of Orte, and it is still located there, although in the museum of the Duomo. Two other fragments were given to the church of S. Filippo Neri in Via Giulia, but were removed already in the 19 th century and are currently in the grotte of St. Peter’s, where other fragments are preserved as well. 139 The antiquity of the cult of the Virgin at S. Maria in Cosmedin, especially in terms of per-iconoclastic images of the Virgin, certainly played a part in receiving the prestigious gift in the time of Pope Urban VIII. As already noted, the mosaic fragment comes from a cycle dating from the time of Pope John VII (705-707), which pre-dates the first iconoclasm (726-87), the very event the titular icon of S. Maria in Cosmedin escaped. 310 Further, the legendary date of the icon’s creation, 341 AD, coincided with the Council of Ephesus, during which the Virgin was officially declared the Mother of God, Theotókos or Deiparae. 311 After the titular icon was safely placed in the central apse of the church in 1618, a conspicuously visible icon of the Virgin was missing from the interior of the church. The mosaic from St. Peter’s Basilica, another image from before the first iconoclasm, once installed above the doorway on the inner façade of the church, provided a more that suitable addition. In fact, the mosaic’s securely documented origin and more authentic ancient appearance may have given it special authority in the face of the legendary 4 th -century icon which had been repainted sometime during the Renaissance. 312 310 The images from the New Testament found in the mosaics of the oratory are some of the best examples of pre-Iconoclastic imagery and are repeatedly studied by scholars of Medieval art. See especially Thunø 2002, 29-38, who notes the importance of the mosaics as introducing key images to Roman sacred spaces. 311 Crescimenbi 1715, 149, who notes the Council of Ephesus, the title of the image in Greek and in Latin, and its transport from Greece during a period of Iconoclasm in the time of Hadrian I in the 8 th century. Further on, 150-51, Crescimbeni goes to great lengths to support the idea that the icon dates from the 4 th century. Modern scholars date the icon to the 12 th century with heavy repainting during 16 th through 18 th centuries. Massimi 1989, 61. For the development of the image of the Virgin following the declarations of the Council of Ephesus, see Osborne 1981, 303. 312 In the 16 th and 17 th century, distinguishing the styles and period of works of art was already underway. In early 17 th century some guidebooks refer to the “ancient manner” of certain artists versus the modern style of others. See Giovanni Baglione. Le Nove Chiese di Roma: nelle Quali si Contengono le Historie, Pitture, Scolture, & Architetture di Esse. Rome: Andrea Fei, 1639, especially his section on the church of S. Croce in Gerusalemme. Even in Crescimbeni’s account of frescoes from the portico of S. Maria in 140 The mosaic cycle from the Oratory of John VII at Old St. Peter’s Basilica also included one of the earliest images of the Virgin shown as “Regina” or “Queen”. 313 The donation of such an important early image to S. Maria in Cosmedin somehow seems linked to an early inscription still in the portico of the church, which is possibly the oldest reference to the Virgin as “Regina” dating to around the mid 8 th century. 314 The mosaic of the Virgin from the oratory also has its own attributes of note. The image shows the Virgin enthroned with Christ on her lap, placing emphasis on the Virgin as the Mother of God, the cult of which was honored at S. Maria in Cosmedin. S. Maria in Cosmedin received the important mosaic no doubt due to the profound history of the devotion to the Virgin at the site. Although pieces of St. Peter’s Basilica, such as the 8 th -century mosaic at S. Maria in Cosmedin, were parceled out to churches in Rome the memory of those fragments remained at their place of origin. In the grotte of new St. Peter’s are a series of frescoes that document the appearance of the old basilica before its monuments were dismantled and the building destroyed. While the 8 th -century mosaic of the Adoration of the Magi from the Oratory of John VII was transferred to S. Maria in Cosmedin in the early 17 th century, the memory of this fragment was retained by means of a detail a fresco in the Cosmedin, he notes that the frescoes were done in the “maniera antichissima”. Crescimbeni 1715, 58. The portico was expanded in the 8 th century, but already had a diaconia in the structure by as early as the 6 th century. 313 See Thunø 2002, 34; and Osborne 1981, 303. The earliest “Maria Regina” image is believed to be the 6 th -century fresco in S. Maria in Antiqua in the Roman Forum. The image from the oratory from old St. Peter’s is believe to be the second oldest. Following the mosaic fragment at S. Maria in Cosmedin is the icon at S. Maria in Trastevere, Madonna della Clemenza, which might date to the time of John VII. For the icon at S. Maria in Trastevere, see Nordhagen 1987. 314 Osborne 1981, 303, who notes the inscription and that it possibly per-dates an example found at S. Maria in Antiqua, from the late 8 th century. Pope Hadrian I patronized both S. Maria in Antiqua and S. Maria in Cosmedin in the 8 th century. 141 grotte. In the chapel of the Cappella della Bocciata, Giovanni Battista Ricci was commissioned in 1615 to paint various views of the old basilica and its monuments, including the oratory of Pope John VII. 315 In Ricci’s fresco showing the oratory, the detail of the Adoration of the Magi was placed over the central image of the Virgin and Pope John VII. In the watercolor documenting the mosaics, the scene was not the central image. The nativity was the central image in the original 8 th -century mosaic cycle. The manifestation of Christ replaces his birth, the Nativity, the scene of which puts emphasis on the Virgin and childbirth, not Christ. Furthermore, these medieval mosaics sometimes included stories derived from apocryphal texts. The representation of the Nativity proved especially problematic because it showed the story of the mid-wife, Salome, which was abolished in the wake of the Council of Trent reforms. 316 The mid-wife doubted the Virgin birth and her hand withered when she “tested” the Virgin. Christ as an infant heals Salome’s hand. In the 17 th -century watercolors that document the 8 th -century cycle of mosaics, a woman is represented standing before Christ with her withered hand extended towards him. In the 17 th -century fresco rendered by Ricci in the grotte, the scene is omitted. Not unlike the well-known story of the Doubting Thomas, the male apostle who doubted Christ’s presence after the resurrection, noted in the Introduction, the doubt of the mid-wife 315 Pinelli, ed. 2000, vol. 4, 869-70. See van Dijk 2005 for a discussion of the inconsistency between the images represented in the fresco in relation to the drawings made to document the monuments before being dismantled. Van Dijk’s essay is an excellent example of the reform of monuments even in their representations which appear historical. 316 The original mosaic was recorded in a watercolor as part of the drawings made to document the monuments being destroyed from Old St. Peter’s Basilica. BAV, Barb. Lat. 4410. See Dijk 2005, 290-91, who notes the story and reproduces the watercolor from the Barberini manuscript, fig. 4. See also Nordhagen 1965. The mosaic fragment of Salome’s withered hand healed by the Christ child is lost. 142 Salome about the Virgin’s purity is tested by means of touch. The touch of the mid-wife, which probed the Virgin’s body, was deemed an inappropriate image of doubt despite the obvious correlation between Thomas’ acceptable doubt-filled male touch. The Salome story’s relationship with the testing of the virginity of Mary and the image of the mid-wife with her extended withered hand certainly could have been misread in the context of S. Maria in Cosmedin. As a site dedicated to the veneration of the virgin birth of Christ, the “testing” of virginity calls to mind the questioning of the virginity of Mary during the early modern period, in particular, by Giordano Bruno who was burned at the stake in Campo di Fiori for this and other heresies. The legend related to the use of Bocca della Verità as a stone for testing the virginity of young women who placed a hand into the stone’s open mouth renders the young girls like Salome if viewed in relation to the image. It is no wonder that S. Maria in Cosmedin received the image of the Adoration of the Magi, rather than the fragment of the Nativity, the image that is more logically connected with the church dedicated to the Virgin and celebrates the virgin birth. The doubting of virginity was certainly at stake when marriages were dependant on male heirs and inheritance could have been jeopardized by the indiscretion of young women and men. Testing virginity was the purview of the Church, not that of midwives and other common people. Women and the Bocca della Verità Numerous stories have circulated since the Middle Ages of how the stone had tempted people to renounce their faith, or that the stone housed a demon or ancient god 143 who would either bite (or even take your hand) if you lied while taking an oath. 317 One of the most repeated stories about the Bocca was recorded in a fresco contained in a medieval house formerly located near the church of S. Maria Egizziaca, located just across from S. Maria in Cosmedin. 318 The fresco showed the story of how an adulterous woman was forced to swear at the Bocca della Verità that she had not been unfaithful. She tricked the stone by having her lover dress as a senseless beggar. When she approached the stone, extending her hand to place it in the mouth of the Bocca, the beggar embraced her and she swore that no man other than her husband and this beggar have ever touched her. She retained her limb. Although the fresco no longer survives, a drawing of the Bocca della Verità (fig. 55) by the artist Francesco de Hollanda from his 16 th -century Italian sketchbook might allude to the story. 319 One figure is clearly a woman advancing towards the object with her right hand extended, about to place it in the mouth. Another figure looks on, frantic, wrapping an arm around her waist as the woman moves forward. The drawing is a tantalizing example of an artist’s engagement 317 For the various early stories thought to be associated with the Bocca della Verità, see Ersilia Caetani Lovatelli. La Bocca della Verità di Roma e la sua Leggenda nell’età di Mezzo. Rome, 1891; John Webster Spargo. Virgil the Necromancer: Studies in Virgilian Legends. Cambridge, MA, 1934, 207-27 and 298- 413; and D’Onofrio 1990, 11-24. 318 Crescimbeni 1715, 27-28, notes the story and the fresco in the house, which at the time of his writing was “più di dugento anni”. Many building and most of the church of S. Maria Egizziaca was stripped from the Temple of Portunus in the 1930s. Inside the cella of the Roman temple are still fragments of 9 th century frescoes. See also D’Onofrio 1990, 16-18. 319 The drawing is often reproduced, but not discussed. See E. Tormo. Os Desenhos das Antigualhas que vio Francisco D'Ollanda, Pintor Portugués, 1539-1540. Madrid: Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores Relaciones Culturales., 1940, fol. 29. Tormo notes that the inscription on the drawing should be read “Rome, the legend and the truth.” 144 with monuments in Rome, either as witness to such an interaction or inventing the scenario after hearing the story or possibly seeing the fresco in the house. 320 By the 18 th century, many guidebooks were repeating the interpretation of the Bocca found in the official history of the church that connected the stone with an ancient past, rather than a modern Christian present. 321 Yet, one source conflates the past and the present to reveal an unexpected connection between early modern women and the Bocca. Francesco de’ Ficoroni, the esteemed Roman antiquarian, relates the Bocca to the ancient Temple of Pudica, a temple for modest patrician women. 322 The temple was identified as the foundation of S. Maria in Cosmedin through coins found at the site. Reproduced on the same page as the coins, a shrunken image of the Bocca is included to underscore its relationship with the ancient site. Ficoroni explicitly states that women used the Bocca in antiquity to take oaths at an altar associated with the Temple of Pudica. By the 18 th century, the Bocca’s ancient origin was firmly identified as a testing stone for oath taking despite the obvious signs that the stone was used for a drain cover. 323 It is possible that 320 In other drawings by Hollanda from the same sketchbook, he also includes people interacting with objects, possibly more for the purpose of scale, but also to recreate history, such as the Colonna Santa in St. Peter’s Basilica, which includes Christ leaning on the column as he preaches in the Temple. See Tormo 1940, which is a facsimile of Hollanda’s Italian sketchbook. 321 Giovanni Mario Crescimbeni. L’istoria della Basilica Diaconale, Collegiata, e Parrocchiale di S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma. Roma: Antonio de Rossi, 1715. 322 Francesco de' Ficoroni. Le Vestigia e Rarità di Roma Antica. Ricercate, e Spiegate da Francesco de' Ficoroni. Rome: Girolamo Mainardi, 1744. Francesco de’ Ficoroni (1664-1747) was one of the most respected of the early modern antiquarians. He wrote numerous publications on ancient Rome, the ruins, and new excavations which he conducted. He is best remembered for the discovery of the unusually monumental, decorated bronze Etruscan toiletry case which is still refered to as the Ficoroni Cista, now in the Museo Nazionale Etrusco at the Villa Giulia museum in Rome. 323 See Barry forthcoming. 145 the early modern practice of tactile interaction with the stone by modest women led to an anachronistic reading back onto the object. 324 Several rare votive objects were also found at the site and one representing a votive figure is reproduced in Ficoroni’s history, in particular, the print Ancient Roman Patrician Woman (fig. 56). Ficoroni’s description of the object provides a striking similarity between the past and the present. 325 The veiled body with only eyes exposed of the ancient Roman woman called to mind the contemporary zitelle, or un-married ladies, Ficoroni had seen processing to various churches in the city. In particular, he 324 An inscription, recorded in Crescimbeni, but dating to the time of the installation of the Bocca in the portico in the early 17 th century, explains the stones ancient origin, the practice of oath taking by placing a hand in the mouth, and the early modern rededication. Crescimbeni 1715, 59. Simulacrum hoc Bucca Veritatis Nuncupatum in Templo Iovi Ammonio ab Hercule dicato Prope Aram Maximam in qua ritu Graeco vana Gentilitas Sacrificia peragebat fuisse dicitur tractu temporis in tali Habitum veneratione ut si quis maximum requireret iuramentum Manu inter os eius imposita solemniter iurare cogeretur Impiis superstitionibus Deorum Gentium sublatis hic iacet Deiectum ut eius falsa religio prostrata in Templo Iam Pudicitiae Patritie priscis temporibus constructo aspiciatur In quo post generis humani reparationem sub titulo S. Mariae in Cosmedin quod Sacerdotum ornamentum sonat Deiparae sempre Virginis Memoria colitur atque Veneratur 325 Ficoroni 1744, 21-28: “Capitolo VI. Del Tempio della Pudicizia Patrizia, e di altre memorie esistenti nel luogo, dove era fabbricato.” “Alla rarità di questa figura votiva concorre quella del suo vestimento, che più pudico, che un occhio, e parte della fronte, e del naso; mà quello, che è di particolarità maggiore, si è, che lo stesso vestire si conserva in Roma dalle zittelle nubile, le quali nate di gente onesta, sono ammesse al sussidio dotale, per lascite di Personaggi defonti, e a diverse Chiese nel giorno della Festa orn’anno vanno processionalmente accompagnate da altrettante Matrone, e fatte le loro Divozioni, si dà loro la Cedola della Dote o per maritarsi, o per monacarsi, seconodo la loro inclinazione. Sono, come si fa, vestite con veste, e sopravveste di lana fino a piedi, portando il capo velato, ricoperto il collo, il petto, il mento, e la bocca, restando ad esse discoperto un solo occhio per vedere, e giusto in tutto simili all’antica figura del sudetto disegno. Fra le chiese, dove sì fatto caritativo sussidio si distribuisce, è quella di S. Maria in Minerva de’ RR. PP. Domenicani per la Festività della Ssma Annunziata, e vi si dotano più centinaja di zitelle nubile; intervenendo i primi Prelati, ed il Sommo Pontefice a tanta opera pia, che è una della molte, che rendono Roma commendabile.” 146 refers to a well-known group of zitelle who were housed at a convent near the Jewish Ghetto, which was not far from S. Maria in Cosmedin. The zitelle processed to the church of S. Maria sopra Minerva on the feast of the Annunciation, the same feast that is celebrated at S. Maria in Cosmedin and S. Agostino. The relationship drawn is striking. Ficoroni connected the past visitors to the site, in particular, the ancient Roman women who went to the temple to take oaths, and the early modern zitelle he saw in the streets of Rome. The present stirred his imagination. He was seeing the past performed before his eyes. Even if the inscription near the Bocca noted that anyone in antiquity needing to take an oath swore at the Bocca stone, men and women alike, in the early modern period, the stone became almost exclusively associated with the female practice of testing by means of the vernacular devotional act of touch. As we have seen at the church of S. Agostino and St. Peter’s Basilica, touching an object had positive, talismanic, and devotional connotations. At S. Maria in Cosmedin, touching the Bocca was not a sign of devotion to the object or the person represented. It was an act that tested faith and honesty in the name of the devotion shown by women to the Virgin. Another author from the early 18 th century, a bit more crass albeit, confirms the invented connection between the stone and the testing of the virginity of young women in ancient Rome and notes that if it were true, “…how many girls in France would get bitten!” 326 This is part of the reflexive power of the present placing meaning upon the 326 Comte de Caylus. Voyage d'Italie (1714 - 1715). Annotée et Précédée d'un Essai sur le Comte de Caylus. Ed. Amilda A. Pons. Paris: Fischbacher, 1914, 184-185. “Dans une espèce de parvis de cette église est un muffle de marbre rond qui a les yeux et la bouche ouverts; ce qui portoit le nom de bouche de Vérité et servoit aux Romains quand ils faisoient faire serment à quelqu’un. On conte aussi que l’on s’en servoit pour les pucelages. Si cela estoit vrai, que de filles en France seroient mordues!” 147 past. The object was mobilized by its prominent placement in the portico of the church, and its dedication to the Virgin. As the inscriptions were removed, the connection between the Bocca and the Virgin was lost because of the lack of Christian iconography, as well as the lack of body parts typically touched as a sign of veneration. By the 18 th century, the early modern Christian meaning was forgotten or not commented upon. The transformative moment of the Counter Reformation that turned this pagan monument into a Christian relic had passed. Roman Antiquity and titillating anecdotes trumped the Counter Reformation in the tourist itinerary and popular guidebooks. Testing Stones The Bocca della Verità was not unusual for its quality as a testing stone. Other stones and altars were touched when used for taking oaths, keeping away demons, and blessing. They were noted in the 16 th and 17 th century, especially by pilgrimage guidebooks. In 1581, Gregory Martin made reference to an altar in the church of Sant’Antonio at which no “false and blasphemous” people dare take an oath, otherwise fire would burn them to a crisp. 327 Martin did not actually see this happen, but he observed a charred body nearby proving the power of the altar. The Bocca should be viewed within a culture that believed in the power of God and demons. The culture that inspired the legend of the Bocca biting off a person’s hand had a serious investment in 327 Gregory Martin. Roma Sancta (1581). Ed. George Bruner Parks. Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1969, 42. “…the famous Aultar of S. Anthonie the holie Eremite, where such experience of Gods justice against flase and blasphemous swearers hath been so manifestly declared that no Italian dare take an othe at that Aultar, which he knoweth flase, for feare lest S. Anthonies fyre consume him, as there is at this day example thereof, a burnt carcasse under the Chappel doore.” 148 the cult of relics, tactile veneration, and the power of saints, God, and in the case of the Bocca, a demon. By comparison, even without a pile of hands lying in front of the Bocca della Verità people believed the stone could function as a vehicle for a higher power to judge mere mortals for their lies and infidelities. The unusual aspect of the Bocca as a tactile site is its status as a reverse testing stone than could hurt the beholder. The stone is given a living, active role. While serving the popular religious function as a site for testing religious faith and fidelity, it could harm the beholder. If a stone in the church of Sant’Antonio could burn a man to a crisp, the Bocca could certainly bite off a few hands. For young women, the guilty would no doubt confess their sins before placing a slender hand upon the lower lip of the ominous mouth, proving the power of the ancient stone. Conclusion Unlike other ancient sculptures reused for Christian purposes, the Bocca della Verità was not re-carved or modified. It was rededicated to the Virgin even though the image was in no way connected to her iconography. The pagan stone, possessed by the demon, was preserved intact. By placing the stone in the portico of the church and adding inscriptions, the pagan object was transformed for Christian purposes. Like the stories narrating the miracles produced by relics and other objects listed in guidebooks, the inscriptions explained the unexpected presence of the pagan object in the portico of the Christian church. The lack of physical changes to the object coupled with the removal of the dedicatory inscriptions led to the loss of knowledge of the object’s Christian history. The devotional history of the Bocca della Verità underscores the 149 difficulty of coming to terms with the material culture of the ancient past that carried traces of pagan traditions even in the wake of the Council of Trent. When the association with the Virgin was lost, the tactile devotion persisted as amusing tourism. The Madonna del Parto’s association with antiquity was also rife with pagan associations derived from the story about it being cut from an ancient statue, or at least, derived visually from the form of an ancient sculpture in a private collection. Even though the Madonna del Parto did not sustain the same movement as the Bocca, the statue of the Virgin and Child was susceptible to appropriation. Its function as a sign of the devotion of a man from Florence was not secured because it was not located in a discrete chapel. The statue was installed far enough away from his tomb that it took on a life of its own. The devotion shown to the Madonna del Parto was not replaced by popular tourism as was the case with the Bocca. The explicit iconography of the statue prevented its loss of meaning. Unlike the Bocca’s liminal position, the placement of the Madonna del Parto within the church of S. Agostino provided sufficient ballast for sustained devotion. Female practice persisted. At both sites, S. Agostino and S. Maria in Cosmedin, important icons representing the Virgin and Child and even a mosaic, were removed from the devotional space of the church. When the ancient images were locked away in monumental tabernacles behind the high altar, the beholder was denied devotional accessibility. The icons became purely visual objects that were not even always on view. While paintings were pulled from the sphere of the beholder, sculptures continued to invite a haptic experience. 150 Chapter 4: Christ The ripple effect of the reforms at St. Peter’s Basilica as well as the watery inundation of the floods of the Tiber River profoundly changed churches in the center of Rome in the late 16 th through the 17 th century. The important Dominican church of S. Maria sopra Minerva was dramatically hit by transformations. The interior of the church was shuffled, redecorated, and cleansed for practical but also for honorific reasons. At the center of attention in this chapter is the well-known marble sculpture of Christ, often referred to as the Risen Christ (fig. 7), by the artist Michelangelo Buonarroti. The sculpture was not impervious to the changes at the Minerva. Within less than a century of being made, Michelangelo’s sculpture was removed from its original setting in a niche and placed on a base near the crossing of the church. The transformations of the sacred architecture and the shuffling of popular and prestigious objects displaced the Christ sculpture while ensuring its status as a vernacular devotional object on the liminal space of the high altar despite the fame of the artist who made it. The actions of the clergy over time and the constant flow of devout men and women attending feast days and masses provided by an important set of confraternities at the Minerva brought new meaning to the marble Renaissance sculpture of Christ. The presence of these active confraternities, including those dedicated to the Annunciation, the Rosary, and the Sacrament, brought beholders to the Minerva for whom the sculpture of Christ could have appealed in terms of confraternity-specific devotional practices. The outcome of the dynamic religious life at the Minerva and the displacement of the Christ sculpture from its original setting was that it remained for centuries a site of vernacular devotion, inspiring one author to write the following: 151 Before, the sculpture of Christ was regarded only with admiration as an excellent sculpture. But in the past twenty-five years faithful people adored [the sculpture] especially for the thanks given at the pleasure of our Lord to the devout people who adored him by kissing his feet. 328 The above description of the sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo comes from a marginal note in the earliest and most complete history of S. Maria sopra Minerva. 329 An unknown person in 1706 copied and made additions to an early 17 th -century text written by Ambrogio Brandi, the prior at the Minerva. The act of copying an earlier text and adding comments provided the author an opportunity to reflect on how the understanding of the sculpture had changed over time. The early 18 th -century author comments that the sculpture was once only admired for being “an excellent sculpture.” In the 16 th and 17 th 328 AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol.21v, margin note Tt. “Era prima questo Cristo riguardato solamente con ammirazione per l’eccellenza della scoltura: má da venticinque anni in qua i fedeli l’adorano con specialità per la grazie che si compiace S. d. M. [Signore della Maria] dispensare alli devoti che doppo averla adorata gli baciano il piede…” The entry on the Christ sculpture in Brandi is discussed at various points throughout this chapter. 329 The full title of the manuscript is as follows: Cronica Breve raccolta dal P[riore] N[ost]ro e Predicatore Fr. Ambrosio Brandi Rom[ano] della Chiesa e Convento della Minerva di Roma Dell’Ord[in]e de Predicat[or]e. AGOP (S. Sabina) XIV. Liber C. Written in pencil at top of first page, left hand corner, “Copia fatta nel 1706,” which is when the copyist’s additions, in margin notes, were added to the copy of Brandi’s manuscript. The date of 1706 is found in expanded inventory of relics, fol. 27r. Brandi died in 1645, and was Prior of the Convent at the Minerva in 1606 thus placing the main body text to sometime before 1645. Giancarlo Palmerio and Gabriella Villetti. Storia Edilizia di S. Maria Sopra Minerva in Roma, 1275-1870. Roma: Viella, 1989, 141. Palmerio and Villetti (1989) are the first to use the Brandi text extensively. Their monograph is a study of the architectural changes over the centuries. Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 168, cite the section about Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture, but do not quote it or discuss it. Strangely, in reference to the Minerva Christ, they note without reference that “L’attribuzione del Cristo è incerta.” (168, fn. 134) I became aware of the Brandi manuscript by reading Gerda Panofsky. Michelangelos "Christus" und sein Römischer Auftraggeber. Römische Studien Der Bibliotheca Hertziana. Vol. 5. Worms: Wernersche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1991, 23, and 146-47, fn. 144. She also notes that Berthier’s reference to the popular devotion in relation to the Christ sculpture is plagiarized from the Brandi manuscript. Yet, Panofsky only uses the one section on the Christ sculpture, as important as it is, being the only early modern source so far discovered which attests to the tactile veneration of the sculpture. Owing to the fact that the description found in Brandi is outside the parameters of her research Panofsky leaves unattended the meaning of the popular devotion surrounding Michelangelo’s sculpture. Jean- Jacques Berthier. L’eglise de la Minerve À Rome. Rome: Manuzio, 1910, 235; Lotz, Wolfgang. "Zu Michelangelos Christus in S. Maria Sopra Minerva." Festschrift für Herbert von einem zum 16. Februar 1965. Ed. Gert von der Osten. Berlin: Mann, 1965, 145, fn. 8, also notes that Berthier is without source. 152 century, a typical reference to Michelangelo’s Risen Christ sculpture praised the object and noted the names of the families recorded on the nearby inscription. The author of the 17th-century text notes the following: The Christ of Michelangelo. Returning to the head of the Church, near the high altar on the left hand side there is an altar upon which was erected the world famous statue of Christ by Michelangelo Buonarroti carved from stone: and this altar, as one sees, has an inscription [naming] three families: the Vari, the Castellani and the Porcari. 330 In the 17 th -century description, the sculpture was identified as well known, by a famous artist, and dedicated by three important Roman families. The 18 th -century author would have been remiss to simply copy the facts noted by the earlier writer. The meaning of the sculpture had changed. The shift in status from being a famous statue to an object of popular veneration testifies to the new meaning acquired in the course of the 17 th century. The veneration of the sculpture added to the esteem. The people beholding the object responded with their bodies. The sculpture became the site of popular devotion, the site of faithful kisses and adornment. In this chapter, I investigate the history of the embodied, devotional response to Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ. In the early modern period, the church of S. Maria sopra Minerva was a ferment of sacred activity. As the sacred context of an object is more than just the original architectural setting, I address the ephemeral devotional changes around the sculpture over time. The Risen Christ has a rich history of vernacular 330 AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol.21v. “Del Cristo di Michel’Agnelo. Ritornando da capo alla Chiesa vicino all’altare Mag.e á mano sinistra ci é l’Altare sopra il quale é eretta la statua famosa per tutt’il Mondo del Cristo di Michel’Angelo Buonaroti intagliata in pietra: et é quest’Altare come si vede quivi dell’inscrittione di tre famiglie Vari, Castellani, e Porcari.” 153 veneration now all but lost in the modern scholarship on Michelangelo. 331 Before modern scholars rendered Michelangelo’s sculpture an iconographical quandary, visitors and patrons, and the writers of popular guides and religious ceremonial descriptions produced their own accounts of the sacred space and the sculpture. 332 Drawing upon a variety of sources, it is my goal to return this sculpture of Christ to its historically specific conditions of beholding. Transforming S. Maria sopra Minerva The church of S. Maria sopra Minerva, officially dedicated to the Annunciation and belonging to the Dominican Order, is one of the most important churches in the historical center of Rome. Visited by the pope annually on the feast of the Annunciation from the 15 th century until 1870, the church was prime sacred real estate because of its location behind the Pantheon, between the palaces on the Via del Corso, the Piazza Navona, and the processional route of the pope. 333 From the 16 th through the 19 th century, the church hosted numerous monumental transformations and necessary renovations. The row of side chapels on the north side of the church was added in the 16 th century. The crossing and choir were remodeled in the 16 th and 17 th century. 331 William E. Wallace. "Michelangelo’s Risen Christ." Sixteenth-Century Journal 28.4 (1997): 1251-80. Wallace is an important exception. He provides an excellent critical reassessment of the early literature on Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture and notes in particular how modern scholarship selectively used early sources to support a negative assessment of the object. 332 In modern scholarship, the subject of the sculpture ranges from the Resurrected Christ, the Man of Sorrows, and the New Adam. For a review of the iconographical studies, see Panofsky 1991, 166-69; See recently, Weil-Garris Brandt, Kathleen. "The Body As "Vera Effigies" In Michelangelo's Art: The Minerva Christ." L'immagine di Cristo: dall'acheropita alla Mano d'artista, dal tardo Medioevo all'età Barocca. Eds. Christoph L. Frommel and Gerhard Wolf. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2006. 269-321. 333 The church received more attention after becoming a Cardinalate church in 1566. 154 Chapels changed hands between families, which allowed older monuments to be moved and new ones installed. Tombs of many illustrious people were installed or were transferred to the site. The body of St. Catherine of Siena was housed in the Capranica family Chapel from 1451 until 1855 when it was transferred to the high altar. The changes to the fabric of the Minerva were certainly great in the early modern period, but the event that had the most traumatic affect on the church was the flood of 1598. 334 The flooding of the Tiber was a regular occurrence until the early 20 th century. Yet, the extent of the damage and the timing of the flood of 1598 devastated the people and buildings in the area around the Pantheon more than any flood prior. The Minerva was one of the churches hit hardest with the inundation breaking through the doors and filling the church with an estimated three meters of water. But the worst part of the flood was done to the pavement. As the water filled the crypts and floor tombs, it pushed open the tomb slabs, revealing and disinterring corpses. 335 One early source observed that the flood of 1598 damaged the Minerva so extensively that the beauty of the church was no 334 On the flood of 1598, see Torgil Magnuson. Rome in the Age of Bernini. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1982, 50; Andrea Bacci. Del Tevere Libro Quarto. Con un Sommario di Monsignor Ludouico Gomes... di Tutte le Prodigiose Inondationi dal Principio di Roma, Insino All'anno 1530 Aggiunteui L'altre Sin'a Quest'ultima Del 99. Rome: Stampatori camerali, 1599, 42-50; Iacomo Castiglione. Trattato dell'inondatione del Tevere. Dove si discorre delle Caggioni, e Rimedij suoi, e si dichiarano alcune Antichità, e Luoghi di Autori Vecchi. Con una Relatione del Diluvio di Roma del 1598. Rome: Guglielmo Facciotto, 1599. The flood markers on the façade of the Minerva show the extent of the 1598 flood in relation to the other devastating floods of the 16 th century. Vincenzo Forcella. Iscrizioni delle Chiese e d'altri Edificii di Roma dal Secolo XI Fino ai Giorni Nostri, 14 Vols. Rome: Tip. delle Scienze Matematiche e Fisiche, 1879, vol. 13, 201-08, for a brief history of the floods, and 209-222, for inscriptions recording the floods of Rome. 335 Bacci 1599, 48. “Gran giuditio di Dio, che ne i luoghi più bassi, & donde le chiaviche hanno havute le bocche più aperte da sfogare, per le Chiese, in Sant’Apostolo, alla Minerva, à S. Rocco, & alla Rotonda baßissima, la forza dell’acque hanno sfondati i pavimenti, e le sepolture, e sbalzati fuora gli avelli di gravißimi marmi, & per le strade dove ha potuto scorrere.” Bacci interprets the floods, as did others, as divine judgment. 155 longer visible, and that many tombs had to be covered over by new pavement. 336 The destruction wrought by the floods of Rome required much needed renovations to the fabric, which in turn led to the disarticulation of tombs and objects from their original locations. Learning the lesson from St. Peter’s, destruction led to the construction of something new. It was most likely during these moments of change that Michelangelo’s sculpture began its new life filled with devotional meaning. Marta Porcari and Michelangelo’s Risen Christ Sometimes noted, but little discussed, is the patron of the Christ sculpture by Michelangelo. 337 Although the main goal of this chapter is to recover the sculpture’s later devotional history, the commission and the dedication need some attention. In contrast to the official monumental projects at St. Peter’s Basilica, the Minerva is a site of local, familial dedications and devotion. Although the Minerva became a site of interest to the papacy at the end of the 16 th century, it was during the commissioning of Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture that we see local patronage in action. Recorded in 336 AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol.11v, “…questo Tempio da principio molto piú bello, che non apparisce oggi; má per l’inondazioni del Tevere fú alzato il pavimento di esso alcune braccia, come lo dimostrano le basi de Pilastri che con l’occasione di cavare nuove Sepolture si vedono sotterrate é sepolte il che dimostrano anche alcune lapidi di sepolture antiche che spesso si trovano sottoterra al piano dell’antico pavimento.” 337 Panofsky 1991, of course, is the important exception. Panofsky’s exhaustive patron study of Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture is a fine example of prosopography. Scholars will benefit from the mine of sources Panofsky has unearthed on Renaissance Roman families. The substance of the discussion of the Christ sculpture is found in various parts of the texts, especially 40-49, in which she discusses Marta Porcari’s will; 120-129, in which she notes the endowments made by Marta Porcari, and the dedications; 130-47, the most often cited section, in which she discusses the contract documents and the proposed sites of the original installation. 156 guidebooks beginning in the 16 th century, the now lost dedicatory inscription located below the Christ sculpture read as follows: Metello Vari and P. Paul Castellani, Romans, Erect this Altar According to the will of Marta Porcari With a third part of the expenses, and dowry, Which Metello completes from his own resources Dedicated to God Almighty. 338 The inscription is not unusual. The person who dedicated the altar by means of her last will and testament, Marta Porcari, was already deceased and the names of the executors, her relatives, were given prominence. In the case of Metello Vari, he received credit for the generosity he showed his aunt Marta Porcari when he provided the remaining two- thirds of the expenses for the dedication of the altar and the donations for dowries. The expenses were for the saying of the mass at the altar intended for the salvation of the soul of Porcari. We know that Porcari in 1512 left several donations and dedications at the Minerva. Porcari named the Confraternity of the Annunciation as her heir in case her 338 “Metellus Varus, & P. Paul Castellanus Romani Martiae Portiae testamento hoc altare erexerunt cum tertia parte impensarum, & dotis, quae Metellus de suo supplens Deo Opt. Max. Dicavit.” The inscription no longer survives, but is recorded already in early guidebooks in the 16 th century, and later in various permeations and with some errors in later texts. In an 18 th century manuscript, an author records that the inscription was located on the side of base towards the high altar: “Al lato del piedestallo verso l’Altar Mag vi é una lapide in cui si legge, Metellus Varus, et P. Paul, Castellanus, Romani, Martiae Porciae Testo, hoc Altare erexerunt, cum tertia parte inpen, sarum, et dotis, quae Met, ellus de suo suplens, Deo. Opt. Max. Dicavit” (AGOP (S. Sabina), XI.2890a, Anon. Res Historica, 10); In the early 20 th century, one author turns “Martiae” (Martha) into “Matthiae” (Matthew), “Metellus Verus et P. Paul. Castellanus, Romani, Matthiae Porciae festo, hoc altare (p. 235) erexerunt, cum tertia parte impensarum et dotis quae Metellus de suo supplens, Deo. Opt. max. dicavit” (Berthier 1910, 230, fn.1), although by the time of Berthier’s publication, the inscription was already removed. I thank Martin Beckmann for help with the Latin translation. 157 family line died out. 339 She bequeathed a house to the Minerva in exchange for the saying of mass three times a week in the Chapel of St. Girolamo, which was founded by bishop Girolamo de’ Porcari, a relative. 340 Porcari also left the same donation to the chapel of the Resurrection of Our Lord. 341 She also requested a tomb near the same chapel. 342 The tomb of Marta Porcari is no longer present at the Minerva, and no sources note what happened to it. The absent tomb underscores how far removed the Christ sculpture by Michelangelo is now from the conditions of its dedication in the early modern period. The floor tomb slab was likely damaged and was removed, as were no doubt many others, after the flood of 1598. 343 By that time, the endowment for the saying of the mass for Porcari had run out. It is possible this is when, if not sooner, the Christ sculpture was moved from its original location, to be discussed further below. 339 Outside of Panofsky’s study, Squarzina is rare for noting that the sculpture was commissioned for Metello Vari’s aunt. It was through the mutual connection of the Annunciation between the Vari family and the Giustiniani family that the first version of Michelangelo’s Christ found its way into the Giustiniani collection sometime after 1607. Silvia Danesi Squarzina. "The Bassano ‘Christ the Redeemer’ in the Giustiniani Collection." The Burlington Magazine 142.1173 (2000): 746-47. 340 Girolamo died in October 1503. Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 176. 341 Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 183; Panofsky 1991. Victor M. Schmidt. "Statues, Idols and Nudity: Changing Attitudes to Sculpture from the Early Christian Period to the Counter-Reformation." Antiquity Renewed: Late Classical and Early Modern Themes. Eds. Zweder von Martels and Victor M. Schmidt. Leuven: Peeters, 2003, 225, notes how unusual it is that Panofsky does not make a connection between this dedication and the Christ sculpture for the subject of Michelangelo’s sculpture. 342 Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 183, noting Ca, I, 178-79. In 1523, Metello Vari would also ask to be buried near the chapel of the Resurrection of the Our Lord. Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 183, although they note that Marta was Metello’s mother, when she was actually his aunt. His tomb is also no longer visible in the Minerva. 343 I have not been able to determine if Marta Porcari is still buried at the Minerva. As already noted above, Brandi’s account of the flood states that a new pavement was put over the old one. 158 Keeping with the practice of the time, a floor tomb was placed in the pavement near or in the family chapel. Sometimes, an image, a painting or sculpture, was dedicated as a sign of devotion of the deceased person. The image would be installed above an altar, but not necessarily above the grave. A comparable example from around the same time as the Minerva Christ is the Madonna del Parto discussed in Chapter Three. The Madonna del Parto was set in a niche on the inner façade of the church while the tombstone for the man was placed in the central doorway. This is a brief moment in which monumental sculptures were set up not simply as tomb markers but to show the devotion and munificence of the person and the family. 344 The Pietà for old St. Peter’s Basilica was another excellent example of a devotional sculpture set up near a tomb. 345 It is known that Michelangelo himself intended to have his Florentine Pietà (now in Florence’s Opera del Duomo museum) donated to S. Maria Maggiore in Rome and himself buried in the floor nearby. 346 In the first quarter of the 16 th century, monumental marble sculptures were used as prestigious votive, devotional offerings. Before entering a discussion of the popular devotion, the confraternities to which the sculpture of Christ would have appealed, and the complicated history of how the object was appropriated by the clergy and even displaced by a sacred object far more valuable than the sculpture, it is 344 Irving Lavin. "The Sculptor’s ‘Last Will and Testament'." Allen Memorial Art Museum Bulletin 35.1-2 (1977-78): 4-39, who limits his discussion to artists’ tombs and the objects intended to be used as signs of their devotion. 345 William E. Wallace. "Michelangelo's Rome Pietà: Altarpiece of Grave Memorial?" Verrocchio and Late Quattrocento Italian Sculpture. Florence: Casa Editrice le Lettere, 1992, 243-55. 346 Lavin 1977-78, 16. See also Philipp Fehl. "Michelangelo's Tomb in Rome: Observations on The "Pietà" in Florence and the "Rondanini Pietà"." Artibus et Historiae 23.45 (2002): 9-27. 159 necessary to address the original installation and suggest when the object began its movements in the Minerva. Installing the sculpture of Christ The proposals for installing Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ support the idea that it was commissioned as a devotional monument rather than a tomb marker. 347 The location was determined by decorum and appropriate viewing of the sculpture, not by virtue of the location of Marta Porcari’s tomb. A modern sense of spatial propriety did not apply to Porcari’s endowment. Her endowments reflected a traditional society’s notion of familial honor and social presence. She was associated with at least three chapels in the Minerva located in discrete but prominent parts of the church. As already noted, Porcari left endowments and wished to be buried near the chapel of the Resurrection, which is the first chapel in the north aisle nearest the main entrance. The chapel of St. Girolamo, that closest to the crossing in the north aisle, was dedicated by a Porcari relative. In its vicinity were tombs of the Porcari family. 348 And the chapel of 347 Two proposals for the installation of the Christ sculpture are recorded in a letter from Federico Frizzi to Michelangelo. The letters are discussed in various sources, including Weil-Garris 2006, 294-95; and Panofsky 1991, Appendix 1. For the original contract between Metello Vari and Paolo Castellano, as executers of Marta Porcari’s will, and Michelangelo, dated June 14, 1514, see Lucilla Bardeschi Ciulich, ed. I Contratti di Michelangelo. Florence: Studio per Edizioni Scelte, 2005, 54-55. 348 One problem with the late 15 th and early 16 th century history of the north side aisle is that the entire aisle was expanded and the “chapels” which were in fact altars against the walls and piers in the north side aisle, were transformed into proper enclosed chapels. When the transformations took place in 1559-69, many monuments were relocated. This is one part of the renovations at the Minerva that complicates the history of the original installation of the Christ sculpture, if one follows the idea that when the Christ sculpture was first installed it was placed inside a niche in one of the no longer extant piers at the crossing. See Palmerio and Villetti 1989. See also Elsea 2003, who studies the 15 th century no longer extant cloister at the Minerva, which had been destroyed in the second half of the 16 th century to make room for the new cloister and the expansion of the chapels of the north side aisle. The changes were made under the tenure of Cardinal Vincenzo Giustiniani, who was the head of the Dominican Order at the Minerva and a major supporter of the confraternity of the Rosary. He is the uncle of Benedetto and Vincenzo Giustiniani, known 160 the Rosary, the first chapel on the south side of the high altar, which was formerly dedicated to St. Catherine of Siena and the Annunciation by the Capranica family, is connected to Marta by her third and final marriage to Giuliano Capranica. 349 Marta Porcari’s familial ties were present throughout the Minerva. It is not surprising then that the sculpture of Christ could be dedicated and installed in any number of prominent locations in the church, and especially near the high altar. The original location and appearance of the niche in which the sculpture by Michelangelo was installed eludes scholars. A print representing Michelangelo’s Risen Christ (fig. 57), derived from a guidebook dated to 1588, gives us an idea of how the sculpture was initially installed. 350 The woodcut shows the statue of Christ apparently standing before an elevated niche, installed in a pier, which likely included an altar on the pavement below. The cross, which Christ carries, protrudes slightly from the space and a shadow is cast on the inside of the niche. These two details suggest that the sculpture was not set deeply inside the space, but was set slightly forward. 351 In the Minerva, the in art history for collecting and commissioning the works of Caravaggio, as well as acquiring the first version of the Christ sculpture from the Minerva. See the various publications on the Giustiniani by Silvia Danesi Squarzina, but especially Silvia Danesi Squarzina. "The Bassano ‘Christ the Redeemer’ in the Giustiniani Collection." The Burlington Magazine 142.1173 (2000): 746-51; Silvia Danesi Squarzina, ed. Caravaggio e i Giustiniani: Toccar con Mano un Collezione del Seicento. Milan: Electa, 2001. For the chapel ceded to the Giustiniani family in 1575, dedicated to S. Vincenzo Ferreri, see Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 179-80. 349 Panofsky 1991, Table B. 350 See Panofsky 1991, 23, fn. 3, and fig. 9; Charles de Tolnay. "Il Tabernacolo Per Il Christo Della Minerva." Commentari 18 (1967): 43-47; Lotz 1965, 143, and fig. 1. The print first appears in the 1588 edition of the Le Cose, published in Venice, and was reused for later editions of the Le Cose until at least 1725. The illustration is usually accompanied by a transcription of the dedicatory inscription. For the Le Cose guidebooks, see Alberto Caldana. Le Guide di Roma: Ludwig Schudt e la sua Bibliografia. Lettura Critica e Catalogo Ragionato. Rome: Palombi, 2003, 115-119, and 50-51, for the editions by Girolamo Franzini/Francino (1537-1596) and Pietro Martire Felini (1565-1613). 351 Although, such details depend on the veracity of the print as a document of the installation. 161 installation of Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture might have resonated with the artist Marcello Venusti, who was a close follower and friend of the older artist. Venusti created an altarpiece for the Salviati Chapel, S. Giacomo Apostolo (fig. 58), which shows the saint stepping out from a niche. 352 St. Giacomo’s right foot crosses over the edge of the represented floor, like a sculputre in a niche. Outside the Minerva, Taddeo Landini’s copy after Michelangelo’s Risen Christ (fig. 59) sculpture located in S. Spirito in Florence provides the closest comparison for the appearance of the original installation. 353 Set above the shallow altar table, Landini’s copy is a devotional object not meant for physical contact. Even if the foot of Christ invades the celebrant’s space, the sculpture itself is safe from physical interaction. As such, I believe that not until Michelangelo’s sculpture was removed from its niche and placed on a base at a pier of the crossing, as illustrated in the print of Michelangelo’s Risen Christ (fig. 60) by Jacob Matham, dated to the 1590s, that the object entered the devotional sphere. 354 When the sculpture was freed from its original installation, removed from the niche set above an altar table, the object became available to devotional touch because of the newly created access. As we have already seen at St. Peter’s Basilica, the moving of an object opens up devotional opportunity. 352 The altarpiece is dated to 1570. See Simona Capelli. "Marcello Venusti: Un Pittore Valtellinese della Controriforma." Archivio Storico della Diocesi di Como 14 (2003): 304. See Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 178-79, for history of the Salviati Chapel (Chapel of S. Giacomo Apostolo). 353 The copy is dated to 1579. Lotz 1965, 149, notes the comparison between the print and the installation of the Landini copy. See also Wallace 1997, 1257, fig. 6, and 1273. 354 The print by Jacob Matham, dated to the 1590s, is reproduced and noted within discussions of the nudity of the Christ sculpture. See Leo Steinberg. The Sexuality of Christ in Renaissance Art and in Modern Oblivion, 2nd Ed Revised and Expanded. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996, 21, fig. 21; Schmidt 2003, fig. 8. 162 The location: mano destra, cornu Evangelorum, or cornu Epistola? It is never clearly noted exactly where the sculpture of Christ at the Minerva was placed when it was finally installed in 1521. Metello Vari’s receipt confirming the delivery and installation of the sculpture notes that the statue “…is in the Minerva, placed in the central apse [capella granne]” 355 This is the earliest reference to the sculpture’s location when it was first installed, and the document does not note which side of the altar. The early history of the installation is not clear, and reconstructing a definitive history of its installation is impossible. Nonetheless, what I would like to propose herein is that Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture was not originally installed at the north pier of the high altar, its current location. Based on descriptions from the 17 th century, a drawing from the workshop of Carlo Maderno, and confusion in the contemporary terms used to describe location and spatial orientation, I would like to suggest that the Risen Christ sculpture was located at the south pier for a short time. The reconstruction of the temporary location of the sculpture is meaningful because it reveals that Michelangelo’s sculpture was appropriated by a variety of religious communities for devotional and sacramental purposes. 355 Bardeschi Ciulich 2005, 208. “…io Metello Vari de’ Porcari romano haver receputa una figura in nuda de relevo, tonna, che fa la resiretione de Nostro Signore Iesu Cristo, da M. Michele Angelo Bono Aroti fiorentino…Qual figura sta in la Minerba, messa alla capella granne…” The receipt is signed and dated June 1, 1532, even though the sculpture was known to have been installed by December 1521. Panofsky 1991, 134, n. 90-91, discusses the receipt along side another document and a drawing by Antonio da Sangallo the Younger (Uffizi 1661A recto) to confirm the original installation in the north pier of the choir. The notation marks either the then current location of the sculpture (as Panofsky follows) or possibly a proposed future location after Sangallo the Younger’s remodelling. The drawing is dated by Giovannoni 1959, 245, to possibly 1538. The word “elcristo” is written near the north pier of the choir. The appearance of the crossing and the choir of the Minerva before Sangallo’s remodeling is difficult to reconstruct, but it is known that there were piers removed to open up the space. Weil-Garris Brandt 2006, 295; Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 126-32, fig. 23. 163 Complicating our knowledge of the Minerva Christ’s location in the 16 th and 17 th centuries is a change in meaning of the terms “on the right hand” and “on the left hand,” versus “cornu Evangelorum” and “cornu Epistola.” 356 Sources written by the clergy, such as the manuscript by Brandi noted at the beginning of this chapter, a Res Historica of the Minerva, as well as descriptions made during official Sacred Visits, which are written in Latin, tend to use the terms cornu Evangelorum or cornu Epistola, but also use the colloquial mano destra. But no sources written by the laity, such as guidebooks, that I have consulted regarding the placement of the sculpture in the early modern period use the terms cornu Evangelorum or cornu Epistola. It is expected that people from the clergy would use the terms familiar to them in describing the sacred space. For the lay writer, even if devout, the terms are according to one’s body or from the practical point of view of entering the church. 357 Thus, the modern culturally and even religiously informed idea of “right hand side” as meaning cornu Evangelorum needs to be looked at more carefully. Since the early 18 th century, the Christ sculpture has been without a doubt on the privileged “cornu Evangelorum,” of the altar, or to be more precise, the north side of the high altar. 358 In 19 th - century accounts of the Minerva, especially the often cited books by 356 The terms come from the placement of the pulpits in early churches from where either the “Epistles” or the “Gospels” were read. Various early churches contained two pulpits, including the Duomo of Pisa and Siena, and Old St. Peter’s Basilica. I thank Peter Dent for pointing out these examples and discussing this subject with me. 357 There are numerous examples of this found in guidebooks. When Gaspare Celio enters the Minerva, he immediately notes “La Cappella prima entrando alla destra.” Gaspare Celio. Memoria Fatta dal Signor Gaspare Celio dell'habito di Christo. Delli Nomi dell'artefici delle Pitture, che sono in alcune chiese, facciate, e Palazzi di Roma. Napoli: Scipione Bonino, 1638, 64. 358 Weil-Garris Brandt 2006, 295, fn. 77, notes the term “cornu evangelorum” but does not provide an discussion of the term or further reference. She sites Panofsky 1991, 133-38, regarding the installation of 164 Pio Tommaso Masetti and Jean-Jacques Berthier, the authors are practical in terms of noting directions and employ the firmly established terms cornu Evangelorum (or Vangelo) and cornu Epistola. Berthier drew upon unpublished 17 th - and 18 th -century sources, in particular an anonymous Res Historica and Brandi’s Cronica, both of which use versions of the terms Evangelorum and Espitola. 359 The cornu Evangelorum is understood as the privileged side of the high altar, according to the Priest saying mass looking toward the congregation. The privileged side is thus understood commonly as the right hand side. 360 It follows then that the cornu Epistola is on the left hand side. But complicating the terms used to describe the location of the Minerva Christ is the temporary change in the use of the terms cornu Evangelorum and cornu Epistola. The words literally switched sides after the building of St. Peter’s Basilica. The apse of St. Peter’s Basilica is at the west end rather than the traditional east, while the high altar at the crossing is appropriately oriented towards the east. 361 The change in language appears temporary, and in particular, it shows up in descriptions from Sacred Visits conducted during the time of Urban VIII, in which the authors are returning to the ancient the sculpture, but Panofsky does not discuss the problems with the term “cornu evangelorum.” Weil-Garris Brandt also notes the dissertation by Laura Agoston 1993, which I was not able to consult. 359 Masetti was a member of the clergy at the Minerva. Panofsky 1991, 147, fn. 144, notes that Berthier is plagiarizing Brandi’s Cronica, in reference to the entry on the Christ sculpture. Berthier also draws upon the Res Historica without citation. When Brandi notes the placement of the Christ sculpture, he notes mano sinistro. AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV, Liber C XIV; and XI.2890a, Anon. Res Historica. 360 The history of the cultural associations of right hand with good and left hand with evil, see Marjorie O’Rourke Boyle. Senses of Touch: Human Dignity and Deformity from Michelangelo to Calvin. Leiden: Brill, 1998. 361 See Georg Satzinger. "Sankt Peter: Zentralbau oder Longitudinalbau-Orientierungsprobleme." Sankt Peter in Rome 1506-2006. Eds. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 2008, 127-45. 165 manner of describing the high altar space. A manuscript in the Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana discusses the history of the terms and the changes in the designation. 362 The author of the manuscript expresses some reservations about the modern usage and notes his preference for the ancient tradition. The author states: The right side of the altar was in ancient time called the epistola side, and the left side was called the evangelo side; but now one says the contrary. The epistola side is the left side, and the evangelo side is the right; however the ancient view on this is better than the modern view. 363 He also made a connection between the Epistola side with St. John the Baptist, and Evangelo side with Christ. 364 On January 4 th , 1630, an official Sacred Visit was made to the Minerva. The point of the visit was to check that everything was running according to the rules, that the priests were saying the Mass according to the endowments, but also that the physical 362 BAV, Barb. Lat. 2974. The discussion of the designations of the altar is not paginated and no author is noted, but the pages are bound together with letters and other documents written by Michele Lonigo. Michele Lonigo (1572-1639) was the Master of Ceremonies in the Papal Chapel and the Prefect of the Vatican Archive in 1610. On Lonigo, see Ingo Herklotz. "Michele Lonigo als Kunstkritiker: zu einer Historistischen Rezeption der Altarbilder von Sacchi und Passignano in St. Peter." Ars Naturam Adiuvans: Festschrift für Matthias Winner zum 11. März 1996. Eds. Victoria v. Flemming and Sebastian Schütze. Mainz am Rhein: von Zabern, 1996, 413-29. 363 BAV, Barb. Lat. 2974, unpaginated, “Il corno destro anticamente si diceva il corno dell’epistola, et il corno sinistro il corno dell’evangelio; ma hora si dice al contrario: il corno dell’ep[is]t[ol]a si dice corno sinistro, et il corno del[l’] evangelio si dice destro; é p[er]ò molto migliore il viso antico in questo, che il moderno.” 364 BAV, Barb. Lat. 2974. “Il suddiacono ordinaria.le bacia le mani al celebrante doppo che la finita l’ep[i]st[ol]a, et il Diacono bacia le mani all’istesso insanzi che principia à leger l’evang.o; et questo si fà per dimostrar, che S. Gio. Batt.a fu il fino della lege vecchia, et Christo che si significa nel evang.o principio della lege nova.” Although not relevant for this project, it is interesting to note the placement of a sculpture of S. John the Baptist (by Giuseppe Obici, 1858, marble) on the Epistola (south) side of the high altar, thus fulfilling the idea outlined by the author of the manuscript. The St. John the Baptist sculpture also displays signs of tactile devotion. 166 state of altars and chapels was in order. 365 The following was recorded about the state of two altars in the Minerva: Near the high altar are two marble altars, that…which is on the Evangelo side is entirely of marble suitable for celebrating the mass, although it is not performed. On the altar table is the statue of Our Savior rising from the dead, out of an unknown type of marble, a work by Michelangelo Buonarotti, set up by the Mazzatotis family, without endowment and equipment [for the mass]. That which is on the Epistola side is of the same quality. Set up by the Metellis family. Equally without endowment and furnishings [for the mass]. 366 Connecting the description from the Sacred Visit of 1630 with the reservations expressed in the above noted manuscript, the author of the Sacred Visit seems to be reverting back to the “ancient view”. The two altars noted in the visit are identifiable as follows. One is the altar dedicated by Metello Vari for his aunt Marta Porcari. This is likely the reference to the “familia de Metellis” situated on what is described as the Epistola (north) side of the high altar. 367 The other altar, on the Evangelo (south) side, is the altar that was dedicated to the Sacrament in the “chapel” of the Nativity of Christ, by 365 On the Sacred Visit, see Rice 1997, 62, fn. 5. 366 ASV, Miscellanea, Armadio VII (Visitazioni), vol. III, fol. 378v (4. I. 1630). “Altari maiori proxima duo sunt Altaria marmorea, quae illi veluti lateralia deservire videntur, quorum illud, quod est a latere Evangelij est totum marmoreum aptum ad celebrationem, licet in eo non celebretur. Supra mensam adest statua Redemptoris nostri a mortuis resurgentis, ex marmore celata, opus Michaelis Angeli Buonarotae, asseritur constructum a familia de Mazzatotis, caret dote, et onere. Aliud quod est a latere Epistolae est eiudsem qualitatis. Asseritur constructum a familia de Metellis. Caret pariter onere et dote.” This is also quoted, but not translated or fully discussed, in Lotz 1965, 146, fn. 15; Schmidt 2003, 225, fn. 66, refers to Lotz for the passage, but only refers to the few words which note the subject of the statue. 367 Metello’s first name appears twice in the dedicatory inscription, and it is possible that a quick glance at the inscription led the writer of the Sacred Visit to think that the family name was “Metello” rather than Vari. Metello Vari will continue to be associated with the Christ sculpture well into the 18 th century. An inscription dated 1701 notes the bones of Metello Vari is recorded in an anonymous manuscript. AGOP (S. Sabina), XI.2890a, Anon. Res Historica, 131: “MDXXI = Hec sunt ossa = Beati Georgii Ord: Pred: = hic reco[n]dita Metellus = De Varis” The author notes that the inscription was found in the Minerva in 1884, but the location is not noted. 167 the Mazzatotis family. 368 The Mazzatotis altar was located next to the tabernacle of the Sacrament, literally the container of the body of Christ, on the south side of the high altar. It is no doubt the sacramental function of the sculpture, as the embodiment of Christ, which partly led to the object being moved to this place of importance in the Minerva. 369 The changes in terminology, literally swapping right with left, reflects the changes at the center of the Catholic Church, St. Peter’s Basilica. The momentary reversion from the “modern view” when the priest faces out towards the congregation back to the “ancient view” when the priest faced away from the congregation caused a disruption in the common understanding of right from left. Such a change is certainly so culturally and chronologically specific that the importance to note it has gone unnoticed no doubt because of the tedious nature of sorting out the texts. The reason it is important in this particular instance is that the terms changed precisely at the moment Michelangelo’s sculpture was moved amidst the renovations near the high altar. The momentary change, reflected in an official Vatican text and an early guidebook, reminds us that a sculpture by Michelangelo was relocated for a sacramental purpose and placed 368 Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 165-66, note the no longer extant altar, which was installed in the transept , at the south pilaster. Brandi 1706, 17r, notes the small altar of the Mazzatosti at the Epistola side (south) of the high altar. Brandi 1706, 17r, margin note ‘X’ goes on further to note that on the pavement in front of the base is an inscription that reads “Riccardus Mazzatosta 1520” and that on the Mazzatosti altar is a sculpture of the Virgin Mary with Christ, St. John the Baptist and the Evangelist. He notes that the work is by Francesco Siciliano, who as Brandi notes, donated the sculpture to the church with an inscription noting that it was made in 1615, but it was not necessarily installed right away. The artist received a place to be buried in the church in 1670. The sculpture is presently found in the chapel of S. Domenico in the north transept, including its original base with images of the Nativity. This is the sculpture visible at the south pier in an early 19 th century print by Giacomo Fontana showing the crossing of the Minerva. 369 The sacramental aspect of the sculpture has been noted already. Eisler, Colin. "The Golden Christ of Cortona and the Man of Sorrows in Italy: Part Two." The Art Bulletin 51.3 (1969b): 244-45; Lavin 1977- 78, 15-16, makes a connection between Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ and Vecchietti’s Risen Christ created originally for Vecchietti’s tomb, but was moved to the high altar of the Siena Cathedral in 1506, creating an sacramental function as well. 168 near the tabernacle of the Sacrament, leaving a base with its dedicatory inscription behind. In this instance, the liturgical function of the object superseded the importance of the families associated with the monument. Sacrament trumped commemoration. Christ and the Golden Rose As just explained, in 1630, the sculpture of Christ was situated not on its altar on the north side, but on the altar of the Mazzatosti on the south side of the crossing, close to the tabernacle of the Sacrament, leaving empty its original altar dedicated by the “Metellis” family. In addition to creating a stronger sacramental meaning for the sculpture, there are practical reasons for the change in installation. During major renovations at the Minerva, the sculpture was no doubt moved to prevent damage to the object. The former chapel of St. Thomas Aquinas was destroyed to make room for the east doorway for the Holy Year of 1600. Later, there were major renovations to the choir completed by Carlo Maderno in either 1614 or in the late 1620s that dismantled the fabric of the building. A drawing from the workshop of Carlo Maderno, Section drawing for the choir of S. Maria sopra Minerva (fig. 61-62), not previously discussed in relation to Michelangelo’s Risen Christ might help point to the reason for the shift in its location from the north side of the high altar to the south side. The Maderno drawing shows a view of the north wall of the choir before the restructuring of the 19 th century. 370 370 For the drawing, its dating, and the dating of Maderno’s work at the Minerva, see Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 132-34, who suggest that the major components of the project was likely finished by 1614. Palmerio and Villetti’s documents do not resolve the problem entirely. See also Howard Hibbard. Maderno. Milan: Electa, 2001, 329, fig. 283, who dates the completion of the project to 1630, based on documents related to the destruction of a house in 1617 for the expansion of the apse, as well as documents in the Borghese 169 Maderno, working around the preexisting Medici tombs in the apse, renders accurately the tomb of Pope Leo X. 371 On the far left side of the drawing, there is a section view of the current location of Michelangelo’s sculpture. A baldacchino, or honorific canopy, is present, but the Christ sculpture is not. Instead, underneath the baldacchino is a flower shaped object. I would like to suggest that placed underneath the canopy in Maderno’s drawing is a Golden Rose, possibly the one donated to the Minerva during the time of Pope Paul V, in 1607. 372 The Golden Rose is an extraordinary three-dimensional religious object made of bronze with gilding and delicate hammered gold leaves. 373 The object traditionally looks Archive in which Cardinal Scipione Borghese, protector of the Dominican Order, paid for stucco work and a balustrade for the new choir, dated April 1630. Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 134, as does Hibbard 2001, 329, note that Cardinal Borghese paid for the installation of the second organ on the south-side of the high altar in 1630, and was likely finished by 1632. See Michael Hill. "Cardinal Scipione Borghese's Patronage of Ecclesiastical Architecture, 1605-1633." Phd Dissertation, University of Sydney, 1998, 226, who summarizes the work on the organs, and notes the Borghese documents. 371 For a discussion of the documents and dating of the earlier changes to the presbytery under Antonio da Sangallo the Younger, c. 1536-38, which included the Medici tombs of Leo X and Clement VII by Baccio Bandinelli and others, see Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 121-25; Gustavo Giovannoni. Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane. Rome: Tipografia Regionale, 1959, 245-46; Pio Pecchiai. "I Lavori Fatti nella Chiesa della Minerva per Collocarvi le Sepolture di Leone X e Clemente VII." Archivi: Archivi d'Italia e rassegna internazionale degli archivi, Serie II 17 (1950): 199-207; Christoph L. Frommel and Nicholas Adams, eds. The Architectural Drawings of Antonio Da Sangallo the Younger and His Circle, Vol. II: Churches, Villas, the Pantheon, Tombs, and Ancient Inscriptions. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 2000, 232-33, and especially 255-56, for the drawing which notes the placement of the Christ sculpture at the north pier in the 1530s, already noted above. See also Panofsky 1991, 134, n. 90-91. 372 No sources I have consulted note or identify this detail of the Maderno drawing. 373 On the history of the celebration of the Golden Rose, including reference to numerous examples of the Golden Rose donated during various pontificates, see Carlo Cartari. La Rosa d'Oro Pontificia. Racconto Istorico Consagrato alla Santitá di N.S. Innocenzo XI Pontefice Massimo. Rome: Rev. Camera Apostolica, 1681. For modern scholarship, see Alvar González-Palacios. "Rose d'Oro." Studi sul Barocco Romano: Scritti in Onore di Maurizio Fagiolo dell'Arco. Milan: Skira, 2004. 251-56, pl. LXXXV; Jennifer Montagu. Gold, Silver and Bronze. Metal Sculpture of the Roman Baroque. New Haven and London, 1996; Maurizio Fagiolo dell'Arco. Berniniana: Novità Sul Regista Del Barocco. Milan: Skira, 2002, fig. 158, the drawing by Bernini, and fig. 159 for the surviving example in the Museum dell’Opera del Duomo, Siena. For art historians, the Golden Rose falls into the category of decorative arts, or minor arts. The first scholar to take seriously the decorative arts of the early modern period is Jennifer Montagu, whose book on the small scale bronze, gold and silver objects of the 17 th century is indispensable. See Montagu 1996, 17, for 170 like a bouquet of roses, some flowers in bloom while other buds are still closed, springing from a base in various forms. The best-known surviving examples of the Golden Rose are those designed by Gian Lorenzo Bernini (fig. 63) for the Chigi pope, Alexander VII, the bouquet of which grows from the mounds of the Chigi family emblem. The origin of the Golden Rose dates back to the time of Charlemagne. 374 On the fourth Sunday of Lent, what is called the “Laetare Sunday,” or “Rose Sunday,” the Golden Rose is blessed by the pope, anointed with scented oil and balsam, and given to a church as a sign of devotion and esteem. On that day, the sermons emphasized meditation on the malice of sin, and recognition of redemption through the coming of the Resurrected Christ on Easter Sunday. Viewed within the context of Lent, and in the Minerva, the Golden Rose is a multi-sensory symbolic manifestation of Christ’s passion and Christ himself. Brandi notes that Paul V came to the Minerva to bless and present a Golden Rose in honor of the Madonna of the Rosary, the confraternity that was dedicated in the Capranica Chapel in 1573. 375 The day in which Paul V came to the Minerva to donate and bless the Golden Rose was also the feast day of the Annunciation. The papal visit connected both the feast of the Confraternity of the Annunciation and the special honor an example from the time of Paul V preserved in Vienna. González-Palacios 2004, 253, also notes the example in Vienna and provides a different date than Montagu, but still comes from the time of Paul V. 374 For an early, lengthy discussion of the history of the Golden Rose, see Cartari 1681, especially pages 1- 50. 375 AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol. 18v. “Nell’anno poi 1606 affrontandosi á venire la festa della Nunziata nella quarta Domenica di Quaresima giorno nel quali il Sommo Pontefice svole benedite la Rosa d’oro la felice memoria di Papa Paolo quinto avendo qual giorno nella Chiesa della Minerva fatta la solita cappella e benedetta la Rosa la dono alla Madonna Santis.a del Rosario dandola in custodia al Priore e Frati del Convento; massime che per l’addi esso questo favore e grazia non era stato fatto inanzi, se non á due altre Chiese di Roma cioé al Salvatore di S. Giovanni in Laterano et alla Madonna di S. Maria Maggiore.” 171 for the Confraternity of the Rosary, the two most prominent confraternities at the Minerva in this period, to be discussed further below. On that single day in the second year of Paul V’s pontificate, space and time allowed for the celebration of the miraculous conception of Christ, the mysteries of the Passion (as experienced through the saying of the Rosary), and the preface to the resurrection on the following Sunday as expressed through Michelangelo’s sculpture, all of which were honored and marked by the sacred Golden Rose. 376 One may ask why the Golden Rose was moved from its prominent location near the high altar recorded in the Maderno drawing. One source from the end of the 17 th century stated that the Golden Rose was in the Sacristy of the Minerva. 377 But the diarist Giacinto Gigli recorded a theft in the chapel of the Madonna of the Rosary, or the Capranica Chapel. On June 29, 1614, jewelry and other votive offerings were stolen from the chapel. 378 Such a theft might have prompted the priors of the Minerva to remove the Golden Rose from view, and as Brandi noted, put it in the custody of the Prior and friars of the Convent. Sometime after the Sacred Visit of 1630, the Christ sculpture was returned to its privileged location on the north side of the high altar. When returned to this location, the 376 In addition, the official Station church for the fourth day of Lent is S. Croce in Gerusalemme, which of course, contains the most important collection of relics related to Christ. 377 Cartari 1681, 140-41: “Nella Sagrestia de’ Padri Domenicani in Roma, detta il Convento della Minerva, ho veduta, e considerate la Rosa d’oro, che Paolo V à quella Chiesa donò, formata di un vago Ramo con cinque Rose, due bottoni chiusi, con molte foglie, e gambo spinoso: è collocata in vaso ovato di vaga fattura, sostenuto da’Draghi, che son parte dell’Arme Borghese: nel gir si legge. Paulus V. Pont. Max. Anno II….Si espone in alcune solennità questa Rosa d’oro sopra l’Altar maggiore.” 378 Giacinto Gigli. Diario di Roma (1608-1670). Ed. Manlio Barberito. Rome: Colombo, 1994, 29. Entry for June 29, 1614: “A di 29. di Giugno furono arrobbaati nella Chiesa della Minerva tutti li vezzi, collane, et altre gioje, che stavano attorno all’Immagine della Madonna della Rosario.” 172 canopy for the Golden Rose was not removed, and thus in the early 18 th century, the somewhat vague remark was made that “…someone thought to have adorned the sculpture with a canopy and a backdrop of damask enriched with fringe and gold lace…” as if the canopy and backdrop were installed for the sculpture. 379 The canopy visible in various 19 th -century drawings and prints, and noted in the 18 th -century description was not for Michelangelo’s sculpture. It was for the more valuable, sacred object, the Golden Rose. But the precious, ephemeral quality of the Golden Rose in comparison to the marble Christ sculpture allowed for its disappearance. When shifted back to the north pier, still sometime in the 17 th century, and placed under the honorific canopy with the damask backdrop, Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ took on the status of a sanctified, relic-like object. The honorific setting placed more attention on the sculpture. It is no wonder that the members of the confraternities at the Minerva, but also devout men and especially women, turned their gaze to the powerful image of the Resurrected Christ. In the next section, I discuss the ways the sculpture could have been appropriated spiritually 379 AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol.21v, [margin note Tt]. “…avuto il pensiero alcuni d’adornarlo con un Baldacchino e dossiero di Damasco Cremesi arrichito di frangia e trina d’oro…” The drawing by Maderno from the early 17 th century discussed above, as well as the reference in Brandi’s manuscript from sometime before 1645, safely places the baldacchino to no later than the early 17 th century. Thinking of the function of the baldacchino and damask backdrop (especially as seen at St. Peter’s Basilica in relation to the bronze St. Peter sculpture, also honored with a baldacchino and damask background in the time of Paul V, discussed in Chapter Two), it makes sense that the baldacchino was installed for the Golden Rose. The baldacchino above the Christ sculpture is noted in the following essays, Lotz 1965; de Tolnay 1967; Gerold Weber. "Bemerkungen Zu Michelangelos Christus in S. Maria Sopra Minerva." Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte XXII (1969): 201-03, all of whom note the same reference from Berthier which is plagiarized from Brandi. De Tolnay 1967, argues that the setting recorded in an anonymous early 19 th century drawing preserved in the Casa Buonarroti records the original setting (fig. 65) designed by Frizzi, but with a later baldacchino, which he dates to some time after 1725, and arguing against Lotz, that the baldacchino did not substitute the tabernacle of Frizzi, but was placed above it. 173 by the various confraternities at the Minerva. The appropriation of the sculpture shows how devotion to the object helped secure its vernacular fame. Christ and the Confraternities at S. Maria sopra Minerva Guidebooks of the early modern period underscore the significance of the Minerva as a site of several important confraternities, the religious groups who took on active public roles in fostering the spiritual lives of laity and clergy alike. A typical guide of the early 16 th century lists the four most important confraternities housed at the Minerva, which include those dedicated to the Sacrament, the Name of God, the Rosary, and the Annunciation. 380 The confraternities of the Annunciation and the Rosary were the most visibly active at the Minerva because of their numerous processions, dispersing of dowries to unmarried young women, and their active role in reforming devotion. I would like to suggest that the people associated with these confraternities, especially the women, found the image of the Risen Christ particularly meaningful within the context of feast days. In the following section, I suggest ways the sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo could have appealed to the devout members and beholders of events for significant confraternities. Each confraternity and passing event brought different meanings to the sculpture. 380 Pompilio Totti. Ritratto di Roma Moderna. Rome: Il Mascardi, 1638, 383-86, includes a long entry on the history of the church, the patrons of the new chapels, and the religious festivals associated with the site. In general, the confraternities are the most prominently mentioned features of the Minerva in most early guidebooks. Felini 1610, 92; Ottavio Panciroli. Tesori Nascosti dell'alma Città di Roma. Rome: Zannetti, 1600, 525; Le cose maravigliose… Rome: Antonio Blado, 1575, 10; Le cose maravigliose… Rome: Iacomo Crulli de Marchucci, 1625, 41-42. 174 i. Christ and the Annunciation The Confraternity of the Annunciation, the oldest confraternity at the Minerva, became well known for the distribution of dowries by the pope to unmarried young women, or zitelle, on their feast day. 381 The event became such a spectacle with the young women dressed in costumes, such as angels holding symbols of the Passion and saints that many people in Rome came out to watch. 382 During this annual event, young women who were quite literally locked away were provided a rare experience to walk through the streets of Rome and visit churches they would not normally enter. 383 381 The feast day is celebrated March 25. The confraternity of the Annunciation was founded at the Minerva in 1460 by a Spanish cardinal Juan de Torquemada. The order was created to provide a way to improve the spiritual lives of the friars of the Dominican order. Others have made important contributions to the ways in which art figured in the lives of the women who were patronised by confraternties, and in particular, during the feast day celebrations of the Annunciation and other confraternties. See especially Louise Smith Bross. "’She is among all Virgins the Queen...So Worthy a Patron...for Maidens to Copy.’ Livio Agresti, Cardinal Federico Cesi, and the Compagnia Delle Vergini Miserabili Di Santa Caterina Della Rosa." Confraternities and the Visual Arts in Renaissance Italy: Ritual, Spectacle, Image. Eds. Barbara Wisch and Diane Cole Ahl. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, 286-287, notes the procession of the zitelle from the convent of S. Catherine dei Funari to the Minerva on the feast day of St. Catherine (November 25) as well as the importance of the Annunciation imagery for the young virgin wards. Bross also illustrates a striking image of St. Catherine (of Alexandria) saved from martyrdom which includes an image of the resurrected Christ reminiscent of Michelangelo’s sculpture. See also Lance G. Lazar. "'E Faucibus Daemonis': Daughters of Prostitutes, the First Jesuits, and the Compagnia Delle Vergini Miserabili Di Santa Caterina Della Rosa." Confraternities and the Visual Arts in Renaissance Italy: Ritual, Spectacle, Image. Eds. Barbara Wisch and Diane Cole Ahl. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, 259-79. 382 Thomas V. Cohen. Love and Death in Renaissance Italy. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2004, 48. The processions are described in several sources, including Gigli 1994, 10, and Pientini 1577, 233-34, who provides a detailed description of the appearance of the young women, especially the ones dressed as saints. “…la processione de le fanciulle di santa Caterina de’ funai, fatta da quel luogo infino a la chiesa de la Madonna de la Minerva. Percio che precedendo molto bene ornata la croce, andavano primieramente quattro fanciulle assai grandi riccamente vestite, & con mirabil gratia rappresentavano queste quattro gloriose sante, cioe santa Caterina martire con la palma del martirio ne l’una mano, & con la ruota ne l’altra, & a guisa de Reina con la corona in resta. Santa Orsola con l’una mano tenendo la palma, & con l’altra la bandiera. Santa Maria Maddalena col bossolo d’alabastro. Et santa Agnesa con la palma in mano, & con un candido agnellino in braccio.” 383 Bross 2000, 287, notes how the feast day of St. Catherine provided the rare opportunity for the young women at the convent of S. Catherine dei Funari to see the decoration inside their church, which reminds us of how special the feast day processions were for the young women. Cohen 2004, 47-48, also notes the 175 The altarpiece of the chapel dedicated to the Confraternity of the Annunciation underscores the important act of giving dowries to the young women. The tempera and gold ground painting on panel by Antoniazzo Romano, Annunciation with “zitelle” and Juan de Torquemada (fig. 64), shows the Annunciation with the unusual addition of the Virgin distributing dowry pouches. Romano, known for his otherworldly depictions of sacred stories, made the painting in time for the March 25 th feast of the Holy Year of 1500. 384 The young ladies enter the realm of the sacred with the Virgin and the angel Gabriele while the founder of the confraternity, Juan de Torquemada, watches on. From 1500 until sometime between 1573 and 1600, the painting was visible in the first chapel on the south side of the high altar, the Capranica Chapel. 385 When located near the high altar, the rituals for the feast of the Annunciation would have taken place near the sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo. Brandi’s discussion of the charitable work of the Confraternity of the Annunciation emphasizes the places of the ceremonies, which are quite diverse, including different days and different sites. The Confraternity of the Annunciation extended its generosity throughout the year, including the feast days of St. Catherine of Siena, St. Valentine, and specialness of the annual procession for both the young women, but also the spectators, who came “wife- shopping” during the event. 384 The painting is tempera on panel and 130 x 185 cm. Antonio Paolucci. Antoniazzo Romano: Catalogo Completo dei Dipinti. Florence: Cantini, 1992, 146, cat. 44; Anna Cavallaro. Antoniazzo Romano e gli Antoniazzeschi: Una Generazione di Pittori nella Roma del Quattrocento. Udine: Campanotto 1992, 204, who notes the renovation by Maderno in 1600, and Cavallaro 1992, 542, notes the documents related to the curtain which hung before the altarpiece. On the function of curtains on altarpieces, see Alessandro Nova. "Hangings, Curtains, and Shutters of Sixteenth-Century Lombard Altarpieces." Italian Altarpieces, 1250- 1550. Eds. Eve Borsook and Fiorella Superbi Gioffredi. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994. 177-89. 385 The painting is currently located in the chapel of the Annunciation, located in the south side aisle, in the fifth chapel from the main entrace. On the chapel of the Annunciation, see Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 151- 52; 163. 176 St. Prassede. 386 By inviting the unmarried young women to the Minerva on the feast days of various saints, and in turn, sending the young women to other churches (in this case, the church of S. Prassede, which contains the column of Christ’s flagellation), the young women were mobilized in Rome and made connections between sites and objects. The exceptional experience of visiting the Minerva and other churches in Rome with important vernacular devotional objects related to Christ on just a few days each year reminds us of the impact the monuments would have left on the young wards. Like the limited experience of visiting the Grotte Vaticane at St. Peter’s Basilica one day each year, the expression of devotion by women who visited the churches of the Minerva, S. Prassede, S. Valentino, and other sites, no doubt was intense. It is no wonder that by the early 18 th century, the Christ sculpture was known more for the devotion shown to the object than for its aesthetic merits. ii. Christ and the Rosary In 1573, the new Confraternity of the Rosary physically displaced the Confraternity of the Annunciation when it received the first chapel on the south side of the high altar. 387 The confraternity asserted its mission in the chapel when they 386 AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol. 29v-30r. The quote is from Brandi’s text, not the copyist’s margin notes. “La dove dette zitelle doppo d’essere andate in processione baciano i piedi al Sommo Pontefice, il quale in questo giorno fá ogn’anno cavalcata solenne dal suo Palazzo á detta Chiesa accompagnato dal tutta la Corte e Nobilitá di Roma [margin note Sss]. Cinque volte l’anno fá maritaggio questa Compagnia. Il giorno della Nunziata della Madonna. La seconda domenica di Maggio á nome della festa di S.ta Caterina da Siena. Il giorno di S. Valentino Martire; et il giorno della Nunziata e questi nella Chiesa della Minerva. Il giorno poi di S.ta Prassede manda le zitelle che dota alla Chiesa di detta Santa; e tutta questa diversitá di luoghi e tempi per adempire l’ultima volontá de Testatori che cosi anno disposto:” 387 The confraternity of the Rosary was founded by pope Gregory XIII in honor of the naval victory in 1571 over the Turks, and its feast day it celebrated the first Sunday of October. Lumbroso and Martini 1963, 54; AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol. 29r. Reminiscent of the Confraternity of the Annunciation, 177 commissioned Marcello Venusti to paint on the vault frescoes showing all fifteen of the Mysteries of the Rosary. 388 And by divine provenance, the Holy Year of 1575 led to the explosion of popularity of the confraternity. Writing in the years just following the extraordinary Holy Year, Gregory Martin included a lengthy description on the merits of the Rosary that cited the universal-personal appeal of the new confraternity. 389 From Martin’s description, it becomes clear that it was the empowering, inclusive nature of the saying of the Rosary for the salvation of individuals, the use of rosary beads, and the sense of community created by the Rosary which drew people in. One early, mass-produced publications about the Rosary in Italy is Gaspare Loarte’s small book from 1610, Instruttioni, per meditare i misterij del Rosario. 390 Written in Italian, with small woodcuts illustrating the fifteen mysteries, the book explicitly informs the reader of the meaning of the meditations, gives instructions for the saying of the Rosary with rosary beads, how to make confession, as well as how to the Rosary also provided dowries to unmarried women. 388 For Venusti’s frescoes in the Capranica Chapel, see Claudio Strinati. "Espressione Figurativa e Committenza Confraternale nella Cappella Capranica alla Minerva (1573)." Ricerche per la Storia Religiosa di Roma 5 (1984): 395-428. 389 Gregory Martin. Roma Sancta (1581). Ed. George Bruner Parks. Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1969, 214-18. 390 In 1575 and then in 1605, Loarte also published books which include instructions for meditating on the passion of Christ, which comprises half of the meditations of the Rosary. The earlier edition of the meditations, from 1605, is a better quality version of the 1610 publication. The 1605 is in Latin, with larger, better quality images of the Passion. The 1610 publication is much smaller, in Italian, and an includes rudimentary wood-cuts, which suggests that the publication for the Rosary was being made for a wider audience. Gaspare Loarte. Meditiones super Sacrosanta Dom. N. Iesu. Christi Passione. Cum Artificiò Meditationis inibi Instituendae. Rome [?], 1605; Gaspare Loarte. Instruttioni, per Meditare i Misterij del Rosario della SS. Vergine Madre. Rome: B. Zannetti, 1610. The saying of the Rosary was introduced earlier in Florence and in Germany, but its wide-spread influence was not felt in Rome until after the founding of the Confraternity of the Rosary at the Minerva in 1571. Anne Winston,. "Tracing the Origins of the Rosary: German Vernacular Texts." Speculum 68.3 (1993): 619-36. The saying of the Rosary derives from an apocraphal tradition in which the Virgin gave rosary beads to St. Dominic in a vision. 178 experience the Mass. 391 The small, inexpensive publication met the meets of the growing number of members in Rome, confirming the popularity of the Confraternity, but also their immediate presence in the city after their foundation. In the early 17 th century, the confraternity took on an active role, especially during times of crisis. As attested by Gigli’s diary, the Confraternity of the Rosary became a powerful presence by means of processions, especially during the plague years in Rome. In June of 1630, a procession starting at the Minerva brought out thousands of people, men and women, filled the church, the piazza, and the surrounding streets. 392 One can imagine the church packed with people seeking blessing before the sacred objects and images, rosaries in hand, seeking salvation from the indiscriminate plague. The day of the procession, June 24, 1630, was just six months after the Sacred Visit to the Minerva, which noted that the sculpture of Christ was standing on the Mazzatosti altar, near the chapel of the Rosary. As if standing as a physical manifestation of the eleventh mystery of the Rosary, the Resurrection, the Christ sculpture would have certainly appealed to the participants in the procession passing by the chapel. How many hands 391 As noted in Loarte 1610, the Mysteries of the Rosary are as follows: 1) Annunciation 2) Visitation 3) Nativity 4) Presentation in the Temple 5) Discovery of Christ in the Temple 6) Agony in the Garden 7) Flagellation at the Column 8) Coronation with the Crown of Thorns 9) Carrying the Cross 10) The Crucifixion 11) The Resurrection 12) Ascension 13) Descent of the Holy Spirit 14) Assumption of the Virgin 15) Coronation of the Virgin. Later, five more meditations would be added to the Rosary, which constitute the saying of the Perpetual Rosary, founded in 1630. The additional meditations are the Baptism of Christ, the Wedding at Cana, the Proclamation of the Kingdom, the Transfiguration, and the Eucharist. 392 Gigli 1994, 194-95: “Alli 24. di Giugno [1630] giorno di S. Gio. Battista la Compagnia del Rosario andò processionalmente dalla Chiesa della Minerva alla Madonna del Popolo, et di la sino a Santa Maria Maggiore, acciò Iddio ci conervi, che non venga la Peste, alla qual Compagnia per questa Processione il Papa concesse Indulgenza Plenaria, e remissione di tutti I peccati. Et fu cosa di gran maraviglia il vedere il popolo numerosissimo, che fu in questa Processione, poi che si tiene, che arrivasee a quaranta mila persone tra homini, et Donne, tal che radunandosi la Gente alla Minerva, essendo piena la Chiesa, e le piazze, e strade vicine, fu bisogno avviare la Processione per la gran calca un hora e mezza prima, che non si era stabilito.” Gigli 1994, 147, notes the 1625 procession in honor of the Rosary which was more solemn than the one for the 1600 holy year. 179 and rosary beads of devout people seeking salvation from the plague pressed to the feet of the statue. iii. Christ, Rosary for Christ, and the S. Salvatore In the 18 th century an anonymous author notes that on the front of the base just below the feet of Michelangelo’s sculpture, written in gold gilded letters was the following inscription: Ave Benignissime Jesu Salvatore Mundi Miserere mei 393 [Hail the most benevolent Jesus Savior of mankind Have mercy on me] It is not surprising to find this inscription in relation to an image of the Resurrected Christ. Brandi, the author of the Cronica, makes further sense of this specific phrase within the context of the devotion at the Minerva, especially the meaning the sculpture had to the Confraternity of the S. Salvatore, founded in the Minerva in 1596 by Fra Vincenzo da Palestrina. Fra Vincenzo began as a minor Sacristan at the Minerva, but was moved to found the confraternity because of the devotion displayed by young noble people to a small painted image of Christ (fig. 65). The icon of Christ was positioned 393 AGOP (S. Sabina), XI.2890a, Anon. Res Historica, 11. “In faccia al de[tto] piedestallo sotto li piedi del Salvatore si legge in lettere di metallo dorato. Ave Benignissime Jesu = Salvatore Mundi = Miserere mei.” The inscription, as well as another one above the sculpture related to the Trinity, and the dedicatory inscription noting Marta Porcari’s name are all found in the Res Historica, but are not noted in the Brandi manuscript. The anonymous Res Historica escaped the notice of Palmerio and Villetti, as well as all other sources (except Berthier) which I have consulted on the Minerva and Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture. Berthier 1910, 235, fn. 1, notes the inscription and the description, but does not note the source, nor does he present an interpretation of the later inscription. 180 above an altar dedicated to Sts. Agata and Lucia, located against the wall of the south aisle of the Minerva, just between the crossing south arm and the first chapel. 394 A tradition of saying the Rosario for Christ began in relation to the icon located in the south aisle. When explaining the differences and similarities between the saying of the Rosary of Christ versus that of the Virgin, Brandi states specifically that “…the Rosary of the Savior is composed by one hundred and fifty salutations in this manner, Ave benignissimé Jesu Salvatror Mundi miserere mei …” quoting the exact line which was later attached to the base of the sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo. 395 Fra Vincenzo, the founder of the Confraternity of the S. Salvatore, was clearly inspired by the devotion shown to the saying of the Rosary of the Virgin. And the saying of the Rosary to Christ found its physical manifestation in the attaching of an inscription related to its confraternity on the base of the statue by Michelangelo. During an official Sacred Visit to inspect the church in the time of Clement VIII (January 30, 1592-March 3, 1605), the altar dedicated to Sts. Agatha and Lucia was 394 The altar is still in its original location with a fresco of SS. Agatha and Lucia, attributed to Marcello Venusti. The altar was dedicated to the Confraternity of the SS. Annunziata by a noble Roman woman named Onesta Marsiliana around 1550. Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 157. 395 The Brandi manuscript, as already noted, does not quote the inscriptions. Whether or not the Ave benignissimé inscription was present in Brandi’s or the copyist’s time is uncertain. Brandi’s note of the exact phrase might have been inspired by the inscription. AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol. 32v-33r. Brandi’s description of the transmission of the devotion is complicated, but it is worth noting in full here. Brandi notes that it was a group of “fanciulletti nobili e divoti” which grammatically suggests young noble men, but could have included young noble women. “Frà Vincenzo da Palestrina nell’anno 1596 ch’in questo tempo era Sagrestano minore della Minerva sotto nome di Congregazione della Purità perche sotto la cura d’una Sacerdote attempato di quella Casa ebbe principio in alcuni fanciulletti nobili e divoti con l’occasione d’una antica imagine del Salvatore ch’era sopra l’Altare della SS. Agata e Lucia alla quale aveva cominciato á concorrere il Popolo con gran divozione per molte grazie da loro ricevute. Fà menzione di quest’Immagine il P. M.o Serafino Razzi nel libro de suoi Sermoni in un Sermone della Circoncisione del Signore, aveva detto Converso insegnato á detti fanciulli una divozione poco tempo inanzi portata in Italia da un Padre Frà Gherardo Fiammengo da Colonia Agrippina; e questa é d’un Rosario del Salvatore composto di cento cinquanta salutationi di questo tenore Ave benignissimé Jesu Salvatror Mundi miserere mei, distinto in quindeci decadi o imposte con l’orazione Domenicale da principio d’ogni decade come quella della Vergine.” 181 deemed unfit to continue holding the sacred painted image of Christ and it was thus moved to the Maffei Chapel, which was then rededicated to the Confraternity of the S. Salvatore. 396 As the Maffei Chapel is dedicated to the family and is within a contained space, the painted image of Christ was not as readily accessible as when it was located in the south side aisle. It is possible that when the devout young people who formerly venerated the miraculous image of Christ at the altar of Sts. Agatha and Lucia looked for a substitute image, they found the substitute in the Christ sculpture by Michelangelo. 397 The access to the sculpture had just changed, as the imposing and prohibiting choir stall and screen were removed, providing a new access to the crossing of the church. The changes in access to the painted image of Christ for the members of confraternities, from the accessible side aisle to an imposing altar tabernacle locked inside a side chapel, paralleled the changes that occurred just a few years earlier in the Cappella Gregoriana at St. Peter’s and a few years later at the high altar of the church of S. Agostino, both of which were discussed in Chapter Three. When faced with the removal of an accessible, miracle-granting object, devout people looked elsewhere for another suitable site of devotion. The sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo filled that need. 396 The transfer of the popular object might have reflected a concern for security in addition to the need for an appropriate image for the chapel dedicated to the new confraternity. The Maffei acquired the chapel dedicated to St. Sebastian in 1588. The chapel was rededicated to the SS. Salvatore in 1596, and in the late 17 th century, it was still the Maffei family chapel. See Palmerio and Villetti 1989, 180-81. Brandi notes the solemn translation of the image to the Maffei Chapel. The painting was believed to have been made by Raphael. AGOP (S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol. 33v-34r. 397 Lumbroso and Martini 1963, 55, make the interesting reverse, but anachronistic, connection between the Confraternity of the SS. Salvatore and Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture, noting that “A questa devozione si collega probabilmente l’idea di far scolpire da Michelangelo la statua del Salvatore alla Minerva.” The Confraternity was founded in 1596, while the sculpture was made and installed by 1521. 182 For the newly founded Confraternity of the S. Salvatore, Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ provided an ideal site of devotion. It is not surprising then to find a reference to the offering of votives at the sculpture, as well as the lighting of candles and lamps. As the copyist of Brandi’s history observes: In addition there are [votive] plates, votives of silver, and candles, which the faithful bring here as signs of the favor they have received and with donations two lamps are kept lit one during the day and one during the night. 398 In two images from the early 19 th century, View of Michelangelo’s Risen Christ (fig. 66) and View of S. Maria sopra Minerva (fig. 67) by Giacomo Fontana, the two lamps noted in the text are visible, attesting to the longevity of the tradition of devotion at Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture. 399 Transporting the Image of Christ The Minerva and the Confraternity of the S. Salvatore also played host to an even more important image of Christ, the miraculous icon that is kept in the Sancta Sanctorum. On January 1, 1709, the miraculous image of Christ was processed solemnly and secretly at night to the Minerva. 400 The object spent one day at the Minerva, in the Chapel of S. 398 AGOP, Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol.21v, [margin note Tt]. “Oltre alle tavolette, voti d’argento e candele che vi portano li fedeli in segno delle grazie ricevute anno anche avuto il pensiero alcuni d’adornarlo con un Baldacchino e dossiero di Damasco Cremesi arrichito di frangia e trina d’oro e con le limosine si mantengono due lampadi accese il giorno et una la notte.” 399 One image is a print by Giacomo Fontana, from Raccolta delle migliori chiese di Roma e suburbane. Rome, Marini: 1838, vol. II, Tav. LII, reproduced in Palmerio and Valletti 1989, fig. 35. The other image is an anonymous drawing in the Casa Buonarroti museum, Florence, dated to the beginning of the 19 th century. It is published and discussed by de Tolnay 1967. 400 Gaspare Bambi. Memorie Sacre della Cappella di Sancta Sanctorum e della Scala del Palazzo di Pilato detta Volgarmente la Scala Santa. Rome: V. Poggioli, 1798, chapter II, includes a lengthy discussion of the miraculously made image, when it was carried in processions, and when it was displayed to the public. 183 Domenico, for a papal mass, before being transported to the S. Peter’s Basilica. A print from the early 18 th century, Vera e Miracolosa Effigie del Ss.mo Salvatore… (fig. 68), notes that the icon was installed on the high altar at St. Peter’s for eight days to beg God for help during a particularly difficult time. 401 But while located in the Chapel of S. Domenico at the Minerva, in the north arm of the transept, the icon was near the sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo, and possibly the Golden Rose, if brought out for such an important event. 402 During just one day, a meeting occured between the miraculously made icon of Christ and the image of Christ created by a master artist. 403 The praesentia of the three-dimensional marble sculpture of the Christ was heightened by the age-value of the icon transported from the Lateran. The tradition of rendering the image of Christ for devotional purposes was continued by modern artists Anon. 1676, “Compagnia del SS.mo Salvatore ad Sancta Sanctorum ,” includes the statutes of the company and the history of when it became a confraternity. BAV, Barb. Lat. 4537, Perleone Casella, “Historia della Capela, e Compagnia del S.mo Salvatore in Laterano,” for an early history, dated to around 1598, first noted in Jack Freiberg. The Latern in 1600: Christian Concord in Counter-Reformation Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, 23. For a modern history of the confraternity of the S. Salvatore at the Sancta Sanctorum, see Lumbroso and Martini 1963, 394-97. See also Enrico Parlato. "La Processione di Ferragosto e l'acheropita del Sancta Sanctorum." Il Volto di Cristo. Eds. Giovanni Morello and Gerhard Wolf. Milan: Electa, 2000, 51-52. 401 The primary source of the information is a print and brief text, which was sold by Giuseppe Rossi at his shop near Piazza Navona. The full legend on the print reads as follows: “Vera e Miracolosa Effigie del Ss.mo Salvatore che si conserva nella Sacra Cappella detta Sancta Sanctorum trasportata di notte privatamente nella Chiesa di S. Maria sopra Minerva il di primo Gennaio 1709 e da questa con Solenne processione con l’intervento della Santità di nostro signore papa Clemente XI trasferita il giorno seguente nella Basilica Vaticana per impetrare il divino aiuto nelli presenti e gravissimi bisogni di S. Madre Chiesa esposta come si vede delineata nell’Altare de Prencipi dell’Apostoli per lo spatio di otto giorni.” At bottom left: “Si vende da Giuseppe Rossi in Piazza Navona all’insegna della Stampa di Roma.” At bottom right: “Roma Sup. licen.” 402 Returning us full circle to the Golden Rose, the honorable visits paid by the pope to the Minerva on Rose Sunday during Lent are only made for two other churches: S. Maria Maggiore and S. Salvatore, or the Sancta Sanctorum. AGOP, Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol.18v. 403 In addition, the miracle granting image of Christ in the Maffei Chapel, dedicated to the S. Salvatore, mentioned above, no doubt figured in the ritual. 184 when they employed visual reference to ancient images. The power of the face of Christ was revealed by the icon from the Lateran, while the potency of the body of Christ, hidden in the icon, occupied the beholder’s space when confronted by Michelangelo’s sculpture. It was the bodily presence, the praesentia, of Christ that inspired the meeting of icons, but also the encounters with sacred objects and sites for pilgrims and other devout people. In the next section, I explore another connection between the sculpture that goes beyond the Minerva to a church located on the Via Appia. While some objects traveled the sacred space of Rome, the movements of pilgrims created meaning, which is not obvious from visiting the Minerva alone. The Minerva Christ and the church of Domine quo Vadis? In the 17 th century, the Risen Christ by Michelangelo at the Minerva is connected with sites outside of its setting by means of narrative appropriations in guidebooks and the copying of the sculpture to create a marker at a popular tactile site of devotion in Rome. At the church of Domine quo Vadis? on the Via Appia, a small white marble stone retaining the impression of two feet, the Footprint stone of Christ (fig. 69-71), is an early 17 th century substitute of the original stone which marks the miraculous encounter between St. Peter and Christ. The event is referred to as Domine quo vadis? St. Peter asked, “Lord, where are you going?” and Christ responded that he was on his way to Rome to be crucified anew. During the miraculous encounter, it is tradition that Christ’s presence burned an impression of his feet into a pavement stone on the ancient via Appia. The stone became an essential site for pilgrims in Rome, even included as a stop-off 185 during itineraries of the seven most important basilicas. 404 In the current discussion, it is important to note that a documented connection was already made between the footprint stone and Michelangelo’s Minerva Christ sculpture during the 16 th century, a connection that would be further exploited in the 17 th century. 405 As such, the story of the footprint stone of Christ is worth fleshing out for the reception of relics and vestiges of Christ during the early modern period in order to underscore the motivations behind the popular devotional practices that surrounded Michelangelo’s sculpture at the Minerva. Francesco Maria Torrigio’s guidebook I Sacri Trofei Romani (1644), dedicated to the sacred sites of St. Peter and Christ, already discussed in Chapter Two, serves as an exceptional source on the footprint stone. 406 Torrigo retells the story of the encounter between St. Peter and Christ, and puts together a collection of early sources that mention the footprint stone, including Petrarch, Baronio, Panciroli, Severano, and Serrano. 407 Torrigio confirms that the stone was already a popular site in the later Middle Ages when he quotes Petrarch’s observation of the veneration to the object. 408 The stone became an important testament to the presence of Christ in Rome, but more importantly, the marker 404 Caldana 2003, 156, noting one of the earliest guides which includes Domine quo vadis? as an essential stop on the pilgrim route, Panvinio 1570. Caldana also notes that Panvinio was one of the first provide a systematic treatment of the seven main pilgrim basilicas. The stop off at Domine quo vadis? happened between visiting S. Sebastiano fuoi le mura and the Lateran. 405 Wallace 1997, 1277-78, is the first person in modern scholarship to make a connection between the footprint stone at Domine quo vadis? and Michelangelo’s Christ sculpture in the Minerva. Wallace notes that the stone is an important example of praesentia, referring to Peter Brown 1981. 406 Francesco Maria Torrigio. I Sacri Trofei Romani del Trionfante Prencipe degli Apostoli San Pietro Gloriosissimo. Rome: Moneta, 1644, 61-67, 105. See “Introduction” for a discussion of Torrigio. 407 Torrigio 1644, 62. 408 Noted in Torrigio 1644, 63. “Di questi sacri vestigii così ne scrisse il famoso Poeta Petrarca, che come persona pia, andava vistando li luoghi santi di Roma scrivendo a Gio. Colonna I, 2. pe. 9. In saxo durissimo aeternum gentibus adoranda vestigial.” 186 of the decisive event that led to St. Peter’s return to Rome to be crucified. The site is commemorated for securing the centrality of Rome at the heart of the Catholic Church. 409 When modern visitors enter the small church of Domine quo vadis?, they are met by a raised marble stone which sits in the midst of what appears to be a section of the ancient Via Appia. A thick iron grate encloses the stone, but does not prevent visitors from touching it or from even placing their feet directly on top of the feet of Christ. The stone is worn smooth and glassy in places where people have touched it, namely the exact area of Christ’s feet. The edges of the Footprint stone of Christ (fig. 71) are eroded with pockmarks, willful damages from pilgrims breaking off pieces of the stone to take as relics, or possibly even to use for medicinal purposes. 410 Running along the edges of the stone on all four sides of the top face, as well as on two sides of the stone, is an inscription. 411 The inscription tells us that “the true stone is in the church of St. Sebastiano” and that the copy in front of the beholder was put in place in 1616. 412 409 The centrality of the Domine quo vadis story is emphasized in various printed and visual sources. For instance, Onofrio Panvinio. Le Sette Chiese Romane (De Praecipuis Urbis Romae Sanctioribusque Basilicis). Rome: Antonio Blado, 1570, 134, provides the prayer one should say when visiting the church of Domine quo vadis? which includes the foundation line,“Tu es Petrus et super hanc petram aedificabo ecclesiam meam”. See Giovanni Morello, Francesco Petrucci, and Claudio Strinati, eds. La Passione Di Cristo Secondo Bernini: Dipinti E Sculture Del Barocco Romano. Rome: Bozzi, 2007, 190-91, for 17 th century painted images of the Domine quo vadis? story. 410 On eating relics and other sacred materials and objects, see Gary Vikan. "Ruminations on Edible Icons." Retaining the Original: Multiples Originals, Copies, and Reproductions. Vol. 20. Studies in the History of Art. Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art, Washington, 1989. 47-59. 411 The inscription is missing lines and is heavily damaged due to the pieces that were broken off. What remains of the inscription reads as follows: Christo.sparve.da.san.Pietro.e [s]asso.la.forma.delli.suoi.santi.pie […] steteru[n]t + pedes.eius adoriamo + il loco […] 187 The original Footprint stone of Christ (fig. 72) was already placed in the important pilgrim basilica of S. Sebastiano fuori le Mura sometime before the early 16 th century. 413 A century would pass before a version was made and installed in the current site. The lapse in time between the transfer of the original stone and the making of the substitute stone caused imprecision in some early sources. In Torrigio’s collection of early sources, all but one refer exclusively to the original stone kept in the basilica of S. Sebastiano. When Torrigio refers to the official Sacred Visit on November 24, 1624 to Domine quo vadis?, he notes that the original footprint stone is kept in S. Sebastiano and “that which is remaining here [is] a specimen modeled closely on the original form, here dove.si.ingen.ochio.san.pietro bene.la.vera.pietra.sta.nel[la] [chi]esa.di.san.bastiano.tra.le[…] ordine.de.pe[nitent]i di.san.francesc[o] cal.21.fecit.an.dom.M.DC.XVI Another inscription dating from 1830, on the wall near the entrance, notes the story of St. Peter’s encounter with Christ on the Via Appia, notes that the stone in the church is a copy, and that the original is located in the basilica of S. Sebastiano. 412 Giovanni Battista Lugari. "Il Sacello 'Domine, Quo Vadis?' Sulla Via Appia." Nuovo bollettino di archeologica cristiana 7.1/2 (1901): 17, notes that the stone was put in place in 1610 by a penitent of the Ordine dei Minori named Fr. Ignazio Floriani di Castelfidardo, but does not note the source of his information. 413 Nine Miedema. "Following in the Footsteps of Christ: Pilgrimage and Passion Devotion." The Broken Body: Passion Devotion in Late-Medieval Culture. Ed. Alasdair A. MacDonald. Groningen: Forsten, 1998, 83, fn. 39, notes that between 1515-1516 a monk from the monastery of Böddeken visited the basilica of S. Sebastiano and touched the footprint stone, indicating that the original stone was already in S. Sebastiano by the early 16 th century, if not earlier, and that at some point it was accessible to touch even in its new context. Although, oddly, Miedema mistakenly notes on the same page that the stone in the church of Domine quo vadis? is the original and the copy is in S. Sebastiano. The current display of the original stone is in a large reliquary cabinet in the second chapel on the right when entering the chruch. The cabinet includes an inscription which dates the display to the Holy Year of 1625. The cabinet is represented by Maggi 1625. It is likely the footprint stone was moved to S. Sebastiano to protect it from theft. Regarding the theft of relics, see Manilio Barberito. "Il Furto Della Testa Di S. Andrea." Strenna dei Romanisti 30 (1969): 25-32; and Patrick J. Geary. Furta Sacra: Thefts of Relics in the Central Middle Ages. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978, who points out that only working relics were stolen, while ones for sale were probably not valuable. 188 in the middle of the church enclosed by iron to protect it”. 414 Torrigio is referring to a description from a moment in which pope Urban VIII ordered official visits to all the churches in Rome as an attempt to take inventory of the devotional practices and physical conditions at the sites. Taking inventory of the object, the author is satisfied with what he sees. The object remained in place and continued to be an important site of devotion. The substitute of the footprint stone no doubt was installed to meet the needs of the influx of pilgrims visiting the site at which Christ appeared to Peter on the Via Appia. Without a marker, the site was illegible. To satisfy the need for a physical, religious experience with the site, the marker was installed. Even the inscription of the edges alludes to its purpose: “we adore the site.” As the original footprint stone is kept in a reliquary cabinet (fig. 73), access to the original object in the early 17 th century was limited to special occasions and illustrious visitors. 415 The footprint stone at Domine quo vadis? is certainly one of the most important popular devotional traces of Christ’s miraculous presence in the city of Rome. 416 But the stone certainly is not unique. It is one of a group of markers that record the fleeting 414 Torrigio 1644, 64-65: “Adest Ecclesia subnomine Domine, quo vadis? Alias S. Maria de Plantis sic nuncupata, propterea quod hic sit locus, in quo Dominus N. I. C. Petro Urbe egredienti occurrit, ac respondit se Romam iterum ire crucifigi, ibique vestigial pedum in silice impressa reliquisse, qui lapid hodie in Ecclesia S. Sebastiani inter ceteras Reliquias custoditur, relicto hic exemplo ad formam originalis [p. 65] expresso, qui in huius Ecclesiae medio orationibus ferries circumdatur servatur…” 415 Torrigio 1644, 63, notes, maybe even brags, about how many times he has seen the stone during the visits of illustrious people: “…come più volte hò visto io con occasione della venuta del gran Duca di Fiorenza a Roma nel 1626. & altro Principi.” 416 Footprint stones are not special to Rome. Gerhard Wolf. "Holy Face and the Holy Feet: Preliminary Reflections before the Novgorod Mandylion." Eastern Christian Relics. Ed. Aliex Lidov. Moscow, 2003: 282-83, notes a footprint stone of Christ at the palace of Pontius Pilate in Jerusalem, which people touched with pieces of cloth (brandea) and used the strips of cloth to heal themselves. Wolf also notes early references to the veneration of the footprints left by Christ on the Mount of Olives and other sites in the Holy Land. 189 moments when divine beings tread upon the earth, the vestiges of the connection between humanity and the divine. Some stones are imprints, left by the intense heat believed to emanate from divine bodies. Others receive veneration because of their status for being touched by sacred bodies although no traces are necessarily visible. Other similar stones are known in Rome. The footprint (possibly knee prints) of the angel who visited St. Peter while he hung nailed to the cross on the summit of the Janiculum hill were visible in a wall near the high altar of the church of SS. Silvestro e Dorotea near Porta Settimiana. 417 A stone from the Via Sacra retaining the knee prints of saints Peter and Paul when they knelt to give thanks to the lord for releasing them from prison was kept in the church of SS. Cosmo e Damiano. 418 The Face print stone of St. Peter (fig. 35) from when St. Peter was pushed against the wall by the Roman soldiers in the Carcere Mamertino is still at the site. 419 The Knee print stones of St. Peter (fig. 36) from when he witnessed Simon Magnus lifted in the air by a demon on the Aventine are located at the church of S. Francesca Romana. 420 417 Torrigio 1644, 49-51, notes the story, various inscriptions, the sacred visit of 1624, and the past and then current location of the stone. See Johanna Heidemann. "The Roman Footprints of the Archangel Michael." Mededelingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome n.s. 12.47 (1987): 155, fn. 41, notes the stone is lost, and refers to an inscription from 1500 noted in a modern source, which is the same noted by Torrigio 1644. 418 Torrigo 1644, 73-75, notes that the stone was taken away to an unknown location during the time of Paul III when the church of SS. Cosmo and Damiano was being expanded. 419 Patrizia Fortini. "Nuovi Documenti sul Carcere Mamertino (Cercer-Tullianum) Quale Luogo di Culto Cristiano." Ecclesiae Urbis. Eds. Federico Guidobaldi and Alessandra Guiglia Guidobaldi. Vol. 1. Vatican: Pontificio Instituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 2002, 530-31, notes that the current location of the stone with its iron grate and inscription dates from 1720. 420 Torrigio 1644, 77-90. See chapter two, “St. Peter.” 190 In the church of the Aracoeli on the Capitoline Hill was a stone that retains the footprints of the archangel Michael from his appearance on the Castle Sant’Angelo. 421 The stone proves to be an extraordinary example of an object that was venerated, received a new honorific installation in 1604, but then was subsequently dismantled in the third quarter of the 17 th century because of its lack of provenance and its clearly pagan origins. Based on the presence of an inscription in Greek, antiquarians reported that the object was, in fact, an ancient votive stone to the cult of Isis, not truly a stone that retains the footprints of the archangel. Yet, one of the voices in support of the stone was the Christian antiquarian and ecclesiastic historian Martinelli Fioravante (1599-1667), who wrote a formal petition to Pope Alexander VII (1655-67). 422 Despite the obvious visual inconsistencies between the footprint stone of the archangel Michael and other footprint stones, Martinelli supported the return of the stone to the church. In this instance, the newly emerging rigor of antiquarian observation was ignored for the sake of the vernacular devotion the object supported. The footprint stone of the archangel Michael was located near the high altar of the church of S. Maria in Aracoeli for centuries. But during the restructuring of the choir and 421 See Johanna Heidemann. "Orme Romani ed il Perduto Reliquiario delle 'Pedate' dell'arcangelo Michele." Bollettino dei musei comunali di Roma N.S. IV (1990): 17-26, for Martinelli Fioravante’s petition and the stone from the Aracoeli, which is now kept in the Musei Capitolini, Palazzo Nuovo. Heidemann provides a photomontage reconstruction of the 1604 installation of the stone. The footprint stone was installed at chest height, easily accessible to tactile veneration. See also Heidemann 1987, for her earlier publication on the footprint stone. Alejandro Recio Veganzones. "Una Ombra Manuscrita de Alfonso Chacon Op (1530-1599): La 'Historica Descriptio Urbis Romae'." Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana 78 (2002): 410, provides a 16 th century reference written by Alfonoso Chacon, manuscript in the Biblioteca Nacional, Madrid. “…el elenco de reliquias y un commentario latino de Chacón a la lápida marmórea con las huellas del Angel que, según la tradición, apareció en Castel-Sant’Angelo.” I thank Ingo Herklotz for these references. 422 Heidemann 1990, 18. Heidemann 1987, 147-56, includes a detailed discussion of the petition, as well as a transcription of the document held in the BAV, Chigi m.s. 191 the high altar area from 1561-68, the stone was relocated, and then installed in a proper monument in 1604. At the same time, the high altar painting by Raphael known now as the Madonna di Foglino was replaced with the miraculous and more appropriate devotional image of the Virgin and Christ, possibly painted by St. Luke. 423 The larger concern during the late 16 th -century renovation was the removal of an object venerated for its status as art, while the legendary stone proved to be less troublesome. But in the later 17 th centuty, the stone was removed because of its Pagan origins. Martinelli’s petition did not succeed in swaying the pope to re-install the object. Martinelli’s petition is important for understanding what these kinds of miraculous print stones meant to people in the early modern period. Even though Martinelli was not successful with his petition, his observations about other touchstones are important to point to the currency of vernacular objects as archaeological evidence for the history of Christianity in Rome. Within the petition, Martinelli notes the three most famous examples of print stones known in the city. He points to the angel print stones from S. Silvestro e Dorotea, the knee print stones of St. Peter in S. Francesca Romana, and the footprint stone of Christ in Domine quo vadis? All three examples are put forth as archaeological evidence for customary devotion. The nascent form of early Christian antiquarianism that emerged in the wake of Baronio’s exploration of the catacombs and the general culture of Classical antiquarianism shifted emphasis towards sustained examination of objects. As a result, these three stones became archaeological evidence 423 Sylvia Ferino Pagden. "From Cult Images to the Cult of Images: The Case of the Raphael's Altarpieces." The Altarpiece in the Renaissance. Eds. Peter Humfrey and Martin Kemp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990, 177-78. The painting is now in the Pinacotheca of the Musei Vaticani, after its removal from Foligno (Convent of S. Anna delle Contesse) by Napoleon’s troops, and its subsequent return to Italy with the Treaty of Tolentino. 192 proving the vitality of early Christian devotion. Regarding the footprint stone of Christ at Domine quo vadis? Martinelli notes: And finally we see, in S. Maria in Palmis, otherwise known as “nelle Pedate” on the Via Appia, where Our Lord Christ was seen by St. Peter, as testimony of this event there is a stone with two feet carved in renovatione of other similar stones, one which is preserved among the relics of the [basilica of] St. Sebastian….And at this stone, where sometimes I have seen lamps lit, people kneel and pray, and venerate [the stone] with kisses and touches with rosaries and medals. 424 The various touchstones provide sites for devotion to make material the traces of the sacred people and their history. 425 In the case of the Christ footprint stone, the stone serves a more profound purpose. It reminds the devotee person of the humanity of the savior and of his existence in the world. 426 As pilgrims follow in the literal and miraculous footsteps of Christ, they need markers. Gregory Martin in his note to readers of his account of two years spent in Rome after the 1575 Holy Year, relishes in how amazing it is to find the sites and objects of which he read in ancient religious texts. Matching sites and texts make the sacred that much more powerful. Martin notes the church of Domine quo vadis? in his introduction to readers, “Read in St. Ambrose how Christ appeared to Peter being about to flee out of the Citie: here is the Chappel Domine 424 BAV, Chigi G III, 70, fol. 337v, first noted in Heidemann 1987, 152. “E finalmente vediamo, che in S. Maria in Palmis, cioè nelle Pedate, della Via Appia, dove Christo Signore Nostro sparve alla vista di S. Pietro, per testimonianza di quest’attione è stato posto un sasso con due pedate scarpellate in renovatione di altri simili sassi, uno de; quali si conserva tra le reliquie di San Bastiano…Et à questa sasso, dove qualche volta ho visto arder lampada, il popolo genuflesso fa oratione, venerandolo con bacio e con toccamenti di corone e madaglie.” 425 Heidemann 1987, 150, also notes this in the closing of her essay on Martinelli’s petition. 426 Wolf 2003, 282-83, notes that the footprint stone is proof against the opposing views of Gnostic writers that he did not leave physical traces and was a kind of “shape shifter” appearing in different forms to different people. 193 quo vadis?” 427 The text tells the story. But the sites are the material places in which the devotion is most intensely experienced as the stone testifies. Coming back to Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ in the Minerva, it is no wonder that people were inspired to show their devotion by means of kissing and touching the foot of the sculpture, and in turn, a protective bronze foot. As already noted in relation to the bronze St. Peter sculpture, the older sites of vernacular devotion throughout Rome testify to the tradition of tactile devotion in relation to sacred sites and objects. Beholders of the footprint stones of Christ were prepared to express their devotion to Christ at Michelangelo’s sculpture by means of touch and kisses. Two pieces of evidence explicitly confirm the relationship between the Minerva Christ and the footprint stones at Domine quo Vadis? in the early modern period. First, in 1590, the Minerva Christ sculpture is identified as representing the moment St. Peter met Christ on the Via Appia. 428 To further solidify the connection between the two sites, a copy of Michelangelo’s Risen Christ (fig. 74) was made possibly sometime between 1637 and 1639, during the time of the renovation of the church ordered by Cardinal Francesco 427 Martin 1969, ed. Bruner, 9. 428 Giorgio Vasari. La Vita di Michelangelo: nelle Redazioni del 1550 e del 1568. Ed. and Comm. Paola Barocchi. Ed. Paola Barocchi. Milan: Ricciardi, 1962, III, 903, noting D. De Villalta, De las estatuas antiguas [1590], f. 47v., noted in Sánchez Cantón, I, 290: “En el templo de la Minerva en Roma está un Christo de marmol sculpido en pie del tamaño tanto y medio como la statura natural de mano de M., que significa quando se le aparesció a Sant Pedro fuera de Roma y le dixo Sant Pedro: Domine, quo vadis? Es figura celebratissima y de tanta stimación entre las personas peritas en el arte de la scultura, que está todo el mundo lleno de los braços y piernas y los demás miembros que los scultores an formado, vaziado y moldeado para ymitar contrahazer los d’esta figura.” Weil-Garris Brandt also refers to the same source from 1590, but does not cite the source correctly in her footnote. Weil-Garris Brandt 2006, 301, fn. 97, “De Villalta 1962, III, 903.” Wallace notes the connection between the Minerva Christ sculpture and the Domine quo vadis? story, and notes a 19th century guidebook which attests to the popular reception of Michelangelo’s sculpture as representing the story. Wallace 1997, 1277-78, fn. 36. 194 Barberini, and placed at Domine quo vadis? 429 Clearly, the practice of pilgrimage that moved people through the city to the sacred sites enabled the joining of sacred spaces and objects. The connection with the site and the Barberini family is certainly worth noting to compare the site with the monumental decorations being constructed at St. Peter’s Basilica under the Barberini pope Urban VIII. Torrigio notes that on the evening of January 8 th , 1637 the church of Domine quo vadis? collapsed because of a windstorm. In 1639, Cardinal Barberini ordered the rebuilding of the church and the construction of a new façade. 430 The event certainly registered on the cultural radar; despite being outside the city, it warranted a note in Giacinto Gigli’s diary. 431 Gigli notes that storms had been raging in the area for about two months. On that fateful evening in January, the church of Domine quo vadis? as well as the adjoining house inside which slept a priest of the church were destroyed. Gigli states, “it was a miracle” that the priest was not hurt during the storm except a wound on his head. It is possible that the force of nature that toppled 429 Wallace 1997 1277-78, fig. 14, notes and illustrates the copy, but does not note when it was made. Lugari 1901, 17, notes that the sculpture was made possibly during the time of Cardinal Barberini, but without reference. 430 Torrigio 1644, 65. “Questo venerando luoco la notte precendente al giorno nono di Gennaro 1637. essendo dell’impeto del vento per essere assai antica caduta, fù da Prencipe d’animo pio, e generoso nel 1639. da fondamenti di nuovo con meglior modello fabricata, acciò si celebre memoria rimanesse à posteri.” 431 Gigli 1994, 289, entry for January 1637. “In questo tempo erano continuamente pioggie grandi già per 2. Mesi con grandine grossissima, et vento gagliardo per le quali cose rovinorno in campagna molti arberi, et edifici, et smantellò it tetti delle Case, in particolare la notte delle 9. di Gennaro, che la tempesta rovinà la Chiesa di S. Maria della Piante, altramente detta, Domine quo vadis? perché vi è il luogo dove apparve Christo Sig. Nostro a S. Pietro quando fuggiva di Roma. Rovinò questa Chiesaa, et insieme la Casa contigua, dove dormiva un Prete, o Cappellano di essa Chiesa, et fu miracolo, che rovinadno la Casa restò solo tanto di loco intanto quanto teneva il letto dove era il Prete, il quale però ferito in testa, fu da alcuni passeggieri ajutato ad uscire da quelle rovine et condotto a medicarsi la ferita. Questa chiesa era fuor di Porta Appia, per la strade di S. Sebastiano vicino ad Acquataccio.” 195 the small church just two days after the Epiphany, the divine manifestation of Christ, caused a renewed attention at the site. The moral and civic responsibility to restore the old churches of Rome certainly played a part in the renovations by the Barberini at the site. 432 Instead of building a monumental, visually stunning structure to commemorate the miracles at the site, the intimate sacred space was maintained. No doubt this reflected the continuing need to accommodate pilgrims by providing sites for an embodied devotional experience, as was the case with the bronze St. Peter at his basilica during the time of Paul V. Furthermore, part of the motivation to restore the site was undoubtedly related to the important shift being placed on Christ and St. Peter in the wake of the building of St. Peter’s Basilica, and the pontificate of Urban VIII. The shift in meaning of Michelangelo’s sculpture moved from a Risen Christ, connected with the moment in which Mary Magdalene witnessed Christ, to the miraculous moment of Christ’s apparition to St. Peter, securing the sculpture as an image of devotion related to the papacy, and in particular, St. Peter. As noted in the Introduction, the Minerva had a chapel simultaneously dedicated to the Resurrection of Christ and Mary Magdalene, which contained an image of the well-known Noli me tangere story, the meeting between Christ and Mary Magdalene when he denied her physical access to his body. As already noted, when the chapel was dedicated solely to the Resurrection of Christ, the patron of Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ, Marta Porcari, provided partial endowment. The sculpture of Christ is called an image of the Resurrection in early sources, in particular 432 Hill 2001, 434, noting Botero 1599, as already noted in Introduction. See also Hill 1998. 196 the receipt of the object by the heir of Porcari. 433 But by the 17 th century, the sculpture’s iconography was reinterpreted as representing the story of the encounter between St. Peter and Christ in addition to the story of the Resurrection. The story of the female witness of Christ’s resurrection was supplanted by the Petrine iconography, which supported the centrality of the Apostle for the authority of the Catholic Church. The Bronze Foot and Antonio Cloche (1628-1720) …being of fine marble that in a brief span of time would be easily worn out, the Reverend Father Fra Antonio Cloche attached on the above mentioned foot, a foot shaped covering of brass to defend it. 434 When one visits Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ at the Minerva today, the bronze foot added by Atonio Cloche, Head of the Dominican Order, as a response to faithful kisses is no longer present. The protective attachment, a bronze foot wearing a delicate sandal that terminated at the ankle, but did not encase the entire foot, was still present on the sculpture in the modern period, as seen in an early photograph of the Risen Christ (fig. 75). A bronze drapery and halo were also present on the Risen Christ (fig. 76). 435 The bronze foot did not prevent people from touching the sculpture. As one 433 Bardeschi Ciulich 2005, 208. 434 AGOP(S. Sabina), Brandi XIV. Liber C, fol.21v, [margin note Tt]: “…essendo il marmo fino a gentile poteva facilmente in qualche spazio di tempo consumersi gli fù fatto porre sopra detto piede dal P. R.mo Generale Fra Antonio Cloche una fronda d’ottone che rappresenta il piede a lo difende.” The word “ottone” (“brass”) is sometimes used in early texts to describe objects made of bronze. Wallace 1997, 1272 and 1279, takes seriously the devotional aspects of the object and notes the tactile veneration, but gives no source to when it first started. He seems to not have been aware of Panofsky 1991, which contains the reference to Brandi, as well as Lotz 1965, which notes the tactile veneration by means of Berthier 1910. It is not my intent to criticize Wallace’s essay, which I find to be one of the most inventive interpretations of the Christ sculpture. His essay obviously played an important role in the development of this chapter. 435 The 17 th - and 18 th -century bronze attachments were removed and the bronze cloth replaced in the early to mid-twentieth century, during the time in which a number of other well known Renaissance sculpture 197 source from the late 18 th century notes, the foot was “already very worn out” at the time. 436 The bronze attachment no doubt called further attention to the precise point where people kissed and touched the object, serving to invite further veneration as the addition resembled the form of a votive foot, offered by pilgrims at shrines for safe voyage or for curing ailments. 437 The metallic shine of the bronze foot is set in pronounced contrast with the white marble. This visually alluring effect is also visible on the Madonna del Parto (fig. 46) sculpture in S. Agostino, discussed in Chapter Three, which still retains its bronze attachment. Cloche’s addition to the Christ sculpture was intended to protect the object, but not necessarily to stop the veneration. If Cloche had intended for the sculpture to be removed completely from tactile veneration and the other displays of popular devotion, the object could have been relocated. Instead, the sculpture maintains a special place of honor throughout the 17 th century. In the Vita of Cloche, published in 1721, he is appropriately hailed as a pious leader. He is commended for his active role in the spiritual life of the Dominican Order, especially at the Minerva, at which he took part in the important ceremonies, such as were having their later attachments removed. The Pietà by Michelangelo in St. Peter’s Basilica also had the crown on the Virgin, the halo on the Christ sculpture, and the decorative cherubs on the wall behind it removed. 436 Vasari, ed. Barocchi, 1962, III, 901, quoting Della Valle [1791-94], X, p. 103, n. I, quotes the observations of an 18 th century viewer who notes the veneration at the sculpture. “Ella sporge infuori un piede, onde, come segue alle statue sagre che stanno in questo atto, tutti concorrevano a baciarlo, in forma che il marmo si cominciava a consumare, perciò fu stimato bene fargli i calzari di metallo dorato, che pur anche’esso è già molto logoro.” 437 My argument goes against the reasonable general assumption about the purpose of the bronze attachment, an assumption I myself held. As Steinberg sensibly notes, “the original marble became so much of a cult image that its right foot had to be shod in bronze to stop the faithful from abrading its surface by millionfold touch and kiss.” Steinberg 1996, 147. It would seem that the bronze attachment was placed on the sculpture to protect it, as even is noted in the Brandi manuscript above. But the bronze attachment did not prevent faithful kissing and touching. It encouraged it. 198 kissing the foot of the pope during his annual visit, as well as washing and kissing the feet of his own congregation on Holy Thursday. 438 Cloche was practiced in the sacred rituals that inspired vernacular form of devotion towards statues of St. Peter, the Virgin, and Christ. It is no wonder that Cloche honored the sculpture of Christ with the bronze attachment, and did not prevent this vernacular form of devotion from continuing. When Cloche died, his funeral was held at the Minerva. Orations were read from a temporary pulpit installed near the chapel of the Rosary. As soon as the funeral was finished, the order decided to bury Cloche’s body just below the sculpture of Christ, returning the sculpture to its original function as a devotional monument for a deceased person. 439 438 Conrado Mesfin. Vita del Reverendissimo Padre F. Antonio Cloche Maestro Generale del Sacro Ordine de’ Padri Predicatori. Benevento: Stamparia Arcivescovile, 1721, 32, 42-43. 439 Mesfin 1721, 134-135: “Terminata la descritta funzione fù riposti il Cadavere in una Cassa, e sepolto nella Sepoltura comune de’ Religiosi, però come in deposito;…dal punto che morì il loro Padre Generale, risolfero in segno del loro affetto, e della gratitudine, che conservavano ad un sì grande Benefattore, di fargli fabbricare una Sepoltura a parte; come s’è praticato con tutti gli altri Generali suoi Predecessori, che sono sepolti nella medesima chiesa della Minerva: & in fatti terminate le descritte Esequie, ne diedero subito la commissione alli Operarj, con ordine, che la collocassero a piedi della Statua del Salvatore situata al Pilastro destro dell’Altare maggiore, acciò fosse più esposta al pubblico: e nel medesimo tempo ordinarono, che si preparasse la Lapide sepolcrale per intagliarvi a perpetua memoria un succinto racconto delle di Lui virtù, e gloriose imprese…” A tombstone was made for the floor of the church to mark the location, which Mesfin notes is located at the bottom of the stairs which lead to the high altar. Mesfin 1721, 139, “…che é sotto i gradini del Presbiterio al lato destro dell’Altare maggiore. “ Cloche’s tomb stone is recorded in the Res Historica. Forcella 1879, vol. 13, 396, nr. 947, notes an inscription dedicated to Cloche in the library of the Minerva. AGOP (S. Sabina), XI.2890a, Anon. Res Historica, 80: “Fra Antonio Cloche Ord Praed.: Le seppolture [sic] e lapidi poi che sono in detto piano che occupano il sito dell’Altar Maggiore alle scalino che sciude alle Navata di mezzo, in primo luogo dalle parte del Vangelo vicino a detta scalinata dell’Altare vi e una lapide piena d’Inscrizzione ove si legge = D.O.M. = F. Antonio Cloche Gallo = Ordinis Praedicatorum = Occidaniae primum, Max Daciae =Provinciali = Roccaberti et Monroy = Generalium = Socio = demum ejusdem Ordinis Magistro = Cujus operá pluras ex suo Ordine = Beati ascripti = Pius V Pontifex Maximus = inter sanctos valutaes = Bibliotheca Casanatensis = costructa, et aucta = totus Orde innumeris beneficiis cumulatus = Parenti optimo = Pietate, Doctrina, et prudentia = eximio = benignitate, ac humanitate = suis caeterisqui omnibus = acceptissimo socii maerentes = P.C. Vixit annos XCII. mens I dies X = Praefuit anno XXXIII. mens VIII. dies XVI. obiit anno MDCCXX = V. Kal. Mart.” 199 Conclusion While St. Peter’s Basilica was being finished, especially during the pontificate of Clement VIII and at the beginning of the Pontificate of Paul V, the church of S. Maria sopra Minerva was being transformed into a powerhouse of sanctity. After the flood of 1598, the church was in need of renovations to replace the heavily damaged floor and inundated crypt. The monumental wood choir stall that occupied the space of the nave at the crossing, extending from the central apse was removed, no doubt because of the destruction from the floodwater. The injuries at the Minerva provided an opportunity to transform the fabric according to the changes in ideas of access in sacred spaces after the Council of Trent, in which important icons were secured in appropriate monumental tabernacles and central crossings of churches were opened up to allow monumental visual access, following the model of St. Peter’s Basilica. But the Minerva contained traces of its late medieval and Renaissance past. The material residue required a restructuring that did not pull all objects from the devotional sphere. Although Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ was set on a high base, the object was still technically in the liminal space of the church. Close to the high altar, but not actually set on or above it, the sculpture’s prominent position invited the gaze and touch of devout beholders. To have tactile access to Michelangelo’s Christ, one did not need to trespass the space of the high altar. At S. Maria sopra Minerva, the practices and rituals of the institutions at the Minerva, the confraternities, replaced a localized tradition. The local families patronized the confraternities, but in the late 16 th and 17 th centuries, the confraternities outgrew their local support and function. The far-reaching hands of devotional reform and munificence extended from the Minerva’s confraternities to the entire city. As such, the chapels and 200 objects within and near the chapels became sites of a wide spread veneration that extended past even the walls of the church to other sacred sites in the city. At the Minerva the meaning of a marble sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo changed as the needs and ideas of devotion transformed around it. But reception of art is not merely passive. The sculpture is an agent. The prestige of the statue carved by Michelangelo certainly had a hand in the transformation of its reception. A famous statue dedicated by an influential noble woman and the prohibition of touch could not have been sustained when brought into close proximity to the hands of women and people seeking salvation. The theme of prohibition was contradicted by the invitation of tactile devotion to a semi- nude man as well as the glimmering bronze attachment beckoning the devout hand. And what artist was more famously associated with the nude male body, producing an incredible anecdote about Michelangelo’s tug-of-war with his censor, noted in Chapter One. Ladies and Mary Magdalene were at risk. By contrast, the Petrine theme, as we have seen at St. Peter’s, did not foreclose intimate yet chaste touch. The heavily draped, seemingly ancient image of the apostle is not the desirable body of the Savior found in the Christ sculpture by Michelangelo. 201 Conclusion The complicated process of reforming the Catholic Church in the early modern period was a multi-faceted project that once started increased in momentum at an unexpected rate. Reforming devotional practices of followers while renovating the sacred sites and repositioning the sacred objects in Rome placed emphasis on the denial of tactile access to valued, yet problematic relics and esteemed works of art. Only viewing the miraculous icon was deemed enough. Yet, the needs of the growing number of pilgrims and devout people in Rome required the clergy to write instructional letters, guidebooks for spiritual meditation, and revise pilgrimage guidebooks that disseminated the changes in devotion, both physical and spiritual. When passing through the sacred landscape of Rome, the pilgrim encountered new streets, new façades, and new monuments marking important sacred sites. The sacred city was changing before their gaze, the results of which was not entirely clear or was greeted with awe in light of the ambitious scale and speed of the projects. The reworking of the sacred landscape started with St. Peter’s basilica. Taking over one hundred years to construct, the finishing of new St. Peter’s basilica in the early 17 th century provided the church the ultimate opportunity for putting into place the decisions from the Council of Trent, the sessions of which occurred while the new crossing of the basilica was still under construction. When faced with preserving the remaining half of the ancient basilica of the apostle Peter, the teetering ancient corpse clinging to the mighty new basilica surging up from the site, the sad reality of destruction must have been clear. When the dome was completed in the early 1590’s, how small and old fashioned the ancient basilica must have looked with the monumental cupola looming 202 above. Instead of having to mend the old and the new together, a new form of sacred architecture replaced the exhausted site filled with an overabundance of problematic and unidentifiable monuments. Certain objects, such as the marble St. Peter and further sculptures and mosaics were moved to the Grotte Vaticane. Other objects, including the bronze St. Peter, were moved into the new basilica to provide familiarity and a symbolic connection between the old structure and the shockingly monumental barrel-vaulted, domed edifice. The success of the new basilica was recognized immediately and was registered in the number of pilgrims who came to Rome following the Holy Year of 1575. The marvel of the majestic building dedicated to St. Peter by the Catholic Church was well worth the long journey. But spreading the message of reform to the rest of the city took many decades, lasting well into the middle of the 17 th century. As I have shown, although the rise of Christian archaeology served the needs for proving the origin and the authority of the papacy in Rome, the ancient traditions related to relic and object worship with their lingering pagan associations proved problematic. The decision to move objects out of reach by creating spectacular altar monuments made devout people turn towards accessible, sculptural objects, especially women who were denied access to the areas that contained the disappearing remnants of the Christian past. The permanence of marble and bronze allowed the physical form of devotion that relics and icons could not sustain. Pilgrims and devout women appropriated sculptural objects when they were denied access to the miracle granting relics and icons. And the clergy who recognized the need for vernacular sites of devotion conceded select objects. 203 I have attempted to point to the currency of tactile devotion in the early modern period in the face of the willful displacement of monuments to prevent vernacular devotion to precious, ancient Christian objects and the dedication of pagan monuments in the name of Christianity. Touchstones, the non-decorative, sometimes miraculously made stones holding the trace of a holy person, were celebrated in the guidebooks and commemorated with new monuments and installations to protect, but not deny access. Prohibition of entry and touch made access to a site or an object more desirable. What I have shown is how dynamic the objects and the sacred spaces of Rome were in the early modern period. This moment was more instrumental than was formerly known for deciding how pilgrims experienced sacred sites from the early modern period down to the present day. Furthermore, the early modern period in Rome monumentalized sacred spaces, which helped invent the touristic experience in churches that is still visible today. The ultimate pilgrim church, St. Peter’s basilica, allowed devout visitors and tourists alike to access the privileged altars without disrupting the mass. As the Catholic Church was coming to terms with its own sacred past, the physical remains of ancient Roman religion proved an omnipresent provocation. The presence of ancient sculptures in a city priding itself on its renewed Christian sanctity proved problematic. To employ the remaining vestiges of pagan antiquity in the service of Christianity, narratives about sculptures emerged that traced their origins in melted down or reworked cult statues of gods, ancient philosophers, and Imperial Roman family members. The idea that the bronze St. Peter was made from the cult statue of Zeus from the Capitoline Hill gave the object a prestigious sacred age-value. The Madonna del Parto’s legend about being made from or at least after the model of an ancient statue, 204 either of a god or of a sinister Imperial Roman woman with her even more ominous son, spoke to the beholder of the strength of the Christian mother and son. The Bocca della Verità, an overtly ancient object without any transformative cutting or carving, was turned into a Christian relic by means of its now lost dedication to the Virgin and its status as a witness to the threat of false belief. Pagan antiquity was a burdensome past, but the Catholic Church found ways to maneuver among its problematic material remains. But something else called the devout beholder to the objects. When the spectacular tabernacles at altars, illusionistic ceiling paintings, and looming domes were too daunting, the familiar relics of the ancient Christian past were there to ease the weary eyes by permitting a comforting caress. The warm surface of the bronze St. Peter, heated by the line of people who pass their hands over the statue’s feet, unites devout visitors to St. Peter’s basilica. The common goal of visiting the burial site of the most privileged of apostles is partly satisfied by the hand-to-foot experience with the statue. The intimate setting of the Madonna del Parto, far from the high altar in S. Agostino, allows women to feel consoled while worrying about their unborn child. They kneel before the statue and press a hand to the Virgin’s foot, surrounded by votive offerings from other women like them, to take part in a long tradition. Even the Bocca della Verità’s tourist-attraction status reminds us of the appeal of tactile experience with objects, even if the modern legend about the stone has lost its sacred Christian association. The long-line at the Bocca della Vertiá does not discourage the tourists who want an entertaining experience with the past as they tempt the mouth of the weathered, ancient face. 205 Only Michelangelo’s sculpture of Christ at S. Maria sopra Minerva is left alone, more naked than ever without any of his devotional offerings and decorative setting. Few people touch the sculpture any longer. Unless encouraged by a knowing guide, or after seeing someone else do it before her, the unshod marble foot does not invite devotional or any kind of touch. The quality of the object, as well as its appropriate liturgical iconography, helped keep the sculpture in a prominent position in the church. Furthermore, the prominent location and changes in access to the statue helped transform the statue into a sacred object irrespective of the fame of the artist. In the 20 th century, the devotional life of the sculpture no longer coincided with modern art historical fame, which rendered the statue a museum object that coincidently still resides in a church. The glass barriers now before famous works of art are just another form of iron grate to entice the beholder’s longing gaze, but do not permit even a thin, rosary laden hand to pass through for a light touch. Michelangelo’s Pietà in St. Peter’s Basilica is flocked to by hundreds and sometimes thousands of visitors each day. They gaze in amazement, some moved to tears, by the power of this Renaissance artist who rendered a psychologically powerful moment by means of a single block of pure white marble. But the glass wall closing off the chapel acts as a barrier between the beholder and the object. The denial of access makes the visitor want to get closer. Instead, the barrier repels the beholder and makes her turn away. Moving down the nave, the beholder encounters an ancient statue of St. Peter in the extra-liturgical space near the northeast pier that permits tactile devotion. The line to touch the bronze St. Peter statue continues to grow. Behavior informs behavior. St. Peter has accepted the devotional kisses and touches of over four hundred years worth of pilgrims. The Madonna del Parto in S. Agostino, also 206 in a liminal space of the church, set in a niche on the inner façade, catches the eye of the beholder upon entering the church. She will continue to accept the blue and pink satin votive offerings along with the touches and kisses to her shimmering bronze shod foot. Luckily, their marble and bronze surfaces will survive the continuing devotion for the years to come. 207 Comprehensive Bibliography iii. Archival and Manuscript Sources Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (BAV) Reg. Lat. 2100 Barb. Lat. 2160 Barb. Lat. 2969 Barb. Lat. 2974 Barb. Lat. 4342 Barb. Lat. 4344 Barb. Lat. 4410 Barb. Lat. 4490 Barb. Lat. 4516 Barb. Lat. 4537 Barb. Lat. 4603 Rome, Biblioteca Casanatense (BC) ms 4984 Rome, Archivio Segreto Vaticano (ASV) Miscellanea, Armadio VII (Visitazioni), vol. III Rome, Archivum generale ordinis Praedicatorum (AGOP), (S. Sabina) Brandi XIV. Liber C XIV XI.2890a, Anon. Res Historica 208 iv. Printed Sources Cenni Storici del Simulcro, del Culto, dei Miracoli e della Conornazione di Maria Ssma. del Parto Venerata in S. Agostino di Roma. Rome: Marco and Lorenzo Aureli, 1853. Vera, e Distinta Relazione della Solenne Processione fatta dalla Chiesa di Santa Maria Sopra Minerva alla Basilica Vaticana, nella quale si è portata la Venerabile, ed Antichissima Imagine del Santissimo Salvatore, che si conserva nella Cappella detta Sancta Sanctorum alla Scala Santa, con l’interuento della Santità di Nostro Signore Papa Clemente Xi. Per Implorare il Diuino Aiuto nelle Presenti Neccssità [Sic]. Roma: Dom. Ant. Ercole, 1709. Le Cose Maravigliose dell’alma Città di Roma, Dove Si Tratta Delle Chiese…L’antichità di Roma di M. Andrea Palladio…Et Una Epistola del Cardinale Borromeo. Rome: Antonio Blado, 1575. Le Cose Maravigliose dell'alma Città di Roma, Anfiteatro del Mondo: Con le Chiese, Ee Antichità Rapresentate in Disegno da Girolamo Francino, con l'aggiunta del Dottor Prospero Parisio. Rome: Gio. Antonio Franzini, 1600. Le Cose Maravigliose dell'alma Città di Roma… Rome: Mauritio Bona, 1620. Le Cose Maravigliose dell'alma Città di Roma…. Rome: Iacomo Crulli de Marchucci, 1625. Le Cose Maravigliose dell’alma Citta di Roma... Roma: Per Francesco Cavalli, 1636. Alfarano, Tiberio. De Basilicae Vaticanae Antiquissima et Nova Structura: pubblicato per pa prima volta, Ed. Michele Ceratti. Graz, 1953. Alpers, Svetlana. The Art of Describing: Dutch Art in the Seventeenth Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983. de Angelis, Pauli. Basilicae Veteris Vaticanae Descriptio Auctore Romano [Petrus Manlius]. Cum Notis Abbatis Pauli De Angelis, Quibus Accedit Descriptio Brevis Novi Templi Vaticani, Necnon Utriusque Ichnographia. Rome: Bernardini Tani, 1646. Antinori, Aloisio. "La Cantoria con Organo di Alessandro vi e la ‘Cappella del S. Pietro di Bronzo." L’architettura della Basilica di San Pietro. Storia e Costruzione. Ed. Gianfranco Spagnesi. Rome: Bonsignori Editore, 1997. 129-36. Archer, Leonie J. "'in Thy Blood Live': Gender and Ritual in the Judaeo-Christian Tradition." Through the Devil's Gateway: Women, Religion, and Taboo. Ed. Alison Joseph. London: SPCK, 1990. 22-49. 209 Aringhi, Paolo. Roma Svbterranea Novissima: In Qva Post Antonivm Bosivm Antesignanvm, Io. Severanvm Congreg. Oratorii Presbytervm, Et Celebres Alios Scriptores Rome: Vitalis Mascardi, 1651. Ausdall, Kristen Van. "The Corpus Verum: Orsanmichele, Tabernacles, and Verrocchio's Incredulity of Thomas." Verrocchio and Late Quattrocento Italian Sculpture. Eds. Steven Bule, Alan Phipps Darr and Fiorella Superbi Gioffredi. Florence: Casa Editrice le Lettere, 1992. 33-49. Bacci, Andrea. Del Tevere Libro Quarto. Con un Sommario di Monsignor Ludouico Gomes... di Tutte le Prodigiose Inondationi dal Principio di Roma, Insino All'anno 1530 Aggiunteui L'altre Sin'a Quest'ultima Del 99. Rome: Stampatori camerali, 1599. Baglione, Giovanni. Le Nove Chiese di Roma: nelle Quali si Contengono le Historie, Pitture, Scolture, & Architetture di Esse. Rome: Andrea Fei, 1639. Baglione, Giovanni. Le Nove Chiese Di Roma. Ed. Liliana Barroero. Rome: Archivio Guido Izzi, 1990. Baker, Malcolm. Figured in Marble: The Making and Viewing of Eighteenth-Century Sculpture. Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Museum, 2000. Baldriga, Irene. "The First Version of Michelangelo's Christ for S. Maria Sopra Minerva." Burlington Magazine 142.1173 (2000): 740-45. Bambi, Gaspare. Memorie Sacre della Cappella di Sancta Sanctorum e della Scala del Palazzo di Pilato detta Volgarmente la Scala Santa. Rome: V. Poggioli, 1798. Bann, Stephen. "Shrines, Curiosities, and the Rhetoric of Display." Visual Display: Culture Beyond Appearances. Eds. Lynne Cooke and Peter Wollen. Seattle: Bay Press, 1995. 14- 29. Barberito, Manilio. "Il Furto della Testa di S. Andrea." Strenna dei Romanisti 30 (1969): 25-32. Bardeschi Ciulich, Lucilla, and Pina Ragionieri, eds. Vita di Michelangelo. Florence: Mandragora, 2001. Bardeschi Ciulich, Lucilla, ed. I Contratti di Michelangelo. Florence: Studio per Edizioni Scelte, 2005. Barkan, Leonard. Unearthing the Past: Archaeology and Aesthetics in the Making of Renaissance Culture. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1999. 210 Barnes, Bernadine. "Aretino, the Public, and the Censorship of Michelangelo’s Last Judgment" Suspended License: Censorship and the Visual Arts. 1997. 59-84. Baxandall, Michael. Giotto and the Orators: Humanist Observers of Painting in Italy and the Discovery of Pictorial Composition, 1350-1450. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972. Baxandall, Michael. Painting and Experience in Fifteenth Century Italy. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972. Baxandall, Michael. The Limewood Sculptors of Renaissance Germany. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1980. Baxandall, Michael. Patterns of Intention: On the Historical Explanation of Pictures. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986. De Beer, E. S. "The Development of the Guide-Book until the Early Nineteenth Century." The Journal of the British Archaeological Association 15 (1952): 35-46. Belting, Hans. Likeness and Presence: A History of the Image before the Era of Art, Trans. E. Jephcott. Trans. Edmund Jephcott. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1994. Belting, Hans. "In Search of Christ's Body." The Holy Face and the Paradox of Representation. Eds. Herbert Kessler and Gerhard Wolf. Bologna: Nuova Alfa, 1998. 1-12. Bentivoglio, Enzo. "Tiberio Alfarano: le Piante del Vecchio S. Pietro sulla Pianta del Nuovo Edita dal Dupérac." L’architettura della Basilica di San Pietro. Storia e Costruzione. Ed. Gianfranco Spagnesi. Rome: Bonsignori Editore, 1997. 247-54. Berthier, Jean-Jacques. L’eglise de la Minerve à Rome. Rome: Manuzio, 1910. Bitton-Ashkelony, Brouria. Encountering the Sacred. The Debate on Christian Pilgrimage in Late Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2005. Black, Jeremy. Italy and the Grand Tour. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2003. Blaau, Jean. Nouveau Théâtre d'Italie ou Description Exacte de la Ville de Rome, Ancienne, et Nouvelle. Amsterdam: Mortier, 1704. Bolland, Andrea. "Desiderio and Diletto: Vision, Touch, and the Poetics of Bernini’s Apollo and Daphne." Art Bulletin 82.2 (2000): 309-30. Bonito, Virginia Anne. "The St. Anne Altar in Sant' Agostino in Rome: A New Discovery." The Burlington Magazine 122.933 (1980): 805-12. 211 Bonito, Virginia Anne. "The Saint Anne Altar in Sant' Agostino: Restoration and Interpretation." The Burlington Magazine 124.950 (1982): 268-76. Bosman, Lex. "The Dilemma of Pope Julius II: How to Preserve the Old St. Peter's While Building a New St. Peter's " Aux Quatre Vents: A Festschrift for Bert W. Meijer. Ed. Anton W. A. Boschloo. Florence: Centro Di, 2002. 39-44. Bosman, Lex. The Power of Tradition: Spolia in the Architecture of St. Peter’s in the Vatican. Hilversum: Uitgeverij Verloren, 2004. Botero, Giovanni. Dell’Uffito del Cardinale Libri II. Rome: Nicolò Mutii, 1599. Bottini, Angelo, ed. Musa Pensosa: L'immagine dell'intellettuale nell'antichità. Milan: Electa Mondadori, 2006. Boucher, Bruce. The Sculpture of Jacopo Sansovino. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1991. Boyle, Marjorie O’Rourke. Senses of Touch: Human Dignity and Deformity from Michelangelo to Calvin. Leiden: Brill, 1998. Branham, Joan R. "Sacred Space under Erasure in Ancient Synagogues and Early Churches." The Art Bulletin 74.3 (1992): 375-94. Bredekamp, Horst. La Fabbrica di San Pietro. Il Principio della Distruzione Produttiva, Trans. E. Broseghini. Turin: Einaudi, 2005. Bross, Louise Smith. ""She is among all Virgins the Queen...So Worthy a Patron...for Maidens to Copy." Livio Agresti, Cardinal Federico Cesi, and the Compagnia Delle Vergini Miserabili Di Santa Caterina Della Rosa." Confraternities and the Visual Arts in Renaissance Italy: Ritual, Spectacle, Image. Eds. Barbara Wisch and Diane Cole Ahl. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 280-98. Brown, Peter. The Cult of the Saints: Its Rise and Function in Late Christianity. Chicago, 1981. Brown, Peter Scott. "As Excrement to Sacrament: The Dissimulated Pagan Idol of Ste- Marie d'Oloron." The Art Bulletin 87.4 (2005): 571-88. Burke, Peter. The Historical Anthropology of Early Modern Italy: Essays on Perception and Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987. Burke, Peter. ""The Language of Gesture in Early Modern Italy"." A Cultural History of Gesture: From Antiquity to the Present Day. Ed. Jan N. Bremmer. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1994. 71-83. 212 Burke, Peter. Eyewitnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press, 2001. Bynum, Caroline Walker, and Paula Gerson. "Body-Part Reliquaries and Body Parts in the Middle Ages." Gesta 36.1 (1997): 3-7. Caglioti, Francesco. "Da Alberti a Ligorio, da Maderno a Bernini e a Marchionni: Il Ritrovamento del ‘San Pietro’ Vaticano di Mino da Fiesole (e di Niccolo Longhi da Viggiù)." Prospettiva 86 (1997): 37-70. Caglioti, Francesco. Donatello e i Medici. Storia del David e della Giuditta, 2 Vols. Florence: Leo S. Olschki Editore, 2000. Caldana, Alberto. Le Guide di Roma: Ludwig Schudt e la sua Bibliografia. Lettura Critica e Catalogo Ragionato. Rome: Palombi, 2003. Calvin, Jean. "Traité Des Reliques (1534)." Three French Treatises. Ed. Francis M. Higman. London: Athlone Press, 1970. Capelli, Simona. "Marcello Venusti e la volta della Cappella Capranica in Santa Maria sopra Minerva in Roma." Bollettino d'Arte 87.117 (2002): 73-80. Capelli, Simona. "Marcello Venusti: Un Pittore Valtellinese della Controriforma." Archivio Storico della Diocesi di Como 14 (2003): 293-314. Caperna, Maurizio. "San Carlo Borromeo, Cardinale di S. Prassede, e il rinnovamento della sua chiesa titolare a Roma." Palladio 6.12 (1993): 43-58. Carlo-Stella, Maria Cristina, Paolo Liverani, and Maria Luisa, eds. Petros Eni/Pietro è Qui: Catalogo della Mostra. Monterotondo: Edindustria, 2006. Carrier, David. "Erwin Panofsky, Leo Steinberg, David Carrier: The Problem of Objectivity in Art Historical Interpretation." The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 47.4 (1989): 333-47. Cartari, Carlo. La Rosa d'Oro Pontificia. Racconto Istorico Consagrato alla Santitá di N.S. Innocenzo XI Pontefice Massimo. Rome: Rev. Camera Apostolica, 1681. Cassidy, Brendan. "A Relic, Some Pictures and the Mothers of Florence in the Late Fourteenth Century." Gesta 30.2 (1991): 91-99. Castiglione, Iacomo. Trattato dell'inondatione del Tevere. Dove si discorre delle caggioni, e eimedij suoi, e si dichiarano alcune antichità, e luoghi di autori vecchi. Con una relatione del diluvio di Roma del 1598. Rome: Guglielmo Facciotto, 1599. 213 Cavallaro, Anna. Antoniazzo Romano e gli Antoniazzeschi: una generazione di Pittori nella Roma del Quattrocento. Udine: Campanotto 1992. de Caylus, Comte. Voyage d'Italie (1714 - 1715). Annotée et Précédée d'un Essai sur le Comte de Caylus. Ed. Amilda A. Pons. Paris: Fischbacher, 1914. De Cavi, Sabina. "Le Incisioni di Mattäus Greuter per le Epistole Heroiche di Antonio Bruni (1627/28): Ipotesi di una Collaborazione Editoriale al Principio del Seicento." Annali dell'Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Storici 15 (1998): 94-285. Celio, Gaspare. Memoria Fatta dal Signor Gaspare Celio dell'habito di Christo. Delli Nomi dell'artefici delle Pitture, che sono in alcune chiese, facciate, e Palazzi di Roma. Napoli: Scipione Bonino, 1638. Chantelou, Paul Fréart de. Diary of the Cavaliere Bernini's Visit to France. Ed. Anthony; trans. Margery Corbett; Blunt. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1985. Christian, Kathleen. "Instauratio and Pietas: The Della Valle Collections of Ancient Sculpture." Collecting Sculpture in Early Modern Europe. Eds. Nicholas Penny and Eike Schmidt. Studies in the History of Art, 70. Symposium Papers, XLVII. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2008. 33-65. Coda, Caterina-Giovanna. Duemilatrecento Corpi di Martiri: la relazione di Benigno Aloisi (1729) e il ritrovamento delle reliquie nella basilica di Santa Prassede in Roma. Rome: Biblioteca Vallicelliana, 2004. Cohen, Elizabeth. "Honor and Gender in the Streets of Early Modern Rome." Journal of Interdisciplinary History 22.4 (1992): 597-625. Cohen, Elizabeth. "Seen and Known: Prostitutes in the Cityscape of Late-Sixteenth- Century Rome." Renaissance Studies 12.3 (1998): 392-409. Cohen, Thomas V. "Reflections on Retelling a Renaissance Murder." History and Theory 41.4 (2003): 7-16. Cohen, Thomas V. Love and Death in Renaissance Italy. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2004. Connors, Joseph. "Alliance and Enmity in Roman Baroque Urbanism." Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 25 (1989): 207-94. Contarini, Luigi. L’antiquità di Roma, sito, imperadori, famiglie, statue, chiese, corpi santi... Venice: Francesco Ziletti, 1575. 214 Cornelison, Sally J. "When an Image is a Relic: The St. Zenobius Panel from Florence Cathedral " Images, Relics, and Devotional Practices in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Eds. Sally J. Cornelison and Scott B. Montgomery. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006. 95-113. Corti, Gino. "Iacopo Sansovino's Contract for the Madonna in Sant' Agostino, Rome." The Burlington Magazine 113.820 (1971): 395-96. Coster, Will, and Andrew Spicer, eds. Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Crescimbeni, Giovanni Mario. L’istoria della Basilica Diaconale, Collegiata, e Parrocchiale di S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma. Roma: Antonio de Rossi, 1715. Crescimbeni, Giovanni Mario. Stato della Basilica Diaconale, Collegiata, e Parrocchiale di S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma. Rome: Antonio de' Rossi, 1719. Cropper, Elizabeth, and Charles Dempsey. ""Vincenzo Giustiniani’s Galleria: A Taste for Style and an Inclination to Pleasure"." Nicolas Poussin: Friendship and the Love of Painting. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1996. 64-105. Crow, Thomas. "Visual Culture Questionnaire", October 77 (Summer 1996): 34-6. Crow, Thomas. The Intelligence of Art. Chapel Hill and London: University of North Carolina Press, 1999. Curzietti, Jacopo. "Antononio Raggi Oltre Il Barocco: il settecento Romano rivisto attraverso lo stile e il gusto delle scultore ticinese." Giovanni Studiosi a Confronto: Ricerche di Storia dell'arte del XV al XX Secolo. Ed. Alessia Fiabane. Rome, 2004. 115-32. Daly, A. Sant’Isidoro. Rome, 1971. Davies, Paul. "The Lighting of Pilgrimage Shrines in Renaissance Italy." The Miraculous Image in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance. Eds. Erik Thunø and Gerhard Wolf. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2004. 57-80. van Dijk, Ann. "The Afterlife of an Early Medieval Chapel: Giovanni Battista Ricci and Perceptions of the Christian Past in Post-Tridentine Rome." Renaissance Studies 19.5 (2005): 686-98. Ditchfield, Simon. "Text before Trowel: Antonio Bosio's Roma Sotterranea Revisited." The Church Retrospective. Ed. R. N. Swanson. Studies in Church History, 58. Woodbridge, UK: Boydell Press, 1997. 343-60. 215 Ditchfield, Simon. "Reading Rome as a Sacred Landscape, c. 1586-1635." Sacred Space in Early Modern Europe. Eds. Will Coster and Andrew Spicer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. 167-92. Dobler, Ralph-Miklas. "Die Vierungspfeiler von Neu-Sankt-Peter und ihre Reliquien." Sankt Peter in Rom 1506 - 2006. Eds. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze. Munich: Hirmer, 2008. 301-23. Eade, John, and Michael J. Sallnow, eds. Contesting the Sacred: The Anthropology of Christian Pilgrimage. Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 2000. Eck, Caroline van, and Edward Winters, eds. Dealing with the Visual: Art History, Aesthetics and Visual Culture. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2005. Eisler, Colin. "The Golden Christ of Cortona and the Man of Sorrows in Italy: Part One." The Art Bulletin 51.2 (1969a): 107-18. Eisler, Colin. "The Golden Christ of Cortona and the Man of Sorrows in Italy: Part Two." The Art Bulletin 51.3 (1969b): 233-46. Elsea, Angi L. "Juan De Torquemada's Meditationes in the First Cloister of Santa Maria Sopra Minerva, Rome: A Reconstruction of Fifteenth-Century Devotional Experience." PhD Dissertation, Emory University, 2003. Evelyn, John. The Diary of John Evelyn, 1620-1649, Ed. E. S. De Beer. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1955. Fagiolo, Marcello. "Il Pellegrinaggio a Roma: strutture e simboli nella città degli Anni Santi." Roma Dei Grandi Viaggiatori. Ed. Franco Paloscia. Rome: Abete, 1987. 27-126. Fagiolo dell'Arco, Maurizio. Berniniana: novità sul regista del Barocco. Milan: Skira, 2002. Fehl, Philipp. "Michelangelo's Tomb in Rome: Observations on the "Pietà" in Florence and the "Rondanini Pietà"." Artibus et Historiae 23.45 (2002): 9-27. Felini, Pietro Martire. Trattato nuovo delle cose maravigliose dell’alma città di Roma. Rome: Per Bartolomeo Zannetti, 1610. Felton, Craig. "Ribera's Early Years in Italy: The 'Maryrdom of St. Lawrence' and the 'Five Senses'." The Burlington Magazine 133.1055 (1991): 71-81. Ferrua, Antonio. "Visite del Torrigio alla Catacomba di S. Saturnino." Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana 58 (1982): 31-45. 216 Ficoroni, Francesco de'. Le vestigia e rarità di Roma antica. Ricercate, e spiegate da Francesco de' Ficoroni. Rome: Girolamo Mainardi, 1744. Foffano, Tino. "Il "De Rebus Antiquis Memorabilibus Basilice Sancti Petri Rome" di Maffeo Vegio i i Primordi dell'archeologia Cristiana." Il Sacro nel Rinascimento: Atti del XII Convegno Internazionale (Chianciano-Pienza, 17-20 Luglio 2000). Ed. Luisa Secchi Tarugi. Florence: Cesati, 2002. 719-29. Fontana, Giacomo. Raccolta delle Migliori Chiese di Roma e Suburbane: Espresse in tavole disegnate ed incise da Giacomo Fontana e corredate di cenni storici e descrittivi. Rome: Marini, 1838. Forcella, Vincenzo. Iscrizioni delle Chiese e d'altri Edificii di Roma dal Secolo XI Fino ai Giorni Nostri, 14 Vols. Rome: Tip. delle Scienze Matematiche e Fisiche, 1869- 84. Fortini, Patrizia. "Nuovi Documenti sul Carcere Mamertino (Cercer-Tullianum) Quale Luogo di Culto Cristiano." Ecclesiae Urbis. Eds. Federico Guidobaldi and Alessandra Guiglia Guidobaldi. Vol. 1. Vatican: Pontificio Instituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 2002. 503-32. Fosi, Irene. "Court and City in the Ceremony of the Possesso in the Sixteenth Century." Court and Politics in Papal Rome, 1492-1700. Eds. Gianvittorio Signorotto and Maria Antonietta Visceglia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002. 31-52. Freedberg, David. "Johannes Molanus on Provocative Paintings. De Historia Sanctarum Imaginum Et Picturarum, Book II, Chapter 42." Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 34 (1971): 229-45. Freedberg, David. The Power of Images: Studies in the History and Theory of Response. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1989. Freedberg, David. The Eye of the Lynx: Galileo, his Friends, and the Beginnings of Modern Natural History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Freiberg, Jack. The Latern in 1600: Christian Concord in Counter-Reformation Rome. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Fried, Michael. Absorption and Theatricality: Painting and Beholder in the Age of Diderot. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1980. Frijhoff, Willem. "The Kiss Sacred and Profane: Reflections on a Cross-Cultural Confrontation." A Cultural History of Gesture: From Antiquity to the Present Day. Ed. Jan N. Bremmer. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press, 1994. 210-36. 217 Frings, Jutta, ed. Barock im Vatikan: Kunst und Kultur im Rom der Päpste: 1572-1676. Leipzig: Seemann Henschel, 2005. Frommel, Christoph L. "La Chiesa di San Pietro sotto Papa Giulio II alla Luce di Nuovi Documenti." San Pietro che non c'è: da Bramante a Sangallo il Giovane. Ed. Cristiano Tessari. Milan: Electa, 1996. 23-49. Frommel, Christoph L., and Nicholas Adams, eds. The Architectural Drawings of Antonio da Sangallo the Younger and his Circle, Vol. II: Churches, Villas, the Pantheon, Tombs, and Ancient Inscriptions. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press, 2000. Frommel, Christoph L., and Gerhard Wolf, eds. L'immagine di Cristo: dall'Acheropita alla mano d'artista, dal tardo Medioevo all'età Barocca. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2006. Fuglesang, Signe Horn. "Christian Reliquaries and Pagan Idols." Images of Cult and Devotion: Function and Reception of Christian Images in Medieval and Post-Medieval Europe. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2004. 7-32. Fusconi, Giulia, ed. I Giustiniani e l'antico. Rome: Erma di Bretschneider, 2001. Gadeyne, Jan. "Function and Dysfunction of the City: Rome in the Fifth Century A.D." PhD Dissertation. Catholic University of Leuven, 2009. Galeotti, Paolo, ed. San Pietro in Vaticano. Naples: Elio de Rosa, 2001. Garrard, Mary D. "Jacopo Sansovino's Madonna in Sant' Agostino: An Antique Source Rediscovered." Journal of the Warburg and the Courtauld Institutes 38 (1975): 333-38. Geary, Patrick J. Furta Sacra: Thefts of Relics in the Central Middle Ages. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1978. Gigli, Giacinto. Diario di Roma (1608-1670). Ed. Manlio Barberito. Rome: Colombo, 1994. Giovannoni, Gustavo. Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane. Rome: Tipografia Regionale, 1959. Giovenale, Giovanni Battista. La Basilica di S. Maria in Cosmedin. Rome, 1927. González-Palacios, Alvar. "Rose d'Oro." Studi sul Barocco Romano: Scritti in Onore di Maurizio Fagiolo dell'Arco. Milan: Skira, 2004. 251-56, pl. LXXXV. 218 Grig, Lucy. Making Martyrs in Late Antiquity. London: Duckworth, 2004. Grimaldi, Giacomo. Descrizione della Basilica Antica di S. Pietro in Vaticano: Codice Barberini Latino 2733. Ed. R. Niggl. Ed. Reto Niggl. Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1972. Guarducci, Margherita. "Il 29 Giugno: Festa degli Apostoli Pietro e Paolo." Rendiconti LVIII (1987): 115-27. Guarducci, Margherita. "Riflessioni sulla Statua Bronzea di San Pietro nella Basilica Vaticana." Xenia 16 (1988): 57-72. Guarducci, Margherita. San Pietro e Sant'ippolito: Storia di statue famose in Vaticano. Rome: Istituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato, 1991. Guarducci, Margherita. "Ancora Sulla Statua Bronzea di San Pietro Nella Basilica Vaticana." Xenia antiqua 3 (1994): 5-16. Günther, Hubertus. ""Michelangelo's Works in the Eyes of His Contemporaries"." The Beholder: The Experience of Art in Early Modern Europe. Eds. Thomas Frangenberg and Robert Williams. London: Ashgate, 2006. 53-85. Hahn, Cynthia. "The Voices of the Saints: Speaking Reliquaries." Gesta 36.1 (1997a): 20-31. Hahn, Cynthia. "Seeing and Believing: The Construction of Sanctity in Early-Medieval Saints' Shrines." Speculum 72.4 (1997b): 1079-106. Hall, James. The World as Sculpture: The Changing Status of Sculpture from the Renaissance to the Present Day. London: Chatto & Windus, 1999. Hall, James. "Desire and Disgust: Touching Artworks from 1500 to 1800." Presence: The Inherence of the Prototype within Images and Other Objects. Eds. Robert Maniura and Rupert Shepard. London: Ashgate, 2006. Hallett, Christopher H. The Roman Nude: Heroic Portrait Statuary 200 Bc-Ad 300. Oxford Studies in Ancient Culture and Representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005a. Hamburger, Jeffrey F. "Seeing and Believing: The Suspicion of Sight and the Authentication of Vision in Late Medieval Art and Devotion." Imagination und Wirklichkeit: zum Verhältnis von Mentalen und Realen Bildern in der Kunst der Frühen Neuzeit. Eds. Klaus Krüger and Alessandro Nova. Mainz: von Zabern, 2000. 47-69. 219 Hamling, Tara. "Another 'Turn' in the Art History Versus Visual Culture Debate?" Art History 30.5 (2007): 757-91. Hansen, Maria Fabricius. The Eloquence of Appropriation. Prolegomena to an Understanding of Spolia in Early Christian Rome. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2003. Haskell, Francis, and Nicholas Penny. Taste and the Antique: The Lure of Classical Sculpture, 1500-1900. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1981. Hecht, Peter. "The Paragone Debate: Ten Illustrations and a Comment." Simiolus 14 (1984): 125-36. Heidemann, Johanna. "The Roman Footprints of the Archangel Michael." Mededelingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome n.s. 12.47 (1987): 147-56. Heidemann, Johanna. "Orme Romani ed il Perduto Reliquiario delle 'Pedate' dell'arcangelo Michele." Bollettino dei musei comunali di Roma N.S. IV (1990): 17-26. Herder, Johann Gottfried. Sculpture: Some Observations on Shape and Form from Pygmalion’s Creative Dream (1778). Ed. Jason Gaiger. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Herklotz, Ingo. "Historia Sacra und Mittelalterliche Kunst Während der Zweiten Hälfte des 16. Jahrhunderts in Rom." Baronio e l'Arte: Atti del Convegno Internazionale di Studi. Eds. Romeo De Maio and Agostino Borromeo. Sora, 1985. 21-74. Herklotz, Ingo. "Michele Lonigo als Kunstkritiker: zu einer Historistischen Rezeption der Altarbilder von Sacchi und Passignano in St. Peter." Ars Naturam Adiuvans: Festschrift für Matthias Winner zum 11. März 1996. Eds. Victoria v. Flemming and Sebastian Schütze. Mainz am Rhein: von Zabern, 1996. 413-29. Herklotz, Ingo. "Excavations, Collectors and Scholars in Seventeenth-Century Rome." Archives & Excavations: Essays on the History of Archaeological Excavations in Rome and Southern Italy from the Renaissance to the Nineteenth Century. Ed. Ilaria Bignamini. Vol. 14. Archaeololgical Monographs of the British School at Rome. London: British School in Rome, 2004. 55-88. Herklotz, Ingo. "Vätertexte, Bilder und Lebendige Vergangenheit: Methodenprobleme in der Liturgiegeschichte des 17. Jahrhunderts." Visualisierung und Imagination: Materielle Relikte des Mittelalters in Bildlichen Darstellungen der Neuzeit und Moderne. Eds. Bernd Carqué, Daniela Mondini and Matthias Noell. Göttingen: Wallstein, 2006. 215-51. 220 Herz, Alexandra. "Cardinal Cesare Baronio's Restoration of Ss. Nereo ed Achileo and S. Cesare de' Appia." The Art Bulletin 70 (1988): 590-620. Hibbard, Howard. Maderno. Milan: Electa, 2001. Hill, Michael. "Cardinal Scipione Borghese's Patronage of Ecclesiastical Architecture, 1605- 1633." PhD Dissertation. University of Sydney, 1998. Hill, Michael. "The Patronage of a Disenfranchised Nephew: Cardinal Scipione Borghese and the Restoration of San Crisogono in Rome, 1618-1628." Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 60.4 (2001): 433-49. Huskinson, J. M. "The Crucifixion of St. Peter: A Fifteenth-Century Topographical Problem." Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 32 (1969): 135-61. Johnson, Geraldine A. "Art or Artefact?: Madonna and Child Reliefs in the Early Renaissance." The Sculpted Object, 1400-1700. Eds. Stuart Currie and Peta Motture. Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997. 1-24. Johnson, Geraldine A. "Touch, Tactility, and the Reception of Sculpture in Early Modern Italy." A Companion to Art Theory. Eds. Paul Smith and Carolyn Wilde. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002a. 61-74. Johnson, Geraldine A. "Beautiful Brides and Model Mothers: The Devotional and Talismanic Functions of Early Modern Marian Reliefs." The Material Culture of Sex, Procreation, and Marriage in Premodern Europe. Eds. Anne L. McClanan and Karen Rosoff Encarnacion. New York: Palgrave, 2002b. Jones, Mark Wilson. "The Tempietto and the Roots of Coincidence." Architectural History 33 (1990): 1-28. Jones, Pamela M. Altarpieces and their Viewers in the Churches of Rome from Caravaggio to Guido Reni. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008. Joselit, David. "Crow's Nest: David Joselit Talks with Thomas Crow." Art Forum (Summer 2000): 41-2 Kemp, Martin. "The Altarpiece in the Renaissance: A Taxonomic Approach." The Altarpiece in the Renaissance. Eds. Peter Humfrey and Martin Kemp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. 1-20. Kempers, Bram. "Diverging Perspectives - New Saint Peter's: Artistic Ambitions, Liturgical Requirements, Financial Limitations and Historical Interpretations." Mededelingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome 55 (1996): 213-51. 221 Kessler, Herbert, and Gerhard Wolf, eds. The Holy Face and the Paradox of Representation. Bologna: Nuova Alfa, 1998. Kessler, Herbert L. Spiritual Seeing: Picturing God’s Invisibility in Medieval Art. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 2000. Kinney, Dale. "Spolia. Damnatio and Renovatio Memoriae." Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 42 (1997): 117-48. Kinney, Dale. "Spolia." St. Peter's in the Vatican. Ed. William Tronzo. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005: 16-47. Kirwin, William Chandler. "Bernini's Baldacchino Reconsidered." Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 19 (1981): 141-71. Kirwin, William Chandler. Powers Matchless: The Pontificate of Urban VIII, the Baldachin and Gian Lorenzo Bernini. New York: Peter Lang, 1997. Körner, Hans. Statuenliebe in St. Peter. Rompilger und Romtouristen vor Guglielmo della Portas Grabmal für Papst Paul III. Düsseldorfer Kunsthistorische Schriften, Band 1. Düsseldorf, 1999. Körner, Hans. "Der Fünfte Bruder. Zur Tastwahrnehmung Plastischer Bildwerke von der Renaissance bis zum frühen 19. Jahrhundert." Artibus et historiae 21.4 (2000): 165-96. Körner, Hans. "Das Hemd der „Justitia“. Rompilger und Romtouristen vor dem Grabmal für Papst Paul III. in St. Peter." Pilgerreisen in Mittelalter und Renaissance. Eds. Barbara Haupt and Wilhelm G. Busse. Vol. Studia humaniora. Düsseldorfer Studien zu Mittelalter und Renaissance Bd. 41. Düsseldorf, 2006. 163-212. Krasinski, Count Valerian, ed. A Treatise on Relics by John Calvin...With an Introduciton Dissertation on the Miraculous Images, as Well as Other Superstitions, of the Roman Catholic and Russo-Greek Churches. Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1854. Krems, Eva-Bettina. Der Fleck auf der Venus: 500 Künstleranekdoten von Apelles bis Picasso. Munich: Verlag C. H. Beck, 2003. La Bella, Carlo et al., ed. Santa Cecilia in Trastevere. Rome: Palombi, 2007. Lamia, Stephen. "Souvenir, Synaesthesia, and Sepulcrum Domini: Sensory Stimuli as Memory Stratagems." Memory and the Medieval Tomb. Eds. Elizabeth Valdez del Alamo and Carol Stamatis Pendergast. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, 2000. 19-41. 222 Langdale, Allan. "Aspects of the Critical Reception and Intellectual History of Baxandall’s Concept of the Period Eye." About Michael Baxandall. Ed. Adrian Rifkin. Oxford: Blackwell, 1999. 17-35. Lanzani, Vittorio, ed. The Vatican Grottoes. Napoli: Elio de Rosa, 2003. Lavin, Irving. Bernini and the Crossing of Saint Peter’s. New York: New York University Press, 1968. Lavin, Irving. "The Sculptor’s ‘Last Will and Testament'." Allen Memorial Art Museum Bulletin 35.1-2 (1977-78): 4-39. Lavin, Irving. Bernini and the Unity of Visual Arts. New York: Pierpont Morgan Library and Oxford University Press, 1980. Lavin, Irving. "Il Volto Santo di Claude Mellan: Ostendatque Etiam Quae Occultet." L'immagine di Cristo: dall'Acheropita alla mano d'artista, dal tardo Medioevo all'età Barocca. Eds. Christoph L. Frommel and Gerhard Wolf. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2006. 449-91. Lazar, Lance G. "'E Faucibus Daemonis': Daughters of Prostitutes, the First Jesuits, and the Compagnia delle Vergini Miserabili di Santa Caterina della Rosa." Confraternities and the Visual Arts in Renaissance Italy: Ritual, Spectacle, Image. Eds. Barbara Wisch and Diane Cole Ahl. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 259-79. Lein, Edgar. "Jacopo Sansovinos Sogennante ''Madonna Del Parto'' in Rom und ihre Beziehung zur Florentiner Skulptur der zweiten hälfte des 15.Jahrhunderts." Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 35.2-3 (1991): 193-210. Lightbown, R. W. "Ex-Votos in Gold and Silver: A Forgotten Art." The Burlington Magazine 121.915 (1979): 352-59. Liverani, Paolo. "Der Bau der Basilika St. Peter und die Anfänge der Christlichen Archäologie." Barock im Vatikan: Kunst und Kultur im Rom der Päpste: 1572- 1676. Ed. Jutta Frings. Leipzig: Seemann Henschel, 2005. 427-35. Loarte, Gaspare. Meditiones super Sacrosanta Dom. N. Iesu. Christi Passione. Cum Artificiò Meditationis inibi Instituendae. Rome [?], 1605. Loarte, Gaspare. Instruttioni, per Meditare i Misterij del Rosario della Ss. Vergine Madre. Rome: B. Zannetti, 1610. Lovatelli, Ersilia Caetani. La Bocca della Verità di Roma e la sua Leggenda nell’età di Mezzo. Rome, 1891. 223 Lotz, Wolfgang. "Zu Michelangelos Christus in S. Maria Sopra Minerva." Festschrift für Herbert von einem zum 16. Februar 1965. Ed. Gert von der Osten. Berlin: Mann, 1965. 143-50. Lucas, Thomas M., ed. Saint, Site, and Sacred Strategy: Ignatius, Rome and Jesuit Urbanism Catalog of the Exhibition, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. Vatican City: Biblioteca apostolica vaticana, 1990. Lugari, Giovanni Battista. "Il Sacello 'Domine, Quo Vadis?' sulla Via Appia." Nuovo bollettino di archeologica cristiana 7.1/2 (1901): 5-25. Lumbroso, Matizia Maroni, and Antonio Martini. Le Confraternite Romane nelle Loro Chiese. Rome: Fondazione Marco Besso, 1963. Magnuson, Torgil. Rome in the Age of Bernini. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell, 1982. Maniura, Robert. "Image and Relic in the Cult of Our Lady of Prato." Images, Relics, and Devotional Practices in Medieval and Renaissance Italy. Eds. Sally J. Cornelison and Scott B. Montgomery. Tempe, Ariz.: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 2006. 193-209. Maniura, Robert, and Rupert Shepard, eds. Presence: The Inherence of the Prototype within Images and Other Objects. London: Ashgate, 2006. Marcovecchio, Amarilli. "Il Culto delle Statue Vestite a Roma in eta Pontificia." La Ricerca Folklorica 24 (1991): 63-71. Martin, Gregory. Roma Sancta (1581). Ed. George Bruner Parks. Rome: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1969. Martinelli, Fioravante. Roma Ricercata nel suo Sito & nella Scuola di Tutti gli Antiquarij. Terza Impressione, Reuista, Corretta, & Aggiunta dall’autore in Molti Luoghi con Figure, e con Antiche e Moderne Eruditioni. Rome: Mascardi, 1658. Marvin, Miranda. The Language of the Muses: The Dialogue between Roman and Greek Sculpture. Los Angeles: Getty Publications, 2008. Masetti, Pio Tommaso. Memorie Istoriche della Chiesa di S. Maria sopra Minerva e de'suoi Moderni Restauri. Rome: B. Morini, 1855. Massimi, Giuseppe. La Chiesa di S. Maria in Cosmedin (in Schola Greca). Rome, 1989. Merz, Jörg Martin. "Pietro da Cortona und das Frontispiz zu Antonio Bosios 'Roma Sotterranea'." Marburger Jahrbuch für Kunstwissenschaft 30 (2003): 229-44. 224 Mesfin, Conrado. Vita del Reverendissimo Padre F. Antonio Cloche Maestro Generale del Sacro Ordine de’ Padri Predicatori. Composta dal Molto Reverendo Conrado Pio Mesfin Dottore in Sacra Teologia. Benevento: Stamparia Arcivescovile, 1721. Matteucci, Daniela, ed. Ercole Ramazzani de la Rocha: Aspetti del Manierismo nelle Marche della Controriforma. Venice: Marsilio, 2002. Metzger Habel, Dorothy. "Bernini's d'Aste Family Tombs in S. Maria in Via Lata, Rome: A Reconstruction." The Art Bulletin 79.2 (1997): 291-00. Miedema, Nine. "Following in the Footsteps of Christ: Pilgrimage and Passion Devotion." The Broken Body: Passion Devotion in Late-Medieval Culture. Ed. Alasdair A. MacDonald. Groningen: Forsten, 1998. 73-92. Montagu, Jennifer. Gold, Silver and Bronze. Metal Sculpture of the Roman Baroque. New Haven and London, 1996. Montagu, Jennifer. Why François Du Quesnoy Should Have 'Dy'd Mad': A Consideration of Roman Baroque Sculptor's Intentions. The Council of the Frick Collection Lecture Series. New York: The Frick Collection, 2007. Montaigne, Michel de. Montaigne’s Travel Journal, trans. Donald M. Frame. San Francisco: North Point Press: North Point Press, 1983. Morello, Giovanni, and Gerhard Wolf, eds. Il Volto di Cristo. Milano: Electa, 2000. Morello, Giovanni, Francesco Petrucci, and Claudio Strinati. La Passione di Cristo Secondo Bernini: Dipinti e Sculture del Barocco Romano. Rome: Bozzi, 2007. Most, Glenn W. Doubting Thomas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005. Nagel, Alexander. Michelangelo and the Reform of Art. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. Nardella, Cristina. Il Fascino di Roma nel Medioevo: La Meraviglie di Roma di Maestro Gregorio. Rome: Viella, 1997. Negro, Angela. Bernini e il 'Bel Composto': La Cappella De Sylva in Sant'Isidoro. Rome: Campisaano Editore, 2002. Niederer, Frances J. "Pagan Monuments Converted to Christian Use: The Roman "Diaconiae"." The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 12.3 (1953): 3-6. 225 Nigel, Yates. Liturgical Space: Christian Worship and Church Buildings in Western Europe 1500-2000. Aldershot: Ashgate, 2008. Nordenfalk, Carl. "The Five Senses in Late Medieval and Renaissance Art." Journal of the Warburg and the Courtauld Institutes 48 (1985): 1-22. Nordenfalk, Carl. "The Sense of Touch in Art." The Verbal and the Visual: Essays in Honor of William Sebastian Heckscher. Ed. Karl-Ludwig Selig. New York: Italica Press, 1990a. 109-20. Nordenfalk, Carl. "A Unique Five-Senses Cycle of the 1620's." Konsthistorisk tidskrift 59 (1990b): 183-89. Nordhagen, Per Jonas. "The Mosaics of John VII (705 - 707 A.D.): The Mosaic Fragments and Their Technique " Acta ad archaeologiam et artium historiam pertinentia Series in 4°, 2 (1965): 121-66. Nordhagen, Per Jonas. "Icons Designed for the Display of Sumptuous Votive Gifts." Dumbarton Oaks Papers 41 (1987): 453-60. Noreen, Kirstin. "The Icon of Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome: An Image and Its Afterlife." Renaissance Studies 19.5 (2005): 660-72. Nova, Alessandro. "Hangings, Curtains, and Shutters of Sixteenth-Century Lombard Altarpieces." Italian Altarpieces, 1250-1550. Eds. Eve Borsook and Fiorella Superbi Gioffredi. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994. 177-89. Nygren, Barnaby Robert. "The Monumental Saint's Tomb in Italy: 1260 - 1520." PhD Thesis, Harvard University, 1999. D'Onofrio, Cesare. Roma nel Seicento. I Volti Di Roma. Florence: Vallecchi, 1968. D'Onofrio, Cesare. Un Popolo di Statue Racconta: Storie Fatti Leggende della Città di Roma Antica Medievale Moderna. Roma: Romana Società Editrice, 1990. Orbaan, J. A. F. Documenti sul Barocco in Roma. Miscellanea Della R. Società Romana Di Storia Patria. Rome: Biblioteca Vallicelliana, 1920. Osborne, John L. "Early Medieval Painting in San Clemente, Rome: The Madonna and Child in the Niche." Gesta 20.2 (1981): 299-310. Ostrow, Steven F. Art and Spirituality in Counter-Reformation Rome: The Sistine and Pauline Chapels in S. Maria Maggiore. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. 226 Pagden, Sylvia Ferino. "From Cult Images to the Cult of Images: The Case of the Raphael's Altarpieces." The Altarpiece in the Renaissance. Eds. Peter Humfrey and Martin Kemp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. 165-89. Palmerio, Giancarlo, and Gabriella Villetti. Storia Edilizia di S. Maria Sopra Minerva in Roma, 1275-1870. Roma: Viella, 1989. Panciroli, Ottavio. Tesori Nascosti dell'alma Città di Roma. Rome: Zannetti, 1600. Panofsky, Gerda. Michelangelos "Christus" und sein Römischer Auftraggeber. Römische Studien der Bibliotheca Hertziana. Vol. 5. Worms: Wernersche Verlagsgesellschaft, 1991. Panvinio, Onofrio. Le Sette Chiese Romane (De Praecipuis Urbis Romae Sanctioribusque Basilicis). Trans. Marco Antonio Lanfranchi. Rome: Antonio Blado, 1570. Paoletti, John T. "Wooden Sculpture in Italy as Sacral Presence." Artibus et historiae 13.26 (1992): 85-100. Paolucci, Antonio. Antoniazzo Romano: Catalogo Completo dei Dipinti. Florence: Cantini, 1992. Parlato, Enrico. "La Processione di Ferragosto e l'acheropita del Sancta Sanctorum." Il Volto di Cristo. Eds. Giovanni Morello and Gerhard Wolf. Milan: Electa, 2000. 51-52. Parrinder, Geoffrey. ""Touching"." The Encyclopedia of Religion. Ed. Mircea Eliade. Vol. 14. New York: Collier Macmillan, 1987. 578-83. Pecchiai, Pio. "I Lavori Fatti nella Chiesa della Minerva per Collocarvi le Sepolture di Leone X e Clemente VII." Archivi: Archivi d'Italia e rassegna internazionale degli archivi, Serie II 17 (1950): 199-207. Pedrocchi, Anna Maria. "Giovan Lorenzo Bernini e Santi Ghetti: L'altare Maggiore in Sant'Agostino a Roma ; Nuovi Documenti e Precisazioni." Bollettino d'arte 6, Ser. 90.2005.133/134 (2006): 115-26. Penn, Michael Philip. "Performing Family: Ritual Kissing and the Construction of Early Christian Kinship." Journal of Early Christian Studies 10 2 (2002): 151-74. Penn, Michael Philip. Kissing Christians. Ritual and Community in the Late Ancient Church. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2005. Penny, Nicholas. The Materials of Sculpture. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1993. 227 Pergolizzi, Alfredo Maria, ed. La Confessione nella Basilica di San Pietro in Vaticano. Cinisello Balsamo: Silvana Editoriale, 1999. Piazza, Carlo Bartolomeo. Opere Pie di Roma Descritte Secondo lo Stato Presente, e Dedicate alla Santita di Nostro Signore Innocenzo Xi. Rome: Gio: Battista Bussotti, 1679. Pientini, Angelo. Le Pie Narrationi dell'opere piu Memorabili Fatte in Roma l'anno del Giubileo 1575. Viterbo: Agostino Colaldo, 1577. Pinelli, Antonio, ed. La Basilica di San Pietro in Vaticano, 4 Vols. Modena: Panini, 2000. Ploeg, Kees van der. "The Spatial Setting of Worship." Images of Cult and Devotion: Function and Reception of Christian Images in Medieval and Post-Medieval Europe. Ed. Søren Kaspersen. Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press, 2004. 149-60. Pocino, Willy. Le Confraternite Romane. Rome: Marco Besso, 1999. Pon, Lisa. "Michelangelo's Lives: Sixteenth-Century Books by Vasari, Condivi, and Others." The Sixteenth Century Journal 27.4 (1996): 1015-37. Potts, Alex. The Sculptural Imagination: Figurative, Modernist, Minimalist. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000. Rafanelli, Lisa Marie. "The Ambiguity of Touch: Saint Mary Magdalene and The "Noli Me Tangere" In Early Modern Italy." PhD Dissertation, New York University, 2004. Ragionieri, Pina. Il Volto di Michelangelo. Florence: Mandragora, 2008. Randolph, Adrian. " Regarding Women in Sacred Space." Picturing Women in Renaissance and Baroque Italy. Eds. Geraldine A. Johnson and Sara F. Matthews Grieco. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. 17–41; 250–56. Recio Veganzones, Alejandro. "Una Ombra Manuscrita de Alfonso Chacon Op (1530- 1599): La 'Historica Descriptio Urbis Romae'." Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana 78 (2002): 325-428. Rice, Louise. "Bernini and the Pantheon Bronze." Sankt Peter in Rome 1506-2006. Eds. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 2008. 337-52. Rice, Louise. The Altars and Altarpieces of New St. Peter's: Outfitting the Basilica, 1621- 1666. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997. 228 Riegl, Alois. "The Modern Cult of Monuments: Its Character and Its Origin,” [1903], Trans. Kurt Forster and Diane Ghirardo." Oppositions 25 (1982): 21-51. Rietbergen, P. Power and Religion in Baroque Rome: Barberini Cultural Policies Leiden: Brill, 2006. Romanini, Angiola Maria "Le Statue di San Pietro in Vaticano " La Basilica di San Pietro. Ed. Carlo Pietrangeli. Florence: Nardini, 1989. 57-61. Romanini, Angiola Maria. "Nuovi Dati sulla Statue Bronzea di San Pietro in Vaticano." Arte medievale 2.Ser. 4, No. 1 (1990): 1-50. Romanini, Angiola Maria. "Arnolfo Architectus." Revue de l'Art 105 (1994): 9-18. Romanini, Angiola Maria. "Arnolfo Di Cambio nella Basilica di S. Pietro." L’architettura della Basilica di San Pietro. Storia e Costruzione. Ed. Gianfranco Spagnesi. Rome: Bonsignori Editore, 1997. 45-62. Romano, Serena. ""La Madonna Della Bocciata"." Fragmenta Picta: Affreschi e Mosaici Staccati del Medioevo Romano. Rome: Argos, 1989. 147-52. Roser, Hannes. "Sankt Peter in Den 'Sacri Trofei Romani' des Francesco Maria Torrigio." Sankt Peter in Rome 1506-2006. Eds. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 2008. 257-73. San Juan, Rose Marie. Rome: A City Out of Print. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2001. Santarelli, Giuseppe. Tradizioni e Leggende Lauretane. Ancona: Edizioni Aniballi, 2007. Satzinger, Georg, and Sebastian Schütze, eds. Sankt Peter in Rome 1506-2006. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 2008. Satzinger, Georg. "Sankt Peter: Zentralbau oder Longitudinalbau- Orientierungsprobleme." Sankt Peter in Rome 1506-2006. Eds. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze. Munich: Hirmer Verlag, 2008. 127-45. Savina, Barbara. "Bernini, Finelli e l'altare di S. Agostino." Storia dell'arte 100 (2000): 117-22. Schleier, Erich. Giovanni Lanfranco: Un Pittore Barocco tra Parma, Roma e Napoli. Milan: Electa, 2001. 229 Schmidt, Victor M. "Statues, Idols and Nudity: Changing Attitudes to Sculpture from the Early Christian Period to the Counter-Reformation." Antiquity Renewed: Late Classical and Early Modern Themes. Eds. Zweder von Martels and Victor M. Schmidt. Leuven: Peeters, 2003. 211-29. Schuddeboom, Cornelis. "Research in the Roman Catacombs by the Louvain Antiquarian Philips Van Winghe." Archives & Excavations: Essays on the History of Archaeological Excavations in Rome and Southern Italy from the Renaissance to the Nineteenth Century. Ed. Ilaria Bignamini. London: British School in Rome, 2004. 23-32. Schütze, Sebastian. ""Urbano Inalza Pietro, E Pietro Urbano": Beobachtungen zu Idee und Gestalt der Ausstattung von Neu-St. Peter unter Urban VIII." Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 29 (1994): 213-87. Schwedes, Kerstin. Historia in Statua: zur Eloquenz Plastischer Bildwerke Michelangelos im Umfeld des Christus von Santa Maria sopra Minerva zu Rom. Europäische Hochschulschriften. Reihe 28, Kunstgeschichte, 317. Frankfurt am Main: P. Lang, 1998. Sénécal, Robert. "Carlo Borromeo’s Instructiones Fabricae Et Supellectilis Ecclesiasticae and its Origins in the Rome of his Time." Papers of the British School at Rome (PBSR) LXVIII (2000): 241-67. Smith, Molly Teasdale. "The Development of the Altar Canopy in Rome." Rivista di archeologia cristiana 50 (1974): 379-414. Spagnesi, Gianfranco, ed. L'architettura della Basilica di S. Pietro: Storia e Costruzione. Rome: Bonsignori, 1997. Spargo, John Webster. Virgil the Necromancer: Studies in Virgilian Legends. Cambridge, MA, 1934. Squarzina, Silvia Danesi. "The Collections of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani, Pt. I." The Burlington Magazine 139.1136 (1997): 766-91. Squarzina, Silvia Danesi. "The Collections of Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani. Part II." The Burlington Magazine 140.1139 (1998): 102-18. Squarzina, Silvia Danesi. "Frammenti dell'antico S. Pietro in una Collezione del Primo Seicento." Arte d'occidente: Temi e Metodi. Studi in Onore di Angiola Maria Romanini, Vol. 3. Ed. Antonio Cadei. Rome: Edizioni Sintesi Informazione, 1999. 1187-98. 230 Squarzina, Silvia Danesi. "The Bassano ‘Christ the Redeemer’ in the Giustiniani Collection." The Burlington Magazine 142.1173 (2000): 746-51. Squarzina, Silvia Danesi, ed. Caravaggio e i Giustiniani: Toccar con Mano un Collezione del Seicento. Milan: Electa, 2001. Squarzina, Silvia Danesi. ""Il Cristo Portacroce di Collezione Giustiniani: Prima Versione Incompiuta di un'opera di Michelangelo”." Dai Giustiniani all'unione Europea: un Percorso Continuo. Atti del Convegno Bassano Romano, 17 Aprile 2004, Comune di Bassano Romano. Ed. Enrico Giustiniani. Bassano Romano, 2005. 157-71. Squarzina, Silvia Danesi. "Cristo 'Uomo dei Dolori' da Savonarola a Michelangelo." L'immagine di Cristo: dall'acheropita alla Mano d'artista, dal Tardo Medioevo all'età Barocca. Eds. Christoph L. Frommel and Gerhard Wolf. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2006. 241-67. Steinberg, Leo. The Sexuality of Christ in Renaissance Art and in Modern Oblivion, 2nd Ed Revised and Expanded. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996. Stevenson, Tom. "The 'Problem' with Nude Honorific Statuary and Portraits in Late Republican and Augustan Rome." Greece & Rome 45.1 (1998): 45-69. Stewart, Susan. Poetry and the Fate of the Senses. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 2002. Strinati, Claudio. "Espressione Figurativa e Committenza Confraternale nella Cappella Capranica alla Minerva (1573)." Ricerche per la Storia Religiosa di Roma 5 (1984): 395-428. Suthor, Nicola. "Bad Touch?: Zum Körpereinsatz in Michelangelo/Pontormos "Noli Me Tangere" Und Caravaggios "Ungläubigem Thomas." Der Stumme Diskurs der Bilder: Reflexionsformen des Ästhetischen in der Kunst der Frühen Neuzeit. Eds. Valeska von Rosen and Klaus Krüger. Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2003. 261-81. Thelen, Heinrich. Francesco Borromini: Die Handzeichnungen. Graz: Akademische Druck- u. Verlagsanstalt, 1967. Thoenes, Christof. "St. Peter als Ruine: zu einigen Veduten Heemskercks." Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 49 4 (1986): 481-500. 231 Thoens, Christof. "Alt- und Neu-St.-Peter unter einem dach: zu Antonio da Sangallos "Muro Divisorio" " Architektur und Kunst im Abendland: Festschrift zur Vollendung des 65. Lebensjahres von Günter Urban. Ed. Michael Jansen. Rome: Herder, 1992. 51-61. Thoenes, Christof. "S. Pietro: Storia e Ricerca." Quaderni dell'Istituto di Storia dell'Architettura 25/30 (1995-1997): 17-30. Thoenes, Christof. La Fabbrica di San Pietro nelle Incisioni dal Cinquecento all'Ottocento. Milan: Il Polifilo, 2000. de Tolnay, Charles. "Il Tabernacolo per Il Christo della Minerva." Commentari 18 (1967): 43-47. Tormo, E. Os Desenhos das Antigualhas que vio Francisco D'Ollanda, Pintor Portugués, 1539- 1540. Madrid: Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores Relaciones Culturales., 1940. Torrigio, Francesco Maria. Le Sacre Grotte Vaticane: cioé Narratione delle Cose piu Notabili, che Sono Sotto il Pavimento della Basilica di S. Pietro in Vaticano in Roma. Viterbo: I Discepoli, 1618. Torrigio, Francesco Maria. Le Cose Maravigliose dell'alma Citta di Roma. Rome: Giacomo Mascardi, 1619. Torrigio, Franceso Maria. Diario Vaticano, cioé Breve Modo di Far' Orazione Ogni Giorno nella Sacrosanta Basilica di S. Pietro di Roma... Rome: Guglielmo Facciotti, 1622. Torrigio, Francesco Maria. Sacro Pellegrinaggio, cioè Instruttione per i Pellegrini e Forastieri che Visiteranno le Quattro Chiese Deputate in Roma il Presente Anno del Santissimo Giubileo 1625. Rome: B. Zanetti, 1625a. Torrigio, Francesco Maria. Catalogo delle Principali Canonizationi de' Santi. Fatte da Sommi Pontefici Dove Breuemente di Nota Dove, Quando, e da Qual Pontefice Siano State Fatte ... Cominciando da S. Leone 3 fino alla Santita di N.S. Papa Urbano 8. di D. Francesco Maria Torriggio Romano. Rome: Lodovico Grignani, 1625b. Torrigio, Franceso Maria. Le Sacre Grotte Vaticane: nelle Quali si Tratta di Corpi Santi, Sepolchri de' Pont., Imperatori, Ré, Cardinali, Vescoui, Chiese, Statue, Imagini, Inscrittioni, Epitaffij e d'altre Cose Memorabili si Dentro Roma, Come Fuori. Seconda Impressione con Aggiunta di Correttione e d'indice Copiosissimo. Rome: Vitale Mascardi, 1639, 2nd ed. 232 Torrigio, Francesco Maria. I Sacri Trofei Romani del Trionfante Prencipe degli Apostoli San Pietro Gloriosissimo. Rome: Moneta, 1644. Torrigio, Franceso Maria. Historica Narratione della Chiesa Parocchiale et Archiconfraternità del Santissimo Corpo Christo Posto in S. Giacomo Apostolo in Borgo. Rome: Lodovico Grignani, 1649. de Tóth, Giovanni B. Grotte Vaticane. Città del Vaticano: Rev. Fabbrica di S. Pietro in Vaticano, 1955. Totti, Pompilio. Ritratto di Roma Moderna. Rome: Il Mascardi, 1638. Trexler, Richard C. "Florentine Religious Experience: The Sacred Image." Studies in the Renaissance 19 (1972): 7-41. Tronzo, William, ed. St. Peter's in the Vatican. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005. Tronzo, William. "Il Tegurium di Bramante." L’architettura della Basilica di San Pietro. Storia e Costruzione. Ed. Gianfranco Spagnesi. Rome: Bonsignori Editore, 1997. 161-66. Thunø, Erik. Image and Relic: Mediating the Sacred in Early Medieval Rome Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2002. Thunø, Erik, and Gerhard Wolf, eds. The Miraculous Image in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2004. Turner, David. "The Politics of Despair: The Plague of 746-747 and Iconoclasms in the Byzantine Empire." The Annual of the British School at Athens 85 (1990): 419- 34. Ugonio, Pompeo. Historia Delle Stationi Di Roma Che Si Celebrano La Quadragesima, Dove Oltre Le Vite De Santi Alle Chiese De Quali È Statione... Rome: Bonfadino, 1588. Varner, Eric R. "Reading Replications: Roman Rhetoric and Greek Quotations." Art History 29.2 (2006): 280-303. Vasari, Giorgio. La Vita di Michelangelo: nelle Redazioni del 1550 e del 1568. Ed. and Comm. Paola Barocchi. Ed. Paola Barocchi. Milan: Ricciardi, 1962. Vikan, Gary. "Ruminations on Edible Icons." Retaining the Original: Multiples Originals, Copies, and Reproductions. Vol. 20. Studies in the History of Art. Washington, D.C.: National Gallery of Art, Washington, 1989. 47-59. 233 Voelker, Evelyn Carole "Charles Borromeo’s Instructiones Fabricae Et Supellectilis Ecclesiasticae, 1577: A Translation with Commentary and Analysis." PhD Dissertation, Syracuse University, 1977. Wallace, William E. "Michelangelo's Rome Pietà: Altarpiece of Grave Memorial?" Verrocchio and Late Quattrocento Italian Sculpture. Florence: Casa Editrice le Lettere, 1992. 243-55. Wallace, William E. "Miscellanae Curiositae Michelangelae: A Steep Tariff, a Half- Dozen Horses, and Yards of Taffeta." Renaissance Quarterly 47 (1994): 330-50. Wallace, William E. "Michelangelo’s Risen Christ." Sixteenth-Century Journal 28.4 (1997): 1251-80. Wallace, William E. "Friends and Relics at San Silvestro in Capite, Rome." Sixteenth Century Journal 30.2 (1999): 419-39. Ward Perkins, J. B. "The Shrine of St. Peter and its Twelve Spiral Columns." The Journal of Roman Studies 42 (1952): 21-33. Ward Perkins, J. B., and Jocelyn M. C. Toynbee. The Shrine of St. Peter and the Vatican Excavations. London and New York: Longmans, 1956. Weber, Gerold. "Bemerkungen zu Michelangelos Christus in S. Maria Sopra Minerva." Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte XXII (1969): 201-03. Weil-Garris Brandt, Kathleen. "Michelangelo's Pietà for the Cappella del Re di Francia." 'Il Se Rendit En Italie': Etudes Offertes À André Chastel. Rome: Dell'Elefante, 1987. 77-119. Weil-Garris Brandt, Kathleen. "The Body As "Vera Effigies" In Michelangelo's Art: The Minerva Christ." L'immagine di Cristo: dall'Acheropita alla Mano d'artista, dal tardo Medioevo all'età Barocca. Eds. Christoph L. Frommel and Gerhard Wolf. Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2006. 269-321. Winston, Anne. "Tracing the Origins of the Rosary: German Vernacular Texts." Speculum 68.3 (1993): 619-36. Wisch, Barbara. "The Roman Church Triumphant: Pilgrimage, Penance and Processions Celebrating the Holy Year of 1575." "All the World's a Stage ...": Art and Pageantry in the Renaissance and Baroque Eds. Barbara Wisch and Susan Scott Munshower. Philadelphia: Pennsylvania State University, 1990: 82-117. 234 Wisch, Barbara. "Keys to Success: Propriety and Promotion of Miraculous Images by Roman Confraternities." The Miraculous Image in the Late Middle Ages and Renaissance. Eds. Erik Thunø and Gerhard Wolf. Rome: "L'Erma" di Bretschneider, 2004: 161-84. Wittkower, Rudolph. Gian Lorenzo Bernini: The Sculptor of the Roman Baroque. London: Phaidon Press, 1955. Wolf, Gerhard. "Holy Face and the Holy Feet: Preliminary Reflections before the Novgorod Mandylion." Eastern Christian Relics. Ed. Aliex Lidov. Moscow, 2003: 281-90. Zanker, Paul. Die Maske des Sokrates: das Bild des Intellektuellen in der Antiken Kunst. Munich: Beck, 1995. Yasin, Ann Marie. "Displaying the Sacred Past: Ancient Christian Inscriptions in Early Modern Rome." International Journal of the Classical Tradition 7.1 (2000): 39-57. Ziegler, Joanna E. Sculpture of Compassion: The Pietà and the Beguines in the Southern Low Countries, c.1300-c.1600. Studies over Kunstgeschiedenis, 6. Bruxelles and Rome: Institut Historique Belge de Rome, 1992. Ziegler, Joanna E. "Michelangelo and the Medieval Pieta: The Sculpture of Devotion or the Art of Sculpture?" Gesta 34.1 (1995): 28-36. Zuccari, Alessandro. "Benedetto Giustiniani e i Pittori di S. Prisca." Caravaggio E I Giustiniani: Toccar Con Mano Un Collezione Del Seicento. Ed. Silvia Danesi Sqaurzina. Milan: Electa, 2001. 81-86. 235 Appendix: Figures St. Peter. Bronze. Nave, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 1) 236 St. Peter, looking east. Bronze. Nave, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 2) 237 St. Peter. Marble. 2 nd century A.D. Entrance to Grotte Vaticane, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 3) 238 Jacopo Sansovino. Madonna del Parto. Marble. 1516-21. Martelli Chapel, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 4) 239 Bocca della Verità. Marble. 2 nd cen. A.D. (?). Portico, S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 5) 240 Bocca della Verità, with visitors. Marble. 2 nd cen. A.D. (?). Portico, S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 6) 241 Michelangelo Buonarroti. Risen Christ. Marble. 1521. S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 7) 242 Giovanni Lanfranco. St. Peter Healing Agatha. Oil on canvas. c. 1614. Parma, Galleria Nazionale (Source: Schleier 2001) (fig. 8) 243 Taddeo Landini. Christ Washing St. Peter’s Feet. Marble. 1578-79. Formerly located in Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican. Currently in Quirinal Palace, Sala Regia, Rome (Source: Rice 1997) (fig. 9) 244 Gian Lorenzo Bernini. Christ Kissing the Feet of St. Peter, detail from the Cathedra Petri. 1657-66. Bronze. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Wittkower 1955) (fig. 10) 245 Marcello Venusti. Noli me Tangere. Oil on canvas. 1577-79. Chapel of the Baptismal Font, S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 11) 246 Caravaggio. The Incredulity of St. Thomas. Oil on canvas. 1601-02. Sanssouci, Potsdam (Source: Internet) (fig. 12) 247 Gian Lorenzo Bernini. Tomb of Alexander VII, detail of the figure of “Truth”. Marble with bronze painted attachment. 1671-78. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Internet) (fig. 13) 248 Gian Lorenzo Bernini, attrib. De Sylva Chapel, detail of virtue, without drapery. Marble. S. Isidoro, Rome (Source: Negro 2002) (fig. 14) 249 Guglielmo della Porta. Tomb of Pope Paul III. 1549-75. Marble and bronze. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 15) 250 Martin van Heemskerck. View of Nave of Old St. Peter’s Basilica. 1538. Berlin, Kupferstichkabinett 79 D 2a, fol. 52r (Source: Kinney 2006, 20, fig. 8) (fig. 16) 251 Martin van Heemskerck. View of Crossing of New St. Peter’s Basilica. 1538. Statens Konstmuseer, Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, Coll. Ankersvärd 637 (Source: Kinney 2006, 20, fig. 9) (fig. 17) 252 Giacomo della Porta. Tabernacle of the Madonna del Soccorso. 1578. Cappella Gregoriana, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Ostrow 1996, 154, fig. 114) (fig. 18) 253 Sarcophagus of Junius Bassus, detail view installed in the Grotte Vaticane, before 1954. Marble. c. 359 A.D. Currently installed in Sacristy Museum, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig.19) 254 View of Clemetine ambulatory of Grotte Vaticane, before 1954. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 20) 255 Confessio, view from nave. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 21) 256 Confessio, view through 20 th century glass wall in Grotte Vaticane. Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 22) 257 Giambattista Ricci da Novarra. Pope Paul V Praying before the Confessio. Fresco. 1617-19. Confessio, north-wall, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Lanzani 2003, 31, fig. 56) (fig. 23) 258 Pieter de Bailliu. Pilgrims Adoring the Shrine of St. Peter. Engraving. 1635. Noted first in BAV, Stampati, Cicognara XII.541, pl. 11 (Source: Internet) (fig. 24) 259 Anon. List of Popes. Woodcut. Le Cose maravigliose dell’alma citta di Roma. Roma, Francesco Cavalli, 1636, 86 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 25) 260 Anon. Seated St. Peter and St. Paul Conversing. Woodcut. Le Cose maravigliose dell'alma città di Roma. Rome, Mauritio Bona, 1620, title page (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 26) 261 Matthaeus Greuter. Longitudinal Section of St. Peter’s Basilica. Engraving. c. 1615 (?). Herzog-August Bibliothek, Wolfenbüttel (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 27) 262 Domenico Tasselli, with notes by Giacomo Grimaldi. Organ of Alexander VI with bronze St. Peter. c. 1605-1607. BAV, Barb. Lat. 2733, fol. 27v (Source: Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 64). (fig. 28) 263 After Tiberio Alfarano. Superimposed Plan of Old and New St. Peter’s Basilica, detail. 1590 (Source: Rice 1997, fig. 3) (fig. 29) 264 Workshop of Carlo Maderno. Project for Staircase of the Confessio. Vienna, Albertina, It. AZ, Rom 768 (Source: Bellini 1999, 51) (fig. 30) 265 Francesco Borromini. Design for Inner Façade of St. Peter’s basilica. 1628. BAV, Vat. Lat. 11257, fol. 3 (Source: Thelen 1967, pl. C 38) (fig. 31) 266 Design Papiro Bartoli. Engraving Matthaeus Greuter, Project for the Coro of St. Peter’s Basilica in the Form of the Navicella. Engraving. Early 17 th century. "Discorso sopra una forma di Coro…” Biblioteca Nazionale, Rome, Vol. X, vol. 3808 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 32) 267 Design Papiro Bartoli. Engraving Matthaeus Greuter. Project for the Coro of St. Peter’s Basilica in the Form of the Navicella, detail. Early 17 th century. "Discorso sopra una forma di Coro…” Biblioteca Nazionale, Rome, Vol. X, vol. 3808 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 33) 268 Column of St. Peter. Carcere Mamertino, below the church of S. Giuseppe dei Falegnami, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 34) 269 Face print stone of St. Peter. Carcere Mamertino, below the church of S. Giuseppe dei Falegnami, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 35) 270 Knee print stones of St. Peter. S. Francesca Romana, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 36) 271 St. Peter, on feast day of the saint, June 29. Bronze. Nave, Basilica di S. Pietro, Vatican (Source: Author) (fig. 37) 272 Domenico Tasselli. Marble St. Peter over entrance to Old St. Peter’s Basilica. After 1605. BAV, Barb. Lat. 2733 (Source: Grimaldi, ed. Niggl 1972, 180, fig. 73). (fig. 38) 273 Cappella della Bocciata, early photo, full view of marble St. Peter (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 39) 274 Cappella della Bocciata, early photo, looking towards altar (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 40) 275 St. Luke Icon of the Virgin and Child. High altar, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 41) 276 High altar tabernacle, containing St. Luke Icon of the Virgin and Child. 1620’s. S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 42) 277 Adoration of the Magi, fragment. Mosaic. 8 th century. From the Oratory of Pope John VII, Old St. Peter’s Basilica. Sacristy, S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 43) 278 La Theotókos. S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Massimi 1989) (fig. 44) 279 Jacopo Sansovino. Madonna del Parto, setting in a niche on the inner façade of the church. Marble. 1516-21. Martelli Chapel, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 45) 280 Jacopo Sansovino. Madonna del Parto, detail of bronze attachment. Marble. 1516-21. Martelli Chapel, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 46) 281 Modern poster for feast day of the Madonna del Parto, October 2006. S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 47) 282 Votives at the Madonna del Parto. S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 48) 283 Andrea Sansovino. Virgin Mary,Christ and S. Anne. Marble. 1510-10. Altar of S. Anne, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 49) 284 Votive hearts. West aisle, S. Agostino, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 50) 285 Martin van Heemskerck. St. Luke Painting the Virgin. c. 1553. Oil on panel. Musée des Beaux-Arts, Rennes (Source: Internet) (fig. 51) 286 Icon tabernacle in central apse. Giovanni Mario Crescimbeni. L’istoria della Basilica Diaconale, Collegiata, e Parrocchiale di S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma. Roma: Antonio de Rossi, 1715, 148 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 52) 287 Bocca della Verità, detail of mouth. Marble. 2 nd c A.D.(?). Portico, S. Maria in Cosmedin, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 53) 288 Façade of S. Maria in Cosmedin. Giovanni Mario Crescimbeni. L’istoria della Basilica Diaconale, Collegiata, e Parrocchiale di S. Maria in Cosmedin di Roma. Roma: Antonio de Rossi, 1715, 61 Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 54) 289 Francesco de Hollanda. Bocca della Verità, detail. 1539-40 (Source: Tormo 1940) (fig. 55) 290 Ancient Roman Patrician Woman. Francesco de' Ficoroni. Le vestigia e rarità di Roma antica. Ricercate, e spiegate da Francesco de' Ficoroni. Rome: Girolamo Mainardi, 1744 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 56) 291 Michelangelo’s Risen Christ. Woodcut. Le cose maravigliose dell'alma città di Roma… Rome, Franzini 1600, 71 (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 57) 292 Marcello Venusti. S. Giacomo Apostolo. 1570. Chapel of S. Giacomo Apostolo, S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 58) 293 Taddeo Landini. Copy after Michenalgeo’s Risen Christ. Marble. 1579. S. Spirito, Florence (Source: Author) (fig. 59) 294 Jacob Matham. Michelangelo’s Risen Christ. Engraving (?). 1590’s. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (Source: Schmidt 2003, fig. 8) (fig. 60) 295 Carlo Maderno. Section drawing for the choir of S. Maria sopra Minerva. c. 1610’s or 1620’s. Albertina, Vienna, It. AZ Rom 606 (Source: Palmerio and Villetti 1989, fig. 33) (fig. 61) 296 Carlo Maderno. Section drawing for the choir of S. Maria sopra Minerva, detail. c. 1610’s or 1620’s. Albertina, Vienna, It. AZ Rom 606 (Source: Palmerio and Villetti 1989, fig. 33) (fig. 62) 297 Gian Lorenzo Bernini. Golden Rose. Gold, copper, and bronze with sapphire. 1658. Museo dell’Opera del Duomo, Siena, inv. n. OA 3297 (Source: Author) (fig. 63) 298 Antoniazzo Romano. Annunciation with “zitelle” and Juan de Torquemada. Tempera on panel. 1500. Chapel of the Annunciation, S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 64) 299 Perugino, attributed. Formerly attributed to Raphael. Christ. Oil on panel. Late 15 th century. Chapel of the S. Salvatore (Maffei Chapel). S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 65) 300 Anon. View of Michelangelo’s Risen Christ. Early 19 th century. Casa Buonarroti, Florence (Source: de Tolnay 1967, 43, fig. 1) (fig. 66) 301 Giacomo Fontana. View of S. Maria sopra Minerva. Engraving. Raccolta delle migliori chiese di Roma e suburbane. Rome, Marini: 1838, vol. II, Tav. LII (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 67) 302 Anon. Vera e Miracolosa Effigie del Ss.mo Salvatore che si conserva nella Sacra Cappella detta Sancta Sanctorum trasfportata di notte privatamente nella Chiesa di S. Maria sopra Minerva il di primo Gennaio 1709…. Engraving. Rome, Dom. Art. Ercole, 1709 (Source: Getty Research Institute) (fig. 68) 303 Footprint stone of Christ, substitute, view from above. Marble. 1616. Church of Domine quo Vadis?, or S. Maria in Palmis, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 69) 304 Footprint stone of Christ, substitute, general view. Marble. 1616. Church of Domine quo Vadis?, or S. Maria in Palmis, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 70) 305 Footprint stone of Christ, substitute, detail. Marble. 1616. Church of Domine quo Vadis?, or S. Maria in Palmis, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 71) 306 Footprint stone of Christ, original. Marble, in bronze and wood relic case. S. Sebastiano fuori le Mura, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 72) 307 Reliquary cabinet. 1625 (?). S. Sebastiano fuori le Mura, Rome (Source: Author) (fig. 73) 308 Copy of Michelangelo’s Risen Christ. 1637-39 (?). Church of Domine quo Vadis?, or S. Maria in Palmis, Rome. (Source: Wallace 1997, fig. 14) (fig. 74) 309 Michelangelo Buonarroti. Risen Christ, early photo, detail of bronze attachment on foot. Marble. 1521. S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 75) 310 (fig. 76) Michelangelo. Risen Christ, early photo, full view, with bronze foot, halo and larger cloth. Marble. 1521. S. Maria sopra Minerva, Rome (Source: Bibliotheca Hertziana) (fig. 76)

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The embodied experience of objects was a historically specific mode of reception formed by the transformations of sacred spaces, rededication of sacred objects, and the continuation of customary religious behavior in early modern Rome. At the end of the 16th century, sacred spaces and art were being reformed as new St. Peter’s Basilica emerged as a devotional space meant to glorify the archaeological evidence of the origins of the Church, providing a model for others to follow. This dissertation focuses on the early modern period, in particular the late 16th- and early 17th-century reception of a selection of ancient, medieval and Renaissance objects, including a bronze sculpture of St. Peter (Basilica di S. Pietro in Vaticano), a marble sculpture of St. Peter (Grotte Vaticane), the Madonna del Parto by Jacopo Sansovino (S. Agostino), the Bocca della Verità (S. Maria in Cosmedin) and a marble sculpture of Christ by Michelangelo Buonarroti (S. Maria sopra Minerva). Some of the objects are quite well known both in the history of art and to the casual visitor to the Eternal City. In bringing together these seemingly unrelated objects, it is my goal to underscore how ancient, medieval, and Renaissance material culture intersected in the sacred spaces of early modern Rome. The dramatic material and spiritual changes at St. Peter’s brought about a moment in which the pagan undercurrents of devotion still lingered on even in the wake of the Counter Reformation.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The politics of eros: writing under the auspices of Ovid's Cupid in early modern English literature

PDF

Women's song across sacred borders: new implications of the seventeenth-century northern Italian solo motet as feminized devotional music and sacred oration

PDF

From the hellmouth to the witch's cauldron: cooking and feeding evil on the early modern stage

Asset Metadata

Creator Nolan, Linda Ann (author)

Core Title Touching the divine: mobility, devotion, and the display of religious objects in early modern Rome

School College of Letters, Arts and Sciences

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Art History

Degree Conferral Date 2010-05

Publication Date 05/09/2010

Defense Date 09/03/2009

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Bocca della Verita,Christ,Christian archaeology,devotion,early modern Rome,Jacopo Sansovino,Michelangelo Buonarroti,OAI-PMH Harvest,reception,relics,Religious art,Sculpture,St. Peter,Touch,Virgin,Women

Place Name Italy (countries), Rome (city or populated place)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Olson, Todd P. (committee chair), Pinkus, Karen (committee member), Pollini, John (committee member), Roberts, Sean (committee member)

Creator Email lan@usc.edu,nolanlan74@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m3058

Unique identifier UC1185430

Identifier etd-Nolan-3593 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-345374 (legacy record id),usctheses-m3058 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-Nolan-3593.pdf

Dmrecord 345374

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Nolan, Linda Ann

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Los Angeles, California

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu