bramante's tempietto, the roman renaissance, and the spanish crown

Bramante’s Tempietto, the Roman Renaissance, and the Spanish Crown

••The Tempietto, the embodiment of the Renaissance mastery of classical architecture and its Christian reinvention, was also the preeminent commission of the Catholic monarchs, Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabel of Castile, in papal Rome. This groundbreaking book situates Bramante’s time-honored memorial dedicated to Saint Peter and the origins of the Roman Catholic Church at the center of a coordinated program of the arts exalting Spain’s leadership in the quest for Christian hegemony. The innovations in form and iconography that made the Tempietto an authoritative model for Western architecture were fortified in legacy monuments created by the popes in Rome and the kings in Spain from the later Renaissance to the present day. New photographs expressly taken for this study capture comprehensive views and focused details of this exemplar of Renaissance art and statecraft.

Jack Freiberg is Professor of Art History at Florida State University. He has been awarded fellowships by the Institute for Advanced Study, the American Academy in Rome, and the Samuel H. Kress Foundation. He is the author of The Lateran in 1600: Christian Concord in Counter-Reformation Rome (Cambridge, 1995) and the coeditor of Medieval Renaissance and Baroque: A Cat’s Cradle for Marilyn Aronberg Lavin.

Bramante’s tempietto, the roman renaissance,

and the spanish crown

•••

Jack FreibergFlorida State University

32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013-2473, USA

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.

www.cambridge.orgInformation on this title: www.cambridge.org/9781107042971

© Jack Freiberg 2014

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written

permission of Cambridge University Press.

First published 2014

Printed in the United States of America

A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library.

Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication dataFreiberg, Jack.

Bramante's Tempietto, the Roman Renaissance, and the Spanish crown / Jack Freiberg.pages cm

Includes bibliographical references and index.ISBN 978-1-107-04297-1 (hardback)

1. San Pietro in Montorio (Church : Rome, Italy) 2. Temples – Italy – Rome. 3. Peter, the Apostle, Saint – Monuments – Italy – Rome. 4. Bramante, Donato,

1444?–1514 – Criticism and interpretation. 5. Architecture, Renaissance – Italy – Rome. 6. Religious architecture – Italy – Rome. 7. Architecture and state – Italy – History –

16th century. 8. Architecture and state – Spain – History – 16th century. 9. Catholic Church – Foreign relations – Spain. 10. Spain – Foreign relations –

Catholic Church. I. Title.NA5620.S87F73 2014

726.509456′32–dc23 2014007717

ISBN 978-1-107-04297-1 Hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

http://www.cambridge.org

http://www.cambridge.org/9781107042971

v

contents

List of Illustrations page viAcknowledgments xiiiAbbreviations xviiPlates xix

Prologue 1 1 Jerusalem in Rome 9 2 Upon This Rock 37 3 Bramante’s Christian Temple 63 4 Symbols of Victory 102 5 History and Prophecy 137 6 Papacy and Crown 158Epilogue 195

Appendix A San Pietro in Montorio, 1500 205Appendix B Tempietto, 1628 209Notes 219Selected Bibliography 285Index 303

vi

illustrations

Figures

1. Israël Silvestre, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, etching page 10 2. Celebration of Station Mass at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme.

Salone Sistino, Vatican palace 12 3. Antoniazzo Romano and assistants, Legend of the True Cross.

Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 13 4. Cardinal Pedro González de Mendoza and Saint Helen, detail,

Legend of the True Cross. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 14 5. Apse mosaic of Old Saint Peter’s basilica, drawing 15 6. Saint Helen visits the site of the True Cross; Three Crosses are

excavated; Proofing of the True Cross, detail, Legend of the True Cross. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 16

7. Heraclius duels with the son of King Chosröes; Heraclius is prevented from entering Jerusalem in triumph; Heraclius enters Jerusalem on foot, detail, Legend of the True Cross. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 17

8. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, apse and subterranean area 21 9. Antonio da Sangallo the Younger, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme,

apse and subterranean area, drawing 22 10. Altar wall, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme,

drawing, ca. 1500 23 11. Chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, vault 25 12. Saint Helen and Cardinal Carvajal, detail, chapel of Saint Helen,

Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 27 13. Christ blessing, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme 27

Illustrations • vii

14. Proofing of the True Cross, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 28

15. Transport of the Passion Relics to Rome, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 29

16. Heraclius Restores the True Cross to Jerusalem, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 30

17. Adoration of the Heavenly Cross, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 31

18. Earthly Paradise with the coat of arms of Cardinal Bernardino de Carvajal, detail, drawing 32

19. King Ferdinand of Aragon as Crusader, woodcut, 1494 33 20. Corridor leading to the chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme 35 21. Majolica tile inscription, detail, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 35 22. Giovanni Battista Falda, San Pietro in Montorio, engraving,

1669 38 23. Giacomo Fontana, San Pietro in Montorio, interior, engraving,

1838 40 24. Paul Marie Letarouilly, San Pietro in Montorio, plan, engraving,

1857 41 25. San Pietro in Montorio, view toward entrance 41 26. San Pietro in Montorio, view toward presbytery 42 27. Filarete, Crucifixion of Saint Peter, detail, bronze doors of Pope

Eugenius IV. Saint Peter’s basilica 44 28. San Pietro in Montorio 53 29. Francesco di Giorgio, Santa Maria delle Grazie al Calcinaio,

Cortona 54 30. San Francesco, Assisi 54 31. Antoine Lafrery, Pilgrimage to the Seven Churches of Rome,

detail, engraving, 1575 55 32. San Pietro in Montorio, plan and elevation, drawing 57 33. San Pietro in Montorio, entrance, detail 61 34. San Pietro in Montorio, pilaster capital 62 35. Luigi Rossini, Tempietto, engraving, 1818 64 36. Giacomo Fontana, Tempietto, cross section, engraving, 1838 65 37. Circle of Bramante, Tempietto, drawing 67 38. Bernardo della Volpaia, Tempietto, cross section, drawing 68 39. Sebastiano Serlio, Tempietto, woodcut, 1540 69

viii • Illustrations

40. Sebastiano Serlio, Tempietto and circular cloister, plan, woodcut, 1540 69

41. Aristotile da Sangallo, Tempietto, cross section, drawing 70 42. Geometer and Roman ruins. Antiquarie prospettiche romane,

frontispiece, woodcut 72 43. Giovanni Antonio Dosio, Temple of Hercules in the Forum

Boarium, Rome, drawing 75 44. Marten van Heemskerck, Temple of the Sibyl, Tivoli, drawing 75 45. Aureus of Vespasian with the Temple of Vesta 76 46. Medal of Pope Alexander VI with the Mausoleum of Hadrian 79 47. Teatro Marittimo, Villa of Hadrian, Tivoli 81 48. Collaborator of Francesco di Giorgio, Teatro Marittimo, Villa

of Hadrian, Tivoli, plan, drawing 82 49. King Ferdinand of Aragon with the Tiburtine Sibyl,

Missal-Breviary of King Ferdinand of Aragon 84 50. Nativity of Christ, Missal-Breviary of King Ferdinand of

Aragon 84 51. Ciborium of the Holy Lance, Saint Peter’s basilica, drawing 86 52. Copy after Ciriaco d’Ancona, Mausoleum of Hadrian, drawing 89 53. Francesco di Giorgio, domed monuments in Rome, drawing 90 54. Marten van Heemskerck, Vatican obelisk and Sant’Andrea,

drawing 90 55. Circle of Bramante, Mausoleum of Theodoric, Ravenna,

drawing 92 56. Erhard Reuwich, Jerusalem, detail, woodcut, 1486 93 57. Maximilian, King of the Romans, as Crusader, woodcut, 1495 94 58. Jacques Callot, Holy Sepulcher complex, plan, engraving, 1620 95 59. Erhard Reuwich, Holy Sepulcher, woodcut, 1486 96 60. Alberti, Holy Sepulcher, Rucellai chapel, San Pancrazio,

Florence 97 61. Santo Brasca, Holy Sepulcher, plan, woodcut, 1481 98 62. Konrad von Grünenberg, Holy Sepulcher, elevation, drawing 98 63. Michael Wolgemut, Jerusalem, woodcut, 1493 100 64. Belvedere courtyard, entrance, Vatican palace 104 65. Granite columns of the Tempietto 107 66. Palace of Cardinal Raffaele Riario (Palazzo della Cancelleria),

courtyard 108 67. Pantheon (Sancta Maria ad Martyres) 109 68. Marten van Heemskerck, Saint Peter’s basilica, interior, drawing 113

Illustrations • ix

69. San Pietro in Vincoli, interior 114 70. Antonio Labacco, Basilica Aemilia, engraving, 1559 114 71. Etruscan cinerary urn. Museo archeologico nazionale, Chiusi 116 72. Giovanni Nanni (Annius of Viterbo), Rome and the Tiber River,

woodcut, 1498 117 73. Leonardo da Vinci (attribution), Etruscan tumulus and

peripteral tholos, drawing 119 74. Circle of Francesco di Giorgio, Temple of Jupiter and Baths of

Diocletian, drawing 120 75. Tempietto, balustrade and Doric frieze viewed from the back 121 76. Tempietto, shell niche 124 77. Tempietto, shell niche 124 78. Tempietto, soffit 125 79. Giuliano da Sangallo, Mausoleum at Porto and Temple of

Hercules in the Forum Boarium, Rome, drawing 127 80. Diego de Sagredo, Pomegranate flower transformed into a

baluster-column, woodcut, 1526 128 81. Diego de Sagredo, baluster-columns, woodcut, 1526 128 82. Colegio de Santa Cruz, Valladolid, detail 130 83. Titles and device of King Charles I of Spain, choir, Cathedral,

Barcelona 130 84. Luca Pacioli, The Beautiful Gate of the Temple of Jerusalem,

woodcut, 1509 131 85. Plan of the Tempietto, drawing 133 86. Isidore of Seville, macrocosmic-microcosmic harmony,

woodcut, 1472 135 87. Foundation stone of the Tempietto, front. Tempietto, crypt 138 88. Foundation stone of the Tempietto, back (contrast digitally

enhanced). Tempietto, crypt 139 89. Paleochristian funerary inscription 142 90. Superscription of the Cross, woodcut, 1610 143 91. Pedro Fernández da Murcia, Vision of Amadeo Meneses

de Silva 147 92. Giacomo Fontana, Altar of the Tempietto, engraving, 1838 155 93. Crucifixion of Saint Peter. Altar of the Tempietto, detail 156 94. Noah’s Ark flanked by the coat of arms of Ferdinand of Aragon

and Isabel of Castile. Altar of the Tempietto, detail 156 95. Marcantonio Raimondi after Raphael, Saint Paul Preaching in

Athens, engraving 159

x • Illustrations

96. Agostino Carracci after Federico Barocci, Aeneas and His Family Flee Troy, engraving 160

97. Giorgio Vasari, Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, the Wounding of Admiral Coligny. Sala Regia, Vatican palace 164

98. Jacopo Sansovino, Sacrament monument. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 166

99. Jacopo Sansovino, Sacrament tabernacle. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme 167

100. Alessandro Cesati, Medal of Pope Paul III with Alexander the Great kneeling before the High Priest of Jerusalem 169

101. Alexander the Great Kneeling before the High Priest of Jerusalem, engraving 170

102. Pieter Coecke van Aelst, festival display honoring Prince Philip of Habsburg, woodcut, 1550 172

103. Cornelis Anthonisz, Allegory of the Prodigal Son, woodcut 173 104. Frans Heylan, high altar of Granada Cathedral, detail, engraving 175 105. Pedro Parret after Juan de Herrera, high altar, San Lorenzo de

El Escorial, engraving, 1587 176 106. Pedro Parret after Juan de Herrera, Sacrament tabernacle, high

altar, San Lorenzo de El Escorial, engraving, 1587 177 107. Pompeo Leoni, Charles V and his family, San Lorenzo de El

Escorial 178 108. Pompeo Leoni, Philip II and his family, San Lorenzo de El

Escorial 179 109. Paul Marie Letarouilly, San Pietro in Montorio and access road,

engraving, 1857 181 110. Giovanni Battista Falda, fountain in the Piazza San Pietro in

Montorio, engraving, 1675 182 111. Tempietto, crypt, plan and elevation, drawing 184 112. Tempietto seen from the back 185 113. Isidore-Laurent Deroy, Tempietto, crypt, lithograph, 1863 186 114. Daniel Castor, Tempietto, drawing, 1999 189 115. Emblem for the exequies of King Philip IV, woodcut, 1666 191 116. Gianlorenzo Bernini, Sacrament altar, Saint Peter’s basilica 192 117. Gaspare Mola, medal of Pope Urban VIII with the high altar of

Saint Peter’s basilica, 1633 193 118. Postage stamp issued for the centenary of the Academia Española

de Bellas Artes en Roma, 1974 196 119. Eugenio Oliva, Lateral View of the New Edifice and Allegorical

Details of the Stair and the Tempietto of Bramante, engraving, 1881 196

Illustrations • xi

120. Tommaso Mercandetti, medal of Pope Pius VII with the Tempietto, 1807 198

121. Luigi Poletti, fireworks display for the feast of Saints Peter and Paul, drawing, 1855 200

122. Visit of Pope Pius IX to San Pietro in Montorio. Vatican palace 200 123. Foundation medal for a monument at San Pietro in Montorio to

commemorate the Vatican Council, 1869 201 124. Inscription commemorating conservation of the Tempietto in

1978. San Pietro in Montorio, cloister 203 125. Inscription commemorating the dedication of San Pietro in

Montorio in 1500. Tempietto, crypt 206

Plates

I. Tempietto in the cloister of San Pietro in Montorio xix II. Tempietto. View from the front xx III. Tempietto. View from above xxi IV. Tempietto. View from the back xxii V. Tempietto. Detail xxiii VI. Tempietto. Detail xxiv VII. Tempietto. Balustrade and metopes xxv VIII. Tempietto. View of soffit and inner surface of entablature xxvi IX. Tempietto. View of soffit xxvii X. Tempietto, chapel xxviii XI. Tempietto, chapel. Altar xxix XII. Tempietto, chapel. Altar and side entrance xxx XIII. Tempietto, chapel. Pavement viewed from altar toward main

entrance xxxi XIV. Tempietto, chapel. View toward dome xxxii XV. Tempietto, chapel. Drum and dome xxxiii XVI. Tempietto, crypt xxxiv XVII. Tempietto, crypt. View to left of altar xxxv XVIII. Tempietto, crypt. Entrance with light shaft xxxvi XIX. Tempietto, crypt. Light shaft xxxvii XX. Tempietto, crypt. Vault xxxviii

XXI. Tempietto, crypt. Pavement and central aperture seen from altar xxxix

xiii

acknowledgments

This book has been on my mind for as long as I can remember, and so it is a happy moment to recognize friends, colleagues, and institutions who helped make it a reality. During the earliest period of formation, I profited from discussions with colleagues at the American Academy in Rome and the Intercollegiate Center for Classical Studies. Research began in earnest during a sabbatical year at the Institute for Advanced Study, where I set down the central themes of this study. I am especially grateful to Irving Lavin who fos-tered an ideal environment for intellectual reflection and posed challenging questions that made it fruitful, then and throughout the process of bringing this project to fruition. The weekly lunches he hosted at the Institute provided a forum for testing theories against the collective knowledge of the group. Oleg Grabar, Cynthia Robinson, and Neil Stratford stimulated new lines of research reflected in the following pages. Marilyn Aronberg Lavin shared insights on the intersection of Renaissance art and politics then, and for many years before and after.

Other friends and colleagues contributed from the beginning of this study right through to completion. It was my good fortune to have the ear through-out of Marie Tanner, whose work on both Habsburg patronage and Saint Peter’s basilica intersected with my own areas of research. Our mutual inter-est in Renaissance architecture as a fully articulate language able to manifest the highest spiritual ideals informed by temporal realities, explored through a single conversation of long duration, was essential in shaping this material. We often recalled our debt to Leo Steinberg, whose early guidance inspires still today. Ingrid Rowland, companion on early travels, opened my eyes to Renaissance Rome’s antiquarian culture and inspired fresh approaches to the historical resonance of Bramante’s architecture. Patricia Waddy, my guide in architectural matters, often during walks in Rome and in the shadow of the Tempietto, scrutinized the manuscript, adding refinement to both fact

xiv • Acknowledgments

and interpretation. Shelley Zuraw, valued interlocutor, was always available to debate new insights and then reviewed chapters as they took shape, bringing subtlety to ideas roughly sketched. Debra Pincus opened the door to epigraph-ical traditions and offered a model of precision I am still striving to match. Paul Gwynne advised on Rome’s literary legacy and provided welcome advice on philological problems, saving me from many pitfalls. Jonathan Brown gener-ously lent his support at the final critical juncture. My heartfelt thanks to all.

At Cambridge University Press, it was a pleasure to collaborate with edi-tors Beatrice Rehl and Asya Graf, and have the support of Isabella Vitti and Liz Shand. Florida State University has been most supportive, providing for research in Italy, underwriting new photographs of the Tempietto, and ensuring publication of the expanded illustration program that appears here. Dr. José Antonio Bordallo, director of the Real Academia de España en Roma, and Professor Enrique de Alvaro, former Segretario, extended every courtesy in facilitating the photographs of the Tempietto, as did Padre Aniceto Gómez, Rector of San Pietro in Montorio. I salute photographer Alessandro Vasari for capturing views and details of the Tempietto that bring alive the monument following the conservation campaign of 1998–99. Marcello Leotta contrib-uted his illuminating photographs of the Tempietto and achieved with ease what seemed impossible. Architect José Sancho Roda, co-supervisor of the conservation of the Tempietto, generously discussed the findings with me in advance of their publication. The firm of CABBSA Madrid, which collaborated on the conservation and sponsored the first publication of the results in 2002, kindly supplied the photograph of the Tempietto’s foundation stone repro-duced here. I benefited from the rich holdings of the Bibliotheca Hertziana where Dr. Johannes Röll, director of the photographic archive, and his staff offered exemplary support. Marcello Castrichini shared his photographs of the frescoes in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme after the conservation that he and his collaborators conducted in advance of the Holy Year of 2000. Graphic renderings of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and the Tempietto were kindly provided by Professor Maria Letizia Accorsi and architect Ana Isabel Acedo Chaves. Daniel DeSimone, curator of the Lessing J. Rosenwald Collection at the Library of Congress, generously made available the resources of his col-lection. Daniel Castor, member of that distinguished line of architects who render homage to the Tempietto in their own work, contributed the analytic drawing he created at the American Academy in Rome.

I enjoyed consistent support from the directors and staff of the American Academy in Rome, Bibliotheca Hertziana, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, and Escuela Española de Historia y Arqueología en Roma. My work was advanced in fundamental ways in other libraries and archives, and in particular at the

Acknowledgments • xv

Order of Discalced Carmelites, where the archivist, Dionisio Tomás Sanchis, helped uncover the record of the Tempietto’s restoration in 1628. Anna Maria Brignardello and Chiara Merucci shared their analysis of Pedro Fernández da Murcia’s painting of the Vision of Amadeo during its recent conservation. I also depended on the expertise of colleagues in fields distant from my own. Dr. Alan T. Whittemore, United States National Arboretum, provided advice on botanical matters, and Dr. M. G. Harasewych, Smithsonian Institution, on the taxonomy of mollusks. Professor Lorenzo Lazzarini, Director of the Laboratorio di Analisi dei Materiali Antichi, Istituto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia, with characteristic collegiality, identified the types of granite used in the columns of the Tempietto.

My colleagues at Florida State University have been consistently support-ive. I recall with special regard former dean Jerry Draper and former depart-ment chair Patricia Rose, who facilitated my work in Italy over many years. Richard K. Emmerson helped me see the end and provided the tools to reach it. Jean Hudson, media specialist extraordinaire, assisted in the selection and refinement of images and when necessary deployed her grammarian’s red pen-cil. I thank FSU colleagues Karen Bearor, Michael Carrasco, Nancy T. De Grummond, Paula Gerson, Adam Jolles, Sally McRorie, and Robert Neuman. For essential contributions, I also thank Fabio Barry, Dawson Carr, Irene Cioffi, Nicola Courtright, Cynthia Hahn, Michael Koortbojian, David A. Levine, Tod Marder, Michael P. Mezzatesta, Sara Cedar Miller, John Moore, Rafael Moreira, Ronald G. Musto, Alexander Nagel, John Beldon Scott, Thomas W. Sokolowski, Edward J. Sullivan, Susan Tye, William E. Wallace, Anabel Wharton, and Clovis Whitfield.

My final, and the most profound, debt is to Franco Di Fazio. His on-site analysis of monuments during travels across Italy and Spain and thoughtful scrutiny of Renaissance texts greatly enriched the conclusions presented here. The steadfast support he provided during the years this study took shape and advanced to completion gave me a sense of shared purpose that sustained the effort and made it truly a joy.

Readers conversant with the rich literature devoted to the Tempietto will recognize my debt to scholars who pioneered critical approaches to its history and meaning, and I take this opportunity to recognize them. Earl Rosenthal (1964) inaugurated systematic analysis of the Tempietto’s antecedents, and in his study of Granada Cathedral demonstrated how architectural design was informed by royal ideology. Arnaldo Bruschi (1969) defined the Tempietto in its full art historical reach, paving the way for all subsequent discussion. Hubertus Günther, in a study of 1973 and many subsequent publications, clar-ified the Tempietto’s genesis and meaning in terms of the literary and graphic

xvi • Acknowledgments

record. Fernando Marías (1987) anchored the Tempietto in Spanish royal patronage and introduced the contributions of Bernardino de Carvajal and Amadeo Meneses de Silva. Deborah Howard (1992) pursued the Tempietto in terms of Spanish royal prerogatives with particular reference to the Holy Land. Christof Thoenes (2004) unveiled the subtleties in Bramante’s use of the Doric system and its creative relation to the antique. Ingrid Rowland (2006–07) established the Etruscan roots of Bramante’s use of the Doric and the rele-vance of Annius of Viterbo’s theories of cultural transmission. Marie Tanner (2010) linked Bramante’s vision of New Saint Peter’s to the political meaning the cult of the Apostle had acquired during the fifteenth century and the ref-erence to Jerusalem that gave it shape. My work would have been far more difficult without having theirs as both a model and challenge.

xvii

aBBreviations

AGOCD Archivum Generale Ordinis Carmelitarum Discalceatorum, Rome

ASFR Archivio di San Francesco a Ripa, RomeASPF Archivio Storico della Propaganda Fide, Vatican CityASR Archivio di Stato, RomeASV Archivio Segreto Vaticano, Vatican CityBAV Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican CityBC Biblioteca Casanatense, RomeBV Biblioteca Vallicelliana, RomeDBI Dizionario biografico degli italiani. Rome, 1960–.PL Migne, J. P., ed. Patrologiae cursus completus . . . , series latina.

221 vols. Paris, 1844–55. Vasari-Milanesi Milanesi, Gaetano, ed. Le opere di Giorgio Vasari. 9 vols.

Florence, 1878–85.

xix

I. Tempietto in the cloister of San Pietro in Montorio. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

xx

II. Tempietto. View from the front. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

xxi

III. Tempietto. View from above. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxii

IV. Tempietto. View from the back. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxiii

V. Tempietto. Detail. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxiv

VI. Tempietto. Detail. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxv

VII. Tempietto. Balustrade and metopes. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxvi

VIII. Tempietto. View of soffit and inner surface of entablature. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

xxvii

IX. Tempietto. View of soffit. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxviii

X. Tempietto, chapel. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

xxix

XI. Tempietto, chapel. Altar. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

xxx

XII. Tempietto, chapel. Altar and side entrance. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxxi

XIII. Tempietto, chapel. Pavement viewed from altar toward main entrance. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxxii

XIV. Tempietto, chapel. View toward dome. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

xxxiii

XV. Tempietto, chapel. Drum and dome. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

xxxiv

XVI. Tempietto, crypt. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxxv

XVII. Tempietto, crypt. View to left of altar. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxxvi

XVIII. Tempietto, crypt. Entrance with light shaft. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxxvii

XIX. Tempietto, crypt. Light shaft. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

xxxviii

XX. Tempietto, crypt. Vault. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

xxxix

XXI. Tempietto, crypt. Pavement and central aperture seen from altar. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

1

Prologue

This book appears during the quincentennial of the death of Donato Bramante (1444–1514), who was recognized in his own time and still today for recovering the principles of Classical architecture that

define the Renaissance. Without the slightest exaggeration, it could be said that Bramante changed the history of Western art, influencing everything that came after and informing our vision of antiquity itself. By common consent, the first fully articulated expression of his achievement is found in the Tempietto, the memorial chapel honoring Saint Peter on the site of his martyrdom in Rome. When Bramante built the Tempietto at the beginning of the sixteenth century, he was a master artist with an impressive record of accomplishments in Milan where he served the duke as architect and engineer. In Rome he created projects subtle in concept and prodigious in scale for that most ambitious Renaissance Maecenas, Pope Julius II, and in prime position New Saint Peter’s basilica, enduring symbol of the papacy and of the Roman Church. Saint Peter’s, like the other projects Bramante initiated for the pope, was completed long after his death by architects who defined his legacy for the later sixteenth century and after. The Tempietto is among the few surviving works that Bramante conceived during his first years in the Eternal City and saw through to completion.

The Tempietto is also one of those special monuments in the history of art that exerts an immediate and lasting impression on all who come into its presence, nestled in the first cloister of the Franciscan monastery of San Pietro in Montorio located high on the Janiculum Hill overlooking the city (Plates I–IV). Bramante’s artistic heirs, Sebastiano Serlio, Giorgio Vasari, and Andrea

2 • Bramante’s Tempietto, the Roman Renaissance, and the Spanish Crown

Palladio, famously praised the Tempietto, but a well-informed visitor in the 1540s best expressed its compelling presence, remarking on its centralized plan, construction material, columnar system, and degree of refinement both outside and within, concluding “it is truly a joy,” et veramente una gioia.1 And so it was for me during an extended period of residence in Rome, at times with students alongside, when I enjoyed the privilege of sustained exposure to this pivotal monument in the Western architectural tradition. The first time I entered the crypt of the Tempietto and made out the names of Ferdinand and Isabel, Catholic King and Queen, inscribed on the 1502 foundation stone, I knew that the relationship of those illustrious monarchs to this most lauded Renaissance building held rich possibilities for defining the historical under-pinnings of Bramante’s architecture.

During the five centuries of its existence, the Tempietto has attracted widespread admiration and detailed examination, but its status as the premier commission of the Spanish monarchs in Rome has received scant attention. The incomplete documentary record may have contributed to this neglect, but equally relevant is the unfamiliar circumstance that foreign sovereigns sponsored one of the canonical works of the Italian Renaissance. The goal of the present study is to recover the conceptual foundations of Bramante’s architecture by situating the Tempietto at the center of a coordinated program of the arts exalting Spain’s leadership in the quest for Christian hegemony. Bramante’s innovations emerge as inseparable from the realities of patronage and politics, and Spain’s contributions to shaping this central monument of Renaissance art are brought into sharp focus.

Roma patria comunis, the ancient praise of Rome as the homeland of all peo-ples, was revived during the Renaissance to acknowledge the universal character of the city, reflected in its residents who came from across the Italian Peninsula and throughout Europe.2 Spain’s influence in Italy was propelled by the 1442 conquest of the Kingdom of Naples by Ferdinand’s uncle, King Alfonso V of Aragon (1416–58), consisting of territories reaching from southern Italy to the borders of the Papal States. During the second half of the fifteenth century that influence emanated from Rome when two members of the Borja family, Borgia in Italian, both subjects of the crown of Aragon, were elevated to the papacy, Alfonso as Callixtus III (1455–58) and Rodrigo, his nephew, as Alexander VI (1492–1503). The influx of their compatriots to Rome increased in step with the international status achieved by Ferdinand and Isabel, afterwards expanded by their grandson, Charles, King of Spain and Holy Roman Emperor.

When Bramante arrived in Rome “before the Holy Year of 1500,” accord-ing to his first biographer Giorgio Vasari, he was a mature artist aged 55, who

Prologue • 3

commanded an impeccable artistic pedigree, born and trained in the shadow of the Montefeltro court in Urbino and active for two decades at the court of Milan.3 When first in Rome, again according to Vasari, Bramante worked for Alexander VI in a supervisory role as sottoarchitetto, and participated in projects sponsored by members of the philohispanic group within the Curia, includ-ing the expansion of San Giacomo degli Spagnoli in Piazza Navona, national church of the Castilian community. Vasari praised the Tempietto in a later section of the biography devoted to Bramante’s influence on other architects, but it too belongs on the roster of works conducted under Spanish patron-age in Rome.4 The program of state celebration that included the Tempietto was coordinated by Bernardino López de Carvajal (1455–1523), native of the Castilian city of Plasencia in Estremadura, and prominent member of the Roman Curia.5 During the course of the fifteenth century, the Carvajal fam-ily rose to distinction in the administration of both the Church and royal court, with Bernardino and his uncle, Cardinal Juan de Carvajal (ca. 1400–69), extending their activities to Rome.6 In 1488, Bernardino de Carvajal became Ferdinand and Isabel’s representative to the Holy See, a post he maintained until his elevation to the cardinalate in 1493, and afterwards informally as the leading Spanish prelate in Rome.7

Contemporaries attest to Bernardino de Carvajal’s sharp intellect, exper-tise in theology and Church ceremonial, and unswerving commitment to advancing Spain’s prestige in the international ambience of the papal city. He employed diplomacy, published tracts, festive celebrations, and patronage of the monumental visual arts to advance that goal. The artistic program he oversaw centered on two venerable churches, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and San Pietro in Montorio, one preserving relics of Christ’s Passion from Jerusalem, and the other identified as the place of Saint Peter’s martyrdom. At Santa Croce, Carvajal conducted initial works on behalf of Pedro González de Mendoza, the titular cardinal, and continued them in his own name after succeeding Mendoza in 1495. At San Pietro in Montorio, Carvajal acted as proxy for Ferdinand and Isabel. In these projects, Carvajal employed the same artists who defined the core artistic projects sponsored by the popes at the Vatican, in the first place Bramante, followed by his associates and artistic heirs, Baldassare Peruzzi and Antonio da Sangallo the Younger. The fresco cycle of the True Cross in the apse of Santa Croce, the first project Carvajal oversaw for Cardinal Mendoza, reflects the renewal of the early Christian her-itage sponsored by Pope Sixtus IV at the Vatican.

Rome’s architectural legacy provides a third focus of this study with spe-cial attention to Spain’s own ancient past and the contemporary ambitions


of its monarchs. By way of introduction, I turn to an event drawn from the mid- fifteenth century when Spain’s influence in Rome was firmly estab-lished. In the autumn of 1461 Enea Silvia Piccolomini, the humanist Pope Pius II (1458–64), visited the city of Porto, located near Ostia just west of Rome. His longtime friend Cardinal Juan de Carvajal staged an elaborate out-door welcome for the papal party, sheltering his guests with tents and arbors formed with the intertwined branches of trees. On October 21 of that year, Pius elevated Carvajal to the office of bishop of Porto, an honor that came after three decades spent in papal service.8 Carvajal belonged to an influen-tial group of Spaniards in the Roman Curia including fellow Castilians Juan de Torquemada (d. 1468) and Rodrigo Sánchez de Arévalo (d. 1470), each one known for staunchly defending the doctrine of papal primacy and vigorously promoting crusade. Pius recalled how on that autumn day Carvajal delivered a speech in which he “talked a great deal about Trajan, saying that he was suc-ceeding him as one Spaniard another.”9 The content of the oration, lacking in Pius’s account, is readily imagined. Of immediate importance was Trajan’s Spanish origins and responsibility for constructing the artificial harbor per-petuated in the city’s name, Porto. Carvajal would have passed to the reputa-tion of the emperor for beneficent rule and military achievement, which was recognized with exceptional honors in his own day and in the Christian era. The Roman Senate honored him with the title Optimus Princeps and permit-ted his burial within the sacred boundaries of the city. By means of arduous military campaigns, Trajan succeeded in expanding the Roman empire to lim-its in northern Europe and the Middle East never matched by his successors. The commemorative column rising from the center of the immense Forum built with the spoils of conquest provided Trajan’s funerary monument. Those ancient distinctions carried over into Christian tradition. It was said that Pope Gregory the Great (590–604), learning of one of the emperor’s great acts of justice, wept so profusely that Trajan’s soul was released from purgatory, a rare example of Christian redemption being extended to a pagan.10 Trajan was widely honored as a model of proto-Christian virtue, winning particular praise among Spanish authors of the Middle Ages and Renaissance.11

It can be certain that Carvajal extended the theme of Trajan’s virtuous exer-cise of power to address the contemporary threat to Western Christendom. That threat had engaged the attention of Pius II long before his accession to the Petrine dignity and consistently thereafter, and it was a central issue in Juan de Carvajal’s own biography. In 1454, one year after the fall of Constantinople to the Ottomans, Callixtus III reigning, Piccolomini represented Holy Roman Emperor Frederick III at the Imperial Diet in Frankfurt, which was convened

Prologue • 5

with the purpose of forging a united Christian front to counter Turkish mil-itary advances.12 After acceding to the papacy in 1458, Pius pursued the goal of crusade with escalating commitment right up to the year of his death.13 Juan de Carvajal played a prominent role in advancing that same goal. Acting as Callixtus’s legate to Hungary, he assembled an enormous military force to halt Ottoman incursions in eastern Europe. That force, led by the general John Hunyadi and fortified by the preaching of John Capistran, engaged the enemy at the battle of Belgrade in 1456.14 The resulting victory was promoted as the harbinger of a definitive Christian triumph. Celebrations were staged in Rome’s Piazza Navona with an actor filling in for the absent Carvajal, who continued to pursue military objectives in northern Europe before return-ing to the papal city in 1461.15 Against this background, the central claim Carvajal made in the oration that Pius did record, his succession of Trajan, is understood in a new light. The military exploits immortalized in the spiraling band of marble relief adorning the emperor’s honorific column commemorate the campaigns against the Dacians, who occupied an area of eastern Europe contiguous to Carvajal’s own arena of military action.16 Moreover, Juan de Carvajal, although modest in his personal life, combined exceptional virtue with military valor, as had Trajan. The rhetoric of Catholic imperial power that Carvajal would have developed in his oration was applied to him directly by the Greek cardinal Bessarion in the epitaph inscribed on his tomb: “Peter in Spirit, Caesar in Courage.”17

Bernardino de Carvajal, Juan’s nephew, expressed his own vision of how universal Christian concerns and Rome’s venerable history cohered with Spain’s privileged status in the address he delivered before Pope Alexander VI and cardinals in a public consistory held on June 19, 1493. On that day a royal delegation conveyed Ferdinand and Isabel’s formal obedience to the pope, a traditional practice that the monarchs expanded to include the announcement of royal policy.18 The delegation was led by Diego López de Haro, viceroy of Galicia, accompanied by Gonzalo Fernández de Heredia, archbishop of Tarragona and governor of Rome, Bernardino de Carvajal, bishop of Carthage, and Juan Ruiz de Medina, bishop of Badajoz. Carvajal, already known for his eloquent oratory, delivered the address, and it was soon published, providing a lasting record of Spanish prestige in papal Rome.19

Carvajal opened the address by remarking on the national origins shared by both the pope and monarchs, which he identified as the fulfillment of Biblical prophecy concerning concord between the spiritual and temporal spheres. Citing Isaiah 11:6, he associated the peaceful calf and the lion that sleep side by side with the heraldic symbols of Alexander VI and the royal house of


Castile and Léon. Rome, he declared, had been chosen to rule the world, but Spain’s rights and privileges approached equivalent status. Carvajal cited the Spanish origins of Rome’s political and intellectual elite, naming among oth-ers the emperors Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Theodosius, and the authors Seneca, Lucan, Martial, Quintilian. The honor roll included the Arab philosophers Avicenna, Averroes, the rabbi Moses Maimonides, and even Aristotle, who was linked to Spain in one medieval tradition.20 Carvajal itemized Spain’s contri-butions to the Church beginning with the sacrifices of the martyrs, continued with the early Councils, and extended by the theological tracts of Orosius, Isidore of Seville, and Ildephonsus. He also emphasized the importance of the Apostle James Major, honored as Spain’s evangelizer, who was venerated by the faithful from all nations at the great shrine dedicated to him at Compostela. Carvajal concluded it was only natural for a Spaniard to occupy the highest ecclesiastical dignity, following previous Spanish popes, Damasus I (366–84), John XXI (1276–77), Benedict XIII (antipope, 1394–1423), and Alexander’s uncle, Callixtus III. This noble Christian lineage found a parallel in the sec-ular sphere through the sacred bloodline that flowed to Ferdinand and Isabel from the heroic race of the Goths, conferring upon them nobility exceeding other rulers.

All those versed in Spain’s history both real and legendary would have rec-ognized the claims Carvajal advanced in the oration. He drew from two his-toriographical strands that Isidore of Seville had first brought together in the seventh century, later absorbed in the encyclopedic history sponsored by King Alfonso X the Wise of Castile in the thirteenth century, and elaborated by humanists working at the courts of Aragon, Castile, Naples, and Rome in the fifteenth century.21 One strand concerned Spain’s contributions to Rome’s achievements in intellectual, religious, and political history. The other strand brought forward an independent dignity rooted in the superior piety and excep-tional courage of the primeval Iberian tribes, which was transmitted to the royal houses of Castile and Aragon by the Goths. The Goths had established political and religious unity across the Iberian Peninsula, a goal that even the mighty Romans had failed to achieve. That unity lasted until it was shattered by the Muslim invasions of the eighth century. To be sure, Carvajal’s concept of a unified Spain was an ideal vision, the kingdoms ruled by Ferdinand and Isabel being quite separate in their laws, language, and culture. Nevertheless, a single nation under the rule of the monarchs had its ideological roots in geography, politics, and religion.22 The nexus was provided by the struggle to assert Christian control over the peninsula and the prospect of extending that control to the Holy Land. Carvajal buttressed the idea of Ferdinand and

Prologue • 7

Isabel’s providential reign by enumerating the recent events of 1492: conquest of the kingdom of Granada, last Muslim stronghold on the Iberian Peninsula, and initial discoveries in the New World. He added to these achievements the expurgation of vice, restoration of purity, conquest of heresy, banishment of infidels, and expulsion of Jews.

Following the norms governing orations of obedience, Carvajal set aside the disagreements between the pope and monarchs already evident at that early point in Borgia’s reign. During the same consistory, Diego López de Haro delivered a scathing criticism of certain actions of the pope that Ferdinand and Isabel judged to be damaging to the Christian community. This conflicted relationship between the monarchs and the pope, which continued through-out Borgia’s pontificate, is insufficient to diminish the claims Carvajal made in the oration or his broader efforts to celebrate Spain’s destiny. By the time of the consistory of 1493, those efforts had been under way for five years at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and San Pietro in Montorio.

San Giacomo degli Spagnoli, national church of the Castilian commu-nity in Rome, where from 1491 to 1498 Carvajal held the chief administrative office, provided a third site of Spanish celebration.23 In the mid-fifteenth cen-tury, Alfonso Paradinas, canon of the Cathedral of Seville and later bishop of Ciudad Rodrigo, constructed the church along the outer perimeter of Piazza Navona. It was the first of the new churches built in Renaissance Rome, and the first to be sponsored by a national group.24 At the end of the fifteenth century, San Giacomo was enlarged and a monumental facade was built on the side facing the piazza, transforming this vast public space in Rome’s his-toric center into an atrium for the church. Because the church honored the Apostle James Major, both it and the piazza became the preferred sites for victory celebrations involving Spain. In January 1490, Bernardino de Carvajal delivered a sermon before the College of Cardinals gathered in San Giacomo degli Spagnoli to acclaim the fall of Baza to Ferdinand’s troops, a crucial step in the progress toward Granada.25 The most dramatic celebrations took place following the conquest of Granada, news of which reached Rome at the end of January 1492. Carvajal, along with Juan Ruiz de Medina, his colleague and col-laborator at San Pietro in Montorio, gathered reports concerning the victory and disseminated the news to the courts of Europe.26 Together, Carvajal and Medina sponsored one of the more spectacular events held in Piazza Navona with a mock siege of Granada centering on a high wooden tower standing for the city’s defenses at the Alhambra.27 In another display, also held in the piazza, Cardinal Raffaele Riario staged a triumphal procession in the ancient manner. Actors playing the role of the monarchs occupied a carriage drawn


by four white horses, accompanied by soldiers and captives.28 On a less jubi-lant note, San Giacomo degli Spagnoli served for the obsequies of Ferdinand and Isabel’s son and heir apparent, Prince Juan, held on January 16, 1498, and again for Queen Isabel on February 16, 1505, attended by representatives of Church and state.29 Carvajal seized those opportunities to exalt the monarchs and their achievements.

These events at San Giacomo degli Spagnoli, along with the attendant cer-emonies and associated works of art, contributed to the celebration of Spain in Rome. Yet to take them fully into account in this study would deflect attention from the projects most relevant for the genesis and meaning of the Tempietto. The first two chapters are dedicated to Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and San Pietro in Montorio where the fortunes of the Spanish monarchy were anchored to the history of Rome and of Christendom through the memory of Constantine and Saint Peter. The four chapters that follow are dedicated to the Tempietto, one to antecedents in ancient and Christian architecture, and another to the symbolism of the architecture and its decoration, in both cases arguing for an overarching iconographic program that engaged the most closely held spiritual beliefs and ideological positions of the royal patrons. In the fifth chapter, the much discussed date of the Tempietto is addressed as part of a consideration of the historical context, demonstrating that Bramante’s formal and conceptual innovations were anchored in reality and addressed an anticipated future. The sixth chapter is devoted to the legacy of the Tempietto during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in commissions by the popes in Rome and the kings in Spain. An Epilogue brings the history of the mon-ument and of Spanish celebration in Rome forward to the nineteenth century and concludes in the present.

9

Chapter One

Jerusalem in rome

Beginning in 1488 and continuing for three decades, Bernardino de Carvajal oversaw renovations to the basilica of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, built in the fourth century by Saint Helen, Constantine’s

mother and Empress Dowager, within the confines of her own palace. The dedication to the Cross and the toponym “in Gerusalemme” refer to the relics of Christ’s Passion that the empress discovered in Jerusalem and brought to Rome. Carvajal engaged that illustrious history to honor Ferdinand and Isabel’s signal achievements of 1492: conquest of the kingdom of Granada and inaugural exploration of the New World. Two narrative cycles devoted to the legend of the True Cross, one in the apse of the basilica and the other in the vault of the subterranean chapel of Saint Helen, address Spain’s mission to lead the Christian world. These cycles establish the vocabulary of Spanish royal celebration also found in San Pietro in Montorio and the Tempietto, discussed in the subsequent chapters.

Introduction

Santa Croce in Gerusalemme counts among the seven privileged basilicas of Rome, distinguished by the relics of Christ’s Passion brought from Jerusalem by Saint Helen and deposited in her palace, later transformed into a site of Christian worship (Figure 1).1 The venerable tradition linking the basilica to the origins of Christianity and the triumph of the Church provided the con-text to celebrate the power of Spain and its monarchs. Bernardino de Carvajal


was responsible for accomplishing that program, first as representative of Pedro González de Mendoza, titular cardinal of the basilica (1478–95), and thereafter in his own name. Carvajal established a professional association with Mendoza when, in his role as rector of the University at the Cathedral of Salamanca (1480–82), he solicited the cardinal’s interest in establishing a new college at the university, a project ultimately realized in Valladolid.2 Arriving in Rome in 1482, Carvajal received a ready welcome. Sixtus IV appointed him private secretary, cubicularius, and on All Saint’s Day, November 1, 1482, the Spaniard delivered the sermon before the Curia, eliciting great praise for his command of theology and eloquent oratory.3 Carvajal returned to Spain in 1485 as Innocent VIII’s nuncio to the court of Ferdinand and Isabel, and when back in Rome in January 1488, he assumed responsibility for the renovations at Santa Croce.4 After Pedro de Mendoza died in January 1495, Carvajal suc-ceeded him as titular of the basilica and pursued additional renovations right up to his own death in December 1523.

Pedro González de Mendoza and the True Cross

Cardinal Pedro de Mendoza’s link to Santa Croce was fundamental in moving the basilica into prominence as a showcase of Spanish royal prestige in

Figure 1. Israël Silvestre, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, etching. Harvard Art Museums / Fogg Museum, Gift of Belinda L. Randall from the collection of John Witt Randall, R11053. Photo: Imaging Department © President and Fellows of Harvard College.

Jerusalem in Rome • 11

Rome. The Mendoza family was among the most powerful in Castile, and the cardinal wielded his influence to support the monarchs and shape their polit-ical program, receiving in return many honors, including the informal title Third King of Spain.5 Mendoza ensured the accession of Isabel to the crown of Castile in the face of considerable opposition, and afterward dedicated his enormous financial resources to promoting the monarchs’ war against the kingdom of Granada, the last independent territory ruled by Muslims on the Iberian Peninsula.6 When Ferdinand and Isabel entered the conquered city on January 6, 1492, both the cardinal and his nephew Íñigo López de Mendoza rode alongside them. The cardinal’s birth on May 3, feast of the Invention of the Cross, inspired a lifelong association with Saint Helen and the instrument of Christ’s death. Mendoza dedicated to the Cross the two pious foundations he established in Spain, the Colegio di Santa Cruz, Valladolid (1487–91) and the Hospital de Santa Cruz, Toledo (begun 1494). Beyond personal devotion, the relationship with the Cross brought forward the same concern with recov-ery of the Holy Land that Mendoza shared with the monarchs.

Initial efforts at Santa Croce were dedicated to providing a dignified set-ting for the Station Masses traditionally held by the pope and cardinals in the basilica, among them Good Friday and the fourth Sunday in Lent, known as Laetare Ierusalem – Rejoice, Jerusalem.7 The roof of the basilica, interior walls, pavement, and the platform for display of relics were all repaired, and splendid coffered wooden ceilings were installed in the nave and transept.8 These features were all lost in the comprehensive eighteenth-century rebuild-ing of the basilica, making a coherent reading of the Mendoza renovations difficult to recover.9 The ceilings hold particular interest for introducing one of the anchors of a conceptual program that must have existed from the start and gathered emphasis over time. The sources record that the ceilings were embellished with gold and ultramarine blue, with rosettes in the center of each coffer, and featuring two coats of arms, of Cardinal Mendoza and of King Ferdinand.10 A sense of the visual prominence of the ceilings can be gleaned from a fresco dating to the pontificate of Sixtus V (1585–90) showing the Station Mass under way (Figure 2).11 The distinctive type of ceiling, flat coffered and highly decorated, was introduced to Renaissance architecture by Brunelleschi in San Lorenzo, Florence, and was soon taken up in Rome at the basilica of San Marco by the titular cardinal Pietro Barbo (later Pope Paul II, 1464–71). At the end of the century, Pope Alexander VI commissioned the largest and most elaborate version of the type at Santa Maria Maggiore. The popularity of these ceilings in Rome continued into the sixteenth century, in part driven by the sheer visual power of the richly articulated coffering. Another way to


understand this popularity concerns the historical resonance of the same ceil-ing type, which literary sources attest were featured in the Constantinian basilicas of Saint Peter’s and Saint Paul’s in Rome.12 An even more prestigious model engaged Santa Croce’s own venerable history. As recorded by Eusebius, Constantine’s fourth-century biographer, the emperor advised the bishop of Jerusalem to install a coffered ceiling in the church of the Holy Sepulcher, the place of origin of Santa Croce’s relics of Christ’s Passion.13

The tradition linking Santa Croce to Jerusalem was confirmed in 1492 when the relic of the superscription of the Cross came to light. On the last day of January or in the early hours of the next day, workers repairing the arch dividing the nave and the transept uncovered a small opening in the wall and a marble plaque inscribed “Here is the Title of the True Cross.”14 Johannes Burchard, papal Master of Ceremonies, reported that the metal container found within the space bore three identical seals of Ubaldo de’ Caccianemici, titular cardinal of the basilica from 1122 to 1144 (later Pope Lucius II, 1144–45).15 The wooden tablet extracted from the container was immediately recog-nized as the one Pontius Pilate had mounted on the Cross with the title “Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews,” inscribed in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin.16 The location of this relic was well known, but its discovery elicited great excite-ment. Miraculum in Urbe fuit, exclaimed the diarist Stefano Infessura, who

Figure 2. Celebration of Station Mass at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Salone Sistino, Vatican palace. Photo courtesy of Musei Vaticani.


observed that the faithful flocked to Santa Croce to see it.17 Burchard recorded Pope Innocent VIII’s own visit on March 12, 1492, feast of Saint Gregory the Great.18 As the cardinals looked on, Innocent handled the relic and ordered that it be protected under glass and displayed on the altar during the prin-cipal feasts celebrated in the church. Four and a half years after the discov-ery, on July 29, 1496, Pope Alexander VI authenticated the titulus Crucis and granted a plenary indulgence to those who visited Santa Croce on the last Sunday in January.19 The importance of the discovery for Spain emerges from contemporary reports that the titulus was brought to light on the same day news arrived in Rome that the kingdom of Granada had fallen and Ferdinand and Isabel had entered the city in triumph.20 That felicitous conjunction lent divine approbation to the military victory and confirmed Spain’s providential role in Christian history.

The True Cross Cycle

The victory over Granada and the discovery of the superscription inspired an expanded program of restoration in Santa Croce centering on the semidome of the basilica’s apse where Antoniazzo Romano and his associates painted epi-sodes from the legend of the True Cross (Figure 3).21 The project must have been under way on June 23, 1494, when Mendoza executed his last will and testament, granting Carvajal 500 gold ducats to provide a gilt silver reliquary

Figure 3. Antoniazzo Romano and assistants, Legend of the True Cross. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Castrichini.


for the titulus Crucis and to repair the high altar chapel.22 The frescoes depend on the medieval tradition of Roman apse decoration, continuing the histor-ical evocation conveyed by the basilica’s wooden ceilings. Christ in Majesty occupies the upper level of the semidome, his luminous mandorla dramatically silhouetted against the deep blue heavens, and below, the narrative unfolds within a continuous landscape accented by winding roads, rolling hills, and hilltop cities. At the center foreground, Saint Helen holds the True Cross and Cardinal Mendoza kneels before her in prayer, his cardinal’s hat propped against the sacred wood (Figure 4).23

The frescoes depend on a number of Roman precedents but engage most directly with the apse mosaic of Old Saint Peter’s, a commission of Pope Innocent III (1198–1216), who appeared at the left of the Heavenly Throne, paired with the figure of Ecclesia Romana opposite (Figure 5).24 This authorita-tive visual source gained added importance through association with Christian militancy; Innocent launched the Fourth Crusade to recapture Jerusalem and supported a major confrontation with the Moors in Spain, at Las Navas de Tolosa, about which more will be said presently. At Santa Croce, as in the apse

Figure 4. Cardinal Pedro González de Mendoza and Saint Helen, detail, Legend of the True Cross. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Castrichini.


of Old Saint Peter’s, Christ appears enthroned holding a book inscribed with his declaration to the Apostles, “I am the Path of Truth and of Life,” Ego Sum Via Veritas Et Vita ( John 14:6). The lower band of the apse at Saint Peter’s, defined by a unified landscape bordered by twin cities, provides another point of contact. Despite these shared features, the presence of historical narra-tives in the semidome distinguishes the Santa Croce cycle from other Roman churches where visionary scenes addressing the grand themes of human sal-vation and the divine origins of the Church occupy that privileged space.25 In the few cases where historical or legendary narratives do appear in the apse, they are relegated to the lower wall and framed to suggest independent panels, reinforcing their separation from the upper zone of spiritual revelation.26

The location of historical scenes in the semidome at Santa Croce coex-ists with a second significant departure from tradition. True Cross cycles commonly engaged the epic sweep of the tale as codified by Jacobus de Voragine (d. 1298) in the Golden Legend, which traces the history of the Holy Wood

Figure 5. Apse mosaic of Old Saint Peter’s basilica, drawing. Giacomo Grimaldi, BAV, Barb. lat. 2733, fols. 158v–159r, © 2014 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, by concession of the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, all rights reserved.


from its origins in the Garden of Eden, continuing through its Old Testament vicissitudes, the pious deeds of Constantine and Helen, and concluding with the Byzantine emperor Heraclius (610–41).27 The great apse cycle by Agnolo Gaddi at Santa Croce, Florence (1380–90), conforms to this pattern, as does the one by Piero della Francesca at San Francesco, Arezzo (completed by 1466). In Rome the cycle is limited to six scenes drawn from the beginning and end phases of the story centering on Helen and Heraclius.28 The scenes are pre-sented in a continuous sequence read from left to right, with a central accent provided by the paired figures of Helen and Mendoza. The first cluster of scenes opens with Helen arriving on the site where the True Cross is buried; the three crosses are excavated; and Christ’s cross is recognized by its power to resurrect a dead youth (Figure 6). In the second cluster, Heraclius duels with the son of the Persian king Chosröes to recover the Cross; an angel prevents Heraclius from entering Jerusalem in imperial splendor to restore the Cross to Golgotha; and in the final scene, the emperor, now dressed as a humble peni-tent and on foot, enters the Holy City carrying the Cross (Figure 7).

The unprecedented placement of the historical scenes in the semidome of the apse and the selection of those six scenes established a link to the liturgical

Figure 6. Saint Helen visits the site of the True Cross; Three Crosses are exca-vated; Proofing of the True Cross, detail, Legend of the True Cross. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Castrichini.


feasts of the Cross and to Spanish victories past and present. All True Cross cycles are grounded in the feasts honoring the instrument of Christ’s death, the Invention of the Cross on May 3, and the Exaltation of the Cross on September 14, the first marking its discovery by Saint Helen and the second its restitution by Heraclius. Those feasts, observed throughout the Universal Church, were celebrated at Santa Croce with special emphasis, marked by the display of the Passion relics and exceptional indulgences provided to the faith-ful.29 The Breviary readings for the Invention and Exaltation of the Cross extract from the broader True Cross narrative the same episodes depicted in the apse, establishing a fundamental link between the frescoes and the lit-urgy.30 Throughout the year, but especially on those feasts, the scenes at Santa Croce are elevated to the level of transcendent revelation, celebrating the per-petual victory of the Church over its enemies.

The apse frescoes also hold typological and anagogical meanings that iden-tify Spain with the continuation of those historical victories. Helen’s discov-ery of the True Cross and Heraclius’s triumph over the Persians were mirrored

Figure 7. Heraclius duels with the son of King Chosröes; Heraclius is prevented from entering Jerusalem in triumph; Heraclius enters Jerusalem on foot, detail, Legend of the True Cross. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Castrichini.


by the rediscovery of the titulus Crucis and the conquest of Granada, the same events that came together at Santa Croce on that fateful day at the end of January 1492.31 The power of those associations was reinforced by contemporary com-parisons of Isabel and Ferdinand with their imperial counterparts, Helen and Constantine.32 A significant precedent for pairing Spain’s military victories with the Constantinian triumph existed in the feast known as Triunfo de la Santa Cruz, celebrated in Spain on July 16 to commemorate the famed battle of Las Navas de Tolosa in 1212.33 On that day, the combined forces of Castile, Navarre, and Aragon, led by King Alfonso VIII of Castile and operating under a cru-sade brief issued by Pope Innocent III, vanquished the immense army of the Almohade Caliph Muhammad Al-Nâsir, known in Spain as Miramamolín. The victory was widely recognized as the turning point in the Christian reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula. All crusade activity occurred under the protection of the Cross, hence the Spanish term cruzada and cognates in other languages, but the Cross was said to have appeared in the sky at Las Navas de Tolosa, as it had to Constantine. Following the victory, a chapel to shelter trophies of the victory was constructed on the place where the Muslim army had encamped, known as Santa Elena.34 The potency of the victory remained vivid during the Renaissance. The royal chronicler Alonso de Palencia recounts how in 1484 Queen Isabel stopped at the site of the battle on her way to pursue the war against Granada.35 A per-sonal link between Las Navas and Cardinal Mendoza existed as well. His ances-tor, Íñigo López de Mendoza, señor de Llodio, namesake of both his father and nephew, was among the first to break through the barriers formed with chains that protected the caliph, a heroic act reflected in the addition of chains to the family’s heraldry.36 That victory also held meaning for the history of the basilica. Anticipating the battle of Las Navas de Tolosa, Pope Innocent III decreed pen-itential processions for all Romans according to a devotional itinerary through the city that culminated at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme.37

The fresco cycle also addresses Ferdinand and Isabel’s official policies con-cerning Jews and Muslims.38 Legend held that Helen was aided in her quest for the True Cross by a Jew named Judas, who agreed to lend his aid, but only after the empress had him thrown into a dry well and threatened to leave him there to die of hunger.39 Nothing of this reluctance is evident at Santa Croce. Judas appears alongside Helen at the start of the cycle and is again present in the third scene when a dead youth is resurrected through the power of the Cross. In both cases, Judas is cast as an aged figure of noble stature with bald pate, white beard, and garbed in the flowing robes of an Old Testament patri-arch. This positive depiction reflects his status as “the son of a just man and a prophet,” who possessed knowledge of Christ’s divinity transmitted by his


father and grandfather. Jacobus de Voragine recounts that Judas converted to Christianity, changed his name to Cyriacus, and, with Helen’s support, suc-ceeded to the office of bishop of Jerusalem. The portrayal of Judas-Cyriacus at Santa Croce evokes Spanish royal policy toward converting the Jews, the same policy that led to the decree of 1492 expelling all those who refused baptism. In a parallel way, the Heraclius scenes allude to the conquest of the Muslim kingdom of Granada and the broader military effort that the monarchs pur-sued in North Africa after 1492 and intended to extend to the East.40

Once the frescoes are understood to relate to Jews and Muslims, the way is open to associating them with Christian eschatological expectation.41 The principal text describing how post-Biblical history would advance toward the End Time, known as the Revelation of the Pseudo-Methodius after the fourth-century martyred Bishop of Olympus, was composed around 691 and underwent continual elaboration thereafter.42 It presents the rise of Islam in an apocalyptic perspective, introducing the figure of a mighty king, referred to as the Last World Emperor, who will rescue Christendom from its enemies. After triumphing over Muslims, he journeys to Jerusalem and lays down his regalia on Golgotha, initiating events leading to the Second Coming. The escalating threat in the fifteenth century brought the text to the forefront of concern; it was published in Cologne in 1475, and other editions followed in quick succession, including an illustrated version produced by Sebastian Brant in 1498. The identity of the Last World Emperor was a matter of intense speculation. Alexander Minorita (Alexander of Bremen, d. 1271) recognized Heraclius as that person and the Persian king Chosröes as the Antichrist in his thirteenth-century commentary on the Book of Revelations that had a consid-erable independent afterlife.43 More commonly, contemporary rulers were cast in the role of the military savior.44

In Spain, a robust version of the prophecy, nourished by centuries of strug-gle to conquer territories ruled by Muslims, was renewed during the Granada campaign and its aftermath.45 In its wake, King Ferdinand was hailed as the Last World Emperor charged with leading the Christian world in the final battle to recover Jerusalem.46 Cardinal Carvajal held dear this type of pro-phetic material, and on the feast of the Exaltation of the Cross in 1508, he articulated its core message in a homily delivered in Mechelen before the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I and members of his family, including Prince Charles, Ferdinand and Isabel’s grandson, future king of Spain and Holy Roman Emperor.47 He referred to Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, the Passion relics, and the auspicious discovery of the titulus Crucis on the day news of the Granada victory arrived in Rome. Themes addressed by the decoration of Santa


Croce appeared as well: the conversion of Judas-Cyriacus to Christianity, the feast of the Triunfo de la Santa Cruz, and Heraclius’s victory over Chosröes. Carvajal declared that by invoking those themes he intended to inspire a new military effort to recover the Holy Land for Christendom.

The depiction of Cardinal Mendoza kneeling before Saint Helen at the cen-ter of the apse reinforces the eschatological meaning of the True Cross cycle and its association with the Spanish monarchy. With head raised high and hands clasped in prayer, this Third King of Spain looks toward the True Cross held by Saint Helen and beyond it to a vision of Christ in heaven. As Renaissance viewers followed Mendoza’s gaze, they saw the twelfth-century frescoes on the arch framing the apse, with Christ Pantocrator at the center flanked by the four creatures of the Apocalypse and the seven candelabra, an iconographic scheme signaling Christ’s return at time’s end.48 When viewed from the nave, the ensemble was completed by another image of the Cross mounted on the triumphal arch where the titulus had been discovered. A gilded Cross was set against a background of blue mosaic, accompanied by Mendoza’s coat of arms and golden letters declaring, “Here was the Title of the Holy Cross.”49 As with the Helen and Heraclius scenes, those features of the program recall the festal liturgy. The versicles and responsories chanted by the faithful during the vigil of the Invention of the Cross refer to the appearance of the Cross in the heav-ens at the Last Judgment, “This Sign of the Cross will Appear in the Heavens When the Lord Comes to Judge.”50 The True Cross cycle of Santa Croce cel-ebrates Spain’s mission to assume the Cross and lead the Christian nation to repossess the Holy Land, part of the Divine Plan to conclude in the eschato-logical future. Mendoza’s presence in the desired terrain of the Christian cru-sader refers to the same militant efforts that inspired the cycle, which brought that goal closer to fruition. An inscription once adorning the upper cornice of the apse written in blue letters against a gold background provided a fitting caption: “If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me” (Matthew 16:2).51 Christ is speaking to the Apostles, and to us. Ever since Pope Urban II (1088–99) used those words in his historic ser-mon preaching the First Crusade, they assumed political meaning that found renewed resonance at Santa Croce in the wake of the events of 1492.52

Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and Cardinal Bernardino López de Carvajal

On September 20, 1493, Pope Alexander VI elevated Bernardino López de Carvajal to the cardinalate and granted him title to the church of Santi Pietro


e Marcellino.53 Following the death of Mendoza in January 1495, Carvajal suc-ceeded him as titular cardinal of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, and continued the basilica’s restoration right up to his own death in December 1523. The dia-rist Marin Sanudo recorded that in April 1523 members of the ambassadorial delegation from the Venetian Senate to Pope Adrian VI (1521–23) visited Santa Croce and praised Carvajal’s efforts, those already accomplished and others under way. They took special note of “cornices and arches of some doors (com-posed) of a stone gathered from the spoils of antiquity of such extreme beauty that a tiny piece would be worthy to be mounted in gold and worn as a most beautiful ring.”54

The works Carvajal sponsored involved every area of the basilica and monas-tery, but the program of Spanish celebration initiated in the apse was extended in the chapel of Saint Helen, located some two meters beneath the church on the right side of the presbytery (Figure 8). Work on the chapel likely began before the Holy Year of 1500 with an eye to accommodating the faithful who flocked to Rome to reap the rich spiritual benefits provided during that spe-cial year of grace. The splendid mosaics of the chapel’s vault – the focus of the following discussion – have been dated to 1507–08, and the design attributed

Figure 8. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, apse and subterranean area. Courtesy of Maria Letizia Accorsi.


to Baldassare Peruzzi.55 Around 1520, Carvajal introduced additional changes to that subterranean area of the church, constructing an antechapel on the left side of the presbytery, directly opposite the Helen chapel, and the two gently sloping corridors leading from nave level to both areas.56 This resulted in a devotional itinerary that began with descent to the antechapel along one cor-ridor, movement into the Helen chapel, and ascent to the nave level by means of the second corridor. A plan of the area by Antonio da Sangallo the Younger attests to his involvement in this late phase of the project, datable to around 1520 on the evidence of the majolica tile inscription that once lined the walls of the twin corridors, to be discussed at the end of this chapter (Figure 9).57 It should be emphasized, however, that these works refined a preexisting situa-tion, documented by a British visitor to Rome in 1470, who stated that twin stairs provided access to the Helen chapel.58 As in many Roman churches with crypts, it is likely that these passages were located on opposite sides of the presbytery and led to the underground area.59 Carvajal would have recognized the need to refine that arrangement in the years leading up to the Holy Year of 1525, when an increased flow of pilgrims to Santa Croce was expected.

Figure 9. Antonio da Sangallo the Younger, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, apse and subterranean area, drawing. Galleria degli Uffizi, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe, Florence, Uffizi 898Ar. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


The Chapel of Saint Helen

A tradition traced to the eighth century identified the Helen chapel as the saint’s private chamber or bedroom, cubiculum, which is how Carvajal referred to it in the majolica inscription.60 Tradition held that Pope Sylvester consecrated the chapel at Helen’s request and provided generous indulgences to those who visited on March 20, the only day women were permitted to enter. Inscriptions mounted at the entrance and on the inner walls recorded those indulgences, and possibly included legendary information concerning the chapel’s origins.61 An early sixteenth-century measured drawing of the altar wall shows an inscription close to the entrance where the word “Amen” can be discerned, and another inscription above, between the altar and the circular window (Figure 10).62 The first inscription is supported at the top by an angel and at the sides by a pope and a woman, likely representing Pope Sylvester and Saint Helen. The altar appears as a columned aedicula adorned with paint-ings of the Crucifixion and Entombment, reflecting the chapel’s identification with the place of Christ’s death and burial in Jerusalem. Additional decoration appears in the area to the left of the oculus, suggesting an expanded narrative

Figure 10. Altar wall, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, drawing, ca. 1500. Galleria degli Uffizi, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe, Florence, Uffizi 4000A. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


program. Descriptions of the chapel refer to marble revetment on the lower walls, now lost, and an opus sectile pavement, portions of which survive in the area of the main altar.63 Holding particular interest is a marble inscription set into the pavement of the cubiculum near the passage from the antechapel and meant to be read by those entering the Helen chapel from that direction. It states how Saint Helen deposited earth transported from Mount Calvary up to the “lower arch,” which conferred on the chapel the name Jerusalem.64 This undated inscription would have been installed when the pavement was restored by Pope Eugenius IV (1431–47), whose coat of arms decorate the few remaining majolica tiles located to the left of the main altar.65 At the end of the sixteenth century, a comprehensive restoration of the chapel undertaken by Albert of Austria, direct descendant of Ferdinand and Isabel, who also served as Santa Croce’s titular cardinal (1580–98), augmented the decoration with scenes of the True Cross and in a second phase with paintings by Peter Paul Rubens.66

In the majolica inscription lining the access corridors leading to the sub-terranean area of Santa Croce, Carvajal recorded that the Helen chapel had been in a state of abandon and the vault threatened ruin.67 He identified the patrons of the original decoration as the emperor Valentinian III (425–55), his sister Honoria, and mother Galla Placidia, no doubt depending on an epigraph then located in the church, which is known today from a transcription made in the late fifteenth century.68 Carvajal used that information to assert a link between the chapel and Spain by identifying Galla as “daughter of Theodosius the Great, of the Spains.”69 The Spanish-born emperor Theodosius I (379–95) had ruled the Western Empire in part from Milan at the time Saint Ambrose ruled the city as bishop. The memory of Theodosius was central to the broader history of the chapel and the political resonance it held: the oration Ambrose read at the emperor’s funeral provides the earliest source for the True Cross narrative and credits Saint Helen for discovering the Passion relics, identify-ing them as military trophies.70

The mosaics Carvajal commissioned to replace the ruined fifth-century originals constitute a watershed in the revival of that technique in Renaissance Rome (Figure 11).71 Francesco Albertini, in his Rome guide published in 1510, but already complete in 1509, pronounced them “most beautiful,” and noting the cardinal’s portrait in the program, praised Carvajal as “most learned and most erudite in the sacred ceremonies (of the Church).”72 For their refined design and execution, the mosaics continued to elicit praise over a century later when Baldassare Peruzzi was first credited with their design, an attribution


Figure 11. Chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, vault. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


affirmed in modern studies.73 The radial composition, with a holy image set at the center, figures at the corners, and garlands of fruit and flowers along the perimeter, follows a compositional type found in Rome, most prominently in the late thirteenth-century chapel of the popes in the Lateran palace.74 The Lateran chapel was dedicated to Saint Lawrence, protomartyr of the Church and native son of Spain, but the exceptional relics it contained, including those pertaining to Christ’s Passion, along with the acheropita, a highly venerated image of Christ, explain why it was called Sancta Sanctorum, Holy of Holies. In the Helen chapel, that same geometric scheme reappears in the vault, now elaborated with reference to decorative ensembles recently uncovered at Nero’s Golden House in Rome and Hadrian’s villa near Tivoli.75 The influence of those same models is found in the contemporary vault decoration of the Stanza della Segnatura in the Vatican palace and in the tribune of Santa Maria del Popolo, the former probably and the latter certainly involving Bramante, who was likely consulted on the cubiculum project as well.76

These debts to antique and medieval precedents in the Helen chapel coex-ist with innovative aspects in both form and iconography. Christ Pantocrator, seen in bust-length, anchors the composition in the central medallion of the vault and the four Evangelists, seated and writing the Gospels, dominate the corner ovals: Matthew and John appear on the altar side, and Mark and Luke appear opposite them, toward the antechapel. Four small scenes nestled in the roughly triangular areas between the ovals mirror the subjects of the frescoes in the semidome of the church. The mosaics extend to the deep transverse arches buttressing the vault at either end where standing saints are accom-modated in elaborately decorated niches on the descending surfaces of the arches, Peter and Paul on the side of the altar and Sylvester and Helen toward the antechapel. The portrait of Carvajal noted by Albertini appears along-side Helen (Figure 12). The center of each arch contains a medallion with an image referring to Christ’s return at the End of Time, on the altar side the Prepared Throne (Hetoimasia) and opposite, the Instruments of the Passion (Arma Christi).77

The saturated colors, emphatic modeling, fictive cast shadows, and accom-modation of the spectator’s low viewpoint combine to produce a compelling visual experience. The vault appears as a permeable surface with figures exist-ing on both the near and far sides. The saintly figures in the niches and their framing garlands appear to inhabit the chapel’s space, but the Evangelists occupy the heavens beyond the vault. Christ at the center, encircled by cher-ubs and music-making angels, seems to peer down into the chapel from above (Figure 13). The centripetal scheme favors viewing from multiple angles, but


Figure 12. Saint Helen and Cardinal Carvajal, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

Figure 13. Christ blessing, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


Christ is seen correctly only when standing directly in front of the altar, in line with the antechapel.78 His face, illuminated from below and defined by a soulful expression, produces an uncanny sense of real presence that translates the text inscribed on the book he holds into a personal address, “I am the Light of the World, Beginning and End.”

The announcement of human salvation in which Christ identifies himself with light is drawn from two passages in the Gospel of John that refer to the ground, one concerning the adulterous woman whom Christ pardoned (John 8:12), and the other the blind man whom Christ healed (John 9:5). In the first passage, Christ writes on the floor of the Temple of Jerusalem, and in the second, he creates healing balm with clay collected from the ground. These Biblical references recall the presence beneath the chapel’s pavement of earth from the site of Christ’s death on Mount Calvary. For the faithful seeking spir-itual grace, Christ’s most human expression, the dramatic illumination, and Biblical quotation convey the fundamental mystery of God’s love for human-kind. That same human quality, and the theological message it expresses, also informs the figures of Helen and Carvajal. In place of the austere devotional

Figure 14. Proofing of the True Cross, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


formula applied to Mendoza and Helen in the basilica’s apse, the empress now draws the Cross and the other Passion relics close to her body, and Carvajal kneels close by, hands clasped in prayer. She rests her right hand on the cardi-nal’s tonsured head, and together they gaze upward, rapt at the vision of Christ at the center of the vault. The compelling visual presence of these figures and their psychological animation responds to the chapel’s identity as Helen’s pri-vate chamber and as the repository of exceptional spiritual grace.

The four small mosaic scenes located between the ovals parallel the imag-ery in the church’s apse, referring to the True Cross and to Spain’s efforts to evangelize the world (Figures 14–17). They too are based on the Breviary readings marking the feasts of the Cross and allude to the 1492 discovery of the titulus and conquest of Granada. Significant differences between the two series exist as well. Helen now participates directly in the narratives, reflect-ing her personal association with the cubiculum. She reaches low to grasp the resurrected youth’s hand in the Proofing of the True Cross, and in the Transport of the Passion Relics guides the soldiers who carry sacks filled with holy earth to a ship headed for Rome.79 The second pair of scenes alludes to the recovery of

Figure 15. Transport of the Passion Relics to Rome, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


the Holy Land as a presage of the eschatological future. Heraclius Restores the True Cross to Jerusalem recapitulates the message conveyed by the apse fresco, identifying the Byzantine emperor as a paradigm of the crusading Christian soldier. The underlying meaning of the series is revealed in the final episode, Adoration of the Heavenly Cross, where a jeweled Cross draped with a purple swag appears in the golden firmament; four figures kneel in prayer and gaze toward the apparition. These witnesses, identified by their garments and head-gear as members of the temporal and spiritual hierarchies, unite the past and present with the future, as did the portrait of Cardinal Mendoza in the apse. They may allude to the founders of the chapel, Constantine and Helen, paired with Pope Sylvester and a cardinal, but they most vividly evoke Ferdinand and Isabel, Alexander VI and Carvajal, brought together by their shared national origins and fervent dedication to the ideals of the Cross.80 For these reasons, they are privileged to participate in the eschatological vision announced by the hymn chanted on the vigil of the feast of the Invention of the Cross, “This Sign of the Cross will be in Heaven.”

Figure 16. Heraclius Restores the True Cross to Jerusalem, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


Viewed as a unified program, the mosaics trace the theme of human sal-vation, originating with Christ, promulgated by the Evangelists, extended by the saints, and completed in the eschatological future.81 These themes would be equally valid in any Christian context, but the basilica’s history and the spiritual and political concerns of Carvajal and the Spanish monarchs impart more focused meaning. The program engages the idea of Christianity’s uni-versal reach, introduced by the Biblical text inscribed on Christ’s book and reinforced by the depictions of the Evangelists, who fulfilled in word and deed Christ’s charge to the Apostles to disseminate the truth of human salvation worldwide. The theme of Christian evangelization relates to Spain through the monarchs’ efforts to spread the faith by crusading efforts at home and by sponsoring exploration overseas. The New World pineapples, corn, and par-rots appearing in the garlands that define the vault’s perimeter, among the ear-liest known depictions, refer to the discoveries Christopher Columbus made on behalf of Ferdinand and Isabel.82 Pietro Martire d’Anghiera, the Milanese humanist and tutor to the monarchs’ children, transmitted knowledge of the

Figure 17. Adoration of the Heavenly Cross, detail, chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


New World discoveries to friends in Rome, including Carvajal. In a letter of September 1, 1497, addressed to Giulio Pomponio Leto, humanist, anti-quarian, and founder of the Roman Academy, Pietro Martire reported how Carvajal understood the New World creation myth that had baffled Leto, and in a jocular tone proposed to compare the erudition of the two friends.83

Other detailed sources of information regarding those discoveries informed the deliberations that produced the lines of demarcation between the spheres of the New World controlled by Spain and Portugal. Alexander VI promul-gated the divisions in a series of bulls beginning with the first on May 3, 1493, feast of the Invention of the Cross.84 Carvajal, as representative of the mon-archs, was a prominent participant in those deliberations. He commemorated that involvement with a map preserved in Munich, datable between 1502 and 1506, that provides an early visual record of the New World, including the lines of demarcation.85 The map mixes science, fable, and religion by iden-tifying the earthly paradise with a mountain in Africa where Carvajal’s coat of arms appears suspended from a high tree, atop which a parrot has alighted (Figure 18). The theme of the map, Spanish empire achieved through explo-ration and crusade, parallels the message conveyed by the decoration of the Helen chapel.

Figure 18. Earthly Paradise with the coat of arms of Cardinal Bernardino de Carvajal, detail, drawing. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, Cod. icon. 133. Courtesy of Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich.


That same message was expressed in compressed form in the mosaic depict-ing Saint Helen, whose cloak is decorated with both New World pineapples and pomegranates, the Holy Land fruit that had long been associated with Christ and the Church (see Figure 12). God had bestowed the pomegranate upon Israel as a sign of his favor, and ordered that it be applied in the decora-tion of the Temple of Jerusalem and on the garments of the high priest.86 The Romans called the pomegranate malum granatam, referring to the profusion of grains or seeds, which is also recalled by its name in English and cognates in other European languages, including the Spanish granada.87 Sharpened polit-ical meaning came in the wake of the 1492 conquest of Granada when the monarchs assumed the title King and Queen of Granada and added the epony-mous fruit to their coat of arms, positioned at the base of the escutcheon. The full military significance of Granada was visually expressed on the title page of a laudatory volume published in 1494 that includes Carlo Verardi’s Historia Baetica and Columbus’s letter announcing the New World discoveries: King Ferdinand, dressed in armor and wearing the royal crown, holds a battle stan-dard emblazoned with the crusade cross and has two shields suspended from his arms, one bearing the combined heraldry of Castile and Léon, and the other eight ripe pomegranates symbolizing the kingdom of Granada (Figure 19).

Figure 19. King Ferdinand of Aragon as Crusader, woodcut, 1494. In laudem Serenissimi Ferdinandi, Hispania(rum) Regis, title page. Courtesy of The Rosenwald Collection, Library of Congress.


Carvajal employed pomegranates in the form of a festive wreath for his own armorial display in Santa Croce, and the fruit was used to embellish pilaster capitals in San Giacomo degli Spagnoli and San Pietro in Montorio.88 These works, as with Helen’s cloak, feature the pomegranate as a symbol of Spain’s success in spreading the faith, and as a harbinger of the definitive Christian victory to come.

The victory of the Cross, the underlying theme of the mosaics in the Helen chapel, was reinforced by the hymns appearing on majolica tiles set directly above the entrances to both the chapel and the antechapel at the end of the twin access corridors.89 “O Cross More Radiant than All the Stars,” at the threshold of the Helen chapel, and “Hail Cross, Sole Hope of Mortal Life,” its counterpart above the antechapel, are offered by the faithful as expressions of thanksgiving for the salvific power of the instrument of Christ’s death.90 Both hymns were additions to Venantius Fortunatus’s sixth-century hymn to the Cross, Vexilla Regis Prodeunt, and were often sung on the feasts of the Cross and on Easter. In addition to their spiritual content, these hymns underscored the political meaning of the program. Tradition held that Heraclius chanted the first hymn upon restoring the Cross to Golgotha after its Persian captivity, this according to Rabanus Maurus (d. 856), repeated by Jacobus de Voragine, and recalled by Carvajal in the homily he delivered before Maximilian I in 1508.91 The second hymn found above the entrance to the antechapel was sung at the triumphal entry of Ferdinand and Isabel into Granada when the Cross was raised above the highest tower of the Alhambra.92 Cardinal Mendoza identified that Cross as the one he used in his role as Primate of Spain when bequeathing it to the Cathedral of Toledo “in memory of such a great vic-tory.”93 These hymns reiterate the meaning of the narrative cycles in the apse of the basilica and the vault of the cubiculum by identifying the history of the True Cross with Spanish victory in the present.

Conclusion

Spain’s providential destiny to propel Christendom to victory, celebrated visually in the apse of the basilica and in the vault of the Saint Helen chapel, was articulated in the majolica tile inscription Carvajal mounted along the corridors leading to the subterranean area of the church. The inscription in the corridor leading to the antechapel was removed in the mid-eighteenth cen-tury in part because of the legendary material it contained, and a portion of the one in the opposite corridor was lost over time.94 The surviving elements convey something of the stunning impression those inscribed tiles conveyed in


their original form (Figures 20, 21). Blue letters of classical shape float against a white ground, framed by colorful borders consisting of a light green strip and an interlace motif of gold against blue. Nothing similar exists in Rome. Majolica tiles were widely employed during the Renaissance, commonly in

Figure 20. Corridor leading to the chapel of Saint Helen, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

Figure 21. Majolica tile inscription, detail, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


pavements, but never with extended inscriptions. In effect, Carvajal created a Christian counterpart to the extended tile inscriptions found throughout the Muslim world, including Spain.95 At Santa Croce the viewer must read each line, approximately eight meters in length, beginning on one wall and repeat-ing the process on the opposite side. As the faithful paced the corridor to fol-low the glistening letters, they learned of the illustrious history of the space and its spiritual significance.

Carvajal speaks to us of themes holding special meaning for him during the entirety of his Roman career, many of which he had articulated to Maximilian I in 1508. In the inscription, he recalled the elevated offices he held, Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem among them, and recounted the history of Santa Croce, its foundation, relic endowment, and exceptional indulgences.96 Citing ancient and Christian sources, he confirmed the Helen chapel as the font of excep-tional spiritual grace, and referred to the patronage of both Helen and the family of Emperor Valentinian III. Carvajal identified the providential discov-ery of the titulus Crucis on the same day news arrived in Rome of the conquest of Granada as harbinger of a future definitive victory. He also exhorted the reigning pope, Leo X de’ Medici (1513–21), and Charles of Spain, Ferdinand and Isabel’s grandson and Holy Roman Emperor elect, who had been present at that event in 1508, to mount a new crusade to liberate the Holy City. In effect, these majolica tiles constitute Carvajal’s spiritual and intellectual testament, and they restate the meaning of the works he pursued in Santa Croce for three decades. Those works transformed the Constantinian triumph of the faith as enshrined in the history of the basilica into a visual panegyric of Spain’s mili-tary and spiritual successes in the past and aspirations for the future.

37

Chapter Two

Upon This Rock

In 1488, at the same time Carvajal assumed responsibility for the renovations of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme for Cardinal Mendoza, King Ferdinand entrusted him with the project of rebuilding the church and

monastery of San Pietro in Montorio (Figure 22). Because tradition held that Saint Peter was martyred in that locale on the Janiculum Hill, the church was identified with Rome’s destiny as the center of Christianity, second only to Saint Peter’s in the Vatican where the Apostle was buried. This chapter describes the process by which the Apostle’s crucifixion came to be associated with San Pietro in Montorio and the reasons for Ferdinand and Isabel’s interest in the site. Literary sources, including correspondence between the king and Carvajal, establish the chronology of construction and define the importance the church held for the crown. A consideration of the antecedents of the church’s design establishes that the most prestigious models of Christian architecture were brought together in a new synthesis to honor Peter and the royal patrons in their role as protectors of the papacy and of the Universal Church.

Introduction

In the majolica tile inscription of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme Carvajal associated the basilica with Rome’s elect status conferred by Peter’s mar-tyrdom. Addressing the spiritual privileges accruing to the Helen chapel, to Santa Croce, and by extension to the entire city, he cited the presence of relics of Christ’s Passion, and especially the holy earth from the place of the Crucifixion. He continues,


for this reason the chapel itself and the whole basilica and all Rome deserved to be called the second Jerusalem, where the Lord for the strength of its faith wished to be crucified a second time in Peter, and where it is believed that the veneration of one God and the indeficient faith, by the prayers of the Lord and the favor of Peter, will remain until the last coming of the judging Lord in Rome, the sublime and mighty and therefore the truer Jerusalem.1

A long tradition traced the primacy of the Roman See to Christ’s declaration in Matthew 16:18, “You are Peter and Upon This Rock I will build my Church.” During the fourth and fifth centuries, the dominant position of Rome within the Universal Church was advanced by referring to its consecration with the blood of the early martyrs and especially Saints Peter and Paul.2 That idea was renewed in both word and image during the fifteenth century as the popes reestablished their custody of the city.3 When Carvajal referred in the majolica inscription to Christ being crucified a second time in Peter, he was alluding to the early and persistent legend of Quo vadis that imparted narrative richness to Peter’s Roman martyrdom.4 It tells how the Apostle, attempting to flee the city to escape his destiny, encountered Christ on the Via Appia. “Where are

Figure 22. Giovanni Battista Falda, San Pietro in Montorio, engraving, 1669. Falda, Nuovo teatro delle fabriche et edificii, 3: plate 31. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.

Upon This Rock • 39

you going Lord?” he asked. Christ replied that he was going to Rome to be crucified a second time. Only then did Peter accept his mission to die on the cross in Rome as Christ had died in Jerusalem. The event was believed to have occurred at the crossroads of the Via Appia and the Via Ardeatina, marked by a medieval chapel, precursor to the seventeenth-century church that occupies the site today.

Notwithstanding the importance Peter’s martyrdom held for the foundation of the Roman Church, it was uncertain where the act had occurred. A literary tradition beginning with the medieval compilation of papal biographies, the Liber pontificalis, located the crucifixion next to the place of the Apostle’s burial at the Vatican, mirroring the situation in Jerusalem where Christ had died and was buried on contiguous sites at the Holy Sepulcher complex.5 During the fif-teenth century an alternative idea favoring San Pietro in Montorio as the place of Peter’s crucifixion took root, and received the support of the popes and the faithful, including the kings of Spain. The grand project Carvajal oversaw for Ferdinand and Isabel to rebuild San Pietro in Montorio inscribed that pious belief onto Rome’s sacred topography.

As one looks toward the Janiculum Hill from the city, the towering trav-ertine facade of San Pietro in Montorio is silhouetted against the verdant backdrop, the first Renaissance monument to take advantage of the promi-nent hillside setting.6 Renaissance visitors to San Pietro in Montorio entered a richly articulated space divided almost equally between the single nave with four semicircular chapels to a side, and the liturgical core consisting of two lateral exedras and an extended choir terminating in a polygonal apse (Figures 23, 24). Notwithstanding changes made in the seventeenth century, including the addition of two prominent chapels along the left flank, and extensive restorations conducted in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the original design is easily discerned. The clear divisions visible in the plan between nave and presbytery, the one serving the lay public, the other the friars, are also marked by variations in the vaulting. Two groin vaults back to back define the longitudinal axis of the nave, a billowing sail vault rein-forces the transversal axis formed by the paired exedras, and the presbytery is divided between a groin vault and a spreading umbrella vault within the apse (Figures 25, 26). These spaces are unified by the continuous entablature run-ning from entrance to apse, supported on pilasters that respond to the stresses of the vaulting. The pilasters beneath the sail vault are thickened and broad-ened with counter pilasters, and at the meeting of the double groin vaults in the nave, they are wider and deeper than the intermediate ones. Illumination was also calculated to differentiate areas of the church even while asserting


their interconnection. The light flowing into the nave from the rose window at the center of the facade is augmented by windows above the nave chapels, each aperture accommodated within the lunette formed by the intersection of the upper walls and the springing of the groin vaults. Illumination becomes more restricted toward the high altar. The exedras were originally lit by twin lancet windows and the apse by three apertures, one accommodated beneath the central segment of the umbrella vault, the others on the side walls.

San Pietro in Montorio conforms to a pattern of church design established in Rome during the last quarter of the fifteenth century at Santa Maria del Popolo (1472–78), Sant’Agostino (1479–83), and Santa Maria della Pace (begun 1482), marked by variations of the aedicula facade, apsidal chapels, trilobite presbytery, and vaulting system. Precisely because the features defining San Pietro in Montorio are found in other works of the period, their special char-acter needs to be considered alongside the two factors that distinguish the church from all others, its dedication to the Apostle Peter and its status as a Spanish royal commission. Before turning to that discussion, it is necessary

Figure 23. Giacomo Fontana, San Pietro in Montorio, interior, engraving, 1838. Fontana, Raccolta delle migliori chiese di Roma, 3: plate 70. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


Figure 24. Paul Marie Letarouilly, San Pietro in Montorio, plan, engraving, 1857. Letarouilly, Édifices de Rome moderne, 3.1: plate 322. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.

Figure 25. San Pietro in Montorio, view toward entrance. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


to examine how the site became associated with the martyrdom of Saint Peter and why Ferdinand and Isabel undertook its restoration.

The Crucifixion of Saint Peter on the Janiculum Hill

In the mid-fifteenth century, the antiquarian scholar Flavio Biondo and the papal datary and canon of Saint Peter’s Maffeo Vegio engaged in a debate concerning the location of Peter’s martyrdom, whether at the Vatican, the tra-ditional view, or on the Janiculum Hill.7 Biondo completed his text by 1446, and Vegio composed his treatise between 1455 and 1457. Each author argued the case based on topographical references in the literary record, the location of certain ancient monuments, and late medieval depictions of Peter’s cruci-fixion. Biondo confirmed the tradition that the Apostle had been martyred near the place of his burial at the Vatican, and specifically “inter duas metas,” between the two metae, referring to the turning posts that in ancient hip-podromes marked the ends of the central axis.8 Despite his appeal to liter-ary tradition, that phrase is absent from the known sources. Moreover, rather

Figure 26. San Pietro in Montorio, view toward presbytery. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


than referring to the Vatican circus located off the south flank of Saint Peter’s basilica, where the ancient obelisk stood in his day, Biondo introduced a more imaginative reading of the topography. He identified one meta as the Castel Sant’Angelo, the mausoleum of the Emperor Hadrian, and the other meta as a Roman tomb in the shape of a pyramid located in its vicinity, which was lost in the urban renewal project sponsored by Alexander VI.9 Most signifi-cant, Biondo ridiculed those who favored the Janiculum Hill as the site of the Apostle’s crucifixion, acknowledging in this way the substantial support the alternative position had attracted by that time.

Maffeo Vegio championed the view that Peter’s martyrdom had occurred on the Janiculum. He accepted the idea of the twin metae advanced by Biondo and identified the Vatican tomb as one of those monuments. However, in place of the Castel Sant’Angelo, built long after Peter’s death as both authors rec-ognized, he substituted the mausoleum of Caius Sestius, another pyramidal monument located near the Porta Ostiense on the opposite side of the city.10 Because the Janiculum Hill was midway between the two pyramids, Vegio posited it as the place where the event had occurred. Other traditions likely informed his reasoning, for example, the association of the two pyramids with the founders of the Christian city, Peter and Paul, one monument being located close to Saint Peter’s basilica, the other near the gate and the road leading to Saint Paul’s.11 He would also have known the testimony of Prudentius, the fourth-century Hispano-Roman poet, that the Janiculum had been the site of Christian martyrdoms.12 Moreover, the Janiculum was located across the Tiber River in the Transtiberim region, modern Trastevere, where in antiq-uity the population was composed of foreigners, especially transplants from the Eastern Empire, including Jews.13 Medieval legend held that Peter had toured the Janiculum during his Roman sojourn, leaving tangible evidence of his presence, in one case knee prints, in another the imprint of his entire body.14 By the late eighth century, the Apostle was associated with the area of San Pietro in Montorio, and a church by that name is mentioned in 1230.15 A catalogue of Roman churches drawn up around 1320 records the occupants, eight monks of the order founded by the hermit Peter Morrone (later Pope Celestine V, 1294), who was said to have worked miracles on that site.16

Biondo and Vegio, through their efforts to establish the place where Saint Peter had died, sought to transform a pious belief into concrete reality, in this way bolstering the supreme authority of the pope. The scene of Peter’s mar-tyrdom traditionally appeared in places closely associated with the papacy, for example, in the Sancta Sanctorum at the Lateran, and in the narthex of Old Saint Peter’s, directly above the main entrance, both dating to the late


thirteenth century.17 Following an early Christian literary tradition, these works depict the Apostle on an inverted cross, heels above head, with antique structures defining the location, including twin pyramidal or conical monu-ments.18 Filarete adapted that same visual formula on the bronze doors he crafted for the main entrance to Saint Peter’s basilica, commissioned by Pope Eugenius IV before 1434 but installed in 1445, and therefore approximately contemporary with the debate waged by Biondo and Vegio (Figure 27).19 The primacy of the Roman See provides the embracing theme of the doors, based on the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul, depicted in the two large reliefs occupy-ing the lower zone, and extended by contemporary events accommodated in the upper borders.20 Filarete depicted Peter’s crucifixion on a hill located approxi-mately midway between the two pyramidal tombs, just as Vegio claimed.21

The idea that Peter was martyred at San Pietro in Montorio found broad acceptance. Nikolaus Muffel, the German nobleman who journeyed to Rome in 1452 to assist at the coronation of the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick III, referred to Peter’s crucifixion between the twin pyramidal tombs.22 On the Janiculum site, he noted the existence of a chapel with privileged relics,

Figure 27. Filarete, Crucifixion of Saint Peter, detail, bronze doors of Pope Eugenius IV. Saint Peter’s basilica. Courtesy of Alinari / Art Resource, NY.


including a portion of Peter’s cross beneath the altar.23 He also stated that twin columns marked the place where the cross of Peter’s crucifixion had been set in the ground, possibly intended to recall the twin metae between which Peter was crucified.24 This early foundation, which was lost in the rebuilding cam-paign at the end of the fifteenth century, may be reflected in a topographical plan of Rome created in 1472 where a simple edifice with a single entrance, pitched roof, and three windows along its exposed flank is identified, “San Pietro in Montorio Where He was Crucified.”25

Spanish Royal Patronage at San Pietro in Montorio

By the date of the topographical plan of 1472, only two nuns occupied the monastery of San Pietro in Montorio.26 In that year, Pope Sixtus IV took steps to revitalize the site by ceding to Amadeo Meneses de Silva, his fellow Franciscan and personal confessor, the “monastery of San Pietro in Montorio in the Trastevere region of the city where it is said that Saint Peter, Prince of the Apostles, suffered martyrdom on the Cross.”27 He made the donation in perpetuity through a solemn bull dated June 18, 1472, stipulating that Amadeo restore and expand both the monastery and the church. Nine years later, on May 8, 1481, Sixtus promulgated a second bull silencing objections to the transfer of the property raised by the Ambrosian monks of San Clemente, whose legal rights to the dependencies of San Pancrazio included San Pietro in Montorio.28 The pope, acknowledging that Benedictine nuns had previ-ously occupied the monastery, invoked the Fourth Lateran Council’s ruling concerning the devolution of abandoned religious foundations to the Holy See. He referred to a church, monastic residence, cloister, unnamed buildings, stalls for animals, a walled garden, and a vineyard.

João de Meneses de Silva (d. 1482), known in Italy as Amadeo, was among the most prominent religious reformers of the fifteenth century who sought to revivify the primitive ideals of poverty and humility espoused by Saint Francis. The earliest biographical notices present Amadeo as the child of noble par-ents, his mother Portuguese and his father Castilian, which if true, would explain why he identified himself in correspondence as Hispanus, evoking the ancient Roman province Hispania that encompassed the Iberian Peninsula.29 Amadeo professed his faith at the Hieronymite monastery of Santa María de Guadalupe in Estremadura and in December 1452 received permission to join the Franciscan brotherhood at Assisi. Thaumaturgic cures and mystical visions provided signs of his exceptional spiritual grace. In Milan, which became his


home base, Amadeo enjoyed the support of the Duke and Duchess, Francesco Sforza and Bianca Maria Visconti, and provided his patrons with spiritual guidance and political counsel. His forceful voice resounds from correspon-dence of the mid-1460s with Sforza and Piero de’ Medici concerning their pledge to support construction of the new Amadeite church of Santa Maria di Bressanoro (also known as Santa Maria di Guadalupe) located in Castelleone, near Cremona.30 When Sixtus IV invited Amadeo to move to Rome and revi-talize San Pietro in Montorio, he established a link between that site and his own Franciscan order. Even before Sixtus acceded to the papacy, he protected Amadeo in his role as Minister General of the Franciscans, and thereafter supported the establishment of many Amadeite houses in northern and central Italy.31 When Amadeo died during a trip to Milan on August 10, 1482, Sixtus confirmed all privileges previously granted, and extended full apostolic pro-tection to the order.32

Amadeo’s fame extended beyond Italy. Following the friar’s death, King Louis XI of France (1461–83), operating through his agent in Milan, staged a magnificent funeral in Santa Maria della Pace, seat of the Amadeite order in that city.33 Notwithstanding the order’s commitment to poverty and humility, the king sponsored an elaborate tomb composed of a marble sarcophagus sur-rounded by a protective metal grill, and with a banner of crimson velvet sym-bolizing his veneration of Amadeo. One year after Amadeo’s death, Sixtus IV granted permission to celebrate exceptional Masses at midday and midnight in the church to benefit the faithful who were drawn to the site by the miracles then occurring at the tomb.34

Louis’s support of the monastery of San Pietro in Montorio has long been known from a letter Pope Sixtus IV addressed to the king on March 5, 1483, thanking him for three donations made following the commutation of a vow. The first of these donations was a golden chalice for use in the Lateran basilica, another involved 500 scudi for the repair of Saint Peter’s basilica, and the third an equal sum “to supplement the works of the Blessed Peter in Monte Aureo.”35 Cardinal Philibert Hugonet, the king’s ambassador to the Holy See, supplied additional details of the donation that clarify some, if not all, questions about this early phase in the monastery’s history.36 On March 6, 1483, the cardinal reported to the sovereign that after having delivered funds for the repair of Saint Peter’s basilica, which he identifies as 500 gold scudi, he gave “the other 500 scudi” to the friars of San Pietro in Montorio, reiterating the king’s own wish that they be employed “for the rebuilding and completion of that convent.”37 On the same day, the cardinal also notified François de Génas, Général des Finances de Languedoc, that the donation was intended “to assist and to contribute to a


certain edifice that (the friars) have begun in the aforesaid place from the alms and gifts that the king made to it at other times . . .”38 These notices clarify that the funds the Amadeites received were gold scudi, a more substantial sum than previously thought, and that the king had made other contributions to the monastery during Amadeo’s lifetime. Nevertheless, they do not support the idea that the French king initiated construction of the new church, which has gained authority through repetition.39 That idea apparently originated in the Rome guide written around 1517 by the Observant Franciscan friar Mariano da Firenze, whose otherwise fanciful presentation of Rome’s monuments encour-ages caution when evaluating the author’s opinions against the factual record.40 Caution is further indicated because the earliest published sources attribute responsibility for the church to Isabel in one case, and Ferdinand in the other; moreover, Mariano’s own source for the French king’s initial involvement at San Pietro in Montorio refers to the monastery generally, not to the church.41

King Ferdinand of Aragon, writing to Amadeo on July 6, 1480, announced his intention to build the church, and provided the financial means to see it realized. He described his plan “to found a church to Saint Peter promised by a vow in that very place where the Prince of the Apostles attained martyr-dom.”42 The letter makes clear that the vow had been prompted by the hope that Amadeo’s spiritual intervention would ensure the birth of a male heir to the Spanish throne.43 At the king’s writing, Ferdinand and Isabel’s son Juan was two years old, having been born on June 30, 1478, the day after the feast of Saints Peter and Paul.44 The king explained that, “owing to the conditions of the times, difficulties of work and the upheavals in our kingdoms, now again at peace,” he had been unable to fulfill his promise. He now sends letters pat-ent, and assigns 2,000 gold florins of Aragon to be paid over three years from the revenues of the Kingdom of Sicily, adding that if the sum should prove insufficient, he would supply what was lacking. In the valediction, Ferdinand requests Amadeo’s continued prayers to Almighty God and to the Prince of the Apostles for his own salvation and that of his wife and son.45

The vow Ferdinand assumed sometime between 1472, when Sixtus ceded San Pietro in Montorio to Amadeo, and the birth of the prince in 1478, estab-lished a personal bond between the royals and the Roman monastery. The mon-archs may not have known Amadeo directly, but they would have been aware of his activities, in part through his sister, Beatriz Meneses de Silva (d. 1490). Beatriz had joined the court of Castile in the train of Isabel of Portugal, who married King Juan II (1406–54) in 1447, and she established a lifelong friend-ship with their daughter Isabel, the future queen. In 1489, Isabel and Beatriz together established a female religious order of cloistered nuns dedicated to


the Immaculate Conception, precursor of the Conceptioniste.46 Ferdinand’s involvement with Amadeo at San Pietro in Montorio reflects a related pro-gram of Spanish religious reform, now associated with the foundations of the Church on the spot hallowed by the Apostle’s martyrdom.

Ferdinand’s interest in Amadeo formed part of a broader pattern of royal patronage that had deep institutional and personal roots. The ruling houses of Castile and Aragon had long favored the Franciscan order, engaging the friars as confessors and in public roles as administrators and diplomats concerned with internal governance and foreign policy.47 Ferdinand and Isabel followed family tradition in maintaining close ties to the order, and they demonstrated a fundamental commitment to supporting the Franciscan Observant move-ment as a template for the spiritual purification of their realms.48 The rigorous interpretation of the Franciscan reform promoted by Amadeo assumes great importance in this context as a Spanish paradigm for the religious life.49

Despite King Ferdinand’s commitment to build the new church of San Pietro in Montorio, construction was impeded until 1488 when the king took steps to resolve the legal challenge raised by the monks of San Clemente con-cerning proprietorship of the site.50 According to the known documents, the activity that occurred during Amadeo’s lifetime was limited to the monastery. In October 1481, Silvestro da Brescia, guardian of the monastery, brought a petition before Sixtus IV regarding completion of a new bell.51 The pope was asked to ensure the safety of the artisan responsible for the project, a certain Master John of the Bell Towers of Rome, who had fled after killing a priest for dishonoring his wife. The guardian states that the funds for the project were provided by alms donated by the faithful, peccunias ex elemosinis. King Louis XI likely provided a portion of those funds, as suggested by the corre-spondence of 1483. It is possible that the king of Portugal contributed as well, which would explain Vasari’s otherwise puzzling claim that he was responsible for the church.52 A likely time for the Portuguese donation would have been 1480 when a late source records that Don García de Meneses, Bishop of Évora, representative of King Alfonso V of Portugal (1438–81), but more precisely of Alfonso’s son and regent João II (1481–95), met Amadeo in Rome and discov-ered they were first cousins.53

The guardian of San Pietro in Montorio presented a second petition to the pope in March 1483, seven months after Amadeo’s death, seeking exemp-tion from customs duties for wood, beams, sand, and other materials to serve construction at the monastery, suggesting that the friars were anticipating increased activity.54 But it was only in November 1486 that the friars orga-nized a formal committee and charged its members, largely drawn from the


Vatican Curia, with defending their interests in all judicial issues, including “building the monastery and arranging for it to be built and the church of the said convent of the aforementioned Saint Peter.”55 The church is mentioned for the first time in this document, and the context makes clear that the activities under discussion were projected for the future.

San Pietro in Montorio: Textual Evidence, 1488–1500

The friars’ independence in administering construction projects at the monastery ended in 1488 when King Ferdinand established procedures for realizing the new church, entrusting its oversight to Bernardino de Carvajal assisted by Juan Ruiz de Medina, another representative of the crown in Rome. Details of the commission emerge from correspondence between the king and both Carvajal and Ruiz, as well as his paymasters in Sicily, during the decade between 1488 and 1499.56 Those surviving letters, only a portion of a more extensive correspondence, enrich the otherwise scant documentary record. Ferdinand emerges as a fully engaged patron keenly aware of the project’s importance for promoting the prestige of the crown in Rome, notwithstand-ing scarce financial resources that prevented the speedy conclusion he initially envisioned.

During the month of September 1488, Ferdinand sent three letters to Carvajal and Ruiz asserting his desire to fulfill the vow he had previously assumed. He instructed them to apply an annual disbursement of 500 gold ducats to engage “masters and ministers,” maintain accounts, make payments, and so forth, all “as it might seem to you suitable for the service of God and for our merit and honor.”57 At the same time, the king recommended that his agents engage the services of a certain Jorge de Castellon, the friars’ pre-ferred architect, who had a good reputation, and was dedicated to the work and to serving God, demonstrated by his willingness to remit one day’s salary each week to the friars.58 The outcome of this negotiation is unknown, but it reveals the king’s close personal involvement in those affairs. In another let-ter Ferdinand arranged for 2,000 ducats to be delivered “to accelerate the said work on the monastery and the church.”59 He declared that he wanted the work to be completed quickly, and advised that in keeping with the practice of the Observant Franciscans, the church should be more devout than large and that it should make up in grandeur what it lacked in size.60

After these initial notices, a lacuna occurs lasting for almost five years, and when the correspondence resumes, the first wave of Spanish military conquest


and overseas exploration had passed. The considerable financial expenditure involved in those enterprises explains the king’s difficulty in funding the works at San Pietro in Montorio. On June 8, 1493, Ferdinand responded to a request that Ruiz and Carvajal had sent in April, expressing great interest in the works, but insisting that an additional 1,000 ducats would have to suffice. On the same day, the king directed the viceroy of Sicily to disburse this sum within three months.61 To reinforce the urgency of the order, he explained that if payment were to be delayed his reputation and that of the royal court would be damaged. These additional funds proved insufficient to complete the project. The celebration of Mass in the church on September 6, 1494, suggests that an advanced stage of construction had been reached by that time.62 In a letter to the king of November 11, 1494, Ruiz stated that he and Carvajal had assumed a loan of 600 ducats to pay what was owed for roofing the church and constructing the bell tower.63 He also requested the king’s continuing support, noting that people were murmuring about the delay, and adding that the works were not so great for such a grand patron.

On April 5, 1495, Ruiz informed Ferdinand that the friars were complain-ing at the interruption of works, and conveyed their concern that the presence of water in the foundations was causing damage that would worsen without immediate action.64 Ferdinand’s response to these entreaties is unknown. The record resumes on December 23, 1496, with a letter from the king confirm-ing his keen interest in the project, and explaining the lack of support by the reduced income from the royal estates in Sicily.65 He expressed his hope to resume funding the works in the future. Almost one year later, on October 24, 1497, Pope Alexander VI wrote to Ferdinand announcing the imminent arrival of an Amadeite friar from San Pietro in Montorio who was charged with thanking the king for his beneficence in building the monastery and church, and supplicating him to complete the project on the site “where the Prince of the Apostles suffered the badge of martyrdom.”66 In the next letter of August 17, 1498, the last to survive, Ferdinand addressed Carvajal as “our very dear and very beloved friend,” and acknowledged the accounting of expenses along with a plan of the church and monastery that Carvajal had sent.67 He also declared his favor for those works, agreeing to cover all outstanding debts, and providing an additional 1,000 ducats to permit completion of the project in the way Carvajal indicated. At the close of this letter, Ferdinand expressed appreciation for Carvajal’s care in pursuing the project, and declared that it brought him great satisfaction. On June 9, 1500, three weeks shy of the feast of the Apostle’s martyrdom, the church was consecrated, and relics were depos-ited in the high altar, to be discussed later in this chapter and in Appendix A.


During the first decade of the sixteenth century, the king provided additional funds from the viceregal treasury of Sicily, more or less at the level of 500 ducats annually that he had committed to the new foundation in 1488.68 Some portion of those disbursements would have been dedicated to the fresco dec-oration of the church, which was under way in 1508.69 In the same year, mea-surements were taken of San Pietro in Montorio with the purpose of adapting them for a new church the Florentine community was then planning to con-struct in Rome.70

San Pietro in Montorio: Antecedents and Meaning

As the literary sources attest, the church of San Pietro in Montorio was con-structed during the years between 1488 and 1500 subject to the ebb and flow of funding provided by King Ferdinand. The question naturally arises whether a comprehensive project existed from the start, and if significant changes were introduced as work advanced.71 A recent measured survey of the church has resulted in the proposal that two groups of masons were active, each employ-ing a separate unit of measure.72 One group worked in the presbytery, likely the first part of the church to be constructed, and employed the Lombard brac-cio; the other group, responsible for the nave and the facade, used the Roman palmo. The significance of this division of labor for determining the design and chronology of the church awaits clarification. Concerning the design, Giorgio Vasari reported an idea circulating in his day that the architect Baccio Pontelli was responsible for San Pietro in Montorio, but he expressed doubt that this was true.73 The attribution to Pontelli has garnered support in recent studies largely because he supplies a bridge to his sometime associate Francesco di Giorgio, whose style has been discerned in San Pietro in Montorio.74 Pontelli, who died in 1492, may have participated in an early stage of the project, but it has been observed that in its final form the church was the product of a vig-orous collaboration involving several levels of architectural professionals, to which one should add contributions by Carvajal, Ruiz, the Amadeite friars, and perhaps the king as well.75 Faced with a paucity of documentary evidence for the authorship of San Pietro in Montorio, and uncertainty that its design was the result of a unified plan, discussion must proceed on other grounds. A consideration of architectural antecedents introduces a more coherent idea of the conceptual principles defining the church than presently exists. The fol-lowing discussion posits a programmatic intention that was present from the start and continued right through to completion. Whatever changes may have


been introduced during the protracted period of construction were absorbed by King Ferdinand’s directive that the church be more devout than large, and that it make up in grandeur for what it lacked in size.

The facade of San Pietro in Montorio rises in three levels divided by two entablatures supported on corner pilasters (Figure 28). Each level is accented by a central element, the portal below, rose window in the middle, and royal coat of arms in the tympanum of the pediment. (The double-ramp staircase leading to the entrance was added in the seventeenth century when the level of the piazza was lowered.) Francesco di Giorgio’s pilgrimage church at Cortona, Santa Maria delle Grazie al Calcinaio, begun in 1485, has often been cited as the model for the facade’s design (Figure 29).76 Their relationship is most fruit-fully considered in terms of the shared dependence of both churches on San Francesco at Assisi, seat of the Franciscan order and burial place of its founder (Figure 30). Despite the more slender proportions and refined classical syn-tax present at San Pietro in Montorio, Assisi remains the dominant influence, lacking parallel in other Roman churches of the period. In Assisi as in Rome, a central feature defines each level, and a pediment spans the entire width of the facade. The shallow setbacks at the sides of the upper zone at Assisi, along with the use of light-colored stone, are also features of the Roman church. On the interior of San Pietro in Montorio, additional parallels with Assisi appear in the double groin vaults articulating the single nave and the umbrella vault defining the polygonal apse. The repetition of these features follows the prac-tice found throughout Europe, including Spain, of adapting the architecture of Assisi to other Franciscan foundations as a sign of spiritual and institu-tional affiliation.77 The references to Assisi appearing throughout San Pietro in Montorio, and especially in the presbytery and facade, the very areas that have been assigned to different phases of construction, suggest that the link to the mother church of the Franciscan order remained a consistent feature of the project throughout construction.

Amadeo joined the Franciscans at Assisi, and the religious community he founded was rooted in Francis’s ideals of humility and poverty, making the Amadeite order a branch of that common spiritual trunk. Amadeo and his fol-lowers saw themselves as superseding even the Observant Franciscans in advo-cating Francis’s pristine vision of the religious life. In Milan and elsewhere, the Amadeites promoted this idea by employing the architecture favored by the Observants for their own churches, including the polygonal apse and umbrella vault of Assisi.78 The insistent references to Assisi at San Pietro in Montorio identified the church with the original and pure Franciscan mission. That claim gained resonance from the location of San Pietro in Montorio on the Janiculum Hill, across the Tiber River and directly opposite the Capitoline


hill, dominated by the basilica of Santa Maria in Aracoeli, the chief Observant Franciscan foundation in Rome.79

The second idea governing the design of San Pietro in Montorio addressed the church’s ties to the papacy through the Franciscan inheritance and recalled

Figure 28. San Pietro in Montorio. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


Figure 30. San Francesco, Assisi. Courtesy of Alinari / Art Resource, NY.

Figure 29. Francesco di Giorgio, Santa Maria delle Grazie al Calcinaio, Cortona. Courtesy of Scala / Art Resource, NY.


the support Amadeo and his followers received from popes Sixtus IV, Innocent VIII, and Alexander VI. The association of Assisi with the papacy was defined in legal terms and was celebrated visually by the frescoes dedicated to Peter located in the right transept, including the Apostle’s crucifixion.80 In San Pietro in Montorio, the apsidal chapels lining the nave, originally four to each side, expressed in architectural terms the church’s affiliation with the papacy. The apsidal chapels found in Rome, at Sant’Agostino, in Cortona, at Santa Maria al Calcinaio, and elsewhere in Italy during the fifteenth century, all descend from Brunelleschi’s Florentine church of Santo Spirito, where they were first applied in a continuous series. The architects of San Pietro in Montorio returned to the primary Roman model, the audience hall constructed by Pope Leo III (795–816) at the Lateran, defined by five apses on each side, their swelling shapes fully visible on the exterior (Figure 31).81 The legacy of that venerable model is found in the Cathedral of Orvieto where the curving walls of the four apsed chapels are visible along the outer perimeter, and perhaps at Assisi where tower-like buttresses articulate both flanks of the basilica. At Santo Spirito Brunelleschi intended that the rounded profiles of the serial apses be visible along the exterior, but they were walled in as construction proceeded.

Figure 31. Antoine Lafrery, Pilgrimage to the Seven Churches of Rome, detail, engraving, 1575. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


The rounded chapels at San Pietro in Montorio along the exposed flank of the church reinforces an association with the Lateran audience hall and through it forges a link to the papacy and the apostolic mission of global evangelization.

The Lateran hall, known as the Hall of the Councils, was used on the most solemn rituals of the year, Christmas and Easter, and when each pope, after his consecration at Saint Peter’s basilica, took possession of the Lateran and the episcopal office of Rome.82 Scenes of the Apostles preaching to the peoples of the world depicted in the lateral apses of the hall reinforced the affiliation with the early Church and the charge to disseminate the faith.83 The name Hall of the Councils codified the association with Catholic orthodoxy. Reference to the Lateran’s papal audience hall in the nave of San Pietro in Montorio also brought forward a fundamental link to Saint Francis. Legend held that Pope Innocent III saw in a dream a “certain Religious, a man small and despised” sustaining the crumbling Lateran basilica.84 The dream constituted a chief support of Franciscan legitimacy, symbolizing the central role the order was destined to play in ecclesiastical reform. At the end of the thirteenth century, the Franciscan Pope Nicholas IV (1288–92) rebuilt the Constantinian apse of the Lateran basilica with a polygonal profile to reflect Assisi, and recalled Innocent III’s vision of Francis in a laudatory inscription prominently dis-played in the new apse.85 Sixtus IV recalled the Franciscan association when commemorating his own works at the Lateran.86 The evocation of the Lateran hall at San Pietro in Montorio conveys that same respect for papal authority emanating from the ancestral seat of Rome’s bishops.

The site of Peter’s crucifixion located in the cloister of San Pietro in Montorio, which lent the church its special venerability as a martyrial founda-tion, provides the third factor informing the design. The cloverleaf presbytery defined by the extended choir, expansive lateral exedras, and sail vault that links them, draws features from the tradition of Christian memorial archi-tecture. In contrast to other Observant Franciscan and Amadeite foundations where a masonry barrier, known as a tramezzo, typically reinforced the sepa-ration between the religious community and the lay public, at San Pietro in Montorio visitors could see the altar and approach it directly.87 As one moves down the nave toward the presbytery, the exedras and the sail vault come into full view, providing a centralized accent in the otherwise longitudinal plan. In the mid-sixteenth century, both exedras were restructured as funerary chapels with the addition of altars, tombs, and elaborate stucco and painted decoration. An early sixteenth century plan and elevation of the church laced with ideal features depicts the left-hand exedra before those changes were introduced, showing twin lancet windows located just below the entablature (Figure 32).88


Figure 32. San Pietro in Montorio, plan and elevation, drawing. Istituto Nazionale per la Grafica, Rome, vol. 2510, fol. 11r, FN 32746. By kind permission of the Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali.


Those windows, along with their counterparts in the opposite exedra, pro-vided a luminous accent, reinforcing the sense of a unified cross axis with a centralized crossing.89 When the lateral exedras are considered in tandem with the choir, the resulting form evokes a triconch, traditionally defined by three apses placed at right angles to one another on each side of a centralized core. The apses found in other Renaissance churches, for example in Rome at Santa Maria del Popolo and Sant’Agostino, occur at the termination of the transepts, but this is quite different from San Pietro in Montorio where the relationship of the lateral apses to the core more closely approximates the standard form of the triconch.90 Even so, because the third apse at San Pietro in Montorio is polygonal, not semicircular, and comes at the termination of the choir, this too must be counted among variations of the traditional triconch.91

The triconch had a prominent history in Christian architecture to honor the graves of saints and to mark holy sites.92 The association of the architec-tural form with the cult of the saints is made clear by the legend of Martha of Antioch (d. 560), mother of Saint Simon Stylities the Younger.93 It tells how the holy woman appeared after her death demanding that her relics be honored with a triconch, with the added request that a vault be constructed between the lateral apses. In the history of architecture the triconch is known in two main forms, as an independent structure and grafted onto a basilican nave, the first type present in Rome in two examples located near the catacombs of San Callisto on the Via Appia, and the second type in the Constantinian church of the Nativity at Bethlehem as rebuilt in the sixth century.94 In fifteenth-cen-tury Italy, the triconch was widely employed in contexts that demonstrate full awareness of its commemorative associations. In the 1470s, Galeazzo Maria Sforza, Duke of Milan, sponsored the addition of a triconch presbytery to the ninth-century chapel of Santa Maria del Monte at Varese where Saint Ambrose is said to have repulsed Arian heretics and raised the first altar dedicated to the Virgin.95 The form was also applied to funerary churches, San Bernardino in Urbino for Duke Federico da Montefeltro and the Certosa of Pavia for the dukes of Milan. In the 1490s, Duke Ludovico Sforza enlisted Bramante to rebuild the presbytery of Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan to serve as his own mausoleum, featuring lateral apses in tandem with an extended choir, result-ing in a plan similar to San Pietro in Montorio.96

The sail vault bridging the space between the exedras at San Pietro in Montorio reinforces the memorial associations of the triconch.97 Brunelleschi introduced the sail vault to Renaissance architecture in Florence, in the por-tico of the Ospedale degli Innocenti and in the transept and side aisles of both San Lorenzo and Santo Spirito, each time as a repeating element of the


design.98 The application of a single sail vault to define a cubic volume con-stitutes a subsequent Renaissance development, the first example being the richly appointed chapel of James of Lusitania, the Cardinal of Portugal (d. 1459), in San Miniato, Florence.99 This splendid chapel, in turn, drew prestige from the prominent fifth-century example of the sail vault in the mausoleum traditionally identified as that of Galla Placidia in Ravenna.100 An even more potent model was provided by the chapel of Saint Helen at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, where the vault conforms to that same type (see Figure 11).

By considering the architectural features of San Pietro in Montorio along-side tradition, the innovations for which the church has long been appreci-ated come into focus as contributing to a coherent program honoring the Petrine origins of the Roman Church on that site. The triconch and sail vault address the martyrial function of the church, the aedicula facade and polygo-nal apse highlight its affiliation with the Franciscan order through Assisi, and the repeating extradossal chapels of the nave assert a link to the seat of papal power at the Lateran. At San Pietro in Montorio, these traditional forms were applied with a new degree of purpose to shape a meaningful physical and con-ceptual experience for the faithful.

Relics and Indulgences

The architects of San Pietro in Montorio, along with Bernardino de Carvajal, in consultation with Juan Ruiz de Medina, the Amadeite friars, and the king, applied the most august models of official Christian architecture to express the sanctity of the site and associate it with the Franciscan mission to revi-talize the Church through the apostolic inheritance. The relics deposited at the high altar during the ritual consecration of the church in 1500 rein-forced those ideas. Information comes indirectly from a lost epigraph known from a transcription made in the eighteenth century (see Appendix A).101 The text states that during the Holy Year and the pontificate of Alexander VI, on June 9, 1500, the Tuesday after Pentecost, “this church and this altar in honor of the blessed Apostle Peter, crucified in this place, were consecrated, and the relics written below have been enclosed within it.” The number of relics is unusual, almost sixty total, and equally remarkable is their spiritual dignity. They are listed in order of spiritual prestige, beginning with eleven objects concerning Christ’s life and Passion. Elements from the crib of the Nativity, the Last Supper table, column of the Flagellation, crown of thorns, and wood and superscription of the Cross, are accompanied by relics drawn from the places in the Holy Land where he was born, preached, appeared to


the disciples, and was crucified. Following in sequence are objects concerning Peter, including elements of his throne, body, and the cross of his crucifixion. The honored saints are weighted with the earliest and most important mar-tyrs of the Church, the Holy Innocents, John the Evangelist, Paul, Stephen, Lawrence, Sebastian, and Pope Sylvester I. Present as well are relics of Mary Magdalen, Agnes, Barbara, Lucina, Justina, Prisca, Prassede, and “many other saints whose names are written in the book of life.” Finally, objects from the place where Francis received the stigmata, bits of his clothing along with that of Saint Clare, and the hairshirt of the “Blessed Amadeo of Spain” establish the Franciscan presence.

Carvajal would have begun to assemble these sacred objects around 1490 as part of a campaign of relic acquisition and distribution. In August of that year, he sent relics to Queen Isabel and another group to his episcopal church of Badajoz, the latter including the 10,000 martyrs that are also present at San Pietro in Montorio.102 The programmatic nature of the collection is indicated by the relics of Peter and Christ that recall the relic treasure of the four patri-archal basilicas of Rome, along with fragments of the Cross and superscription that repeat those of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Moreover, the emphasis on both Peter and Christ was reflected in the indulgences available to the faithful at San Pietro in Montorio. The Observant Franciscan friar Mariano da Firenze reported that each day the faithful could gain 100 years and many indulgences were available on the feast days honoring Saint Peter and during the Lenten season, the period of penance observed during the forty days pre-ceding Christ’s Resurrection on Easter.103 The relics recorded in the list of 1500 assumed heightened significance on those same feasts dedicated to Peter and to Christ.

Conclusion

The association of Ferdinand and Isabel with the site of Peter’s martyrdom, in addition to expressing personal devotion, resonated with the monarchs’ status as protectors of the Church and of the papacy. In 1496, Alexander VI rec-ognized that status by investing them with the honorific title Catholic.104 At times Popes Sixtus IV and Innocent VIII had addressed Ferdinand and Isabel using that same title, and Alexander first considered granting it to them in the spring of 1494, anticipating the danger presented by the French king Charles VIII, then preparing his descent into Italy. As promulgated on December 19, 1496, the papal bull exalts their heroic deeds in support of the Apostolic See, emphasizing the conquest of Granada, and acclaiming their “justice, religion,


piety, greatness of soul, clemency toward the orthodox faith, distinguished zeal, and perpetual devotion toward the Roman Church, forever shining out among all Christian princes.”105 The title Catholic recalled the honorific formula Most Christian King, Rex Christianissimus, which the French mon-archs had assumed to promote their singularity among Christian princes.106 Alexander initially considered transferring that title to Ferdinand and Isabel before deciding on Catholic. Through its Greek root, Catholic conveys the idea of the Church’s universal reach and in this instance refers equally to the monarchs’ successes in spreading the faith through conquest and exploration. Moreover, just as Catholic is applied in the Creed to refer to the institutional Church, founded on the primacy of Peter and his legitimate successor, it rec-ognizes Ferdinand and Isabel’s role as protectors of the Church. Those same exalted roles were expressed in the architecture of San Pietro in Montorio.

The monarchs’ coat of arms appears with insistent repetition through-out the church, identifying it as a Spanish royal foundation. The heraldry of Aragon is quartered with León and Castile, the pomegranate of Granada at the base, and a nimbed eagle supports the whole. This official image of the triumphant monarchy fills the pediment of the facade, visible from afar, and appears again in more intimate scale just above the entrance portal (Figure 33). The royal arms were distributed throughout the interior, above each of the side chapels and in the keystone of each vault, including an especially large one in the choir that was damaged in 1798 and never replaced.107 Clusters of

Figure 33. San Pietro in Montorio, entrance, detail. Photo courtesy of Sara Cedar Miller.


ripe pomegranates, with their rinds bursting apart to reveal the characteristic seeds of the fruit, appear on three of the pilaster capitals on the interior of the church, referring to the conquest of Granada (Figure 34).108 These heraldic symbols of Ferdinand and Isabel’s Spain reinforce the celebratory message of the architecture that brings together the origins of the Church on that site and the tutelary role of the Spanish monarchs.

Figure 34. San Pietro in Montorio, pilaster capital. Photo courtesy of Sara Cedar Miller.

63

Chapter Three

Bramante’s Christian temple

The memorial shrine Bramante constructed on the site of Peter’s crucifixion anchors the series of works sponsored by the Catholic monarchs at San Pietro in Montorio and like them involved the

participation of Cardinal Bernardino de Carvajal (Figure 35, Plates I–XXI). The sole surviving primary source attesting to the chronology and patronage of the Tempietto is the inscribed foundation stone, which attributes responsibility to Ferdinand and Isabel, records the year 1502, and credits Carvajal with installing the stone in the inaugural trench. The significance of the stone and its date will be discussed in Chapter 5 as part of a broader consideration of the historical context. The present chapter is devoted to identifying the sources of the architecture and defining their meaning. Bramante’s fundamental achievement in the Tempietto resides in fusing the tholos temple of antiquity with the Christian martyrium, producing a new species of architecture that honors the site of Peter’s martyrdom and proclaims the political and spiritual aspirations of the Spanish monarchs.

Introduction

The Tempietto is found in the first cloister of the monastery located to the right of the church of San Pietro in Montorio.1 This is likely the place identified with Peter’s crucifixion in the fifteenth century when two columns are recorded as marking the site. Access to the cloister would normally be restricted to the religious community, but it was imperative that the faithful be permitted to enter to pay their devotions. The rusticated portal opening


Figure 35. Luigi Rossini, Tempietto, engraving, 1818. Rossini, I monumenti più interessanti di Roma. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.

Bramante’s Christian Temple • 65

directly onto the piazza in front of the church and monastery satisfied that requirement (see Figure 22). Because the cloister is located at a higher level than the piazza, visitors mount two sets of stairs, the first course dating to the seventeenth century when the ground level was lowered, and the second, orig-inal course located just inside the rusticated portal. As a result, the Tempietto is initially seen from below, gradually coming into view and looming large in the restricted space.

The Tempietto is anchored to the site by a vaulted subterranean chamber, and rises aboveground in marked stages, a three-stepped crepidoma followed by a low podium, a peripteros of sixteen columns encircling the cella, and at the top a dome raised upon a fenestrated drum (Figure 36). The cream-colored travertine, the main construction material, contrasts with the gray granite column shafts, which are further set off by capitals and bases fash-ioned in white marble. The distinctive cushion capitals accompanied by the frieze of repeating triglyphs and metopes, both based on the ancient Doric system, appear for the first time in Renaissance architecture. A continuous balustrade marks the transition between the colonnade and the retracted cen-ter formed by the dome-upon-drum. The walls of the cella are articulated by deep-set windows alternating with shell niches, each unit framed by pilasters

Figure 36. Giacomo Fontana, Tempietto, cross section, engraving, 1838. Fontana, Raccolta delle migliori chiese di Roma, 3: plate 71. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


that match the columns one for one (Plate V). Three portals provide access to the chapel proper, the principal one facing the cloister’s entrance, and the others located equidistant at the sides.2 At the rear, a narrow opening in the wall originally gave access to a stair that descended into the crypt, but in the seventeenth century this was replaced by the present arrangement consisting of twin stairs leading to a portal cut into the wall of the crypt (Plate IV).

The numerous drawings of the Tempietto created in the sixteenth and fol-lowing centuries attest to the monument’s enduring importance for defining Bramante’s architectural legacy.3 Two approaches to rendering the monument can be defined, and both likely originated with Bramante. One approach is preserved in a remarkable sketch now in the Uffizi that captures the on-site experience of the Tempietto, seen from a low viewpoint and with visual dis-locations that a spectator might experience when moving through the space (Figure 37).4 The drawing documents the original hemispherical shape of the dome, as well as the delicate lantern that rises in stages, terminating with a cross tethered to a globe. The existence of related versions of the drawing sug-gests dependence on a single authoritative model. The Uffizi sheet stands out among the other versions for the presence on the verso of a polished rendering of the choir of New Saint Peter’s based on Bramante’s wooden model of 1506.5 The optical effects of the Tempietto sketch recall Bramante’s concern with perspective and viewpoint, suggesting that it, like the drawing of the choir, descends from an original by the master.6

A complementary approach to rendering the Tempietto favoring measure and geometry over subjective experience defines three drawings created in the mid 1510s and compiled in a sketchbook known as the Codex Coner.7 The attri-bution of these drawings to Bernardo della Volpaia, who moved in Bramante’s immediate circle and may have worked alongside the architect, confers author-ity equivalent to the Uffizi sketch. Volpaia presented the Tempietto in plan, elevation, and a cross section of the interior, adopting an ideal viewpoint to minimize perspectival distortion (Figure 38). The same reasoned approach to the monument was widely disseminated by Sebastiano Serlio in Book Three of his treatise on architecture, published in 1540, that includes four illustra-tions, two elevations, one an exterior view reproduced here (Figure 39), the other a cross section showing the interior.8 Two plans preceding the eleva-tions are similarly analytic. One isolates the monument from the setting, and the other records Bramante’s unexecuted project for a circular cloister defined by a columned portico encircling the Tempietto (Figure 40).9 By including the Tempietto in a treatise principally devoted to ancient monuments, and


Figure 37. Circle of Bramante, Tempietto, drawing. Galleria degli Uffizi, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe, Florence, Uffizi 4Ar. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


Figure 38. Bernardo della Volpaia, Tempietto, cross section, drawing. Sir John Soane’s Museum, London, Codex Coner, fol. 34. By courtesy of the Trustees of Sir John Soane’s Museum. Photo courtesy of Ardon Bar-Hama.


Figure 40. Sebastiano Serlio, Tempietto and circular cloister, plan, woodcut, 1540. Serlio, Il terzo libro, 41. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.

Figure 39. Sebastiano Serlio, Tempietto, woodcut, 1540. Serlio, Il terzo libro, 43. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


by inserting it in a privileged position following Bramante’s projects for New Saint Peter’s, Serlio defined the canonical place in the history of architecture the Tempietto would possess thereafter. This reflected the importance the Tempietto held for Bramante and members of his immediate circle, includ-ing Serlio’s teacher, Baldassare Peruzzi, who succeeded Bramante and Raphael as architect of Saint Peter’s. Serlio freely acknowledged his debts to Peruzzi, and contemporaries credited Peruzzi with the literary and visual materials collected in the treatise.10 A splendid drawing by Aristotile da Sangallo bris-tling with closely observed details attests to that same reception of Bramante’s architecture as an essay in ideal form, embodying the relations of part to part impossible to capture in Rome’s venerable ancient ruins (Figure 41).11

Serlio reinforced the association of the Tempietto with antiquity by twice referring to it as “little temple,” and identifying the ancient Roman foot as Bramante’s unit of measure, which he noted had been used in the Pantheon.12 Within ten years of Serlio’s publication, Giorgio Vasari promoted the idea that Bramante had initiated a mature phase of Renaissance architecture in the first codified presentation of the architect’s biography published in 1550.13 He began by praising Bramante for perfecting the achievements of his predeces-sors, and in particular Brunelleschi, “who imitated and restored to the light,

Figure 41. Aristotile da Sangallo, Tempietto, cross section, drawing. Galleria degli Uffizi, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe, Florence, Uffizi 4319Ar. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


after many ages, the noble works of the most learned and marvelous ancients.” In this way, Bramante secured the path for all who followed in the profession of architecture. Vasari firmly believed that prolonged exposure to the monu-ments of Rome was necessary for artists to produce great works, a position supported by a statement attributed to Bramante that Vasari surely knew.14 Vasari reinforced that same point by placing Bramante’s arrival in the Eternal City just before the inception of the Holy Year 1500. During those years of special grace that fell every quarter century, the faithful who visited Rome could earn exceptional spiritual benefits. Vasari included Bramante among them, but rather than seeking spiritual renewal, his goal was the perfection of architecture. In Vasari’s retelling, when first in Rome Bramante acted as any pilgrim might, devoting himself to study and living frugally on his savings. He traveled about “alone and wrapped in thought,” measuring all the ancient monuments located in the city and the surrounding countryside. In the second edition of the Lives, published in 1568, Vasari specified that Bramante visited Tivoli, Hadrian’s villa, and the area south of Rome as far as Naples.15

The program of study Vasari attributed to Bramante recalls the one that the humanist-architect Leon Battista Alberti declared he had followed, “exploring, considering, and measuring everything, and comparing the infor-mation through line drawings.”16 Brunelleschi followed the same procedure according to his late fifteenth-century biographer.17 Bramante likely observed that practice as well. Before his definitive move to Rome from Milan in 1499, he possibly visited the city on one or more occasions, and in any case would have learned about the Roman monuments from Francesco di Giorgio and Giuliano da Sangallo, who were present in Milan in the 1490s and had studied the ancient corpus in the way Vasari claimed for Bramante.18 Whatever knowl-edge of Rome and its antiquities Bramante may have acquired before 1500, upon becoming a resident, those monuments would have asumed heightened meaning as tangible markers of the city’s illustrious past and harbingers of future glory.

The antiquarian culture existing in Rome at the time Vasari placed Bramante’s arrival, specifically its Lombard variant, is vividly presented in the Antiquarie prospettiche romane, a poem of 400 verses in terza rima concerning the antiquities of Rome, which appeared in print just before 1500.19 Its dedica-tion to Leonardo da Vinci provides a link to the same social and intellectual ambient in Milan that included Bramante, even if an attribution to the archi-tect has proved difficult to sustain. The frontispiece captures the wonderment at firsthand experience of Rome’s antique monuments: a geometer kneels at the center of a circle to trace diagrams aided by compasses and an armillary


sphere, with the Colosseum identifying the setting (Figure 42). The figure’s heroic nudity, commanding posture, and upward glance all suggest that the examination of ancient architecture, like the discipline of geometry, was a means to fathom higher truths. Appropriately, the poem opens with an invoca-tion to Apollo, the pagan deity most closely linked to spiritual and intellectual illumination, and closes with the Tiburtine Sibyl revealing Christ’s birth to Augustus.

Vasari reports that Bramante’s first activities in Rome involved works of painting, hydraulic engineering, and collaborative efforts in both secular and religious architecture, sponsored by patrons holding the highest ecclesiasti-cal rank: Pope Alexander VI and Cardinal Juan López, both natives of Spain, and Cardinals Oliviero Carafa and Raffaele Riario, both affiliated with the philohispanic group in the Vatican. Vasari refers to fountains in front of Saint Peter’s basilica and Santa Maria in Trastevere, construction of Riario’s palace (Palazzo della Cancelleria), enlargement of San Giacomo degli Spagnoli, and the cloister of Santa Maria della Pace. Of these, documentation survives solely for this last commission of Cardinal Carafa, which was begun in the summer of 1500.20 If Bramante indeed participated in the expansion of the church of San Giacomo degli Spagnoli, then from the start of his Roman career he would

Figure 42. Geometer and Roman ruins. Antiquarie prospettiche romane, frontispiece, woodcut. Biblioteca Casanatense, Rome. Photo courtesy of Mario Setter.


have been in contact with Bernardino de Carvajal, who served as g overnor of the foundation from 1491 to 1498, and was otherwise involved with its admin-istration.21 Of the Tempietto, Vasari states, “nothing more shapely or better conceived, whether in proportion, design, variety, or grace, could be imag-ined.”22 He reserved that praise for a section of the biography dedicated to Bramante’s projects that were widely influential due to their formidable con-ception, referring to the circular cloister Bramante designed as a setting for the Tempietto, known from the woodcut Serlio published in 1540.23

Bramante’s first contact with Carvajal likely occurred in Milan between August 1496 and March 1497, when as legate a latere of Alexander VI, the cardinal traveled there to conduct negotiations with Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I.24 Johannes Burchard, papal Master of Ceremonies, among the more than fifty individuals who accompanied Carvajal on the journey, recorded official activities as the entourage traveled through the Papal States and during the stay in Milan, including visits to Pavia, Vigevano, and Monza.25 Carvajal’s tour would have included the major architectural monuments of Milan and its territory, those dating to the early Christian period, as well as the ambitious projects then under way sponsored by the ruling Sforza family. Most prominent among the former was San Lorenzo, the central-plan basilica dating to the late fourth century when Milan served as capital of the Western Roman Empire under the rule of Emperor Theodosius I. The fact that both Saint Lawrence, protomartyr of the Church, and Theodosius were from Sapin would have increased the basilica’s relevance for Carvajal. Moreover, tradi-tion traced the origins of San Lorenzo to the patronage of Galla Placidia, Theodosius’s daughter, who was also identified as one of the patrons of the Saint Helen chapel at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme.26 The Sforza projects in pro-gress included the comprehensive renewal of the city center at Vigevano, and a magnificent new cathedral for Pavia, the first sponsored by Duke Ludovico, the second by his brother Cardinal Ascanio, and both involving Bramante. Bramante also designed the new tribune for Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan to serve as the duke’s mausoleum. Carvajal likely met Bramante during his time in Milan and seized the opportunity to discuss the projects then under way in Rome at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and San Pietro in Montorio. The idea of raising a shrine on the site of Peter’s crucifixion may have been introduced at that time. When the troops of King Louis XII of France invaded Milan in October 1499 ending Ludovico Sforza’s rule, Bramante had every reason to expect a ready welcome in Rome, as Vasari suggested.

Precious insight into how those closest to Bramante’s own time under-stood the Tempietto is revealed by two early responses written before Serlio


and Vasari codified Bramante’s place in the history of architecture. Mariano da Firenze, Franciscan Observant friar, penned the first known response to the Tempietto around 1517 in his manuscript guide to the churches of Rome, and Andrea Fulvio, antiquarian-scholar, addressed the Tempietto in his treatise on the antiquities of the city published in 1527.27 Each author interpreted the work in keeping with his professional affiliation, the friar by emphasizing its Christian function, and the humanist its classical pedi-gree, but each agreed on the Tempietto’s essential meaning as a metaphor of Christian salvation.

The Tempietto and Antiquity

Andrea Fulvio promoted a view of the Tempietto most familiar to schol-arship, and for that reason it takes precedence in this discussion. After sum-marizing the history of the Janiculum Hill, Fulvio dedicated a brief but pithy sentence to the Tempietto, describing it as a sacellum, diminutive of sacer, sacred, the ancient term for a small place consecrated to a deity and outfit-ted with an altar.28 He then identified Bramante’s architectural model as the temple of the Sibyl located in Tivoli, approximately 30 km east of Rome. This was one of only two ancient tholos temples to survive into the Renaissance, the other temple located in Rome’s Forum Boarium, close to the island in the Tiber River.29 Sixteenth-century drawings capture the powerful architectural presence of these monuments (Figures 43, 44). The Forum Boarium temple, which had long functioned as a Christian church, is the better preserved of the two, but the high ground level obscures its lowest level and medieval additions encumber its sides. The Tivoli temple, in contrast, rises from the promon-tory of the ancient citadel, its identity as a pagan temple intact partly due to its ruinous condition, portions of the colonnade having fallen away, and the cella open to the sky. Fulvio’s identification of the Tivoli temple as Bramante’s model warrants close attention. Fulvio likely knew Bramante personally, as he did Raphael, whom he assisted on the grand project sponsored by Pope Leo X to reconstruct ancient Rome in text and image. In the preface to his 1527 volume addressed to Pope Clement VII, Fulvio recalled how he had toured the city with Raphael, pointing out the ancient monuments as the artist drew them.30 Fulvio commanded a degree of knowledge of Rome’s history and its physical remains second only to his teacher, Giulio Pomponio Leto, who was also a great friend of Bernardino de Carvajal. This prodigious knowledge, and a thoroughly modern approach to using it, explains Fulvio’s success in


Figure 43. Giovanni Antonio Dosio, Temple of Hercules in the Forum Boarium, Rome, drawing. Galleria degli Uffizi, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe, Florence, Uffizi 2054A. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.

Figure 44. Marten van Heemskerck, Temple of the Sibyl, Tivoli, drawing. Kupferstichkabinett, Staatliche Museen, Berlin, 79 D 2 A, fol. 21. Courtesy of Bildagentur für Kunst, Kultur und Geschichte, Berlin / Volker-H. Schneider / Art Resource, NY.


identifying correctly many ancient monuments, including the two surviving tholos temples in Rome and Tivoli.

At times, Renaissance observers, including Poggio Bracciolini and Flavio Biondo, associated those temples with Vesta, the deity whose lost shrine in the Roman Forum represented the inaugural example of the tholos temple in Roman architecture.31 Numa Pompilius, Rome’s second king and high priest, constructed the temple with wattles and thatch, and although rebuilt many times, its centralized plan and columnar surround were reverently maintained, documented by Roman coins dating from the late Republic to the Empire (Figure 45).32 From the start, the temple was destined to shelter the sacred flame and the household gods Aeneas had brought from Troy, along with other objects believed to protect the Roman state and ensure its dominion. Notwithstanding the popular tradition identifying the Vesta temple as the one in the Forum Boarium, the ancient literary sources pointed to its true location as the Roman Forum, a fact that Leto and members of his circle knew well.33 In 1497, important physical evidence for the temple came to light when Leto assisted in the discovery of eight inscriptions pertaining to the Vestal Virgins in the “pronaos of the temple of Vesta below the Palatine and opposite the Roman Forum.”34 Fulvio referred to that discovery and reproduced two of the inscriptions in his publication of 1527; he also fixed the location of the temple with great precision by situating it in relation to neighboring monu-ments.35 That same sensitivity to literary and archaeological evidence defines his discussion of the tholos temple in the Forum Boarium, which he associ-ated with Hercules, citing the ancient texts that modern archaeologists use to arrive at the same identification.36 The Forum Boarium was closely linked to the memory of Hercules, who vanquished the cattle thief Cacus in that place,

Figure 45. Aureus of Vespasian with the Temple of Vesta. Courtesy of British Museum, London. © The Trustees of the British Museum.


and was honored by the Roman people with sacrifices at the Great Altar, the Ara Maxima. In the Aeneid, Virgil tells how King Evander welcomed Aeneas there and recounted Hercules’ heroic deeds, examples of divine favor foretell-ing Rome’s future greatness.37

Interest in the Forum Boarium and its identification with Hercules was renewed during the pontificate of Sixtus IV. In anticipation of the Holy Year of 1475, the pope sponsored the restoration of the tholos temple, which since the mid-twelfth century had served the Christian cult under the title Santo Stefano Rotondo.38 Also during Sixtus’s reign, excavations conducted close to the nearby church of Santa Maria in Cosmedin uncovered architectural, dec-orative, and epigraphic elements pertaining to another tholos temple. Its cen-tralized plan and dedication to Hercules were attested by Leto and Albertini, but the only feature known today is the gilded bronze statue of the divinized hero that Sixtus IV transferred to the Capitoline Hill to join the other ancient bronzes he brought from the Lateran.39 In the mid-sixteenth century Pirro Ligorio noted the circular plan of this lost temple and identified the architec-tural system as Doric, citing drawings by Peruzzi that have not survived. The temple’s dedication to Hercules may have inspired Ligorio, and Peruzzi before him, to draw an association with the Doric by way of Vitruvius’s recommen-dation that temples dedicated to virile deities conform to that system. Most importantly, Ligorio and Peruzzi would have recalled the Tempietto, which held absolute authority for defining the appearance of the Doric tholos.40 Fulvio, writing closer to the time the Tempietto was built, and with a firm grasp of the archaeological record, was surely aware of the memorable discov-eries in the Forum Boarium, but neither they nor the fact that the surviving circular temple was also dedicated to Hercules were sufficient to deflect his attention from Tivoli. The tradition identifying Hercules as Spain’s mythic founder makes this selection particularly significant.41

When Fulvio singled out the Tivoli temple as the model for the Tempietto, he cited the peripteral colonnade as a shared element, but the Forum Boarium temple also possesses a peripteros, and the number of columns and their mate-rials differ in all three structures. The Tempietto is defined by sixteen Doric columns of gray granite, the Forum Boarium temple by twenty Corinthian columns of Pentelic marble (two replaced in antiquity with Luna marble), and the Tivoli temple by eighteen Corinthian columns of travertine, originally clad in stucco to simulate marble. Clearly then, Fulvio based his statement on other criteria. The use of travertine in both the Tempietto and the Tivoli temple provides a link so fundamental as to invite disregard. The tholos in the Forum Boarium, in contrast, was composed of marble imported from


Greece, one among several features differing from Roman tradition. Another is the low, three-stepped crepidoma in place of the raised podium found in Roman temples, including the one in Tivoli.42 Fulvio would have recognized these distinctions, along with the use of the local stone, lapis Tibertinus, which the ancient Romans widely employed as a construction material, valuing its exceptional strength and resistance to weathering.43 Unlike many Renaissance buildings that incorporate travertine extracted from ancient structures and pieced in to create uniform surfaces, the Tempietto employs newly quarried blocks, each one precisely adapted to the radial design. Travertine established a direct connection between the Tempietto and Tivoli’s famous temple.

Tivoli’s association with both the emperor Hadrian and the local Sibyl pro-vided Fulvio with additional support for his identification of Bramante’s archi-tectural model. Hadrian, who succeeded Trajan as emperor, and whose family came from Italica in southern Spain, constructed the sprawling imperial villa located four kilometers southwest of the city in the direction of Rome. Even though the historical link to Hadrian was clear, during the Renaissance the extensive remains of the villa were called Tivoli vecchio.44 In 1461, Pope Pius II made an excursion to the villa accompanied by Flavio Biondo, and a few years later Francesco di Giorgio visited and sketched the most prominent monu-ments then visible, recording measurements and proposing identifications of what he saw.45 Interest in the site intensified during the reign of Alexander VI when a group of statues representing the Muses was discovered in the south theater.46 Pirro Ligorio recorded that information while engaged in excavating the villa to supply Cardinal Ippolito II d’Este, papal governor of Tivoli, with materials for his own famed villa located in the city.47 The cardinal may have shared information about the Muses with Ligorio, having learned of their dis-covery from his mother, Lucrezia Borgia, daughter of Alexander VI. Indirect confirmation of Ligorio’s report comes from the appearance in the years around 1500 of other ancient sculptures that were likely found in Hadrian’s villa. Two Egyptianizing telamones sculpted in Aswan granite were installed at the entrance to the bishop’s palace in Tivoli, and a relief showing the head of Neptune (or Oceanus) was acquired by Bramante’s first patron in Rome, Cardinal Oliviero Carafa.48 Because Tivoli formed part of the Papal States, excavations on the scale necessary to uncover large statues would have been subject to the same laws then in force protecting the antiquities of Rome.49 Those excavations would have required the permission of the pope, but it is likely that Alexander VI sponsored them directly.

The pope’s broader involvement with Tivoli and the memory of Hadrian sup-ply additional reasons for interest in the emperor’s villa at that time. Alexander


introduced significant changes to the fortress Pope Pius II had built just outside the center of Tivoli, transforming what had been a serviceable military instal-lation into a proper papal residence.50 He also engaged Hadrian’s architectural legacy in a parallel project to refortify the Castel Sant’Angelo, the emperor’s mausoleum in Rome, which provided a bulwark to protect Saint Peter’s basil-ica and the Vatican palace. The pope added bastions to the centralized core of the ancient monument, and commemorated that work with a portrait medal bearing an image of the structure on the reverse, identified as “Fortress of the Divine Hadrian” (Figure 46).51 A large inscription mounted at the Vatican palace on the interior wall of the Porta Viridaria (Porta di San Pietro) also cel-ebrated the restoration and called attention to Alexander’s Spanish heritage.52 In addition to shared national origins, the pope’s special interest in Hadrian would have been inspired by his fundamental contributions to Rome’s history, consolidating Trajan’s vast territorial acquisitions and introducing the concept of a commonwealth of nations, to which Spanish chroniclers of the Middle Ages and Renaissance added support of Christianity.53 After Hadrian sup-pressed the Jewish revolt in Jerusalem, 132 to 135 AD, he rebuilt the Holy City in a more magnificent form, incorporating within its walls the place where Christ had died and was buried, and dedicated the new city in his own name, Aelia Capitolina. The idea that the emperor had prohibited Jews from enter-ing the city transformed him into an advocate for Christianity, responsible for nurturing the growth of the faith in Jerusalem.

Hadrian’s liberality, clemency, philosophical awareness, and even artis-tic accomplishments, were described in an ancient text, part of the collec-tion of imperial biographies known as the Historia augusta, which circulated

Figure 46. Medal of Pope Alexander VI with the Mausoleum of Hadrian. Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


widely in manuscript long before the first publication of 1475.54 It contained the only known ancient description of the emperor’s Tivoli villa, referring to areas reflecting “provinces and places of the greatest renown,” including the Lyceum, Academia, Prytaneum, Canopus, Poecile, and Tempe. “And in order not to omit anything, he even made a Hades.”55 Areas of Roman villas were sometimes tagged with exotic names, but the sites mentioned in the biogra-phy were all associated with the intellectual and spiritual legacy of Greece and Egypt. Alexander VI allied himself with those same cultures through his choice of papal name, recalling Alexander the Great, whose territorial con-quests, and especially those in the East, contemporaries were quick to inter-pret in terms of a crusading ideology.56 Alexander VI’s personal imagery, as displayed in the Vatican apartments decorated by Pinturicchio, asserted those same associations with Greece and Egypt.57 By supporting and perhaps spon-soring the exploration of Hadrian’s villa, the pope gained knowledge of how his imperial counterpart had constructed an iconography of universal rule. The visit Bramante made to the villa recorded by Vasari may have occurred as part of those same archaeological explorations that unearthed the Muses, and possibly the other works as well. Circumstantial evidence indicates that Leonardo da Vinci was present at the villa in March 1501, and it is tempting to see him tromping around the site with Bramante, his old friend from Milan, knowing their discoveries would find a ready reception at the Vatican.58

One of the principal monuments encountered by visitors to the villa during the Renaissance, as today, is the island complex dubbed the Teatro Marittimo, Maritime Theater, consisting of a series of chambers with interlocking shapes set on a round platform, encircled by a water channel, and framed by an exten-sive peripteral colonnade (Figure 47). For sound reasons, it has been proposed as an inspiration for the circular cloister Bramante planned at San Pietro in Montorio with the Tempietto at its center.59 Francesco di Giorgio was espe-cially intrigued by the Teatro Marittimo, demonstrated by two drawings, one a rough sketch, including measurements and annotations, the other a polished rendering by an artist working under Francesco’s supervision to illustrate the version of his architectural treatise now in Turin (Figure 48). The round struc-ture occupying the center of the Turin drawing and the encircling peripteros of sixteen columns found an echo in Bramante’s idea to situate the Tempietto at the hub of the circular cloister at San Pietro in Montorio.60 Renaissance view-ers, unaware of the residential nature of the Teatro Marittimo and its associa-tion with water, could have identified it with another of the sacred spaces in the East noted by Hadrian’s ancient biographer.


The Hadrianic architectural model provided the opportunity to draw a connection between the Tempietto and Spain’s imperial heritage traced to the reign of a Spanish emperor who had advanced the authority of Rome and was believed to have assisted the spiritual progress of the Empire toward Christianity. These considerations support the view that the monuments of ancient Tivoli stimulated particular interest during the years when Bramante was first in Rome and the Tempietto was planned and built. The associations of those monuments with Hadrian engaged the theme of universal dominion that held timely significance for Pope Alexander VI and Cardinal Carvajal at the same time Ferdinand and Isabel were vigorously expanding the borders of empire at home through the definitive conquest of the peninsula lands, and abroad by claiming the New World for Christendom.

The dedication of the Tivoli temple to the local Sibyl draws those histor-ical realities close to the great themes of Christian prophecy. When Fulvio named the temple as Bramante’s model, he suggested a seriousness of pur-pose by employing the Sibyl’s proper name, Albunea, and locating the tem-ple’s position above the cascades of the Aniene River.61 He drew these details

Figure 47. Teatro Marittimo, Villa of Hadrian, Tivoli. Courtesy of Alinari / Art Resource, NY.


from Lactantius, who depended on a lost text by the Roman author Varro.62 Lactantius identified Albunea as the tenth and last of the Sibyls, who was revered as a deity in Tivoli, on a site close to the banks of the Aniene River where her statue had been discovered holding a book. He adds that the Roman Senate transferred her oracles to the Capitoline Hill, implying that the book was real and preserved the Sibyl’s famous prophecies. In that way, the find-spot and hence the temple was sanctified as a place of spiritual revelation. In Christian tradition, Albunea, like her sister Sibyls, was credited with knowl-edge of the coming of the Messiah, and for this reason she was often depicted in their company, as in San Pietro in Montorio where she appears along with the Cumaean, Delphic, and Erithyraen Sibyls as part of the original decora-tive program.63 Saint Augustine favored the Erithyraen Sibyl as the princi-pal pagan voice in announcing Christian salvation, echoing Lactantius, who recorded that the Romans had granted her special status.64 A parallel tradition traced to Virgil held that the Cumaean Sibyl announced the birth of a child who would inaugurate a Golden Age.65 Constantine the Great drew forth the Christian implications of that prophecy by identifying the child as Christ.66

Albunea, too, occupied a significant place in Christian prophetic specula-tion. She expressed knowledge of human salvation with greater specificity than

Figure 48. Collaborator of Francesco di Giorgio, Teatro Marittimo, Villa of Hadrian, Tivoli, plan, drawing. Biblioteca Reale, Turin, Codex Sallustiano 148, fol. 88v. By concession of the Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Reale, Turin.


the other Sibyls, and divulged it in a distinctive way. Before settling in Tivoli, she traveled across the known continents, and extensively in the East, proph-esizing “good things to the good, evil things to the evil.”67 According to a tra-dition introduced in the thirteenth century, in place of the obscure utterances common to the other sibylline prophecies, Albunea conveyed her revelation directly: “Christ will be born in Bethlehem, and the King will be announced in Nazareth, in the reign of the pacific bull, founder of tranquility.”68 This last phrase evokes Augustus, who established the pax Romana, preparing the way for the birth of Christ and the pax Christiana. The bull of the Sibyl’s prophecy carried rich associations with Spain. The beast was consistently featured on coins issued in Spain following the Roman conquest and was equally familiar as a native subject, indicated by the pre-Roman sculptures hewn out of the liv-ing rock that survive today in the area west of Madrid, the Bulls of Guisando being the most famous examples. The importance of the bull in the iconogra-phy of Spain helps to explain why Alexander VI, upon acceding to the Petrine office, replaced the agrarian ox of his family’s heraldry with the peaceful bull. For the same reason, the full-fleshed bull heads, bukephalia, alternating with libation vessels sculpted on the frieze of the Tivoli temple, draw the temple close to the spiritual message announced by Albunea and reinforce its associa-tion with Spain.

The link between imperial history and Christian revelation traced through the Tiburtine Sibyl was codified in the legend telling how she had revealed to Augustus a vision of the Virgin and Child on the day Christ was born.69 That event was said to have occurred on the Capitoline Hill, on the site of Augustus’s own chamber where the church of Santa Maria in Aracoeli would later rise. The legend was perpetuated on that spot by a late medieval fresco in the vault of the tribune of Santa Maria in Aracoeli, which Vasari judged to be the best work of Pietro Cavallini.70 In addition to conveying purely religious meaning, the theme of Augustus and the Sibyl carried political associations for patrons who saw themselves, and who were viewed by their subjects, as a modern Augustus. This was the case with the illuminated Missal-Breviary that King Ferdinand received as a gift from Giovan Maria Poderico, his cappel-lano maggiore, during his visit to Naples from 1506 to 1507.71 On the opening folios Ferdinand appears kneeling in prayer accompanied by the Tiburtine Sibyl, who indicates the scene of the Nativity depicted on the facing folio (Figures 49, 50). The text reproduces the prophecy as given previously. This image identifies Ferdinand as a new Augustus charged with instituting the pax Christiana, thereby fulfilling the Sibyl’s prophecy. The idea that Ferdinand and Isabel were poised to usher in a new Virgilian Golden Age was promoted


Figure 49. King Ferdinand of Aragon with the Tiburtine Sibyl, Missal-Breviary of King Ferdinand of Aragon. BAV, Chigi C.VII.205, fol. 2v, © 2014 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. By concession of the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, all rights reserved.

Figure 50. Nativity of Christ, Missal-Breviary of King Ferdinand of Aragon. BAV, Chigi C.VII.205, fol. 3r, © 2014 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. By concession of the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, all rights reserved.


elsewhere in their iconography.72 In this case, the application of the sibylline prophecy to Ferdinand provides the more specific link to Tivoli and to the Sibyl’s temple.

Christian eschatological speculation offers another means to assess the significance of this material. In addition to knowing of Christ’s birth, the Sibyl possessed foreknowledge of events that would mark the conclusion of human history at the end of time. The Endtime prophecy was introduced in a fourth-century Greek text that underwent continual elaboration, with eleventh-century Latin versions being especially resonant for absorbing the character of the Last World Emperor.73 The earliest extant version of the aug-mented Latin text is included in a volume commissioned by Queen Sancha of León in 1047 and preserved in the library of the Escorial.74 In that tradition derived from the Pseudo-Methodius, the Tiburtine Sibyl foretells the com-ing of a savior king who will oversee the conversion of the pagans and Jews, and preside over the battle against Gog and Magog. He then relinquishes to God the Christian kingdom by setting down his diadem and other regalia in Jerusalem, thus ushering in the reign of the Antichrist, followed by the Second Coming and Judgment Day. Aspects of this same prophetic tradition informed the decoration at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme sponsored by Pedro González de Mendoza and carried out by Bernardino de Carvajal, and they are again relevant when considering the Tempietto’s classical model.

The Tiburtine Sibyl’s Christian knowledge, along with the historical asso-ciations between Tivoli and Spain traced through Hadrian, provided Andrea Fulvio with compelling reasons to identify the Tempietto with the Tivoli tem-ple. Moving beyond the centralized plan and peripteral colonnade that the Tempietto shares with all temples of that type, Fulvio recognized in Bramante’s reinterpretation of classical architecture an underlying connection between the pagan and Christian dispensations based on shared revelation, now refo-cused to honor the site of Peter’s martyrdom and the establishment of the Church in Rome. That theme carried particular resonance for the Catholic monarchs, whose evangelical activities and vigorous confrontation with Islam positioned them in the prophetic role as leaders of Christendom.

The Tempietto and Christianity

“A large marble ciborium embellished with columns” is how Fra Mariano da Firenze described the Tempietto, deftly avoiding the classical pedigree that was so clear to Fulvio and to observers ever since.75 In ecclesiastical usage, the term ciborium refers to the architectural structure used to shelter Christian


altars, saints’ relics, and geographical sites of exceptional spiritual impor-tance. Mariano may have been recalling a type of late medieval altar ciborium found in Rome consisting of two levels, a lower one sheltering the altar and an upper one where the relics were protected and could be displayed to the faithful. Three ciboria of this type stand out among others for their location and the sanctity of their contents. The high altar of the Lateran basilica with the head relics of Saints Peter and Paul is still extant, but the other two, for-merly located in Saint Peter’s, are known only from graphic sources, the altar of Saint Veronica with the sudarium bearing the imprint of Christ’s face, and the ciborium of the Holy Lance, containing the relic of Christ’s Crucifixion.76 Mariano’s intention is best appreciated through this last example, the most prominent Renaissance iteration of the type, which Pope Innocent VIII erected to honor the relic that the Ottoman sultan Bejazet II donated in 1492 (Figure 51).77 The parapet formed with double-bulb balusters at the upper level and an elevated hemispherical dome are features echoed in the Tempietto. These similarities help to explain why Giacomo Grimaldi, the seventeenth-century Vatican archivist and historian, attributed the ciborium of the Holy Lance to Bramante, and why that attribution was long sustained.78 By referring to the Tempietto as a ciborium, Mariano drew Bramante’s architecture close

Figure 51. Ciborium of the Holy Lance, Saint Peter’s basilica, drawing. Giacomo Grimaldi, BAV, Barb. lat. 2733, fol. 71r, © 2014 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. By concession of the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, all rights reserved.


to the essential form and function of structures honoring relics of the Apostles and of Christ’s Passion.

Mariano’s additional remarks have exerted a powerful influence on mod-ern understanding of the Tempietto’s early history, and for that reason they deserve careful consideration. Seeking to augment the religious associations of the place hallowed by Peter’s crucifixion, Mariano claimed there existed on that site a grotto where Amadeo Meneses de Silva had fasted and prayed and where he received spiritual instruction from the Archangel Gabriel. Contemporaries knew of those revelations through a text attributed to Amadeo that acquired the august title Apocalypsis nova. The text opens with a first person statement that Amadeo experienced his vision in a grotto, an idea reiterated by the fri-ar’s earliest biographers and acquaintances.79 Nevertheless, Mariano is alone in reporting that Amadeo’s grotto was related to Peter’s martyrdom and by extension to the Tempietto. The Franciscan friar Giorgio Benigno reported that Amadeo had shown him the grotto at San Pietro in Montorio, but was silent on the matter of Peter’s crucifixion, as was Raffaele Maffei, who also knew Amadeo personally.80 Moreover, images referring to Amadeo’s revela-tions show him within the grotto, but they too lack reference to Peter.81 For these reasons, Mariano’s statement is best understood as an embellishment intended to personalize the association between the Petrine site and Amadeo. In this way, Mariano advanced the prestige of the Amadeites and through them of his own Observant branch of the Franciscan brotherhood. The rela-tionship of the two was under review during the years that Mariano was in Rome and wrote his guidebook; in 1513, and again in 1517, Pope Leo X sought to enforce a prior decree of Julius II’s to assimilate the Amadeites to the Observant Franciscans.82

Mariano’s additional claim that the height of the Tempietto matched a hill-ock existing on the place of Peter’s crucifixion added a marvelous quality to Bramante’s architecture, reflecting stories told about Rome’s monuments in the medieval guides known as the Mirabilia urbis Romae, Marvels of the City of Rome. Mariano may have drawn support for his fanciful idea from the column of Trajan, which bears an inscription often interpreted as equating its height with the landmass that had to be eliminated to provide space for the emperor’s Forum.83 Another potential source pertained to the ancient pyramidal tomb located near the Vatican, the so-called Meta Romuli, which was said to match the dimensions of a heap of grain associated with Saint Peter.84 Most revealing of Mariano’s approach to constructing meaning, and the one most resonant in the present context, is the phrase mons Crucifixionis applied to the site, evoking the place where Christ died in Jerusalem. Although the Gospels speak only of


a place where the event occurred, Calvary was often designated as a hill, and it was commonly depicted in that way, as in the fourth-century apse mosaic of Santa Pudenziana in Rome. The pious tale that Adam had been buried in a grotto beneath the site of Christ’s death may have inspired Mariano to assert that Amadeo’s grotto was located beneath the place of Peter’s martyrdom.85 In the end, Mariano’s characterization of the Tempietto as a ciborium relates to this same line of thought. Because in ecclesiastical practice the ciborium shel-tered the altar where the Eucharist is celebrated, it was related in function and meaning to the edifice marking Christ’s tomb, which at times was also called a ciborium.86

The history of architecture provides both confirmation and clarification of Mariano’s efforts to define the Tempietto as a Christian monument with reference to Jerusalem. It has long been understood that Bramante’s debt to classical temples was partial: the crypt, niches along the cella wall, and the drum supporting the dome, all lacking in ancient temples, are derived from Christian funerary architecture. The dome-upon-drum most clearly distin-guishes the Tempietto from ancient tradition, and identifies its function to honor the site of Peter’s martyrdom. The immediate result of applying the drum was to add significant height to the shrine in relation to its width, far exceeding Vitruvius’s directive that the height of tholos temples should be half the diameter of the entire work.87 Serlio praised Bramante for mitigating the effect of excessive height with the deep-set windows and niches, along with the horizontal emphasis achieved by what he termed “doubled cornices,” referring to the entablature of the colonnade and a second entablature at drum level.88 The first modern scholar to remark on the Tempietto’s drum understood it to be an interpolation in the classical scheme and characterized it as Byzantine, suggesting a link to the architecture of the Eastern empire.89

By Bramante’s day, the dome-upon-drum could be found in major works of Renaissance architecture, among them Brunelleschi’s dome for the Cathedral of Florence and Francesco di Giorgio’s Santa Maria delle Grazie al Calcinaio at Cortona (see Figure 29).90 Fifteenth-century artists and architects devel-oped a deep fascination for that same configuration, and at times sought to assimilate it to the classical canon. Among the earliest examples is Filarete’s imaginative recreation of Hadrian’s mausoleum appearing in the scene of the crucifixion of Peter on the bronze doors of Saint Peter’s basilica, which likely depends on a drawing of the ancient monument by Ciriaco d’Ancona known in copies (Figure 52; compare Figure 27).91 As in the drawing, Filarete placed a hemispherical dome atop the upper tier of the stepped structure, raised it upon a drum, and set a broad peripteral colonnade at a slightly lower level. This


assortment of architectural elements reflects the same exuberant embrace of the antique seen elsewhere on the doors; it also expresses an understanding of the drum and dome as components of funerary architecture. Far more accu-rate in details, and approaching the solution Bramante subsequently adopted in the Tempietto, are drawings by Francesco di Giorgio that reconstruct monu-ments he presumed to be ancient, including the paleochristian church of Santo Stefano Rotondo on the Caelian Hill, in each case envisioning a peripteral colonnade and a dome rising from a drum (Figure 53).92 Bramante may have known these and other graphic expressions of the dome-upon-drum, but the built environment provided more compelling models.

The drum first appeared in late antique funerary architecture, exemplified in Rome by Santa Costanza, mausoleum of Constantine’s daughter, where a broad, outer ambulatory is complemented by a retracted core supporting a dome.93 In that case, a masonry shell encloses the dome, obscuring its curved profile when viewed from the exterior. Two additional examples of the same mausoleum type existed in proximity to the south transept of Old Saint Peter’s, known as Santa Petronilla and Sant’Andrea (Figure 54).94 Burials dis-covered within Santa Petronilla in 1458 were identified as Constantine and one of his sons, drawing the structure into the same category of Christian

Figure 52. Copy after Ciriaco d’Ancona, Mausoleum of Hadrian, drawing. The Bodleian Library, University of Oxford, MS. Lat. misc. d. 85, fol. 63r. Courtesy of The Bodleian Library.


Figure 53. Francesco di Giorgio, domed monuments in Rome, drawing. Biblioteca Reale, Turin, Codex Sallustiano 148, fol. 84r. By concession of the Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali, Biblioteca Reale, Turin.

Figure 54. Marten van Heemskerck, Vatican obelisk and Sant’Andrea, drawing. Staatliche Museen, Kupferstichkabinett, Berlin, 79 D 2 A, fol. 21. Courtesy of Bildagentur für Kunst, Kultur und Geschichte, Berlin / Volker-H. Schneider / Art Resource, NY.


imperial memorial represented by Santa Costanza.95 By the early eighth cen-tury, an association was established between Santa Petronilla and the Franks, and thereafter with the French monarchy, which King Louis XI and his son, Charles VIII, carefully nurtured during the late fifteenth century. When Charles VIII was in Rome in January 1495, he used Santa Petronilla as a royal preserve, attending Masses, taking meals, and performing the ceremony of thaumaturgic healing.96 This traditional reminder of French royal prestige in the shadow of Peter’s basilica must have inspired Pope Callixtus III to claim the rotunda of Sant’Andrea for Spain. At mid-century he added the Apostle James Major, Spain’s evangelizer and patron saint, to the established dedi-cation to Andrew, Peter’s brother, and chose to be buried there, initiating a practice followed by members of the Curia who were Spanish either by birth or descent.97

Rivaling even those works in importance for the genesis of the Tempietto is the majestic mausoleum of Theodoric the Great, King of the Ostrogoths and ruler of Italy (493–526), located in Ravenna. An artist in Bramante’s cir-cle, possibly the master himself, depicted the monument in a careful rendering (Figure 55).98 The decagonal structure, formed with smoothly worked ashlar blocks, rises in two levels that approach equal height, and is crowned with a fully exposed dome carved from a single block of Istrian stone.99 These fea-tures, as well as the presence of a crypt, constitute notable points of contact with the Tempietto. A dynastic link to Bramante’s royal patrons existed as well. Theodoric, who ruled in Spain as regent for his grandson, the Visigoth prince Amalaric, formed part of that same Gothic bloodline that the houses of Aragon and Castile claimed as their own, inheriting the sacred charge to recover the political and religious unity that had been the glory of Gothic achievement in Iberia.

Beyond providing partial models for the Tempietto, the tholos temples and the mausolea anchor Bramante’s shrine in history and specifically in the epochal shift from pagan to Christian embodied in Rome’s sacred topography. The ancient temples that survived the Middle Ages had all acquired a second life as Christian churches, the Pantheon being the most prominent example, reconsecrated in 609 in honor of the Virgin Mary and martyrs of the early Church with the title Sancta Maria ad Martyres. Also counted in this group is the tholos temple in the Forum Boarium, known as Santo Stefano Rotondo, and the temple of the Sibyl in Tivoli, which received the sobriquet Santa Maria Rotonda, a name also applied to the mausoleum of Theodoric.100 Adding to the slippage between architectural types and their functions was the tendency to identify central-plan mausolea as pagan temples that had been reconsecrated


to serve the Christian cult. Some mausolea even incorporated an external peripteral colonnade, furthering the process of assimilation.101 Alberti, always sensitive to the proper application of architectural types, noted the underly-ing association between the temple and mausoleum.102 That association, both imagined and real, recalled Rome’s layered past and resonated with the idea of Christianity’s triumph over paganism. For the same reason the destruction of pagan temples and their transformation into churches appears in the Christian prophetic tradition as an indicator of spiritual victory.103

The architecture of the Tempietto draws its most meaningful resonance from two additional descendants of the Roman mausoleum type that domi-nate the topography of Jerusalem and define its spiritual importance, the Holy Sepulcher complex, erected by Constantine on the site of Christ’s death, burial, and Resurrection, and the Dome of the Rock (Qubbat as-Sakhrah), erected by the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan (685–705) on the Temple Mount.104 The relevance of these two Jerusalem monuments for the Tempietto has drawn attention. One suggestion holds that at the Holy Sepulcher the con-centric arrangement of the tomb of Christ at the center of the domed chapel of the Resurrection (Anastasis), with its interior ring of piers and columns, is reflected in Bramante’s plan to situate the Tempietto at the hub of the circular

Figure 55. Circle of Bramante, Mausoleum of Theodoric, Ravenna, drawing. Galleria degli Uffizi, Gabinetto Disegni e Stampe, Florence, Uffizi 1563Ar. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


cloister.105 Another view maintains that the Tempietto’s centralized form and combination of dome and drum was indebted to related features of the octagonal Dome of the Rock.106 Those proposals illuminate the affiliation of Bramante’s architecture with the most sacred sites in the Judeo-Christian tra-dition, and point to its underlying meaning.

The Dome of the Rock, rising from its dramatic position on the Temple Mount, dominates the panorama of the city and provides its most recogniz-able architectural feature. This first major monument of Muslim architec-ture, intended to supplant the Holy Sepulcher as Jerusalem’s most prominent religious shrine, was reassigned in Christian tradition as the Temple of the Lord.107 Descriptions of the monument provided by pilgrims who returned from Jerusalem stimulated a rich visual tradition in the medieval West.108 A new degree of accuracy in recording the topography of the city and the loca-tion of its chief monuments was introduced in the pilgrimage book of Bernhard von Breydenbach, Dean of the Cathedral of Mainz, with illustrations by the Utrecht artist Erhard Reuwich, who accompanied him on the journey to the Holy Land in 1483 and also printed the work in 1486 (Figure 56).109 The vol-ume enjoyed an immediate success with translations into French, German, Flemish, and Spanish, this last published in Zaragoza in 1498 with additions by Martín Martínez Dampiés. The Breydenbach cityscape with the Dome of

Figure 56. Erhard Reuwich, Jerusalem, detail, woodcut, 1486. Breydenbach, Peregrinatio in Terram Sanctam. Courtesy of The Rosenwald Collection, Library of Congress.


the Rock at the center, identified as “Templum Salomonis,” was repeated in many subsequent renderings of the Holy City, including the frontispiece to Sebastian Brant’s 1495 volume dedicated to the history of Jerusalem and its recapture (Figure 57). Maximilian, king of the Romans (later Holy Roman Emperor), to whom Brant dedicated the volume, stands in the foreground, holding the crusade banner and receiving from the hand of God the sword and palm. The background view of Jerusalem isolates the Dome of the Rock from the Breydenbach panorama, now serving to identify the goal of Christian conquest.

The Tempietto functioned in an analogous way to honor the Spanish mon-archs’ commitment to repossess the Holy Land for Christendom. However compelling the Dome of the Rock may have been as a visual metonym of the Holy City, the declared goal of all crusade activity was the tomb of Christ, and it provided the principal Christian model for the Tempietto. By the Renaissance period, the Holy Sepulcher complex existed in a form radically different from its original fourth-century state, consisting of an aisled basil-ica, an open courtyard with the hill of Calvary, and just beyond, the Anastasis rotunda with Christ’s tomb at the center. The Caliph al-Hakim destroyed the complex in 1009, and it was rebuilt in the eleventh and again in the twelfth

Figure 57. Maximilian, King of the Romans, as Crusader, woodcut, 1495. Brant, De origine et conversatione bonorum regum, title page. Inc 7772 31.1, Houghton Library, Harvard University.


century. These interventions joined the rotunda to the surviving portion of the basilica, with a monumental dome defining each area (Figure 58).110 In that revised form the Holy Sepulcher complex assumed a new identity, attest-ing to the triumph of Christianity over its enemies. The centralized plan of the Anastasis, in both its original form and later configuration, provided the model for numerous variations built during the later Middle Ages throughout Europe.111 In Spain, two examples dated to the twelfth century exist along the pilgrimage road to Santiago de Compostela at Eunate and Torres del Rio, and a third, the most prominent, is located just outside the royal city of Segovia; its dedication to La Vera Cruz honors the relic of Christ’s Passion preserved there.112

The form and ideological meaning of the Tempietto derives more directly from the Edicule, the tomb of Christ. Pilgrims’ descriptions, drawings, and small-scale souvenirs conveyed aspects of the monument to those far from the site, but its history of damage and restoration presented a formidable challenge to anyone wishing to evoke its authentic form.113 One fundamental aspect of the monument often conveyed by pilgrims was its rotundity, tegurium rotundum

Figure 58. Jacques Callot, Holy Sepulcher complex, plan, engraving, 1620. Amico, Trattato delle piante e immagini, plate 22. Courtesy of Bibliothèque nationale de France.


in Arculf’s seventh-century testimony that was widely disseminated in redac-tions by the Venerable Bede and others, and which entered the visual tradition as well.114 That persistent idea is difficult to reconcile with the tomb as rebuilt by the crusaders and famously documented in the same Breydenbach travel book (Figure 59).115 The woodcut shows a vestibule surmounted by a balus-trade, a polygonal apse articulated by columns supporting a shallow arcade, and a shedlike addition at the back. At the top, a pavilion dome is raised on columns. Alberti, working twenty years or so before Breydenbach’s publica-tion, reimagined the architectural miscellany in Jerusalem in an ideal form, but one that is decisively not round (Figure 60).116 In the Rucellai chapel in Florence, he elided the divisions among the parts present in Jerusalem, pro-ducing an oblong terminating in a shallow apse, and embellished the resulting basilican shape with Corinthian pilasters along the sides and an inscription in the frieze consisting of stately Roman majuscules. The polychrome marble inlays, lilylike excrescences at the roofline, and spiral-fluted dome at the top provide exotic accents to this thoroughly westernized interpretation of the Holy Land original.

Figure 59. Erhard Reuwich, Holy Sepulcher, woodcut, 1486. Breydenbach, Peregrinatio in Terram Sanctam. Courtesy of The Rosenwald Collection, Library of Congress.


Like Alberti, Bramante refashioned the sacred model to conform to classi-cal ideals, but the process he followed constituted an act of Christian archaeo-logical recovery. To appreciate how the Tempietto was the result of that effort, it is necessary to approach the tomb as Bramante’s contemporaries did, rec-ognizing that the forward and rearward portions were late additions to the original structure. Santo Brasca, Milanese administrator and statesman, who traveled to the Holy Land in 1480, presented that situation with great clar-ity. In the account of his journey published in 1481, he included a schematic ground plan of the tomb, to which he added a description in the second edition of 1497 (Figure 61). “The round part (tondo) is the true Sepulcher; those two cubicles (cellete) that you see, one in front of the round part, the other behind the round part were added subsequent to the Passion of Our Lord.”117 Brasca clarified that the cubicle at the front was built to honor and protect the stone upon which the angel sat when addressing the three Maries, and the one at the back was built by Ethiopian monks to celebrate the Mass and recite their offices and orations. (It actually served the Copts.) What Brasca described and depicted in plan was visualized in an elevation by the German pilgrim Konrad von Grünenberg, who visited the Holy Land in 1486 (Figure 62).118 The drawing depicts the monument from the side, demonstrating how the

Figure 60. Alberti, Holy Sepulcher, Rucellai chapel, San Pancrazio, Florence. © The Courtauld Institute of Art, London.


Figure 61. Santo Brasca, Holy Sepulcher, plan, woodcut, 1481. Brasca, Itinerario alla santissimo città di Gerusalemme. Inc 5934 26.1, Houghton Library, Harvard University.

Figure 62. Konrad von Grünenberg, Holy Sepulcher, elevation, drawing. Grünenberg, Beschreibung der Reise von Konstanz nach Jerusalem, Badische Landesbibliothek, Karlsruhe, St. Peter perg. 32, fol. 45v. Courtesy of Badische Landesbibliothek.


richly articulated core defined by columns below and elevated dome above was visually distinguished from the architecturally nondescript portions fore and aft. In a similar way, Bramante approached the Holy Sepulcher as an archi-tectural palimpsest, stripping away those later phases of construction and articulating the centralized portion with classical features. In comparison to Alberti’s simplified rendering, he reinstated the columns and restored the dra-matic emphasis of the towering top-piece, interpreting the one as a peripteral colonnade and the other as a dome raised upon a drum. The simple parapet appearing above the vestibule in Jerusalem becomes a recognizable balustrade. Finally, Bramante unified all these features in a new architectural synthesis by rigorously applying the Doric system on a centralized plan.

Once the Tempietto is understood in relation to the Holy Sepulcher, it becomes possible to define its ideal geometry with increased precision. The centralized plan of the Tempietto has elicited interpretations that engage phil-osophical and theological ideas of the broadest type, drawing on links between God, the cosmos, and the world.119 Those ideas assume sharpened meaning when referred to temporal matters. Ancient precedent existed for interpret-ing the centralized architectural plan in political terms. Plutarch, writing of the temple of Vesta in the Roman Forum, identified the plan as a metaphor of the “entire universe.”120 Neither the ancient author nor those like Alberti who repeated his assertion could have avoided drawing a further association with the temple’s well-known purpose to shelter the objects Aeneas had sal-vaged from Troy and brought to Rome, among them the eternal flame sacred to Vesta and the household gods, the Penates. The belief that they ensured Rome’s destiny as an “empire without end,” in Virgil’s formulation, imparted a political dimension to the temple’s distinctive plan.121 The same idea is present in the Christian tradition that associated the centralized church plan with the global dissemination of the faith, best known from the handbook of ecclesias-tical symbolism by Durandus, Bishop of Mende (d. 1296), but dependent on an idea introduced in the twelfth century by Honorius of Autun (d. ca. 1150) and reiterated by Sicardus of Cremona (d. 1215).122 Centrality as both a spiritual and political concept had its natural focus in the city of Jerusalem, which both Jews and Christians accorded the privilege of occupying the world’s center. The Jews situated the Temple at the hub of the Holy City; the Christians reserved that honor for the Holy Sepulcher.123

The idea of aligning Jerusalem’s spiritual preeminence with ideal geom-etry assumed increased potency during the Renaissance when Alberti and others praised the centralized form in nature as in architecture.124 A striking


example of how the two were brought together visually is provided by an ideal view of Jerusalem published in Hartmann Schedel’s World Chronicle of 1493 (Figure 63). The Holy City appears in a circular form defined by three con-centric walls, with the Dome of the Rock at the center identified as “Templum Salomonis.” This tholos, girded with columns and crowned by a melon dome, dominates the view and generates the ideal urban plan. The Franciscan friar, Francesco Suriano, who twice served as Guardian of Mount Sion, from 1493 to 1495 and again from 1512 to 1515, wrote a treatise on the Holy Land in which he transposed those visual ideas into literary form, now focusing on the Holy Sepulcher. Suriano explained that the Lord’s tomb had been con-structed as round because that was the perfect form, and he compared it to God’s design in creating the heavens and the earth.125 He also advanced the idea that the Romans were guided by divine inspiration to rebuild the city as a circle with the Holy Sepulcher at the center, making it physically accessible and thereby facilitating devotion. These notions of sacred geometry attrib-uted to Jerusalem and its most revered monument exerted a decisive influ-ence on Bramante’s conception of the Tempietto. The centralized plan of the

Figure 63. Michael Wolgemut, Jerusalem, woodcut, 1493. Schedel, Liber chroni-carum, fol. 17r. http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00003774; George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida.

http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00003774


monument, columnar surround, and prominent dome all descend from the tomb of Christ. It now becomes clear why Mariano da Firenze characterized the Tempietto as a ciborium surrounded by columns. His sensitive reading of the architecture acknowledged Bramante’s ultimate model in the ciborium-like structure that sheltered the burial place of Christ.

Conclusion

The Tempietto, in its centralized plan, peripteral colonnade, dome raised upon a drum, and projected hypaethral rotunda, fuses elements of sacred archi-tecture drawn from ancient and Christian traditions to achieve a revolutionary synthesis simultaneously fully classical and fully Christian. Andrea Fulvio and Mariano da Firenze responded to that underlying duality, Fulvio by focusing on the legacy of ancient architecture, Mariano on its Christian counterpart, in each case informed by the memory of Jerusalem. Bramante’s combination of those architectural traditions was inspired by two principal factors: the trans-lation of the Apostolic Church from Jerusalem to Rome achieved with Peter’s sacrifice and the roots of the patrons’ power traced through Spain’s Roman imperial heritage. The dream of Catholic hegemony that provided the under-pinning of Ferdinand and Isabel’s political program received physical expres-sion on the very spot where the Roman Church was founded.

102

Chapter Four

SymbolS of Victory

With the Tempietto Bramante brought together in an unprecedented architectural synthesis the tholos temple of Roman antiquity and the Christian martyrium, honoring the site where

Peter died on the cross and extolling the Catholic monarchs as defenders of the faith. Against this backdrop components of the architecture and decoration assume a new significance. The granite column shafts, Doric system, and decorated metopes, along with the shell niches, balustrade, and geometric design of the chapel’s pavement constitute interlocking components of an iconographic program that defines every aspect of the Tempietto. Bramante employed those features to express the most cherished spiritual and political ideals of his royal patrons.

Introduction

Vasari, in the first comprehensive treatment of Bramante’s life, presents the architect as a person of extraordinary intellectual gifts, and credits him with initiating the third or modern age in architecture, following Arnolfo di Cambio and Brunelleschi, founders of the first and second ages, and parallel to Leonardo da Vinci, whose life opens that third section of the Lives.1 In one memorable passage, Vasari reports that Bramante “delighted in poetry, and loved to improvise upon the lyre, or to hear others doing this: and he composed some sonnets, if not as polished as we now demand them, at least weighty and without faults.”2 Bramante’s musical ability is not otherwise attested, but his poetic skill is fully corroborated. In Milan, Bramante frequented a group of

Symbols of Victory • 103

humanists that included the nobleman Gaspare Visconti, his friend and patron, who was also counselor to Duke Ludovico Sforza.3 Over twenty of Bramante’s poems survive from that period.4 They are rough specimens, burlesques really, dedicated to subjects ranging from affairs of the heart to Bramante’s material needs. The first in the series concerns a lengthy trip to Liguria and Piedmont, from which Bramante returns “roasted” and “without a penny in his pocket.” Another poem concerns his socks, old and riddled with holes, and he appeals to Visconti for money to purchase a new pair.5 The high esteem Visconti held for Bramante can be judged from a passage in one of his literary works where he mused that it would be easier to record all the marvels of nature and “to count the blessed souls in the heavens than to recount the knowledge you possess, Bramante.”6

Vasari suggests how Bramante translated those qualities of mind and spirit into his architecture when referring to the pictographic inscription he proposed to mount in the Belvedere courtyard at the Vatican. Letters in “the guise of ancient hieroglyphs” were to express the name of the patron, Pope Julius II, along with his own name.7 Vasari describes a rebus of the kind that along with related visual and literary enigmas held considerable fascination for Renaissance artists and intellectuals, including Leonardo da Vinci and other members of Bramante’s circle in Milan.8 Bramante composed at least one such literary enigma.9 Vasari recorded that the Belvedere inscription was to begin with an image of Julius Caesar, followed by a bridge with two arches, and the obelisk in the Circus Maximus, interpreted as “Julius II Pontifex Maximus.” He also recalled how the pope referred to the proposal as a foolish thing (scioccheria), and rejected it straightaway. No trace of the pictographic inscription survives, but the story is confirmed by a relief in Viterbo that Vasari identified as Bramante’s model, the work of an architect named Francesco that expressed his name following a similar procedure.10 Direct evidence for Vasari’s report comes from the pay-ment of January 1509 to a stonecutter employed by the Fabbrica of Saint Peter’s “for crafting Egyptian letters according to the order of Master Bramante.”11 Moreover, an echo of Bramante’s idea survives in the inscription adorning the eastern entrance to the Belvedere courtyard, on axis with the modern Porta Sant’Anna (Figure 64). The stately Latin majuscules begin to the left of the entrance with the pope’s name, continue on the frieze of the projected rusticated portal, and conclude along the wall to the right.12 The central field is inscribed Pont. Max., referring to the title Pontifex Maximus that the Roman emperor held as high priest of the state religion, which Renaissance popes adopted as their own.13 Its literal meaning, Chief Bridge Builder, is reflected in the rus-ticated entrance of the Belvedere that unifies the two parts of the wall in the


Figure 64. Belvedere courtyard, entrance, Vatican palace. Photo courtesy of Musei Vaticani.


manner of a bridge. When the portal and inscription are read together, they underscore the classical resonance of the courtyard’s architecture and proclaim the imperial persona Julius espoused. Bramante approached the Tempietto in a similar way, using its architectural and decorative components to honor the Petrine site and extol the Catholic militancy of the royal patrons.

The Granite Columns

Sixteen column shafts of gray granite outfitted with white marble bases and capitals establish the Tempietto’s classical pedigree and anchor the system of proportions that determine every aspect of the structure (Plates I–V).14 The number of columns and the ratio of their width to height have been analyzed in previous studies with an eye to Vitruvius’s directives for the Doric system, and how Renaissance theorists either repeated or adjusted them. The columns of the Tempietto with a ratio about 1:8.5 are more slender than Vitruvius’s prescription of either 1:6 or 1:7 for the Doric, which Alberti and Francesco di Giorgio echoed in their own treatises.15 The fluid nature of those recom-mendations is evident in Filarete’s proposal that 1:9 be applied to the Doric, perhaps, as has been suggested, because he identified it with the traditional proportions of the human male, which also explains why Francesco di Giorgio recommended 1:9 for the closely related Tuscan column.16

The columns of the Tempietto differ from ancient models in their num-ber, fewer than those found in the tholos temples located in Rome and Tivoli, eighteen and twenty, respectively.17 Bramante may have recalled Vitruvius’s statement that the Romans favored sixteen, following the Greeks, who believed ten and six were ideal numbers, but more immediate benefits resulted from his choice.18 Sixteen columns made it possible to divide the peripteros into equal quadrants, with the principal axis running from the entrance to the altar, and the secondary axis at right angles to it (see Figure 40).19 As a result, the three entrances to the cella and the one to the crypt are aligned with the intercol-umniations, allowing free passage to the interior. The four large windows are similarly unencumbered, permitting light to flow into the chamber. Vitruvius emphasized the importance of providing clear access to temples, and sug-gested various ways that space could be left between the columns to make that possible.20 Nevertheless, the arrangement Bramante applied in the Tempietto has no parallel in ancient architecture. His source was early Christian cen-tral-plan structures like Santa Costanza and the Lateran baptistery where


the interior colonnades are aligned with the cross axes, front to back and side-to-side.21 In the Tempietto, that symmetrical disposition determines the placement of pilasters, doors, windows, niches, metopes, and balusters, right up to the ribs articulating the dome, culminating in the lantern and the cross at the top. This pervasive symmetry was generated by the Tempietto’s funda-mental purpose to commemorate the spot where Peter’s cross was implanted in the ground.

In addition to size and number, the columns contribute to defining the meaning of the Tempietto by their venerable age and material. The shafts are ancient spoils, materials in second use, which Bramante completed by adding capitals and bases of white marble (Plate V).22 At first glance, they all appear to be hewn from the same fine-grained gray granite, but a more precise identifica-tion of their type and origin has been determined.23 As indicated in Figure 65, thirteen shafts are formed with granite quarried in the area of Kozak in ancient Mysia, located near Pergamum (M). Completing the series are two shafts from the Troad, the region of Troy in northwest Mysia (T), and one shaft either from the island of Elba or Isola del Giglio located off the coast of Tuscany (G). The Elban quarry continued to be worked in the later Middle Ages, but the others were closed in antiquity.24 Bramante supplemented a matched set of thirteen columns with three additional ones positioned toward the rear of the Tempietto to minimize visual disruption.25 Because those same types of gran-ite were often employed in ancient construction, and subsequently reused, the source of the Tempietto’s shafts is difficult to determine. They may have been present at San Pietro in Montorio, employed either in the church or monas-tery, which would have made them both accessible and historically compelling for reuse in the Tempietto.26 Another possible source is the stockpile of ancient construction materials located at Porto, near Ostia, a site well known in the Renaissance and one that resonated with Spain’s imperial history traced to Trajan.27 Wherever the shafts were found, it is certain that Bramante chose them knowing their number and size would determine other features of the design in a system of corresponding relations, forming part of a conceptual program that engaged the heritage of classical architecture to an unprece-dented degree. The columns introduce the program by their prominence in the design, but also by the natural properties of the granite and its historical resonance.

Bramante, like other Renaissance architects, was conversant with a vari-ety of building materials. A close associate from Milan praised his knowledge of the rocks, stones, and gems of Lombardy.28 Bramante surely matched the expertise of Francesco di Giorgio, who described ancient granites, Egyptian


porphyry, and serpentine, along with native Italian types of stone similar in appearance.29 Francesco declared the choice of material a significant element of every building, and recommended that the “dignity of the edifice” deter-mine the selection.30 After arriving in Rome, Bramante would have studied the materials employed in monuments of all periods, along with their construc-tion technique and style, knowledge essential to working in the new envi-ronment.31 Among the modern structures then nearing completion was the palace of Cardinal Raffaele Riario (Palazzo della Cancelleria), which in scale, complexity, and classical refinement, marks a watershed in the Renaissance invention of the patrician residence.32 Vasari asserted that when first in Rome, Bramante participated in the Riario palace project. Among the palace’s nota-ble features is the immense courtyard that rises in two levels, each one defined by twenty-two granite columns consisting of both rose pink and gray shafts that were brought from sites around the city, and especially from the area of the Baths of Diocletian (Figure 66).33 The smaller columns were installed on the second level and the larger ones on ground level, where bases and plinths of slightly different sizes achieve the impression of uniformity. The notable

Figure 65. Granite columns of the Tempietto: M = Mysia; T = Troad; G = Isola del Giglio or Elba. Courtesy of Jack Freiberg after Lorenzo Lazzarini.


Figure 66. Palace of Cardinal Raffaele Riario (Palazzo della Cancelleria), court-yard. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


visual vibrancy achieved by positioning the colored shafts without pairings either across space or between the upper and lower levels, has no parallel in ancient practice.

Bramante’s treatment of the Tempietto’s shafts as a uniform series reveals a new degree of sensitivity to how granite was utilized in ancient Rome, with the portico of the Pantheon providing the enduring example (Figure 67). Sixteen colossal shafts support the projected pediment, eight composed of rose-pink granite, and an equal number of gray granite, the exception being the col-umn in the left front corner, which replaced a missing shaft in the seventeenth century. Both types of granite were quarried in the eastern Egyptian desert, the rose-pink shafts from Syene (Aswan), and the gray shafts from Mons Claudianus (Gebel Fatireh), the latter located near Mons Porphyrites where the highly prized purple porphyry was also excavated. The Claudian granite shafts were positioned in the privileged position across the front of the Pantheon and the others were set within the portico and therefore less immediately vis-ible. Various types of granite were widely employed throughout the Empire, including Spain, but the gray Claudian granite was reserved for the principal public building projects sponsored by the emperors in Rome.34 Bramante likely selected the Tempietto’s shafts with the Pantheon and other imperial models in mind, adapting the most prestigious ancient usage to honor Peter.

Figure 67. Pantheon (Sancta Maria ad Martyres). © Vanni Archive / Art Resource, NY


The Vatican obelisk, hewn from Aswan granite and located until 1586 off the south flank of Saint Peter’s basilica, contributes to the conceptual associa-tions of the Tempietto’s columns (see Figure 54). Among the obelisks brought to Rome in antiquity, this was the sole example to survive the depredations of the Middle Ages upright and intact. Fantastic legends grew up around it, including the most persistent one identifying the bronze globe at its summit as the repository of the ashes of Julius Caesar.35 In addition to their imperial associations, both the portico of the Pantheon and the Vatican obelisk carried Christian meaning. In the first case, a pagan temple was transformed into a church dedicated to the Virgin Mary and the martyrs, and in the second, the obelisk was located in proximity to the place of the Apostle’s burial, and in some sources was said to mark the site of Peter’s crucifixion.36

The widespread use of granite in Rome’s venerable basilicas provides the most resonant point for evaluating the meaning of the Tempietto’s col-umns. Heterogeneous building materials, including granite columns, were employed in considerable numbers in the churches built in Rome beginning with Constantine and continuing through the Middle Ages. Most significant, granite was used in profusion in the nave and side aisles of Old Saint Peter’s.37 The durability of the stone, its most lauded quality, provides a means to inter-pret the significance of those Roman columns reconsecrated to Christian use. Vasari was especially eloquent on this point, remarking that granite can be found in Rome, “in columns almost infinite [in number], that for hard-ness and compactness have not feared fire or sword, and time itself, which drives everything to ground, not only has not destroyed them but has not even altered their color.”38 That same durability carries spiritual significance when related to the constancy manifested by the early Christians in the face of persecution and triumph over death. That poetic association is anchored by the harsh reality of ancient Roman law, under which condemned prisoners were sentenced to forced labor in mines and stone quarries.39 Eusebius iden-tified some of those unfortunates as Christians and located their activities in Egypt. He told how holy confessors in large numbers worked the porphyry quarries in the Egyptian desert and of those, 97 men along with women and infants were sent to the mines in Palestine after being maimed to prevent their escape.40 Christians who quarried stone also appear in the lives of the saints. Pope Clement I (88–97), third successor of Peter, was said to have encountered in the Crimea 2,000 Christians, who had been condemned to work the marble quarries.41 The Four Crowned Saints, patrons of sculptors and stone workers, received the same punishment in Pannonia.42 When architectural spoils, and especially granite and porphyry, are present in Christian contexts they signal


an important point of contact with the early martyrs, who extracted those same materials from the earth, and died in the course of their labors.

The equation of columns with Christian martyrs finds another level of specificity in the identification of the Church as a spiritual edifice constructed with living stones that are the faithful. Saint Peter addressed the Christians of Asia Minor using that metaphor, referring to a stone rejected by the Temple’s builders, which became the head of the corner, that is, Christ (I Peter 2:4–8).43 Saint Paul extended the metaphor, referring to Peter, James Major, and John the Evangelist as columns, reinforcing their privileged position among the Apostles (Galatians 2:9). Based on these and other Biblical passages, the iden-tification of witnesses to the faith as columns became a standard trope in the pious literature of the Christian East and West.44 The column shafts of the Tempietto, along with those found in Roman churches generally, and in par-ticular those hewn from blocks of granite and porphyry, embody the spirit of those same Christian martyrs. In the present view, the Tempietto’s col-umns engaged the rich associations that granite held in imperial and Christian Rome, and extended the meaning of the architecture to honor Peter, the rock upon which the Church would rise, on the very site in Rome where he was crucified.

The Doric System

The columnar system Bramante employed in the Tempietto marks the first appearance of the Doric in postclassical architecture where it is applied with a degree of refinement approaching its ancient use.45 The capital follows the tra-ditional form of a cushion-like abacus set beneath a squared echinus, and with a base conforming to the type Vitruvius called Attic, consisting of two convex moldings separated by a concave channel, the top slightly smaller in diameter, and the whole resting on a square plinth (Plate V).46 A related essay in Doric revival occurred in the courtyard of the Riario palace, which may explain why Vasari credited Bramante with participating in that project. The Tempietto’s columns conform more precisely to ancient practice by supporting an entabla-ture articulated with a frieze consisting of alternating triglyphs and metopes (Plates V–VII). Vitruvius reported that architects avoided the Doric system, which required centering the triglyphs above columns and placing metopes of identical size at equal intervals within the intercolumniations. Those rules were impossible to observe at the corners of a structure and respect norma-tive proportions. By applying the Doric system to the circular plan, the cor-ner problem was eliminated, but even greater complication was introduced by


the necessity of adapting that system to increasingly reduced curved surfaces moving from the outer perimeter inward.47 The triglyph-metope frieze on the exposed face of the entablature is repeated on its inner side, again on the cella wall, and a fourth time within the chapel, in each case requiring adjust-ments in size and alignment (Plates VIII, X, XII).48 The pilasters on the outer wall of the cella that reflect the columns were resized, but given the restricted area, the doorframe, which conforms to Vitruvius’s porta ionica, intrudes on the flanking pilasters.49 To accommodate the entrances and altar on the inte-rior of the chapel, Bramante reduced the number of pilasters from sixteen to eight, set them upon high pedestals, and arranged them in pairs (Plate X). No ancient example of the Doric system known to the Renaissance had reached this level of complexity, and as far as can be established, examples of the Doric applied to the tholos were also unknown in the Renaissance. The Tempietto likely influenced those imaginative reconstructions of Doric tholos temples that have sometimes been proposed as Bramante’s models.50

The application of the Doric system in the Tempietto, as often noted, recalls Vitruvius’s directive that each column type be matched to the appropriate deity, and in the case of the Doric to honor Minerva, Mars, and Hercules, “because temples for these gods, on account of their courage in battle, should be set up without a trace of embellishment.”51 Fifteenth-century theorists moved toward translating that idea into Christian terms, but Serlio was the first to express it outright by recommending that the Doric be employed in churches dedicated to Christ and to virile saints, naming Paul, Peter, and George.52 Bramante’s inaugural use of the Doric in the Renaissance to honor Peter provided sup-port for his position. Bramante again applied the Doric in the architecture of New Saint Peter’s, and to define the tegurium, the monumental encasement for the high altar and tomb of the Apostle (Figure 68).53 By closely associating the Doric with Peter, Bramante drew from a prominent early Christian prec-edent, the fifth-century Roman basilica of San Pietro in Vincoli where twenty monolithic Doric columns crafted in grayish-white Aegean marble divide the nave from the side aisles (Figure 69).54 Although fluted in the Greek manner, and supporting arches rather than an entablature, those columns provided an authoritative model for linking Peter with the ancient columnar system. A spiritual association between the basilica and the Tempietto reinforced the point: the relics enshrined in San Pietro in Vincoli, the two sets of prison chains that secured Peter in Jerusalem and Rome, represent preliminary stages in the martyrdom of the Apostle that was concluded with his crucifixion.55

If San Pietro in Vincoli supplied Bramante with a paleochristian model for employing the Doric to honor Peter, other sources of inspiration governed the


form of the Tempietto’s columns, defined by an unfluted shaft and the use of a base. Among examples of the Doric in Rome, the most widely known and highly prized was the exterior cladding of the Basilica Aemilia in the Roman Forum. Around 1500 that cladding was dismantled and reused in the palace of the humanist Cardinal Adriano Castellesi (later Palazzo Giraud-Torlonia) located near Saint Peter’s basilica, a project often associated with Bramante.56 Antonio Labacco, who enjoyed a close association with both Peruzzi and Antonio da Sangallo the Younger and likely worked with Bramante, noted how the Doric elements of this bel Tempio were enriched with other forms, and that Bramante especially admired their novelty and adapted them in his own works (Figure 70).57 That might be true, but the fluted shafts, rosettes on the necking of the capitals, and decoration of the metopes with bulls’ skulls and libation vessels constitute an embellished version of the Doric distinct from the Tempietto. Bramante’s austere version of the system recalls more closely the Colosseum where attached half columns frame the ground level arches but without the triglyph-metope frieze, and the Theater of Marcellus where the frieze does appear but the column base is absent.

Figure 68. Marten van Heemskerck, Saint Peter’s basilica, interior, drawing. Courtesy of Nationalmuseum, Stockholm, Collection Anckarvärd, n. 637. Photo © Hans Thorwid / Nationalmuseum, Stockholm.


Figure 69. San Pietro in Vincoli, interior. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

Figure 70. Antonio Labacco, Basilica Aemilia, engraving, 1559. Labacco, Libro appartenente a l’architettura, fol. 18. Typ 525 59.508. Courtesy of Houghton Library, Harvard University.


Bramante’s version of the Doric columns of the Tempietto recalls the native Italic type that Vitruvius mentioned in the context of temples built by the Etruscans, the ancestral inhabitants of Central Italy, responsible for introduc-ing the Romans to social organization and religious ritual. The link between the Tempietto and the legacy of the Etruscans based on archaeological knowl-edge and imaginative speculation has drawn significant scholarly attention, revealing a rich vein of conceptual material.58 Vitruvius described the Tuscan order with a capital similar to the Greek Doric, but with a base supported on a round plinth.59 This hint of an autochthonic architectural form proved irre-sistible to Alberti, proud son of Florence, who favored the Etruscans as the inventors of the arts. He specifically claimed that they, not the Greeks, had first employed the Doric.60 By his own admission, Alberti knew at firsthand Etruscan necropolises where he would have encountered columns similar to the Doric, and friezes consisting of triglyphs and metopes carved directly into the living rock, often independent of a columnar or pilaster support.61 Bramante likely visited those sites, and both architects could have known a class of Etruscan cinerary urn featuring Tuscan-Doric columns, including the Attic base that Vitruvius described and Alberti recommended for use with the Doric, which Bramante followed in the Tempietto (Figure 71).62

Bramante’s application of Tuscan-Doric architecture to honor Peter and cel-ebrate the foundation of the Church in Rome needs to be considered in terms of Renaissance attitudes toward the Etruscans, and especially the idea that the right bank of the Tiber River, where Peter had been martyred and buried, was located in Etruria. Virgil and Horace, among other ancient writers, referred to that identification, and it was reiterated by Boccaccio and Renaissance authors, including Francesco Albertini, who declared that the Janiculum Hill and San Pietro in Montorio are located “in Etruria, not in Rome.”63 Shortly before Bramante’s arrival in Rome, the Etruscan legacy was promoted in a spectacu-lar way by the Dominican friar Giovanni Nanni, known as Annius of Viterbo, who served Alexander VI as official theologian from 1499 until his death in 1502.64 In 1498, the prestigious Roman publishing house of Eucherius Silber issued Annius’s Commentaries of Friar Giovanni Nanni of Viterbo on the Works of Various Authors who Speak about Antiquities, a book impressive for its size, com-plex typography, and dense content.65 Annius used authentic ancient texts and others of his own invention to advance a startling interpretation of the pro-gress of cultural achievement and spiritual revelation.66 Sidestepping the con-tributions of the Greeks, he imagined a more ancient wisdom originating with God’s revelations to the Jews, which the Etruscans transmitted to the Romans through a long line of prisci theologi, Chaldeans, Egyptians, and Assyrians. One


anchor of Annius’s scheme was the Old Testament patriarch Noah, who built the Ark at God’s direction and repopulated the earth following the Deluge. Annius promoted the idea that the ancients venerated Noah under the guise of various deities, among them Proteus, Uranus, and most important for the present discussion, Janus, all referring to the same mortal person.67 In antiq-uity, Janus was said to have been the first to rule over the peoples of Italy, responsible for introducing principles of government, of agriculture, and of sacred rituals, including constructing the first temples dedicated to the gods.68 Janus was also revered as a cosmic deity, credited with reigning over the sky, sea, and earth, and organizing time itself, which explains the name of the first month of the calendar year.69 Annius augmented the ancient literary sources with others of his own devising to support the claim that Noah-Janus had con-veyed the spiritual revelations of the Jews to the Etruscans, suggesting that the Etruscan language was related to Hebrew through common descent from the language of Adam.70 He also developed the ancient idea that the Janiculum was located in Etruscan territory, providing a schematic view of the hilly city and its relation to the Tiber River, which he identified as Etruscan (Figure 72).71 Even if Annius did not explicitly draw the connection between that ancient

Figure 71. Etruscan cinerary urn. Museo archeologico nazionale, Chiusi. By con-cession of the Soprintendenza per i Beni Archeologici della Toscana–Firenze.


legacy and the establishment of the Church on the right bank of the Tiber, it was implicit in his larger point. During the pontificates of Julius II and Leo X, the Augustinian friar Egidio da Viterbo expanded Annius’s theme by force-fully advancing the papacy’s Etruscan roots at the Vatican.72

These imaginative speculations regarding the course of spiritual history inform the present discussion. Annius granted Spain and its monarchs a cen-tral role in his scheme, dedicating the Commentaries to Ferdinand and Isabel and praising their representatives, Garcilaso de la Vega and Bernardino de Carvajal, whom he calls very dear friends (percharissimi familiares).73 In a chap-ter of the treatise inserted after printing had begun, he argued for Spain’s anteriority among great civilizations, including an invented series of the first twenty-four kings, beginning with Tubal, Noah’s grandson and Spain’s first ruler according to a tradition introduced by Josephus, and reiterated by Isidore of Seville.74 The late addition of that chapter may have been encouraged by the financial subvention provided by de la Vega, but it does not follow that Annius’s Hispanic focus constitutes empty flattery.75 De la Vega and Carvajal would have been receptive to Annius’s ideas concerning Spain, to be sure, but the possibility that the representatives of Ferdinand and Isabel inspired Annius directly is raised by the precedents for his procedures and conclusions found in Spanish historiography.76 Moreover, a source of 1499 records that Annius was

Figure 72. Giovanni Nanni (Annius of Viterbo), Rome and the Tiber River, woodcut, 1498. Nanni, Commentaria, fol. Miv. This item is reproduced by permission of The Huntington Library, San Marino, CA.


healed of a life-threatening disease by a thaumaturgic sage while in the house of the “Orator of the Most Illustrious Kings of the Spains,” likely referring to de la Vega.77 A late report states that Annius died in Carvajal’s presence in 1502, and bequeathed his library to the cardinal.78

The political message embedded in the Commentaries illuminates why Carvajal would have fostered a close association with Annius. His introduction to Annius’s work would have come through the 1480 tract entitled Concerning the Future Triumph of the Christians over the Saracens, an appeal to the pope, the kings of France, Spain, Naples, Hungary, and the Senate of Genoa, to defend Christendom.79 Annius framed his entreaty with apocalyptic and astrological ideas signaling the imminent collapse of the Muslim Empire, and anticipating the Golden Age of universal monarchy under papal rule to follow. This vision of the future was so compelling the text appeared in several editions before the end of the century. Annius’s epic presentation of human culture in the Commentaries of 1498 was grounded in the same view of religious confronta-tion and triumph, but instead of the anticipated future presented in the earlier text, Annius now projected those ideas onto a fabled past.80 In the dedicatory epistle of the Commentaries, he addressed Ferdinand and Isabel as mortal dei-ties, who “alone ‘separated the light from darkness,’ forcefully and bravely removing tyrants and Geryons from the Spains like descendants of Hercules.” He goes on to praise the virtues bestowed upon them by God as the summa-tion of “everything told of the victorious bravery, chastity, humanity, wisdom, shamefastness, piety, and care of our leader and lawgiver Moses and David and the holy leaders of old.”81 The underlying conceptual link between Annius’s texts of 1480 and 1498 explains why the idiosyncratic view of human history presented in the Commentaries proved so compelling for contemporaries, and why it found favor in Spain, republished in 1512 by the humanist and royal chronicler Antonio de Lebrija, and valued long after as a credible historical text.82

The importance of the Etruscans in the providential history of the Church, beginning in the East and concluding in Rome, and the parallel importance of the Spanish crown in securing the broader scheme of Christian monarchy, provide the context for interpreting the architectural system of the Tempietto as an essay in historical recovery with a focus on Etruscan, not Hellenic or purely Roman, antiquity.83 Confirmation of this interpretation comes by way of a drawing attributed to Leonardo da Vinci in which a vast tumulus, simi-lar to those known from Etruscan necropolises, has at its summit a peripteral tholos combining a dome raised upon a drum (Figure 73).84 A likely model for the tumulus, but not the interpolated tholos, is the Etruscan funerary


mound discovered in 1507 in the area of Castellina in Chianti known as Montecalvario.85 Whether this image depends directly on the Tempietto or reflects a parallel process of imaginative reconstruction, it documents contem-porary understanding of the Etruscan funerary tumulus and the tholos temple as affiliated architectural forms. Contemporaries would have found support in Vitruvius for the identification of the tholos as an Etruscan type. The ancient author discussed the tholos directly after the Tuscan temple in the same sec-tion of the treatise.86 Because the subheadings and paragraph divisions added to modern editions to distinguish the subjects being discussed were lacking, that conclusion was eminently reasonable. For the same reason Francesco di Giorgio and an artist in his circle imagined as a peripteral tholos the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline Hill, which was initiated by Rome’s last Etruscan kings (Figure 74).87

Bramante’s formulation of the Tempietto’s columnar order, no less than its circular plan and twin-storied elevation, reveals a broad knowledge of texts and monuments, both historical and imagined. Like the documents Annius

Figure 73. Leonardo da Vinci (attribution), Etruscan tumulus and peripteral tholos, drawing. Musée du Louvre, Paris, no. 2386. © RMN Grand Palais / Art Resource, NY.


fabricated to support his vision of the progress of ancient history leading inex-orably to the establishment of Christian empire, the Tempietto evokes the appearance of the Tuscan temple from which the sacred architecture of the West would descend. In that way, Bramante honored Peter’s establishment of the Church on that spot as the fulfillment of Rome’s ancient destiny traced from the Romans to the Etruscans and thence to Old Testament origins.

The Metopes

The metopes of the Tempietto’s frieze propel the meaning of the granite columns and Doric columns by engaging the idea of sacral privilege and Old Testament origins. The frieze with repeating metopes and triglyphs marks the first appearance in Renaissance architecture of this component of the classical Doric system. The metopes are set in a regular sequence, one above each col-umn and two within the intercolumniations, forty-eight total (Figure 75; Plates I–VII). Vitruvius recommended that Doric metopes be decorated with divine images (numina), but they were most often sculpted with objects employed in the pagan sacrifice, as in the Basilica Aemilia where libation vessels alternate with bulls’ skulls.88 Among the potential models for the Tempietto’s metopes,

Figure 74. Circle of Francesco di Giorgio, Temple of Jupiter and Baths of Diocletian, drawing. Galleria degli Uffizi, Gabinetto disegni e stampe, Florence, Uffizi 165 S. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


Figure 75. Tempietto, balustrade and Doric frieze viewed from the back. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

attention is drawn to the central-plan mausoleum of the Roman general Lucius Munatius Plancus (d. after 22 BC) in Gaeta, within the territory ruled by the Aragonese kings of Naples.89 In that case, the metopes are decorated with sac-rificial instruments alternating with military insignia. Bramante would have known this important example of Roman funerary architecture directly if, as Vasari claimed, he traveled as far as Naples after arriving in Rome. He reinvented that ancient tradition by depicting vessels and other appurtenances employed in the Christian liturgy. Those objects establish the religious nature of the shrine, and reinforce the bond linking Peter to Christ on the site of the Apostle’s death.

The Tempietto’s liturgical service consists of thirteen objects depicted sin-gly or in pairs, the chalice and paten jointly, the incense boat, holy water ves-sel, ewer, pyxis, books, cruets, candelabra, candles, and snuffers.90 The cross strung with rosary beads is also present, as are the umbrella and keys, signal-ing Peter’s pontifical status.91 The number of these objects varies from two to five, avoiding the symmetry produced if twelve objects had been repeated in four sets.92 The lack of regularity signals an alternative system of organization that can be discerned by considering how those objects are employed in the liturgy. The chalice and paten, which come into direct physical contact with the consecrated Host, receive the greatest emphasis through repetition and placement. They appear directly above the main entrance to the chapel, above the side entrance to the left, and again at the rear of the structure. (The pon-tifical umbrella marks the corresponding entrance on the right side.) In each


instance, the chalice and paten are flanked by the incense boat and candela-bra, which also function during the consecration of the Host. In an auxiliary position are books, cruets, candles, and snuffers, which appear as a unified sequence in four instances. Along with differences in number and placement, the manner of presentation also varies. In three cases, paired liturgical books are shown closed, one turned left, the other right, with differences in size, the decoration of the binding, and viewing angle. In two cases, single vol-umes appear with the pages flipped open. Moreover, although many objects are placed upright and appear to be supported by the lower edge of the relief, the paired candles, snuffers, and papal keys are crisscrossed in the manner of heraldic elements and depicted upright as if appended to the wall.

These variations in the grouping of objects and manner of display introduce a temporal quality to the series, suggesting that the objects are poised for use, as though the liturgy honoring Peter might soon begin. This idea raises the question of how the Tempietto was outfitted for the celebration of the Mass, an aspect of the monument’s history that has been entirely lost. Liturgical vessels and other altar furnishings were typically provided by the patron, and figured prominently in the ritual of dedication. The chalice and paten, which come into direct contact with the Sacred Species, are consecrated by the appli-cation of chrism, and the other objects are blessed either individually or as a group.93 When the metopes of the Tempietto are understood to evoke the liturgical accessories of the Tempietto, they reinforce the Christian purpose of the architecture, and honor the beneficence and piety of the patrons.

The association of Christian liturgical implements with their Old Testament prototypes produces another level of significance. Christian exegetes inter-preted the liturgical apparatus that God ordered for use in the Hebrew sanc-tuary as prefiguring the advent of Christ and the establishment of the Church, ideas holding potent meaning on the site of Peter’s crucifixion. The Hebrew vessels also possessed political significance in Rome, having been paraded into the city as war booty in the triumph celebrated by Vespasian and Titus follow-ing the conquest of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Josephus described that event and it was immortalized on the arch honoring Titus in the Roman Forum, where soldiers hold aloft the seven-branched Menorah and a ritual table upon which are set small cups. Tradition held that Constantine donated the Hebrew vessels to the Lateran basilica, bestowing upon Rome’s Cathedral, episcopal seat of Peter’s successors, the sacred functions possessed by the Temple under the Old Law.94 When the Tempietto’s metopes are viewed with these associations in mind, the objects depicted extend other references to Jerusalem conveyed by the architec-ture and decoration and engage the embracing theme of Catholic militancy.


The Shell Niches

Shells appear as decorative accents in many works of ancient and Renaissance architecture, which explains why those adorning the Tempietto have been understood to advance its classical affiliation without drawing close exami-nation (Plates V, VI, XII, XIV). Each of the twenty niches articulating the architecture is embellished with a shell in the semidome, eight on the exterior wall of the cella, an equal number at drum level, and four within the chapel. Renaissance architects favored a tightly controlled version of the shell, setting the hinge below so that the furrows and ribs fan out with geometric regular-ity to meet the rounded upper border of the niche. Brunelleschi applied that type in the exterior tribunes of Florence Cathedral and Bramante followed his model in Milan, in the side aisles of Santa Maria presso San Satiro. In contrast to these examples, the shells of the Tempietto are placed with the hinges at the top so the flutes radiate downward to terminate in a scalloped contour that incompletely fills the concave area (Figures 76, 77, showing the niches located to the right of the principal entrance). As a result, the shells assume the char-acter of independent objects affixed to the architecture in the manner of votive offerings. Alongside these changes from previous Renaissance interpretations of the shell, Bramante varied the form of the hinge, at times widely splayed, and at times tightly scrolled, and in the number of flutes, numbering between six and thirteen. As a result, the shells of the Tempietto possess a fresh vital-ity, suggesting specimens originating in nature.95 A similar sense of natural variety defines the rosettes located in the soffit between the colonnade and the cella, where the changing form of petals and stamens with no two identical evokes a blossoming arbor (Figure 78; Plates VIII, IX). This treatment recalls the coffers of Rome’s ancient triumphal arches, which differ from the repet-itive floral shapes seen in most Renaissance examples, including Bramante’s own works in Milan.

No true counterpart to the Tempietto’s shells exists in nature, but the sym-metry and especially the splayed ears of the hinge indicate that Bramante’s point of departure, as for Renaissance artists generally, was the bottom valve of the scallop, either the pecten maximus found in the Atlantic Ocean, or the pecten jacobaeus found in the Mediterranean Sea. This same natural model was adapted to frame portraits of the deceased on ancient and early Christian sarcophagi where it carried associations of fertility and regeneration.96 The dedication of the Tempietto to Peter and the patronage of the monarchs sug-gest more precise meanings. The shells honor Peter as fisherman and recall the theme of evangelization through Christ’s invitation to Peter and Andrew


Figure 77. Tempietto, shell niche. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

Figure 76. Tempietto, shell niche. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.


Figure 78. Tempietto, soffit. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.

to become fishers of men (Matthew 4:19; Mark 1:17). The other fisherman, the Apostle James Major, credited with introducing Christianity to Spain, provides the most compelling association for the Tempietto’s shell niches. Tradition held that after James was martyred in Jerusalem his relics were brought to Galicia in northwestern Spain and were venerated in the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela, honored as the third major pilgrimage site in the Christian world following Jerusalem and Rome. From the twelfth century forward, pilgrims to Compostela wore shells on their garments as an identi-fying badge, which explains the use of jacobaeus in the modern classification of the scallop.97

The widespread veneration of Saint James as divine ally in the struggle to restore Christianity to the Iberian Peninsula expands those associations and brings them close to the ideological content of the Tempietto’s architecture. James was credited with ensuring an important victory over the Moors in 844 when he appeared to Ramiro I, King of Asturias, on the eve of the bat-tle of Clavijo. Thereafter he was honored as protector of the Reconquest, and received the epithet Matamoros.98 The link between James and the struggle for Christian victory was dramatically expressed when Spanish troops conquered Muslim cities: on those occasions, the banner of the saint was displayed and


his name chanted, as occurred when the monarchs entered Granada in tri-umph.99 During the long years of the Granada war, in 1486, Ferdinand and Isabel undertook a pilgrimage to Compostela to gain the saint’s assistance.100 In 1493, with the war concluded, Pope Alexander VI ceded to Ferdinand and Isabel control of the military order of Saint James, which had been founded in the twelfth century to ensure the safety of Compostela pilgrims and to promote the Reconquest.101 The association of James with Christian victory was so pervasive, and its appeal to the monarchs so personal, it provided the theme of one of Isabel’s most spectacular state jewels formed with the Cross of Jerusalem supported by the scallop shell of Santiago.102 These associations suggest how the shells decorating the Tempietto’s niches provide a powerful gloss on the meaning of the architecture. By alluding to the Apostle James Major, they evoke the most venerable traditions of the faith in Spain and honor the martial efforts of the monarchs in achieving Catholic victory.

The Balustrade

Bramante extended the use of natural forms in the balustrade of the Tempietto to amplify the theme of Spanish royal prerogative and triumph over the enemies of the Church. A series of sixty-four balusters, each formed with two swelling bulbs joined at the center, is set above the entablature, one baluster above each column and three within each intercolumniation (see Figure 75; Plates I–IV, VI, VII).103 They complete the columnar order and mark the transition from the outer peripteros to the center dominated by the dome and drum. Balusters were widely used in fifteenth-century Italy as supports for altars, and as accents on doorframes, windows, and balconies.104 Bramante applied balusters in his Milanese churches, but never in the form or position they appear in the Tempietto. Renaissance architects strived to assim-ilate balusters to the classical canon despite being absent from ancient archi-tecture. Giuliano da Sangallo incorporated balusters in his graphic renderings of temples and central-plan mausolea, placing them at the termination of the colonnade in the same position they appear in the Tempietto (Figure 79).105 Because those drawings lack a secure date, they may reflect Bramante’s influ-ence; it is also possible that both Sangallo and Bramante depended on earlier Renaissance depictions of centrally planned domed structures where the outer colonnade is accented in a similar way either with balusters or upright posts. That treatment frequently appears in depictions of Holy Land buildings, as in the centrally planned temple appearing in the background of Perugino’s Christ Delivering the Keys to Peter from the Sistine chapel.106


The balusters found throughout Renaissance art and architecture conveyed nuanced meaning depending on the context, and it is possible that at times they were also employed as purely decorative features. By way of directing atten-tion to the significance of the Tempietto’s balustrade, this discussion begins at a point when the baluster was established in Spain as both a privileged archi-tectural form and a political symbol. Diego de Sagredo, architect and cleric, who served as chaplain for Cardinal Jimenez de Cisneros, regent of Spain from 1516 to 1519, and thereafter for Charles’s mother, Juana, Queen of Castile, pub-lished a treatise in 1526 on the columnar orders, the first such work to appear in Spain and the first anywhere to be devoted exclusively to that subject.107 He dedicated the work to his patron, Alfonso de Fonseca, Archbishop of Toledo, Primate of Spain, and Lord Chancellor of Castile. Sagredo had visited Italy and knew the treatises of Vitruvius, Alberti, and Francesco di Giorgio, but he was far from a slavish imitator. Among other innovations, he introduced an entirely new genus to the canonical architectural types, the baluster-column, and provided precise rules for its use (Figures 80, 81).108 Sagredo, while admit-ting that the ancients had never mentioned the type, advanced its legitimacy by citing the variety of ornament found in classical architecture, noting in particular the baluster-like shape of the candelabra employed in the pagan

Figure 79. Giuliano da Sangallo, Mausoleum at Porto and Temple of Hercules in the Forum Boarium, Rome, drawing. BAV, Barb. lat. 4424, fol. 37r, © 2014 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. By concession of the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, all rights reserved.


Figure 80. Diego de Sagredo, Pomegranate flower transformed into a baluster-column, woodcut, 1526. Sagredo, Medidas del romano, fol. Cir. Courtesy of Universidad de Salamanca, España. Biblioteca General Histórica.

Figure 81. Diego de Sagredo, baluster-columns, woodcut, 1526. Sagredo, Medidas del romano, fol. Ciiv. Courtesy of Universidad de Salamanca, España. Biblioteca General Histórica.


liturgy, the same shape found in the metopes of the Tempietto (Plate VII). He used the word balaustre to describe the form, perhaps recalling balausti and balagusti that Francesco di Giorgio applied to the same distinctive shape.109 Sagredo traced the origin of the word to the Latin balaustium, meaning pome-granate flower, and remarked on the plant’s similarity to the architectural bal-uster.110 In certain varieties the flower is tubular and swells toward the tip, so that when one is inverted above the other the resulting shape resembles the double-bulb baluster.

Sagredo never declared the baluster-column as especially appropriate for use in Spain, but that must have been his purpose when including it among the Vitruvian types.111 As previously discussed, the pomegranate had acquired political meaning during the war against Granada and in its aftermath when Ferdinand and Isabel adopted the title King and Queen of Granada and assim-ilated the fruit of the eponymous plant to their coat of arms. The idea of using the pomegranate flower under the guise of a baluster was introduced in the same period. Double-bulb balusters approaching the form Bramante would later apply in the Tempietto appear in two works built by prominent members of Queen Isabel’s circle, both of whom were actively engaged in the Granada war, the mortuary chapel in the Cathedral of Burgos of Don Pedro Fernández de Velasco, royal governor of Castile (d. 1492), and the Colegio de Santa Cruz in Valladolid, built by Pedro González de Mendoza, titular cardinal of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (Figure 82).112 During the second decade of the six-teenth century, double-bulb balusters were prominently applied as window screens at the Royal Chapel in Granada, which served as the mausoleum for Ferdinand and Isabel and their immediate descendants. By the time the chapel was nearing completion, Ferdinand and Isabel’s grandson Charles, Duke of Burgundy, King Designate of Spain, and future Holy Roman Emperor, adopted the double-bulb baluster as his personal device, integrated with the Columns of Hercules that in a more classical form became an enduring symbol of his political ambitions. Although the device was likely introduced in 1516 at the eighteenth chapter of the Order of the Golden Fleece when Charles presided for the first time, the baluster-columns appeared slightly later in the choir stall of Barcelona Cathedral that served for those august gatherings (Figure 83).113

The assimilation of the fruit and flower of the pomegranate to the most sacred symbols of the Spanish monarchy was motivated by the Granada vic-tory and looked ahead to possession of the Holy Land. In accordance with God’s orders in the Old Testament, pomegranates adorned the garments of the high priest and embellished the architecture of Solomon’s Temple (Exodus 28:33–34; I Kings 7:18–20). The primary visual document bridging Biblical


Figure 83. Titles and device of King Charles I of Spain, choir, Cathedral, Barcelona. © Fundació Instituto Amatller de Arte Hispánico. Archivo Mas.

Figure 82. Colegio de Santa Cruz, Valladolid, detail. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


references to the pomegranate with the architectural baluster is a woodcut published by Luca Pacioli in his treatise on divine proportion that appeared in Venice in 1509 (Figure 84).114 Pacioli, Dominican friar and mathematician, held the chair of mathematics in Milan from 1496 to 1499, at which time he befriended Leonardo and was acquainted with the same circle of humanists Bramante himself frequented.115 In the architectural portion of the treatise, he counseled the architect to use material form to express spiritual mean-ing, and recommended as a model God’s own architecture, referring to the entrance of the Temple of Solomon. The woodcut shows a pedimented por-tal flanked by two columns, inscribed in the tympanum Hierosolimis, and in the frieze Porta Templi Domini Dicta Speciosa. Pacioli referred to the visionary temple that would rise after Jerusalem was destroyed (Ezekiel 40–48), but the image depends on the description of the bronze portal located in the vesti-bule of Solomon’s Temple called the Beautiful Gate, the Porta Speciosa of the inscribed plate (I Kings 7:13–22).116 That entrance was distinguished from others as the place where Peter healed the lame man, the first miracle of the Apostles (Acts 3). For the Gate, Hiram of Tyre, the consummate artisan whose intelligence was said to match his talent, fashioned two bronze columns, called Jachim and Boaz, along with their capitals, and decorated them with bronze

Figure 84. Luca Pacioli, The Beautiful Gate of the Temple of Jerusalem, woodcut, 1509. Pacioli, De divina proportione. Courtesy of The Rosenwald Collection, Library of Congress.


pomegranates. Pacioli visualized this last feature as a series of nine double-bulb balusters extending across the width of the portal, located just below the entablature and at the level of the capitals.117 Pacioli’s image of the Beautiful Gate provides evidence that the baluster was understood as a meaningful form based on the etymology of the term linking it to the pomegranate, and thence to the most sacred architecture of the Judeo-Christian tradition.

These considerations establish how the Tempietto’s balustrade reinforces the religiopolitical meaning expressed by the architecture. When the balus-trade appears in other monuments that engage Christian political concerns through patronage and function, related meaning can be assumed. One prom-inent example is the ciborium of the Holy Lance at Saint Peter’s where the balustrade formed with double-bulb balusters reinforces the iconographic associations with Jerusalem and extends the theme of Catholic militancy (see Figure 51). Another example is the singers’ gallery at San Giacomo degli Spagnoli (1500–02), a commission of Diego Meléndez Valdès, majordomo of Pope Alexander VI and ambassador of the monarchs, whose coat of arms appear alongside balusters and military trophies.118 Finally, at San Pietro in Montorio, the altars in the chapels flanking the entrance are supported on the same type of double-bulb balusters, a pattern that was likely repeated in the other chapels. When Bramante encircled the upper level of the Tempietto with a balustrade he brought together three levels of interlocking significance, referring to the Universal Church, the prerogatives of the Spanish Kings, and the goal to recover the Holy Land for Christendom.

The Pavement

The pavement of the Tempietto’s chapel restates the meaning of the archi-tecture in a highly abstract, but nonetheless articulate form (Figure 85; Plates X, XII, XIII). The centralized design is produced by small square and trian-gular pieces of colored marble, with purple porphyry and green serpentine dominant, set in interlocking geometric patterns framed by broad bands of white marble.119 Although the materials were likely extracted from some medi-eval pavement, and therefore qualify as spolia, the design so closely reflects the plan of the Tempietto, it constitutes an integral feature of the ensemble. The technique of opus sectile originated in antiquity, but the variation seen in the Tempietto derives more directly from a Byzantine type widely employed in Italy and especially in Rome and Lazio from the eleventh through thir-teenth centuries. The extended family of marble workers collectively known as the Cosmati had a virtual monopoly on the type, hence the common tag,


Cosmatesque. Over time, the Tempietto’s pavement has suffered damage and restoration, but the resulting changes and even the wooden step inserted in front of the altar are insufficient to obscure the forceful design, which restates the plan of the Tempietto and draws attention to the midpoint.

Cosmatesque church pavements are commonly organized around a series of rotae, large disks often formed with porphyry, but sometimes with gray or rose-pink granite, which anchor the longitudinal axis of the nave, denoting areas of ceremonial activity, where the bishop and others would stand, sit, and kneel.120 In several cases a quincunx, five circles arranged in a radial design, appears in the apse, at the end of the nave, or toward the entrance of the church, this last being the case in the twelfth-century pavement of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme.121 By utilizing the materials and recapitulating the form of a venerable pavement type, Bramante continued the revival that Pope Martin V (1417–31) initiated in the nave of the Lateran basilica, and Pope Sixtus IV extended in the Sistine chapel at the Vatican, in both cases following the pro-cessional scheme, punctuated by one or more quincunxes.122 By the middle of the fifteenth century, Cosmatesque pavements also appeared in private funerary chapels, the earliest example being the chapel of James of Lusitania, Cardinal of Portugal, at San Miniato, Florence.123 Because these chapels were

Figure 85. Plan of the Tempietto, drawing. Courtesy of Ana Isabel Acedo Chaves.


square and vaulted, the quincunx reinforces the centralized architecture and draws attention to the midpoint, as occurs in the Tempietto.

Despite evident links to the past, Bramante expanded the tradition by intro-ducing to the quincunx greater complexity and greater formal unity than pre-vious examples. In the Tempietto, two variations of the quincunx are linked by a common center. In the first, the roundels and the square to which they are anchored closely follow the plan of the architecture. The roundels are nestled within the apses marking the chapel’s entrances and altar recess, and the angles of the square are aligned with the center of the windows. The sec-ond, enfolded quincunx consists of a smaller square set on point. The bands of white marble framing the four roundels that emerge from the sides suggest a swirling clockwise motion. Whereas the geometric forms of the first quincunx are kept separate, in the second quincunx they interpenetrate, producing a greater emphasis on the center. Today, a round metal grill occupies that mid-point toward which all vectors of the architecture and pavement lead. Peering through the grill to the crypt below one sees a second aperture that pierces the lower pavement to reveal the golden-colored earth of Montorio (Plates X, XVI). It has long been assumed that these features formed part of Bramante’s original design, making accessible the spot where Peter’s cross was inserted in the earth. A source to be discussed in Chapter 6 makes clear, however, that both apertures were opened during renovations to the Tempietto in 1628. By analogy with other applications of the quincunx in medieval and Renaissance pavements, it can be inferred that the center of the Tempietto’s upper chapel was originally closed by a porphyry rota. Porphyry was highly prized for its Roman imperial associations and, as noted previously in this chapter, carried associations with the martyrs of the early Church, who worked the quarries in Egypt where the stone was extracted. In the present context, the purple color of porphyry resonates with particular force for evoking the color of blood, “spurting forth from the vein,” in Dante’s memorable description of the stone.124 The centripetal design of the quincunx, along with the purpose-ful use of materials, visually express the martyrial function of the Tempietto by aligning the sacred center with the place of Peter’s crucifixion.

In developing the pavement so that geometry and faith coincide, Bramante engaged a prominent theme in Renaissance architectural theory. Alberti rec-ommended that musical or geometric subjects be inscribed on the pavement of churches to direct the soul to the Christian cult, “so that whichever way we may turn our eyes we may be sure to find enjoyment for our minds.”125 He based that recommendation on the ancient notion that the microcosm of the world was linked to the macrocosm of the universe in an infinite chain of


correspondences.126 Filarete elaborated that idea in the cathedral he proposed to build in Milan for Francesco Sforza, father of Ludovico Sforza, Bramante’s ducal patron, where the domed, centralized plan recalled the basilica of San Lorenzo and with it the heroic age of the early Church in Milan.127 Filarete describes how the circular area of the pavement beneath the principal dome would be inscribed with the lands and the waters of the earth, the perimeter with the months of the year and the signs of the zodiac, and the peripheral areas with the four seasons and four elements.128 This scheme recalls a type of medieval radial diagram best known from illustrations of Isidore of Seville’s De natura rerum where the macrocosm and microcosm are related through tetradic correspondences between the World, the Year, and Man (Figure 86).129 The central field in these designs, both the diagrams and the pavements, carried an implicit link to Jerusalem, center of the world in Judeo-Christian tradition.130 The pavement of the Tempietto conveys that idea with a focus on Peter’s cru-cifixion at the midpoint. When understood in these ways, the pavement rein-forces the meaning of the architecture, formally, by restating the centripetal plan, functionally, by referring to its martyrial purpose, and iconographically, by evoking the geographical and spiritual center of the world. This last idea supplied a powerful reference for reasons of personal faith, the prerogatives of the Catholic monarchs, and the collective goal of Holy Land recovery.

Figure 86. Isidore of Seville, macrocosmic-microcosmic harmony, woodcut, 1472. Isidore of Seville, De natura rerum. Inc. 1533 B 16.1, Houghton Library, Harvard University.


Conclusion

The view of the Tempietto that emerges from this discussion extends previous interpretations toward greater specificity by demonstrating that the materials and forms Bramante employed advance the spiritual meaning of the site and celebrate the patrons’ Catholic militancy. With the granite columns, Tuscan-Doric detailing, and decoration of the metopes, Bramante absorbed elements of classical architecture, referring to the early Church, to martyrdom, and to Rome’s ancient destiny traced to the Holy Land through the Etruscan legacy. The shells and balusters, potent religious and political symbols, complemented those ideas holding special meaning for Spain and its monarchs. Finally, the geometric design of the chapel’s pavement reinforced the cosmological reso-nance of the circular plan and honored the site where Peter died for his faith, drawing equivalence between the city of Rome and Jerusalem. In all these ways Bramante fortified the cultural, geographical, and ultimately political meanings of the Tempietto’s architecture to project the idea of Christian vic-tory under the aegis of Spain.

137

Chapter Five

History and ProPHecy

By situating the Tempietto at the center of Spanish royal patronage in Rome, it becomes possible to approach with fresh insight the date of the monument and, by extension, its historical context. The sole

surviving primary source attesting to the chronology of the Tempietto is the 1502 foundation stone discovered during renovations to the crypt in 1628 (Figure 87). The unusually complicated history of the stone, traced through its discovery, damage, and restoration, along with uncertainty about its function, has obscured the singular importance of this object for defining the history of the Tempietto.1 A tendency to advance the date of the Tempietto to 1505–06 and at times later still has assumed familiarity through repetition.2 That revised chronology allows for the inclusion of the Tempietto in the roster of innovative works Bramante conceived for Pope Julius II (1503–13), with the result that it becomes an afterthought rather than the catalyst for New Saint Peter’s. The ritual function of the foundation stone and its distinctive epigraphical style, along with the significance the year 1502 held for the monarchs, demonstrate that the Tempietto’s formal and conceptual innovations were anchored in historical reality and addressed an anticipated future.

The Foundation Stone of the Tempietto

The renovation of the crypt of the Tempietto that brought forth the inscribed stone was commissioned by the Spanish Discalced Carmelite monk, Domingo Ruzola (Domingo de Jesùs y María), known in Italy as Domenico di Gesù Maria (1559–1630).3 Aspects of the renovation including the discovery of


Figure 87. Foundation stone of the Tempietto, front. Tempietto, crypt. Photo cour-tesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.

the stone have been known from the brief and in parts inaccurate report con-tained in the 1655 biography of Domenico published in Vienna by his nephew, the polymath and Cistercian monk Juan Caramuel.4 A far more detailed record of the renovation is now made available in a biography written by Annibale Angelini (d. 1630), known as Fra Pietro di Madre di Dio, who served as Domenico’s personal secretary during the last fifteen years of his life (Appendix B).5 The lengthy manuscript chronicling every aspect of Domenico’s eventful life fills two volumes of unbound sheets that must have been composed over an extended period. The chapter concerning the Tempietto renovations begins “last year, 1627,” indicating that it was written as the events unfolded.

The stone was discovered when workers broke through the subterranean wall of the Tempietto to create a new entrance to the crypt. Fra Pietro sup-plied the approximate dimensions of the stone, and recorded the inscriptions on both sides. On one side he saw,

Lapidem Apostolor(um) Principis martirio sacrum, Ferdinandus Hispaniarum Rex, et Helisabeth regina catholici, post erectam ab eis aedem posuerunt anno salutis Christianae 1502.

History and Prophecy • 139

(Ferdinand and Isabel, Catholic King and Queen of the Spains, set up this stone sacred to the martyrdom of the Prince of the Apostles after the church had been erected by them. In the year of Christian salvation 1502.)

The inscription on the other side of the stone read

Bernard(in)us Carvajal Card. S.R.E. primum lapidem, i(n)ecit.

(Bernardino Carvajal, Cardinal of the Holy Roman Church, deposited the first stone.)

Fra Pietro also recorded the discovery of four silver coins bearing the image and name of King Ferdinand set into circular recesses located at the corners of the stone.

The stone is found today mounted on the front of the crypt altar where it was installed in the early nineteenth century (Plate XVI).6 It differs from Fra Pietro’s description in three significant respects: it is marginally smaller than the dimensions provided; only one of the four circular recesses mentioned

Figure 88. Foundation stone of the Tempietto, back (contrast digitally enhanced). Tempietto, crypt. Courtesy of CABBSA, Madrid.


is present; and the first word of the text reads Sacellum, chapel, not Lapidem, stone.7 These differences are the result of extensive damage to the stone visi-ble in the irregular contours and especially the web of cracks at the upper left, and its subsequent repair. The damage likely occurred during the bellicose events accompanying the establishment of the First Roman Republic in 1798, discussed in the Epilogue. During conservation of the Tempietto in 1998 and 1999, the stone was removed from the altar, revealing the inscription on the reverse side (Figure 88).8 The new evidence was sufficient to assuage lingering doubts concerning the authenticity of the stone. The other major discovery was that the roughly triangular piece in the upper left was formed with mar-ble different from the main block and attached to it with two metal grips. The fact that the letters of the word Sacellum reflect, but do not precisely match, the epigraphical style of the rest confirms it as a late insertion. On the reverse of the repaired portion, the letters added to complete Car(dinalis) and the final word Posuit, not Iniecit as transcribed by Fra Pietro and Juan Caramuel, lack the depth and regularity of the letters on the main block. Of the circular recesses mentioned by Fra Pietro, one was likely located in the area of resto-ration beneath the initial word, directly across from the single surviving one. The other two may have been accommodated along the original lower border, or possibly on the reverse side, where at the upper left a partial recess can be discerned. Based on this evidence, it can be concluded that the stone preserved today is the same one discovered in 1628, reduced in size and repaired with a new piece of marble inscribed in an epigraphical style intended to complete the damaged original.

Before considering the principal inscription naming the patrons and the date, attention is drawn to the text crediting Bernardino de Carvajal with installing the primus lapis. The “first stone” refers to the ritual stone that the Church required be inserted into the inaugural trench before construction could begin. During the excavations of 1628, it was discovered that the foun-dations of the Tempietto were relatively shallow, with the structure rising from a solid mass of tufa. Fra Pietro adds the important detail that the stone was discovered in the lower foundation wall, which follows the procedure set forth in the Roman Pontifical that the primus lapis be placed in fundamento, on the site where the structure would rise.9

Foundation stones, crafted to be buried and hidden from sight, were con-spicuous during the ceremony of installation and at times the texts they bore were recorded.10 The text incised on the Tempietto’s stone follows tradition by providing the name of the patrons and the date, but it differs by referring to the stone itself, identified as sacred to Peter’s martyrdom. That point is


emphasized visually by centering Martyrio and Sacrum on two successive lines. These words define the nature of the stone, Lapidem, the initial word in Fra Pietro’s transcription. The implication is that the stone served in the Apostle’s crucifixion and was worthy of devotion.11 The stone’s spiritual importance clarifies why it was installed in a space lined with bricks, this according to Fra Pietro. Isolating the stone from contact with the other construction materials preserved its integrity, in a sense preparing it for future discovery.

The venerable associations of the primus lapis provide the proper context for considering the epigraphical style of the main text.12 The seriphs used to embellish the letters, centering to emphasize certain words, and the abbrevi-ation poss for posuerunt, all reflect ancient practice. Also dependent on ancient models are the palmate Y in Martyrio, the diagonal descending from the loop of the R, and the circle of the P that occasionally lacks closure. Despite these features, the lack of consistency in height, spacing, and alignment produces a rustic quality distinct from the refined all’antica style characteristic of many Renaissance epigraphs.13 Fra Pietro, sensitive to those same qualities, char-acterized the stone as exhibiting great age (dimostrava antichità).14 One of the most striking results of the recent conservation of the stone was discovery of the inscription on the reverse side where ruled lines provide a guide for letters regular both in size and spacing. The coexistence of two styles, the rustic one announcing the relationship to Peter’s martyrdom, and the more classical one documenting the stone’s ritual function, confirms that the shape of the letters was intentional. The extensive epigraphical collections assembled in Rome by, among others, Olivero Carafa, Giulio Pomponio Leto, and members of the Mellini family, all close associates of Carvajal, provided exposure to a range of styles dating from all phases of Rome’s history, early Republic through medieval.15 Additionally, Carvajal would have been in touch with humanists working in Spain who held inscriptions in the highest esteem for clarifying aspects of Spain’s illustrious history otherwise lacking in the literary record.16 Carvajal himself possessed two inscriptions, and even if their date and content are unknown, they confirm his personal regard for epigraphy.17 That regard is further demonstrated by the majolica tile inscriptions he installed toward the end of his life in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (see Figures 20, 21).

The closest parallel for the rustic letterforms on the principal inscription of the Tempietto stone is provided by early Christian funerary epigraphs dat-ing from the fourth and fifth centuries (Figure 89).18 These epigraphs typi-cally exhibit classical features, but lack the precise technical procedures that characterize Roman imperial examples. The use of the Greek contraction chi-rho in the final line of the Tempietto stone, along with the rendering of the


ivy leaf just above, confirms the source of the style in those lapidary records of the primitive Church. The historicizing epigraphy of the stone and its inser-tion into the foundations of the shrine marking the place of Peter’s martyr-dom demonstrate the same sensitivity to form and meaning that defines every aspect of the architecture and decoration.

The art of the early Church played a significant role in Renaissance visual culture and assumed a new urgency in Rome during the late fifteenth century. Giulio Pomponio Leto and his fellow members of the Roman Academy were early explorers in the catacombs, marking on the walls the classical names they assumed as academicians.19 Pietro Sabino, a member of Leto’s circle and professor of Greek and Latin at the University of Rome, compiled a sylloge consisting exclusively of Christian inscriptions, the first of its kind in the Renaissance.20 In January 1495, he presented the collection to King Charles VIII of France during the sovereign’s month-long stay in Rome on his way to Naples to assert his rights to the Kingdom. Sabino declared his purpose was to inspire a new military campaign to recover the Holy Land, and cited as evi-dence for its imminent success the recent transfer of the Holy Lance of Christ’s Crucifixion to Rome, conquest of the kingdom of Granada, and rediscovery of the superscription of the Cross. Sabino’s view of those events as harbingers of a new military effort parallels the coordination of the Granada victory with the discovery of the titulus Crucis that also informed the decoration of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. In the present context, the titulus assumes great inter-est as a catalyst for valuing an epigraphical style radically different from that of imperial Rome, and one directly tied to Christ and to the early Church.

When the titulus was discovered in 1492, only the word Nazareth and the beginning of king in both Greek and Latin were visible, with indecipherable

Figure 89. Paleochristian funerary inscription. Galleria lapidaria, Musei Vaticani, inv. no. 6131. Photo courtesy of Musei Vaticani.


bits at the upper edge indicating the position of the lacking Hebrew text (Figure 90). The misaligned letters of unequal size are inscribed in mirror image and follow in retrograde fashion from right to left, “in the tradition of the Jews,” according to the papal Master of Ceremonies Johannes Burchard.21 During Innocent VIII’s visit to Santa Croce in Gerusalemme on March 12, 1492, Burchard looked on as the pope held the relic and examined it closely, recording that the form of the letters was rather good, a clear indication that epigraphical nuances were closely observed.22 Those letters, fragmentary and difficult to make out in the wooden tablet, were repeated in the bronze plaque joined to the top of the Mendoza reliquary, where the Hebrew text was recon-structed in its entirety.23 The titulus likely inspired both the historicizing style of the Tempietto’s stone and the claim that it was a relic of Peter’s martyrdom. In each case, the inscription identifies the object as a sacred relic and the unre-fined letters announce the martyr’s august status, King of the Jews, Prince of the Apostles. These links between the stone and the superscription of Christ’s Cross point to the same ideas expressed by the architecture of the Tempietto, referring to Jerusalem and the idea of Christian glory under the leadership of the Catholic monarchs.

Figure 90. Superscription of the Cross, woodcut, 1610. Bosio, La trionfante e gloriosa croce, 64. f Arc 1033.35.21, Houghton Library, Harvard University.


The Year 1502

Once the year inscribed on the primus lapis is understood as the date the Tempietto was founded, it becomes possible to approach the historical con-text with increased clarity. Documentation is entirely lacking for the process of constructing the Tempietto, but following common practice, work would have begun after the installation of the foundation stone in accordance with a detailed plan already established.24 The question naturally arises why atten-tion would have turned to the site of Peter’s crucifixion only two years after the consecration of San Pietro in Montorio in June 1500 and the close of the Holy Year that December. Carvajal and Bramante may have discussed a project to build a memorial when the cardinal visited Milan between 1496 and 1497, and Carvajal possibly conveyed an initial concept to King Ferdinand along with the plan of the church and monastery and final accounts that he sent in August 1498. The king expressed great pleasure in the plan, and provided an additional 1,000 ducats to permit the project’s completion in the way indi-cated. Those funds were likely applied to the church, but some portion of the disbursements Carvajal received during the subsequent years would have sup-ported construction of the Tempietto.25 Notwithstanding uncertainty about how construction was financed, it can be certain that the decision to found the Tempietto in 1502 was purposeful. It has passed unobserved in previous discussions that 1502 marked the tenth anniversary of the monarchs’ signal achievements of 1492, conquest of the kingdom of Granada and Columbus’s inaugural voyage of exploration in the New World.26 Moreover, contemporary events clustering around 1502 confirmed those portentous achievements as part of a providential plan moving toward realization.

The Apocalypsis Nova

The premier event of 1502 that sets the stage for the others by revealing Carvajal’s hand in orchestrating history to promote faith was the unsealing of the prophetic text attributed to Amadeo Meneses de Silva, known as the Apocalypsis nova.27 Amadeo, whose presence at the monastery of San Pietro in Montorio marked the beginning of Spanish royal involvement, was said to have received revelations from the Archangel Gabriel while praying in a grotto at the monastery.28 A text purporting to record those revelations was widely dis-seminated in Italy and throughout Europe during the sixteenth century and thereafter.29 This interest reveals fascination with the themes addressed in the


text involving the future perfection of the world to be presaged by the advent of an angelic pope and the union of the Western and Eastern Churches, all in preparation for the Endtime. Modern studies have uncovered important facts concerning the manuscript Amadeo left behind at his death, the circumstances of its opening, and changes made to the text under Carvajal’s watchful eye.

The fact that Amadeo had written a significant work attracted official attention soon after he died in Milan on August 10, 1482. Nine days later, the archbishop of the city interrogated four Amadeite friars concerning the book (liber) Amadeo had in his possession.30 The record of the meeting specifies that Amadeo had written it at San Pietro in Montorio and directed that it remain sealed. He left detailed instructions about what should happen following his death: the guardian of the monastery in Milan would take custody of the text succeeded by a second friar, both of whom are named, followed by another elected by the congregation, and so forth. Carvajal, who fulfilled the informal role of protector of the Amadeites, had direct contact with the group between August 1496 and March 1497 when he was in Milan as legate of Pope Alexander VI to the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I; at that time he named the Milanese priest Tommaso Conti to serve as his chaplain, a reward for services rendered to Amadeo and to the order in Milan.31 Carvajal may have devel-oped a plan at that time to return the book to San Pietro in Montorio, thus augmenting the spiritual prestige of the order’s official seat in Rome, where Amadeo had received the revelations. Carvajal’s engagement with the book emerges from sources compiled in the early sixteenth century when interest in it continued unabated, largely due to the cardinal’s own efforts at its dissem-ination. These sources include the testimonies of Isaia da Varese, guardian of San Pietro in Montorio, and of Giorgio Benigno Salviati ( Juraj Dragišić), Franciscan friar and theologian of Bosnian origin.32 The sensitive nature of the events they describe explains the elliptical way they present the informa-tion and the variations among their accounts, but sufficient correspondence exists to permit the following reconstruction.

Isaia da Varese, in a year not specified, conveyed or had one of the friars con-vey Amadeo’s volume to Carvajal at the cardinal’s request, and in spring 1502, between the feasts of Easter and the Ascension, it was unsealed at San Pietro in Montorio.33 In 1502, Benigno shared details of that event and its aftermath with a friend in Florence where prophetic expectation remained high due to the memory of Savonarola, the Dominican friar who had died at the stake as a heretic in 1498.34 Like Benigno, Carvajal had links to Savonarola and to his followers.35 Benigno reports that in addition to himself and Carvajal, the cere-mony was attended by the Minister General of the Franciscans, Egidio Delfini


d’Amelia, and an unnamed associate of Carvajal, a bishop of “our order,” iden-tified in other sources as a Spanish penitentiary at Saint Peter’s called either Morlion or Morone.36 Delfini and Carvajal determined that the volume should be opened, and they selected Benigno for that honor. Benigno was reticent to accept, citing Amadeo’s directive that it remain sealed, and noting that three friars who had previously attempted to open it had sickened and died.37 He also reports that the bishop declared his own desire to open the volume. After celebrating Mass in San Pietro in Montorio, Benigno and the bishop together opened it and were the first to read its contents.38 Thereafter Carvajal took possession of the volume, kept it in a locked box, and carried the key on his person; he held it as an “oracle” and determined to read it himself, even while limiting access to others.39 It must have been in the aftermath of these events that the text was amplified with interpolations of a theological nature involv-ing the role of the Virgin Mary and the angels in the scheme of salvation. Benigno, with Carvajal’s consent if not direct participation, was likely respon-sible for making these additions, an idea suggested by one contemporary.40 Most interesting is Benigno’s report that each person present at the ceremony believed himself to be Amadeo’s angelic pastor, who was destined to reform the Church in preparation for the Final Days.41 Benigno favored the Minister General as that person, reserving for himself the role of one of the ten Eastern cardinals also discussed by Amadeo who would play a role in the Endtime.

Mariano da Firenze, writing around 1517, suggested that Carvajal aspired to the role of angelic pope and used that idea to explain the cardinal’s leader-ship of the schismatic Council of Pisa.42 In 1511, after years of disagreement with the policies of Pope Julius II, Carvajal joined forces with a handful of other cardinals, and with the support of the Holy Roman Emperor and the French king, moved to depose the pope. Julius II responded by excommunicat-ing Carvajal and stripping him of all ecclesiastical offices. Carvajal remained alienated from the Church until 1513, when Leo X rehabilitated him following a humiliating, public abjuration.43 After reinstating Carvajal, the pope inter-rogated him about the whereabouts of Amadeo’s original text and the cardinal responded that it had been lost in the turmoil following the Council, but at least one informed contemporary doubted that this was true.44

Memory of these dramatic events in the life of the Church was still fresh when Mariano was writing his text. He reinforced the prophetic expectancy associated with San Pietro in Montorio by claiming that the grotto where Amadeo received the revelations and wrote the Apocalypsis was located beneath the site of Peter’s crucifixion, that is, beneath the Tempietto. As previously dis-cussed, that claim cannot be sustained.45 Nevertheless, visual evidence indicates


that a link between the Tempietto and Amadeo’s revelations was being forged during the years immediately following the Council of Pisa. The Spanish artist Pedro Fernández da Murcia, likely between 1512 and 1514, painted an image of Amadeo’s visionary experience for the Amadeite hermitage of San Michele Arcangelo, Montorio Romano (Rieti) (Figure 91).46 The artist, who was previ-ously employed by the Amadeites in Lombardy, based his style in part on the Milanese work of Bramante and Bartolomeo Suardi (called Bramantino), hence the tag pseudo-Bramantino that was applied before discovery of his proper name. The painting shows the Archangel Gabriel presenting Amadeo to members of the heavenly court, who populate an edifice defined by features recalling the Tempietto.47 This structure, like the Tempietto, rises in three stages, the lowest, polygonal level articulated by Doric pilasters, the metopes of the frieze emblazoned with liturgical vases, pyxides, and amphoras, and the

Figure 91. Pedro Fernández da Murcia, Vision of Amadeo Meneses de Silva. Galleria Nazionale d’Arte Antica in Palazzo Barberini, Rome. Courtesy of Alinari / Art Resource, NY.


transition to the middle level defined by a balustrade. The association of the Tempietto with the Apocalypsis nova found in Mariano’s text and visualized in Fernández’ painting may have been advanced by Carvajal and promoted by the Amadeites of San Pietro in Montorio.48 Nevertheless, it would be difficult to explain Bramante’s invention exclusively through reference to Amadeo and his prophecies. The Tempietto expresses in a new architectural synthesis the con-stellation of political and spiritual concerns, including prophetic revelation, long of interest to both the Spanish monarchs and Cardinal Carvajal, which came together with particular force in 1502.

The Kingdom of Sicily and the Hohenstaufen Inheritance

During the years 1501 to 1503 Ferdinand and Isabel achieved control over the Kingdom of Sicily, ending a conflict with France that had begun in the thirteenth century. This victory can be associated with the foundation of the Tempietto indirectly, and then only in the broadest terms. Nevertheless, the military effort, well advanced in 1502, engaged themes associated with the establishment of universal Christian hegemony that also provide the core meaning of the Tempietto.

Aragonese claims to the Kingdom of Sicily (sometimes called Kingdom of the Two Sicilies), consisting of the island of Sicily and the mainland territo-ries in Apulia, Campania, and Calabria, along with the Abruzzi and Molise, were based on the inheritance of the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II (d. 1250), traced through the 1262 marriage of his granddaughter, Constance of Hohenstaufen, to King Pedro III of Aragon.49 As part of the epic conflict between Frederick and the papacy, in 1245 Pope Innocent IV deposed the emperor and twenty years later Pope Clement IV bestowed his title to the Kingdom of Sicily upon Charles I of Anjou, brother of the saintly King Louis IX of France. One part of the Aragonese claim to the Kingdom was realized in 1282 when Pedro III seized control of the island of Sicily in the wake of the popular uprising against the Angevins known as the Sicilian Vespers.50 The mainland territories of Frederick II remained under Angevin control until King Alfonso V of Aragon, Ferdinand’s uncle, vanquished René of Anjou and became king of Naples (1443–58). Alfonso, rather than uniting those penin-sular lands with the island of Sicily to recompose the full Hohenstaufen leg-acy, passed them to his illegitimate son Ferrante (1458–94), reinforcing the division of the Kingdom that began in 1282. Despite the close ties existing


between Aragon and Naples, including the marriage of Ferdinand of Aragon’s sister Juana to King Ferrante in 1477, the alienation of Naples from Aragon was never accepted as a permanent condition.51

A new phase in the contest for control over the Kingdom began in 1494 when Charles VIII of France descended into Italy with an enormous military force to assert his rights to the Angevin inheritance.52 Charles spent a month in Rome (December 31, 1494 to January 28, 1495), during which time Carvajal negotiated with him on behalf of the pope, before the king continued on to Naples where he received the Neapolitan crown.53 In the wake of these events, Alexander VI refused to invest Charles with the title to the Kingdom, and he was forced to withdraw under threat of the League of Venice, composed of the pope, the emperor, Venice, Milan, and Spain.54 A formal truce between France and Spain was introduced early in 1497, and a definitive treaty was signed by Charles’s successor, King Louis XII (1498–1515) in August 1498.55 The two powers agreed to depose the king of Naples (Federico, 1496–1501) and partition the peninsular lands of the Kingdom between them, which they formalized in the treaty of Granada of November 11, 1500.56 The declared purpose of that accommodation was to avoid weakening the Christian powers and deflecting attention from a united defense of Christendom. The terms of the treaty provided that Louis XII would receive the northern portion of the realm, consisting of Naples, Gaeta, the Terra di Lavoro, and the Abruzzi, and Ferdinand and Isabel would receive the southern portion, Apulia and Calabria. Under this arrangement, Louis would hold the title king of Naples and Jerusalem, and Ferdinand and Isabel would become duke and duchess of Apulia and Calabria.

In 1501, the parties began putting the agreement into effect, but war soon broke out between them. The contemporary historian Francesco Guicciardini pointed to the lack of clear borders separating those territories, but Niccoló Machiavelli advanced a more critical view: Ferdinand understood the inevita-bility of war and “hoping, either with fortune or with trickery to go ahead.”57 The war was waged throughout 1502 and 1503 under the skilled leadership of Gonzalo Fernández de Córdoba, called “el Gran Capitán.” At that time, Cardinal Carvajal supported the effort by sending funds and men to the Kingdom.58 Rumors circulated that King Ferdinand would come to Italy to pursue the war in person.59 Spanish forces took Naples in May 1503, won a decisive victory at Garigliano in December, and on January 1, 1504 forced the surrender of Gaeta, thus ending the war. The lands of Frederick II were now reunited under the crown of Aragon.


King and Queen of Jerusalem

In addition to asserting the Hohenstaufen inheritance, the conquest of the Kingdom of Sicily meant that the influence of the crown of Aragon extended over territory traditionally identified with passage to the eastern Mediterranean, and for that reason was considered ideal for launching a crusade to the Holy Land. When Charles VIII descended into Italy and invaded Naples, he claimed crusade, not territorial gain, as his true objective.60 Matching the geographi-cal importance of the Kingdom was its titulary link to Jerusalem. Frederick II assumed the title King of Jerusalem based on his marriage in 1225 to Yolande (Isabel II), daughter of John of Brienne and Isabel I, the titular queen, and he employed it to great effect during his diplomatic campaign with the Sultan of Egypt to advance the rights of Christians in the Holy Land. In 1277, Charles I of Anjou secured his own title to Jerusalem by purchasing it from Mary of Antioch, another claimant, and thereafter styled himself King of Jerusalem and Sicily.61 After the island of Sicily became an Aragonese possession in 1282, the title to Jerusalem was applied more narrowly to the kings of Naples. All who held Naples adopted it as their own, including Alfonso V of Aragon and his descendants, as well as the unsuccessful claimants, René of Anjou and Charles VIII.62 Ferdinand began to employ the title immediately after concluding the war with France; he was named King of Sicily and Jerusalem in the truce of 1504 ending the war, and again in the definitive peace treaty of 1505. Isabel was honored as Queen of the Two Sicilies and of Jerusalem during the exequies Cardinal Carvajal staged at San Giacomo degli Spagnoli following her death in November 1504.63 Papal confirmation of that status came in 1510 when Pope Julius II invested Ferdinand with the Kingdom and formally granted him the title King of Sicily and Jerusalem.64

Ferdinand and Isabel’s acquisition of the title to Jerusalem marked the cul-mination of a lifelong effort to assert a personal association with the Holy Land by protecting Christian pilgrims and safeguarding holy sites. In pur-suing those goals, the monarchs embraced the legacy of King James II of Aragon and Sicily (1291–1327), who had succeeded in securing tutelary privi-leges for Christians in the Holy Land from the Mamluk Sultan of Egypt.65 That activity constituted a significant element in the rivalry with the Angevin dynasty in Naples, and engaged another aspect of Frederick II’s memory. In the mid-fourteenth century the King and Queen of Naples, Robert of Anjou (1309–43) and Sancia of Aragon-Mallorca (1309–45), advanced the same tute-lary role. After lengthy negotiations with the Sultan involving great expense, they attained rights for the Franciscans to live and celebrate the Divine Office


at the Holy Sepulcher and the Cenaculum on Mount Sion. The extraordinary nature of those concessions prompted Pope Clement VI to ratify them in two bulls issued on November 21, 1342.66 The record of Spanish royal patronage of the Holy Land also provides precedents for the pledge Isabel assumed in 1477 to donate funds each year to support the Franciscans of Mount Sion and to repair the Holy Land monuments; in 1489 she increased that pledge and made it perpetual.67 Ferdinand honored the pledge after her death as did their grandson Charles and his own son and heir Philip II.68 In 1555, Philip spon-sored a comprehensive restoration of Christ’s tomb.69

Ferdinand complemented Isabel’s efforts in asserting a tutelary role in the Holy Land. In 1480, at the start of the new military campaign against Granada, he expressed concern that the Sultan might seek retribution by harming Christian pilgrims and damaging the Holy Land monuments.70 In 1489, with the campaign against Granada moving toward conclusion, the Moors appealed directly to Sultan Qaلاit Bey for protection against Ferdinand’s troops.71 The Sultan dispatched an embassy to Pope Innocent VIII consisting of Franciscan guardians of the Holy Sepulcher charged with conveying his objections to the monarchs’ military activities and the threat to treat Christians under his rule in the same way the Moors were being treated in Spain. Ferdinand and Isabel succeeded in mollifying the Sultan at that time, and once again in 1501 when, anticipating the expulsion of the Moors from Castile, they sent an embassy to the new Sultan, Khansu al-Ghuri. The leader of the embassy, Pietro Martire d’Anghiera, succeeded in forestalling possible retribution against Christian pilgrims, and procured permission to repair the holy places.72

When Ferdinand and Isabel extended their tutelage over the Holy Land and reasserted Hohenstaufen rights to the Kingdom of Sicily with title to Jerusalem they positioned themselves to claim the role of the Last World Emperor, the messianic leader destined to recover Jerusalem for Christendom. Prophecies foretelling that event circulated throughout Europe during the later Middle Ages, at times identifying the German emperor as the chosen leader and at times the kings of France and Spain.73 The Spanish prophetic strand was invigorated during the war against the kingdom of Granada and the conquest of 1492, which was understood as a prelude to the recovery of Jerusalem.74 Ferdinand and Isabel’s sponsorship of New World exploration offered additional opportunities for prophetic speculation.75 Columbus, a firm believer in prophecy and in his own predestined role in recapturing the Holy Land, declared that the monarchs had been divinely chosen to fulfill the age-old prophecy that a Spaniard would recover the “Ark of Sion.”76 That idea was especially resonant in the Kingdom of Sicily where the Aragonese and


Angevin rulers had long engaged prophetic ideas to promote the legitimacy of their contested rule.77 Charles VIII extended those claims during his inva-sion of Italy and expedition to Naples when royal publicists identified him as the Last World Emperor.78 By 1501 when war broke out between France and Spain, prophetic expectation fully enveloped the struggle for the Kingdom.

The Byzantine Imperial Inheritance

The assertions of political power and spiritual privilege represented by the war against France and the tutelage of the Holy Land frame the final event of 1502 that confirmed the Spanish monarchs’ exalted role in Christian history and prophecy. A fundamental component of the prophetic tradition held that the messianic emperor would assume control of Constantinople, thus joining the empires of East and West. One aspect of that tradition was fulfilled in 1502 upon the death of Andreas Palaeologus, nephew of the Byzantine emperor Constantine XI and last male descendant of the imperial family. Andreas was born in 1453, the same year Constantinople fell to the Ottomans, and along with his father and sister escaped to Rome. As the legitimate heir to the impe-rial title, he enjoyed a privileged status in the papal court, participating in Curial ceremonies and receiving a generous financial stipend. On April 7, 1502, Andreas executed his testament designating Ferdinand and Isabel and their successors as his universal heirs.79 The monarchs apparently never employed that privilege publicly, but the inheritance bore great significance for engag-ing the highest Christian honor that was also raised by the struggle for con-trol of the Kingdom of Sicily unfolding during the same year 1502. Jerónimo Zurita, historian of the Crown of Aragon, took care to define the nature of the Palaeologan inheritance in his history of the reign of Ferdinand of Aragon, published in 1580.80

A half-century before Andreas Palaeologus’s death, Ferdinand’s uncle, King Alfonso V of Aragon, sought to acquire the Byzantine imperial title as part of a campaign to extend Aragon’s influence to the eastern Mediterranean. The treaty of Torre del Greco of February 9, 1451, which Alfonso sealed with Demetrios Palaeologus, despot of the Morea and nephew of the emperor, stip-ulated that he would ensure Demetrios’s dominance in lands controlled by either the Turks or the emperor, and in exchange would receive the titles to Trebizond and Constantinople.81 The fall of Constantinople in 1453 inter-rupted this agreement, and it ended with Alfonso’s death in 1458. Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, negotiated with Andreas and perhaps his brother Manuel between 1475 and 1476, concerning the acquisition of those same


dignities, but whatever arrangement was considered ended with the duke’s death in 1477.82 The principal event in the unfolding history of the Byzantine imperial office that directly engages the themes traced in this study occurred on September 6, 1494, just weeks before Charles VIII embarked on his inva-sion of Italy.83 Following celebration of the Mass of the Holy Spirit in San Pietro in Montorio, Cardinal Raymond Perault, indefatigable advocate of the French monarchy, staged a solemn ceremony “between the two most sacred columns, on the spot Blessed Peter Prince of the Apostles received the crown of martyrdom.”84 Perault, acting as proxy for the king, received from Andreas Palaeologus the “Empire of Constantinople,” which henceforth would be held by Charles and his legitimate successors. Rumors of the event and of Charles’s imminent investiture reached the Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian I, who objected, stating that for the good of Christendom only the Western emperor should hold the imperial title.85 That San Pietro in Montorio was chosen to host this translatio imperii underscores the wide attention the site of Peter’s crucifixion had attracted at that point and its political utility. The event also reflects an attempt to counter the patronage of the Spanish monarchs, already well advanced through construction of the new church.

Andreas Palaeologus has been presented at times as an unscrupulous per-son, and his attempts to pass on the august title of the Byzantine imperial office have been discredited.86 However, in the instrument of 1494 ceding his rights to Charles VIII, as well as the testament of 1502 naming Ferdinand and Isabel, Andreas indicated his fundamental sincerity by entrusting his benefi-ciaries with the charge of mounting a new crusade to preserve the Byzantine legacy for Christendom. He underscored his desire that Ferdinand and Isabel would recover the Eastern empire by referring to the traditional titles held by the Aragonese crown, Duke of Athens and Neopatria, and expressing the hope that the monarchs would launch a crusade from their lands in Sicily, Apulia, and Calabria, move into the Peloponnesus and onward to Thrace and Constantinople. The conquest of Granada in 1492 and the military success in Cephalonia in 1500 heralded a positive outcome. In effect, when Andreas Palaeologus bestowed the Empire of Constantinople upon Ferdinand and Isabel he confirmed their sacred charge to lead Christendom in achieving the ultimate victory of the faith that would come with conquest of the East.

The Altar of the Tempietto

The historical events recounted here, the opening of the Apocalypsis nova, possession of the Kingdom of Sicily, and inheritance of the Byzantine empire,


combined to present Ferdinand and Isabel as leaders divinely chosen to usher in a new age of purity and faith, vanquish the enemies of the Church, unify East and West, and recover the Holy City of Jerusalem. The monarchs’ exalted role in Christian history was addressed at the main altar of the Tempietto where each time Mass is celebrated Christ is present and Jerusalem is evoked (Figure 92, Plates X, XI). The imposing marble statue of Peter seated and holding the keys conferred upon him by Christ anchors the theme of pontifi-cal authority. The rectangular relief on the altar predella, alive with narrative incident, addresses the sanctification of the site through the Apostle’s mar-tyrdom (Figure 93). Despite lingering questions whether the altar ensemble as seen today reflects the original disposition, pervasive references to vener-able models in Saint Peter’s basilica suggest that its components existed from the start.87 The statue of Saint Peter reflects the stylized features of the late medieval bronze statue of the Apostle venerated in Saint Peter’s, including the advanced right leg, V-shaped folds between the legs, and upright, hieratic pose of torso and head. The crucifixion scene adapts on a reduced scale the monumental marble relief adorning the front of the ciborium that formerly sheltered the basilica’s high altar and burial place of the Apostle, a project that Pope Sixtus IV brought to completion.88 The echo of those works in the altar of the Tempietto reinforced its affiliation with the epicenter of the Petrine cult at the Vatican.

The marble sheathing of the altar table introduces the royal patrons to the message of Petrine authority. The front of the altar bears three reliefs, Noah’s Ark in the center flanked by the royal coat of arms, each relief of equivalent size (Figure 94, Plate XI).89 The arms conform to the type that Ferdinand and Isabel developed to express their status as co-rulers, quartering the heraldic elements of Aragon and Sicily with those of Castile and Léon, the pomegran-ate of Granada set at the bottom, and a royal crown encircling the top. A nimbed eagle holds the arms aloft. Smaller versions of these same arms flank the relief of Peter’s crucifixion, and they appear with insistent repetition in the church and monastery, as they do in royal commissions throughout Spain. The avian component of the arms holds special interest for referring to Saint John the Evangelist, Isabel’s saintly patron and protector, who was identified as the messianic eagle in John’s own Book of Revelation 4:7.90 The fact that John the Evangelist engaged in evangelical activities in Asia Minor, an area long contested by Muslims and Christians, added a political dimension to the image of the eagle and enhanced its messianic reference. The central relief on the altar shows Noah’s Ark, one of the oldest symbols of the Church and of


Figure 92. Giacomo Fontana, Altar of the Tempietto, engraving, 1838. Fontana, Raccolta delle migliori chiese di Roma, 3: plate 85. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


Figure 94. Noah’s Ark flanked by the coat of arms of Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabel of Castile. Altar of the Tempietto, detail. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

Figure 93. Crucifixion of Saint Peter. Altar of the Tempietto, detail. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


human salvation, now brought into direct association with Peter and the foun-dation of the Roman See.91 The archaizing style of the relief, visible in the skewed perspective of the roof and the patterning of the waves, evokes vener-able age. Unlike many depictions of the Biblical Flood where the presence of a dove and dry land indicates the imminence of God’s grace, the dove is absent from the relief and the roof portals of the Ark remain tightly sealed against the roiling floodwaters. When the reliefs are read as a triptych, they signify that the age of tribulation is ongoing and the monarchs, divinely elected guardians of the Church, are destined to steer the Ark into safe harbor, preparing the way for the ultimate phase of Christian revelation to come.

Conclusion

By reconstructing the original text of the Tempietto’s foundation stone and clarifying its ritual function, it becomes possible to situate the Tempietto in its proper historical context. In 1502, tenth anniversary of the conquest of the kingdom of Granada and inaugural exploration of the New World, Ferdinand and Isabel were poised to recover the mainland territories of the Kingdom of Sicily to which the crown of Aragon laid claim based on the leg-acy of the Holy Roman Emperor Frederick II Hohenstaufen. Their military successes, along with acquisition of the august titles King of Jerusalem and Emperor of Constantinople, supported the prophecy that a king of Spain would unify the Christian world and lead a crusade to recover the Holy Land. Carvajal’s staging of the unsealing of Amadeo’s Apocalypsis nova during the period between Easter and Ascension, feasts celebrating Christ’s triumph over death and entrance into Heaven, reinforced the prophetic aura associated with San Pietro in Montorio. When the themes of victory and revelation expressed in the architecture and decoration of the Tempietto are viewed against this background, they assume a recognizable place in both contemporary his-tory and prophetic expectation. The events of 1502 combined to make those themes exceptionally vivid, but their validity and compelling expression were such that the Tempietto enjoyed a rich afterlife during the later sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in commissions sponsored by the popes in Rome and the kings of Spain.

158

Chapter Six

PaPacy and crown

The afterlife of the Tempietto during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries constitutes a significant chapter in the history of the monument, and a notable example of continuity in the history of art.

The authority of the Tempietto as a model of classical style evolved in step with its spiritual and political meaning. In works of art commissioned by the popes in Rome, the image of the Tempietto was enlisted to symbolize the triumphant Church. A parallel phenomenon occurred at the principal sites of royal commemoration in Spain, the Cathedral of Granada and San Lorenzo at the Escorial. Papal and royal interest in the Tempietto continued into the 1620s when Pope Urban VIII and King Philip IV both laid claim to Bramante’s shrine as a prerogative of their own exalted office, the pope in commissions at Saint Peter’s basilica, and the king at San Pietro in Montorio.

Introduction

During the sixteenth century, when the Tempietto acquired an undisputed reputation as a watershed in the recovery of classical architecture, its image was widely employed as a symbol of the Church and of Catholic victory.1 Two examples will set the stage for the following discussion. Raphael’s Saint Paul Preaching in Athens, part of the tapestry series Pope Leo X commissioned in 1515 for display in the Sistine chapel, counts as the first visual adapta-tion of the Tempietto in the history of art (Figure 95). Raphael developed an austere variant of Bramante’s Doric tholos to anchor the introduction of Christianity to Athens, intellectual and philosophical center of the pagan

Papacy and Crown • 159

world, and to evoke the epochal shift that would occur with Peter’s mar-tyrdom in Rome. Raphael avoided reproducing Bramante’s architecture in every detail, for example, by eliminating the frieze of triglyphs and metopes and transforming the balusters into upright posts, but the Tempietto pro-vided his most recognizable model, as it did for the other works treated here.2 Through this visual quotation, Raphael evoked Ferdinand and Isabel’s efforts to spread the faith, reinforcing the tapestry’s subject as Christian evangelization of the East. The kings of Aragon employed the title Duke of Athens beginning in the fourteenth century, and continued long after political realities rendered it purely symbolic.3 Ferdinand, who died in 1516 during the execution of the tapestry commission, followed his predecessors in assimilating Duke of Athens to his royal titulature. Because Athens had passed to Ottoman control in 1456, that title carried a clear political mean-ing, as did the tapestry.4

At the end of the sixteenth century, Federico Barocci resumed the dialogue with the Tempietto in Aeneas and His Family Flee Troy, which honors both

Figure 95. Marcantonio Raimondi after Raphael, Saint Paul Preaching in Athens, engraving. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.


Raphael and Bramante, his compatriots from Urbino. The painting is best known today from the second version Barocci painted in 1598 for Monsignor Giuliano della Rovere (Rome, Museo della Galleria Borghese), but he created the lost original between 1586 and 1589 for the Holy Roman Emperor Rudolf II, a descendant of Ferdinand and Isabel on both maternal and paternal sides of his family. An engraving by Agostino Carracci dated 1595 is thought to repeat the original composition, which Barocci closely matched in the second itera-tion of the subject (Figure 96).5 Barocci followed Raphael in recalling Rome’s divine destiny by including the Tempietto, now with reference to the founda-tion myth codified by Virgil tracing the city’s origins to ancient Troy. Because Troy formed part of the Byzantine Empire absorbed by the Ottomans with the conquest of Constantinople, the image addressed the theme of Christian mil-itancy. Both Raphael and Barocci employed the Tempietto to predict the vic-tory of Christendom over its enemies, exalting the foundation of the Church in Rome and the tutelage of the Spanish monarchs.

Figure 96. Agostino Carracci after Federico Barocci, Aeneas and His Family Flee Troy, engraving. British Museum, London. © The Trustees of the British Museum.


San Pietro in Montorio, the Tempietto, and the Papacy

The destruction of the archive of San Pietro in Montorio during the estab-lishment of the first Roman Republic in 1798 has left significant gaps in the historical record. Works of art commissioned for the church and the numerous burials on its hallowed ground attest to the great favor the site enjoyed among the faithful, including those at the pinnacle of the ecclesiastical hierarchy.6 In 1523, Raphael’s monumental painting of the Transfiguration of Christ was installed on the main altar, a donation of Cardinal Giulio de’ Medici, vice-chancellor of the Church, who was elevated to the papacy in the same year and assumed the name Clement VII (1523–34).7 Although the cardinal apparently commissioned the work for his bishopric in France, he would have made the donation recognizing that the subject resonated with themes of revelation and prophetic fulfillment that were present at San Pietro in Montorio through the legacy of Amadeo Meneses de Silva.8 Additional meaning came from the litur-gical feast of the Transfiguration that Pope Callixtus III instituted in 1457 to commemorate the victory over the Turks at Belgrade in the prior year, which was also a personal success for Juan de Carvajal, Bernardino de Carvajal’s uncle.9 Bernardino, who died in December of the year Cardinal Medici made the donation, must have been instrumental in securing Raphael’s work for the altar, and for inspiring the subsequent actions of Alessandro Farnese, his long-time colleague in the College of Cardinals, who confirmed the Tempietto as a center of Catholic piety shortly after his elevation as Pope Paul III (1534–49).

In 1536, Paul III opened the spiritual treasury of the Church and granted a plenary indulgence to those who visited the Tempietto each year on Palm Sunday and during the following octave, culminating with Christ’s Resurrection on Easter. Lesser indulgences were available in the church of San Pietro in Montorio during the Lenten season, including Holy Week, but these were now increased and focused on the site of Peter’s crucifixion. In the early seventeenth century, the Irish Franciscan Luke Wadding, who lived for a time at San Pietro in Montorio, referred to the multitude of people who came to receive the indulgence, and this is likely to have been true from the begin-ning.10 Paul III also granted to priests who celebrated Mass at the Tempietto the daily privilege of liberating a soul from Purgatory. These spiritual benefits were announced to the faithful by a large inscription set above the portal lead-ing to the cloister from the piazza.11 The Masses in question may have been performed at the main altar of the Tempietto, but it is also possible that a


second altar was added to the crypt at that time to accommodate priests wish-ing to avail themselves of the exceptional papal privilege.

Among the high-ranking ecclesiastics drawn to San Pietro in Montorio and the Tempietto were Ignatius of Loyola (d. 1556) and Philip Neri (d. 1595), founders respectively of the Society of Jesus and the Oratory. The spiritual values they espoused and the emphasis they placed on evangelical activities were informed by memory of the Apostolic Church, making their interest in the place where Peter was martyred both reasonable and necessary. For Ignatius, native son of Spain, royal patronage of the site provided an addi-tional point of interest. Ignatius chose as his personal confessor an Amadeite friar who resided at San Pietro in Montorio, and for that reason he was a regular visitor. In an event that became a standard reference for early Jesuit history, following Paul III’s approval of the new order in 1541, Ignatius was chosen by his companions to serve as the first General Superior. Eschewing that honor, he retreated to San Pietro in Montorio, seeking spiritual guidance from his confessor and leaving the ultimate decision to him.12 Francis Xavier, Ignatius’s early and close follower, shared the founder’s devotion to the site. Writing to Ignatius from India in January 1549, he requested that each month a Jesuit brother celebrate “a Mass for me at San Pietro in Montorio, in that chapel where they say that Saint Peter was crucified.”13 Philip Neri, too, was associated with the Tempietto, most famously when he provided spiritual suc-cor to a mortally ill youth, Gabriele Tana, one of his first penitents.14 As the youth struggled with impending death, Neri promised to celebrate “Mass in the chapel where the Apostle was crucified,” an example of his steadfast faith that was often recounted.15

The importance that San Pietro in Montorio and the Tempietto acquired in the spiritual life of Rome during Paul III’s pontificate increased in the follow-ing decades with notable activity occurring in the 1550s and 1580s. During the first period, Pope Julius III (1550–55) and Cardinal Giovanni Battista Ricci, in separate but coordinated commissions, transformed the large exedras located on each side of the presbytery of the church into richly decorated funerary cha-pels, visually unifying the cross axis.16 The papal chapel to the right, intended for members of Julius’s own del Monte family, was designed by Vasari and exe-cuted by him and the sculptor Bartolommeo Ammanati, with Michelangelo act-ing as advisor. Cardinal Ricci, responsible for the chapel in the left-hand exedra (begun 1558), expressed the close association he and his family enjoyed with the pope by having his own artist, Daniele da Volterra, adapt the visual vocabulary of that earlier chapel. There existed an iconographic aspect to the unification of the church’s cross axis in this manner. Vasari’s Healing of Saint Paul on the


altar of the del Monte chapel and Volterra’s Baptism of Christ on the altar of the Ricci chapel engage the same themes of initiation and spiritual transformation that Raphael had brought together in the Transfiguration on the high altar. The three images together presented a powerful statement concerning the prestige of the papal office and of the ecclesiastical hierarchy on the site hallowed by Peter’s martyrdom. Another element of this renewal campaign at San Pietro in Montorio involved Clemente Dolera, Minister General of the Franciscans and close associate of Julius III, who sponsored construction of a second cloister in 1555 to 1557, providing increased accommodations for the friars.17

Pope Sixtus V (1585–90) extended the prominence of San Pietro in Montorio by assigning it the rank of titular church, the same one held by Rome’s most venerable early Christian foundations.18 To reinforce that change in status, which involved the oversight of a cardinal, a monumental coat of arms of the pope was painted on the wall just above the entrance leading to the clois-ter and the Tempietto (see Figure 22).19 Sixtus also intended to make the site more accessible to the faithful. In 1588, after attending Mass in the church, he announced the plan to construct a new road from the Ponte Sisto, the bridge leading from the city proper to Trastevere and the Janiculum Hill.20 The pope’s lifelong membership in the Franciscan order would have stimu-lated his interest in the church, recalling the patronage of his namesake and fellow friar, Sixtus IV, who ceded the monastery to Amadeo a century before, and who built the bridge bearing his name.

The consistent attention dedicated to San Pietro in Montorio during the second half of the sixteenth century was generated by the belief that Peter had been martyred on that site, consecrating Rome as the center of the Catholic Church and its bishop, Peter’s successor, as its undisputed head. At the time the works considered here were carried out on site, the image of the Tempietto was promoted in papal iconography as a symbol of the triumph of the Church over its enemies. In the fresco cycle extolling Paul III’s papacy painted in the Palazzo Farnese at Caprarola, the Tempietto signals the defeat of heresy in the scene of Paul III excommunicating King Henry VIII of England (Taddeo Zuccaro, Antecamera del Consilio, 1562–63).21 That same meaning, now applied to the struggle against the French Calvinists, was introduced at the core of the Vatican palace during the reign of Pope Gregory XIII (1572–85). In the Sala Regia, constructed by Paul III for the reception of foreign rulers and ambassadors, Vasari depicted in three scenes the massacre of the Huguenots that occurred in Paris on Saint Bartholomew’s day in 1572. The Tempietto appears in the background of the first scene, signaling the source of papal authority and the imminent defeat of Protestant apostasy (Figure 97).22


Between Papacy and Crown: Paul III and Charles V

The association of San Pietro in Montorio and the Tempietto with Catholic orthodoxy during the sixteenth century coincides with the use of the Tempietto as a symbol of the Spanish crown’s own elevated status and sacred charge to protect Christendom. That history was initiated in 1536 by the titular car-dinal of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, Francisco de Los Angeles Quiñones. Quiñones, who was born and educated in Spain, played a prominent role in the political and religious history of his time.23 Pope Clement VII engaged him as emissary to the emperor-elect Charles with the goal of averting the conflict that led to the Sack of Rome in 1527. Following the Sack, Quiñones was instru-mental in securing the pope’s liberation from the Castel Sant’Angelo. For these and other services, Clement elevated him to the cardinalate in December 1527, naming him titular of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, an office he maintained until his death in 1540.

Quiñones’s lasting contribution to the basilica involved reorganizing the presbytery to focus attention on the Eucharist. He substituted for the

Figure 97. Giorgio Vasari, Saint Bartholomew’s Day Massacre, the Wounding of Admiral Coligny. Sala Regia, Vatican palace. Courtesy of Alinari / Art Resource, NY.


medieval episcopal throne located at the base of the apse a monument to serve for reservation of the consecrated Host and to mark his own burial in the pavement directly below (Figures 98, 99).24 Jacopo Sansovino is credited with the design of the monument, consisting of a marble aedicula in the form of a tripartite triumphal arch articulated by columns of porphyry and portasanta, and with verde antico defining the upper frieze, the whole framing the gilded bronze Sacrament tabernacle that provides the focus of the ensemble. This freestanding tholos interprets Bramante’s architecture in a festive key with attached Doric columns, multiple pedimented portals surmounted by oculi, and volutes adorning the drum beneath the hemispherical dome.25 The inscrip-tion set along the base of the monument identifies the cardinal with precision, “From the Spanish Nation, and the Homeland of Léon,” records its dedica-tion to the “Most Holy Body of Christ,” and includes the date July 1, 1536.26 Quiñones was inspired, at least in part, by works in the apse sponsored by Bernardino de Carvajal, the marble bench lining the perimeter, and Carvajal’s own burial in the pavement, directly beneath the cenotaph located on the wall at the liturgical right (viewer’s left) of the Sacrament monument.27 The project drawing by Antonio da Sangallo (see Figure 9) has the word “tombe” inscribed twice, possibly referring to a plan to transform that space into a collective monument for the titular cardinals of the basilica.28

By substituting the Sacrament monument for the episcopal throne, Quiñones redefined how the presbytery functioned during the Stational liturgy when Mass was celebrated at the high altar by the pope and cardinals (see Figure 2). At those times, the pope occupied the throne and the cardinals flanked him, seated upon the stone bench. By moving the tabernacle into the center, directly behind the papal altar and visible from the entrance to the basilica, Quiñones focused attention on the Sacrament in a way that was unparalleled in Rome. Tabernacles of the Sacrament existed on the main altars of churches in Italy and in Spain, but the practice had yet to be introduced to Rome at that date.29 The Santa Croce tabernacle marks a second innovation by referring to an iden-tifiable architectural model. Freestanding, central-plan Sacrament tabernacles existed before 1536, but even large-scale examples that incorporate architectural features more closely recall the shape of reliquaries and pyxides than recogniz-able independent structures.30 The prominent position of the tabernacle and its evocation of the Tempietto direct the viewer’s attention to the unique status of Santa Croce expressed by the toponym “in Gerusalemme,” recalling the pres-ence of the Passion relics brought by Saint Helen from Jerusalem. By virtue of containing the consecrated Host, all Sacrament receptacles evoke the Holy Sepulcher, and as previously discussed, the Tempietto itself was modeled on


Figure 98. Jacopo Sansovino, Sacrament monument. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


features of the Lord’s tomb. The statues of David and Solomon in the lateral niches of the aedicula framing the Sacrament reinforce the link to the Holy City and recall the title King of Jerusalem that Ferdinand and Isabel possessed and that their grandson Charles V, King of Spain and Holy Roman Emperor, and his descendants employed as a hereditary right.31 The aedicule’s triple arch frame sounds the note of Christian imperial triumph.

By means of the Sacrament monument, Quiñones highlighted the legacy of Ferdinand and Isabel and honored Charles V, heir to both their titles and political ambitions. Paul III would have granted the exceptional indulgences at the Tempietto in the year the Quiñones monument was completed with a similar purpose in mind. In 1535, Charles achieved a notable military suc-cess by recovering Tunis, which Barbarossa, corsair pirate and ally of the Ottomans, had captured in the prior year, thus opening to attack the entire western Mediterranean.32 Charles placed himself at the head of a large naval force that succeeded in vanquishing Barbarossa and his allies. In the aftermath

Figure 99. Jacopo Sansovino, Sacrament tabernacle. Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Photo courtesy of Marcello Leotta.


of this success, which Charles promoted as part of a broader crusade, he visited his lands in Sicily and southern Italy, and in April 1536 presented himself in Rome where he spent the two weeks leading up to and including Easter.33 He entered the city at the Porta Ostiense and evoked ancient imperial precedent along the march to the Vatican by passing through the triumphal arches of Constantine, Titus, and Septimius Severus, as well as the ephemeral arches newly constructed that lauded in word and image his august lineage and heroic achievements in the service of the Church.34

During his sojourn in Rome, the emperor toured the churches and ancient monuments, and at the Pantheon climbed the dome, from which vantage point he could see the entire city laid out before him.35 Charles continued to make financial contributions to San Pietro in Montorio, as had his grandfather, but it is unknown if he visited the Janiculum monastery during his time in Rome.36 The papal Master of Ceremonies noted that on Holy Saturday, April 16, the emperor paid the obligatory devotional visit to the seven privileged basilicas of Rome, including Santa Croce in Gerusalemme where Quiñones hosted a lunch for him and his entourage.37 It is possible that Charles saw the Sacrament monu-ment at that time, two months before its dedication. The monument recalls the sacred charge Ferdinand and Isabel had assumed to defend the faith, extending the honorific program initiated with the True Cross cycle in the semidome of the apse, continued with the mosaics of the Helen chapel, and expressed by the Tempietto at San Pietro in Montorio.38 The Quiñones tabernacle, papal indul-gences at the Tempietto, and the emperor’s visit to Rome all relate to Spain’s victories in the past and present and those anticipated in the future.

Despite the conquest of Tunis in 1535, the need for additional military action soon became evident. Barbarossa succeeded in marshaling his forces, and with the assistance of the Ottoman Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent, organized a campaign that again threatened the Italian Peninsula. To coun-ter this danger, the Christian powers overcame their differences and in 1538 established a Holy League with the intention of mounting a vast military force to protect Catholic Europe. The treaty that brought together France, Venice, the pope, and the emperor focused on the definitive conquest of the Turkish empire.39 The signatories to the treaty agreed that in the future partitioning of those lands, Charles V would become Emperor of Constantinople, echoing the privilege that Andreas Palaeologus had bequeathed to Ferdinand and Isabel in 1502.40 This ambitious undertaking met with little success. During the follow-ing years, Charles kept alive the idea of waging war with the Ottomans, but his attention was deflected by the ongoing conflicts with Francis I, King of France, and the Protestants in Germany.


This situation provides the proper context to examine a medal honoring Paul III created by Alessandro Cesati, Master of the Papal Mint, and dated by inscription to the twelfth year of the pope’s reign, 1545 to 1546 (Figure 100).41 The portrait of Paul III is complemented on the reverse by Alexander the Great kneeling before the high priest of the Temple of Jerusalem, an apocry-phal event introduced by Flavius Josephus, the first-century Romano-Jewish historian, repeated by Petrus Comestor (d. 1178/79), and famously depicted by Michelangelo in the Sistine chapel.42 The same narrative appears in the deco-ration of the main reception hall of the Castel Sant’Angelo sponsored by Paul III, part of a cycle treating the deeds of Alexander the Great (Marco Pino, Sala Paolina; 1545–46).43 The text inscribed around the border of Cesati’s medal, “All Kings Shall Serve Him,” engages Biblical authority to reinforce the mes-sage of the scene, the superiority of spiritual over temporal power, quoting the Book of Daniel, 7:27.44 Vasari recorded how Michelangelo praised the medal, stating that it signaled the death of art since “it would not be possible to see better.”45 The composition has been identified with a design by Francesco Salviati, which may have formed part of the decorations celebrating Charles’s entry into Rome in 1536.46 An undated engraving that must be close in time to the medal enlarges and clarifies its composition, reinforcing the identi-fication of the domed tholos temple in the background with the Tempietto (Figure 101).47 There existed a tradition for depicting the Temple of Jerusalem as a central-plan structure, but by referring to the Tempietto, Cesati focused the underlying meaning of the medal to address the relationship of Paul III and Charles V and their broader political concerns.

Figure 100. Alessandro Cesati, Medal of Pope Paul III with Alexander the Great kneeling before the High Priest of Jerusalem. Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


Cesati’s medal for Paul III alluded to the recent clash between the pope and emperor over the duties and prerogatives of their respective offices. At the Fourth Imperial Diet in Speyer, called by Charles V in 1544, the emperor offered extraordinary concessions to the Protestants, permitting them free prac-tice of their religion and suspending legal processes against their ecclesiastical properties pending the convocation of a Church council. In exchange, Charles received financial resources to support his struggle against France and the Ottomans. Paul III, after extended consultation with his cardinals, responded to Charles’s actions in a formal brief that had wide circulation. In a stern, but nonetheless affectionate and confident reprimand, he reminded Charles of the superiority of spiritual over temporal power, citing Old Testament precedents and referring to the divine protection enjoyed by Constantine, Theodosius, and Charlemagne, but noting the retribution visited upon those who thwarted God’s will.48 Resolution of the conflict came quickly: by the end of 1544 peace between France and Spain had been declared, in 1545 the Council of Trent was convened, and in 1546 Charles began a vigorous campaign to suppress the Protestants in Germany.

The purpose of Cesati’s medal to celebrate the concord between pope and emperor becomes clear, but the medal also presents a challenge to the

Figure 101. Alexander the Great Kneeling before the High Priest of Jerusalem, engraving. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.


Christian powers to reach harmony as a precondition for protecting the faith through crusade. Eastern domination was a fundamental aspect of Alexander’s visit to Jerusalem. When asked why he had subjugated himself to the High Priest, Alexander explained that he honored not the priest, but God, and recounted how the priest had appeared to him in a dream and exhorted him to undertake the conquest of Persia that would lead to the domination of Asia. Confirmation of that vision came when Alexander entered the Temple, con-ducted the ritual sacrifice, and was shown the Book of Daniel, which contained the dictate inscribed on the medal. For Alexander, Daniel’s prophecies of the fall of the Persians to a Greek, referred to his own future success. During the Renaissance, those same eastern exploits of Alexander made him a ready model for the Christian crusader and symbol of the persistent desire to recover the Holy Land.49 Cesati’s medal for Paul III, through image and text, declares the submission of the emperor to the spiritual power of Christ’s vicar and the mutual charge to spearhead a new crusade.

The Tempietto and the Spanish Crown, Sixteenth Century

Two works created at mid-century and addressed to a broad international public expand these examples of how the image of the Tempietto was enlisted to honor the papacy and the Spanish crown.50 The first concerns the ephem-eral display mounted by the Spanish community in Antwerp to celebrate the arrival in 1549 of Prince Philip of Habsburg, Charles V’s son and heir appar-ent, at the conclusion of an extended tour of his realm. Details of the display are known from the festival book published in Latin, Dutch, and French with illustrations by Pieter Cocke van Aelst (Figure 102).51 The theme of Spanish conquest was introduced by the columns of Hercules at the entrance to the space, and extended at the sides by statues depicting the seven Christian virtues paired with Spain’s illustrious kings, from Pelayo, who began the Reconquest, to Ferdinand the Catholic, who brought that effort to conclusion. A rusticated arch at the far end supported a centralized, colonnaded temple intended to represent the famed temple of Janus in Rome, painted to simulate bronze, out-fitted with an Ionic columnar system, and augmented with projecting porticoes at the sides. This imaginative rendering of one of Rome’s most sacred temples adapts a number of features from the Tempietto, reinforcing a link between the two shrines grounded in the Tempietto’s location on the Janiculum, Janus’s own hill in Rome. The idea of universal pacification reinforced their association. In antiquity the temple of Janus was opened solely in time of war:


Augustus, who closed it for the second time in its history, appears to the left brandishing a key, paired on the opposite side by Charles and Philip, who would repeat his action in the present age. Images and inscriptions applied to the supporting arch lauded Charles V’s victories over the Turks, making clear that the anticipated peace would come with Christian victory. The form of the Tempietto and its essential political meaning find an unmistakable echo.

The second example, a woodcut also dating to the 1540s, presents a con-trasting interpretation of the Tempietto. It forms part of a series of six alle-gories by the Amsterdam artist Cornelis Anthonisz, who drew his theme from the Biblical parable of the Prodigal Son (Luke 15:11–32) (Figure 103).52 Catholic and Protestant theologians interpreted the text in opposing ways, with the former group understanding it in terms of penance, the latter in terms of justification by faith. Anthonisz redefined this theological polemic toward a more sharply drawn political message. Heresy and Poverty debase the Prodigal, and Superstition directs him to Disease, who appears enthroned

Figure 102. Pieter Coecke van Aelst, festival display honoring Prince Philip of Habsburg, woodcut, 1550. Grapheus, Le triumphe d’Anuers, fols. Eiiv–Eiiir. Bibliothéque de l’INHA, Paris. © RMN Grand Palais / Art Resource, NY.


inside a peripteral tholos labeled Synagoga Sathanae, Synagogue of Satan. The peripteros formed with Doric columns and sporting a drum, features based on the Tempietto, along with the papal tiara assimilated to the fantastic headgear of Disease, identify the image as a censure of both the pope and Charles V, Catholic overlord of the Netherlands. The religious conflicts of the sixteenth century supply the essential background to these images and reinforce the political meaning that accrued to the Tempietto in their wake. That meaning received focused expression in commissions of Charles V and Philip II on the sites most sacred to the crown in Spain, the Cathedral of Granada and San Lorenzo at the Escorial.

By the time Charles visited Rome in 1536, he and his representatives were engaged in realizing the desire of his grandparents to build the Cathedral of Granada adjacent to the Royal Chapel they had initiated and where they were buried. The architect Enrique Egas developed initial plans for the cathedral in 1523, but five years later, Diego de Siloe assumed responsibility for the pro-ject. During the extended period of design and construction lasting until 1563, its defining feature was the assimilation of a basilican nave to a rotunda with ambulatory, recalling the Crusader church that marked the spot of Christ’s

Figure 103. Cornelis Anthonisz, Allegory of the Prodigal Son, woodcut. Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam.


death and burial in Jerusalem.53 This august model reinforced the identifica-tion of the Granada victory with the broader goal of Holy Land recovery. That same idea received emphatic expression at the high altar.54 The norm in Spanish churches was to install the altar against the presbytery wall with the retable filling the entire available space. At Granada the altar stands free beneath the dome, just as Christ’s tomb occupies the center of the domed chapel of the Anastasis in Jerusalem. The function of the altar also differed from tra-dition by providing a stage for the perpetual exposition of the consecrated Host, mounted in a large monstrance visible from around the church. The monumental altar ciborium, crafted in wood, gilded and painted, completed this program by absorbing features of the Tempietto at its upper level. The ciborium was possibly realized early in the reign of Philip II (1556–98), around 1560, but following a design of 1528; it was described and engraved before being dismantled in a remodeling campaign of 1614 (Figure 104).55 The lower stage was defined by four columns of the Corinthian order linked by arches, with Old Testament Patriarchs in the spandrels and “at the sides priests of the Old Law.” The features recalling the Tempietto in the upper story were applied in an open construction forming an octagonal tholos consisting of eight Doric columns set against arches, a balustrade, and a dome raised upon a drum.56 As in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, the Eucharist and the Tempietto were drawn together to underscore the link to Jerusalem and proclaim the sacred mission of the Spanish monarchy.

The Tempietto received the most splendid presentation and the most explicit expression of meaning at the high altar of San Lorenzo at the Escorial, center-piece of the vast complex built by Philip II – basilica, monastery, royal palace – to serve as the dynastic mausoleum of the Spanish Habsburgs (Figures 105, 106). The high altar retable occupies multiple tiers, each one decorated with painted and sculpted elements depicting the life of Christ and the Virgin, alongside the martyrdom of Saint Lawrence, to whom the basilica was dedi-cated. The program is completed by the over-life-size gilded bronze effigies of Charles and Philip and their queen consorts, shown devoutly kneeling in prayer within the elevated balconies located on the walls to the left and right of the altar (Figures 107, 108). The magnificent Sacrament tabernacle, set directly above the altar table, received the highest praise from Fray José de Sigüenza (d. 1606), prior and historian of the monastery, who declared that it exceeded in beauty, material, and labor all else, supplying the ultimate reason for the “house, temple, and altar.”57 Philip II initially considered acquiring an existing Sacrament tabernacle designed by Michelangelo, but he ultimately commissioned the new work from the basilica’s architect, Juan de Herrera.58


Between 1578 and 1585, the Milanese goldsmith Jacopo da Trezzo realized the imposing structure, measuring 4.5 × 2 m, with red and green jasper, rock crys-tal, gold, silver, and gems. For his prodigious labor, which included inventing special tools to carve those materials, Jacopo was honored by the placement of his name alongside that of the king in inscriptions placed on the socle of the tabernacle, on the custodia, and elsewhere. The principal epigraph also iden-tified the materials as indigenous to Spain. Federico Zuccaro, who contributed painted components of the altar retable and was acquainted with the king, praised the tabernacle and described it as “a round tempietto similar to that of Bramante at San Pietro in Montorio.”59 In 1626, Cassiano dal Pozzo, scholar, antiquarian, and collector, who accompanied Cardinal Francesco Barberini on the papal legation to Spain, stated that the tabernacle was “made in the shape of an ancient tempietto, and looks very much like the little church or chapel which is in the cloister of the fathers of San Pietro in Montorio as can be seen in the printed image, namely, in the shape of a temple with a dome surrounded by a portico with columns.”60 The printed image Cassiano referred to was the ninth plate in the suite of engravings published in 1589 by Juan de Herrera (see Figure 106). Both Zuccaro and Cassiano were responding to features of the tabernacle modeled on Bramante’s architecture, rendered especially potent at

Figure 104. Frans Heylan, high altar of Granada Cathedral, detail, engraving. Museo Casa de los Tiros, Granada. Photo courtesy of Carlos Choin


Figure 105. Pedro Parret after Juan de Herrera, high altar, San Lorenzo de El Escorial, engraving, 1587. Courtesy of Biblioteca Nacional de España, Madrid, inv. 28848.


the Escorial that honored the descendants of Ferdinand and Isabel and exalted the Spanish nation they had envisioned and helped to create.

The idea of absorbing the Tempietto to Spanish royal iconography and associating it with the Sacrament, which began with the Quiñones Sacrament monument in Rome and continued with the high altar ciborium in Granada, received a new degree of dynastic focus at the Escorial. The form of the altar and the presence of the royal effigies draw force from those earlier projects, but their meaning is declared more directly. The presentation of the roy-als as “eternal adorers” descends from a venerable tradition in which burial near the altar and the Sacrament demonstrates faith in Christian salvation.61 The immediate model was provided by the Royal Chapel at Granada, which Ferdinand and Isabel founded as their dynastic mausoleum next to the cathe-dral they also projected.62 In the warrant establishing the Royal Chapel, dated September 13, 1504, the monarchs directed that the Sacrament be reserved there, reinforcing their association with Christ in the Eucharist.63 Charles V, for much of his life, expressed the desire to be buried in the Royal Chapel along with his wife, Isabel of Portugal (d. 1539) and at the side of his parents, Juana of Castile and Philip the Fair, and grandparents, Ferdinand and Isabel.64 Following his abdication of power in 1554 and retirement to the monastery

Figure 106. Pedro Parret after Juan de Herrera, Sacrament tabernacle, high altar, San Lorenzo de El Escorial, engraving, 1587. Courtesy of Biblioteca Nacional de España, Madrid, inv. 28849.


of San Jerónimo de Yuste, the emperor revised that plan in favor of burial directly beneath the high altar of the monastic church at Yuste. In a codicil to his testament dated September 9, 1558, he described how the Sacrament should be reserved to the right of the altar, flanked by statues depicting him and Isabel of Portugal kneeling, barefoot, and enfolded by shrouds.65 At the same time, he charged Philip II with determining the final disposition of his body, suggesting an ongoing discussion concerning Habsburg dynastic commemoration.66

At the Escorial, the association of the royal effigies with the altar and the Sacrament adapted and focused the arrangement found in the Royal Chapel at Granada. The splendid retable of the chapel crafted from 1520 to 1522 by Felipe Vigarny demonstrates how personal piety and political ambition cohered, as it would again at the Escorial.67 Scenes from the life of Christ, the Virgin, and saints, depicted with remarkable verisimilitude, appear on successive tiers, with Christ’s Crucifixion positioned at the top. The king and queen are presented kneeling in prayer at the sides of the altar. Ferdinand appears as a Christian knight, Isabel as a pious matron; together they bear witness to the miracle of human redemption and manifest their own exceptional faith. Behind each figure reliefs with the patron saint of their realm sound the note of Christian militancy, Ferdinand paired with Saint George slaying a dragon, and Isabel

Figure 107. Pompeo Leoni, Charles V and his family, San Lorenzo de El Escorial. Courtesy of Album / Art Resource, NY.


with Saint James slaying a Moor. Four additional reliefs located at the lowest level of the retable flanking the altar table celebrate the conquest of Granada and its aftermath, the monarchs taking possession of the conquered city, and Muslim men and women receiving baptism.68 These scenes identify Ferdinand and Isabel’s efforts to disseminate the faith as an extension of Biblical history into the present. Once Christian evangelization is recognized as the under-lying meaning of the retable, it becomes possible to view the Biblical narra-tives in political terms as well. Even while commemorating a heroic spiritual past, the narratives function as topographical markers, referring to places in the Holy Land where those events had occurred. The monarchs, through the power of their faith and the victories that marked their reign, are mystically projected into the Holy Land, having realized the promise expressed in their august title, King and Queen of Jerusalem. Personal piety and the mission to recover Jerusalem came together in the Royal Chapel, as it did in other works the monarchs sponsored directly.69 At the Escorial the dynastic commemora-tion is extended to Charles V and Philip II, and the focus is provided by the Tempietto-tabernacle. These kings and queens of Spain fix their pious atten-tion on the Eucharist, central mystery of the faith, and on Jerusalem that it

Figure 108. Pompeo Leoni, Philip II and his family, San Lorenzo de El Escorial. Photo courtesy of Marburg / Art Resource, NY.


evokes. In all the works under discussion, but especially at the Escorial, the Tempietto is presented as the Palladium of the Spanish crown, simultaneously royal insignia and battle standard.70

The Tempietto and the Spanish Crown, Seventeenth Century

During the decades the image of the Tempietto was enlisted to glorify the Spanish monarchy through works in Rome, Granada, and the Escorial, Charles V continued the financial contributions to the monastery of San Pietro in Montorio that his grandparents had initiated in the 1480s.71 His support is reflected in the coats of arms of Juana of Castile (d. 1555), Charles’s mother and titular queen, which were discovered during the recent conservation painted on the interior of the chapel at the level of the drum. Other elements on the interior were likely added at the same time, ribs and gold stars against a blue ground in the dome, colorful bits reinforcing the classical detailing of the Doric architecture, and fragments of narrative scenes in the metopes of the frieze. The German antiquarian, Lorenz Schrader, who visited Italy shortly after the middle of the sixteenth century, referred to paintings and sculpture in the Tempietto, which he attributed to the patronage of the Queen of Spain.72

A new phase of royal involvement in the monastery opens with the reign of Charles’s grandson, King Philip III (1598–1621). In 1604, the royal ambas-sador to the Holy See, Juan Fernández de Pacheco, Marchese di Villena, ini-tiated a comprehensive restoration of the monastery with funds supplied by the king.73 Villena wrote to Philip on June 1, 1604, emphasizing the historical importance of the monastery and its link to Ferdinand and Isabel, and noting how constant rain had eroded the terrain, preventing the faithful from mak-ing the uphill journey in their coaches.74 As a result, alms to support the friars and to repair the monastery were lacking. The king agreed to provide 3,000 ducats to fund the work, which involved reinforcing the hillside site with an artificial terrace and constructing a wide road to facilitate access to the mon-astery (Figure 109). At that time, the level of the piazza in front of the church and monastery was lowered, requiring construction of the double-ramp stair leading to the church’s entrance and additional stairs to enter the cloister. A monumental fountain, visible from afar, enlivened the piazza and honored the king by incorporating the heraldic symbols of Castile and Léon (Figure 110). The dome of the Tempietto was partially rebuilt to remedy damage caused by rain and humidity, with the result that the original hemispherical profile was raised, and the stout lantern with the ambassador’s coat of arms was added.75


These works were commemorated by an inscription of 1605 placed on the exterior of the Tempietto, just below the springing of the dome on axis with the main entrance and another coat of arms of the ambassador (Plate VI).76 It credits Philip with the restoration and states that the structure had been in danger of collapse. Another inscription bearing the same date, now monumen-tal in scale, was mounted on the terrace wall along the new road where it could be seen by those approaching the monastery (see Figure 122). The laudatory text identifies the royal works as an extension of the munificence and piety of Philip’s forefathers, the Catholic Kings, referring to restoration of the road, leveling the terrace, expanding the area with a rampart, and decorating the “monument of ancestral piety.”77

The restoration sponsored by Philip III likely inspired additional interven-tions in and around the monastery undertaken by Pope Paul V (1605–21).78 They included construction of the Acqua Paola (completed 1612), the great fountain marking the termination of the restored and augmented aqueduct of Trajan that supplied water to Trastevere and the Vatican, and fed the new fountain in the piazza of San Pietro in Montorio. Additionally, Paul revived the project introduced by Sixtus V to construct a new road leading from the

Figure 109. Paul Marie Letarouilly, San Pietro in Montorio and access road, engraving, 1857. Letarouilly, Édifices de Rome moderne, 3.1: plate 322. Photo cour-tesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


Ponte Sisto to the monastery. His nephew, Cardinal Scipione Borghese, redec-orated the presbytery of San Pietro in Montorio with walnut benches, win-dows, and choral books, all bearing his coat of arms and all subsequently lost.79 The chronological proximity of these works to those sponsored by Philip III confirmed the strong alliance existing between the pope and king during the early years of Paul’s pontificate (1606–07) when Philip provided essential sup-port to the Holy See during the potentially disastrous dispute with Venice, and with Venice’s ally, France.80

The renewal of royal patronage at San Pietro in Montorio was followed in 1628 by the efforts of Domenico di Gesù e Maria to increase accessibility of the Tempietto and reinforce its association with the crown. Domenico was a native of Calatayud (Zaragoza), and enjoyed a privileged relationship with both Philip III and his son and successor Philip IV (1621–65). After arriving in the papal city in October 1604, he was active in the administration of the Carmelite order, furthered the Church’s missionary endeavors, and used his consider-able influence with Paul V to promote Spanish royal interests.81 Heightened

Figure 110. Giovanni Battista Falda, fountain in the Piazza San Pietro in Montorio, engraving, 1675. Falda, Le fontane di Roma. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


spiritual activity, including thaumaturgic cures, mystical visions, and ecsta-sies, drew great attention, even before 1620 when Domenico achieved interna-tional fame for his role in the Battle of Prague (Battle of White Mountain). At that time, the forces of the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II Habsburg van-quished Frederick V, Protestant claimant of the crown of Bohemia. Domenico was credited with leading the emperor’s troops into battle like a latter-day Constantine, brandishing a Cross and with a holy image affixed to his chest.82 In 1622, the image of the Adoration of the Christ Child, which was believed to have ensured the victory, was brought to Rome and installed on the high altar of the Discalced Carmelite church of San Paolo alle Terme, afterward dedicated as Santa Maria della Vittoria. Domenico’s activities at San Pietro in Montorio were grounded in that same brand of militant Catholicism.

Fra Pietro di Madre di Dio, Domenico’s personal secretary, described the 1628 restoration of the Tempietto in his biography of Domenico, which pro-vides the first record of the discovery of the foundation stone discussed in Chapter 5. Fra Pietro also credited Domenico for inspiring the restoration of 1604–05, claiming that when Domenico arrived in Rome and saw the dilapi-dated state of the monastery, he criticized the ambassador, “saying with great resentment, ‘where is your devotion?’ and that he was not the reliable min-ister of the king he thought himself to be, since he had allowed to deteri-orate those sacred things favored by the crown.”83 In Fra Pietro’s retelling, this resounding admonition moved the ambassador to solicit funds from the king. In truth, Domenico arrived in Rome five months after the ambassador requested the king’s support. Even if Fra Pietro embellished the facts, possibly echoing Domenico’s own version of events, Domenico may have encouraged the ambassador to expand the restoration initially considered.84 A quarter cen-tury later Domenico focused his own efforts on advancing the prominence of the Tempietto, and in this case Fra Pietro provided an eyewitness account of the events as they occurred.

Fra Pietro begins “last year, 1627,” when Domenico visited San Pietro in Montorio to consult with Gian Garzia Mellino, cardinal protector of the Carmelite order, who was then living in the monastery. Upon leaving he saw the “small but famous round temple made by the hand of Bramante, excellent architect of the King of Spain.” Wishing to enter the crypt to kiss the holy earth and obtain the protection of Peter, he descended “as though into a base-ment” by a flight of stone steps, which were both steep and dangerous since poorly illuminated and lacking guardrails. Sixteenth-century drawings of the crypt show the entrance to the lower chamber located between the two axial columns at the rear, with a flight of twelve steps that descends into the center


of the space (Figure 111).85 Domenico found the walls, pavement, and altar of the crypt lacking adornment and ruined by humidity. Mindful of the pil-grims from Italy and northern Europe who would come to pay their devotions, he acted swiftly to remedy those defects. He solicited funds from Cardinal Gaspare Borgia, a descendant of Pope Alexander VI, and titular cardinal of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (1616–30), who also served as royal ambassa-dor to the Holy See before and after the events under discussion.86 Domenico supplemented Borgia’s contribution of 500 scudi with 1,000 scudi drawn from other sources, and with the support of Pope Urban VIII (1623–44) received permission to renovate the chapel from the Reformed Franciscans, whom the pope had placed in control of the monastery in 1626.87

Fra Pietro relates how Domenico consulted with architects, but neglects to identify them, emphasizing instead Domenico’s own responsibility for super-vising the renovations. The architect Francesco Peperelli, whose name consis-tently appears in the documents for the crypt chapel, was likely responsible for the design.88 The inscription along the frieze at the upper margin of the walls

Figure 111. Tempietto, crypt, plan and elevation, drawing. Istituto Nazionale per la Grafica, Rome, FF 7702 (32746/33v), vol. 2510. By kind permission of the Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali.


refers to the dedication and completion date, “To the honor and glory of the martyr Prince of the Apostles in the year 1628” (Plates XVI–XVIII).89 That date is confirmed by the records of the Apostolic Visitation conducted at San Pietro in Montorio in December 1628, referring to the main components of the decoration, identifying Domenico as the patron, and crediting the faithful with funding the project.90 Fra Pietro transcribed a second text defining the sacred nature of the space, now lost, written in golden letters along the cor-nice: “The Prince of the Apostles’ place of martyrdom is venerated here by a most ancient tradition and by the great devoted crowd of the faithful.”91

The stairs encumbering the interior of the crypt were eliminated, replaced by an external stair consisting of two courses leading to a single doorway cut into the lower wall of the structure (Figure 112, Plate IV). The new stairs were designed to facilitate the visits of the faithful, who could now descend to the crypt on one side without blocking the ascent of others exiting on the opposite side. The humid conditions and absence of light were corrected, the altar rebuilt, and the vault decorated with stucco reliefs depicting scenes from the life of Saint Peter, all “richly covered with gold” (Plate XX).92 The types of polychrome marble used to sheathe the walls and pavement are identified in the contract between Domenico and the stonecutter Giovanni Pagni, dated

Figure 112. Tempietto seen from the back. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.


March 1, 1628, which specifies that the marble would be installed according to a design provided by the architect and strictly controlled by Domenico.93 Today the crypt appears in the altered form it received after the restorations under-taken to remedy damage inflicted during the establishment of the first Roman Republic in 1798.94 A lithograph of 1863 documents the chapel’s appearance following those interventions (Figure 113). The stucco reliefs of the vault were repaired, but extensive damage to the wall revetment and pavement required that they be replaced respecting the original scheme, but employing different materials. An idea of the original decoration can be gleaned from the contract of 1628. The pavement was formed with portasanta, fior di pesco, and breccia, bordered with white marble. The socle was divided into a lower strip of white marble and an upper one of africano. The wall surfaces had large panels of alabaster, portasanta, and fior di pesco arranged in symmetrical pairs to either side of the altar and separated by coupled pilasters of broccatello inset with various colors. The visual splendor of these materials is noteworthy, but their color is also significant, marked by shades of red, purple, and yellow, evoking

Figure 113. Isidore-Laurent Deroy, Tempietto, crypt, lithograph, 1863. Luquet and Tilloy, Les sanctuaires de Rome. Photo courtesy of Bibliotheca Hertziana, Max-Planck-Institut für Kunstgeschichte, Rome.


Peter’s martyrdom on the golden hill of Montorio (Mons Aurea). When describing the crypt, Fra Pietro pointedly compared the yellow, sandy earth of the ground beneath the pavement to gold, and recalled the blood Peter had shed at his crucifixion.95

Fra Pietro provided important additional information concerning the state of the crypt and the changes that Domenico introduced. A large marble inscription found beneath the altar referring to the spiritual privileges Paul III granted to priests was repaired and reinstalled in the pavement directly in front of the altar, “so that this ancient memorial might be preserved in that place” (Plate XXI). 96 Fra Pietro noted that a new light shaft was created in the area where the entrance to the crypt was formerly accommodated, suggesting that the original stair had been accessed through an opening in the rear wall of the upper chamber and was concealed behind the niche framing the altar, just as the light shaft is today (see Figure 36, Plates XVIII, XIX). Most significant, the circular openings piercing the upper and lower chapels at the center of the pavement, both traditionally credited to Bramante, were opened in 1628. The hollow left in the new pavement of the crypt, protected by a gilded metal grill and illuminated with a lamp, allowed worshipers to view the earth from the upper chamber by looking through the aperture.97 Fra Pietro notes that visi-tors to the Tempietto, after viewing the holy earth from above, were able to descend to the crypt and touch it with their rosaries.

The altar in the crypt was dismantled and its components reinstalled to draw the attention of the faithful. A statue of Peter was moved to a niche in the exterior wall along the new stair, and a painting of Peter lamenting his denial of Christ was placed above the entrance. Neither work survives. At the sides of the altar, two column shafts, which pious tradition identified as having served in one stage of Peter’s martyrdom, were cleaned and moved to the posi-tion they still occupy flanking the entrance on the interior (Plate XVIII).98 Those columns are likely the same ones said to mark the site of Peter’s cruci-fixion in the fifteenth century. The new altar featured an aedicule formed with two alabaster columns framing an unidentified relic of Peter donated by the Infanta of Flanders, Isabel Clara Eugenia, daughter of King Philip II and Fra Domenico’s longtime supporter.99 The reliquary had the form of an effulgence fashioned in gilded copper set against a blue background, recalling Peter’s tra-ditional colors, yellow and blue. Candelabra, a bronze cross, and marble busts of Christ and the Virgin are recorded as well.

Fra Pietro described the new altar as an open construction formed with a large slab of white marble supported on two pilasters bearing polychrome marble inserts, quite different from the solid masonry block dating to the


nineteenth century present today. The foundation stone was installed in the pavement directly beneath the altar, protected by a gilded iron grill embellished with large floral buds and leaves, and illuminated by a lamp. That privileged treatment responded to the intense interest elicited by the stone’s discovery. When told of the find, Urban VIII proposed that the “pope of that time” had donated the stone to the monarchs to satisfy their devotion. Referring to blotches that suggested blood, he drew an association with the crucifixion of Peter, and advised that the stone be treated with proper care. The pope’s con-jectural tone explains why the passage was canceled in Fra Pietro’s manuscript; it nevertheless demonstrates Urban’s willingness to engage the sacred status of the stone declared by the inscribed text. Domenico wanted the stone to be “rendered illustrious and held in great veneration.” The discovery stimulated general excitement after a bit of the mortar found attached to it was admin-istered to a bewitched woman who immediately threw up the spell, proving the stone more efficacious than certain holy relics that had been applied to her body without benefit. News of this event attracted many others who sought to procure the same material for their devotion. Fra Pietro also recounted how a woman visiting the upper chamber while work was under way in the crypt fell through the central aperture before the metal grill was in place. Notwithstanding her considerable size and voluminous garments, the woman plunged through this small opening, breaking a piece of the wooden scaffold being used by the stuccoists, but landing on her feet without suffering harm.

Fra Pietro demonstrated heightened sensitivity to how the components of the decoration produced a unified ensemble, surely reflecting the intention of the architect and patron. In one passage he noted that the pilasters along the walls and the ribs of the vault were aligned, and in another observed how the divisions of the vault were reflected in the design of the pavement (Plates XVI–XVIII, XX, XXI). The correspondence between walls, vault, and pave-ment was developed to draw attention to the circle of earth left exposed at the center of the space, which could also be viewed from the upper chapel. The structural and decorative system radiating from that point embraced the crypt and by extension the entire Tempietto. This brought greater clarity to the concept Bramante introduced with the centralized plan that privileged a sin-gle point conceptually associated with the place where Peter’s cross had been planted in the ground. The concentric design of the Cosmatesque pavement in the upper chapel reinforced that idea, but it was incompletely expressed because the pavement was sealed, and in the crypt, the last step of the access stair intruded on the privileged midpoint (see Figure 111). In the new organi-zation, the circular plan of the architecture was more precisely identified with


Peter’s crucifixion. A contemporary architect’s rendering of the Tempietto provides a dramatic view of interior and exterior simultaneously, demonstrat-ing how the entire design unfolds from the aperture at the midpoint of the crypt (Figure 114).

The changes introduced to the Tempietto in 1628 provided the faithful with a series of physical and spiritual encounters, beginning with a view of the crypt from above, and ending below ground where relics of Peter’s mar-tyrdom, the columns, holy earth, and foundation stone, could be seen and

Figure 114. Daniel Castor, Tempietto, drawing, 1999. Photo courtesy of Daniel Castor.


touched.100 Painted and sculpted images, colored marble, and other precious materials, along with directed illumination, encouraged heightened devo-tion. In effect, this seminal work of Renaissance architecture, itself a water-shed in the evolving interpretation of the Christian memorial, was modified to accommodate ideas developed during the Counter-Reformation period to encourage physical contact with, and emotional response to holy sites and rel-ics. The evolving situation in New Saint Peter’s provided the principal model for the crypt. Gilded narrative reliefs, polychrome marble revetment, and a double-ramp staircase descending to a subterranean chapel also defined the area beneath the high altar of Saint Peter’s in proximity to the Apostle’s tomb, the Clementine chapel built by Clement VIII (begun 1594), and the confes-sio of Paul V (1616–18).101 The pointed allusions to the sacred core of Saint Peter’s basilica in the Tempietto’s crypt unite these venerable sites of Petrine devotion, the one dedicated to the martyrdom of the Apostle, the other to his burial. In this way, the Spanish royals honor Peter, and are themselves cele-brated as Catholic kings, defenders of the faith and of the Universal Church.

Between Papacy and Crown: Philip IV and Urban VIII

Philip III and Philip IV, when agreeing to sponsor the restoration of the monastery of San Pietro in Montorio, sought formal patronage rights, jus patronatus, citing Ferdinand and Isabel’s support of the foundation.102 That legal status would confer responsibility for administering the monastery, its lands and benefices. The Franciscan authorities were sympathetic to Philip III’s request in 1604, referring to the royal arms placed throughout the com-plex, along with other evidence attesting to the early patronage of the Catholic monarchs, but the outcome was inconclusive. On November 11, 1628, when the crypt renovations were nearing completion, Philip IV announced his intention to donate the considerable sum of 6,000 ducats to restore the monastery, link-ing his beneficence to that of Ferdinand and Isabel, and citing the testimony provided by the recently discovered foundation stone of the Tempietto.103 Neither Urban VIII nor the Reformed Franciscans favored this renewed claim to patronage rights. When still a cardinal, Urban had served as titular of San Pietro in Montorio, 1607 to 1610, years marked by the resurgence of interest in the site by both Philip III and Paul V. Two years after his elevation to the papacy, in 1625, Urban ceded a portion of the monastery’s property to the col-lege Pope Gregory XV (1621–23) had founded there to instruct missionaries in Arabic and other eastern languages as part of the activities of the Sacred


Congregation for the Propagation of the Faith.104 Urban also intended to add his own coat of arms at “principal points” of the monastery. News of that plan reached Madrid, and on October 28, 1629, Philip IV wrote to his ambas-sador expressing vigorous opposition, concerned that the papal arms would eclipse the royal commemoration on the site.105 Royal claims to San Pietro in Montorio remained a vital issue throughout Philip’s lifetime, and when he died in 1665, the image of the Tempietto appeared among the sacred emblems displayed during the memorial service at the royal convent of La Encarnacíon in Madrid (Figure 115).106

The mounting tensions over the status of San Pietro in Montorio, whether a papal or royal foundation, illuminate the Sacrament tabernacle Bernini designed in March 1629 for use in Saint Peter’s.107 From the first realization in gilded wood of 1630, through the series of revised project drawings dating to the mid-seventeenth century, and concluding with the work executed in precious materials on the eve of the Holy Year 1675, the tabernacle was mod-eled on the Tempietto, freestanding, centrally planned, girded by columns, and crowned by a dome elevated upon a drum (Figure 116).108 By Bernini’s day, Sacrament tabernacles often took the form of centrally planned, domed structures, frequently polygonal, less commonly circular, and these have often

Figure 115. Emblem for the exequies of King Philip IV, woodcut, 1666. Rodríguez de Monforte, Descripcion de las honras. Typ 660.66.749, Houghton Library, Harvard University.


been treated as a group with little attention to differences in form, location, and patronage. The tabernacle for Saint Peter’s followed the Tempietto more closely than all other examples. Like the monuments erected under Spanish patronage in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, the Cathedral of Granada, and San Lorenzo at the Escorial, Bernini reinterpreted Bramante’s architecture, but his closer adherence to the model reinforced the allusion to the Janiculum site. The identification of the tabernacle with Saint Peter and the Apostolic Church was enhanced in the tabernacle as realized by placing bronze statu-ettes of the Apostles above the colonnade to form a figural balustrade, and by using gilded bronze and lapis lazuli bearing luminous accents of yellow and deep blue, colors traditionally associated with Saint Peter.

In chronological and conceptual terms, the Tempietto-tabernacle for Saint Peter’s followed the plans Bernini developed for Urban VIII to redefine the Crossing, the space beneath the dome of Saint Peter’s, including the four piers, the subterranean area encircling the Apostle’s tomb, and the centerpiece of the design, the bronze baldacchino that rises above the high altar.109 By the Holy Year of 1625 a large-scale model for the baldacchino was in place, its supporting

Figure 116. Gianlorenzo Bernini, Sacrament altar, Saint Peter’s basilica. Courtesy of Alinari / Art Resource, NY.


columns based on the vine scroll marble shafts of Old Saint Peter’s that were identified as relics of the Temple of Jerusalem; its completion in 1633 was com-memorated by a papal medal (Figure 117).110 In this work and with greater specificity in the Sacrament tabernacle, Bernini reiterated the ideas Bramante first engaged in the Tempietto, assimilating Rome to Jerusalem through the identification of Peter’s martyrdom with Christ’s death. The fact that Urban VIII initiated these projects at the time Domenico di Gesù Maria and King Philip IV were renewing Spanish tutelage of San Pietro in Montorio holds great significance for defining the legacy of Bramante’s shrine. The reciprocal influence at each site, with features of Saint Peter’s adapted in the crypt of the Tempietto, and those of the Tempietto absorbed by works for the Apostle’s basilica, is best understood as a means for those patrons to define their posi-tion within the Universal Church. They did so by evoking their illustrious predecessors, Pope Julius II and the Catholic monarchs, who had engaged Bramante to extol their status in projects honoring Peter and the foundation of the Roman Church. The works commissioned by Urban VIII at Saint Peter’s and by Philip IV and Domenico di Gesù Maria at the Tempietto bring those ideas full circle.

Conclusion

The vigorous negotiation between the Spanish crown and the papacy over the Tempietto and the site it honors constitutes a significant phase of the monument’s rich afterlife. Works owed to Spanish patronage, beginning with the Quiñones Sacrament monument in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, and

Figure 117. Gaspare Mola, medal of Pope Urban VIII with the high altar of Saint Peter’s basilica, 1633. Museo Nazionale del Bargello, Florence. Courtesy of S.S.P.S.A.E e per il Polo Museale della città di Firenze – Gabinetto Fotografico.


followed in the Cathedral of Granada and the Escorial, remained remark-ably consistent in enlisting the Tempietto to emphasize the exalted role of the Spanish monarchy in Christian history, charged with defending the faith and recovering the Holy Land. During the first three decades of the seventeenth century, royal interest in the Tempietto was extended to the Janiculum site by Kings Philip III and Philip IV, and their proxy Domenico di Gesù Maria. In contrast, the popes increasingly defined the Tempietto and the monastery of San Pietro in Montorio as a papal domain, asserting a unitary vision of the tri-umphant faith that transcended individual patrons and national boundaries.111 Paul III began that process by reinforcing the Tempietto as a devotional cen-ter through the rich indulgences he conferred upon the faithful and by using the image of the Tempietto to exalt his own office. His lead was advanced by Julius III and Sixtus V, and concluded with Urban VIII, who brought renewed emphasis to the Tempietto as a shrine honoring Peter and the papacy. Those complementary approaches to the Tempietto on the part of the papacy and the crown emerge with great clarity during the period studied here. They also had a significant reprise in more recent times, which the following Epilogue will serve to introduce.

195

EpiloguE

A five-peseta postage stamp issued by the Spanish government in 1974 to celebrate the first centenary of the Academia Española de Bellas Artes en Roma, founded in 1873, provides the point of departure

for considering the Tempietto’s history during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (Figure 118).1 Despite the small format of the stamp, great care has been taken to present the Tempietto within the cloister of San Pietro in Montorio, which became the Spanish Academy’s permanent seat in 1876. At that time, Rome’s civil government ceded patronage rights of the church and monastery to King Alfonso XII (1874–85), stipulating that the Academy be housed in a portion of the monastery.2 That change in status was proclaimed by a prominent inscription installed above the entrance to the church, “Under the Patronage of the Kings of the Spains, Alfonso XII Reigning, in the Year of the Lord 1876.”3 Architect Alejandro Herrero y Herrero constructed a new building next to the monastery to house the Academy.4 Its inauguration on January 23, 1881, feast of the king’s namesake Saint Ildephonsus, was attended by Roman nobles, European diplomats, and representatives of both Church and state; also present were painters, sculptors, and musicians from Spain and elsewhere. A lengthy report published at that time provides details of the event and records the delicate negotiations required to locate the academy at San Pietro in Montorio.5 An engraving created by Eugenio Oliva, pensionado of the Academy during that same inaugural year, accompanies the report, providing a visual parallel to its laudatory tone (Figure 119). Oliva presented the Tempietto and the arms of the Catholic Kings as part of the natural


spectacle, overshadowed by the new turreted building where the arts would again flourish as they had during the Renaissance.

Given the history of Spanish royal patronage at San Pietro in Montorio, it might seem a foregone conclusion that Spain’s national arts academy in Rome would be housed there, but extraordinary effort was required to realize that idea. Following the unification of Italy and the absorption of Rome as capital in 1870, the government declared its intention to secularize religious institutions

Figure 119. Eugenio Oliva, Lateral View of the New Edifice and Allegorical Details of the Stair and the Tempietto of Bramante, engraving, 1881. La ilustracion española y americana, 25, no. 5 (Feb. 8, 1881): 77. Collection of author.

Figure 118. Postage stamp issued for the centenary of the Academia Española de Bellas Artes en Roma, 1974. By permission of Sociedad Estatal Correos y Telégrafos S.A.

Epilogue • 197

in preparation for selling off their property. The Spanish eminences respon-sible for diverting that scheme, saving the monastery, and dedicating it to the arts are honored in a marble inscription of 1881 seen on the right wall upon entering the first cloister of San Pietro in Montorio.6 The list includes the dip-lomat Emilio Castelar, who nurtured the dream of creating a Spanish academy of fine arts in Rome, Conde Coello de Portugal, the king’s ambassador to Italy, who worked tirelessly to locate the Academy in the monastery, and Alfonso XII, who lent royal prestige to their plan. The project to preserve the monas-tery and gain patronage rights was complicated by the fact that the papacy had assumed tutelage of the site during the earlier nineteenth century. At that time the Tempietto was enlisted in the campaign to bolster the powers of Rome’s bishop by asserting the Apostolic roots of the Roman Church. Peter’s martyr-dom in that place assumed increased importance as the temporal authority of the pope was attacked, weakened, and rejected.

This phase of the Tempietto’s history opens with the bellicose events accom-panying the establishment of the first Roman Republic in 1798, when the citi-zens of Rome assisted by the French overturned papal rule.7 Anticipating the entry of French troops into the city, Pope Pius VI (1775–99) implored the faith-ful to pray for peace; propitiary processions and Masses were held throughout the city with the Tempietto providing a focus of pious activity.8 Following the fall of the city, the church, gardens, and cloister of San Pietro in Montorio were treated as the spoils of war, secularized and sold for a pittance to a Frenchman, who proceeded to remove all saleable materials.9 Raphael’s Transfiguration of Christ was removed from the church’s high altar and transferred to Paris as one of the premier works to be displayed in the Musée Napoléon (Musée du Louvre).10 A report drawn up in 1804 documents the extensive damage inflicted on the monastery, church, and Tempietto. At the Tempietto, all metal fixtures were removed, including the guardrails and the grates closing the entrance to the crypt and the light shaft.11 Within the crypt, both the pavement and wall revetment were ruined and the altar mutilated. Pope Pius VII (1800–23) launched an extensive restoration of the Tempietto.12 His efforts are commem-orated by an inscription dated 1804 originally mounted in a prominent posi-tion above the entrance to the crypt, now installed on the wall of the cloister.13 It refers to the patronage of Ferdinand and Isabel, provides the date 1502, and praises Bramante, naming as well those who were responsible for the restora-tion, Carlo Fea, papal Commissioner of Antiquities, and Giuseppe Camporese, neo-classical architect.14 The pope again publicized the restoration in a por-trait medal where the Tempietto is presented in extraordinary detail right down to the decorated metopes (Figure 120). The encircling legend reads, “To


Saint Peter on the Janiculum Restored 1804,” again bearing Bramante’s name and the year 1502, along with the name of Tommaso Mercandetti, who crafted the medal, and the year 1807.15 The exceptional concern with preserving the Tempietto and associating it closely with the pope reflects its great fame and spiritual significance. As the visible marker of Peter’s martyrdom in Rome, the Tempietto provided support for papal claims to both spiritual and temporal power.

A treatise on Peter’s martyrdom written by a Church official, one Filippo Pacifici, and published in Rome in 1814, demonstrates that same high regard for the Tempietto and clarifies the reasons that inspired it.16 The treatise forms part of a renewed polemic concerning the place of the Apostle’s martyrdom in Rome, whether on the Janiculum or at the Vatican, which was introduced in 1809 with the publication in quick succession of three pamphlets.17 These works and Pacifici’s response to them come at the beginning and end of the five-year period from 1809 to 1814 when Napoleon annexed Rome as the sec-ond capital city of the empire, abducted the pope, and deported him to France. Pacifici cited the Tempietto, “recently sacked and devastated” and restored by the pope, as evidence for papal primacy. He found support for that idea in the crypt where the cross of Peter had been inserted in the aperture at the center of the pavement. Pacifici advanced the foundation stone as additional evidence for his position and transcribed the text he saw. This counts as the first pub-lished record of the epigraph with the initial word transcribed as Sacellum, chapel, not as in Pietro di Madre di Dio’s account Lapidem, stone.18 The addi-tion of the new word on a separate piece of marble attached to the main block, as discussed in Chapter 4, would have occurred during the restoration of the

Figure 120. Tommaso Mercandetti, medal of Pope Pius VII with the Tempietto, 1807. Staatliche Münzsammlung, Munich. © Staatliche Münzsammlung München, Photo Nicolai Kästner.

Epilogue • 199

Tempietto undertaken by Pius VII. The substitution carried important impli-cations for how the stone was interpreted during that contentious period in papal history. In its original form, the principal inscription credited Ferdinand and Isabel with founding the chapel, and the text on the reverse side identified the stone as the primus lapis. Once the stone was installed in the pavement of the crypt in 1628, this second inscription was rendered invisible, breaking the essential connection with the Tempietto that came with its identification as the ritual foundation stone. This same rupture was maintained in the nine-teenth century when the stone was repaired and inserted into the front of the altar. By adding the word Sacellum to the forward, visible text, the relic status of the stone that hinged on the word Lapidem yielded to the assertion that the chapel was where Peter had been martyred. In this process, the foundation stone was recast as a historical document attesting to the early identification of that place with the martyred Apostle.

Pope Pius IX (1846–78) extended the bond between the papacy and the Tempietto begun by Pius VII. At the start of his long pontificate, the pope saw the church and monastery severely damaged during the short-lived sec-ond Roman Republic of 1849.19 Giuseppe Garibaldi and his forces used the monastery as the staging ground to repulse French troops seeking to enter the city through the fortification walls at the nearby Porta San Pancrazio, with the final assault occurring on June 29, feast of Saints Peter and Paul. All reports concur that the Tempietto emerged from the conflict unscathed. In the following years, Pius financed repairs to the church and monastery and restored the Tempietto.20 To commemorate those works, in 1855 the munici-pal authorities mounted a spectacular fireworks display designed by the archi-tect Luigi Poletti for the feast of Peter and Paul, consisting of a rendering of the Tempietto framed by a colonnaded portico and inscribed along the base “Where He Was Crowned by Martyrdom” (Ubi Martirio Coronatus Est) (Figure 121).21

Increased attention to the Janiculum site marked the waning years of papal temporal rule in Rome.22 In 1867, Pius IX proclaimed the 1800th anniversary of the martyrdom of Saints Peter and Paul, and marked the occasion by again restoring the Tempietto and rebuilding the road leading to the monastery. The road necessitated excavating portions of the hillside and constructing massive retaining walls to support the new terracing, augmenting and extending the works undertaken at the beginning of the seventeenth century by King Philip III (Figure 122).23 The road was inaugurated amidst great jubilation on July 5, 1867, the last day in the octave of the feast of Peter and Paul, which was tradi-tionally accompanied by celebration of Mass at San Pietro in Montorio.24 The


communal government installed on the new retaining wall a large inscription identifying the road with the anniversary of Peter’s death, crediting the pope with providing funds for the project, and claiming it took a mere fifty days to complete the work.25

Figure 121. Luigi Poletti, fireworks display for the feast of Saints Peter and Paul, drawing, 1855. Biblioteca civica d’arte Luigi Poletti, Modena, Fondo Poletti, inv. 981. Photo courtesy of Rolando Paolo Guerzoni.

Figure 122. Visit of Pope Pius IX to San Pietro in Montorio. Vatican palace. Photo courtesy of Musei Vaticani.

Epilogue • 201

This focus on the Janiculum site intensified during the final years of papal rule in Rome. To commemorate the Vatican Council of 1869–1870, convened with the declared goal of proclaiming papal temporal power as dogma, an extraordinary monument was projected for the terrace in front of San Pietro in Montorio.26 Virginio Vespignani designed a triumphal column that rose from a base decorated with sculptures referring to the Church’s global reach, and with a bronze statue of Peter in the act of blessing at the top.27 The plan was to utilize a shaft of richly veined marmo africano (marmor luculleum) that had recently been discovered during construction of the embankment along the Tiber River in the area of the Emporium, the ancient port located just south of the Aventine Hill. In October 1869, the foundation stone of the monument was laid, and papal coins of that year, along with a commemorative medal showing the column in place, were deposited on the site (Figure 123).28 The projected monument, imperial in its scale, material, and design, recalled the tradition of Peter’s martyrdom in that place and signaled the point of ori-gin of the universal power claimed by the bishop of Rome. As viewed from the city, the Apostle would have appeared in front of the church’s facade extend-ing his benediction to the city and the world, signifying both pacification and dominion. With the fall of Rome in 1870, papal concern for San Pietro in Montorio and the Tempietto ended.

Against this background, heightened importance accrues to the modern history of San Pietro in Montorio, beginning in 1876 when King Alfonso XII received patronage rights and the monastery became the permanent home of the Spanish Academy of Fine Arts. This revival of the crown’s historical

Figure 123. Foundation medal for a monument at San Pietro in Montorio to commemorate the Vatican Council, 1869. Gabinetto Numismatico, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, © 2014 Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana. By concession of the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, all rights reserved.


involvement with San Pietro in Montorio provided the king, recently restored to power, the means to assert his own legitimacy, recalling the illustrious tra-dition of royal patronage established by the Catholic monarchs four centuries earlier.

A more recent reprise of those conditions occurred in 1975 when Alfonso XII’s great-grandson, King Juan Carlos I (1975–2014), became head of state fol-lowing the death of the military leader Francisco Franco. In discourses deliv-ered early in his reign, Juan Carlos emphasized his own illustrious lineage and the history of his country. In 1976, he addressed the Congress of the United States, noting that he was the first king of Spain to visit the land whose history he traced to Queen Isabel’s decision to sponsor the journeys of Christopher Columbus. He took that opportunity to claim direct descent from the queen.29 In the following year, Juan Carlos paid a state visit to Rome, where he was received by Pope Paul VI (1963–78) at the Vatican and by President Giovanni Leone (1971–78) at the Quirinal.30 In his address to the pope, he recalled the strong links between his family and Rome during the period of political exile, the death there of his grandfather, Alfonso XIII, the marriage of his parents, and his own birth in the city.31 In connection with this historic visit to Rome, the first by a Spanish king in a half-century, conservation of the Tempietto was undertaken with funds provided by Spain.32 The month of October 1978 was marked by the promulgation of the new democratic constitution of Spain and the inauguration of the restored Tempietto. On October 22, Juan Carlos visited Rome to dedicate the completed work, unveiling a handsome marble inscription honoring him, Ferdinand and Isabel, Bramante, and Peter, in that order, with their names distinguished by a historicizing epigraphical style (Figure 124).

In the year 1978, during the reign of Juan Carlos, this shrine, built in times past at the bidding of King Ferdinand and Queen Isabel through the lofty genius of Bramante, dedicated to Peter prince of the Apostles, and weakened by great age, lest it deteriorate further under the assault of time, was restored at the public expense of the nation of Spain with care and generosity at the initiative of the same Catholic king of Spain.33

The inscription, like the one of Pius VII, was mounted directly on the Tempietto, above the right side entrance to the chapel; it was subsequently removed and set into the wall of the cloister.34

The act of linking the tutelage of the monument so closely to Spain and to the person of the king reinforced the identification of Juan Carlos’s reign as a historical restitution.35 The king asserted that idea through the coat of arms he

Epilogue • 203

adopted by royal decree in January 1977, which absorbed the monarchical sym-bols that Ferdinand and Isabel had first brought together and that Francisco Franco adapted to honor his own government.36 The heraldry of Aragon is quartered with that of Castile and Léon, the pomegranate of Granada at the base of the escutcheon, and the whole held aloft by the eagle of Saint John the Evangelist. Juan Carlos’s full armorial display incorporates the yoke and bundle of arrows, personal devices of Ferdinand and Isabel, along with the Columns of Hercules and the motto Plus Ultra of their grandson Charles V. By assuming these traditional devices, Juan Carlos proclaimed his commit-ment to restore the internal stability and international prominence Spain had enjoyed during the reign of those same monarchs.

Spain’s official presence on the Janiculum Hill entered a new phase in the final years of the twentieth century when, in advance of the Holy Year of 2000, the Patrimonio Histórico Español and Italy’s Istituto Centrale per il Restauro collaborated on an extensive campaign to conserve the Tempietto.37 King Juan Carlos returned to San Pietro in Montorio on May 22, 1999, to celebrate the conclusion of those efforts.38 During the course of the work, the foundation stone was removed from the crypt altar, revealing evidence sufficient to silence doubts concerning its authenticity. As testimony to the potency of the lapidary record, and the growing importance of the Tempietto to Spain, in December

Figure 124. Inscription commemorating conservation of the Tempietto in 1978. San Pietro in Montorio, cloister. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.


1998 news of this epigraphical confirmation of the patronage of the Catholic kings was presented in Madrid to the Congreso de Deputados, and reiterated in February 1999.39 The second announcement placed the discovery of the foundation stone in the context of a 1992 lawsuit brought by the Franciscan order with the goal of rescinding Spain’s rights to the site.40 In 2000, those legal proceedings were resolved in Spain’s favor, opening the way to estab-lishing a Spanish cultural and political hub on the Janiculum Hill.41 A com-prehensive restoration of the monastery complex was announced and Spain’s embassy to Italy was transferred to that site.

It is only natural that the image of the Tempietto now serves as the official logo of this center of Spanish activity in Rome, known as the Real Academia de España en Roma. The doors of the main building, the website, and all pub-lications sponsored by the Academy are branded with its image. As in the past, Spain draws prestige from the association with San Pietro in Montorio and the Tempietto, vivid reminders of the cultural ties to Rome and the papacy that flourished in the decades around 1500 and long after. The purpose of the present study has been to clarify how the highly political nature of those ties inspired a coordinated program of the arts that included at its center the Tempietto. By examining the Tempietto in light of royal concerns, and by associating it with the broader patronage activities of the Spanish crown in Rome, it has been possible to reclaim the historical context as a vital factor motivating the visual and conceptual innovations that have made the Tempietto a focal point for the history of Western architecture. Bramante’s shrine honoring Saint Peter on the site of his martyrdom assumes its proper place in Renaissance art, under-stood in its fullest dimension as an international phenomenon, to which the Catholic Kings of Spain, Ferdinand of Aragon and Isabel of Castile, acting through their agent Bernardino de Carvajal, made decisive contributions.

205

Appendix A

San Pietro in Montorio, 1500

Visitors to the crypt of the Tempietto see an inscribed marble slab measuring 38.25 cm × 62 cm mounted on the right embrasure of the doorway as one enters (Figure 125, Plate XVIII). It reads,

In the year of Christian salvation 1500, during the Jubilee and the pon-tificate of Alexander VI, on the ninth day of June, the Tuesday after Pentecost, let it be known to each and every who shall see the present [text] that the present church and this altar in honor of the Blessed Peter the Apostle, crucified in this place, were consecrated and the relics writ-ten below were enclosed within it.

At that point the text abruptly ends, signaling that it is an excerpt from a lengthier document. It is generally agreed that the inscription is a modern cre-ation, but neither its date nor its meaning have been established. On occasion, it has been taken as evidence that construction activity on the site occurred in 1500, before the Tempietto itself was built.1 The following analysis makes clear that the text concerns the consecration of the high altar of the church. It is also argued that the inscription was created and installed in the crypt early in the nineteenth century at the same time the foundation stone of 1502 was repaired and installed on the altar.

In 1879, Vincenzo Forcella published the full text of the 1500 inscription, including the list of relics, as part of his magisterial corpus of Roman inscrip-tions.2 Forcella knew this text from the collection of materials concerning the

206 • Appendix A

churches of Rome compiled by the erudite Giacomo Gregorio Terribilini (d. 1755).3 Terribilini identified his own source in a notation at the top of the manu-script page that has escaped notice, S(an) Pietro Montorio in Lap(ide) Marm(oreo) (San Pietro in Montorio According to the Marble Slab). The only marble inscrip-tion known today is located in the crypt of the Tempietto, but since it omits the list of relics, it cannot have been Terribilini’s source. The notation suggests that Terribilini knew the text from an inscription and understood it to refer to the church, not to the Tempietto.

Additional information concerning the 1500 text is provided by Francesco del Sodo in his guide to the churches of Rome written between 1575 and 1581.4 Del Sodo reported the high altar of San Pietro in Montorio had been consecrated in 1500 and that all the altars were reconsecrated in 1580, citing information sup-plied by two wooden tablets (tavole), one mounted on the screen of the high altar and the other found in the sacristy.5 These tablets are lost, and so it cannot be determined if both were created in 1580 or if the one referring to the consecra-tion of the church was original to 1500.

Two tablets, probably the same ones seen by del Sodo, are described in an unpublished history of San Pietro in Montorio written by the Franciscan friar Lodovico da Modena (d. 1722), quoting information from a manuscript by another Franciscan, Fra Gregorio da Roma, which has not been traced.6 We

Figure 125. Inscription commemorating the dedication of San Pietro in Montorio in 1500. Tempietto, crypt. Photo courtesy of Alessandro Vasari.

Appendix A • 207

learn from this source that the texts were written on parchment and mounted on the tablets. The one concerning the reconsecration of 1580 specified that only the eight lateral altars of the nave were involved, named the saints to whom they were dedicated, and identified the relics deposited within them. The sec-ond tablet with the text of 1500, including the list of relics, matches Terribilini’s transcription, and it is located in the sacristy of the church.7 Terribilini likely copied a version of this same text, which had been cut in marble as he stated, but was subsequently lost. The most relevant point to emerge from these facts is that beginning in the late sixteenth century the consecration text of 1500 was not physically associated with the Tempietto. Lacking evidence to the contrary, there is no reason to assume that it had been previously. The relics recorded in the 1500 text reinforce the identification of the altar in question as the high altar of the church. As discussed in Chapter 2, the special indulgences available to the faithful in the church on the feast days of Christ and Peter found an echo in the relic collection that emphasized the earliest and most venerable martyrs of the Church, and in particular relics of Christ and Peter.

It remains to determine when and why the modern epigraph seen today in the crypt of the Tempietto was created, repeating the first part of the dedicatory inscription, but omitting the list of relics. The extended horizontal ligatures and commas are common in nineteenth-century productions generally, but a date early in the period is indicated by the lack of precision in the cutting of the letters, quite different from the more regularized incisions found later in the century. An early nineteenth-century date is also suggested by the empha-sis placed on the words In Honorem B. Petri Ap(osto)li / In Hoc Loci Crucifixi (In Honor of Blessed Peter the Apostle, Crucified in this Place), which are formed with letters slightly larger and more widely spaced than the rest and centered on two successive lines, recalling features of the foundation stone (see Figure 87). Those same words referring to Peter’s crucifixion may have encouraged the idea that the consecration in question concerned the crypt chapel. However, as long as the original wooden tablet and the marble slab Terribilini saw were present in the church, it would have been natural to interpret the phrase “Crucified in This Place” as referring to the sanctification of the entire monastic complex through the Apostle’s martyrdom, including the church and its main altar. This was the meaning of similar expressions used by both Pope Sixtus IV and King Ferdinand to describe the site (see Chapter 2). With the loss of both the wooden tablet and original marble inscription, the precise meaning of the 1500 text may have become unclear, in part due to a broader lack of knowledge concerning the early history of the monastery after the events of 1798 when the monastery was secularized, the church vandalized, and the archive destroyed.8

208 • Appendix A

It is unlikely that the chief factor motivating the creation of the modern, abbreviated inscription and its installation in the crypt chapel was concern for the date of the Tempietto. Far outweighing this issue, and even the extraordi-nary relics listed in the original text but now omitted, was the claim carried by the words referring to Peter’s crucifixion “In This Place.” It will be observed that like those words, the name of Alexander VI in the second line is also accented by the application of larger letters. Although the name of the pope appears solely to date the consecration during his reign, this privileged visual treatment sug-gests papal approbation of the tradition that Peter was martyred on that site. As discussed in the Epilogue, these same concerns were raised by Pope Pius VII’s 1804 restoration of both the Tempietto and the foundation stone, and they were articulated by Filippo Pacifici ten years later. It can be concluded on both epi-graphical and historical grounds that the modern plaque was created following the events of 1798 and installed in the crypt to augment the epigraphical evi-dence provided by the foundation stone. Together these two inscriptions bol-stered the claims to Apostolic primacy of the beleaguered bishop of Rome by affirming that site as the authentic place of Peter’s crucifixion.

209

Appendix B

TempieTTo, 1628

Fra Pietro di Madre di Dio, “Vita del Venerabile Padre nostro fra Domenico di Giesù Maria Carmelitano Scalzo scritta da fra Pietro della Madre di Dio senese suo compagno, di ordine delli suoi superiori,” AGOCD, 319A, pt. 2, fols. 50–59, packet of unbound folios concerning part 6, chapter 6 of the biography. (In the following transcription the abbreviations employed by the author have been expanded and punctu-ation modernized.)

Degli ornamenti preciosi, che fece nella Cappella della crocifissione di S. Pietro in Montorio di Roma l’anno 1628. Cap. 6

L’anno passato 1627 essendo andato il Domenico una volta di stare a S. Pietro in Montorio per trattare alcuni negotii col Cardinale (Gian Garzia) Mellino, che quivi per una sua indispositione si era ritirato, nel ritorno havendo veduto nel mezzo del cortile di quel convento il piccolo, ma famoso tempio, di forma rotonda circondato di fuori da bellissimo colonnato, fatto per mano di Bramante eccellente architetto dei Re di Spagna, nel luogo dove si tiene che fusse crocifisso il glorioso S. Pietro, scese nella cappella che sta sotto la cappella principale, per baciare quella terra, e raccomandarsi al Principe degli Apsotoli, dove havendo veduto che i ministri dell’opera, havevano atteso a far bella la cappella di sopra, e la parte di fuora, e trascurata quella poichè vi si scendeva, come in una cantina per una scala che posava quasi nel mezzo con brutta vista et impedimento, et ancorché di pietra, nondimeno assai erta, stretta, e pericolosa di cascarvi per non haver riparo ni dall’una parte, ni dall’altra, di più havendo osservato che il pic-colo altare che vi era, mancandosi la tovaglia, e gl’ornamenti per l’umidità stava

210 • Appendix B

quasi del tutto spogliato, et anco che l’incollatura dei muri col pavimento erano già molto brutti, e mal trattati gli fece tanta compassione di vedere che quel luogo, dove scendevano per devotione non sola quei di Roma, ma i pellegrini di Italia, e delli parti oltramontane, non fusse stato ornato con quella decenza, che meritava il martirio del Portinaro del Regno del Cielo, che delibero di far il possible, acciò che fussi accomodato.

Conferì il pensiero al suo grande amico il Cardinale (Gaspare) Borgia, che era andato visitarlo, il quale per la sua pietà, e devotione verso il santo, offrì sub-bito di dargli 500 scudi accioché con essi l’accomodasse come più gli piaceva. Con quella sì buona promessa essendosi più assicurato che Dio benedetto haveva riservato a lui questa opera, diede conto alla Santità di Nostro Signore Urbano 8. di quanto era passato, pregandola . . . che volesse dargli il suo consenso, e la sua beneditione per accomodar quel luogo, accioché i Padri riformati di S. Francesco che n’havevano il possesso, e vi habitavano non mettessero impedi-menti, e Sua Santità aggradendo il pensiero sì contento molto benignamente e mando a dire al Padre Guardiano di S. Pietro, che lasciasse fare al Padre frate Domenico quanto egli desiderava intorno agl’ornamenti di quella cappella, che tutto era di suo ordine si che la prima volta che andò il Domenico a parlare sopra di ciò al Padre Guardiano et agli altri Padri, li ritrovò tanto pronti che gli diedero subbito il dominio della cappella, accioché in essa facesse, e disfacesse quanto gli piaceva, approvando così buona volontà, da loro tanto desiderata e lo ringratiarono della carità con ogni affetto.

Onde havendo il Domenico consultato con architetti, messi mano all’opera, e prima levò la scala di dentro, et aprì la porta al pari del pavimento, per la quale si entra commodamente per una scala di fuora da due parti, cavata nel mezzo della scalinata che saglia al colonnato, e cappella di sopra, fece che quella apertura che serviva per porta, e finestra della cappella, servisse solo per finestra, et anco aprì un’altra finestrella tonda nel mezzo della volta, che sostiene la cappella di sopra, e così diede maggior luce alla cappella, e resto rimediato all’umidita che vi era, la quale entrandovi anco dalla parte di fuora, prohibi che non ne potesse più entrare coll’accrescere al coperto di piombo che è solo alla cupola, un altro sopra il colonnato, che gira tra essa, et i balaustri di travertino, et a quella appresso fece anco dare più pendenza e buono stucco all’scalinata di travertino, che gira intorno al tempio.

Nel rompere la porta di questa cappella fu il Domenico grandemente con-solato, poichè havendo ritrovato i fondamenti che per esser con molto massiccio tutto unito sopra tufo sodo non erano molto profondi, scoprirono nel mezzo del muro, che è dirimpetto alla porta interna del convento, un luogo murato attorno con mattoni e dentro di esso un pezzo di marmo bianco, che dimostrava antichità,

Appendix B • 211

di grossezza [canceled: circa a mezzo] quasi un palmo, di lunghezza circa a tre, e di larghezza due, nella quale da una parte erano scolpite le sequenti parole. Lapidem Apostolor(um) Principis martirio sacrum, Ferdinandus Hispaniarum Rex, et Helisabeth regina catholici, post erectam ab eis aedem posuerunt anno salutis Christianae 1502. e dall’altra parte stava scolpito. Bernard(in)us Carvajal Card. S.R.E. primum lapidem, i(n)ecit. e nelle cantonate della pietra vi erano 4. incavati di forma rotonda, nelli quali si ritrovarono monete di argento simili ad un giulio, o poco più grosse, che havevano l’impronta, et l’inscrittione dell’istesso Re. Di che havendo il Domenico dato conto al Papa si rallegrò Sua Santità e gli disse, che forse era stata data quella pietra alli Re, e Regina dal Papa di quel tempo per sodisfare alla loro devotione, come cosa sagra per esser stata forse adoperata nel crocifiggere S. Pietro [canceled: striata col suo sangue, come pareva che ne mostrasse alcune macchie], e che di essa tenesse molto conto come fece il Domenico facendola mettere in buonissima custodia.

Volse il Domenico che l’istessa pietra fusse illustrata, e tenuta in maggior veneratione, poichè uno di quelli che furono presenti quando fu trovata, prese per sua devotione un poco di calcina, che le stava attorno della quale havendo poi dato ad una donna affatturata, le fece subito vomitar le fatture, et afferma che diverse sante reliquie applicate non le havevano fatto simile effetto, di che sparsasi la voce molti procurarono di haverne per loro devotione. Fu anco assai ammirato il seguente caso occorso nell’istesso luogo, poichè havendo il Domenico fatto aprire la finestrella rotonda nel mezzo della volta che riesce nella cappella di sopra, mentre vi faceva fare la ferrata, andò quivi a pigliar il per-dono una Signora romana assai principale, et una zitella già grande sua nipote, la quale stando in piedi guardando la cappella di sopra, si accostò tanto alla detta finestrella rotonda, che vi cadde dentro e calando sempre dritta diede con un piede, e ruppe un pezzetto di tavola, che era in un ponte fattovi per servizio delli stuccatori, e si ritrovò in piedi sopra il pavimento della cappella bassa senza nocumento alcuno con gran meraviglia di chi lo vidde e l’intese, poiché l’apertura della finestrella non era più che tre palmi di diametro, et ella assai grande, e con molte vesti e rese insieme con la sua nonna, e compagne molte grazie al Signore et a S. Pietro, che l’havesse così conservata, senza essersi rotta una gamba, o un braccio, come esse si credevano e probabilmente si poteva temere.

In tanto il Domenico attendeva a sollecitare l’opera con gran diligenza, si che in un anno, o poco più la ridusse alla desiderata perfettione, e fece incrostare all’altezza di 9. palmi tutta la cappella che gira in tondo poco più di 60. palmi di fini marmi, cioe il basamento, e le cornici, di bianco, e tutto il resto di mischio di diversi colori, che commessi, e lustrati nei pilastrelli, e fra essi con vago disegno, e spartimenti, fanno una bellissima vista. E nel collarino della cornice grande

212 • Appendix B

di sopra fece scolpire a lettere doro la seguente inscrittione Hic antiquissima traditione, et magno fidelium devoto concursu, Principis Apostolorum martirij locus veneratur. Sopra di questa nei pilastrelli posano alcune costole, che vanno a finire nella finestrella rotonda della volta, ornate tutte, come anco li spazij fra mezzo con historiette della vita di S. Pietro, fatte di stucco, bassi rilievi, e fogliami coperti di oro riccamente. Nel mezzo del circolo incontro alla porta sta l’altare di sotto aperto, fatto tutto di marmo bianco con due pilastri, che sostengono un grosso lastrone, nella parte dinanzi tutti scorniciati e coperti di pietre di diversi colori, sopra l’altare stanno due colonnette di alabastro, che sostengono una bella cornice architravata, nello spazio tra esse nella parte bassa il gradino che sostiene i candelieri, con tutto il resto di sopra commesso con pietre fine di varii colori, nel cui mezzo sta un’altro bellissimo ornamento di rame con raggi dorati in campo di smalto turchino che contiene un pezzo di reliquia di S. Pietro mandatogli dell’Infanta di Fiandra. Sotto l’altare pose la pietra [canceled: sagra] che fu trovata nei fondamenti della cappella molto ben ornata, e con lampada serrata quivi da una vaga ferrata [canceled: di ferro di color nigro incornciato, e boccioni, e fogli-ami] di ferro tutta dorata, accioché da i devoti circostanti si possa vedere, et anco toccare con le corone. Sopra il gradino dell’altare pose due teste di marmo del Salvatore, e della sua santissima Madre, tenute in mezzo delli candelieri, e croce di ottone. Il pavimento fece di grossi tavoloni di noce [canceled: et altro legname bianco] e cipresso, spartiti con bel disegno, che corrisponde all’opera della volta, accioché fatto di marmo non rendresse umidità et i devoti che vi andassino a dir la messa, o udirla, ovver a far oratione la possino fare più a lungo, e con maggior commodità. Nel mezzo del questo pavimento fece una finestrella rotonda ornata attorno di varii marmi di 4. palmi di diametro chiusa dalla ferrata dorata, accio-ché i devoti possino vedere, et anco toccare con le corone il luogo, e la terra, che è tutta di rena soda e gialla simile all’oro dove si tiene che fusse alzato in croce il glorioso S. Pietro, e che versasse del suo sagrato sangue. Et un’altra simil ferrata dorata pose nella finestrella della volta corrispondente a quella accioché i devoti, stando ancora nella cappella di sopra possino godere di tal devotione.

Sopra dell’altare antico era un lastrone di marmo, nel quale erano scolpite le seguente parole. Paulus 3. Pont. Max. Predecessorum Suorum Vestigiis Inhaerendo Ob Eximiam Omnium Huic Templo Devotionem Atque Observantiam Inter Alia, Quibus libet Missam In Hoc Sacello Celebrantibus Vice Qualibet Unam Animam Ex Iis Quae Apud Inferos Ad Sua Purgandum Delicta Sunt Eruntque Destinatae Redimendi Atque Ab Eisdem Cruciatibus Evocandi Omnimodam Perpetuamque Facultatem Concessit, Anno Domini M.D. XXXVI. che contengono l’indulgenza perpetua, che vi è concessa a chi celebrerà quivi la messa. Alla qual pietra il Domenico per esser molto rozza, e

Appendix B • 213

mal trattata diede luogo sotto la predella dell’altare, accioché quivi si conser-vasse quella memoria antica, e si potesse vedere ad ogni occasione. Ma prima fece intagliare l’istesse parole in un’altra pietra di marmo molto ben ornata con stucchi dorati, che sta sopra la porta incontro alla finestra grande, dove si puo commodamente leggere [canceled: di chi entra nella cappella, et anco dalla], e sopra di questa pose una bellissima pittura fatta da eccellente mano della cro-cifissione di Santo Pietro ornata con cornice e stucchi dorati. Vicino all’istesso altare antico vi erano due colonne di circa dieci palmi, semplici, et appoggiate al muro senza ornamento alcuno, le quali havendo egli fatto repulire, e lustrare collocò accanto alli stipiti della porta di dentro per conservare quella devotione antica, poiche alcuni hanno creduto che ad esse fusse stato legato S. Pietro quando fu crocifisso, o altra cosa simile, il che però non si è potuto verificare con scritture o altra traditione antica, che haverle ritrovato in quel luogo, come si suol fare a cose simili.

In una piccola, e semplice nicchia fatta nel muro sopra l’istesso altare antico era una statua di marmo antica di S. Pietro alta circa a 4. palmi, et a quella che fece prima restaurare non essendo luogo proportionato nella cappella, diede luogo fuori di essa in una bella nicchia ornata di stucchi, che sta incontro all’altar nuovo, dove si uniscono le due scale che scendono dai lati, accioché ogn’uno che entrava in essa sia necessitato a vederla, et adimandargli la sua intercessione. Alla finestra grande fece fare una forte ferrata, come anco alla porta, in cambio dell’anta di legno, vagamente lavorata et ornata con cornice turchina et oro, accioché da esse, venisse custodita la cappella, et insieme rispondendo esse sotto il colonnato si potesse vedere l’altare, e farvi commoda oratione. Finalmente volendo che anco la parte di fuora della cappella, e la entrata fusse ornata, e cus-todita, pose sopra la finestra un quadro colla cornice dorata di un Santo Pietro, quando pianse amaramente la sua negatione, e sopra la porta tre serafini di marmo, attorno alle scale, fra le colonne e sopra lo scalino nel piano del cortile, fece fare forti e belli ripari di ferro col le palle in cima di ottone accioché le per-sone che si acostano non vi possino cascare, si che è riuscita nella sua grandezza una delle belle cappelle, che si siano fatte in Roma con gran consenso delli buoni padri francescani, con accrescimento del concorso e devotione, e con sodisfat-tione universale da tutta Roma, che ha veduto quivi nuovamente honorato il Principe degli Apostoli suo Battezzatore Advocato e Protettore, e tutto questo piasse molto poco al Domenico per il gran desiderio che haveva di honorarlo accioché oltre li 500 scudi che diede il Cardinale Borgia ve ne habbia spesi più di altri mille fra ogni cosa di quelli che erano stati dati con molte fatiche fattevi in soprastare quasi tutto l’anno 1628, e tutto sia a maggior gloria del Signore sia del glorioso Portinaro del Cielo, et aprofitto dell’Anime.

214 • Appendix B

Translation

Chapter 6. Concerning the precious ornaments [Domenico] made in the chapel of the Crucifixion at San Pietro in Montorio in Rome in the year 1628.

Last year, 1627, Domenico went to San Pietro in Montorio to conduct some business with Cardinal (Gian Garzia) Mellino, who had retreated there due to an indisposition, and upon leaving saw in the center of the cloister of the mon-astery the small but famous round temple surrounded on the exterior by a quite beautiful colonnade, made by the hand of Bramante, excellent architect of the King of Spain, on the place where it is held that the glorious Saint Peter was crucified. He descended to the chapel beneath the main chapel to kiss that earth and entrust himself to the Prince of the Apostles. He noted that the wardens of the monument had desired to embellish the upper chapel and the exterior, but neglected the other chapel to which one descended, as into a basement, by a stair located almost in the center, and even if (built in) stone, (it was) poorly illuminated and incommodious, quite steep, narrow, and with the danger of fall-ing since it lacked handrails on either side. Furthermore, he saw that due to humidity the small altar was deprived of an altar-cloth and other ornaments were almost entirely missing, and the surfaces of the walls and pavement were unsightly and poorly maintained. He felt much pity seeing that this place where pilgrims came for their devotion from Rome, from Italy and lands beyond the Alps, was not decorated with the decency merited by the martyrdom of the Gatekeeper of the Kingdom of Heaven, and he decided to do whatever possible so that it would be repaired.

Domenico shared this idea with his great friend Cardinal (Gaspare) Borgia, who went to visit him. Out of piety and devotion, the Cardinal immediately offered him 500 scudi so the chapel could be repaired as would most please him. With this good promise assuring him that blessed God had reserved this work for him, Domenico recounted to Pope Urban VIII what had happened, beseech-ing him to give his consent and blessing to repair that place so the Reformed Friars of Saint Francis who had possession of it and lived there would not impose obstacles. His Holiness liked the idea and very amiably asked the Guardian of S. Pietro (in Montorio) to allow Domenico whatever he desired concerning the embellishment of that chapel. The first time Domenico went to speak about it to the Guardian and the other friars, he found them quite prepared to give him immediate control of the chapel so he might create and destroy whatever he pleased, approving of his good intentions, which they greatly desired, and with all affection thanked him for his charity.

Appendix B • 215

Having consulted with architects, Domenico took the work in hand by first removing the inner stair and opening an entrance at the level of the pavement, approached more conveniently by means of an external stair of two parts, inserted into the middle of the stair that leads to the colonnade and the upper chapel. He wanted the opening that served as the door and window of the (lower) chapel to serve only as a window, and he also opened another small, round aperture in the center of the vault that supports the upper chapel, in this way giving more light to the chapel and remedying the humidity that was there. The humidity enter-ing the chapel from the exterior was resolved by extending the lead sheathing, now only on the cupola, to the area above the colonnade which extends from it to the travertine balusters, and in addition he gave more inclination and had proper stucco applied to the travertine stairs encircling the temple.

In breaking through the door of this chapel Domenico was greatly comforted since having discovered the foundations to be quite massive and completely consol-idated above a solid tufa bed, they were not very deep. The (workmen) uncovered in the middle of the wall (located) in front of the internal door to the monastery an area walled-in with bricks and within it a piece of white marble which exhibited great age, [canceled: about a half] almost a palmo thick, about three palmi long, and two in height on one part of which were incised the following words:

Lapidem Apostolorum Principis martirio sacrum, Ferdinandus Hispaniarum Rex, et Helisabeth regina Catholici, post erectam ab eis aedem posuerunt anno salutis Christianae 1502,

and on the other side was incised

Bernardinus Carvajal Card. S.R.E. primum lapidem, inecit.

And at the corners of the stone were four round recesses in which were found silver coins similar to a giulio or slightly larger bearing the image and inscrip-tion of the same king. Domenico reported this to the pope and His Holiness was overjoyed, telling him that perhaps the pope of that time, wishing to sat-isfy the devotion of the king and queen, had given them the stone as a sacred object, perhaps having been used in crucifying Saint Peter [canceled: streaked with his blood, as some spots would demonstrate], and that Domenico should take proper care of it as he did by having it placed in very good custody.

Domenico wanted the stone to be rendered illustrious and held in great ven-eration since one of those present when it was found took for his devotion a bit

216 • Appendix B

of the mortar that was around it and afterwards gave it to a bewitched woman, who immediately threw up the spell. He asserts that the application of various holy relics did not have a similar effect. Once the news spread, many tried to get (the mortar) for their devotion. The following case, which occurred in the same place, was also much acclaimed. Domenico opened the small round aper-ture in the middle of the vault which communicates with the upper chapel, and while the grill was being made, a distinguished Roman woman went there to receive the indulgence along with her granddaughter, an adult unmarried woman, and while they were standing and looking at the upper chapel, (this latter woman) approached close to the said round opening and fell into it, falling straight down hitting with one foot and breaking a small piece of the wooden plank that was on a scaffold which served the stuccoists and found herself standing on the pavement of the lower chapel without suffering harm. Those who saw this marveled greatly since the opening of the aperture was not more than three palmi in diameter and she was quite large and dressed in many garments. Together with her grandmother and companions, she ren-dered much grace to the Lord and to Saint Peter who had protected her in this way, without even breaking a leg or an arm as they believed, and as is likely to have been feared.

In the meantime, Domenico pursued the work with great diligence so that in one year or a little more it was brought to the desired perfection. He revertted the entire chapel with fine marble to the height of nine palmi and all around a little more than 60 palmi, that is, the dado and the frames, of white (marble), and all the rest of mischio of various colors, inlaid and polished in the small pilasters, and between them the fine design and divisions produce a beautiful appearance. Along the top of the large, upper frame he had sculpted in golden letters the following inscription “The Prince of the Apostles’ place of martyrdom is ven-erated here by a most ancient tradition and by the great devoted crowd of the faithful.” Above this (frame), the small pilasters support some ribs which extend to the small round window in the vault, (which is) entirely embellished, as (are) the intermediary spaces, with small histories of the life of Saint Peter fashioned in stucco, low reliefs, and foliage richly covered with gold. In the middle of the circuit opposite the door stands the lower, exposed, altar made entirely of white marble with a large slab supported on two pilasters, the forward parts of which are entirely decorated with intarsia and overlaid with stones of various colors. Above the altar two small alabaster columns support a beautiful trabeated frame and in the space between them, the lower part of the ledge that supports the candelabra, (as) with all the rest, is inlaid with fine marbles of various colors. In the middle stands another quite beautiful copper ornament with gilded rays in

Appendix B • 217

a field of dark blue enamel containing a portion of a relic of Saint Peter, sent to him by the Infanta of Flanders. Beneath the altar he placed the [canceled: sacred] stone which was found in the foundations of the chapel, embellished it very well, and (illuminated it) with a lamp, enclosed by an attractive grill [canceled: of iron framed with black and with large buds and leaves] of iron completely gilded, so that the devout gathered (there) would be able to see and also to touch (it) with their rosaries. Above the ledge of the altar he placed two marble busts of the Savior and of his most holy mother, along with candelabras and a brazen cross. He had the pavement made of great planks of walnut [canceled: and other white wood] and cypress, divided in a beautiful design which corresponds to the work of the vault, so that being made of marble it would not produce humidity and so the devout who go there to say Mass or hear it, or to recite prayers, could do so longer and with greater ease. In the middle of this pavement he made a small, round opening about four palmi in diameter, decorated around with vari-ous marbles and closed with a gilded grill, so that the devout could see and also touch with their rosaries the place and the earth which is entirely of compact sand similar to gold where it is held that the glorious Saint Peter would have been raised on the cross and where he would have shed his sacred blood. And he placed another similar grill, (also) gilded, in the small opening of the vault cor-responding to that one (in the pavement) so while remaining in the upper chapel the devout might enjoy that devotion.

Above the old altar was a large slab of marble in which were sculpted the following words (see transcription for the Latin text) containing the perpet-ual indulgence conceded to those who celebrate there the holy Mass. Since the stone was very rough and poorly preserved, Domenico provided a place (for it) beneath the altar step so that this ancient memorial might be conserved there and so that it would be seen at every opportunity. First he had the same words incised on another marble plaque properly embellished with gilded stuccoes and located above the entrance and opposite the large window, where it could be conveniently read [canceled: by those entering the chapel and also from the], and above this plaque he placed a very beautiful painting by an excellent hand representing the crucifixion of Saint Peter embellished with a frame and gilded stuccoes. Next to the same, older altar there were two monolithic columns about ten palmi high leaning against the wall without any decoration whatsoever; he had them cleaned and polished and placed next to the embrasures of the door on the interior in order to preserve that ancient devotion believed by some that Saint Peter had been tied to them when he was crucified or something similar, even if it is not verified by a written document or other ancient tradition linking them to that place, as one can do in similar cases.

218 • Appendix B

In a small and simple niche let into the wall above the same altar was an old marble statue (representing) Saint Peter about four palmi, which was first restored, and since there was no appropriately proportioned place in the chapel, he had it installed outside in a beautiful niche ornamented with stuccoes located opposite the new altar where the two stairs which descend from the sides come together, so that everyone who enters the chapel necessarily sees it and entreats his (Saint Peter’s) intercession. At the large window he had a strong grill made, as also at the door, in substitution for the wooden shutter, beautifully worked and ornamented with a dark blue and gold frame, so that they might protect the chapel and (when) looking at the ensemble from beneath the colonnade one might see the altar and recite prayers in a commodious manner. Finally, also desiring that the exterior of the chapel and the entrance be decorated and cared for, he placed a painting of Saint Peter when he sorrowfully repented his denial within a gilded frame above the window, three marble seraphim above the door, and around the stairs, between the columns and above the low stair at the level of the cloister, he made strong and handsome handrails of iron with globes of brass at the top so that those who approached would not fall. In its grandeur it proved to be one of the beautiful chapels made in Rome, receiving the great approval of the good Franciscan friars, with the growth of the concourse and devotion (of the faithful) and the universal satisfaction of all Rome which saw here newly honored the Prince of the Apostles, its Baptizer, Advocate and Protector. All this pleased Domenico very little for his great desire to honor him (Saint Peter), even though beyond the 500 scudi which Cardinal Borgia donated, he spent more than another thousand on all the things that were done (and) with all the effort in supervising (the project) during almost the entire year 1628, all for the greater glory of both the Lord and the glorious Gatekeeper of Heaven, and (for) the benefit of the souls.

219

Notes

Prologue 1. Carl Frey, ed., Il codice Magliabechiano cl. XVII.17 contenente notizie sopra l’arte degli anti-

chi e quella de’ fiorentini da Cimabue a Michelangelo Buonarroti (Berlin, 1892), 130: “Nel chiostro di detta chiesa v’e un tempietto tondo, fatto di triuertino dell’opera Doricha, fatto da Bramante architetto, tanto ben fatto et honorato et di fuora et di dentro, et (è) veramente una gioia.”

2. For the period of this study, see Thomas James Dandelet, Spanish Rome 1500–1700 (New Haven and London, 2001); and Álvaro Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI y los Reyes Católicos: relaciones político-eclesiásticas (1492–1503) (Rome, 2005). For Rome’s foreign population, see Matteo Sanfilippo, “Roma nel Rinascimento: una città di immigrati,” in Le forme del testo e l’immaginario della metropoli, ed. Benedetta Bini and Valerio Viviani (Viterbo, 2009), 73–85; and for residents from Spain, see Maria Antonietta Visceglia, “Roma e la Monarchia Cattolica nell’età dell’egemonia spagnola in Italia: un bilancio storiografico,” in Roma y España, un crisol de la cultura europea en la Edad Moderna, ed. Carlos José Hernando Sánchez, 2 vols. (Madrid, 2007), 1:49–78.

3. Gaetano Milanesi, ed., Le opere di Giorgio Vasari, 9 vols. (Florence, 1878–85) (hereaf-ter cited as Vasari-Milanesi), 4:152–53 (“se ne venne a Roma innanzi lo Anno Santo del MD”).

4. The Tempietto was first considered in the conext of Spanish patronage by Elías Tormo y Monzó, Monumentos de españoles en Roma, y de portugueses e hispano-americanos, 2 vols. (Rome, 1940–42); expanded by Fernando Marías, “Bramante en España,” introduction to Bramante, by Arnaldo Bruschi, trans. Rosario Ochoa and Consuelo Luca de Tena (Bilbao, 1987), 36–44; explored by Deborah Howard, “Bramante’s Tempietto, Spanish Royal Patronage in Rome,” Apollo 146 (Oct. 1992): 211–17; and emphasized most recently by Ximo Company, Bramante, mito y realidad. La importancia del mecenazgo Español en la promoción Romana de Bramante (Lleida, 2012).

5. For Carvajal, see Dizionario biografico degli italiani (Rome, 1960–) (hereafter cited as DBI), s.v. “Carvajal, Bernardino López de” (entry by Gigliola Fragnito); Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 80–90; and Diccionario Biográfico Español, vol. 30 (Madrid, 2009), 395–401, s.v. “López de Carvajal, Bernardino” (entry by Álvaro Fernández de Córdova Miralles). Carvajal’s political activities are analyzed by Isabella Iannuzzi, “Bernardino de Carvajal, teoria e propaganda di uno spagnolo all’interno della Curia Romana,” Storia della chiesa in Italia 61 (2008): 25–47; and idem, “Le radici culturali di uno spagnolo alla corte papale: Bernardino de Carvajal,”

220 • Notes to Pages 3–5

in Metafore di un pontificato, Gulio II (1503–1513), ed. Flavia Cantatore et al. (Rome, 2010), 45–59. For his art patronage in Rome, see Marías, “Bramante en España,” 36–44; and Flavia Cantatore, “Un committente spagnolo nella Roma di Alessandro VI: Bernardino Carvajal,” in Roma di fronte all’Europa, ed. Maria Chiabò, Silvia Maddalo, Massimo Miglio, and Anna Maria Oliva, 3 vols. (Rome, 2001), 3:861–71. For his activities in Milan, see now Edoardo Rossetti, “Uno spagnolo tra i fran-cesi e la devozione gesuata: il cardinale Bernardino Carvajal e il monastero di San Girolamo di porta Vercellina a Milano,” in Le duché de Milan et les commanditaires français (1499-1521), ed. Frédéric Elsig and Mauro Natale (Rome, 2013), 181-235.

6. Lino Gómez Canedo, Un español al servicio de la santa sede, Don Juan de Carvajal carde-nal de Sant’Angelo legado en Alemania y Hungria (1399?–1469) (Madrid, 1947); Roger Louis Martínez, “From Sword to Seal: The Ascent of the Carvajal Family in Spain (1391–1516)” (Ph.D. diss., University of Texas at Austin, 2008).

7. Bernardino de Carvajal presented himself in an undated portrait medal that must have been crafted at the height of his influence. His stately countenance on the obverse is complemented on the reverse by the figure of Lady Philosophy as Boethius described her at the beginning of the Consolation of Philosophy. The accompanying legend “Qui me dilucidant vitam eternam habeb(unt)” (“They Who Elucidate Me Shall Have Eternal Life”) is drawn from the Hebrew Book of Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 24:31, referring to Divine Wisdom. George Francis Hill, A Corpus of Italian Medals of the Renaissance before Cellini, 2 vols. (London, 1930), 223, no. 862.

8. Conrad Eubel, ed., Hierarchia catholica medii aevi (Münster, 1913–), 2:62. 9. Enea Silvio Piccolomini, I commentarii, ed. Luigi Totaro, 2 vols. (Milan, 1984), 2:2209

(“multa de Traiano locutus, cui successisset Hispanus Hispano”); Leona C. Gabel, ed., Memoirs of a Renaissance Pope: The Commentaries of Pius II, trans. Florence A. Gragg (New York, 1959), 300.

10. G. Whatley, “The Uses of Hagiography: The Legend of Pope Gregory and the Emperor Trajan in the Middle Ages,” Viator 15 (1985): 26–63.

11. Julián González, ed., Trajano emperador de Roma (Rome, 2000), especially Juan Gil, “Trajano en la Edad Media,” 155–78; and José María Maestre, “Trajano y los humani-stas,” 313–62.

12. Miguel Navarro Sorní, “Calixto III y la cruzada contra el Turco,” in Alessandro VI dal Mediterraneo all’Atlantico, ed. Maria Chiabò, Anna Maria Oliva, and Olivetta Schena (Rome, 2004), 147–67.

13. Kenneth M. Setton, The Papacy and the Levant (1204–1571), 4 vols. (Philadelphia, 1976–84), 2:231–70.

14. Ibid., 2:173–83. 15. For the celebration in Piazza Navona, see Flavio Biondo, Roma trionfante, trans.

Lucio Fauno (Venice, 1549), 78v–79r; Fabrizio Cruciani, Teatro nel Rinascimento, Roma 1450–1550 (Rome, 1983), 100–01.

16. The inscription on the base of the Column of Trajan referring to the Dacian wars was recorded by Francesco Albertini, Opusculum de mirabilibus noue & veteris urbis Romae (Rome, 1510), fols. Oiiir–v.

17. Vincenzo Forcella, ed., Iscrizioni delle chiese e d’altri edificii di Roma dal secolo XI fino ai giorni nostri, 14 vols. (Rome, 1869–84), 2:303, no. 933 (“Animo Petrus Pectore Caesar”). For Carvajal’s lost tomb in San Marcello al Corso, see Francesco Caglioti, “Sui primi tempi romani d’Andrea Bregno: un progetto per il cardinale camerlengo Alvise Trevisan e un San Michele Arcangelo per il cardinale Juan de Carvajal,” Mitteilungen des kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 41 (1997): 213–52.

Notes to Pages 5–8 • 221

18. This point can be followed through the Spanish delegations to Pope Innocent VIII of 1486, to Alexander VI of 1493, and to Julius II of 1507; Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 133–44; idem, “‘Reyes Católicos’: mutaciones y permanencias de un paradigma político en la Roma del Renacimiento,” in Hernando Sánchez, Roma y España, 1:133–54.

19. Bernardino de Carvajal, Oratio super praestanda solemni obedientia sanctissimo D. N. Alexandro papae VI ex parte christianissimorum dominorum Fernandi et Helisabe regis et reginae Hispaniae habita Romae in consistorio publico . . . (Rome, n.d. [1493]). See Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 171–72, 204, 291–94; and for Carvajal’s rhetorical procedures, John M. McManamon, “The Ideal Renaissance Pope: Funeral Oratory from the Papal Court,” Archivum Historiae Pontificiae 14 (1976): 9–70, esp. 16–17, 29–30, 47–50; and John W. O’Malley, Praise and Blame in Renaissance Rome: Rhetoric, Doctrine and Reform in the Sacred Orators of the Papal Court (Durham, NC, 1979), 116–17, 209, 215–17, 220, 227–35.

20. Francisco Rico, “Aristoteles Hispanus: en torno a Gil de Zamora, Petrarca y Juan de Mena,” Italia medioevale e umanistica 10 (1967): 55–94.

21. Jeremy N. H. Lawrance, “Humanism in the Iberian Peninsula,” in The Impact of Humanism on Western Europe, ed. Anthony Goodman and Angus MacKay (London and New York, 1990), 220–58; Ángel Gómez Moreno, España y la Italia de los humani-stas: primeros ecos (Madrid, 1994); Peter Stacey, “Hispania and Royal Humanism in Alfonsine Naples,” Mediterranean Historical Review 26 (2011): 51–65.

22. José Manuel Nieto Soria, “Conceptos de España en tiempos de los Reyes Católicos,” Norba. Revista de Historia 19 (2006): 105–23.

23. Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 85. 24. Manuel Vaquero Piñeiro, La renta y las casas. El patrimonio inmobiliario de Santiago

de los Españoles en Roma entre los siglos XV y XVII (Rome, 1999); Flavia Cantatore, “Aspetti della committenza straniera nella Roma di Sisto IV: S. Pietro in Montorio e S. Giacomo degli Spagnoli,” in Sisto IV: le arti a Roma nel primo Rinascimento, ed. Fabio Benzi (Rome, 2000), 417–25. See also Piers Baker-Bates, “A Means for the Projection of Soft Power: ‘Spanish churches’ at Rome 1469–1527,” in Foundation, Dedication and Consecration in Early Modern Europe, ed. Maarten Delbeke and Minou Schraven (Leiden, 2012), 155–81.

25. Bernardino de Carvajal, Sermo in commemoratione victoriae Bacensis (Rome, n.d.); Carlos de Miguel Mora, ed. and trans., La conquista de Baza (Granada, 1995), esp. 40–75; Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 155–57.

26. María Dolores Rincón González, “La divulgación de la toma de Granada: objeti-vos, mecanismos y agentes,” Anuario de estudios medievales 40, no. 2 (2010): 603–15. For the victories that preceded Granada, see Paola Farenga, “Non solo classici. Politica, cronaca (e storia) . . . ,” in Chiabò, Oliva, and Schena, Alessandro VI, 235–53, esp. 246–48. The career of Juan Ruiz de Medina is treated by Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 79–80, and passim; see also idem, in Diccionario Biográfico Español, vol. 44 (Madrid, 2013).

27. For the celebrations in Piazza Navona and elsewhere following the conquest of Granada, see Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 160–69. Cruciani, Teatro nel Rinascimento, 228–39, provides excerpts from the principal literary sources; see also Setton, Papacy and the Levant, 2:422–24.

28. On April 21, 1492, Rome’s traditional natal day, Riario hosted a performance of Carlo Verardi’s dramatic retelling of the fall of Granada, Historia Baetica, which also saw print six times before the end of the century; María Dolores Rincón González, ed., Historia Baetica de Carlo Verardi: drama humanístico sobre la toma de Granada (Granada,


1992); Carlo Verardi, Historia Baetica. La caduta di Granata nel 1492, ed. Maria Chiabò, Paola Farenga, and Massimo Miglio (Rome, 1993).

29. Manuel Vaquero Piñeiro, “I funerali romani del principe Giovanni e della regina Isabella di Castiglia: rituale politico al servizio della monarchia spagnola,” in Chiabò et al., Roma di fronte all’Europa, 2:641–55; Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 184–93.

1 Jerusalem in Rome 1. Sible de Blaauw, “Jerusalem in Rome and the Cult of the Cross,” in Pratum roma-

num, Richard Krautheimer zum 100. Geburtstag, ed. Renate L. Colella, Meredith Gill, and Lawrence A. Jenkins (Wiesbaden, 1997), 55–73. For the basilica’s history with updated bibliography, see Roberto Cassanelli and Emilia Stolfi eds., Gerusalemme a Roma, la basilica di Santa Croce e le reliquie della Passione (Milan, 2012).

2. Francisco Javier Villalba Ruiz de Toledo,”Política universitaria en la Castilla del siglo XV: el Colegio de Santa Cruz de Valladolid,” En la España Medieval 5 (1986): 1285–97.

3. Jacopo Gherardi da Volterra, “Il diario romano,” in Rerum italicarum scriptores, new ed., 23.3, ed. Enrico Carusa (Città di Castello, 1904), 111; see also ibid., 129, for the favorable response to the sermon Carvajal delivered on the Feast of the Circumcision, January 1, 1484.

4. During Carvajal’s absence, work on the basilica was managed by Mendoza’s nephew Íñigo López de Mendoza, who served as royal ambassador in Rome during those same years; Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 49–53, 134–35. In 1485, Cardinal Mendoza transferred funds to his nephew for unspecified works in the basilica; F. de B. San Román, “Las obras y los arquitectos del Cardenal Mendoza,” Archivo Español de Arte y Arqueología, no. 20 (1931): 153–61, esp. 154.

5. Helen Nader, The Mendoza Family in the Spanish Renaissance 1350 to 1550 (New Brunswick, NJ, 1979); Francisco Javier Villalba Ruiz de Toledo, El Cardenal Mendoza (1428–1495) (Madrid, 1988).

6. Villalba Ruiz de Toledo, Mendoza, 174–83; idem, “Participación del cardenal Mendoza en la guerra de Granada,” Cuadernos de estudios medievales y ciencias y técnicas histo-riográficas 18–19 (1993–94): 129–36. Isabel was opposed in the succession by Juana “la Beltraneja,” presumed daughter of Isabel’s half brother King Henry IV (1454–74), which resulted in war with Alfonso V, King of Portugal, who married Juana in 1475.

7. de Blaauw, “Jerusalem in Rome,” 71. 8. Raimondo Besozzi, La storia della basilica di Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (Rome, 1750),

102, records Mendoza’s coat of arms on the ceilings, the seats of the choir, and the balcony (ringhiera) where relics were displayed. For repair to the Cosmatesque pave-ment and whitewashing of the architecture, see Stefano Infessura, Diario della città di Roma, ed. Oreste Tommasini (Rome, 1890), 270. These works followed the res-toration sponsored by Angelo Capranica, Mendoza’s predecessor as titular cardinal (1460–78), for which see Besozzi, Storia, 29.

9. Claudio Varagnoli, S. Croce in Gerusalemme: La basilica restaurata e l’architettura del settecento romano (Rome, 1995).

10. Giovanni Baglione, Le nove chiese di Roma (Rome, 1639), ed. Liliana Barroero (Rome, 1990), 142; Benedetto Mellini, La “Descrittione di Roma” di Benedetto Mellini nel codice Vat. lat. 11905, ed. Federico Guidobaldi and Claudia Angelelli, with the collaboration


of Luana Spadano and Giulia Tozzi (Vatican City, 2010), 136, 138 (written in the 1660s); Besozzi, Storia, 29.

11. Sible de Blaauw, “Immagini di liturgia: Sisto V, la tradizione liturgica dei papi e le antiche basiliche di Roma,” Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 33 (1999): 259–302, figures 14, 15.

12. Richard Krautheimer, Wolfgang Frankl, Spencer Corbett, and Alfred K. Frazer, Corpus basilicarum christianarum Romae: The Early Christian Basilicas of Rome (IV–IX cent.), Monumenta di Antichità Cristiana, Pontificio Istituto Archeologia Cristiana, ser. 2, 5 vols. (Rome, 1937–77), 5:86–87, 98, 173.

13. Eusebius, Life of Constantine, 3.32, 36. 14. Infessura, Diario, 270–71 (“Hic Est Titulus Verae Crucis”). 15. Johannes Burchard, Liber notarum ab anno 1483 usque ad annum 1506, ed. Enrico Celani,

2 vols., Rerum italicarum scriptores, 32, 1–2 (Città di Castello, 1906), 1:340–41. 16. John 19:19; cf. Matt. 27:37, Mark 15:26, Luke 23:38. For related art historical issues,

see Alexander Nagel and Christopher S. Wood, Anachronic Renaissance (New York, 2010), 219–39.

17. Infessura, Diario, 288–89. The relic’s location was mentioned in 1452 by Nikolaus Muffel, Descrizione della città di Roma nel 1452, ed. and trans. Gerhard Wiedmann (Bologna, 1999), 70; and more precisely ca. 1470 by William Brewyn, A XVth Century Guide-Book to the Principal Churches of Rome, ed. and trans. C. Eveleigh Woodruff (London, 1933), 54.

18. Burchard, Liber notarum, 1:341. 19. C. Coquelines, ed., Bullarum privilegiorum ac diplomatum romanorum pontificum . . . ,

14 vols. in 28 (Rome 1739–62), 3.3:237, no. 7. 20. Sigismondo de’ Conti, Le storie de’ suoi tempi dal 1475 al 1510, 2 vols. (Rome, 1883),

1:375, states that the titulus Crucis was discovered the day before the announcement of the victory; Infessura, Diario, 269–70, gives the date February 1 for both events. A source dated February 1, states that news of the victory arrived in Rome “circa le sette hore,” i.e., 1:00 AM, which would explain the discrepancy; Ludwig von Pastor, The History of the Popes from the Close of the Middle Ages, 5th ed., 34 vols. (St. Louis, MO, 1923–41), 5:315 n. **. Carvajal recorded the two events on the same day in the majolica tile inscription he mounted in Santa Croce discussed at the end of this chapter.

21. Vitaliano Tiberia, L’affresco restaurato con storie della Croce nella basilica di Santa Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma (Todi, 2001). A drawing of the cycle was published as a compo-sitional study by Christa Gardner von Teuffel, “Light on the Cross: Cardinal Pedro González de Mendoza and Antoniazzo Romano in Sta. Croce in Gerusalemme, Rome,” in Coming About . . . A Festschrift for John Shearman, ed. Lars R. Jones and Louisa C. Matthews (Cambridge, MA, 2001), 49–55. See also Chapter 2, n. 69.

22. Andrés Alvarez y Ancil, ed., Copia fiel y exacta del testamento del cardenal arzobispo que fué de Toledo Don Pedro González de Mendoza, que original y auténtico existe en el archivo de la excma. diputación provincial de Toledo (Toledo, 1915), 12–13 (“para fazer una caxa o guaraimento de plata dorada al título de la Santissima Cruz de nuestro señor que en de se falló nuevamente e para el reparo de la Capilla Mayor”). The reliquary bears Mendoza’s coat of arms on the base; see Chapter 5, n. 22.

23. For the identification of Cardinal Mendoza as the kneeling figure and an insightful analysis of the iconography of the cycle, see Francesca Cappelletti, “L’affresco nel catino absidale di Sta. Croce in Gerusalemme. La fonte iconografica, la committenza


e la datazione,” Storia dell’arte 66 (1989): 119–26; see also Meredith J. Gill, “Antoniazzo Romano and the Recovery of Jerusalem in Late Fifteenth-Century Rome,” Storia dell’arte 83 (1995): 28–47; Felipe Pereda, “Pedro González de Mendoza, de Toledo a Roma. El patronazgo de Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Entre la arqueología y la filología,” in Les Cardinaux de la Renaissance et la modernité artistique, ed. Frédérique Lemerle, Yves Pauwels, and Gennaro Toscano (Villeneuve-d’Ascq, 2009), 217–43; and Nagel and Wood, Anachronic Renaissance, 321–33.

24. Gill, “Antoniazzo,” 45 n. 54, and passim, referred to Antoniazzo’s debts to Roman apse decoration, and noted the similarities with the apse of Old Saint Peter’s.

25. Christa Belting-Ihm, “Theophanic Images of Divine Majesty in Early Medieval Italian Church Decoration,” in Italian Church Decoration of the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance: Functions, Forms and Regional Traditions, ed. William Tronzo (Bologna, 1989), 43–59; Maria Andaloro and Serena Romano, “L’immagine nell’abside,” in Arte e iconografia a Roma da Costantino a Cola di Rienzo, ed. Maria Andaloro and Serena Romano (Milan, 2000), 93–132.

26. See, for example, in Rome, Santa Maria Maggiore and Santa Maria in Trastevere, and in Tivoli, San Silvestro. Filippo Lippi continued this pattern in the Cathedral of Spoleto (1466–69), where the Coronation of the Virgin occupies the semidome and three scenes from her earthly life appear on the lower wall.

27. Jacobus de Voragine, The Golden Legend: Readings on the Saints, trans. William Granger Ryan, 2 vols. (Princeton, 1995), 1:277–84, 2:168–73. For the visual tradi-tion of True Cross cycles, see Marilyn Aronberg Lavin, The Place of Narrative: Mural Decoration in Italian Churches, 431–1600 (Chicago, 1990), 99–118, 167–94.

28. Maria Ciartoso, “Note su Antoniazzo Romano, degli affreschi in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme e di due immagini votive,” L’Arte 14 (1911): 43–45, first observed the restricted number of scenes at Santa Croce and suggested the Golden Legend as the principal literary source for the cycle.

29. For the classification of the feasts as double majors, see Lavin, Narrative, 322 n. 51; and for their observance at Santa Croce, see Brewyn, Guide-Book, 53–54.

30. Breviarium (romanum) de camera . . . morem S. Romane Ecclesie (Venice, 1521), 43r–46r (Invention of the Cross), 115r–117v (Exaltation of the Cross). See Louis van Tongeren, Exaltation of the Cross: Toward the Origins of the Feast of the Cross and the Meaning of the Cross in Early Medieval Liturgy (Leuven, 2000). Lavin, Narrative, 99–108, emphasized the importance of the Breviary readings for the Golden Legend and proposed they provided the literary source for the decoration of many Renaissance chapels.

31. Cappelletti, “L’affresco nel catino absidale,” 121–22, followed by others. 32. See Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 192, 210, 219, citing contempo-

rary texts concerning Isabel. A bronze helmet likely worn by Ferdinand during the Granada campaign bears symbols of Granada, the Cross, and the inscription In Hoc Signo Vincit; Hispania Austria, I re cattolici Massimiliano I e gli inizi della casa d’Austria in Spagna, exhib. cat. (Milan, 1992), 216–17, cat. no. 46 (entry by Christian Beaufort-Spontin).

33. Lavin, Narrative, 114, 326 n. 85, first associated the Santa Croce cycle with the Spanish feast. Regarding the origin and development of the feast, see Rocio Sánchez Ameijeras, “La memoria de un rey victorioso: los sepolcros de Alfonso VIII y la Fiesta del Triunfo de la Santa Cruz,” in Grabkunst und Sepulkralkultur in Spanien und Portugal, ed. Barbara Borngässer, Henrik Karge, and Bruno Klein (Frankfurt am Main and Madrid, 2006), 289–315; and Pereda, “Pedro González de Mendoza,” 221.


34. Joseph F. O’Callaghan, Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain (Philadelphia, 2003), 72–74, 191; Manuel G. López Payer, La Batalla de Las Navas de Tolosa (Madrid, 2002), 155–70.

35. Alonso de Palencia, Guerra de Granada, estudio preliminar, ed. Rafael Gerardo Peinado Santaella (Granada, 1998), 117 (bk. 4, 1484).

36. Gonzalo Argote de Molina, Nobleza del Andaluzia . . . (Seville, 1588), 36v (pt. 1, ch. 46).

37. Christoph T. Maier, “Mass, the Eucharist and the Cross: Innocent III and the Relocation of the Crusade,” Pope Innocent III and His World, ed. John C. Moore (Aldershot, 1999), 351–60; referring to Innocent III, “Indicitur supplicatio genera-lis,” in Patrologiae cursus completus . . . , series latina, ed. J. P. Migne, 221 vols. (Paris, 1844–55) (hereafter cited as PL), 216:698–99.

38. Tiberia, L’affresco restaurato, 40–52, emphasized the importance of Judas-Cyriacus in the cycle and the overarching theme of the conversion of Jews and Moors.

39. Jan Willem Drijvers, Helena Augusta, the Mother of Constantine the Great and the Legend of Her Finding of the True Cross (Leiden, 1992), 165–80. This episode is found in Voragine, Golden Legend, 1:281–82; and was recounted by John Capgrave, Ye Solace of Pilgrimes: A Description of Rome, circa A.D. 1450 . . . , ed. C. A. Mills (London, 1911), 76–79 (referring to a sacra rappresentazione on Good Friday), 124–25, and Boninus Mombritius, Sanctuarium seu vitae sanctorum (Milan, 1480), new ed., 2 vols. (Paris, 1910), 1:376–79. For Piero della Francesca’s depiction of Judas in the well, see Lavin, Narrative, 181–84.

40. For Heraclius as Christian crusader, see Anatole Frolow, “La déviation de la 4e Croisade vers Constantinople. Note additionnelle: La Croisade et les guerres per-sanes d’Héraclius,” Revue de l’histoire des religions 147 (1955): 50–61; and Barbara Baert, “New Observations on the Genesis of Girona (1050–1100): The Iconography of the Legend of the True Cross,” Gesta 38 (1999): 115–27, esp. 124.

41. Jonathan B. Riess, The Renaissance Antichrist, Luca Signorelli’s Orvieto Frescoes (Princeton, 1995), 144–45, first related the frescoes of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme to the prophetic tradition, referring to the Apocalypsis nova of Amadeo Meneses de Silva, for which see Chapter 5.

42. Benjamin Garstad, ed. and trans., Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius. An Alexandrian World Chronicle (Cambridge, MA, 2012). G. J. Reinink, “Pseudo-Methodius und die Legende vom römische Endkaiser,” in The Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages, ed. Werner Verbeke, Daniel Verhelst, and Andries Welkenhuysen (Leuven, 1988), 82–111; idem, “Pseudo-Methodius, A Concept of History in Response to the Rise of Islam,” in The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, vol. 1, Problems in the Literary Source Material, ed. A. Cameron and L. Conrad (Princeton, 1992), 149–87.

43. Alexander Minorita, Expositio in Apocalypsim, ed. Alois Wachtel (Weimar, 1955), 255–92 (chs. 12–13). See Baert, “Observations,” 127 nn. 47–48; and idem, A Heritage of Holy Wood. The Legend of the True Cross in Text and Image, trans. Lee Preedy (Leiden, 2004), 5–6, 152–59.

44. Marjorie Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages, a Study in Joachimism (Oxford, 1969), 293–392; Bernard McGinn, Visions of the End: Apocalyptic Traditions in the Middle Ages (New York, 1979), 270–79, and passim.

45. José M. Pou y Martí, Visionarios, beguinos y fraticelos catalanes (siglos XIII–XV) (Vich, 1930); José Guadalajara Medina, Las profecías del Anticristo en la Edad Media (Madrid, 1996).


46. Alain Milhou, Colón y su mentalidad mesiánica en el ambiente franciscanista español (Valladolid, 1983), 160–72, 349–400; see also ibid., “La chauve-souris, le nouveau David et le roi caché (trois images de l’empereur des derniers temps dans le monde ibérique: XIIIe–XVIIe s.),” Mélanges de la Casa de Velázquez 18 (1982): 61–78.

47. Bernardino de Carvajal, Homelia doctissima reverendissimi domini cardinalis Sancte Crucis utriusque philosophie facile principis habita coram maximo Maximiliano Cesare semper Augusto (Rome, 1508). See Nelson H. Minnich, “The Role of Prophecy in the Career of the Enigmatic Bernardino López de Carvajal,” in Prophetic Rome in the Renaissance Period, ed. Marjorie Reeves (Oxford, 1992), 111–20.

48. Gill, “Antoniazzo,” 30, 37. For the medieval frescoes, see Lucia Morganti, “Il ciclo dei patriarchi in S. Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma,” Arte medievale, ser. 2, 7, no. 1 (1993): 61–78.

49. Besozzi, Storia, 29–30, 41 (“Hic Fuit Titulus Sanctae Crucis”). Besozzi describes the cross with a double transversal bar, a feature shared with the one Mendoza used as Archbishop of Toledo and Primate of Spain.

50. “Hoc Signum Crucis Erit In Caelo Cum Dominus Ad Judicandum Venerit.” The text recalls Christ’s words to the Apostles in Matthew 24:30. Alexander VI quoted the same text in the bull of 1496 establishing the cult of the titulus. For the liturgical use of the text, see van Tongeren, Exaltation of the Cross, 189.

51. Mellini, Descrittione, 141: “Sotto la cornice de semicircolo si legge in lettere azurre in campo d’oro: Qui Vult Post Me Venire Abneget Semet Ipsum Et Tollat Crucem Suam et Sequatur Me.” The passage appears in Matthew 16:24, with variants in Mark 8:34; Luke 9:23, 14:27, etc.

52. Edward Peeters, ed., The First Crusade: The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres and Other Source Materials, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia, 1998), 26.

53. Carvajal’s elevation to the cardinalate was proposed at the time of the embassy of 1493, supported by Queen Isabel and Cardinal Mendoza; Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 83.

54. Eugenio Albèri, ed., L’Italia nel secolo decimosesto: ossia Le relazioni degli ambasciatori veneti presso i stati italiani nel XVI secolo, vol. 3 (Florence, 1858), 105: “Poi a Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, titolo del reverendissimo Santacroce, fabbrica nova fatta da Sua Signoria. Si fabbricava tutavia, e si lavorava ad alcune cornici e volte di alcune porte, di una pietra raccolta dalle anticaglie di tanta estrema bellezza, che un piccol pezzetto di essa saria degno d’esser legato in oro e di portarlo per bellissimo anello.” For a vari-ant transcription of this text, see Marino Sanuto, Diarii, 58 vols. (Venice, 1879–1902), 34:218; quoted by Fragnito, in DBI, s.v. “Carvajal, Bernardino López de.”

55. For dating, attribution, and iconography, see Christoph Luitpold Frommel, Baldassare Peruzzi als Maler und Zeichner, Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte, suppl. vol., 11 (Vienna, 1968), 56–58, no. 13. The mosaics have been discussed by Cynthia A. Payne, “‘In the Fullness of Time’: The Vault Mosaic in the Cappella Sant’Elena, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, Rome” (Ph.D. diss., University of Georgia, 2003), por-tions of which appeared as “Lux Mundi: The Vault Mosaic in the Cappella S. Elena, S. Croce in Gerusalemme, Rome,” Athanor 17 (1999): 35–43; and “The Christ in the Vault of the Cappella Sant’Elena, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, Rome: Archaizing Imagery and a Renaissance Monarchy,” in The Historian’s Eye: Essays on Italian Art in Honor of Andrew Ladis, ed. Hayden B. J. Maginnis and Shelley E. Zuraw (Athens, GA, 2009), 139–51. See recently, Nagel and Wood, Anachronic Renaissance, 321–45.


56. Christoph Luitpold Frommel, “Progetto e archeologia in due disegni di Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane per Sta. Croce in Gerusalemme,” in Roma, centro ideale della cul-tura dell’antico nei secoli XV e XVI: da Martino V al Sacco di Roma, 1417–1527, ed. Silvia Danesi Squarzina (Milan, 1989), 382–89.

57. See preceding note, and Christoph Luitpold Frommel and Nicholas Adams, eds., The Architectural Drawings of Antonio da Sangallo the Younger and His Circle (Cambridge, MA, 1994–), 2:177 (entry by C. L. Frommel). Carvajal referred to those works in the majolica tile inscription mounted along the corridors; Ilaria Toesca, “A Majolica Inscription in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme,” in Essays in the History of Art Presented to Rudolf Wittkower, ed. Douglas Fraser, Howard Hibbard, and Milton J. Lewine (London, 1967), 102–05. The date 1520 appeared in the left-hand corridor, where Carvajal was identified as bishop of Sabina, an office he occupied until July 24, 1521, when he was named bishop of Ostia, and this second title appeared in the right-hand corridor. See Frommel, Peruzzi, 57; and for these offices, Eubel, Hierarchia catholica, 3:4–5.

58. Capgrave, Solace of Pilgrimes, 77 (“Thann go we down on a peyre greces in to a chapel þei clepe ierlm”).

59. Krautheimer et al., Corpus basilicarum, 1:178, suggested that this circulation pat-tern was found at Santa Croce. For phases of construction and access to the Helen chapel, see Maria Letizia Accorsi, “La tribuna e le cappelle semipogee della basil-ica sessoriana,” Palladio, N.S. 9, no. 18 (July–Dec. 1996): 19–34; idem, “S. Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma, recenti scoperte nella cappella di S. Elena,” Palladio, N.S. 12, no. 23 (1999): 5–20.

60. For medieval references to the chapel as cubicellum and cunabulum, see de Blaauw, “Jerusalem in Rome,” 67–68. For the fifteenth century, see Muffel, Descrizione, 70 (“schlafkammer”); and Capgrave, Solace of Pilgrimes, 77 (“pryuy chambir of seint heleyn in whech sche lay moost”).

61. Capgrave, Solace of Pilgrimes, 77, cited the inscriptions and referred to a plenary indul-gence available every Friday, and the absolution “a pena & culpa” on Holy Friday. See also Brewyn, Guide-Book, 52–57. See Forcella, Iscrizioni, 8:183, for a lost inscrip-tion located at the entrance to the chapel prohibiting women from entering. Muffel, Descrizione, 70, compared the spiritual grace available in the chapel with that of the Holy Sepulcher in Jerusalem. Mariano da Firenze, Itinerarium, 164, reported a daily plenary indulgence.

62. Frommel, “Progetto,” 382–83, figure 2; Accorsi, “S. Croce in Gerusalemme,” 9, figure 4.

63. Muffel, Descrizione, 70, noted the marble revetment. Besozzi, Storia, 85, described the pavement, for which see Accorsi, “S. Croce in Gerusalemme,” 8, 13, figures 10–11; and Peter Cornelius Claussen, Die Kirchen der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter 1050–1300, Corpus Cosmatorum, 2.1 (Stuttgart, 2002), 1:435, figure 354.

64. The inscription was first published by Lorenz Schrader, Monumentorum Italiae quae hoc nostro saeculo & a christianis posita sunt, libri quatuor (Helmstadt, 1592), 128r; see also Mellini, Descrittione di Roma, 147; and Besozzi, Storia, 85–86, with minor variants. In 1436, the Castilian nobleman Pero Tafur stated that the entire church, including the pavement and walls, was fashioned with earth Helen had transported to Rome in ships; Manuel Vaquero Piñeiro, ed., Viaggiatori spagnoli a Roma nel Rinascimento (Bologna, 2001), 40.


65. The restoration of the pavement by Eugenius IV was noted by Onofrio Panvinio, De praecipuis urbis Romae sanctioribusque basilicis, quas septem ecclesias vulgo vocant, liber (Rome, 1570), 222.

66. Besozzi, Storia, 82–85, referred to the restoration by Albert of Austria and included an inscription of 1593 still in place honoring Carvajal’s patronage, also in Forcella, Iscrizioni, 8:193, nos. 514–15. For the frescoes of the True Cross added at that time by Nicoló Circignani (il Pomarancio), see Maria Luisa Madonna, ed., Roma di Sisto V, le arti e la cultura (Rome, 1993), 201–02, no. 9 (entry by Daniela Porro). In 1601–02, Albert of Austria commissioned three paintings by Peter Paul Rubens for the chapel; Hans Vlieghe, Saints, Corpus Rubenianum Ludwig Burchard, 8 (London and New York, 1973), 2:58–68, nos. 111–12.

67. Toesca, “Majolica Inscription,” 104. 68. Giovanni Battista De Rossi, ed., Inscriptiones christianae urbis Romae septimo saeculo

antiquiores, 2 vols. (Rome, 1861–88), 2.1:435, no. 107; Ernst Diehl, Inscriptiones latinae christianae veteres, 4 vols. (Bern, 1925–85), no. 1775. At times, the inscription has been associated with the apse of the basilica, but Carvajal understood it to refer to the Helen chapel.

69. Toesca, “Majolica Inscription,” 105 (“Galla Placidia filia magni Theodosii hispani”).

70. Sancti Ambrosii Oratio de Obitu Theodosii, ed. and trans. Mary Dolorosa Mannix, Catholic University of America, Patristic Studies, 11 (Washington, DC, 1925).

71. Simona Antellini, “La cappella di S. Elena in S. Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma. Restauro del mosaico e degli affreschi della volta,” in La basilica di S. Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma: quando l’antico è futuro, ed. Anna Maria Affanni (Viterbo, 1997), 127–35.

72. Albertini, Opusculum, fol. Xiir. For contemporary praise of Carvajal, see Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 87 n. 129.

73. Baglione, Nove chiese, ed. Barroero, 147; Giulio Mancini, Considerazioni sulla pittura, ed. Adriana Marucchi, 2 vols. (Rome, 1956–57), 1:275, 314, 2:16 n. 147. Frommel, Peruzzi, 56–58, no. 13, favored Peruzzi’s authorship and assigned a date of 1507–08.

74. Julian Gardner, “Nicholas III’s Oratory of the Sancta Sanctorum and its Decoration,” Burlington Magazine 115 (1973): 283–94; Sancta Sanctorum (Milan, 1995). Pompeo Ugonio described similar garlands including colored birds in the Oratory of the Holy Cross at the Lateran; Gilian Mackie, Early Christian Chapels in the West: Decoration, Function, and Patronage (Toronto, 2003), 203, 329 n. 58.

75. Hetty E. Joyce, “Studies in the Renaissance Reception of Ancient Vault Decoration,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 67 (2004): 193–232.

76. For Pinturicchio’s frescoes in the tribune of Santa Maria del Popolo, Rome, see J. Schulz, “Pinturicchio and the Revival of Antiquity,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 25 (1962): 35–55, esp. 50–51 n. 45; and for Bramante’s involve-ment, see Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 453–54, 911–21.

77. Frommel, “Peruzzi,” 58, identified the letters on the throne “.E.A.D.Q.T.P.M.” with the passage in John 1:29, “Ecce Agnus Dei qui tollis peccata mundi.”

78. Accorsi, “Tribuna,” 19–20, observed that the inscription on Christ’s book was legible only when approached from the antechapel and referred to the relative dates of the mosaic and the antechapel.

79. The dismantling of the three crosses in the background alludes to the time after the Crucifixion when the Passion relics were concealed from the faithful. For different interpretations, see Frommel, Peruzzi, 58; and Payne, “Vault Mosaic,” 11–12.


80. Cf. Frommel, Peruzzi, 58; and Payne, “Vault Mosaic,” 15, 17, with uncertainty about the identity of these figures.

81. Payne, “Vault Mosaic,” 133–40, discussed the eschatological aspect of the program, referring to the Greek letters appearing on Christ’s book in the central medallion, the Prepared Throne, and the Arma Christi.

82. The New World elements of the decoration were first identified by Antellini, “La cappella di S. Elena,” 127–35; see also Payne, “Vault Mosaic,” 18, 29, 155–56.

83. E. Lunardi, E. Magioncalda, and R. Mazzacane, eds., La scoperta del nuovo mondo negli scritti di Pietro Martire d’Anghiera (Rome, 1988), 80–85, no. 181. For Leto, see John D’Amico, Renaissance Humanism in Papal Rome (Baltimore and London 1983), 88–99; and Phyllis Pray Bober, “The Legacy of Pomponius Laetus,” in Roma nella svolta tra Quattro e Cinquecento, ed. Stefano Colonna (Rome, 2004), 455–64.

84. José Goñi Gaztambide, “Bernardino López de Carvajal y las bulas alejandrinas,” Anuario de Historia de la Iglesia 1 (1992): 93–112; Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 478–97.

85. Alessandro Scafi, “The African Paradise of Cardinal Carvajal: New Light on the ‘Kunstmann II Map,’ 1502–1506,” Renaissance and Reformation 31, no. 2 (Spring 2008): 7–28.

86. Guy de’ Tervarent, Attributs et symboles dans l’art profane, 1450–1600, 2 vols. (Geneva, 1958), 1:204–06; Friedrich Muthmann, Der Granatapfel. Symbol des Lebens in der alten Welt (Fribourg, 1982). For the iconography of the pomegranate, see Chapter 4.

87. Pliny the Elder, Natural History, 13.34.112–13; Isidore of Seville, “Etymologiae,” 17.7.6 (PL 82:610).

88. Carvajal’s coat of arms with the pomegranate wreath appears at the center of the vaulted passage between the chapel of Saint Helen and the antechapel. At San Giacomo degli Spagnoli, the pomegranate appears in a pilaster capital on the right side of the facade; for San Pietro in Montorio, see Figure 34 and Chapter 2, n. 108.

89. The letters of the hymns are narrow, irregular in shape, closely spaced, and bound by inscribed lines, suggesting that they were created before the more robustly classical wall inscriptions. Carvajal’s personal device appears above the hymns in both corri-dors, a Jerusalem Cross halved vertically with green (left) and yellow (right), accom-panied by the motto In Spem Contra Spem, referring to Abraham’s faith (Genesis 15:5; Romans 4:18); Forcella, Iscrizioni, 8:187, no. 504.

90. For the hymn above the entrance to the chapel of Saint Helen, see Forcella, Iscrizioni, 8:187, no. 504; and Toesca, “Majolica Inscription,” 105 (with variations). For the hymn above the entrance to the antechapel, see Besozzi, Storia, 64.

91. Rabanus Maurus, “Homilia LXX” (PL 110:134); Voragine, Golden Legend, 2:170; see also Mombritius, Sanctuarium, 1:381. For Carvajal’s homily of 1508, see n. 47.

92. The opening line of the hymn is recorded in a letter of January 7, 1492, addressed to the Venetian Senate by Bernardo del Roi, eyewitness to the events. The letter was published in Lettere di prinicipi le quali si scrivono o da principi o a principi or ragionano di principi, vol. 2 (Venice, 1575), 2–4; and in Johannes Burchard, Diarium, ed. L. Thuasne, 3 vols. (Paris, 1883–85), 1:554–55. This account is confirmed by an official report sent to Milan and Lucca; Raúl González Arévalo, “Ecos de la toma de Granada en Italia: de nuevo sobre las cartas a Milán y Luca,” in Homenaje al profesor Eloy Benito Ruano, 2 vols. (Madrid, 2010), 1:343–53. For these and other sources pertaining to the entry, see María del Carmen Pescador del Hoyo, “Cómo fué de verdad la toma de Granada, a la luz de un document inédito,” Al-Andalus, Revista de las Escuelas de


Estudios Árabes de Madrid y Granada 20, no. 2 (1955): 283–344, esp. 289, 300–01 n. 10, 333 n. 103.

93. Alvarez y Ancil, Copia fiel y exacta del testamento, 12. 94. Toesca, “Majolica Inscription,” 102–05. Portions of the inscription were published

by Panvinio, De praecipuis urbis Romae, 216–18; and Schrader, Monumentorum Italiae, 128r–129r; see also Forcella, Iscrizioni, 8:187, 191, nos. 504–05. Besozzi, Storia, 63–64, specifies that the excised material in the left-hand corridor, right wall, concerned the legend of Pope Sylvester II (999–1003), for which see Peter G. Bietenholz, Historia and Fabula, Myths and Legends in Historical Thought from Antiquity to the Modern Age (Leiden, 1994), 108–14. Besozzi could not explain the removal of portions of the inscription on the left wall of the same corridor.

95. Toesca, “Majolica Inscription,” 104, made this important point. 96. Pope Julius II named Carvajal Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem on December 30, 1503;

Eubel, Hierarchia catholica, 2:164. It was likely in reference to that honor that Carvajal added a Jerusalem cross to his coat of arms.

2 Upon This Rock 1. Toesca, “Majolica Inscription,” 105. The translation is quoted from Irving Lavin,

Bernini and the Crossing of Saint Peter’s (New York, 1968), 34–35. Carvajal drew those words concerning Peter’s role in elevating Rome as the New Jerusalem from the hom-ily he delivered before Maximilian I in 1508; Carvajal, Homelia doctissima, fol. aviv.

2. For the earliest literary traditions, see George E. Demacopoulos, The Invention of Peter, Apostolic Discourse and Papal Authority in Late Antiquity (Philadelphia, 2013).

3. Sixtus IV referred to the martyrdom of Peter and Paul in the bull Et si de cunctarum, dated June 30, 1480, which established the administrative offices for tutelage of the city; Eugène Müntz, Les arts à la cour des papes pendant le XVe et le XVIe siècle, 3 vols. (Paris, 1878–82), 3:182–87. Carvajal reviewed the evidence for Petrine primacy in his oration before the College of Cardinals at the start of the conclave that elected Alexander VI; Bernardino de Carvajal, Oratio de eligendo summo pontefice (Rome, 1492). For the importance of that oration, see Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 263–65.

4. The Quo vadis legend was introduced in the second-century apocryphal Acts of Peter; R. A. Lipsius, and M. Bonnet, eds., Acta apostolorum apocrypha, 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1891–1903), 1:7–8. The legend was mentioned by Saint Ambrose (PL 15:2070; 16:1011), received eloquent restatement by the Venerable Bede (PL 94:496–97), and was enshrined in the Decretals of Gregory IX (bk. 4, tit. 17, cap. 13) via a reference to it by Innocent III (PL 214:1133). J. K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament, a Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature in an English Translation (Oxford, 1993), 424.

5. L. M. O. Duchesne, ed., Le Liber pontificalis: texte, introduction et commentaire, 2 vols. (Paris, 1886–92), 1:118 (Life of Peter), 150 (Life of Cornelius). See also the twelfth-century text by Peter Mallio published in Roberto Valentini and Giuseppe Zucchetti, eds., Codice topografico della città di Roma . . . , 4 vols. (Rome, 1940–53), 3:383.

6. For the history of the church, see Brigitte Kuhn-Forte, Die Kirchen innerhalb der Mauern Roms . . . , vol. 4 of Handbuch der Kirchen Roms. Der römische Sakralbau in Geschichte und Kunst von der altchristlichen Zeit bis zur Gegenwart, by Walther Buchowiecki, 4 vols. (Vienna, 1967–97), 4:935–1030, 1081–88. Fundamental contri-butions to the discussion have been made by Flavia Cantatore, “La chiesa di San


Pietro in Montorio a Roma: ricerche ed ipotesi intorno alla fabbrica tra XV e XVI secolo,” Quaderni dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura, N.S., fasc. 24 (1994) [1997]: 3–34; idem, San Pietro in Montorio, la chiesa dei Re Cattolici a Roma (Rome, 2007) (all citations in the following notes are to Cantatore, 2007); Nicole Riegel, “San Pietro in Montorio in Rom. Die Votivkirche der katholischen Könige Isabella und Ferdinand von Spanien,” Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 32 (1997–98): 273–319; Arnaldo Bruschi, “Le vicende della chiesa di San Pietro in Montorio e qualche nota sui problemi storiografici dell’architettura romana del Quattrocento,” Quaderni dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura, N.S. 51 (2008): 17–34; and idem, “Review of San Pietro in Montorio, la chiesa dei Re Cattolici a Roma,” by Flavia Cantatore, Annali di architettura 21 (2009): 184–85.

7. J. M. Huskinson, “The Crucifixion of St. Peter: A Fifteenth-Century Topographical Problem,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 32 (1969): 135–61; idem, “Review of Est et alia pyramis” by Margarete Demus-Quatember, Art Bulletin 58 (1976): 618–21.

8. Flavio Biondo, Roma instaurata (Rome, 1471), n.p., published in Valentini and Zucchetti, Codice topografico, 4:271–72; see also Huskinson, “Crucifixion,” 158–59.

9. The medieval Mirabilia urbis Romae referred to the Vatican tomb as the meta and claimed that Peter was crucified in its proximity; Valentini and Zucchetti, Codice topografico, 3:45–46. For the location of the tomb and its loss ca. 1500, see Enrico Guidoni and Giulia Petrucci, Urbanistica per i giubilei. Roma, Via Alessandrina, una strada “tra due fondali” nell’Italia delle corti (1492–1499) (Rome, 1997), 36–38.

10. Maffeo Vegio, “De rebus antiquis memorabilibus basilicae S. Petri Romae,” 2.2, in Acta Sanctorum, June VII, pt. 2 (Antwerp, 1717), 69–70.

11. The pyramids were also associated with Romulus and Remus; B. M. Peebles, “La meta Romuli e una lettera di Michele Ferno,” Atti della Pontificia Accademia Romana di Archeologia, ser. 3, Rendiconti 12 (1936): 21–63.

12. Prudentius, Crowns of Martyrdom, 11.45–47. Giovanni Battista Lugari, Le lieu de cru-cifiement de Saint Pierre (Tours, 1898), 14–26, introduced the more specific idea that criminals were crucified on the Janiculum Hill in antiquity, but the evidence he cited does not support that claim.

13. For the Jewish population of Trastevere, see Philo of Alexandria, “Legatio ad Gaium,” 155; Philonis Alexandri, Legatio ad Gaium, ed. and trans. E. Mary Smallwood (Leiden, 1961), 92, 233–38.

14. Margherita Cecchelli, “Un monastero altomedievale a S. Pietro in Montorio,” in Ianiculum-Gianicolo, Acta Instituti Romana Finlandiae, 16, ed. Eva Margareta Steinby (Rome, 1996), 101–07.

15. Christian Huelsen, Le chiese di Roma nel medio evo (Florence, 1926), 418, no. 15; Gerold Walser, ed. and trans., Die Einsiedler Inschriftensammlung und der Pilgerführer durch Rom (Codex Einsidlensis 326), Historia, suppl. vol. 53 (Stuttgart, 1987), 148–49, 181–82.

16. Huelsen, Chiese di Roma, 418. One tradition held that Peter of Morrone resurrected a dead monk at San Pietro in Montorio and foretold the recovery of the moribund prior of the monastery; Celestino Telera, Historie sagre degli huomini illustri per santità della congregatione de celestini dell’Ordine di S. Benedetto . . . (Bologna, 1648), 76–77, 85–86.

17. For the frescoes in the narthex of Saint Peter’s basilica and in the Sancta Sanctorum, see Jens T. Wollesen, Die Fresken von San Piero a Grado bei Pisa (Bad Oeynhausen,


1977), 60–72, no. 28; and Serena Romano, “Il Sancta Sanctorum, gli affreschi,” in Sancta Sanctorum (Milan, 1995), 38–125, esp. 60–63. The martyrdoms of Peter and Paul were previously depicted at Saint Peter’s in the Oratory of Pope John VII (702–05), and perhaps in another cycle as well. Adolf Weis, “Ein Petruszyklus des 7. Jahrhunderts im Querschiff der Vatikanischen Basilika,” Römische Quartalschrift 58 (1963): 230–70; Ann van Dijk, “Jerusalem, Antioch, Rome, and Constantinople: The Peter Cycle in the Oratory of Pope John VII (705–707),” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 55 (2001): 305–28.

18. Peter’s crucifixion on an inverted cross is described in the apocryphal Acts of Peter (Lipsius and Bonnet, Acta apostolorum apocrypha, 1:15–16); Eusebius, Church History, 3.1.2; and Prudentius, Crowns of Martyrdom, 12.15–20.

19. Hannes Roser, St. Peter in Rom im 15. Jahrhundert: Studien zu Architektur und skulp-turaler Ausstattung, Römische Studien der Bibliotheca Hertziana, 19 (Munich, 2005), 62–69. The martyrdoms of Peter and Paul were also paired on the fifteenth-century ciborium of the high altar of Saint Peter’s; see Roser, 103–18; and Johannes Röll, “The Ciborium of Sixtus IV,” in Sisto IV: le arti a Roma nel primo Rinascimento, ed. Fabio Benzi (Rome, 2000), 385–97.

20. The contemporary events involve the coronation of the Holy Roman Emperor Sigismund (1433) and the Council of Ferrara-Florence (1438–39). For the political significance of the doors, see Caroll William Westfall, In This Most Perfect Paradise: Alberti, Nicholas V, and the Invention of Conscious Urban Planning in Rome, 1447–55 (University Park, PA, 1974), 1–16.

21. Huskinson, “Crucifixion,” 135–61. For alternative interpretations of the relief, see Francesco Paolo Fiore and Arnold Nesselrath, eds., La Roma di Leon Battista Alberti. Umanisti, architetti e artisti alla scoperta dell’antico nella città del Quattrocento, exhib. cat. (Milan, 2005), 310–11, cat. no. III.2.1 (entry by Enrico Parlato).

22. Muffel, Descrizione, 90–92. 23. Ibid., 90. 24. The suggestion that the columns recalled the twin metae was made by Philipp Fehl,

“Michelangelo’s Crucifixion of St. Peter: Notes on the Identification of the Locale of the Action,” Art Bulletin 53 (1971): 327–43, esp. 338 n. 61. The columns are also men-tioned in a text of 1494 (see Chapter 5, n. 84) and are likely the ones preserved today in the crypt of the Tempietto (see Chapter 6, n. 98).

25. Amato Pietro Frutaz, ed., Le piante di Roma, 3 vols. (Rome, 1962), 2:140, plate 158; Silvia Maddalo, “In Figura Romae”: Immagini di Roma nel libro medioevale (Rome, 1990), 128–29, figures 58–59 (“S. Petri in Montorio ubi cruci fuit afixus”).

26. Nine Robijntje Miedema, Die römischen Kirchen im Spätmittelalter nach den “Indulgentiae ecclesiarum urbis Romae” (Tübingen, 2001), 718, quoting the German pilgrim Ulrich Brunner in 1470.

27. José M. Pou y Martí, ed., Bullarium franciscanum continens constitutiones, epistolas, diplomata Romanorum pontificum, nova series, vol. 3, 1471–1484 (Quaracchi, 1949), 110, no. 266, dated June 18, 1472 (“monasterium S. Petri in Montorio de Urbe in Transtyberi, ubi dicitur S. Petrum principem Apostolorum martirium in cruce sus-cepisse . . . ecclesiam ac aedificia sua praedicta reficere et ampliare, seu refici et ampli-ari facere et perpetuo inibi residere”). See also Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 54–55.

28. Pou y Martí, Bullarium franciscanum, 3:719–21, no. 142 (“annexiones et incorpora-tiones ecclesiae sive monasterii S. Petri, si quae sunt, quoad corpus ipsius ecclesiae S.


Petri et illi contiguam domum, structuras et aedificia, ac hortum muris, arcum area clausum, iuxta aedificia praedicta situm, et horticellum seu hortulum prope stallas eiusdem ecclesiae, et vineas”).

29. DBI, s.v. “Menes Silva, Amadeo De (Amadeo Lusitano, Amedeus Hispanus)” (entry by G. G. Merlo), noting the difficulty in determining Amadeo’s family origins. For the rich source material, see Anna Morisi, “Apocalypsis nova”: Ricerche sull’origine e la formazione del testo dello pseudo Amadeo (Rome, 1970), 1–6; and Antonio Domingues de Sousa Costa, “Studio critico e documenti inediti sulla vita del Beato Amedeo da Silva nel quinto centenario della morte,” in Noscere Sancta Miscellanea in Memoria di Agostino Amore OFM (+1982), Bibliotheca Pontificii Athenaei Antoniani, 25, ed. Isaac Vázquez Janeiro, 2 vols. (Rome, 1985), 2:101–09, 196–263. Amadeo’s impor-tance for the history of San Pietro in Montorio was introduced by Marías, “Bramante en España,” 7–67.

30. Paolo M. Sevesi, B. Amedeo Menez de Sylva dei frati minori, fondatore degli Amadeiti (Vita inedita di Fra Mariano da Firenze e documenti inediti) (Florence, 1912) [extract from Luce e Amore 8 (1911)], 14–19, 40–41, app. 1, no. 4; Cesare Cenci, “Silloge di documenti francescani trascritti dal P. Riccardo Pratesi,” Studi francescani 64 (1967): 80–104, esp. 90–92, nos. 79–80; Flavia Cantatore, “Architettura e committenza tra Milano e Roma. Alcuni documenti su Amedeo Menez de Silva,” Roma nel Rinascimento (2012): 197–202.

31. For the period March 24, 1472, to April 27, 1484, see Pou y Martí, Bullarium francis-canum, 3:78–79, 427, 515–16, 517, 538, 885–86, 925–26.

32. Ibid., 3:833–34, nos. 1639–40 (dated September 22, 1482). 33. See the report of January 5, 1483, in Sevesi, Amedeo, 60–61, app. 1, no. 23, referring

to the king’s devotion to the friar, and describing the funeral and its cost. For the church, see Luciano Patetta, L’architettura del Quattrocento a Milano (Milan, 1987), 105–12.

34. de Sousa Costa, “Studio critico,” 240–41, 312, no. 50 (dated July 16, 1483). 35. Pou y Martí, Bullarium franciscanum, 3:861–62, no. 1706; Müntz, Les arts à la cour des

papes, 3:165–66 (“in supplementum fabricae B(eati) Petri in monte aureo”). 36. The letters referring to the donation were published by A. de Boislisle,

“Communication de M. L’Abbé René, correspondant à Nimes,” Bulletin du Comité des travaux historiques et scientifiques section d’histoire et de philologie (1884): 82–86, cited in G. Périnelle, “Louis XI bienfaiteur des églises de Rome,” Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire d’École de France 23 (1903): 131–59, esp. 144. I previously discussed them in Jack Freiberg, “Bramante’s Tempietto and the Spanish Crown,” Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 50 (2005): 151–205, esp. 155.

37. Boislisle, “Communication,” 85: “En après, sire, j’ay distribué cinq cents escus d’or pour la fabrique et réparation de l’église Saint Pierre de Rome, et les autres 500 escus je les ay aussy distribués aux frères et couvent de Saint Pierre in Monte Aureo, pour la réfection et accomplissement d’iceluy couvent, ainsi que me le mandiés et selon vostre bon dézir.”

38. Ibid., 86: “Et finallement ont esté aussi distribués aux frères et couvent de Saint Pierre in Monte Aureo autres 500 escus, pour ayder et fournir certain édifice qu’ils ont com-mencé audit lieu des aulmosnes et dons que le Roy y avoit autresfois faict, comme plus à plein du tout vous informera vostre nepveu.”

39. Pietro Tomei, L’architettura a Roma nel Quattrocento (Rome, 1942), 133–34, repeated by others.


40. Mariano da Firenze, Itinerarium urbis Romae, ed. Enrico Bulletti (Rome, 1931), 98: “Veterem ecclesiam prostravit ibique iuxta pulcherrimam erexit eleemosynis Christianissimi Ludovici Regis Francorum primum, deinde Catholici Ferdinandi Regis Hyspanorum et Reginae Elisabeth uxoris perfecit.”

41. The earliest published sources for the history of San Pietro in Montorio are Albertini, Opusculum, fol. Xiiv (“regina hyspaniorum”); and Andrea Fulvio, Antiquaria Urbis (Rome, 1513), fols. Iiiiir–v (“Rex Fernandus”). Compare Mariano (as quoted in the preceding note) with the text published by the Minister General of the Franciscans in France, Bonifacio da Ceva, Firmamenta trium ordinum beatissimi patris nostri Francisci (Paris, 1512), pt. 1, fol. 36v, quoted in Sevesi, “Amedeo,” 36 n. 6 (“Ubi eleemos-ynis christianissimi regis francorum primum, ac deinde catholici regis hyspanorum, devotus est erectus conventus . . .”).

42. The letter, which depends on a copy of the lost original, was first published by Francisco Aguado, ed., Documentos relativos à la fundación de San Pedro in Montorio (Rome, [1876]), 10–11, no. 3, and more accurately by José Maria Pou y Martí, “Felipe III y los santuarios Franciscanos de Italia, III. San Pedro in Montorio, en Roma,” Archivo Ibero-Americano, anno 3, no. 13 (Jan.–Feb. 1916): 216–17; and idem, “Un monumento de los Reyes Católicos en Roma,” in Fernando el Católico e Italia, Actas del V Congreso de Historia de la Corona de Aragón, 3, ed. Alberto Boscolo (Zaragoza, 1954), 254–55 (“votivam Ecclesiam Divo Petro fundare eo in loco ubi Apostolorum Princeps martirium con-sumavit”). The letter belongs to a group of documents concerning the activities of the Spanish crown at San Pietro in Montorio now preserved in Madrid, Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores (noted by Marías, “Bramante en España,” 63 n. 100), but formerly located in the Spanish embassy to the Holy See in Rome where a microfilm is on file.

43. Amadeo was said to have inspired the birth of a child for the Duke and Duchess of Milan and for a more humble couple; Acta sanctorum, August, vol. 2, new ed., ed. J. Carnandet (Paris and Rome, 1867), 583, no. 56; 593–94, no. 102.

44. J. N. Hillgarth, The Spanish Kingdoms, 1250–1516, 2 vols. (Oxford, 1976), 2:361, citing contemporary sources.

45. The king’s intention to build a new church is confirmed by a letter dated July 11, 1481, from the viceroy of Sicily to the treasurer (Archivio di Stato, Palermo, Real cancelleria, vol. 148, fols. 17v–18v); see Rosalia Claudia Giordano, “Gli amadeiti e la Sicilia nella costruzione di S. Pietro in Montorio in Roma,” in Francescanesimo e civilità siciliana nel quattrocento, Schede medievali, 32–33, ed. Diego Ciccarelli and Armando Bisanti (Palermo, 1997), 91–97, esp. 95; and Flavia Cantatore, “A prop-osito del Tempietto di San Pietro in Montorio,” in Metafore di un pontificato: Giulio II (1503–1513), ed. Flavia Cantatore et al. (Rome, 2010), 457–81, esp. 469 no. 1.

46. Enrique Gutiérrez, Santa Beatriz de Silva y origen de la Orden de la Inmaculada Concepción (Burgos, 1976); de Sousa Costa, “Studio critico,” 190–96, 319–25, nos. 55, 57; Manuel de Castro, “Los monasterios de concepcionistas franciscanas en España,” Archivo Ibero-Americano 51, nos. 203–04 (1991): 411–77.

47. Pable Martín Prieto, “Sobre la promoción regia de la orden franciscana,” Hispania sacra 59, no. 119 (2007): 51–83.

48. José García Oro, La reforma de los religiosos españoles en tiempo de los Reyes Catolicós (Valladolid, 1969); idem, Cisneros y la reforma del clero español en tiempo de los Reyes Católicos (Madrid, 1971).

49. In 1490, the monarchs introduced an Amadeite congregation to a Franciscan Conventual house in Castrogeriz (Burgos); de Sousa Costa, “Studio critico,” 327–28, and 249–50, for other efforts to disseminate the Amadeite order in Spain.


50. On September 23, 1488, Ferdinand provided 300 ducats to resolve the problem, and empowered Gonzalo Fernández de Heredia to negotiate with Domenico della Rovere, cardinal of San Clemente; Antonio de la Torre, ed., Documentos sobre relaciones interna-cionales de los Reyes Católicos, 6 vols. (Barcelona, 1949–66), 3:149–50, nos. 160–61.

51. de Sousa Costa, “Studio critico,” 301–02, no. 41, dated October 20, 1481. 52. Vasari-Milanesi, 2:653. (I am grateful to Professor Rafael Moreira for sharing his

thoughts concerning the possible contributions of the crown of Portugal.) 53. Francisco de S. Joseph, Historia universal de la primitiva y milagrosa imagen de nuestra

Señora de Guadalupe (Madrid, 1743), 248. 54. de Sousa Costa, “Studio critico,” 308–09, no. 47, dated March 24, 1483 (“pro fabrica

eorum monasterii necesse habeant conducere lignamina, trabes et arenam aliaque dicte fabrice necessaria”).

55. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 149–51, app. no. 1, quoting ASFR, Convento di San Pietro in Montorio, busta 1 (“edificandum et edificari faciendum monasterium et ecclesiam dicti conventus Sancti Petri predicti”).

56. The letters were first published by de la Torre, Documentos, 3:142–44, nos. 151–52; 3:149–50, nos. 159–61; 4:212, nos. 136–37; 5:381–82, no. 286; 6:117, no. 179. Their content has been reviewed by Marías, “Bramante en España,” 32–33; Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 43–45, 70–72; and Riegel, “Votivkirche,” 284–86. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 152–53, app. nos. 2–3, published two additional letters that Juan Ruiz wrote to the king in 1494 and 1495. These sources are supplemented by docu-ments in the viceregal archive in Palermo; see Giordano, “Gli amadeiti e la Sicilia,” 91–97; Ciro D’Arpa, “Il Tempietto di San Pietro in Montorio, la Sicilia e l’istituto della ‘Regia Monarchia,’” Lexicon, Storia e architettura in Sicilia 5–6 (2007–08): 37–46; and Cantatore, “Tempietto,” 469–72, app. nos. 2–8.

57. de la Torre, Documentos, 3:142–43, no. 151, dated September 10, 1488, addressed to Carvajal and Ruiz (“segunt vos pareciere conueniente al seruicio de Dios y al merito y honra nuestra”).

58. Ibid., 3:149, no. 159, dated September 23, 1488, addressed to Carvajal and Ruiz. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 58, 69–70, followed by others, identified this indi-vidual as Giovanni Giorgio da Castiglione, who appears as a stonemason (murator) in documents of 1476–77 concerning the church of Santa Maria della Pietà al Campo Santo Teutonico, Rome.

59. de la Torre, Documentos, 3:150, no. 161, dated September 23, 1488, addressed to Lope de Sant Martín, representative of Francisco Vida de Noya, bishop of Cefalù (“man-damos dar prissa a la dicha obra, assi del monesterio como de la yglesia”).

60. Ibid., 3:143–44, no. 152, dated September 10, 1488, addressed to Carvajal and Ruiz (“las yglesias de los obseruantes acostumbran y deuen ser mas deuotas que grandes edifficios”).

61. Ibid., 4:212, nos. 136–37. 62. See Chapter 5, n. 84. 63. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 152, app. no. 2. 64. Ibid., 153, app. no. 3. 65. de la Torre, Documentos, 5:381–82, no. 286, addressed to Ruiz. 66. Tarsicio de Azcona, “Relaciones de Alejandro VI con los Reyes Católicos según el

fondo Podocataro de Venecia,” Miscellanea Historiae Pontificiae 50 (1983): 145–72, esp. 162 (“ubi apostolorum Princeps Martirium insigne pertulit”).

67. de la Torre, Documentos, 6:117–18, no. 179 (“Muy reuerendo in Christo padre carde-nal de Santa Cruz, nuestro muy caro e muy amado amigo”).


68. D’Arpa, “Tempietto,” 37, 43 n. 6; Cantatore, “Tempietto,” 468 n. 36, 472, no. 8. On September 25, 1499, the viceroy ordered that the archbishop of Palermo, acting as representative of Carvajal, receive 333 gold ducats “per la opera et fabrica di lo dicto monasterio,” and another 50 ducats to purchase a garden to expand the monastery’s property. Between 1502 and 1508, 500 ducats were disbursed annually, with the exception of 1503 and 1507 when two such payments were made; one of the 1507 pay-ments was likely intended to cover 1506, which is otherwise absent from the record. D’Arpa, 37, suggested that the 1503 payment was applied to the Tempietto, but on this point cf. Cantatore, “Tempietto,” 468.

69. For the frescoes, see Frommel, Peruzzi, 49–51; idem, “‘Disegno’ und Ausführung: Ergänzungen zu Baldassare Peruzzis figuralem oeuvre,” in Kunst als Bedeutungsträger. Gedenkschrift für Günter Bandmann, ed. Werner Busch, Reiner Haussherr, and Eduard Trier (Berlin, 1978), 208–11, esp. 244 n. 34; Oltre Raffaello, aspetti della cultura figurativa del Cinquecento romano (Rome, 1984), 72–79; and Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 114. Frommel, “Disegno,” referred to a notarial record dated July 4, 1508, concerning a chapel to be painted by an artist named Giovanni Pinura. This is likely the artist Bendetto Mellini identified in the 1660s as Giovanni Piacere, referring to his name written on the cornicetta of one of the two chapels he painted at San Pietro in Montorio. On stylistic grounds, Mellini credited him with portions of the apse frescoes of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, including the landscapes, the Savior, Saint Helen in the scene of the excavation of the crosses, and the central pair of Helen and Mendoza. See Mellini, Descrittione di Roma, 141, and 137, for other works by this art-ist in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme.

70. The document was first published by Hubertus Günther, “Das Trivium vor Ponte S. Angelo. Eine Beitrag zur Urbanistik der Renaissance in Rom,” Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 21 (1984): 165–251, esp. 226 n. 320.

71. Riegel, “Votivkirche,” 293, 295–97, 308, summarized the state of the literature on this point. Christoph Luitpold Frommel, “Roma,” in Storia dell’architettura italiana, il Quattrocento, ed. Francesco Paolo Fiore (Milan, 1998), 374–433, esp. 408–09, pro-posed a preliminary project.

72. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 69, 92. 73. Vasari-Milanesi, 2:653. 74. Frommel, “Roma,” 408–09; Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 92–102; Riegel,

“Votivkirche,” 309–16. 75. Bruschi, “Le vicende,” 23–33, emphasized the collaborative nature of the project. 76. The dependence of San Pietro in Montorio on Santa Maria delle Grazie al Calcinaio

was introduced by Adolfo Venturi, Storia dell’arte italiana, 11 vols. in 25 (Milan, 1901–40), 8.1:919, repeated by Tomei, L’Architettura a Roma, 136, 283, and followed by others. For the Cortona church, see Francesco Paolo Fiore and Manfredo Tafuri, eds., Francesco di Giorgio architetto, exhib. cat. (Milan, 1993), 244–51 (entry by Mario Gori Sassoli). The links between Saint Francis and Cortona were especially strong: Francis was credited with founding the Convento delle Celle located to the north-east of the city, and Brother Elia, among his earliest followers and founder of the Assisi basilica, was responsible for the church of San Francesco, Cortona, which reflects the Assisi façade.

77. For Spain, see Marta Cuadrado Sanchez, “Arquitectura franciscana en España (siglos XIII y XIV),” Archivo Ibero-Americano 51 (1991): 15–70, 479–52.


78. Lia Barelli, “Il Beato Amadeo Menez de Sylva e la chiesa di Santa Maria delle Grazie a Ponticelli Sabino,” Quaderni dell’Istituto di storia dell’architettura 15–20 (1990–92): 407–18.

79. The opposition between the Capitoline and Janiculum Hills had a counterpart in the ancient tradition that placed Saturn on the one hill and Janus on the other; Paolo Liverani, “Ianiculum. Da Antipolis al mons Ianiculensis,” in Steinby, Ianiculum-Gianicolo, 4–12; Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 17.

80. A. P. Frutaz, “La chiesa di San Francesco in Assisi, basilica patriarcale e cappella papale,” Miscellanea Francescana 54 (1954): 399–432. For the Petrine cycle, see E. Hertlein, Die Basilika San Francesco in Assisi (Florence, 1964), 113.

81. A link between San Pietro in Montorio and the Lateran hall was proposed by Vincenzo Golzio and Giuseppe Zander, L’arte in Roma nel secolo XV (Bologna, 1968), 146; see also Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 72, referring to the “patriarchio later-anense,” among other potential models.

82. Mariano da Firenze, Itinerarium, 156, referred to the papal ceremonies held there and used the name Hall of the Councils (“Aula Concilii”).

83. Duchesne, Liber pontificalis, 2:11 (Life of Pope Leo III) (“diversis storiis depictas apostolos gentibus praedicantes”).

84. Maria Andaloro, “Il sogno di Innocenzo III all’Aracoeli: Niccolò IV e la basilica di S. Giovanni in Laterano,” in Studi in onore di Giulio Carlo Argan, ed. Silvana Macchioni and Bianca Tavassi La Greca, 3 vols. (Rome, 1984–85), 1:29–37.

85. Francesco Gandolfo, “Assisi e il Laterano,” Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria 106 (1983): 63–113. For the inscription, see Forcella, Iscrizioni, 8:15, no. 16.

86. The inscription of Sixtus IV at the Lateran was recorded by Pompeo Ugonio, Historia delle stationi di Roma che si celebrano da quadragesima . . . (Rome, 1588), 44r.

87. Barelli, “Beato Amadeo,” 412, treats the tramezzo in Observant and Amadeite churches.

88. Hubertus Günther, Das Studium der antiken Architektur in den Zeichnungen der Hochrenaissance, Römische Forschungen der Bibliotheca Hertziana, 24 (Tübingen, 1988), 351, no. 2; Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 156–58, app. no. 5, observ-ing that the outline of the lancet windows is visible along the exterior wall of the church.

89. Tomei, L’architettura a Roma, 134, identified the cross axis as “quasi la navata traversa.”

90. Günter Urban, “Die Kirchenbaukunst des Quattrocento in Rom: Eine bau- und stilge-schichtliche Untersuchung,” Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 9–10 (1961–62): 73–287, esp. 102; followed by Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 81, associated those churches with San Pietro in Montorio. Also mentioned is the Roman basilica of Santi Apostoli, where the lateral apses open directly from the side aisle walls. Santi Apostoli is especially significant because of its early Christian date and dedication to the Apostles; for the renovations undertaken there in 1474–81 by Cardinal Giuliano della Rovere, see Lorenzo Finocchi Ghersi, “La basilica dei SS. Apostoli a Roma: Le modifiche dell’impianto medievale nel Quattrocento,” Quaderni dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura, N.S. 15–20 (1990–92): 355–66.

91. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 68–69, associated the extended choir at San Pietro in Montorio with the choir partially realized by Pope Nicholas V at Old Saint Peter’s.


92. Andrè Grabar, Martyrium, recherches sur le culte des reliques et l’art chrétien antique, 2 vols. (Paris, 1946), 1:102–19. See also Dictionnaire d’archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, 15 vols. in 30 (Paris, 1907–53), 2.2:2894–2905 (entry by H. Leclerq); and Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum (Stuttgart, 1950–), 2:944–55 (entry by Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann).

93. Cyril Mango, ed., The Art of the Byzantine Empire, 312–1453 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1972), 126–27.

94. Umberto M. Fasola, “Indagini nel sopraterra della catacomba di S. Callisto,” Rivista di archeologia cristiana 56 (1980): 221–78; Thomas Lehmann, “Zur Genese der Trikonchosbasiliken,” in Innovation in der Spätantike, ed. Beat Brenk (Wiesbaden, 1996), 317–57.

95. Ornella Morisi, “La ristrutturazione sforzesca della basilica di S. Maria del Monte di Varese,” in Sacri monti, devozione, arte e cultura della controriforma, ed. Luciano Vaccaro and Francesca Riccardi (Milan, 1992), 357–70.

96. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 81, drew an association with Santa Maria delle Grazie, for which see Richard Schofield, “Bramante and Amadeo at Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan,” Arte lombarda 78 (1986): 41–58, esp. 42–46, where the cited examples of triconchs are mentioned along with the Pozzobonelli chapel, Milan. For this last example, see Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 802–03; and Sylvia Righini Ponticelli, “Cascina Pozzobonelli,” in Bramante in Lombardia, restauri 1974–2000, ed. Rosa Auletta Marrucci (Milan, 2001), 26–29. The triconch was also applied in the Sacrament chapel in the Cathedral of Narni, built at the end of the fifteenth cen-tury by architect-sculptors from Lombardy and containing references to Bramante’s Milanese works; Francesco Quinterio and Ferruccio Canali, Percorsi d’architettura in Umbria (Foligno, 2010), 310.

97. Fabio Benzi, Sisto IV Renovator Urbis, architettura a Roma 1471–1484 (Rome, 1990), 122; and Piero Spagnesi, “La chiesa dei Re di Spagna: S. Pietro in Montorio a Roma,” Napoli nobilissima 29, nos. 1–4 (Jan.–Aug. 1990): 17–22, esp. 18–20, observed that the wooden beams in the interspace above the sail vault appear to have been hastily truncated, suggesting a change in purpose. The significance of this point for the history of construction remains to be determined. See Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 81–82; Riegel, “Votivkirche,” 294–95, 303–04; and most recently, Ignacio Bosch Reig, Pilar Roig Picazo, Nuria Salvador Lujan, and Valeria Marcenac, “La iglesia de San Pietro in Montorio di Roma. Actuaciones para su permanencia,” Arché (Instituto Universitario de Restauración del Patrimonio de la Universidad Politécnica de Valencia) 4–5 (2010): 295–302.

98. For observations on the sail vault in Renaissance architecture, see Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 82.

99. Linda A. Koch, “The Early Christian Revival at S. Miniato al Monte: The Cardinal of Portugal Chapel,” Art Bulletin 78 (1996): 527–55, esp. 533, 545. On the history of the chapel, see now Eric Apfelstadt, “Bishop and Pawn: New Documents for the Chapel of the Cardinal of Porgual at S. Miniato al Monte, Florence,” in Cultural Links Between Portugal and Italy in the Renaissance, ed. K. J. P. Lowe (Oxford, 2000), 183–223.

100. F. W. Deichmann, Ravenna, Haupstadt des spätantiken Abendlandes 2.1 (Weisbaden, 1974), 51–52, 63–66; Mackie, Early Christian Chapels in the West, 172–94. The iden-tification of the mausoleum with Galla was never forgotten; see the text writ-ten ca. 1450 by the local humanist Desiderio Spreti, De amplitudine, eversione, et


restauratione urbis Ravennae, libri tres (Venice, 1489), ed. Camillo Spreti, 3 vols. (Ravenna, 1793–96), 1:8.

101. Forcella, Iscrizioni, 13:468, no. 1142. The opening part of the text recording the date of the consecration, but omitting the list of relics, appears on a marble tablet mounted at the entrance to the crypt of the Tempietto. As discussed in Appendix A, it was likely created in the early nineteenth century.

102. A. Prieto Cantera, ed., Archivo General de Simancas, Catalogo V: Patronato Real 834–1851, 2 vols. (Valladolid, 1946–49), 1:390–91, nos. 2809–12, dated August 2 and 23, 1490, respectively. See also Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 88.

103. Mariano da Firenze, Itinerarium, 98: “Ad quam ecclesiam in Quadragesima et festiv-itatibus beati Petri multas indulgentias consequuntur accedentes. Aliis vero diebus annos centum.” See also Muffel, Descrizione, 90: “do ist altag VII hundert jar ablas und als vil karen.” For the medieval sources concerning the relics and indulgences of San Pietro in Montorio, see Miedema, Die römischen Kirchen im Spätmittelalter, 716–18.

104. For the choice of this title, the pope’s decision to bestow it upon the monarchs, and the political motivation, see Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 175–82; idem, “Imagen de los Reyes Católicos en la Roma pontificia,” En la España Medieval 28 (2005): 259–354, esp. 314–19; and idem, “Reyes Católicos,” 148–52. Alexander VI conferred the title without making it a hereditary prerogative of the Spanish crown. Pope Leo X extended its use to Charles V in a bull of April 1, 1517, and all subse-quent kings of Spain absorbed it to their titulature.

105. Rafael García y García de Castro, Virtudes de la Reina Católica (Madrid, 1961), 462–64, no. 33 (“justicia, religio, pietas, animi magnitudo, clementia in orthodoxam fidem, precipuus zelus atque in Romanam ecclesiam perpetua devotio inter omnes christianos Principes semper enituit”).

106. Frank Tang, “The ‘Rex Fidelissimus’: Spanish-French Rivalry in the Reign of Alfonso XI of Castile (1312–1350),” Legal History Review 93 (2005): 73–109. The origins of the French title are discussed by Colette Beaune, The Birth of an Ideology, Myths and Symbols of Nation in Late-Medieval France, trans. Susan Ross Huston (Berkeley, 1991), 172–93. (I am grateful to Irving Lavin for an illuminating conversation about the differences between the royal titles.)

107. The coat of arms above the second and fourth chapels to the left were lost when those chapels were rebuilt in the seventeenth century. For the coat of arms in the vault of the choir, which was destroyed in 1798, see ASPF, Rome, Fondo collegi vari, Busta 61, fol. 207r (“Nella volta del coro si morava una grandissima buca, dalla quale eravi spiccata una grossissima Arma di pietra simile alle altre che vi sono rimaste, . . . ”). Tormo, Monumentos de españoles en Roma, 1:102–10, observed the pomegranate in the royal arms, and on that basis dated construction of the church 1493–1500.

108. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 85, figure 38; Riegel, “Votivkirche,” 296 n. 80.

3 Bramante’s Christian Temple 1. The rich literature concerning the Tempietto is summarized by Kuhn-Forte, Kirchen

innerhalb der Mauern Roms, 1031–70, 1088–90; see also, Carlo Stefano Salerno and Caterina Volpi, “Il Tempietto del Bramante,” in San Pietro di Montorio, La Spagna sul Gianicolo, 1, ed. Alessandro Zuccari ( Rome, 2004), 57–91. The fundamental studies are Earl Rosenthal, “The Antecedents of Bramante’s Tempietto,” Journal of


the Society of Architectural Historians 23 (1964): 55–74; Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 463–527, 986–1035, cat. no. 40; Hubertus Günther, “Bramantes Tempietto: Die Memorialanlage der Kreuzigung Petri in S. Pietro in Montorio, Rom” (Ph.D. diss., Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, 1973); and Franco Borsi, with critical catalogue by Stefano Borsi, Bramante (Milan, 1989), 251–59, cat. no. 21. For recent discus-sion and updated bibliography, see Arnaldo Bruschi, “L’architettura a Roma negli ultimi anni del pontificato di Alessandro VI Borgia (1492–1503) e l’edilizia del primo Cinquecento,” in Storia dell’architettura italiana, il primo Cinquecento, ed. Arnaldo Bruschi (Milan, 2002), 34–75, esp. 56–65; and Christoph Luitpold Frommel,”La città come opera d’arte,” in Bruschi, Storia dell’architettura italiana, 76–131, esp. 80–82.

2. Three portals leading into the main chapel are depicted in most sixteenth-century plans of the Tempietto, but the steps preceding the lateral portals were awkwardly cut into the crepidoma, perhaps in 1628 when the other changes discussed in Chapter 6 were introduced.

3. The principal drawings of the Tempietto are discussed by Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 995–1003; Hubertus Günther, “Werke Bramantes im Spiegel einer Gruppe von Zeichnungen der Uffizien in Florenz,” Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst 33 (1972): 77–108, esp. 86–91; and idem, Studium der antiken Architektur, 350–51, 372, plates on pp. 70, 74–78, 117–18.

4. Günther, “Werke Bramantes,” 80, 101. The low viewpoint and the same distinc-tive shape of the lantern are found in drawings in Lille, Musée Wicar (Aristotile da Sangallo), and in Chatsworth; ibid., figures 9, 10. See now Hubertus Günther, “Copie da Bramante fra i disegni degli Uffizi,” in Disegni rinascimentali di architettura, Opus incertum, 3, no. 5, 2008, ed. Amedeo Billuzzi and Sabine Frommel (Florence, 2010), 76–85, esp. 81–84.

5. The drawing of the choir has been attributed to a Tuscan assistant of Bramante and dated 1506; The Renaissance from Brunelleschi to Michelangelo, the Representation of Architecture, ed. Henry A. Millon and Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani, exhib. cat. (Milan, 1994), 606–07, no. 293 (entry by Christoph Luitpold Frommel).

6. Günther, “Copie da Bramante,” 81–84. 7. Thomas Ashby, Jr., “Sixteenth-Century Drawings of Roman Buildings Attributed

to Andreas Coner,” Papers of the British School at Rome 2 (1904): 1–96. For the attri-bution, see Tilmann Buddensieg, “Bernardo della Volpaia und Giovanni Francesco da Sangallo. Der Autor des Codex Coner und seine Stellung im Sangallo-Kreis,” Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 15 (1975): 89–108; Günther, Studium der antiken Architektur, 165–202; and Arnold Nesselrath, “Codex Coner – 85 Years On,” in Cassiano dal Pozzo’s Paper Museum, vol. 2, ed. Ian Jenkins and Jennifer Montagu (Milan, 1992), 145–67.

8. Sebastiano Serlio, Il terzo libro . . . nel qual si figurano, e descrivono le antiquita di Roma, e le altre che sono in Italia, e fuori d’Italia (Venice, 1540), 41–44. Serlio’s presentation of the Tempietto was followed by Andrea Palladio, I quattro libri dell’architettura (Venice, 1570), 64 (bk. 4, ch. 17). Serlio eliminated the podium and inserted a fourth step in the crepidoma. Bruschi, “L’architettura a Roma negli ultimi anni,” 63, 75 n. 66, posits that these and other variations in Serlio’s woodcut reflect an interim stage in Bramante’s design.

9. Serlio explained that in the woodcut of the circular cloister, the church is on the right and the “old cloister” on the left. For the cloister project, see Hubertus Günther, “Bramantes Hofprojekt um der Tempietto und seine Darstellung in Serlios drittem


Buch,” in Studi bramanteschi (Rome, 1974), 483–501; and idem, “Das komplizierte Ebenmaß der Renaissance-Architektur. Die Proportionen von Bramantes Tempietto über dem Kreuzigungsort Petri und die Rekonstruktion des Hofprojekts,” Architectura 32 (2002): 149–66.

10. Serlio acknowledged his debt to Peruzzi generally in Book Four of his treatise, Regole generali di architettura (Venice, 1537), 4; and it was noted by Vasari-Milanesi, 4:606–07, among others. See Hubertus Günther, “Das geistige Erbe Peruzzis im vierten und dritten Buch des Sebastiano Serlio,” in Les traités d’architecture de la Renaissance, ed. Jean Guillaume (Paris, 1988), 227–45.

11. Meg Licht, L’edificio a pianta centrale, lo sviluppo del disegno architettonico nel Rinascimento, trans. Angelica Di Nardi, exhib. cat. (Florence, 1984), 77, no. 40; Adriano Ghisetti Giavarina, Aristotile da Sangallo, architettura, scenografia e pittura tra Roma e Firenze nella prima metà del Cinquecento (Rome, 1990), 90–91, nos. 93–94.

12. The terms applied to the Tempietto in the sixteenth century vary: Serlio, Terzo libro, 41–44, employed tempietto twice and tempio seven times. Tempietto and tempietto tondo appear in the Codex Magliabechiano; Frey, Codice Magliabechiano, 125, 130. Tempio and tempio tondo were adopted, respectively, by Vasari-Milanesi, 4:160; and Palladio, Quattro libri, 64 (bk. 4, ch.17). For analysis of the measurements of the Tempietto, see Mark Wilson Jones, “The Tempietto and the Roots of Coincidence,” Architectural History 33 (1990): 1–28.

13. Vasari-Milanesi, 4:145–68. 14. In 1569, Guglielmo della Porta wrote to Bartolomeo Ammanati referring to a text

that he accepted as Bramante’s own testimony concerning the importance of study in Rome; Werner Gramberg, Die Düsseldorfer Skizzenbücher des Guglielmo della Porta, 3 vols. (Berlin, 1964), 1:123; Carlo Pedretti, “Newly Discovered Evidence of Leonardo’s Association with Bramante,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 32 (1973): 223–27, esp. 225.

15. Vasari-Milanesi, 4:154. Guglielmo della Porta located Bramante’s explorations in “Rome, Tivoli, Palestrina, and in several other places, so that by studying, noting and learning something new every day, he opened the road to the good and well-proportioned architecture of antiquity.” See the preceding note.

16. Leon Battista Alberti, On the Art of Building in Ten Books, trans. Joseph Rykwert, Neil Leach, and Robert Tavernor (Cambridge, MA, 1988), 155 (bk. 6, ch. 1).

17. Antonio Tucci Manetti, The Life of Brunelleschi, ed. Howard Saalman, trans. Catherine Enggass (University Park, PA, 1970), 52–53; repeated by Vasari-Milanesi, 2:337.

18. Richard Schofield, “Florentine and Roman Elements in Bramante’s Milanese Architecture,” in Florence and Milan, Comparisons and Relations, ed. Craig Hugh Smyth and G. C. Garfagnini, 2 vols. (Florence, 1989), 1:201–22.

19. The attribution and date of the work has inspired a lively polemic; see most recently Giovanni Agosti and Dante Isella, Antiquarie prospettiche romane (Parma, 2005); Maurizio Calvesi, “Il mito di Roma e le ‘Antiquarie prospettiche,’” Storia dell’arte 113–14 (2006): 55–76; Massimo Giontella and Riccardo Fubini, “L’uomo con il com-passo e la sfera. Note sulla recente edizione delle ‘Antiquarie prospettiche romane’ attribuite a Bramante,” Archivio storico italiano 164, no. 2 (2006): 325–34; and idem, “Ancora sulle ‘Antiquarie prospettiche romane.’ Nuovi elementi per l’attribuzione a Bramante,” Archivio storico italiano 164, no. 3 (2006): 513–18.

20. Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 822–36, cat. no. 23. For Carafa’s career and interests, see Franco Strazzullo, “Il cardinale Oliviero Carafa mecenate del Rinascimento,”


Atti della Accademia Pontaniana, N.S. 14 (1964–65): 139–60; and DBI, s.v. “Carafa, Oliviero” (entry by Franca Petrucci).

21. For Carvajal’s involvement in the administration of San Giacomo degli Spagnoli, see Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 85.

22. Vasari-Milanesi, 4:160. 23. The position of the Tempietto within the biography may also reflect Vasari’s uncer-

tainty about its chronology, but that should not be taken as evidence for a late dating of the monument; see Chapter 5.

24. Carvajal’s presence in Milan was noted by Günther, “Bramantes Tempietto,” 65; Arnaldo Bruschi, “L’architettura a Roma al tempo di Alessandro VI: Antonio da Sangallo il Vecchio, Bramante, e l’antico, autumno 1499-autunno 1503,” Bollettino d’arte, ser. 6, no. 29, 70 (1985): 67–90, esp. 69; and others.

25. Burchard, Liber notarum, 1:615–43. See also Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 344–46.

26. Dale Kinney, “The Evidence for the Dating of S. Lorenzo in Milan,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 31 (1972): 92–107, esp. 95–96.

27. The relevance of Mariano’s text was noted by Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 58 n. 9; and Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 990–91, 1009–10. Fulvio’s text was first discusssed by Günther, “Bramantes Tempietto,” 210–11.

28. Andrea Fulvio, Antiquitates Urbis per Andream Fulvium antiquarium Ro. nuperrime aeditae (Rome, 1527), fol. 27v: “Sacello ibi nuperrime exitato eleganti rotu(n)do in gyrum colu(m)nato ad eius similitudinem quod Albune(a)e erat dicatum super casum Anienis vti hodie tyburi visitur.”

29. For the importance of those temples during the Renaissance, see Hubertus Günther, “La ricezione dell’antico nel Tempietto,” in Donato Bramante, ricerche, proposte, rilet-ture, ed. Francesco Paolo Di Teodoro (Urbino, 2001), 267–302.

30. John Shearman, Raphael in Early Modern Sources: 1483–1602, 2 vols. (New Haven and London, 2003), 2:819–20, no. 1527/1. For Fulvio, see Roberto Weiss, “Andrea Fulvio antiquario romano (c. 1470–1527),” Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, Classe di Lettere e Filosofia, ser. 2, 28 (1959): 1–44; and Massimo Ceresa, “Andrea Fulvio erudito, antiquario e classicista,” in Roma nella svolta tra Quattro e Cinquecento, ed. Stefano Colonna (Rome, 2004), 143–49.

31. Arnold Nesselrath, Der fossombroner Skizzenbuch, Studies of the Warburg Institute, 41 (London, 1993), 87–89; Ruth Elizabeth Kritzer, “Renaissance Rome Descriptions in Comparison,” Bibliothèque d’Humanisme et Renaissance 72 (2010): 113–25.

32. Bauten Roms auf Münzen und Medaillen, exhib. cat. (Munich, 1973), 8–10, nos. 1–8 (entries by Harald Küthmann and Bernhard Overbeck); Francesca Caprioli, Vesta Aeterna: L’Aedes Vestae e la sua decorazione architettonica (Rome, 2007), 61–67.

33. Angela M. V. Fritsen, “Renaissance Commentaries on Ovid’s Fasti” (Ph.D. diss., Yale University, 1995); idem, “Renaissance Fasti Commentaries and Antiquarianism,” Acta Conventus Neo-Latini Bariensis, Proceedings of the Ninth International Congress of Neo-Latin Studies, ed. J. F. Alcina et al. (Tempe, AZ, 1998), 251–58; Frances Muecke, “Humanists in the Roman Forum,” Papers of the British School at Rome 71 (2003): 207–33.

34. Francesca Niutta, “Il Romane historiae compendium di Pomponio Leto dedicato a Francesco Borgia,” in Principato ecclesiastico e riuso di classici, gli umanisti e Alessandro VI, ed. Davide Canfora, Maria Chiabò, and Mauro De Nichilo (Rome, 2002), 321–54, esp. 321–22, 332–33 (“in pronao templi Vestae sub Palatio contra forum Romanum”).


35. Fulvio, Antiquaria Urbis (1513), fol. Miir (bk. 2); idem, Antiquitates Urbis (1527), fols. 40r–41r (Kiir–Kiiir) (bk. 3).

36. Fulvio, Antiquitates Urbis (1527), fols. 45v–46r (Liv–Liir) (bk. 3). Pomponio Leto, “De antiquitatibus urbis Romae libellus,” in Opera Pomponii Laeti . . . (Strasbourg, 1510), fol. 59v, proposed Mater Matuta, followed by Fulvio, Antiquaria Urbis (1513), fols. Mivr–v (bk. 2). For the modern discussion, see Filippo Coarelli, Il Foro Boario dalle origini alla fine della Repubblica (Rome, 1988), 99–102, and passim.

37. Virgil, Aeneid, 8.185–275. 38. See Forcella, Iscrizioni, 12:307, no. 442, for an inscription of 1475 recording the ded-

ication and restoration. Huelsen, Chiese di Roma, 484, no. 92, provides other relevant sources.

39. For the discovery, see Leto, “De antiquitatibus urbis Romae,” fols. 59v–60r; Albertini, Opusculum, fols. Miiir, Yiir. Albertini stated that the statue had been found on the site of the temple, and he provided the inscription Sixtus IV placed on the new ped-estal, referring to Hercules Victor. Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 61–62, proposed the temple as Bramante’s immediate source for the Tempietto, but cf. Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 1015–16 and n. 60; and Günther, “Ricezione,” 277–79. The incomplete evi-dence for the lost temple awaits satisfactory analysis; see Vladimir Juřen, “Un traité inédit sur les ordres d’architecture et le problème des sources du Libro IV de Serlio,” Monuments et mémoires de la Fondation Eugène Piot 64 (1981): 195–239, esp. 202 n. 30, 204, figure 13; and Howard Burns, “Baldassare Peruzzi and Sixteenth-Century Architectural Theory,” in Guillaume, Traités d’architecture, 207–26, esp. 210–11, 221, figure 8. See also Coarelli, Foro Boario, 84–92.

40. The Tempietto provided the model for Ligorio’s fanciful reconstruction of a tholos with sixteen columns in the Gardens of Sallust; see Giorgio Ortolani, Il padiglione di Afrodite Cnidia a Villa Adriana: progetto e significato (Rome, 1998), 114–15; and Kim J. Hartswick, The Gardens of Sallust, a Changing Landscape (Austin, 2004), 68–82. For the Tempietto’s influence on reconstructions of ancient temples by Renaissance architects, see Chaper 4, n. 17.

41. Robert B. Tate, “Mythology in Spanish Historiography of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance,” Hispanic Review 23 (1954): 1–18; José Antonio Caballero López, “El mito en las Historias de la España primitiva,” Excerpta philologica 7–8 (1997–98): 83–100.

42. Vitruvius, De architectura, 4.8.2. Although the creipidoma of the Forum Boarium temple was partially obscured by the high ground level, its existence was recorded in a drawing of ca. 1530 in Montreal, Canadian Centre for Architecture, Roman sketch-book, fol. 23r; and by Palladio, Quattro libri, 52–53 (bk. 4, ch. 14).

43. For the properties of travertine, see Vitruvius, De architectura, 2.7.2; and Vasari-Milanesi, 1:122–24. Isidore of Seville, Etymologies, 19.10.5, claimed Tivoli’s name was derived from the stone, and this was repeated by Francesco di Giorgio Martini, Trattati di architettura ingegneria e arte militare, ed. Corrado Maltese, 2 vols. (Milan, 1967), 2:312.

44. Bartolomeo Nogara, ed., Scritti inediti e rari di Flavio Biondo (Rome, 1927), 201; Francesco di Giorgio, Trattati, ed. Maltese, 1:286.

45. Gabel, Memoirs of a Renaissance Pope, 193 (bk. 5, ch. 4); Nogara, Scritti inediti, 193–202, no. 18. Francesco di Giorgio’s sketches are discussed later in this chapter.

46. Federico Rausa, “Un gruppo statuario dimenticato: il ciclo delle Muse c.d. Thespiades da Villa Adriana,” in Villa Adriana. Paesaggio antico e ambiente moderno: elementi di novità e ricerche in corso, ed. Anna Maria Reggiani (Milan, 2002), 43–51.


47. It should be noted that in 1519, Pope Leo X named Carvajal as governor of Tivoli, and the cardinal occupied the residence and gardens attached to the Benedictine mon-astery of Santa Maria Maggiore, later transformed by Cardinal Ippolito d’Este into the famed Villa d’Este. For the inscription above the entrance to the villa and other evidence of Carvajal’s presence, see Vincenzo Pacifici, Ippolito II d’Este Cardinale di Ferrara (Tivoli, 1923), 162 n. 1; and Dante Bernini, Memorie artistiche di Tivoli, una schedatura degli anni venti (Rome, 1988), 147.

48. For the telamones, see Wolfgang Helbig, Führer durch die öffentlichen Sammlungen klas-sicher Altertümer in Rom, ed. Hermine Speier, 4 vols. (Tübingen, 1963–72), 1:25–26, cat. no. 30; and Brian Curran, The Egyptian Renaissance: The Afterlife of Ancient Egypt in Early Modern Italy (Chicago and London, 2007), 200–08. For the relief owned by Carafa, see Antonella Ranaldi, Pirro Ligorio e l’interpretazione delle ville antiche (Rome, 2001), 118. For additional evidence of interest in Hadrian’s villa in this period, see Stefano Borsi, “Francesco Colonna e Villa Adriana, un nuovo documento,” Storia dell’arte 113–14 (2006): 35–54.

49. For the legal protections of antiquities, see Manuel Vaquero Piñeiro, “‘Ad usanza di cave’: società per l’estrazione di pietre e materiali antichi a Roma in età moderna,” in Il reimpiego in architettura: recupero, trasformazione, uso, ed. Jean-François Bernard, Philippe Bernardi, and Daniela Esposito, Collection de l’École Française de Rome, 418 (Rome, 2008), 523–29.

50. Daniela del Pesco, “Fonti per la storia della Rocca di Pio II a Tivoli, un papa e il suo poeta dal Castel Nuovo di Napoli all’arce tiburtina,” in Napoli, l’Europa. Ricerche di storia dell’arte in onore di Ferdinando Bologna, ed. Francesco Abbate and Fiorella Stricchia Santoro (Catanzaro, 1995), 85–93. Pope Alexander VI’s additions to the Tivoli fortress were described in 1580 by Giovanni Maria Zappi, Annali e memorie di Tivoli, ed. Vincenzo Pacifici (Tivoli, 1920), 5.

51. Hill, Corpus, no. 854 (“Mole Divi Hadri(ani)”). 52. Dioclecio Redig de Campos, I palazzi vaticani (Bologna, 1967), 80–81. Hadrian’s

Spanish heritage was recalled by an inscription in the Castel Sant’Angelo accom-panying the frescoes Pinturicchio painted for Alexander VI; August Schmarsow, Pinturicchio in Rom (Stuttgart, 1882), 63–64.

53. Juan Gil de Zamora (d. ca. 1316), De preconiis Hispanie, ed. Manuel de Castro y Castro (Madrid, 1955), 68–70; Lucio Marineo, De Hispaniae laudibus (Burgos, 1497), 40r–v.

54. Historia augusta, “Hadrian,” 26.5. 55. This passage was quoted by Biondo (as in n. 44); Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 6.4; and

Fulvio, Antiquitates Urbis (1527), fol. 97v (Riiiv). 56. Sabine Poeschel, “Alexander Magnus Maximus. Neue Aspekte zur Ikonographie

Alexanders des Großen im Quattrocento,” Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 23/24 (1988): 61–74; Paul Botley, “Giannozzo Manetti, Alfonso of Aragon and Pompey the Great: A Crusading Document of 1455,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 67 (2004): 129–56, esp. 137–40; Édouard Bouyé, “Alexandre VI, les Turcs et la croisade,” in Chiabò, Oliva, and Schena, Alessandro VI, 169–86. For the associa-tion of King Ferdinand with Alexander the Great, see Juan Gil, “Alejandro, el nudo gordiano y Fernando el Católico,” Habis 16 (1985): 229–42.

57. Ingrid D. Rowland, The Culture of the High Renaissance, Ancients and Moderns in Sixteenth-Century Rome (Cambridge and New York, 1998), 42–47; Curran, Egyptian Renaissance, 107–21.


58. For Leonardo’s presence at Hadrian’s villa, see Carlo Pedretti, A Chronology of Leonardo da Vinci’s Architectural Studies After 1500, Travaux d’Humanisme et Renaissance, 54 (Geneva, 1962), 79–81; idem, Leonardo architetto (Milan, 1978), 115; and Pietro C. Marani, “Tivoli, Hadrian and Antinoös: New Evidence of Leonardo’s Relation to the Antique,” Achademia Leonardi Vinci 8 (1995): 207–25.

59. The influence of the Teatro Marittimo on the Tempietto was proposed by Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 70; but questioned by Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 487–88, 1020–21, 1035. To my knowledge, the link to Spain through Hadrian has not been considered.

60. Francesco di Giorgio, Tratatti, ed. Maltese, 1:286, plate 164. The features shared between the drawing in Turin and the Tempietto were observed by William L. MacDonald and John A. Pinto, Hadrian’s Villa and Its Legacy (New Haven and London, 1995), 208–10; and Marani, “Tivoli,” 213 n. 29, 225. The sketch, Uffizi 319Ar, is inscribed “treato cho(n) logia j(n)torno j(n)torno e j(n) sulla logja e gradj”; Fiore and Tafuri, Francesco di Giorgio architetto, 331–32 (entry by Howard Burns).

61. For the modern discussion, see Cairoli F. Giuliani, Tibur, pars prima, Forma Italiae, regio 1, vol. 7 (Rome, 1970), 24–25, 109–23, 132–43; and Filippo Coarelli, I santuari del Lazio in età repubblicana (Rome, 1987), 103–10.

62. Lactantius, “Divinarum Institutionum,” 1.6 (PL 6:144). Isidore of Seville and Rabanus Maurus depended on Lactantius for their own enumeration of the Sibyls, but only Lactantius referred to the discovery of the statue in the Aniene River.

63. For the frescoes in San Pietro in Montorio, see Chapter 2, n. 69. For the Sibyls in the visual arts, see Angelina Rossi, “Le Sibille nelle arti figurative italiane,” L’arte 18 (1915): 209–21, 272–85, 427–58.

64. Saint Augustine, City of God, 18.23. 65. Virgil, Ecologues, 4.4–5. 66. Eusebius, Oration to the Saints, 19. For questions concerning authorship and dat-

ing, see H. A. Drake, “Suggestions of Date in Constantine’s Oration to the Saints,” American Journal of Philology 106 (1985): 335–49.

67. Pseudo-Bede, “Sibyllinorum verborum interpretatio” (PL 90:1181); Ernst Sackur, Sibyllinsche Texte und Forschungen, Pseudomethodius, Adso, und die tiburtinische Sibylle (Halle a.S., 1898), 177–78.

68. Émile Mâle, L’art religieux de la fin du Moyen Age en France, 3rd ed. (Paris, 1925), 260, 262; Carlo De Clercq, “Quelques séries italiennes de Sibylles,” Bulletin de l’Institut Historique Belge de Rome 48–49 (1978–79): 105–27, esp. 115, 127, reproduc-ing the text in Filippo Barbieri, Tractatus de discordantia inter Eusebium, Hieronymum et Augustinum . . . (Rome, 1481): “Nascetur xristus. et annunciabitur in Nazareth rex. Tauro pacifico fundatore quietis.” The Renaissance tradition of the Sibyls with focus on the lost frescoes in the Orsini palace in Rome has been treated by Charles Dempsey, The Early Renaissance and Vernacular Culture (Cambridge, MA, 2012).

69. The legend was introduced in the Mirabilia urbis Romae and the Graphia aureae urbis Romae of the mid-twelfth century; see Valentini and Zucchetti, Codice topografico, 3:28–29, 89–90; and Arturo Graf, Roma nella memoria e nelle immaginazioni del medio evo, 2 vols. (Turin, 1882–83), 1:312–20.

70. Vasari-Milanesi, 1:539 (“nella volta della tribuna maggiore”); also mentioned by Brewyn, Guide-Book, 44–45 (“upon the wall above the high altar”).

71. Giovanni Morello and Silvia Maddalo, eds., Liturgia in figura: codici liturgici rinas-cimentali della Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana (Rome, 1995), 274–79, cat. no. 66 (entry


by Silvia Maddalo). For the political significance of the image, see Joaquín Yarza Luaces, “Imágenes reales hispanas en el fin de la Edad Media,” in Poderes públicos en la Europa medieval: principados, reinos y coronas (Pamplona, 1997), 441–500, esp. 469–72; and Carmen Morte García, “El maestro del Misal-Breviario vaticano de Fernando el Católico,” Boletín del Museo e Instituto Camón Aznar 89 (2002): 261–86, esp. 275–76.

72. Jeremy Lawrance, “Fabulosa illa aura secula: The Idea of the Golden Age at the Court of Isabel,” in The Spain of the Catholic Monarchs, ed. David Hook (Bristol, 2008), 1–43; Martin Biersack, “Los Reyes Católicos y la tradición imperial romana,” eHumanistica 12 (2009): 33–47.

73. Sackur, Sibyllinischen Texte, 177–87. For the history of the text, see Paul J. Alexander, The Oracle of Baalbek: The Tiburtine Sibyl in Greek Dress (Washington, DC, 1967); McGinn, Visions of the End, 43–50; idem, “Teste David cum Sibylla: The Significance of the Sibylline Tradition in the Middle Ages,” in Women of the Medieval World, Essays in Honor of John H. Mundy, ed. Julius Kirshner and Suzanne F. Wemple (Oxford, 1985), 7–35; and idem, “Oracular Transformations: The ‘Sibylla Tiburtina’ in the Middle Ages,” in Sibille e linguaggi oraculari. Mito, storia, tradizione, ed. Ileana Chirassi Colombo and Tullio Seppilli (Pisa, 1998), 603–44.

74. Guillermo Antolín, Catálogo de los códices latinos de la Real Biblioteca del Escorial, 4 vols. (Madrid, 1910–16), 2:331–36 (Ms &.I.3, fols. 240–42). Sackur (as in preceding note) used this manuscript. The Escorial text is now thought to descend from a lost model of ca. 1000 created for the Ottonian emperors; Anke Holdenried, The Sibyl and Her Scribes: Manuscripts and Interpretation of the Latin ‘Sibylla Tiburtina’ c. 1050–1500 (Aldershot, 2007), 4–5, 12–13, and passim.

75. Mariano da Firenze, Itinerarium, 98: “Quam etiam Amadaeus Hyspanus ordinis Minorum a Xysto IV obtinuit, subque crucifixione Petri in quadam cavernula orans et ieiunans, ut dicitur, angelo revelante, plurima scripsit. . . . At vero pro commoditate conventus mons crucifixionis in medio claustri remanens, adaequavit. Ibique mag-num marmoreumque ciborium columnis ornatum ad magnitudinem ablati collis cum altare et cavernula Amadaei, ut visitur, exstruxit.”

76. Fehl, “Michelangelo’s Crucifixion of St. Peter,” 332 n. 37, considered the arrange-ment of the Tempietto in two stories as reflecting this type of ciborium, citing the altar of the Holy Lance. See Giuseppe Zander, “Considerazioni su un tipo di ciborio in uso a Roma nel Rinascimento,” Bollettino d’arte 26, fasc. 6 (1984): 99–106; and Peter Cornelius Claussen, “Il tipo romano del ciborio con reliquie: questioni aperte sulle genesi e la funzione,” Mededelingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome 59 (2000): 229–49.

77. Simona Olivetti, “Il ciborio della sacra lancia di Innocenzo VIII: Un’impresa quat-trocentesca dimenticata,” Storia dell’arte 71 (1991): 7–24; Roser, St. Peter in Rom, 127–33.

78. The drawing is annotated at the right side, “Bramantis Architecti Opus”; Giacomo Grimaldi, Descrizione della basilica antica di S. Pietro in Vaticano. Codice Barberini latino 2733, Codices e Vaticanis Selecti, 32, ed. Reto Niggl (Vatican City, 1972), 104; cited by Olivetti (as in preceding note), 13. The attribution of the ciborium to Bramante was accepted by Heinrich de Geymüller, Les projets primitifs pour la basilique de Saint-Pierre de Rome . . . , 2 vols. (Paris and Vienna, 1875–80), 1:82–83; and Venturi, Storia dell’arte, 11.2:57. It was rejected by Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 1053, and has not been considered since.


79. Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 47: “Ego Amadeus fui raptus ex spelunca mea ubi orabam in monticulum quendam et in rotam ubi Deo astabant angeli et animae sanctorum . . .” See also Chapter 5.

80. For these sources, see respectively, Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 30 n. 56; and Raffaele Maffei, Commentariorum urbanorum . . . (ed. princ., Rome, 1506) (Paris, 1511), 219r (bk. 21), quoted by Sevesi, “Amedeo,” 36 n. 6. Primo Luigi Vannicelli, S. Pietro in Montorio e il Tempietto di Bramante (Rome, 1971), 73–74, suggested Amadeo’s grotto was located in another position on the monastery’s grounds.

81. Amadeo is depicted in the grotto in the frontispiece of Philippus Varagius, Flores totius sacrae theologiae (Milan, 1509), and in a detached fresco from the cloister of the Amadeite church of San Martino de Via, Genoa, now Museo di Sant’Agostino, Genoa. See, respectively, Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 92 n. 156; and Raffaella Besta, “Un duplice ritratto di Amadeo Mendez da Silva in un affresco genovese,” Studi di storia delle arti (Istituto di Storia dell’Arte, Università di Genova) 8 (1995–96): 265–78.

82. Julius II issued the initial decree in 1506, but the union of the Amadeites with the Observants was accomplished during the reign of Pope Pius V (1566–72); Paolo Maria Sevesi, “S. Carlo Borromeo e le congregazioni degli Amadeiti e dei Clareni,” Archivum franciscanum historicum 37 (1944): 104–64, esp. 108–09.

83. Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 991 n. 13, suggested the parallel with the Column of Trajan. The inscription on the base of the column was recorded by Albertini, Opusculum, fols. Oiiir–v.

84. John Osborne, “Peter’s Grain Heap: A Medieval View of the ‘Meta Romuli,’” Echos du Monde Classique. Classical Views 30, N.S. 5 (1986): 111–18.

85. Joan E. Taylor, Christians and the Holy Places: The Myth of Jewish-Christian Origins (Oxford, 1993), 122–34.

86. Maximus the Confessor (d. 662) associated the ciborium with Calvary, and that idea appeared in a text attributed to the Byzantine patriarch Germanos (d. ca. 733); see respectively Joseph Braun, Der christliche Altar in seiner geschichtlichen Entwicklung, 2 vols. (Munich, 1924), 2:274 n. 7 (referring to materials collected by Anastasius Bibliothecarius); and Victor H. Elbern, “Altar Implements and Liturgical Objects,” in Age of Spirituality, Late Antique and Early Christian Art, Third to Seventh Century, ed. Kurt Weitzmann, exhib. cat. (New York, 1979), 592–98, esp. 592.

87. Vitruvius, De architectura, 4.8.3. 88. Serlio, Terzo libro, 44 (“duplicate cornici”). 89. Geymüller, Projets primitifs, 1:66: “. . . zum ersten mal wird hier der von den

Byzantinern ausgebildete Tambour in klassischen Formen wiedergegeben.” 90. For other examples of the dome-upon-drum, see Ralph Lieberman, “Venetian

Church Architecture Around 1500,” in Bollettino del centro internazionale di studi di architettura Andrea Palladio 19 (1977): 35–48; and Riccardo Pacciani, “Santa Maria della Pietà a Bibbona e Santa Maria delle Carceri a Prato,” in La chiesa a pianta cen-trale, tempio civico del rinascimento, ed. Bruno Adorni (Milan, 2002), 81–95.

91. Fritz Saxl, “The Classical Inscription in Renaissance Art and Politics: Bartholomaeus Fontius: Liber monumentorum Romanae urbis et aliorum locorum,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 4 (1940–41): 19–46, esp. 32, 42.

92. Francesco di Giorgio, Tratatti, ed. Maltese, 1:283–84, plate 155. The importance of those drawings for the Tempietto was first signaled by Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 64–65, figure 11; see also Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 1028–31; and Günther, “Ricezione,” 280–82.


93. Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 64, 67, introduced Santa Costanza to the discussion of Bramante’s sources. Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 469, 1018; and Günther, “Ricezione,” 277, linked the Tempietto more specifically to the tradition of mausolea.

94. Sant’Andrea has been dated to the first half of the third century and Santa Petronilla to the early fifth century; Mark Joseph Johnson, “Late Antique Imperial Mausolea” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton University, 1986), 38–43, 118–22. See now, Jens Niebaum, “Die spätantiken Rotunden an Alt-St.-Peter in Rom, mit Anmerkungen zum Erweiterungsprojekt Nikolaus’ V. für die Peterskirche und zur Aufstellung von Michelangelos römischer Pietà,” Marburger Jahrbuch für Kunstwissenschaft 34 (2007): 101–61. For the drawing by Marten van Heemskerck, see Christian Hülsen and Hermann Egger, Die römischen Skizzenbücher von Marten van Heemskerck im Königlichen Kupferstichkabinett zu Berlin, 2 vols. in 3 (Berlin, 1913–16).

95. In 1544 the tomb of Maria, wife of the emperor Honorius (395–423), was also dis-covered there; Johnson, “Imperial Mausolea,” 320–34.

96. Périnelle, “Louis XI,” 138–41; Kathleen Weil-Garris Brandt, “Michelangelo’s Pietà for the Cappella del Re di Francia,” in “Il se rendit en Italie,” études offertes a André Chastel (Rome and Paris, 1987), 77–119.

97. Tiberio Alfarano, De basilicae vaticanae, antiquissima et nova structura, Studi e testi, 26, ed. Michele Cerrati (Rome, 1914), 90 n. 1, 139–45, 198, no. 170. For the tomb of Callixtus III, see Daniela Gallavotti Cavallero, “Sculture quattrocentesche prove-nienti dal vecchio San Pietro: il monumento funebre di Callisto III Borgia,” in Le due Rome del Quattrocento, Melozzo, Antoniazzo e la cultura artistica del ‘400 romano, ed. Sergio Rossi and Stefano Valeri (Rome, 1997), 236–44; and Roser, St. Peter in Rom, 160–69.

98. Christoph L. Frommel, “Proposte per una revisione del corpus dei disegni di Bramante,” in Billuzzi and Frommel, Disegni rinascimentali di architettura, 39–55, esp. 45, suggests that Bramante may have created the drawing when he was in Bologna with Pope Julius II in 1506–07. Other drawings of the monument are dis-cussed by Licht, L’edificio a pianta centrale, 60–62, nos. 32–33. For the mausoluem, see R. Heidenreich and H. Johannes, Das Grabmal Theoderichs zu Ravenna (Wiesbaden, 1971); and Mark J. Johnson, “Toward a History of Theoderic’s Building Program,” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 42 (1988): 73–96, esp. 92–95.

99. The mausoleum was praised by Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 1.8; and Vasari-Milanesi, 1:232. For its continuing identification with Theodoric, see Johnson, “Building Program,” 93 n. 183; and Spreti, De amplitudine, 9.

100. For the Forum Boarium temple, see n. 36; and for the Tivoli temple, see Giuliani, Tibur, 32, 123.

101. Examples include the mausoleum of Diocletian at Split, and the mausolem at Porto (known as the temple of Portunus); Johnson, “Imperial Mausolea,” 47–55, 159. The influence of the Porto mausoleum on the Tempietto has been posited by Bruschi, Bramanate architetto, 469, 1018; and Günther, “Ricezione,” 277–78. For the pos-sibility that an external peripteral colonnade once existed at Santa Costanza, see Johnson, “Imperial Mausolea,” 99–100; and Maurizio Ricci, “Un contributo alla conoscenza di Lorenzo Donati, allievo senese di Baldassarre Peruzzi,” Bollettino d’arte, ser. 6, 80, no. 91 (1995): 71–94, esp. 83–85, figure 21.

102. Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 8.3. 103. Sackur, Sibyllinischen Texte, 185; Alexander, Oracle of Baalbek, 98–101.


104. For the Dome of the Rock, see Oleg Grabar, The Shape of the Holy, Early Islamic Jerusalem (Princeton, 1996), 52–116; and the studies collected in idem, Jerusalem, Constructing the Study of Islamic Art, vol. 4 (Aldershot, 2005).

105. Staale Sinding-Larsen, “Some Functional and Iconographical Aspects of the Centralized Church in the Italian Renaissance,” Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam Pertinentia 2 (1965): 203–53, esp. 236.

106. The association of the Tempietto with the Dome of the Rock was introduced by Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 63–64, through analogy with the temple in Raphael’s 1504 Marriage of the Virgin (Milan, Museo del Brera). The idea was developed by Howard, “Bramante’s Tempietto,” 211–17, who proposed the architectural similaraties between the Tempietto and the Dome of the Rock conveyed political meaning, referring to Ferdinand and Isabel’s interest in propelling the faith through crusade. Nevertheless, the complicated inscriptional evidence led Howard to ques-tion and finally reject Ferdinand and Isabel’s involvement with the Tempietto.

107. Sylvia Schein, “Between Mount Moriah and the Holy Sepulchre: The Changing Traditions of the Temple Mount in the Central Middle Ages,” Traditio 40 (1984): 175–95.

108. Kathryn Blair Moore, “Textual Transmission and Pictorial Transformations: The Post-Crusade Image of the Dome of the Rock in Italy,” Muqarnas 27 (2010): 51–78; Pamela Berger, The Crescent on the Temple: The Dome of the Rock as Image of the Ancient Jewish Sanctuary (Leiden, 2012).

109. Bernhard von Breydenbach, Peregrinatio in Terram Sanctam (Mainz, 1486). For the editions, see Hugh Wm. Davies, Bernard von Breydenbach and His Journey to the Holy Land 1483–84, a Bibliography (London, 1911). See now Elizabeth Ross, Picturing Experience in the Early Printed Book: Breydenbach’s Peregrinatio from Venice to Jerusalem (University Park, PA, 2014).

110. Nurith Kenaan-Kedar, “Symbolic Meaning in Crusader Architecture: The Twelfth-Century Dome of the Holy Sepulcher Church in Jerusalem,” Cahiers archéologiques 34 (1986): 109–17; Robert Ousterhout, “Rebuilding the Temple: Constantine Monomachus and the Holy Sepulchre,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 48 (1989): 66–78; idem “Architecture as Relic and the Construction of Sanctity: The Stones of the Holy Sepulchre,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 62 (2003): 4–23.

111. Richard Krautheimer, “Introduction to an ‘Iconography of Medieval Architecture,’” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 5 (1942): 1–33; Geneviève Bresc-Bautier, “Les imitations du Saint-Sépulcre de Jérusalem (IXe–XVe siècles), archéolo-gie d’une dévotion,” Revue d’histoire de la spiritualité 50 (1974): 319–42. The influence of the Holy Sepulcher on the evolving plans to rebuild Saint Peter’s basilica has been studied by Marie Tanner, Jerusalem on the Hill: Rome and the Vision of St. Peter’s Basilica in the Renaissance (London and Turnhout, 2010).

112. Stefanie Dathe, La Vera Cruz in Segovia. Dialektische Untersuchung zu Ursprung, Baugeschichte und Funktion eines romanischen Zentralbaus in Alt-Kastilien (Weimar, 2001). See also Heribert Sutter, Form und Ikonologie spanischer Zentralbauten, Torres del Rio, Segovia, Eunate (Weimar, 1997), reviewed by Bruno Klein in Journal für Kunstgeschichte 2 (1998): 225–28. In Portugal, the Templars built the principal Holy Sepulcher monument at Tomar in the twelfth century.

113. John Wilkinson, “The Tomb of Christ, an Outline of its Structural History,” Levant 4 (1972): 83–97.


114. Colin Morris, The Sepulchre of Christ and the Medieval West (Oxford, 2005), 102–04. For the visual tradition, see Carol Heitz, Recherches sur les rapports entre architec-ture et liturgie à l’époque carolingienne (Paris, 1963), 211–17, plates 40–46. An early tenth-century ivory from northern Italy (New York, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, The Cloisters Collection, inv. 1993.19) is especially resonant for depicting a two-tiered tholos surmounted by a hemispherical dome raised upon a drum; Peter Barnet and Nancy Wu, The Cloisters: Medieval Art and Architecture (New York, 2005), 27, cat. no. 4.

115. For the Breydenbach woodcut, see Massimo Bulgarelli, Arturo Calzona, Matteo Ceriana, and Francesco Paolo Fiore, eds., Leon Battista Alberti e l’architettura, exhib. cat. (Milan, 2006), 374–76, cat. no. 58 (entry by Riccardo Pacciani). See also Kathryn Blair Moore, “Seeing Through Text: The Visualization of Holy Land Architecture in Niccolò da Poggibonsi’s Libro d’oltramare, 14th–15th centuries,” Word & Image 25 (2009): 402–15.

116. Robert Tavernor, On Alberti and the Art of Building (New Haven and London, 1998), 106–19; Amedeo Belluzzi, “La cappella Rucellai e il tempietto del Santo Sepolcro,” in Leon Battista Alberti: architetture e committenti, ed. Arturo Calzona, Joseph Connors, and Francesco Paolo Fiore, 2 vols. (Florence, 2009), 1:103–34. See also, Anke Naujokat, Non est hic. Leon Battista Albertis Tempietto in der Capella Rucellai (Aachen, 2011), esp. 77–80, for Alberti’s accommodation of ideal geometry in his interpretation of the Jerusalem model.

117. Santo Brasca, Itinerario alla santissima città di Gerusalemme, 2nd ed. (Milan, 1497), fol. Hiiv: “Questa e la forma del sanctissimo Sepulchro. El tondo si e el vero Sepulchro. Quele due cellete che vedreti una de nante al tondo laltra drieto al tondo sono agionti da la passione del nostro signoro in qua. La celleta denante al sepulchro fu facta per non lassare inculto & senza reverentia quel saxo quadro che vedeti in mezo sopra lo quale sedeva langelo quando introrno le Marie dicendo. Quis revolvet nobis lapidem ab hostio monumenti. Laltra celleta de drieto al sepulchro e facta da frati Ethyopi aliter Sabasini per sacrificare & dire suoi officii & orationi.”

118. Andrea Denke, Konrad Grünembergs Pilgerreise ins Heilige Land 1486. Untersuchung, Edition und Kommentar (Vienna, 2010). See also the late fourteenth-century draw-ing of the Holy Sepulcher showing the vestibule and the centralized core as separate structures, in BAV, Urb. lat. 1362, fol. 1v, reproduced in Arnold Nesselrath, “I libri di disegni di antichità. Tentativo di una tipologia,” in Memoria dell’antico nell’arte italiana, vol. 3, Dalla tradizione all’archeologia, ed. Salvatore Settis (Turin, 1986), 87–147, esp. 97–98, figure 48.

119. Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 464–71. 120. Plutarch, Numa, 11.1; Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 7.3; Palladio, Quattro libri, 52 (bk.

4, ch. 14), this last text cited by Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 467. 121. Virgil, Aeneid, 1.278–79. 122. William Durandus, Rationale Divinorum Officiorum, 1.1.17, 18; Honorius of Autun,

“Gemma animae,” 1.147 (PL 172:590); Sicardus of Cremona, “Mitrale,” 1.4 (PL 213:20).

123. Bianca Kühnel, From the Earthly to the Heavenly Jerusalem: Representations of the Holy City in Christian Art of the First Millenium (Rome, 1987), 37, 84, 88, 138–40; and idem, “Geography and Geometry of Jerusalem,” in City of the Great King: Jerusalem from David to the Present, ed. Nitza Rosovsky (Cambridge, MA, and London, 1996), 288–332. See also Sylvia Schein, Gateway to the Heavenly City: Crusader Jerusalem and the Catholic West (1099–1187) (Aldershot, 2005), 141–57.


124. Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 7.3, 7.4; Francesco di Giorgio, Trattati, ed. Maltese, 2:372, 375. For Filarete, see Chapter 4, nn. 127–28. The fundamental study remains Rudolph Wittkower, Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism, 3rd ed. (New York, 1971), 3–13. See also Jens Niebaum, “Leon Battista Alberti: Begruender einer Theorie des Zentralbaus in der Renaissance?,” in Leon Battista Alberti: Humanist, Architekt, Kunsttheoretiker, ed. Joachim Poeschke and Candida Syndikus (Münster, 2008), 243–56.

125. Francesco Suriano, Il trattato di Terra Santa e dell’Oriente, ed. Girolamo Golubovich (Milan, 1900), 26 (ch. 17). This is the expanded 1514 version of Suriano’s 1485 rec-ord of his Holy Land experiences. The editio princeps was published in Venice in 1524.

4 Symbols of Victory 1. Jack Freiberg, “Vasari’s Bramante and the Renaissance of Architecture in Rome,”

in Reading Vasari, ed. Anne B. Barriault, Andrew Ladis, Norman E. Land, and Jeryldene M. Wood (Athens, GA, and London, 2005), 132–46.

2. Vasari-Milanesi, 4:164. 3. Cynthia M. Pyle, “Towards the Biography of Gaspar Ambrogio Visconti,”

Bibliothèque d’Humanisme et Renaissance 55 (1993): 565–82; Richard V. Schofield, “Gaspare Visconti, mecenate del Bramante,” in Arte, committenza ed economia a Roma e nelle corti del Rinascimento (1420–1530), ed. Arnold Esch and Christoph Luitpold Frommel (Turin, 1995), 297–330; Luciano Patetta, ed., Bramante e la sua cerchia a Milano e in Lombardia 1480–1500 (Milan, 2001); Jill Pederson, “Henrico Boscano’s ‘Isola beata’: New Evidence for the Academia Leonardi Vinci in Renaissance Milan,” Renaissance Studies 22 (2008): 450–75.

4. Carlo Vecce, ed., Donato Bramante, sonetti e altri scritti (Rome, 1995). 5. Dante Isella, “I sonetti delle calze di Donato Bramante,” in Operosa parva per

Gianni Antonini, ed. Domenico De Robertis and Franco Gavazzeni (Verona, 1996), 123–33.

6. Francesco Malaguzzi Valeri, La corte di Ludovico il Moro, 4 vols. (Milan, 1913–23), 2:136.

7. Vasari-Milanesi, 4:158. See Freiberg, “Vasari’s Bramante,” 140–42. 8. Carlo Vecce, “La parola e l’icona: dai rebus di Leonardo ai ‘fermagli’ di Fabricio

Luna,” Achademia Leonardi Vinci 8 (1995): 173–83; idem, “Leonardo e il gioco,” in Passare il tempo: la letteratura del gioco e dell’intrattenimento dal XII al XVI secolo, 2 vols. (Rome, 1993), 2:269–312.

9. Dawson Kiang, “The ‘Enigma of the Dice’: A Bramante Sonnet Published by Lomazzo,” Achademia Leonardi Vinci 4 (1991): 196–99.

10. Enzo Bentivoglio, “Bramante e il geroglifico di Viterbo,” Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 16 (1972): 167–74.

11. Christoph Luitpold Frommel, “Die Peterskirche unter Papst Julius II. im Licht neuer Dokumente,” Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 16 (1976): 57–136, esp. 111 (197), 112 (209) (“pro faciendis certis literis egiptatis iuxta ordinem magistri Bramanti”). These two payments identify Bramante as architect of Saint Peter’s, and the second one includes work for the basilica.

12. James S. Ackerman, The Cortile del Belvedere (Vatican City, 1954), 43. 13. Iiro Kajanto, “Pontifex Maximus as the Title of the Pope,” Arctos 15 (1981): 37–52;

Rowland, Culture of the High Renaissance, 174–75.


14. For the Tempietto’s columns, see Christiane Denker Nesselrath, Die Säulenordnungen bei Bramante (Worms, 1990), 113; Jones, “Roots of Coincidence,” 7, 8, 20, 27. For revised calculations of their size and proportions, see Bruschi, “L’architettura a Roma negli ultimi anni,” 62, 64; and Frommel, “La città come opera d’arte,” 81–82.

15. Vitruvius, De architectura, 4.1.6, 4.3.4; Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 9.7; Francesco di Giorgio, Trattati, ed. Maltese, 2:376.

16. John Onians, “Filarete and the ‘qualità’: Architectural and Social,” Arte lombarda 38–39 (1973): 116–28; Francesco di Giorgio, Trattati, ed. Maltese, 1:61. For Bramante’s use of the Doric system, see Christof Thoenes, “Il Tempietto di Bramante e la costruzione della ‘dorico genere aedis sacrae,’” in Per Franco Barbieri, studi dell’arte e dell’architettura, ed. Elisa Avagnina and Guido Beltramini (Venice, 2004), 435–48.

17. The tholos temple in Hadrian’s villa at Tivoli with sixteen columns is a modern recon-struction; Ortolani, Il padiglione di Afrodite Cnidia, 23, 65, and passim. The Tempietto likely influenced Renaissance drawings of temples with that same number of col-umns; see, e.g., Pirro Ligorio’s fanciful reconstruction of a tholos in the Gardens of Sallust cited in Chapter 3, n. 40. See also Orietta Vasori, I monumenti antichi in Italia nei disegni degli Uffizi, Xenia, Quaderni, 1 (Rome, 1981), 101–02, no. 76 (Antonio da Sangallo the Younger, temple of the Sibyl at Tivoli; Uffizi 1069Ar), 184, no. 139 (Lorenzo Donati, unidentified temple at Civitavecchia; Uffizi 1982Av), and 231–32, no. 174 (Giorgio Vasari il Giovane, Carceri Vecchie at Santa Maria Capua Vetere; Uffizi 4828Ar).

18. Vitruvius, De architectura, 3.1.5–8; cited by Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 475 n. 18. 19. Thoenes, “Tempietto,” 438–39, 442, provides a subtle reading of the axial design,

how it differs from ancient practice, and the formal effects it achieved. 20. Vitruvius, De architectura, 3.3.3, 3.3.6. On this point, see Frommel, “La città come

opera d’arte,” 81–82. 21. This same disposition is found in the early Christian church of Sant’Angelo, Perugia,

which was proposed as a model for the Tempietto on other grounds by Timothy Verdon, “Bramante and Early Christian Spatial Articulation,” Arte lombarda, N.S. 3 (1988): 180–86, esp. 181.

22. Hans-Christoph Dittscheid, “Form versus Materie. Zum Spoliengebrauch in der römischen Bauten und Projekten Donato Bramantes,” in Antike Spolien in der Architektur des Mittelalters und der Renaissance, ed. Joachim Poeschke (Munich, 1996), 277–307, esp. 277–80. The tradition of reuse in fifteenth-century Rome is studied by Georg Satzinger, “Spolien in der römischen Architektur des Quattrocento,” in Poeschke, Antike Spolien, 249–76. See also Derek A. R. Moore, “Notes on the Use of Spolia in Roman Architecture from Bramante to Bernini,” in Architectural Studies in Memory of Richard Krautheimer, ed. Cecil L. Striker et al. (Mainz, 1996), 119–22, esp. 119–20.

23. I am indebted to Professor Lorenzo Lazzarini, Director of the Laboratorio di Analisi dei Materiali Antichi, Istituto Universitario di Architettura di Venezia, for identi-fying the types of granite employed in the Tempietto. See Lorenzo Lazzarini, “I graniti dei monumenti italiani e i loro problemi di deterioramento,” Bollettino d’arte, supp. vol. 41 (1987): 157–72; idem, “Des pierres pour l’éternité: les granits utilisés dans l’antiquité classique,” Dossiers d’Archéologie 173 (1992): 58–67; and idem, “Sul ‘marmo Misio,’ uno dei graniti più usati anticamente,” in Marmi antichi, vol. 2, Cave e tecnica di lavorazione, provenienze e distribuzione, ed. Patrizio Pensabene (Rome, 1998), 111–17.


24. G. Tedeschi Grisanti, “Il granito dell’Elba a Pisa: uso e riuso nel’ XI e XII scolo,” in Niveo de marmore: l’uso artistico del marmo di Carrara dall’XI al XV secolo, ed. Enrico Castelnovo (Genoa, 1992), 43–51.

25. Troad granite is darker than the other types, but granite from Elba and the Isola del Giglio is visually similar to the Misian stone; Lazzarini, “Marmo Misio,” 111 and n. 1.

26. Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 994. 27. J. Clayton Fant, “The Imperial Marble Yard at Portus,” in Ancient Stones: Quarrying,

Trade and Provenance, Acta Archaeologica Lovaniensia, Monographia 4, ed. Marc Waelkens, Norman Herz, and Luc Moens (Louvain, 1992), 115–20. For Renaissance knowledge of the ancient materials available at Porto, see Gabel, Memoirs of a Renaissance Pope, 300; and Paola Barocchi and Renzo Ristori, eds., Il carteggio di Michelangelo, 5 vols. (Florence, 1965–83), 3:217.

28. Schofield, “Gaspare Visconti,” 305–07. 29. Francesco di Giorgio, Trattati, ed. Maltese, 2:311. 30. Ibid., 1:106. 31. Much of what Bramante saw in Rome would have recalled the late antique and early

Christian monuments of Milan. For his knowledge of early Christian architecture, including monuments in Milan no longer extant, see Peter Murray, “Bramante paleocristiano,” in Studi bramanteschi, 27–34.

32. Christoph Luitpold Frommel, “Raffaele Riario, committente della Cancelleria,” in Arte, committenza ed economia a Roma e nelle corti del Rinascimento (1420–1530), ed. Arnold Esch and Christoph Luitpold Frommel (Turin, 1995), 197–211; Bruschi, “L’architettura a Roma negli ultimi anni,” 45–46.

33. Enzo Bentivoglio, “Nel cantiere del palazzo del Card. Raffaele Riario (La Cancelleria). Organizzazione, materiali, maestranze, personaggi,” Quaderni dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura 27, fasc. 169–74 (1982): 27–34.

34. Hazel Dodge, “Decorative Stones for Architecture in the Roman Empire,” Oxford Journal of Archaeology 7 (1988): 65–80, esp. 74; D. P. S. Peacock, Olwen Williams-Thorpe, R. S. Thorpe, and A. G. Tindle, “Mons Claudianus and the Problem of the ‘granito del Foro’: A Geological and Geochemical Approach,” Antiquity 68 (1994): 209–30, esp. 229. For both imported and indigenous granites found in Spain, see Olwen Williams-Thorpe, “Geochemical and Magnetic Provincing of Roman Granite Columns from Andaluasia and Extremadura, Spain,” Oxford Journal of Archaeology 21 (2002): 167–94.

35. Brian Curran and Anthony Grafton, “A Fifteenth-Century Site Report on the Vatican Obelisk,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 58 (1995): 234–48; John Osborne, “St. Peter’s Needle and the Ashes of Julius Caesar,” in Julius Caesar in Western Culture, ed. Maria Wyke (London, 2006), 95–109.

36. The obelisk was associated with Peter’s martyrdom in the apocryphal Acts of Peter; Lipsius and Bonnet, Acta apostolorum apocrypha, 1:11–12; see also Huskinson, “Crucifixion,” 136–37, and passim.

37. For a useful, if incomplete, overview, see A. V. Van Stekelenburg, “Some Statistics Regarding the Spolia Columns in the Christian Basilicas of Rome,” Mededelingen van het Nederlands Instituut te Rome 51–52 (1992–93): 114–21. For Saint Peter’s, see Dale Kinney, “Spolia,” in St. Peter’s in the Vatican, ed. William Tronzo (Cambridge and New York, 2005), 16–47; and Lex Bosman, The Power of Tradition: Spolia in the Architecture of St. Peter’s in the Vatican (Hilversum, 2004), 29–43. Pope Nicholas V transferred


colossal granite columns from the Campus Martius to be used in Old Saint Peter’s; Georg Satzinger, “Nikolaus V., Nikolaus Muffel und Bramante: Monumentale Triumphbogensäulen in Alt-St.-Peter,” Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 31 (1996): 93–105.

38. Vasari-Milanesi, 1:116. 39. Fergus Millar, “Condemnation to Hard Labour in the Roman Empire, from the

Julio-Claudians to Constantine,” Papers of the British School at Rome 52 (1984): 124–47; Valerie A. Maxfield, “Stone Quarrying in the Eastern Desert with Particular Reference to Mons Claudianus and Mons Porphyrites,” in Economies Beyond Agriculture in the Classical World, ed. David J. Mattingly and John Salmon (London and New York, 2001), 143–70, esp. 154–55.

40. Eusebius, On the Martyrs of Palestine, 8.1. 41. Voragine, Golden Legend, 2:331; Mombritius, Sanctuarium, 1:343. The tale also appears

in the Breviarium romanum (Rome, 1568), 910, and earlier editions. 42. D. P. S Peacock, “The Passio Sanctorum Quattuor Coronatorum: A Petrological

Approach,” Antiquity 69 (1995): 362–68; Suzanne B. Butters, The Triumph of Vulcan: Sculptor’s Tools, Porphyry, and the Prince in Ducal Florence, 2 vols. (Florence, 1996), 1:174–76.

43. The idea is derived from Psalm 117 (118):22; cf. Matthew 21:42, etc. See J. C. Plumpe, “Vivum saxum, vivi lapides: The Concept of ‘Living Stone’ in Classical and Christian Antiquity,” Traditio 1 (1943): 1–14; and Gerhard B. Ladner, “The Symbolism of the Biblical Corner Stone in the Medieval West,” Medieval Studies 4 (1942): 43–60; repub-lished with updated bibliography in idem, Images and Ideas in the Middle Ages: Selected Studies in History and Art, 2 vols. (Rome, 1983) 1:171–96, 2:1020.

44. John Onians, Bearers of Meaning: The Classical Orders in Antiquity, the Middle Ages, and the Renaissance (Princeton, 1988), 70–76; Fabio Barry, “Disiecta membra: Ranieri Zeno, the Imitation of Constantinople, the Spolia Style, and Justice at S. Marco,” in San Marco, Byzantium, and the Myths of Venice, ed. Henry Maguire and Robert S. Nelson (Washington, DC, 2010), 7–62; Dale Kinney, “The Discourse of Columns,” in Rome Across Time and Space: Cultural Transmission and the Exchange of Ideas c. 500–1400, ed. Claudia Bolgia, Rosamond McKitterick, and John Osborne (Cambridge and New York, 2011), 182–99.

45. For Bramante and the Doric system in the Renaissance, see Denker Nesselrath, Säulenordnungen, 17–22; Hubertus Günther, “Die Anfänge der modernen Dorica,” in L’emploi des ordres dans l’architecture de la Renaissance, ed. Jean Guillaume (Paris, 1992), 97–118, esp. 104–09; Thoenes, “Tempietto,” 435–48; and Paola Zampa, “L’Ordine dorico nel ‘De re aedificatoria’: modelli e interpretazioni,” in Leon Battista Alberti, teorico delle arti e gli impegni civili del “De re aedificatoria,” ed. Arturo Calzona, Francesco Paolo Fiore, Alberto Tenenti, and Cesare Vasoli, 2 vols. (Florence, 2007), 2:859–92.

46. Vitruvius, De architectura, 5.3.2. 47. Frédérique Lemerle and Yves Pauwels, “Du bon usage de la frise dorique. Bramante,

Raphaël et les ordres,” Mélanges d’École française de Rome, Italie e Méditerranée 110, no. 2 (1998): 687–702, esp. 692–94; Thoenes, “Tempietto,” 444–45.

48. The misalignment of the guttae with the triglyphs along the sides of the colon-nade and on the external wall of the cella may be another result of adapting the Doric system to the radial context. Alternatively, this could reflect a miscalculation in facture since the guttae eventually realign with the triglyphs. These and other


anomalies have rarely been observed in the literature, but see Manfred Schuller, “The Application of Bauforschung – Methodology and Presentation,” in Preparatory Architectural Investigation in the Restoration of Historical Buildings, ed. Krista de Jonge and Koen van Balen (Leuven, 2002), 31–48, esp. 31–36.

49. Vitruvius, De architectura, 4.6.3. For the Renaissance interpretation of the ionic por-tal, including the Tempietto, see Christoph Luitpold Frommel, “La porta ionica nel Rinascimento,” in idem, Architettura alla corte papale nel Rinascimento (Milan, 2003), 35–88, esp. 44–47, noting a similar treatment by Alberti at San Sebastiano, Mantua.

50. See Chapter 3, nn. 39–40. The Doric tholos in Hadrian’s villa at Tivoli is a modern reconstruction; Ortolani, Il padiglione di Afrodite Cnidia, 23, 65, and passim.

51. Vitruvius, De architectura, 1.2.5; Vitruvius, Ten Books on Architecture, ed. Ingrid D. Rowland and Thomas Noble Howe, trans. Ingrid D. Rowland (Cambridge and New York, 1999), 25.

52. Serlio, Regole generali 17r (bk. 4, ch. 6). For Renaissance attitudes toward the Doric, see Onians, Bearers of Meaning, 125–26, 154–57, 220–21, 273.

53. For the use of the Doric in Saint Peter’s basilica, see Pier Nicola Pagliara, “Una ‘non imitanda licentia’ di Bramante nel Dorico del coro di S. Pietro,” in Architektur und Kunst im Abendland: Festschrift zur Vollendung des 65. Lebensjahres von Günter Urban, ed. Michael Jansen (Rome, 1992), 83–89. For the tegurium, see John Shearman, “Il tiburio di Bramante,” in Studi bramanteschi, 567–73; and William Tronzo, “Il tegu-rium di Bramante,” Quaderni dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura, N.S., fasc. 25–30 (1995–97): 161–66.

54. Richard Krautheimer, “S. Pietro in Vincoli and the Tripartite Transept in the Early Christian Basilica,” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 84 (1941): 353–429, esp. 369–71; Krautheimer et al., Corpus basilicarum, 3:186, 212–14.

55. For renewed attention to San Pietro in Vincoli and its relics during the Renaissance, see Alessandro Ippoliti, Il complesso di San Pietro in Vincoli e la committenza della Rovere (1467–1520) (Rome, 1999).

56. Arnaldo Bruschi, “Edifici privati di Bramante a Roma, Palazzo Castellesi e Palazzo Caprini,” Palladio, N.S. 2, no. 4 (1984): 5–44. For the importance of the Basilica Aemilia to Renaissance architects, see Paola Zampa, “La basilica Emilia,” in La Roma di Leon Battista Alberti. Umanisti, architetti e artisti alla scoperta dell’antico nella città del Quattrocento, ed. Francesco Paolo Fiore with Arnold Nesselrath (Milan, 2005), 214–23.

57. Antonio Labacco, Libro appartenente a l’architettura, nel qual si figurano alcune nota-bili antiquita di Roma (Rome, 1559), fols. 17–18 (“Bramante architetto lo imitò molto in diverse opere, come chiaro si vede, perciochè molto lo dilettava per esser cosa nuova”). See Valeria Cafà, “Basilica Aemilia nel Libro d’Antonio Labacco,” in Michelangelo e il disegno di architettura, ed. Caroline Elam, exhib. cat. (Venice, 2006), 165–68.

58. I am indebted to Ingrid D. Rowland for discussions concerning the Etruscan leg-acy. For the following, see Ingrid D. Rowland, “Bramante’s Hetruscan Tempietto,” Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 51–52 (2006–07): 225–38; and the adum-bration of those ideas in idem, “Raphael, Angelo Colocci, and the Genesis of the Architectural Orders,” Art Bulletin 76 (1994): 84–104, esp. 96–97; and idem, “Render Unto Caesar the Things Which are Caesar’s: Humanism and the Arts in the Patronage of Agostino Chigi,” Renaissance Quarterly 39 (1986): 673–730, esp. 716–27. The influence of Etruscan architectural forms on the evolving designs of Saint Peter’s


basilica has been defined by Tanner, Jerusalem on the Hill. For other applications of the Etruscan legacy, see Alina Payne, “Vasari, Architecture, and the Origins of Historicizing Art,” Res 40 (2001): 51–76; and Caroline Elam, “‘Tuscan Dispositions’: Michelangelo’s Florentine Architectural Vocabulary and its Reception,” Renaissance Studies 19 (2005): 46–82.

59. Vitruvius, De architectura, 4.7. For Renaissance definitions of the Tuscan order, see Patrizia Barucco, “Interpretazione e reinvenzione del tuscanico vitruviano nel primo Rinascimento romano,” in Vitruvio nella cultura architettonico antico, medievale e moderna, ed. Gianluigi Ciotta, 2 vols. (Genoa, 2003), 2:406–13.

60. Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 6.3, 7.6. For the view of the Etruscans held by Alberti and more generally by Renaissance humanists, see Giovanni Morolli, “Vetus Etruria”: Il mito degli Etruschi nella letteratura architettonica nell’arte e nella cultura da Vitruvio a Winckelmann (Florence, 1985), 50–59, 61–81, 288–89.

61. Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 8.4; Friedhelm Prayon, “Genese der tuskanischen Säule,” in Vitruv-Kolloquium des Deutschen Archäologen-Verbandes e.V. durchgeführt an der Technischen Hochschule Darmstadt, ed. Heiner Knell and Burkhardt Wesenberg (Darmstadt, 1984), 141–62. For knowledge of Etruscan tombs during the Renaissance, see Nancy Thomson de Grummond, “Rediscovery,” in Etruscan Life and Afterlife, a Handbook of Etruscan Studies, ed. Larissa Bonfante (Detroit, 1986), 18–46.

62. Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 7.7. 63. Virgil, Aeneid, 8.473; Horace, Satires, 2.2.33; Horace, Odes, 1.2.13–14; Sextus Pompeius

Festus, De significatione verborum . . . , ed. Wallace M. Lindsay (Leipzig, 1913), s.v. “Ianiculum.” See also Giovanni Boccaccio, De montibus, sylvis, fontibus, lacubus, fluminibus, stagnis seu paludibus, et de nominibus maris (Venice, 1473); Albertini, Opusculum, fol. Diiiv; and Mariano da Firenze, Itinerarium, 1–2, 75–76.

64. Roberto Weiss, “Traccia per una biografia di Annio da Viterbo,” Italia medioevale e umanistica 5 (1962): 425–41; DBI, s.v. “Nanni, Giovanni (Annio da Viterbo)” (entry by Riccardo Fubini); Ingrid D. Rowland, “Annius of Viterbo,” in The Etruscan World, ed. Jean MacIntosch Turfa (Oxford and New York, 2013), 1117–29. See also n. 58.

65. Giovanni Nanni, Commentaria fratris Joannis Annii viterbensis super opera diversorum auctorum de antiquitatibus loquentium (Rome, 1498), and subsequent editions. The principal critical study is Walter Earl Stephens, “Berosus Chaldaeus: Counterfeit and Fictive Editors of the Early Sixteenth Century” (Ph.D. diss., Cornell University, 1979); see also idem, “The Etruscans and the Ancient Theology in Annius of Viterbo,” in Umanesimo a Roma nel Quattrocento, ed. Paolo Brezzi and Maristella de Panizza Lorch (Rome and New York, 1984), 309–22; and Christopher R. Ligota, “Annius of Viterbo and Historical Method,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 50 (1987): 44–56.

66. Amanda Collins, “Renaissance Epigraphy and its Legitimating Potential: Annius of Viterbo, Etruscan Inscriptions, and the Origins of Civilization,” in The Afterlife of Inscriptions: Reusing, Rediscovering, Reinventing and Revitalizing Ancient Inscriptions, ed. Alison E. Cooley (London, 2000), 57–76.

67. Stephens, “Berosus,” 32, 37, and passim; Morolli, Vetus Etruria, 112–17; Ligota (as in n. 65), 53. Otto of Freising (d. 1158) identified Janus as Noah’s grandson, and Jacobus de Voragine (d. 1298) claimed Janus and Noah were the same person. See, respec-tively, Marie Tanner, The Last Descendant of Aeneas: The Hapsburgs and the Mythic Image of the Emperor (New Haven and London, 1993), 89; and Walter Stephens, Giants in Those Days, Folklore, Ancient History, and Nationalism (Lincoln, NE, 1989), 109–10.


For additional references to this tradition and its political meaning, see Tanner, Last Descendant, 59, and passim.

68. Macrobius, Saturnalia, 1.9.3. 69. Christiane L. Joost-Gaugier, “Why Janus at Lucignano? Ovid, Dante, St. Augustine

and the First King of Italy,” Acta Historiae Artium Academiae Scientarium Hungaricae 30 (1984): 109–22.

70. Stephens, “Berosus,” 180–86; idem, Giants, 110. 71. For convenience, I cite Giovanni Nanni, Antiquitatum variarum (Paris, 1512), fols.

41v, 43r, 50r (bk. 5); fol. 62r (bk. 7); fol. 150v (bk. 16); fol. 162r (bk. 17). 72. Rowland, “Render Unto Caesar,” 716–27; Marjorie Reeves, “Cardinal Egidio da

Viterbo: A Prophetic Interpretation of History,” in Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 91–109, esp. 100; Amanda L. Collins, “The Etruscans in the Renaissance: The Sacred Destiny of Rome and the Historia Viginti Saeculorum of Giles of Viterbo (c. 1469–1532),” Historical Reflections 27 (2001): 107–37, esp. 120–37.

73. Stephens, Giants, 108, 136–37; Rosa Helena Chinchilla, “Garcilaso de la Vega Senior, Patron of Humanists in Rome: Classical Myths and the New Nation,” Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 73 (1996): 379–93, esp. 386–87.

74. Luciano Pérez Vilatela, “Lo onomástica de los apócrifos reyes de España en Annio de Viterbo y su influencia,” in Humanismo y pervivencia del mundo clásico, actas del I Simposio sobre Humanismo y pervivencia del mundo clásico, ed. José María Maestre Maestre and Joaquín Pascual Barea, 2 vols. (Cadíz, 1993–94), 2:807–20. The tech-nical evidence for the production of the Commentaries has been defined by Roland Crahay, “Réflexions sur le faux historique: le cas d’Annius de Viterbe,” Bulletin de la classe des lettres et des sciences morales et politiques, ser. 5, 69 (1983): 241–67.

75. For the funding, see Weiss, “Traccia,” 435; Stephens, “Berosus,” 44–46; idem, Giants, 108; and Crahay, “Réflexions,” 241–67, plate 4, reproducing Alexander VI’s permis-sion to publish the volume referring to the funding.

76. Tate, “Mythology in Spanish Historiography,” 11–18. 77. Weiss, “Traccia,” 435. The event is reported in Acta Sanctorum, vol. 5 (May

20) (Antwerp, 1685), 366, no. 144; for the date during the period of Lent in 1499, see Julio Caro Baroja, Las falsificaciones de la historia (en relación con la de España) (Barcelona, 1992), 50, citing an eighteenth-century source also noted by Tate, “Mythology in Spanish Historiography,” 12 n. 27.

78. Anna Morisi Guerra, “The Apocalypsis nova: A Plan for Reform,” in Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 27–50, esp. 46–47 n. 41; idem, “Il profetismo al tempo di Alessandro VI,” in Chiabò et al., Roma di fronte all’Europa, 3:961–70, esp. 963 n. 7 (“tra le braccia del Carvajal”), referring to a chronicle of the convent of Santa Maria in Gradi, Viterbo, redacted in 1616 and copied in 1892. In 1677, it was also said that Carvajal took pos-session of Annius’s books and brought them to Spain; Giancarlo Petrella, L’officina del geografo, La ‘Descrittione di tutta Italia’ di Leandro Alberti e gli studi geografico-antiquari tra Quattro e Cinquecento (Milan, 2004), 70–72.

79. Giovanni Nanni, De futuris christianorum triumphis in Saracenos (Genoa, 1480). For this work, see Reeves, Influence of Prophecy, 354, 463–64; and Riess, Renaissance Antichrist, 87–91.

80. Cesare Vasoli, “Profezia e astrologia in un testo di Annio da Viterbo,” in Studi sul medioevo cristiano offerti a Raffaello Morghen per il 90 anniversario dell’Istituto Storico Italiano (1883–1973), 2 vols. (Rome, 1974), 2:1027–60, republished in idem, I miti e gli astri (Naples, 1977); see also Ligota, “Annius,” 45.


81. Lawrance, “Golden Age,” 21, 40–41, app. 11. 82. Georges Cirot, Les histoires générales d’Espagne entre Alphonse X et Philippe II (1284–

1556) (Burdeos, 1904), 66–75; Caro Baroja, Las falsificaciones, 49–78. 83. Rowland, “Tempietto,” 231, 233, 235; see also Morolli, Vetus Etruria, 114–15. 84. Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 64; and Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 1032, discussed the

relationship of the drawing to the Tempietto in other ways. This paragraph was already written when I happily discovered a parallel reading of Vitruvius’s text presented in the context of the Louvre drawing by Caroline Susan Hillard, “An Alternative Antiquity: The Etruscans in Renaissance Rome and Florence” (Ph.D. diss., Washington University, 2009), 151–53.

85. Marina Martelli, “Un disegno attribuito a Leonardo e una scoperta archeologica degli inizi del Cinquecento,” Prospettiva 10 ( July 1977): 58–61; Gilda Bartoloni and Piera Bocci Pacini, “The Importance of Etruscan Antiquity in the Tuscan Renaissance,” in The Rediscovery of Antiquity: The Role of the Artist, ed. Jane Fejfer, Tobias Fischer-Hansen, and Annette Rathje (Copenhagen, 2003), 449–79, esp. 456–57.

86. The 1486 editio princeps of Vitruvius introduced subheadings, but the tholos and other hybrid temples appeared together in Book Four under the rubric, De Tuscanicis rationibus aedium sacrarum.

87. Licht, L’edificio a pianta centrale, 25–26, no. 1, figure 3; Günther, “Ricezione,” 280, 281, figure 13. The plan of the Jupiter temple was reconstructed as a peripteral tholos by Francesco di Giorgio, Trattati, ed. Maltese, 1:282, plate 151.

88. Vitruvius, De architectura, 4.3.6. For the ancient tradition, see Anne Viola Siebert, Instrumenta sacra. Untersuchungen zu römischen Opfer-, Kult- und Priestergeräten (Berlin and New York, 1999); and Thesaurus cultus et rituum antiquorum, 5 vols. (Los Angeles, 2005), 5:160–61. Various models have been proposed for the Tempietto’s metopes: Peter Murray, Bramante’s Tempietto (Newcastle upon Tyne, 1972), 8 (temple of the Divine Vespasian); Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 477 n. 19 (temple of Concord); Günther, “Bramantes Tempietto,” 71–72 (fragments of the Doric frieze from the mausoleum of Lucius Sempronius Atratinus in Gaeta mounted in the bell tower of the cathedral); and Rowland, “Tempietto,” 232 (ancient friezes from San Lorenzo fuori le Mura, now Musei Capitolini).

89. Paola Zampa, “Antonio da Sangallo il Vecchio, l’impiego del fregio dorico nei disegni e nell’opera,” Annali di architettura 15 (2003): 59–73.

90. Different identifications for some of the objects depicted in the metopes have been proposed by Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 475–80; idem, “L’architettura a Roma negli ultimi anni,” 59; and Marías, “Bramante en España,” 55–58.

91. The umbrella, which formed part of the papal regalia, also appears in conjunc-tion with the keys of Peter; Donald Lindsay Galbreath, Papal Heraldry, 2nd ed., ed. Geoffrey Briggs (London, 1972), 27–37.

92. The incense boat, chalice and paten, candelabra, cruets, tapers, and snuffers are all repeated four times; the keys, umbrella, ewer, and cross are repeated three times; the pyxides and books are repeated five times; and the vessel for holy water is repeated twice.

93. Michel Andrieu, ed., Le Pontifical romain au moyen-âge, vol. 3, Le Pontifical de Giullaume Durand, Studi e testi, 88 (Vatican City, 1940), 518–32.

94. Jack Freiberg, The Lateran in 1600: Christian Concord in Counter-Reformation Rome (Cambridge and New York, 1995), 120–22. For the importance of the Temple vessels in Jewish tradition, see Ra’anan S. Boustan, “The Spoils of the Jersualem Temple at


Rome and Constantinople, Jewish Counter-Geography in a Christianizing Empire,” in Antiquity in Antiquity: Jewish and Christian Pasts in the Greco-Roman World, ed. Gregg Gardner and Kevin L. Osterloh (Tübingen, 2007), 327–72.

95. The chapel in the Piazza del Campo, Siena, incorporates dynamic shells in the niches on the upper level, which was added to the fourteenth-century structure in the 1460s; Fabrizio Nevola, Siena: Constructing the Renaissance City (New Haven and London, 2007), 21–22. The dynamic shell also functions as a sheltering canopy for holy figures in Renaissance paintings, e.g., Piero della Francesca, Madonna and Child with Saints (Museo del Brera, Milan), which Bramante adapted in his Prevedari engraving of 1481.

96. See, e.g., F. Cumont, Recherches sur le symbolisme funéraire des Romains (Paris, 1942), plates 11, 29; and Friedrich Wilhelm Deichmann, with Giuseppe Bovini and Hugo Brandenburg, Repertorium der christlich-antiken Sarkophage, vol. 1, Rom und Ostia (Wiesbaden, 1967), nos. 34, 40, 42, 44, 45, etc.

97. Kurt Köster, Pilgerzeichen und Pilgermuscheln von mittelalterlichen Santiagostraßen: Saint-Léonard, Rocamadour, Saint-Gilles, Santiago de Compostela (Neumünster, 1983), 119–55.

98. Katherine Elliot van Liere, “The Missionary and the Moorslayer: James the Apostle in Spanish Historiography from Isidore of Seville to Ambrosio de Morales,” Viator 37 (2006): 519–43.

99. Hillgarth, Spanish Kingdoms, 2:387–88. 100. Teresa Jiménez Calvente, “Nebrija, poeta áulico: la ‘Peregrinatio Regis et Reginae

ad Sanctum Iacobum.’ Edición, traducción y estudio,” Medievalismo, Revista de la Sociedad Española de Estudios Medievales 20 (2010): 63–95.

101. Concerning the monarchs’ control over the three main military orders, Santiago, Calatrava, and Alcántara, see Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 568–72.

102. Letizia Arbeteta Mira, “La Corona Rica y otras joyas de estado de la reina Isabel I,” in Isabel la Católica, la magnificencia de un reinado. Quinto centenario de Isabel la Católica, 1504–2004, ed. Fernando Checa Cremades, exhib. cat. (Salamanca, 2004), 169–86, esp. 174. Sculptures of shells decorate the facade of the palace of don Rodrigo de Maldonado, member of Queen Isabel’s council, in Salamanca, known as the Casa de la Conchas.

103. Thoenes, “Tempietto,” 442–43, questioned whether the balusters had been reduced in number in an undocumented restoration of the Tempietto, citing Paul Marie Letarouilly, Édifices de Rome moderne, vol. 1 (Liege, 1849), 246 n. 1. During his sec-ond trip to Rome, Letarouilly compared his engravings with the Tempietto and discovered three balusters between each column instead of the four he had depicted. Letarouilly likely depended for this detail on an engraving of 1794 where four bal-usters appear in that position; Giandomenico Navone, Giovanni Batttista Cipriani, and Niccola Magi, Nuovo metodo per apprendere insieme le teorie, e le pratiche della scelta architettura civile . . . (Rome, 1794), n.p. Three balusters were depicted in that posi-tion by Giuseppe Vasi in 1786; Valeria Di Piazza, Carte, piante e vedute di XVIII secolo nelle stampe della Biblioteca della Provincia di Roma (Rome, 2003), 252, no. 409.

104. The Tempietto is absent from the otherwise fundamental discussions of the bal-uster by Ludwig Heinrich Heydenreich, “Baluster und Balustrade. Eine ‘invenzi-one’ der toskanischen Frührenaissancearchitektur,” in Festschrift Wolfgang Braunfels, ed. Friedrich Piel and Jörg Traeger (Tübingen, 1977), 123–33; and Paul Davies and


David Hemsoll, “Renaissance Balusters and the Antique,” Architectural History 26 (1983): 1–23. See also Nagel and Wood, Anachronic Renaissance, 172–74, referring to the Tempietto’s balustrade.

105. Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 1015 n. 59, 1017, 1018 n. 68; Günther, “Ricezione,” 277, 299 n. 33.

106. For this and other relevant examples, see Davies and Hemsoll, “Renaissance Balusters,” 7; and Dittscheid, “Form versus Materie,” 279, 291 n. 14.

107. Diego de Sagredo, Medidas del Romano: necesarias a los oficiales que quieren seguir las formaciones de las basas, colunas, capiteles y otras pieças de los edificios antiguos (Toledo, 1526). Nigel Llewellyn, “Diego de Sagredo and the Renaissance in Italy,” in Guillaume, Les traités d’architecture, 295–306; idem, “‘Hungry and Desperate for Knowledge’: Diego de Sagredo’s Spanish Point of View,” in Paper Palaces: The Rise of the Renaissance Architectural Treatise, ed. Vaughan Hart and Peter Hicks (New Haven and London, 1998), 122–39.

108. Sagredo, Medidas del Romano, fols. Bviiiv–Ciiv. On the baluster-column, see J. B. Bury, “The Stylistic Term ‘Plateresque,’” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 39 (1976): 199–230, esp. 215 and n. 56; Nigel Llewellyn, “Two Notes on Diego da Sagredo, II: The Baluster and the Pomegranate,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 40 (1977): 294–300; and Davies and Hemsoll, “Renaissance Balusters.”

109. Francesco di Giorgio, Trattati, ed. Maltese, 1:62. For Sagredo’s knowledge of Francesco’s treatise, see Llewellyn, “Two Notes,” 293, 295 n. 11, 296.

110. Sagredo, Medidas del Romano, fol. Cir: “Pero balaustre creo yo q. desciende de balaustium vocablo latino q. significa la flor del granado: de donde por su mucha semejança fue dicho balaustre.” For that nomenclature, traced to Pliny the Elder’s Natural History, see Llewellyn, “Two Notes,” 295–96; and Davies and Hemsoll, “Renaissance Balusters,” 8.

111. This would parallel the “French column” invented by Philippe de l’Orme in his treatise of 1567; Yves Pauwels, “Les Français à la recherche d’un langage. Les ordres hétérodoxes de Philibert De L’Orme et Pierre Lescot,” Revue de l’Art 112 (1996): 9–15.

112. For these monuments, but without the interpretation of the balustrade advanced here, see Felipe Pereda and Alfonso Rodríguez G. de Ceballos, “‘Coeli enarrant gloriam dei.’ Arquitectura, iconografia y liturgia en la capilla de los Condestables de la Catedral de Burgos,” Annali di architettura 9 (1997): 17–34; and Luis Cervera Vera, Arquitectura del Colegio Mayor de Santa Cruz de Valladolid (Valladolid, 1982). For the Colegio’s construction and later alterations, see Victor Nieto, Alfredo J. Morales, and Fernando Checa, Arquitectura del Renacimiento en España, 1488–1599 (Madrid, 1989), 30–32. Another relevant example is the balustrade of the main stair in the Hospital de Santa Cruz in Toledo, also constructed by Cardinal Mendoza.

113. Earl E. Rosenthal, “The Invention of the Columnar Device of Emperor Charles V at the Court of Burgundy in Flanders in 1516,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 36 (1973): 198–230, esp. 203–04, figures 30a–b, 31a. Rosenthal dated the choir stall 1518–19. For additional observations about the baluster, see Hanno-Walter Kruft, A History of Architectural Theory: From Vitruvius to the Present, trans. Ronald Taylor, Elsie Callander, and Antony Wood (New York, 1994), 219–20.

114. Bryna Rachusin, “The Architectural Theory of Luca Pacioli,” Bibliothèque d’Humanisme et Renaissance, travaux et documents 39 (1977): 479–502; Onians, Bearers


of Meaning, 216–24; Alberto Pérez-Gómez, “The Glass Architecture of Luca Pacioli,” Architectura 28 (1998): 156–80.

115. For Pacioli’s circle in Milan, see Pederson, “New Evidence,” 450–75. Leonardo is thought to have provided drawings for the woodcuts depicting the stereometric bodies included in the last part of the treatise.

116. Luca Pacioli, Divina proportione (Venice, 1509), pars prima, fol. 17r [sic, fol. 25r]: “Deli quali habiando detto poi li situaremo in lopera de vna porta qul sia asimilitu-dine di quella del tempio de Salamone in Hierusalem prenunciata per lo propheta ezechiel con laltre dispositioni. E voi poi per vostro ingegno potreti piu o manco farne.”

117. Bury, “Stylistic Term Plateresque,” 215 n. 55; and Llewellyn, “Two Notes,” 298 n. 29, referred in passing to Pacioli’s use of the balustrade.

118. Buchowiecki, Handbuch der Kirchen Roms, 3:499–500. For the patron, see Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 122. Also relevant in this context are the large balusters of red-streaked pavonazetto marble that form the parapet of the chapel of Olivero Carafa in Santa Maria sopra Minerva; Silvia Catitti, “L’architettura della cappella Carafa in Santa Maria sopra Minerva a Roma,” Annali di architettura 16 (2004): 25–43, esp. 34–35, figure 14.

119. Concerning the Tempietto’s pavement, see Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 473–74, 484–85, 1012; Wilson Jones, “Roots,” 10–11; and Angela Dressen, Pavimenti decorati del Quattrocento in Italia (Venice, 2008), 109, 332.

120. Dorothy F. Glass, “Papal Patronage in the Early Twelfth Century: Notes on the Iconography of Cosmatesque Pavements,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 32 (1969): 386–90; idem, Studies on Cosmatesque Pavements (Oxford, 1980).

121. Claussen, Kirchen, 1:432–35. 122. Dressen, Pavimenti, 284–86, 319–20. For remarks on the Renaissance tradition, see

Nagel and Wood, Anachronic Renaissance, 185–94. 123. Koch, “Early Christian Revival,” 551. Additional examples are cited in Bruschi,

Bramante architetto, 473 n. 15; and Dressen, Pavimenti, 309–10, 318–19, 323–25. 124. Dante, Purgatorio, 9.101–2 (“porfido . . . sì fiammeggiante, come sangue che fuor di

vena spiccia”). 125. Alberti, De re aedificatoria, 7.10; Wittkower, Architectural Principles, 9 and n. 4. 126. Related ideas have been applied to the tomb of Cosimo de’ Medici in San Lorenzo,

Florence by Irving Lavin, “Donatello’s Bronze Pulpits in San Lorenzo and the Early Christian Revival,” in idem, Past-Present: Essays on Historicism in Art from Donatello to Picasso (Berkeley, 1993), 1–27, esp. 17–20.

127. Alessandro Rovetta, “Le fonti monumentali milanesi delle chiese a pianta cen-trale del tratatto d’architettura di Filarete,” Arte lombarda, N.S. 60 (1981): 24–32; Jens Niebaum, “Filarete’s Designs for Centrally Planned Churches in Milan and Sforzinda,” Arte lombarda, 155 (2009): 121–38.

128. Anna Maria Finoli and Liliana Grassi, eds., Antonio Averlino detto il Filarete, Trattato di Architettura, 2 vols. (Milan, 1972), 1:248 (bk. 9, fol. 64v). See S. Lang, “Leonardo’s Architectural Designs and the Sforza Mausoleum,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 31 (1968): 218–33, esp. 230.

129. Harry Bober, “An Illustrated Medieval School-Book of Bede’s ‘De Natura Rerum,’” Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 19–20 (1956–57): 65–97. The quincunx pavement located in the presbytery of Westminster cathedral (1268) is identified with the mac-rocosm in the accompanying inscription; David Howlett, “The Inscriptions in the


Sanctuary Pavement at Westminster,” in Westminster Abbey, the Cosmati Pavements, ed. Lindy Grant and Richard Mortimer (Aldershot, 2002), 92–110.

130. The link to Jerusalem was made explicit, among other places, in tidal and wind diagrams; Bober, “Medieval School-Book,” figures 3, 13a. The meaning of medi-eval scientific diagrams has been defined in terms of Biblical and eschatological iconography by Bianca Kühnel, The End of Time in the Order of Things: Science and Eschatology in Early Medieval Art (Regensburg, 2003). See also Paloma Pajares-Ayuela, Cosmatesque Ornament: Flat Polychrome Geometric Patterns in Architecture, trans. Maria Fleming Alvarez (London, 2002), 217–46.

5 History and Prophecy 1. The modern inscription located in the crypt of the Tempietto bearing the date 1500

has added uncertainty to the meaning of the foundation stone; for its proper identi-fication, see Chapter 2 and Appendix A.

2. The traditional dating of the Tempietto is supported by Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 55 n. 2 (shortly before 1502); Günther, “Bramantes Hofprojekt,” 419 n. 19 (1499/1500–1502); and Marías, “Bramante en España,” 34 (1498–1500 for the crypt; 1502 for the Tempietto). The revised, later date for the Tempietto was first proposed by Guglielmo De Angelis d’Ossat, “Preludio romano del Bramante,” Palladio, N.S. 16, fasc. 1–4 (1966): 83–102, esp. 95–98, based on a text he wrote in 1944. That idea was taken up by Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 989–95; Borsi, Bramante, 251–59; Howard, “Tempietto,” 211–17; and others.

3. I previously discussed the foundation stone in Freiberg, “Bramante’s Tempietto,” 151–205.

4. Juan Caramuel, Dominicus: hoc est, venerabilis P. Dominici a Jesu-Maria, parthenii ordinis carmelit. excalceat. generalis, virtutes, labores, prodigia, ecstases, et revela-tiones (Vienna, 1655), 471. This text was introduced to Bramante scholarship by Vannicelli, S. Pietro in Montorio, 66–72; and Giuseppe Tibaudo, “Precisazioni sul Tempietto di S. Pietro in Montorio,” in Studi bramanteschi, 513–16. For Domenico’s life and career, see Silvano Giordano, Domenico di Gesù Maria, Ruzola (1559–1630): un carmelitano scalzo tra politica e riforma nella chiesa posttridentino (Rome, 1991).

5. I first published the portion of the text concerning the Tempietto in Freiberg, “Bramante’s Tempietto,” 190–93.

6. The vicissitudes of the stone are discussed in this chapter, Chapter 6, and the Epilogue. The text of the inscription is incorrect in Forcella, Iscrizioni, 5:248, no. 686, reflecting errors in his source, Pietro Luigi Galletti (d. 1790), “Inscriptiones Urbis, Hispania,” in BAV, Vat. lat. 7917, fol. 10, no. 26a (ab eisdem in place of ab eis aedem; 1500 in place of 1502).

7. Fra Pietro provided approximate dimensions in palmi (22.34 cm): “about two palmi high,” “three palmi wide,” and concerning its depth, he adjusted an initial estimate of “about a half (palmo),” to “almost one palmo.” The maximum dimensions would be 44.68 cm × 67.02 cm × 11.17 (or 22.34) cm. As it appears today, the tablet mea-sures approximately 37.5 cm in height and 54.5 cm in width; its depth has been esti-mated as 9–10 cm. I owe the last of these dimensions to architect José Sancho Roda, Patrimonio Histórico Español, Madrid, who generously shared the results of the conservation.


8. Luisa F. Humanes, Restauración en el Templete de Bramante, Roma, septiembre 1998, mayo 1999 (Madrid, 2002), 64–66.

9. Andrieu, Pontifical romain, 453, no. 11. 10. The most prominent example is the foundation stone used for New Saint Peter’s

in 1506; Nikolaus Staubach, “Der ritus der impositio primarii lapidis und die Grundsteinlegung von Neu-Sankt-Peter,” in Sankt Peter in Rom, 1506–2006, ed. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze (Munich, 2008), 29–40.

11. Another relic of Peter’s crucifixion found in the vicinity of San Pietro in Montorio and transferred to Santa Dorothea in Trastevere ca. 1500 was a stone said to preserve the foot-prints of two angels who offered solace to the Apostle; Freiberg, “Tempietto,” 162–63.

12. Cf. De Angelis d’Ossat, “Preludio,” 98; Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 992–93. 13. For Renaissance inscriptions combining classical refinement with rusticity, see Iiro

Kajanto, Classical and Christian: Studies in the Latin Epitaphs of Medieval and Renaissance Rome (Helsinki 1980), 14.

14. See the similar response by Luke Wadding (d. 1657), Annales minorum seu trium ordinum a S. Francisco institutorum . . . , vol. 14, 3rd ed., ed. Joseph Maria Fonseca (Quaracchi, 1933), 55 (1472, no. 84) (“vetustae incisionis characteribus”).

15. Sara Magister, “Censimento delle collezioni di antichità a Roma: 1471–1503,” Xenia antiqua 8 (1999): 129–204; Anna Cavallaro, ed., Collezioni di antichità a Roma tra ‘400 e ‘500 (Rome, 2007); Kathleen Wren Christian, Empire Without End: Antiquities Collections in Renaissance Rome, c. 1350–1527 (New Haven and London, 2010). Of par-ticular interest is an inscription datable before 1470 honoring Giulio Pomponio Leto that imitates the rustic qualities found in Roman Republican epigraphs (Rome, Museo Epigrafico, Museo Nazionale Romano; CIL 6.3477*). Nadia Petrucci, “Pomponio Leto e la rinascita dell’epitaffio antico,” Eutopia 3 (1994): 19–44, cites the work’s pri-vate nature to explain the epigraphical style, but for Leto’s concern with Republican epigraphs, see Sara Magister, “Pomponio Leto collezionista di antichità: note sulla tradizione manoscritta di una raccolta epigrafica nella Roma del tardo Quattrocento,” Xenia antiqua 7 (1998): 167–96.

16. Robert B. Tate, “La geografia humanistica y los historiadores del siglo XV,” in Actas del cuarto Congreso Internacional de Hispanistas, 2 vols. (Salamanca, 1982), 2:691–98, esp. 697; Helena Gimeno Pascual, “El despertar de la ciencia epigráfica en España. ¿Ciríaco de Ancona: un modelo para los primeros epigrafistas españoles?,” in Ciriaco d’Ancona e la cultura antiquaria dell’Umanesimo, ed. Gianfranco Paci and Sergio Sconocchia (Regio Emilia, 1998), 373–81; idem, “El Descubrimiento de Hispania,” in Hispania, el legado de Roma, exhib. cat. (Zaragoza, 1999), 25–35.

17. Magister, “Censimento,” 157. 18. Angelo Silvagni, ed., Inscriptiones christianae urbis Romae, septimo saeculo antiquiores,

N.S., vol. 1, Inscriptiones incertae origines (Rome 1922), 291, no. 2284. 19. Christian, Empire Without End, 121–49. 20. De Rossi, Inscriptiones, 2.1:407–52. 21. Burchard, Liber notarum, 1:340–41. 22. Ibid., 1:341 (“Sculptura litterarum hujusmodi fuit satis concava et satis’ bonis carac-

teribus facta, . . .”). 23. For the reliquary, see Tesori d’arte sacra di Roma e del Lazio, exhib. cat. (Rome, 1975),

57–58, no. 133 (entry by Maria Andaloro). The titulus was drawn by Sigismondo Tizio (d. 1528), “Historia senensis,” in BAV, Chigi G.2.36, fol. 193r (cited by Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 164 n. 169), and by Francisco de Hollanda with a


partial depiction of the reliquary; Elías Tormo, ed., Os desenhos das antigualhas que vio Francisco d’Ollanda pintor portugués (Madrid, 1940).

24. Bruschi, “L’architettura a Roma negli ultimi anni,” 58, refers to “rifiniture interne” between June and September 1506, without specifying its extent or providing the source of that information.

25. For reference to the plan of the monastery and monetary disbursements to Carvajal during the first decade of the sixteenth century, see Chapter 2.

26. A lost epigraph of 1502 from San Giacomo degli Spagnoli recognized the anniversary by recalling the Granada conquest and the indulgences Pope Innocent VIII granted to the faithful who visited the church on the feast of Saint James Major; Forcella, Iscrizioni, 3:221, no. 535.

27. The opening of Amadeo’s text and the laying of the foundation stone of the Tempietto in the same year was first proposed as a meaningful conjunction by Manfredo Tafuri, “‘Roma instaurata’: Strategie urbane e politiche pontificie nella Roma del primo ‘500,” in Raffaello architetto, ed. Christoph Luitpold Frommel, Stefano Ray, and Manfredo Tafuri (Milan, 1984), 59–106, esp. 102 n. 65. Marías, “Bramante en España,” 44–59, explored the association of the two events and suggested that the Tempietto could be understood to convey prophetic meaning.

28. Morisi, Apocalypsis nova; Cesare Vasoli, “Notizie sul Giorgio Benigno Salviati ( Juraj Dragišić),” in idem, Profezia e ragione, studi sulla cultura del Cinquecento e del Seicento (Naples, 1974), 15–127, esp. 84–102; Morisi Guerra, “Plan for Reform,” 27–50; and Cesare Vasoli, “Giorgio Benigno Salviati (Dragišić),” in Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 139–45. See now, with updated bibliography, James W. Nelson Novoa, “Imagination as Exegesis in the Apocalypsis nova Attributed to Blessed Amadeus da Silva,” in Faith and Fantasy in the Renaissance: Texts, Images, and Religious Practices, ed. Olga Zorzi Pugliese and Ethan Matt Kavaler (Toronto, 2009), 71–83.

29. Reeves, Influence of Prophecy, 234–35, 432, 440–41; Vasoli, “Notizie,” 121. 30. Sevesi, “Amedeo,” 67–69, no. 14. 31. On August 27, 1496, four days after arriving in Milan, Carvajal attended Mass at the

Amadeite church of Santa Maria della Pace accompanied by the duke and members of the court; Burchard, Liber notarum, 1:635–36. For Carvajal’s documented involve-ment with the Amadeites in Milan, see Sevesi, “Amedeo,” 62–64, app. 1, no. 26 (nam-ing Tommaso Conti chaplain); 66, app. 2, nos. 5–6; and de Sousa Costa, “Studio critico,” 254, 354–57, app. 83.

32. Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 27–36; Vasoli, “Notizie,” 91–99. 33. Amadeo’s revelations occurred during those same feasts in April and May 1482;

Morisi Guerra, “Plan for Reform,” 31 n. 10. Benigno stated that both Sixtus IV and Innocent VIII had the text in their possession, but did not open it; Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 28–33.

34. Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 28, suggested that Benigno’s letters to his friend may have been “fabbricate ad arte, per accreditare una certa versione dei fatti.”

35. Minnich, “Role of Prophecy,” 113; Josephine Jungić, “Joachimist Prophecies in Sebastiano del Piombo’s Borgherini Chapel and Raphael’s Transfiguration,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 51 (1988): 66–83, esp. 75; republished in Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 321–43.

36. Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 31, 33. 37. Ibid., 29.


38. Ibid., 29 (June 18, 1502). Other accounts state that Benigno alone opened the text; Vasoli, “Benigno,” 143.

39. Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 29–30 n. 56, 31 n. 56, 34–35. 40. Ibid., 16, 22, 34; Vasoli, “Benigno,” 144. 41. Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 29, 30–31 n. 56. 42. Mariano’s testimony was transmitted by Wadding, Annales minorum, 14:371, no. 39

(year 1482), quoted by Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 27. 43. Nelson H. Minnich, “The Healing of the Pisan Schism (1511–13),” Annuarium

Historiae Conciliorum 16 (1984): 59–192; idem, “Role of Prophecy,” 111–20; Aldo Landi, “Prophecy at the Time of the Council of Pisa (1511–1513),” in Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 53–61.

44. Morisi, Apocalypsis nova, 33–34. 45. See Chapter 3 at nn. 79–81. 46. Fausta Navarro, “Lo Pseudo-Bramantino: proposta per la ricostruzione di una

vicenda artistica,” Bollettino d’arte 67, no. 14 (1982): 37–68, esp. 42–48. See also Marco Tanzi, Pedro Fernández da Murcia lo Pseudo Bramantino, un pittore girovago nell’Italia del primo Cinquecento (Milan, 1997); and DBI, s.v. “Fernández, Pedro” (entry by Tiziana Mancini).

47. Navarro, “Pseudo-Bramantino,” 47–48, 64 n. 45; and d’Arpa, “Tempietto,” 39, recog-nized the artist’s dependence on the Tempietto for the painted architecture.

48. Tafuri, “Roma instaurata,” 102 n. 65; and Marías, “Bramante en España,” 55, empha-sized the importance of the theme of the angelic pastor for Carvajal, and suggested that the Eucharist and Christianity’s universal reach were reflected in the metopes of the Tempietto (Tafuri) and the circular design Bramante projected for the clois-ter (Marías). For the influence of the Apocalypsis nova on the later decoration of San Pietro in Montorio, see Jungić, “Joachimist Prophecies,” 66–83.

49. These claims were set forth by Cristóbal Santisteban, Tratado dela successio(n) delos reynos de Ierusalen y de Napoles y de Çecilia y delas p(ro)vincias de Pulla y Calabria . . . (Zaragoza, 1503), n.p. (ch. 5); see also Andrés Bernáldez, Memorias del reinado de los Reyes Catolicos, ed. Manuel Gómez Moreno and Juan de M. Carriazo (Madrid, 1962), 459–72 (chs. 193–95).

50. A cadet branch of the Aragonese royal family ruled the island until 1409, at which time Sicily was reunited with the Crown of Aragon. In this process the Hohenstaufen eagle, first absorbed into the heraldry of Sicily, was joined to that of Aragon; Martin Aurell, “Messianisme royal de la couronne d’Aragon (14e–15e siècles),” Annales his-toire, sciences sociales 52, no. 1 (1997): 119–55, esp. 142–44. Upon becoming Queen of Sicily in 1474, Isabel of Castile commissioned a crown modeled on a Hohenstaufen crown of the thirteenth century that featured eagles in the decoration; Rafael Domínguez Casas, Arte y etiqueta de los Reyes Católicos, artistas, residencias, jardines y bosques (Madrid, 1993), 145; Arbeteta Mira, “La Corona Rica,” 178–79, 273–75.

51. Carlos José Hernando Sánchez, “Estrategia cruzada y guerra moderna: la conquista de Nápoles en la política italiana de los Reyes Católicos,” in Los Reyes Católicos y la monarquía de España, ed. Lucía Vallejo (Madrid, 2004), 287–302.

52. Yvonne Labande-Mailfert, Charles VIII et son milieu (1470–1498), la jeunesse au pou-voir (Paris, 1975), 171–75; David Abulafia, ed., The French Descent into Italy 1494–95, Antecedents and Effects (Aldershot, 1995).

53. Bernáldez, Memorias, 347 (ch. 147).


54. William H. Prescott, History of the Reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, 3 vols. (Boston, 1838), 2:253–329 (pt. 2, chs. 1–2); Barón de Terrateig, Politica en Italia del Rey Católico, 1507–1516, correspondencia inédita con el embajador Vich, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1963), 1:34–35. In the aftermath of those events, Charles VIII considered mounting a second Italian campaign to secure the conquest; Amnon Linder, “An Unpublished ‘Pronosticatio’ on the Return of Charles VIII to Italy,” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 47 (1984): 200–03.

55. Prescott, History of Ferdinand and Isabella, 2:330–42 (pt. 2, ch. 3); Hillgarth, Spanish Kingdoms, 2:553–59; Labande-Mailfert, Charles VIII, 466–70.

56. J. du Mont, Corps universel diplomatique du droit des gens, contenant un recueil des traitez d’alliance . . . , vol. 3, pt. 2 (Amsterdam, 1726), 444–47, no. 220. For the ratification of the treaty by Pope Alexander VI in June 1501, see Burckhard, Liber notarum, 2:291–92. The relevant treaties are translated in Jose Lopez de Toro, ed. and trans., Tratados internacionales de los Reyes Catolicos . . . , Documentos inéditos para la historia de España, 7–8, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1952).

57. Francesco Guicciardini, Storia d’Italia, ed. Giuseppe Rosini, vol. 1 (Milan, 1843), 333–34 (bk. 5, ch. 3). See Machiavelli’s letter to Francesco Vettori, dated April 29, 1513, reviewing all of Ferdinand’s actions, including the partition of Naples; Niccolo Machiavelli, The Chief Works and Others, trans. Allan Gilbert, 3 vols. (Durham, NC, 1965), 2:903–10. For an overview of attitudes toward Ferdinand’s actions, see Hillgarth, Spanish Kingdoms, 2:556–57.

58. The pope admonished Carvajal for his involvement in the war during a consistory held on January 11, 1503; Pasquale Villari, ed., Dispacci di Antonio Giustinian, ambas-ciatore veneto in Roma dal 1502 al 1505, 3 vols. (Florence, 1876), 1:333.

59. Sanuto, Diarii, 4:344, 358, 483 (entry dated October 1502). 60. Robert W. Scheller, “Imperial Themes in Art and Literature of the Early French

Renaissance: The Period of Charles VIII,” Simiolus 12 (1981–82): 5–69, esp. 36–37. Charles declared that idea from Florence in November 1494; Burckhard, Liber notarum, 1:542–43. See also Hernando Sánchez, “Estrategia cruzada,” 287–95.

61. Rudolf Hiestand, “Ierusalem et Sicilie rex. Zur Titulatur Friedrichs II,” Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 52 (1996): 181–90. For the history of the title to Jerusalem as reflected in the coinage of the Kingdom of Sicily, see Philip Grierson and Lucia Travaini, Medieval European Coinage with a Catalogue of the Coins in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, vol. 14, Italy (III) (South Italy, Sicily, Sardinia) (Cambridge and New York, 1998).

62. For Charles VIII’s use of the title, see Scheller, “Imperial Themes,” 21–26. 63. For the diplomatic documents, see n. 56. For the obsequies of Isabel in Rome, see

Burckhard, Liber notarum, 2:472; and the literature cited in Prologue, n. 29. In a public consistory of April 25, 1505, the ambassadors of the kings of France and Spain clashed over which sovereign possessed legitimate rights to the title; Burchard, Liber notarum, 2:478.

64. The bull dated July 7, 1510, is translated in José María Doussinague, La política inter-nacional de Fernando el Católico (Madrid, 1944), 620–35, app. 48.

65. Jose Garcia Oro, “La cruzada del Cardenal Cisneros: de Granada a Jerusalen,” Archivo Ibero-Americano N.S. 51 (1991): 553–766, esp. 724–63; Félix del Buey and Cristóforo Alvi, “Orígenes de la custodia de Tierra Santa, ayuda de los Reinos de Aragón, Nápoles y Castilla (capítulo reabierto),” Archivo Ibero-Americano 65, nos. 250–51 (2005): 7–96.


66. Girolamo Golubovich, Biblioteca bio-bibliografica della Terra Santa e dell’Oriente francescano, 5 vols. (Quaracchi, 1906–27), 4:52–59; Conrad Eubel, ed., Bullarium franciscanum, vol. 6 (Rome, 1902), 95–96, nos. 159–60.

67. Samuel Eiján, El real patronato de los Santos Lugares en la historia de Tierra Santa, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1945), 1:229–30; Lopez de Toro, Tratados internacionales, 1:3–4, 276–78. Isabel’s 1489 renewal of the original pledge was perhaps a response to Pope Innocent VIII’s 1487 appeal to the kings of France and Spain and the Duke of Burgundy to support the Holy Sepulcher; Samuel Eiján, España en Tierra Santa, páginas de la vida franciscana en Oriente (Barcelona, 1910), 38–40.

68. de la Torre, Documentos, 6:254–55, nos. 11–12; Golubovich, Biblioteca, 4:46–47. 69. The project was carried out in 1555 by Bonifacio Stefano, Franciscan Custodian of

the Holy Land (1551–60, 1562–64), and described by him in a document dated May 13, 1570, published by Jakob Gretser, Mantissa ad primum tomum de S. Cruce . . . , 2. Apologia pro Sancta Cruce (Ingolstadt, 1608), 109–11; and in Bonifacio Stefano, Liber de perenni cultu terrae sanctae et de fructuosa eius peregrinatione (Venice, 1573), 2nd ed. (Venice, 1875), 278–84.

70. See Ferdinand’s letter to the governor of Aragon, dated February 2, 1480, in de la Torre, Documentos, 1:75–76, no. 17.

71. J. E. López de Coca Castañer, “Mamelucos, otomanos y caída del reino de Granada,” En la España medieval 28 (2005): 229–58.

72. Pietro Martire, Legatio babylonica (Seville, 1511); Luis García y García, ed. and trans., Una embajada de los Reyes Católicos a Egipto (Valladolid, 1947). See also the letter of August 8, 1501, from Ferdinand to Pietro Martire d’Anghiera; de la Torre, Documentos, 6:267–69, no. 31 (“por bien que puedan rrehedificar y rreparar todos los edifiçios de aquellos santos lugares”). Ferdinand’s previous efforts are documented in letters of November 2, 1497, addressed to the Sultan and to his lieutenant, requesting permission to repair an arcada in the Holy Sepulcher that was in danger of collapse; de la Torre, 5:551, nos. 252–53.

73. For the European context, see Reeves, Influence of Prophecy, passim. 74. Milhou, Colón, 349–403. 75. Adriano Prosperi, “New Heaven and New Earth: Prophecy and Propaganda at the

Time of the Discovery and Conquest of the Americas,” in Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 279–303; Pauline Moffitt Watts, “Prophecy and Discovery: On the Spiritual Origins of Christopher Columbus’s Enterprise of the Indies,” American Historical Review 90 (1985): 73–102; and idem, “Apocalypse Then: Christopher Columbus’s Conception of History and Prophecy,” Medievalia et Humanistica N.S. 19 (1992): 1–10.

76. Milhou, Colón, 339; Reeves, Influence of Prophecy, 360. See also Garcia Oro, “De Granada a Jerusalen,” 724, quoting Hieronymus Münzer’s address to Ferdinand and Isabel on January 24, 1495, stating that the recovery of the Holy Sepulcher was reserved for them as foretold by “el calabrés Joaquín,” referring to Joachim of Fiore; Jerónimo Münzer, Viaje por España y Portugal, trans. Ramón Alba (Madrid, 1991), 269.

77. Miguel Battlori i Munné, “La Sicile et la couronne d’Aragon dans les prophéties d’Arnaud de Villeneuve et de Jean de Roquetaillade,” Mélanges de l’École française de Rome. Moyen Age 102, no. 2 (1990): 363–79; Aurell, “Messianisme royal,” 119–55.

78. Reeves, Influence of Prophecy, 354–58; Scheller, “Imperial Themes,” 27–32. 79. The testament was published by P. K. Enepekides, “Das wiener Testament des Andreas

Palaiologos vom 7. April 1502,” in Akten des XI. Internationalen Byzantinistenkongresses,


ed. Franz Dölger and Hans-Georg Beck (Munich, 1960), 138–43. I am grateful to Marie Tanner for alerting me to the Palaeologan inheritance at an early stage of my research; see Tanner, Last Descendant, 109, 299 n. 42. The event was noted in the context of prophetic expectation surrounding King Ferdinand by Milhou, Colón, 397; and Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Alejandro VI, 155 n. 129.

80. Jerónimo Zurita, Historia del rey don Hernando el Cathólico: de las empresas, y ligas de Italia, 2 vols. (Zaragoza, 1580), 1:209v–211r (bk. 4, ch. 39).

81. Francesco Cerone, “La politica orientale di Alfonso di Aragona,” Archivio storico per le provincie napoletane 27 (1902): 555–634, esp. 573–82; Alan Ryder, “The Eastern Policy of Alfonso the Magnanimous,” Atti della Accademia Pontaniana, N.S. 28 (1979): 7–25, esp. 25; Milhou, Colón, 370 n. 834.

82. Richard J. Walsh, “Charles the Bold and the Crusade: Politics and Propaganda,” Journal of Medieval History 3 (1977): 53–86, esp. 73–76; Riccardo Fubini, ed., Lorenzo de’ Medici, Lettere, vol. 2 (1474–1478) (Florence, 1977), 505–06.

83. Setton, Papacy and the Levant, 2:461–63; Scheller, “Imperial Themes,” 42–44, 63–69. 84. William Roscoe, The Life and Pontificate of Leo the Tenth, 4 vols. (Liverpool, 1805),

1:71–73, app. 36 (separate pagination) (“inter duas sacratissimas Columnas, in quo loco Beatus Petrus Apostolorum princeps Sacri Martyrii coronam suscepit”). Based on this notice, Tomei, L’architettura a Roma, 134; followed by Urban, “Kirchenbaukunst,” 277–78, and others proposed that the church was functional at that date.

85. Scheller, “Imperial Themes,” 42–45. 86. For a balanced assessment, see Jonathan Harris, “A Worthless Prince? Andreas

Palaeologus in Rome, 1465–1502,” Orientalia Christiana Periodica 61 (1995): 537–54. 87. The shell niche framing the altar, which is nestled within the architecture of the

Tempietto, indicates that the altar was reinstalled, likely as part of the extensive res-toration in 1804 discussed in the Epilogue. Opinions concerning the original loca-tion of the altar, the placement of the statue of Peter and its date are summarized by Kuhn-Forte, Kirchen innerhalb der Mauern Roms, 1066. For the conservation of the altar, see Humanes, Restauración, 45, 46, 54. The statue of Peter was recorded above the altar by Gasparo Alveri, Roma in ogni stato, 2 vols. (Rome, 1664), 2:320.

88. The dependence of the Tempietto’s relief on the Saint Peter’s ciborium was observed by Fritz Burger, “Das Konfessionstabernakel Sixtus’ IV. und sein Meister,” Jahrbuch der königlich preussischen Kunstsammlungen 28 (1907): 95–116, 150–67, esp. 164. For additional literature, see Chapter 2, n. 19. For the bronze statue of Saint Peter, see Maria Angiola Romanini, “L’attribuzione della statua bronzea di San Pietro in Vaticano,” in La figura di San Pietro nelle fonti del medioevo, ed. Loredana Lazzari and Anna Maria Valenti Bacci (Louvain-La-Neuve, 2001), 548–68.

89. Each side of the altar is sculpted with a trilobe cross terminating in a spiked foot. The trilobe cross without the spike appears in the metopes of the Tempietto (Plate VII). Bramante employed the same form with the spiked foot in one of the metopes of the tegurium of Saint Peter’s, depicted in a sketch in London, Sir John Soane’s Museum, Codex Coner, fol. 62r; illustrated in Ashby, “Sixteenth-Century Drawings,” 43 no. 79; and Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 516, figure 344.

90. Ana Isabel Carrasco Manchado, “La metáfora animal en la propaganda política de los Reyes Católicos (1474–1482),” Cahiers de linguistique et de civilisation hispaniques médiévales 25 (2002): 399–419; idem, “El ‘armorial moralizado’ de Antonio García de Villalpando: heráldica y propaganda de los Reyes Católicos,” En la España medieval suppl. vol. 1 (2006): 113–30.


91. Rowland, “Tempietto,” 233, emphasized the meaningful alignment of the Ark on the same axis as the statue of Peter, the relief of the Apostle’s crucifixion, and the center of the pavement, marking the site where the event occurred.

6 Papacy and Crown 1. In addition to the works discussed in this chapter, see Bruschi, Bramante architetto,

1003 n. 28; and Borsi, Bramante, 256. 2. These variants led John Shearman, Raphael’s Cartoons in the Collection of Her Majesty the

Queen and the Tapestries for the Sistine Chapel (London, 1972), 125, to reject the associa-tion with the Tempietto, which was apparently first made in 1814 (ibid., 124 n. 146).

3. Felipe Mateu y Llopsis, “Los titulos ‘Rex Iherusalem’ y ‘Dux Athenarum et Neopatrie’ del ‘Hispaniarum Rex,’” in Homenaje a Don José Maria Lacarra de Miguel en su jubilación del profesorado, vol. 5, Estudios medievales (Zaragoza, 1977), 269–83. See also Kenneth M. Setton, Catalan Domination of Athens, 1311–1388, rev. ed. (London, 1975).

4. Raphael’s understanding of the Tempietto in terms of Christian militancy is con-firmed by its second appearance in the tapestry of Saint Paul’s Sacrifice at Lystra, in that case with a balustrade composed of double-bulb balusters. Lystra, located in Anatolia, was the site of conflict between the Seljuk Turks and Christian crusaders in the eleventh and twelfth centuries.

5. Barocci’s cartoon for the first version of the painting (Paris, Musée du Louvre; inv. no. 35774) shows a different background without the Tempietto; Roseline Bacou, Cartons d’artistes du XV au XIXe siècle (Paris, 1974), 19 no. 14. Barocci changed the background in the process of executing the painting; Michael Bury, The Print in Italy, 1550–1620 (London, 2001), 14, cat. nos. 9–10. Barocci’s handsome cartoon for the Tempietto (Uffizi 135A) was published by Geymüller, Projets primitifs, 271, plate 55, figure 1, as an autograph work by Bramante; followed by Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 55–58. The correct identification was advanced by Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 995–97; Hubertus Günther, “Uffizien 135A, eine Studie Baroccis,” Mitteilungen des kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 14 (1969): 239–46; and Ronald E. Malmstrom, “A Note on the Architectural Setting of Federico Barocci’s Aeneas’ Flight from Troy,” Marsyas 14 (1968–69): 43–47. The cartoon had previously been recognized as a work of Barocci in 1658 and 1793; John Shearman, “Barocci at Bologna and Florence,” Burlington Magazine 118, no. 874 (1976): 49–55, esp. 51.

6. For the burials, see Schrader, Monumentorum Italiae, 166r–167v; Alveri, Roma in ogni stato, 2:308–20; and Forcella, Iscrizioni, 5:243–88. The first major commission was the chapel decorated by Sebastiano del Piombo for the Florentine banker Pierfrancesco Borgherini, begun 1516, for which see Michael Hirst, Sebastiano del Piombo (Oxford, 1981), 49–65; and Jungić, “Joachimist Prophecies,” 66–79, who proposed the influ-ence of Amadeo’s Apocalypsis nova on it and on Raphael’s Transfiguration.

7. The wooden frame bore the cardinal’s name and office, the dedication to Peter, and the date; Shearman, Raphael, 764–65, no. 1523/20. For the rich literature on the paint-ing, see Sheryl E. Reiss, “Cardinal Giulio de’ Medici as a Patron of Art, 1513–1523” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1992), 312–56.

8. Jungić, “Joachimist Prophecies,” 79–83; Bert Treffers, “Franciscus Redivivus: Angelo del Pas e la cappella de’ Vecchi in S. Pietro in Montorio,” Antonianum 64 (1989): 518–39; Stefania Pasti, “L’Apocalypsis Nova, Giulio dei Medici e i quadri per la Cattedrale di Narbonne,” Konsthistorisk tidskrift 81 (2012): 231–37.


9. Rudolf Preimesberger, “Tragische Motive in Raffaels ‘Transfiguration,’” Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 50 (1987): 89–115, esp. 97–98.

10. Wadding, Annales minorum 6:771, no. 84 (“magna illuc confluit populi multitudo”). In 1618 Wadding served as theologian to the delegation Philip III sent to Rome to promote the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, and he resided at San Pietro in Montorio; Francis Harold, Vita fratris Lucae Waddingi (Rome, 1662), 3rd ed. (Quarrachi 1931), 21–22. For the indulgences available in the church, see Chapter 2, n. 103.

11. Andrea Palladio, Descrittione de le chiese . . . (Rome, 1554), n.p.: “Paolo .3. vi con-cesse molte indulgentie, come appare in vn marmo sopra la porta per andare a detta capella.” See also Alveri, Roma nel ogni stato, 2:320–21; and Forcella, Iscrizioni, 5:252, no. 701 (“Sopra la porta del convento”). This is likely to be the same inscription today found on the rear wall of the cloister.

12. Giovanni Pietro Maffei, De vita et moribus Ignatii Loiolae (Rome, 1585), 117; Monumenta ignatiana, ser. 4, vol. 1, Scripta de Sancto Ignatio de Loyola (Madrid, 1904), 391, no. 109. For additional sources, see Sevesi, “S. Carlo Borromeo,” 110 n. 2. In 1541, Ignatius celebrated Mass in an unspecified location at San Pietro in Montorio, thus ensuring the health of a follower; Monumenta ignatiana, 343, no. 17.

13. Monumenta xaveriana, vol. 1, Sancti Francisci Xaverii epistolas aliaque scripta complectens (Madrid, 1899–1900), 481, no. 15; Henry James Coleridge, ed., The Life and Letters of St. Francis Xavier, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (London, 1890), 2:74.

14. Giacomo Ricci, Vita di S. Filippo Neri fiorentino, fondatore della Congregatione dell’Oratorio . . . (Turin, 1676), 152 (bk. 2, ch. 8, no. 4) (“voglio andar’ à S. Pietro in Montorio à dir Messa per te nella Cappella dove il Santo Apostolo fù crocefisso”).

15. An engraving of 1612 commemorating the meeting of Neri with Charles Borromeo, whose head he saw surrounded by an aureole of light, includes the Tempietto to iden-tify the location of the event; Paolo Bellini and Mark Carter Leach, The Illustrated Bartsch, vol. 44, Italian Masters of the Seventeenth Century (New York, 1983), 134 (n. 73); La regola e la fama, San Filippo Nero e l’arte, exhib. cat. (Milan, 1995), 484, cat. no. 38 (entry by O. Melasecchi). Borromeo and his family were also associated with San Pietro in Montorio; Enrico Cattaneo, “Nel IV centenario dell’ordinazione sac-erdotale e episcopale di San Carlo Borromeo,” La Scuola Cattolica 91 (1963): 305–15.

16. Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 115–18, 159–64, with extensive bibliography. Bernardo Gamucci, Dell’antichità della città di Roma . . . (Venice, 1565), 175–76, inter-preted the dependence of the Ricci chapel on the del Monte chapel in terms of the cardinal’s papal ambitions.

17. Ponce De Leon Hernandez, “El claustro de la Academia Española de Bellas Artes en Roma,” Academia, Boletín de la Real Academia de Bellas Artes de San Fernando 62 (1986): 217–42. For Dolera’s residence at San Pietro in Montorio during the final years of his life, see Sevesi, “S. Carlo Borromeo,” 112; and DBI, s.v. “Dolera (De Olera, D’Olera), Clemente” (entry by Anna Maria Giraldi).

18. The papal bull of April 13, 1587, elevated ten churches to that rank; Bullarum, diplo-matum et privilegiorum sanctorum romanorum pontificum . . . , 26 vols. (Turin, 1857–85), 8:833–37, no. 81 (dated April 13, 1587). For the titular cardinals of San Pietro in Montorio, see Eubel, Hierarchia catholica, 3:68, 4:47. Sixtus may have been inspired by the idea that Constantine the Great had constructed the first church on the site. That idea was advanced by Ottavio Panciroli, I tesori nascosti nell’alma città di Roma . . . (Rome, 1600), 674, and it received official sanction in the records of the Apostolic


Visitation of San Pietro in Montorio dated December 11, 1628; ASV, Misc. Arm VII, vol. 112, fol. 7r (new numeration).

19. The first titular cardinal of San Pietro in Montorio, Costanzo Boccafuoco (1587–95), sponsored an extensive cycle of frescoes in both cloisters of the monastery treating the life and miracles of Saint Francis; Giampaolo Belardinelli, “La ‘Sancti Francisci Historia’ negli affreschi di Circignani e Lombardelli a San Pietro in Montorio e nelle incisioni di Villamena e Thomassin,” Bollettino d’arte 77, nos. 68–69 (July–Oct. 1991): 131–46.

20. The new road was announced in an avviso of October 12, 1588; Marcello Fagiolo, “La Roma di Sisto V: le matrici del policentrismo,” Psicon 8–9 (1976): 24–39; René Schiffmann, Roma felix. Aspekte der städtebaulichen Gestaltung Roms under Papst Sixtus V. (Bern, 1985), 33–34, 213; Marcello Fagiolo, “Da Sisto V a Paolo V: i piani paral-leli per l’Esquilino e il Gianicolo,” in Il centro storico di Roma, storia e progetto, ed. Roberto Cassetti and Gianfranco Spagnesi (Rome, 2004), 90–105, esp. 96–97. Also relevant is Cesare Baronio’s confirmation of the Janiculum Hill as the authentic place of Peter’s crucifixion in the first volume of his Church history published in 1588; Cesare Baronio, Annales ecclesiastici . . . , ed. Antonio Pagi, 19 vols. (Lucca, 1738–46), 1:594–95 (year 69, nos. 15–18).

21. Jan L. De Jong, The Power and the Glorification: Papal Pretensions and the Art of Propaganda in the Fifteenth and Sixteenth Centuries (University Park, PA, 2013), 114–15, figure 78.

22. The identification of the image with the Tempietto has been widely noted; ibid., 145, figure 115.

23. J. Ignacio Tellechea Idígoras and F. Victor Gil Sánchez, “Testamento del Cardenal Quiñones, protector de la Orden Franciscana (OFM) y gobernador de Veroli (+ 1540),” Archivum franciscanum historicum 96 (2003): 129–59.

24. Bruce Boucher, The Sculpture of Jacopo Sansovino, 2 vols. (New Haven, 1991), 1:52–53, 2:325–26, cat. no. 16, figures 110–11; Manuela Morresi, Jacopo Sansovino (Milan, 2000), 159–63, cat. no. 25; Sible de Blaauw, “Das ‘opus mirabile’ des Kardinals Quiñones in S. Croce in Gerusalemme zwischen Memoria und Liturgie,” in Tod und Verklärung, Grabmalskultur in der frühen Neuzeit, ed. Arne Karsten and Philipp Zitzlsperger (Cologne, 2004), 137–55. Concerning the medieval throne, see Claussen, Kirchen, 1:438–40.

25. Boucher, Sansovino, 2:52, observed the reference to the Tempietto. 26. Forcella, Iscrizioni, 8:191, nos. 508–09 (“Natione Hispanus Et Patria Legonensis”). At

the center of the plinth a Jerusalem cross is encircled by a quotation from Galatians 6:14, “Absit Gloriari in Cruce.”

27. The inscription provides only the date of Carvajal’s death in 1523; Forcella, Iscrizioni, 8:191, nos. 506–07. Carvajal’s coat of arms appear at the terminal parts of the bench beneath reliefs of winged lions; Anna Cavallaro, Santa Croce in Gerusalemme (Rome, 2009), figure on 44. For the seating arrangement, see de Blaauw, “Immagini di liturgia,” 292–93.

28. Frommel, “Progetto,” 382; de Blaauw, “Quiñones,” 151–52. 29. de Blaauw, “Quiñones,” 144–47. 30. See, for example, the bronze Sacrament tabernacle Vecchietta created in 1467–72

for Santa Maria della Scala, Siena, transferred in 1506 to the high altar of the cathe-dral. For other examples, see Derek Moore, “Sanmicheli’s ‘Tornacoro’ in Verona Cathedral: A New Drawing and Problems of Interpretation,” Journal of the Society


of Architectural Historians 44 (1985): 221–32; and Sandro Benedetti, “Un’aggiunta a Pirro Ligorio: Il tabernacolo di Pio IV nel Duomo di Milano,” Palladio, ser. 3, 25, fasc. 1 (1978): 45–64.

31. For the contested date of the sculptures of David and Solomon, see Boucher, Sansovino, 2:325. They may replace lost originals or stand in for elements planned at the start but only realized subsequently.

32. Pastor, History of the Popes, 11:218–32; Setton, Papacy and the Levant, 3:395–98. 33. Pastor, History of the Popes, 11:241–52; B. Podestà, “Carlo V a Roma nell’anno 1536,”

Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria 1 (1878): 303–44. 34. Maria Luisa Madonna, “L’ingresso di Carlo V a Roma,” in La festa a Roma dal

Rinascimento al 1870, exhib. cat., ed. Marcello Fagiolo, 2 vols. (Turin, 1997), 1:50–65. 35. Podestà, “Carlo V,” 332; Paolo Giovio, Historiarum sui temporis, vol. 2 (n.p., 1555), 727

(ch. 35) (“in summu(m) fastigium eius testudinis per plumbeos gradus ascendit, ut uniuersam urbem oculis subijceret”).

36. On June 26, 1523, Charles pledged to continue King Ferdinand’s annual contribution of 500 ducats to the monastery; Aguado, Documentos, 11–12, no. 4; Pou y Martí, “San Pedro in Montorio,” 218.

37. Podestà, “Carlo V,” 337. 38. In the majolica inscription of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, Carvajal exhorted

Charles, then emperor-elect, and the reigning pope, Leo X, to undertake a crusade to recover the glorious “Holy Sepulcher of Jerusalem”; Toesca, “Majolica Inscription,” 104–05.

39. Pastor, History of the Popes, 11:261–96; Setton, Papacy and the Levant, 3:427–48. 40. Pastor, History of the Popes, 11:277; Setton, Papacy and the Levant, 3:445. For the

Palaeologan inheritance, see Chapter 4. 41. Catherine Monbeig Goguel, ed., Francesco Salviati (1510–1563) o la bella maniera

(Milan, 1998), 282–83, cat. no. 112 (entry by Alessandro Nova). 42. Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, 11.302–47; Petrus Comestor, “Historia scholastica,

Historia Libri Esther,” 4 (PL 198:1496). For Michelangelo’s source in the Biblia ital-ica, trans. Niccolò Malermi (Venice, 1493), see Edgar Wind, “Maccabean Histories in the Sistine Ceiling, a Note on Michelangelo’s Use of the Malermi Bible,” in Italian Renaissance Studies: A Tribute to the Late Cecilia M. Ady, ed. E. F. Jacob (London, 1960), 312–27.

43. Julian Kliemann, “Imperial Themes in Early Modern Papal Iconography,” in Basilike Eikon: Renaissance Representations of the Prince, ed. R. Ericksen and M. Malmanger (Rome, 2001), 11–29, esp. 14–15; Lorenzo Canova, “Omnes Reges Servient Ei: Paolo III e Carlo V: La supremazia pontificia nella Sala Paolina di Castel Sant’Angelo,” Storia dell’arte 103 (2002): 7–40.

44. The same text appears on a medal of Callixtus III, where a cross set on a rocky out-crop is surmounted by the papal tiara and illuminated by a celestial radiance; Canova, “Omnes Reges,” 18 n. 9, citing a variant text in Psalm 72 (71):11. Filippo Buonanni, Numismata pontificum romanorum . . . , 2 vols. (Rome, 1699), 1:64, no. 5, intepreted the medal as an expression of Callixtus’s commitment to crusade. He also suggested various meanings for the Paul III medal, including the conquest of Tunis; Buonanni, 1:231–33, no. 31.

45. Vasari-Milanesi, 5:385–86. 46. Salviati’s drawing of Alexander the Great (Houston, private collection) has been dated

on stylistic grounds to the years immediately following Charles V’s Tunis victory and


the establishment of the Holy League; Monbeig Goguel, Francesco Salviati, 280–81, cat. no. 111 (entry by Alessandro Nova). Vasari-Milanesi, 6:573, 7:15, praised the paintings Salviati executed for the entry of Charles V without identifying their con-tent. Around 1560 Taddeo Zuccaro adapted Salviati’s composition for the same sub-ject, including visual reference to the Tempietto, in the Palazzo Maffei (Caetani), Rome; John A. Gere, Taddeo Zuccaro (London, 1969), 94, 97 n. 1, plate 126a.

47. For discussion of both the engraving and medal, see Jay A. Levenson, Konrad Oberhuber, and Jacquelyn L. Sheehan, Early Italian Engraving, exhib. cat. (Washington, DC, 1973), 512, cat. no. 186 (entry by Konrad Oberhuber); Werner Gramberg, “Guglielmo della Portas Grabmal für Paul III. Farnese in S. Pietro in Vaticana,” Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 21 (1984): 253–364, esp. 335–37; and Monbeig Goguel, Francesco Salviati, 280. See also Madeline Cirillo Archer, Italian Masters of the Sixteenth Century, The Illustrated Bartsch, vol. 28, Part 1 (Commentary) (New York, 1995), 31.

48. Pastor, History of the Popes, 12:195–203, described this episode and provided a sum-mary of the papal brief. For an Italian translation of the brief, see Sforza Pallavicino, Istoria del Concilio di Trento, 3 vols. (Rome, 1664), 1:501–11 (bk. 5, ch. 6).

49. Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, 11.302–47. Gramberg (as in n. 47), 336–37, drew attention to the potential threat to Rome by the Turks in the years the medal and engraving were created; see also Kliemann, “Imperial Themes,” 15. For Alexander the Great as a model for crusade, see Chapter 3, n. 56.

50. The lost monument erected in Zaragoza in 1534 to honor the city’s early Christian mar-tyrs may have referred to the Tempietto as well; see Carmen Gómez Urdáñez, “Sobre la recepción del clasicismo en la Zaragoza del siglo XVI. El templete circular de la Cruz del Coso,” in Actas del V Coloquio de Arte Aragonés (Zaragoza, 1989), 460–77; and Javier Ibáñez Fernández, “La Cruz del Coso de Zaragoza, memoria artística de un monu-mento desaparecido,” Boletín del Museo e Instituto Camón Aznar 80 (2000): 141–92.

51. Cornelius Grapheus, Le triumphe d’Anuers, faict en la susception du Prince Philips, Prince d’Espaigne (Antwerp, 1550). The allusion to the Tempietto was recognized by Catherine Wilkinson Zerner, Juan de Herrera, Architect to Philip II of Spain (New Haven and London, 1993), 100.

52. Barbara Haeger, “Cornelis Anthonisz’s Representation of the Parable of the Prodigal Son, a Protestant Interpretation of the Biblical Text,” Nederlands kunsthistorisch Jaarboek 37 (1986): 133–50, esp. 135–36; idem, “The Prodigal Son in Sixteenth and Seventeenth-Century Netherlandish Art: Depictions of the Parable and the Evolution of a Catholic Image,” Simiolus 16 (1986): 128–38; Christine Megan Armstrong, The Moralizing Prints of Cornelis Anthonisz (Princeton, 1990), 93.

53. This architectural lineage and its significance for the Spanish crown was established in a foundational study by Earl Rosenthal, Cathedral of Granada, a Study in the Spanish Renaissance (Princeton, 1961), 148–68. See also idem, “A Renaissance ‘Copy’ of the Holy Sepulchre,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 17 (1958): 2–11; and idem, “La catedral de Granada: el altar mayor bajo cúpula,” Anuario del Departamento de Historia y Teoría del Arte (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid) 23 (2011): 21–30.

54. For the sources and meaning of the altar and its ciborium, see Rosenthal, Cathedral of Granada, 131–48.

55. Ibid., 131 and n. 112. Rosenthal published relevant documents and provided an exerpt from the description of the ciborium by Francisco Bermúdez de Pedraza, Antiguedad y excelencias de Granada (Madrid, 1608), fols. 80v–81r. The engraving is thought to have been created to illustrate a history of Granada completed in 1611, but only recently


published; Justino Antolínez de Burgos (d. 1637), Historia Eclesiástica de Granada, ed. Manuel Sotomayor (Granada, 1996).

56. Rosenthal, Cathedral of Granada, 146, considered the upper stage of the ciborium “somewhat reminiscent” of the Tempietto.

57. José de Sigüenza, Tercera parte de la Historia de la Orden de San Geronimo (Madrid, 1605), 803 (“y pues es el vltimo fin para que se hizo toda esta casa, templo y retablo”).

58. Jean Babelon, Jacopo da Trezzo et la construction de l’Escorial (Bordeaux, 1922), 134–39, 159–68, 313–16; J. J. Martínez González, “Estructura y tipología del retablo mayor del monasterio de El Escorial,” in Real Monasterio-Palacio de El Escorial. Estudios inédi-tos en conmemoración del IV Centenario de la terminación de las obras (Madrid, 1987), 203–20; Wilkinson Zerner, Juan de Herrera, 108–10. For the fate of Michelangelo’s tabernacle designs, see Jennifer Montagu, Gold, Silver and Bronze, Metal Sculpture of the Roman Baroque (Princeton, 1990), 21–32, 199–200.

59. Jesús Domínguez Bordona, “Federico Zuccari en España,” Archivo Español de Arte y Arqueologia 3 (1927): 77–89, esp. 83–84 (“Questa custodia è un tempietto rotondo simile a quel di Bramante a S. Pietro Montorio . . .”); cited by Marías, “Bramante en España,” 12; and Wilkinson Zerner, Herrera, 110, 168, 202 n. 3.

60. Alessandra Anselmi, ed., Il diario del viaggio in Spagna del Cardinale Francesco Barberini scritto da Cassiano Dal Pozzo (Madrid, 2004), 205 (“è fatto a foggia d’un tempietto antico, e assomiglia assai alla chiesetta, ò cappella, che è a Roma nel Chiostro de’ padri di San Pietro Montorio, come si può vedere della figura stampata in effetto a foggia d’un tempio con cupola circondato da un portico con colonne”).

61. Stained glass windows commissioned by Charles V for the church of Saint Gudule in Brussels provided an important source for the arrangement at the Escorial; Michael P. Mezzatesta, “Imperial Themes in the Sculpture of Leone Leoni” (Ph.D. diss., Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 1980), 97–103; see also Wilkinson Zerner, Juan de Herrera, 107–08. Other precedents for the commemoration of the deceased in effigies flanking the altar are noted by Rosemarie Mulcahy, The Decoration of the Royal Basilica of El Escorial (Cambridge and New York, 1994), 193–96.

62. The Royal Chapel had significant precedents at the Carthusian church of Miraflores (Burgos), burial place of Isabel’s parents, Juan II and Isabel of Portugal, King and Queen of Castile; and at San Juan de los Reyes in Toledo, which Ferdinand and Isabel intended to serve for their own burial before the conquest of Granada. See Carmen Maria Labra González, “De la chartreuse de Miraflores à la chapelle royale de Grenade: L’expression du pouvoir après la mort au cours du Moyen Âge hispan-ique,” e-Spania 3 (2007): 1–24; and Rafael Dominguez Casas, “San Juan de los Reyes: espacio funerario y aposento regio,” Boletín del seminario de estudios de arte y arque-ología 56 (1990): 364–83.

63. José Manuel Pita Andrade, ed., El libro de la Capilla Real (Granada, 1994), 300–04. 64. William Eisler, “Charles V and the Cathedral of Granada,” Journal of the Society

of Architectural Historians 51 (1992): 174–81, referring to the wills and codicils of Charles and Isabel of Portugal. This evidence supersedes the proposal by Rosenthal, Cathedral of Granada, 14, 114–16, that the emperor sought burial in the rotunda of Granada Cathedral. For the importance of the Royal Chapel, see María José Redondo Cantera, “La Capilla Real de Granada como pantéon dinástico durante los reinados de Carlos V y Felipe II: problemas e indecisiones. Nuevos datos sobre el sepulcro de Felipe el hermoso y Juana la Loca,” in Borngässer, Karge, and Klein, Grabkunst und Sepulkralkultur, 403–18; idem, “Los sepulcros de la Capilla Real de Granada,” in


Juana I en Tordesillas: su mundo, su entorno, ed. Miguel Á. Zalama (Valladolid, 2010), 185–214.

65. Eisler, “Charles V,” 178; Mulcahy, Escorial, 82–83. 66. Rosenthal, Cathedral of Granada, 115–16 n. 36. 67. Javier Martínez Medina, “El gran retablo mayor,” in Pita Andrade, El libro de la

Capilla Real, 97–111. 68. Antonio Fernández-Puertas, “Sobre los relieves en la predela del retablo de la Capilla

Real de Granada,” Anales de la historia del arte 4 (1994): 373–84. 69. Ferdinand and Isabel are depicted in the space of the Holy Land in the multi-figure

stone tableau representing the Lamentation of Christ on the facade of Santa Cruz el Real, Segovia, and in the Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes by Juan de Flandes (Madrid, Palacio Real, ca. 1505), part of an altarpiece commissioned by Isabel. See Sonia Caballero Escamilla, “Fray Tomás de Torquemada, iconógrafo y promotor de las artes,” Archivo español de arte 82, no. 325 (2009): 19–34, esp. 25–26; Chiyo Ishikawa, The “Retablo de Isabel la Católica” by Juan de Flandes and Michel Sittow (Turnhout, 2004), 137–41, cat. no. 21; and Felipe Pereda, “Isabel I, señora de los moriscos: figuración como historia profética en una tabla de Juan de Flandes,” in Visiones de la monarquía hispánica, ed. Víctor Mínguez (Castelló de la Plana, 2007), 261–82.

70. Herrera again referred to the Tempietto at the Escorial in the fountain of the Evangelists located at the center of the monastery’s cloister (completed 1593), rein-forcing the theme of evangelization and the allusion to Jerusalem. For the fountain and its models, see George Kubler, “The Claustral Fons Vitae in Spain and Portugal,” in Homenaje a Rodríguez-Moñino, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1966), 1:291–95; Pedro Navascués Palacio, “El patio y templete de los Evangelistas de El Escorial,” in Real Monasterio-Palacio de El Escorial, 63–74; and Wilkinson Zerner, Juan de Herrera, 99–100.

71. For Charles V’s pledge to continue funding the monastery see n. 36. 72. Schrader, Monumentorum Italiae, 166r. In the introduction Schrader referred to his

initial trip to Italy in the company of Philipp Melanchthon (d. 1560), among others, and a second trip in 1567. For the coat of arms of Queen Juana in the Tempietto, see Humanes, Restauración, 56, and unnumbered plate at the end of the volume, and for the other painted reinforcements, see Humanes, 19, 47–50, 57–58, proposing 1604–05 for those in the dome. Restoration of the stucco statues of the Evangelists located in the niches above the windows is discussed by Humanes, 51–53.

73. For these works, see Pou y Martí, “San Pedro in Montorio,” 220–38; Fagiolo, “Da Sisto V a Paolo V,” 120–21; idem, “Intorno a S. Pietro in Montorio e a Giovanni Fontana: opere viarie, panorami e fontane,” in Studi sui Fontana, una dinastia di architetti ticinesi a Roma tra manierismo e barocco, ed. Marcello Fagiolo and Giuseppe Bonaccorso (Rome, 2008), 121–40; and Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 119–23, with rich visual documentation.

74. Fagiolo, “Intorno a S. Pietro in Montorio,” 138, app. no. 1. 75. De Angelis d’Ossat, “Preludio romano,” 96; Bruschi, Bramante architetto, 1006–08;

Gabriella Delfini and Ruggero Pentrella, “San Pietro in Montorio: la chiesa, il con-vento, il Tempietto,” in Fabbriche romane del primo ‘500, cinque secoli di restauri, ed. Ruggero Pentrella (Rome, 1984), 23–27; Giovanni Di Geso and Ruggero Pentrella, “Da recenti restauri di fabbriche romane del primo Cinquecento, indagine sulla gen-esi costruttiva delle strutture a cupola,” in Baldassarre Peruzzi, pittura, scena e architet-tura nel Cinquecento, ed. M. Fagiolo and M. L. Madonna (Rome 1987), 689–98.


76. Forcella, Iscrizioni, 5:267, no. 748. See Defini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 23–25, figures 13–15; and Humanes, Restauración, 40–41, 43. In 1608–10 additional funds were solicited from the king for repairs to the terrace walls; Fagiolo, “Intorno a S. Pietro in Montorio,” 140, nos. 6–7.

77. Forcella, Iscrizioni, 13:177, no. 347 (“Monimentum Avitae Religionis Ornavit”). 78. C. H. Heilmann, “Acqua Paola and the Urban Planning of Paul V Borghese,”

Burlington Magazine 112 (1970): 656–62; Fagiolo, “Da Sisto V a Paolo V,” 90–105. 79. Benedetto Spila, Memorie storiche della provincia riformata romana, 3 vols. (Rome,

1890–96), 1:36–37; ASV, Sacra Cong. Visita Ap., vol. 3, fol. 434v. See also Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 123.

80. Dandelet, Spanish Rome, 102–06. The sympathy Paul held for the Spanish crown began in 1594 when he visited the court of Philip II as legate of Pope Clement VIII.

81. Giordano, Domenico di Gesù Maria, 119–20, 127. 82. For Domenico’s role in the battle and the image he carried, which had been pro-

faned by the Protestants, see ibid., 179–87, 210–12; Olivier Chaline, “The Battle of the White Mountain (8 November 1620),” in 1648, War and Peace in Europe, ed. Klaus Bussmann and Heinz Schilling, 3 vols. (Münster, 1998), 1:95–101; and idem, La Bataille de la montagne blanche (8 novembre 1620). Un mystique chez les guerriers (Paris, 2000).

83. AGOCD, 319a, pt. 2, fols. 11–12, cited by Giordano, Domenico di Gesù Maria, 120. Domenico saw that “la chiesa, e convento di S. Pietro in Montorio, raccomandata alla corona di Spagna, stava in pericolo di rovinare. . . . Egli disse molto resentitamente, dove la sua devotione. E che non era buon ministro del Re, con egli si teneva, mentre lasciava andar male le cose sacre raccomandate a quella corona. E furono di tanta efficacia queste parole, che l’Ambassatore scrisse al Re quanto era passato, e di suo ordine di restauro, e fortifico quanto era necessario.” The substance of Fra Pietro’s record of events in 1604 was repeated in the deliberations regarding Domenico’s can-onization in 1677; Beatificationis et canonizationis Ven. Servi Dei Patris Dominici a Iesu Maria olim praepositi Generalis Ordinis Carmelitarum Discalceatorum (Rome, 1677), 28, no. 35.

84. On June 1, 1604, the ambassador requested the king’s support for the restoration, and Domenico arrived in Rome on October 26, 1604; Giordano, Domenico di Gesù Maria, 115–16.

85. Günther, “Bramantes Hofprojekt,” 494, plate 181, figure 16; idem, Das Studium der antiken Architektur, 371, figure 70b. The plan of the crypt also appears in a draw-ing in Kassel, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen; see Günther, Das Studium der antiken Architektur, 372, figure 118b; and Rosenthal, “Antecedents,” 60, figure 5. The loca-tion of the original access to the crypt is identified by annotations on drawings Uffizi 4318Av and Uffizi 4319Av; Ghisetti Giavarina, Aristotile da Sangallo, 90, nos. 92, 94.

86. In 1616–18 Gaspare Borgia acted as interim ambassador of Philip III to the Holy See, and in 1631–34 served Philip IV in that capacity; Dandelet, Spanish Rome, 127, 192–93. For his tenure as titular cardinal of Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, see Eubel, Hierarchia catholica, 4:42.

87. Pou y Martí, “San Pedro in Montorio,” 238. The Reformed Franciscans followed a strict interpretation of the Franciscan rule; Enciclopedia Cattolica, vol. 5 (Vatican City, 1950), col. 1729, s.v. “Frati Minori, Osservanza” (entry by Riccardo Pratesi).

88. Elena Longo, “Per la conoscenza di un architetto del primo seicento romano: Francesco Peperelli,” Palladio 3, no. 5 (1990): 25–44, without reference to the Tempietto.


89. “Ad Honorem Et Gloriam Martyrii Principis Apostolorum Anno MDCXXVIII”; recorded by Wadding, Annales minorum, 14:55, year 1472, no. 85. Humanes, Restauración, 24–25, noted that the word “Decoratum” preceding the date is painted, indicating a subsequent addition.

90. ASV, Misc. Arm. VII, vol. 112, fol. 6v (new numeration), December 11, 1628; see also ASV, Congr. Visita Ap., vol. 3, fols. 7v–8r.

91. “Hic antiquissima traditione, et magno fidelium devoto concursu, Principis Apostolorum martirij locus veneratur.” Caramuel, Dominicus, 471, seems to have confused the two inscriptions and provided the erroneous date of 1629.

92. For the subjects of the reliefs, see Humanes, Restauración, 26–27. Fra Pietro’s report confirms they were created in 1628, rather than 1652, as proposed by Vannicelli, S. Pietro in Montorio, 69–70, 168 n. 95, citing a source referring to work executed by Gian Francesco Rossi for San Pietro in Montorio in that year, but without specifying the location of the work. In the recent conservation of the Tempietto, the gilding of the vault was removed and not replaced.

93. ASR, 30 Notai capitolini, L. Bonincontri, Uff. 18, vol. 184, fols. 1r–v, 34r–v. I was able to trace these documents by following the citation of the parallel records in Rome, Archivio storico capitolino discovered by Sandra Varca, and noted in Livia Carloni, “Le opere del Domenichino in Santa Maria della Vittoria a Roma: La Madonna della Rosa di Guido Nolfi e la cappella di San Francesco di Ippolito Merenda,” in Domenichino, 1581–1641, ed. Giovanna Grumo, exhib. cat. (Milan, 1996), 330–48, esp. 335, 348 n. 43. (I am grateful to Fabio Barry for this reference.) Additional pay-ments to Pagni are recorded in ASR, 30 Notai capitolini, L. Bonincontri, Uff. 18, vol. 190, fols. 449r–v, 798r–v, dated respectively March 21 and April 11, 1629, the later one referring to the final payment as evaluated by Peperelli, stating that the works were not entirely finished (“li d(ett)i lavori misurati non erano totalm(en)te finiti”).

94. See Epilogue. 95. Raniero Gnoli, Marmora romana, rev. ed. (Rome, 1988), 210–11, quotes a contem-

porary source concerning the chapel of Paul V in Santa Maria Maggiore that iden-tifies broccatello with Spain and associates its color with blood. For the toponym Montorio and its association with golden earth, see Eva Margareta Steinby, ed., Lexicon topographicum urbis Romae, 6 vols. (Rome, 1993–2000), 3:250, s.v. “Mica aurea (Ianiculum)” (entry by Paolo Liverani).

96. A plaque reproducing the inscription and a painting of Peter’s crucifixion were installed in the light shaft where pilgrims could see them from the level of the colon-nade (Plate XIX). The painting is lost.

97. This arrangement recalls the high altar of Old Saint Peter’s, where a fenestella confes-sionis communicated with the presumed location of Peter’s tomb below ground. Fehl, “Michelangelo’s Crucifixion of St. Peter,” 332–33 and n. 37, unaware of Fra Pietro’s description, proposed that the aperture in the pavement of the Tempietto was opened in 1628, and drew a parallel with the altar of Old Saint Peter’s.

98. These columns were first mentioned in 1452 by Muffel, “Descrizione,” 90; and again in 1494; see Chapter 5, n. 84. Fehl, “Michelangelo’s Crucifixion of St. Peter,” 338 n. 61, noted that the columns were recorded in the crypt by the German architect Joseph Furttenbach, Neueu Itinerarium Italiae (Um, 1627), 121–22.

99. Isabel Clara Eugenia was married to the Archduke Albert of Austria, who conducted significant works at Santa Croce in Gerusalemme in the chapel of Saint Helen; see Chapter 1, n. 66.


100. To protect pilgrims, iron guardrails were inserted between the six columns at the rear of the shrine, and again at pavement level just above the stairs to the crypt; for their location, see the plan of the Tempietto of 1794, reproduced in Delfini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 30.

101. For these chapels, the surrounding grottoes, and the interventions of Urban VIII, see Antonio Pinelli, ed., San Pietro in Vaticano, 4 vols. (Modena, 2000), (Schede), 849–903; and Alfredo Maria Pergolizzi, ed., La confessione nella basilica di San Pietro in Vaticano (Cinisello Balsamo, 1999). Federico Bellini, “La moderna confessione di San Pietro: le proposte di Ferrabosco e Maderno,” in Pergolizzi, Confessione, 42–55, proposed the influence of the Tempietto on an unexecuted design for the confessio for which, see Howard Hibbard, Carlo Maderno and Roman architecture, 1580–1630 (University Park, PA, 1971), 165, figure 71b.

102. The sources for the following discussion are published in Aguado, Documentos, 12–13, 15–20, nos. 5, 8–11; Pou y Martí, “San Pedro in Montorio,” 219–22, 227–39; and Fagiolo, “Intorno a S. Pietro in Montorio,” 138–40, nos. 1–4.

103. Aguado, Documentos, 13–14, no. 6; Pou y Martí, “San Pedro in Montorio,” 238–39. 104. Arduino Kleinhans, Historia studii linguae arabicae et collegii missionum ordinis fratrum

minorum in conventu ad S. Petrum in Monte Aureo Romae erecti (Quaracchi, 1930), 7, 9. 105. Aguado, Documentos, 14–15, no. 7; Pou y Martí, “San Pedro in Montorio,” 240. 106. Steven N. Orso, Art and Death at the Spanish Habsburg Court: The Royal Exequies

for Philip IV (Columbia, MO, 1989), 86–87. The campaign to acquire patronage rights at San Pietro in Montorio was pursued during the pontificates of Innocent X (1644–55) and Alexander VII (1655–67), in both cases without success; see Pou y Martí, “San Pedro in Montorio,” 238–39; Marías, “Bramante en España,” 36; and Spila, Memorie storiche, 1:38–40.

107. For the meaning of the work, and Bernini’s drawing for the tabernacle of 1630, see Irving Lavin, “Bernini at St. Peter’s: Singularis in singulis, in omnibus unicus,” in Tronzo, St. Peter’s in the Vatican, 111–243, esp. 209–17; and idem, Bernini at St. Peter’s. The Pilgrimage (London, 2012). For a review of the documents and the rich literature associated with the commission, see Pinelli, San Pietro in Vaticano (Schede), 698–700 (entry by Evonne Levy). For the tabernacle as executed, see the contributions by Marina Carta, Gerardo Casale, and Laura Falaschi, in L’ultimo Bernini (1665–1680): nuovi argomenti, documenti e immagini, ed. Valentino Martinelli (Rome, 1996).

108. The dependence of the Saint Peter’s Sacrament tabernacle on the Tempietto, despite variations in form and materials, has often been observed. It was noted in print for the first time by Giovanni Bottari, ed., Vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori, e architetti scritte da Giorgio Vasari . . . , 3 vols. (Rome, 1759–60), 2:198 n. 3; and followed by Francesco Milizia, Le vite de’ più celebri architetti d’ogni nazione e d’ogni tempo . . . (Rome, 1768), 373.

109. Lavin, Crossing, established the meaning of the Crossing and its reference to Jerusalem. For the reciprocity between the Sacrament tabernacle and the baldacchino, see George C. Bauer, “Bernini and the Baldacchino: On Becoming an Architect in the Seventeenth Century,” Architectura 26 (1996): 144–65, esp. 160–61.

110. Lucia Simonata, “Impronta di Sua Santità.” Urbano VIII e le medaglie (Pisa, 2008), 262–66, cat. no. 13.

111. Paul III and his successors treated the financial contributions Spain made to the construction of New Saint Peter’s in a similar way; Thomas James Dandelet, “Financing New Saint Peter’s: 1506–1700,” in Sankt Peter in Rom 1506–2006, ed. Georg Satzinger and Sebastian Schütze (Munich, 2008), 41–48.


Epilogue 1. The stamp is inscribed around the border, “Academia Española de Bellas Artes en

Roma Primer Cent.o 1873–1973,” and beneath the image, “Templete de Bramante,” “F.N.M.T.” (Fábrica Nacional de Moneda y Timbre).

2. For the relevant documents, see Margarita Bru Romo, La Academia Española de Bellas Artes en Roma (1873–1914) (Madrid, 1971); and for the broader history of the Academy, see Maria Cristina Bagolan, ed., La Reale Accademia di Spagna, La Spagna sul Gianicolo, 3 (Rome, 2004).

3. “Sub Patronatu Regum Hispaniarum Alphonso XII Regnante Anno Domini MDCCCLXXVI.”

4. The initial plan for entrance to the Academy was through the first cloister, with the portal leading from the piazza reconfigured as a triple arch closed by grills, ensuring visibility of the Tempietto; Bru Romo, Academia Española, 31.

5. Anon., “Inauguración de la Academia Española en Roma,” in La ilustración española y americana 25, no. 5 (Feb. 8, 1881): 82–86; idem, 25, no. 6 (Feb. 15, 1881): 95–98. The inaugration was described by Conde Coello de Portugal in an unpublished report of February 1881, cited by Bru Romo, Academia Española, 35–36.

6. For this history, see La ilustración española y americana citied in the preceding note. In 1876, documents attesting to Spanish patronage at San Pietro in Montorio were collected and published by Francisco Aguado, secretary and archivist of the Lugares Pios españoles in Rome; Aguado, Documentos. See Chapter 2, n. 42.

7. For details of the damage and repair, see Freiberg, “Bramante’s Tempietto,” 183–84. See Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 128–47, for the history of the monastery after 1798.

8. Basilio Sebastián Castellanos de Losada, Historia de la vida civil y politica del célebre diplomático y distinguido literato español el magnifico caballero D. José Nicolas de Azara, Marqués de Nibbiano . . . 2 vols. (Madrid, 1849–50), 1:309.

9. Giuseppe Antonio Sala, Diario romano, scritti varij, 4 vols. (Rome, 1882–88), 2.2:40–41, 112 (dated July 21 and August 26, 1798).

10. Martin Rosenberg, “Raphael’s Transfiguration and Napoleon’s Cultural Politics,” Eighteenth-Century Studies 19 (Winter 1985–86): 180–205.

11. ASPF, Fondo collegi vari, Busta 61, fol. 207v; cited by Günther, “Bramantes Tempietto,” 220–24, nos. 34–38; and Delfini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 38–39. For a partial transcription of the document, see Freiberg, “Bramante’s Tempietto,” 184 n. 120.

12. A selection of documents concerning the restoration of Pius VII was published by Delfini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 38–40; and Adelaide Maresca Compagna, “Fonti archivistiche,” in Pentrella, Fabbriche romane, n.p. [85–109, esp. 91–95].

13. The restoration was praised and the epigraph transcribed by Giuseppe Antonio Guattani, Memorie enciclopediche romane sulle belle arti, antichità, etc. 1 (1806): 5. For the original location of the inscription, see Delfini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 84 n. 58; and Maresca Campagna, “Fonti archivistiche,” n.p. [93]. Drawings of the Tempietto dating 1820–22 document the state of the monument soon after the resto-ration; Francesco Paolo Di Teodoro, “Due temi bramanteschi: l’Opinio e l’incompiuta monografia di Barbot, Benois e Thierry,” in Di Teodoro, Donato Bramante, 83–142, figures 12–16, 25.

14. Guattani (as in preceeding note), 64, referred to the restoration and credited Giuseppe Valadier with placing the inscription. In 1825–26, Valadier extended


the initial restoration with funds provided by the titular cardinal of San Pietro in Montorio, Rodolfo Ranieri of Habsburg-Lorraine, Archduke of Austria, and descendant of Ferdinand and Isabel. For a selection of the relevant docu-ments, see Delfini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 44–46, 51–53; Maresca Campagna, “Fonti archivistiche,” n.p. [92–102]. The works involved new lead sheathing of the dome, replacing the frames (telai) of the windows, and installing large slabs of peperino in the pavement surrounding the Tempietto, thus prevent-ing the infiltration of rainwater; additionally, the marble decoration was cleaned and repaired, the stuccoes reconstructed and regilded (rifatti e rindorati), and the external and internal walls repainted. Gazzetta piemontese, no. 113 (September 21, 1826): 726.

15. Franco Bartolotti, “Le medaglie di Tommaso Mercandetti (parte prima),” Medaglia 1, no. 2 (Dec. 1971): 18–37, esp. 34–35, no. 77. The medal was reproduced and Mercandetti was praised for the precision of the rendering of the Tempietto by Giuseppe Antonio Guattani, Memorie enciclopediche romane sulle belle arti, antichità, etc. 3 (1806): 2–3.

16. Filippo Pacifici, Dissertazioni sul martirio di San Pietro nel Gianicolo e sulla venuta e morte nello stesso monte di Noé simbolo del santo principe degli Apostoli ivi crocifisso umiliate alla santita di N.S. PP. Pio VII (Rome, 1814), iv–v, 38–39. Pacifici identified himself as “Consultore e Sommista della Sagra Romana Universale Inquisizione.” His tomb slab of 1817 is located in the presbytery of San Pietro in Montorio; Forcella, Iscrizioni, 5:286, no. 808.

17. For the history of that polemic, see Orazio Marucchi, “La crocifissione di S. Pietro nel Vaticano,” Nuovo Bullettino di archeologia cristiana 11 (1905): 135–79, 269–72. The treatises published in 1809 are all held in the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana: Giovanni da Capistrano, O.F.M., Il martirio del principe degli Apostoli rivendicato alla sua sede in sul Gianicolo: dissertazione critica dedicata alla santità di N.S. Papa Pio VII, felicemente regnante (Rome 1809; 2nd ed. Rome, 1903); Leonardo Adami, Lettera dell’avvocato Leonardo Adami romano ed archeologo amico, sulla dissertazione critica, che ha per titolo, il Martirio di S. Pietro rivendicato al Gianicolo (Rome, 1809); Giovanni da Saracinesco, O.F.M., Lettera di F. Giovanni Saracinesco . . . indirizzata all’avvocato Leonardo Adami, in risposta all’altra da questo diretta ad Archeofilo sulla dissertazione critica, che ha per titolo Il Martirio di S. Pietro rivendicato al Gianicolo (n.p., 1809).

18. Many surviving records of the inscription were defective in this opening part, per-haps because of the gilded iron grill embellished with large floral buds and leaves that protected the stone according to Fra Pietro.

19. For damage to the church and monastery and subsequent repair, see Delfini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 56–58; and Maresca Compagna, “Fonti archivistiche,” n.p. [107–09].

20. For the restoration of the Tempietto in 1853, see preceding note. 21. Fagiolo, Il Settecento e l’Ottocento, 373 (entry by M. Parisei). 22. For the following, see Fagiolo, “Intorno a S. Pietro in Montorio,” 121–40, citing con-

temporary sources. 23. For the new road and its relation to the one built by Philip III, see Fagiolo (as in pre-

ceding note); and Cantatore, San Pietro in Montorio, 132–33, figures 90–91. Documents for the ripolitura of the Tempietto in 1867 are cited by Montserrat Moli Frigola and Pedro Olea Alvarez, “Pio IX y España, indices del archivo particular de Pio IX en


sus relaciones con España,” Cuadernos de investigación histórica. Seminario “Cisneros” 6 (1982): 73–102, esp. 99. The works undertaken by the pope are described in La Civiltà Cattolica, ser. 6, 11 (1867): 247.

24. In 1743 Pope Benedict XIV instituted special observances for the octave of the feast of Saints Peter and Paul, including a Mass to be celebrated at San Pietro in Montorio on July 5; Gaetano Moroni, Dizionario di erudizione storico-ecclesiastica da S. Pietro sino ai nostri giorni, 103 vols. (Rome, 1840–61), 11:233.

25. José Maria Carulla, Roma en el centenar de San Pedro (Madrid, 1867), 299–300, 319, provides the inscription that survives in place.

26. After prolonged debate, on July 18, 1870, the Council promulgated papal infallibil-ity, not temporal power, as Church dogma; R. De Cesare, Roma e lo stato del papa dal ritorno di Pio IX al XX settembre, 2 vols. (Rome, 1907), 2:367–69.

27. Civiltà Cattolica, ser. 7, 6 (1869): 100, 492; Triplice omaggio alla Santità di Papa Pio IX nel suo giubileo episcopale . . . (Rome, 1877), 44–45, 71, with illustrations of the column and statue. See Valerio Cianfarani, “Storia di un monumento peripatetico,” L’Urbe 2, no. 8 (Aug., 1937): 23–28, with illustration of Vespignani’s project drawing in Cianfarani’s collection; Filippo Magi, “Il monumento commemorativo del concilio Vaticano I,” Studi romani 10, no. 1 (1962): 25–30; and Clementina Barucci, Virginio Vespignani: architetto tra Stato Pontificio e Regno d’Italia (Rome, 2006), 250–53.

28. Civiltà Cattolica, ser. 7, 8 (1869): 351–53. 29. Juan Carlos I, Discursos, 1975–1995, 2 vols. (Madrid, 1996), 1:33 (June 2, 1976), (“Una

Reina de Castilla, Isabel, de la que yo desciendo en línea directa, . . .”). 30. Julián Cortés Cavanillas, Crónica de Juan Carlos, Rey: de la restauración a la constitución,

1975–1978 (Madrid, 1978), 356–69 (February 10, 1977). For the king’s discourses on those occasions, see Juan Carlos I, Discursos, 1:60–62.

31. With the proclamation of the Second Spanish Republic in 1931, Alfonso XIII left Spain, and eventually settled in Rome, where he remained until his death in 1941. He was buried in the church of Santa Maria di Monserrato; in 1980 his body was repa-triated to Spain. When Juan Carlos addressed the government and citizens of Rome on May 2, 1988, he emphasized the strong ties between Spain and the city, noting among other points of contact Bramante’s Tempietto, and the Spanish Academy of Fine Arts; Juan Carlos I, Discursos, 2:722.

32. For the extent of the restoration, see Defini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 72–76.

33. The translation is adapted from Tyler Lansford, The Latin Inscriptions of Rome (Baltimore, 2009), 483, no. 14.4. The inscription commemorating the restoration was unveiled in the presence of the king and queen on October 22, 1978, according to another inscription in the cloister.

34. Defini and Pentrella, “S. Pietro in Montorio,” 84 n. 58. 35. Francisco Franco restored the monarchy in 1947, but did not permit Alfsono’s XIII

son and heir, Juan, Count of Barcelona, to be installed as king. In 1969, Franco named Juan Carlos as his heir.

36. King Juan Carlos promulgated regulations for the new coat of arms in Royal Decree 1511/1977, dated January 21, 1977; Boletín oficial del Estado, 156 (July 1, 1977): 14744–45. In that instrument the king annulled the decree of April 22, 1971, in which Francisco Franco had defined the coat of arms to be used by Juan Carlos in his role as prince; he also annulled previous decrees of February 2, 1938 and October 11, 1945 concerning Spain’s state heraldry.


37. The conservation of 1998–99 was co-supervised by architects José Sancho Roda (Madrid) and Gisella Capponi (Rome). The most extensive report published to date is Humanes, Restauración, sponsored by CABBSA, the Madrid firm that participated in the conservation project. See José Sancho Roda, “Proyecto de restauración del templete de Bramante (Italia),” Restauración & rehabilitación, no. 18 (1998): 28–37; José Sancho Roda and Antonio Sánchez Barriga Fernández, “El templete de Bramante restaurado,” Restauración & rehabilitación, no. 30 (1999): 26–35; and idem, “La res-tauración del Templete de Bramante en Roma,” in Restaurar la memoria, Actas del Congreso Internacional AR&PA 2000 (Valladolid 2001), 135–54.

38. The king’s visit is commemorated by an inscription also immured in the cloister, dated May 25, 1999, referring to the restoration for the Holy Year 2000. The coat of arms of Juan Carlos I at the top of the plaque follows the form described previously.

39. Boletín oficial de las Cortes Generales, Congreso de los Deputados, VI Legislatura, Ser. D, no. 363 (December 23, 1998): 96; idem, no. 385 (February 25, 1999): 95–96.

40. For the background to that legal action, see Luigi Cipriani, S. Pietro in Montorio e il Tempietto di Bramante, studio storico-giuridicio (n.p., 1986), privately printed and con-taining rich documentation.

41. Juan Vincente Boo, “España y los franciscanos despejan el futuro del Templete de Bramante tras ocho años de pleito,” ABC (Madrid, April 20, 2000): 42–43.

Appendix A San Pietro in Montorio, 1500 1. See the literature cited in Chapter 5, n. 2. Vannicelli, S. Pietro in Montorio, 162–63 n.

50, understood the text to refer to the consecration of the church’s high altar. The first person to question the inscription’s meaning was Tormo, Monumentos de espa-ñoles en Roma, 1:203.

2. Forcella, Iscrizioni, 13:468, no. 1142. 3. Giacomo Gregorio Terribilini, “Descriptio Templorum Urbis Romae,” in BC, Cod.

2185, fols. 125r–v. 4. For information about del Sodo, see Huelsen, Chiese di Roma, xxix–xxxi. Two versions

of the text exist, an autograph manuscript in BV, G.33, which Huelsen dates 1575–81, and a later redaction, BAV, Vat. lat. 11911. Terribilini included the relevant passages in the collection of sources concerning the history of San Pietro in Montorio; BC, Cod. 2185, fol. 129r.

5. Francesco del Sodo, “Compendio delle chiese,” BV, G.33, fols. 63v–64r: “questa chiesa stata restaurata da Ferdinando Re di Spagna con belli altari . . . è fu consacrata l’anno 1500. alli 6. [sic] di giugnio nel Pontificato di Alessandro sesto i(m)pose nel altar maggior alquanti reliquie indi poi tutti l’altari furono consacrati l’anno 1580. adi 18 di lug(li)o nel pontificato di Gregorio XIII. et in detti altari che vi furono posti alquante reliquie come in tavole in sacristia et alla cancellata del altar maggiore si vede . . .”

6. ASFR, vol. 12 (old vol. 99), Lodovico da Modena, “Cronaca della Riforma dal 1519 al 1722, fondazioni dei conventi,” fols. 420–22. Vannicelli, S. Pietro in Montorio, 31–32, 157 n. 6, 162–63 n. 50, knew this material from another late eighteenth-century com-pilation of documents pertaining to the history of the monastery.

7. da Modena, “Cronaca,” fols. 420–42, quoting Fra Gregorio’s description of the tablet of 1580, as a “tabella lignea, in qua erat scriptum in charta pergamena”; and the one of 1500 as a “tabella scripta in charta pergamena existente in sacristia.” The information

Notes to page 207 • 283

concerning the 1580 consecration also appears in the 1727 description of the monas-tery; ASV, Congr. Visita Ap., vol. 129, int. 9, fol. 40, no. 52. See also the text quoted by Vannicelli, S. Pietro in Montorio, 162–63 n. 50.

8. Even before that time, there was a tendency to elide the separate histories of the church and the Tempietto and to date both consecrations to 1500, for example, in the 1727 description of the monastery; ASV, Congr. Visita Ap., vol. 129, int. 9, fol. 44.

285

Selected BiBliography

Abulafia, David, ed. The French Descent into Italy 1494–95, Antecedents and Effects. Aldershot, 1995.

Accorsi, Maria Letizia. “La tribuna e le cappelle semipogee della basilica sessoriana.” Palladio N.S. 9, no. 18 (July–Dec. 1996): 19–34.

“S. Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma, recenti scoperte nella cappella di S. Elena.” Palladio N.S. 12, no. 23 (1999): 5–20.

Aguado, Francisco, ed. Documentos relativos à la fundación de San Pedro in Montorio. Rome, [1876].

Alberti, Leon Battista. On the Art of Building in Ten Books. Translated by Joseph Rykwert, Neil Leach, and Robert Tavernor. Cambridge, MA, 1988.

Albertini, Francesco. Opusculum de mirabilibus noue & veteris urbis Romae. Rome, 1510.Alexander, Paul J. The Oracle of Baalbek: The Tiburtine Sibyl in Greek Dress. Washington,

DC, 1967.Alvarez y Ancil, Andrés, ed. Copia fiel y exacta del testamento del cardenal arzobispo que fué de

Toledo Don Pedro González de Mendoza, que original y auténtico existe en el archivo de la excma. diputación provincial de Toledo. Toledo, 1915.

Alveri, Gasparo. Roma in ogni stato, 2 vols. Rome, 1664.Amico, Bernardino. Trattato delle piante e immagini di sacre edifizi di Terra Santa.

Florence, 1620.Andrieu, Michel, ed. Le Pontifical romain au moyen-âge. Vol. 3, Le Pontifical de Giullaume

Durand. Studi e testi, 88. Vatican City, 1940.Anon. “Inauguración de la Academia Española en Roma.” La ilustración española y

americana 25, no. 5 (Feb. 8, 1881): 82–86; and idem, 25, no. 6 (Feb. 15, 1881): 95–98.

Antellini, Simona. “La cappella di S. Elena in S. Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma. Restauro del mosaico e degli affreschi della volta.” In La basilica di S. Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma: quando l’antico è futuro, edited by Anna Maria Affanni, 127–35. Viterbo, 1997.

Arbeteta Mira, Letizia. “La Corona Rica y otras joyas de estado de la reina Isabel I.” In Isabel la Católica, la magnificencia de un reinado. Quinto centenario de Isabel la Católica, 1504–2004, edited by Fernando Checa Cremades, 169–86. Exhib. cat. Salamanca, 2004.

Ashby, Jr., Thomas. “Sixteenth-Century Drawings of Roman Buildings Attributed to Andreas Coner.” Papers of the British School at Rome 2 (1904): 1–96.

286 • Selected Bibliography

Aurell, Martin. “Messianisme royal de la couronne d’Aragon (14e–15e siècles).” Annales histoire, sciences sociales 52, no. 1 (1997): 119–55.

Baert, Barbara. “New Observations on the Genesis of Girona (1050–1100): The Iconography of the Legend of the True Cross.” Gesta 38 (1999): 115–27.

A Heritage of Holy Wood. The Legend of the True Cross in Text and Image. Translated by Lee Preedy. Leiden, 2004.

Baglione, Giovanni. Le nove chiese di Roma (Rome, 1639). Edited by Liliana Barroero. Rome, 1990.

Bagolan, Maria Cristina, ed. La Spagna sul Gianicolo. La Reale Accademia di Spagna, 3. Rome, 2004.

Barelli, Lia. “Il Beato Amadeo Menez de Sylva e la chiesa di Santa Maria delle Grazie a Ponticelli Sabino.” Quaderni dell’Istituto di storia dell’architettura 15–20 (1990–92): 407–18.

Baronio, Cesare. Annales ecclesiastici . . . Edited by Antonio Pagi. 19 vols. Lucca, 1738–46.Barry, Fabio. “Disiecta membra: Ranieri Zeno, the Imitation of Constantinople, the Spolia

Style, and Justice at S. Marco.” In San Marco, Byzantium, and the Myths of Venice, edited by Henry Maguire and Robert S. Nelson, 7–62. Washington, DC, 2010.

Barucco, Patrizia. “Interpretazione e reinvenzione del tuscanico vitruviano nel primo Rinascimento romano.” In Vitruvio nella cultura architettonico antico, medievale e moderna, edited by Gianluigi Ciotta, 2 vols., 2:406–13. Genoa, 2003.

Bentivoglio, Enzo. “Bramante e il geroglifico di Viterbo.” Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz 16 (1972): 167–74.

Benzi, Fabio. Sisto IV Renovator Urbis, architettura a Roma 1471–1484. Rome, 1990.Besozzi, Raimondo. La storia della basilica di Santa Croce in Gerusalemme. Rome, 1750.Biersack, Martin. “Los Reyes Católicos y la tradición imperial romana.” eHumanistica 12

(2009): 33–47.Billuzzi, Amedeo, and Sabine Frommel, eds. Disegni rinascimentali di architettura, Opus

incertum, 3, no. 5, 2008. Florence, 2010.Biondo, Flavio. Roma ristaurata e Italia illustrata, translated by Lucio Fauno. Venice,

1548. Roma trionfante, translated by Lucio Fauno. Venice, 1549.Bober, Harry. “An Illustrated Medieval School-Book of Bede’s ‘De Natura Rerum.’”

Journal of the Walters Art Gallery 19–20 (1956–57): 65–97.Borngässer, Barbara, Henrik Karge, and Bruno Klein, eds. Grabkunst und Sepulkralkultur

in Spanien und Portugal. Frankfurt am Main, 2006.Borsi, Franco, with critical catalogue by Stefano Borsi. Bramante. Milan, 1989.Bosio, Giacomo. La trionfante e gloriosa croce . . . Rome, 1610.Boucher, Bruce. The Sculpture of Jacopo Sansovino. 2 vols. New Haven, 1991.Bouyé, Édouard. “Alexandre VI, les Turcs et la croisade.” In Chiabò, Oliva, and Schena,

Alessandro VI, 169–86.Brandt, Kathleen Weil-Garris. “Michelangelo’s Pietà for the Cappella del Re di

Francia.” In “Il se rendit en Italie,” études offertes a André Chastel, 77–119. Rome and Paris, 1987.

Brant, Sebastian. De origine et conversatione bonorum regum et laude civitatis Hierosolymae cum exhortatione eiusdem recuperandae. Basel, 1495.

Brasca, Santo. Itinerario alla santissima città di Gerusalemme. Milan, 1481. 2nd ed. Milan, 1497.

Brewyn, William. A XVth Century Guide-Book to the Principal Churches of Rome. Edited and translated by C. Eveleigh Woodruff. London, 1933.

Selected Bibliography • 287

Breydenbach, Bernhard von. Peregrinatio in Terram Sanctam. Mainz, 1486.Bru Romo, Margarita. La Academia Española de Bellas Artes en Roma (1873–1914).

Madrid, 1971.Bruschi, Arnaldo. Bramante architetto. Bari, 1969. “L’architettura a Roma al tempo di Alessandro VI: Antonio da Sangallo il Vecchio,

Bramante, e l’antico, autumno 1499-autunno 1503.” Bollettino d’arte, ser. 6, no. 29, 70 (1985): 67–90.

“L’architettura a Roma negli ultimi anni del pontificato di Alessandro VI Borgia (1492–1503) e l’edilizia del primo Cinquecento.” In Bruschi, Storia dell’architettura italiana, 34–75.

ed. Storia dell’architettura italiana, il primo Cinquecento. Milan, 2002. “Le vicende della chiesa di San Pietro in Montorio e qualche nota sui problemi

storigrafici dell’architettura romana del Quattrocento.” Quaderni dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura N.S. 51 (2008): 17–34.

Buchowiecki, Walther. Handbuch der Kirchen Roms. Der römische Sakralbau in Geschichte und Kunst von der altchristlichen Zeit bis zur Gegenwart. 4 vols. Vienna 1967–97.

Bulgarelli, Massimo, Arturo Calzona, Matteo Ceriana, and Francesco Paolo Fiore, eds. Leon Battista Alberti e l’architettura. Exhib. cat. Milan, 2006.

Buonanni, Filippo. Numismata pontificum romanorum . . . , 2 vols. Rome, 1699.Burchard, Johannes. Liber notarum ab anno 1483 usque ad annum 1506. Rerum italicarum

scriptores, 32, 1–2. Edited by Enrico Celani, 2 vols. Città di Castello, 1906.Bury, J. B. “The Stylistic Term ‘Plateresque.’” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld

Institutes 39 (1976): 199–230.Caballero López, José Antonio. “El mito en las Historias de la España primitiva.” Excerpta

philologica 7–8 (1997–98): 83–100.Calzona, Arturo, Joseph Conners, and Francesco Paolo Fiore, eds. Leon Battista Alberti:

architetture e committenti, 2 vols. Florence, 2009.Canfora, Davide, Maria Chiabò, and Mauro De Nichilo, eds. Principato ecclesiastico e riuso

dei classici. Gli umanisti e Alessandro VI. Rome, 2002.Canova, Lorenzo. “Omnes Reges Servient Ei: Paolo III e Carlo V: La supremazia

pontificia nella Sala Paolina di Castel Sant’Angelo.” Storia dell’arte 103 (2002): 7–40.Cantatore, Flavia. “La chiesa di San Pietro in Montorio a Roma: ricerche ed ipotesi

intorno alla fabbrica tra XV e XVI secolo.” Quaderni dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura N.S., fasc. 24 (1994) [1997]: 3–34.

“Aspetti della committenza straniera nella Roma di Sisto IV: S. Pietro in Montorio e S. Giacomo degli Spagnoli.” In Sisto IV: le arti a Roma nel primo Rinascimento, edited by Fabio Benzi, 417–25. Rome, 2000.

“Un committente spagnolo nella Roma di Alessandro VI: Bernardino Carvajal.” In Chiabò, Maddalo, Miglio, and Oliva, Roma di fronte all’Europa, 3:861–71.

San Pietro in Montorio, la chiesa dei Re Cattolici a Roma. Rome, 2007. ed. Metafore di un pontificato: Giulio II (1503–1513). Rome, 2010 “A proposito del Tempietto di San Pietro in Montorio.” In Cantatore, Metafore di un

pontificato, 457–81. “Architettura e committenza tra Milano e Roma. Alcuni documenti su Amedeo Menez

de Silva.” Roma nel Rinascimento (2012): 197–202.Capgrave, John. Ye Solace of Pilgrimes: A Description of Rome, circa A.D. 1450 . . . Edited by

C. A. Mills. London, 1911.Cappelletti, Francesca. “L’affresco nel catino absidale di Sta. Croce in Gerusalemme. La

fonte iconografica, la committenza e la datazione.” Storia dell’arte 66 (1989): 119–26.


Caramuel, Juan. Dominicus: hoc est, venerabilis P. Dominici a Jesu-Maria, parthenii ordinis carmelit. excalceat. generalis, virtutes, labores, prodigia, ecstases, et revelationes. Vienna, 1655.

Caro Baroja, Julio. Las falsificaciones de la historia (en relación con la de España). Barcelona, 1992.

Carrasco Manchado, Ana Isabel. “La metáfora animal en la propaganda política de los Reyes Católicos (1474–1482).” Cahiers de linguistique et de civilisation hispaniques mediévales 25 (2002): 399–419.

“El ‘armorial moralizado’ de Antonio García de Villalpando: heráldica y propaganda de los Reyes Católicos.” En la España medieval, suppl. vol. 1 (2006): 113–30.

Carvajal, Bernardino de. Oratio super praestanda solemni obedientia Sanctissimo D. N. Alexandro papae VI ex parte christianissimorum dominorum Fernandi et Helisabe regis et reginae hispaniae habita Romae in consistorio publico . . . Rome, n.d. [1493].

Homelia doctissima reverendissimi domini cardinalis Sancte Crucis utriusque philosophie facile principis habita coram maximo Maximiliano Cesare semper Augusto. Rome, 1508.

Cavallaro, Anna, ed. Collezioni di antichità a Roma tra ‘400 e ‘500. Rome, 2007.Cecchelli, Margherita. “Un monastero altomedievale a S. Pietro in Montorio.” In Steinby,

Ianiculum-Gianicolo, 101–07.Chiabò, Maria, Silvia Maddalo, Massimo Miglio, and Anna Maria Oliva, eds. Roma di

fronte all’Europa al tempo di Alessandro VI, 3 vols. Rome, 2001.Chiabò, Maria, Anna Maria Oliva, and Olivetta Schena, eds. Alessandro VI dal Mediterraneo

all’Atlantico. Rome, 2004.Chinchilla, Rosa Helena. “Garcilaso de la Vega Senior, Patron of Humanists in Rome:

Classical Myths and the New Nation.” Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 73 (1996): 379–93.Christian, Kathleen Wren. Empire Without End Antiquities Collections in Renaissance Rome,

c. 1350–1527. New Haven and London, 2010.Ciartoso, Maria. “Note su Antoniazzo Romano, degli affreschi in Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme e di due immagini votive.” L’Arte 14 (1911): 43–45.Ciotta, Gianluigi, ed. Vitruvio nella cultura architettonica antica, medievale e moderna, 2 vols.

Genoa, 2003.Cirot, Georges. Les histoires générales d’Espagne entre Alphonse X et Philippe II (1284–1556).

Burdeos, 1904.Claussen, Peter Cornelius. Die Kirchen der Stadt Rom im Mittelalter 1050–1300. Corpus

Cosmatorum, 2.1. Stuttgart, 2002.Coarelli, Filippo. Il Foro Boario dalle origini alla fine della Repubblica. Rome, 1988.Company, Ximo. Bramante, mito y realidad. La importancia del mecenazgo Español en la

promoción Romana de Bramante. Lleida, 2012.Cooley, Alison E., ed. The Afterlife of Inscriptions: Reusing, Rediscovering, Reinventing and

Revitalizing Ancient Inscriptions. London, 2000.Cortés Cavanillas, Julián. Crónica de Juan Carlos, Rey: de la restauración a la constitución,

1975–1978. Madrid, 1978.Crahay, Roland. “Réflexions sur le faux historique: le cas d’Annius de Viterbe.” Bulletin de

la classe des lettres et des sciences morales et politiques ser. 5, 69 (1983): 241–67.Cruciani, Fabrizio. Teatro nel Rinascimento, Roma 1450–1550. Rome, 1983.Curran, Brian. The Egyptian Renaissance: The Afterlife of Ancient Egypt in Early Modern Italy.

Chicago and London, 2007.D’Amico, John. Renaissance Humanism in Papal Rome. Baltimore and London 1983.Dandelet, Thomas James. Spanish Rome 1500–1700. New Haven and London, 2001.


D’Arpa, Ciro. “Il Tempietto di San Pietro in Montorio, la Sicilia e l’istituto della ‘Regia Monarchia.’” Lexicon, Storia e architettura in Sicilia 5–6 (2007–08): 37–46.

Dathe, Stefanie. La Vera Cruz in Segovia: Dialektische Untersuchung zu Ursprung, Baugeschichte und Funktion eines romanischen Zentralbaus in Alt-Kastilien. Weimar, 2001.

Davies, Paul, and David Hemsoll. “Renaissance Balusters and the Antique.” Architectural History 26 (1983): 1–23.

De Angelis d’Ossat, Guglielmo. “Preludio romano del Bramante.” Palladio N.S. 16, fasc. 1–4 (1966): 83–102.

de Blaauw, Sible. “Jerusalem in Rome and the Cult of the Cross.” In Pratum romanum, Richard Krautheimer zum 100. Geburtstag, edited by Renate L. Colella, Meredith Gill, and Lawrence A. Jenkins, 55–73. Wiesbaden, 1997.

“Immagini di liturgia: Sisto V, la tradizione liturgica dei papi e le antiche basiliche di Roma.” Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 33 (1999): 259–302.

“Das ‘opus mirabile’ des Kardinals Quiñones in S. Croce in Gerusalemme zwischen Memoria und Liturgie.” In Tod und Verklärung, Grabmalskultur in der frühen Neuzeit, edited by Arne Karsten and Philipp Zitzlsperger, 137–55. Cologne, 2004.

de la Torre, Antonio, ed. Documentos sobre relaciones internacionales de los Reyes Católicos. 6 vols. Barcelona, 1949–66.

Delfini, Gabriella, and Ruggero Pentrella. “San Pietro in Montorio: la chiesa, il convento, il Tempietto.” In Pentrella, Fabbriche romane, 17–85.

del Sodo, Francesco. “Compendio delle chiese con le loro fondationi consegrazioni e titoli de’ cardinali, delle parochie con il battesimo, o senza delli hospitali, reliquie et indulgentie di tutti luogi pij di Roma. Novamente posto in luce dal M. Francesco del Sodo Canonico di S.ta Maria in Cosmedin, detta Schola Greca.” BV, G.33.

Denker Nesselrath, Christiane. Die Säulenordnungen bei Bramante. Worms, 1990.De Rossi, Giovanni Battista, ed. Inscriptiones christianae urbis Romae septimo saeculo

antiquiores. 2 vols. Rome, 1861–88.de Sousa Costa, Antonio Domingues. “Studio critico e documenti inediti sulla vita

del Beato Amedeo da Silva nel quinto centenario della morte.” In Noscere Sancta Miscellanea in Memoria di Agostino Amore OFM (+1982). Bibliotheca Pontificii Athenaei Antoniani, 25. Edited by Isaac Vázquez Janeiro, 2 vols., 2:101–360. Rome, 1985.

Di Geso, Giovanni, and Ruggero Pentrella. “Da recenti restauri di fabbriche romane del primo Cinquecento, indagine sulla genesi costruttiva delle strutture a cupola.” In Baldassarre Peruzzi, pittura, scena e architettura nel Cinquecento, edited by M. Fagiolo and M. L. Madonna, 689–98. Rome, 1987.

Di Teodoro, Francesco Paolo, ed. Donato Bramante, ricerche, proposte, riletture. Urbino, 2001.

Dittscheid, Hans-Christoph. “Form versus Materie. Zum Spoliengebrauch in der römischen Bauten und Projekten Donato Bramantes.” In Poeschke, Antike Spolien, 277–307.

Dressen, Angela. Pavimenti decorati del Quattrocento in Italia. Venice, 2008.Duchesne, L. M. O., ed. Le Liber pontificalis: texte, introduction et commentaire. 2 vols. Paris,

1886–92.du Mont, J. Corps universel diplomatique du droit des gens, contenant un recueil des traitez

d’alliance . . ., vol. 3, pt. 2. Amsterdam, 1726.Eiján, Samuel. España en Tierra Santa, páginas de la vida franciscana en Oriente (siglo XVII),

apuntes históricos. Barcelona, 1910. El real patronato de los Santos Lugares en la historia de Tierra Santa. 2 vols. Madrid, 1945.


Eisler, William. “Charles V and the Cathedral of Granada.” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 51 (1992): 174–81.

Enepekides, P. K. “Das wiener Testament des Andreas Palaiologos vom 7. April 1502.” In Akten des XI. Internationalen Byzantinistenkongresses, edited by Franz Dölger and Hans-Georg Beck, 138–43. Munich, 1960.

Eubel, Conrad, ed. Bullarium franciscanum, vol. 6. Rome, 1902. Hierarchia catholica medii aevi. Münster, 1913–.Fagiolo, Marcello, ed. Il Settecento e l’Ottocento. Corpus delle feste a Roma, 2. Rome, 1997. “Da Sisto V a Paolo V: i piani paralleli per l’Esquilino e il Gianicolo.” In Il centro storico

di Roma, storia e progetto, edited by Roberto Cassetti and Gianfranco Spagnesi, 90–105. Rome, 2004.

“Intorno a S. Pietro in Montorio e a Giovanni Fontana: opere viarie, panorami e fontane.” In Studi sui Fontana, una dinastia di architetti ticinesi a Roma tra manierismo e barocco, edited by Marcello Fagiolo and Giuseppe Bonaccorso, 121–40. Rome, 2008.

Falda, Giovanni Battista. Nuovo teatro delle fabriche et edificii, in prospettiva di Roma moderna. 3 vols. Rome 1665–69.

Le fontane di Roma nelle piazze e luoghi publici della città, con li loro prospetti, come sono al presente. Rome, 1675.

Fehl, Philipp. “Michelangelo’s Crucifixion of St. Peter: Notes on the Identification of the Locale of the Action.” Art Bulletin 53 (1971): 327–43.

Fernández de Córdova Miralles, Álvaro. Alejandro VI y los Reyes Católicos: relaciones político-eclesiásticas (1492–1503). Rome, 2005.

“Imagen de los Reyes Católicos en la Roma pontificia.” En la España Medieval 28 (2005): 259–354.

“‘Reyes Católicos’: mutaciones y permanencias de un paradigma político en la Roma del Renacimiento.” In Hernando Sánchez, Roma y España, 1:133–54.

Fernández-Puertas, Antonio. “Sobre los relieves en la predela del retablo de la Capilla Real de Granada.” Anales de la historia del arte 4 (1994): 373–84.

Fiore, Francesco Paolo, ed. Storia dell’architettura italiana, il Quattrocento. Milan, 1998.Fiore, Francesco Paolo, with Arnold Nesselrath, eds. La Roma di Leon Battista Alberti.

Umanisti, architetti e artisti alla scoperta dell’antico nella città del Quattrocento. Exhib. cat. Milan, 2005.

Fiore, Francesco Paolo, and Manfredo Tafuri, eds. Francesco di Giorgio architetto. Exhib. cat. Milan, 1993.

Fontana, Giacomo. Raccolta delle migliori chiese di Roma e suburbane . . . 4 vols. Rome, 1838.Forcella, Vincenzo, ed. Iscrizioni delle chiese e d’altri edificii di Roma dal secolo XI fino ai giorni

nostri. 14 vols. Rome, 1869–84.Francesco di Giorgio Martini. Trattati di architettura ingegneria e arte militare. Edited by

Corrado Maltese, 2 vols. Milan, 1967.Freiberg, Jack. The Lateran in 1600: Christian Concord in Counter-Reformation Rome.

Cambridge and New York, 1995. “Bramante’s Tempietto and the Spanish Crown.” Memoirs of the American Academy in

Rome 50 (2005): 151–205. “Vasari’s Bramante and the Renaissance of Architecture in Rome.” In Reading Vasari,

edited by Anne B. Barriault, Andrew Ladis, Norman E. Land, and Jeryldene M. Wood, 132–46. Athens, GA and London, 2005.

“San Pietro in Montorio, Bramante’s Tempietto, and the Spanish Crown.” In The Janus View from the American Academy in Rome: Essays on the Janiculum, edited by Katherine A. Geffcken and Norma W. Goldman, 202–11. New York, 2007.


Frey, Carl, ed. Il codice Magliabechiano cl. XVII.17 contenente notizie sopra l’arte degli antichi e quella de’ fiorentini da Cimabue a Michelangelo Buonarroti. Berlin, 1892.

Frommel, Christoph Luitpold. Baldassare Peruzzi als Maler und Zeichner. Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte, suppl. vol. 11. Vienna, 1968.

“‘Disegno’ und Ausführung: Ergänzungen zu Baldassare Peruzzis figuralem oeuvre.” In Kunst als Bedeutungsträger. Gedenkschrift für Günter Bandmann, edited by Werner Busch, Reiner Haussherr, and Eduard Trier, 208–11. Berlin, 1978.

“Progetto e archeologia in due disegni di Antonio da Sangallo il Giovane per Sta. Croce in Gerusalemme.” In Roma, centro ideale della cultura dell’antico nei secoli XV e XVI: da Martino V al Sacco di Roma, 1417–1527, edited by Silvia Danesi Squarzina, 382–89. Milan, 1989.

“Roma.” In Fiore, Storia dell’architettura italiana, 374–433. “La città come opera d’arte.” In Bruschi, Storia dell’architettura italiana, 76–131. “Proposte per una revisione del corpus dei disegni di Bramante.” In Billuzzi and

Frommel, Disegni rinascimentali di architettura, 39–55.Frommel, Christoph Luitpold, and Nicholas Adams, eds. The Architectural Drawings of

Antonio da Sangallo the Younger and His Circle. Cambridge, MA, 1994–.Frommel, Christoph Luitpold, Luisa Giordano, and Richard Schofield, eds. Bramante

milanese e l’architettura del Rinascimento lombardo. Venice, 2002.Fulvio, Andrea. Antiquaria Urbis. Rome, 1513. Antiquitates Urbis per Andream Fulvium antiquarium Ro. nuperrime aeditae. Rome, 1527.Gabel, Leona C., ed. Memoirs of a Renaissance Pope: The Commentaries of Pius II. Translated

by Florence A. Gragg. New York, 1959.Geymüller, Heinrich de. Les projets primitifs pour la basilique de Saint-Pierre de Rome . . .

2 vols. Paris and Vienna, 1875–80.Ghisetti Giavarina, Adriano. Aristotile da Sangallo, architettura, scenografia e pittura tra

Roma e Firenze nella prima metà del Cinquecento. Rome 1990.Gil de Zamora, Juan. De preconiis Hispanie. Edited by Manuel de Castro y Castro.

Madrid, 1955.Gill, Meredith J. “Antoniazzo Romano and the Recovery of Jerusalem in Late Fifteenth-

Century Rome.” Storia dell’arte 83 (1995): 28–47.Giordano, Rosalia Claudia. “Gli amadeiti e la Sicilia nella costruzione di S. Pietro in

Montorio in Roma.” In Francescanesimo e civilità siciliana nel quattrocento, Schede medievali, 32–33, edited by Diego Ciccarelli and Armando Bisanti, 91–97. Palermo, 1997.

Giordano, Silvano. Domenico di Gesù Maria, Ruzola (1559–1630): un carmelitano scalzo tra politica e riforma nella chiesa posttridentino. Rome, 1991.

Giovio, Paolo. Historiarum sui temporis, vol. 2. n.p., 1555.Giuliani, Cairoli F. Tibur, pars prima. Forma Italiae, regio 1, vol. 7. Rome, 1970.Golubovich, Girolamo. Biblioteca bio-bibliografica della Terra Santa e dell’Oriente francescano.

5 vols. Quaracchi, 1906–27.Gómez Moreno, Ángel. España y la Italia de los humanistas: primeros ecos. Madrid, 1994.González, Julián, ed. Trajano emperador de Roma. Rome, 2000.Grabar, Andrè. Martyrium, recherches sur le culte des reliques et l’art chrétien antique. 2 vols.

Paris, 1946.Grabar, Oleg. The Shape of the Holy, Early Islamic Jerusalem. Princeton, 1996. Jerusalem, Constructing the Study of Islamic Art, vol. 4. Aldershot, 2005.Grapheus, Cornelius. Le triumphe d’Anuers, faict en la susception du Prince Philips, Prince

d’Espaigne. Antwerp, 1550.


Grimaldi, Giacomo. Descrizione della basilica antica di S. Pietro in Vaticano. Codice Barberini latino 2733, Codices e Vaticanis Selecti, 32. Edited by Reto Niggl. Vatican City, 1972.

Guillaume, Jean, ed. L’emploi des ordres dans l’architecture de la Renaissance. Paris, 1992. Les traités d’architecture de la Renaissance. Paris, 1988.Günther, Hubertus. “Werke Bramantes im Spiegel einer Gruppe von Zeichnungen der

Uffizien in Florenz.” Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst 33 (1972): 77–108. “Bramantes Tempietto: Die Memorialanlage der Kreuzigung Petri in S. Pietro in

Montorio, Rom.” Ph.D. diss., Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, 1973. “Bramantes Hofprojekt um der Tempietto und seine Darstellung in Serlios drittem

Buch.” In Studi bramanteschi, 483–501. Das Studium der antiken Architektur in den Zeichnungen der Hochrenaissance. Römische

Forschungen der Bibliotheca Hertziana, 24. Tübingen, 1988. “Die Anfänge der modernen Dorica.” In Guillaume, L’emploi des ordres, 97–118. “La ricezione dell’antico nel Tempietto.” In Donato Bramante, ricerche, proposte, riletture,

edited by Francesco Paolo Di Teodoro, 267–302. Urbino, 2001. “Das komplizierte Ebenmaß der Renaissance-Architektur. Die Proportionen von

Bramantes Tempietto über dem Kreuzigungsort Petri und die Rekonstruktion des Hofprojekts.” Architectura 32 (2002): 149–66.

“Copie da Bramante fra i disegni degli Uffizi.” In Billuzzi and Frommel, Disegni rinascimentali di architettura, 76–85.

Hernando Sánchez, Carlos José. “Estrategia cruzada y guerra moderna: la conquista de Nápoles en la política italiana de los Reyes Católicos.” In Los Reyes Católicos y la monarquía de España, edited by Lucía Vallejo, 287–302. Madrid, 2004.

Hernando Sánchez, Carlos José, ed. Roma y España, un crisol de la cultura europea en la Edad Moderna. 2 vols. Madrid, 2007.

Hill, George Francis. A Corpus of Italian Medals of the Renaissance before Cellini. 2 vols. London, 1930.

Hillard, Caroline Susan. “An Alternative Antiquity: The Etruscans in Renaissance Rome and Florence.” Ph.D. diss., Washington University, 2009.

Hillgarth, J. N. The Spanish Kingdoms, 1250–1516. 2 vols. Oxford, 1976.Hispania Austria, I re cattolici Massimiliano I e gli inizi della casa d’Austria in Spagna. Exhib.

cat. Milan, 1992.Howard, Deborah. “Bramante’s Tempietto, Spanish Royal Patronage in Rome.” Apollo 146

(Oct. 1992): 211–17.Huelsen, Christian. Le chiese di Roma nel medio evo. Florence, 1926.Humanes, Luisa F. Restauración en el Templete de Bramante, Roma, septiembre 1998, mayo

1999. Madrid, 2002.Huskinson, J. M. “The Crucifixion of St. Peter: A Fifteenth-Century Topographical

Problem.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 32 (1969): 135–61. “Review of Est et alia pyramis” by Margarete Demus-Quatember. Art Bulletin 58 (1976):

618–21.Iannuzzi, Isabella. “Bernardino de Carvajal, teoria e propaganda di uno spagnolo

all’interno della Curia Romana.” Storia della chiesa in Italia 61 (2008): 25–47. “Le radici culturali di uno spagnolo alla corte papale: Bernardino de Carvajal.” In

Cantatore, Metafore di un pontificato, 45–59.Infessura, Stefano. Diario della città di Roma. Edited by Oreste Tommasini. Rome, 1890.Isidore of Seville. De natura rerum. Augsburg, 1472.Johnson, Mark Joseph. “Late Antique Imperial Mausolea.” Ph.D. diss., Princeton

University, 1986.


“Toward a History of Theoderic’s Building Program.” Dumbarton Oaks Papers 42 (1988): 73–96.

Jones, Mark Wilson. “The Tempietto and the Roots of Coincidence.” Architectural History 33 (1990): 1–28.

Juan Carlos I. Discursos, 1975–1995. 2 vols. Madrid, 1996.Jungić, Josephine. “Joachimist Prophecies in Sebastiano del Piombo’s Borgherini Chapel

and Raphael’s Transfiguration.” In Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 321–43.Kinney, Dale. “Roman Architectural Spolia.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical

Society 145, no. 2 (2001): 138–50. “Spolia.” In Tronzo, St. Peter’s in the Vatican, 16–47. “The Discourse of Columns.” In Rome Across Time and Space: Cultural Transmission and

the Exchange of Ideas c. 500–1400, edited by Claudia Bolgia, Rosamond McKitterick, and John Osborne, 182–99. Cambridge and New York, 2011.

Kliemann, Julian. “Imperial Themes in Early Modern Papal Iconography.” In Basilike Eikon: Renaissance Representations of the Prince, edited by R. Ericksen and M. Malmanger, 11–29. Rome, 2001.

Koch, Linda A. “The Early Christian Revival at S. Miniato al Monte: The Cardinal of Portugal Chapel.” Art Bulletin 78 (1996): 527–55.

Köster, Kurt. Pilgerzeichen und Pilgermuscheln von mittelalterlichen Santiagostraßen: Saint-Léonard, Rocamadour, Saint-Gilles, Santiago de Compostela. Neumünster, 1983.

Krautheimer, Richard. “Introduction to an ‘Iconography of Medieval Architecture.’” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 5 (1942): 1–33.

Krautheimer, Richard, Wolfgang Frankl, Spencer Corbett, and Alfred K. Frazer. Corpus basilicarum christianarum Romae: The Early Christian Basilicas of Rome (IV–IX cent.). Monumenti di Antichità Cristiana, Pontificio Istituto Archeologia Cristiana, ser. 2. 5 vols. Vatican City, 1937–77.

Kühnel, Bianca. From the Earthly to the Heavenly Jerusalem: Representations of the Holy City in Christian Art of the First Millenium. Rome, 1987.

The End of Time in the Order of Things: Science and Eschatology in Early Medieval Art. Regensburg, 2003.

Kuhn-Forte, Brigitte. Die Kirchen innerhalb der Mauern Roms . . . Vol. 4 of Handbuch der Kirchen Roms, by Walther Buchowiecki. Vienna, 1997.

Labacco, Antonio. Libro appartenente a l’architettura, nel qual si figurano alcune notabili antiquita di Roma. Rome, 1559.

Labande-Mailfert, Yvonne. Charles VIII et son milieu (1470–1498), la jeunesse au pouvoir. Paris, 1975.

Labra González, Carmen Maria. “De la chartreuse de Miraflores à la chapelle royale de Grenade: L’expression du pouvoir après la mort au cours du Moyen Âge hispanique.” e-Spania 3 (2007): 1–24.

Ladner, Gerhard B. “The Symbolism of the Biblical Corner Stone in the Medieval West.” Medieval Studies 4 (1942): 43–60.

In laudem Serenissimi Ferdinandi, Hispania(rum) Regis, Bethicae & regni Granatae obsidio victoria & triu(m)phus. Et De insulis in Mari Indico nuper inuentis. Basel, 1494.

Lavin, Irving. Bernini and the Crossing of Saint Peter’s. New York 1968. “Bernini at St. Peter’s: Singularis in singulis, in omnibus unicus.” In Tronzo, St. Peter’s in

the Vatican, 111–243. Bernini at St. Peter’s. The Pilgrimage. London, 2012.Lavin, Marilyn Aronberg. The Place of Narrative: Mural Decoration in Italian Churches,

431–1600. Chicago, 1990.


Lawrance, Jeremy N. H. “Humanism in the Iberian Peninsula.” In The Impact of Humanism on Western Europe, edited by Anthony Goodman and Angus MacKay, 220–58. London and New York, 1990.

“Fabulosa illa aura secula: The Idea of the Golden Age at the Court of Isabel.” In The Spain of the Catholic Monarchs, edited by David Hook, 1–43. Bristol, 2008.

Lazzarini, Lorenzo. “I graniti dei monumenti italiani e i loro problemi di deterioramento.” Bollettino d’arte, suppl. vol. 41 (1987): 157–72.

“Des pierres pour l’éternité: les granits utilisés dans l’antiquité classique.” Dossiers d’Archéologie 173 (1992): 58–67.

“Sul ‘marmo Misio,’ uno dei graniti più usati anticamente.” In Marmi antichi II: Cave e tecnica di lavorazione, provenienze e distribuzione, edited by Patrizio Pensabene, 111–17. Rome, 1998.

Lemerle, Frédérique, and Yves Pauwels. “Du bon usage de la frise dorique: Bramante, Raphaël et les orders.” Mélanges d’École française de Rome, Italie e Méditerranée 110, no. 2 (1998): 687–702.

Letarouilly, Paul Marie. Édifices de Rome moderne . . . 6 vols. Liege and Paris, 1849–66.Leto, Giulio Pomponio. “De antiquitatibus urbis Romae libellus.” In Opera Pomponii

Laeti . . . Strasbourg, 1510.Levenson, Jay A., Konrad Oberhuber, and Jacquelyn L. Sheehan. Early Italian Engraving.

Exhib. cat. Washington, DC, 1973.Licht, Meg. L’edificio a pianta centrale, lo sviluppo del disegno architettonico nel Rinascimento.

Translated by Angelica Di Nardi. Exhib. cat. Florence, 1984.Lipsius, R. A., and M. Bonnet, eds. Acta apostolorum apocrypha. 3 vols. Leipzig, 1891–1903.Llewellyn, Nigel. “Two Notes on Diego da Sagredo, II: The Baluster and the

Pomegranate.” Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 40 (1977): 294–300.Lopez de Toro, Jose, ed. and trans. Tratados internacionales de los Reyes Catolicos . . .

Documentos inéditos para la historia de España, 7–8, 2 vols. Madrid, 1952.Luquet, J. F. O., and A. Tilloy. Les sanctuaires de Rome. Paris, 1863.Mackie, Gilian. Early Christian Chapels in the West: Decoration, Function, and Patronage.

Toronto, 2003.Magister, Sara. “Pomponio Leto collezionista di antichità: note sulla tradizione

manoscritta di una raccolta epigrafica nella Roma del tardo Quattrocento.” Xenia antiqua 7 (1998): 167–96.

“Censimento delle collezioni di antichità a Roma: 1471–1503.” Xenia antiqua 8 (1999): 129–204.

Marani, Pietro C. “Tivoli, Hadrian and Antinoös: New Evidence of Leonardo’s Relation to the Antique.” Achademia Leonardi Vinci 8 (1995): 207–25.

Maresca Compagna, Adelaide. “Fonti archivistiche.” In Pentrella, Fabbriche romane, n.p.Mariano da Firenze. Itinerarium urbis Romae. Edited by Enrico Bulletti. Rome, 1931.Marías, Fernando. “Bramante en España.” Introduction to Bramante, by Arnaldo Bruschi,

translated by Rosario Ochoa and Consuelo Luca de Tena, 7–67. Bilbao, 1987.Marineo, Lucio. De Hispaniae laudibus. Burgos, 1497.Marucchi, Orazio. “La crocifissione di S. Pietro nel Vaticano.” Nuovo Bullettino di

archeologia cristiana 11 (1905): 135–79, 269–72.McGinn, Bernard. Visions of the End: Apocalyptic Traditions in the Middle Ages. New

York, 1979. “Teste David cum Sibylla: The Significance of the Sibylline Tradition in the Middle

Ages.” In Women of the Medieval World, Essays in Honor of John H. Mundy, edited by Julius Kirshner and Suzanne F. Wemple, 7–35. Oxford, 1985.


“Oracular Transformations: The ‘Sibylla Tiburtina’ in the Middle Ages.” In Sibille e linguaggi oraculari. Mito, storia, tradizione, edited by Ileana Chirassi Colombo and Tullio Seppilli, 603–44. Pisa, 1998.

Mellini, Benedetto. La “Descrittione di Roma” di Benedetto Mellini nel codice Vat. lat. 11905. Edited by Federico Guidobaldi, Claudia Angelelli, with the collaboration of Luana Spadano, and Giulia Tozzi. Vatican City, 2010.

Mezzatesta, Michael P. “Imperial Themes in the Sculpture of Leone Leoni.” Ph.D. diss., Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 1980.

Miedema, Nine Robijntje. Die römischen Kirchen im Spätmittelalter nach den “Indulgentiae ecclesiarum urbis Romae.” Tübingen, 2001.

Milhou, Alain. “La chauve-souris, le nouveau David et le roi caché (trois images de l’empereur des derniers temps dans le monde ibérique: XIIIe–XVIIe s.).” Mélanges de la Casa de Velázquez 18 (1982): 61–78.

Colón y su mentalidad mesiánica en el ambiente franciscanista español. Valladolid, 1983.Millon, Henry A., and Vittorio Magnago Lampugnani, eds. The Renaissance from

Brunelleschi to Michelangelo, the Representation of Architecture. Exhib. cat. Milan, 1994.Minnich, Nelson H. “The Healing of the Pisan Schism (1511–13).” Annuarium Historiae

Conciliorum 16 (1984): 59–192. “The Role of Prophecy in the Career of the Enigmatic Bernardino López de Carvajal.”

In Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 111–20.Mombritius, Boninus. Sanctuarium seu vitae sanctorum. Milan, 1480, new ed. 2 vols.

Paris, 1910.Monbeig Goguel, Catherine, ed. Francesco Salviati (1510–1563) o la bella maniera. Exhib.

cat. Milan, 1998.Morisi, Anna. “Apocalypsis nova”: Ricerche sull’origine e la formazione del testo dello pseudo

Amadeo. Rome, 1970. “The Apocalypsis Nova: A Plan for Reform.” In Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 27–50. “Il profetismo al tempo di Alessandro VI.” In Chiabò, Maddalo, Miglio, and Oliva,

Roma di fronte all’Europa, 3:961–70.Morolli, Giovanni. “Vetus Etruria”: Il mito degli Etruschi nella letteratura architettonica

nell’arte e nella cultura da Vitruvio a Winckelmann. Florence, 1985.Muecke, Frances. “Humanists in the Roman Forum.” Papers of the British School at Rome 71

(2003): 207–33.Muffel, Nikolaus. Descrizione della città di Roma nel 1452. Edited and translated by Gerhard

Wiedmann. Bologna, 1999.Mulcahy, Rosemarie. The Decoration of the Royal Basilica of El Escorial. Cambridge and New

York, 1994.Müntz, Eugène. Les arts à la cour des papes pendant le XVe et le XVIe siècle. 3 vols. Paris,

1878–82.Murray, Peter. Bramante’s Tempietto. Newcastle upon Tyne, 1972. “Bramante paleocristiano.” In Studi bramanteschi, 27–34.Nader, Helen. The Mendoza Family in the Spanish Renaissance 1350 to 1550. New Brunswick,

NJ, 1979.Nagel, Alexander, and Christopher S. Wood. Anachronic Renaissance. New York, 2010.Nanni, Giovanni. De futuris chistianorum triumphis in Saracenos. Genoa, 1480. Commentaria Fratris Joannis Annii Viterbensis super Opera Diversorum Auctorum de

Antiquitatibus Loquentium. Rome, 1498.Navarro, Fausta. “Lo Pseudo-Bramantino: proposta per la ricostruzione di una vicenda

artistica.” Bollettino d’arte 67, no. 14 (1982): 37–68.


Nesselrath, Arnold. Der fossombroner Skizzenbuch. Studies of the Warburg Institute, 41. London, 1993.

“Codex Coner – 85 Years On.” In Cassiano dal Pozzo’s Paper Museum, vol. 2, edited by Ian Jenkins and Jennifer Montagu, 145–67. Milan, 1992.

Nieto, Victor, Alfredo J. Morales, and Fernando Checa. Arquitectura del Renacimiento en España, 1488–1599. Madrid, 1989.

Nieto Soria, José Manuel. “Conceptos de España en tiempos de los Reyes Católicos.” Norba, Revista de Historia 19 (2006): 105–23.

Niutta, Francesca. “Il Romane historiae compendium di Pomponio Leto dedicato a Francesco Borgia.” In Canfora, Chiabò, and De Nichilo, Principato ecclesiastico, 321–54.

Nogara, Bartolomeo, ed. Scritti inediti e rari di Flavio Biondo. Rome, 1927.O’Callaghan, Joseph F. Reconquest and Crusade in Medieval Spain. Philadelphia, 2003.Onians, John. Bearers of Meaning: The Classical Orders in Antiquity, the Middle Ages, and the

Renaissance. Princeton, 1988.Ortolani, Giorgio. Il padiglione di Afrodite Cnidia a Villa Adriana: progetto e significato.

Rome, 1998.Pacifici, Filippo. Dissertazioni sul martirio di San Pietro nel Gianicolo e sulla venuta e morte

nello stesso monte di Noé simbolo del santo principe degli Apostoli ivi crocifisso umiliate alla santita di N. S. PP. Pio VII. Rome, 1814.

Pacioli, Luca. Divina proportione. Venice, 1509.Pajares-Ayuela, Paloma. Cosmatesque Ornament: Flat Polychrome Geometric Patterns in

Architecture. Translated by Maria Fleming Alvarez. London, 2002.Palladio, Andrea. Descrittione de le chiese . . . Rome, 1554. I quattro libri dell’architettura. Venice, 1570.Panvinio, Onofrio. De praecipuis urbis Romae sanctioribusque basilicis, quas septem ecclesias

vulgo vocant, liber. Rome, 1570.Paolini, Devid. “Los Reyes Católicos e Italia: los humanistas italianos y su relación con

España.” In La literatura en la época de los Reyes Católicos, edited by Nicasio Salvador Miguel and Cristina Moya García, 189–205. Pamplona, 2008.

Pastor, Ludwig von. The History of the Popes from the Close of the Middle Ages, 5th ed. 34 vols. St. Louis, MO, 1923–41.

Patetta, Luciano, L’architettura del Quattrocento a Milano. Milan, 1987. Bramante e la sua cerchia a Milano e in Lombardia 1480–1500. Milan, 2001.Payne, Cynthia A. “‘In the Fullness of Time’: The Vault Mosaic in the Cappella Sant’Elena,

Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, Rome.” Ph.D. diss., University of Georgia, 2003.Pederson, Jill. “Henrico Boscano’s ‘Isola beata’: New Evidence for the Academia Leonardi

Vinci in Renaissance Milan.” Renaissance Studies 22 (2008): 450–75.Peebles, B. M. “La meta Romuli e una lettera di Michele Ferno.” Atti della Pontificia

Accademia Romana di Archeologia, ser. 3, Rendiconti 12 (1936): 21–63.Pentrella, Ruggero, ed. Fabbriche romane del primo ‘500, cinque secoli di restauri.

Rome, 1984.Pereda, Felipe. “Pedro González de Mendoza, de Toledo a Roma. El patronazgo de Santa

Croce in Gerusalemme. Entre la arqueología y la filología.” In Les Cardinaux de la Renaissance et la modernité artistique, edited by Frédérique Lemerle, Yves Pauwels, and Gennaro Toscano, 217–43. Villeneuve-d’Ascq, 2009.

Périnelle, G. “Louis XI bienfaiteur des églises de Rome.” Mélanges d’archéologie et d’histoire d’École de France 23 (1903): 131–59.

Pinelli, Antonio, ed. San Pietro in Vaticano. 4 vols. Modena, 2000.


Pita Andrade, José Manuel, ed. El libro de la Capilla Real. Granada, 1994.Podestà, B. “Carlo V a Roma nell’anno 1536.” Archivio della Società Romana di Storia Patria

1 (1878): 303–44.Poeschke, Joachim, ed. Antike Spolien in der Architektur des Mittelalters und der Renaissance.

Munich, 1996.Pou y Martí, José M. “Felipe III y los santuarios franciscanos de Italia, 1: Chiesa Nuova de

Asís,” Archivo Ibero-Americano 3 (Jan.–Feb. 1915): 212–33. “Felipe III y los santuarios Franciscanos de Italia, III. San Pedro in Montorio, en

Roma.” Archivo Ibero-Americano anno 3, no. 13 (Jan.–Feb. 1916): 214–41. “Un monumento de los Reyes Católicos en Roma.” In Fernando el Católico e Italia. Actas

del V Congreso de Historia de la Corona de Aragón, 3, edited by Alberto Boscolo, 254–55. Zaragoza, 1954.

Pou y Martí, José M., ed. Bullarium franciscanum continens constitutiones, epistolas, diplomata Romanorum pontificum, nova series. Vol. 3, 1471–84. Quaracchi, 1949.

Prescott, William H. History of the Reign of Ferdinand and Isabella. 3 vols. Boston, 1838.Real Monasterio-Palacio de El Escorial. Estudios inéditos en conmemoración del IV Centenario de

la terminación de las obras. Madrid, 1987.Redondo Cantera, María José. “La Capilla Real de Granada como pantéon dinástico

durante los reinados de Carlos V y Felipe II: problemas e indecisiones. Nuevos datos sobre el sepulcro de Felipe el hermoso y Juana la Loca.” In Borngässer, Karge, and Klein, Grabkunst und Sepulkralkultur, 403–18.

“Los sepulcros de la Capilla Real de Granada.” In Juana I en Tordesillas: su mundo, su entorno, edited by Miguel Á. Zalama, 185–214. Valladolid, 2010.

Reeves, Marjorie. The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages, a Study in Joachimism. Oxford, 1969.

ed. Prophetic Rome in the High Renaissance Period. Oxford, 1992.Riegel, Nicole. “San Pietro in Montorio in Rom. Die Votivkirche der katholischen Könige

Isabella und Ferdinand von Spanien.” Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana 32 (1997–98): 273–319.

Riess, Jonathan B. The Renaissance Antichrist, Luca Signorelli’s Orvieto Frescoes. Princeton, 1995.

Rincón González, María Dolores, ed. Historia Baetica de Carlo Verardi: drama humanístico sobre la toma de Granada. Granada, 1992.

ed. “La divulgación de la toma de Granada: objetivos, mecanismos y agentes.” Anuario de estudios medievales 40, no. 2 (2010): 603–15.

Rodríguez de Monforte, Pedro. Descripcion de las honras que se hicieron a la Catholica Magd. de D. Phelippe quarto rey de las Españas y del nuevo Mundo en el Real Conuento de la Encarnacion . . . Madrid, 1666.

Röll, Johannes. “The Ciborium of Sixtus IV.” In Sisto IV: le arti a Roma nel primo Rinascimento, edited by Fabio Benzi, 385–97. Rome, 2000.

Rosenthal, Earl. “A Renaissance ‘Copy’ of the Holy Sepulchre.” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 17 (1958): 2–11.

Cathedral of Granada, a Study in the Spanish Renaissance. Princeton, 1961. “The Antecedents of Bramante’s Tempietto.” Journal of the Society of Architectural

Historians 23 (1964): 55–74.Roser, Hannes. St. Peter in Rom im 15. Jahrhundert: Studien zu Architektur und skulpturaler

Ausstattung. Römische Studien der Bibliotheca Hertziana, 19. Munich, 2005.Rossetti, Edoardo. “Uno spagnolo tra i francesi e la devozione gesuata: il cardinale

Bernardino Carvajal e il monastero di San Girolamo di porta Vercellina a Milano.”


In Le duché de Milan et les commanditaires français (1499-1521), edited by Frédéric Elsig and Mauro Natale, 181–235. Rome, 2013.

Rossini, Luigi. I monumenti più interessanti di Roma dal decimo secolo al secolo decimottavo. Rome, n.d. [1818].

Rowland, Ingrid D. “Render Unto Caesar the Things Which are Caesar’s: Humanism and the Arts in the Patronage of Agostino Chigi.” Renaissance Quarterly 39 (1986): 673–730.

“Raphael, Angelo Colocci, and the Genesis of the Architectural Orders.” Art Bulletin 76 (1994): 84–104.

The Culture of the High Renaissance: Ancients and Moderns in Sixteenth-Century Rome. Cambridge and New York, 1998.

“Bramante’s Hetruscan Tempietto.” Memoirs of the American Academy in Rome 51–52 (2006–07): 225–38.

Sackur, Ernst. Sibyllinsche Texte und Forschungen, Pseudomethodius, Adso, und die tiburtinische Sibylle. Halle a.S., 1898.

Sagredo, Diego de. Medidas del Romano: necesarias a los oficiales que quieren seguir las formaciones de las basas, colunas, capiteles y otras pieças de los edificios antiguos. Toledo, 1526.

Salerno, Carlo Stefano, and Caterina Volpi. “Il Tempietto del Bramante.” In San Pietro di Montorio, La Spagna sul Gianicolo, 1, edited by Alessandro Zuccari, 57–91. Rome, 2004.

Sánchez Ameijeras, Rocio. “La memoria de un rey victorioso: los sepolcros de Alfonso VIII y la Fiesta del Triunfo de la Santa Cruz.” In Borngässer, Karge, and Klein, Grabkunst und Sepulkralkultur, 289–315.

Sancho Roda, José. “Proyecto de restauración del templete de Bramante (Italia).” Restauración & rehabilitación, no. 18 (1998): 28–37.

Sancho Roda, José, and Antonio Sánchez Barriga Fernández. “El templete de Bramante restaurado.” Restauración & rehabilitación, no. 30 (1999): 26–35.

“La restauración del Templete de Bramante en Roma.” In Restaurar la memoria, Actas del Congreso Internacional AR&PA 2000, 135–54. Valladolid, 2001.

Sanuto, Marino. Diarii. 58 vols. Venice, 1879–1902.Satzinger, Georg. “Spolien in der römischen Architektur des Quattrocento.” In Poeschke,

Antike Spolien, 249–76.Scafi, Alessandro. “The African Paradise of Cardinal Carvajal: New Light on the

‘Kunstmann II Map,’ 1502–1506.” Renaissance and Reformation 31, no. 2 (Spring 2008): 7–28.

Schedel, Hartmann. Liber chronicarum. Nuremburg, 1493.Schein, Sylvia. “Between Mount Moriah and the Holy Sepulchre: The Changing

Traditions of the Temple Mount in the Central Middle Ages.” Traditio 40 (1984): 175–95.

Gateway to the Heavenly City: Crusader Jerusalem and the Catholic West (1099–1187). Aldershot, 2005.

Scheller, Robert W. “Imperial Themes in Art and Literature of the Early French Renaissance: The Period of Charles VIII.” Simiolus 12 (1981–82): 5–69.

Schofield, Richard. “Bramante and Amadeo at Santa Maria delle Grazie in Milan.” Arte lombarda 78 (1986): 41–58.

“Florentine and Roman Elements in Bramante’s Milanese Architecture.” In Florence and Milan, Comparisons and Relations, edited by Craig Hugh Smyth and G. C. Garfagnini, 2 vols., 1:201–22. Florence, 1989.


“Gaspare Visconti, mecenate del Bramante.” In Arte, committenza ed economia a Roma e nelle corti del Rinascimento (1420–1530), edited by Arnold Esch and Christoph Luitpold Frommel, 297–330. Turin, 1995.

Schrader, Lorenz. Monumentorum Italiae quae hoc nostro saeculo & a christianis posita sunt, libri quatuor. Helmstadt, 1592.

Serlio, Sebastiano. Regole generali di architettura. Venice, 1537. Il terzo libro . . . nel qual si figurano, e descrivono le antiquita di Roma, e le altre che sono in

Italia, e fuori d’Italia. Venice, 1540.Settis, Salvatore, ed. Memoria dell’antico nell’arte italiana. 3 vols. Turin, 1984–86.Setton, Kenneth M. The Papacy and the Levant (1204–1571). 4 vols. Philadelphia,

1976–84.Sevesi, Paolo Maria. B. Amedeo Menez de Sylva dei frati minori, fondatore degli Amadeiti (Vita

inedita di Fra Mariano da Firenze e documenti inediti). Florence, 1912. Extract from Luce e Amore 8 (1911): 14–19.

“S. Carlo Borromeo e le congregazioni degli Amadeiti e dei Clareni.” Archivum franciscanum historicum 37 (1944): 104–64.

Shearman, John. Raphael in Early Modern Sources: 1483–1602. 2 vols. New Haven and London, 2003.

Sinding-Larsen, Staale. “Some Functional and Iconographical Aspects of the Centralized Church in the Italian Renaissance.” Acta ad Archaeologiam et Artium Historiam Pertinentia 2 (1965): 203–53.

Spagnesi, Piero “La chiesa dei Re di Spagna: S. Pietro in Montorio a Roma.” Napoli nobilissima 29, nos. 1–4 (Jan.-Aug. 1990): 17–22.

Spila, Benedetto. Memorie storiche della provincia riformata romana. 3 vols. Rome, 1890–96.

Spreti, Desiderio. De amplitudine, eversione, et restauratione urbis Ravennae, libri tres. Venice, 1489. Edited by Camillo Spreti. 3 vols. Ravenna, 1793–96.

Stacey, Peter. “Hispania and Royal Humanism in Alfonsine Naples.” Mediterranean Historical Review 26 (2011): 51–65.

Steinby, Eva Margareta, ed. Lexicon topographicum urbis Romae. 6 vols. Rome, 1993–2000. ed. Ianiculum-Gianicolo, Acta Instituti Romana Finlandiae, 16. Rome, 1996.Stephens, Walter Earl. “Berosus Chaldaeus: Counterfeit and Fictive Editors of the Early

Sixteenth Century.” Ph.D. diss., Cornell University, 1979. “The Etruscans and the Ancient Theology in Annius of Viterbo.” In Umanesimo a Roma

nel Quattrocento, edited by Paolo Brezzi and Maristella de Panizza Lorch, 309–22. Rome and New York, 1984.

Giants in Those Days, Folklore, Ancient History, and Nationalism. Lincoln, NE, 1989.Studi bramanteschi. Rome, 1974.Tafuri, Manfredo. “‘Roma instaurata’: Strategie urbane e politiche pontificie nella Roma

del primo ‘500.” In Raffaello architetto, edited by Christoph Luitpold Frommel, Stefano Ray, and Manfredo Tafuri, 59–106. Milan, 1984.

Tanner, Marie. The Last Descendant of Aeneas: The Hapsburgs and the Mythic Image of the Emperor. New Haven and London, 1993.

Jerusalem on the Hill: Rome and the Vision of St. Peter’s Basilica in the Renaissance. London and Turnhout, 2010.

Tate, Robert B. “Mythology in Spanish Historiography of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance,” Hispanic Review 23 (1954): 1–18.

“La geografia humanistica y los historiadores del siglo XV.” In Actas del cuarto Congreso Internacional de Hispanistas. 2 vols., 2:691–98. Salamanca, 1982.


“The Rewriting of the Historical Past: Hispania et Europa.” In Historical Literature in Medieval Iberia, edited by Alan Deyermond, 85–103. London, 1996.

Tavernor, Robert. On Alberti and the Art of Building. New Haven and London, 1998.Thoenes, Christof. “Il Tempietto di Bramante e la costruzione della ‘dorico genere

aedis sacrae.’” In Per Franco Barbieri, studi dell’arte e dell’architettura, edited by Elisa Avagnina and Guido Beltramini, 435–48. Venice, 2004.

Thoenes, Christof, and Hubertus Günther. “Gli ordini architettonici, rinascita o invenzione.” In Roma e l’antico nell’arte e nella cultura del Cinquecento, edited by Marcello Fagiolo, 261–310. Rome, 1985.

Tibaudo, Giuseppe. “Precisazioni sul Tempietto di S. Pietro in Montorio.” In Studi bramanteschi, 513–16.

Tiberia, Vitaliano. L’affresco restaurato con storie della Croce nella basilica di Santa Croce in Gerusalemme a Roma. Todi, 2001.

Toesca, Ilaria. “A Majolica Inscription in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme.” In Essays in the History of Art Presented to Rudolf Wittkower, edited by Douglas Fraser, Howard Hibbard, and Milton J. Lewine, 102–05. London, 1967.

Tomei, Pietro. L’architettura a Roma nel Quattrocento. Rome, 1942.Tormo y Monzó, Elías. Monumentos de españoles en Roma, y de portugueses e hispano-

americanos. 2 vols. Rome 1940–42.Treffers, Bert. “Franciscus Redivivus: Angelo del Pas e la cappella de’ Vecchi in S. Pietro

in Montorio.” Antonianum 64 (1989): 518–39.Tronzo, William, ed. St. Peter’s in the Vatican. Cambridge and New York, 2005.Ugonio, Pompeo. Historia delle stationi di Roma che si celebrano da quadragesima . . .

Rome, 1588.Urban, Günter. “Die Kirchenbaukunst des Quattrocento in Rom: Eine bau- und

stilgeschichtliche Untersuchung.” Römisches Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 9–10 (1961–62): 73–287.

Valentini, Roberto, and Giuseppe Zucchetti, eds. Codice topografico della città di Roma . . . 4 vols. Rome, 1940–53.

Vannicelli, Primo Luigi. S. Pietro in Montorio e il Tempietto di Bramante. Rome, 1971.van Tongeren, Louis. Exaltation of the Cross: Toward the Origins of the Feast of the Cross and

the Meaning of the Cross in Early Medieval Liturgy. Leuven, 2000.Vaquero Piñeiro, Manuel. “I funerali romani del principe Giovanni e della regina Isabella

di Castiglia: rituale politico al servizio della monarchia spagnola.” In Chiabò, Maddalo, Miglio, and Oliva, Roma di fronte all’Europa, 2:641–55.

ed. Viaggiatori spagnoli a Roma nel Rinascimento. Bologna, 2001.Varagnoli, Claudio. S. Croce in Gerusalemme: La basilica restaurata e l’architettura del

settecento romano. Rome, 1995.Vasoli, Cesare. “Profezia e astrologia in un testo di Annio da Viterbo.” In Studi sul

medioevo cristiano offerti a Raffaelo Morghen per il 90 anniversario dell’Istituto Storico Italiano (1873–1973). 2 vols., 2:1027–60. Rome, 1974.

Profezia e ragione, studi sulla cultura del Cinquecento e del Seicento. Naples, 1974. I miti e gli astri. Naples, 1977. “Giorgio Benigno Salviati (Dragišić).” In Reeves, Prophetic Rome, 139–45.Vecce, Carlo, ed. Donato Bramante, sonetti e altri scritti. Rome, 1995.Venturi, Adolfo. Storia dell’arte italiana. 11 vols. in 25. Milan, 1901–40.Verardi, Carlo. Historia Baetica. La caduta di Granata nel 1492. Edited by Maria Chiabò,

Paola Farenga, and Massimo Miglio. Rome, 1993.


Villalba Ruiz de Toledo, Francisco Javier. El Cardenal Mendoza (1428–1495). Madrid, 1988.Vitruvius. Ten Books on Architecture. Edited by Ingrid D. Rowland and Thomas Noble

Howe, translated by Ingrid D. Rowland. Cambridge and New York, 1999.Voragine, Jacobus de. The Golden Legend: Readings on the Saints. Translated by William

Granger Ryan. 2 vols. Princeton, 1995.Wadding, Luke. Annales minorum seu trium ordinum a S. Francisco institutorum . . . , vol. 14,

3rd ed. Edited by Joseph Maria Fonseca. Quaracchi 1933.Weiss, Roberto. “Traccia per una biografia di Annio da Viterbo.” Italia medioevale e

umanistica 5 (1962): 425–41.Westfall, Caroll William. In This Most Perfect Paradise: Alberti, Nicholas V, and the Invention

of Conscious Urban Planning in Rome, 1447–55. University Park, PA, 1974.Wilkinson Zerner, Catherine. Juan de Herrera, Architect to Philip II of Spain. New Haven

and London, 1993.Wittkower, Rudolph. Architectural Principles in the Age of Humanism, 3rd ed. New

York, 1971.Yarza Luaces, Joaquín. “Imágenes reales hispanas en el fin de la Edad Media.” In Poderes

públicos en la Europa medieval: principados, reinos y coronas, 441–500. Pamplona, 1997.Zampa, Paola. “Antonio da Sangallo il Vecchio, l’impiego del fregio dorico nei disegni e

nell’opera.” Annali di architettura 15 (2003): 59–73. “La basilica Emilia.” In Fiore and Nesselrath, Roma di Leon Battista Alberti, 214–23. “L’Ordine dorico nel ‘De re aedificatoria’: modelli e interpretazioni.” In Leon Battista

Alberti, teorico delle arti e gli impegni civili del “De re aedificatoria,” edited by Arturo Calzona, Francesco Paolo Fiore, Alberto Tenenti, and Cesare Vasoli. 2 vols., 2:859–92. Florence, 2007.

Zuccari, Alessandro, ed. San Pietro in Montorio. La Spagna sul Gianicolo, 1. Rome, 2004.Zurita, Jerónimo. Historia del rey don Hernando el Cathólico: de las empresas, y ligas de Italia.

2 vols. Zaragoza, 1580.

303

Index

Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan, Caliph, 92Academia Española de Bellas Artes en

Roma, 195–97, 201–2Acqua Paola, 181Acts (Bible), 131Adam, 88, 116Adrian VI, Pope, 21Aelst, Pieter Cocke van, 171Aeneas, 76, 77, 99, 159–60The Aeneid, 77Aguado, Francisco, 279n6Albert, Archduke of Austria, 24, 228n66,

277n99Alberti, Leon Battista

generally, 92, 99, 127Bramante compared, 71, 99centralized plan and, 99Doric system and, 105, 115pavement and, 134–35Rucellai chapel (Holy Sepulcher) and, 96

Albertini, Francesco, 24, 26, 77, 115, 220n16, 234n41, 243n39

Albunea (Tiburtine Sibyl), 81–83Alexander VI, Pope

generally, 11, 43, 83, 132, 184, 220–21n18, 244n52

Alexander the Great and, 80Amadeite order and, 55Annius of Viterbo and, 115Bramante and, 3, 72Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 5–6, 20–21,

73, 145Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme) and, 30

Charles VIII and, 60, 149demarcation of New World

and, 32Ferdinand and Isabel and, 60–61, 126Hadrian and, 78–80historical background, 2, 5–6, 220–21n18Kingdom of Sicily and, 149Order of Saint James Major and, 126San Pietro in Montorio and, 50, 59,

205, 208Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 13,

226n50Tivoli and, 78–80, 81Treaty of Granada (1500)

and, 266n56Alexander VII, Pope, 278n106Alexander the Great, 88, 169, 170–71,

244n56, 272–73n46Alexander Minorita (Alexander of

Bremen), 19Alfonso V, King of Aragon and Naples, 2,

148–49, 150, 152Alfonso V, King of Portugal, 48,

222n6Alfonso VIII, King of Castile, 18Alfonso X the Wise, King of

Castile, 6Alfonso XII, King of Spain, 195–97,

201–2Alfonso XIII, King of Spain, 202, 281n31,

281n35Alighieri, Dante, 134Altar of Tempietto, 153–57, 268n87,

268n89

304 • Index

Amadeo (João de Meneses de Silva) generally, 48, 264n33Amadeite order, 45–49, 50, 51, 52–53, 87,

144–48, 162, 234n49, 247n82, 264n31Apocalypsis nova, 87, 144–48, 157, 225n41,

264n27, 265n48, 269n6Ferdinand and, 47–48grotto at San Pietro in Montorio and, 87,

144, 146, 247n81Leo X and, 87Louis XI and, 46–48San Pietro in Montorio and, 45–49,

52–55, 87, 161Sixtus IV and, 45, 46, 47Tempietto and, 87, 146–47

Amalaric, King of the Visigoths, 91Ambrose, Saint, 24, 58, 230n4Ammanati, Bartolommeo, 162, 241n14Andrew (Apostle), 91, 125Angelini, Annibale. See Pietro di Madre

di DioAnghiera, Pietro Martire d’, 31–32, 151,

267n72Annius of Viterbo, 115–18, 119–20, 257n78Anthonisz, Cornelis, 172–73Antiquarie prospettiche romane, 71–72Antoniazzo Romano, 13Apocalypsis nova (Amadeo), 87, 144–48, 157,

225n41, 264n27, 265n48, 269n6Apsidal chapels in San Pietro in Montorio

and antecedents, 55–56Arculf, 95–96Arévalo, Rodrigo Sánchez de, 4Aristotle, 6Augustine, Saint, 82Augustus, 83–85, 171–72Averroes, 6Avicenna, 6

Balustrade of Tempietto and antecedents, 99, 126–32

Barbarossa, Hayreddin, 167, 168Barberini, Francesco, 175Barbo, Pietro (Pope Paul II), 11Barocci, Federico, 159–60, 269n5Baronio, Cesare, 271n20Basilica Aemilia, 113, 120Bede (Venerable Bede), 95–96, 230n4Bejazet II, Sultan, 86

Belgrade, Battle of (1456), 5, 161Belvedere (courtyard), 103–5Benedict XIII, antipope, 6Benedict XIV, Pope, 281n24Benigno Salviati, Giorgio, 87, 145–46Bernini, Gianlorenzo, 191–93Bessarion, Cardinal, 5Biondo, Flavio, 42–44, 76, 78Boccafuoco, Costanzo, 271n19Borghese, Scipione, 182Borgia, Alfonso. See Callixtus IIIBorgia, Gaspare, 184, 210, 213,

214, 218Borgia, Lucrezia, 78Borgia, Rodrigo. See Alexander VIBorromeo, Charles, 270n15Bracciolini, Poggio, 76Bramante, Donato. See also Tempietto.

generally, 1, 3, 78, 197–98, 202, 204Alberti compared, 71, 97, 99Ammanati and, 71n14Belvedere courtyard, 103–5arrival in Rome, 71Brunelleschi compared, 70–71, 102Carafa, Olivero and, 72, 78Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 72–73Francesco di Giorgio compared, 71,

106–7intellect of, 102–5Julius II and, 1, 103–5, 137, 248n98Leonardo da Vinci and, 71, 80, 103, 131Milan, monuments, and, 253n31palace of Adriano Castellesi and, 113palace of Raffaele Riario and, 107, 111Pavia Cathedral and, 73petrology and, 106–7poems by, 102–3Saint Peter’s and, 1, 66, 72, 251n11Sangallo, Giuliano da and, 71, 126San Giacomo degli Spagnoli and, 3,

72–73Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 26Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan and,

58, 73Santa Maria presso San Satiro, Milan,

and, 123Tivoli and, 80Vasari on, 2–3, 70–73, 80, 102–5,

107, 121

Index • 305

Vigevano and, 73Visconti, Gaspare and, 102–3

Bramantino (Bartolomeo Suardi), 147Brant, Sebastian, 19, 93–94Brasca, Santo, 97Brescia, Silvestro da, 48Breydenbach, Bernhard von, 93–94, 96Brunelleschi, Filippo

generally, 71Bramante compared, 70–71, 102Florence Cathedral and, 88, 123Ospedale degli Innocenti, Florence

and, 58–59San Lorenzo, Florence and, 11, 58–59Santo Spirito, Florence and, 55, 58–59

Bull as symbol of Spain, 83Buonarroti, Michelangelo. See MichelangeloBurchard, Johannes, 12, 13, 73, 143Byzantine imperial inheritance, 152–53

Caccianemici, Ubaldo de (Pope Lucius II), 12

Cacus, 76–77Caius Sestius, 43Callixtus III, Pope, 2, 4–5, 6, 91, 161,

272n44Cambio, Arnolfo di, 102Camporese, Giuseppe, 197Capistran, John, 5Capponi, Gisella, 282n37Carafa, Oliviero, 72, 78, 141, 261n118Caramuel, Juan, 137–38, 139Cardinal of Portugal Chapel (San Miniato al

Monte, Florence), 59, 133–34Carracci, Agostino, 160Carvajal, Bernardino López de

generally, 74, 150, 161, 219–20n5, 227n57, 244n47, 264n31

Amadeite order and, 145, 148as ambassador of Ferdinand and Isabel, 3,

5–7, 8, 32Apocalypsis nova and, 144–48, 157Benigno, Giorgio and, 145–46Annius of Viterbo and, 117–18, 257n78Bramante and, 26, 72–73, 144burial of, 165Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme) and, 23–34, 229n88Charles VIII and, 149

coat of arms, 32, 33–34, 230n96, 271n27

Council of Pisa (1511) and, 146crusade and, 272n38demarcation of New World and, 32device, 229n89epigraphs and, 141foundation stone of Tempietto and,

139–40historical background, 3, 5–8, 63Julius II and, 146, 230n96Kingdom of Sicily and, 149, 266n58as Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, 36,

230n96Leo X and, 146, 244n47Leto, Giulio Pomponio and, 32, 74Anghiera, Pietro Martire d’ and, 31–32Maximilian I and, 19–20, 34, 36, 73Mendoza, Pedro González de, and,

9–10, 13–14Milan and, 73portrait medal, 220n7prophecy and, 19, 20, 85San Giacomo degli Spagnoli and, 7, 8,

72–73, 150San Pietro in Montorio and, 3, 37–39,

49–51, 59–60, 230n3, 236n68Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 3,

9–10, 13–14, 20–22, 24, 34–36, 37–38, 163, 165

Savonarola and, 145Tempietto and, 63, 81, 157

Carvajal, Juan de, 3–5, 161Carvajal family, 3Casa de la Conchas, Salamanca, 259n102Castelar, Emilio, 197Castellesi, Adriano, 113Castellon, Jorge de, 49Castel Sant’Angelo, 79, 169, 244n52Cavallini, Pietro, 83Celestine V, Pope, 43, 231n16Cesati, Alessandro, 169–71Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce

in Gerusalemme), 23–34, 59, 73, 277n99

Charlemagne, 170Charles I, King of Spain, 2, 19, 36, 127, 129,

151, 239n104. See also Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor

306 • Index

Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor. See also Charles I, King of Spain

generally, 272n38, 272–73n46, 274n61Battle of Tunis (1535) and, 167, 272n44Paul III and, 164–71San Pietro in Montorio and, 180, 272n36Tempietto and, 164–80

Charles VIII, King of France generally, 142, 153, 266n60Italy, invasion of, 60, 149–50, 151–53,

266n54Naples, invasion of, 142, 149–50, 152Santa Petronilla and, 91

Charles I of Anjou, King of Naples and Sicily, 148, 150

Charles the Bold, Duke of Burgundy, 152–53

Chosröes, King of Persia, 16, 19–20Christ. See JesusCiboria, 85–87, 88, 132, 154, 174, 178,

232n19, 246n76, 247n86Circignani, Nicoló (il Pomarancio), 228n66Cisneros, Jimenez de, 127Clement I, Pope, 110Clement IV, Pope, 148Clement VI, Pope, 151Clement VII, Pope, 74, 161, 164Clement VIII, Pope, 190, 276n80Codex Coner, 66Codex Magliabechiano, 1–2, 241n12Colegio de Santa Cruz, Valladolid, 11, 129Colosseum, 71–72, 113Columbus, Christopher, 31, 33, 144,

151, 202Comestor, Petrus, 169Commentaries of Friar Giovanni Nanni of

Viterbo on the Works of Various Authors who Speak about Antiquities (Annius of Viterbo), 115–18

Conde Coello de Portugal, 197, 279n5Constance of Hohenstaufen, 148Constantine the Great

generally, 9, 12, 30, 82, 89, 92, 110, 122, 170

arch of, 168Holy Sepulcher and, 92True Cross Cycle and, 15–16, 17–18

Constantine XI, 152Córdoba, Gonzalo Fernández de, 149

Cosmatesque pavements, 132–34, 188Council of Ferrara-Florence (1438–39),

232n20Council of Pisa (1511), 146–47Council of Trent, 170crusade, promotion of, 4–5, 14, 18, 20, 36,

150, 153, 168, 249n106, 272n38

Damasus I, Pope, 6Dampiés, Martín Martínez, 93Daniel (Bible), 169, 170–71Daniele da Volterra, 162–63Dante Aligheri, 134David, 118, 167, 272n31Delfini d’Amelia, Egidio, 145–46del Monte family, 162–63Dolera, Clemente, 163Domenico di Gesù Maria (Domingo

Ruzola), 137–38, 182–90, 193–94, 209–13, 214–18

Dome of the Rock as model for Tempietto, 92, 93–94, 249n106

Dome-upon-drum design, 88–89Doric system, 111–20Dragišić, Juraj. See Benigno Salviati, GiorgioDurandus of Mende, 99

Egas, Enrique, 173–74Egidio da Viterbo, 117eschatology. See prophecyEscorial. See San Lorenzo at the Escoriald’Este, Ippolito, 78, 244n47Etruscans in Renaissance thought, 8,

115–17, 118–19, 255–56n5Eucharist, 88, 164–65, 174, 178–80, 191–92,

265n48Eugenius IV, Pope, 24, 44, 228n65Eusebius, 12, 110, 232n18, 245n66Evander, 77Exaltation of the True Cross (Feast), 17, 19Ezekiel (Bible), 131

Farnese, Alessandro (Pope Paul III), 161Farnese palace, Caprarola, 163Fea, Carlo, 197Federico, King of Naples, 149Ferdinand II, King of Aragon

generally, 81, 171–72, 202–3, 204, 274n62

Index • 307

Alexander the Great compared, 244n56Amadeo and, 47–48Annius of Viterbo and, 117, 118Byzantine imperial inheritance and,

152–53as Catholic king, 60–61Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme) and, 30, 33, 34coat of arms, 33, 52, 61–62, 129, 154Columbus and, 31Compostela and, 126Constantine compared, 17–18Constantinople and, 152–53, 168crusade and, 33, 152–53, 249n106as Duke of Athens, 158Franciscan order and, 48Granada, Royal Chapel, and, 129, 178–80Granada war and, 7, 11, 13, 19, 29, 33, 34,

60–62, 125–26, 142, 144, 151, 153, 179historical background, 2, 3, 6–7, 8Jerusalem, connection with, 150–52, 167,

267n72, 275n69as King of Granada, 33, 129as King of Jerusalem, 150as King of Naples and Sicily, 150–52Kingdom of Sicily, conquest of, 148–49,

150–52Order of Saint James and, 126Palaeologus, Andreas and, 152–53prophecy and, 19, 83–85, 151–52, 153–57San Juan de los Reyes, Toledo and,

274n62San Pietro in Montorio and, 37, 39,

47–48, 49–51, 60–62, 234n45, 235n50Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 10–13,

17–18, 224n32Tempietto and, 101, 138–39, 153–57,

197–98Tiburtine Sibyl and, 83–85Virgilian Golden Age and, 83–85

Ferdinand II, Holy Roman Emperor, 183Fernández da Murcia, Pedro, 147, 265n46Ferrante I, King of Naples, 148–49Filarete, 44, 88–89, 105, 135First Roman Republic, Tempietto in, 139,

161, 186, 197Flandes, Juan de, 275n69Flavius Josephus, 117, 122, 169Florence Cathedral, 88, 123

Fonseca, Alfonso de, 127Forcella, Vincenzo, 205–6Forum Boarium, 74–78, 91, 127, 243n42Fourth Imperial Diet, Speyer (1534), 170Fourth Lateran Council (1215), 45France. See also specific monarch

Kingdom of Sicily and, 142, 148–49, 150

Spain and, 150, 153, 170Francesco di Giorgio, 51, 52

generally, 89, 119, 127balustrade and, 129Bramante compared, 71, 106–7columns and, 105petrology and, 106–7San Pietro in Montorio and, 51, 52Santa Maria delle Grazie al Calcinaio,

Cortona and, 52, 55, 88Tivoli and, 78, 80

Francis, Saint, 45, 52–53, 56, 60, 236n76Francis I, King of France, 168Franco, Francisco, 202–3, 281nn35–36Frederick II, Holy Roman Emperor,

148–49, 150, 157Frederick III, Holy Roman Emperor,

4–5, 44Frederick V, King of Bohemia, 183Fulvio, Andrea, 74–78, 81–82, 85, 101

Gabriel (Archangel), 87, 144, 147Gaddi, Agnolo, 16Galla Placidia (daughter of Theodosius), 24,

59, 73, 238–39n100Garibaldi, Giuseppe, 199Génas, François de, 46–47George, Saint, 112, 179Granada Cathedral, 158, 173, 192,

193–94Granada, Royal Chapel, 129, 178–79,

274n62granite columns in Tempietto, 105–11Gregorio da Roma, 206Gregory I (Gregory the Great),

Pope, 4, 13Gregory XIII, Pope, 163Gregory XV, Pope, 190–91Grimaldi, Giacomo, 86Grünenberg, Konrad von, 97–99Guicciardini, Francesco, 149

308 • Index

Hadrian generally, 6Alexander VI and, 78–80Jerusalem and, 79mausoleum of (Castel Sant’Angelo),

42–43, 79, 88–89, 169, 244n52Spanish heritage of, 6, 78, 79, 85, 244n52Tivoli and, 26, 71, 78–80, 81, 85villa of, 26, 71, 80, 252n17

al-Hakim, Caliph, 94–95Haro, Diego López de, 5, 7Helen, Saint

in Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in Gerusalemme) mosaics, 23–34, 59, 73, 277n99

Judas-Cyriacus and, 18–19relics of Christ’s Passion and, 9, 165Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and,

9–10, 11in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme frescoes,

14, 16, 17–18, 20Henry VIII, King of England, 163Heraclius

Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in Gerusalemme) and, 30, 34

as crusader, 19–20, 30in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme frescoes,

16, 17–18, 20Hercules, 76–77, 112, 118, 129, 171, 203Heredia, Gonzalo Fernández de, 5, 235n50Herrera, Juan de, 174–75, 275n70Herrero y Herrero, Alejandro, 195Hiram of Tyre, 131–32Hohenstaufen inheritance, 148–49Holy League (1538), 168, 272–73n46Holy Roman Empire. See specific emperorHoly Sepulcher

Constantine the Great and, 12, 92Ferdinand and Isabel and, 151, 267n72,

267n76Hadrian and, 79Philip II and, 151Saint Peter’s compared, 39, 249n111Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 12,

227n61Tempietto, as model for, 92–93, 94–101

Honoria (sister of Valentinian III), 24Honorius, 248n95Honorius of Autun, 99

Horace, 115Hospital de Santa Cruz, Toledo, 11,

260n112Hugonet, Philibert, 46–47Hunyadi, John, 5Hymns to the Cross and Chapel of Saint

Helen (Santa Croce in Gerusalemme), 30, 34, 229n89, 229–30n92

Ignatius of Loyola, 162, 270n12Ildephonsus, Saint, 6, 195indulgences

in San Giacomo degli Spagnoli, 264n26in San Pietro in Montorio, 59–60in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, 13, 17,

23, 36, 227n60in the Tempietto, 161–62, 167, 168, 216

Innocent III, Pope, 14, 18, 56Innocent IV, Pope, 148Innocent VIII, Pope

generally, 10, 54–55, 60, 151, 264n33, 267n67

historical background, 220–21n18indulgences and, 264n26Saint Peter’s and, 86San Pietro in Montorio and, 53–55, 60Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 10, 13Titulus Crucis and, 143

Innocent X, Pope, 278n106Invention of the True Cross (Feast), 11, 17,

20, 30, 32Isabel I, Queen of Castile

generally, 81, 117, 118, 202–3, 204, 274n62

Byzantine imperial inheritance and, 152–53

as Catholic queen, 60–61Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme) and, 24, 30, 31, 34coat of arms, 33, 52, 61–62, 129, 154Columbus and, 31Compostela and, 126Constantinople and, 152, 168Franciscan order and, 48Granada, Royal Chapel, and, 129, 178–80historical background, 2, 3, 6–7, 8James Major and, 126Jerusalem, connection with, 150–52, 167,

267n67, 275n69

Index • 309

Kingdom of Sicily and, 148–49, 150–52Order of Saint James and, 126Palaeologus, Andreas, and, 152–53as Queen of Granada, 33, 129as Queen of Jerusalem, 150as Queen of Sicily, 265n50Saint Helen compared, 17–18San Juan de los Reyes, Toledo and, 274n62San Pietro in Montorio and, 40–42, 60–62Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 10–13,

17–18, 224n32Tempietto and, 101, 153–54, 157,

197–98, 199Isabel Clara Eugenia, Infanta of Flanders,

187, 277n99Isabel of Portugal, Queen of Castile, 47–48,

274n62Isabel of Portugal, Queen of Spain,

178–79Isaiah (Bible), 5–6Isidore of Seville, 6, 117, 135, 243n43,

245n62Istituto Centrale per il Restauro, 203

James II, King of Aragon and Sicily, 150James Major, Saint

generally, 111Alexander VI and, 126Escorial and, 179Feast of, 264n26Ferdinand and, 126Isabel and, 126Order of, 126Saint Peter’s and, 91Spain, relation to, 6, 7, 125–26

James of Lusitania (Cardinal of Portugal), 59, 133–34

Janiculum Hill, 37, 42–45, 52, 74, 115, 116, 171–72, 198, 199–201, 203–4, 231n12, 237n79, 271n20

Janus, 116, 171–72, 237n79, 256–57n67Jerusalem. See also Holy Sepulcher

Carvajal, Bernardino de, as Latin Patriarch of, 36, 230n96

as center of world, 99Ferdinand, connection with, 150–52, 167,

267n72, 275n69Isabel, connection with, 150–52, 167,

267n76, 275n69

Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, link to, 12–13, 165–67

Spain, connection with, 150–51Temple of Solomon, 131–32

Jesus generally, 83–85, 125, 153–54Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme), depiction in, 26–28, 228n78

as cornerstone of the Temple, 111Crucifixion of, 87–88Doric columns and, 112Eucharist and, 154, 178–79relics at San Pietro in Montorio, 60Titulus Crucis, 12–13, 142–43True Cross Cycle in Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme, 13–20João II, King of Portugal, 48John (Bible), 28John the Evangelist, Saint, 26, 111, 154, 203John VII, Pope, 231–32n17John XXI, Pope, 6John of Brienne, 150Josephus. See Flavius JosephusJuan (son of Ferdinand and Isabel), 8, 47Juan II, King of Castile, 47, 274n62Juan, Count of Barcelona, 281n35Juan Carlos I, King of Spain, 202–3, 281n31,

281n35, 282n38Juana of Aragon, Queen of Naples,

148–49Juana, Queen of Castile, 127, 148–49,

178–79, 180, 275n72Judas-Cyriacus, 18–20, 225n38Julius II, Pope

generally, 117, 137, 193, 220–21n18Amadeo and, 87, 247n82Bramante and, 1, 103–5, 248n98Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 146,

230–31n96Kingdom of Sicily and, 150

Julius III, Pope, 162–63, 194Julius Caesar, 110

Khansu al-Ghuri, Sultan, 151Kingdom of Granada, conquest of, 6–7, 9,

11, 13, 17–18, 19, 33, 34, 36, 60–62, 125–26, 129, 142, 144, 151, 153, 154, 157, 179

310 • Index

Kingdom of Sicily, 148–49, 150–52, 266n54

I Kings (Bible), 131

Labacco, Antonio, 113Lactantius, 81–82Las Navas de Tolosa, Battle of, 14, 18Lateran. See also San Giovanni in Laterano

Baptistery, 105–6Hall of the Councils, 55–56Oratory of the Holy Cross, 228n74Sancta Sanctorum, 26, 43–44

La Vera Cruz, Segovia, 95Lavin, Irving, 230n1, 261n126, 278n107,

278n109Lavin, Marilyn Aronberg, 224n27, 224n30Lawrence, Saint, 26, 73, 174Lazzarini, Lorenzo, 252n23League of Venice, 149Lebrija, Antonio de, 118Leo III, Pope, 55Leo X, Pope

generally, 74, 117, 158, 239n104Amadeo and, 87Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 36, 146,

244n47crusade and, 36, 272n38

Leonardo da Vinci, 71, 80, 102, 103, 118, 131, 261n115

Leone, Giovanni, 202Letarouilly, Paul Marie, 259n103Leto, Giulio Pomponio, 32, 74, 76, 77, 141,

142, 263n15Ligorio, Pirro, 77, 78, 243n40, 252n17Lippi, Filippo, 224n26liturgical instruments depicted in the

Tempietto, 120–22, 258n92López, Juan, 72Louis IX, King of France, 148Louis XI, King of France, 46–48, 91Louis XII, King of France, 73, 149Lucan, 6Lucius II, Pope, 12Lucius Munatius Plancus, 120–21Luke, Saint, 26

Machiavelli, Niccoló, 149, 266n57Maffei (Caetani) palace, Rome, 272–73n46Maffei, Raffaele, 87

Maldonado, Rodrigo de, 259n102Maria (wife of Honorius), 248n95Mariano da Firenze, 47, 60, 74, 85–88,

101, 146Mark, Saint, 26Mars, 112Martha of Antioch, Saint, 58Martial, 6Martin V, Pope, 133Mary, 58, 83, 91, 110, 146, 174, 179, 187,

224n26Matthew (Bible), 38Matthew, Saint, 26Maximilian I, Holy Roman Emperor, 19, 34,

36, 73, 93–94, 145, 153, 230n1Maximus the Confessor, 247n86Medici, Giulio de (Pope Clement VII), 161Medici, Piero de, 46Medina, Juan Ruiz de. See Ruiz de

Medina, JuanMelanchthon, Philipp, 275n72Meléndez, Valdès Diego, 132Mellini, Bendetto, 236n69Mellini family, 141Mellino, Gian Garzia, 183, 209, 214Mendoza, Íñigo López de, 11, 222n4Mendoza, Íñigo López de (señor de

Llodio), 18Mendoza, Pedro González de

Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 3, 9–10, 13–14, 20

Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in Gerusalemme) and, 26, 30, 34

Colegio de Santa Cruz, Valladolid, and, 129

death of, 21historical background, 3Hospital de Santa Cruz, Toledo, and, 11Kingdom of Granada and, 11, 34Last Will and Testament of, 13–14Saint Helen and, 11Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 10–14,

222n8, 226n49in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme frescoes,

14, 16, 20as Third King of Spain, 11

Mendoza family, 11Meneses, García de, 48Meneses de Silva, Beatriz, 47–48

Index • 311

Meneses de Silva, João de. See Amadeo (João de Meneses de Silva)

Mercandetti, Tommaso, 197–98Michelangelo, 162, 169, 174, 248n96,

255–56n58Minerva, 112Miraflores (Burgos), Carthusian Church,

274n62Montefeltro, Federico da, 3, 58Monza, 73Morrone, Peter. See Celestine VMoses, 118Moses Maimonides, 6Muffel, Nikolaus, 44, 223n17, 227n61,

239n103, 277n98Muhammad II Al-Nâsit, Caliph, 18Münzer, Hieronymus, 267n76

Nanni, Giovanni. See Annius of ViterboNaples

French invasion of, 142, 149–50, 152Spanish conquest of, 2, 149

Napoleon, 198Narni Cathedral, Sacrament Chapel,

238n96Neri, Philip, 162, 270n15Nero, 26Nerva, 6Nicholas IV, Pope, 56Nicholas V, Pope, 237n91, 253–54n37Noah, 115–16, 117, 256–57n67Noah’s Ark, 154–57, 269n91Numa Pompilius, 76

Oliva, Eugenio, 195–96Oratory of Philip Neri, 162Orosius, 6

Pacheco, Juan Fernández de, 180Pacifici, Filippo, 198, 208, 280n16Pacioli, Luca, 129–32, 261n115Pagni, Giovanni, 185–86Palaeologus, Andreas, 152–53, 168Palaeologus, Demetrios, 152Palaeologus, Manuel, 152–53Palencia, Alonso de, 18Palladio, Andrea, 1–2, 240n8, 241n12,

243n42Pantheon, 70, 91, 109, 110, 168

Paradinas, Alfonso, 7Patrimonio Histórico Español, 203Paul, Saint

Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in Gerusalemme), depiction in, 26

column metaphor, 111Doric system and, 112Feast of, 47, 60, 199, 281n24martyrdom of, 38, 44, 230n3, 231–32n17,

232n19pyramid of Caius Sestius and, 43relics of, 86

Paul II, Pope, 11Paul III, Pope

generally, 272n44, 278n111Charles V and, 164–71medal by Alexander Cesati and, 169–71Tempietto and, 161–63, 167, 169–71,

187, 194Paul V, Pope, 181–82, 190, 276n80, 277n95Paul VI, Pope, 202pavement of Tempietto, 132–35, 188–89Pavia, Certosa, 58Pavia Cathedral, 73Pedro III, King of Aragon and Sicily, 148Pelayo, 171Peperelli, Francesco, 184Perault, Raymond, 153Perugino, 126Peruzzi, Baldassare, 3, 21–22, 24–26, 70,

77, 113Peter, Saint

generally, 125altar of Tempietto and, 154, 187Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme), depiction in, 26column metaphor, 111, 201crucifixion of, 42–45, 87–89, 102, 110,

136, 162, 163, 204Doric system and, 112Feast of, 47, 60, 199, 281n24healing by, 131indulgences and, 60metopes of Tempietto and, 120–22relics in San Pietro in Montorio and,

44–45, 60Rome consecrated by the martyrdom

of, 38–39San Pietro in Montorio and, 37–39, 55

312 • Index

Philip II, King of Spain, 150–51, 171–74, 179–80, 187

Philip III, King of Spain, 180–83, 190–91, 199, 270n10, 276n86

Philip IV, King of Spain, 158, 182, 190–91, 193–99, 276n86

Philip the Fair, King of Castile, 178–79Piazza del Campo, Siena, 259n95Piccolomini, Enea Silvia. See Pius IIPiero della Francesca, 16Pietro di Madre di Dio (Annibale Angelini),

138–41, 183–89, 198, 209–18, 262n7Pino, Marco, 169Pinturicchio, 80, 228n76Pinura, Giovanni, 236n69Pius II, Pope, 4–5, 78–79Pius V, Pope, 247n82Pius VI, Pope, 197Pius VII, Pope, 197–99, 202, 208Pius IX, Pope, 199–200Plutarch, 99Poderico, Giovan Maria, 83–85Poletti, Luigi, 199pomegranate, symbolism of, 33–34,

61–62, 127–32, 154, 202–3, 229n88, 239n107

Pontelli, Baccio, 51Pontius Pilate, 12porphyry, 106–11, 132–35, 165Porta, Guglielmo della, 241n14, 241n15Porto (Ostia), 4, 106, 127, 248n101Pozzo, Cassiano dal, 175–78Prague, Battle of (1620), 182–83prophecy

Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 19, 20, 85Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme) and, 26, 30–31, 229n81Charles VIII and, 152Ferdinand and, 19, 83–85, 151, 267n76Heraclius and, 19–20Mendoza, Pedro González de, and, 85Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and,

19–20, 85Spain and, 81–83, 151–52Tivoli Temple of the Sibyl and, 81–85

Prudentius, 43

Qait Bey, Sultan, 151Quincunx pavement, 133–34, 261–62n129

Quiñones, Francisco de Los Angeles, 164–68, 178, 193–94

Quintillian, 6Quo vadis legend, 38–39, 230n4

Rabanus Maurus, 34Ramiro I, King of Asturias, 125Ranieri, Rodolfo, Archduke of Austria,

280n14Raphael, 70, 74, 158–60, 161–63, 197,

249n106, 269n4Real Academia de España en Roma, 204relics

Saint Helen and, 165in San Pietro in Montorio, 59–60, 205–8in Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, 9, 11,

12–13, 17, 19, 24, 26, 37, 165René of Anjou, 148, 150Reuwich, Erhard, 93Revelation of the Psuedo-Methodius, 19, 85Revelations (Bible), 19, 154Riario, Raffaele, 7, 72, 221–22n28

palace of (Cancelleria), 107, 111Ricci, Giovanni Battista, 162–63Robert of Anjou, King of Naples, 150–51Roda, José Sancho, 282n37Roi, Bernardo del, 229–30n92Rossi, Gian Francesco, 277n92Rovere, Domenico della, 235n50Rovere, Giuliano della, 160Rowland, Ingrid D., 255–56n58Rubens, Peter Paul, 24, 228n66Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor, 160Ruiz de Medina, Juan, 5, 7, 49–51, 59,

221n26

Sabino, Pietro, 142Sagredo, Diego de, 127–29sail vault in San Pietro in Montorio and

antecedents, 58–59, 238n97, 238n98Saint Gudule, Brussels, 274n61Saint Paul’s basilica, Rome, 11–12Saint Paul’s Sacrifice at Lystra

(Raphael), 269n4Saint Peter’s basilica, Vatican

generally, 1Bramante and, 1, 66, 251n11ciborium of the high altar, 154, 232n19,

268n88

Index • 313

ciborium of the Holy Lance, 86, 132, 142, 246n76

ciborium of the sudarium (Veronica), 86dome-upon-drum design, 88–91Doric system in, 112foundation stone of, 263n10fountain, 72granite in, 110Holy Sepulcher compared, 249n111Innocent VIII and, 86James Major and, 91Sacrament tabernacle, 191–93Santa Croce in Gerusalemme compared,

11–12, 14–15statue of Saint Peter, 154tegurium, 112, 268n89Tempietto compared, 154, 277n97,

278n108Salviati, Francesco, 169, 272–73n46San Bernardino, Urbino, 58Sancha, Queen of León, 85Sancia of Aragon-Mallorca, Queen of

Naples, 150–51Sancta Maria ad Martyres (Pantheon),

Rome, 91, 110San Francesco, Assisi, 45, 52, 56, 236n76Sangallo, Antonio da, the Younger, 3, 22, 70,

113, 165Sangallo, Giuliano da, 71, 126San Giacomo degli Spagnoli, Rome

generally, 150Bramante and, 3, 72–73Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 7–8, 72, 150as Castilian national church in Rome,

3, 7–8indulgences in, 264n26pomegranate in decoration of, 34singers’ gallery, 132

San Giovanni in Laterano, 46, 55, 56, 86, 122, 133. See also Lateran

San Jerónimo de Yuste, 179San Juan de los Reyes, Toledo, 274n62San Lorenzo, Florence, 58–59San Lorenzo at the Escorial, 158, 174–80,

192, 193–94, 275n70San Lorenzo Maggiore, Milan, 73, 135San Martino de Via, Genoa, 247n81San Michele Arcangelo, Montorio Romano

(Reiti), 147

San Miniato al Monte, Florence, 59, 133–34

San Pietro in Montorio, Rome generally, 3, 7Acqua Paola, 181Alexander VI and, 50, 53–55, 59, 60–

61, 230n3Alfonso XII and, 197, 201–2altars in, 132, 206–7Amadeo and, 45–49, 52–55, 161apsidal chapels in, 53–56Borgherini Chapel, 269n6Bramante and, 73, 209, 214Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 37–39,

49–51, 59–60, 230n3, 236n68Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce

in Gerusalemme) compared, 33–34, 229n88

coats of arms in, 61–62, 239n107columns, 45, 63, 187, 232n24consecration of (1500), 59, 205–8crucifixion of Peter and, 37–39del Monte Chapel, 162–63, 270n16description of, 39–40Dolera, Clemente and, 163exedras in, 56–58facade of, 52Ferdinand and, 37, 39, 40–42, 47–48,

49–51, 60–62, 234n45, 235n50fresco decoration, 51, 82, 236n69Gregory XV and, 190–91indulgences in, 60innovations in design, 39–40, 59inscription dated 1500 in, 205–8Isabel and, 40–42, 61–62, 234n45Julius III and, 162–63Louis XI and, 46–48monastery of, 180–82overview, 37–42Paul V and, 181–83Peter and, 37–39, 55Philip III and, 180–83, 190Philip IV and, 190pomegranates and, 33–34, 61–62Portugal and, 48presbytery of, 56–59relics in, 59–60Ricci Chapel, 162–63sail vault in, 58–59, 238n97

314 • Index

Sixtus IV and, 45, 46, 47, 48, 53–55, 56, 60, 163, 230n3

Spanish patronage of, 45–49, 61–62, 180–94

Tempietto. See Tempiettotextual evidence regarding, 49–51triconch form of, 58, 238n96Urban VIII and, 184, 188, 190–93Vasari and, 48, 51, 162–63

San Pietro in Vincoli, Rome, 112San Silvestro, Tivoli, 224n26Sansovino, Jacopo, 165Santa Costanza, Rome, 89–91, 105–6Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, Rome

generally, 3, 7, 141, 142, 184Alexander VI and, 11, 13, 20–21, 30Bramante and, 26, 73Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 9–10,

13–14, 20–22, 30, 34–36Chapel of Saint Helen, 23–34, 59, 73,

228n66, 277n99crusade and, 18, 20Exaltation of the True Cross (Feast) and,

17–18, 29Ferdinand and, 10–13, 17–18, 224n32indulgences in, 13, 17, 23, 36, 227n60Innocent VIII and, 10, 13Isabel and, 10–13, 17–18, 224n32Invention of the True Cross (Feast) and,

17–18, 20, 29Jerusalem, link to, 12–13majolica (inscription), 22, 23, 24, 34–36,

37–39, 141, 223n20, 227n57, 230n94, 272n38

Mendoza, Pedro González de, and, 10–14, 222n8, 226n49

overview, 9–10prophecy and, 19–20, 85Quiñones, Francisco de los Angelos

and, 164Sacrament tabernacle and, 164–68,

193–94Saint Helen and, 9–10, 23Saint Peter’s compared, 11–12, 14–15Sixtus IV and, 10Spanish patronage of, 10–11, 19, 21, 36,

164–68Tempietto compared, 164, 174

Titulus Crucis and, 12–13, 14, 18, 19, 20, 29, 36, 142–43

True Cross Cycle in, 13–20Santa Cruz el Real, Segovia, 275n69Santa Dorothea in Trastevere, Rome,

263n11Sant’Agostino, Rome, 40, 58Santa Maria de Guadalupe (Spain), 45Santa Maria della Pace, Milan, 40, 46, 72,

264n31Santa Maria della Scala, Siena, 271–72n30Santa Maria della Vittoria, Rome, 183Santa Maria delle Grazie al Calcinaio,

Cortona, 52, 55, 88, 236n76Santa Maria del Monte, Varese, 58Santa Maria del Popolo, Rome, 26, 40, 58Santa Maria di Bressanoro, Castellone

(Santa Maria di Guadalupe), 26, 46Santa Maria in Aracoeli, Rome, 52–53, 83Santa Maria in Cosmedin, Rome, 77Santa Maria Maggiore, Rome, 11, 224n26,

277n95Santa Maria in Trastevere, Rome, 72,

224n26Santa Maria presso San Satiro, Milan, 123Santa Maria sopra Minerva, Rome, 261n118Sant’Andrea, Vatican, 89–91, 248n94Sant’Angelo, Perugia, 252n21Santa Petronilla, Vatican, 89–91, 248n94Santi Apostoli, Rome, 237n90Santo Spirito, Florence, 55, 58–59Sanudo, Marin, 21Savonarola, 145Schedel, Hartmann, 99–100Schrader, Lorenz, 180, 275n72Sebastiano del Piombo, 269n6Second Roman Republic, Tempietto in, 199Seneca, 6Septimius Severus, 168Serlio, Sebastiano, 1–2, 66–70, 73–74, 88,

112, 240–41n8Sforza, Ascanio, 73Sforza, Francesco, 45–46, 135Sforza, Galeazzo Maria, 58Sforza, Ludovico, 58, 73, 102–3, 135Sforza family, 73shell niches of Tempietto, 123–26, 268n87Sibyls, 81–85. (See also Albunea; Tiburtine

Sibyl)

San Pietro in Montorio, Rome (cont.)

Index • 315

Sicardus of Cremona, 99Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor, 232n20Sigüenza, José de, 174Silber, Eucherius, 115Siloe, Diego de, 174Simon Stylities the Younger, Saint, 58Sistine Chapel, 126, 133, 158, 169Sixtus IV, Pope

generally, 163Amadeo and, 45, 46, 47Forum Boarium and, 77historical background, 3San Pietro in Montorio and, 45, 46, 47,

48, 53–55, 56, 60, 163, 230n3Santa Croce in Gerusalemme and, 10Sistine Chapel and, 133Tempietto and, 154, 207, 243n39

Sixtus V, Pope, 11, 163, 181–82, 194, 270–71n18

Society of Jesus, 162Sodo, Francesco del, 206Solomon, 167, 272n31Spain. See also specific monarch or church

Annius of Viterbo and, 117–18balustrade of Tempietto and, 126–32bull as symbol of, 83Chapel of Saint Helen (Santa Croce in

Gerusalemme) and, 23–34France and, 170Hadrian, Spanish heritage of, 78, 79, 85,

244n52Hercules, relation to, 77James Major, relation to, 6, 7, 125–26Jerusalem, connection with, 150–51Kingdom of Naples, conquest of, 2Kingdom of Sicily, conquest of, 148–49in 19th century, 195–202prophecy and, 81–83, 151–52Rome, patronage in, 1–8San Pietro in Montorio, patronage of,

45–49, 61–62, 180–94Santa Croce in Gerusalemme, patronage

of, 10–11, 19, 21, 36in 17th century, 180–90in 16th century, 171–80Tempietto, patronage of, 63, 81, 101, 136,

137, 157, 193–94Trajan, Spanish heritage of, 106True Cross Cycle and, 9, 16–17, 20

in 20th century, 202–4Stefano, Bonifacio, 267n69Stephen, Saint, 60stone quarrying by early Christian martyrs,

106–11Suardi, Bartolomeo (Bramantino), 147Suleiman the Magnificent, Sultan, 168Suriano, Francesco, 100Sylvester I, Pope, 23, 26, 30, 60

Tafur, Pero, 227n64Tana, Gabriele, 162Tanner, Marie, 249n11, 255–56n58Teatro Marittimo as model for

Tempietto, 80Tempietto. See also San Pietro in Montorio

overview, 1–2, 63, 101Alexander VI and, 72, 73, 78–80, 81, 208altar of, 153–57, 161–62, 268n87, 268n89,

269n91Amadeo and, 87, 146–47, 247n81antiquity and, 74–85Apocalypsis nova and, 144–48balustrade of, 126–32Bramante and, generally, 86–87, 88, 89,

91, 92–93, 97, 99, 102, 136, 137Carvajal, Bernardino de, and, 63, 81Charles V and, 164–80, 202–3Christianity and, 85–101ciboria as model for, 85–88, 101, 246n76,

247n86crucifixion of Peter and, 63, 87–89, 134,

141, 146, 152–53, 186–87, 188–89, 269n91

crypt of, 138–41, 161–62, 182–89date of, 137, 144, 262n1description of, 63–66Domenico di Gesù Maria and, 182–90Dome of the Rock as model for, 92,

93–94, 249n106dome-upon-drum design, 88–89Doric system in, 111–20drawings of, 66–70Escorial Sacrament tabernacle compared,

174–80Etruscan influence on, 115–17, 255–

56n58Ferdinand and, 63, 101, 153–54, 157, 167,

197, 199, 207

316 • Index

in First Roman Republic, 161, 186, 197–98

foundation stone of, 137–43, 187–88, 190, 198–99, 203–4, 210–11, 212, 215, 217, 264n27

Francesco di Giorgio and, 78Fulvio on, 74–78, 81–82, 85, 101Granada Cathedral altar ciborium

compared, 174granite columns of, 105–11Holy Sepulcher as model for, 92–93,

94–101importance of, 1–2, 66–70Isabel and, 63, 101, 153–54, 157, 167,

197, 199Jesus, depiction of, 187liturgical instruments depicted in, 120–22,

258n92Mariano da Firenze on, 74, 85–88, 101mausolea compared, 88–89, 91–92,

120–21metopes of, 120–22name of, 241n12in 19th century, 195–202Palladio and, 1–2, 240–41n8, 241n12Paul III and, 161–63, 167, 169–71, 194pavement of, 102, 132–35, 187,

277n97Philip III and, 180–82Philip IV and, 190–93, 194Pietro di Madre di Dio and, 182–89renovations (1628), 180–90Saint Peter’s compared, 154, 277n97,

278n108Saint Peter’s Sacrament tabernacle

compared, 191–93Santa Croce in Gerusalemme Sacrament

tabernacle compared, 164–68, 174, 191–92, 193–94

in Second Roman Republic, 199Serlio and, 1–2, 66–70, 73–74, 88, 112,

240–41n8in 17th century, 180–90shell niches of, 123–26, 268n87in 16th century, 171–80Spanish royal patronage of, 63, 81, 101,

136, 137, 157, 193–94Teatro Marittimo as model for, 80

Tivoli Temple of the Sibyl as model for, 74, 78–80, 83–85, 91

triglyphs of, 254–55n48in 20th century, 202–4Urban VIII and, 190–93, 194Vasari and, 1–2, 70–73, 242n23

Terribilini, Giacomo Gregorio, 205–6, 207, 282n4

Theater of Marcellus, 113Theodoric the Great, King of the

Ostrogoths, 91Theodosius I, 6, 24, 73, 170Tiburtine Sibyl, 72, 81–85titular churches, 163, 270–71n18Titulus Crucis, 12–14, 18–19, 20, 29, 36,

59–60, 142–43, 226n50, 263–64n23Titus, 122, 168Tivoli Temple of the Sibyl

Hadrian and, 78–80, 81, 85prophecy and, 81–85Tempietto, as model for, 74, 78–80, 85, 91Tiburtine Sibyl and, 81–85

Torquemada, Juan de, 4Trajan

Column of, 4–5, 87, 220n16, 247n83Spanish heritage of, 3–5, 6, 78, 79, 106

Travertine, 77–78Treaty of Granada (1500), 149Treaty of Torre del Greco (1451), 152–53Trezzo, Jacopo da, 174–78triconch

cult of the saints and, 58in Renaissance architecture, 238n96in San Pietro in Montorio, 56–58in Narni Cathedral, 238n96

Trifuno de la Santa Cruz (Feast), 18, 19–20True Cross legend, 9, 13–20Tubal, 117Tunis, Battle of (1535), 167, 272n44

Urban II, Pope, 20Urban VIII, Pope

generally, 158, 184, 188, 210, 214, 276n87San Pietro in Montorio and, 184, 188,

190–93Tempietto and, 190–93, 194

Valadier, Giuseppe, 280n14Valentinian III, 24, 36

Tempietto (cont.)

Index • 317

Varese, Isaia da, 145Varro, 81–82Vasari, Giorgio

generally, 83, 169on Bramante, 2–3, 73–74, 80, 102–5,

107, 121Doric system and, 111granite columns and, 110Tempietto and, 1–2, 70–73, 242n23

Vatican Council of 1869–1870, 201, 281n26Vatican obelisk, 110, 253n36Vatican palace, 26, 163Vecchietta (Lorenzo di Pietro), 271–72n30Vega, Garcilaso de la, 117–18Vegio, Maffeo, 42–44Velasco, Pedro Fernández de, 129Venantius Fortunatus, 34Verardi, Carlo, 33, 221–22n28Vespasian, 122Vespignani, Virginio, 201Vesta, Temple of, 76–77, 99Vettori, Francesco, 266n57Vigevano, 73Vigarny, Felipe, 179Villa d’Este, Tivoli, 244n47

Villena, Marchese di, 180Virgil, 77, 82, 83–85, 99, 115Virgin. See MaryVisconti, Bianca Maria, 45–46Visconti, Gaspare, 102–3Vitruvius

generally, 127, 258n84columns and, 105Doric system and, 111–12, 115metopes and, 120temples and, 77, 88

Volpaia, Bernardo della, 66Voragine, Jacobus de, 15–16,

19, 34

Wadding, Luke, 161, 270n10Westminster Cathedral, 261–62n129

Xavier, Francis, 162

Yolande, Queen of Jerusalem, 150

Zuccaro, Federico, 175–78Zuccaro, Taddeo, 163, 272–73n46Zurita, Jerónimo, 152