This item is only available as the following downloads:
1 THE PAPABILE AND THE PAUPER: THE INFLUENCE OF CARDINAL DEL By BRITTANY ASHLYN STELLA A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011
2 2011 Brittany Ashlyn Stella
3 To my parents, Danny and Debbie Stella
4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my parents, Danny and Debbie Stella for their support, my committee, Dr. Robert Westin and Dr. Elizabeth Ross for their guidance through this research, the University of Florida Art History faculty for their research advice during the past few years, the University of Florida l ibrary staff and the Interlibrary Loan Office for working with my often difficult requests, the UF in Rome Program for allowing me to spend unforgettable weeks in the Eternal City and view undergraduate studies, and my friends for their moral support during stressful times.
5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 6 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 8 2 THE COUNCIL OF TRENT AND COUNTER REFORMATION ITALY ................... 14 The Council of Trent ................................ ................................ ............................... 15 Pope Clement VIII Aldobrandini and Cardinal Gabriele Paleotti ............................. 18 The Counter Reformation and the Roman Inquisition ................................ ............. 21 3 EARLY EMPLOYMENT IN ROME AND SIGNIFICANT PATRONS ....................... 26 First Arrival and the Early Years, 1592 1595 ................................ ........................ 29 Distinguished Roman Patrons: Del Monte, the Giustinianis, and the Matteis ......... 33 4 TISTIC EXPANSION ......... 43 Saint Francis : Caravaggio Creates a Counter Reformation Subject ....................... 45 Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto : The Alchemist and His Apprentice ............................. 50 Medusa : Catering to the Tastes of the Medicis ................................ ....................... 58 5 INTINGS ....... 62 The Musicians : Musical Performance and Allegory in the Del Monte Household ... 64 The Giustiniani and Del Monte Lute Players ................................ ........................... 68 6 SCIENCE IN THE DEL MONTE HOUSEHOLD ................................ ...................... 73 Martha, Mary, and the Mirror ................................ ................................ .................. 76 Love Conquers All ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 79 7 CONCLUSION ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 87 APPENDIX: LIST OF ART WORKS CITED ................................ ................................ .. 91 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................... 94 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 101
6 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Gra duate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts PATRONAGE FOR MICHELANGELO MERISI DA CARAVAGGIO By Brittany Ashlyn Stella August 2011 Chair: Robert H. Westin Major: Art History The artist Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio has been considered a catalyst for late sixteenth and early seventeenth century painting. Although often criticized by his contemporaries for his lack of tradition and disegno his artistic style progressed into something of his own that redefined the meaning of Baroque art. In observing paintings by the artist we notice a juncture in his artistic style as it shifted toward more refined subject matter and compositions. commission ed religious and secular paintings dating to the period when he was living with his patron, Cardinal Francesc o Maria del Monte between the years of 1595 and 1601 Cardinal del Monte was highly influential for Caravaggio during this period, and their relationship was arguably the D el Monte encourage d the artist to expand his comp ositions and subject matter, but his social connections also helped the artist receive future commissions, including his very first public commission for the Contarelli Chapel in the church of San Luigi dei Francesi encounter with del Monte, his work progressed from simple half length genre subjects to full length compositions of religious, mythological, and musica l scenes. This was achieved in part
7 found that he incorporated into his compositions Utilizing these objects helped Caravaggio create more complex settings and compositional arrangements for his subj ects; t hese artistic experiments and improvements prepared him for his career as a private artist and also as a painter of public church commissions.
8 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Michelangelo Merisi da (September 1571 July 1610), has been labeled as one of the m ost influential and enigmatic arti sts of the late sixteenth and early seventeenth ce nturies. C onsidered the first modern artist responsible for changing the dynamics of painting durin g the Baroque era. 1 By examining the artist, his surroundings, and a chronology of his works, we are able to see his true i nnovative style and artistic progression. The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that the patronage of Cardinal Francesco Maria del Monte (1549 1627), who was considered a papabile (a cardinal with the possibility to become the next pope), had a dramatic effect on Caravaggio artistically, intellectually, and socially. The cardinal played multiple life, all of which had a positive impact on the artist in different ways. The duration of while he was living w ith and working for del Monte is the primary period of focus ; Caravaggio first acquired residency at Cardinal d o Madama in Rome during the mid 1590 s until 1600/1601 arguably the most progressive tim 1 Genevieve Warwick, introduction in Caravaggio: Realism, Rebellion, Reception (Newark, NJ, 2006), p. 13. Warwick mentions Roger Fry (1866 1934) as one of the leading art critics to bestow Caravaggio with this title Leading contemporary writers on Caravaggio include Giovanni Baglione, Gian Pietro Bellori, and Giulio Mancini. More recent leading scholars for Caravaggio include John T. Spike, Catherine Puglisi, Mia Cinotti, Keith Christiansen, and Creighton E. Gilbert Key sources that pertain to d with Caravaggio include Zygmunt out of a research paper presented in a Caravaggio seminar, fall of 2010 at the University of Florid a. A listing for the remaining ke y sources for this work is found at the end of this thesis. A more extensive
9 person who crossed his path. T he cardinal w as not only an artistic guide but an intellectual informer and ve hicle of esote ric knowledge (through his circle of acquaintances, collection of musical and scientific instruments, and knowledgeable resources). After the Council of Trent, the city of Rome experienced serious reform, which affected public art commissions directly. The Catholic Church sought to defend its power against Protestant threats and wanted churches to display imagery that exhibited dramatic devotion, suffering, and piety. Caravaggio had no formal academic training and no experience with this type of imagery bu t del Monte supplemented his lack of training and aided him in his career, which later gained him noteworthy public commissions of apprenticing under Simone Peterzano ( 1540 9 6) in Milan and then later in the workshop of Cavaliere Giuseppe Cesari d ( 1568 1640) in Rome. Despite the own work never greatly expanded or flourished during or immediately after these experiences Peterzano was known for his frescoe s and Cesari 1536 1605) favorite artist Caravaggio would never paint a fresco nor would he gain a papal commission from Clement VIII. 2 However, ts changed for the better when he met d el Monte Reformation subject, his Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy (1594 96, Wadsworth 2 Del Monte is responsible, however, for commissioning Carav aggio to paint a ceiling work for him, albeit
10 Atheneum, Hartford), while living with the cardina l His connection with del Monte, as well as his experimentation with this type of religious imagery, would pay off greatly ; with the help of del Monte he received his first public commission to paint his Matthew Cycle (1599 1601) for the Contarelli Chapel in San Luigi dei Francesi (Saint Louis of the French) This commission resulted in many more public commissions throughout the remainder of his career. When Caravaggio and del Monte were first introduced (sometime between 1595 and 1596) del Monte was not only a cardinal but also the Medici representative in Rome. The du ality of his social connections ecclesiastical and secular would benefit Caravaggio later painted secular imagery for the Medicis and other private patr ons but also created religious imagery publicly and privately for the more conservative. As codirector of the Accademia di San Luca (the ) in Rome, del Monte would have been able to provide guidance and advice for Caravaggio so he could obt was also located close proximity of the church where Caravaggio received his first commission and near another future art patron, Vincenzo Giusti niani. In addition to encouraging Caravaggio to experiment with religious subjects that contained the strong Catholic ideology desired for public commissions, del Monte also prepared him to paint works that catered to private patrons as well, with such th emes as works were rejected, they were then quickly purchased by private patrons who had become enamored with his style.
11 Chapter 2 of this study discusses events during the Co uncil of Trent and their subsequent reper cussions throughout the Counter Reformation, focusing on the time when Caravaggio entered the city. These events had a direct effect on art because they established guidelines as to what type of art was acceptable f or public churches; these public work s also had to be approved by a church official before their acceptance. Chapter 3 Rome, followed by a discussion of his three prominent Roman patrons: Cardinal del Monte, Vincenzo Giustiniani, and Ciricao Mattei. 3 The social standings, inventories, and artworks commi challenging start as an artist in Rome, followed by a discussion placing Cardinal del Monte within the context of other noteworthy patrons of the period, I aim to establish del Monte as the most significant for Caravaggio. This represents a different point of view Caravaggio and H is Two Cardinals which suggests that Mattei was the most significant patron for the artist. 4 Chapter 4 explores the superiority of d various ways in which he encouraged the artist to expand his capabilities. Perhaps the most significant work for this entire st udy is included in this chapter: his first religious work, Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy Another important work discussed is his first and only ceiling painting, Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto (1597 Villa Ludovisi, Rome ) followed by a gift for the Medici and a possible copy of a lost Leonardo da Vinci work, Medusa shield (1597, U ffizi Gallery, Florence) I have chosen to group 3 these wealthy individuals had a brother living with him (Cardinal Benedetto Giustiniani and Cardinal Girolamo Mattei), who were known to have influenced the art commissions conducted by their brother. 4 Creighton E. Gilbert, Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals (University Park, Pa., 199 5).
12 these three works together because they were all commissioned by del Monte and, more importantly, they show dramatic changes in composition and style from his earlier works. Chapter 5 covers artworks that s The Musicians (159 5, Metropolitan Museum of Art New York ) and the two versions of The Lute Player ( first version 1596 State Hermitage Museum, Saint Petersb urg, and the second version 1596, private collection now at the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York). T he musical instruments Choosing to and subjects but also creates agreement and balance in his compositions. In a similar vein, C hapter 6 focuses i n particular Martha and Mary Magdalene (1598, Detroit Institute of Arts) and Love Victorious (1602, Gemld egalerie Berlin ). This includes a discussion of items present in the two works such as mirrors and geometric compasses An examination of his scientific intellectual circle will also be discussed in this chapter Chapter 7 helps Caravaggio land his first publicly commissioned work, the artist continued to exec ute many works for the public. Some of these monumental works were highly did not hesitate to purchase
13 conduit fo r te and public patrons alike. In sum, the basic thesis of this paper proposes that the relationship between Cardinal d el Monte and Caravaggio was a major factor in his development as an artist and that this influence was greater than h as been generally acknowledged.
14 CHAPTER 2 T HE COUNCIL OF TRENT AND COUNTER REFORMATION ITALY All intellectuals had to tread with the utmost care in that time of ideological closure and repression. None more than those lodged within the church itself. 1 The social, political, and religious status of the city of Rome in the seicento is important because it had a direct effect on art and artists. Caravaggio is now considered one of the most highly renowned and innovati ve painters within the span of W estern Art History. However, the social circumstances during his own lifetime caused his inno vations to be viewed as counteractive toward h is success. During the late si xteenth century, Rome was amid a society still very much in restraint after the Counc il of Trent. A pope who supported strong Tridentine R eform was in reign (Clement VIII ) promoting the didactic back to basics of the visual arts in the ecclesiastical sphere and opposing progressively new representations 2 Before Caravaggio became an activ e painter in Rome ( in the late sixteenth to early seventeenth century), the decrees established by the Council of Trent proposed changes that would have affected the artist directly By limiting the standard subject matter and style for public commissions, the council tried to control how the public viewed works of art. Ch u r ch commissions, t he most prominent vehicles for an ar were especially regulated by church officials T his section of my paper explores the basic decrees a nd the effects surrounding the Council of Trent, the Counter Reformation, and certain aspects of the 1 Peter Robb, M: T he Man Who Became Caravaggio (N Y, NY, 2000), p. 55. 2 R eform, in the context of this paper, refers to the ideas coinciding with or supporting the decrees established during the Council of Trent. See Felix Bungen er, Histo ry of the Council of Trent (NY, NY, 1855 ), for more information on the importance of the Council of Trent.
15 Roman Inquisition. 3 This discussion also includes the considerable auth ority figures within the period: Pope Paul IV, Pope Sixtus V, Pope Clement VIII Cardinal Gabriele Paleotti, and a few ot arrival, we are able to gain a sense of certain expectations and challenges he would face in his pursuit to become a successful painter. His initial years were rigorous and unsuccessful, but his alignment with an intellectual art patron of ecclesiastical standing would place him on the appropriate course. T he Council of Trent The Council of Trent ( 1545 63) a council of the Roman Catholic Church, was i nitiated by Paul III to reinforce the strength and power of the c hurch by condemning Protestant heresies and conducting efficient ecclesiastical reform. In its attempts to do so, the c ouncil strengthened the f acilitation of Catholic beliefs sacraments such as the Eucharist, the veneration of saints such as Francis of Assisi and Ignatius of Loy ola, and the s criptures. 4 Lasting eighteen years ( longer than any other church council wh en including its intermissions) and issuing the most decrees this council lit erally attempted to define church policy of this era 5 It was conducted just shortly before the death of 3 N. S. Davidson, The Counter Reformation (NY, NY, 1987) p. 1. Catholic historians usually argue against the term claiming that the reforms began before the era of Martin Luther. It is also referred to as the Tridentine Reformation, named after the decrees established by the Council of Trent. For more informa tion regarding the terminology for this movement, see Trent and All That ( Cambridge Mass., 2000 ) and David M. The Counter Reformation: The Essential Readings (Malden Mass., 1999 ) For more information on the reform of Catholic The Catholic Reformation (NY, NY, 1999). 4 See Bungen er, History of the Council of Trent for more in depth information regarding the history and decrees of the Council of Trent. 5 A. Hyatt Mayor, "The Art of the Counter Reformation," Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 4 (1945):102.
16 Ma rtin Luther (1483 1546), one of the leading Protestant reformers during the beginning decades of the sixt eenth century. Protestant reformers had issues with the doctrines of the Catholic Church and also with how Catholics could reestablish their relationship with God. Reformers objected to the selling of indulgences, the worshipping of saints, and the overpowering authority of the p ope. Although t he Council of Trent did not implement any reform for the Curia in Rome, it did address other issues of administration. 6 The council set certain standards for the eligibility of bishops and priests while also creating seminaries to conduct proper training f or priests of parishes established by Carlo Borromeo (1538 84). The early decrees discussed purgatory and the s acraments. In addition to certain ecclesiastical and administrative reform s the last sessions issued decrees for art, such as how to use art to instruct the faithful, the proper way to depict biblical imagery, and the rules for artists. In March 1547 to November 1563, members met to establish decrees on matters such as purgatory the s acraments, indulgences, prayers to saints, and religious imagery. On December 3 5, 1563, they wrote decrees that would dictate which types of images were appropriate and which were unnecessary. 7 Members of the c ouncil were not against the use of rel igious art but certain reformers felt that religious art had been abused, such as the idolatrous worship of saints. Therefore m embers of the Council of Trent wanted to promote and justify the production of imagery as works of art that exhibited a didactic function, which reinforced the dogma of the Catholic Church. 6 N. S. Davidson, The Counter Reformation pp. 5 in this context refers to the administration of the Catholic Church, specifically the Vati can and papal affairs in Rome, and not its meaning during the Roman Empire. Davidson claims that by changing the regulations of the Curia, the Catholic C hurch would be giv ing in to Protestant opposition ; any type of Curia reform was put on hold during the Council of Trent (24) 7 Rev H. J. Schroeder, Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent: Original Text with English Translation (St. Louis, MO, 1941), p. 216.
17 The December 3 5 decrees were forme d in this final session of the c ouncil regarding the standards for church art that woul d prohibit misleading images of false shameless beauty...lasciviousness...and irregular imagery. 8 Instead, works of art displayed in the churches of Rome would promote biblical imagery and sacred persons by representing the suffering of religious figures (Christ and saints in works. Although the decrees established from the Council of Trent were somewhat amb iguous i n their standings on visual art, it was clear that they were against the portrayal of such erratic themes as eroticism and pagan gods. 9 The type of subject matter for church art did not change necessarily, but instead the council intended to refine the instructions for how the subject matter was portrayed. Caravaggio executed works t hroughout his career that exhibited acceptable religious subjects according to these new regulations, but some of his other works were rejected by the church as inapprop riate and in violation of the Council of Trent decrees. The liberal views of Cardinal d el Monte are reflected in some of these rejected works and will be discussed in C hapters 4 and 5. That said, t here is a difference between public and private works of art. Many private works were viewed by only a selected few Some of the individuals from d el 8 Mayor, "The Art of the Counter Reformation, 104. Mayor follows her discussion of the Council of Trent ry was too provocative for the artistic views proposed by the council and would later be rejected. 9 Robb, M : T he Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 74. Historians have debated whether the Council of Trent should be viewed as progressive or reactionary After the meetings of the congregations, the decrees of the council were not strictly enforced everywhere. The farther away from Rome, the more lenient the authority. It is significant to note here that Carav aggio would be working in Rome, the city with perhaps the most reform and strictest disciplinary actions as a result from the meetings of the c ouncil.
18 ellectual circle were more open minded to t his liberal artistic expression as opposed to any st rict Tridentine Reformers. Under the patronage of d el Monte, Caravaggio learned to tackle both motifs: the public Counter Reformation themes and the private secular imagery. Pope Clement VIII Aldobrandi ni and Cardinal Gabriele Paleotti The conservative na ture of the Rome that Carav aggio entered in the early 1590 s can be seen in t wo significant individuals of authority during this time of Tridentine Reform : Clement VIII ( Ip polito Aldobrandini, 1536 1605) and C ardinal Gabriele Paleotti (1522 97). 10 Both of th ese individuals were strong advocators of conservative social (and even artistic) reform during this time. In the year 1592, just months before Caravaggio entered Rome, Aldobrandini was elected pope, and he wasted no time utilizing his papal power to imple ment his strict regime. He reactivated the Index Librorum Prohibitorum (Index of Forbidden Books) met weekly with the Roman inquisitors had at least thirty or more people executed, moved prostitutes to the Ortaccio district of Rome, and banned carrying w eapons, dueling, playing games, hosting carnival celebrations, and so on 11 The very same year Giordano Bruno (1548 1600) was arrested by the Veneti an Inquisition, placed on trial and imprisoned in Rome and eventually executed eight years later 12 10 Aldobrandini became the elected Pope Clement VIII on January 30, 1592 and Pal eotti became cardinal in 1565, bishop of Bologna in 1566, and a rchbishop of Bologna in 1592. Paleotti also participated uditore di Rota (auditor of the Rota) Beverly Louise Brown, The Genius of Rome 1592 1623 (London, 2001), p. Music and Letters 84 no. 1 (February 2003): 1. 11 Robb, M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 48. See Paul F. Grendler, The Roman Inquisition and the Venetian Press (Princeton, NJ, 1977 ) for more information regarding the Index and its affilia tion with the Roman Inquisition; in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani 26 ( 1982 ). 12 Francis Yates, Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition (London 2002), p. 388.
19 To Caravaggio, it is important to briefly discuss the lifestyle of Caravaggio, an individual who appears to have constantly roamed the back street s in Rome, carousing with prostitu tes, gamblers, drinkers, Romani and the like. 13 Prostitutes were frequently the including his representation s of biblical figures such as the Virgin Mary, Mary Magdalene, and Judith. He was also a man of violence, killing a m an over the loss of a bet in a tennis match and also injuring a waiter after a small dispute about the flavor of his artichokes. He carried his sword with him at all times, sometimes initiating trouble on the streets of Rome with his friends In sum, he wa s a person of a very volatile nature, constantly defying authority as well as the common citizen, all the while obtaining an extensive police record. He exemplified the very antithesis of ign. When appears as if his years under d el his artistic skills and knowledge while under the protection of a pat ron with connections to both the Medici family and the pope. Thus, it needs to be acknowledged that d el Monte granted Caravaggio his desired artistic and social freedom while also protecting him from the possible repercussions of exercising those freedoms. The reforms attempted by Clement VIII had banned many of the activities of stray too far from his own social world. One is not surprised to discover that the pope 13 Peter Robb, M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio ; Helen Langdon, Caravaggio: A Life (NY, NY, 1999 ) and Andrew Graham Dixon, Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane (London 2010) For a more scholarly approach, see John T. Spike, Caravaggio (NY, NY, 2001 )
20 greatly esteemed the painter Cavaliere G 1640) instead of Caravaggio as his favorite. 14 style was traditional sentiments, whil e Cardinal Gabriele Paleotti was an important conservative reformer during this time, especially of art. Paleotti was an Italian cardinal who wrote the Discorso Intorno alle Imagini Sacre e Profane ( Discourse on the Sacred and Profane Images ) in 1582, which attempted to implement the reforms of Clement VIII such as the index of prohibited images, similar to the index of ideas p roposed by the Council of Trent and reinforced the Cath olic motives behind the Counter Reformatio n; he called for images to reinforce the s criptures and the dogma of the Catholic Church through a visual display of clear messages in which to serve a didactic purpose. Peter Robb mentions that this i dea was widely supported but never really came into fruition because church patronage was already so powerful in dictating regulations on art commissions (especially after the Council of Trent, n ow that bishops had to approve church images ) that an index was considered obsolete. 15 claimed that they should be direct and meditative. Ar t should not confuse the viewer but rather represent images of strong devotion containing clear messages. Nudity and eroticism were not sacred, and therefore were unacceptable. False gods were also frown ed upon. The cardinal had further ideas on banning certain religious art, such as the depiction of saints engaged in 14 Brown, The Genius of Rome 1592 1623 p. 18. C hapter 3, as Caravaggio was employed in his workshop during his early years in Rome, before break ing away and developing his own style. 15 Robb, M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 74
21 spiritually unproductive activities. His ideas on reform have often been compared to th ose of Cardinal Fed erico Borromeo (1564 1631), the A rchbishop of Milan, elected by Clement VIII. 16 Together, these three individuals attempted to maintain strong control over the religious imagery commissioned in Milan, Bologna, and Rome n churches but he also wanted this artistic guideline to extend to images displayed in homes and ivate commissions for Cardinal d el Monte and the provocative images he created for other patrons such as Vincenzo Giustiniani. Cardinal Paleotti died in 1597, his Discorso unfinished Paleotti would have definitely objected to certain representations in Car a using prostitutes as his models for biblical figures, portray ing saints in unproductive activity, painting you ng males fully nude with dirty fingernails and toenails, and so on. It was perhaps fortunate for Caravaggio that Paleotti died before the artist exhibited his first public work, which enabled Caravaggio to m aintain his success in both the public and private art domains The Counter Reformation and the Roman Inquisition The effects of the Council of Trent triggered the ideolo gical movement within the later sixteenth and early seventeent h century known as the Counter Reformation, a nineteenth century term coined by Protestant historians. 17 Basically, this was a continuation and extension of the ideas proposed by the Council of Trent, maintained (in Rome especially) into the seventeenth century. Clement VIII has generally been 16 http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02688b.htm. 17 Davidson, The Counter Reformation p. 1.
22 considered the last uncompromising Tridentine R eform pope and durin g his reign (1592 1605) he rejected any facet of progressive or intellectual thinking that did not coincide with the s criptures and Catholic ideologies 18 The supreme power and authority of the Catholic Church had been previously threatened by the Protestants and he was determined to abolish any radical ideas by free thinking revolutionari es such as Giordano Bruno (1548 1600), Gal ileo Galilei (1564 1642), and even visual artists. Certain philosophies, scientific observations, and new artistic styles and techniques would soon be dismissed as unprecedented falsehoods in a world where religious faith constituted legitimacy and overthrew scientific truth or obs ervation. One is not surprised Luigi dei Francesi, Saint Matthew and an Angel ( 1602 ) was ultimately rejected. 19 The writings of both Bruno and Galileo were placed und er the Index Librorum Prohibitorum list. The Index was most severe under Pope Paul IV in 1559, but when Clement VIII reinstated it in 1596 he proposed rules for future censorship. Around this time, Caravaggio was residing at the Palazzo Madama with his ne w patron, Cardinal d el Monte, and most likely encountered some of the intellectuals that read or even wrote these banned books in addition to the collection of books that was stored in the household 20 Alth ough the writings of such avant garde scholars suc h as Bruno and Galileo are widely acknowledged in educational institutions at present day, near the turn of the seventeenth century these books were highly controversial and essentially 18 Desmond Seward, Caravaggio: A Passionate Life (New York, 1998), p. 6. 19 Robb, M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 187. 20 Storia dell'arte 9/10 (1971): 43 44.
23 condemned because they contradicted the s criptures. Therefore, the pro gressive ideas presented by these renowned intellectuals were seen as a contradiction to the ideology of the Council of Trent and the Catholic Church. T he thoughts and writings of Bruno and Galileo were ahead of their time and banned because of it. 21 Carava seen in a similar way. But as a strong supporter of Galileo, del Monte saw the potential sums up my argument by mentioning t hat The Counter Reformation had rung down the iron curtain of ideology, and dogma was now being preferred to empirical knowledge. 22 Galileo himself discusses the problem with W anting people to deny the evidence of their own sense and submit it to the arbitrary judgment of others, and allowing people total ly ignorant of an art or science to be judges of intellectuals hese are the new powers that can ruin republics and subvert states. 23 The Inquisition also played a significant role in solidifying the power and control of the Catholic Church during the C oun ter Reformation era. In 1542 the previous medieval Inquisition was replaced and the Holy Office was permanently established in Rome under the p ope, encouraged by Gian Pietr o Carafa, Pope Paul IV (r. 1555 59). This system was extended to other Italian citi es as well, but remained the strongest in Rome. Notaries recorded trials, and if serious, the process could be lengthy. Many public sentences, or autodaf occurred i nside Santa Maria Sopra Minerva From the years 21 See Gigliola Fragnito, Church, Censorship, and Culture in Early Modern Italy (Cambridge, Mass., 2001); Ernan McMullin, The Church and Galileo (Notre Dame, IN, 2005); and Francis Yates, Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition for more information on this subject. 22 Robb, M : The Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 73 23 Galileo quoted in Ferdinando Bologna, <
24 1553 to people. 24 These executions often execution in 1600. 25 In regard to artists during the Inquisition, one has to mention the case of Paolo Veronese (1528 88) held in Venice by the Holy Office on July 18, 1573. He was questioned for the lack of decorum and representation of ambiguous and discrepant imagery in his painting for the church of Santi Giovanni e Paolo, representing the Last Supper ( now titled, The Feast in the House of Levi 1571 73 Ga Venice, F ig. 1) 26 Instead of altering the se accused discrepancies represented in the image, he simply changed the name from The Last Supper to The Feast in the House of Levi T he artist was treated fairly well and his questioning was considered mild, because the Venetian Inquisition did not always operate in the strict manner of the Roman Inquisition. 27 Unlike in Rome, the Venetian Republic was granted access in the decision mak ing processes of the Inquisition and had the ability to withhold sentences. 28 Had this artist been placed in front of the Inquisition in Rome, it is possible that his treatment would have been harsher with more repercussions. Now that I have presented some background information regarding the Council of Trent, Counter Reformation ideolo gy, and the leading Tridentine R eformers, I will now 24 Christopher F. Black, Church, Religion, and Society in Early Modern Italy (NY, NY, 2004), pp. 9 176. 25 Torture existed in this system, but was rarely used. Although no full record of the executions from the Inquisition exists, we know that the rate was not nearly as high as the secular courts in Europe 26 A. Baschet, Paolo Veronese au tribunal du St Office Venise (1573) (Paris, 1980) ; and Percy H. Osmond, Paolo Veronese : His Career and Work (London, 1927), pp. 68 70 in Robert Klein, Italian Art 1500 1600 : Sources and D ocuments (Englewood Cliffs, NY, 1966), p. 129. 27 28 Robert Klein, Italian Art 1500 1600: Sources and Documents p. 129.
25 place the artist within this context at his arrival in Rome and discuss his early career and i nfluential patronage. Cardi nal d el Monte played many significant part s life and future commissions and it is advantageous that the artist connected with a patron that would not only help his artistic career but also grant him artistic freedom and protection, insuran ces that Carav aggio desired and needed. A s I have mentioned previously, d in Rome Other prominent figures within Roman society have commissioned his works such as the Ma rc hese Vincenzo Giustiniani (1564 1637 ), Maf feo Barberini (1568 1644), Ciricao Mattei (? 1614), Ottavio Costa (1554 1639), and ot hers. The artist is fortunate that his work gained such p opularity after his years with d el Monte ; continuing patronage and elite social connections for artists during this time was imperative.
26 CHAPTER 3 E ARLY EMPLOYMENT IN R OME AND SIGNIFICANT PATRONS Mattei led Caravaggio to ambitious paths that would then be central for him. One could claim Mattei as the more significant [than d el Monte] in that he worked with an artist already close to his peak and coping with more complex communications. 1 Caravaggio was born in Milan in the autumn of 15 71, a son to Fermo Merisi (1540 77) and Lucia Aratori ( ? 1590), who were married January 14, 1571. 2 His father was a buil der for the Marchese Francesco I Sforza di Caravaggio, a family connection that was helpful for the artist during his initial years in Rome. 3 The plague had swept the many others. After the death of his mother in 1590, the artist traveled to the small town outside of Milan, Caravaggio (after which he was named), to divide the family estate which was finalized May 11, 1592. 4 Cardinal del Monte the artist lived quite the itinerant lifestyle, unable to find an appropriate fit for his artistic and social 1 Gilbert, Ca ravaggio and H is Two Cardinals p. 152. Gilbert addresses the often overlooked significance of Cardinal Mattei Mattei brothers (in addition to other patrons) I find neither Cardinal Girolamo Mattei nor his brother Ciricao to have the most important patronage or relationship for the artist as implied by Gilbert My approach to the patronage of the artist throughout thi s study is to present Cardinal d el Monte, as is generally acknowledged by most Caravaggio scholars, as the most significant of patrons for Caravaggio. I cons ider Cardinal d the works Caravaggio created during his stay with him ; the cardinal also served as the foundation for future commissions gained by the artist, those by the Matteis and others. As I explain throughout this pape r, Cardinal d was multi faceted, extending beyond simply providing the artist with a roof over his head in a decent home and an allowance It is the alternative role s played by d el Monte most important patron. 2 Graham Dixon, Caravaggio : A Life Sacred and Profane p. 9 3 The Marches a di Caravaggio was from the Colonna family and had ties in Rome, and she also lived in the Eternal City in late 1592. In addition to consulting his uncle, Ludovico Merisi (in Rome 1591 92), it is possible the artist sought assistance in finding lodgings f rom Colonna and her acquaintances. 4 Alfred Moir, Caravaggio (NY, NY, 1989), p. 9. Caravaggio received 393 lire imperiali which was a sufficient amount of money for his journey to Rome.
27 tracking his chronological artisti c employment. The latter portion of this chapter investigates his more distinguished patrons during and immediately following the del period. This section includes an assessment of the inventories and the commissions and the Mattei brothers (Ciricao and Cardinal Girolamo Mattei). Of these three art patrons, Cardinal del Monte was not the wealthie st nor was his private collection filled with the most works from the artist. Despite this financial lack, he remains the most and intellectual agency on the artist as well as provide a deeper examination of the works of art commissioned by him and fellow patrons. But for momentous encounte work. somewhat difficult to pinpoint, but his contemporary biographers provide insight to the years prior to d The three promine nt contemporary writers of Caravaggio during t his time were Giulio Mancini (1558 16 30), Giovanni Baglione (1566 1643), and Gian Pietro Bellori (161 3 96 ) 5 The earliest notice of Caravaggio arriving in Rome is found in the work of Mancini, doctor (and future papal doctor) in the year 1592 and his last recorded 5 and therefore still considered credible. Helen Langdon mentions in the introduction to her Lives of Caravaggio p. 9
28 appearance in the Lombardy area was documented as May of that year. 6 Caravaggio and his fellow Lombard painter and friend Prospero Orsi (1558 1633) also known as Prosperino delle Gro ttesche were recorded in attendance of the annual Forty Hours Devotion in honor of Saint Luke (the patron saint of artists) in the fall of 1594 in Rome. 7 The antiquarian and theorist Gian Pietro Bellori is the only biographer to mention le sojourn in Venice before his arrival to Rome. Modern biographers s uch as Helen Langdon note that his stay in Venice is very likely, although it has yet to be confirmed. 8 The late mannerist painter and biographer Giovanni Baglione would have known Carav aggio quite well during his lifetime, but the two did not have a positive relationship with each other. In fact, Baglione would take Caravaggio and his circle of friends to court later in 1603, attempting to sue them for libel. 9 In this sense, it is wise n ot to ttori, scultori, et architetti (The lives of painters, sculptors, and architects) of 1642 provide the most 10 But the two artists were contemporaries and therefore Baglione (and other writers of this era) 6 Giulio Mancini Considerazioni sulla pittora circa 1617 1621 trans. Helen Langdon (London, 2005), p. 27. Bellori claimed that the artist fled from Milan to Rome due to criminal trouble, but there are no police records in Milan indicating that this was the c ase (Moir, Caravaggio 1989 p. 9). 7 Lives Caravaggio: Realism, Rebellion, Reception ed. Genevieve Warwick (Newark, NJ, 2006), p. 26. 8 Helen Langdon, introduction to Lives of Caravaggio p. 13. 9 Genevieve Warwick, introduction to Caravaggio : Realism, Rebellion, Reception p. 13. 10 innovative style, indebted to colore instead of t he generally accepted and traditional disegno his work was not well received by contemporary artists in Rome who were working in the classical style.
29 disdain for aspects of his work. The vital texts of Christoph Frommel, Z ygmunt W. Chandler Kirwin, Luigi Salerno, and Creighton Gilbert help us to obtain a closer look into the inventories and private collections of Cardinal del Monte, Vincenzo Giustiniani, and the Mattei brothers; thus, we can establish a possible connection, comparison, and distinction among the artistic preferences and artworks collected by these patrons. 11 These men were imperative supporters of the artist, from helping the artist to land prestigious public commissions to purchasing his rejected public works for no laughable sum of money. Although Caravaggio never acquired papal patronage from Clement VIII, some of the most prominent art collectors in Rome exhibited a great interest i n the emerging style of the artist. First Arrival and the Early Years 1592 1595 Baglione tells us that Caravaggio initially settled in Rome with a works of art, which was most likely a Sicilia n painter name d Lorenzo. 12 From here he staye d with a man by the name of Tarquino, then worked for a Sienese painter, Antiveduto Grammatica (1571 1626) 13 Following his stay with Grammatica, he lived for a few months with a priest Pandolfo Pucci of Recanti 11 Storia dell'arte 9/10 (19 71): 5 52; Zygmunt Il cardinale F rancesco Maria del Monte : 1549 1626 (F lorence, 1994 ); W. Chandler Kirwin Inventory: the Date of the Sale of Various Notable Paintings 9/10 (1971) : 53 56; Luigi Salerno, The Burlington Magazine 102: (1960): 21 28 93 104, 135 46 ; Gilbert Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals 12 Giovanni Baglione, r i et architetti 1642 trans. Helen Langdon (London 2005), p. 41; Howard Hibbard, Caravaggio (NY, NY, 1983), pp. 8 10. 13 Grammatica was also known for having a connection with Cardinal Del Monte.
30 (1530 1614) an d Giulio Mancini that Caravaggio was not fond of Pucci because Pucci did not treat him well ; he would stay with him only a few months. 14 devotional images, whi ch were sent back to Recanti and are now lost. 15 A fter being kicked by a horse Caravaggio was sent to the h ospital Santa Maria della Scala and painted many works for the prior Giovanni Buttari (which were also lost) 16 Following his recovery, he was employe d under the workshop of the favored Cavaliere Giuseppe Cesari for about eight months where he painted fruits and flowers. 17 Caravaggio was 18 His artistic i ntuition was not and he left with hope s of a better opportunity. 19 Just before his stay with d el Monte, Caravaggio lived with a man named Monsignore Fantin Petrignani. Howard Hibbard notes that this man was not in Rome in the year 1594; therefore Caravaggio must have lived with him prior to or after this 14 Mancini, Considerazioni sulla pittora circa 1617 1621 p. 27. 15 longer survive. We do not know what these images may have looked like, whether they were strictly Saint Francis in Ecstasy (discussed in Chapter 4) as the first true religious work by the artist. 16 Frommel notes that Buttari was the prior for Santa Maria della Sca la from January 1592 until January 1594 (50). 17 In Giovanni tori et architetti 1642 Alfred Moir mentions that he was kicked by a horse and hospitalized sometime in 1593 and hired by pino sometime in 1593 94 (Moir, Caravaggio 1989 p. 14). 18 Graham Dixon, Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and P rofane p. 118. 19 We also know that he painted a portrait of an innkeeper (now lost) most likely one who gave him lodging around this time.
31 date 20 under Petrignani to 1595, which given a ccurate. However, a census taken that year reveals that neither Caravaggio nor Petrignani occupied this Roman residence at the time, thus indicating an issue for an 21 Hibbard claims that Caravag some time before the census was taken during Easter of 1595, indicating that his time there was transient, lasting only a few months. and suggests that Caravaggio did not leave Petrig but instead arrived after the census was taken, thus ma rking Carava Palazzo Madam a closer to or into the year 1596. 22 chronology, con tending that w as short lived. His idea that an early departure before the census of 1595 would place the artist in r only a while also marking the time frame for all of as more confined. The se reason s seem justifiable, y et they can be dismissed because the artist was notorious for frequently changing his residence, a behavior (excluding his years with del Monte) the 20 Hibbard Caravaggio p. 8 f n 14. However, Moir, writing six years after Hibbard, mentions that, Caravaggio 1989, p. 14). 21 Gilbert, Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals 1995 p. 133. 22 Ibid, p. 133.
32 artist exhibited consistently throughout his entire lifetime 23 In fact, his accommodation under Cardinal d el Monte is arguably the first ti me one can truly claim that his living situation was in a permanent state during his years in Rome. The emphasis y lies within his arrival into d ther scholars have argued for an early arrival to (and often a later departure from) d el such a way as to mitigate the impact of this patron artist relationship vouching fo r the 24 I believe that ence post census (thus subsequently entering Palazzo Madama at a later date than originally understood), it in no way discredits the effect artist relationship with del Monte. One can argue that for del Monte to impact the artist in such significant ways in an even shorter time frame than previously accepted is more worthy of respect and recognition That said, w hether Caravaggio took up residence at the Palazzo Madama in late 1595 or early 1596, his years spent with d el Monte would b e the most critical for the artist and the time spent under other patrons such as the Mattei brothers cannot equally compare. 23 Graham ( 73 ) 24 Gilbert, Caravaggio and H is Two Cardinals
33 Distinguished Roman Patrons: Del Monte, the Giustinianis, and the Matteis Caravag gio arran ged for an art gallery located near Palazzo Madama and Palazzo Giustiniani to sell his paintings in hopes of attracting some of the prominent art patrons and connoisseurs of Rome. 25 The owner of but the public display of his paintings paid off greatly for the artist. 26 It was here that del Monte first enc Fortune T ell er (1594, C apitoline, Rome, F ig. 2) and Cardsharps (1594, K imbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, F ig. 3). This juncture end workshop employer or painter of small and amateurish works to an artist of more serious patronage Following the years with del Monte, the artist would receive many commissions, private and public. Although some of his public works were eventually rejected, they were still purchased and admired by private patrons. At the time when del Monte and Carav aggio were first introduced, del Monte was not only a cardinal but also the Medici representative in Rome and unsurprisingly an avid art patron. His parents had encouraged him to pursue an ecclesiastical career but del Monte was intereste d in learning b eyond the church and studied disciplines such as 25 across the street from each other, as well as in close proximity to this art gallery and the Church of San Luigi dei Francesi, where Caravaggio would obtain his very first public commission under the residence (and support) of del Monte. 26 Baglione, Le scultori, et architetti 1642 The Burlington Magazine 140 (1998): 25). Langd on also discusses Valentino as Spada, selling works by Caravaggio and Prospero Orsi as well as going out with them and drinking ( Caravaggio: A L ife p. 78); Moir, Caravaggio 1989, p. 13.
34 civil law. 27 He studied in Pesaro among notable figures such as Torqu ato Tasso and the (soon to be) d uke of Urbino, Francesco Maria II della Rovere. 28 By 1574 del Monte was a representative of the duke During this time his friendship with a certain Cardinal Zucchi to paint The Mass of Saint Gregory the Great (1575, Oratory of the Santissima Trinit dei Pellegrini, Rome) and include worshippers. 29 Later in 1586 del Monte declined an appointment as the bishop of Pesaro to serve as the Medici representative in Rome, revealing his strong ties to the Medici family. This loyalty, however, did not cease h is ecclesiastical strides as he became a cardinal December 14, 1588. He now had his own Medici palace in Rome, Palazzo Madama, with religious connections as cardinal but also with secular connections was ; he would later paint secular imagery for the Medici and other private patrons but also painted religious ima gery public and private for more conservative art patrons. An argument can even be made for the location of Palazzo Madama itself patron Vincenzo Giustiniani as well as being next door to the French church in Rome where the artist received his first public commission. 27 Zygmunt Il cardinale F rancesco Maria del Monte: 1549 1 626 pp. 28 38. volume publication offers the most extensive background information on Cardinal del Monte. 28 Ibid, p. 17. 29 Ibid, pp. 71, 75.
35 As a whol e, d was quite extensive and he acquired many 30 Before the year 1600 (around the time Caravaggio left the Caravaggio, not including his painting of Pastor Friso (also referred to as Saint John the Baptist 1602, Capitoline Museum, Rome, F ig. 4), a gift he received long after the 31 In comparison, the inventory of Vincenzo Giustiniani (1564 1637) displayed thirteen works b y Caravaggio, and possibly two others that were attributed to him. 32 Giustiniani was known as one of the richest art patrons in Rome at the time and had come from a wealthy Genoese banking family ; he t ook over as the head of the family after the death of hi s father in 1600. His art collection had the largest number of works by Caravaggio obtained by any one patron, but d el Monte had more paintings by Caravaggio than by any other artist. So a by the 30 Frhwerk und der Kardinal Francesco Maria del Monte Storia dell'arte 9/10 (1971): 30 49; and Il cardinale F rancesco Maria del Monte: 1549 1626 31 Gilbert claims that two works, Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto (discussed in more detail in Chapter 4) and Still Life in the Ambrosiana in Milan are debatable paintings possessed by del Monte, therefore claiming he owned Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals p. 111 ). I have considered the there is evidence that post Jupiter, Neptune and Pluto as a Caravaggio (see John T. Spike, Caravaggio: a c atalogue of paintings (NY, NY, 2001), pp. 67 69, for more information). Also, in regard to Still Life in The Age of Caravaggio Luigi Salerno mentions that Cardinal Federico Borromeo owned the particular still life by Caravaggio in the Ambrosiana, while o thers mention del Monte as the possible owner (Gilbert, Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals p. 17). Therefore, it is certain that del Monte had at least nine but possibly ten works by the artist. For a more extensive description of the works by Caravaggio in Caravaggio and H is Two Cardinals Saint Catherine of Alexandria (1598, Madrid) as a work by Orazio Gentileschi, but years later Marangoni and Voss attributed it to Caravaggio, and Longhi concurred (discussed by Cinotti, in I pittori bergamaschi del seicento (Bergamo, 1983), p. 418). The Pastor Friso work was actually given to del Monte by Ciricao Mattei in 1624 (Frommel, ardinal Francesco Maria del Monte Storia dell'arte p. 50). 32 The Burlington Magazine 102: (1960): 21 28 93 104, 135 46
36 artist was (only sl ightly) larger in quantity, when comparing the abundance of works by Caravaggio to the works of other artists represented in collection the strong preference for the artist becomes apparent Out of the 705 total works liste d in d created by named artists. 33 Giustiniani had 581 total works in his inventory of 1638, and 3 66 were by named artists. It is apparent that Giustiniani was an avid art collector and connoisseur concerned with acquiring works by renowned artists of the period. Del Monte could be considered the opposite, because he favored a distinct style or quality instead of a collection of works from sp ecifically well known artists (the majority of the works in his collectio n were by unnamed artists). 34 had a large number of artworks, but they were perhaps more affordable and easier to obtain; therefore, the quantity of artworks in his collection does not e xhibit d wealth over someone such as the Genoese nobleman Giustiniani. financial status is further demonstrated as we examine the residences of the two patrons Palazzo Madama was one of two Medici palaces in Rome; the villa Medici on the Pincian Hill was the official Medici family seat in the city. In 1595, contemporary to Palazzo Madama measured sixty by forty fee t, with thirteen rooms It was fa 33 artists. 34 That is not to say that Giustiniani did not exhibit interest in certain styles altogether. In the first decades of the seventeenth century, Giust artists such as Caravaggio and Annibale Carracci toward more classical Baroque works of art such as those by Nicholas Poussin. For a detailed assessment of works and artists in Giust The Burlington Magazine (1960).
37 structures. 35 With these measurements, Gilbert warns against making assumptions of d Palazzo Madama was a palazzo but not a palace, and the reference to his [inaccurately] assimilates him to the grand type of maecenas that Bernin i did have in Cardinal Borghese and that Caravaggio should have had. 36 and powerful patron, whil e simultaneously claiming that d el Monte was financially incapable of fill ing that position. Giustiniani used twenty eight rooms to display his artworks, and his palazzo was without question more spaciou t is evident that del Monte was living in a property of the Medici s as their representative an d that Giustiniani was his own representative with his own palace. There is a lack of extensive building records but previous documentation indicates that he acquired a recently remodeled and redecorated palace. 37 Giustin Benedetto (1554 1621), also lived with him at this residence and was elected cardinal by Sixtus V in 1586, just a few years before the Giustiniani family acquired its palazzo 38 Benedetto is noted for commissioning four of the thirteen works by Caravaggio found in the inventory. 39 35 F. Borsi, Palazzo Madama, (1969), p. 40. 36 Gilbert, Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals p. 132 37 The Burlington Magazine 102 no. 685 (April 1960): 166. 38 The Burlington Magazine (1960) p. 21. 39 Eliza beth Cropper, The Burlington M agazine 143 no. 1180 (July 2001): 450. For an in depth analysis regarding Benedetto and his possible The Burlington Magazine 139 No. 1136 (Nov. 1997): 766 91.
38 in the Contarelli Chapel, his Matthew Cycle of 1600 ( Calling of Saint Matthew and Martyrdom of Saint Matthew Rome, F ig. 5 and F ig. 6 ) Some speculat e that this was Vincenzo and commissioned by Vinc enzo by Caravaggio in 1596 marks his encounter with the artist as earlier, and the two men were definitely well acquainted with del Monte at this time. 40 In 1598 Benedetto had traveled with the pope to Ferrara, as did del Monte. Also, Vincenzo was present a t Palazzo Madama when del Monte hosted music parties and concerts, as both gentlemen were enthusiastic lovers of music. 41 Saint Matthew and Angel (1602, previo usly in Berlin, now destroyed, F ig. 7) w as actually rejected and replaced by a similar work by the artist, his Inspiration of Saint Matthew (1602, Co ntarelli Chapel, Rome, F ig. 8 ). The private patronage of Vincenzo and possibly his brother Benedetto became critical for the artist at this time because Vincenzo purchased the rejected work. f art were continually rejected Madonna dei Palafrenieri ( 1606, Galleria Borghese, Rome, F ig. 9) and Death of the Virgin ( 160 5 6, Muse du Louvre, Paris, F ig. 10) are two examples but private patron s continued to show 40 The Lute Player has now been accurately attributed as a commission by Vincenzo Giustiniani, previously t hought to be a commission from d el Monte, as he had a very similar version in his inventory coming shortly after the first version was created. Therefore, the Giustiniani brothers must have been introduced to the artist before the display of his public work s in the Contarelli Chapel, through d el Monte. 41 The Burlington Magazine (1960), p. 21.
39 interest. 42 The significance of this private interest stems from the initial private patron catalyst, Cardina l del Monte. As previously mentioned, the artist did not take up residence with his wealthy neighbors, the Giustiniani family, but instead left Palazzo Madama in early 1601 and headed for the residence of Ciricao (1545 1614) and Cardinal Girolamo Mattei ( 154 7 1603). 43 After Caravaggio gained recognition from his first public commission, the Matteis were willing and, more importantly, capable of proposing a more attractive tho usand scudi as recorded in 1605, and he had no family wealth to pass on or distribute 44 This is in comparison to the three hundred thousand scudi the Mattei brothers i nherited from their uncle, in addition to their own previously accumulated wealth. 45 Del M onte could not fault Caravaggio for departing from his residence to seek a greater financial career and living situation; it was, after all, what the p atron had been preparing him for during the past five years. 42 Cardinal Scipione Borghese purchased the Madonna dei Palafranieri a fter it was rejected from the Basilica of Saint Peter After its rejection for the church of Santa Maria della Scala, the Death of the Virgin was purchased by the Duke of Mantua under strong encouragement by one of the leading painters of the period, Peter Paul Rubens. 43 The Burlington Magazine volume 127 no. 988 (July 1985): 441. Parks discusses a document that was signed by Caravaggio for his Death of the Virgin on July 14, 1601; in this contract the artist mentions his current residency with the Mattei brothers. Cinotti discusses that the last documented date for the artist living with del Monte is November 1600, and in 1605 he is listed as living on his own. This supports the idea that during the first years of the seventeenth century, the artist was living with the Matteis. However, Cardinal I pittori bergamaschi del seicento vol. 1, pp. 240 43). 44 Luigi Spezzaferro, al del Monte e il primo tempo di Caravaggio 9/10 (1971): 21. 45 Gilbert, Caravaggio and H is Two Cardinals p. 131. For more information regarding the Matteis, see Chapter 10.
40 Under the residence of the Mattei family, Ca ravaggio executed such religious works as the Supper at Emmaus (1 601, National Gallery, London, F ig. 11) and the Betrayal of Christ (1602, National Gallery, Dublin, F ig. 12). 46 They are also credited for purchasing the Pastor Friso which had been painted p ri employment under the Matteis. 47 Although these works are few in quantity, they contain many figures and are larger in size, thus taking the artist much longer to execute. But, as I discuss in C hapter 4, del Monte was the initial patron responsible for encouraging the artist to break away from his earlier half length, single figured imagery and to experiment with larger and more complex compositions. 48 admired paintings, a talent unobtainable without the previous practice and instruction under del Monte for his religious subjects of Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy Saint Cath erine of Alexandria (1598, Thyssen Bornemisza Museum Madrid, F ig. 13), Rest on the Flight into Egypt (1597, Doria Pamphilj Gallery Rome, F ig. 14), Penitent Magdalen e (1597, Doria Pamphilj Gallery Rome, F ig. 15), and so on. The works commissioned an d style, a transition that occurred during the latter 1590 s household. 46 Emmaus and in 1603 for the Betrayal (Cappelletti and Testa, in G. Correale Identificazione di un Caravaggio (Venice, 1990), p. 77 ) 47 This painting, previously mentioned in del deaths of Caravaggio and Cardinal Mattei. For the provenance issues surrounding this Pastor F riso image, see John T. Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of paintings 2001, pp. 132 41. 48 Caravaggio ha d already begun to experiment with more than one figure in his Fortune Teller and Cardsharps shortly before he meets d el Monte. Although these two genre scenes do not display full length figures, each work contains more than a single figure. Following the se works, d el Monte encouraged the artist to create full length figures of more refined subject matter, such as religious subjects.
41 By comparing the household finances of it is clear that del Monte did not have the most extensive collection or the most wealth, but he had more paintings by Caravaggio than of any other single artist, proving his strong admiration for him. Del Monte substituted his lack of financial excess for intellect, social connections, and educational and artistic instruction. Caravaggio did not need a dowry for his future family, something that could be obtained from wealthy patrons such as Giustiniani an d Mattei. Instead, what was most imperative for the artist during this time was a distinguished person in society willing to help him expand his artistic fame and improve his amateur talent. Giustiniani was concerned with obtaining the cr me de la cr me wo rks of art created by artists already established within the artistic society of Rome. The Mattei brothers were interested in commissioning works for religious and Cara vaggio had already achieved that when he met the Matteis (hence the quote in the very beginning of this chapter), which can even with Vincenzo Giustiniani as well. Although Caravaggio and del Monte did part ways around the turn of the century, neither expressed disdain for one another. Del Monte Doubting Thomas (original 1602, Bildergalerie, Potsdam, Sanssouci) as well as assisted the artist in 1604 with a confrontation with the pol ice. three of his significant pa trons, the following Chapters 4 6 comprise a closer mention ed, del Monte had alternative forms of clout to offer artists other than wealth.
42 Chapter 4 examines the cardi work by discussing three Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy ; Jupi ter, Neptune ; and Pluto ; and the Medusa shield.
43 CHAPTER 4 Entering the circle of Cardinal del Monte, living in his palace, absorbing his ideas, listening to his musicians, looking at his art collections those experiences are all clearly reflected in Caravagg 1590 s. His work becomes more sophisticated and more intellectually rarefied 1 During the years Caravaggio stayed at Palazzo Madama (1595 1600), Cardinal del Monte had a permanent impact on him. W hen looking at his oeuvre chronologically, the influence on his art and style of work is c lear. Beginning as early as the mid to late 1590s, the cardinal was the artistic instructor and guide for the artist encouraging him to expand the possibilities within his subject matter, compositions, and the surface mate rial of his paintings. In this c hapter, I discuss three works by the artis t Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy ( F ig. 16 ) ; Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto ( F ig. 17 ) ; and his Medusa s hield ( F ig. 18 ) painted on canvas, a ceiling, and a wooden convex shield (with the canvas stretched over). While these were all privately commissioned by del Monte, Caravaggio took advantage of these projects and used them to experiment with his artistic capabilities, painting new subject matter and compositions that eventually led to his success as a public painter. Caravaggio arrived in Rome in 1592; when comparing the paintings he executed prior to his del Monte years to the paintings completed during, there is a clear transformation in his work, which presents more diverse subject matter and compositions. From h is early years in Rome in Cesari elsewhere, Caravaggio produced still life scenes and secular subjects of single figures 1 Graham Dixon, Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane p. 160
44 in half length or three quarters length. This type of earl y style is evident in his Boy Peeling a Fruit (1592, Fondazione Roberto Longhi, Florence F ig. 19 ), Sick Bacchus (1593, Galleria Borghese, Rome F ig. 20 ), and Boy with a Basket of Fruit (1593, Galleria Borghese, Rome F ig. 21 ). Following these wor ks, Carav aggio created two genre scenes, t he Fortune Teller and the Cardsharps of 1594. These two genre works implement additional figures, but are still partial length and show an amateurish style and subject matter. Taking a look at one of these early works, the Sick Bacchus for example, presents a self portrait of the artist as Bacchus, the god of wine (known as Dionysus in Greek mythology). His body is in profile, and his head is closer to a three quarters view as it turns toward the viewer. His right elbow i s s lightly resting on the table as he brings his hand full of grapes toward his mouth. He wears a crown of ivy leaves and a toga like garment, which partially wraps around his body and is secured by a burgundy knotted sash. Fruits such as pears and grapes lie on the table in front of him. Visible beyond the corner of the table, parts of his legs are cast in a mixture of light and shade, as the dark background contrasts the tone of his flesh. The skin of his entire body is portrayed in a sickly pale greenish ti nt, giving a malnourished look. The artist was obviously struggling at this point in his life, able to paint only himself as a figure, as he could not afford a model. This image may reference his own lack of proper sustenance during these difficult times. Possibly due to his financial means and artistic inexperience, Caravaggio continued to execute secular works portraying this type of composition and subject matter, as two genre scenes follow in 1594. His Fortune Teller and Cardsharps appear
45 to be modeled directly from the streets of Rome The first image portrays a Romani so trying to slip a ring off his finger), and the latter displays two men collaborating to cheat a young nave boy in a game of card s. Caravaggio was a struggling artist at this time, and probably did not have the finances to hire expensive models, and resorted t o paint ing these subjects directly from the streets of Rome. These Roman street scenes were the very subject matter that caug ht the eye of del Monte and he became an avid patron and host to the artist as a result. But when his works expanded beyond this type of subject matter and presented the viewer with more co mplex compositio nal arrangements; t he artist soon produced religious s ubjects images of music and mythology and even individual portraiture. Saint Francis : Caravaggio Creates a Counter Reformation Subject Shortly after his arrival to executed Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy This work dates around 1595, about the time he completed The Musicians (F ig. 22 ), but t here have been discrepancies regarding its precise date and provenance 2 Although the evidence is considered inconclusive as to which image came first, Saint Francis or The Musicians it is widely accepted and understood that both 2 Musicians or d el Monte ( Robb M : The Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 77; i Paragone 3 no. 25 (Jan. 1952): 24). Creighton Gilbert and Mia Cinotti acknowledge that the work dates no later than 1595 97. (Gilbert, Caravaggio and H is Two Cardinals p. 153 ; Mia Cinotti, I pittori bergamaschi del seicento 1, p. 441.). An earlier date has been proposed for the resemblance of the angel figure in this painting and in the figure of Eros in his Musicians However, Howard Hibbard claims that the head of the figure has been repainted in ea ch of the works, and cannot serve as proof for the accurate dating of Saint Francis (Hibbard, Caravaggio p. 287 )
46 works were executed during el Monte 3 int Francis image by 4 The information on this piece currently in Hartford 5 I believe that the Hartford Sain t Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy is an original work by Carav aggio commissioned by del Monte sometime around 1595 and the Costa painting of the same subject is either a copy or a lost work by the artist. When observing this image of Saint Francis, the viewer can see an immediate change and innovation del Monte works; t his painting portrays a sce ne with not one but two figures in full length. The main f igure, Saint Francis wears h is usual and humble brown habit and lies down in a field while being cared for by an angel. An extremely dark background blankets the a bundant vegetation, affirming that this is an outdoor night scene. This scene is so dark, in fact, that the figures gather ing around the fire in the background are barely visible 6 The softer and light colored backgrounds of the Fortune Teller and Cardsharps have 3 These two works, Saint Francis and Musicians were executed within a relatively close time to each other (a year or less). 4 Luigi Spezzaf Novit sul Caravaggio: Saggi e Contributi (Milan, 1975), p. 113. is mentioned in Cardinal d Frommel, Francesco Maria del Monte Storia dell'arte p. 34) 5 For an in John T. Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings 20 01, pp. 40 50, 339 poss Sai works by the artist that serve as possibilities for the Costa work, one in the Udine museum (possibly a copy) and the other in Carpineto 6 In viewing only digital reproductions of this work I am unable to make out the figures within their setting of sheer darkness. Th e only indication of these figures is the small fire burning just above th e left knee/shin of the saint. Therefore, I consider the figures in the foreground to indicate the number of figures that this work contains, which, in full length, is still a compositional variation and innovation for Caravaggio during this time.
47 first (outdoor ) night painting of h is career in addition to his first por trayal of full length figures. The most significant innovation presented in this image however, is not the scene setting elements the rendering of night or representation of more than one figure in full length but th e actual subject matter itself: t relig ious subject. Chapter 2 examined the effects of the Counter Re formation and the strong encouragement for images of religious suffering and piety during this period ; these ideas are epitomized by the artist for the very first time in this painting. Caravaggio has represented one of the most beloved Counter Reformation saints, Saint Francis of Assisi 7 Within a setting of extreme darkness, an illuminated light is cast on to the two figures Saint Francis and the angel who rest in the foreg round. The saint is in a reclining position, with eyes closed in ecstasy, ready to receive the stigmata. The angel partially covered with a garment resembling a toga, kneels down to hold th e saint. 8 The model for the figure of th e angel is Mario Minniti, also the model for Boy with a Basket of Fruit and the Eros figure of The Musicians 9 Minniti (1577 1640) makes 7 A later images were of religious subject matter which would inevitably dominate his oeuvre. 8 This white toga wor ks; his earlier Sick Bacchus and Boy with Basket of Fruit and his later Musicians Bacchus Rest on the Flight to Egypt and Boy Bitten By a Lizard are a few examples. Thus, it is clear that the artist was using earlier ideas from previous works while pai nting under del Monte, combining them with more widely accepted Counter Reformation subject matter (such as Saint Francis). Caravaggio continued to implement his past techniques throughout his career. Skills developed by the artist during the del Monte yea rs proved to be indispensible artistic innovations used in his later monumental religious commissions (religious subjects, full length multi figural compositions, chiaroscuro effects), a reason his years with del Monte were so critical for the artist. 9 Vittorio Sgarbi, Caravaggio (Milan, 2007), p. 52.
48 frequent appearances ime because he was also living in Palazzo Madama with the artist until 1600. Creighton Gilbert claims that the Mattei brothers (Cardinal Mattei especially) are responsible for providing the artist with important artistic instruction regarding images of religious subject matter, but he still acknowledges two important Saint Francis image: it displays the stigmata as a form of light as opposed to bodily wounds, and it presents Saint Francis in an unconscious state. He even admits that The best case for a complex religious communication for the young Caravaggio, before his Mattei connection, is probably in the Ecstasy of Saint Francis in Hartford. 10 Helen Langdon also mentions that past paintings of Saint Francis usually present the saint kneeling but Caravaggio instead chose to show him lying down on the ground 11 This portrayal could be considered another innovation in his work in which he emphasizes the suffering and dramatic moment of the saint, not through visible physical wounds but through bodily expression Although this is a religious image, it was privately commissioned. Del Monte perhaps commissioned this work as a play on (or emulation of) his own name: Francesco or Francis. Christoph Frommel has taken this idea further by suggesting that 10 Gilbert, Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals p. 153. Maf feo Barberini (a later patron of Caravaggio ), mentions that the stigmata may seem like wounds, but openings whence th e heart breathes out its flames Storia della Letteratura Italiana vol. V (Milan, 1967), pp. 794, 153). 11 Langdon, Caravaggio: A Life p. 126. Earlier examples of Saint Francis kneeling while receiving the stigmatization are The Stigmatization of St. Francis by Giotto, (1319 1328 Florence, Bard i Chapel, Church of Santa Croce ) and The Stigmatization of St Francis by Jan van Eyck (1428 29 Philadelphia Museum of Art). An example of the saint standing is presented in Saint Francis in Ecstasy by Giovanni Bellini (1480, New York, The Frick Collection).
49 the image of the saint portrays a physical likeness to the cardinal himself. 12 I find this likeness difficult to accept using solely v isual evidence in the painting. Due to the natural horizontal position, eyes closed, with part of his face cast in shadow), a clear view of his face is obstructed. When of the cardinal in 1616, a true likeness cannot be seen, which may be due to its later date. While I believe there is not enough evidence to prove this as a portrait of the cardi nal, for the likeness as Saint Francis would not be out of the question. In this painting the cardinal has convinced the artist to expand his techniques, c omposition, and subject matter. Although del Monte expressed admiration for the artis ular partial length subjects ( Fortune Teller and Cardsharps ), he encouraged the artist to execute a religious scene. There are many possible reasons for this; the cardinal encouraging the artist to expand and practice his brush toward a more widely appreciated subject matter, in hopes to receive a prestigious public commission is not an unlikely possibility. 13 Public commissions at this time always exhibited Counter Reformation religious subjects. When observing the first and last paintings within Car unlikely that they were even created by the same hand. From a modest canvas (64.2 x 51.4 cm) displaying a secular image of a single half length youth figure in Boy Peeling 12 Frommel, Storia dell'arte, p. 15. The physical likeness has been explored, but it has not been widely accepted that the saint is a portrait of del Monte. 13 Saint Francis was the ideal saint of the Counter Reformation era. Helen Langdon in Caravaggio: A Life rromeo made a pilgrimage to Mount La Verna in Tuscany, where Francis,
50 Fruit to a larger canvas (106.0 x 179.5 cm) representing four mature figures of Counter Reformation suffering engulfed in extreme chiaroscuro in the Martyrdom of Saint Ursula (1610, Galleria di Palazzo Zevallos Stigliano Naples, F ig. 23), there must have been a subjects. It is arguably the momen t that he paints this work, Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy for Cardinal del Monte. Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto : The Alchemist and His Apprentice Another type of image introduced by the artist during the later 1590s is his Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto a work Saint Francis has been much debated by scholars in regard to its dating and attribution. It remained virtually unknown as a work by Caravaggio until recently and for good reason. The first p erson to mention and attribute this painting to Caravaggio (and the only Caravaggio source with access to its location) was his biographer Gian Pietro Bellori. 14 The painting is located in situ at the Villa Boncompagni Ludovisi (also known as the Villa Aur ora ) in Rome It was executed on the ceiling of a fairly small space, a room 15 This area was primarily a pri vate sector of the summer villa; thus it is possible that even the few visitors who ventured inside t he villa n ever viewed the work. That said, this work was not always accepted as a work by Caravaggio. For example, Howard Hibbard considered it a lost work or a work that was 14 Spike, Caravaggio : a catalogue of p aintings 2001, p. 66. Even at present day, this villa is private and closed to the public, making it difficult to view this work. 15 Graham ( Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane p. 159).
51 erroneously attributed to the artist by Bellori. 16 However, recently it has been g enerally accepted to be a work by the artist, a view supported by stylistic evidence, 1989. 17 Bellori mentions that Cardinal del Monte acquired a villa near the Porta Pinciana in the fall of 1596. 18 He then sold the villa to Pietro Aldobrandini in September 1597 and later reacquired the property in April 1599. 19 Catherine Puglisi, Helen Langdon, Andrew Graham property. 20 acquisition, between the fall of 1596 and th e fall of 1597. In 1599 Caravaggio would have been preoccupied with his public works for the C ontarelli Chapel in the French c hurch in Rome, San Luigi dei Francesi, executing his Calling of Saint Matthew and Martyrdom of Saint Matthew paintings, which were commissioned to him on July 23, 16 Hibbard, Caravaggio p. 336 Hibbard felt that there was insufficient evidence to compare it to other Caravaggio works because it is a ceiling painting that was not painted in fresco. 17 Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of paintings 2001, p. 69 For more information on the restoratio n and technical analysis, see M. Bernardini, G. Gaggi, and A. Marcone. nel Casino Ludovisi a Roma. Il cosmo in una stanza, Art et dossier 60 (1991): 18 21. 18 Gian Pietro Bellori, itetti moderni Rome. Ed. G. Einaudi. (Turin, 1976 ), p. 233. 19 Zygmunt Il cardinale Francesco Maria del Monte : 1549 1626 p. 117. 20 Catherine Puglisi, Caravaggio p. 110; Langdon, Caravaggio: A Life p. 128; Graham Dixon, Caravaggio : A Life Sacred and Profane p. 159. Puglisi gives the later date and claims that Caravaggio 1609) ceiling frescoes in the Farnese Gallery, The Love of the Gods (1598 1601). However, Caravaggio and small ceiling work that has been discussed only by Bellori (the only one with access to this building during this time). Therefore, I would have to disagree that it was in competition with a larger, more public ceiling work.
52 1599. 21 Had he painted the ceiling for the villa at the later date of 1599, that would have given him approximately two months or so to complete it before his Matthew Cycle. Taking into consideration that Caravaggio had neve r created a ceiling painting before, I believe that a couple of months was simply not enough time for him to complete this work. By examining its visual qualities, the additional time needed for its completion become s clear. Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto presents the viewer with an image of three full length subjects in a completely differen t theme, function, and surface than anything created by Caravaggio thus far. This work is considered an inn oeuvre because this was his first last, and only ceiling painting. He was offered money to paint fresco works in the past but unfortunately never worked in the medium. Although this work was executed in oil (on a plastered barrel vault) it still m imics the fresco tradition. Caravaggio n ever painted in the fresco technique, another reason to attribute Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto to him. This painting is represented on a new surface for the artist, a ceiling instead of a canvas, but the subject matter here is also different. This work does not recall the familiar subjects he painted in the past but instead emphasizes his diversity in style and s ubject matter. This painting is not a still life image or a single figure surrounded by food or fruit, it is not a scene of Roman street life, and i t is not a religious scene either; this is a mythological image that portrays three figures wit hin a pagan and alchemical context. The composition of this image is more complex than his previously discussed Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy The figures are depicted from a viewpoint below and 21 Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of paintings 2001, p. 99.
53 seen on a ceiling vault. Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto, also known as Heaven, Sea, and Hades, are the sons of the god Saturn. They divided the world between themselves, and Caravaggio display s this moment i n his image. Jupiter took the air, Neptune had the sea, and Pluto chose to rule under th e earth, the home of the dead. In the center of the composition, a large celestial sphere that contains the sun and the earth divides the composition of the three figur es. Jupiter is pictured hovering above the other figures on an eagle and rotates the sphere with his hand. A band of zodiac symbols rep resenting the signs of the moon are pictured on the sphere. These signs are known affiliations of alchemy, hence the plac ement of the painting distillery room. Underneath this sphere Neptune is shown on a sea horse, and Pluto is behind the three 22 These figures are portr ayed in a di sotto in su fashion, pictured from below while using the illusion of space and perspectival techniques such as foreshortening. 23 It is possible the cardinal consulted his older brother, Guidobaldo del Mon te (1545 1607), a prominent mathe matician and frequent visitor of Palazzo Madama to aid in these ambitious perspectival aspects that were foreign to Caravaggio. 24 Guidiobaldo wrote on Renaissance visual perspective in his Perspectivae libri sex (Six Books on Perspective) 22 Puglisi, Caravaggio p. 110. 23 Di sotto in su is an Italian term used to describe ceiling paintings that use perspective, foreshortening, and other illusionistic effects 24 For more information on Guidobaldo d el Monte, see Van Helden. Galileo Pro ject Search, 1995. http://galileo.rice.edu/Catalog/NewFiles/monte.html ; Paul L. Rose, "Materials for a Scientific Biography of Guid o baldo del Monte," Actes du XIIe Congr s internationale d'histoire des sciences, Paris 1968, 12 (Paris, 1971): 69 72; and G. Arrighi, "Un grade scienziato italiano Guidobaldo del Monte in alcune carte inedite della Biblioteca Oliveriano di Pesaro," Atti dell'Accademia lucchese di scienze, lettere ed arti 1 2 (1968): 183 99.
54 of 1600. 25 Although completed, Guidobaldo would have been writing the text at this time and also fully aware of visual perspectival understanding. Guidobaldo was also an influence for Galileo, and helped him with his career ; b oth Gu id obaldo and Cardinal d el Monte were strong supporters of Galileo. 26 According to L. Rossi, these three gods are self portraits of the artist. 27 Self representation relates to alchemy and transmutation and this idea wo uld have appealed to Caravaggio; he was notorious for putt ing himself into his own images as we have seen in his Sick Bacchus A lso the god Saturn, the father of the three gods pictured, was the planetary sign for artists. The alchemist Andrea Libavio discussed the transmutation of the elements in 1595, and del Monte had a portrait of him in his laboratory along with many other alchemists and scientists. 28 Many contemporaries and biographers ( Giovanni Baglio ne includ ed) discuss his use of mirrors to execu te self portraits in his work. There is also an eye witness report from 25 Van Helden. Galile o Project 1995. http://galileo.rice.edu/Catalog/NewFiles/monte.html Guidobaldo a lso wrote a manuscript on refraction in water Bacchus the water reflection in Narcissus and oth ers. 26 Al Van Helden. Galileo Project Chronology Galileo Timeline., 1995. http://galileo.rice.edu/chron/galileo.html 27 Arte documentata 8 (1994): 181 84. 28 Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings 2001, p. 69. Spike lists the other scientists: Roger Bacon, Paracelsus (Theophrastus Bombastus Philippus von Hohenheim), Jabir Ibn Haiyan (alchemist who discovered acids and minerals during the Middle Ages), and so on.
55 1597 that describes the fea tures of Caravaggio at the time, which matches the appearances of these three mythological figures. 29 Not onl y did d el Monte persuade the artist to experiment with diverse subjects on alternative surfaces, but it is highly likely that he would have discussed the ideas of alchemy with Caravaggio as well, as it directly pertained to the subject matter of the painti ng and related to the purpose of the room in which it would be seen. 30 M. Calvesi provides a general understanding of the imagery of Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto and its relation to the practice of alchemy. He describes Pla to discussing the four elements ear th, air, fire, an d water and how they were disbursed among the three gods. 31 The three figures of gods could also be physical representations of three of the se elements, earth, air, and water 32 Maria Rzepi ska and Krystyna Malcharek discuss the connection between alchemists and painters: The contact of painters with alchemy and pharmacy had always been lively on account of the procedure of making paints. It is also almost certain that the symbolism of colours, related with the planet s, temperaments, mythological figures, and individual phases of alchemic process, was known to artists. 33 This was perhaps the first time Caravaggio encountered a connection to anyone with this strong a knowledge of alchemy, which could explain his strong c hiaroscuro effects 29 The Burlington Magazine 140 ( 1998): 25 28. 30 Alchemy has been considered a form of dark magic to some, but others such as Spezzaferro consider p. 92). 31 Art et dossier 60 (1991): 23. 32 Graham Dixon discusses that Gerolamo Cardano (1501 76 ), an astronomer, proposed that fire should be left out ( Caravaggio : A Life Sacred and Profane p. 160). 33 Maria Rzepi ska and Krystyna Malcharek, Baroque Painting and Its Ideological Background, Artibus et Historiae 7, 13 (1986): 103, 106.
56 in his paintings: alchemy held contrasts of shading in high regard and considered darkness an important value. 34 In this work, Carava ggio presents ambiguous imagery not extremely profane yet not sacred. In refe rence to this painting, d el were quite apparent. Puglisi n otes that this work relates to d effort as an 35 It is not surprising for del Monte to commission Caravaggio to execute a work of this nature for his alchemy study. This image ep ideas while representing his clear understanding of Counter Reformation strictness. It appears Cardinal del Monte had similar interests to his close friends in the Medici family; Graham Dixon and Langdon have mentioned the similarities of this ceiling to the c hio in Florence 36 Together the cardinal and artist produced an image rarely seen by others in the public sphere, ref l e cting the progressive id eas held by the patron in the privacy of his own home, without ringing the alarm for any conservative authorities such as Clement VIII or Gabriele Paleotti. 37 Had Paleotti actually seen this image he would have expressed his disdain for it and encouraged it to be placed on his image Index Not only does this image depict full nudity, but it also presents pagan mytho logical imagery, or false gods. Paleotti discusses his contempt for imag es specifically of this nature: 34 Ibid, p. 106. 35 Puglisi, Caravaggio p. 112 36 Graham Dixon, Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane p. 160; Langdon, Caravaggio: A Life p. 128. 37 An example of the oppositions to representati ons of alchemy during this time is evident with Giambattista della Porta (1535? 1615). As a well known alchemist in Rome, he was under suspicion of heresy. That mat tered not to progressives like d Natural Magic (first published in 1558), discus sed later in C hapter 6
57 Christ our lord shed his blood in order to e xtinguish their memory totally, and now it seems that many Christians instead of painting that Christ who demolished the Joves and the Junos with the holy cross, are trying to revive their mem ory with chisel and paintbrush. 38 As the codirector of the Accade mia di San Luca with Paleotti himself, del Monte was aware of the disdain for this type of imagery within the church and the public view. This was not the praised Counter Reformation imagery like that of Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy but instead repre sents the interests of the Medici family and del Monte and his intellectual circle of friends. Del Monte cleverly kept up appearances by containing his progressive interests of alchemy and pagan mythology in a private sector on the outskirts of Rome. The cardinal convinced Caravaggio to expand his artistic horizons in attempting to execute foresh ortened figures seen from below ( di sotto in su ). The fact that this villa was secluded and off l imits to most of the population poses a credible reason as to why Caravaggio would have been willing to attempt such a work o utside of his style and skill. s understood different projects, from alchemical transmutation to pagan imagery that would have offended Counter Reformation zealots such as Cardinal Paleotti. Althoug h this image would have failed to attract those in the public religious sphere, it would have appealed to private patrons and art connoisseurs such as the Medicis and Vincenzo Giustiniani. 38 Quote from Gabriele Paleotti found in Paola Barocchi [ed.], manierismo e controriforma. Vol. II, (Bari: G. Laterza 1961), p. 290 ; and Robb M : The Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 158.
58 Del Monte helped Caravaggio improve his trade to work both angles o f the art market, private and public. Medusa : Catering to the Tastes of the Medicis Another subject of Greek mythology Medusa from 1597 is the final work I discuss in this chapter. 39 As mentioned earlier, this is a work executed in oil on canvas but it was then s tretched over a convex wooden surface. T he composition and function of the Medusa are different than the ceiling work. This work was commissioned by del Monte, but he gave it to the Grand Duke Ferdinando 40 It is possible that del Monte brought this work to Florence himself in July 1598; otherwise he could have had it sent there. 41 The grand duke displayed this object in his armory along with his knights in armor, exhibiting it not simp ly as a painting but as a utilitarian object for protection in warfare or possibly as parade armor 42 The subject of the image is the monster Medusa, th e only mortal of the three Gorgons. According to the ancient Greek myth, anyone who looked at Medusa was turned into stone. Perseus sought to defeat the Gorgon and was equipped with a mirrored shield given to him by Athena, the goddess of war. This object allowed him to 39 This image of Medusa is a copy of a shield Caravaggio signed and executed in 1596, now in a private collection. It is also known as Murtola named after the poet Giovanno Battista Murtola who wrote a poem of this subje ct which has been reprinted in M. Marini, Caravaggio, Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (Rome: 1989), p. 404; found in Langdon, Caravaggio: A Life p. 120; Artibus et Historiae Vol. 25, No. 49 (2004): 175 184. 40 This work could have been a wedding gift for the d uke. 41 Il card inale Francesco Maria del Monte: 1549 1626 p. 96. 42 Langdon, Caravaggio: A Life p. 119.
59 hea d and then gave it to Athena for her to put on her shield to aid in battle. Caravaggio chose to depict the monster without the presence of her def eater Perseus, which leaves the viewer with nothing but her decapitated head and her blood gushing from out of the bottom of her neck. This was painted for a shield as soldiers would often put images like this on their shield to intimidate their enemies taking after the myth that Athena put it on her shield This work is one that displays extreme violence, an image that is alm ost unsettling for the viewer. Displaying violence was a popular artistic tool during the Baroque period, often providing the shocking Baroque moment a clo se up of head the m oment it has been decapitated. I t floats in thin air i n front of a green background and is enclosed in a decorated trim around the edges. The head of the monster is composed of snakes twisting about as she lets out a screa m of horror. Although Medusa was a female figure, the artist has once again used his own face to represent the monster. This image was created on a convex surface, but Caravaggio has intriguingly presented the figure in a concave form, evident by the shado w behind the head. Scholars such as Zygmunt mention the Medusa was probably another Medusa image by Leonardo 43 While I do not believe that Caravaggio saw this original work by Leonardo, it is very l ikely that del Monte did because he served in the Medici court and was the Medici representative in Rome and therefore had access to their collection. It is also possible that d el Monte 43 Il card inale Francesco Maria del Monte: 1549 1626 p. 96. This work was also executed for the Medici family. Although now lost, it is possible to understand what it may have looked like through the copy engraving by Cornelis Cort ( 1533 regarding this and other treasures in the Medici collection, see M ina Gregori, in La Magnificenza alle Corte dei Medici, exhibition catalogue (F lorence: 1997), no. 59, pp. 101 2.
60 Treatises on Painting or was, at the very le ast familiar with As a diplomat and administrator for the interests of the grand duke of Tuscany (Fe r 1549 1609 obvious. Del Monte and the Medicis also held fav or to the French during their competition with the Spanish over power and authority during this time. Del Monte was a descendant of the French Bourbon dynasty, and the Medicis were pro French as well. 1519 89) was the q ueen of France, and after the death of ( 1541 87) Ferdinando sought a quick marriage to hold his newly gained position as grand d uke. H e aimed to marry his 1565 1637 ) in 1587. Ca therine supported the marriage and wanted the Medicis to gain an alliance with the French during the French Spanish struggle for papal power. French sentiments had a direct e endeavors. The French churc h in Rome, San Luigi dei Francesi, conveniently located in the area of Palazzo Madama, was in need of an artist to execute religious images of Saint Matthew for its Contarelli Chapel named after the French cardinal Mathieu Cointrel Del Monte was the clos e personal friend and political ally of the Crescenzi year 1585. The French connections of del Monte and the Medicis helped Caravaggio receive this large public com mission. As protector of the Accademia di San Luca with Gabriele Paleotti, ( del Monte initially taking the position in 1595 and maintaining it until his death), it is possible del Monte helped Caravaggio receive this public commission so
61 the artist could b e eligible to join the academy; a public commission was a prerequisite for entry. The t hree works previously discussed Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy ; Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto ; and the Medusa s hield all commi ssioned by d el Monte, present a ubject, and surface material Caravaggio had expanded on his previous imagery of youths with fruit and flowers and Roman street scenes to portray works of religious suffering, mythological power, and Baroque violence. These artistic innovations only continue to develop during the image, Saint Francis proved to be a pioneering project for the artist, initiating his new fou nd niche as a religious painter. Now that I have discussed some compositional and s array includes an examination of such works as The Musicians The Lute Player (both versions, F igs. 24 and 25) Martha and Mary Magdalene (F ig. 26) and Love Victorious (F ig. 27)
62 CHAPTER 5 INSTRUMENTS IN CARAV By the time Caravaggio arrived at the Palazzo Madama, Del Monte had assembled one of the most complete collections of fine musical instruments in Italy. 1 The imagery discussed in C subject s compositions, and surf ace materials, from genre scenes to religion and mythology, b ut in what additional ways did del Monte impact the artist and his work? In a social aspect, de l Monte kept the company of many intellectuals at his residence poets, musicians, mathematicians, philosophers, scientists, and other s Gian Vincenzo Pinelli of Padua (1535 1601) a humanist who influenced Galileo, along with his sec retary, Paolo Gualdo (1553 1621), a man who possibly commissioned a work from Caravaggio, serve as examples of visitors at 2 Caravaggio was most likely present during social gatherings at Palazzo Madama with these types of individuals. This chapter focuses on the achievements of the artist by examining three private works, two commissioned by Cardinal d el Monte and the third by Vincenzo Giustiniani. In particular, these works interest s in m usic manifested as well as his acquaintance with a ctual musicians, such as the figure in The Lute Player Specific paintings examined in this chapter are The Musicians and the two versions of The Lute Player 1 Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings 2001, p. 50. 2 Wazbinski, Il card inale Francesco Maria del Monte: 1549 1626 31; and Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings 2001, p. 50, fn 149. Spike mentions that G
63 father, Vinc enzo Galilei (1520 91). Vincenzo was a prominent music composer, music theorist, and lute player. He often visited del Monte at Palazzo Madama and was part of Madama, musical performances were, naturally, reoccurring events in this residence. For example, in a letter of 1603, the musician and music composer, discusses musical concerts held in house and villa featuring the f amou s singer Vittoria Archilei. 3 Caravaggio was thus privy to private concerts held in his current residen extensive collection of musical which were commissioned by del Monte and other private patrons. Examples include madriga ls, lutes, violins, guitars, organs, and recorders The artist would have had direct access to many of these inst ruments, and they were often featured in his paintings and enhanced the setting of his compositions. He no longer painted simply a figure with some fruit or flowers; the still life imagery placed within his scene s had become more refined. Del Monte was a musician in his own right and his admiration for music developed at an early age. 4 Later in his life, in 1579, a letter mention s that he sang i n the Spanish 3 Franca Trinchieri soffitto Ricerche di Sto ( 1992 ): 82, also quoted in Langdon, Caravaggio : A Life p. 139. 4 In 1566, when del Monte was just seventeen, a composer named G. Leonardo Primavera dedicated a book of songs to him. ( Spike, Caravaggio 2001, p. 50 )
64 style and also played the guitar. 5 His inventory of 1627 lists thirty seven musical instruments, excluding his storage chest of violas. 6 passion for music had an obvious influence especially on The Musicians and both versions of The Lute Player Scholars such as Elizabeth Cropper and Franca Trinchieri Camiz their connection to the theme of music. 7 Although del Monte was not the only music lover in late sixteenth cen tury Rome to co mmission a work from Caravaggio Vincenzo Giustinian i also did, for example the artist never painted musical subject s after leaving residence. Whi le Caravaggio was staying with d el Monte he did, however paint one for Vincenzo Giu stiniani, which was his first version of The Lute Player 8 The Musicians : Musical Performance and Allegory in the Del Monte Household created for del Monte is The Musicians first discovered by Denis Mahon i n 1952. 9 This image presents the viewer with a secular music scene with four figures: three male youths and one allegorical continued experiment ation with compositiona l arrangements and subject matter, as it 5 Spezzaferro, cultura del C 9/10 (1971): 68. 6 9/10 (1971): 44 45. 7 Caravaggio pp. 45 56 and Franca Metropolitan Museum Journal Vol. 26 (1991): 213 226. 8 Love Victorious with del Monte, it is not a musical scene or subject. I discuss this in more detail later and propose maintains strong connections to del Monte. 9 Keith Christiansen, A Caravaggio Red iscovered: The Lute Player (NY, NY, 1990), p. 57.
65 was executed close to the time of Saint Francis but presents its own unique innovations in comparison with the religious scene discussed in Chapter 4 In the center of The Musicians a figure stares off into the distance his mouth slightly open while tuning a lute. 10 The boy on the right wears a white gar ment, half draped over his body and reads from a part book with his back to the viewer ; this was the first time Caravaggio portrayed a figure in this position. 11 A boy in the background holds a cornetto ( a type of horn ) while making direct eye contact with the viewer, his mouth partly open as well. To the left of the composition is a you ng boy with wings and a quiver. His identity has been established as Eros (also known as Cupid in Roman contexts). This was a new artistic endeavor for the artist, and it is likely that he sought collection 12 The Musicians with Paolo Allegory of Music (1556 67, Bibliote ca Nazionale Marciana, Venice, F ig. 28) customary for women to represent allegorical imagery, but Carava ggio has chosen to 10 the same ins played, a common instrument at the time. For more information on the lute as a sixteenth century musical in A Caravaggio Rediscovered : The Lute Player 1990. 11 The part book is now undecipherable due to damage, but Christiansen claims that it is most likely contained music from J acques Arcadelt and his circle ( A Caravag gio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 28). 12 Del Monte had at least four other images of musical subjects in his collection, and two were of concerts Christiansen discusses this in more detail in his A Caravaggio Rediscovered 26. These works include an image of Orpheus by Bassano, a scene of Parnassus by Antiveduto Grammatica, and concert Fr hw collection of works.
66 portray males instead. 13 models or figures, or was the preference of the patron. According to scholars Keith Christiansen and Beverly Louise Brown The Musicians does not depict a realistic concert but instead displays an allegory of music and lo ve indicated by the winged figure Eros, picking grapes. 14 W ine (here in the form of grapes) accompanied with music is a prevalent notion and is discussed by Cesare Ripa (1 560 1622) in his Iconologia (Moral Emblems) of 1593 text was dedicated to Cardinal d el Monte proposing an answer as to why the cardinal would have wanted an allegorical figure with grapes in this musical scene 15 Although schol ars generally accept an allegorical interpretation of this work John Spike assesses the subject matter as a preparation for a n actual concert, evident by the central fi gure tuning his instrument. Spike also suggests that the image references theater and t hat the pictured Eros is not a convincing allegorical element but rather a n inadequate portrayal of a mythological figure, like a young boy dressed for a role in play 16 I believe that this image is an attempt by the artist to combine allegorical iconograph y into a portrayal of a music al s cene at the patron If the composition and figures appear in a posed or artificially constructed manner, it is because they were; the artist 13 Gilbert, Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals pp. 118 121; Hibbard, Caravaggio pp. 33 36; for more Paintings Jour nal of the American Musicological Society 14 (1961): 184 195. 14 Christiansen, A Caravaggio Rediscovered : The Lute Player p. 57 ; Brown, The Genius of Rome 1592 1623 p. 26. 15 Cesare Ripa, (Rome, 1603), p. 345; Christiansen, A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 10; Spike Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings 2001, p. 54. 16 Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings 2001, p. 54.
67 relied on live models. By depicting the figure of Eros with grapes among yo uthful musicians, the artist creates a hybrid setting of the allegorical and the real. Although the three youthful musicians are not allegorical, they do not re present likenesses of actual musicians known at the time either 17 Despite the ir lack of music al training Caravaggio has incorporated instruments to properly set the scene and convince the viewer otherwise The models for the figures resemble one another and have been identified as Mario Minniti ( the central figure t uning his lute ) or various self portraits (slightly altered) of the artist himself, especially the figure in the back with the cornetto, gazing at the viewer. 18 Caravaggio painted these models from life separately and directly onto the canvas. This composit ion was therefore intellectually created and arranged by superimposing each separate figure onto the canvas to create the musical group. This method caused compositional issues for the setting, leaving the realistic sense of space in the canvas undefined. For example, it is difficult to distinguish which leg the lutenist reveals to the viewer, as much leg with his back turned T his work has been criticized biographers and others for its compositional inaccuracies, but the artist still attempted to experiment and tackle this complex composi tion. 19 By work ing through these complications, it helped 17 Lute Player which I discuss next. 18 Seward, Caravaggio p. 43 ; Christiansen, A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 57. For more information on self portraiture and self representatio n by the artist, see Michael Fried, The Moment of Caravaggio (Princeton, NJ, 2010). 19 due to his reliance on models instead of borrowing from antiquity or previous works, as well as his lack of disegno and drawing. Spike quotes one ns depends upon the imagination
68 Caravaggio practice artistic challenges that would eventually im prove his compositional inadequacies. The Counter Reformation was a period that venerated monumental religious and history paintings, which typically feature d multiple full length figures in action, primarily exhibiting dramatic religious suffering. Carava ggio would establish himself as a master, and in his later works, such as his Entombment (1602 3, Pina coteca Vaticana, Vatican City, F ig. 29), he displayed the ability to conquer complex compositional arrangements and multi ple figures with the utmost preci sion. Because Caravaggio had no formal academic training, his years spent with del Monte were crucial for improving the skills that would later land him prestigious commissions. The Giustiniani and Del Monte Lute Players Another image with a musical theme The Lute Player of 1596 was either commis sioned by Vincenzo Giustiniani or given to him as a gift from del Monte. 20 Sharing a passion for music with the cardinal, Giustiniani often attended performances at Palazzo Madama where the two men discussed music 21 to a music school as a child, and he later wrote a Discourse on Music in 1628 22 It is possible he came into contact with the artist while Caravaggio was painting The Musicians and wanted a musically themed painting for himself. At first glance The Lute Player resembles compositions: a single half length figure seated and surrounded by still life objects. Boy and not t Giulio Mancini, Considerazioni sulla pittura 161 9 21 [ed. A. Mar ucchi, 2 vols., Rome:1956, 225] in Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of p ainting s 2001, p. 90. 20 Wa b i ski, Il cardinale F rancesco Maria del Monte: 1549 1626 p. 606. 21 Cropper, The Burlington Magazine p. 450. 22 Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings 2001, p. 54; Christiansen, A Caravaggio Redis c overed: The Lute Player p. 28.
69 Peeling a Fruit (1593) and Si ck Bacchus (1593) are examples of these similar compositions. In the center of T he Lute Player a y oung boy sits wearing a white He has an open mouth, as if he is s inging a song to his audience (the viewer). Franca Trinchieri Camiz has conducted a thorough study on the figure identifying him as the Spanish castrato (soprano) Pedro Montoya, a singer of the papal choir at the Sistine Chapel between 1592 and 1600. 23 According to another letter Montoya was a res and the cardinal was seriously capabilities. 24 Giustiniani was most likely an audience member during musical performances at Palazzo Madama, probably generating his interest in commissioning this work if in fact it was not a gift from del Monte In The Lute Player t he musician sits behind a marble tabletop covered with various objects. To the left is a highly rendered carafe hol ding different types of flowers placed next to pears, cucumbers, and other fruits. Scholars have mentioned a lost work by Car avaggio that also featured a carafe with flowers very similar to the one featured in this work that was supposedly commissioned by del Monte; the lost still life could have served as a precursor to the carafe included in The Lute Player 25 Directly in fro nt of the musician is a violin that rest s slightly on top of a madrigal, the o pening lines of the 23 Franca Trinchieri Camiz, Informal to Formal Portraiture, Artibus et Historiae ( 1988): 171 186. This ca strato singer has a very androgynous persona, so much so that Bellori mistakes him for a woman. (Christiansen, A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 32; G.P. Bellori, ( Rome, 1672 ) p. 204). 24 Del is explained by Christiansen, A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. Informal to Formal Portraiture, Artibus et Historiae p. 172. 25 Sgarbi, Caravaggio p. 62.
70 madriga l reading (You know I love you), with music by Jacob Arcadelt ( c a .1507 68) a Franco Flemish musical composer 26 The sitter for this image lived with del Monte, and the objects surrounding him thus be denied, even if it was possibly commissioned by a different patron. Baglion e c laims that Caravaggio considered The Lute Player his piece that he ever 27 This description is significant in that this work is set apart from previous renditions of similar c ompositions and subject matter. The artist has taken his skill for rendering still life fruit s and flowers and single figured half length imagery to a higher level in this painting, presenting the figur e engaged in musical activity. The viewer can almost hear the musician playing his lute while singing his mouth partly opened and surrounded by vanitas symbols and musical imagery. The artist created an intimate dialogue betw een the figure and the viewer, which is missing in his previous Boy Peeling Fruit or Sick Bacchus extensiv e musical instrument collection, as well as his acquaintance with a r eal musician, Pedro Montoya, contributed greatly to the overall success of this image. Del Monte wanted a Montoya image for his very own, and Caravaggio would paint one The second version of The Lute Player was created for Cardina l del Mon te, shortly In the past, before this second image was discovered, scholars 26 Seward, Caravaggio p. 43. 27 Quoted in Sgarbi, Caravaggio p. 62.
71 attributed the first version to del Monte. 28 At first glance these two works look very similar: Montoya is the sitter and holds a lute. But the differen ces in the two paintings are in the details and slight stylistic changes, such as the varia nt contrast and the brushstroke 29 In the second work, the tabletop is no longer marbled but covered with a red Turkish style carpet, and the carafe of flowers and fr uit have been eliminated. 30 The notable difference in this composition is not the elimination of the highly rendered objects from the previous image but the inclusion of additional objects: more musical instruments are on the table and there is a finch insi de a birdcage hanging in the top left corner. A spinettina (a small spinet, piano, or harpsichord) takes the pos ition of the carafe of flowers and a recorder is placed horizontally across the central foreground on the table. The madrigals also differ from the previous version 31 Christiansen discusses whether these pictorial innovations were allegorical or simply decorative props for the setting; the instruments and the songbird especially 28 Both Bellori and Baglione (Baglione, Le Vite de' Pittori, Scultori, Architetti 1642, p. 123) state that del Monte had a painting of a lute player in his inventory, although this may have been confused with Lute Players in 1787 but considered the d el Monte version a copy. (See von Ramdohr, Ueber Mahlerei und Bildhauerarbeit in Rom fuer Liebhaber des Schoenen in der Kunst ( Leipzig, 1787) ) M ahon would later attribute the d el Monte version as an original work by Paragone 3 no. 25 (Jan. 1952): 20 31. 29 See Christiansen for the stylistic variations between the two Lute Player versions. 30 Christiansen describes this as a n ( A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 60 ) 31 X rays of the del Monte version reveal that fruit is pictured underneath the spinettina and that initially his version was very similar to the Giustiniani version ( A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 36); See the appendix in Christiansen for the Italian text and Englis h translation for the madrigals of each image ( A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player pp. 90 91 ) Del Monte probably had these iconographic elements changed because he did not care much for still life imagery, as he had only 6 still life images out of his inventory of 705 works.
72 Iconologia 32 Ripa discusses the nightin gale as a symbol of music because of its voice. Caravaggio has depicted a finch instead of a nightingale, but according to Christiansen both birds were popular songbirds in the seventeenth century. Although Caravaggio has not transmitted the exact allegori cal iconography of writings for The Lute Player imagery as well as for The Musicians In his earlier work, The Musicians we see a group of youths with no official musical training, surrounded by all the musical paraphernalia needed to perform musical entertainment and convince the viewer otherwise. In the two versions of The Lute Player we see a bona fide musician in an intimate setting, mimicking an actual concert that would have been performed at Palazzo Madama The three private commissions discussed in this chapter present the viewer with objects Caravaggio encountered in del these musical instruments and used them in his composition not only to tell the story of each image but also to create balance and harmony within these experimental compositions. Although the artist used simi lar objects in each of these works, he utilized them in various ways to correspond to the different subject matter and composition in each instance. 32 Christiansen, A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 41; Ripa, Iconologia overo Descrittione p. 345.
73 CHAPTER 6 SCIENCE IN THE DEL M ONTE HOUSEHOLD Cardinal d musical instruments were not the only dev ices depicted in Carav athematical and scientific objects such as mirrors, compasses, and astral globes were also pictured. Gilbert even suggests that del Monte had a stronger interest in natural science than in music. 1 Given the close r elation ship of d the scientific prodigy Galileo, the Palazzo Madama must have served as a vortex for meetings between lovers of music, art, and science. Del Monte was the Medici representative in Rome and also, like his b rother, a supporter of Galileo. As someone with close ties to the Medici, Galileo visited Palazzo Madama on more than one occasion during his travels to Rome. One can speculate that Galileo and Caravaggio crossed paths with each other, although this cannot be proven. 2 Even if they never actually met, del Monte could have acted as the intercessor between ideas. 3 The two images discussed in this chapter are Martha and Mary Magd alene and Love Victorious Through these images, it is evident that Caravaggio had similar access scientific objects as he had with his musical instruments. interest in science and its subsequent effect on Caravaggio has been previously discussed in C hapter 4 with the Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto ceiling painting. M any scholars, such as Antonio Saggio, Michael John Gorman, Peter Robb, Christoph 1 Gilbert, Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals p. support of Galileo is the most significant thing he ever did in his life, according to Gilbert. 2 Peter su M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 64); Spike states that Caravaggio and Caravaggio: a catalogue of p a intings 2001, p. 15). 3
74 Frommel, and Luigi Spezzaferro, have made a connection between science and art in del Frommel lists more than fifty 4 Del Monte also expressed his admiration for the field of science by hanging portraits of famous scientists on his walls. 5 R ecently the British artist and art critic David Hockney proposed that Renaissance and Baroque artists used a device known as the camera obscura to create their paintings. 6 The camera obscura is a n optical device that projects an image onto a surface. The image would appear upside down but with accurate coloring and perspective. By using this device with a concave mirror, the image could be projected works. Taking into a ccount that Caravaggio appears not to have used preliminary drawin gs for his paintings in addition to his erratic perspectival and compositional 7 Although has been rejected by many, his proposal shows that 4 Antonio Saggio, Lo Strumento di Caravaggio History: New Light on the Hockney Leonardo Vol. 36, No. 4 (2003): 295 301; Peter Robb, M : The Man Who Became Caravaggio ; Frommel, Storia dell'arte ; Luigi Spezzaferro ; Frommel, 45 47. 5 See previous, Chapter 4, fn 28. 6 David Hockney, Secret Knowledge: rediscovering the lost techniques of the old masters (NY, NY, 2001). 7 Michael John Gorman states that Hockney claims artists would either trace or incise lines on the canvas Leonardo Vol. 36, No. 4 (2003): 295). Subtle incising li paintings, but applying this thesis to his work still lacks evidence. Also, serious art historians have yet to fully accept the Hockney thesis.
75 scholars are very much concerned with connecting art and science during this period, most likely stimulated by the earlier works of Leonardo da Vinci. 8 Despite the lack of evidence for the camera obscura, it is quite obvious that Caravaggio did experiment with mirrors, as I have discussed previously. Langdon notes Natural Magic in 1568 but was reprinted many 9 We do not know nal del Monte would have had this book in his household and could have explained it to him. This knowledge of mirrors and scientific tools by the artist is implemented more literally in subsequent works; in addition to depicting many reflected surfaces tha t hold water, wine, and other liquids, he also placed mirrors and compasses directly within his compositions as didactic objects for his narratives. oil) was most abundant throughout his stay with del Monte: beginning with the carafe of flowers in Boy Bitten by a Lizard (1 596, National Gallery, London, F ig. 30) and continuing with the carafe in the first version of The Lute Player (1596) the wine jar and glass in the Uffizi Bacchus (1596, Uffizi Florence, F ig. 31), the oil jar in Penitent Magdalene and perhaps most vividly in his Narcissus 8 Martin Kemp is a leading scholar on the artist Leonardo d a Vinci and has published many texts connecting art and science; Martin Kemp, The Science of Art: optical themes in western art from Brunelleschi to Seurat (New Haven, CT, 1990); Martin Kemp, Seen/unseen: art, science, and intuition from Leonardo to the H ubble Telescope (NY, NY, 2006); Martin Kemp, Visualizations: the nature book of art and science (Berkeley, CA, 2000). 9 Langdon, Caravaggio: A L ife p. 123.
76 Antica, Rome, F ig. 32). The only other image with a similar represe ntation is seen later in his Supper at Emmaus which is a meal scene displaying a table crowded with objects; thus the reflective glass is less noticeable or prominent here than in his earlier works. An argument can be made that Caravaggio was learning abo ut water refr action and reflective surfaces and how to depict them in his pain tings from Guidobaldo and the cardinal. 10 Caravaggio, in fact, has made the comment that still life imagery is just as complicated to paint as the human form. 11 Martha, Mary, and the Mirror Caravaggio presents a different type of reflective object in his Martha and Mary Magdalene of 1598, which was commissioned for Ottavio Costa. 12 As mentioned Caravaggio does not execute self portraiture in Martha and Mary Magdalene but instead includes an actual mirror in his composition. The biblical figure of Mary Magdalene, the sister of Lazarus and Martha, was the patron saint of prostitutes. The represent ation of this religious figure would have been a popular subject during the Counter Reformation, exhibiting moral instruction for the pro stitutes on the streets of Rome the very social circle that Sixtus V and Clement VIII wished to reform. Caravaggio port rays Mary Magdalene front and center and elegantly dressed in a purple dress with vivid red sleeves Her head turns to her right in a three quarters view and gestures toward her sister Martha, who has messy hair and is much more modestly 10 Van Helden. Galileo Project http://galileo.rice.edu/Catalog/NewFiles/monte.html 11 Robb, M: The Man Who Became Caravaggio in Discorsi sulle arti e sui mestieri ed. by Anna Banti (Florence, 1981 ), pp. 42, 14. 12 This painting has been copied many times, but the painting in Detroit is now generally accepted as the original.
77 dressed. Mary uses her right hand to pull an orange blossom close to her chest. 13 Martha leans toward Mary and the sisters exchange gazes, while Martha makes a counting gesture with her hands. Spike claims that Caravaggio uses these polarities between the two women to repres ent the active versus the contemplative life. 14 Martha is humbly dressed and displays an active life of difficult labor, while Mary reveals anything but. The two women are further separated by the cast of light on Mary, who is almost fully illuminated, whil e aside from her hands most of Martha is cast in shadow. Martha appear s to play a subordinate role to Mary in the composition. The right side of the composition is occupied by a fancy, dark large convex Venetian mirror containing a reflection, as Mary holds it up with her left hand. 15 This curved surface. The chiaroscuro and dark background make it difficult to identify the wall that su pports the back of the mirror, t hus Mary appears to hold it up on her own so Martha can see and garments and also a window which is not pict ured in the painting. On the table before the two women is a cosmetic jar with a sponge and a comb made of ivory, indicating the symbols 13 in particular resembles Caravaggio mage of the prostitute and model for many of his works, Felide Melandroni in his Portrait of a Courtesan (1597, previously in the Kaiser Friedrich Museum in Berlin, destroyed in 1945). 14 Spike, Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings style and composition for this work, notin Medusa and Allegory of Music 15 Medusa image. ( Ca ravaggio: A Life p. 123).
78 ess before her conversion. The subject of this work indicated by her richly adorned garments and the objects on the table. Caravaggio is again making use of the objects found within d el household. and compositional arrangement s but Caravaggio has placed the mirror in such a way to complete the composition, providing symmetry for the arrangement. As the mai n subject, Mary occupies the center of the composition. The large mirror takes up the right side of the composition, complementing the left side taken up by Martha. If the mirror were not pictured, the composition would appear too heavy on the left side an d would lose its symmetrical balance. If Caravaggio would have simply omitted the mirror and shifted the composition to maintain its symmetry, Mary would then lose her central position and therefore her role as the more important leading figure of the sce ne would also be lost. 16 While the mirror has been utilized as a compositional element by the artist, it can also be seen as a tool for the narrative as well. It symbolizes while also representing her vision after her conversion, thus fusing t he polarities embodied by each of the sisters together into one single object. 17 16 illumination, expensive dress, heightened posture, and gesture. 17 t o f vision is discussed by Spike ( Caravaggio: a catalogue of p aintings 2001, p. 88 ) ; Frederick Cummins claims that the light reflected in the mirror is a symbol of ( Cummins, ersion of the The Burlington Magazine Vol. 116, No. 859 (Oct. 1974): 578 ) Caravaggio has used light as a religious tool in his previous works as well: the previously discussed Saint Francis image and in the Calling of Saint Matthew where the artist portrays a beam of light as if it is coming from Christ toward Matthew.
79 Love Conquers All of is present in one Love Victorious from 1602 also known as Amor Vincit Omnia Marchese Vincenzo Giustiniani. The date of 1602 3 is understood by Orazio to Cara Love Victorious painted by Baglione in c original. 18 Documentary evidence discloses the high regard Giustiniani held for this image, as he refused to sell it. According to Robert Enggass, Joachim von Sandrart visited Pa lazzo Giustiniani from 1629 to 1635 and mentioned that Giustiniani refused the price it. 19 palace in such a position that it was the last painting any visitor would see: But, I recall, it was covered with a curtain of dark green silk, and was shown last, after all the others, to avoid eclipsing the other works. 20 Giustiniani covered the painting perhaps to create thrill and anticipation from the audience, while also concealing its secular imagery from his more conservative guests. 18 Gregori, The Age of Caravaggio Gentileschi mentions that Caravaggio borrowed some wings from him about six to eight months before his deposition, most likely to use for his winged figure in Love Victorious 19 Robert Enggass Palatino 9 (1967): 13 20 Rudolf A. Peltzer, Joachim von Sandrarts Academie der Bau, Bil d, und Mahlerey Kunste von 1675: Leben der berhmten Maler, Bildhauer und Baumeister (Munich, 1925 ), p. 276; more Giustiniani, p. 13.
80 The single figure in Love Victorious Eros in T he Musicians and the angel in Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy but the following provide s insight as to what sets this particular image apart and makes it so significant. In his previous paintings, Caravaggio used Mario Minniti as the model fo r his young male figures. Here he presents a different model, Francesco Boneri, also known 1610 mid 1620s). 21 Caravaggio portrays Cecco standing, playful and proud, as the figure of Love (Cupid/Eros) while laughing and gazi ng at the viewer. Love is a youthful and frontal male nude and consumes the composition. In his right hand he grasps a couple of arrows, indicating (along with his carefully rendered dark wings) that this is the figure of Cupid, and not an angel. 22 His left leg partially rests on an unmade bed of wrinkled white sheets, as his left foot with dirty toenails supports his weight and is surrounded by many objects on the floor. Much attention has been given to the provocative nature of this work, evident in the f dirty wings, dirty toen ails, and come hither stare toward the viewer. These crude elements are not the iconographic norm for the figure of Love, especially one that is pictured as triumphant over all other worldly things. Many scholars, su ch as Walter Friedlaender, carry this idea further by claiming that the young male is portrayed in a homoerotic manner, a notion that, in my opinion, has been overcompensated in the 23 The significance of this wo rk as it relates to my argume nt 21 The Flute Player (1615 20, Ashmol ean Museum, Oxford). 22 Gregori, catalogue entry in The Age of Caravaggio p. 277. 23 Walter Friedlaender suggests that Giustiniani instructed Caravaggio on his preferences for the work, but that it was the artist who provided such a homo erotic representa tion ( Caravaggio Studies p. 91).
81 influence is not presented within the figure himself but in the objects surrounding him, similar to the compositional tools for The Lute Player Again, looking at the details of erative elements to These objects are indicative of the narrative, as this painting represents Love triumphing over all human endeavors 24 War is depicted by the armor in the foreground just behind th usic is represented by the lute, violin, a nd musical scores on the floor, which are slightly recessed into the background. Science is by the blue astral globe decorated with gold stars thigh. Knowledge is represented by a book, pen, and laurel wreath resting in the area next to the armor. Government or secular power is depicted by the gold crown and scepter on the altarpiece Saint Cecilia (1516 17, Pinacoteca Nazionale, Bologna F ig. 33 ) painted by the High Renaissance master Ra phael (1482 1520). 25 Neoplatonic symbolism in these objects (also discussed by Vasari) with ideas that were unnecessary to my argument, but this idea perhaps provides another reason for Giustiniani to cover it with a green curt ain. 24 Gregori discusses the connection of this s theme to Vi rgil his Eclogues (X, 69): (Gregori, The Age of Caravaggio p. 277). 25 Hugo Wagner, Michelangelo da Caravaggio (Berne, 1958), p. 81; Gregori, The Age of Caravaggio p. 278; Friedlaender proposes another influence, that Love Victorious is a parody of Michelangelo Victory sculpture group at the Palazzo Vecchio in Florence ( Caravaggio Studies p. 91).
82 familiar to Caravaggio and Giustiniani. 26 wn lifetime, this Raphael painting would have been in the chapel of San Giovanni in Monte, Bologna. I disagree that was few reasons. One reason is that Caravaggio was not known to follow the ar tistic tradition of Raphael in any wa y, and in fact was known more as the antithesis of the circle of painters who worked in his manner. Also, the altarpiece was located in Bologna, a city that has never been mentioned i n any Caravaggio scholarship as a pl ace visited by the artist. Granted d el Monte and others who came into conta ct with Caravaggio were admirers of the Italian Bolognese style of painting and probably had engravings or copies of such works. However, neither Chri stoph Frommel nor Luigi Salern o the two most fa miliar with the inventories of d el Monte (1627) and Giustiniani (1638) made a connection to this altarpiece or to subsequent copies I believe that because Caravaggio relied so heavily on nature and live models, his inspiration or influenc e was taken from real instruments in d in The Musicians and The Lute Player Although Love Victorious dates with de l Monte and was commissioned by Giustinian i, an argument can be made for d el lin gering presence in the work; it was possibly even painted at Palazzo Madama. Frommel supports this theory by stating The last work with musical instruments are represented in the A mor Victorious in Berlin, which dates from about 1603 and which could still have 27 26 Giorgio Vasari, eccellenti pittori Florence, 1568, Ed. G. Milanesi, 9 vols. (Florence, 1906), p. 551; Gregori, p. 278. Vasari mentions that these musical instruments were not painted by Raphael himself, but rather by his student Giovanni da Udine (1487 1564). 27 Frommel, 51.
83 Baglione also states that Caravaggio painted an earlier picture for Cardinal d el 28 It is possible that Baglione was referring to the image of Love Victorious and because it resembles elements so heavily style and his household objects its patronage was misattributed. If Baglione was referring to a different painting, an earlier work for del Monte similar to the Giustiniani work, the earli er work would have then served as a prototype and influence for the latter. A similar concept can be considered for The Lute Player A home and p erformed musical concerts there. Caravaggio was li ving with del Monte at the time, therefore painting at Palazzo Madama and the objects in The Lute Player r ecall musical instruments from d inventory. I work Love O verpowering Profane Love was in fact an earlier work, it is possible it was also executed at Palazzo Madama, possibly even while Caravaggio was living there. Perhaps a more tangible indication of del Monte in one particular object pictured: the set of compasses. Underneath foot among the many instruments, one can see a pointed compass. In 1597 Galileo invented a compass also known as a sector for geometric and military use 29 This instrument is described as similar to the common mathematical instrument used today, consisting of two rulers connected by a joint at t he end and marked with scales. The 28 Baglione, Le vite.. p. 138, also quoted in Gregori, The Age of Caravaggio p. 278. 29 Van Helden. Galileo Project Chronology Galileo Timeline., 1995. http://galileo.rice.edu/chron/galileo.html
84 object featured in Love Victorious closely rese compass. Galileo taught the use of this instrument to his private students and wrote an instruction al manual for it which was later published. By 1598 Galileo employed Marcantonio Mazzoleni (? 1632) to create these instru ments and their corresponding manuals and sell them to his students. 30 Guidobaldo was known to experiment with compasses as well, and it is possible these compasses reached Palazzo Madama through him or were sent by someone else. Proof of this connection a rises a year after Galileo Caravaggio was arrested somewhere between Palazzo Madama and Piazza Navona in Rome. He was charged for c arrying a sword without a license and a pair of compasses, most likely obtained from d el Monte. Caravaggio was documented as telling the police officer I was taken yesterday evening at around [ten or eleven in the evening] between piazza Madama and piazza Navona because I was wearing a sword which I wear as a painter of the cardinal Del Monte and I receive an allowance from the cardinal for myself and my servant [Minniti] and I live in h is house and am on hi s payroll. 31 assisting the pope in his travels. The law against weapon possession implemented by Clement VIII the artist even in That Caravaggio had these compa sses in his possession while roaming the streets of Rome and not while in the studio is perhaps the most interestin g aspect of the police record. He was already equipped with his sword, and t herefore his violent nature cannot provide a reason as to why the compasses were found on him at 30 Van Helden. Galil eo Project Science Instruments, 1995. http://galileo.rice.edu/sci/instruments/sector.html 31 Tre documenti in Prospettiva 65 (1992 ), quoted in Robb, M : The Man Who Became Caravaggio p. 70.
85 this specific time. It is possible that these compasses were l ent to Caravaggio by del Monte as props or perhaps even a gift; their reappearance in Love Victor ious shows that the artist held onto them for years. these compasses is unknown, the fact that he was questioned by the authorities because of them and responded by claiming to be the painter (and under the p rotection) of d el Monte holds serious weight to the relationship between the two individuals. In a similar vein, Galileo was deeply indebted to his own patron of the Medici family; he dedicated his manual of the geometric and military compass to Cosimo II 32 truly It was only after the death of Cosimo that Galileo would face serious trouble for his writings and teachi ngs. Caravaggio would suffer constant trouble after his departure from the del Monte household as well Protection from patrons with secular and ecclesiastical ties may explain why Caravaggio and Galileo were able to get away with as much as they did wheth er it was painting offensive imagery of biblical narratives or teaching Copernican ideas. Others without such connections, such as Giordano Bruno, suffered harsher consequences for their actions and beliefs; he was burned at the stak Fiori i n Rome in 1600. As this chapter closes, it should now be without question that d el Monte had a strong interest in many facets of progressive thinking music, science, mathematics, philosophy poetry, and so on and that these interests influenced Caravaggio not only exposed the painter to these types of 32 Van Helden, Galileo Project ChronologyGalileoTimeline, 1995. He also dedicated the four moons of Jupiter to Cosimo. http://galileo.rice.edu/chron/galileo.html
86 ideas, but also enabled him to express himself in an innovative way, breaking away from tradition without offending his patron, the buttre ss of his artistic pro minence. The cardinal proved to be a helpful resource and artistic advisor for Caravaggio, who did no t hesitate to claim himself as d on the streets for his indiscretions. Although Martha and Mary Magdalene lacks the musical instruments present in the previously mentioned canvases of The Musicians and The Lute Player it contains a religious vision: the la rge reflective mirror. A work that follows the del Monte years, Love Victorious link to one of his intellectual connections in the field of science, Galileo Galilei. By encoura ging Caravaggio to continue his experiments with different subjects, objects, and compo sitions beyond the usual single figure with fruits and flowers, the cardinal prepared the artist for anything that could come his way in the future, from patrons public and private alike. From works in this c hapter as well as the works in C hapter 5, it is evident that del Monte has helped Caravaggio successfully tackle the private sphere in patronage while also strengthening his ability for the next stage of his career: a painter of public religious commissions in the midst of the Counter Reformation.
87 CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSION commission for the Contarelli Chapel. Throughout this paper, I have sugg ested reasons that point to del Monte as the cause for this opportunity: his pro French sentiments, his acquaintance with the church directors (the Crescenzi family) and the proximity to Palazzo Madama Baglione and others point to d el Mont the commission, while Frommel concurs that Various circumstances suggest that it was he [del Monte] who procured him in the first great commission and, later, offered protection in times of difficulty, above all showing a profound unders tanding for the artist as much as for the man. 1 As previously mentioned in the discussion of Love Victorious the artist did not cease when Caravaggio left his residence. In Andrew Graham recent publication, he states, Prob ably as a result of his connections with del Monte and the Medici, Archconfraternity of Pilgrims, and with the Order of the Oratory. Two of his most impressive altarpieces, The Madonna of L oreto and The Entombment of Christ would result. 2 Following his commissi on for the Contarelli Chapel, Caravaggio moved in and worked for the Mattei brothers. At this time, he had already established himself in the Roman public as a painter, and many public works followed. monumental p ely recognized today: his religious scenes with many figures, dramatic expression and 1 Frommel, p. 51. 2 Graham Dixon, Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane p. 116.
88 Reformation subjects, but this was nothing new to Carav aggio; it all began with del Monte and the painting of his Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy 3 Not public works were widely accepted due to their non traditional and provocative manner Caravaggio painted directly from nature and from l ive models, and this did not always measure up to the classical ideal archetype of biblical imagery desire d by ecclesiastical officials for their churches. However, this mattered not as his rejected works were soon purchased by private patrons, mostly in t Inspiration of Saint Matthew for the Contarelli Chapel is one example. Without the patronage and cl ose relationship with Cardinal d el Monte, it is possible the artist could hav e maintained his amateurish artistic ability as a nameless painter in the workshop of Cesa ri, struggling to find a breakthrough for his career. Later, Caravaggio was given the opportunity to paint serious public works, but his erratic lifestyle prevented him from succeeding t o the height of his potential. The guidance provided by del Monte desired by all struggling artists in Rome during the Counter Reformation. Cardinal d el stands as a vivid indication for the significance of patronage during a time of difficult social and artistic change. After examining the e Eternal City as a young artist from 1592 1595, Caravaggio struggled to succeed in the competitive art world. P atronage 3 Gilbert, Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals p. 150, and mainly all of Chapter 10, pp. 135 158.
89 w as of the utmost importance but the city of Rome was conflicted with strict limitations on the production of art, especially publ ic c ommissions for ecclesiastical establishments. Counter Reformation Rome proved to be a daunting place for an enigmatic and innovative individual without academic artistic training such as Caravaggio but he eventually found his way. transformed toward more refined subject matter and compositions. His early works such as Boy Peeling a Fruit Sick Bacchus and Boy with a Basket of Fruit ( images of partial length sin gle figures), became a style of his past. He immediately began to experiment with desired Counter Reformation subjects such as Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy preparing him for his monumental p eriod of religious scenes. Del Monte also aided in expandin simplistic devotional and religious imagery and secular scenes alike. The artist utilized large collection of instruments to help creat e his compositions and display his narratives. The patronage and close friendship between Car avaggio and Cardinal Francesco d el Monte proved to be indis pensable for the young artist. Not only did d el Monte encourage the arti st to expand his artistic techn iques, he also exposed the artist to higher learning and the expectations of public and private patrons. Caravaggio was became greatly responsible for his success. A lthough scholars such as Creighton Gilbert consider the elite patronage of the Matteis as the more critical for Caravaggio, especially improving his artistic skills in
90 d religious commissions p ossible The majority of existing information o n the artist post dates the del mental period beginning in 1600 16 0 1 has be en a strong focus for scholars However, essentially it was not the later period of fame and public church commissions that can be considered the most significant for Caravaggio; the progressive and experimental period under del Monte improved his capability as an artist and was imperative for such later success in his monumental commissions.
91 APPENDIX LIST OF ART WORKS CI TED 1. Paolo Veronese, Feast in the House of Levi Italian, Venetian, 1571 3, 555 x 1280 cm, oil on canvas. Galleria della Academia, Venice. Accessed December 05, 2010 Artstor.org: < http://library.artstor.org/library/secure/ViewImages?id =4iFCeTg4NCciJy8laCt2KngqXXspeF9%2FdA%3D%3D&userId=gzdAdTMh&zo omparams=> 2. Caravaggio, Fortune Teller Italian, 1594, 115 x 150 cm, oil on canvas. Capitoline Museums, Rome. (in A Caravaggio Rediscov ered: The Lute Player p. 18 ) 3. Caravaggio, Cardsharps Italian, 1594, 94.2 x 131.2 cm, oil on canvas. Kimbell Art Museum, Forth Worth. (in A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p 13 ) 4. Caravaggio, John the Baptist ( pastor friso ). Italian, 1602, 129 x 94 cm, oil on canvas. Capitoline Museums, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 127. ) 5. Caravaggio, Calling of Saint Matthew Italian, 1600, 323 x 343 cm, oil on canvas. Contarelli Chapel, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 94.) 6. Caravaggio, Martyrdom of Saint Matthew Italian, 1600, 323 x 343 cm, oil on canvas, Contarelli Chapel, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 95.) 7. Caravaggio, Saint Matthew and the Angel Italian, 1602, 232 x 183 cm, oil on canvas, Kaiser F riedrich Museum, Berlin, destroyed in 1945. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 119.) 8. Caravaggio, Inspiration of Saint Matthew Italian, 1602, 292 x 186 cm, oil on canvas, Contarelli Chapel, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 120.) 9. Caravaggio Madonna dei Palafrenieri Italian, 1606, 292 x 211 cm, oil on canvas, Borghese Gallery, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 170.) 10. Caravaggio, Death of the Virgin Italian, 1601 1606, 369 x 245 cm, oil on canvas, Mus e du Louvre, Paris. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 151.) 11. Caravaggio, Supper at Emmaus Italian, 1602, 139 x 195 cm, oil on canvas, National Gallery, London. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 117.) 12. Caravaggio, Betrayal of Christ ( Taking of Christ ). Italian, 133 x 169 cm, oil on canvas, National Gallery of Ireland, Dublin. (in Discovering Caravaggio p. 144.) 13. Caravaggio, Saint Catherine of Alexandria Italian, 1598, 173 x 133 cm, oil on canvas, Thyssen Bornemisza Museum, Madrid. (in John T. Sp ike, Caravaggio p. 87.)
92 14. Caravaggio Rest on the Flight into Egypt Italian, 1597, 133.5 x 166.5 cm, oil on canvas, Doria Pamhphilj Gallery, Rome. (in Discovering Caravaggio p. 36.) 15. Caravaggio, Penitent Magdalene Italian, 1597, 122.5 x 98.5 cm, oil on canvas, Doria Pamphilj Gallery, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 75.) 16. Caravaggio, Saint Francis in Ecstasy Italian, 1595, 93.9 x 129.5 cm, oil on canvas, Wadsworth Atheneum, Hartford, Connecticut. (in J ohn T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 56.) 17. Caravaggio, Jupiter, Neptune, and Pluto Italian, 1597, 300 x 180 cm, celing fresco in oil, Casino di Villa Boncompagni Ludovisi, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 67.) 18. Caravaggio, Medusa Italian, 1597, 60 x 55 cm, oil on cavnas over convex poplar wood shield, Uffizi Gallery, Florence. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 65.) 19. Caravaggio, Boy Peeling Fruit Italian, 1592, 64.2 x51.4 cm, oil on canvas, Fondazione Roberto Longhi, Florence. (in Gilles Lambe rt, Caravaggio, p. 8.) 20. Caravaggio, Sick Bacchus Italian, 1593, 67 x 53 cm, oil on canvas, Borghese Gallery, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 32.) 21. Caravaggio, Boy with a Basket of Fruit Italian, 1593, 70 x 67 cm, oil on canvas, Borghese Gallery, Rome. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 3 1 ) 22. Caravaggio, The Musicians Italian, 1595, 87.9 x 115.9 cm, oil on canvas, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. (in A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 20.) 23. Caravaggio, Martyrdom of Saint Ursula Italian, 1610, 106 x 179.5 cm, oil on canvas, Galleria di Palazzo Zevallos Stigliano, Naples. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 238.) 24. Caravaggio, The Lute Player Italian, 1596, 94 x 119 cm, oil on canvas, Hermitage Museum, Saint Peters burg. (in A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 29.) 25. Caravaggio, The Lute Player Italian, 1596, 100 x 126.5 cm, oil on canvas, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York. (in A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player p. 34.) 26. Caravaggio, Martha and Mary Magdalene Italian, 1598, 97.8 x 132.7 cm, oil on canvas, Detroit Institute of Arts, Michigan. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 89.)
93 27. Caravaggio, Love Victorious Italian, 1602, 156 x 113 cm, oil on canvas, Gem ldegalerie, Berlin. (in John T. Spike, Caravaggio p. 103.) 28. Paolo Veronese, Music Italian, 1556 57, size? oil on canvas, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, Venice. Accessed December 05, 2010. Friendsofart.net:
94 LIST OF REFERENCES Arrighi, G. "Un grade scienziato italiano Guidobaldo del Monte in alcune carte inedite della Biblioteca Oliveriano di Pesaro. Atti dell'Accademia lucchese di scienze, lettere ed arti 12 (1968), 183 99. Banti, Anna, ed. Discorsi sulle arti e sui mestieri Florence: Sansoni, 1981 Barocchi, P. Vol. 2. Bari: G. Laterza, 1961. Baschet, A. Paolo Veronese au tribunal du St Office Venise (1573) Paris: 1980. Tre documenti per Michelangelo da Caravaggio. Prospettiva 65 ( 1992 ) Bellori, Gian Pietro. Turin : G. Einaudi, 1976. Casino Ludovisi a Roma. Il cosmo in una stanza Art et dossier 60 (1991), 18 21. Black, Christopher F. Church, Religion, and Society in Early Modern Italy New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. Blunt Anthony. Artistic Theory in Italy 1450 1600 Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1940. Bologna, Ferdinando. naturali>> Toronto: Bollati Boringhieri, 1992 _____ da Caravaggio per il cardinal Francesco Maria Del Monte Artibus et Historiae Vol. 8, No. 16 (1987), pp. 159 177. in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, Vol. XXVI, Roma 1982. Borsi, F. Palazzo Madama 1969 Brown, Beverly Louise. The Genius of Rome 1592 1623 London: Royal Academy of Arts, 2001. Bungener,Flix. History of the Council of Trent New York: Harper, 1855. 9/10 (1971) 93 142.
95 _____ (1985 88) 53: 51 85, 55: 227 87, 63: 117 92. _____ Art et dossier 60 (1991) 22 26. Artibus et Historiae (1988), 171 186 _____ Metropolitan Museum Journal Vol. 26 (1991), 213 226. http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02688b.htm Cecchi, E.and N. Sapegno (eds.), Storia della Letteratura Italiana vol. 5. Milan: Garzanti, 1967. Artibus et Historiae vol. 8, no. 16 (1987), 149 158. Christiansen, Keith. A Caravaggio Rediscovered: The Lute Player New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1990. I pittori bergamaschi del seicento. Vol. 1. Bergamo: Edizioni Bolis, 1983. Correale, G. Identificazione di un Caravaggio Venice: Marsilio, 1990. The Burlington Magazine Vol. 143, No. 1180 (Ju l., 2001), 449 452. The Burlington Magazine Vol. 116, No. 859 (Oct., 1974), 562+565+570+572 578+591. Davidson, N.S. The Cou nter Reformation New York: Basil Blackwell, Ltd., 1987. Dean, Trevor and K.J.P. Rowe, Crime, Society and the Law in Renaissance Italy New York: Cambridge UP, 1994. Dooley, Brendan. Italy in the Baroque : selected readings New York: Garland Publishing, Inc., 1995. Journal of the American Musicological Society 14 (1961), 184 195.
96 Palatino 9 ( 1967 ), 13 20 Fragnito, Gigliola. Church, Censorship, and Culture in Early Modern Italy. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2001. Freedberg, S. J. Painting in Italy 1500 1600 Baltimore: Penguin Books, 1970. Fried, Michael. The Moment of Caravaggio Princeton: Princeton Univer sity Press, 2010. _____ Critical Inquiry Vol. 24, No. 1 (Autumn, 1997), 13 56. Friedlaender, Walter. Caravaggio Studies Princeton: Princeton UP, 1955. Monte Storia dell'arte 9/10 (1971), 5 52. Gilbert, Creighton E. Caravaggio and His Two Cardinals University Park, PA: Penn State UP, 1995. New Light on the Hockney Thesis. Leonardo Vol. 36, No. 4 (2003), 295 301. Graham Dixon, Andrew. Caravaggio: A Life Sacred and Profane London: Allen Lane, 2010. Gregori, Mina, in The Age of Caravaggio New York: Electa/Rizzoli, 1985. _____ La Magnificenza alle Corte dei Medici, exhibition catalogue. Florence: Museo degli Argenti 1997. Grendler, Paul F. The Roman Inquisiti on and the Venetian Press, 1540 1605 Princeton: Princeton UP, 1977. Hall, Marcia B. After Raphael New York: Cambridge UP, 1999. _____ Rome New York: Cambridge UP, 2005. Haskell, Francis. Patrons and Painters: a study in relations between Italian art and society in the age of the Baroque. New Haven: Yale UP, 1980. Hibbard, Howard. Caravaggio New York: Harper & Row, 1983. Hockney, David, Secret Knowledge: Rediscovering the Lost Techniques of the Old Masters. New York: Viking Studio, 2001.
97 Janelle, Pierre. The Catholic Reformation Milwaukee: The Bruce Publishing Company, 1963. the Date of the Sale of Various Notable Paintings 9/10 (1971) 53 56. Klein, Robert. Italian Art 1500 1600: sources and documents. Englewood Cliffs, NY: Prentice Hall, Inc, 1966. Lambert, Gilles. Caravaggio, 1571 1610 London: Taschen, 2000. Langdon, Helen. Caravaggio: A L ife. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1999. _____ The Lives of Caravaggio: Mancini, Baglione, Bellori London: Pallas Athene, 2005. _____ ravaggio and his Two Cardinals]. The Burlington Magazine Vol. 137, No. 1110 (Sep., 1995), 621 622. Longhi, Roberto. Caravaggio Roma: Editori Riuniti, 1977. Luebke, David M. (ed.). The Counter Reformation: The Essential Readings Malden: Blackwell Pub. Inc, 1999. Paragone 3, no. 25 (Jan. 1952), 20 31. Medusa Artibus et Historiae Vol. 25, No. 49 (2004), 175 184. Mayor, A Hyatt. "The Art of the Counter Reformation." The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin ns 4.4 (1945), 101 05. McMullin, Ernan. The Church and Galileo Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press, 2005. Miranda, Salvador: The Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church 1998 2010, http://www2.fiu.edu/~mirandas/bios1565.htm#Paleotti Moir, Alfred. Caravaggio New York: Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1989. _____ Caravaggio and his Two Cardinals by Creighton E. Gilbert. The Catholic Historical Review V ol. 82, No. 2 (Apr., 1996), 245 246. The Composer as Spy: The Ferraboscos, Gabriele Paleotti, and the Music and Letters Vol. 84, no. 1 (February 2003).
98 Mullett, Michael A. The Catholic Reformation New York: Routledge, 1999. Trent and All That: Renaming Catholicism in the Early Modern Era Cambridge: Harvard UP, 2000. Osmond, Percy H. Paolo Veronese London: 1927 Parks, N. Randolph. The Burlington Magazine Vol. 127, No. 988 (July 1985), 43 8 448. Peltzer, Rudolf A. Joachim von Sandrarts Academie der Bau, Bild, und Mahlerey Kunste von 1675: Leben der berhmten Maler, Bildh auer und Baumeister. Puglisi, Catherine R. Caravaggio New York: Phaidon, 2000. Reeves, E. Painting the Heavens: art and science in the age of Galileo Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997 Ripa, Cesare. et da altri luoghi Rome: 1603. Robb, Peter. M: the Man Who Became Caravaggio New York City: Henry Holt, 2000. II Cardinale Francesco Maria del Monte, 1549 1626 by Zygmunt The Burlington Magazine Vol. 137, No. 1112 (Nov., 1995), 759 760. Rose, Paul L. "Materials for a Scientific B iography of Guidbaldo del Monte. Actes du XIIe Congr s internationale d'histoire des sciences, Paris 1968 12 (Paris, 1971), 6 72. Caravaggio nel C Arte documentata 8 (1994), 181 84. Rzepi Artibus et Historiae Vol. 7, No. 13 (1986), 91 112. Schroeder, Rev H.J. Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent: Original Text with English Translation St. Louis: B Herder Book co.,1941 Saggio, Antonio. Lo Strumento di Caravaggio Roma: Kappa Roma, 2007. Gallery of Vincenzo Giustiniani. The Burling ton Magazine 102: (1960), 21 28 93 104, 135 46.
99 Seward, Desmond. Caravaggio: a passionate life New York: William Morrowe and Company, Inc., 1998. Sgarbi, Vittorio. Caravaggio New York: Rizzoli International Publications, 2007. Shahan, Shahan. Federico Borromeo. In The Catholic Encyclopedia New York: Robert Appleton Company. New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02688b.htm ings: Ottavio Costa as Patron for The Burlington Magazine Vol. 116, no. 859 (Oct. 1974), 570+579 586+591. _____. Storia 9/10 ( 1971 ), 57 92 Novit sul Caravaggio: Saggi e Contributi Milan: Regione Lombardia, 1975. Spike, John T. Caravaggio. New York: Abbevil le Press, 2001a _____. Caravaggio: a catalogue of paintings (CD Rom). New York: Abbeville Press, 2001b. The Burlington Magazine Vol. 139, No. 1136 (Nov., 1997), 766 791. Strinati, Claudio. Caravaggio e La Collezione Mattei Rome: Mondadori Electa, 1995. Toesca, I The Burlington Magazine Vol. 102, No. 685 (Apr., 1960) pp. 134+164+166 167. Van Helden, Al. Galileo Project 1995, updated August 3, 2003. http://galileo.rice.edu/ von Ramdohr, Friedrich. Ueber Mahlerei und Bildhauerarbeit in Rom fuer Liebhaber des Schoenen in der Kunst Leipzig: 1787. W agner, H. Michelangelo da Caravaggio Berne: 1958. Zygmunt. Il card inale Francesco Maria del Monte : 1549 1626 Florence: Leo S. Olschki Editore, 1994. Williams, Robert. Art, Theory, and Culture in Sixteenth Century Italy New York: Cambridge UP, 1997. Yates, Francis. Bruno and the Hermetic Tradition London: Rutledge, 2002. Zuffi, Stefano.
100 Symbols in His Paintings New York: Rizzoli International Pub., 2010.
101 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Brittany Stella attended the University of Florida where she received her Bachelor of Arts Degree in Art History and her minor in Classics in Spring 2009 She continued her studies at the University Florida where she received her Master of Arts Degree in Art History with a concentration in Baroque studies in Summer 2011