The Baptistery San Giovanni in Florence and its Placement within the Chronology of Tuscan Romanesque Churches
Brian E. Roy Dept. of Art History • McGill University March,1994
"A f1lCsis slIbmilted ta the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research 111 partial fullfillment of the requirements of tl,e degree of Master of Arts. "
© Brian E. Roy, 1994
• / 1
Abslract • The controversial dating of the Baptistery San Giovanni i8 approached through formalistic considerations. FormaI analyses of the Baptistery and the Duomo (If Pisa lcad to comparison and isolation of definitive features of PIsan and Florcntine stylCb. As such, the buildines are shown to be prototypes and their rc~pcctivc rcceptions are traced ir. the Romanesque churches of Fiesole, EmpoIi, LUCCil, PIstoia and Sàfdinia. It is concluded that the Baptistery must have been complctcd bcfore the Duomo of Pisa was begun
Résumé
La datation du Baptistère San Giovanni à Flor(lnce est mise en question. Suivant des analyses formalistiques, les styles distinctifs des deux églises sont définis. La réception des deux monuments est tracée dans les églises d'Empoli, Fiesole, PistOle est Sardegna. Enfin, on trouve que la construction du Baptistère était compli>tc avant que la cathédrale de Pise il été commencée . •
• II •
Acktlowlcdgeme1lts
Expressions of the most sincere gratitude are extcnded ta Dr. H. J. Biikt'r Jor 1/1::;
guidance and encouragement, ta the staff at the Departl1le/lt of Art History, ta flte
helpful personnel at Blackader-Lallterman library, alld to tlle Bram Carber Foundatiol1 for its gencrollS financial support . •
• 111 •
Introduction 1
1: Dating: 4 The Baptistery San Giovanni at Florence 4 The Duomo of Pisa 13
Il: Analyses and Comparison 14 The Baptistery San Giovanni 14 The Duomo of Pisa 20 Comparison 33
III: The Reception of the Baptistery San Giovanni 41 San Miniato al Monte 44 The Collegiate Church of Sant'Andrea at Empoli 45 The Badia Fiesolana 46 Slln Salvatore al Vescovo 47
IV: The Reception of the Duomo of Pisa 49 • Lucca: Duomo San Martino 49 San Mkhele in Foro 54 San Frediano 56 Pistoia: San Giovanni Fuorcivitas 58 San Bartolomeo in Pantano 59 Sardinia: Ozieri, Sant'Antioco di Bisarcio 61 Ottana, San Nicolô 61 Borutta, San Pietro di Sorres 63 Codrongianus, 5S Trinità di Saccargia 65
Conclusions 67
Bibliograpy 74
Gro~.mdplans and Illustrations 79 •
l • ! Introduction
• One problern WhlCh troltbles architectural histori,ms concerns thl' dating and building chronology of the BaptIstery San Giovanni at Plon.'nee. Long the subject of debate, construction dates as early as the fourth dnd as latl' as the twelfth century have been proposed. While 1110st sL'holars prt'sl'ntly agree that the building was begun in the eleventh ccntury, histonans in
favour of a Romanesque dating have re-interpreted the ~dme body of evidence as those supporting an Early ChristIan dating. One point on which aIl scholars agree is that the marble incrustation covering aIl of the walls of the buildmg is Romanesque. D,lting the incrustation has bee:1 somewhat problemahc. In the carly part of the present century Beenken proposed a late tenth- or early eleventh-century date for tlw
completion of the incrustation.1 This theory was countered in the fOllrtJ(~~ by Walter Horn, who compiled a chronology of Florentme ROllhlllPSqUt' churches.2 Horn's date of c1150 for the cornpletioll of the mcrustation has
since received a favourable response from most scholar~ of Florl'lltll1e
Romanesque architecture. The case for an carlier ~ eleventh-century dating for the completion of ~he incrustation. As su ch, It is in line with the theories of 8eenken and Jacobsen, white contradictmg the popular theories of Walter Horn, and also of PIero Sanpaolesi who saw the Baptistery within a larger group of churches following the construction of the 1H. Beenken, "Der Florentiner Inkrustationsarchltektur des XI Jahrhunderts" 2W. Horn, Das Florentiner Baptisterium, and "Romanesque Churches ln Florence" • 3W. Jacobsen, "Zur Datierung der florentiner Baptlsteriums San Giovanm". 2 Duomo of Pisa.4 Toward the objective of adcling welght to the argument of an early to • rnid eleventh-century datmg [')1 the completion of incrustation at the Baptistery San Giovanni, the present thesls proposes to place the Baptistery wlthm the chronology cf Tuscan Romanesque churches. The anchor of the chronology is the Duomo of PIsa, the initation of construction of which is securcly dated at 1064. The hypothesis is that the churches in the study are either before or after Pisa. The ultimate objective is placing the Baptistery relative to Pisa. The methodology begins with a thorough analysis of both the Baptistery and the Duomo, that the (orms and conceptions can be compared. In this way it is possible to lsolate slmilar and divergent features. As such, the divergent clements constitute a list of definitive criteria for either the Pisan or Florentine style. The validity of the criteria is tested by tracing the receptian of the Florentme and Pisan prototypes. The present study will show that the reception of the Flol'~ntine style was restricted and short lived, while the Pisan style was enthusiasticdIly received throughout the region, but conspicuously absent at Florence. Further, it will be shawn that the churches representative of the reception of the Baptistery were, by and large, cornpleted before any of the churches following Pis a were begun. Finally, the findings are interpreted in light of traditional evidence and theories. As such, the first chapter of this thesis is dedicated to the re examinatiOl\ of traditional evidence and theories concerning the dating and building chronology of the Baptistery. In the second chapter the Baptistery and the Duomo are analysed and compared so that conceptual ùifferences between the two can be isolated. Consequently, the reception of the • 4p. Sanpaolesi, Il Ouamo di Plsa, 125. J Florentine style is discussed in the third chapter, and that cf Pis.l in the • fourth. A concluding chapter syntheslzes the aforenwntioned dlScll~sillns, and finds that the Baphstery must have been t'egun beforl' the middll' of tl1l' eleventh century, with incrustation complete before constructu.m W,1S much advanced, or perhaps even begun, at Fisa. • • 4 Chapter 1: Dating the Baptistery San Giovanni at Florence • and the Duomo of Pisa Tlle Baplistery San Giovanni al Florence Therc is no definitive documentatIon to permit a precise dating of the Baptistery San Giovunni m Florence. Epigrdphic evidence is restricted and excavations have !pd to dIvergent interpretations. Many of the conclusions reached by scholars about the date of construction have beE'n based on stylistic comparison with more securely-dated buildings. The development of constructiona! techniques in Florentine Romanesque architecture has also been studICd and relative chronologies of the Florentine churches have been proposed. TitI' Documentation Documents fram Caralingian and Ottonian times attest to the existence of a basihca or temple dedicated to the Baptist 0ccupying the site of the present baptist~ry.:; The earliest record of the dedication of the church in 1059 appears in a twelfth-century document.6 The association of Pope Nicholas II 5"Dum ad preclaram potestatem domni Lambertl pllsslml Imperatons missus directus fUisset ln flnlbus Tuscle Amedeus cornes palatl[li] et c Jnvenisset clvltate FlorenCia in domlnlum eplscopll IpSIUS clvitatls, elus ln atno, ant(3 basilica sanct: loanni Baptlsta ... " Judgement record dated 897, onginal ln Archlvlo Arciv 7scovlle, Lucea, Manaresl, doc. 102 "concesslmus et condonaUlmus eeCleSlae Beati lohanms eplscopatui Florentino, cui Grasulfus uenerabllus auctre Deo preese Uldetur, id est terra ad modls duodeclm, quae dlcltur Campus Regis, prope Ipsam eccleslam" 898, onginal ln Florence ACF, Plattoh, doc. 7 "per uestra -::ar!ula offerslonls dedlste et offersiste ln ecJesla et domUi Sancti 10annL" Property Grant of Bishop Ralmbaldus dated 941, origlnal in ACF, Piatto/i, doc. 11. "terre et case Ille sunt prope eec\ a et dom us S lohannls." Property exchange of Bishop Lambert dated 1032, Archlvlo dl Stato, Lucca,S. Ponzlano, Cocchi,65, 125 "In cUitate Florentia lusta ecclesia et domUi Sanc!1 lohannls batIste .. " Gift ot priest Roland, dated 1040, Archlvio dl Stato, Florence, S Fellcltà, Plattoh, doc 42. 6The ded/catlon IS recorded tirs! ln the twelfth-century "Ri!us ln Eeclesla Servandi," • Ricardlana 3005, fol. 65 The notion IS repeated in an early 13th-century document with the dedication on 6 Nov, 1059 is fIrst mentioped ln the sl'\,l'ntl'l'nth • ceritury. Firm documentation records Nicholas' prt.'sencl' 1I1 Florl'l1ù' ,lt Il',lst from 7 Ncw. 1059 until Jan. 1060.7 The fourteenth-century Florentine chronicler Villani h.1S Il'ft Sl'\'l'r.li notes concerning the BaptIstery.8 He is the first to mention tlw Pis.1Il gifl ot two porphyry columns in 1117.9 These columns werl' ~)rigin,llly l'rl'clL'd iIl front of the Baptisteryl0 and later attached tn the l'.lst l'xtl'nor w,lll of thL' building in the Quattrocento. 11 Villani, and a number of otl1l'r wrîtl'rs - including Dante, Petrarch, and Poliziano - stated that the Bapllstl'ry W.1S converted from a Roman temple ta Mars. 12 Villani nlso records th.ll tlll' lantern was erected in 1150. 13 The replacement of the original semi-circular apse on the west pnd of the bUIlding with the rectc1ngular scarsclla in 1202 is first J1lentlolll'd III tlll' seven teenth century.14 Less reliable documenta tian rl'fers to 1Ill' 1Il~ talla tion of a Baptismal font of unknown shape and dimensions III 112H.' '1 "Mores et Consuetudines canonlce florentIne," Archlvlo dei Duomo, Florence, ser la/3/8, fol 25. 7Papal bulls publlshed ln, Jaffé, P , Reglsta pontlflcum romanorum, Berlin, 1851, 387. 8Villani's source appears to have been records of the Arte dl Cahmala whlch was responsible for the Opera San Giovanni at least slnce 1193 and perhaps earher. Villani served as consul for the Calimala ln 1330. 9Villam, G., Cronaca, v 30. 10The phnths of the columns were dlscovered dunng excavations in 1971 11W. Paatz, 220, no 14. 12G. Villanl, Cronaca, VIII, 3. 13G.Villanl, Cronaca. " 15 14Carlo StrozzI presumably copled the date from the Callmala records, see Davldsohn, 1896, 146 15BéI<:l3d on A Lumachl, Memone stonche dell'antlchlsslmR battlstero dl S Jd]QysUl.o.La Firenze, 1782, 20. Lumachi apparently read a note made by Carlo StroZZI ln the 17îh century. StrozzI supposedly read the date ln the records of the Calimala The onginal • record was destroyed by tire ln the 18th cf'ntury 6 EpixraplllC EVidence • The epigraphic evidence is scant. Only two relevant dates have been isolatcd at S. Giovanni. The first is the tomb of Bishop Ranieri which is inscnbed with the date 1113. The tomb is built into the north-west wall of the Baptistcry. The second eplgraphic record is found on the helmet of the lantern. Walter Horn alone has wntten about this inscription, presumably after personal observation of the character.1 t1 Archeologlcal Evidence Excavations undertaken in 1895 revealed the foundations and lower courses of the semi-circular apse which originally stood in place of the scarse))a. The samc excavations also brought to light a section of the north wall of Roman Florence, a small bath complex, and the ruins of a second century house which had been renovated in the late-fourth, or early fifth century.17 Excavations made in the second decade of the twentieth century turned up a number of medieval tombs and an octagonal construction below the floor of the Baptistery. ThL' Theory of a Late Alltiqlle/Early Christian Construction Ever smce Villani refered to the Baptistery as a converted pagan temple,IS many scholars have supported the idea that the Baptistery was a late AntIque or Early Christian construction. No opposition to this view was presented until the nineteenth century. Since that time the theory of a Late Antique/Early Christian dating has been advanced by Nardini, Rupp, Toesca, SalIm and de Angelis d'Ossat. AlI but Nardini date the construction to be 16W. Horn. Das Florentlner Baptistenum . 17 A Toker , "A Baptistery Below the Baptistery" ,160-162. • 18A. Toker, "A Baptistery Below the Baptistery", 157. 7 from the fifth century, and the incrustation to the High Middle Agl'S . Nardini considered a date as early as the fourth or possibly fifth cl'ntury, • incrustation included. To support these hypotheses thl' Baptistery was certainly standing by the ninth (entury, as notl'd 111 tlH' Carolingian records. They have further tnterpretl'd thl' afch,ll'ologic,ll evidence as proof that the building WhlCh stoocl in the ninth century must Lw the same as the one still standing for no earlier foundatlons Wl'rt.' fl'Vl'a Il'li through excavation. They have not failed to note similanties Lll'twl'l'n tlll' Baptistery and Roman and Early Christian monuments such as thl' l\lIltlll'on and the church of San Aquilino in Milan. Toesca placed the Baptistery withlll the development of central-plan churches from Santa Costanza to Sdn Vitall' in Ravenria, while de Angelis d'Ossat saw it as a Palatine Chapd at Âachf..'nyl The most thorough attempt to link the Baptistcry wlth structurt.'~ of Antiquity has been made by De Angelis cl 'Ossat.20 He has Iinkl'd tlll' • Baptistery to fourth-century cupolas at the Bapttsterics of Fréjus dnd Nocer" dei Pagani in that aIl three utilize both stone and brick in the construction. The Early Christian church of S. Aquilino in Milan has a number of characteristics in common with the Baptistery; a vertical organlzation of three levels with niches on the lowest storey, wall passages in tht, intermediate storey, and a steeply-pltched doister vault covered by il pyramidal roof. Echoes of the Pantheon have been detected in the niches scrl'cned by two columns on the ground storey of the Baptistery. The Baptistery would have appeared even more Iike the Pantheon when its ~emi-circular ap~c Wilb 19p. Toesca, Storm dell'Arte Italiana, 108 . • 20G. De Angelis d'Ossat, "II Battistero dl Firenze ... " 8 still in place. D'Ossat has also shown that the carving below the beams of the pronaos of the Pantheon is repeated in the lower entablature of the • Baptistery.21 Further, the domes of both buildings feature a stepped base. These well-noted similarities between the Baptistery and Early Christian buildings are supported by an interpretation of the documentary evidence as indicative of the fact that a church dedicated to the Baptist has been recorded at least since Carolingian times. Since excavations have failed to reveal the foundations of an earlier building, scholars in support of an Early Christian date have seen this as proof that the present Baptistery was certainly built long before the Romanesque period. The epigraphic evidence does Jittle to disprove the theory, for the Ranieri tomb cou Id very easily have been erected in a 700-year-old building. Further, Horn's deciphered character cou Id account only for the lantern and cou Id oHer little insight on building chronology. In the case that the lantern was not in place earlier advances the • possibility that the Baptistery originally featured an open oculus in imitation of the Pantheon. Tire Them'y of a Lombard Construction The idea that the Baptistery was built during the period of the Lombard ru!~ has its origins in a pair of forged documents. The first is a tenth-::entury forgery of a supposed land grant of 724. 22 The second, the Vita S. Zanobi, is a twclfth-century forgery purporting to be an early fifth-century record written by Saint Simplicianus of Milan.23 The theory has most recently propogated by 21G. De Angelis d'Ossat, "II Battistero di Firenze ... " 230. 22Florence, FAC, Piattoli, doc.1 . 23G. Morozzi and F. Toker, S. Reparata: l'antica cattedrale tiorentina, Florence, 1974. • 87-88,92, ri. 40. Lopes Pegna.24 He has based his conclusions on d passage in ViIlani's Cronaca which Toker has demonstrated to be an irresponsible invention of • 25 the author. The Theory of a Romanesque Construction Since the nineteenth century, the îdea of a late Antique, Early Christian, or Lombard dating for the construction has attracted few followl'rs outside of Italy.26 Scholars in favour of a Romanesque rlating h<1"e generally exp12ined the Carolingian documents as indicative of an earlier church on the site. Toker has effectively shown that the octagonal structure under the floor of the Baptistery was the foundation of an earlier Baptistery.27 AlI scholars in favour of a Romanesque dating of the Baptistery h credence to the reports of the 1059 consecration by Pope Nicholas II. According to sorne, the consecration marked the completion of • construction,28 while for others only the groundstone would have been laid, or the earliest stages of construction would have been underway. Ali agree that the construction was complete by 11':'0. Proposed building chronologies have resulted through comparison of 24M. lopes Pegna, Le più antiche chiese dl Flren~ 77. 25F. Toker, liA Baptistery Below the Baptistery of Florence," 157, n. 5. 26Exceptions include B. Fletcher, A History of Architecture on the Comparative Method, 1961, 613, and A.Chastel, History of Italian Art, 1963, 65. 27F. Toker, liA Baptistery Below the Baptistery", 163-165. Scholars ln favour of an early dating consider the octagonal structure to have been a font designed for cOh'lplete immersion. Toker, however, has shown the dimenSions of the structure capable of supporting a building similar in size to the Arian Baptistery ln Ravenna Further, he has shown that the structure lacks a floor and could not have held water. By comparing the dimensions of the structure with those of other Early Chnstlan fonts, he has demonstrated that the supposed font would have been three tlmes as deep as the font at S.Giovanni ln laterano, and 2-3 metres wider than the largest Early Christian fonts. Finally, the font would have been twice the size of the Early Christian font at San Aquilino in Milan. • 28H. Beenken, "Die Florentiner Inkru'itations-Architektur des XI. Jahrhunderts". 10 constructional techniques and stylistic traits with other Tuscan Romanesque churches. Foremost among these is the church of Sant'Andrea Empoli, the • façade of which certainly follows that of San Miniato al Monte, which in turn found Its prototype in the Baphstery San Giovanm. An inscription on the façade of Sant'Andrea records a date of 1093. This date has been variably interpreted to mdicate either the initiation of construction or its completion. Hypothetical building chronologies have relied on stylistic comparison with other Romanesque buildings in Tuscany. Walter Horn has concluded that the construction of the Baptistery was completed in two phases: the first would include both the ground floor and second storey, and the second phase the attic and the dome. He dates the first phase 1059-ca1090 and the second to ca. 1090-1128. His date for the initiation of construction is based on the 1059 consecration and a stylistic comparison of the capitals and incrusted columns of the Baptistery with (hose of the Florentine church of S. Felicita. The dedication of S. Felicita is more securely • dated than the dedication of the Baptistery, and Horn has observed that the capitals of S. Giovanni exhibit a slightly more developed style than those of S. Felicita. His conclusions concerning the completion of the first constructional phase are derived from the dated inscription on the façade of the church of Sant'Andrea in Empoli. He has assumed that the Empolese inscription indicates the cornpletion of the façade of Sant'Andrea. His proposed datmg of the completion of the second constructbnal phase is derived from Villani's mention of the installation of a baptismal font in 1128. There elrc obvious flaws in Horn's reasoning. It is, of course, impossible to propose a chronology of construction based on analysis the superficial incrustation alone. Further, he has assumed that the construction of the • Baptistery must have been covered by the dome in order to permit the 1 1 installation of the font. The record of this font has alrcady bel~n shown ,1S • only moderately reliable.29 Finally, his attempts to build a chronology basl'd on the stylistic development in architectural sculpture (i.l'. c.lpit.lls) Sl't'ms somewhat tenuous and dlfected toward providing a conventent dating for the Romanesque churches in Florence. Werner Jacobsen has proposed a terminus post quem 01 1036 for tIlt' Baptistery and a terminus ante quem of 1093. He recogmzes Toker's conclusion that the octagonal structure found hclow the Baptisl('ry floo!' was the foundation for the earlier church recorded in Carolmglal1 and Ottpnian documents. He does not ü1terprf't the 1059 consecration of the church as indicative of the initiation of construction, but rather of il construction already underway, perhaps since 1036. The 1036 date i5 based on Imperial donations to the Florentine Bishopric in the wake of the religious reform movements.30 He has assumed that these donations were directed loward • the costs of construction and expe'.lsive marble incrustation. Ilis terminus ante quem is derived from the inscription on the façade of Sant'Andrea at Empoli. Summary The present thesis considers it imprudent to base assumptions on Villani's belated records of the dedication and the installation of both baptismal font (1128) and lantern (1150). It views the c1assically-derived articuh~tion of the building as a prime example of the phenomenon of Medieval quotations of Antique central-plan buildings such a~ S. Vitale and the Arian Baptistery at Ravenna, and the Palatine Chapcl at Aachen. Toker's 29F. Toker, "A Baptistery Below ... " 157 and 158. • 30W. Jacobsen, "Zur Datierung ... ", 226 ft. 1 2 wnc1us)')n that the construction below the floor of the Baptistery was the foundation of an carlier Baptistery - the one recorded in Carolingian and • Ottonian documents - is accepted. That the building was covered (and indeed complete) on the occassion of the installation of the Ranieri tomb (1113) is not doubted. Horn's interpretation of the single cha l'acter on the lantern is given no weight whatsoever, ev en though it would conveniently validate ViIlani's record of the 1150 consecration of the lantern. Horn's ac('cptance of the Empolese inscription as marking the completion of the façade of Sant'Andrea is considered valid. His assignment of two constructional phases based on his chronological observations on Florentine Romanesque churches is approached with greatest caution. In fact, the present work is in favour of a mid eleventh-century dating for the completion of construction and incrustation, and as such gives an ear to the propositions of Werner • Jacobsen . • 1 .3 Dating the Duomo of Pisa There is no controversy concerning the initiation of "'onstruction of • the Pisan Duomo. The church was begun in 1064 commemoratIon of.l n.w,ll victory over the Saracens at Palermo.:l1 .!\ftcr an cxtensiVl' l')"lmin,ltion of documents, nineteenth-century sketches madt.' by Gt.'orgl'-; Rouh.1uIt dl' Fleury, the materials and rnasonry of the ducmo, Urs Boeck has concludl'd that following the excavations and construction (If the foulldation~ tlH' work on the cathedral began with the lower-storey nave W.1lls. ThIs was tollowl'd by the walls of the eastern end of the church. According tu Sanpaoll'si and Boeck, the main apse of the church was completed between HNO and 1110.:'2 No firm dating has, as yet, been provided for the completton of tht' church, however it is known that at sorne point the nave W3S extendl'd wt'stward and completed with the presen~ façade. Many believe that thls l'xten~ion and construction of a new façade occurred between 111 0 and 11 HO.:\1 Th is view has • been challenged, most recently by Christine Smith, who, after nwticulotls analysis of the sculpture of the façade, has concluded that it was built in tIlt' second haH of the thirteenth century.34 31p. Sanpaolesi, Il Duomo di Pisa, 161. 32U. Boeck, Der Pisaner Dom Zwischen 1089 und 112.Q, 30. P. Sanpaolesl, Il Duomo dl Pisa, 125 ft. 33p. Sanpaolesi, 1\ Duomo di Pisa, 235-305 . • 34C. Smith, The Date and Authorship of the Pisa Duomo Façade. 14 • Chapter II: Analyses In this chapter the Duomo of Pisa and the Baptistery San Giovanni at Florence are analysed. From these anlayses a comparison is made so that the similarities and differences can be isolated. The characteristic differences are then outIined as a checklist for tracing the reception of the prototypes in subsequent monuments. The Baptistery San Giovanni (plan 3) The Baptistery is a centrally-planned building, octagonal in form. The W(lst wall is extended by a rectangular apse (scarsella) which replaced a semi circular arrangement in the thirteenth century. The interior and exterior wall surfaces of the walls and the scarsella are thoroughly articulated through the application of three-dimensional structural members • (buttresses, columns, pilasters, entablatures etc.), and the application of bichrome marbles. Complete entablatures define the walls into three storeys: ground, mezzanine and attic. Adjacent walls are effectively separated from one ano\her by heavy buttress piers at the corners and by the fact that they always meet at oblique angles. Elements such as the continuous entablatures and patterns of structural and ornamental design bind the component walls into a cohesive composition. Structural systems contrast with flat surfaces of intervening wall which are covered with large geometric patterns drawn in bichrome marblcs dissolve the mass and depth of the wall. The smooth and brilliant surfaces of the intervening walls are akin to fabric and reveal no mass of masonry, but appear as a curtain wall stretched between elements of the • trabeation. 1 5 • Interior Walls (illus. 3-4) AIl of the interior walls are similar in design except that of the west. The portal walls are slightly more elaborate than the others, and tlw Wl'st wall is peculiar in that it is open to the apse at the ground levd and is spanned by a broad triumphal arch which rises to the levl'1 of the second storey entablature. The artic walls are the sa me on ail eight skies. The verticallimits are defined by continuous projecting ent.lblaturcs. On the ground storey pairs of free-standing columns of the Composite order carry the entablature on its course between the t:orner piers. The columns constitute a screen forward of a rectangular niche stretched between the corner piers. Large chains of geometric patterns in 01'"S seclill! are arranged in registers on the rear and si de walls of the niche. Portal walls are distinguished by the intercolumniation framing the dDor which results in a wider central bay. More elaborate patterns are used in the marble incrustation of the waIls whieh surround the doars than in the non-portal walls. The mezzanine hou ses three barrel-vaulted galleries on each wall (except on the west). The vaults spring from the comer piers and are supported in the middle by transverse walls anchored to piers. Bays arc connected by narrow passageways eut into the transverse walls. Buttresses and fluted pilasters delimit the bays, the mterstices htted wlth an open bifora springing from the transverse piers and carried by single monolithic columns with Ionie capitals on a taU socle. Relative structural importance between the main system of pilaster') etc., and that of the bifora is • emphasized through; the use of Ionie capitals, contrasts in bichromatic 1 6 application, and the decoration of flat surfaces of the arcade wall, where rectilinear frames are arranged in a frieze and are embellished by floral and • Iiturgical designs in opus sectile. The patterns have the effect of de emphasizing the mass, especially when juxtaposed with the plasticlty of pilasters and entablatures. The broad arch which domina tes the west end at the level of the galleries has Its arcade wall divided by fluted pilasters. The resulting segments are decorated in opus sectile patterns, bath floral and liturgical, sorne in gold. T'tIL Vault The interior of the Baptistery is closed by a steeply-pitched octagonal dome of eight triangular segments which rise directly from the cornÎLe of the attic. At the crown the y are joined by an octagonal oculus surmounted • by a lantern. Thirteenth-century mosaics caver aIl of the surface of the vault. Exterior AIl eight exterior walls are similarly treated and each constitutes a thoroughly articulated façade spun over with a web of architectural and decorative details cor.sistently defined in bichromatic marble incrustation. There is sorne elaboration of the design for portal façades, stemming mostly From the placement of the door, and the intercolumniation of ground and second storeys, as weIl other details r~stricted ta the incrustation. Façade waIls are marked into three storeys by continuous entablatures. The course of the lowest entablature is interrupted at the west buttresses • while the others run the peruneter of the building. Each storey of each wall 1 7 is divided into three bays by buttresses, columns, pilasters or piers. First ,md • third storeys are post-and-lintel while the mezzanll1L' is a blind Mcade. The two lower storeys are joined into il super-order by tlw cnrner bllttressl's which rise to the springmg of the second-storey arcadl'. The .lthc is distanced from the lower block by a stepped base On the lowest storey of the portal walls the bays are deflllt'd by tIlt' corner butlresses and a pair of columns with ComposIte capltals whleh flank the doorways. The colurnns are fret:-standing forward of the W<11l .1Ild the entablature projects to meet the capItals. The non-portal walb differ in that three equal bays are framed by pilasters and projectIon of the ent.lblature is restricted to the impost area. AIl of the lower-storey bays are blind, and the resliiting curtain walls are ordered in two registers of rectilinear patterns in two-dimenslOnal bichromy. Rectangles and subctivided squares are the typical patterns, with • some more delicate patterns in opus sectile on the portal sides. The second storey is a round-arched arcade which springs from tilt' corner buttresses and is carried by a pair of engaged octagonaJ piers on each wall. The details of marble blchromy, both as a cOmplelll<'nt tn the structural system and as a decorative element, are very important for they set a standard enthusiastically recelved by churches withlll the Florentine sphere. Engaged piers are predominantly covered in green marble and contra st with the prevailing white of the curtain wall. The arches llre faced with green moulding carved with shallow Iinear profiles, <"lnd white is applied to face of the intrados. White marble is also used for bases and capitals and as such emphasizes the artIculation of the structural ~ystem. Spcmdrels are indicated by green triangles and the horizontal Itmlts of the • arcade wall are drawn by vertical strips of green at the corners and by a tl"tin ------1 8 band of green running directly below the architrave. The entablature is explicitly articulated by the white rnarble architraves and projecting cornice, • with fneze of green. The curtain wall behmd the arcade is ordered in two zones. The lower reduces a blind arcade to bichromy. Seemingly supported by the two JlmensionaJ arcade, the three bays of the second zone each conta in a c1assically-derived window wlth an elaborate independent system of trabeation. The extent of thlS classicizahon has led sorne to argue that they are Roman. On the portal walls the windows are actually supported by an aedicula which sits forward of the central arch of the blind arcade. Each window features either a triangular or round headed pediment, or a simple round arch frame. In ail cases the windows are supported by pilasters or colonett'2s. Both Ionie and Doric appear; the former on windows with triangular pediments and the latter on windows with round arches . • Different schemes of fenestration are used on dlfferent walls. The east wall has a window with a triangular pediment in the central bay, and windows with simple round arches in the flanking bays. The other portal walls have a window with round-headed pediment in the central bay and triangular pediments in the outside bays. The non-portal walls share a similar system of fenestratIon with simple round arches on the windows of the central bays, and triangular pediments on the windows of the flanking bays. The Attle Ail eight attic walls are identical except for minor variants in the paterns of ill/arsin decorating the entablature. White fluted pilasters eut • each wall into tluee bays. Adjacent walls are effectively separated by the 1 l) architrave which rises uncommonly From the bast' of the .lttie tn tllrn ,1 right angle and assume the normal hOrIzontal courSl' .lbOVl' the ptl.lstl'rs. • Curtain walls of the attic are derorated with a largl' green SqUtHl' subdivdl'd into three tall rectangles. Windows are placed at the very bottom 01 tlw central rectangle and are emphasized only by shallow profllt.'S carvl'd into the white IT'3.rble. Tite Lantern The building is crowned by an octagonal lantern bllilt in white marbk'. Eight free-standing columns wIth Composite capitals are plaCl'd ,li tlll' corners and support a richly-sculptured entdblature with I11lar:;ill decoratmg the frieze. A taU helmet composed of eight trinngular segnll'nts b supported at the bottom by the cornice and surmounted by • The Scarsella The choir or scarsella is defined as a rectangular tldjllnct to tIlt' W('st wall of the Baptistery. Its width is determined by the Wl'stl'rI1 (,oflH'r buttresses between which it is built. A cros~-grojn vault ~pnng~ froln ,111 entablature supported at the corners by free-standmg colllll1ns with gilded capitals. Curtain walls are decorated 111 ordered reglsters of rl'clilinl'tH frames containing various abstracted patterns. There are threc wIndows on the west wall, two lozenge windows mldway up the wall and <1 small oculu~ in the centre at the top. Exterior walls of the Scarsella The exterior walls of the scarsella are decorated with a system of • articulation derived from the other walls of the building. A single ~t()rey is 20 defined as a blind arcade. On the west wall elongated round arches spring form corner buttresseb and are supported in the centre by a smooth pilaster • with ComposIte capital. The arches do not spring directly from the capital but from an mtervening impost. The impost occurs as a projecting continuation of an entablature stretched between the corner buttresses. Gables crownmg aIl three walls of the scarsella are separated from the arcade by a sculpted entablature with frieze decorated in intarsia. The entablature is not contmuous, but is interrupted by apotropaic sculptures superimposed on the corner buttresses. Marble blchromy is used to define the corner buttresses and the structural elements as to give order to the curtain wall of the blind arcade. Arches and spandrels are defined in green marble and the curtain walls are defined In superimposed registers of rectangles drawn in green against a white ground. One square window is placed in the central rectangle on the lowest register. At the level of the arcade, each curtain wall is penetrated by one iozenge-shaped window in the centre of each bay. In contrast to the frames of the c1assically-denved windows on the other walls, the windows of the scarsella haVi: no elabornte architectural frames but are accentuated only by Iines of bichromy framing their perimeters. The D"o",o of Pisa (plan 4, illlls. 5-14) The Duomo is a five-aisled columnar basilica with three-aisled transepts. The central aisles of the both nave and transepts terminate in a semi-circular apse. It IS a multi-storeyed construction with three orders defined 111 the nave, choir and transept walls, and five storeys on the east, west and transept façades. Rising above aIl of these is the eliptical crossing • dome. In detai\s Oi both form and elevation, the three-aisled transepts are 2 1 reductions of the five-aisled nave, and as such, the overall form is acht.llly the fusion of three rectangular churches with central aisle terminating in " • semi-circular apse. The rectangular church with semi-circul.u apse is perhaps the most popular form found in Romanesqul' Tuscany; .lppl'arin~ in aisleless and hall churches, and basilicas. Pisd 1S, howl'ver, unique in tlll' fusion of three basilicas, dS weIl as in Hs prestigious five-aisll'd structurl' whieh recalls the great basilicas oi Constantine. The rigid articulation of the interior, and especial1y the cxterÎor walls results from the persistent ordering of the surfaces mto storeys delimited by projecting entablatures and supported by wall strips in both bhnd arcadl's and post-and-lintel àrrangements. On the elaborate façades of the cast and west, lower-storey blocks of blind arcading are con trastl'd with superimposed open galleries . • Exterior (illus. 5-9) The impressive exterior appearance of Pisa Duorno is duc not only to its great dimensions, but also to the brilliance of the marbles, the rigorous articulation of the wall surfaces in rigid architectural orders, and the juxtaposition of multi-storeyed volumetrie masses. The nave, transept, and choir walls are ordered in three storeys marked by projecting ('ornices, generally without indications of architrave and frieze. Blind arcades on wall strips are the norm for the lowest storey, and blind post-and-lintcl arrangements for the upper storeys, the second carried by wa)) strips and the third on columns free-standing forward of the wall to crcate a wall passage. Designs for the east, west, apse and transept façades arc articulated in five storeys and incorpora te the juxtaposition of blind arcades with open • galleries. 22 The East End of the Church VJewed from the east the Duorno is a eomplex juxtapositon of multi • storeyed volumetrie masses. These indude the cubes corresponding to the main and si de aisleless of bath nave and transepts, the clerestory bloeks, the semi-cylindrical apses which anchor the composition, and the eliptical dome which crowns it. The East Façade The contours of the east façade are dictated by the east walls of the choir and the projecting half-cylinder of the apse. Five storeys are defined by comices, the third and fHth of which are pedirnental and effect a division of the façade into upper and lower blocks. The lower block is tripartite in elevation and completely incorpora tes the apse, while the upper block is bipartite; the lower arder corresponding ta celerestory and the pediment • masking the roof. In its most fundamental terms, the lower block is a rectangular mass of two storeys crowned by a triangular pediment, completely incorporating the projecting apse. The conical roof of the apse rises to the peak of the pediment. The elevation continues that of the choir walls, divided by continuous entablatures. The lowest storey of the lower black is definerl as a blind arcade, carried by wall strips on the choir wall and by engaged colurnns on the apse. The second storey appears as a post-and-lintel construction on wall strips on the choir wall and as an open groin-vaulted wall passage on free-standing columns at the apse. The intercolumniation of the wall passage is half that of the blind arcade below, however impost blocks and elongated arches • serve to accentuate the loftiness of the storey. 23 The third storey is defined as a triangular pediment on the choir wall and an open wall passage (post-and-lintel) at the apsc. The scmi-conic.11 • roof of the apse is .also contained within the pedinu.'ntal comice. TIll' intercolumniation of the passage is the same as that of the lower wall passage, and as such the storey is more squat. On the choir walls blind post and-linteJ bays are outlined by wall strips. The upper block b composed of two storeys, its contours ddined by tilt' width of the central nave and the nave roof. 8Hnd post-and-Imtel bays on wall strips constitute the lower storey while the pedimcnt fcatures a v4..'ry narrow wall passage behind an arcade on free-standing cotumns. The arcade follows the contours of the pedimental cornice. The generai composition of the five storeys of the cast façade n'veats the Pisan concern for juxtaposed volumetrie masses and rigidly-ordl·red wall surfaces defined by blind arcades and superimposed gatk:ril's. • Attention to the salient details of the composition offers tfl'mendous insight into the Pisan predilection for exploiting the depth (lf thl' wall. This is achieved primarily through the incorporation of pcnetrating clements such as; blind windows, stepped-Iozenges, polychrome marbles, sculptUfl', and the three-dimensional spa ce of the open gallery or wall passage. At Pisa, the incorporation of polychrome marbles into the structural system is primarily tied to techniques inherent in masonry. This is observed in the use of alternating dark-and-light voussoirs and espccially in the horizontal bands appearing in the marblc fabric of the wall. Ultimatcly the observer is confronted with a building constructed of massive marble blocks. Depth and strength of the walls are further accentuated by the • consistent employment of devices which conspicuously pentrate deeply into 24 the surfaces. One of the most important elements responsible for this phenome'1on is the stepped lozenge as it appears in the lunettes of the blinà • arcade. The deep round-arched blind windows and stepped oculi are also typical proponents of wall penetration. Furthermore, polychromy is Lé\lled into the formula to ensure preception of the elements. Alternating marbles are used for the receding profiles of the lozenges and blind windows. Sculpted mouldings (foliate, bead-and-reel, egg-and-dart) are employed to bridge the stepped profiles of arches, emphasizing the extrados and giving added plasticity to the comices. Such mouldings are found on aIl of the arcades and stringcourses of the chOIr wall and apse. Opus sectile and infarsia in polychrome marbles are usually restricted to the lunettes of the arches and the arcade walls. Generally, continuous patterns of simple geometric configurations are used for the arcade wall and the interior face of the stepped lozenges. Su ch fabric-like intarsia often fiIls • entire lunettes. The delicacy of these patterns is calculated to contrast with the compact mass of the masonry. The Transept Façades The north and south transept façades are reduced versions of the east façade. A similar arrangement of five storeys is defined on the wall, with the semi-cylmdrical apse rising to the level of the side-aisle galleries, and a rectangular block with pediment correspondinb to clerestory and roof of the central aisle. Certain variations exist between the two transepts, resulting in a more elaborate version on the south (which faces the city and the Archbishop's palace), than on the north (which faces the defensive walls). The lower storey is articulated as a blind arcade on wall strips on the • wings, and a blind arcade on engaged columns on the apse. This ------~ - 25 arrangement is a close duplication of the situation on the east f.1çtlde. On • the south side the blind arcade of the apse does not rise as high as the stofl'Y defining continuous comice of the south wall, and tIlt' d ISCI'l'p,lI1cy b bridged by a mezzanine of five s1uare trabeated bays on wall strips. E,\ch b,\y is fitted with a stepppd lozenge. The lunettes of the lower-store~' blind arcade of the apses tlrl' trl'tltl'd differently, with intarsin patterns in polychrome meubles on the south transept, and lozenges 111 the north apse. In the central bay of l'.lch ,1pSt' there is a blind window similar to those in the bays of blind arcade of thl' main apse. Above the mezzanine, the upper storey of the south transept is a blind arcade on free-standing columns, while the arrangement on the north is a post-and-lintel system on wall strips. StE'pped lozengl's decorate the 11ll1l'ttes of both the blind arcade and the upper quadrants of the post-and-hntel bays. • Further distinguishing the south apse is the placement of a wll1dow in the central bay. The roof of the apse is fitted into thé centre of a broken pediment on the end wall of each transept. The pediment corresponds to the height of the side aisle roofs, and provides a base for the upper block WhlCh masks tl1l' clerestory and roof of the central aisle. A blind arcade 011 wall strips articulates the lower storey of the block, while four thin wall stnps carry the pedimental cornice of the ultimate storey. Further definition of the blind arcade results from the penetration of the central bay with a bifornte window, and stepped lozenges in the lunettes of the flanking bays. • 26 The Side Walls of the Choir, Transept and Nave In general, all of the side walls of the building are similarly articulated • into three storeys by projecting cornices. The lowest storey is consistently defined as a blind round-arched arcade carried by wall strips. The second storey is a post-and-lintel arrangement, aga in carried by wall strips. The intercolumniation of the second storey is half that of the lower storey, thus resulting in twice as rnany bays as are defined in the storey below. The third storey is a narrow wall passage, the arcade of which is supported by free standing columns. The lower-storey bays are alternately fitted with round-arched windows or stepped lozenges. The same rhythm is effected in the second storey, however, the bays with rectangular windows are alternated with stepped lozenges or blind oculi decorated with elaborate starhurst patterns in opus sectilc. The third storey bays are alternately fitted with round-arched • windows and stepped lozenges. TIlc West Façade The impressive west façade of the Duomo is unanimously accepted as the last phase of construction, following an extension of the church to the west. Most have followed Sanpaolesi's theory that the façade was completed in the 1120s, however more recent scholarship has presented a case for a later date, perhaps ev en in the Duecento. In any case, the composition consolida tes the various elements typical of the Pisan style/and reappears in numerous churches within the Pisan sphere. Like the eastern and transept façades, the west façade is arranged in five storeys. The lowest storey is a blind arcade of seven bays. The four superior • stnreys are aIl vaulted wall passages. The arrangement is f .~,1 that the first 27 storey rises to the height of the side-aisle arcades. The second storey riscs tn • the height of the interior galle ries, and the third storey riscs to the Iwight of the side-aisle roofs, effectively constituting a triangular pedin1l'nt broken hy the block of the fourth storey which is in turn crownl'd by a completl' pediment. The compact mass of the ground storey serves as il basement for the four airy colonnades above. It is articulated as a seven-bay arcade supported at the corners by buttresses and carried by six engaged Corinthian columns. There are doors in the second, central and sixth bays, eilch wlth The division of the arcade into three subgroups Ü:. further ell1phasized through the application of marble polychromy and clements of architectural relief. The wide central doorway is distinguished from aIl of the others by the richly-carved columns which flank it and by the many profiles of thl' arch which recede deeply into the wall. Each level of thl'sl' recl'ding profiles is duly marked out 111 contrasting marbles and decoratl'd with ornatl'ly carved mouldings. The arches of the flan king bays are much less e1aboratcly • sculpted, nor are there a~ many profiles defined, so that the tympanum is ------28 shallower. However, the lunettes of the narrow bays are fitted with stepped • lozenges. Thus, the triumphal group is given articulation through the contrasts between the width of the central vs. flanking bays, and by the placement of stepped lozenges or oculi in the lunettes. The side-aisle groups are similarly defined, except that the door is much shorter, and the tympanum rises only to the level of the springing of the arcade. The lunettes above the doors are each decorated with an oculus in opus sectile. As such, contrast is effected through juxtaposition of the lozenge and the oculus. The Iight airy quality of the vaulted wall-passages of the upper four storeys of the façade results from; the dozens of slender monolithic columns which support the arcades, extensive use of sculpture, and arcade walls spun over with a net of opus sectile in polychrome marbles. AlI columns are separated from the arches by square imposts, each replete with figuraI, • animal and abstract sculpture. FiguraI elements are also found in the opus sectile of the arcade walls, however the focal elements are discs sawn from Antique columns and placed as geometric elements in the opus sectile fabric. In effect, the whole façade is like a display case of Antique columns and precious marbles. The definition of the inner wall with contrasting stripes of masonry serves as a contrast to the predominant verticality of the colonnades, thus insuring the perception of both the colonnade and the inner wall. Further, it allows sorne perspective on the depth of the passage, which is also ,cmphasized by the deeply receding profiles of the biforate and triforate windows which open onto the central nave . • 29 • The Interior (illus. 10-14) The interior of the basilica is comprised of three distinct spatial areas, each virtually an independent church. The main body of the church is il rectangular five-aisled structure with the wide central aisle termin.1tll1g in cl semi-circular apse. From the crossing, transept adjuncts stretch north ,md south. Nave, choir, and transept walls are organized in cl tripartite elevation consisting of arcade, gallery and clerpstory. The central aisll' of the main body of the church and the transepts were originally c\osed by an open-timber roof (later replaced by a ceiling of suspended coffers). SkIe aisles are cross groin-vaulted. The crossing, which rises much higher than the rest of the building, is capped by an elipticai dome on squinches. Four storeys are defined on the interior wall of west façade, corresponding to the first four storeys of its exterior elevation. The interior of the east and • transept façades are characterized by tall semi-circular apses which rise tn the gallery level of the nave walls. The Nave The nave is delimited by the north, south and west walls of the church, and by its junction with the crossing at the east. The junction is marked by a taU acute transverse arch supported by cruciform piers. Four colonnades of ten columns each divide the space into five aisles; a wide central aisle flanked by low narrow side aisles. The Articulation of the Central Aisle of the Nave The central-aisle arcade is carried by monolithic columns of granite • with Corinthian capitals. The voussoirs of the arches are presented in white 30 The white voussoirs contrast with the fIat black of the masonry of the arcade • wall. Spandrels of the arcade wall are decorated with rectangular or cruciform configurations executed in white or red marble. The cornicc of the storey serves as a base for the second storey galleries. Thp gallery arcade is cdrried by striped cruciform piers. Into each bay is fitted a biforat<.> arch springing from the Cl uciform pier at the si de and carried in the centre by a slender column variously crowned with Corinthian or Ionie capitals. The piers are, of course, tied to the primary support system, while the funchonal role of the columns IS restricted to the support of the curtain wall of the biforate arcade. A rhythm is effected by the regular alternation of the supports. Polychromy serves ta eL'phasize the structure. Cruciform piers are defined by wide bands of black and white marble~, the voussoirs are treated in alternating black-and-white stones, and the curtain wall spanning from • the extrados of the bifora to the intrados of the main arcade is gray, contrasting with the white marble of the main arch profiles and the coJumns supporting the bifora. An oculus or lozenge of opus sectile appears in the curtain wall of each biforate arcade. The c1erestory is the least artieulated section of the nave walls. According to Sanpaolesi, the intonaco covering this section of wall was orginally monochromatic (white) and the horizontal bands were painted on much later3s. The round-headed windows appear cut out of the wall, with no relief or chromatic elements to accentuate their forms. Tite Sidt' Ais/es of the Nave The pairs of narrow side-aisles of the nave are two storeys in elevation . • 35p. Sanpaolesi, Il Duorno, 197. - " ."\ 1 The first rises to the level of the arcade of tlw central aisle, and tlw sl'cond • constitutes the three-dimenslOnal space of the galleries. The 10\\'l'l' storey IS groin-valllted, takmg support from the centr:)1 colonn.ldl', the side-dlsll' colonnade, and from corbeis on the outside walls Arch \'O":.Sllll'S .Hl' treated in alternating black-and-white stone, and thl' SldC-.lISll' w.llls .Hl' striped; wide bands of white masonry altertlating with narrow b.1t1ds nt dark. Light from the side-aIsle windows reaches tlll' g.1l1l'ry ~p.h'l' through an open arcade. The arcade is executed in white Ill.Hb!t, with .1 thin Iml' lit black fol1owing the CurVl'S of the arches. The second storey of the side .lit·;\es is covered by a sloping roof, originally open limber but now coffl'rl'd. The Crossing The space of the crossing is, in many ways, an extensIOn of tilt' central aisle of the nave, and as such its transverse width is l'quai to that of tlll' • central aisle. Hs length corresponds to the width of the transepts. The spaCl' is defined at alI four corners by cruciform piers. On the cast and west il IS delineated from the choir and nave by tall transverse arches and on tlll' north and south by elaborate three-storey arrangements which servc as pseudo-façades for the transepts. The transverse arches of the crossing sprmg from tall wall strips whlch extend from the cruciform piers. Each pila8ter 18 topped by a CorinthJaIl capital. The voussoirs of the arches grow out of the wall and assume thclr autonomous form only after they surpass the height of the ga "l'l'y arcade At this point their course is emphasized by richly-~culpturcd proJecting profiles. Inner transverse walls of the crossing fcature an elongated blll1d arch in the centre, the curtain wall of which b decorated in alternating • bands of white and black marbles. There is a sguinch on cach corner which 32 allows the transition from the rectilineal' configuration of the crossing walls to the eliptical form of tpe crowning dome. • The north and south walls of the crossing constitute the pseudo-façades ot the tran~epts and are trIpartite in elevation. The lowest level is defined as an open triumphal arch of three bays. The triumphal arcade springs from cruciform piers on the outside and is carried by a pair of monolithic Corinthlan columns. The arches are glven further definition by the white voussoirs which contra st with the black-and-white stripes of the wall above. The vertical hmits of the arcade storey are dfined by a projecting cornice. At the gallery level the triple arch is repeated. The central arch rises higher and IS wider, than the two on the flanks, and is fitted with a quadrafora spnnging fro.n the piers and carried by three monolithic columns. The curtain wall which is stretched between the subordinate and main arcade is executed in alternating bands of white and black marbles . • The arches have alternating voussoirs of dark and light stone. An elaborate floral pattern decorates the centre of the curtain wall. The flanking arches are similar, each fitted with a simple bifora carried by a single monolithic column. TilL' Choir The choir is a continuation of the nave and double side aisles. It is two bays in length and terminates in the semi-circular apse. The articulation of the arcade, gallery and cleres tory also repeat the solution for the nave. At the east end the central aisle termina tes in a tall semi-circular apse, defined at the perimeters as a broad triumphal arch . • The Transepts As has already been noted, the north and south \Valls of the crossing • constitute pseudo-façades for the isolated transept~. TI1l' sldl' .1\Sll'S ot tlH' nave continue through the main body of the church mto the choIr but .ln' not incorporated into the crossing. At this pOlllt, howl'wr, tl1l'y benll11l' p.ut of the transept space. These galleries open onto both tlw crossmg .1I1li the central aisle of the transept. The articulatIOn of tilt' m.lin and g.lllery arcades, and of the walls, is almost identIcal tn th.1t of tl1l' 111.1111 bndy of tlll' church, with white voussoirs defining the arches of the central MC.H.il's, ,md alternating voussoirs in the arches of the groin-vaulted slde .1ISll'S. The vertical limit of the arcade storcy is defmed by a sculptured projl'ctlllg cornice and the organization of the semi-circular apse repe.lts tilt' solutu))l used in the choir. • Interpretation of the Analyses: Toward a definitie" of tllC F/ort'lltilll' tlIltl Pisan Styles Although both the Baptistery of Florence and the DU0n10 of Pi!'.,l .Ht' marble buildings which make conslstent reference tn Antiqul' Illodeb, the differences between them outnumber similaritles. Through cOll1r~ris\)J1 of the buildings it is possible to isolate slmllar and dls~imJ!é.H Chtlr,lctl'n!'.tlc~ As such, the dissimilar characteristics can be sald to dcfme the tndl'Pl'ndl'nt styles. This allows not only a clarification of conceptutll dlffl'rl'Ilcc:-, L-,plwl'l'/1 the buildings, but also a checklist useful in assessing the reception of the two prototypes. Comparison of General Form • It is, of course, impossible to make a forma) c()mpari~()n between two 34 such divergent building types as a centrally-planned octagon and a five aisled basihca with transepts. It is, however, worthwhile ta consider the • rdevance of these forms in light of traditional apphcations. As we have seen, the Baphstery of Florence IS strongly remmiscent of Antique buildmgs, 50 much sa that it has led to erroneous interpretations of the building as a LateAntique/Early Christian structure. It seems that the builder's prime pomt of reference was the greatest of ail Roman temples, the Pantheon. The Baphstery also diverges from the Pantheon in that the former is octagonal and the latter cicrular. The octagonal arrangement certainly reflects the builder's mtent on recalling ti e prestigious church of San Vitale at Ravenna, and l'ven Charlemagne's Palatine Chapel at Aachen. It seems relevant that wlth the choice and construction of an octagonal building the builders of the Baptistery consciously tied it to the most prestigious • constructions of Imperial Rome, Byzantium, and the Carolingian Empire. The predominant reference made by the five-aisled basilican form of the Duomo of Pisa is to Constantine's basilica of Oid St. Peter's. Another similarity between the Baptistery San Giovanni and the Pisan Duomo concerns the articulatIon of the walls with a rigid network of relief elt:ments. Foremost among these are the blind arcade, and the definition of a trabeated architecture wherein vertical division is achieved through the application of projecting entablatures, stringcourses or cornices. Despite these formai similarities, the details of the forms reveal divergent conceptions, and this is generally due to the application of coloured l1larbles. The most obvious differences is that at Pis a we see marble as masonry while at Florence it is a superficial incrustation. Pisa has a more • extensive palette than Florence, yet the dominant impression (especially on 35 the exterior) is of white marble, for the coloured stones arc relegated to secondary functions such as the outlining of shape!:> and the emphasis of • penetrating elements such as windows, lozt.>ngcs and .uches. At rlor~'nCl', however, there is a much more graphie application of bichromy with marbll' used to accentua te structural members, and to order mtcrvenmg strl'tclll's of curtain wall. The Pisan conception has precedents in the Roman Basihctl of Maxentius, Byzantine churches in Kiev, Greece, and Serbia, wlu.'re dcfinition of walls incorporates stripes of alternating colours.\O Tlll' Plort.'ntÎlw application of biehromy is in Hne with Roman techniques of mcrllsttltiOI1 ,1I1d is decidedly reminiscent of the Carolingian Gatehollse at Lorsch wl1l'n' tilt' wall is spun over with a web of architectural detalls emphasized through bichromy (white and red), and a fabric wall decorated III geometric patterns. The general composition of the façades of Pisa and Plorcncc arc extremely divergent. Florence features a tripartite c1evation with a post-and • lintel arrangement on the ground storey and attic, and a blll1d ,HC,ldl' on the mezzanine. On aIl levels the bays are blind and no e1emen t exploits tht.' depth of the wall. Pisa, on the other hand, presents a multi-stofl'yed arrangement with a blind arcade on the lowest level, and open supcnmposcd galleries on the upper storeys. The blind arcade of the lowest level of Pisa does, of course, correspond in sorne ways to the blind arcade of the mezzanine at Florence. The superimposed galleries of the Duorno have no parallel at the Baptistery, and the penetration of the third dimension through the galleries and even thE' recedmg windows in the Pisan façade arc in direct opposition to the Florentine system which is restncted to surface incrustation. A comparison of the Pisan and Florentine apses is not pOSSible, for the original semi-circular apse at Florence was replaced by the rectanguJar • 36C. Pietramellara, "La Blcromla nell'Architettura dell'Oriente Mediterraneo", 25. 36 scarsella in the thirteenth century, and any description of the elevation of the original would be entirely speculative. It does not seem unreasonable, • howev('r, to assume that the articulation (lf the exterior walls of the apse would have followed the system established on the other exterior walls of the building, i.e. a blind arcade executed in relief and emphasized with bichrome marbles. There is no church within the sphere of Florentine influence which evidences such artIculation of the exterior of the apse, but the Pisan arangemenl of a blind arcade and superimposed columnar wall passages is conspicuously absent in Florentine churches while often copied in the churches within the range of reception of the Duomo of Pisa. As concerns the use of polychrome marbles for the emphasis of structural formula, we have observed that the Florentine design depends completely on such defmition while eolour is rarely a factor in the Pisan formula except for the alternation of black and white voussoirs. At Florence, • in fact, the formula is quite distinct, with shafts and the face of arcades consistently covered in green, while white is used for bases, capitals, and the facing of the intrados. A standard arrangement is also present in the exterior entablatures, wlth white architraves and cornices alternating with a green frieze. Further, the curtain walls of blind bays are always ordered by geometric shapes - usually rectilinear - outlined in green marble on a white ground. Stripes in the masonry, the use of alternating voussoirs in the arches, and alternating eolours used to define the profiles of lozenges, arches and windows are typically Pisan characteristics. Such devices make no appearance at Florence, except for the COIller buttresses of the Baptistery, which were originally in 11laciguo and striped only in the last decade of the thirteenth • century. 37 Exami!\ation of the exterior wall surfaces of Pisa rcveals n lt'ss rigid approach to the application of polchromy, espccinlly in cnmparison tn • Florence where it seems every detail of the incrustation was consldl'red in .l single conception. At Pisa, the fact that the l'arlil'st w,l11s (Iowest storl'Y ni original nave walls) were not l'ven built or covered 111 rnarbll' Il'l'IVl'S room for speculation as to the designer's onginal intentions. Morl'ovl'r, tIlt' predominant applicatIOn of polychromy on the exterior of the DlIomo is relegated to striped masonry and this is neither contll11101lS nor reglll.H 111 tIlt' earliest parts of the structure (nave walls, choir walls, cast end etc.) Only with the erection of the west façade do these stripes appenr rl'glllar and controll'd. Both churches employ the motif of the trillmphal arch 111 tlll'ir compositions. At Flor~nce a triumphal arch is defined by the SUPl'l'-order of the ground and mezzanine storeys of ea,=h of the exterior façnde walls. This arrangement is particularly elaborate on portal façades where tlw centrnl arch • is wider and taller than the two which flank it. On the façade of the ()uomo, the seemingly continuous blind arcade of the groul1d storey hns nlre.1dy bl'en revealed as an implied series of three triumphal arches. The tluee st'mi circular apses at Pisa and the entrance to the scarsella of the Baptistl'ry .. II feature broad arches, again in the triumphal tradition. Yet tlw triumphaJ arch does appear in a peculiar representation at Florence, which is not sel'Il at Pisa. This is in its reduction to two-dimensional bichromy as on tIlt' mezzanine of the exterior façades, and on the interior curtain walls surrounding the north and east portaIs. The decoration of the walls of the biforate arcade at the gallery levl·I with abstraet patterns seems, at first, a factor common to both churehes. On doser observation, however, the differences arc clear. At Pisa there is cither • an oculus or lozenge-shaped pattern decorating the curtain wall of the bifora 38 arcade. These patterns are not framed or anchored by any sculptural or polychromatic means, and seem to swim in the space. At Florence, on the • other hand, the decorative patterns on the gallery level are contained within rectilinear frames constituting a well-ordered frieze running between the pilasters. Plasticity is another important factor separating the det Florence. Any variet j of animal, vegetable or human life can be found in the sculptured mouldings and protomes at Pisa. At Florence, on the other hand, there is no figuraI or animal sculpture whatsoever, and the plastic representation of flora is restrÏcted to the classically-derived acanthus leaves etc., which decorate comices . • Finally, one must consider the use of free-standing columns as a definitive factor in the Pisan style. While such columns are used on the primary support system of the interiot' and exterior of the ground storey of the Baptistery, as well as in the secondary supports of bifore in the gallery zone, this does not come close to the proud display of columns at Pisa. The Duomo is a five-aisled columnar basilica. Columns are also used on the gaIJery level of the interior. On the exterior, free-standing columns are the predominant component in the designs for the main apse and west façade, and figure also in the uppermost order of the nave walls. The above comparison of the Duomo and the Baptistery has shown that the character and conception of the two buildings is considerably divergent, despite overwhelming similarities such as the referenœs to cassical • architecture, the use of marbles, and the rigid articulation of the wall surfaces 39 into networks of architectural relief. Isolating the charactcristics unique to each church provides a definitive checklist with which to gaugc the reception • of the two churches in subsequent monuments . • • 40 Characteristics of the Florentine Characteristics of the Pisan Style Style • Complete incrustation of building Double-shelled construction built in bichrome (white/green) predominantly of white marble marbles Tripartite elevation marked by Multi-storeyed elevation marked corn-pIete entablatures only by projecting cornices or stringcourses, generally with no indication of architrave or frieze Persistent defimhon of the wall by Insistence on depth and strength superficial elements. No of the wall through application of exploitation of the depth of the elements penetrating the surface wall such as blind windows, stepped lozenges elc. Typical formula for chroma tic Definition of the structural system definition of structural system primarily through plasticity of the with green used for shafts and members, with use of polychromy incrusted profiles of arch, and restricted to the altern.lting vous white used for bases, capitals, soirs and profiles of the arches • intrados Plasticity restricted to architectural Extensive use of sculpture in clements, no use of animal or architectural elements, mouldings figuraI sculpture carved with vegetable and animal life, and representation of the human figure in the form of protomes No exploitation of colot;red Stripes defined on wall fabric by marbles in alternating voussoirs, alternating courses of dark and stripes of masonry or emphasis of light masonry reccd ing profile,. Fluted pllasters of white marble Wall strips The triumphal arch appearing in Stepped lozenges, stepped oculi friezes of two dimensional OpliS decorated with starburst patterns sec/ile in opus sectile No open galleries or wall passages Designs for façade and apse on façade or apse juxtapose compact mass of • ground-storey blind arcade with superimposed galleries and wall passages 4 1 Chapter III: Reception of the Baptistery of Florence • There are only four Romanesque churches to be cited as representativl' of the reception of the Baptistery of Florence. None of thcm .1fe ccntral-;"'ll.m churches, and the Florentine formula is detected in the f'lçades of basiliC'.ls or hall churches. The adaptation of the formula first occurs with the façade of San Miniato al Monte, which was, in turn, imitatcd at Empoli, Ficsok', .1I1d San Salvatore al Vescovo. Tracing the reception shows that the prot,)type was foUowed faithfully with little or no incorporation of alien forms, elements, or characteristics. San Miniato al Monte (plan 5) San Miniato al Monte is one of the oldest and most prestigiolls of sacred buildings in Florence, tied lo the legend of the city's first and only • martyr San Miniato. There are no allthentic documents to nttest to tIlt' existence of a cult building on the site before the Carolingian pcriod, although Villani recalls the existence of a smalt oratory dedicated to Saint Peter at the site in the Early Christian period.:n Authenhc documentation from thl' eighth century affirms that some sort of bulding, perhaps an Early Christidn basilica, was in place and received donations from Charlemagne in 783 or 786, and again from Emperor Lambert in 898.38 It appears that by the eleventh century the bUIlding had f 37F. Gurrieri, La Basilica di San M;niato al Monte a F;renze, 15. • 38F. Gurrieri, La Basilica di San M;n;ato al Monte a Firenze, 15. 42 vetustate neglectam atque pene destructam '.39 Numerous donations from Florentine bishops continued through the decades of the eleventh century, • and an act of Henry IV, dated 1062, records that the church was 'decenter constructum ... ut modo cernitur honorabiliter restauratum'. 40 The building chronology was considered by Walter Horn in 1943 with hlS rexamination of Florentine Romanesque churches. Through analysis of masùnry techniques in the church and comparison with other buildings in Florence, he proposed that the construction of the church was completed in three phases. The first phase includes the walls of the crypt and the absidial zone, the second includes the Iower order of the façade, the walls of the si de nave, the choir to the point at which it connects to the walls of the central nave, and the third phase inc1udes the walls of the central nave, the internaI arcades of the nave and the second store y of the façade. He dates the first phase to the second decade of the eleventh century, the second to around the • 1070, and the third to the second quarter of the twelfth century.41 A section of the pavement of the nave is inscribed with the date 1207, and obvious stylistic similarities connect the opus sectile to the patterns in the upper haH of the façade pediment. In the nineteenth century the building was much restored and the columns were marblized in stucco, white most of the green and white decoration of the interior c1erestory walls was completed. Much of this apparent incrustation is in actually paint. The incrustation of the exterior and interior wans of the west façade, and the interior of the apse is quite authentic. ln plan, the church of San Miniato al Monte is a three-aisled basilica, 39The act is reported by Ughelli, 164, III. Lami, 158, l, p. 42., and Berti, 1850, p 175. (See Gurrieri, La Basilica, 15-16). 40R. Davidsohn, Geschichte von Florenz, 1,35 . • 41W. Horn, "Romanesque Churches in Florence", 110-123. 43 central aisle terminating in a semi-circular apse. The arcade is carricd by li system of alternating supports with two columns betwecn compound piers. • The compound piers also support transverse arches and the intl'rior SpllCl' is thus effectively measured in three large spatial cubes. There are two storl'ys defined as arcade and clerestory, while the choir is elevated abovl' .1 hall crypt. Side and central aisles are covered by a ceiling of open timberwork. The Façade (illus. 15) The façade of San Miniato is illustrative of the adaptation of the Baptistery façades to a basilica. The west wall is ordered into tl1ree storeys; arcade, mezzanine and pediment. Storeys are delineatcd by complete entablatures. The discrepancy between the height of side and nave wnlls is bridged by triangular wings. The ground storey combines elements of the first and second storeys of • the Baptistery. The arcade is certainly derived from the second storey of the Baptistery, yet the use of columns ties it to the situation on the grounc:l sturey portal walls of the prototype. The definition of the arcade with white for base, capital and shafts and arches of green are typical. The use of rectilinear frames in the curtain wall of the blind arcade recalls the large blocks of the lower storey of the Baptistery while the decoration of the lunettes necessarily looks to San Giovanni's second storey. Elements from the mezzanine and the attic of the Baptistery arc fused in the design for the second storey of San Miniato. The large block is dlvided into three rectangular sections; the outer two being identical in design and the central one contrasting. The outside sections are defined at the sides by white fluted pilasters which support an architrave which grows out of the • capitals and turns at right angles to efft:-ctively frame off the ~ection. This 44 device is familiar from the attic of the Baptistery. The intervening curtain wall is ordered by two large rectangular configurations; the lower one defined • by a broad frame decorated in opus sectile and subdivided into two rectangles poised on the short ends. The upper haH con tains a large oculus quartered by spoke~ and circumference drawn in marble bichromy. While the rectilinear frames can be found on first and third storeys of the Baptistery, the oculus has no precedent in Florence. The central bay of the mezzanine is also ordered in two registers; the lower one containing a window wlth triangular pediment similar to those on the second storey of the Baptistery. The upper quadrant is decorated in mosaic and has no precedent on the exterior of San Giovanni. The triangular wings which mask the side aisle roofs are tied to the central bay of the mezzanine in that their height corresponds to lhat of the window pediment, and thelr surfaces are decorated in a trellis of green marble like the surface • surrounding the window. A possible precedent for the trellis can be found in the broad chains of lozenges on the interior ground-storey walls of the Baptistery. The pediment of the church follows the Baptistery only in a few details. Thl' lowest register of blind arcade in OpllS sectile has been seen on the second-storey exterior walls and the interior north and east portal walls of San Giovanni. Decoration of the spandrels of the blind arcade echoes the spandrels of the exterior second storey arcade at the Baptistery. The telamons which hold up the comice and the frieze of zodiacal figures and fantastic beasts are without precedent at the Baptistery. The adaptation of a façade design for the walls of a central plan church to a basilica implies a number of concessions. Yet there is never any doubt • that the design for the façade of San Miniato follows that of the Baptistery. 45 This adaptation did not however rely on Pisa in any way, for it cxhibits 110l1l' of the definitive characteristics of the Pisan façade. As slIch, San Miniato • becomes as much a mode} as the Baptistery itself, for slibseqlll\l1t churcht.\s in the reception are basilicas or aisleles~; churches and haVl\ " gn\.1tl\r .1fftnity with San Miniato than the central plan of San Giovanni The Collegiate Church of Sant'Andrea at Empoli (ii/liS. 16) The church of Sant'Andrea is particularly important in the n.\ct.\ption of the Baptistery for the inscription on its façade which bears the datl\ of lOY3. As has already been noted, the present thesis follows the idea th"t this datl' is indicative of the completion of the façade. The façade is representativl' nt tlll' Romanesque design only on the ground storey, for rebuildll1g of the church in the eighteenth century resulted in numerous changes to the upper pMt:l~ There are no remnants of the Romanesque church on the intel'ior. The ground storey is a reduction of the corresponding stmey .lt San Miniato. Five bays are defined by the typical Florentine arcade. Bas('s, capitals, and intrados are characteristically white wh de profiles, ~hafts and plinths are green. Here, only the central bay hou ses a portal, portal at San Miniato, while those in the outer bays are derived From the interior galleries of the Baptistery. The complete entablature follows both Florentine models . • 42G. Brucher, Die Sakrale Baukunst Italiens, 169. 46 The Badia Fiesolana milis. 17) Of the Romanesque church of the Badia Fiesolana, only two storeys of • the façade ~urVlve, having been incorporated into the design of a Renaissance rebuilding. The Romanesque church has been dated to the middle of the twelfth century, following the Florentine siege of Fiesole in 1125. 43 As it stands today, the Romanesque façade is complete to the height of the second storey corntcc, and it seems likely that it was originall} crowned by a triangular pediment. In any case, we are dealing with an incomplete façade of two storeys separated by a complete entablature. The ground storey is a blind arcade of three bays and the upper storey contains three windows. The blind arcade of the lower storey springs from nzacigno buttresses on the corners and is carried by a pair of Corinthian columns with green shafts and arches and white bases, c \pitals and intrados. The span of the central arch is much narrower than the flanking ones, and there is a noticeable elongation of the round arch. A single portal is found in the • central bay while the others each have a large rectilif'('ar frame of green subdivided into three tall rectangles. There is subsequent opus sectile decoration of the green frames and the white centres of the rectangles. Lunette8 are decorated in friezes of blind arcade and rectangles. The central lunette is distinguished by the poised lozenges in the lower register and the cross and flanking representations of fowl in opus sectile. The profiled architrave is bordered by the sawtooth chain on its underside,and by the lozenge cham of the frieze. Above this projects a modest comice. The second storey is defined by narrow buttres~es of nzacigno which support the white profiled architrave. The architrave is bounded by waves bt:'low and a double frieze of blind arcade and lozenge chains above. The • 43G. Brucher, Die Sakrale Baukunst Italiens,170. ~7 storey is capped by a modestly-projecting cornice. Between the lowl'r-storl'Y comice and the second-storey architrave cleven tall rcdangular Irallll'S arc • drawn in double or triple Imes of green marble on Hw whIte ground. Tlll'rc are windows with tnangular pedlments ll1 the fourth, ~",th and l'Ighth rectangles. The surfaces of the pediments are decoratcd 111 p.lttl'rn~ 01 O/,IIS sectile, and there is a semi-circle of green marbl" III the second fr.lIl11' The preceeding analysis of the Badia Fiesolana l'l'Vl'.1ls Il .1S .1 1ru l' follower of the Florentine style. ThIS is witncssed in tlw char.1ctl'nslIcs ot Ihl' blind arcade, the insistent reliance on rectilml'ar framl'~ III Hw rurtam \",111, the conception of marble bichromy as a deftl1ltive compolll'ni in Ihl' structural system and curtain waIl, complete entablatllres, wllldow~ wlth pediments, devices such as the blind arcade frieze and thc rectillllc San Salvatore al Vescovo (i/lus. 18) • Romanesque rernnants of the Episcopal cha pel of San Salvatore dt Florence are restricted to the ground storcy of the west façndc, up tD tlll' Il'vel of the comice. Begun in the early years of the thirtccnth century, the chllrch exemplifies the Florentine resistence to Pisan style The ~torey is ordered as a blind arcade of thrcc bays spnngJl1g from engaged half-columns at the corners and carried by free standlllg c()lumn~. The chromatic definition of the structural mcmbers i~ consi~tent wlth the Florentine formula; a complete entablature with proftled archltraw, lozenge frieze in opus sectzle, and modestly projecting comice. The central bay hou~e~ the portal, while the curtain walls of the flanking bays are ordered m three tiers of paired rectangles drawn in green marble agdll1st a white ground. • 48 Summary By tracing the reception of the Baptistery it has become clear that the • four churches discussed were true fol1owers of the Baptistery and exhibit not a single definitive feature of t'le Pisan style. Note should also be made of the dating of the churches, for they indicate the reception was complete with the façade of the Badia Fiesolana (1127), and the style reaffirmed in the façade of San Salvatore al Vescovo . • • 49 • Chapter IV: Reception of the Duomo of Pisa Given that the Duomo of Pisa was the largest church built in Italy during the Romanesque period, it should come as no surprise th.lt it exertcd tremendous influence on succeeding constructions, especially in tIlt' Arno Valley of Tuscany. There are no exact copies of its ambitiolls flve-dlsll-d form with independent three-aisled transepts. Howcver, many elen1l'nts of the church were borrowed for the designs of smaller churches. While adaptations of the Pisan ground plan reappear in a few examplcs, it is in the desIgns for façades and apses that the most consistent referenccs tn the Pisan prototypt' itre found. This chapter looks at a number of churches in Lucca, PistOia, and on the Mediterranean island of Sardinia, to gauge the degree of influcnn' the Duomo of Pisa had, and to isolate factors which deviate frnm the Pisan • formula. Romanesque Churches in Lucea It is in the Romanesque churches of Lucca that the most thorough references to the Duomo of Pisa are detected. The most indicative cxamples are the Duomo San Martino, San Michele in Foro, and San Frcdiano. Duomo San Martino (plan 6, illus. 19-21) The present construction of San Martino, the Duomo of Lucca, is the result of a long bulding project that stretched from 1060 into the fourteenth century. The ground-storey loggia of the west façade dates from the second haH of the twelfth century. The superimposed galleries were complcted in 1233. The exterior articulation of the nave walls, transepts and cast end was • completed after 1308. In the last quarter of the fourteenth century much of 50 the interior was renovated in Gothie style.44 In plan, San Martino is a three-aisled columnar basilica with semi • ::ircular apse termmating the central aisle at the east end. The six bays of the nav(' are s'!parated from the apse by a rectangular transepts and a rectangular choir. The transepts are wider than the nave by a single bay, and are separated from the rectangular choir by two bays. A sacristy and a square chapel abut the rectangular choir. Three storeys are defined on the nave: as those of arcade, gallery and c1erestory. The elevation of the transepts is bipartite, lacking a cleres tory but fitted with galleries. The transepts rise to the same height as the nave c1erestory. The square blocks of sacristy and chapel that abut the rectangular choir are a single storey in height and are topped by octagonal domes. The West Façade • The west façade of San Martino is strongly reminiscent of Pisa. It consists of a lower storey block surmounted by three colonnaded wall passages. The total number of storeys is only four, one less than the Pisan façade. The ground storey of the façade is a loggia, or porch, open on the front through an arcade of three broad arches on compound piers, and accessed on the north sicle through a low round arch. The loggia, of course, has no precedent on the façade of Pisa. The broad arches have nothing in common with the tall arches of the blind arcade at Pisa. Alternating voussoirs are found in the profiles of the arches of the open arcade, however it is not an equal distribution of dark and white voussoirs, and the individual voussoirs are dccidedly narrower than those at Pisa. Further differences are detected in • 44C. Baracchini and A. Caleca, Il Duame di Lucca, 9-38. 5 1 the support system. The arcade neither springs directly from, nor is it c.uried • by columns, but instead springs from buttresses at the corners and is ùuried by compound piers. The corner buttresses are articulated only to tl1l' levl'l of tl1L' springing of the arches where they are crowned by folii\tc c.lpit.\ls. This dl'tail is aga in in contradiction to the design of Pisa where COI"l1l'r buttl"t.'ssl'S continue not only to the lowest-storev comice, but also defil1l' the corners of the second storey to incorpora te it into a two-storèY black. The second storey is separated from the levcls abovl' and below by sculptured projecting comices. Like the two storeys above lt, the second storey consists of an open arcade on columns. In this respect, tlll' .lrC.ldl'S resemble those at Pisa. Also in line with Pisa is the use of alternating voussoirs to define the arches, the consistent use of Corinthi.lI1 and Composite capitals and impost blocks above the capitals which .ln.' in reality stone bridges to the inner wall. The use of sculpture to decorate the imposts, • mouldings, and arch profiles is also familiar from the Pisan formula as is the incrustation of the arcade wall with patterns in opus secti/e. The inJll'r wall is similar to Pisa in the stripes of alternating courses of masonry and the penetration of the wall by biforate windows with receding profiles dcfined by shafts. Despite aIl of these similarities in the arrangement of the superimposed galle ries, a number of very important details can be cited which lend the Lucchese façade a character separate from Pisa. Thl' foremost of these concerns the types of columns used. At Pisa the galleries served as a display case for monolithic marble columns, sorne Antique, others newly quarried. At Lucca there are indeed a few Antique columns, and sorne of the columns are srnooth or fluted, however the majority are ('Iaborately • decorated in sculpture or incrusted with geometric patterns of opus secti/e. 52 Many of the capitals arc decorated with figuraI sculpture. At the corners the!'e are compound piers built of four columns tied in a knot. • Another substantial differcnce is detected in the opus sectile decoration of the arcade walls. At Pisa these sections are highlighted by dises sawn from columns, and by geomctrieally-abstraeted floral patterns. While floral patterns do exbt at San Martino, there are no marble dises, and much of the opus scctlfc deplcts animal and human figures. The depietion of animal and human figures in opus sectile has no precedent on the façade or anywhere cise on the Duomo of Pisa. ln spitc of the numerous eontrasts seen between the façades of Pisa and San Martino, it is still evident that the latter looked to the former as a model. The general contours of the façade and the arrangement of a lower storey block surmounted by open arcade galleries are indicative. The fact that there are only ;our storeys at San Martino does not detract from the intentions of • repeating the Pisan façaùe, for the storeys are disposed exactly as at Pisa. It is Iikely that a pediment was originally intended to crown the rectangular block t)f the fourth storey just like Pisa. Till.' East E1ld The east end of the church is certainly derived from the Duomo of Pisa. A similar juxtaposition of volumetrie masses oceurs here, the basic differences rcslliting from the facts that; the transepts rise to the same height as the central nave, the transepts have no clerestory, and the rectangular choir is ablltted by single-storcy structures with domed roofs. The cast façade follows the Pisan prototype in the organization of the choir wall mto five storeys. The incorporation of the half cylinder of the • projecting apse is not exactly as on the east façade of Pisa, for here the apse is only two storeys in height. As such, the blind arcade of the lower storl'y risl's to the same height as the first-storey blind arcade of the choir wall, bound by • the continuous cornice. The second storey of the choir and .1pSl' ",ails arl' .1lso of equal height; a blind arcade carried by slender frel'-standing colmnns on tlw choir wall, and an open arcade on monolithic colllmns at the .lpSl'. TI1l' third storey is artIculated as a broken pediment the cornin' of wll1ch is c,lITll'd by free-standing columns. The semi-conical roof of the apse abuts the sqU.lrt.' block in the centre of the storey. In these details the precedent is not tl1l' l'ast façade of Pisa, but rather that of its transept façades. The fourth stol"l'y is .l rectangular block with little surface articulation except for a largl' oculus in the centre and two stepped lozenges next to the corner bllttresses TIll' fifth storey is triangular in form, with exposed brick and no marbll' IIlcrllstdtion to articulate the surface. AU the familiar details arc fOllnd on the edst f,lçade of San Martino, including the elaboration of the arcade with dltl'rndtlll~ • voussoirs and profiles, sculptured mouldings, stepped lozengl's in tlll' lunettes etc. The exterior walIs of transepts, choir and nave arc artlculatl'd in a similar manner as the corresponding walls at Pisa. Blind arcadl'~ are deflncd on the three storeys of the nave, however, on the lower two storeys bay~ arl' defined by heavy butresses. At the lowest level a single blind arch spans cach pair of butresses, while on the second storey a bhnd arcade of five bays carried by slender columns is fitted betwcen each pair of buttresses. The c1cn.'story IS articulated as a continuous blind arcade on wall stnps. While the buttresse~ and the width of the arcades do not reflect the proportional systems of Pisa, the use of sculptured mouldings, alternating voussoirs, and projecting comices are typical of the prototype. Blind arcades also defme the walls of the • transepts, however they differ from Pisa in that only two ~toreys are 54 articulated, and the proportions of the taU upper-storey arcade are not • consistent with Pisa. San Michele in Foro (plan 7, il/us 22-23) Construction of the present church of San Michele in Foro was begun before 1143. The incrustation of the exterior and the erection of the façade were carried out in the last half of the twelfth and into the early thirteenth centunes. In the second half of the fourteenth century the gallery on the second storey on the south flank was built.45 In form the church is defined as a three-aisled columnar basilica with aisleless rectangular transepts. A rectangular tower rises ab ove the south transept. While the interior elevation is bipartite (arcade and clerestory), the exterior is multi-storeyed with three orders on the flanks and five on the west façade . • It is on the west façade that the strongest echoes of Pisa are heard. The contours of the structure are more closely related to the façade of Pis a than to the building behind. This is seen by the fact that the façade rises much higher than the level of the nave roof and is held up by props. The façade is ordcred in five storeys, the lowest being a blind arcade of seven bays carried by engaged columns with doors in the second, central and sixth bays. An independent post-and-lintel is provided only for the central portal, while there is no elaboration of the doors which open onto the side aisles. Ail arches in the blind arcade are equal in height and width except for the central bay which is bath wider and taller. A tympanum framed by an arch of alternating voussoirs and fitted with a rose window which fiIls most of the lunette space of the central bays, while aIl the other bays have a stepped • 451.Moretti and R. Stopani, Toscane Romane, 245-247 55 lozenge in the lunette . True to the Pisan formula, the arches of the blind arcadl' and thl' • superimposed galleries are emphasized by alternatl\1~ dark ,lnd whitl' voussoirs, and the arcade walls are incrusted in opus scctilc. The rl',U w,lll of the galleries features stripes of hght and dark maslmry, .md (h'cply-rl'n'd in~ biforate windows pentrate the wall on the second and third ston'ys. A number of factors, already observed in the d iscllssion ot San Martino, distinguish the design of San Michele in Foro from tIlt' Duomo of Pisa. These include the variety of richly sculpted columns dnd also columns decorated in patterns of opus sectile. The opus sl'ctik decoration of tl1l.' t1rc.ldl' walls of the galleries is almost entirely composed of two-d i Il1l'nsion.ll representations of animal and human figures. The openin~s in thc illlll'r wall of the galleries of the upper two storeys include oculi and dcutc archcs, features not found at Pisa . • The apse of San Michele reduces the Pisan formula from tluce to lwo storeys, eliminating one storey of open gallerics. The lowest storcy is a blind arcade of five bays carned by engaged columns with Corinthian capltals. TIll' symmetry of the Plsan apse is repeated in the altcrnatiorl of wll1dows and lozenges in the lunettes of the blind arcade. The windowb in the firbt, thinl, and fifth bays are composed in the same manner as the blind windows at Pis<1, and the voussoirs of the window and main arches are presented wlth alternating voussoirs. The second and fourth bays have typlcaJ steppeJ lozenges in the lunettes. The second storey repeats the Pisan design in that it is il wall passage carried by a variety of monolithic columns, sorne of cxotic marbles. The voussoirs are of alternating colours. An obvious difference 15 the fact that the • passage is not groin-vaulted, but actually a stone ceihng supportcd in post- 56 and-lintel fashion. Finally, the apse terminates in a heavily-projecting cornice whlch crowns the second storey. • While the articulation of the nave walls follows Pisan forms, it does not copy those of the nave walls. Rather, it combines elements From the façade and side walls of the prototype. The lower storey is articulated as a blind arcade on engaged Corinthian columns. This is analogous to the east and west façades of Pisa. Alternating light and dark voussoirs and sculptured mouldings give definition to the arches. The second storey contains the side aisle windows. There is also a calculated striping of the fabric throllgh the alternation of dark and light courses of masonry. On the right flank of the church an open gallery was built in front of the second-storey wall in the early thirteenth century, evidence of persistence of Romanesque forms at a time when quotations from the Gothic style were becoming the norm. The brick wall of the thud storey of the nave is undecorated, punctuated only by the • cleres tory windows. San Frediano (plan 8, illus 24-25) The construction of San Frediano was begun during the administration of the provost Rotone, 1105-1119. The church was completed, including tower, in 1147 when it was consecrated by Pope Eugene III. The façade was heightened in the thirteenth century, and the extension was covered in mosaic. Lateral chapels were installed along the flanks of the church in the fourteenth century. On the west façade of the church these appear as wings extending the original façade to the right and left.46 In form the church is a three-aisled basilica with the wide central aisle terminating in a semi-circular apse. There are no transepts. The interior • 46MoreUi and R. Stopani, Toscane Romane, 239-250. 57 elevation is bipartite; arcade and clerestory. There is no gallcry It'vel. The arcade is carried on monolithic columns with Corinthian capitals. • The façade of the chu!'ch is not represent.ltive of the reception of the Duomo of Pisa. While it is a marble façade, it is completcly built of whih' marble, and there are neither stripes defined In the masonry nor 'Ul' tlll're .lny blind arcades. RelIef articulation is restricted to tall w.lll strips divlding 111l' space into compartments relative to aisles of the basihca behind the f,lçade. Each door is built as a post-and-lintel system surmollntl'd by a round-,udll'd tympanum. The central portal is wider and taller than those wluch access the si de aisles In the central section of the façade a wall passage constitutl's a second storey. The area of the church which does recall the Duomo of Pis" is the main apse. As in the prototype, it projects as a half-cylinder from the east wall of the church. It is ordered in only two storeys as in the other LlIcchese churcl1l'~ • discussed above. The lower order is given no surface articulatioll, and is defined only by stripes in the masonry and three biforate wllldows which penetra te the wall surfaces. The second storey of the apsl' is ar. open wall passage with a colonnade of various monolithic colllmns slIpporting a \intel and, ultimately, the conical roof. The Churches of. Pistoia The influence of Pisa was felt in the small commune of Pistoia, and this is seen in the churehes of San Giovanni Fuorcivitas and San Bartolomeo in Pantano. The references to the prototype arc, for thc most part, revealcd in the designs of the façades . • 58 San Giovanni Fuorcivitas (plan 10, illus 27) The church of San Giovanni Fuorcivitas received its name because at • the time of its construction it was beyond the city walls. Construction was initiated around the middle of the eleventh century, while t;·ie north façade was reveted in the late-twelfth and early-thirteenth centuries. The church was enlarged in the second quarter of the fourteenth century, affecting, above aIl, the interior arrangements as weIl as the east and south walls.47 The original construction of the church comprised a rectangular aisleless basilica with a semi-circular apse on the east end. With the campaign of the thirteenth century the church was extended to the east and south to create the present form. As such, the original north wall of the church is authentic (except for the last two bays on the east end), and the west walls (not including the right portal). East and south walls were cornpletely rebuilt. The building is constructed of brick, and only the north wall is incrusted. The decision to decorate the north wall may have been based on the geographical • situation of the church with the north wall facing thp city, and by the fact that it was the largest wall surface available on the small church. Every element on the reveted north façade of San Giovanni Fuorcivitas is derived from Pis a Cathedral. The application of the forms, however, makes a copy of no single part of the prototype although the composition most closely n'sembles the nave walls of Pisa. It is arranged in three storeys. The three orders comprise a blind arcade of fourteen bays carried by wall strips on the ground storey, and two superimposed wall passages on free-standing columns on the upper storeys. As such, the ground storey articulation follows that of the Pisan nave walls. At Pisa the second storey of the nave walls is a blind post-and-lintel system, while the clerestory • 47Morettl and R. Stopam, Toscane Romane, 289-291. 59 is defined as a wall passage. The design for the upper storeys of San Giovanni Fuorcivita~ eliminates the post-and lintel bays but doubles tlw wall passagl's, • recalling the superimposed galleries of Pisa's east and west façadl's. The fabric of the building 15 typified by the relentless striping of tl1l' wall in green and white courses of masonry. While striping is a characteristk feature of the Pisan style, the equal widths of the alternating bands contrast with the typical Pisan application of wide bands of white alternatlllg wlth narrow bands of black. The arches are defined by alternating vousSOirs Whtll' stepped lozenges are placed in aIl of the lunettes of blind and 0pl'n arcades (except in the window bays of the first gaIlery). The off-centre placement of the single portal in the sixth bay from the west end would have been less conspicuous in the original situation bl'fore the extension of the wall by two bays on the east. The design of the dom follows the Pisan protytpe with an independent trabeation and tympanull\ outlined by an arch of alternating voussoirs. Furthermore, the blind tlfch of • the portal bay reaches slightly higher than all the others in the blind arcade, its moulding almost touching the cornice. This also parallels the situation of the central portal at Pisa. San Bartolomeo in Pantano (plan 9, illus. 26) The Romanesque church of San Bartolomeo was built in the mid eleventh century, completed by 1159.48 In plan it is a three-aisled columnar basilic a, eight bays in length. The central aisle terminates in a semi-circular apse. There are no transepts. Neither the Romanesque designs for the façade, nor even plans for later renovations were ever carried to completion. The first order of the • 48Moretti and R. Stopani, Toscane Romane, 285-287. 60 façade 1S, just the same, Indicative of the original intentions. AlI relief articulation of the surface is complete, and marble incrustation of the arches • and arcade wall prvovide cIues to the overall conception. The lowest storey is articulated in a blind arcade arcade of five bays with portaIs placed In the first, central and fifth bays, corresponding to main and side aisles. The arcade is carried by engaged columns with Corinthian capitals, and the arches are buIlt of alternating green and white voussoirs. Furthcr cmphasis IS glven to the arches by sculptured mouldings. The arcade wlllI is composed of green and white stripes subsequently decorated in lozenge chllins of OpliS secti/e. The design for the portaIs follows the Pisan solution in that each doorway is glven its own trabeation and tympanum. There is a pyramidal arrangement of the portaIs in that the side-aisle doors are mueh lower th an the central one. This tao follows the Pisan example. In the non-portal bays • stcppcd lozenges arc placed in the lunettes while side-aisle bays contain deep oculi. Sardillia A number of churehes on the island of Sardinia are representative of an intcresting adaptatIon of Pisan forms. These ehurehes are aIl of modest sizl' and dlltc from the second half of the twelfth century. References to the Pisan DUP1110 arc most evident in the designs of façades, apses, and articulation of the extenor wall surfaces. While there are dozens of examples of tlw phcnomcnon, this discussIOn is restricted ta four buildings rcprcsl'ntativc of the reception . • 61 Ozieri, Sant'Atltioco di Bisarcio (plan 11, i/lIlS 28) • Sant'Antioco is a three-aisled columnar basilica wlthout trdI1Sl'ptS. Tlw central aisle terminates in a semi-clrcular apse. Side alslt.'s Ml' \,.lultl'd ,llld the main alsle is covered with a timber roof. The clevatlOl1 I~ bipartIte, with arcade and clerestory. Construction of the church was l1l'gull cllhO-70, ,llld completed around the turn of the century ..tlJ While the façade of the church and the articulation of its l'xtl'rIOr w,llls do not refer to the Pisan prototype, the exterior appearancl' of tlll' ,1 pSt.' IS certainly indicative of a falTIl lia rit y with Pisan forms. Of cour~l', tlw prototype has here been reduced from a tnpartlte clevatlOn tn Olll' of ,1 ~Illglt.' shm'y, however the storey is cornposed of a number of elements definltlve of tilt.' Pisan style. The half-cylinder of the apse is articulatl'd mto five tall b'lYS by ,1 blind arcade on engaged columns. A tall window pcnetrates tIlt.' ll1id St'ctlOll of the central bay and each of the lunettes are fitted with steppcd lozt'Ilgcs. • Furthermore, profiles are defined in alternating marblcs with subst't.]l1l'nt opus sectile decoration of the interior face and penmeter. Ottana, San Nicolo (plan 12, illus. 29-30) The church of San Nicola is an aisleless church with rectllllgular transept-like adjuncts of a single storey. The extenor walls of the building incorpora te a great deal of polychrome marbles in the fabric of thl' mil~()nry and are spun over with a rigid network of articulation ln l'Iemt.'n b of architectural relief. Only the façade and south walls can by directly comp elevatlon. The ~toreys are separated by projecting cornices, the lower storeys bounded by buttresses on the flanks. The third storey is a triangular • pedlment. Ali three ~torey~ are ordered into bhnd arcades on wall strips or pJla~ter~. There are no open gallenes or wall passages. The blllld arcade of the lowest storey has three bays, springing from the buttre~~e~ at the extreme ends and carried by wall strips. The wall strips frame the portal ~et lf1 the central bay. The arches are defined as a double profile of colollred blot:ks. The portal is given an mdependent trabeation with lymp lozengl'~. The ~l'cond storey is similar ta the first except that it is much shorter and thal the central arch is fitted wlth a biforate window. The biforate arcade spnngs from independent butresses with Doric capitals. Profiles of the arcade sink deeply mto the wall and are carried by single monolithic columns with • IOllic capitals. The pediment is comprised of a blind arcade of five bays on wall strips. Arches feature double profiles of alternating voussoirs as in the lower storeys. There 1S no opus scctlle or sculptural decoration of the curtain or arcade wall. The north and south walls exhibit dIvergent solutions for similar wall SpdCl'~ Both are nchly articulated through relief elements, however the south wall IS c1ot-ely tied with PIsa while the north wall relies on atypical fDrllls. The ~ollth wall is a reduction of the first storey nave walls at PIsa; a bhnd arcade 1S carril'd by wall strips. The north wall, on the other hand, is divided II1to wlde bays of varymg spans carried by narrow wall strips. The lIltersticses are defined at the upper extreme by a frieze of blind arcade on corbeis. ThIs particlliar element is very common in Sardinian architecutre, • and is Cl'I tJlIlly Iinked ta Lombard and northern European Romanesque architecture. It is, none the less, atypical of Pisa. Eehnes of PiSd do rl'solll1d in the portal of the second bay and section of striped wall in the upper sl'cllons 01 • the four western bays. The portal has an independent traL1l'dtinll with ,uch defined by alternating voussoirs. Borutta, Chiesa di Salt Pietro di Sorres (plnll 13, il/us. 31-32) The church at Borutta is a three-aisled basiica without transl'pts. TIlt.' central aisle terminates in a semi-circular apse. The fabrie of tIlt' chureh is marble, and recollection of the Pisan prototype is by and largl' rl'strictl'd to tl1l' west façade. Elsewhere the references are restricted to occassion.ll striping in the rnasonry. The contours of the façade are dictated by thl' buildll1g L1l'hind. Four storeys are seprated by projecting cornices. A blind arcadl' of hw b,lyS is articulated on the ground storey. Tt springs from buttresses at tlll' sldl's and IS • carried by wall strips. Stepped arches arc defined by polychromy and sculptured rnouldings. A single portal is placed in the central bay, tlnd is flltl'd with its own lintel on piers and a tympanum with arch of altl'rnating voussoirs. The flanking bays have stepped lozenges in the lunettes while the extreme bays feature oculi decorated with starburst patterns in Opll~ ~l'clilt'. The corner butresses are defined to the level of the spnnglllg of tIlt' second-storey arcade. A system of alternating supports, i.e. column~ and pier~, divides the storey horizontally mto three bays, wlth a double JfGH.le corresponding to each of the side aisles and thrce to the nave. The Œntral bay is fitted with a biforate window with 3/4 arches springll1g From pier~ and carried by a single monolithic column. A fabric of mtricate geometnc pJttern~ in opus sectile decorates the lunette of the bifora. Stepped lozenge~ fdl the • lunettes of the second, third, fifth and sixth bays, while first and ~evcnth have 64 stepped oculi decorated in starburst patterns of opus sectile . The discrcpancy between the heights of the side aisles and nave are • bridged by slightly-inclining cornices, appearing as wings ta the rectangular block of the second storey. The block is held together at the corners by buttresses and three bays are outlined by a blind arcade carried on corbeIs. The arches have richly-sculptured profiles and the lunette of each bay is decorated with a polychromatic stepped lozenge. The lower half of the central bay fcatures an oculus, the perimeters of which are accentuated by a running chain of base-to-tip rectangles. Dark and white stripes are defined in the masonry of the buttresses, curtain and arcade walls. A finer fabric of geometric patterns in opus secti/e borders the arcade and gives the implication of a frieze. The horizontal limit of the storey is defined by the ornately-carved projectmg comice. The ultimate storey is a triangular pediment slightly heightened by the • buttresscs at the corners and closed by the inclining cornice. The masonry fabric is defined in wide, regularly-spaced bands of dark and light marbles. There is no division of the space through the application of surface articulation or opus sectile. Just under the peak a circular pattern with a cross is depicted in two-dimensional opus sectile. This same pattern is found in the galler}' arcade ll1 the nave of the Duomo of Pisa. As regards the rest of the building's exterior walls, references to Pisa are restricted to the pediment on the east end of the nave and isolated areas of wall surfacc (exterior clerestory, choir and apse walls) where there are stripes defmcd m alternating courses of masonry. The interior of the church is composed of transversely barrel-vaulted bays carried by cruciform piers. The piers are decorated in dark and white • stripl's and the voussoirs of the main arcade and transverse arches of the 65 main and side aisles are built of alternating blocks of dark and Iight marbIL' . The pilasters from which the transverse arches spring at the sidl'-aislc walls • are not chromatically defined although they appear in relief. TIll' Cfuciform piers and the use of striping and alternating voussoirs arc certamly dl'rivl'd from the side aisles of Pisa Cathedral. Codrongianus, 55 Trinità di 5accargia (ilIl/s. 33) SS Trinità is an aisleless church with semi-circular apsc. Thl'Tl' is a square tower joined to the north wall by short corridor. The fabric of Hw external walls is striped. Beyond this, the refercnces to the Pisan prototypl' arl' restricted to the west façade. The elevation of the façade is tripartite. The first storcy constitutl's tl rectangular loggia projecting from the west wall of the church. It 15 0pl'n on three sides by arcades springing form the corner buttresses and carried by • monolithic columns with animal capitals. On each side there is an arcade of two bays. Access to the church is through a single portal on the IIlslde wall of the loggia. The loggia itself has an inclining comice on the front and thl' implication is obviously a pediment. The upper storeys conslst of cl rectangular block and superimposed triangular pediment. On each storey li blind arcade of five bays springs from corner buttresses and is carned by frel' standing monolithic columns. The distance between the columns and tlw curtain wall of the blind arcade creates a narrow wall pa~sage. On the ~l'cond storey the lunettes of the outside bays feature a stepped oculus dccoralcd wllh a starburst in opus sectile. The central bay has a tall bifora spnnging from piers and carried by monolithic columns. In the lunettes of the flanking bays there are stepped lozenges. The pediment is defined at the ~ides by squat • buttresses and on the top by the inclining pedimental cornicc. 66 The ground storey loggia is certainly without parallel at Pisa. It is, • howcver, familiar from the Duomo San Martino at Lucca. The striping, espccially on the corner buttresses, is certainly recollective of Pisa as are the alternating voussoirs of the arcade. The upper storeys have reduced Pisa's airy géllleric~ to narrow wall passages behind a blind arcade. The lozenges and oculi are mainstays of the Pisan formula. Sllmmary The churches discussed in this chapter have evidenced the tremendous influence exerted by the Duomo of Pisa. While none of the churches copies Pisa in every detail, and although atypical elements are found in a number of the examples, there can be no question that the dominant influence was Pisa. It is mtcresting ta note that not a single definitive element of the Florentine style appears in any of the churches. AIso, one must keep in mind that none • of the examples was constructed before the mid-twelfth century. • 67 Conclusions • Conceming the Dating of the Baptistery San Giovanni The preceeding chapters have shown that while the Duomo of PiS.l .md the Baptistery of Florence share a number of similarities (m.1rblt" tr,lbeatcd architecture, rigid networks of wall articulation etc.), they arc repfl'sl'nt.ülvl' of truly distinctive stylistic conceptions. It has bccn revl'.lll'd that thl' reception of the Florentine style (as defined by the Baptistery) was rcstrictL'd 10 Florence (San Miniato al Monte, San Salvatore al Vescovo) and ils cont.H.io (Empoli, Fiesole), and that these churches gave no indication of Pisan influence. On the other hand, Pisa was enthusiastically rccelvcd throllghollt Tuscany and in Sardinia and examples of the reception often exhibitl'd external influence (never Florentine) while conspicuously turning to Pisa as a definitive model. • 1t is important to note that the churches which adopted the Pisan formula were constructed (for the most part) betwccn the mid-twclfth and early-thirteenth century. The path of reception of the Florentine style bl'gan at San Miniato al Monte, followed by Sant'Andrea Empoli (10Y3), thl' Badt light of such evidence it seems reasonable to conclude that the Baptistery was completed before the Duorno of Pisa was begun, and as such had an earlier following oblivious to the trend set by Pisa. This IS proven not only by the fact that the churches within the Pisan spherc were built much laler than those (except San Salvatore al Vescovo) that followcd the Baphbtery, but al~o through the observation that the Pisan influence was dominant thmughout Tuscany, and further afield, but absent at Florence. • The case of the resistance to Pisa is exemplified by San Salvatore al 68 Vescovo (c1200), which is, in fa ct, contemporaneous with the enthusiastic reception Pisa was receiving in Tuscany and beyond. This might be explained • as an indication that the distinctly Florentine style was by then well-rooted and had taken on specific significance for the commune. It is also possible that Florence set a standard with the Baptistery that was later countered by Pisa in a desire to identify Itself with an architectural style distinct from that of Florence. These conclusions are not without far-reaching ramifications for architectural history. Above aIl, they cast a shadow of doubt on widely accepted chronologies of Florentine Romanesque churches for these are generally based on the observations of Walter Horn. Concerning the DistinctIy Different Styles of Pisa and Florence The use of classical forrns in the architecture of the High Middle Ages • has resulted in the definition of such architecture as "Romanesque." In Tuscany, however, the reference to Anitquity is more pronounced than in any other region of Western Europe. This has led Burkhardt, and many scholars after hirn, to designate the terrn "proto-Renaissance" to Tuscan Romanesque architecture. The te ~rn has been applied, without discrimination, to both Florentine and Pisan, architecture. That the Romanesque architecture in both of these Tuscan cities makes thorough use of a classically-derived vocabulary of forms cannot be disputed. Yet, the resulting compositions differ substantially in each of the two localities. This is explained not by the vocabulary of forms, but rather by the way in which they are exploited. As such, the objective of this section is to clarify the differences in conception, attitude and syntax of the architecture of • Pisa and Florence. Through discussion of the forms corn mon to Pisan and 69 Florentine Romanesque architecture, it will be revealed that the Pisan examples are quite in line with contemporary trends in other parts of EurOPl' • (especially the monuments within Imperial territory) while the Flofl'ntilll' expression stands as an isolated phenomenon. Finally, possible l'l.'asons for the phenomenon will be put forth. Plan As we have seen, the plan of the Baptistery is centralized white th"t of Pisa is longtiudinal. Despite this contradiction, both have bl'en derived from Roman prototypes; the Baptistery following the Pantheon and the Duomo after Old St. Peter's. As such, èhey have in common the "c1assÏCal" derivation. It is in the way these forms have been handled that spts Pisa apart from Florence. The Baptistery appears as a single autonomous volumetrie mass, • octagonal in plan with an absidial adjunct and a pyramidal covering. The form is created, in essence, by the simple contraposition of surface planes, bl' they wall or roof segments. There is no exploitation of juxtaposed voluml's. Even in its present configuration the scarsella fails to register as a contrasting spatial mass, as does the absidial area of San Vitale at Ravenna, for example. On the interior, the broad triumphal arch of the west end emphasizcs a continuity of the autonomous space, while the lower-Ievcl colonnade and the mezzanine galleries are given Httle or no volumetrIe dcfinition. PiSil, on the other hand, is based on an additive conception which relies strongly on the juxtaposition of volumetrie components. This has been duly demonslratcd in the analysis of the east end of the church. It is also represented by tht~ definition of the transepts as independent three-aisle basilicas and by the • distinction between central- and side-aisle spaces. 70 It is, thereforc, clear that although the plans of the Baptistery and the Duomo are derived from Roman prototypes, the conception and handling of • the forms arc quite different. At Pisa, the additive nature of the architecture with its insistence on juxtaposed volumetrie masses puts it in line with contemporary architecture throughout Europe. The autonomous and unified conception of the Florentine church makes a much stronger reference to the bygone age of Hadrianic Rome. Marble In a tradition celebrated by Caesar Augustus, the Duomo and the Baptistery glisten with marble The thorough use of this material separates the buildings from aIl contemporary trends in Romanesque and Byzantine architecture. At Pis a, only small sections of the exterior nave walls, and the ceiling of the church are not marble. At Florence, the entire building is • covered in marble both inside and out (except for the mosaie-covered vault). Despite the fact that the two buildings are both marble, the exploitation of the material differs substantially at Pisa and Florence. At Florence, the revetment is a th in veneer applied to the surface of an ashlar and briek construction while the technique of revetement at Pisa treats the marble as masonry. Thus, at the most essentiallevel, the employment of marble at Pisa can be tcrmcd structural while that of Florence is superficial. At Pisa, this is cxcmp lificd by the use of striping, alternating voussoirs etc., while in Florenn> the surface is drawn out in a graphie manner, definition given by bichromatic contrasts. The Florentine use of bichromy serves less to distinguish the members from the flat surface of intervening wall than to intcgratc them into the pervading graphie scheme. As such, the three • dimensional aspect of the members is dissolved or flattened. 7 1 The Pisan approach, on the other hand, emphasizes mass and structure. The third dimension is the key element in the definition for walls • are predominantly of one single colour, or striped, and thert' 18 Httle lise of the polychromy to absorb members into a graphie 8cheme. St ripes and alternating voussoirs emphasize the structure and never absorb the rehef into a two-dimensional plan. Opus sectile, again an ancient technique, is an important clement dt both churches, and despite the fact that the repertoire of abstract gconll'trical patterns is decidedly similar, the function differs greatly. As wc have seen in the analyses, the patterns serve to accentuate the bi-dimensionality of the architecture at Florence, while at Pisa they emphasize mass and depth through contrast with the heavy relief of surrounding members. Elements of Articulation The elements responsible for the rigid articulation of the buildings • (arcades, columns, piers, pilasters, wall strips, l'te.) are again strongly reminisicent of classical architecture as is evidenced in the pronounced use of the Corinthian and other classical orC:ers, and the division into storeys by entablatures. As we have already observed, a significant differencc exists in that the members are disolved into the muralesque bichromy while they are tied to structural masonry at Pisa. ft is partlclilarly noteworthy that the exploitation of truc arcades is restricted to the mezzanine gallerIes in Florence, while it is a hallmark of the Pisan formula - displayed tn advantage on the east and west façades as weIl as the interior side aisles and galleries. • 72 Summation • The c1assical derivation of the forms used at the Baptistery and the Duomo certainly can not be disputed. Moreover, that the syntax of this vocabulary is significantly different is also without debate. The Florentine use is, qUlte simply, a surface architecture, while that of Pisa is obsessed with the exploitatIon of three-dimensional space. As has been demonstrated, the Pisan approach is in line with contemporary trends and might truly be termed Romanesque, while the designation of the term to the Baptistery is justified only in that construction was carned out in the eleventh century. The Baptistery is truly an isolated phenomenon In MedIeval architecture. It cannot be explained as part-and parcel of a "proto-Renaissance", but certainly carries a much more significant connotation. While it is beyond the scope of this paper to investigate thoroughly the implications of the phenomenon, it is certainly worthwhile to • put forth a suggestion. As one of the largest and most prestigious architectural projects undertaken in the Middle Ages, the Pisan monument must be ranked with the likes of Durham, Cluny III, and even Speyer Cathedral. Of aH regional styles, Pisa IS most c10sely tied to the architecture of Lombardy and especially to that of the Imperial terri tories. A precedent for the articulation of the wall into blind arcades and wall passages is seen on the west façade of the Cathedral of Tner. The typical use of alternating voussoirs echoes not only the western portais of Trier, but also the crypt of Speyer. AlI in aH, the Dllomo is an augllst representative of the Imperial style. The Baptistery, however, shuns any reference to the architecture of the Holy Roman Empire, while reviving Roman architecture beyond anything • that can be satisfied by the designations "Romanesque" or "proto- 73 Renaissance" . • One factor which might shed some Iight onto tt1l' pl'ObIl'm COl1ù'IT\S tlw power struggle between Pope and Emperor, mal'ked by tIlt' l'isl' of l'l'liglOlls reform movements, through the submission of Henri IV tn POPl' Crl'gOl'y VII at Canossa, and culminating in the creation of tilt' Colll'gl' of C,Udll1,lls which gained the right to elect the Roman blShop; an offIce whlCh had pn'\'Il11lsly been appointed by the Emperor. As such, one shollid not Lw surpnsed by the fact that Florence served as the ltalian base for thl' l'ehglOlIs rd(ll'm~, nol' th,lt the submission of Henry IV took place at the VIlla of the Tuscan M,\I'gl\l\'tnt.· (who had her favourite residence at Florence). Pisa, on the otllt.'1' h,1I1d, hdd early received Imperial privileges of self-ru le, and was rl'warded with numerous bishoprics in return for the security It provided III the Mediterranean. In eHect, 1 propose tha t the Isolated pl1l'nolllt.'non of Florentine Romanesque architecture can be explained as a an affil'Illiltion of • Papal autonomy while the erection of the Duomo of PiS,l W.1S slll'l·ly ca1culated to propagate the idea of a continued Imperial presence III Tusc,1I1Y. • 74 • Bibliography History Benvcnutl, G., Storia della Repubblica di Pisa, Pisa, 1962. Davidsohn, Robert, Storia di Firenze, Florence, 1956. Da vidsoh, Robert, Geschichte von Florenz, Berlin, 1896-1927. Fanelh, C., Architettura e città, Vallecchi, Florence, 1973. Galasso, G., ed., "Communl e Slgnorie" Storia d'HaHa, v. 7, 1987. Lopes Pegna, Firenze dalle origmi a] Medioevo, Del Re, Florence, 1962 SchcvIlI, F , History of Florence, 1961. Architecture: General Aubert, M., "Les enduits dans les constructions du Moyen Age", Bulletin Monumental. CXV, 1957 Cattal1l'O, R., L'archItettura in Halia dal secolo VII al mille circa, Le Monnier, Venicc, 1889. Clapham, A. W., Romanesque Architecture in Western Europe, 3rd ed., Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1967. Conant, Carolmgian and Romanesque Architecture 800-1200, Harmondsworth, 19~;9. Dccker, Heinrich, Romanesque Art in Italy, Braun, Paris, 1958 . En]art, c., L'Art Roman en Italie, L'Architeture et la Decoration, Paris, 1924. Frank!, P., Ole frùhmitte]alterliche und romanische Baukunst, Wildpark- • Potsdam, 1926. Kubach, Hans ErIch, Romanesque Architecture, Electa/Rizzoli, 1975. Ricci, c., Romanesque Architecture in Italy, New York, 1925. Toesca, P., Storia dell'Arte Italiana, Turin, 1927 Thtimmler, "Die Baukunst des 11. lahrhunderts in Italien", Romisches lahrbuch fur Kunstgeschichte, III, 1939, 141. Wagner-Rleger, Die itaIiel1lsche Baukunst zu Beginn der Gotik, Graz and Cologne,1%6-57. Studies on Polychromy: General Borghini, G., cd., Marml Antichi, de Luca EdlzlOne d'Arte, Rome, 1989. Brucher, G., Die sakrale Baukunst italiens im 11. und 12. Jahrhundert, Du Mont, Küln, 1987. Cuerncri, Fr,lJ1ccsco, "Lineamenti filologici dell'architettura policroma", in Lamberini, Daniela, cd., Il Bianco e il Verde, Alinea, Florence, 1991, 15- 20. Klein, H.J., Marmorierung und Architektur, Ein Beitrag zur Frage der Musterung,Diss.,Colognc, 1976 Meyer, A., "ArchItekturmusterung und Kosmateske Architekturdekoration", Von F.ube und Farben. Albert Knoepfle zum 70. Geburtstag' Zürich, • 1980. Moretti, L, "Bicromia "struttiva" nell'architettura romanica". Prospcttiva, 29, 62-67. Pero ni, A.; "Osservazioni sul rivestimento nell'architettura dl'l Medioeyo: paramento, intonaco, affresco e cpramica"; Atti dd XII Convl'j;nn internazionale della ceramica, Genova, 1983. - Pietramellara, Carla, "La bicromia nell'architettura dell'Oriente mediterraneo:, in_ Lamberini, Daniela, ed., Il Bianco e il Verde, AliIwa, Florence, 1991, 21-28. Tuscany: Architecture and Polychromy Beenken, H. "Die Florentiner Inkrustationsarchitektur des XI. Jahrhllndl\rt~", Zeitschrift für bildende Kunst, 60, 1926/27, 220-230 and 245-2,115. Behne, A, Inkrustationstil in Toscana, Berlin, 1912. Gurrieri, F., "Il Marmo verde di Prato nel policromismo archltett~)nico", AtlI della Società Toscana di Scienze Naturali, LXXXI, Pisa, 1974. Lamberini, Daniela, ed., Il Bianco e il Verde, Alinea, Florence, 1991. Lamberini, Daniela,"11 policromismo architettonico, nell'arcluleltura medievale toscana, Primi risultati e riflessioni su un'esperienza didattica", Bollettino dell'Accademia, n 56/9, San Miniato al Tede~co, 1989. Lopes Pegna, M., Le più antiche chiese di Firenz~, Florence, 1<)71 Moretti, L, Stopani, R., L'achitettura romanica religiosa nel contado fiorentino,Salimbeni,Florence, 1974. MOl"etti, Luigi, "Trasfigurazione di Strutture Muranc", Spazio, 4, J<)51, ,l1ff. Peroni, A, "Le cattedrali medievali erano bianche?", In ricordo di Ce~arl\ Angelini. Studi di letteratura e filologia, Milan, 1978. Rupp, F., Incrustationsstil der romanis chen Baukunst zu Florenz, 1Ieilz and Mundel, Strasburg, J. H., 1912. Ruschi, Pietro, "La policromia nell'architettura medievale toscana. rnflll~~i l' influenze", in Lamberini, Danielà, ed., Il Bianco c il Verde, AlInea, Florence, 1991, 29-44. Salmi, M., "Decorazione romanica in Toscana", SpazlO, 2, J951. Salmi, M., "Pietre e marmi intarsiati e scolpiti", Atti dei 1 Convegno Civiltà delle arti minori in Toscana, Arezzo, May 1971, Florence, 1973. Salmi, M., "Toscana e Oriente", Atti deI Convegno InternaZlOnale ~u l'Oriente cristiano nella Storia della Civiltà, Rome, 1964, 655-65H Swarenski, G., "Romanische Plastik und Inkrustationstilm Florenz", Repertorium für Kunstwissenschaft, Berlin, 190fJ Pisa: Duomo Bacd, Peleo, Le fondazioni della Facciata dei secolo XI. Notizie d'un saggiu di scavo, Pisa, 1918. 76 Baracchini, c., "Sculture dei XII secolo pertinenti al Duomo", Il museo dcll'Opcra dei Duomo a Pisa, Milan, 1986. Boeck, Urs, "Der Pisaner Dom zwischen 1089 und 1120", Architectura, Band • II/Vol. Il, 1981, 1-30. Burger, S., "Os~ervazioni sulla storia della costruzione deI Duomo di Pisa", Critlca d'arte, XXXXIJI, 1961,28-44. btltuto dl I{e~tauro dei Monument! della Facoltà dl Architettura di Firenze, Il Duomo di Pisa. Collan a di rilievI architettonici, vI. l, Pisa, 1970. PapInI, K, "La Costruzione deI Duomo di Pisa", 1... 'Arte, XV, 191, 345-66. Salml, M., "La genesi deI Duomo di Pisa", Bollettino d'arte, XXXII, 1938, 149-162. SanpaoJesl, PIero, Il Duomo di Pisa, Pisa, 1975. Sanpaolesi, PIero, "La facclata della cattedrale di Pisa, Rivista dell'Istituto Nazionale d'Archeologia e Storia dell'Arte, n.s. 5-6,(1956-57). Smith, Christine, "East or West in 11th-Century Pisan Culture: The Dome of the Cathedral and Its Western Counterparts", ISHA, XLIII, October 1984, 195-208. Smith, Christine, "The Date and Authorship of the Pisa Duomo Façade", GESTA, XIX/2, 1980,95-108. Florence: General Anthony, E. W., Early Florentine Architecture and Decoration, Cambridge, 1927. • BusIgnal1l, A., Bencini, R., Le Chiese di Firenze, Quartiere di S. Spirito, Sansoni, Florence, 1952. Horn, W., "Romanesque Churches in Florence", AB, XXV, 1945. Lopes l'l>gna, Le pItt antiche chiese fiorentine, Del Re, Florence, 1972. Monnerel de Villard, V., Il Battistero e le chiese romaniche di Firenze, 1914. Morozzi, G , and F. Toker, S. Reparata: l'antica cattedrale fiorentina, Florence, 1974 Paatz. W. and E., Die Klrchen von Florenz, Ein kunstgeschichtliches I-Iandbuch, Klostermann, Frankfurt am Main, 1952. Salmi, M., "Arte romal1lca flOrentino", L'Arte, VII, fasc. IV, 1914. Sanpaolesi, P., "Sulla cronologla dell'Architettura Romanica fiorentina", Studi in pnore di V. Manam, Naples, 1971. Zt'ppegno, L., Le chiese di Firenze, Newton Compton, Rome, 1976. Florence: BaptIstery Dt' Angelis d'Ossat, C., "Il Battistero dl FIrenze: la decorazione tardo romana e Il' modlficazioni SUCCI!ssive", Realtà dell'Architettura, 1, Rome, 1982, 337-347. Horn, W. "OdS Florentiner Baphsterium". Mitteilungen des Kunsthlstorischen InstItuts von Florenz, V, 1937-1940,100-151. Jacobsen, W., "Zur Datierung der Florentiner Baptisteriums San Giovanni", • Zt,>ltschnft fur Kunstgeschlchte", 43, 1980, FP 225-243. 77 Marchini, G., Il Battistero e il Duomo di Firenze, Flort'nce, 1972. Nardini, Despotti Mospignotti, Il Duomo di S. Giovtmni, fratdli Ahnan, Florence, 1902. • Swoboda, K. W., Das Florentiner Baptisterium, Ikrlin, 19tH Toker, F., "A Baptistery Below the Baptistery nt Florence", Art Bulll'lIl1, IUIW, 1976, 157-167. Florence: S. Mmiato Berti, G.F., S. Miniato al Monte, Tip. Baracchl, FIrenze, lS5(1. Oalmi, L, "La basilica di S. Miniato al Monte", Bollctmo d'Artl', August, 1915 Fanucci, Q., "La basilica di S. Miniato al Montl' ~opra Pm.'nzl''', Itdli,l S.lCr.1, 1933. Gurrieri, Francesco, et al, editors, La Basilica di San M1111,llo dl Montt:.....!.L Firenze, Giunti, Florence, 1989. Lugano, P., "S. Miniato a Fienze", Bibiloteca SClentlfIco-Rl'II).!IOScl, 1902. Tarani, D. F., La basilica di S. Mllliato al Monte, ArcivescoviIt" 1;lofl'l1n', Il) 10 Florence: San Salvatofl' ,11 Vl'~COV() Carocci, G., "La chiesa di San Salvatore", Arte e Stona, 2:1/24, Il)OH, 1KH. Paoletti, G., "La facciata della chiesa di San Salvatore al Vl'~C()V() .1 Flrl'Il:tp", : Il policromismo nell'archltettura medlevale toscan.1, 29-41 Badia Fiesolana • Borsi, F., et al, La Badia Fieso}ana, Le Monnier, FlorenCl', }LJ76. Viti, V., La Badia Fiesolana, 1926. Lucca Baracchini, A. C, "Architettura medievalc in Lucche~ia, Critica d'Arte, 112/114,1970, 3-36 and 3-20. Baracchini, C., A. Caleca, Il Duomo di Lucca, Librl'ria edltnce Baron!, LU('l'.l, 1973. Burger, S., "L'archltettura romalllca in LuechesiJ c i ~u()i rdprortl con PIS", Atti deI Seminario di Stona dell'Arte, PI~L1, lLJS:1. Luporini, E., "Nota introduttlva all'architettura rornanicd Jucche<;l''', BpI/l' Arti, l, 1948, 311-314. Ragghianti, C. L., "L'architettura lucche~e e l'archltl'ltura pl~ana", Cnliça d'arte, 28,1949,168-172. Silva, R., La baslica di SLln Frediana a Lueca. UrbLllllstlCll, L1rehltdlur,l, drr('Jo, Lueca,1985 • 78 Sardegna and Corsica Delogu, R., "Architcttura romanica fuori Pisa; Le chiese romaniche della Sa rdegna ", A rte Cristiana, XVII, 4 1929, 345-351 • Delogu, K, L'Archicttura deI Medioevo in Sardegna, Libreria dello Stato, Rome, 1953. Giostra, L., OaganI, C, "Chiese policrome medlevali della Sardegna", IL policromisrno nell'architettura miedievaie toscana, San Minato, 1989, 127-54. Moracchini-Mazel, G., Les Eglises Romanes de Corse, Paris, 1967. SaImi, M., "Toscana e Sardegna ne] periodo romanico", Atti dei XIII Con vegno di ,Storia dell'Architettura, Rome, 1966, 345-351 . • • , 79 Ground Plans • 1. Rome, Pantheon (Brown) 2. Rome, Old Saint Peter's (Jongkees) 3. Florence, Baptistery San Giovanni (TR) 4. Pisa, Duorno (TR) 5. Florence, San Miniato (TR) 6. Lucca, Duomo (TR) 7. Lucca, San Michele in Foro (TR) 8. Lucca, San Frediano (TR) 9. Pistoia, San Bartolomeo in Pantano (TR) 10. Pistoia, San Giovanni Fuorcivitas (TR) 11. Ozieri, Sant'Antioeo in Bisarcio (qel) 12. Ottana, San Nicolô (Del) 13. Borutto, San Pietro di Sorres (Del) III ustrations 1. Florence, Baptistery San Giovanni, exterior looking NW, (TR) 2. Florence, Baptistery, exterior looking NE, (Ricci) 3. Florence, Baptistery, interior looking NW, (TR) • 4. Florence, Baptistery, interior looking E, (TR) 5. Pisa, west façade, (TR) 6. Pis a, Duorno, south flank, (Kubach) 7. Pisa, Duorno, east end, (Ricci) 8. Pisa, Duorno, south transept apse, (SP) 9. Pisa, Duorno, north transept apse, (SP) 10. Pisa, Duorno, interior, nave looking E, (SP) 11. Pisa, Duorno, interior, crossing looking S, (Ricci) 12. Pisa, Duorno, interior, crossmg looking S, (Ricci) 13. Pisa, Duorno, interior, south transept, (SP) 14. Pisa, Duorno, interior, north transept, (SP) 15. Florence, San Miniato, façade, (Brucher) 16. Ernpoli, Sant'Andrea, façade, (Brucher) 17. Fiesole, Badia, façade, (Brucher) 18. Florence, San Salvatore, façade, (Ricci) 19. Lueca, Duomo, aenal view from SE 20. Lucca, Duomo, west façade, (Ricci) 21. Lueca, Duomo, east apbe, (Bar) 22. Lueca, San Michele in F0ro, west façade and south flank, (Ricci) 23. Lueea, San Michele in Foro, east apse, (TR) • 24. Lueca, San Frediano, west façade, (TR) 80 25 . Lucca, San Frediano, east end, (RICci) 26. PistOIa, San Bartolomeo in Pantano, west façade, (TR) 27. Pistoia, San Giovanni Fuorcivitas, north façade, (TR) • 28. Ozicri, Sant'Antioco di Bisarcio, east end, (Del) 29. Ottana, San Nicol<), west façade, (Del) 30. Ottana, San Nicolà, south flank, (Del) 31. Borutta, San Pietro di Sorres, west façade, (Del) 32. Borutta, San Pietro di Sorres, interior, nave 100 king east, (Del) 33. Codrongianus, SS Trinità di Saccargia, west façade, (Del) Not(> tu References to IllustratIOn and ground plan Itsts. Complete references for ail but the Brown and Jongkee,c, arc glven In the bibltography. Bar Barace/lIIH, C., dnd A Caleca, Il Duomo dl Lucca Brown, Brown, F, Roman ArchItecture, BrazllIer, New York, 1961. BrUc/1er Brucher, G., Ole sakrale Baukunst Italtens Del IJelogu, R, L'Architettura dei MedlOevo in Sardegna. Jongkccs Jongkcc,c" J H, Studles on Old St Peter's, Wolters, Groningen, 1966. Kubach KlIbach,H E, Romanesque ArchItecture RICCI RICCI, C , Romanesque ArchItecture In Italy SI' Sanpaole.'>l, P, Il DlIomo dl Plsa TR Moreth, I.,and M. Stopanl, Toscane Romane • • • '1 1. Rome, Pantheon 1 ;1 • • • ...... • ...... • .. _- • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 2. Rome, Old Saint Peter's • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • . ...• --...• --- =-----', $ j il -, • /' , l, l, e:::::::::] t )' L -..i- ~ •~ • • • • • 1 ~ • • J · '11 "': 20 M ~ • • 1 · • • • 1 ·~ • I[ & , r~r 1 J · ..• • J • • c:::. ~ J ~_.... 4. Pisa, Duomo • 3. Florence, Baptistery San Giovanni rOM - . ~~--.::.. lJ ~o • • li • t. J-- <:"=--=:-0--::-' .-J-, - ~.:" ---l--.-n- --=0--=:::.:.: r t - j .;;;~~ .~ • i--:~ ~ '3 • ':.J0 • - -- f .-~ ~ 0 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • - , 1 • • • 1 • 1 1= , 5. Florence, San Miniato 6. Lucca, Duomo (~~"'- r,"'L, "U :--.~/ ,,1 1,~ - :' _ 20'" Il " ill li li ,1 ~_ S";-;;Jü~l • ~ " ====* ~ ., 1 . li li Il ~ , l, r ..,'" ii ~ " , 1 Il 1: Ir~ 2I- 1 il- . 7. Lucca, San Michele in Foro 8. Lucca, San Frediano • r.-r.~~ • • Q=: 0 _ f.)'1 .~ -=-- • • 0 • • 0 • • Cr- • • C;-' , • • 1 i ~--- • J --- 9. Pistoia, San Bartolomeo in Pantano 10. Pistoia, San Giovanni Fuorcivitas • 12. Ottana, San Nicola • ...- -_ .. ~ Il. Ozieri, Sant'Antioco in Bisarcio ~ ~=ih_U~ - o 0 ~o ~ • . .... 13. Borutto, San Pietro di Sorres • ••. • 1. Florence, Baphstery San Giovanni, exterior looking NW • 2. Florence, Baptistery, extenor looking NE • • 3. Florence, Baptlstery, interior 100 king NW • 4. Florence, Baptistery, interior looking E • • 5. Pisa, west façade • 6. Pisa, south flank , • 7. Pisa, east end • • 8. Pisa, south transept apse 9 . Pisa, north transept a pse .-- • • 10 . Pisa, interior, nave 100 king E • .. Il. Pisa, interior, crossing • • 12. Pisa, interior, crossing looking ~ • 13. Pisa, interior, south transept 14. Pisa, interior, north transept • ,.. 15. Florence, San Mimato, façade 16. Empoh, Sant'Andrea, façade ~!tH~!i:tHiHHHmHHHnHmUHmH:m' • 111111 r III III" 1II11l11rrlTTrrnrrrrr"TTTTTTTTTTlImllll1rrnrlll Il "'" 17. Fiesole, Badia, façade • 18. Florence, San Salvatore, façade • 19. Lucca, Duomo, aerial view trom SE • • 20. Lucca, Duome, west façade • 21. Lucca, Duomo, cast apse • 22. Lucca, San Michele in Foro, west façade and south flank • • 23 . Lucca, San Michele in Forc, east apse • 24. Lucca, San Frcdiano, west façade • • 25. Luccû, San Frediano, 2ast end • • 26. Pistoia, San Bartolomeo in Pantano, west façade • • • 27 . Pistoia, San Giovanni Fuorcivitas, north façade • 28. Ozieri, Sant'Antioco di Bisarcio, east end • • . . 29. Ottana, San Nicola, west façade 30. Ottana, San Nicolo, south Hank • • 31. Borutta, San Pietro di Sorres, west façade • 32. Borutta, San Pietro di Sorres, nave looking east 1 v a_· , III • • • • ~ --.-...... 33. Codrongianus, 55 Trinità di Saccargia, west façde •