works of art from rome for henry viii. a study of anglo-papal relations as reflected in papal gifts...

Works of Art from Rome for Henry VIII. A Study of Anglo-Papal Relations as Reflected inPapal Gifts to the English KingAuthor(s): Margaret MitchellSource: Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 34 (1971), pp. 178-203Published by: The Warburg InstituteStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/751020 .

Accessed: 17/02/2014 14:49

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The Warburg Institute is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of theWarburg and Courtauld Institutes.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 66.77.17.54 on Mon, 17 Feb 2014 14:49:46 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=warburg

http://www.jstor.org/stable/751020?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


WORKS OF ART FROM ROME FOR HENRY VIII

A STUDY OF ANGLO-PAPAL RELATIONS AS REFLECTED IN PAPAL

GIFTS TO THE ENGLISH KING

By Margaret Mitchell

I

O n 30 November 1521, the night before he died, Pope Leo X received a strange omen of his approaching end. Paolo Giovio's De Vita Leonis

Decimi Pont. Max., of 1548, tells how the Pope, that evening ... Pessimum omen imminentis mortis in ipso cubiculi limine accepit, in quo constiterat architectus ligneam offerens sepulchri effigiem, quod tum insigni marmoris caelatura Henrico regi in Britannia parabatur.1 What was this tomb that was being prepared for King Henry in

England, and that the architect presented to the Pope's view in the form of a wooden model? Can we determine which King Henry or what tomb was under construction in England? Who commissioned the model and why? Are there other references to it that will help to answer these and many other questions?

Giovio's story tells us little, but it is significant that he refers to the event at all. We must assume that the tomb in question was something considerable and that the Pope's interest in it was well-known. The obvious temptation is to identify it with the most famous English royal monument of the epoch, constructed, moreover, by an Italian artist, the tomb of Henry VII. This is the interpretation put upon the passage by the only modern authority to comment on Giovio's account.2 But there are serious objections to the identification. First the verb parabatur is in the imperfect tense, which makes it clear that the monument was in course of construction at Leo's death and cannot therefore have been the tomb of Henry VII, completed in 1518. Second, it is inherently improbable both that a model of this tomb should be in Rome and that Leo X should have been interested in the tomb of an English King who died twelve years before. The inference is clear: the sepulchre represented by the wooden model must have held some special interest for the Pope and it was intended for the reigning monarch, Henry VIII. The substance of this article was presented as a M.A. degree report at the Courtauld Institute, and it owes much to the information, advice and encouragement of Dr. John Shearman, to whom I am very grateful. My thanks are also due to Mr. Oliver Millar and Dr. Roy Strong for their helpful criticisms.

The following abbreviations are used in these footnotes: L.P.: Letters and Papers, Foreign and Domestic, of the reign of Henry VIII, 1509-1547, ed. Brewer, Gairdner, and Brodie, London 1862- 190o.

Vasari: G. Vasari, Le Vite de' pi' eccellenti pittori, scultori ed architettori . . ., ed. G. Milanesi, Florence 1881. Rymer: T. Rymer, Foedera, Conventiones, Lit- teras etc., edn. 1704-35. Sanuto: M. Sanuto, Diarii, Venice 1879- 1903- Pastor: L. von Pastor, Storia dei Papi, iv, Rome 196o0.

1 P. Giovio, De Vita Leonis Pont. Max., Florence 1584, Bk. iv, p. I 13.

2 H. M. Vaughan, The Medici Popes, Lon- don 1908, p. 270.

178



WORKS OF ART FROM ROME FOR HENRY VIII 179

To show that these are the facts it will first be necessary to consider briefly the relations between Henry and Leo, especially as these are reflected in the works of art and other gifts that they exchanged. We shall see Henry emerge as the 'dilecto filio' of the Church, receiving rewards for his loyalty from the Pope.

i

Henry VIII, unlike his father, who had pursued an isolationist foreign policy, was determined to make his mark on European affairs politically and culturally. Not only did he want to increase the size of his kingdom, he wished also to show his superior power and wealth through the magnificent splendour of his court.3 He was proud, vain and ambitious; he was also a considerable patron of the arts, spurred on by a sense of rivalry with the other courts of Europe. He gave particular encouragement to Italian artists, extended the trade of Italian merchants, and re-established direct diplomatic relations with the papacy very soon after he came to the throne in I509.4 During the four years of Julius II's (d. I513) pontificate the Pope looked to Henry for support in a 'holy' league against France, and to encourage him to give military aid to the campaign Julius sent a Golden Rose in 15Io and some wine and cheeses the following year.5 However, the Pope engaged in war alone, and after serious defeats he again approached Henry, in March 1512, this time with a unique bribe. He wrote a brief which authorized the transference of all Louis XII's dominions and titles to Henry VIII, whom he would crown King of France when the French had been defeated." In spite of all these efforts, when Julius II died in February 1513 Henry had not yet taken up arms, but he was more enthusiastic about the French title. It whetted his appetite for a larger kingdom and more power; he never forgot this promise.

When Cardinal Giovanni de' Medici was elected as Pope Leo X to succeed Julius II, King Henry was told of the new Pope's gentleness, virtue, and dislike of war:

(he) will favour literature, oratory, poetry, music, employ himself in building, will not neglect the dominions of the Church, but not enter on any war except on compulsion, except, perhaps, against the Infidels.7

These interests were shared by Henry, whose enthusiasm for ceremonial display and extravagant pageants was echoed at the papal court. Francesco Chiericati observed the celebrations in Rome in 1513 for Leo's reception of

3S. Anglo, Spectacle, Pageantry and Early Tudor Policy, Oxford 1969, pp. 4, 122-3.

4 R. Weiss, Humanism in England during the fifteenth century, (3rd. edn.), Oxford 1967; L. Einstein, The Italian Renaissance in England, New York 1902; D. Hay, 'The Early Renais- sance in England', From the Renaissance to the Counter-Reformation: Essays in Honor of Garrett Mattingly, ed. C. H. Carter, New York 1965; J. R. Hale, England and the Italian Renaissance, London 1963.

5 The Diary of Paris de Grassis, B.M. Add MS 8443, fol. 31 and Sanuto, x, col. 114, for the Golden Rose; see also Sanuto, xii, cols. 273, 362, 370.

6 A. Ferrajoli, 'Un breve inedito di Giulio II per la Investitura del Regno di Francia ad Enrico VIII d'Inghilterra', Archivio della R. Societac Romana di Storia Patria, xix, 1896, PP- 425-41.

7 L.P., i, 1677.



18o MARGARET MITCHELL

his brother Giuliano on the Capitol8 and the ceremonial welcome given to the French ambassadors on their arrival in London in 1517. It is interesting to compare these eye-witness accounts. Far from being inferior, the English display so impressed Chiericati that he wrote to Isabella D'Este:

... Qui vedo bellissimi costumi, summa honesta

et grandissima creanza. Et tra le altre cose ci e questo invictissimo Re, predito de tante excellenti virth et conditioni, che mi par superar quante ne portasse mai corona in capo. ....

With so many interests in common it is not surprising that a rapport developed between Henry and Leo.

Pope Leo took an oath at his election to procure peace in Christendom, and he urged Henry to do likewise.10 But the King was now, in 1513, ready at last to embark on the war begun by Pope Julius. Leo had endorsed 'omnes gratias, indulgentias, praerogativas' granted by his predecessor,11 and with the French title still to be won, Henry could not be deterred. With the help of the Emperor Maximilian he captured Tournai and Th6rouanne in the autumn of 1513,12 and as soon as the news reached Rome Cardinal Bainbridge, English spokesman at the papal court, began to press for Henry's coronation at Rheims.13 All Rome celebrated the victories and the Pope wrote to congratulate the King.14 He rewarded Henry's efforts by nominating him the recipient of the Holy Sword and Cap of Maintenance, as a mark of esteem.15 The Sword was complete with scabbard and girdle. The Cap was of red velvet with an ermine lining and trim; it was encircled by a band of pearls and gold, and had the Dove of the Holy Spirit embroidered on it in silver and precious stones. Symbolically it signified that the wearer had his head veiled in obedience and possessed the candour of pearls.16

Leo X, like Henry, was ambitious. Soon after his election he began to advance members of the Medici family through grants of titles and lands, and politically and socially advantageous marriages. Henry, perhaps recognizing the Pope's weakness in this respect, bestowed honours on members of the Medici family and looked forward to their petitions to the Pope on his

8 B.M. Harley MS 3462, fols. 12ff. 9 B. Morsolin, 'Francesco Chiericati, Ves-

covo e Diplomatico', Atti dell'Accademia Olim- pica, iii, Vicenza 1873, pp. 142, 200.

10 W. Roscoe, Life of Leo the Tenth, London 1846, i, p. 307.

11 22 June 1513; 0. Raynaldus, Annales ecclesiastici ab anno quo desinit Card. C. Baronius MCXCVIII usque ad annum MDXXXIV con- tinuati, Rome 1694, xx, p. 146 (hereafter Raynaldus, Annales).

12L.P., i, 2194, 2300, 2302; and John Taylor's account of the campaign in his diary, B.M. MS Cotton Cleo. C. V., fols. 64ff.

13 Sanuto, xvii, col. 47. Christopher Bain-

bridge, Cardinal Protector of England, raised to the purple in 151 I, to become first English Curia cardinal since the I4th century. See D. S. Chambers, Cardinal Bainbridge in the Court of Rome 1509-1514, Oxford 1965-

14 Sanuto, xvii, col. 218; Raynaldus, Annales, xxxi, p. 27; and see D. S. Chambers, op. cit., p. 53-

15 Paris de Grassis's papal diary, B.M. Add. MS 8443, fol. 93v. De Pileo et Gladio Consecratis ad Regem missis, B.M. MS Cotton Vitell. B.II, fol. 69; (L.P., i, 4833). 16 E. Rodocanachi, La premiere Renaissance: Rome au temps de Jules II et Leon X, Paris 1912, pp. 297-8.




behalf. This was a policy his father, Henry VII, had employed.1 Henry VIII gave Cardinal Giulio de' Medici the Protectorship of England18 and elevated the Pope's brother, Giuliano, to the Order of the Garter.19 The Pope wrote to Henry of his indebtedness to him and thanked him for these honours.20

Several letters were exchanged by Leo and Henry in 1514 and 1515. Two of these show particularly well the nature of the relationship developing between them. In the first, dated July 1514, Leo asks for the services of the King's best theologian and astronomer to correct the errors in the calendar which had led to the miscalculation of the date of Easter: other scholars have been consulted, but the Pope begs for the King's assistance to remedy the error.21 The second letter also demonstrates Leo's estimation of Henry as a patron of learned men. It is dated o July 1515 and recommends Erasmus to the King, as deserving his particular favour and bounty. Leo mentions reports he has received from England of the King's magnanimity:

Is ad nos ex Anglia, ubi nunc commoraratur, literas misit plenissimas officij, nobis hoc etiam, gratiores quod afferunt secum ab illo testi- monium regiae istius virtutis, et magnanimitatis tuae, qua commemora- tione nihil nobis est pro nostra summa in maiestatem tuam benevolentia iucundius.22

There can be no doubt that, in less than a decade, Henry VIII had brought England to a position of importance in European affairs and had won considerable personal respect, especially from Leo X.

At his coronation, and on many occasions thereafter, the Pope expressed his desire to establish universal peace and then to launch a crusade against the Turks.23 By 1517 this concern had so greatly increased that plans were made, and in 1518, following the signing of a five-year truce and inter- cessory processions, legates were sent out from Rome to European leaders. One would expect, as the Pope certainly did, that the Legate to England would be welcomed-had not Henry shown strong loyalty to the Church? However, prompted by his Lord Chancellor Cardinal Wolsey, Henry delayed Cardinal Lorenzo Campeggio's landing until Leo X granted Wolsey powers to act as the Italian prelate's equal.24 Once this had been achieved, Cardinal Campeggio was received and entertained with due honour, but he was not allowed to fulfil his mission. Wolsey had other plans which, in October 1518, resulted in the Treaty of London, binding all European powers to perpetual peace and annulling the Pope's treaty drawn up in March.25 Although he accomplished nothing, Campeggio was dispatched

17 C. H. Clough, 'The Relations between the English and Urbino Courts, 1474-I508', Studies in the Renaissance, xiv, 1967, pp. 206-8, 211-14.

18 L.P., i, 5356; and see D. S. Chambers, op. cit., p. 57.

19J. Anstis, The Register of the Most Noble Order of the Garter, London 1724, ii, p. 276.

20 L.P., i, 2639-

21 L.P., i, 5262; and see C. J. Hefele, Histoire des Conciles, ed. H. Leclercq, Paris 1917, viii, pp. 445-5 .

22 B.M. Add. MS 15387, fols. 3iff. 23 Pastor, iv, I, pp. I39ff. 24 L.P., ii, 4034, 4073; see also Pastor, iv, I,

pp. 148-53; J. J. Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, London 1968, pp. 69-70.

25 J. J. Scarisbrick, op. cit., pp. 70-71.



182 MARGARET MITCHELL

with a shower of gifts-tapestries, horses, gold and silver plate, and a patent granting him the English palace in Rome.26 The Cardinal was placated and the Pope was pleased too: he wrote to Henry thanking him for the gifts to the Legate, and he rewarded Campeggio with the important office of the Signatura Justitiae.27

The relationship between Henry and Leo thus begins to conform to a pattern of reciprocal flattery which, for the King, had the effect of increasing his ambition and his sense of obedience to the Church. His ambition contained a contradiction. On the one hand, Henry felt his duty to Rome, as when he said to Sir Thomas More,

We are so much bounden unto the Sea of Room that we cannot doe to muche honor unto it... For we receaved from that Sea our crowne Imperiall.28

Nor had he forgotten Julius II's promise of the French title; loyalty to the papacy could bring much prized rewards. On the other hand, the King was independent by nature and enjoyed power. With Wolsey at his right hand he had already made his mark on European affairs. Soon he desired a change in style that would befit his greater might; for a time the 'crowne Imperiall' was all important. This dream of ruling an empire began in I519 but recurred again and again throughout the rest of Henry's life. In

15I9 Maximilian died, and in the elections which followed Henry became papal candidate, chiefly because the success of either of the main contenders, Francis I of France and Charles V of Spain, seriously threatened the balance of power in Europe and conflicted with papal policy.29 Nevertheless, on 28 June 1519 Charles was elected Holy Roman Emperor, and Henry apparently resigned himself to his defeat.

In fact there was the matter of the crusade to capture his imagination: Henry wrote a letter of self-dedication to the Pope:

We gird ourselves for this most holy expedition, and dedicate our whole kingdom, our wealth, our authority, our goods, our prestige to it; yes, our very blood and body we offer and dedicate to Christ and His Vicar. Whenever the call is made we shall be ready. If our longed-for heir shall have been granted before the expedition sets out to do battle against the Infidel, we shall lead our force in person.30

This unequivocal declaration of loyalty to the Church in response to years of appeals for assistance points towards the climax of Henry's devotion, expressed in Assertio Septem Sacramentorum. It earned Leo's special affection

26 W. M. Brady, Anglo-Roman Papers, London I890, p. 40. Patent granting the palace to Campeggio, L.P., iii, 119.

For the history of the palace see W. M. Brady, op. cit., pp. 9-91 and A. Bruschi, Bramante architetto, Bari 1969, pp. 849ff., with biblio- graphy.

27 L.P., iii, 183; ioi6. 28 W. Roper, The Life of Sir Thomas More,

knight, ed. Hitchcock, E.E.T.S., 1935, p. 68. 29 L.P., iii, 307, 308. For papal policy

and the imperial elections, F. Nitti, Leone X e la sua Politica, Florence 1892, pp. I86ff.

30 E. Martine and U. Durand, Veterum Scriptorum et Monumentorum amplissima collectio, Paris 1724-32, iii, pp. I297ff. (L.P., iii, 432). Translation quoted from Scarisbrick, op. cit., p. 105-




and gratitude. The letter was written some time before Cardinal Cam- peggio's departure from England in the summer of I519. Further evidence of Henry's genuine interest in a crusade is shown by a manuscript History of the Crusades, c. 1518-20, compiled for him.31

We know of Pope Leo's belief in Henry VIII's support for his initiatives from a letter written by Cardinal Giulio de' Medici on 22 October 1520: the Pope was pleased by 'il santo proposito del re d'Inghilterra di procurare e conservare la pace universale...' and he thanks Henry for being:

sempre parato e pronto a defendere il papa contro qualsiasi principe lo volesse offendere per non aver conseguito da lui contro giustizia... Per6 Sua Santitai in questa parte hara caro che ne parliate piii a lungo col Re e col Cardinale secondo che le occasioni insegneranno, et usciate un poco de' generali .. .832

The publication, in 1520, of Luther's De Captivitate Babylonica gave Henry a specific cause in which to show his support for the papacy. Few people, including the Pope, can have anticipated the form or extent of Henry's loyalty as it appeared in the form of the book Assertio Septem Sacramentorum, which Henry claimed to be entirely his own work.33 In it he ascribes the highest authority to the papacy and vindicates Leo personally saying that his 'innocent, unspoiled and most holy conversation are well known throughout the world'.34 In July 152I Richard Pynson printed an edition in London, twenty-eight copies of which were dispatched to Rome to be presented by the Pope to various potentates and universities.35 In the two copies presented to the Pope these verses are written above the royal signature:

Anglorum rex Henricus, Leo decime, mittit Hoc opus etfidei testem et amicitie.36

Henry's orator, John Clerk, comments particularly on Leo's delight in these verses, which he read three times when Clerk presented the King's book to him.3" Two presentation volumes were prepared: an illuminated copy of the edition printed in London by Richard Pynson in July 1521, and a manuscript copied by a certain Hall. Knowing Leo X's reputation as a bibliophile, Henry, an enthusiastic collector himself, arranged for this 'ferre more excellent and princely' manuscript copy to be prepared.38 Bound in a sumptuous cover of cloth of gold, it was decorated with the King's arms on

31 B.M. Royal MS 18. B. xxvi. 32 F. Nitti, op. cit., p. 338. 33 H. Ellis, Original Letters illustrative of

English History, London 1846, 3rd series, ii, pp. 134f.

34Assertio Septem Sacramentorum, London 1521. Translation T. W. Gent., London 1687, p. 2. Henry says, e.g., that the 'Sacrament of Ordination' is like 'the rest of the whole Church; which not only is subject to Christ, but also for Christ's sake, to Christ's only Vicar, the Pope of Rome'.

35 H. Ellis, op. cit., ser. 3, i, p. 256 note. 36 N. Vian, 'La Presentazione e gli esem-

plari Vaticani della Assertio Septem Sacramen- torum di Enrico VIII', Collectanea Vaticana in honorem Anselmi Card. Albareda..., Vatican City 1962, ii, pp. 364-5-

37 B.M. MS Cotton Vitell. B.V., fols. 165-79; H. Ellis, op. cit., ser. 3, i, pp. 256ff.

38 Wolsey in an undated letter to Henry VIII, text in G. Burnet, History of the Reformation of the Church of England, London 1715, III, ii, p. 7; (L.P., III, ii, 1450).




the frontispiece and with illuminated initials throughout the text.39 In a letter of instruction addressed to Clerk, Wolsey draws his attention to 'the King's epistle and proem put in the beginning of the same book', where Henry styled himself 'the very Defender of the Catholic Faith [of] Christ's Church, which he has truly deserved of the See Apostolic'. Wolsey includes a list of further titles which the King would be pleased to have conferred on him by the Pope: Clerk is to have a bull made and to prepare a letter of thanks addressed to the King 'with certain words to be inserted therein by the Pope's own hand'.40 In accordance with these instructions, Clerk presented Henry's written allegiance to the Pope in private consistory (he was not granted the full splendour of a public consistory).41 The Pope replied with glowing praise, 'We render immortal thanks to our creator who has raised such a prince to defend His Holy Church and this Holy See'.42

From the time he first announced his intention of entering the Lutheran controversy in defence of the Pope, Henry made it quite clear that he expected a title in reward for his book. In June the cardinals began to discuss it, and they were reminded that Julius II had once promised the French King's title to Henry. In October the title Defensor Fidei was chosen, and the Bull confirming it was signed by Leo X and twenty-seven cardinals.43 For the King it was a 'reward for persistence as much as virtue'.44

In the light of this observation combined with what has been shown as Henry's willingness to defend the Church and extinguish heresy by sword and pen, it is no longer a surprise that Pope Leo should wish to give the King a more personal gift as a reward. Thus, Giovio's story of the ominous architect and his model of a tomb becomes credible in the context of the interaction of the cultural and political aspects of the relationship between Henry and Leo X.

ii On 30 November 1521, then, a finished model of a tomb for Henry VIII

was shown to the Pope, who had recently returned from his villa La Magliana to Rome to celebrate the capture of Milan and the recovery of Parma and Piacenza from the French.45 His absence had prevented him from

39 N. Vian, loc. cit. It has been suggested that the inspiration for this MS came from the Epistola written by Federico Veterani in Urbino and brought to Henry VII by Baldassare Castiglione when he acted as proxy for Duke Guidobaldi da Montefeltro on his installation in the Order of the Garter, 1508. See C. H. Clough, 'Relations between the English and Urbino Courts, 1474-1508', Studies in the Renaissance, xiv, 1967, p. 217; see also L. Michelini Tocci, 'Il manoscritto di dedica della Epistola .. .', Italia Medioevale e Umanistica, v, 1962, pp. 273-82.

40 B.M. MS Cotton Vitell. B. IV, fol. 145; (L.P., III, ii, 15Io).

41 B.M. MS Cotton Vitell. B. IV, fol. 185; H. Ellis, op. cit., ser. 3, i, p. 262.

42 L.P., iv, I656. See also E. Doernberg, Henry VIII and Luther, London 1961, p. 19. To all readers of the Assertio an indulgence of ten years was granted.

43 'Bulla Ro. Pon. ad Regiam Majestatem pro eius operis confirmatione', Rymer, xiii, p. 756.

44J. J. Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, London 1968, p. 117; see also S. Anglo's comment, Spectacle, Pageantry and Early Tudor Policy, Oxford 1969, p. 174-

45 W. Roscoe, The Life of Leo the Tenth, London 1846, ii, pp. 369-70.




seeing the model earlier; on this night, although he was mortally sick, it was shown to him. Therefore we must assume that he had a special interest in the project. It is probable that Leo had given the commission not long before, almost certainly in response to Henry's book defending the sacraments and the papacy.

The name of the artist who showed his model to the Pope can be found in Vasari's Vite, where the author repeats the two main points of Giovio's account: that the model was in Rome and that the King's tomb was made in England.

[Baccio Bandinelli] fece ancora un bellissimo modello di legno, e le figure di cera, per una sepoltura al re d'Inghilterra; la quale ne sorti poi l'effetto da Baccio, ma fu dato a Benedetto da Rovezzano scultore, che la fece di metallo.46

There is in fact no connexion, such as Vasari makes, between Bandinelli's model and the work carried out by Benedetto da Rovezzano on Henry VIII's tomb. This was done in the i530s, as will be shown later, and followed the pattern set by Pietro Torrigiano's tomb for Henry VII, a sarcophagus surrounded by a highly worked 'grate'.

Pope Leo's choice of Baccio Bandinelli to design the tomb was a natural one. Throughout his life, Bandinelli was closely associated with the Medici family; he sought their patronage and executed the majority of his works for them. Before 1517 he went to Rome, bringing with him the model for a David which he wanted to make for the Medici Palace in Florence, to show to the Pope.47 Later, when he returned to Rome from Loreto, he was commissioned by the Pope, through Cardinal Giulio de' Medici, to do several statues for the family palace in Florence. One of these connects Bandinelli's name with the Cardinal and Benedetto da Rovezzano. Vasari says of Bandineili's Orfeo:

Finita la statua, fu fatta porre dal cardinale Giulio nel sopradetto cortile del palazzo Medici, mentre che egli governava Firenze, sopra una basa intagliata, fatta da Benedetto da Rovezzano, scultore.48

Bandinelli returned to Rome from Florence in about I519-20 and was commissioned by Cardinal Guilio to execute the two Giganti which flank the gate of the 'xysto' or secret garden of the Cardinal's villa on Monte Mario, which was being built by Raphael.49 In 1520, Bandinelli was chosen to make a faithful copy in marble of the Laocodn to be sent to Francis I. This work was interrupted by the election of Adrian VI following Leo X's death. Bandinelli left Rome in January 1522 and during Adrian's pontificate stayed in Florence in the service of Cardinal Giulio. Towards the end of 1523, when the Cardinal was elected Pope Clement VII, Bandinelli returned to Rome and resumed work on the Laocoiin.50

46G. Vasari, Le Vite..., (ed. Club del Libro), Milan 1964, vi, p. 144.

47 Vasari, vi, p. 27. 48 Ibid., p. 25-

49 D. Heikamp, 'In Margine alla Vita di Baccio Bandinelli del Vasari', Paragone, xvii, 1966, pp. 52-54-

50 Vasari, vi, pp. 27-28. 13




Any work to be done on Henry VIII's tomb would have been suspended while Bandinelli was in Florence, but the model was probably already finished when he showed it to Leo X. The appearance of the model is described by Leonardo Sellaio in a letter sent from Rome to Michelangelo in Florence.51 The letter is dated 14 December 1521 and reports that Giovanni Cavalcanti has had Baccio Bandinelli make a large model, shaped like the arch at the foot of the Capitol [the Arch of Septimius Severus], with an enclosure of steps and the top part in the form of a funerary canopy [or: with steps below and above (so that the whole looked) like a funerary canopy]. On the steps (and) on every side there are one hundred and forty- two life-size bronze figures and above is the King on horseback and low relief panels, also of bronze. It is estimated that solely to gild the bronze will cost forty thousand gold ducats. He doubts that it will ever be made. He explains that Giovanni [Cavalcanti] was compelled by the Datary to have it made by Bandinelli.

In a second letter, dated 4 January 1522, Sellaio refers to the matter again, briefly:

there is no work for you [Michelangelo] in it, [and] we shall be able to talk about it. I am doubtful whether Baccio will embark upon it.62

In the first letter Sellaio describes the finished model, and in the second he implies that there are no plans to begin work on the monument itself in the near future. It is unlikely that the tomb itself was ever intended to be executed in Italy: the transport to England of so massive a monument would certainly have posed some engineering problems! Thus, the information given in Sellaio's letter is easily reconcilable with Giovio's statement that Pope Leo was shown the wooden model of a sepulchre for the King of England.

Bandinelli makes no mention of any aspect of his work on the model for Henry VIII's tomb in his interesting Memoriale, written in the 1550's.53 This omission is particularly strange because of the great pride with which he lists the titles and honours he received from Francis I, Charles V and Pope Clement VII, and the works he executed for them. It is possible, however, that by the time he wrote his Memoriale Bandinelli felt that his association with Henry VIII was best left unmentioned.

The basis for the assumption that Pope Leo instigated the project to design this monumental sepulchre for Henry VIII is contained in Sellaio's first letter to Michelangelo. The significant fact is that Bandinelli was instructed to make the tomb model by Giovanni Cavalcanti, who was acting on the instructions of the Datary. The Datary controlled the most important revenues of the papacy, including the Pope's personal expenditure.5 In 1521

51 G. Poggi, ed., II Carteggio di Michelangelo, Florence 1967, ii, no. DXLV, p. 336. See infra, Appendix I, for text.

52 Il Carteggio di Michelangelo, ed. cit., no. DXLVII, p. 339.

53A. Colasanti, 'I1 Memoriale di Baccio Bandinelli', Repertorium fiir Kunstwissenschaft,

xxvii, 1905, pp. 406-43. 54 L. Ranke, The Popes of Rome, (3rd. ed.),

London 1847, i, p. 287; P. Partner, 'The Budget of the Roman Church in the Renais- sance', Italian Renaissance Studies, ed. E. F. Jacob, London I960, pp. 256ff.




Baldassare Turini da Pescia held this important office.55 He was a considerable patron of the major artists in Rome, a personal friend of Raphael and an executor of his will. Giovanni Cavalcanti was a wealthy Florentine merchant who did business with both Henry VIII and Pope Leo. He was a gentleman usher at the English court and appointed a special purveyor of cloth of gold. He was also one of the merchants employed by Leo X to ship alum belonging to the Apostolic Camera from England to Italy, an important source of papal revenues.56 In 1519 Cavalcanti was involved in England in a project for a tomb for Henry VIII: he stood bond for Torrigiano when the draft indenture was drawn up.57 But the most interesting business linking Rome and London in which Cavalcanti was a central figure concerned the palace Henry VIII had given to Cardinal Lorenzo Campeggio. In 1520 the palace (Palazzo Corneto) was in a ruinous state-the building had never been completely finished-when Campeggio wrote to Cardinal Wolsey in March saying that he would borrow 1,000ooo for three years to pay for the necessary repairs, and for this he offered a bond to Cavalcanti.58 (King Henry repaid the loan in June 1520.) Sellaio says that Cavalcanti was acting on the instructions of the Datary when he ordered Bandinelli to make the model. In his official capacity, the Datary acted on the instructions of the Pope, and it is for this reason that the commission may be said to have been given by the Pope. In this case Leo X almost certainly told Turini to make the necessary arrangements for the monument he wished Bandinelli to design. Turini wisely appointed Cavalcanti as intermediary, knowing his connections with both the English and the papal courts.

Sellaio's description is the only indication of the appearance of Bandinelli's model: a platform of several steps supporting a triumphal arch decorated with panels of gilded bronze, surmounted by a statue of the king on horseback. Somehow a hundred and forty-two life-size bronze statues were accommodated on it and it is implied that they stood on the steps around the base of the arch. Although this monument would have been quite unique had it been built in the I520's, the design is related, as an equestrian statue and as a triumphal arch, to a number of current traditions and sources. Already in the fifteenth century in Italy, equestrian statues had been erected to military leaders.59 Leo X's commission of this monument for Henry VIII may be considered as a reward in this tradition, with the important difference that the recipient is a foreign monarch.

The combination of triumphal arch with the equestrian statue in Bandinelli's design has clear imperial overtones. This combination was known

55 In April 1518, Turini was appointed Leo X's Datary (A. Prandi, Villa Lante, Rome 1954, p. 6). For Turini's career and activities as a patron of art, see A. Prandi, ibid.; and H. Janitschek, Die Gesellschaft der Renaissance in Italien und die Kunst, Stuttgart 1875.

56 L.P., III, i, 182. 57L.P., iii, 7. Transcript of original in

P.R.O. published in Archaeologia, xvi, I, 1812, p. 84.

58 L.P., III, i, 646, 3 March 152o. King Henry repaid the loan in June (L.P., III, ii, p. 1536; the King's Book of Payments).

59 Of the well-known examples, Donatello's Gattamelata may have been erected by Venice as a cenotaph to Erasmo da Narni: G. Soranzo, 'Due note intorno alla donatel- liana statua equestre del Gattamelata', Bollet- tino del Museo Civico di Padova, xlvi-xlvii, 1957-58, pp. 21-50.




to sixteenth-century Rome through imperial Roman coins and medals,60 which were enthusiastically collected. Temporary triumphal arches were a usual feature of the decorations erected for ceremonial processions and entries throughout Europe, and both Henry VIII and Leo X were particularly fond of such displays. Leo was responsible for the recreation of a classical triumphus when in September I513 he received his brother Giuliano on the Capitol.61 Two years later, Bandinelli was one of many artists employed to decorate Florence for the Pope's entry, and he made one of the twelve arches, richly ornamented with sculpture, 'fatto a similitudine di quelli delli antichi Romani.'62

Although some of Bandinelli's ideas for the King's monument could have come from his earlier activity using perishable materials, his design may have been inspired by the work of contemporary artists. The enormous scale of the work is comparable only with Michelangelo's projects for Julius II's tomb, but the design resembles some of Leonardo's drawings for the Trivulzio monument. The drawings, Nos. 12,353 and 12,355 in the Royal Library, Windsor, contain a variety of sketches of arched monuments surmounted by equestrian statues, and show experiments with the introduction of other figures around the arch.63 Leonardo's estimate of the cost of materials for the 'Sepulcro di Messer Giovanni Jacomo Trevulzo' shows that he intended to replace the arch by marble columns with bronze capitals, but the life-size bronze statues of the condottiere general and his horse were retained, and eight marble figures were to be placed 'attorno allo imbasemento del cavallo'.64 Bandinelli's model includes many similar features, and moreover, it was to have the same function, that of a sepulchre, according to Giovio.

It is also possible that Bandinelli knew of a more recent design than Leonardo's, Raphael's design for the funerary monument of the Marchese Giovanni Francesco Gonzaga.65 This is known through a drawing in the Louvre which shows an equestrian statue of an imperator, like the Marcus Aurelius, on the highest of five steps which decrease in size forming a truncated pyramid. This is the characteristic shape of a castrum doloris, the funerary canopy placed over the bier of an ecclesiastical or royal corpse.66

60 G. Soos, 'Antichi modelli delle statue equestre di Leonardo da Vinci', Acta Historiae Artium, iv, 1956, p. 130, fig. 3 for illustration of B.M. coin of 'Claudio Nerone Imp.', showing arch and statue.

61 Francesco Chiericati wrote a detailed description of the ceremonies: Descriptione de la pompa et solemnita fatta in Roma il di chl. S. Mag.co Juliano di Medici fratello di N. S. Papa Leone fu fatto cittadino et baron romano ... B.M., MS Harley 3462.

62 Vasari, v, p. 25 and note 3. For the Pope's progress and the decorations see Paris de Grassis's description in W. Roscoe, Life of Leo the Tenth, London 1846, ii, Appendix I, pp. 401Iff.

63 K. Clark and C. Pedretti, The Drawings of Leonardo da Vinci... at Windsor Castle,

(2nd edn.), London 1968, i, Appendix A4- 64 G. Castelfranco, 'I1l Preventivo di

Leonardo per il Monumento sepolcrale di Giangiacomo Trivulzio', Studi Vinciani, Rome 1960, pp. i86f.

65 E. Lechevallier-Chevignard, 'Un dessin du Mus6e du Louvre', Gazette des Beaux- Arts, iijme p6riode, xv, 1877, p. 477. The monument is mentioned in a letter written by Baldassare Castiglione on 3 June 1519: V. Golzio, Raffaello nei Documenti .. ., Vatican City 1936, p. 99.

66 For examples see E. Borsook, 'Art and Politics at the Medici Court: I. The Funeral of Cosimo I de' Medici', Mitteilungen des kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz, xii, I965, figs. 4, 5-




Such a connexion might explain Sellaio's phrase 'a modo di chapana d'esequio' in his description of Bandinelli's model; it would also support Giovio's reference to the monument as a sepulchre.

It is doubtful whether the project to build a monument for Henry VIII ever went beyond the preparation of the wooden model, because of the interruption caused by Leo X's death and the elections which followed. Sellaio's remark in his second letter, 'Ne manco penso Bac[i]o v'entri'-I doubt whether Baccio will embark upon it-was an astute prediction. Bandinelli left Rome for Florence and stayed there during the twenty-month pontificate of Adrian VI. With the election, in November 1523, of Cardinal Giulio de' Medici as Clement VII, there was a resumption of certain of Leo X's policies, and a continuation of strong English representation at the papal court. Clement sent the first Golden Rose of his pontificate to Henry,67 and in March 1524, he confirmed the title Fidei Defensor.68 During the next three years he was engaged in the unsuccessful pursuit of peace in Europe, and had neither time nor money to spend on Henry's monument. Only once, in February 1527, did an event occur which might have caused Clement to revive the project. After months of urgent appeals stressing the Pope's 'imminent ruin', Henry sent thirty thousand ducats and further promises of support which 'restored his holiness from death to life'.69 But, before Clement could make a reciprocal gesture, Imperial forces burst into Rome in May 1527, plundered the city and imprisoned the Pope. Just at this moment of crisis in Europe, Henry's desire to divorce Queen Katherine began to be seen in England as 'diplomatically expedient and, so some judged, dynastically urgent'.70

Given these political circumstances, it is not surprising that Giovio's reference to a model of a tomb for the King of England has remained an isolated, unexplored detail in his biography of Leo X. Baccio Bandinelli, who was given many other commissions by Clement VII, did not return to work on the project. But, before leaving the Italian side of the fate of the project to discuss Henry VIII's tomb in England, mention should be made of the possibility of Jacopo Sansovino's connexion with the project in 1527- In a letter written by Lorenzo Lotto in October of that year it is stated that the banker, Giovanni Gaddi, had negotiated on Jacopo Sansovino's behalf the contract for a work-una opera-for the King of England, valued at seventy-five thousand ducats, and that part of the money had been secured so that work can begin.71 There is no specific reference to any aspect of Bandinelli's activity for the King in this letter, and no further information about this commission to Sansovino is known to me. It is possible that Henry VIII may have been trying to secure Sansovino's services as an architect (it is known that Francis I wanted him to go to France at this time),72 by offering him a rich contract. There are, however, a number of reasons for

67 L.P., IV, i, 23. 68 L.P., IV, i, 148; Rymer, xiv, 13. 69 L.P., IV, ii, 2868 and 2870. 70J. J. Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, London

1968, p. 152.

71 See Appendix III. 72 Francesco Sansovino's biography of his

father; F. Sapori, Jacopo Sansovino, Rome 1927, p. 20.




associating Sansovino's 'opera' for the King of England with Bandinelli's work for him. There are, for example, similarities in the circumstances of the commission. In each case this was handled by an Italian: Cavalcanti, a merchant, and Gaddi, a banker. Moreover, Sansovino was a friend of Gaddi and was living in Gaddi's house when the letter was written. The cost of both works was very high: Sellaio estimated that the gilding on Bandinelli's monument would cost forty thousand ducats, and Lotto gives seventy-five thousand ducats as the negotiated cost for Sansovino's work. These two artists worked together in Florence and later in Rome.73 They were both in Rome in the early I520'S, when Gaddi contracted Sansovino to build him a palace there.74 In 1525 they were rivals in a competition for the commission to design the Duke of Sessa's tomb.75 Giovanni Gaddi, a clerk of the Apostolic Camera, paid Clement VII thirty-two thousand ducats from the family bank for the elevation of his brother Niccol6 to the purple in 1527, when the Pope was imprisoned and in great need of money.76 All this is circumstantial evidence, but if Clement thought of reviving Leo X's project of a monument for Henry VIII, perhaps in response to the King's gift of money in February 1527, it could be sufficient reason for him to turn to Giovanni Gaddi, who in turn would naturally offer the contract first of all to his friend Sansovino. Furthermore, Bandinelli had been absent from Rome since before the Sack, employed on a Medici commission for Florence.

Thus it is possible that the contract worth seventy-five thousand ducats offered to Jacopo Sansovino in October 1527 for work for the King of England was for the building of the monument planned by Leo X. There is insufficient evidence to confirm or disprove this hypothesis but, if accepted, it would give a plausible explanation of some of the elusive remarks on Sansovino's Roman activities made in passing by Lorenzo Lotto in his letter concerning the intarsie for S. Maria Maggiore, Bergamo.77 On the Italian side the history of the project to build a monument for Henry VIII barely outlived its instigator Pope Leo.

English sources are as silent as Italian about the fate of Bandinelli's model after Leo X died. If King Henry knew anything about the monument Pope Leo was planning for him in 1521, he never betrayed the fact. In 1519 Pietro Torrigiano contracted to build a tomb for the king, but the project was abandoned before it was begun. Henry was young and very active; he cannot have felt any great urgency to build a monument to receive his remains and perpetuate his glorious memory. Exactly ten years later, following Wolsey's disgrace in September I529, work on Henry's tomb began. The

73 e.g. Bandinelli made a wooden model of Sansovino's design for the facade of S. Lorenzo, Florence, commissioned by Leo X; see Vasari, vii, p. 496.

74F. Sapori, op. cit., p. 37; Vasari, vii, p. 497-

75 Cf. Letter from L. Sellaio to Michel- angelo, 5 January 1525, K. Frey, Sammlung

ausgewdhlter Briefe an Michelangelo Buonarroti, Berlin 1899, p. 244; and one from Sansovino, 22 February 1525, loc. cit., p. 248.

76 Sanuto, xxxii, 236. 7 Lettere inedite di Lorenzo Lotto sulle Tarsie

de S. Maria Maggiore in Bergamo, 1962, no. xxvii, pp. 54-55. See infra Appendix iii.




King had seized the Cardinal's property, including his half-finished tomb, which Benedetto da Rovezzano had begun about 1524.78 Henry instructed Benedetto to make a report on the work he had executed, and to estimate the materials that could be made available to build a monumental tomb for himself.79 The description of Wolsey's unfinished tomb shows that it was to be a free-standing, sarcophagus-type structure, and implies that the platform, base, sarcophagus and four giant columns were already in situ in the Lady Chapel of St. George's, Windsor.8s

In a letter to Wolsey, written on 30 June I529, Benedetto states that he has been promised the execution of a tomb for the King.81 Since this letter predates Wolsey's fall, and Henry's engagement of Benedetto, it is possible that the King was intending to have his monument built before the materials from Wolsey's tomb became available. If he knew of Bandinelli's design at this time and hoped to see it carried out we do not know, but, before any work began, the King had at his disposal a rich supply of materials from Wolsey's tomb. Between i530 and 1536 Benedetto da Rovezzano, Giovanno da Maiano, and a team of skilled assistants worked on the King's tomb following a design which resembled more closely Benedetto's tomb for Cardinal Wolsey than Bandinelli's model.82

King Henry was destined to have no monumental sepulchre; when work ceased in 1536, his tomb was left unfinished. He died on 28 January 1547, and was buried in the vault of Queen Jane Seymour in the choir of St. George's Chapel, Windsor.83 On 30 December I546, he made a will which gave directions for his burial and for the erection of a monument:

that our bodie be buried and enterred in the quire of our College of Windsor midway between the Stalles and the high Altar; and there to be made and set... an honourable tombe for our bones to rest in, which is well onward and almost made therefore already, with a faire grate about it which we will also the bones of our true and loving wife Queen Jane be put alsoe, and that there be provided ... a convenyent aulter, honorablie prepared and aparelled with all manner of things requisite and necessarie for dailie masses there to be said

... .84

78 A. Higgins, 'On the Work of Florentine Sculptors in England', Archaeological Journal, ii, (2nd series, i), 1894, Appendix iii, p. 202

(hereafter Higgins). 79Higgins, Appendix iv, transcription.

Original in P.R.O. (L.P., IV, ii, 5113). 80 Higgins, p. 153. The Lady Chapel,

an independent structure attached to the east end of St. George's Chapel, was built by Henry VII for his own sepulchre (later erected in Westminster). It was later granted to Wolsey by Henry VIII, State Papers of Henry VIII, London 1830-52, i, 1506, 4856. See also W. H. St. John Hope, Windsor Castle, London, 1913; J. Pote, The History and Antiquities of Windsor Castle..., Eton 1749, pp. 6of.

81 L.P., IV, iii, 5743. Full transcription Higgins, Appendix iii, p. 202.

82 31 December I530, first recorded payment made: N. H. Nicholas, The Privy Purse Expenses of King Henry Eighth, London 1827, p. 101. Transcriptions of all payments are in Higgins, Appendix vi, pp. 207-15.

83 Death, funeral and burial are described by J. Pote, op. cit., pp. 55-59; W. H. St. John Hope, 'On the Funeral Effigies of the Kings and Queens of England', Archaeologia, lx, ii, 1907, P. 541-

84 Rymer, xv, p. 117. It is impossible to determine whether the document among the royal wills in the P.R.O. is the version signed by the royal hand.




The appearance of the intended monument, 'well onward and almost made' in December 1546, can be reconstructed approximately on the basis of information contained in Benedetto's detailed accounts, in a report showing the weight of bronze required for a tomb, chantry chapel and altar for Henry VIII, and a list of 'speciall things wantinge' drawn up for the Lord Treasurer (Lord Burghley) twenty years later.85 The contrast with Bandi- nelli's model is immediately apparent. The basic structure is similar to that of Wolsey's tomb: a base or platform on which stood a pedestal supporting the black touchstone sarcophagus. This central part was surrounded by great columns, ten feet high with bronze capitals, on which stood gilded bronze figures four and a half feet in height. There were also relief panels and many smaller figures, all of gilded bronze, and a bronze enclosure surrounded the whole work including a chantry altar at the east end of the tomb. The effect would have been powerful: gleaming gold contrasting with white marble and black touchstone, similar to Henry VII's tomb in its basic form, but surpassing it in size, cost and magnificence.

It is ironical, therefore, that no monument marks the place of Henry's burial. His unfinished tomb remained in the Tomb House, or Lady Chapel, of St. George's Chapel, and was still there, incomplete and damaged, when the Long Parliament resolved in March 1645, that: 'the Brass Statue at Windsour Castle, and the Images there defaced, and other broken Pieces of Brass, be forthwith sold to the best advantage of the State .... '86 In spite of the revival of interest in Henry VIII's tomb during Queen Elizabeth I's reign, no work had been carried out.87 The black touchstone sarcophagus, once to have been part of Wolsey's tomb, now serves as Lord Nelson's in the crypt of St. Paul's Cathedral, and is the only recognizable remainder of King Henry's monument.88

This is what can be said of the project of Benedetto da Rovezzano. With it, the story of King Henry's tomb might be thought to be at an end, since, as we have seen, we do not know what happened to Bandinelli's model and Benedetto's design came to nothing. There is, however, one other document which hints that Bandinelli's model may not have been unknown in England and this document we must now consider.

A remarkable passage in John Speed's History of Britain, 1623, describing a tomb for Henry, corresponds in many places to the letter of Leonardo Sellaio. At the end of his biography of Henry VIII, Speed writes that the King

was buried at Windsore, under a most costly Tombe, begun in Copper 85 Higgins, Appendices v, vi, vii. The

present whereabouts of the Pritchard MS are unknown. Higgins's reconstruction, pp. i90-91, is acceptable for the purposes of comparison.

86 Higgins, Appendix viii. 87 As well as the report for Lord Burghley,

(B.M. MS Lansdowne i 16, fols. 49r-50v; Higgins, Appendix vii), there is another report, probably also Elizabethan, on the state of the tomb. This confirms that it was

in the Lady Chapel: the building also needed repairs to the roofing, paving, and glazing. It also shows that there was a model of Benedetto's design, as this is a 'calender' of 'all things wrought and unwrought touchinge the moddell from the ground upwarde'. Higgins does not refer to this unpublished MS, B.M. Lansdowne 94, fol. 27.

88W. H. St. J. Hope, Windsor Castle, London, 1913, PP- 484ff.




and guilt, but neuer finished, in the inclosures of whose Grates is curiously cast this inscription: HENRICUS OCTAVUS REX ANGLIAE, FRANCIAE, DOMINUS HIBERNIAE, FIDEI DEFENSOR.89

Of course, Henry was not buried under the half-finished tomb. Nevertheless, the substance of this statement is correct: the tomb was begun, those materials were used, and contemporary sources confirm the inscription on the enclosures-it is the style used by Henry on the Great Seal before 1541.90 Speed continues:

With what cost and state this his monument was intended, is manifested by a Manuscript taken from the true modell thereof, which I receiued from that industrious Harald Master Nicholas Charles Lancaster.

There follows a detailed description (covering two closely printed folio columns) in which there are some extraordinary similarities to Bandinelli's model as described by Leonardo Sellaio. Furthermore, the monument described is so different from the tomb begun by Benedetto da Rovezzano that Alfred Higgins referred to it as 'this monstrous scheme', which 'can never have emanated from the mind of an Italian artist of the earlier half of the sixteenth century, and must have been the idea of some Englishman or Fleming, who thought himself competent not only to complete but to vastly augment and improve upon Benedetto da Rovezzano's unfinished work'.91

Nicholas Charles was Lancaster Herald of Arms from I6o8 to his death in 1613; he compiled a number of manuscript descriptions of funeral monuments, epitaphs, and arms. Several of these still exist, but his description of the model of Henry VIII's tomb cannot be traced.92 The account as it appears in Speed is printed at the end of this article with Sellaio's letter describing Bandinelli's model, so that the two may be compared (Appendices I and II). For each point in Sellaio's letter a parallel in Charles's description can be found. First, the 'recinto di schale' at the base of the monument is like the 'two great steps under all the worke'. This main structure, 'a modo dell'archo che e a pie di chanpi dogl[i]o,' 'shall be made an Arch Triumphall, of white Marble wrought within, and about it'. The 'Re a chavallo' is also there: 'an Image of the King on Horse-backe, liuely in Armour like a King, after the antique manner.. . the whole stature of a goodly man and a large horse', but this is placed under the arch in a quite different context. The total number of bronze statues is approximately the same in each case, and they are life-size, 'a naturale' or 'V. foot in length', and they are placed on the base platform and on other parts of the work, 'dintorno', in each case.

The uppermost part of the structure, which, it has been suggested from

89J. Speed, History of Britaine, London, 1623, P. 796.

90J. Stow, Annales, ed. E. Howes, London, 1631, p. 592; Sandford, A Genealogical History of the Kings of England, London 1677, p. 449.

9" Higgins, pp. i85-6. This comment is understandable; Higgins did not know of the existence of Bandinelli's model.

92 Charles's MSS include a 'Description of Arms and Epitaphs on Sepulchral Monu- ments' contained in B.M. MS Lansdowne 874 and a MS in the College of Arms. Mr. R. O. Dennys, Somerset Herald of Arms assisted in the search for Charles's description of the model for Henry's tomb.




Sellaio's description, resembled a stepped, truncated pyramid, was, according to Speed's account: 'in the manner of a Casement of white Marble, garnished with like Orientall stones.., .on the four corners of the said Casement shall be made the Images of the foure Cardinall vertues'. Two of these sides were decorated with relief panels, in gilded bronze, showing the life of St. John the Baptist. There were to be five steps here, 'euery one more then other downeward,' like the uppermost part of Raphael's design for the Duke of Mantua's monument. However, as the equestrian statue was to be placed under the arch according to Charles's description, its place on top of the steps is occupied by an image of God the Father:

on top of the highest step of the said flue steps, on the one side, shall be an Image of the Father, hauing in his left hand the Soule of the King, and blessing with his right hand, with two Angels holding abroad the Mantle of the Father on either side. In like wise shal be made, on the other side, the said image of the Father, hauing the soule of the Queen in his left hand, blessing with his right hand with like Angels.93

The whole work, twenty-eight feet high from the ground to the figure of God the Father at the top, was to be placed between 'the two Pillars of the Church', the distance between these pillars being fifteen feet and the overall width of the monument twenty feet. It was to have two facades, a principal one, or front, from which the tombs and the king on horseback could be properly viewed, and a back, the only side on which God the Father holding the Queen's soul could be seen. It is very difficult to visualize the monument, particularly to be certain of the number and disposition of the figures and relief scenes and of columns and 'casements' (framed niches) on each level of the decoration of the pillars. The general impression, however, is of an accretion of decoration in three tiers-Old Testament, New Testament, and angelic chorus-on the flanking piers; between these the two sarcophagi watched over by guardian angels and between them, on a high pedestal, a life-size figure of the king on horseback, triumphant over death as he looks down on his own recumbent effigy. Over this central area, from pillar to pillar, spans the triumphal arch and, crowning it, the celestial zone where God the Father sits enthroned and holds the souls of the two whose effigies lie below on the tombs. The choir of angels also belongs to this level.

There can be little doubt that Nicholas Charles's description was made from a three-dimensional 'model' rather than a drawing; this, not only because he mentions the spatial relationship of some parts, but also because he indicates that there are two sides. The model seems to have been coloured, or if not, a key to the materials to be used and their colours must also have been available to him. He mentions, 'Orientall stone... Alabaster, Porfido, Serpentines, and other stones of diuers colours, as in the patterne is shewed,' and roses of 'fine Orientall stones of white and red'. Could this model be the one made by Bandinelli in 1521, 'un modello, chosa grande,' to which alterations and additions have been made? The scale and cost of

S93There is an echo of Pisanello's design for the arch of the Castelnuovo in Naples here, a towering structure with the equestrian

statue under the arch and the statue of God the Father at the highest point.



WORKS OF ART FROM ROME FOR HENRY VIII I95 the work in each case, and the extensive gilding, correspond, to support further the similarities already indicated. Benedetto da Rovezzano probably did not know the appearance of Bandinelli's model. He made his own model, and in accordance with it made the report on the parts of Wolsey's tomb he could re-use: it was this design that he and his assistants worked on between 1530 and 1536. It would also appear that Henry VIII did not know of Bandinelli's model. Or, knowing of it only later in his reign, did he ignore it because it was an unequivocal reminder of his support of the papacy? In his will he provided for the completion of Benedetto's tomb.

At the end of the first decade of Queen Elizabeth I's reign, when considerable interest was shown in completing her father's monument,94 it is just possible that the model described by Charles came under consideration, or may have stimulated concern about the unfinished state of the tomb at Windsor. The most important element present at Windsor and missing from Bandinelli's project is the tomb itself. This alone suggests that Bandinelli's construction was made in Henry VIII's lifetime and the former after his death; besides, one would not expect the King's tomb to be a prominent feature of an honorific monument intended for him by the Pope during his lifetime. Without any evidence as proof, the hypothesis might be considered that, during the reign of Elizabeth, the model of the triumphal-arch 'sepulchrum', designed by Bandinelli at the behest of Pope Leo X as a reward for Henry for his military and literary support of the papacy, was adapted to perform the function of a funerary monument. All changes and additions are consistent with an apotheosis of Henry VIII, founder of the Tudor dynasty, whose heir and successor Elizabeth was.95 The King rides triumphant, overlooking his own effigy and that of Queen Jane, while above the arch, over his head, their souls are in heaven. On the pillars flanking this central theme are the prophets, apostles, evangelists, Doctors of the Church, and angels.

Nevertheless, it is most unlikely that there was ever any serious plan to build this monument; it is difficult to imagine where a site could be found for it in St. George's Chapel.96 In fact nothing was done at any time to complete Henry VIII's tomb. In 1645, as we have seen, it was broken and defaced and sold for scrap.

Without more written or visual evidence to shed light on the appearance of the extraordinary monument represented in Bandinelli's model, many questions arise, but none can be answered. It would be interesting, for example, to compare this design of Bandinelli's with the tombs he constructed for Popes Leo and Clement. What kind of horse and rider did he intend, was Henry to be shown as 'imperator' or as conquering hero on a rearing charger

94 I5 July 1567, Marquis of Winchester sent Lord Burghley plans for the tomb of Henry VIII to be put up at Windsor: Calendar of State Papers, Domestic. . 1547- 158o, ed. R. Lemon, London I856.

95 R. Strong, Holbein and Henry VIII, Lon- don 1967, p. 6. On Tudor, particularly Elizabethan, imperialism, see F. A. Yates, 'Queen Elizabeth as Astraea', this Journal,

X, 1947, PP. 37-56. 96 The arches of St. George's Chapel choir

are 24ft. 5ins. high and 9ft. wide, and the piers are 3ft. across. It is difficult to imagine how the tomb could be built in the Lady Chapel either, because it was clearly meant to incorporate 'two great Pillars of the Church', one on either side.




trampling his foes? If Henry did know of the triumphal monument intended, could it have acted as a stimulus for the idea of his 'imperial' dignity which he began to assert about I530, 'a new authority of his own over against the papal.'97 As early as 1521, the King asserted that he possessed a crown imperial and that he owed it to the Pope. His acknowledgement of the Donation of Constantine was one of the reasons for his insistence on papal primacy in the Assertio. His words to Sir Thomas More bear this out.98

Later, the idea of empire grew quite independent of the notion of obliga- tion to the Pope of Rome. The model of Henry's tomb described by Nicholas Charles, where it differs from the one described by Leonardo Sellaio, is consistent with Reformation propaganda for the King's position as Supreme Head of the Church. As appears from the preamble to the Act in Restraint of Appeals (April I533), in reforming abuses of the Anglican clergy it was Henry's intention to restore the Church in England to the status of the Church of Constantine.99

II The tomb is unique, in substance and circumstances, among the gifts

exchanged by Henry and Leo; compared with other works of art which passed between the English and papal courts we are well-informed about it. Only isolated hints in Italian and English sources link the names of the Pope and Henry through these works. Nevertheless, they merit more than a passing reference in the brief historical section at the beginning of this article. Tradi- tion is often the earliest source: we can only look for evidence to support or refute it within the bounds of probability, and while it is sometimes possible to decide that Henry VIII did possess a certain work of art, we cannot be certain how he acquired it. He was more often the recipient than the donor in the instances mentioned here. We begin with the least and end with a more extensive discussion of the greatest, greatest in artistic and historical importance, and the most costly-the duplicate set of the Raphael Acts of the Apostles tapestries which belonged to Henry VIII.

First, there is the possibility that Henry may have given Leo X, as well as the manuscript Assertio bound in cloth of gold, a chasuble embroidered in gold with a scene showing 'Christ giving the keys to St. Peter'-a point which Henry particularly stressed in the Assertio in the chapter 'On Indulgences': 'Una pianeta figurata tutta, e ricamata d'oro, dove Xpo da le chiave a San Pietro, con l'arme del re d'Inghilterra.' This item occurs in an inventory of the contents of the wardrobes of the sala dei paramenti, the sacristy of the Cap- pella Paolina, drawn up in 1547.100 The King can only have been Henry VIII or his father, and considering the great emphasis Henry VIII laid on papal primacy in the Assertio, quoting Matthew xvi, I9 in support of the

97J. J. Scarisbrick, Henry VIII, London 1968, p. 260. See also G. R. Elton, England under the Tudors, London 1955, pp. 16o-62. R. Koebner, '"The Imperiall Crown of this Realm . . ." ', Bulletin of the Institute of Historical Research, xxvi, 1953, PP. 29-52; and The Anglica Historia of Polydore Vergil, ed.

D. Hay, Camden Soc., lxxiv, London 1950. 98 Above, p. 182. 99 R. Koebner, op. cit. 100 X. Barbier de Montault, 'Inventaire de

la Chapelle Papale sous Paul III, en 1547', Bulletin Monumental, 5 me s6rie, vi, 1878, p. 430.




Donation of the Keys, he was probably the donor. The disintegration of his relations with the papacy gives a terminus ante quem dating of about I530, the most likely date would seem to be 152 I, when he presented his book, but a considerable amount of correspondence for the summer and autumn of that year is preserved and contains no mention of such a gift.

'Tradition' is the only authority to support King Henry's ownership of the Golden Gospels now in the Pierpont Morgan Library (MS 23).101 This magnificent Latin codex with leaves of purple vellum, written in uncials of burnished gold, characteristic of Carolingian scriptoria, has on the fly-leaf a coat of arms and inscription painted by a sixteenth-century hand. The arms are English, and while there is no one reason to connect them with Henry VIII, he is the obvious candidate.102 On the verso of the fly-leaf an eighteenth- century hand has written the conjecture that the Gospels were a gift from Leo X to Henry VIII when he conferred the title Defensor Fidei.103 Leo could well have owned such a magnificent codex, but it is not listed in the inventories of books belonging to his father's library.'04 While we would like to consider that the Gospels were another gift from the Pope to the King of England, we have no proof to support such a conjecture.105

Finally, once again acknowledging how little source material is available, let us investigate the tradition that Henry VIII owned a set of the Acts of the Apostles tapestries. It is first mentioned by Peacham in The Compleat Gentleman, 1622,

'... Those stately hangings of Arras, containing the Historie of S. Paul out of the Acts, (than which, eye never beheld more absolute Art, and which long since you might have seen in the banqueting house at Whitehall) were wholly of his [Raphael's] invention, bought (if I be not deceived) by King Henrie the eight of the State of Venice, where Raphael of Urbine dyed [sic].'106

The central fact that Henry VIII possessed the tapestries has been repeated by many authors, and until some contemporary records referring to the commission, payment, expedition or receipt of the tapestries are discovered, we can only repeat the traditional suggestions and comment upon them. Did the King buy the tapestries from Venice or was he given them by the Pope?107

101 B. da Costa Greene and M. P. Harrsen, Catalogue of Manuscripts. Exhibition of Illumin- ated Manuscripts from the Pierpont Morgan Library, held at the New York Public Library, November 1933 to April 1934, New York 1934, pp. 2f.

102 Similar arms, dated 1528, are found on that part of the vaulting of the stone ceiling of St. George's Chapel, Windsor, built by Henry VIII.

103 E. A. Lowe, 'The Morgan Gospels: The Date and Origin of the MS', Studies in Art and Literature for Belle da Costa Greene, Princeton 1954, p. 268.

104 E. Piccolomini, Intorno alle condizioni ed alle vicende della Libreria Medicea privata,

Florence, 1875; and his article in Rivista di filologia e d'istruzione classica, ii, I874, pp. 401of.

105 I am most grateful to Dr. John Plum- mer of the Pierpont Morgan Library for his researches into this matter on my behalf.

106 H. Peacham, The Compleat Gentleman, London 1622, p. 137-

107 Peacham, alone, loc. cit., names the State of Venice as donor. The following authors mention both possibilities: W. Gunn, Cartonensia, London (2nd edn.) 1832, pp. 32; R. Cattermole, The Book of the Cartoons, London 1837, p. 20; G. F. Waagen, Treasures of Art in Great Britain, London 1854, ii, p. 402.




The first of these alternatives is less probable for political and chronological reasons. It may be the result of confusing these tapestries with some of the sixty pieces sent to England from Antwerp by the Venetian Signory in October I520;108s but these were for Cardinal Wolsey and the date is rather early for the Acts of the Apostles to be included amongst them. The second suggestion, that Leo X gave Henry a duplicate set of the tapestries he had commissioned Raphael to design for the Sistine Chapel, is more likely.109 Whereas the State of Venice had no claim to ownership of the designs and no specific motive for giving the English King such a present, Leo X had reasons for honouring Henry VIII, particularly in 152 I when he received the Assertio Septem Sacramentorum, but also in 1519 when Henry dedicated himself to go on a crusade. Since Leo died in December 1521 and all expenditure on artistic projects was suspended by his successor Adrian VI, if the tapestries came from Leo they would have been on the point of completion at his death and commissioned at least one year before (c. 1519 or very early I520) to allow time for nine large pieces to be woven (and paid for). This excludes the receipt of Henry's Assertio as stimulus for a papal gift of the tapestries.

Neither of the above hypotheses is wholly satisfactory so one may, with Waagen, prefer a third: that 'immediately after the completion of the tapestries for Pope Leo X, these were executed in the manufactury at Arras, by command of Henry VIII, who was equally fond of art and splendour'.110 Henry owned a large collection of tapestries, many of them woven at his command.1'1 On hearing of the Pope's new series, woven at great cost and with gold and silver threads, he may have wished to possess similar ones himself, perhaps to decorate a royal chapel. The 'cappella grande' of the temporary palace at the Field of Cloth of Gold, July 1520, was 'coperta tutta et razata di drappo d'oro et veluto verde', and in the palace itself the most sumptuous part of the decoration was the tapestries lining the walls: 'Ma sopra tutto forno maravegliose le tapezarie, de le qual tutte sono d'oro et seda, alcune a figure at altre a verdure, che piu belle non se poriano depinzer, veramente le figure pareano vive.'112

The tapestries of the Acts of the Apostles which were in England in the reign of Charles I and may have belonged to Henry VIII can be identified as those

108 Sanuto, xxix, cols. 404, 411. 10 That Leo X gave the tapestries to

Henry VIII is first mentioned in 1824 when they were exhibited in London: Exhibition of the Arras of Tapestry, for which Raffaello di Urbino designed the Cartoons presented by Leo X to Henry VIII ... at the Egyptian Hall, Picca- dilly, London 1824; The Repository of Arts, literature, Fashion &c., ed. R. Ackermann, 3rd series, iv, I824, pp. 356-7; The Literary Gazette and Journal of the Belles Lettres, 13 November I824, p. 732; Le Mayeur, La Gloire Belgique, Louvain 1830, p. 402 says Leo gave them to Charles I [sic]; R. Trull, Raphael Vindicated ..., London 1840, pp. 4, 5: 'Two sets, precisely similar, were ordered by Leo, afterwards designated the 'Gold

and Silver sets', no other being worked with these precious metals ... One of them being presented to Henry VIII of England; while the other adorned the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican'.

110 G. F. Waagen, loc. cit. 111 W. G. Thomson, A History of Tapestry,

London 1906, pp. 219, 260. The King also employed weavers to repair his tapestries, e.g. 29 September 1539, pieces being re- paired, History of David, History of Troy, St. John the Baptist; and a History of the Apostles was being lined. See P.R.O. Augmentation Account, Misc. Books no. 456, quoted by Thomson, p. 263.

112 Sanuto, xxix, col. 82.




that were in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum, Berlin, at the outbreak of World War II,113 nine pieces which faithfully reproduce the designs of Raphael's cartoons. These cartoons had been commissioned by Leo X in 1515 and all ten were finished by December 1516, when Raphael received the final payment.114 They were sent north to the Brussels manufactory of Pieter van Aelst, where they were seen in July 1517. By 26 December 1519, seven pieces had arrived in Rome and been hung in the Sistine Chapel; the remaining three had not yet arrived, but all ten were in Rome when Pope Leo died (December I521).115 All the cartoons remained in the hands of the weavers until 1521, when that of the Conversion of Saul was recorded in Venice.116 Since the Berlin set reproduces these cartoons and includes this scene, it is possible that they may have been executed before this date by the same weavers, that is, almost concurrently with the Vatican editio princeps. This implies that the Berlin tapestries were commissioned in about 1519-20 at the latest, in which case Leo X would surely have known of their existence. How- ever, copies of the cartoons were made at an early date, and the scene of the Conversion of Saul is included in other sets of tapestries woven in Brussels soon after 1521, the Mantua and Madrid sets for example. The Berlin set could also have been woven after 152 1; the original cartoon of the Conversion of Saul is no longer extant for comparison with the tapestry, so that the exact relationship between the two cannot be ascertained. We do know, however, that the Berlin tapestries were woven before 1528, since they bear no signs of the Brussels mark, which in that year became obligatory.117

In the Berlin set there are only nine pieces, the tenth scene of the Vatican set, St. Paul in Prison, being omitted here and in the other three early replicas, those in Mantua and Madrid, and that ordered by Francis I in 1534. This is quite simply explained by the fact that this piece is a narrow strip made for the particular exigencies of its position next to the 'cancellata' in the Sistine Chapel. The remaining nine scenes are fairly uniform in size and do not differ substantially from the Vatican tapestries in the contents of the scenes- some extra vegetation appears in the foreground of the Miraculous Draught of Fishes and the Conversion of Saul. The principal difference is in the border decoration which consists of a continuous strip of closely packed flowers and foliage around each scene. This takes the place of wider bands containing allegorical and historical scenes designed specifically for Leo X, and to fit the available space in the Sistine Chapel. Therefore, as with St. Paul in Prison, one would not expect them to be reproduced in any copies of the original set. Berlin borders contain no arms or heraldic devices which might point to their

113 As far as may be established they were destroyed during World War II.

114J. White and J. Shearman, 'Raphael's Tapestries and their Cartoons', i, Art Bulletin, xl, 1958, p. 214f. for the chronology.

115 Ibid., p. 196 and note io. 116 Ibid., p. 214, quoting Th. Frimmel, Der

Anonimo Morelliano, Vienna, 1896. 117 M. Wauters, Les Tapisseries Bruxelloises,

Brussels 1878, pp. 144-50; E. Miintz, A

Short History of Tapestry, Paris 1885, pp. 182ff; W. G. Thomson, op. cit., p. 219. In 1528 it became obligatory for all Brussels tapestries manufacturers to put the Brussels mark- B OB-on the selvage of all the pieces they wove. E. Kumnsch, Die Apostelgeschichte nach Raphael, Dresden I914, p. I2, says that this mark is absent on all the pieces in the Berlin set.




origin; strong, raking light falls on the flowers to give three-dimensional illusion.

The history of the Berlin set of the Acts of the Apostles can be traced back to the sale of the effects of King Charles I. In an inventory drawn up in 1649 there appears the item: 'Nine peeces of the History of the Acts of the Apostles.... Valued at viij per Ellne' to give a total value of ?4,429 5s.118 No other hangings in this list are valued at more than [?5 IOS per ell, so these must be the Raphael tapestries which had gold and silver threads woven through them. On i i October I650, '9 peeces of rich Arras Hangings of the History of the Acts of the Apostles' were sold for the same sum of ?4,429 5s to Mr Robert Houghton, Citizen and Brewer of London, who gave exactly half this amount as security.119 Within three years the tapestries became the property of the Spanish ambassador (Don Alonso de Cardenas) who obtained permission on 24 August 1653 'to ship from London, and export, custom free, 24 chests of pictures, hangings, and household stuff for his own use'.120 The tapestries remained in Spain until the nineteenth century, passing into the possession of the dukes of Alba in I662.121 In 1823 the British Consul in Catalonia bought the tapestries and returned them to London122 where they were exhibited the next year.123 In 1844, after King George IV had declined to buy them, they were acquired for the Berlin Museum.124

The provenance of the tapestries before Charles I's death is much less certain. In 1649 they were in the Tower wardrobe. Peacham, writing in 1622, said that they decorated the walls of the Banqueting Hall at Whitehall 'long since', probably during the reign of James I, perhaps earlier. In 1549, two years after Henry VIII's death an inventory of his goods was drawn up, and amongst the 'Hangings of Arras' in the Tower there is listed: '9 peces of the Storye of thactes of thapostles'.125 These are almost certainly the Berlin tapestries, but no description or valuation that could prove the identification is given.

The evidence presented here supports the tradition that Henry VIII owned a duplicate set of the Vatican Acts of the Apostles tapestries, but the problem of how he acquired them, whether as a gift from Leo X, or from someone else before 1528, or whether he bought them himself during those years, remains unresolved. It is difficult to understand the unbroken silence about the presence of the tapestries in England during Henry's reign: it extends even to the visual arts where no trace of their direct influence can be detected. If it could be proved that Pope Leo had given Henry these wonderful tapestries, this project for a vast triumphal monument for him would be eclipsed.

*I *e *f

118 P.R.O., L.R.2, 124, fol. 77v. The inventory will be published in vol. xliii of the Walpole Society. I am most grateful to Mr. O. N. Millar, Deputy Surveyor of the Queen's Pictures, for drawing my attention to this MS, and for allowing me to consult his transcript.

119 P.R.O., State Papers 29/447, fol. 258r. 120 P.R.O., State Papers Domestic, 25/70,

p. 276.

121 W. Trull, Raphael Vindicated..., Lon- don 1840, p. 18 quotes the archives of the house of Alba.

122 Duque de Alba, Discurso, Madrid 1924, p. 36.

123 See note 104. 124 E. Kumsch, op. cit., p. 12. 125 B.M. MS Harley I419A, fol. 28. Pub-

lished in W. G. Thomson, op. cit., p. 264-




What emerges clearly from a study of Anglo-Papal relations during the period I509-27 is that, although few works of art survive and documents relating to them are scarce, culture and politics, art and diplomacy, are inseparable because of the continual interaction of one upon the other.

APPENDIX I

G. Poggi, ed., II Carteggio di Michelangelo, ii, Florence 1967, p. 336. DXLV. Letter of Leonardo Sellaio to Michelangelo, 14 December 1521.

'Avesti la morte del Papa... G[i]ovanni Chavalchanti ' fatto fare a Bac[i]o di

Michelagnolo un modello, chosa grande, a modo dell'archo che a pie di Chanpi dogl[i]o, chon uno recinto di schale e di sopra a modo di chapana d'esequio. Dove vano, tra in su' detti schagl[i]oni e dintorno, 142 fighure di bronzo a' naturale, e di sopra e' Re a chavallo, e quadri di basso rilievo, pure di bronzo. G[i]udichasi che, solo per dorare detti bronzi, vi vada 4000ooo duchati, c[i]oe quaranta mila duchati d'oro. Non so se si farh mai. G[i]ovanni e suto forzato dal Datario, e perc[i]6 gl[i]el'h fatto fare. Tutto per aviso... .'

APPENDIX II

Description of a model of a tomb for Henry VIII. From John Speed, History of Britaine, London 1623, pp. 796-7.

The manner of the Tombe to be made for the Kings Grace at Windsore. First, the Pauement wherevpon the Tombe shall stand, shall be of Oriental stone:

That is to say, of Alabaster, Porfido, Serpentines, and other stones of diuers colours, as in the patterne is shewed.

Item, vpon the same Pauement shall be two great steps vnder all the worke, of like Orientall stones.

Item, the Basement of the Pillars shall be of white marble, with Angels holding between them Crownes or Garlands guilt, as more plainely sheweth in the Patterne.

Item, aboue the said Basement and Angels, shall be all the old Testament, that is to say, xiiij. Images in the xiiij. Casements of the same two Pillars of the Prophets, and all the Pillars which shall be xvi. shall be of stones Serpentine, Porfido, and Alabaster, and other fine Orientall stones, of such colours as is shewed in the patterne; and the foot of euery pillar, and also the head shall be of Brasse. And euery Prophet shall have an Angell sit at his foot, with Scripture of the name of his Prophet, and aboue ouer the head of the same shall be the story of his Prophet; in euery of which story shall be at least viij. or xi. figures.

Item, aboue all the same pillars shall be another Basement of white marble, with a partition being made of such fine Orientall stones as the pillars be, wherein shall be written such Scripture as please you.

Item, aboue the same Basement shall be the story of the new Testament, that is to wit, with the Images of the Apostles, the Euangelists, and the foure Doctors of the Church, and euery Image shall haue sitting at his foote a little childe, with a Scripture of the name of his Image, and a Basket full of red and white Roses, which they shall shew to take in their hands, and cast them downe off the Tombe, and ouer the Paue- ment, and the Roses that they shall cast ouer the Tombe, shall be enamelled and guilt, and the Roses that they cast ouer the Pauements shall be of fine Orientall stones of white and red.

Item, behinde all the same Images of the new Testament round about, shall be made in brasse and guilt all the life of Iesus Christ from the natiuity to his ascention, and it shall be so clearely and perfectly made, that the Mystery of Christs life to his ascention shall plainely appeare.

'4




Item, aboue the said new Testament and Images thereof, and aboue the said life of Christ, shall be a Quire of xx. Angels standing vpon a Basement of white Marble, with great Candlestickes in their hands hauing lights in them shewing to honor and reuerence the same Tombe.

Item, all these foresaid figures, stories, and ornaments shall be made to garnish and ornate the two Pillars of the Church betweene which the Tombe shall be set.

Item, betweene the said two great Pillars of the Church thus garnished, shall be a Basement of white Marble of the height of the Basement of the Pillars, and therein the Epitaph of the King and Queene, with letters of gold, of such Scriptures as ye deuise.

Item, vpon the same Basement shall be made two Tombes of blacke-Touch, that is to say, on eyther side one, and vpon the said Tombes of blacke Touch shall be made the Image of the King and Queene on both sides, not as death, but as persons sleeping, because to shew that famous Princes leauing behinde them great fame, their names neuer doe die, and shall lie in royall Apparels after the antique manner.

Item, ouer the right hand, ouer both the sides of the same Tombe shall be an Angell which shall hold the Kings Armes, with a great Candlesticke, hauing as it were light on it as a Lampe, and in like manner shall be an other Angell holding the Queenes Armes on the left hand with a like Candlesticke.

Item, on the right hand and left hand on both the sides ouer the said Images of the King and Queene, shall be two Angels, shewing to the people the bodies of the King and Queene, holding aboue their Heads veiles of Gold, and the Crownes of the King and Queene on their hands.

Item, betweene the said two Tombes of blacke Touch, and the said Angel ouer the King and Queene, shall stand an high Basement like a sepulchre, and on the sides whereof shall be made the story of St. George, and ouer the height of the Basement shall be made an Image of the King on Horse-backe, liuely in Armour like a King, after the antique manner, shewing in countenance and looking on the said two Images lying on the said Tombes.

Item, on the right hand and left hand of the said two Tombes shall be foure Pillers of the fore saed Orientall stones, that is to say, on either side two Pillers, and vpon euery Piller shall be a like Basement of white Marble with partitions for Scriptures as shall be aboue the other Pillers. And on the same foure Basements of the said Pillers shall be made foure Images, two of St. Iohn Baptist, and two of St. George, with foure little Children by them, casting roses, as is aforesaid.

Item, ouer the said Image of the King on horseback shall be made an Arch

triumphall, of white Marble wrought within, and about it, and vpon the same arch, in manner of a Casement of white Marble, garnished with like Orientall Stones of diuers colours, as the patterne sheweth, and on the two sides of the saide Casement shall be made and set of brasse guilt, the story of the life of Saint Iohn Baptist, and one height of the said Casement shall be made flue steps, euery one more than other downeward, of like Orientall stones, as the said Pillers shall shew.

Item, on the foure corners of the said Casement shall be made the Images of the foure Cardinall vertues, hauing such Candlestickes in their hands as is aboue-said.

Item, on the top of the highest step of the said flue steps, on the one side, shall be an image of the Father, hauing in his left hand the Soule of the King, and blessing with his right hand, with two Angels holding abroad the Mantle of the Father on either side.

Item, in like wise shal be made, on the other side, the said image of the Father, hauing the soule of the Queene in his left hand, blessing with his right hand with like Angels.

The height of the same worke from the Father vnto the Pauement shall be xxviij. foot.

Item, the breadth and largenesse of the said worke shall be xv. foot, and the Pillers




of the Church in greatnesse, v. foote: and so the largenesse of the said worke, from the vttermost part of the two great Pillars shall be xx. foote.

Item, euery of the Images of the xiiij. Prophets, shall containe euery Image V. foot in length, and the Angels shall containe two foot and a halfe in length.

Item, euery of the xx. Pillers shall containe in length X. foote. Item, euery of the Images of the Apostles, Euangelists, and Doctors shall containe

in length V. foote and the Angels as is abouesaid. Item, in likewise euery of the xx. Angels of the quire shall containe in length two

foot and a halfe, and in likewise the Images of the Children two foot and a halfe. Item, the foure Images of St. Iohn Baptist and Saint George, and all the figures of

the Father and Angels on the V. steps shall be V. foot. Item, the foure Images of the King and Queene shall be of the stature of a man and

woman, and the foure Angels by them of the stature of a man euery one. Item, the Image of the King on Horse-backe with his Horse shall be of the whole

stature of a goodly man and large horse. Item, there shall be a Cxxxiiij, figures, Xliiij. Stories, and all of brasse guilt, as in

the patterne appeareth. But, Sic transit gloria mundi, For whosoever this Kings fame was thus intended,

yet that great work neuer came to perfection.

APPENDIX III

Lettere inedite di Lorenzo Lotto: sulle Tarsie di S. Maria Maggiore in Bergamo, ed. L. Chiodo, Bergamo 1962, pp. 54-55- Concerning a work which Jacopo Sansovino has been commissioned to do for the King of England: ... Lui [Jacopo Sansovino] stassi qui alogiato con Gioane de Gaddi homo di gran reputatione, rico e gran banchieri in Roma, fratello del cardinale, quale ha fatto a dito misser Jacopo el manegio de una opera e mercato in duchati setantacinque mile per el re de Ingeltera et sicurth de certa parte de essi per il principio, ultra le altre importante imprese che have in Roma. Non ha bisogna questui di comprar lavori mendicamente. Questa opera la toglieria lui volontera per amor de bergamaschi che practichano per tuto el mondo a zi6 che in Lombardia ce fusse sua opera et de simil materia quale in poco tempo la conduria a perfetione perch6 gia e obligato; ma fino che le cose si aconciassero se ne caveria i piedi per essere usato a imprese di importantia et risolversi valoroso. Et haveresti ogni cautione che voresti. Al presente per fuzir ocio et per piacere fa una figura de una Venere per gitarla de metallo et uno modello di certo pallacio ch'e per un homo da ben rico che importava de venti mille ducati o circha, qual ha veduto li prefati vostri excell.mi ambasciatori, fino qualche di si vedera fornito....



works of art from rome for henry viii. a study of anglo-papal relations as reflected in papal gifts...

Documents