Mendicant choir relocations in the local context
The case of late sixteenth-century Florence
p. 189-223
Résumé
Florence holds a unique place amongst the major church renovation schemes of post-Tridentine Italy. In the 1560s and 1570s, projects to remove nave screens and choirs and institute further aethestic and liturgical changes transformed numerous churches in the city, most prominently the large mendicant churches of Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce. However, too often these Florentine renovations are attributed solely to the impetus of Duke Cosimo I de Medici and expertise of his court architect, Giorgio Vasari. Certainly in some prominent cases, Cosimo and Vasari pioneered architectural change: Cosimo financed alterations in the two mendicant churches, and Vasari later bragged about these achievements in Le Vite.
Direct ducal patronage notwithstanding, this article will present a more nuanced picture of late sixteenth-century church architecture in Florence, demonstrating that numerous agents – including private patrons, lay administrators, and religious communities – proposed, organized and enacted these transformation projects. Users of the altered spaces also expressed differing opinions about their impact and utility. Within a broader context of Tridentine reform, this article will track the day-to-day realities of the renovations extracted from records preserved in the Florentine archives, from minutes of chapter meetings to payments for moving wooden choir stalls. By focusing on the lesser known church renovations, I will argue for a subtle interpretation of historical events and reconsider the broader motivations and effects of the wide-ranging alterations.
Entrées d’index
Keywords : Florence, Renaissance, Choir stalls, Cosimo I de Medici, rood screen, Giorgio Vasari
Note de l’auteur
I am grateful for the continued support, inspiration and guidance of many colleagues, in particular Marcia Hall, Donal Cooper and Michael Gromotka. I delivered a version of this paper at the “Vasari @ Santa Croce”conference on 4 March 2016, jointly organized by The Medici Archive Project, Opera di Santa Croce, Syracuse University in Florence and The Samuel H. Kress Foundation. I wish to thank Sally Cornelison for the opportunity to present at that conference.
Texte intégral
1In his 1574 funeral oration for Cosimo I de’ Medici, Pietro Vettori identified the renovation of Florence’s churches as one of the duke’s major accomplishments, exclaiming:
Moreover, are you aware how much beauty and how much splendor he conveyed to the temples and the churches, those things [screens] – that stood in the way and that blocked the light, so that the interiors could not be seen all at once – having been removed from the center parts. After all, through this intervention, the inherent form as well as the greatness has been returned to the holy places1.
2But how much of Vettori’s statement was mere pomp and circumstance? Should Duke Cosimo and his court architect Vasari be given full credit for this major overhaul of Florence’s churches? Was religious reform, in the Tridentine context, the main impulse behind the alterations? Certainly, Florence holds a unique place amongst the major church renovation schemes of post-Tridentine Italy. In the 1560s and 1570s, projects to remove nave screens and choirs together with further changes to liturgical furnishings and wall paintings transformed numerous churches in the city. In some prominent cases, evidence attests that Cosimo and Vasari pioneered architectural change: Cosimo financed alterations in the two main mendicant churches, Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce, and Vasari later bragged about these achievements in Le Vite.
3This chapter will present a more nuanced picture of late sixteenth-century church architecture in Florence, demonstrating that numerous agents – including private patrons, lay administrators, and religious communities – proposed, organized and enacted these transformation projects. Users of the altered spaces also expressed differing opinions about their impact and utility. Within a broader context of Tridentine reform, this chapter will track the day-to-day realities of the renovations extracted from records preserved in the Florentine archives, comprising various source types including minutes of chapter meetings, ducal letters, and payments. The chapter will shed new light on the well-known mendicant renovations in Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce by resituating them in a wider Florentine context, encompassing other mendicant spaces, churches belonging to traditional monastic orders, and parish churches. By focusing on the lesser known church renovations, I will argue for a subtle reconsideration of the broader motivations and effects of this major shift in Italian ecclesiastical architecture.
4Marcia Hall’s innovative studies of the two large mendicant churches of Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce have been fundamental in shaping our understanding of the spatial dynamics of the pre-Tridentine church interior2. Her findings showed that in the 1560s these spaces were radically altered due to the elimination of rood screens or tramezzi, transferal of choir stalls to behind the high altar, whitewashing of church walls, creation of new uniform nave altarpieces, and the addition of large Eucharistic tabernacles prominently placed on the high altar. However, while Hall’s investigations of these mendicant spaces are well known, the other Florentine churches from which tramezzi or nave choirs were removed in the 1560s and 1570s have often been overlooked; these include San Marco, Santa Maria del Carmine, Ognissanti, Santa Trinita, San Pier Maggiore, San Niccolò Oltrarno, Orsanmichele, and San Pancrazio.
5Needless to say, the transformations in Florence were not unprecedented, the city itself bearing witness to the Renaissance desire for clear, open spaces in the church interior. Brunelleschi’s churches of San Lorenzo and Santo Spirito were built without substantial screens which intersected the nave, while the tramezzo in Santissima Annunziata was exchanged for the centrally-planned tribuna choir in the mid-fifteenth century3. Across the Italian peninsula, scattered cases of church renovation projects date from the fifteenth century on, while some notable retrochoir schemes in Umbria date from the fourteenth century as we saw in the previous chapter by Donal Cooper4. In the second half of the sixteenth century, contemporary developments in Milan (Duomo), Venice (Palladio’s San Giorgio Maggiore) and Rome (Vignola’s Gesù) show that Florence formed just one part of this significant episode in Italian architectural history5.
6The unusually intense Florentine renovations appear to have unfolded in three main stages: minor alterations to small churches in the first years of the 1560s; Vasari’s high profile transformations of Santa Croce and Santa Maria Novella initiated in 1565 and 1566; and a series of alterations in the late decade likely stimulated in part by the return of exiled Archbishop Antonio Altoviti. This chronology of developments, however, relies on evidence which varies in format and accuracy. Dating has been taken from Vasari’s Vite, Lapini’s Diario, records of Altoviti’s visitation, church ricordi and payments, letters, and later chronicles, all of which might contain inaccurate or biased information. In some cases, such as Ognissanti, several dates for the removal of the tramezzo are provided by sources such as church chronicles, Bocchi’s Le Bellezze, Richa’s Notizie Istoriche, and Vasari’s Vite. Bearing that caveat in mind, the available evidence will be used to track how, when and why Florence’s churches were transformed into the open, unified spaces we experience today.
Renovations in 1561-64
7In the years 1561-64, when Vasari was involved in the reorganization of the Pieve in Arezzo, church alteration projects in Florence occurred in the Carmine, San Niccolò, San Marco, and Ognissanti. This earlier period saw interventions to smaller churches with wall-type tramezzi and is characterized by somewhat ambiguous documentation.
8Demonstrating that tramezzi were not limited to mendicant or monastic contexts, the parish church of San Niccolò Oltrarno featured a screen bifurcating the nave, at the approximate site of the present-day pulpit, since its Gothic-style rebuilding of the early 1400s (fig. 1)6. In his Memoria dated 1579, Prior Leonardo Tanci, who provided an invaluable record of the state of the church in the sixteenth century, noted that the tramezzo featured two attached chapels (the left-hand one probably adorned by Masolino’s Goldman Annunciation, now in the National Gallery of Art in Washington7), each framed by two columns, while in the centre of the screen a crucifix was supported by a wooden beam (“travaccia”)8. In his Memoria, Tanci lamented that many altarpieces were ruined as a result of the 1557 disastrous flood of the Arno (commemorated in a plaque on the church façade). A major restoration of the church began soon after the flood in 1561. In this year, Tanci stated, the high altarpiece was attached to the back wall; a Eucharistic tabernacle was fashioned “according to a design by Giorgio Vasari”; two rows of seats were removed from the tramezzo to the side walls of the cappella maggiore; and a wooden pulpit was destroyed with the intention of installing one or two replacements9. This long explanation was accompanied by a marginal note referring to the selling and reusing of the tramezzo columns, implying that this also occurred in 1561. Frustratingly, Tanci did not record precisely when the tramezzo was eliminated: in fact, when describing the vicissitudes of the Guardini chapel, he left a blank space for the year this alteration occurred (“onde quando si levò il tramezzo l’anno ...10”). While 1561 is a distinct possibility, scholars have tended to favour 1567, when the Pieri Scodellari altar (previously on the tramezzo) was translated to a newly restored pietra serena chapel11. Anna Laghi suggested that the Arno flood only provided a convenient excuse for the renovations, the case still forming part of a city-wide scheme governed by Duke Cosimo and Vasari12. However, if the alterations were initiated in 1561, San Niccolò would represent the earliest major project in the city, possibly influencing later cases.
9Renovations in the Observant Dominican church of San Marco are also difficult to date accurately (fig. 2). Marcia Hall and Sally Cornelison have shown that in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the church was divided into distinct sections used by three social groups: the cappella maggiore choir enclosed by a choir screen for friars, the upper nave for laymen, and the lower nave – separated from the male section by a wall – for laywomen13. Interestingly, depictions of crowds segregated along gender lines during the preaching of San Bernardino and Savonarola show that such divisions might have been particularly important to the Observant Franciscans and Dominicans14. When this gender-dividing nave tramezzo was removed, its two attached altars (dedicated to Thomas Aquinas and the Holy Cross) were transferred to newly whitewashed side walls. The Annalia Conventus S. Marci – a chronicle written by multiple hands between 1505 and 1612 – mentions the renovation twice, with both sections agreeing that it took place under Prior Santi Cini, who presided from 1563-6615. The first section dates the work to 1564, and stating that on account of the “decision, effort and diligence” of Cini, the church was “brought back to a better shape” with the removal of the nave partition wall, also confirming that Alessandro Ottaviano de’ Medici (later Archbishop of Florence and briefly pope Leo XI) contributed a new walnut pulpit16. In a section listing San Marco’s priors and their accomplishments, a further passage begins by stating that Cini took office in 1563 and attributes the spatial changes (here undated) to Prior Cini, possibily acting on the advice of the community, again citing Alessandro’s donation of the pulpit17. A further source – a nineteenth-century copy of an eighteenth-century text – also dates the alteration to 1564, although this was possibly translated from the earlier chronicle18. While it appears that Duke Cosimo was not directly involved in the scheme, Alessandro’s involvement – at least in contributing the pulpit – shows some direct Medici influence, although Cini and the friars were given credit in the albeit biased convent chronicle. If 1564 is an accurate dating, San Marco could have played an influential role in the chronology of the Florentine church renovations, as Monica Bietti Favi has also acknowledged19.
10A further example also seems to predate Vasari’s Santa Croce project. In Ognissanti, the nave choir was enclosed by a simple transverse wall, a single door piercing its centre between two attached chapels (fig. 3)20. In 1561, after decades of negotiations involving both Cosimo and his wife Eleonora, Pope Pius IV officially sanctioned an unusual swap of religious houses whereby the Humiliati of Ognissanti would transfer to Santa Caterina and the Observant Franciscans of San Salvatore al Monte to Ognissanti21. In earlier documents, the Franciscans had expressed a desire to change the choir layout of Ognissanti, likely to replicate a seating arrangement they had been accustomed to in their previous church of San Salvatore22. This church was equipped with a large cappella maggiore which contained the friars’ choir from the outset of construction in the late fifteenth century, in an unusual disposition for the order as a whole but one which the Florentine friars evidently wished to preserve23. According to Pulinari, a Franciscan friar and eyewitness to these events before his death in 1582, the Franciscans transferred their wooden choir from San Salvatore to Ognissanti, which was “beautiful, ample and spacious with a beautiful platform” and installed an altar “on the model of that at Monte” (fig. 4)24.
11As Irene Hueck has acknowledged, the dating of the removal of the nave choir in Ognissanti is slightly uncertain. While it might have occurred shortly after the Franciscan occupation, it certainly took place prior to Vasari’s second edition of Le Vite in 1568, possibly in 1564, the year in which he states that the screen frescoes by Botticelli and Ghirlandaio were detached (fig. 5)25. The seventeenth-century Franciscan chronicler Tognocchi di Terrinca dated the alteration to 1565, stating that it made the church more beautiful, light and comfortable, while the late sixteenth-century local historian Francesco Bocchi (whose text was revised by the seventeenth-century Giovanni Cinelli) stated that this occurred in 156626. Pulinari commented that the friars removed the choir “in order to make the church more beautiful”, but did not provide a precise date27. The eighteenth-century antiquarian Giuseppe Richa dated the alteration to 1566, commenting that it was executed on the order of Duke Cosimo28. Although archival sources indicate that the Franciscans likely instigated the alteration, Duke Cosimo may have had some influence since he was certainly involved with the friars’ campaign to exchange convents with the Humiliati. However, even Vasari remarked in passing that it was the friars themselves who wanted the choir removed from the nave29.
Vasari’s Renovations of Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce
12It is clear then that already in the early 1560s, some church renovations in Florence anticipated Vasari’s large scale schemes in the city. During this time, the architect had been occupied in Arezzo, in 1554 proposing a rearrangement of the high altar and choir of the cathedral which only started to take shape a decade later, and from 1560 pursuing a dramatic transformation of the church interior of the Arezzo Pieve30. On completion of this project in 1564, Vasari wrote to Cosimo extolling the virtues of his spatial redesign, stating that the removal of the tramezzo made the raising of the Sacrament more visible, provided more space in the church, and enabled the choir singers to be more audible from their new position in the cappella maggiore31. In Florence, Vasari’s restorations of Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce followed.
13In his autobiography in the 1568 edition of Le Vite, Vasari explained that in demonstration of his Catholic piety and in imitation of King Solomon, Duke Cosimo “lately made me remove the tramezzo in the church of Santa Maria Novella, which deprived it of its beauty32” (fig. 6). Roberto Lunardi has shown that the first document relating to the project was dated 12 September 1565, in which the prior of Santa Maria Novella reminded Cosimo to organize funds for the church renovation33. A letter from the Operai to the duke on 5 October confirmed that the project had been instigated by the duke, explaining that “for the greatest ornament, convenience and beauty and religious observance of your venerable church of Santa Maria Novella the rood screen and choir be removed from its centre34”. Instead of requesting consent from the patrons of the chapels scheduled for demolition – which included those in the side aisles and on the rood screen – new patrons were sought to build the new altars35. The following year the high altar was brought forward and the choir stalls removed from the nave36. In January 1567, new stalls designed by Vasari, which supplemented the existing fifteenth-century stalls in the cappella maggiore, were installed behind the high altar (fig. 7). In the following years, new altarpieces were completed for the nave interior by Vasari, Bronzino, Naldini and others.
14The interior of Santa Croce was radically altered starting in 1566, just a few months after Vasari’s previous rearrangement in Santa Maria Novella (fig. 8). According to a letter written by the Operai to Duke Cosimo on 21 July 1566, at that point they had “removed all the rood screen and chapels” except the Foresta chapel along the wall adjoining the cloister37. They further explained that they had partially reduced the height of the choir wall according to the duke’s suggestion, and that if the high altar was moved forward, the friars’ choir stalls could comfortably fit into the cappella maggiore, rendering the church “much more beautiful and delightful to the eye38”. The wording of the letter, Hall argues, implies that while the duke was clearly in control of the renovation, specific aspects of the project – such as the removal of the friars’ choir – were fluid responses to the practical situation in the church39. It is manifest in a very short note (a single line) sent one week later by Cosimo’s ducal secretary: “If the choir can be put in the cappella maggiore, remove it entirely from its present position40”. The duke became financially involved with the project, donating marble for the altar table and providing a new ciborium, which still exists in the church albeit with seventeenth-century additions41. Vasari supervised the program of nave altarpieces – allocated to new lay patrons – depicting the Passion narrative framed by tabernacles characterised by alternating triangular and segmental pediments42.
15In comparison to other sites in Florence, the transformations of these two largest mendicant churches had several distinctive characteristics. Firstly, they were both directly financed by Cosimo himself. Secondly, both churches were under the direct aesthetic control of Vasari, who not only altered spatial arrangements but designed choir stalls and nave altarpiece tabernacles. Thirdly, both schemes involved the relatively speedy completion of various elements as part of a unified project (screen, stalls, side altars, whitewashing, sacrament tabernacle) which were more protracted in other cases. In the Carmine, by contrast, the first pietra serena tabernacle appeared in c. 1561, the nave walls were whitewashed in 1564, but the tramezzo was not removed until late 1568 and the high altar ciborium installed much later in 159343.
16Moreover, these high profile renovations captured the public imagination. Only Santa Maria Novella warranted mention in the diary of cathedral canon Agostino Lapini, who claimed that the Dominican church was the first of many transformations, which universally pleased the Florentine people44. The anonymous writer of a letter in 1565 stated that the removal of the Dominican tramezzo made the church seem larger and more beautiful45. Taking a slightly broader perspective, the monk philologist and artistic advisor Vincenzo Borghini noted that while tramezzi had previously been present in many Florentine churches including Santa Croce, Santa Maria Novella, the Carmine and the old church of Santo Spirito, without such structures “churches today have a much more beautiful and magnificent prospect46”.
Renovations in 1568-69
17An intense series of church renovation projects in the last years of the 1560s was surely influenced by the prominent Dominican and Franciscan churches, whose new interior aesthetic and spatial dynamic must have seemed appealing and contemporary. However, they were also possibly related to another ecclesiastical event: the Pastoral Visitation of Florentine archbishop Antonio Altoviti, who had arrived in the city in 1567 following a decades-long political exile47. Although Altoviti’s Visitation records for the city churches were concise and sometimes praiseworthy, four churches started renovations in the same period as the Visitation, either shortly before or after the archbishop’s attendance48. After witnessing the state of San Pier Maggiore at his ceremonial Entrata, the archbishop visited Orsanmichele and Santa Trinita before their restorations and the Carmine only months after demolition of the tramezzo began49. Although in three of these cases – San Pier Maggiore, Santa Trinita, and the Carmine – documentation shows that the alterations were ordered by Cosimo himself (or at least by his authority), the archbishop might have asserted additional pressure. Moreover, visitation records demonstrate that on occasion, Altoviti ordered the removal of rood screens from churches in the surrounding Florentine campagna, even stating that the screen in the Pieve of San Gavino Adimari “disfigures the church50”.
18The four nave choirs and screens removed in this period varied greatly in typology, from the dominating architectural tramezzo in the Carmine to the permeable iron barrier in Orsanmichele. Evidently, the desire for a new spatial aesthetic and increased visual attention directed towards the high altar transcended differences of function, church architectural type, and religious administration.
Santa Maria del Carmine
19In common with other mendicant churches in Florence, the nave in the Carmelite church of Santa Maria del Carmine was bisected by a large, monumental tramezzo, in some documents described as “nel mezzo della chiesa51” (fig. 9). Dating back to at least 1373, when the St Michael tramezzo chapel was dedicated, the construction was roughly 3,6 meters high and 18,2 meters wide according to one eyewitness who also confirmed that it extended the entire width of the nave52. Physically separated from friars’ choir stalls, the screen was a vaulted structure densely packed with tombs and chapels on both sides, featuring an extensive platform for performances of the Ascension Day “sacre rappresentazioni” on its upper section.
20Already around 1561 a nave side chapel patronized by the Botti family became “the first chapel” to be redesigned with “decoration of pietra serena”, according to the Libro dei Padronati53. In 1563, this chapel received a Crucifixion altarpiece by Giorgio Vasari, suggesting his broader involvement in the redesigned frame. Whitewashing of the church and consequent elimination of medieval fresco decoration took place in 1564: evidence of a revolution in taste which often accompanied such spatial changes54.
21In 1568, the Carmine tramezzo was dismantled in an episode which led the convent into ecclesiastical difficulties. In a papal bull of Pope Pius V dated 27 September 1568, the prior and convent were released from an excommunication imposed as a result of the arbitrary demolition of the two chapels of the Magi and St Michael without proper consultation. The bull also gave permission to demolish the St Andrew chapel, so long as the obligations of all three chapels were transferred elsewhere55. These reassignments were confirmed in a subsequent letter from the vicar general of the archbishop of Florence dated 26 October 1568 (revealing Altoviti’s indirect involvement in the scheme): the St Michael chapel was to be incorporated into the Passion Chapel; the Magi into San Giovanni Decollato and St Andrew into the Assunta chapel56. The following month, payments are recorded to two porters for “putting in order the wood of the choir”, indicating the complete removal of the choir precinct from the nave into the cappella maggiore57.
22The papal bull stated that the removal of the choir was “for the enlargement of the church”, and according to the convent’s Libro delle Ricordanze, the expense was covered by “donations given to us by different kind persons”, the results giving “universal satisfaction to the people58”. The same archival record stated that the friars had conducted the restoration with “the license” of Duke Cosimo, who may or may not have ordered the alteration himself59.
San Pier Maggiore
23Long since demolished, a seventeenth-century loggia and a collection of street names are all that remain of the female Benedictine convent and parish church of San Pier Maggiore (fig. 10)60. The dual functions of the church, together with its unique role in Florentine religious ceremony, demanded the separation of distinct spatial zones in the church interior. In the fourteenth-century Gothic church, the nuns’ choir was a raised balcony at the eastern end of the south nave aisle, while the so-called “coro degli uomini” or men’s choir precinct was located in the centre of the nave, probably located at the second nave column, likely partitioned by a screen with at least two attached chapels surrounded by ironwork grates. The men’s choir was used by the male community of priests and chaplains but also by the Operai, a committee of laymen responsible for the upkeep and administration of the church, and possibly other laymen during neighbourhood meetings or the archbishop’s Entrata ceremony, during which the new archbishop symbolically “married” the Benedictine abbess61.
24On 24 February 1569 (modern style), the Operai agreed to completely remove the men’s choir (“il Coro che è in mezo della chiesa, detto il Coro degli Huomini”) together with the two chapels with iron railings (“con li graticole di ferro”) belonging to the Albizi and Da Filicaia families and the one called la Gravida, dedicated to the pregnant Madonna62. This action had been ordered (“come haveva commesso”) by Duke Cosimo, who also required that new benches be made for the church63. Two new ranges of wooden benches, purchased on the same day, were referred to as the “choir in front of the high altar”, indicating the location of the new seating64. Only a few days later, on 2 March, the old ironwork of the two tramezzo chapels was weighed and valued, confirming its removal65. On 7 July, the Operai repaved the church floor, possibly to repair damage due to the removal of the iron railings around the screen chapels66.
Orsanmichele
25Originally a communal grain market, the oratory of Orsanmichele (fig. 11) was always a space in which civic, guild, and devotional functions were held in common, but the presence of an interior ironwork screen (which although seemingly permeable and unobtrusive was still called a “tramezzo” in documentation) seems rather remarkable67. Lack of documentary evidence from the first half of the fifteenth century impedes a precise dating for the installation of this iron partition, but it likely took place between 1415 and the early 1430s when other architectural and administrative changes to the building were underway, such as the church’s upgrade to canonical status and the enclosure with walls and tracery of the open loggia arches68. The screen may have been located about half-way down the building or at the eastern nave piers, in either case restricting physical and visual access to the Marian tabernacle and high altar of St Anne (fig. 12)69.
26Income records from the sale of the tramezzo in April 1569 indicate that it was composed of three types of wrought ironwork70. Catenas ferreas refers to iron beams, presumably horizontal and/or vertical bars which would have framed the tramezzo and perhaps divided it into more subsections. The terms crassas and craticulatos refer to lattice-work and smaller lattice-work or grating respectively71. Although its permeable nature might imply that the tramezzo played an unobtrusive role in the Orsanmichele interior, its removal formed part of the series of Florentine interventions which saw the disappearance of much larger, more monumental and functional screens.
27In March 1569 (modern style), in the context of a series of liturgical, administrative and hygienic reforms to the oratory, a letter from the confraternity leaders or Capitani of Orsanmichele to Duke Cosimo explained their motivations behind dismantling the tramezzo: while some people favoured preserving and restoring the screen, the Capitani maintained that it was an obstacle to viewing the miraculous Marian tabernacle72. With the tramezzo eliminated, they claimed, the oratory would be transformed from being busy and dark (“occupato et fosco”) to being free, spacious and light (“libero ampio et luminoso”). Moreover, the sale of the extensive ironwork on the screen could fund some simple and honest benches (“semplici et honeste panche”) around the walls and piers for use during divine services. In fact, only a few weeks later, this ironwork was sold. The beams and lattice-work were valued differently – the beams at 15 lire, 10 soldi, the lattice-work at 13 lire, 6 soldi and 8 denari – indicating that the tramezzo had already been dismantled into its respective sections73.
28While Cosimo was clearly involved in this reform project (soon after, on his orders, the two upper floors of Orsanmichele were reutilized to house the city’s notarial archives74), archbishop Altoviti might also have played a role. The archbishop visited Orsanmichele on 6 April 1568, just one day before the ducal secretary sent a letter to the Capitani regarding the reform of the oratory, which possibly represents the first date associated with this development75.
Santa Trinita
29The Vallombrosan monks’ church of Santa Trinita (fig. 13), an old foundation dating back to the 8th or 9th centuries, experienced several rebuilding projects up to the late fourteenth century, when the church was completed in the Gothic style around 140576. Today, the interior is largely a result of nineteenth-century Neo-Gothic alterations, although much of the original frescoed decoration survives. The monastic wooden choir stalls, constructed in the early fifteenth century (likely between 1411 and 1419), were jointly financed by the Spini and Ardinghelli families, who held patronal rights over the adjacent nave side chapels. Most probably, the choir would have occupied the first two bays of the nave, perhaps also extending into the transept. Archival sources referring to the nave choir typically used the generic terms “coro” or “choro vecchio”, neglecting to indicate the presence of an additional tramezzo or other substantial screen77. However, it is likely that the monks’ choir stalls would have been, at the very least, backed with wooden panelling or enclosed by a simple wall, perhaps equipped with one or more pulpits. The absence of a tramezzo is not unusual, since a physical demarcation could be achieved by means of high wooden panels at the back of the monks’ choir stalls, as shown previously in chapter 5 by Michael Gromotka (see his restitution of San Pietro’s interior furnishings in the 1530s).
30A record in the monastery archive dated 16 April 1569 recalls how on 10 August 1568, Duke Cosimo had ordered “that as soon as possible the choir in the middle of said church should be removed [...] and must be put behind the high altar78”. The abbot, Don Vincentio da Stia, however, went to see the duke’s agent, Lionardo Marinozzi, arguing that “removing said choir would displease many gentlemen79”, but Lionardo was insistent. Don Vincentio, who wanted to avoid taking full responsibility, told the Operai of Santa Trinita that they had ten days to appeal against the judgment. Considering the monastery’s request that the choir stalls be donated, the duke decided that since the remains were in poor condition (“lavanzo di dicto choro era cattivo”) and broken or water damaged (“fradicio”), they should not be given to the monastery at Vallombrosa, but rather half to the Vallombrosan nuns of Santo Spirito (also known as San Giorgio alla Costa), who compensated Santa Trinita thirty scudi, and half placed behind the high altar of Santa Trinita. Indeed, a ricordo in the Santa Trinita archive describing the 1557 flood of the Arno noted that water entered up to the cappella maggiore and “around our choir everything was moved from its place80”. Following the 1569 ricordo, the subsequent entry appears to be a transcript of a letter sent from the abbot to the duke in which he acquiesced to the duke’s request, commenting that with the choir removed “firstly they [the monks] may officiate with more quiet and less difficulty, also the church would remain open and beautiful81”.
31The relocation of the choir in Santa Trinita sparked an extensive renovation of the high altar area, which included the creation of two pulpits, a new organ and marble balustrade. In 1574, Abbot Lorenzo da Firenze commissioned Gianfrancesco di Niccolo Balsinelli, a stonecarver from Passignano, to construct the stone and marble ensemble designed by Bernardo delle Girandole (Bernardo Buontalenti) “that goes before the high altar for decoration of the enlarged floor in front82”. Housed in Santo Stefano al Ponte Vecchio since its removal from Santa Trinita in 1894 (fig. 14), the elaborate ensemble of stairs, stage, and balustrade, characterized by fantastical Mannerist forms and an organic, scenographic movement, would have created a dramatic setting for the liturgy at the high altar83.
Renovations in the 1570s
32The drive to modernize Florence’s churches did not perish alongside Duke Cosimo (died 21 April 1574) and Vasari (died 27 June 1574). Indeed, at least two further cases, albeit with quite unusual circumstances, were executed under Cosimo’s successor, Duke Francesco.
San Pancrazio
33The Vallombrosan monks’ church of San Pancrazio, today home to the Museo Marino Marini (fig. 15), has almost completely lost its medieval character. While the Rucellai chapel preserves Alberti’s micro-architectural replica of the Holy Sepulchre, of the church itself only the basic structure, the crypt, fragments of pilasters and other stonework, and a frescoed cupola survive84. The nave choir, the original location of which is hard to accurately reconstruct, was installed under Abbot Benedetto Toschi (1429-1464), who, in addition to the completion of the church building, oversaw interior furnishings such as pavements, windows, and an organ; the campanile; and new conventual buildings comprising a cloister, dormitory, and refectory85. The monks’ nave choir stalls (1444-46) were donated by the gonfalone of the Lion Rosso and embellished with their insignia86, the choir screen later receiving a new wooden arched entrance surmounted by a crucifix in 149787.
34Unlike in other Florentine cases, stalls from the nave choir of San Pancrazio were not transferred behind the high altar. This area already housed a further set of late fifteenth-century stalls donated by Pandolfo Rucellai, which, despite their precise liturgical function remaining ambiguous, disseminated Rucellai presence throughout the church interior88. Instead, the San Pancrazio choir stalls were transferred to the order’s mother church at Vallombrosa, some 40 km east of Florence, where they survive today (fig. 16). On 14 June 1573 in a chapter meeting convened by the President of the Vallombrosan Congregation, Don Arsenio da Poppi, the relocation of the choir was framed within the context of further improvements to the Vallombrosa abbey church: after a vote “it passed that they should tile the church namely the roof, and do the ceiling, and bring there the choir of San Pancrazio of Florence89”. This implies that at least part of the impetus for the renovation project at San Pancrazio came from Vallombrosa itself, even directly from the president of the congregation. A note in the monastery’s archive stated that in the following year, 1574, Abbot Minucci of San Pancrazio obtained permission from Grand Duke Francesco to remove the choir “because it was a great impediment to the church, and because behind it, laypeople were doing many impertinent and disgraceful things90” and that “it was liberally allowed by His Highness that [the choir] be removed and sent to Vallombrosa”, at the expense of said monastery91. The price specified was 125 scudi and 48 barrels of good wine, to be delivered in several instalments: the cash over the following two years and the wine over four years92.
35Payments in the Vallombrosa archives chart this unusual transaction93. On 18 October 1574, Maestro Bastiano detto Confetto was paid 22 lire for “the removal of the choir of San Pancrazio94”. Another payment is recorded on 14 March 1575 (modern style), but it would not be until 28 December 1577 when Bastiano was paid a further 105 lire “for the choir that he dismantled of San Pancrazio to send it to Vallombrosa95”.
Baptistery of San Giovanni
36A further, unusual, case of church interior renovation in 1570s Florence concerns the Baptistery of San Giovanni96. The medieval interior of this locus of Florentine religious and civic identity was subdivided into areas for the font, choir, and altar (fig. 17). An archaeological excavation carried out in 1912-15 discovered a series of marble panels carved with lozenge and circle geometric patterns, likely the remains of the thirteenth-century square font and surrounding octagonal screen97. Giuseppe Castellucci, the archaeological administrator in charge, produced a reconstruction of the Baptistery’s medieval interior, which shows a gate linking the octagonal screen to a rectilinear choir enclosure.
37In 1577, this interior was altered to accommodate festivities for the baptism on September 29th of Don Filippo, Duke Francesco’s firstborn son: a long-awaited male heir destined to die in early childhood98. The baptismal apparato, masterminded by Vincenzo Borghini, was intended to cement the grand duke’s diplomatic ties, especially with the Spanish King Philip II, after whom Filippo was named99. Bernardo Buontalenti, who created the temporary architectural ensemble, produced a ground plan of the Baptistery which depicts the medieval furnishings together with an overlay of his proposed curved staircases to either side of the altar. Buontalenti annotated the rectilinear choir area thus: “questo era il coro de pretti che ogi è rovinatto – era di marmo100”. On September 14th 1577, Grand Duke Francesco authorized the destruction of this choir enclosure and the thirteenth-century font which had found fame in Dante’s Divine Comedy101. In addition to Buontalenti’s scenographic ensemble of double ramped staircases leading to the elaborate font set on a raised platform, Alessandro Allori and Francesco di Poppi provided painted decoration for the building’s interior and exterior respectively102.
38Although this church renovation may seem like an atypical case set against the other Florentine projects – given the unique status and function of the Baptistery, and the specific temporary circumstances which led to the removal of the priests’ choir – Vincenzo Borghini himself viewed it as part of the same city-wide scheme. In a description of the baptismal apparato first published only a few days into the celebrations, Borghini explained that the removal of the choir would not only better accommodate the ceremony, but enable the baptistery to harmonize in its interior parts, and become beautified and enriched “in the manner which has been done in all the other principal ones of this city103”. Moreover, he added that the medieval furnishings were not useful or decorative, rather they were ram shackled and impeded the “bella vista” of the space, echoing some justifications given for previous church renovations104. Although Borghini praised the apparato decorations, stating that “one could say that everything was most excellent105”, others lamented the loss of the baptistery’s historic interior furnishings. An anonymous writer poured scorn on Buontalenti’s enterprise, stating that the marble panels “were taken away without reverence for much unction and incense along the walls106”.
Conclusion
39Scholars have not agreed upon a single motivation which governed the Florentine church renovations, but many have interpreted them as a prime example of architectural changes instituted at a local level through a combination of religious reform and politics107. Isermeyer conceded that while aesthetics was certainly a significant factor, clerics were keen for the laity to have visual access to the sacrament in the wake of Trent, and absolutist political leaders like Cosimo valued the removal of Republican vestiges in the church interior108. Hall analysed the relative motivations and responsibilities of a complex web of interested parties, suggesting that the alterations publicly demonstrated Cosimo’s adherence to the Tridentine spirit, fulfilled Vasari’s desire to modernize ecclesiastical space and represented a new era of altar patronage109. Waźbiński suggested that Cosimo’s visit to Rome in late 1560 – which included a tour of major early Christian churches – influenced the duke’s views on modernizing Florentine church interiors110. Writing with a focus on Vasari’s architecture, Lunardi, Satkowski and Conforti related the new arrangements both to Cosimo’s desire for the Grand Ducal crown and to contemporary religious reform, which in its emphasis on church attendance, preaching and frequent communication, required churches with open naves and prominent high altars111. On a more prosaic level, Cresti noted that the restorations were a relatively cheap, but effective, alternative to constructing grandiose new churches112. Gaston observed that in his personal engagement with church architecture, Cosimo in essence assumed the role of archbishop by asserting centralized authority113. Van Veen, meanwhile, noted that for all their modernity, Vasari’s projects also emphasized retrospection, reprising both early Christian precedents and Brunelleschi’s unified, open interiors114.
40While most historians have based their analyses on the two main mendicant churches, Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce, which clearly demonstrate both Cosimo’s power and Vasari’s aesthetic vision, the lesser known cases reveal an even more complex picture. The pre-Vasarian renovations in Florence show that a movement for change was building seemingly independent from Cosimo and Vasari, in response to diverse reasons such as flood damage and administrative change. Then, in the period after Vasari’s direct involvement, the influence of Archbishop Altoviti’s Pastoral Visitation might have been a key factor115.
41In considering churches of all types and administrations within Florence, my research adds to the debate surrounding the development of mendicant retrochoirs. Some patterns of early mendicant choir relocations can be detected within the Dominican and Observant Franciscan orders more broadly116. However, it would appear that in Florence, the local climate overrode institutional trends. While fifteenth-century mendicant new builds such as San Salvatore or Santo Spirito embraced the new aesthetic of open church interiors, most alterations to existing choir layouts date to the later sixteenth century. Seemingly blind to earlier developments outside the city, the mendicant churches of Santa Maria Novella and Santa Croce were altered within the same concentrated period as other mendicant churches like Santa Maria del Carmine and San Marco, in a phenomenon which also included monastic and parish churches. Within this Florentine context, then, local actors such as the duke and archbishop, amongst others, exerted their influence over the disposition of ecclesiastical interior space.
42Archival sources have brought to light the quotidian consequences of these major alterations. Screens and choirs had to be physically dismantled and their most valuable metal components sold. Stalls too had to be moved, either to a new location within the same building, to a different church entirely, or in one case, to a site far beyond the city walls. The floor area once occupied by the nave choir was sometimes repaved, and any attached chapels had to be moved or reassigned. Further tasks included constructing pulpits and organs, reorganizing the high altar area, and whitewashing the church walls.
43Moreover, archival findings have revealed that a large number of interested parties were directly involved in organizing the church renovations. Beyond Duke Cosimo and Vasari, active participants included the duke’s agents and secretary, possibly Alessandro de’ Medici, Archbishop Altoviti, the archbishop’s vicar, Pope Pius V, the Operai of San Pier Maggiore, the Capitani of Orsanmichele, and various abbots and priors. In the 1570s, following the deaths of Cosimo and Vasari, Duke Francesco, the president of the Vallombrosan congregation, Bernardo Buontalenti, and Vincenzo Borghini were associated with the alterations, which affected members of religious congregations and lay patrons alike. While the possibility remains that in some cases Cosimo and Vasari exerted pressure which left no extant documentation, this broad community of participants shows the multifarious contexts and motivations behind the church renovations. As more evidence is discovered, we are getting ever further away from Vettori’s exaggerated claim that singularly due to Cosimo’s piety all of Florence’s churches “regained their form and the holy places their greatness”.
Notes de bas de page
1 Quantam autem speciem, splendoremque sacris aedibus ac delubris attulerit, sublatis e medijs illis quae obstabant, luminibusque officiebant, ne tota simul aspicerentur, novistis: ita enim et facies sua, atque amplitudo fanis reddita est, et dignitas etiam religioque aucta, cum simul numerus in gens ararum oculis obijcitur, imaginumque sanctorum virorum. Vettori 1574, unpaginated. Adapted from translation in Veen 2006, p. 120-121. I am especially grateful to Tycho Mass for assisting with this translation.
2 Hall 1974a, Hall 1974b, Hall 1979. For more recent research on the Santa Maria Novella rood screen, see Schwartz 2009, p. 187-211; Cannon 2013, p. 322-336; De Marchi 2015. For Santa Croce, see Cooper 2013; De Marchi 2011. For a recent investigation of Italian rood screens more generally, see Cooper 2017.
3 In the fifteenth-century church of San Lorenzo, although the location of the choir might have originally been under the “cupola del coro”, the canons’ stalls were in the cappella maggiore by the 1480s at the latest; see Saalman 1993, p. 162-164; Pacciani 2006, p. 142-43; Pacciani 2017, p. 322. In Santo Spirito, a choir precinct in the nave was enclosed by a low wall; see Bruschi 2006, p. 127-142. For Santissima Annunziata, see Brown 1981.
4 For examples of pre-Tridentine church renovations, see in particular the contributions by Sible de Blaauw, Martin Gaier, Riccardo Pacciani and Paola Modesti in Stabenow 2006 and Allen 2010. For Dominican cases, see Morvan 2021 and Morvan's essay in this book.
5 For Milan, see Alexander 2007, p. 140-180; for Venice, see Cooper (T.) 2005, p. 109-114, Guerra 2006 and Bisson 2014a; for Rome, see Ackerman 1972.
6 For the tramezzo, see Badino 2006, p. 50 and fig. 8, p. 49.
7 For Masolino’s Goldman Annunciation, see Padovani 1994.
8 “Crocifisso sopra la porta di dentro, de Busini. Era nel tramezzo della chiesa sopra una travaccia tra l’altare di S. Bartolomeo de Pieri, e quello di Santo Antonio de Guardini” (Florence, Archivio parrocchiale di San Niccolò Oltrarno, Leonardo Tanci: Memoriae della chiesa di San Niccolò Oltrarno in Firenze, fol. 155r; Damiani 1982, p. 36). The crucifix mentioned by Tanci is still in the same position against the counter-façade above the entrance door. Ibid, p. 45, note 114.
9 “L’anno 1561 s’alzò la tavola dello altare e appoggiosi al muro […] si fece il tabernacolo del Sagramento, con gl’angeli di terra cruda e con nostro Signore in mezzo di terracotta, con duo gradi, secondo il disegno di Giorgio Vasari pittore, ma non interamente […]. Il tabernacolo fu a spese di Bernardo Andrea e Pagol Quaratesi […]. Io [..] feci levare del tramezzo della chiesa duoi ordini di sedie, e metterle a fornirle dagli lati della cappella […]. Il pergamo di legno s’è levato perchè si rifaccia uno o duo pergami in mezzo la chiesa più horrevoli.” Tanci: Memoriae, fol. 97v.
10 Tanci: Memoriae, fol. 116r.
11 For example, Damiani 1982, p. 29.
12 Laghi 1982, p. 104.
13 Hall 2006, p. 219; Cornelison 2009, p. 314-316.
14 For example Sano di Pietro, St Bernardino Preaching in the Campo of Siena, 1445, tempera on panel, Museo dell’Opera del Duomo, Siena.
15 BML, Codice San Marco 370 (Annalia Conventus S. Marci de Florentia). The library’s inventory described the manuscript thus: Codex scriptus anno 1505. Sed alia addita sunt usque ad annum 1612.
16 Anno 1564. consilio, opera ac diligentia eiusdem Reverendi Patri prioris Fratris Sanctis Cini, ecclesia in meliorem formam redacta est. Et primo omnium destructum fuit antemurale, quo mulieres a viris secernebantur. [...] Sublatus est et pulpitus ligneus in quem scalis ligneis iuxta ecclesiae parietem sitis apendebatur. Et eodem loci alius politissimo de ligneis nuceis constructus est, opera atque expensis Domini Alexandri Octaviani de Medicis, scalis lapideis intra parietem edificatis. (BML, Codice San Marco 370, fol. 39r-39v). See also Teubner 1979, p. 267, doc XVIII. For Alessandro de’ Medici, see Luchinat 1994.
17 In quo munere officii prioratus de consilio priorum (?), primo Ecclesia tota dealbata est, postea renovata, destructum enim (?) fuit ante murale, Chori secularium atque ambone veteri sublato, alius opera et expensis Magnifici et nobilis viri Domini Alexandri Domini Octaviani de Medicis, constructus est (BML, Codice San Marco 370, fol. 76v).
18 “L’Anno 1564, la Chiesa di S. Marco fu ridotta a miglior forma; perocché in primo luogo fu atterrato il muro di divisione tra gli uomini e le donne” (Teubner 1979, p. 267, doc. XVIII.2). The wording used in this passage appears to be an Italian translation of the Latin used in the Annalia at fol. 39r.
19 Bietti 1990, p. 239.
20 For reconstructions of the Ognissanti tramezzo, in particular its relationship to the Giotto panels, see Hueck 1992, p. 47; Giannetti 2011, p. 49-57; Miller – Taylor 2015, p. 29-31.
21 Razzòli 1898, p. 2.
22 Antonio Tognocchi di Terrinca, in his 1691 Descrizione della Chiesa del Convento d’Ognissanti in Firenze, recorded a copy of a document of 1537, when the friars had attempted to negotiate with the Humiliati to take over Ognissanti. The Franciscans requested “Che la Chiesa sia libera a nostra disposizione […] Che possiamo acconciare la Chiesa a nostro modo, così il Coro, e le altre cose”. Florence, Archivio Storico Provincia San Francesco Stimmatizzato, Firenze S. Salvatore Ognissanti, no. 224, Descrizione della Chiesa del Convento d’Ognissanti in Firenze de’ Padri Minori Osservanti divisa in due Part composta dal P. F. Antonio Tognocchi di Terrinca Cronologo dell’Alma Osservante Provincia di Toscana l’Anno 1691 e fedelmente trascritta dall’Originale l’Anno 1760, fol. 66.
23 Although the Tuscan general chapter of 1474 dictated that the choir should be in front of the high altar in San Salvatore, it is likely that the choir was placed in the large cappella maggiore from the time of construction. Trotta 1997, p. 12-14, note 29; Pacciani 1992, p. 29. For early Franciscan retrochoirs, see Cooper 2001, and his chapter in this volume. For a discussion which includes San Salvatore in the broader Observant context, see Cobianchi 2013, p. 37-39.
24 “E nella Cappella ci si è meso il Coro che era al Monte et è bella, larga e spaziosa, con un bel palco, et un bell’Altar maggiore sul modello di quello del Monte” (Mencherini 1913, p. 227-228).
25 In Botticelli’s Life, Vasari commented: “Questa pittura, come si è detto nella Vita di Ghirlandaio, quest’anno 1564 è stata mutata dal luogo suo salva ed intiera” (Barocchi – Bettarini 1966-1987, III, part 1, p. 513).
26 “Di levare di mezzo il detto Coro per dare la sua vaghezza alla Chiesa, e renderla più luminosa, e adagiata” (Florence, Archivio Storico Provincia San Francesco Stimmatizzato, Firenze S. Salvatore Ognissanti, no. 224, p. 35-36). Francesco Bocchi wrote: “Era già posta questa figura nel tramezzo della Chiesa, allato alla porta del Coro quando nel MDLXVI con ordine del Gran Duca Cosimo (come fu fatto in S. Croce, et in Santa Maria Novella) levato il tramezzo, onde la Chiesa fosse più luminosa, più adagiata, & più spedita” (Bocchi – Cinelli 1677, p. 123). See also Hueck 1992, p. 41.
27 “Levossi il coro, che era avanti l’altare, e quei tramezzi: onde si venne a fare la chiesa più bella” (Mencherini 1913, p. 227-228).
28 “Il Sant’Agostino dipinto a fresco fatto a i Vespucci da Domenico del grillandaio, per la sua rara bellezza fu trasferito quivi fasciato di ferro, essendo prima nella parete del Coro vecchio, che l’anno 1566, d’ordine del Duca Cosimo I fu levato dal mezzo della Chiesa, ove pure eravi un San Girolamo di Sandro Botticelli traslatato dall’altra banda dirimpetto a Sant’Agostino, ritraendosi in questa pittura molte cose atte allo studio” (Richa 1754, IV, part 2, p. 266).
29 “Essendo occorso a’ frati levare il coro del luogo dove era” (Barocchi – Bettarini 1966-1987, III, part 1, p. 480).
30 For Vasari’s schemes in Arezzo, see Isermeyer 1952, p. 230-32; Satkowski 1993, p. 83-92; Freni 2000; Freni 2006; Cornelison 2021a and 2021b.
31 Satkowski 1993, p. 84-85.
32 “Ultimamente ha fattomi levare il tramezzo della chiesa di Santa Maria Novella, che gli toglieva tutta la sua bellezza” (Barocchi – Bettarini 1966-1987, VI, part 1, p. 406).
33 Lunardi 1988, p. 406.
34 “Per maggiore ornamento, comodità e bellezza e religiosa osservanza della sua venerabile chiesa di Santa Maria Novella si levi del mezzo di quella il ponte e il coro” (Lunardi 1988, p. 407).
35 Hall 1979, p. 16.
36 “A’ di 23 d’aprile 1566 si fini di levare il coro vecchio della sopradetta chiesa, dov’era stato molti e molti anni, che guastava tutta la sua bellezza.” Corazzini 1900, p. 152; Hall 1979, p. 17.
37 “Habbiamo levato tutto il tramezzo et cappelle, eccetto quelle della Foresta lungo il muro di verso il chiostro” (Archivio di Santa Croce, vol. 429, fol. 27r-v). Transcribed in Moisé 1845, p. 122-124 and Hall 1979, p. 169-170 (both citing the now incorrect reference vol. 426, fol. 51).
38 “Molto più bello et dilettevole all’occhio.” Hall 1979, p. 170.
39 Hall 1979, p. 18-19.
40 “Se il coro si può mettere nella cappella maggiore, lievisi del tutto il coro dov’è hora.” Hall 1979, p. 170.
41 Hall 1979, p. 19.
42 Hall 1979, p. 122-151.
43 ASF, Corporazioni Religiosi Sopprese dal Governo Francese (hereafter Corp. Rel.), no. 113, Carmine, vol. 19, fol. 79v. On the Carmine, see below.
44 Corazzini 1900, p. 152.
45 “Si ordina di combattere una città sulla piazza di S.ta Maria Novella, nel mezzo della quale si è levato quel tramezzo che la fa parer maggiore e più bella assai et si leverà ancora il coro facendolo dopo altar grande.” Waźbiński 1987, p. 394-395.
46 “Che ne’ tempi nostri a nulla più non servivano, non ci essendo, Diograzia, ne’ Infedeli, ne’ Catecumeni: e così restano oggi le Chiese con molto più bella, e magnifica vista.” Manni 1755, p. 433.
47 Due to hostility between Cosimo and Antonio’s father, Bindo Altoviti (who was found guilty of rebellion after the War of Siena), the duke had refused the archbishop entry to the city on his election to the Florentine see in 1548. Antonio had spent the years of exile in Rome and Trent, before his return to the city in 1567. D’Addario 1972, p. 121-124.
48 For example, the Carmine was described thus: Ecclesia in edificijs est optime. Florence, Archivio arcivescovile, VP 09.1, fol. 39v.
49 Altoviti visited Orsanmichele (fol. 19r), Santa Trinita (fol. 22v-23r), and San Pancrazio (fol. 22r-v) on the same day, 6 April 1568. The following Spring, he visited San Pier Maggiore on 7 March 1569 (fol. 31v-32v), the Carmine on 15 March 1569 (fol. 39v-40v), and San Niccolò Oltrarno on 13 May 1569 (fol. 42r-44r). Florence, Archivio arcivescovile, VP 09.1.
50 Demoliatur infra duos annos intermedium quod deturpat ecclesiam, una cum duobus altaribus iuxta illud consistentibus (D’Addario 1972, p. 521). The Latin term intermedium, referring to a rood screen, appears in the 1249 Dominican General Chapter. Cannon has shown that intermedium could refer to both a boundary and intermediary, evoking ideas of division and interaction (Cannon 2013, p. 25-26).
51 “Ponte et volte che erano poste nel mezzo della chiesa” (ASF, Corp. Rel. Soppr. no. 113, Santa Maria del Carmine, vol. 19, fol. 75r). For the tramezzo, see Procacci 1932, p. 144-145; Garbero Zorzi 1975; Gurrieri 1992, p. 63, 68; Maisonneuve 2012, p. 143-153; Eckstein 2014, p. 59-60.
52 Russian Orthodox bishop Abraham of Souzdal witnessed the Ascension Day festa of 1439. Newbigin identified the Russian bishop’s measurements as sagenes (0.91m): Newbigin 1996, p. 63.
53 “Fù questa la prima cappela che si facessi in tal forma, e ornamento di pietra serena” (ASF, Corp. Rel., no. 113, Carmine, vol. 13, fol. 69). Fossi 1992, p. 333.
54 “L’anno 1564 del mese di settembre s’imbiancò la nostra chiesa” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 113, Carmine, vol. 19, fol. 74r).
55 ASF, Diplomatico, Normali, Firenze, Santa Maria del Carmine, 27/09/1568 (pergamene).
56 ASF, Diplomatico, Normali, Firenze, Santa Maria del Carmine, 26/10/1568 (pergamene).
57 “A dua fachini che assettorno il legname del coro”, dated 18 November 1568 (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 113, Carmine, vol. 106 [Entrata e uscita 1563-1571], fol. 201r).
58 “Con universale satisfattione dei popoli” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 113, Carmine, vol. 19, fol. 75r).
59 “Havuta la licentia dall’Illustrissimo Signore Duca Cosimo” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 113, Carmine, vol. 19, fol. 75r).
60 The street names include Piazza di San Pier Maggiore and Via delle Badesse. For San Pier Maggiore, see Richa 1754, I, p. 124-161; Paatz – Paatz 1952, IV, p. 629-657; Solberg 2007; Bietti 2013; Sliwka 2015.
61 On the archbishop’s Adventus ceremony, see Miller 2006; Strocchia 2007.
62 ASF, San Pier Maggiore, vol. 229, fol. 141a.
63 This directive had been sent to the prior and the purveyor Luca Mini, and was notarized by Ser Piero di Ser Bartolomeo Pontassieve. I have been unable to find this original document.
64 24 February 1569: “ij. Panche con gli appoggiata fatto fare pel coro innanzi alla altare mag[giore]” (ASF, San Pier Maggiore, vol. 229, fol. 141b).
65 Ironwork from the Da Filicaia chapel weighed 2089 libre (709.3 kg) and from the Albizi chapel 2389 libre (811.16 kg). ASF, San Pier Maggiore, vol. 229, fol. 39a. Martini equated one Florentine libbra to 0.339542 kg (Martini 1883, p. 207).
66 7 July 1569: “per amattonare la chiesa” (ASF, San Pier Maggiore, vol. 229, fol. 41a).
67 Allen 2021.
68 For the raising of Orsanmichele to a canonical church, see Richa 1754, I.1, p. 24-25. For the tracery infills, see Kreytenberg 2012, p. 113-120; Zervas 2015, p. 298. Even if the tramezzo had been installed later, almost all confraternity records from 1438 to the end of the fifteenth century are lost (Zervas 1996, p. 209).
69 Zervas states that the tramezzo likely just enclosed the two easternmost bays of the oratory (Zervas 1996, p. 237). However, the March 1569 letter regarding its removal also requested that a pulpit, situated underneath the organ, should also be dismantled as it obscured a painting of Christ among the Doctors. The organ was probably in the middle of the central bay, so might allude to the location of the tramezzo. For the organ, see Richa 1754, I.1, p. 27 and Paatz – Paatz 1952, IV, p. 505-506.
70 Catenas ferreas crassas et crati[cu]latos ferreos qui erant in tramezo ecclesiae oratorij (ASF, Capitani di Orsanmichele, vol. 31 bis, fol. 25r).
71 I am grateful to Sandro La Barbera for his help in transcribing and translating this passage.
72 “Ostaculo che ne priva di si bella vista della artificiosa base et dello oggetto del miracoloso tabernacolo della santissima Vergine” (ASF, Capitani di Orsanmichele, vol. 31 bis, fol. 23r-v).
73 April 28, 1569: Vendita de ferri […] quodlibet centinarium dictorum catinarum – [lire] 15. 10 – dictorum craticulatorum et aliorum – [lire] 13.6.8 (ASF, Capitani di Orsanmichele, vol. 31 bis, fol. 25r).
74 This took place from late in 1569 to December 1570. On the notarial archive, see Richa 1754, I.1, p. 32; Zervas 1996, p. 234-236; Napoli 1995.
75 Ducal Secretary Lelio Torelli’s note back to the Capitani, dated April 7, 1568, responded to their letter of complaint to the duke regarding the reform (ASF, Capitani di Orsanmichele, vol. 78, fol. 164v). Since the Capitani minutes are lacking for the pre-1568 period (the previous volume, no. 30, covers 1527-28), it is hard to verify whether this was the first mention of reform.
76 Saalman 1966, p. 31-40.
77 For example, in a list of tombs in the church: “Sepultura de coiai sotto al choro vecchio” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 89 [Santa Trinita], vol. 52, fol. 48v).
78 “Che quanto prima facessi levare il Choro del mezzo di dicta chiesa [..] et lo dovessi mettere dietro all’altare maggiore di dicta chiesa” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 89, Santa Trinita, vol. 51 [Ricordi 1567-1629], fol. 8r).
79 “Levando dicto coro si fara dispiacere a molti gentilhuomini” (ibid.).
80 “Apresso el nostro coro tutto si mossa deluogho suo” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 89, Santa Trinita, vol. 50 [Ricordi 1519-1566], fol. 99v).
81 “Primieramente con piu quiete, e meno sturbo ufitierebbano poi la chiesa resterebbe piu spedita, e bella” (fol. 8v).
82 “Che vanno innanzi all’Altar grande per ornamento dell’accrescimento del pian dinanzi” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 89, Santa Trinita, vol. 51, fol. 31r: contract dated 4 April 1574).
83 For the transferral to Santo Stefano, see Canali 2014, p. 193-195.
84 For a history of the church, see Galletti 1988.
85 Dezzi Bardeschi 1966, p. 11-15.
86 Minutes from a gonfalone meeting on 21 December 1444 stated: Que arma debeant intarsiari in dicto coro, in illis locis prout videbitur condecens dictis sindicis vel eorum successoribus. Kent – Kent 1982, p. 155 and p. 169, note 86.
87 On 22 January 1497, the woodworkers Chimenti and his son Leonardo del Tasso were commissioned by Abbot Don Giovanni Gualberto to “fare una porta dinanzi al coro con uno arco di sopra, lavorata tutta di noce” (Milanesi 1973, p. 353, doc. 1, transcribed from ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 88, San Pancrazio, vol. 68 [Ricordanze dal 1483 al 1527], fol. 13v-14r). See also Dezzi Bardeschi 1966, p. 28.
88 Pacciani 2009, p. 158.
89 “Passò che si dovesse fare impianellare la chiesa cioè il tetto di quella, e fargli la soffitta, e condurvi il choro di S. Pancrazio d Fiorenza” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 260, Vallombrosa, vol. 145 [Libro di partiti e ricordi segnato A. B., 1573-1683], fol. 2r).
90 “Poter levare il coro quale era in Chiesa, perche era di grandissimo impedimento a detta, e perche dreto adetto, si facevano da secolari molte cose impertinenti et inhoneste” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 88, San Pancrazio, vol. 70, fol. 123v, transcribed in Cecchi 1999, p. 241). Tarani notes that the choir was removed because there was insufficient space for it behind the high altar (Tarani 1923, p. 44).
91 “Fu liberamente concesso da Sua Altezza che si levassi, e mandassi a Vallombrosa” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 88, San Pancrazio, vol. 70, fol. 123v).
92 “Per parte di ricompensa scudi centoventicinque e barili quarantotto di buon vino” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 88, San Pancrazio, vol. 70, fol. 123v).
93 See Cecchi 1999, p. 242, note 6.
94 “Levare il coro di Santo Pancratio” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 260, Vallombrosa, vol. 191 [Zibaldone dal 1573 al 1578], fol. 138a). Alessandro Cecchi has shown that this worker was the same Confetto who restored the Vallombrosa choir in 1581-82 and completed carved ornamentation of the organ and pulpit in Passignano (Cecchi 1999, p. 244).
95 “Per il coro che disfece di San Pancratio per mandarlo a Vallombrosa” (ASF, Corp. Rel. no. 260, Vallombrosa, vol. 182 [Libro D: Debitori e Creditori dal 1572 al 1582], fol. 47b).
96 Isermeyer 1952, p. 234; Clearfield 1981, p. 26.
97 Toker 2013, p. 23-24.
98 Although a note on Buontalenti’s drawing stated that the baptism took place in 1576 (“si fece il batesimo l’ano 1576 et il giorno di san michelle”), another inscription on the area of the font states “Batesimo del principe Filipo 1577”. Don Filippo was born on 20 May 1577. Benzoni 1997, p. 800.
99 Borsook 1967, p. 95. Borghini published a description of the event, printed by Giunti as early as 3 October 1577 (Borghini – Razzi 1577).
100 Florence, Uffizi, GDSU Arch. 2483. Neri Lusanna 1994, p. 71, fig. 38.
101 Borsook 1967, p. 100. Borsook also mentioned that Duke Cosimo had previously refused to alter the medieval furnishings, but did not provide a reference.
102 Borsook 1967, p. 108.
103 “Nella maniera, che sono stati fatti tutti gl’altri principali di questa città” (Borghini – Razzi 1577, p. 9).
104 “Oltre che tutto quello si è levato, non che fusse di commodo, et ornamento, anzi impediva piu presto la sua bella vista: ma era anco in parte guasto, e massimamente la fonte” (ibid.).
105 “Si può dire, che tutte siano eccellentissime, e dignissime di lunga vita” (Borghini – Razzi 1577, p. 28).
106 “E così quei santi marmi e sacri calcinacci, furono portati senza reverentia di tante untioni e di tanti incensi lungo le mura, salvo che molte persone per devozione ne hanno prese e le tengono come cose sante” (Tinti 1921, p. 7).
107 This will be explored more fully in the author’s forthcoming book Transforming the church interior in Renaissance Florence, Cambridge University Press, 2022.
108 Isermeyer 1952.
109 Hall 1979, p. 8.
110 Waźbiński 1987, p. 374.
111 Lunardi 1988, p. 403-404; Satkowski 1993, p. 81-82; Conforti 1993, p. 209.
112 Cresti 1995, p. 15.
113 Gaston 2006, p. 352.
114 Veen 2006, p. 117-121.
115 Paolucci also acknowledged this possibility (Paolucci 1980, p. 100).
116 Isolated fifteenth-century examples include San Francesco in Brescia, San Giobbe in Venice, and Santa Corona in Vicenza. See in particular Cooper 2001; Allen 2013a; Allen 2013b; Cobianchi 2013, p. 37-39; Morvan 2021 and Morvan's essay in this book.
Auteur
American University, Washington DC - jmallen@american.edu
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
Le Thermalisme en Toscane à la fin du Moyen Âge
Les bains siennois de la fin du XIIIe siècle au début du XVIe siècle
Didier Boisseuil
2002
Rome et la Révolution française
La théologie politique et la politique du Saint-Siège devant la Révolution française (1789-1799)
Gérard Pelletier
2004
Sainte-Marie-Majeure
Une basilique de Rome dans l’histoire de la ville et de son église (Ve-XIIIe siècle)
Victor Saxer
2001
Offices et papauté (XIVe-XVIIe siècle)
Charges, hommes, destins
Armand Jamme et Olivier Poncet (dir.)
2005
La politique au naturel
Comportement des hommes politiques et représentations publiques en France et en Italie du XIXe au XXIe siècle
Fabrice D’Almeida
2007
La Réforme en France et en Italie
Contacts, comparaisons et contrastes
Philip Benedict, Silvana Seidel Menchi et Alain Tallon (dir.)
2007
Pratiques sociales et politiques judiciaires dans les villes de l’Occident à la fin du Moyen Âge
Jacques Chiffoleau, Claude Gauvard et Andrea Zorzi (dir.)
2007
Souverain et pontife
Recherches prosopographiques sur la Curie Romaine à l’âge de la Restauration (1814-1846)
Philippe Bountry
2002