Précédent Suivant

Roma vetus vs. Roma nova

Restoration and Propaganda in the Papal Court in Counter-Reformation Rome

p. 421-446

Résumés

In the period of the Counter-Reformation the city of Rome experienced a profound transformation. Particularly, popes Pius IV (1559-1565), Gregory XIII (1572-1585), and Sixtus V (1585-1590) played a prominent role in the urban renovation of Rome. I have focused my research on the restoration programs of the mentioned popes and on the propaganda of their projects for transforming the city. My primary sources are the occasional Neo-Latin poetry and oratory composed or/and pronounced in Rome during the second half of the XVIth century. With the help of these sources, I have analyzed how the humanists, in celebrating some of the most emblematic monuments of this period, highlight the parallels and contrasts between ancient and modern Rome, and how a propagandistic image of the popes is contructed through this encomiastic literature.

Pendant la période de la Contre-Réforme, la ville de Rome a connu de profondes transformations urbanistiques. Les papes Pie IV (1559-1565), Grégoire XIII (1572-1585) et Sixte V (1585-1590) ont joué un rôle crucial dans la restauration urbaine de Rome. Cette recherche se concentre sur les programmes de restauration mis en oeuvre par ces trois pontifes, ainsi que sur la manière dont ces projets urbanistiques s’intégrèrent dans la propagande pontificale. Mes sources principales sont la poésie néo-latine de circonstance et les discours composés et/ou prononcés à Rome dans la seconde moitié du XVIe siècle. En me fondant sur cette documentation, je montre comment les humanistes, en célébrant les monuments les plus emblématiques de cette période, mettent en lumière les parallèles et les contrastes entre la Rome antique et la Rome moderne, et comment cette littérature encomiastique participe de la construction d’une image du souverain pontife, véhiculée par la communication politique pontificale au cours de cette période.

Entrées d’index

Mots-clés : Rome post-tridentine, cour pontificale, rénovation urbaine, Roma vetus vs Roma Nova, Littérature néo-latine de célébration

Keywords : Post-Tridentine Rome, Papal court, urban renewal, Roma vetus vs. Roma Nova; Celebrative Neo-Latin Literature


Texte intégral

Introduction

1In the Quattrocento and Cinquecento, many popes used to present themselves as ‘restorers’ of Rome.

2Since the transfer of the papal court from Avignon to Rome at the beginning of the 15th century, the city of Rome underwent a profound transformation. One of the first popes to enthusiastically assume his role as renovator of the city was undoubtedly Sixtus IV, who during his pontificate (between 1471 and 1484) carried out a deep urban reconstruction of the Eternal City. Under his impulse Rome became a Renaissance city: its churches, its streets, its squares, its bridges, its aqueducts were renovated. This urban transformation was propagandistically baptized as “renovatio urbis”. In fact, already in his time the artists and humanists who used to frequent his court communicate to posterity the building programme of the pope: medals, artistic works, poems serve to praise his work. In this period, as we shall see, the foundations of the propaganda that the coming pontiffs will make their own will be laid.1

3The ideal of the “renovatio urbis” maintained its validity and continuity from the 15th century and throughout the 16th century, reaching a great development under the pontificates of Julius II and Paul III, among others.2 But my work deals with a much later period, specifically the second half of the sixteenth century, a period known as the post-Tridentine era or the period of the Counter-Reformation. In particular, I have paid special attention to the pontificates of Pius IV (1559-1565), Gregory XIII (1572-1585) and Sixtus V (1585-1590), who, each in their own way, played a prominent role in the urban renovation of Rome. I have focused my research on the restoration programme of the mentioned popes and on the propaganda of their projects for transforming the city. My primary sources are the occasional Neo-Latin poetry and oratory composed or/and pronounced in Rome during the second half of the XVIth century. Therefore, I operate with laudatory writings of the Popes that provide a partial and biased vision of reality and that, consciously or unconsciously, contribute to the propaganda of the so-called “Counter-Reformation” of the Catholic Church.

4To offer a panoramic view of this issue, I will concentrate my contribution on some specific aspects:

  • For my research, I will analyze some Neo-Latin literary works of the papal court (epideictic and occasional poetry, demonstrative speeches, etc.), in which the projects of urban reform promoted by the popes are emphasized and praised.

  • I will try to illustrate the restoration programs of these popes with some paradigmatic examples as the construction of the Porta Pia under the patronage of Pius IV, the Collegio Romano, promoted by Gregory XIII, or the placement of the obelisk at the front of Saint Peter’s Basilica, commissioned by Sixtus V.

5Between 1560 and 1590 a kind of furor aedificandi takes over the city of Rome. As Pamela Long points out, this renewal of the city found an almost theological justification in the post-Tridentine era.

A reformed church – she writes – should be represented by a renewed capital city. This city would be as magnificent as imperial Rome had been. The ideals of renovatio imperii and renovatio Romae lay behind the reconstruction and renewal of Rome. The popes should rule – as the Roman emperors had – a splendid and now also Christian city.3

Altera Roma: a New Rome

6Pius IV will close the Council of Trent (1545-1563) and will be in charge of promulgating its decrees. After the Council, the Catholic Church, beset by the Protestant threat, proposed a profound reform. This reform is not only intended to be spiritual but also physical and its objective will be to turn Rome back into caput mundi. It was with this intention that Pius IV began important urban constructions and ambitious engineering projects in the city.4 It is not surprising that some of these works are extolled by the group of humanists and men of letters that surrounded him.5

This pope – wrote P.O. Long – erected more new city gates than almost any pope before or since. Among them was the famous Porta Pia, designed by Michelangelo. Pius IV’s new street, the via Pia (now XX settembre), extended on the Quirinale toward the Aurelian walls and through the elegant new gate6.

7An anonymous poem, preserved in the miscellaneous manuscript D-343 Inf. from the Ambrosian Library of Milan (fol. 12r), which contains papers belonging to Carlo Borromeo, Pius IV’s nephew, celebrates the “piety” of the New Rome in a brief epigram:

Ad Pium IIII Pont. Max.
Quae iussu uia aucta tuo, quae condita porta est,
Dicta Pia est de te Semita, Porta Pia.
At quam toti per te decus additur Vrbi.
Aptius hoc longe est dicere: Roma Pia.

“The street that was enlarged, the gate that was built by your command, / because of you are called Semita Pia and Porta Pia. / But how much splendor is added to the whole City thanks to you! / For this reason, it would be much more appropriate to call it Roma Pia”.7

8The author of this epigram extols the pope’s urbanistic plan, while, at the same time, giving his reform a religious significance. In fact, in these panegyrics to the works promoted by the pope, we find many of the topics of classical laudatio, which are repeated over and over again.

9Thus, for example, if the previous poem played with the anticipatory value of the name adopted by the pope (Pius), other poems focus on the prophetic reinterpretation of his name (Giovanni Angelo Medici) as in another anonymous epigram of Ms. Ambros. D-343 Inf, fol. 4r:

Ad Ioannem Angelum Medicem, Pium IIII Pont. Opt. Max.
De Magistratuum emendatione quam reformationem uocant.

Nomine reque Pius caelo qui missus ab alto es,
Angele, tot nostris ut medeare malis.
Non geminae Portae reuocataque uirginis unda,
Nec uia quae merito est nomine dicta tuo;
Aucta nouis Arx aggeribus Thermaeque redactae
In templum, tua nec tot monumenta operum,
Per memores titulos quos nulla aufferet aetas,
Extollunt superis te super astra parem,
Sed quod iustitia, pietate et legibus Ipsam
Ne ruat in praeceps Rem tueare Petri.

“Pius in name and in fact, you were sent from the high heaven, / Oh, Angel, to cure so many evils that afflict us. / Neither the two gates8 nor the rehabilitation of the Acqua Vergine aqueduct,9 / nor the street that deservedly received your name, / nor the Fortress10 enlarged with new walls, nor the thermal baths that you converted / into a church,11 nor so many monuments of your works / by means of commemorative inscriptions that no age will take /, none of these things elevates you above the stars as equal to the gods, / but the fact that with justice, piety and laws you protect / the very legacy of Peter, so that it will not fall into a precipice”.

10It begins by alluding to the concept of Papa Angelicus, according to which the pontiff is conceived as an angel sent by God to heal the world.12 The author also plays with the etymology of his family name (Medici), which is related to ‘doctors’. Some of his main public works (the gates of Rome, the Acqua Vergine, the via Pia, etc.) are listed below to conclude that, beyond all of them, what exalts the figure of Pius IV is his legislative and spiritual reform of Rome.

11Another commonplace often used by humanists of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries to praise the new era of light and prosperity, inaugurated by a new pontiff, is the myth of the Golden Age. As M. Laureys says, “from the time of Nicholas V, the humanists extolled the popes for having inaugurated an era of peace and prosperity by restoring the ancient legacy of Rome”.13 This myth is also used in the propagandistic literature dedicated to Pius IV, as we see, for example, in these verses (48-50) of a poem Ad Pium IIII composed by the Portuguese humanist Aquiles Estaço soon after his election as new pope (ms. Ambros. D-343 Inf., fol. 2v):

Tu uero, neque fallor enim, tu saecla reduces
Aurea, florebunt artes et inertia longo
Tempore corda virum.
14

12In the opinion of many, the urban reform carried out by Pius IV is so profound that, rather than decorating or embellishing the city, it could be said that he built a new Rome.15 This is indicated, for example, by Silvio Antoniano, an outstanding member of the papal court, in his oratio funebris in memory of the Pope from Medici family:

Urbem ipsam Templis nobilissimis, Viis, Portis, Theatris, Aquaeductibus, Moenibus, Propugnaculis adeo ornauit et muniuit, ut pene alteram Romam condidisse uideatur.16

“He adorned and fortified the city itself with magnificent temples, streets, gates, theatres, aqueducts, walls, and bulwarks to such an extent that he almost seems to have founded another Rome”.

13A similar idea was developed by the anonymous author of an epigram entitled Ad spectatorem, which is preserved in ms. Ambros. D-343 Inf., fol. 12r:

Ponere templa Deo, moliri immania tecta,
Perpetuas nitidi ducere fontis aquas
Et portas aperire nouas et moenibus arcem
Cingere et exciso sternere colle uiam,
Vt Quarti monumenta Pii miraberis, illum
Tu ne ornare urbem dixeris an struere?

“To erect temples to God, to construct enormous buildings, / to bring back the inexhaustible waters of a crystalline fountain, / to open new gates, to surround the Fortress17 / with walls and, after breaking the hill, to pave the street; when you admire the monuments of Pius IV, will you say that he embellishes or, rather, that he builds a city?”.

14After the pontificate of Pius IV, we enter into a kind of parenthesis or lapse of waiting in the urban restructuring of Rome. As Pamela Long states, “although he oversaw important urban projects, Pius V took it as his main task to reform the church and put the decrees of the Council of Trent into effect”.18 In the words of Alessandro Donati, in his celebrated Roma vetus ac nova, “Pius V maluit destruere uim hostium Ecclesiae quam aedificiorum moles extruere”.19

15In the same sense, it is illustrative that in the oratio funebris in memory of Pius V, Marc Antoine Muret does not emphasize any element of his building programme.20 On the contrary, the French humanist makes it clear that his laudatio focuses exclusively on the Pope’s Christian virtues:

Qui ethnicorum more uixerunt, ethnicorum more laudentur; ego tam sancto tamque Christiano Principi nullam laudem conuenire arbitror nisi uere ac proprie Christianam.21

Roma vetus vs. Roma nova

16Pope Pius V was succeeded by Cardinal Ugo Boncompagni, who adopted the name of Gregory XIII (1572-1585). The Bolognese Pope enthusiastically resumed the urban renewal of Rome, focusing on the restructuring of the temples and, above all, on the construction and provision of many colleges and seminaries (Germanic, English, Hungarian, etc.), which ensured the preparation of a large army of priests, destined to implement the decrees of the Council of Trent.22

17Particularly significant was the support that the new pope gave to the Jesuits in the creation of their church (Il Gesù) and, above all, in the construction of the Collegio Romano, which became the most brilliant gem of his building activity, and a very important symbol of his regeneration of Rome.

18It is not by chance that the Jesuits will have the leading role in the praise of the new pope, greeted and extolled, mainly as the founder of the Collegio Romano. The visits of Gregory XIII to the Jesuit College were the ideal occasion for great celebrations: his presence was praised in numerous Latin epigrams, some of which have been preserved in manuscripts such as the following: Vat. Lat 5682; Vat. Lat. 8923; Chigi I IV 147, Cappon. 155, etc. In these codices, the figure of the pope is exalted and often compared with the ancient founders and reformers of Rome through a rhetorical exercise (synkrisis), which was very popular from the Hellenistic Schools.23

19Frequent is the comparison with Romulus, whom, according to an anonymous poem, he surpasses in many aspects, especially because in the Rome of Gregory XIII (whom he calls reparator Vrbis) a peace reigns, “not founded on cruel violence but on the art of his virtue and counsel”:

Non Marte saeuo constituta, sed tuae

Virtutis arte et consili.24

20The comparison between Romulus and Gregory XIII is also set out in another epigram of the codex Vat. Lat. 8923 (fol. 56r-56v), in which Rome is invoked as judge of this curious dispute:

In eundem

Romulus inuictam quia primus condidit Vrbem
Imperii custos et Pater Vrbis erat.
Gregorius lapsam reficit, finesque propagat
Imperii, extremo quaerit ab orbe decus.
Quis maiora facit? Quisnam celebrabitur Vrbis
Et Pater et custos? quis dator Imperii?
Confer, Roma, duces et quae tibi fecit uterque.
Maius ab hoc dices, Roma, tulisse decus.

“Since Romulus was the first to found the undefeated City, / he was the guardian of the Empire and the Father of the City. / Gregory rebuilds the fallen city and extends the borders / of the Empire; he seeks glory in the most remote place on earth. / Who does greater things? Who will be celebrated as father / and guardian of the City? Who as the giver of the Empire? / Compare, Rome, these leaders and what each one did for you. / Rome, you shall confess to have obtained greater glory from this one”.

21It is also common to find comparisons with Augustus as renovator of the city.25 Pope Gregory XIII, needless to say, is always victorious in these confrontations:

De Augusto et Gregorio

E latere extructam Augustus quam repperit Vrbem
Marmoream ut fecit, ‘laetus -ait- morior’.
Viue diu, ter sancte parens, age, laetior illo.
Per te Roma nitet conspicienda magis
Miraturque nouos fontes pontesque, referta
Gymnasiis, templis nobilis, aucta uiis.
26

“When Augustus made of marble the city he found built / of bricks, he said: ‘I die happy’. / O most venerable Father, have a long life, happier than he. / Thanks to you Rome shines more worthy of being admired / and contemplates with astonishment its new fountains and bridges, full / of academies, embellished with its churches, augmented with its streets”.

22The pontiff is even compared with mythological characters such as Anfion, who, when building the walls of Thebes, made the stones move magically to the sound of his lyre.27

23On the other hand, as is natural, the Jesuits describe in great detail the construction of the Collegio Romano, which, in their opinion, is the most evident symbol of the new Rome of Gregory XIII.28

24Any aspect concerning the construction of the Collegio Romano (1582-1584) was likely to become a subject of poetic re-elaboration. The Jesuits and their young students dedicate, for example, several epigrams to a fact that was interpreted as a good omen: it seems that, while removing the foundations for the construction of the Collegio Romano, two heads were found: a human skull and a marble bust. This discovery excited the imagination of the panegyrists, who wrote several poems on this subject.29

25The placement of the first stone was also a matter of poetic re-elaboration. In 1582 Cardinal Filippo Boncompagni, nephew of the pope, threw a commemorative stone and several medals into the foundations of the future school. This is recalled, among others, in an anonymous epigram of the above-mentioned codex Vat. Lat. 8923 (fol. 34r) entitled De iacendis Gymnasii fundamentis:

Quo memorem lapidem fossam iactatis in imam?
Quo signata rudi spargitis aera solo?
An facti ut saeclis extent monumenta futuris?
Gregoriique Patris uiuat in orbe decus?
Gregorii nomen uiuet per se usque. Superstes
ponte sua tantum fama loquetur opus.

“Why do you throw the memorial stone at the bottom of the pit? / Why do you scatter marked coins on the uncultivated ground? / So that they serve as a reminder of this fact for centuries to come / and the glory of Pope Gregory remains in the world? / Gregory’s name will survive on its own forever. Spontaneously, the enduring fame / will speak of such a work”.

26The block of houses itself (insula), on which, later, the Collegio Romano will be built, is invoked by the Jesuits in their epigrams: “Why do you complain, insula, of your ruinous state? / What a high building will rise soon for your glory! / Then you will be surprised at yourself and it will seem good to you / that the great Gregory has watched over you now. / For you, who long ago were going to perish (even if you had not perished in this way), / it is useful for you to have perished in such a way that you never perish.”30

Ad insulam

Insula, quid quereris paruis afflicta ruinis?
Quae subito assurgent ad decora alta domus!
Tunc uero tu te miraberis, et tibi magnum
Nunc bene Gregorium consuluisse feres.
Nam perituram olim, si non hac arte perisses,
Vt nunquam pereas, sic periisse iuuat.

27The image of a dragon without a tail, insignia of the new pope, will obviously be one of the most used ornamental elements in the Collegio Romano. The panegyrists will strive to offer a positive interpretation of this symbol, which many associated with satanic forces.31 Thus, for example, an anonymous poem preserved in ms. Chigi I IV 147 (fol. 36v) deals with this issue:

Fortunata domus fertur, si forte draconis
Liminibus domini supposuere caput.
Id magici finxere doli, finxitque priorum
Corda superstitio fallere docta uirum.
At me non magicae capiunt fraudesque dolique.
Credite, diuinis nitimur auspiciis.
Tuta domus uigili nunc tollor in astra dracone.
Hoc limen foelix, hoc mihi culmen erit.
32

28In this poem, the Collegio Romano declares itself fortunate and secure, since it enjoys the protection of a watchful dragon. Another epigram from this same codex (fol. 40r-40v), entitled Ad uiatorem litterarum studiosum, reads thus (v. 9-14):

Purpureos inter decerpe rosaria flores.
Quid trepidas? Foelix aurea poma lege.
Non hic quem cernis seruantem limina, saeuus
Hesperidum prohibet carpere mala Draco.
Aspicis ut placidus plaudat rutilantibus alis?
Largus Palladias hic tibi donat opes.

“Take the purple flowers among the rosebushes – the poet says to a passerby –. / Why are you shaking? Collect the golden apples happily. / The one you see here protecting the door is not the cruel / dragon who forbids taking the apples from the Hesperides. / Can you see how peacefully it flaps with its glittering wings? / It offers you generously the riches of Pallas Athena”.33

29The Collegio Romano also is used by the Jesuits to draw a parallel between ancient Rome and modern Rome. Thus, in an anonymous poem transmitted in ms. Vat. Lat. 8923, fol. 42r, entitled Ad Romam, the poet invokes the Eternal City to contrast the old and ruinous Rome with the new and brilliant city, whose most representative building is the Collegio Romano. The author compares the old forum with the new Seminary; and he praises the cultivation of genius through the arts instead of the unproductive and empty leisure practiced by the ancient Romans. The natural conclusion of this debate can already be seen in this poem: as expected, within the context of the Rome of the Counter-Reformation, the confrontation will end with the clear victory of modern and Christian Rome over ancient and pagan Rome, not only in material but also in moral aspects. Furthermore, Pope Gregory XIII is pointed out as the main architect of this victory:

Hic ubi inane forum celebrasti, Roma, Mineruae
En tibi Gymnasium Palladis extruitur.
Otia ubi ciues per nugas longa trahebant,
Artibus ingenium lecta iuuenta colit.
Gregorius superat ueterum monumenta nouando
Commoda pro amissis nobiliora parit.
Gregorii auspiciis sensim instauraris erisque
Fortunata magis quam Domina Orbis eras.
34

30The opposition Roma uetus vs. Roma noua even becomes a matter of debate in the rhetorical exercises developed in Jesuit schools. Thus, Francesco Benci (1542-1594), a disciple of Marc Antoine Muret and professor of rhetoric at the Collegio Romano since 1583-84,35 has transmitted to us, among his oratorical works, three speeches that, probably, had their origin in a school exercise of debate: an oration Pro Roma uetere aduersus nouam, an oration Pro Roma noua and a final Iudicium, in which he concludes by affirming without ambiguity the superiority of the new and Christian Rome over the old and impious city:

Sic statuo Romam nouam uetere non meliorem modo ac praestantiorem, sed maiorem etiam atque illustriorem uideri. Dixi.36

31The Italian Jesuit also dedicated several epigrams to the conflict Roma uetus / Roma noua; he even wrote an ode (XV) with the significant title De Romae Nouae Victoria (= ‘On the victory of the New Rome’).37

Victoria Romae Novae

32It is thus anticipated what will be a constant in the pontificate of Sixtus V: the victory, not only moral but also physical, of the new Rome over the ruins of the ancient city. Already since the fifteenth century, and especially in the second half of the sixteenth century, many epigrams describe how Rome stands among the ruins of the past, reborn from its own ashes.

33The theme of the ruins, so popular in papal Rome, especially from the famous poem by Giano Vitale (Qui Romam in media quaeris, nouus aduena, Roma) and his many imitators,38 is often used by humanists of the Counter-Reformation period to extol the “rebirth” of the City under the inspiration of the popes, as a symbol of the physical and moral restoration of the New Rome. Variations on this theme are inexhaustible and would distract us from our main objective. It is enough to cite some examples of how this literary topic is used to praise the urbanistic reform of the Rome of this period.

34Vitale’s own poem (and its numerous re-elaborations) is used as a reference point to remind readers that Rome is Rome again; in other words, thanks to popes like Sixtus V, to paraphrase the famous verse, “Rome is not to be sought in Rome”, for it is already easy to recognize the splendour of the new Rome in the ruins of the old one. This is what François Suares says, for instance, in his Panegyric to Sixtus V:

Hoc tacere non potui, ut intelligeretur magisque eluceret, quam salutarem medicinam aegris reipublicae partibus attuleris, qua illud effectum est, ne amplius qui ex omnibus terrae partibus in Urbem contendimus, postquam ad eam peruenimus, Romam in ipsa Roma requiramus.39

35In an epigram dedicated to the Vatican Obelisk (XII), the Spanish humanist J.B. de Aguilar alludes to this new order in which the new Rome makes the old one to be reborn (lines 21-22; and 39-40):

His namque auspiciis rerum nouus incipit ordo
Antiquumque refert iam noua Roma decus.
[…]
Inque renascentem sub docto principe Romam
Ciuis ab extremo conuolat orbe nouus.
40

36Another epigram by the French Jesuit François Remond associates the new brilliance of Rome with the renovation of its ancient monuments:

Dum ueteris Romae per te monumenta resurgunt,
Immortale adfert ipsa ruina decus.
Sixte, mori numquam poterit noua Roma, sepultis
Cum possis uitam reddere marmoribus
.41

37In the mentioned ms. from the Ambrosian Library of Milan D-343 Inf., an anonymous poem greets the new Rome established by Pius IV (v. 1-4), which raises its head so long prostrate:

Salue, Roma, Pii magnis decorata triumphis
Illius et larga facta beata manu.
Nunc merito caput extollis, modo moenibus aucta,
Tutaque et egregiis conspicienda uiis.
42

38Another epigram composed by the Flemish theologian Georgius Cassander (1513-1566), quoted by A. Donati, contrasts the ruins of ancient Rome with the vigour and the strength of modern Rome:

Qui miseranda uidet ueteris uestigia ROMAE,
Ille potest merito dicere, ROMA fuit.
At qui celsa nouae spectat pallatia ROMAE,
Hic merito poterit dicere, ROMA uiget.
43

39Later, contemplating the Rome of Sixtus V, the French theologian Guillaume Leblanc (1561-1601) establishes a comparison between the Phoenix and Rome:

Vnica sic Roma est, longos quae firma per annos
Incensa hostili saepius igne fuit;
Illa sed e propriis fuit instaurata ruinis,
Atque e ruderibus post reparata suis.
44

40This brings us to the pontificate of Sixtus V, who stands out as an ardent reformer of Rome: among many other works, he remodeled its streets, completed the construction of its temples and relocated four large obelisks to rearrange the entire urban map of Rome.45

41However, among his numerous works of urban engineering, none reached a greater resonance than the transfer and relocation of the Vatican obelisk in the center of San Pietro Square. It was a project long cherished by the Roman pontiffs that could only be carried out, after many previous studies, in 1586 thanks to the architect Domenico Fontana.46 The architect himself, years later, will present in detail all the works of transport and erection in his book Della transportatione dell’obelisco vaticano et delle fabriche di nostro signore papa Sisto V, fatte dal cavallier Domenico Fontana [...] (Rome: Domenico Basa, 1590).

42However, long before Fontana’s book appeared there was a great proliferation of images and texts (reports, treatises, discourses and celebratory poems, etc.) that described and praised this project.

43As a culmination of the delicate engineering tasks, on September 26/27, 1586, Sixtus organized a great procession and ceremony to consecrate the papal insignia (the lion, the three hills and the star) (fig. 1) and the cross, which will be placed on top of the obelisk (fig. 2).47 As it would later happen with the placement of the statues of St. Peter and St. Paul crowning the columns of Trajan (1587) and Marcus Aurelius (1588), respectively,48 the transformation of pagan antiquities into objects of Christian veneration was staged through a complex ceremony carefully designed in every detail. These works played a crucial role in the process of “Christianization” of the monuments of Antiquity that took place in the Rome of Sixtus V.49 This was the view of Baldo Cataneo, for example, who, in his funeral speech in memory of Pope Sixtus V, says:

Sed et sanctissimum crucis uexillum obeliscis atque turribus ad tutelam impositum, Traiani et Antonini Columnae Petri et Pauli imaginibus sustinendis dicatae, summam eius uiri pietatem, ingentem in diuinum numen indicant aemulationem, quod eiusmodi inuenta non nisi ab animo singulari sanctitate praedito proficisci potuere. Id maxime cupiebat uir pietate insignis, ut siue e Quirinali siue e Vaticano siue e priuatis Laribus subiectam planitiem despectaret, siue iter per urbem faceret, undique sacrosanctum redemptionis nostrae monumentum et fundatorum Apostolicae sedis effigies oculis occursarent, ac subinde sacras imagines quas pectori infixas gestabat, confirmarent.50

Fig. 1. Engraving of the figure and the insignia of Sixtus V. (from Vitae et res gestae pontificum Romanorum […] ab Augustino Oldoino Societatis Iesu recognitae […], tomus quartus, Romae, Ph. et A. de Rubeis, 1677, p. 111).

Fig. 2. Engraving of the obelisk erected in St. Peter’s Square and consecrated with Sixtus V’s stemma and the sign of the cross (Source: Angeli 1586, s.p.).

44Indeed, the Vatican obelisk soon became an iconic image of the New Rome. Nothing symbolized better than the so-called guglia the triumph of Christian and modern Rome over pagan and ancient Rome. It is not surprising, therefore, that many humanists dedicated various compositions to celebrate this historical achievement.

45Thus, the replacement of the metal sphere that crowned the obelisk with the sign of Christ and the insignia of the pope was celebrated by numerous humanists of the court of Sixtus V.51 The epigram VI of Juan Bautista de Aguilar, which records the erection and sacralization of the obelisk, could serve as an example:

Inclytus ECCE foro situs est Obeliscus aperto,
Qui pridem latuit semisepultus humi.
Quatuor ECCE premit solidos ex aere leones,
Hi ingentem lapidem, saxa superba lapis.
Erigit ECCE sacrum purgato uertice montem,
Mons stellam suffert, stella deinde Crucem.
Gentibus ECCE uiam Crux omnibus obuia pandit
Huc, ubi uera datur lux, uia, uita, salus.
52

46The aforementioned Francesco Benci dedicates several poems to this issue as well. We can quote as an example his epigram Ad Sixtum V Pont. Max. De Obelisco Vaticano, which concludes with these three elegiac couplets that describe the new decoration of the obelisk and its meaning:

Infima quadrato pars nixa est marmore: surgit
Ordine decrescens suspiciendus apex.
Nec pila, nec radius, sed mons in uertice et astrum
Et super impositae sunt sacra signa crucis.
Haud aliter terras paulatim deserit imas
Relligio, et caeli sidera celsa petit.
53

47Guillaume Leblanc also dedicates his epigram XXI to the insignia of Sixtus V on the obelisk:

Astra polo lucent, transcendunt aera montes,
Vasto terrarum degit in orbe leo.
Pyramide in summa sunt haec insignia Sixti,
Cuius laus terras, aera et astra replet.
54

48Aurelio Orsi goes one step further and proposes in another epigram a symbolic interpretation of each of the elements that crown the obelisk:55

Qui legis et tanti miraris pondera saxi
Niliacae quondam prodigiosa Pharo.
Disce quid hoc rerum, quas conspicis, argumentum
Signat, stella, lapis, crux, leo monsque triplex.
Stella fauor caeli, crux est accepta Tonanti
Relligio, montes, spes, amor atque fides,
Principis in uigili cura est expressa leone,
In lapide imperii pondus et orbis onus.
Spectat opus gaudetque Crucis Roma aucta triumpho
Et ueteres Sixto Principe ridet opes.
56

49The star represents the favor of the sky, the cross is the religion, the three mountains are hope, love and faith, the lion symbolizes the vigilant care of the pope and the stone means the weight of the empire and the burden of the universe. The poet imagines that the New Rome, happy with the triumph of the cross, even takes the liberty of despising pagan antiquities.57

50This is only a small sample of the inexhaustible propagandistic literature that was generated around this fact. Indeed, the list of poems, speeches or treatises celebrating the transfer, placement and sacralization of the Vatican obelisk is endless and would provide by itself more than enough material for a monographic seminar on this subject. This must also have been the impression among the humanists themselves in the sixteenth century, as can be deduced from the following unpublished epigram of Giano Pelusio (1520-1600) from Crotona, preserved in ms. Vat. Lat. 5515, in which the poet wondered why this stone had attracted the attention of so many poets:

Quum tot sint altae Romae monumenta, Camoenae
Laudibus innumeris quae super astra uehant,
Cur saxum hoc unum certatim carmine uates
Tollunt? et reliquis molibus anteferunt?
Haec pietas Xisti facit argumenta poetis,
Talia caelitibus qui monumenta parit
.58

51In another epigram, the poet from Crotona, due to the impossibility of writing anything new on the subject, asks the obelisk to permit him to remain silent or, on the contrary, to provide new material for his poetry:

Ad Obeliscum

Quum tot grandiloqui uates super aethera tollant
Laudibus hanc molem dulcisonisque modis,
Ianus ego infelix, quid scribam? Scribere quicquam
Audeat hos inter nostra Camoena rudis?
Si quot Pierides nunquam fecere poetas,
Tot (monstro similis res), Obelisce, facis,
Aut, Obelisce, mihi ueniam concede silenti,
Materiam aut uati tu quoque subde nouo.
59

52Pelusio’s collection of poems on the Vatican Obelisk, dedicated to Cardinal Alessandro Peretti, nephew of the Pope, and, as far as I know, never published, concludes with an exhortation to young people (Ad pueros et puellas) to ask God to grant Sixtus a long life:

Optate a Christo, iuuenes, optate, puellae,
Pontifici huic Pylii tempora longa senis.
Secula Saturni, priscum remeabit et aurum,
Virtutique suus constituetur honos.
60

53It is no coincidence that, once again, the return of a new Golden Age, inaugurated with the erection of this monument, is announced. Indirectly, the period of the previous pope is described as a sad Iron Age.61 This does not seem to be a coincidental fact either, since Sixtus V always wanted to make clear differences with his predecessor.62

Conclusion

54In this paper, I wanted to review some literary works, which highlight the parallels and contrasts between Roma vetus and Roma nova, paying special attention to unpublished or little-known Latin works. Since this opposition became a commonplace, there were many examples of this debate in contemporary literature both in Latin and in vernacular languages.

55I have analyzed some of the most emblematic monuments of the Rome of the Counter-Reformation only insofar as they become symbols of a new era. I have focused exclusively on occasional and celebrative Neo-latin literature, which fulfills a propagandistic function but also reflects the impact that these monuments had on the intellectual elite of this period. Examples such as those analyzed, in particular, the transfer and relocation of the Vatican Obelisk, stand as emblems of the victory of the New Rome.

56Finally, through this selection of texts, I have attempted to emphasize the importance of humanists as propagandistic “communicators” of the idea of a New Rome, which is presented as a city reformed not only from a religious point of view but also from an urbanistic one.63

Bibliographie

Primary sources

Manuscripts

Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana:

– D-343 Inf.

Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana:

– Cappon. 155

– Chigi I IV 147

– Urb. Lat. 739

– Vat. Lat. 5008

– Vat. Lat. 5453

– Vat. Lat. 5515

– Vat. Lat. 5542

– Vat. Lat. 5682

– Vat. Lat. 8923

Ancient editions

Aguilar 1586 = J.B. de Aguilar, Ad sanctissimum D.N.D Sixtum V Pont. Opt. Max. Ioannis Baptistae de Aguilar […] in dedicationem Obelisci Vaticani epigrammata, Rome, ex officina B. Grassii, 1586.

Angeli 1586 = Petri Angeli Bargaei, Commentarius de Obelisco ad Sanctissimum et Beatissimum DND Xystum V Pont. Max. […], Romae, ex officina B. Grassii, 1586.

Antoniano 1610 = Siluii Antoniani [...], Vita […]. Eiusdem Siluii Orationes XIII […], Rome, apud Iacobum Mascardum, 1610.

Antonio 1783-1788 = N. Antonio, Bibliotheca Hispana Noua […], 2 vol., Madrid, apud Joachimum de Ibarra, 1783-1788.

Benci 1592 = Francisci Bencii, Orationes et carmina / Quae partim nunquam antehac, partim in Germania nunc primum in lucem prodierunt [...] His demum subiuncta est eiusdem de stylo et scriptione disputatio, Ingolstadt, excudebat Dauid Sartorius, 1592.

Cataneo 1590 = Oratio Baldi Catanei in funere Sisti V Pont. Max. habita Romae in Basilica S. Petri in Vaticano octauo Id. Septemb. MDXC, Rome, ex typographia haeredum Ioannis Ciliotti, 1590.

Donati 1638 = A. Donati, Roma uetus ac recens utriusque aedificiis illustrata […], Rome, ex typographia M. Manelphii, 1638.

Donati 1694 = A. Donati, Roma uetus ac recens utriusque aedificiis illustrata […], Amsterdam, apud Janssonio-Waesbergios et J. Wolters, 1694.

Fontana 1590 = Della transportatione dell’obelisco vaticano et delle fabriche di nostro signore Papa Sisto V, fatte dal cavallier Domenico Fontana [...], Rome, Domenico Basa, 1590.

Leblanc 1586 = G. Leblanc, Epigrammata Guilielmi Blanci Albiensis Iurisconsulti in Obeliscum […] Accesserunt ad S.N.D. Sixtum V Pont. Max aliquot eiusdem Blanci Anagrammata et Epigrammata, Rome, ex officina B. Grassii, 1586.

Leroux 2009 = M.A. Muret, Juvenilia. Édition critique, traduction et commentaire par V. Leroux, Geneva, 2009.

Marinova 2000 = E. Marinova, Germanus Audebertus, Roma. Edition und Kommentar, Hamburg, 2000.

Muret 1834 = M.A. Mureti, Opera Omnia [...] edidit Carolus Henricus Frotscher […], Lipsia, Serigiana Libraria, 1834.

Remond 1606 = Francisci Remondi Societatis Iesu, Epigrammata et Elegiae, Antwerp, apud Ioachimum Trognaesium, 1606.

Rossi 1645 = Iani Nicii Erithraei, Pinacotheca imaginum illustrium, doctrinae uel ingenii laude, uirorum […], Cologne, apud Iodocum Kalcouium et socios, 1645.

Soarez 1562 = De arte rhetorica libri tres ex Aristotele, Cicerone et Quintiliano praecipue deprompti, authore Cypriano Soarez sacerdote Societatis Iesu, Conímbriga, apud Ioannem Barrerium, 1562.

Suares 1587 = Francisci Suares Auenionensis Iuriscons., Ad Sanctissimum et Beatissimum Patrem Sixtum Quinctum Pont. Max. Panegyricus primus, Rome, in aedibus Populi Romani: apud G. Ferrarium, 1587.

VV.AA. 1586 = Sequuntur carmina a uariis auctoribus in Obeliscum conscripta et in duos libros distributa […], Rome, ex officina B. Grassii, 1586.

Secondary sources

Alcina Rovira 1995 = J. Alcina Rovira, Repertorio de la poesía latina del Renacimiento en España, Salamanca, 1995.

Argentieri-Piuma 1984 = G. Argentieri-Piuma, Giano Pelusio Crotonese del XVI secolo: poeta, letterato, pedagogo, politico, Soveria Mannelli, 1984.

Bellini 2007 = F. Bellini, I collegi e gli insediamenti nazionali nella Roma di Gregorio XIII, in Città e Storia, 2, 2007, p. 111-130.

Bellini 2011 = F. Bellini, Michelangelo, la Strada e la Porta Pia, in Studi Romani, 59, 2011, p. 74-109.

Bellini 2014 = F. Bellini, Le porte romane di Pio IV (1559-1565), in G. Bonaccorso, C. Conforti (eds), Entrare in città: le porte di Roma, Rome, 2014, p. 37-61.

Blondin 2005 = J.E. Blondin, Power made visible: Sixtus IV as urbis restaurator in Quattrocento Rome, in The Catholic Historical Review, 91, 2005, p. 1-25.

Bösel 2010 = R. Bösel, Meglio soli che…: la facciata del Collegio Romano, in Römische Historische Mitteilungen, 52, 2010, p. 147-198.

Bottereau 2001 = G. Bottereau, Leblanc, Guillaume, in Ch.E. O’Neill, J.M. Domínguz (eds), Diccionario Histórico de la Compañía de Jesús, Rome-Madrid, 2001, p. 3331.

Ciciotti 2012 = E. Ciciotti, Disegno, progetto e costruzione: la basilica di Santa Maria degli Angeli e dei Martiri alle Terme di Diocleziano, Tesi di dottorato, Università di Tor Vergata, Rome, 2012.

Conforti 2008 = C. Conforti, via Pia. Rus in Vrbe, in Paragone Arte, 59, 2008, p. 21-31.

Conforti 2014 = C. Conforti, Entrare in città, in Roma Moderna e Contemporanea, 22, 2014, p. 3-16.

De Beer 2014 = S. De Beer, Rom: Symbolischer Ort, in Der Neue Pauly, 2, Staffel, vol. 9, M. Landfester (ed.), Renaissance Humanismus. Lexikon zur Antikerezeption, Stuttgart, 2014, p. 856-864.

Dejob 1881 = Ch. Dejob, Marc-Antoine Muret, un professeur français en Italie dans la seconde moitié du XVIe siècle, Paris 1881.

De Lucca 2012 = J.P. De Lucca, Giano Pelusio: ammiratore di Telesio e poeta dell’età aurea, in G. Mocchi et al. (eds), Bernardino Telesio: tra filosofia naturale e scienza moderna, Pisa-Rome, 2012, p. 115-132.

De Lucca 2014 = J.P. De Lucca, Giano Pelusio (1520-1600), in E. Sergio (ed.), Galleria dell’Accademia Cosentina. Parte prima, Rome, 2014, p. 117-121.

Disselkamp 2006 = M. Disselkamp et al. (eds), Das alte Rom und die neue Zeit. La Roma antica e la prima età moderna. Varianten des Rom-Mythos zwischen Petrarca und dem Barock, Tubingen, 2006.

Doublet 1901 = G. Doublet, Guillaume Le Blanc, évêque de Grasse et de Vence à la fin du XVIe siècle, in Annales du Midi, 13, 1901, p. 13-51 and 346-365.

Fagiolo – Madonna 1972 = M. Fagiolo, M.L. Madonna, La ‘Civitas Pia’, la ‘Salus Medica’, la ‘Custodia Angelica’, in Arte Illustrata, 5, 1972, p. 383-402.

Fumaroli 1980 = M. Fumaroli, L’âge de l’éloquence : rhétorique et res literaria de la Renaissance au seuil de l’époque classique, Geneva, 1980.

García Villoslada 1954 = R. García Villoslada, Storia del Collegio Romano dal suo inizio (1551) alla soppressione della Compagnia di Gesù (1773), Rome, 1954.

Girot 2012 = J.-E. Girot, Marc-Antoine Muret, des isles Fortunées au rivage romain, Geneva, 2012.

Greene 1982 = T.M. Greene, Resurrecting Rome. The Double Task of Humanist Imagination, in P.A. Ramsey (ed.), Rome in the Renaissance: The City and the Myth, Binghampton, 1982, p. 41-54.

Ijsewijn 1993 = J. Ijsewijn, Achilles Statius, a Portuguese latin poet in late 16th century Rome, in Humanismo Português na Época dos Descobrimentos, Coimbra, 1993, p. 109-123.

Jedin 1966 = H. Jedin, Rom und Romidee im Zeitalter der Reformation und Gegen­reformation, in Id., Kirche des Glaubens – Kirche der Geschichte, Freiburg, 1966.

Karmen 2005 = D. Karmen, Restoring the Ancient Water Supply System in Renaissance Rome; the Popes, the Civic Administration, and the Acqua Vergine, in Waters of Rome, 3, 2005, p. 38-55.

Labrot 1978 = G. Labrot, Un instrument polémique. L’image de Rome au temps du schisme, 1534-1667, Paris, 1978.

Laureys 2000 = M. Laureys, The Pagan and Christian Legacy of Rome in Pompeo Ugonio’s oration de Lingua Latina, in Neulateinisches Jahrbuch, 2, 2000, p. 125-153.

Leuker 2009 = T. Leuker, Incisività sublime; l’arte epigrammatica di A. Orsi nel giudizio di Giambattista Marino, in S. De Beer et al. (eds), The Neo-Latin Epigram. A learned and witty genre, Leuven, 2009, p. 233-253.

Long 2018 = P.O. Long, Engineering the Eternal City: Infrastructure, Topography and the Culture of Knowledge in Late Sixteenth-Century Rome, Chicago-London, 2018.

MacDougall 1960 = E. MacDougall, Michelangelo and the Porta Pia, in Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 19, 1960, p. 97-108.

Maurer 2006 = G. Maurer, Überlegungen zu Michelangelos Porta Pia, in Römisches Jahrbuch der Bibliotheca Hertziana, 37, 2006, p. 123-161.

McGinness 1980 = F.J. McGinness, Preaching Ideals and Practice in Counter-Reformation Rome, in The Sixteenth Century Journal, 11/2, p. 108-128.

McGinness 1982 = F.J. McGinness, The Rhetoric of Praise and the New Rome of the Counter Reformation, in P.A. Ramsey (ed.), Rome in the Renaissance: The City and the Myth, Binghampton, 1982, p. 355-370.

McGinness 1995 = F.J. McGinness, Right Thinking and Sacred Oratory in Counter-reformation Rome, Princeton, 1995.

Mouchel 1997 = Ch. Mouchel, Muret (Marc-Antoine), in C. Nativel (ed.), Centuriae Latinae. Cent une figures humanistes de la Renaissance aux Lumières offertes à Jacques Chomarat, Geneva, 1997, p. 575-579.

Mouchel 2001 = Ch. Mouchel, Rome franciscaine. Essai sur l’histoire de l’éloquence dans l’Ordre des Frères Mineurs au XVIe siècle, Paris, 2001.

Negri 1966 = R. Negri, Benci, Francesco, in Dizionario biografico degli Italiani (DBI), 8, 1966, on line.

Pastor 1928a = L. van Pastor, Storia dei Papi dalla fine del Medio Evo, VII, Pio IV (1559-1565), versione italiana di A. Mercati, Rome, 1928.

Pastor 1928b = L. van Pastor, Storia dei Papi dalla fine del Medio Evo, X, Sixto V, Urbano VII, Gregorio XIV e Innocenzo IX (1585-1591), versione italiana di P. Cenci, Rome, 1928.

Pastor 1929 = L. van Pastor, Storia dei Papi dalla fine del Medio Evo, IX, Gregorio XIII (1572-1585), Italian trans. by P. Cenci, Rome, 1929.

Patrizi 2010 = E. Patrizi, Silvio Antoniano. Un umanista ed educatore nell’età del Rinnovamento cattolico (1540-1603), Macerata, 2010.

Pecchiai 1944 = P. Pecchiai, Acquedotti e fontane di Roma nel Cinquecento (con documenti inediti), Rome, 1944.

Peeters 1998 = H. Peeters, La correspondance de Juste Lipse avec Plauto/Francesco Benci: le récit d’une amitié, in M. Laureys (ed.), The World of Justus Lipsius: a contribution towards his intellectual biography, Bruxelles-Rome, 1998, p. 97-120.

Pereira 1991 = B. Fernandes Pereira, As oraçoes de obediência de Aquiles Estaço, Coimbra, 1991.

Pignatti 2013 = F. Pignatti, Orsi, Aurelio, in DBI, 79, Rome, 2013, on line.

Prodi 1961 = P. Prodi, Antoniano, Silvio, in DBI, 3, Rome, 1961, on line.

Quilici 1968 = L. Quilici, Sull’acquedotto Vergine dal Monte Pincio alle sorgenti, in Studi di Topografia Romana, 5, 1968, p. 125-160.

Revest 2014 = C. Revest, L’émergence de l’idéal humaniste de la Roma instaurata dans le contexte curial de la fin du Grand Schisme, in É. Crouzet-Pavan, D. Crouzet, P. DeSan (eds), Cités humanistes, cités politiques (1400-1600), Paris, 2014, p. 123-138.

Rinaldi 1914 = E. Rinaldi, La fondazione del Collegio Romano. Memorie storiche, Arezzo, 1914.

Rospocher 2015 = M. Rospocher, Il papa guerriero. Giulio II nello spazio pubblico europeo, Bologna, 2015.

Rotondò 1972 = A. Rotondò, Brandolini, Aurelio Lippo, in DBI, 14, Rome, 1972, on line.

Ruffini 2005 = M. Ruffini, Le imprese del drago: Politica, emblematica e scienze naturali alla corte di Gregorio XIII (1572-1585), Rome, 2005.

Ruiz – Ruiz 2019 = M. Ruiz Sánchez, M. Ruiz Sánchez, Las imitaciones del poema de Giano Vitale y el tema de las ruinas en la literatura neolatina, in Minerva. Revista de filología clásica, 32, 2019, p. 89-114.

Salatin 2017 = F. Salatin, Paolo III, Latino Giovenale Manetti e Carlo V: strategie urbane tra le miracolose ruine, in Studi e Ricerche di Storia dell’architettura, 2, 2017, p. 28-45.

Schwager 1973 = K. Schwager, Die Porta Pia in Rom. Untersuchungen zu einem ‘verrufenen’ Gebäude, in Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst, 24, 1973, p. 33-96.

Simoncini 1990 = G. Simoncini, Roma restaurata. Rinnovamento urbano al tempo di Sisto V, Florence, 1990.

Sommervogel 1890-1932 = C. Sommervogel, Bibliothèque de la Compagnie de Jésus, Brussels-Paris, 1890-1932.

Stinger 1998 = Ch.L. Stinger, The Renaissance in Rome, Bloomington-Indianapolis 1998.

Turnberg 2001 = T. Turnberg, De Marco Antonio Mureto oratore et Gallo et Romano, in Humanistica Lovaniensia, 50, 2001, p. 303-327.

Verdugo Santos 2017 = J. Verdugo Santos, La reinterpretación cristiana de los monumentos de la Antigüedad en la Roma de Sixto V (1585-1590), in Archivo Español de Arqueología, 90, 2017, p. 53-76.

Vetere – Ippoliti 2003 = B. Vetere, A. Ippoliti, Il Collegio Romano: storia della costruzione, Rome, 2003.

Notes de bas de page

1Revest 2014; Blondin 2005.

2See, for example, the recent works of Rospocher 2015 and Salatin 2017, in this regard.

3Long 2018, p. 2.

4On Pius IV’s building programme for the city of Rome, see Pastor 1928a, p. 551-585; and Fagiolo – Madonna 1972.

5Regarding Pius IV’s patronage of men of letters and artists, it is still useful to consult Pastor 1928a, p. 548-585.

6Long 2018, p. 170. On the symbolic value of the gates of Rome and on their propagandistic use as a visible example of papal power, see Conforti 2014.

7All translations are my own. On the design and construction of the Porta Pia and its importance within the urban reform promoted by Pius IV, see the works of MacDougall 1960; Schwager 1973; Maurer 2006; and Bellini 2011. On the via Pia, in addition to the above-mentioned work by Bellini (2011), see Conforti 2008.

8The poet probably refers to the Porta Pia and the Porta San Giovanni. Cf. Bellini 2014, p. 39-48.

9On the circumstances surrounding the repair of the Acqua Vergine during the pontificate of Pius IV, see Pecchiai 1944, p. 7-56 and 77-93; Quilici 1968; Karmen 2005; and Long 2018, p. 67-78.

10With this term (Arx) he refers to the fortress of Castel Sant’Angelo.

11In 1561 Pius IV lays the foundations of the church of Santa Maria degli Angeli in the frigidarium of Diocletian’s Thermae. On its design and construction, see Ciciotti 2012.

12On the concept of Papa Angelicus and its application to Pope Sixtus V, see Mouchel 2001, p. 496-528.

13Laureys 2000, p. 144. On the theme of the golden age in Renaissance Rome, see Stinger 1998, p. 296-299.

14Trans: “But you (for I know it well), you will bring back the golden / centuries; the arts and the genius of men, long inert, / will flourish again.” A clear synthesis on the life and works of Aquiles Estaço can be read in Pereira 1991, p. 11-46. A seminal study on Estaço as a Neo-Latin poet and on the group of intellectuals gathered in Rome in that period can be read in Ijsewijn 1993.

15This idea is, of course, not new. We already find it, among others, formulated in similar terms in an epigram entitled De urbe Roma a Sixto iterum condita that Aurelio Lippo Brandolini (1454-1497) dedicates to Sixtus IV (Urb. Lat. 739, fol. 82), whose first couplet reads: Ausus at est Sixtus ueteremque resurgere solus / Iussit Romam, immo condidit ipse nouam. On Brandolini’s life and works, see Rotondò 1972.

16Antoniano 1610, p. 117. On Silvio Antoniano (1540-1603), see Prodi 1961, p. 511-515; and Patrizi 2010.

17Cf. n. 10.

18Long 2018, p. 10.

19Donati 1638, p. 386. Trans: “Pius V preferred to destroy the strength of the enemies of the Church rather than build massive buildings”.

20On the life of M.A. Muret (1526-1585), the most relevant Latin orator of this period, Ch. Dejob (1881) is still useful. Recently, attention has also been given to his life and works in Mouchel 1997; Turnberg 2001; Leroux 2009; and Girot 2012.

21Muret 1834, vol. I, p. 253; trans: “Those who lived as pagans, be praised as pagans. I believe that to such a saintly and Christian prince no praise should be better than a true and properly Christian one.”

22On the foundation of various national seminaries under the patronage of Gregory XIII, see Bellini 2007.

23The Jesuits were very well trained in this type of literary composition exercise in Latin. Specifically, on the exercise of synkrisis or comparatio Cipriano Soarez speaks in his manual of rhetoric, the most used in Jesuit schools: Est etiam cum caeteris praestantibus uiris comparatio in laudatione praeclara. Sic apud Vergilium Augustus Caesar cum his comparatur, quorum erant illustres uictoriae. Cf. Soarez 1562, fol. 30v.

24These verses belong to the poem entitled De Romulo et Gregorio XIII Pont. Max., preserved in Chigi I IV 147, fol. 35v-36v (= Cappon. 155, fol. 64v). It is not, however, a new image; many years before Aurelio Lippo Brandolini had compared Sixtus IV to Romulus: cf. Urb. Lat. 739, fol. 82 and Vat. Lat. 5008, fol. 63: Romule, cede, pater; ueteres concedite cuncti.

25This comparison with Augustus is not new either; we find it among the panegyrists of the popes, almost since the transfer of the papal court from Avignon to Rome. Cf. Blondin 2005, p. 1.

26Vat. Lat. 8923, fol. 9v. On this theme, see also Cappon. 155, fol. 74r.

27See, for example, an anonymous epigram, preserved in Chigi I IV 147, fol. 51v, which reads thus: Dicitur Amphion Thebas cum conderet olim / Saxa lyrae blando conciliasse sono. / At tu magne Parens pietati moenia ponens / Romam homines toto largus ab orbe trahis. / Extruis hic muros et propugnacula et arces, / Quas uis nulla queat uertere nulla dies. Cf. Cappon. 155, fol. 56r, where we can read pietate instead of pietati.

28On the design and construction of the building that was to house the Collegio Romano it is still useful to consult the works of Donati 1638, p. 387-391; Rinaldi 1914, p. 99-106; García Villoslada 1954, p. 145-172 and Pastor 1929, p. 815-818. Recently, Vetere – Ippoliti 2003; and Bösel 2010 have published important studies on this subject.

29See, among others, the poems on this topic preserved in ms. Chigi I IV 147, fol. 43r (De duobus capitibus inuentis) (= Cappon. 155, fol. 59r-59v), fol. 50r (De humano capite inuento ad Gregorium XIII Pontificem Maximum) (= Cappon. 155, fol. 56v), fol. 59r
(De duobus capitibus, altero humano, altero marmoreo, inuentis in fundamentis) (= Cappon. 
155, fol. 79v-80r) and Cappon. 155, fol. 52v (De hominis capite inuento ad studiosos), etc.

30Vat. Lat. 8923, fol. 10r.

31The case of Gregory XIII was particularly problematic, since his family insignia evoked the worst omens: his coat of arms, that of the Boncompagni of Bologna, was that of a dragon with its tail cut off, an anti-Christian symbol widely used in biblical texts, such as in the Book of Revelation (12:9) or the Book of Daniel (14:23-27), where this monster is associated with the forces of evil. Cf. Ruffini 2005, p. 13-42.

32Trans.: “The house is said to be fortunate, on whose threshold / the lords place the head of a dragon. / The deceitful magicians feigned this and the superstition / of the ancients feigned it to deceive the learned minds of men. / But I am not seduced by the tricks and deceptions of the magicians. / Believe me, I am sustained by the auspices of God. / Now I am a protected house and a watchful dragon lifts me up to the heavens. / This will be a happy house, this will be my summit.” Chigi I IV 147 transmits the reading lumen (v.8); I opted for the reading limen of codex Cappon. 155 (fol. 53v-54r), which also preserves this poem under the following title: In columna ubi depicta famosa domus.

33See also Cappon. 155, fol. 57v-58r. On the façade of the Collegio Romano, see Bösel 2010.

34Trans.: “Here where you used to frequent the useless forum, Rome, / a College of Pallas Minerva is being built; / here where citizens spent long periods of leisure occupied in trifles, / a select group of young people cultivate their minds in the arts. / Gregory surpasses the monuments of the ancients by renovating them; / to replace the lost constructions he creates more beautiful ones. / Under the auspices of Gregory you are gradually being renovated and you will be / a more fortunate master of the world than you once were”. It is doubtful whether the term Mineruae here is grammatically connected to Palladis or to forum.

35On F. Benci’s life and works, see Negri 1966; Fumaroli 1980, p. 176-178; Peeters 1998.

36Benci 1592, p. 38. Trans: “Thus I conclude that the new Rome not only looks better and more distinguished than the old one but also bigger and more important. I said.” On the use of epideictic oratory to re-establish Rome’s image as caput mundi, see Jedin 1966; and McGinness 1980, p. 125-127.

37Cf. Benci 1592, p. 100-101 (lines 17-32): O NOVA, o uictrix ueteris. Triumphe. / Vincis, en uincis, NOVA. Io, triumphe. / In NOVAE laudes noua Christiani / Flectite uerba. / Disce iam uinci, VETUS, et recenti / Cede. Tu uictrix, refer unde uincis / Gratias Christo; fuit ille tanti / Auctor honoris. / Ille te saxo stabilem locauit, / Et coli immotam dedit; ille terris / Esse te lumen uoluit, suoque / Limen Olympo. / Ille ad hanc grata uice te regendam / Legit, o custos hominum paterque / GREGORI, et longum uiridis senectae / Prorogat aeuum.

38An in-depth review of some of the imitations of Vitale’s poem, along with an updated bibliography on the subject of ruins in Neo-Latin poetry, can be read in Ruiz – Ruiz 2019.

39Suares 1587, p. 24. Trans: “I could not keep it quiet so that it might be understood and shine out more clearly what salutary medicine you applied to the sick parts of the State. With this it was achieved that those of us who go to Rome from all parts of the world, when we arrive there, no longer search for Rome in Rome itself.”

40Aguilar 1586, s.p. Trans: “For under these auspices a new order of events begins / and already the new Rome brings back the old beauty. […] And under this wise ruler a new citizen / comes to the reborn Rome from the end of the world.” On this humanist from Granada, see Antonio 1783-1788, vol. I, p. 645; and Alcina Rovira 1995, p. 23.

41Remond 1606, p. 33 (epigr. IX: Ad Sixtum V Pont. Max. de obeliscis et aliis huiusmodi monumentis Romae ab ipso rursus erectis). Trans: “While thanks to you the monuments of ancient Rome are re-emerging, / the ruin itself restores its immortal beauty. / O Sixtus, the new Rome will never die, / as long as you are able to bring the buried marbles back to life.” On F. Remond (1561?-1631), who was at the Collegio Romano during the pontificate of Sixtus V, see Sommervogel 1892-1932, vol. VI, p. 1652-1656; García Villoslada 1954, p. 327-332; and Bottereau 2001.

42B. Ambrosiana D-343 Inf., fol. 15r. Trans: “Greetings, O Rome, embellished with the great triumphs of Pius / and blessed by his generous hand. / No wonder you now lift up your head, recently strengthened and protected by walls, / and admirable with your splendid streets.”

43Donati 1694, p. 347. Trans: “He who sees the deplorable remains of ancient Rome / can rightly say, ‘Rome is gone’; / but he who sees the magnificent palaces of the new Rome / can rightly say, ‘Rome is in bloom’.”

44Leblanc 1586, p. 14 (epig. XVI, v. 5-8). Trans: “Equally exceptional is Rome which, resisting for long years, / was often burned with hostile fire. / But it has been restored from its very ruins / and then repaired from its own remains.” On G. Leblanc, see Doublet 1901.

45On Sixtus V’s building programme, see Pastor 1928b, p. 173-218; Simoncini 1990; and Long 2018, p. 173-218.

46A summary of the transfer and relocation of the Vatican Obelisk in 1586 can be read in Long 2018, p. 189-213.

47On the ceremony of the sacralization of the Vatican obelisk, see Verdugo Santos 2017, p. 71. As we saw in the popes that preceded him, the name adopted for his papacy and his coat of arms will be the object of investigation in order to identify in them different allegorical or prophetic meanings that will serve as a basis for humanists’ eulogies. In the case of Sixtus V, we could mention, among many others, the unpublished treatise by G. Battista Guarini (1538-1612), Allegoriae siue de misticis sensibus insigniorum Sixti V […], preserved in Ms. Vat. lat. 5453. The pope’s name has even been used in a recent novel by Álvaro Enrigue (Muerte súbita, Barcelona, 2013, p. 145) to point out with humour some aspects of his pontificate: “Sixto V inventó el urbanismo aunque no se llamó Urbano. […] Prueba que la Iglesia católica es una institución sin sentido del humor el hecho de que ningún papa se volvió a llamar Sixto después de él, que fue el Quinto.”

48Verdugo Santos 2017, p. 61-65.

49In the strictest counter-reformist spirit, some humanists complained that, before the arrival of Sixtus V, no pope had done anything to “Christianize” the monuments of pagan Rome. This is the case, for example, of Piero Angeli da Barga (1517-1596), who, seeing how the columns of Trajan and Antoninus were crowned with the images of St. Peter and St. Paul, says (Angeli 1586, p. 68-69): Vtinam curam hanc unam maiores nostri atque adeo Pontifices omnes suscepissent, ut Deorum omnium imagines ac signa ex hominum oculis et memoria penitus tollerentur, ac pro iis eorum statuae, qui Christiane, hoc est pie sancteque, uiuendo in caelum euocati sunt, reponerentur. Id enim si factum esset, longe melius Christianae pietati consultum fuisset. The triumph of the Cross, that is, the victory of Christian Rome over pagan Rome, will also be greeted in many of the epigrams gathered to celebrate the erection of the Vatican obelisk. As an example, we can quote an ode (vv. 29-34) by Orazio Torsellini (VV.AA. 1586, p. 20): Cocytiae actutum procul, o procul / Hinc este pestes, nunc penitus sacra / Nunc Roma Roma est, en quod unum / Caeca superstitio tenebat / Insigne prater cetera, iam Cruci / Christoque sacrum est. Cedite, cedite or the first lines (1-4) of an epigram by Gulielmus Everardus entitled Ad Urbem Romam (VV.AA. 1586, p. 28): Quam bene deposito cultu monumenta profano / Ferre salutiferam iam didicere Crucem; / Cernimus Augusto rutilare in uertice Christum, / Et stygis iratae monstra uidere iuuat.

50Cataneo 1590, p. 4. Trans.: “But the most sacred sign of the cross, placed upon the obelisks and towers for protection, and the columns of Trajan and Antoninus, consecrated with the protecting statues of Peter and Paul, indicate the great piety of this man and his great emulation of the divine will, for inventions of this kind could not have arisen but from a mind endowed with singular holiness. This man, illustrious for his piety, wished above all that, whether the plain was seen from the Quirinal, from the Vatican or from private homes, or if one walked through the city, the sacred monument of our redemption and the effigies of the founders of the Apostolic See were offered in view from every place; and thus immediately consolidated the sacred images that each one carried fixed in his chest.” On Baldo Cataneo, see Rossi 1645, p. 115-116.

51Since the Middle Ages it was believed that the metal sphere of the obelisk contained the ashes of Julius Caesar: cf. Germain Audebert’s Roma vv. 416-419: […] obeliscus ad aethera surgit, / cuius in aurato supremae cuspidis ouo / (si modo Romuleae uera est sententia plebis) / sacrati cineres Diui asseruantur Iuli. On this passage, see Marinova 2000, p. 62 and 173-174. Other humanists like G. Everardus (see n. 49) or the Calabrian poet Giano Pelusio, on the contrary, seem to believe that it contained the ashes of Augustus (see Pelusio’s poem In eandem vv. 9-12 = ms. Vat. lat. 5515, fol. 16v: Seruabat cineres Augusti in uertice et urnam. / Nunc montem et stellam sustinet atque Crucem, / Qua super est aeterna salus et uita redempta, / Vulnera quum Christus pertulit atque necem). However, Domenico Fontana discovered that the ball was solid and therefore contained nothing. Cf. Fontana 1590, p. 13.

52Aguilar 1586, s.p. Trans: “Behold, the famous obelisk, which once laid half-buried in the ground, / was placed in the middle of the square; / behold, it rests on four lions of solid bronze, / and these on a great stone, and the stone on magnificent rocks. / Behold, it is crowned by a sacred mountain with a clear summit; / the mountain holds a star, the star, in turn, holds a cross. / Behold, the cross, visible to all people, opens the way / to where the true light, the way, the life, the salvation is to be found.”

53Benci 1592, p. 172 (lines 9-12). Trans: “The lower part rests on a square block of marble; / the amazing obelisk rises in a straight, decreasing line. / At the top there is neither a sphere nor a ray but a mountain and a star, / and above it the sacred sign of the cross. / In the same way, religion gradually leaves the bottom / of the earth and goes to the high stars of heaven.” In the first edition of Benci's poem in Obeliscus Vaticanus (= VV.AA. 1586, p. 10), the form of the last couplet (vv. 11-12) is slightly different: Haud aliter magis atque magis terrasque relinquit / Relligio, et rectam quaerit ad astra uiam.

54Leblanc 1586, p. 15. Trans: “The stars shine in the sky; the mountains pierce the air; / the lion dwells on the immense earth. / On the top of the obelisk are the insignia of Sixtus, / whose praise fills the earth, the air and the stars.”

55On A. Orsi and his epigrams, see Rossi 1645, p. 164-166; Leuker 2009; and Pignatti 2013.

56VV.AA. 1586, p. 59-60. Trans: “You, who read and admire the magnitude of such a rock / that once marvelled the Egyptian Pharos, / learn the meaning of the objects you see: / the star, the stone, the cross, the lion and the three mountains. / The star is the favor of heaven; the cross is considered the worship / of God; the mountains are hope, love and faith. / The watchful lion represents the care of the ruler; / the stone represents the weight of the empire and the burden of the earth. / Rome, magnified by the triumph of the cross, looks upon this work and rejoices, / and, under the reign of Sixtus, laughs at the treasures of the ancients.”

57Orsi’s poem, along with many others from a large list of humanists, is collected in a pamphlet called: Sequuntur carmina a uariis auctoribus in Obeliscum conscripta et in duos libros distributa, in quibus si quid uel mutatum uel additum uel demptum aliquis inueniet, id eius auctoritate factum esse sciat cuius uoluntati non parere nefas est, Romae, ex officina B. Grassii, 1586; as we read in the title itself, the publisher candidly admits that the pieces composed by the humanists have been previously censored. Later this booklet would be reissued together with those of Aguilar (1586), Angeli (1586), Leblanc (1586) and many others, forming the work entitled: Obeliscus Vaticanus Sixti V Pont. Opt. Max. pietate inuictissimae cruci sacer ope divina stabilis ad perpetuitatem praeclaris eruditorum uirorum litteris laudatus egregie, Romae, ex officina B. Grassii, 1587.

58Vat. Lat. 5515, fol. 17r (Cur tot poetae caeteris urbis monumentis omissis hunc unum tantum obeliscum laudibus in caelum ferant). Trans: “Although there are so many monuments of ancient Rome that the Muses / could glorify with innumerable praises, / why do poets compete to extol this one stone / with their poems? And why do they prefer it to the other moles? / It is this piety of Sixtus, which creates such monuments / for the saints, that offers themes to the poets.” On Giano Pelusio’s life and works, see Argentieri-Piuma 1984; and De Lucca 2012 and 2014.

59Giano Pelusio, Vat. Lat. 5515, fol. 17r. Trans: “Since so many sublime poets extol this enormous stone / with their praises and their mellifluous rhythms, / what can I, poor Giano, write? Will my inexperienced Muse / dare to write anything among these? / Obelisk, if you create so many poets (it seems like a miracle!) / as many as the Pierides ever created, / either give me your permission, obelisk, to remain silent / or suggest a theme to this novice poet.”

60Ibid. fol. 17v, lines 7-10. Trans: “O boys, ask, O girls, ask Christ to grant / this pope the long years of old Nestor. / The centuries of Saturn and the old Golden Age will return, / and glory will be founded on virtue.”

61This topic is often employed also by the orators who speak before the pope. A representative example is the case of the French jurist F. Suares who widely develops this theme in his Panegyricus primus. Cf. Suares 1587, p. 14-16: Et iure quidem tanto, tamque glorioso bono frueris, quando tu nouus Saturnus auream aetatem mundo reddidisti, ipsamque Iustitiam e caelo in terras iterum euocasti […]. A handwritten copy of this speech can also be found in Vat. Lat. 5542, fol. 1-30.

62On the enmity between Sixtus V and Gregory XIII, see Long 2018, p. 10-11 and 196.

63On the image of the new Rome and its propagandistic use during the period of the Counter-Reformation, see Labrot 1978; Greene 1982; McGinness 1982; 1995, p. 167-190; Disselkamp 2006; De Beer 2014.

Précédent Suivant

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.