giovanni bandini’s bronze crucifix and candlesticks made · pdf file ·...

IN 1584, THE year that Raffaello Borghini’s Il Riposo was pub-lished, the sculptor Giovanni Bandini, also known as Giovannidell’Opera (1539/40–1599), was yet to make most of the workshe created for Francesco Maria II della Rovere, Duke of Urbino(1549–1631), at his court at Pesaro, where the sculptor spent longperiods between 1582 and his death in 1599.1 Concluding hisbiography of Bandini, who has been called the ‘last great sculptorin the territory of Urbino, during those dying days of ducal civil-isation’,2 Borghini refers to one of the first commissions Bandinimade for the Duke – the bronze Hunt of Meleager (1583; Museodel Prado, Madrid) – and expresses confidence in his progress:

it is to be hoped that this work will be done very beautifullyas are all of his others since he understands design very well andis very experienced in working and carefully observing all thegood considerations that the sculptor is given to have. Andfinding himself at forty-four years of age, it can be believedthat he will come to greater perfection in working so that hewill be able to climb a little higher.3

The works Bandini produced in the Marche are recorded inthe Duke’s account books; those carved in marble were the bustsof Francesco Maria I della Rovere (1582) and Francesco Maria II dellaRovere (1583; modified by Giovan Battista Foggini in 1691; bothVilla del Poggio Imperiale, Florence), the statue of Francesco MariaI della Rovere (1585–87; Doge’s Palace, Venice), the Pietà (1585–88; Oratorio della Grotta, Urbino) and the tomb of FrancescoMaria I della Rovere (1587), the fragments of which are in thechurch of the former monastery of S. Chiara in Urbino.4The works in precious metals mentioned in the Duke’s

account books, however, no longer survive: the golden lantern(1588–90) for the Marian basilica of the Santa Casa in Loreto, theseven silver saints for which Giovanni was paid for supplying waxmodels in 1592,5 and the golden Crucifix mounted on a jaspercross with two candlesticks also in jasper for which the Duke paidhim between 29th December 1592 and 1st January 1593,although without naming the sculptor.6 During his years at theducal court, Bandini also made various works in bronze, ofwhich only the Hunt of Meleager in the Prado has been identified.The payments for these bronzes are also in the Duke’s accountbooks, where Bandini is often referred to simply as ‘sculptor’,without being named.7On 29th June 1589 Bandini was paid 125 scudi for a ‘Crucified

Christ in bronze’;8 on 3rd October 1590, ‘for two candlesticks inbronze and for a Cross with mound in the same’ (187 scudi);9 on13th July 1592, ‘for the manufacture of 4 candlesticks in bronze’(187.30 scudi);10 on 26th January 1595, for a ‘Crucified livingChrist in bronze’ (68.10 scudi);11 on April 1596, ‘for two candle-sticks in the form of Angels, and a cross with mound all inbronze’ (27 scudi);12 in May 1596, for a ‘Crucifix in bronzealready made by the sculptor Giovanni’ (12 scudi);13 and, finally,on 14th October 1598: ‘To Giovanni Bandini sculptor for a Cru-cifix and two Angels for candlesticks in bronze’ (99 scudi).14The payments Bandini received for bronze sculptures relate to

two separate commissions. In the first instance, the sculptor wascommissioned to make a bronze Christ on the Cross with MountCalvary which was completed between 29th June 1589 and 3rdOctober 1590; it was accompanied by six bronze candlesticks exe-cuted in two consignments between 3rd October 1590 and 13th

I would like to thank Dimitrios Zikos who has guided me in this research. I wouldalso like to thank Davide Gambino, Giancarlo Gentilini, Francesca Girelli, Marian-gela Guido, Carlo and Giacomo Montanari, Ruth Taylor and Lucio Tomei for theirinvaluable assistance. I am also grateful to Sara Bartolucci, Emanuela Bracconi andMons. Davide Tonti at the Ufficio Arte Sacra e Beni Culturali della Diocesi di Urbino, Luigi Bravi and Mons. Eugenio Gregoratto at the Archivio Diocesano inUrbino, Federico Marcucci at the Biblioteca Universitaria di Urbino and P. Francesco Merletti OFM Conv. at the Archivio Storico della Curia Provinciale deiFrati Minori Conventuali in Ancona. The photographs of the sculptures in Urbinowere taken by Mauro Magliani and Barbara Piovan, to whom I express my sincerethanks. This article is dedicated to Maichol Clemente, in memory of our fruitful visitto Urbino.

1 On Bandini’s activity in Urbino, see E. Calzini: ‘Documenti relativi, tra l’altro,all’autore del “Cristo morto” nella cripta del duomo di Urbino’, Rassegna bibliograficadell’arte italiana 17 (1914), pp.93–95; idem: ‘Ancora del “Cristo morto” erroneamenteattribuito al Giambologna’, Rassegna bibliografica dell’arte italiana 19 (1916), pp.133–35;A. Alippi: ‘Documenti: lavori eseguiti da Giovanni Bandini detto Giovanni dell’Opera, fiorentino, per Franc. Maria II° della Rovere’, ibid., pp.135–37; U. Middel-dorf: ‘Giovanni Bandini detto Giovanni dell’Opera’, Rivista d’arte 9, 4 (1929),pp.481–518, repr. in idem: Raccolta di scritti, I, 1924–1938, Florence 1979, pp.77–92; G.Gronau: ‘Appendice: documenti concernenti i rapporti del Duca Francesco Maria IId’Urbino con Giovanni Bandini e con Giovanni Bologna’, Rivista d’arte 11 (1929),pp.519–24; P. Rotondi: ‘Contributi all’attività urbinate di Giovanni Bandini dettodell’Opera’, Urbinum 17, 21 (1942), pp.8–18; L. Moranti: Bibliografia urbinate, Flor-ence 1959, pp.85–86; C. Avery: ‘Giovanni Bandini (1540–99) Reconsidered’, Anto-logia di Belle Arti 48–51 (1994), pp.16–27; E.D. Schmidt: ‘Giovanni Bandini tra

Marche e Toscana’, Nuovi studi III, 6 (1999), pp.57–103 (hereafter cited as Schmidt);R. Morselli: ‘In the Service of Francesco Maria II della Rovere in Pesaro and Urbino(1549–1631)’, in E. Fumagalli et. al., eds.: The Court Artist�in Seventeenth-century Italy,Rome 2014, pp.49–93, passim; F. Loffredo: ‘Giovanni Bandini’s “Venus” and “Ado-nis” for the Sevillian House of Juan de Arguijo in a Sonnet by Lope de Vega’, THEBURLINGTON MAGAZINE 157 (2015), pp.758–63.2 Rotondi, op. cit. (note 1), p.18: ‘l’ultimo grande scultore in suolo urbinate, in quegli ulti-mi palpiti di civiltà ducale’.3 R. Borghini: Il Riposo, Florence 1584, p.640: ‘la qual opera si spera che sarà bellissima,sicome sono tutte l’altre sue; perciocché egli beni ssimo intende il disegno et è pratichissimo inlavorare e diligente osservatore di tutte le buone considerationi, che haver dee lo scultore: eritrovandosi in età di 44 anni, si può credere che in operando sarrà a maggior perfettione, comeche poco più in alto possa salire’; the translation is from idem: Il Riposo, ed. L.H. Ellis Jr,Toronto, Buffalo and London 2007, p.315.4 Schmidt, passim; M. Visonà: ‘Un ritratto di Anna Maria Luisa dei Medici bambina ei lari del Poggio Imperiale (riflessioni sul Foggini)’, Paragone 59 (1998), pp.19–30, esp. p.25.5 For Bandini’s involvement in the making of the lantern, see Schmidt, p.66. Thesilver saints have been identified with the sculptures ‘d’altezza più d’un palmo’,approximately 30 cm., of Sts John the Baptist, Francis, Archangel Michael, Stephen,Andrew, Peter and Apollonia, which were still in the Palazzo Ducale in Pesaro in1623–24; see Schmidt, p.91, note 120; and mentioned among the items in the Castel-durante inventory of 1631, see G. Semenza: ‘La quadreria roveresca da Casteldurantea Firenze: l’ultima dimora della collezione di Francesco Maria II’, in T. Biganti: L’eredità dei Della Rovere: inventari dei beni di Casteldurante (1631), Urbino 2005, pp.69–137, esp. p.134. On Giovanni Bandini as a silver sculptor, see Schmidt, pp.65–66; G.Gentilini (and L. Principi): ‘“Ercole e il centauro” ed altre “Fatiche”:�una propostaper Giovanni Bandini scultore in argento’, Commentari d’arte 18 (2013), pp.50–59.

870 november 2016 • clvi i i • the burlington magazine

Giovanni Bandini’s bronze Crucifix and candlesticksmade for Urbino Cathedralby LORENZO PRINCIPI

LAY_PRINCIPI_Bandini_v2.qxp_Layout 1 19/10/2016 11:43 Page 870

July 1592.15 In the case of the second commission, however, theDuke paid Bandini for a bronze Crucifix, probably representingChrist ‘vivo’ on the Cross,16 paired with two candlesticks in theform of angels. While the second group of sculptures is now lost,although the present writer believes it can be identified with the‘one crucifix in bronze with its base and with two angels made ofthe same, for the altar’ listed at no. 2152 in the 1631 inventory of

the works at Casteldurante that were subsequently dispersed,17 thebronzes of the first commission still survive in Urbino. This group of bronzes can be identified with a Crucifix on

Mount Calvary and six altar candlesticks in the form of spirallingintertwined oak branches now in the Museo Diocesano Albaniin Urbino (Fig.8). Given that Bandini was in the Marche in 1589and 1590, it is reasonable to suppose that he produced the Cru-

6 Schmidt, p.77. This group should be identified with the ‘croce di diaspro con il Christod’oro et altri ornamenti d’oro’ and the ‘candelieri doi di diaspro, simili con l’istesso ornamentod’oro’ listed at numbers 1116 and 1117 in the 1631 Casteldurante inventory, nowdispersed, see Biganti, op. cit. (note 5), p.247 ; see also note 17. 7 Bandini is referred to simply as ‘scultore’ in almost all the payments for the workshe executed for the Duke of Urbino still extant; see Schmidt, pp.71–72 and 76. 8 Archivio di Stato di Firenze (cited hereafter as ASF), Ducato di Urbino, classe III,vol.23, fol.699v: 29th June 1589, ‘Per il Cristo crocifisso di bronzo nel dì medesimo: 125scudi’; see Schmidt, p.76.9 Document cited at note 8, fol.717r, 3rd October 1590, ‘Al scultore per doi candel[ie]ridi bronzo e per una Croce col monte del medesimo a 3 d’ottobre: 187 scudi’; see Schmidt, p.77.10 Document cited at note 8, fol.723r, 13th July 1592, ‘Per fattura di 4 candel[ier]i dibronzo a 13 di luglio: 187.30 scudi’; see Schmidt, p.77.11 Document cited at note 8, fol.731r, 26th January 1595, ‘Al scultore per un Crocifissovivo di bronzo a 26 di gennaio: 68.10 scudi’; see Schmidt, p.77. In August of the same year(ibid., fol.733r), 14 scudi were paid for ‘un Crocifisso di bronzo fatto da un allievo di Gio-vanni Bologna’; see Schmidt, p.77; see also note 16 below; Calzini 1914 op. cit. (note1), p.95, has attempted to identify this pupil of Giambologna as Bandini. No trace ofthis work remains but, conceivably, the sculptor of this Crucifix may have been Anto-nio Susini, Giambologna’s favourite pupil at the time; see D. Zikos: ‘Giovanni Bolo-gna and Antonio Susini: An Old Problem in the Light of New Research’, in P.Motture et. al., eds.: Carvings, Casts & Collectors: The Art of Renaissance Sculpture, Lon-don 2013, pp.194–209. Susini was already identified as a pupil ‘di molta eccellenza’whom Simone Fortuna recommended to the Duke of Urbino in a letter of 27th Octo-ber 1580; see P. Barocchi et. al., eds.: Collezionismo mediceo: Cosimo I, Francesco I e il car-dinale Ferdinando. Documenti 1540–1587, Modena 1993, p.182, doc.196; D. Gasparotto:‘I Crocifissi di Giambologna e la tradizione fiorentina’, in A. Di Lorenzo: exh. cat. Il

Crocifisso d’oro del Museo Poldi Pezzoli: Giambologna e Gasparo Mola, Milan (MuseoPoldi Pezzoli) 2011, pp. 9–22, esp. p.12. It might otherwise refer to the Flemish sculp-tor Adriaen de Vries, who in March 1581 received silver from the ducal Guardarobato cast, on Giambologna’s instructions, two Crucifixes to be sent to Spain; see F.Scholten: ‘Adriaen de Vries, Imperial Sculptor’, in F. Scholten: exh. cat. Adriaen deVries, 1556–1626, Amsterdam (Rijksmuseum), Stockholm (Nationalmuseum) and LosAngeles (J. Paul Getty Museum) 1998–2000 (ed. 1999), pp.13–45, esp. p.15.12 Document cited at note 8, fol.735r, April 1596, ‘Per doi cand[elie]ri fatti a Angeli etuna croce col monte tutti di bronzo: 27 scudi’; see Schmidt, p.77.13 Document cited at note 8, fol.735r: May 1596, ‘Crocifisso di bronzo fatto già da Gio-vanni scultore: 12 scudi’; see Schmidt, p.77.14 Document cited at note 8, fol.743r, 14th October 1598, ‘A Giovanni Bandini scul-tore per un Crocifisso et doi Angeli per cand[elie]ri di bronzo a 14 d’ottobre: 99 scudi’; see Schmidt, p.77.15 Considering that in the payment made on 3rd October 1590, Bandini received 187lire for two candlesticks, the cross and the mount, while on 13th July 1592 hereceived a further 187.30 lire for the four remaining candlesticks, we can assume thatthe first payment must refer to the two larger ones.16 It is more difficult to guess to which of the three Crucifixes executed for the DellaRovere court the Duke is referring when he recorded the expenditure of 12 scudi inMay 1596 for a ‘Crocifisso di bronzo fatto già da Giovanni scultore’ (see note 13), but thiswas probably an additional payment for the ‘Crocifisso vivo’ already paid for on 26thJanuary 1595; see note 11, above.17 Biganti, op. cit. (note 5), p.355, no.2152: ‘crocifisso uno di bronzo col suo piede et condoi angeli del medesimo, per l’altare’. The gold Crucifix on the jasper cross and thematching candlesticks paid for between 29th December 1592 and 1st January 1593also ended up in Casteldurante; see note 6, above.

the burlington magazine • clvi i i • november 2016 871

B AND IN I ’ S CRUC I F I X AND C AND L E S T I C K S

8. Crucifix and a set of six candlesticks, by Giovanni Bandini. 1589–92. Bronze. Crucifix 160 by 57 cm.; height of candlesticks, from left to right: 84 cm.; 99 cm.; 113 cm.;112 cm.; 95 cm.; and 94 cm.; all dimensions include the bases (Museo Diocesano Albani, Urbino).



B A N D I N I ’ S C R U C I F I X A N D C A N D L E S T I C K S

9. Detail of the Crucifix illustrated in Fig.8.


cifix and the two candlesticks in his Pesaro workshop.18 Follow-ing a sojourn in Florence probably made between October 1590and September 1591,19 as can be inferred from documents, thesculptor returned to the Adriatic coast in order to make the silverstatues and also to cast the remaining four candlesticks. That theChrist now in the Museo Diocesano Albani should be identifiedwith the one paid for on 29th June 1589, and not with the pay-ment in October 1598,20 can be inferred from the account of Fra’Orazio Civalli who visited the Cathedral between 1594 and 1597and recalls the bronzes already being in place on the high altar.Civalli describes ‘a large Cross with its Crucified Christ and sixCandlesticks in bronze made of oak branches’ on the ‘high altar’of the ‘Archidiocese church’,21 namely the cathedral of S. MariaAssunta. The Crucified Christ is characterised by the meticulous ren-

dering of the anatomical and facial details, the hair, the beard andthe crown of thorns (Fig.9). The bronze was cast using the lost-wax method, and close examination reveals the joints betweenthe shoulders and the arms, suggesting that the work may havebeen cast in three separate pieces that were subsequently fused.The face reveals different degrees of finish: its right-hand side,almost resting on the chest, has no sign of repolishing, while the

left-hand, more visible side shows signs of a light cold-finishing,also evident in the treatment of the hair, particularly in theflowing locks on the left of the head (Figs.13 and 15). The surfaceof the body is chiselled and more highly polished, and there aretraces of a red varnish still visible on the body and the loincloth,confirming the bronzecaster’s Florentine origin. As is wellknown, in 1586 Antonio Susini had already adopted this tech-nique for the bronzes that were transferred from the Studiolo ofFrancesco I de’ Medici in Palazzo Vecchio to the Tribuna in theUffizi.22 Bandini’s cross, adorned with an elegant titulus crucis,rests on a bronze mount imitating the irregular terrain. In a cavityat the centre of Mount Calvary are placed a realistic skull and twotibiae, alluding to Adam’s burial place. The considerable size ofthe Crucifix23 would suggest that it was destined for an altar.Similar technical characteristics can also be seen in the candle-sticks, which are divided into three pairs of differing sizes,24 andwhich were evidently intended to flank the Crucifix. The candle-sticks evoke the trunk of an oak tree – an obvious reference tothe Della Rovere emblem – its roots emerging from the ground,and dividing into three sinuously intertwined branches that grad-ually become more slender towards the tips, which support thesocles for the candles. Sections of the trunks and many of the

18 Schmidt, pp.62–63.19 Schmidt, pp.68–69; L. Zangheri: Gli Accademici del Disegno: Elenco alfabetico, Flor-ence 2000, p.20.20 The possiblity that the Crucifix discussed here might be identified as the ‘Crocifissovivo’ mentioned in January 1595 can be excluded for iconographical reasons.21 O. Civalli: Visita triennale di F. Orazio Civalli maceratese dell’ordine de’ Minori Conventuali Ministro Provinciale nella Marca Anconitana parte istorica ossia Memorie stori-che riguardanti i diversi luoghi di essa provincia raccolte dall’autore nel tempo del suo provin-cialato, in G. Colucci: Antichità picene 25 (1795), pp.155–215, esp. p.189: ‘All’altarmaggiore vi è una Croce grande con il suo Crocifisso e Candelieri sei di bronzo fatti a rame dicerqua’. As can be inferred from the unpublished typescript in the Archivio dell’Ordine dei Frati Minori Conventuali della Curia Provinciale di Ancona, F. Merletti:Dizionario bio-bibliografico dei Frati Minori Conventuali della Provincia delle Marche (secoliXIII–XX), 2007, p.135, Civalli was provincial minister of the Conventual Franci-scans in the Marche from 1594 to 1597. The manuscript is identical to the publishedtext. Mons. Eugenio Gregoratto and Luigi Bravi report that among the papers in the

Archivio del Capitolo Metropolitano di Urbino and of the Archivio della CuriaArcivescovile di Urbino there is no mention of the Crucifix and candlesticks in thepastoral visits of Mons. Antonio Giannotti (6th–13th March 1595, fols. 46v–58r),Mons. Carretto, provisor Mons. Giuseppe Ferrerio (fasc.II, 15th April 1608,pp.153–65), Mons. Benedetto Ala (classe di città, Decreti, busta no.58, fasc.D, 1613–17, pp.1–28) and Mons. Paolo Santorio (busta no. 8, Visita alla Metropolitana, 24thMarch 1625, pp.I–VII). The first evidence of the bronzes is in the 1601 inventorywhere they are recorded ‘to be found among the books kept in the choir’ (tra i libriche stanno in coro).22 D. Heikamp: ‘Zur Geschichte der Uffizien-Tribuna und der Kunstschränke inFlorenz und Deutschland’, Zeitschrift für Kunstgeschichte 26 (1963), pp.193–268, esp.p.245, docs. 5–6; Zikos, op. cit. (note 11), p.204.23 The Cross and Calvary measures 142.8 by 52.3 cm. without its base. The CrucifiedChrist measures 61 by 47 cm. 24 The length of the leaves varies between 4.5 and 8 cm.: ten are complete, one lacksa point and another is in a fragmentary condition.



10. Detail of a candlestick illustrated in Fig.8. 11. Detail of a candlestick illustrated in Fig.8. 12. Detail of a candlestick illustrated in Fig.8.


branches were cast separately and subsequently fused, anticipa-ting a technique used by other Florentine sculptors such as PietroTacca.25 Originally, much of the surface of each of the six bron-zes was embellished with oak leaves that had been ‘cast almostfrom nature’, to borrow the words of Ulrich Middeldorf,26 aswell as with acorns;27 unfortunately, only ten leaves nowremain28 – probably executed using moulds taken from leaves, inaccordance with a practice widely employed in Florence sincethe time of Cennini and Ghiberti29 – but the mastery of theirexecution is admirable. The sculptor used screws, still partiallyvisible, at the time of the modelling process to join the waxmodels of the branches (Fig.10). Examination of the bronzesrevealed that no cold-polishing occurred at the base of the trunk,while the surface is more highly polished as the trunk separatesinto branches. The extraordinary invention and plastic quality ofthese bronzes are immediately apparent, and it seems evident,comparing Christ’s crown of thorns to the slender branches sup-porting the socle (Fig.12), that the Crucifix and the candlestickswere the work of one craftsman.

According to a Miscellanea written in 1744 by Ubaldo Tosi, ascholar and priest from Urbino who enjoyed a benefice and musthave officiated in the city’s Cathedral, the ‘set of large bronzeCandlesticks, and Crucifix for the high altar, which form threeoak branches with leaves, and acorns around them, with stabletriangular bases in wood coloured as bronze’, kept at that time inthe sacristy, were ‘presented [to the Cathedral] by our mostSerene Signor Duke Francesco Maria on 5th October 1529’.30To this, Tosi adds: ‘nowadays somewhat damaged’,31 referring,as we shall see, to the candlesticks’ extensive loss of the leaves andacorns that must have been separately cast and entwined aroundthe trunks. While it would seem obvious to identify the bronzesdescribed by Tosi with those now in the Museo Albani, the dateof the ducal gift that Tosi recorded, 5th October 1529, seemsimprobable. Given the the style of the bronzes, which stylisticallyappear much later than the 1520s, we must presume that Tosimisread the date and inverted the 9 and the 2: indeed, as we have seen, 1592 was the year in which the commisson was com-pleted.32 In 1708, Pope Clement XI (Albani), a native of Urbino,

25 D. Zikos: ‘“Ars sine scientia nihil est”: il contributo di Pietro Tacca al bronzo ital-iano’, in F. Falletti: exh. cat. Pietro Tacca. Carrara, la Toscana, le grandi corti europee, Car-rara (Centro Internazionale delle Arti Plastiche) 2007, pp.55–73, esp. pp.66 and 68.26 The shape of the leaves suggests identification with the Irish oak (Quercus petraea,rovere in Italian). For botanical representation in sculpture in the fifteenth and six-teenth centuries, see G. Caneva et al.: ‘La fitoiconologia per il riconoscimento e l’in-terpretazione delle rappresentazioni artistiche’, in G. Caneva, ed.: La biologia vegetaleper i beni culturali, Florence 2005, II, pp.85–128. The expression ‘fusione quasi di natura’was used by Middeldorf in an unpublished typescript entitled Intervista con il prof. Bear-zi, autunno 1969 in the scholar’s archive at the Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles.The text was discussed by Alfredo Bellandi, to whom I am grateful for having sharedhis work with me, in a lecture entitled ‘La scultura fiorentina del Rinascimento nell’archivio di Ulrich Middeldorf al Getty Research Institute for the History of Art diLos Angeles’ given at a conference at Palazzo Manzoni, Perugia, and at the Fonda-zione Orintia Carletti Bonucci (17th–19th November 2015); Bellandi’s article will be

published in the conference proceedings.27 See notes 30 and 31 below.28 There are holes on the bowl and along the branches of the candlesticks that be-fore the removal of the core pins served to attach the leaves and – probably – theacorns. Of the ten leaves that remain, some are still fixed in this way, others are inser-ted. On the surface of some of the branches, sections of the sprues that might havebeen used to attach the acorns are visible.29 M. Ciardi Duprè Dal Poggetto, in exh. cat. Lorenzo Ghiberti: ‘materia e ragionamenti’,Florence (Museo dell’Accademia and Museo di San Marco) 1978–79, pp.396–97.30 Urbino, Biblioteca Universitaria (cited hereafter as BUU), Urbino 93, U. Tosi:Miscellanea non nullarum notitiarum ad civitatem Urbini spectantium atque collectarum perme Ubaldum Tosi sacerdotem beneficiatum ex non nullis auctoribus ac notariorum rogitibusque viam sternunt ad enixe demonstrandas antiquitatem excellentiamque eiusdem civitatis.MDCCXLIV, fol. 376v: ‘Una muta di Candelieri e Crocifisso di bronzo grandi per l’altare maggiore che formano tre branconi di quercia con foglie e ghiande intorno con zocche stabili



13. Detail of Fig.9. 14. Detail of Fig.17.


donated a magnificent altar and a set of silver candlesticks to theCathedral.33 In 1789, the dome of the Cathedral collapsed, caus-ing extensive damage to the building and destroying the altar,which was subsequently rebuilt in a similar style and using thesame materials in 1796.34 It is probable that the sixteenth-centurybronzes were moved to the sacristy, where they were recordedby Tosi in 1744. Since the date given by Tosi has never been challenged before,

scholars who have examined the bronze Crucifix and candle-sticks have accepted that they dated from before 1529. They arenot mentioned in any of the publications devoted to Bandini byUlrich Middeldorf (1929), Pasquale Rotondi (1942), CharlesAvery (1994) or Eike D. Schmidt (1998). They were first men-tioned in 1962 by Franco Mazzini in the Guida di Urbino as beingamong the works kept in the Cathedral’s sacristy and dating fromthe fifteenth century.35 They were moved to the Museo Albanisometime before 1984: Franco Negroni and Giuseppe Cuccofirst published Tosi’s reference in the museum’s catalogue andsomewhat unconvincingly suggested that they were the work of

Girolamo Genga.36 This attribution was accepted in the DellaRovere exhibition catalogue of 2004,37 despite the fact that thereis no proof that Genga practised as a sculptor.38 This was the sec-ond time that a work by Bandini had been erroneously attributedto Genga. Vasari claimed that the monument to Francesco MariaI della Rovere, the remains of which are in the church of the for-mer monastery of S. Chiara, was designed by Genga and sculptedby Bartolomeo Ammannati.39 But it was in fact the sculpture forwhich Bandini was paid in 1587.40To confirm the attribution of the bronze Crucifix and candle-

sticks to Bandini and to identify them with the bronzes for whichhe was paid between 1589 and 1592, we must turn to the figureof the dead Christ from the marble Pietà sculpted by Bandinibetween 1585 and 1588 (Fig.17):41 the anatomical conceptionand the faces of the two Christs viewed from the front and inprofile (Figs.13–16) are identical, and the harmonious propor-tions, the definition of the torso, the musculature of the limbsand the loincloths are also very similar. Both faces have narrow,elongated eyes in round sockets, natural volume of the cheeks,

a triangolo di legno colorite di bronzo. Regalati [to the Cathedral] dal Serenissimo nostro Signor Duca Francesco Maria sotto li 5 ottobre 1529’, see opac.uniurb.it/ODIG-IT/AU/tosi_02/album0.html; no.P1030543; last accessed 10th August 2016. 31 ‘In oggi assai logori’: ibid. 32 The Crucifix was paid for on 29th June 1589, while it and two of the six candle-sticks were probably completed by 3rd October 1590 and it cannot therefore beexcluded that the date of 5th October 1589 could refer simply to money advanced bythe Duke for work in progress.33 BUU, Urbino 54, A. Rosa: Serie cronologica di tutti li signori canonici della chiesa d’Urbino:opuscolo che prende il suo cominciamento dall’anno 1481 fino al corrente 1815 corredato di storicheinteressanti notizie con in fine un’appendice degli opportuni autentici documenti, pp.764–76;BUU, Urbino 55, fol.184r–v; BUU, Archivio del Comune, Chiesa Metropolitana,183, fols.109r–123r and 132v; F. Negroni: Il Duomo di Urbino, Urbino 1993, p.90.34 B. Ligi: Memorie ecclesiastiche di Urbino, Urbino 1938, pp.281 and 287. On PopeClement XI’s patronage and work on the Cathedral in the sixteenth century, seeNegroni, op. cit. (note 33), passim; E. Debenedetti, in G. Cucco: exh. cat. Papa Albani

e le arti a Urbino e a Roma 1700–1721, Urbino (Palazzo del Collegio) and Rome (S. Sal-vatore) 2001–02, pp.318–23.35 F. Mazzini: Guida di Urbino, Vicenza 1962, p.83.36 G. Cucco, in F. Negroni and G. Cucco: Urbino: Museo Albani, Bologna 1984,p.122, cat. no.555. 37 M. Giannatiempo López, in P. Dal Poggetto: exh. cat. I Della Rovere: Piero dellaFrancesca, Raffaello, Tiziano, Senigallia (Palazzo del Duca), Urbino (Palazzo Ducale),Pesaro (Palazzo Ducale) and Urbania (Palazzo Ducale) 2004, pp.313–14, cat.V.9.38 Vasari claimed that Genga ‘Fece anco alcune opere di scultura e figure tonde di terra e dicera’; G. Vasari: Le vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori, nelle redazioni del 1550e del 1568, ed. R. Bettarini and P. Barocchi, Florence 1984, V, pp.349–50. See also M.Grasso: ‘Genga, Gerolamo’, Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, 1999, LIII, pp.88–93.39 Vasari, op. cit. (note 38), p.350.40 Rotondi, op. cit. (note 1), pp.16–18; Schmidt, pp.63–66.41 See note 1 above, and A. Fucili, in D. Tonti et al., eds.: exh. cat. Imago pietatis: Il Corpo, Urbino (Oratorio della Grotta) 2008, pp.72–75.



16. Detail of Fig.17.15. Detail of Fig.9.


the soft and half-open mouth, while the divided beard recallsVerrocchio’s work of the late quattrocento.42 The treatment ofhair terminating in curls is similar in both, which cascades overthe shoulders in the bronze and falls down the back in the marble. Comparison with the marble bust of the Saviour by thesame artist, now in the monastery of S. Vincenzo in Prato, alsosupports the attribution of the bronze Crucifix to Bandini.43It is evident that stylistically this Crucifix is close to those of

Giambologna, and can be compared both to his of c.1573(Museo dell’Antico Tesoro della Santa Casa di Loreto)44 – hisonly work in the Marche – and to that in S. Lorenzo at the Escorial,45 which, despite traces of Della Porta’s influence, provides a significant antecedent for the sculpture in Urbino, asdoes Giambologna’s Crucifix of similar dimensions in the Salviatichapel in S. Marco, Florence (1579–89; Fig.18).46 The UrbinoCrucifix seems to lie mid-way between Giambologna’s S. Marcosculpture, with its naturalistic anatomical definition, and themonumental bronze in St Michael’s church in Munich (1593–94).47 The Urbino bronze would seem to antedate the Munich

Crucifix by four or five years and throws light on Giambologna’sown artistic development, anticipating his style in the 1590s withits increasingly abstract and idealised forms. In an exchange ofletters between Simone Fortuna and Francesco Maria II dellaRovere between October 1581 and June 1583, the Dukeexpressed his wish to acquire autograph works by Giam-bologna,48 writing on 27th March 1583: ‘I greatly desire to havesome work by the hand of Gio. Bologna, and so I would be verypleased if you might discover whether he might undertake tomake me a large Crucifix in marble measuring approximatelytwo palmi without the cross [c.50 cm.] in a single piece’.49Fortuna replied that Giambologna would prefer to make theCrucifix ‘in silver, bronze or copper’,50 rather than in marble.After much negotiation, the Duke declined ‘the model that[Giambologna] is offering, in order to then have the work doneby my sculptor [Giovanni Bandini], because I am fully satisfiedwith his ability and worth’.51 In February 1582, Fortuna had recommended that Francesco Maria II welcome ‘Gio. dell’Opera’ to his court, who:

42 For the influence of quattrocento art on Bandini and his contemporary Florentines,see A. Giannotti: ‘Lo stile puro dei fiorentini, da Andrea del Sarto a Santi di Tito’, inA. Giannotti et al., eds.: exh. cat. Puro, semplice e naturale nell’arte a Firenze tra Cinque eSeicento, Florence (Galleria degli Uffizi) 2014, pp.27–55, esp. pp.41 and 46–47. 43 Borghini, ed. Ellis op. cit. (note 3), p.314; S. Bellesi: La scultura nel Seicento, in C. Cerretelli et al., eds.: Il Seicento a Prato, Prato 1998, pp.311–22, esp. pp.311–12;Schmidt, pp.66–67.44 The Crucifix stands 23.8 cm. high, see K.J. Watson, in C. Avery et al., eds.: exh.cat. Giambologna: Sculptor to the Medici, Edinburgh (Royal Scottish Museum), London(Victoria and Albert Museum) and Vienna (Kunsthistorisches Museum) 1978–79,p.144, cat. no.106; Gasparotto, op. cit. (note 11), p.11. 45 The Crucifix measures c.42 cm. high, ibid., p.11.46 The Crucifix stands 46.8 cm. high, see K.J. Watson, in Avery et al., op. cit. (note44), p.144, cat. no.107; Gasparotto, op. cit. (note 11), p.12. 47 D. Diemer: ‘Giambologna in Germania’, in B. Paolozzi Strozzi et al. eds.: exh. cat.Giambologna: gli dei, gli eroi. Genesi e fortuna di uno stile europeo nella scultura, Florence

(Museo Nazionale del Bargello) 2006, pp.107–25, esp. p.111; idem, in R. Eikelmann,ed.: exh. cat. Bella figura: Europäische Bronzekunst in Süddeutschland um 1600, Munich(Bayerische Nationalmuseum) 2015, pp.264–67, cat. no.37.48 Further evidence of the Duke’s relationship with artists belonging to Giambolo-gna’s circle is to be found in a letter sent by Girolamo Portigiani from Florence toFrancesco Maria II on 28th June 1581; see D. Zikos: ‘Die Ausbildung von Adriaende Vries zum Bronzeplastiker in Florenz (ca.1581–1586)’, in S. Adelmann et al., eds.:Neue Beiträge zu Adriaen de Vries, Symposiums vom 16. bis 18. April 2008 in Stadthagenund Bückeburg, Bielefeld 2008, pp.179–93, esp. p.187.49 Letter from the Duke of Urbino to Simone Fortuna, 27th March 1583, in Gronau,op. cit. (note 1), p.522 doc. XII: ‘Io ho molto desiderio d’haver qualche opera di mano diGio. Bologna et però mi farete piacer assai d’intendere destramente se potesse attendervi et farmiun Crocifisso grande di marmo senza la croce d’intorno a due palmi d’un sol pezzo’. 50 Letter from Simone Fortuna to the Duke of Urbino, 9th April 1583, in Barocchi, op.cit. (note 11), pp.240–41, doc. 265, esp. p.241 doc. 265: ‘d’argento, di bronzo o di rame’.51 Letter from the Duke of Urbino to Simone Fortuna, 22nd May 1583, in Gronau,



17. Detail of the Pietà, by Giovanni Bandini. 1585–88. Marble, 212 by 185 cm. (Oratorio della Grotta, Urbino).



18. Crucifix, by Giambologna. 1579–89. Bronze, 46.8 cm. high. (S. Marco, Florence).


op. cit. (note 1), p.524, doc. XVI: ‘non ricercherei altrimenti il modello che [Giambologna]offerisce per far poi fare il lavoro dal mio scultore [Giovanni Bandini], perché della sufficienzaet valor suo io mi ritrovo veramente a pieno sodisfatto’.52 Letter from Simone Fortuna to the Duke of Urbino, 10th February 1582, inGronau, op. cit. (note 1), p.521, doc. VIII: ‘è huomo sodo, saldo et sicuro et l’opere sue sonogià riuscite in eccellenza, acquistando molto fama et havendo superato la povertà ogn’un credeche sempre migliorerà et la felicità ch’ha di scolpire del naturale è in lui dono singulare et piacemolto a i Principi. Nel getto egli non s’è molto esercitato, havendola per cosa assai facile [. . .].In somma a me pare che, concludendo, dicto Giovanni, Vostra Eccellenza, habbi il migliore etpiù valoroso huomo che sia ora in Toscana doppo Gio. Bologna’.53 For Bandini’s training with Baccio Bandinelli, see Borghini, ed. Ellis, op. cit. (note3), p.313; for Seriacopi’s letter, see L. Fumi: Statuti e regesti dell’Opera di Santa Maria diOrvieto: Il Duomo di Orvieto e i suoi restauri, Orvieto 1891, rev. ed. L. Riccetti, Orvietoand Perugia 2002, p.721, doc. LXIII; see also note 55, and Schmidt, p.57.54 M. Leithe Jasper: ‘Rapimenti. Nesso e Deianira’: in Paolozzi Strozzi, op. cit. (note47), p.165.

55 Fumi, op. cit. (note 53), p.721, doc. LXIII: ‘Giovanni Bandini, detto Giovanni dell’Opera, allievo del cavalier Bandinelli, è andato a Livorno e a Carrara e con se ha portato ilmodello et misure de l’Apostolo’. See also note 53.56 E. Dhanens: Jean Boulogne: Giovanni Bologna Fiammingo, Douai 1529–Florence 1608.Bijdrage tot de studie van de kunstbetrekkingen tussen het graafschap Vlaanderen en Italië,Brussels 1956, pp.41–43, and see also Giambologna’s letter to Girolamo Seriacopi sentfrom Venice on 7th October 1593, ibid., p.357. 57 W. Timofiewitsch: Girolamo Campagna: Studien zur venezianischen Plastik um dasJahr 1600, Munich 1972, pp.47–59 and 253–55, cat. no.12; A. Bacchi: ‘GirolamoCampagna’, in idem, ed.: La scultura a Venezia da Sansovino a Canova, Milan 2000,pp.715–19, esp. p.716. 58 G. Gronau: ‘Die Statue des Federigo di Montefeltro im herzoglichen Palast vonUrbino’, Mitteilungen des Kunsthistorischen Institutes in Florenz, 3, 5 (1919–32, but1930), pp.254–67, esp. p.257: ‘nella chiesa del Redentore, fatta dalla Signoria per voto,all’altar maggiore quel famosissimo Crocifisso di bronzo con le due statue’.

is a hardworking, consistent and trustworthy man and whoseworks have already achieved excellence, acquiring muchrenown, and having overcome his limitations everyonebelieves that he will continue to improve and the capacity thathe has to sculpt from nature is a singular gift and much likedby Princes. He has not spent much time casting, having foundit quite easy [. . . ]. In short it seems to me that in the said Gio-vanni, Your Excellency, will have the best and most valiantman in Tuscany after Gio. Bologna.52

It would seem that the commission of the Crucifix and thecandlesticks for Urbino Cathedral was prompted by the Duke’sdesire to have a Crucifix by Giambologna and the arrival, someseven years later, of Giovanni Bandini in the Marche. It seemsincreasingly likely that, Bandini, following his apprenticeshipwith Baccio Bandinelli, who died in 1560,53 may subsequentlyhave worked with Giambologna: the horse in his Meleager isclosely related to that in Giambologna’s Rape of Deianira (Muséedu Louvre, Paris) of 1576.54 In the letter to workmen in the Fab-brica del Duomo in Orvieto written by Girolamo Seriacopi,provveditore del castello in Florence of 24th September 1595, hestates that ‘Gio. Bandini known as Giov. dell’Opera, Bandinelli’spupil, has gone to Livorno and Carrara and has taken with himthe model and measurements of the Apostle’:55 this was the StMatthew and the angel that Giambologna was to make for OrvietoCathedral. Now that the Urbino Crucifix can be dated to 1589,it also illustrates how Giambologna’s ideas were disseminatedthroughout Italy; there were no other known examples in Italyof such close derivation from Giambologna’s work. Between thelate 1580s and 1595 Giambologna’s Crucifixes were made almostexclusively in metal on an increasingly monumental scale. AllGiambologna’s large-scale Crucifixes – in Munich (1593–94), inhis funerary chapel in SS. Annunziata, Florence (1594), and inPisa Cathedral (1597) – post-date his journey to Venice in Octo-ber 1593,56 during which he could have seen Girolamo Cam-pagna’s magnificent Crucifix for the church of the Redentore inVenice, cast in 1590.57 This was the first example of a monumen-tal Christ on the Cross in metal to be made in Italy sinceDonatello’s work for the altar of the Santo in Padua (1443–49)and that of Niccolò Baroncelli and Domenico di Paris for thecathedral in Ferrara (1450–55). Campagna made his great statueof Federico da Montefeltro in 1604–06 for the Palazzo Ducale inUrbino and, in a letter sent to the duke from Venice on 19th June1604, he mentions with pride that he was also the author of the‘very famous bronze Crucifix’ made ‘in the church of the

Redentore’, and still in situ.58The bronze candlesticks outclass other examples in their

inventiveness and the sharp, fresh detail of the wax model, whichrenders the knots in the trunk and the pattern of the wood in ahighly naturalistic manner (Fig.11). In the conception of theseworks, Bandini shows his debt to the artists of the Studiolo ofFrancesco I, but also to Jacopo Ligozzi. His freedom of inventionin its mimetic and striking naturalism anticipates the greatBaroque inventions of the following century, and the candle-sticks find an echo, for example, in the golden rose that GianLorenzo Bernini designed for Alexander VII, ‘with the roots

LAY_PRINCIPI_Bandini_v2.qxp_Layout 1 19/10/2016 11:44 77

raising the plant (the Chigi oak tree, on which the roses bloom)above the base with exactly the same daring that he had used inthe rocky support for the obelisk in his Four Rivers fountain inthe Piazza Navona’.59 In these candlesticks, Bandini combinesNiccolò Tribolo’s60 sculptural tradition of the late 1540s duringthe construction of the Medici villa at Castello withGiambologna’s realism, evident in some of the bronze birds hemade around 1567 for the grotto at the same villa.61 Bandini’snaturalism may have also influenced the Vicentine Camillo Mar-iani (c.1567–1611), who was in Bandini’s workshop in theMarche in the 1590s and appears in the Duke’s accounts in 1595and 1596;62 he sculpted the fountain in the Villa Miralfiore inPesaro, of which four bronze monkeys survive (three in theBoboli Gardens, Florence, and one in the Metropolitan Museumof Art, New York).63Finally, it is worth considering the chronology of this com-

mission in the context of Urbino around 1590.64 FollowingArchbishop Giannotti’s departure for Avignon in 1585,65 PaoloPagani arrived in Urbino as apostolic vicar and, in November1592, inaugurated the episcopal seminary, initiated by his pre-decessor,66 and also established the Orations, in which the ven-eration of the Holy Sacrament was central.67 During Pagani’stime in Urbino, and concerned that the Papacy was imposing itsinfluence on the Duchy, Francesco Maria II gave his patronageto the chapel of the Sacrament, with, as its altarpiece, Barocci’sLast Supper (1590–99).68Thus it seems probable that Bandini’s bronzes, and the candle-

sticks in particular, which were intended to be placed on theCathedral’s high altar, which had to be rebuilt ex novo,69 werepart of an extensive programme glorifying the Della Roveredynasty that the Duke was keen to promote, culminating withthe payment of 745.41 scudi made by Francesco Maria II on 4thJanuary 1605 for a ‘gold censer with oak leaves’.70 Just as thetrunk of the oak tree supports the candles in Bandini’s candle-sticks, so Federico Barocci in his Last Supper 71 also glorified theDella Rovere: on the right a youth carries a vase with oak leavesengraved around its rim, while a young boy rushing to stoke theblazing fire carries branches of oak, ready to warm Christ’s finalrepast (Fig.19).

59 J. Montagu: Roman Baroque Sculpture: The Industry of Art, New Haven and London1989, p.122. See also idem: Gold, Silver and Bronze: Metal Sculpture of the Roman Bar-oque, New Haven and London 1996, p.17. See also A. González-Palacios: Arredi eornamenti alla corte di Roma, 1560–1795, Milan 2004, pp.36–41.60 A. Giannotti: Il teatro di natura: Niccolò Tribolo e le origini di un genere. La scultura dianimali nella Firenze del Cinquecento, Florence 2007, passim.61 D. Heikamp, in Paolozzi Strozzi, op. cit. (note 47), pp.249–52, cat. no.50.62 Schmidt, pp.72–73.63 On this group, the monkeys and Mariani’s collaboration with Giovanni Bandini,see M.T. De Lotto: ‘Camillo Mariani’, Saggi e memorie di storia dell’arte 32 (2008),pp.21–233, esp. pp.22, 23, 47–49, 76, 123–125, cat. nos.4–4b.; I. Wardropper: Euro-pean Sculpture, 1400–1490, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, New Haven 2011, pp.98–100, cat. no.31.64 I am grateful to Davide Gambino for providing me with vital information.65 G. Montinaro: Fra Urbino e Firenze: politica e diplomazia nel tramonto dei della Rovere(1574–1631), Florence 2009, p.45.66 BUU, Urbino 54, document cited at note 33, p.46.67 A. Lazzari: Memorie istoriche dei conti e duchi di Urbino, delle donazioni, investiture e

devoluzioni alla Santa Sede, Fermo 1795, p.393: ‘Orazioni dette della Settimana’.68 Negroni, op. cit. (note 33), pp.95–107; B. Bohn, J.W. Mann and C. Plazzotta, inJ.W. Mann et al., eds.: exh. cat. Federico Barocci: Renaissance Master of Color and Line,Saint Louis (Saint Louis Art Museum) and London (National Gallery) 2012–13,pp.224–37, cat. no.12.69 This can be inferred from a report, ASF, Ducato di Urbino, classe I, 4, fols.778r–785v; see F. Piperno: L’immagine del Duca: musica e spettacolo alla corte di Guidubaldo IIduca d’Urbino, Florence 2001, p.234, note 4; F. Biferali et al.: Battista Franco ‘pittore vini-ziano’ nella cultura artistica e nella vita religiosa del Cinquecento, Pisa 2007, p.112; thereport, ‘Quanto alla Fabrica della Chiesa Cathedrale d’Urbino’, fol.778r, dated 1592,requests that the Archbishop of Urbino carry out work in the church, including thehigh altar. 70 Document cited at note 8, fol.685r: 4th January 1605, ‘Per un Turibolo d’oro a fogliedi quercia’. 71 S. Cuppini: ‘“L’Ultima cena” di Federico Barocci, dettagli iconografici’, in G. Cucco: the conference proceedings ed. Iconografie eucaristiche: testimonianze dall’Arcidiocesi di Urbino–Urbania–Sant’Angelo in Vado, Urbino (10th–17th April 2005), Urbi-no 2005, pp.157–63, esp. p.158.



19. Detail of The Last Supper, by Federico Barocci. 1590–99. Canvas, 299 by 322cm. (Cathedral of S. Maria Assunta, Urbino).


giovanni bandini’s bronze crucifix and candlesticks made · pdf file ·...

Documents