Roman Baroque Models and Local Traditional Construction. The Sanctuary of St. Ignatius of Loyola and its dome

Iacopo Benincampi

Generically, the term ‘Stereotomy’ refers to the scien- reotomy can be defined as the technique required to ce of cutting solids (Crescenzi 2002, 194; Defilippis cut stones, wood or metal in order to convey course 2012, 39), or rather, the sum of theoretical and practi- application in construction (Palacios Gonzalo 2003, cal knowledge (often originating from tradition) utili- 7).2 Therefore, this practice does not just regard the zed to determine the exact shape of all the components simple operation of cutting stone, but provides codi- used to seattle a particular architectural component. In fied graphic procedures, indispensable for designing fact, this element is built as the result of an assembla- structural components and the advanced verification ge (more or less complex) of blocks –generally stone– of the overall stability of an architectural organism. for which the prior knowledge of the outline of each In addition, knowing the vera forma, of every singu- ashlar is necessary for a successful outcome. This dis- lar load-bearing part in advance facilitates the trans- cipline represents the alternative to construction tech- mission of information to the craftsmen and the mo- niques based on the use of bricks, traditionally quite nitoring of the proper execution for each piece, later popular precisely because of their small dimensions to be placed in the nearly-dry stone work.3 Thus, it is and the flexibility of their joints, both optimal charac- a complex operation, in which a logical process anti- teristics in the fabrication of complex spatial structu- cipates the technical application through which the res. However, this does not necessarily mean that ma- appropriate and precise profile of each block can be terial selection constrains the design. Thus, the model attained which, when united with all of the others, designed by papal architect Carlo Fontana (1638– will then ensure the capacity of the entire structure. 1714) for the dome of the actual minor Basilica of the Since the end of the sixteenth century,4 numerous Sanctuary of St. Ignatius located in the village of Lo- treatises have been written in attempt to provide pre- yola1 (figure 1), rather than being realized in masonry cise procedural instructions, and yet often these texts (as was plausibly conceived) was found to be imple- were difficult to understand. Consequently, especially mented by means of the application of complex ste- in Spain, writers proceeded to establish a more practi- reotomic principles, giving rise to a unicum that has cal language furthered, above all, by the theoretical not again been encountered or equaled on the entire works of Alonso de Vandelvira (1544–1626), Fray Iberian Peninsula (Kubler 1957, 152). Lorenzo de San Nicolás (1593–1679), and Ginés Martínez de Aranda (1556–1620),5 whose writings were widely circulated, as they promised robust and STEREOTOMY: INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE detailed instructions on the implementation of techni- cal construction. In these elaborations, accurately Proceeding from the geometry, without which it characterized by briefly annotated graphic tables, the would be impossible to accomplish any result, ste- authors reported with extreme meticulousness the me-

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 117575 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 176 I. Benincampi

Figure 1 Loyola, Sanctuary of St. Ignatius, exterior, general view. Photo: I. Benincampi.

chanisms for projecting the geometry of the shapes, turing of building-stones for a specific architectural with the objective of determining as precisely as pos- element and therefore –once fulfilled– its task beca- sible the patrones: the actual plans to be utilized in me useless for any other fabrication site.6 Alongside the cutting of the ashlars (figure 2). the baibel, the saltarregla could always be found: an These technical drawings were obtained according object similar to a compass and generally made of to two different methods: either by establishing the drawings in advance and then scaling them to the ne- cessary dimensions, or by proceeding directly in real-time, arriving in extreme cases to project the ele- ments directly on the building site floor. The latter process was rather complex but also guaranteed re- sults with a minimal margin of error. In the operation of cutting, as stonecutter procee- ded using a particular tool at the worksite, known as a Baibel. It was a sort of rigid template formed with two arms, one of which was curved: a highly specia- lized object, unique to each worksite and often made with scrap material (appropriate considering its sin- Figure 2 gular use), aimed at eliminating excess material and Loyola, Sanctuary of St. Ignatius. Reconstruction of the delineating the ashlars as needed. In fact, the curva- procedure for defining the patrones that were used as a refe- ture of one of the sides of these devises was defined rence for cutting the ashlars for the dome. Elaboration: I. in such a way that it only allowed detailed manufac- Benincampi.

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 117676 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 The Sanctuary of St. Ignatius of Loyola and its dome 177

wood or metal. Utilized more for defining angles pected among his contemporaries (Eguillor 1977, than drawing curves, this tool had internal sides with 442).9 He led the worksite until his death in 1733, flat arms and was used primarily for making trompas bringing the fabric to a highly advanced state (De and in the elevation of any type of arch. With this Hornedo 1956, 393) while resolving some long-stan- tool, one could cut ashlars from the head, so that the ding critical points within the work as a whole, na- angle formed between the vertical plane of the face mely the elevation of the arches10 encircling the annu- and the plane of the soffit of the ashlar formed the lar nave of the church as well as the elevation of the desired shape. dome. The latter was completed by his assistant and Instead, concerning the cutting procedure, a ma- successor as the director –Ignacio de Ibero (1684– nual operator could follow two possible options. In 1766)– who finished the work on the church, resolved the first case, from the identification of the initial pa- the decorations for the interior and built the lantern, tron for each element, it was then possible to establis- all in time for the inauguration (31 July 1738, the hment its horizontal projection. From here, they pro- feast day of St. Ignatius). However, the dome presen- ceeded to cut, having established both the vertical ted static defects from the beginning, for which it was length and depth of the actual shape. On the contrary, immediately necessary to be reinforced at the base, the second method primarily exploited the use of the encircling it with two bands of iron.11 Still today, this baibel that, in continuity with the horizontal projec- temporary remedy requires an inquiry for a new and tion of the ashlar, allowed the shaping of the element. more effective solution (figure 3).12 Both techniques fall under that purported arte de Montea: the ability to realize drawings quoted in the real-life dimensions of the pieces for an architectural design or, more simply, just a part of the design. A body of knowledge that, based on predetermined refe- rence plans, allowed the working of stones even in the absence of the designer, who could therefore be far away from the worksite even for long periods of time. For example, this is what happened at Loyola where stable work was able to resume even without the constant presence of the general manager.7

THE DOME OF LOYOLA: A COMPLEX OBRA

The War of the Spanish Succession (1701– 1713/1714), which had seen a confrontation in the House of Bourbon –the legitimate heir to the Spanish throne after the death of King Charles II Habsburg (1661–1700)– and the future Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire Charles VI Habsburg (1685–1740), for a long time caused the privatization of Spanish Royal factories and funds necessary for the comple- tion of works under construction (Blasco Esquivas 2004, 391–393). So, even if founded in 1689 from the design of architect Carlo Fontana along with the pa- tronage of the Queen Mother Mariana of Austria (1634–96),8 the Jesuit Sanctuary of Loyola remained at a standstill and only in 1717 the fabric was able to Figure 3 be resumed, under the guidance of Sebastian de Lecu- Loyola, Sanctuary of St. Ignatius, interior. Photo: I. Benin- na (1662–1733), a local maestro de obras highly res- campi.

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 117777 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 178 I. Benincampi

Furthermore, the construction under Lecuna and who, while probably respecting the initial plan set by Ibero was assisted by a team of three architects from the master from Ticino, they likely interpreted the Madrid, whose identities remain unknown. They – design according to their own building cognizance which is certain– were involved in design and struc- while utilizing more readily available materials, na- tural decisions, in particular on materials to be use.13 mely stone (figure 4). Alongside all them worked sculptors and stonema- Today, what had been the architect’s vision for the sons, who were primarily entrusted with the realiza- project and his architectural decisions for its eleva- tion of the finishing touches. In fact, the eight seg- tion are not able to be determined with any certainty, ments of the soffit of the dome (identified by the lacking any graphic testimony of an elevation ribs) today appear enriched not only for the extensive drawing with the exception of a drawing depicting decorations in relief that also characterizes the tam- the site in 1721 (Benincampi 2015b, 59–62).21 In- bour but also from the presence of the eight allegori- deed, this image already shows a variation of the si- cal statues of the virtues,14 sketched in 1732 by the tuation in respect to the likely beginning of the pro- French sculptor Juan de Lane and modeled in stucco ject and, in addition, written sources confirm the by the Italian artist Gaetano Pace (died in 1738).15 implementation of this modification.22 Nevertheless – Moreover, a conspicuous number of workers realized in respect to the dome– the idea of the double shell is the majority of the ornamentation, which is attributa- plausibly attributable to the Ticino architect, as it was ble mostly to the hand of Ibero.16 This master builder typical in Italian regions23 but generally extraneous grew up in a Jesuit complex and specialized in the to Spanish tradition. However, what is not typically practice of tallista,17 building retables outside of assimilated to roman architectural culture is not only Basque worksite for local clients18 who, nevertheless, the utilization of stone as the preferred material but, provide an insight into the training of this artist, an above all, the predetermining of the shape of each as- apprentice of the Churriguera and of their followers. hlar along with its corresponding decorated portion. In this regard, the high altar of the church of Loyola After all, this choice constrained the technical reali- explicitly encompassed the Iberian tendency of ex- zation of the work as a whole, obligating the imple- treme exaltation of details, well expressed by the mentation of identical ashlars for the inner shell, sin- craftsmen of Salamanca and, as well as in the orna- ce the only possible way to simplify the operations mentation of the principal hall such as in the dome, was to use pre-fabricated elements, only later to be called for the custom of reducing architectural struc- carved with ornate figures and shapes (figures 5–6).24 tures to purely decorative grandeur, later exported Furthermore, these shapes, not being geometric but and developed especially in the New World (Gutier- rather depicting draperies, coat of arms and animals, rez De Ceballos 1971, 11).19

LOCAL PRACTICES AND ROMAN MODELS

A double shell in stone with a diameter of approxi- mately 20 meters, separated by an interspace of about 32 cm:20 a solution unique in its genre that shows how the dome of the Sanctuary of Loyola was probably determined by the special circumstances that also developed the process used on the Basque construction site itself. In fact, executive guidance on the part of Carlo Fontana was lacking (he never visi- ted the worksite) and the substantial isolation of the site compared to the other principal cultural centers Figure 4 at the time –due to its location– left ample room for Loyola, Sanctuary of St. Ignatius, exterior. Photo: I. Benin- the local craftsmen to make decisions on their own campi.

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 117878 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 The Sanctuary of St. Ignatius of Loyola and its dome 179

Figure 5 Loyola, Sanctuary of St. Ignatius, interior, detail of the soffit of the dome. Photo: I. Benincampi.

implied there was an even greater conceptual effort vings, perfecting the joints and removing any excess in the workmanship, since every block of stone had material, thus highlighting the three-dimensionality to be worked individually and then placed in relation of the whole. to all of the other contiguous pieces so that the final Completely different situations were presented ex- image was uniform. Therefore, it was not possible to ternally. Here, the lack of decorative elements per- place each singular element in an already finished mitted the Spanish craftsmen to exploit all the stones state, but was instead appropriate to proceed first on the worksite, avoiding unnecessary waste and in- with a preliminary rough-shaping of the ashlar du- creasing the speed of fitting and finishing the joints, ring production and only later, once the piece had achieving an austere result, while at the same time been put in place with the others, finalizing the car- essential. Consequently, one could almost imagine the two shells of the Jesuit church as two autono- mous subjects in their shape and the architectural choices, which seems to be confirmed by the shaping of the two profiles: the almost perfectly hemispheri- cal profile of the soffit (a media naranja), while the external one is slightly more arcuated. However, the presence of the ribs instead allows us to consider the two domes as a single entity, which is tightly inter- connected and strengthened precisely from these ra- dial elements, guaranteeing stability and robustness (figures 7–8). And, in this regard, the fact that the first five rows of stones starting at the base present a slight difference in dimensions in respect to those above, signals a search for the tangency necessary to attach to the tambour below. Simultaneously, this re- veals the workings of the dome itself, in which every Figure 6 singular element collaborates with all of the others Loyola, Sanctuary of St. Ignatius. Reconstruction of the for the general soundness of the structure. Hence, it profile of the dome. Elaboration: I. Benincampi. seems a solution with no affinity found in Spain and

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 117979 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 180 I. Benincampi

had participated. Indeed, from the case study of San- ta Maria dei Miracoli (1675–79) to the unrealized church that was to be erected in the Coliseum (from 1676), and as well as the dome of Montefiascone (from 1670), these are several occasions which can be used to measure the Ticino architect against the problems of the dome. In addition, the opportunity to closely observe the impressive ancient Roman structures and their tectonic solutions, such as in the case of the so-called Temple of Minerva Medica,25 as well as Fontana’s study on the St Peter’s Basilica –collected in the volume Templum Vaticanum (Fon- tana 1694, 311, 313, 315–323)– represents a clear Figure 7 indication of the technical competence and the capa- Loyola, Sanctuary of St Ignatius. Reconstruction of the bilities of the architect. Therefore, from this cursus arrangement of the ashlars of the soffit of the dome. Elabo- honorum transpires the mastery of architectural ration: I. Benincampi. practices of the expert, which allows us to put forward a hypothesis on the elevation of the dome of Loyola and its evident structural problems. Defects, such as these, probably are thus not imputable to the project designer, who unlikely would have been able to present a proposal with such deficiencies. Instead, these shortcomings may be more plausibly traced to, on one hand, the selection of stone as the building material and, on the other, the commingling of diffe- rent construction practices. Also, the decision to pro- foundly modify the design with the insertion of the annular nave26 –in place of the presumed previous configuration of radial chapel passageways– undou- btedly undermined the static stability of the whole (by reducing the surface area of the supporting walls), which was initially supported by the chapels, exacerbating the load on the foundations. Moreover, the very decision to proceed with a consultation on the design of the internal arches of the church (Be- nincampi 2015a, 32–38) suggests the existence of a structural problem and the lack of a shared and relia- Figure 8 ble solution on how to proceed. And, perhaps, this Loyola, Sanctuary of St. Ignatius. Reconstruction of the as- complex weaving of demands and problems could hlars of the soffit of the dome. Elaboration: I. Benincampi. be explained by the unusual height of the tambour, slightly lower in respect to the other solutions by Fontana (Coudenhove-Erthal 1930, 135). Plausibly, it configures the dome as the singular result of a fu- the fear of an excessive load on the pillars –also be- sion of stately requests and local construction capabi- cause of the expectation of a heavy lantern– as well lities. as the necessity to reduce as much as possible the In Rome and in its surroundings, there are some occurrence of an overturning moment which the formal references –useful comparisons for the Bas- walls remained subject to, imposed a modification in que intervention– that can be observed and, in parti- the master plan, so as to prevent a possible general cular, the worksites in which Carlo Fontana himself collapse of the structure.

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 118080 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 The Sanctuary of St. Ignatius of Loyola and its dome 181

Anyway in support of the local craftsmen it is im- er, forming the walls. In contrast, in a non-homoge- portant to recognize the uncommon and exceptional neous layering, their role is fundamental for the proper nature of the design. The craftsmen, finding no equal distribution of loads. Cfr. Defilippis 2012, 83. in dimensions or in form in the Spanish Basque 4. In Spain, the first treatise on architecture appeared Country, undoubtedly sought to seek models for refe- around 1560 by Brother Hernán Ruiz the Younger (1514–69): a short document that, in part, re-proposed rence elsewhere, one of which could possibly have some of the observations of Vitruvius and Serlio, but been the Royal Palace of San Lorenzo de El Escorial enriched with ideal plans and other drawings of his (1563–94). In fact, the palace-monastery commissio- own invention. This was followed by the dissemination ned by King Philip II of Habsburg (1527–98) not of a treatise by Philibert de L’Orme (1568) which, only was built entirely of stone –as was the Sanc- however, was not widely circulated because it was tuary of Loyola– but, above all, was the work of Bas- mainly aimed at an audience of specialists (Pecoraro que master craftsmen, providing them (although a 2005, 841). long time prior to them) a noble exemplum to refer 5. Particullary at Loyola, the treatise by Vandelvira –Trat- to. Therefore, it was an articulated design and cons- ado de Arquitectura (1575–1591)– was a fundamental truction site, as suggested simply by the mere presen- point of reference for the transposition of Roman de- sign in construction documents for worksites, though ce of the nearby Holy House in which –according to also the treatise of Ginés Martínez de Aranda –Cerra- tradition– St. Ignatius was born and converted to reli- mientos y trazas de Montea (end of XVI century)– be- gion: a relic that implicated from the beginning spe- longing to José and Alberto de Churriguera could have cial attention to be given in designing the features.27 been a manual-like source of absolute importance (Cal- However, most likely, no one could have ever ex- vo Lopez 2009, 1–18). In this sense, the visit by their pected its visible state today. The curious application brother Joaquin to Loyola corroborates the hypothesis of local building practices to a Roman matrix, led in of this connection (Benincampi 2015a 26–49). fact to a model that constitutes one of the most uni- 6. Probably, for this reason, no examples of the tools have que manifestations in the European landscape in an survived to today. international style, typical of the late Baroque. In this 7. In the case of Loyola, it is indeed known that the site manager Lecuna left the worksite several times to work sense, the modifications and adaptations made by lo- on other tasks, which was possible only because of this cals in consideration to the functional needs of a work methodology (Astiazarain 1989, 81). After all this country with different tastes and styles from Italy did stereotomic technique allowed the architect to create not substantially distort this re-interpretation to have una tantum drawings for the realization of the ashlars. a local aesthetic or flavor. Contrary, this contribution Subsequently, master carpenters and stonemasons pro- has shown and clearly defined the terms through ceeded independently without the need of constant su- which Spain drew inspiration in the eighteenth cen- pervision on the part of the project manager (Palacios tury from the Italian culture, especially Roman. 2003, 15). 8. On the foundation: Astrain 1920, 24–32; De Hornedo 1989a, 127–161; De Hornedo 1989b, 67–77. 9. On the figure of Lecuna and his activities: Astiazarain NOTES 1988, 1: 207–225; Astiazarain 1989, 67–88; De Horne- do 1989a, 138–144; Benincampi 2015a, 26–49. Lecuna 1. About the Sanctuary: Garcia1866, passim; Schubert replaced Martin De Zaldua (1654–1726), former con- 1908, 263–269; Braun 1913, 150–160; Coudenhove- struction builder, who was removed from the project in Erthal 1930, 133–149; De Hornedo 1956, 383–430; 1705 because of the economic constraints imposed by Hager 1974, 280–289; Eguillor 1982, 249–276; Eguil- the civil war at the time. Originally from Oyarzun in lor y Hager y De Hornedo 1989, passim; Cabasés 2001, the Spanish Basque Country, Lecuna held several posi- passim; Sale 2003, 81–88; Guadalupi y Gutierrez de tions throughout the region dealing with public utility Ceballos y Berchez 2002, passim; Astiazarain 1989, buildings (City hall of Elgoibar, 1733) and urban infra- passim. Gutierrez De Ceballos 2006, 92–116; Benin- structure (bridge of Astigarraga, 1731) which indicate a campi 2015a, passim; Benincampi 2015b, passim. certain notoriety (Astiazarain, 1: 185–225). 2. See also Aterini 2002, 185; Castro Villalba 1996, pas- 10. See I. Benincampi, Carlo Fontana e il Santuario di Lo- sim; Rabasa Diaz 2000, passim. yola: progettazione italiana e pratiche costruttive spa- 3. In fact, the mortars in this situation played a limited gnole, in progress. In fact, a peculiarity of Loyola is the role, as the stones already interlocked perfectly togeth- central structure, characterized by a girola (or, ambula-

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 118181 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 182 I. Benincampi

tory): a modification realized by Martin De Zaldua, of quently, it is not difficult to imagine a reciprocal rela- which the repercussions caused many complications tionship and an integration of the two, in which the both in the construction of the internal arches of the younger apprentice managed the decorations while the passageway between the hall and the nave, and in the older Master dealt with the structural aspects of the pursuit of the stabilization of the dome itself. church (Benincampi 2015b, 64. Eguillor 1989, 163– 11. De Hornedo 1989a, 147. In fact, after the end of the 171). lantern and the position in 1735 of the Cross set above 17. Probably, Ibero started as a wood sculptor. However, it, Ibero had to immediately report that there had been his experience easily transferred to stone, assuming the structural movement due to settling. connotations of bas-reliefs and then later in true sculp- 12. Since (and still today) the static structure of the exter- tures. nal dome continued to have problems. In 1988 the Ital- 18. Referring to the retablos mayors in convents de la ian engineer Giorgio Croci was given the task of stabi- purissima Conception Francisca in Azpeitia, de Santa lizing the structure as a whole. From his analysis, it Clara in Azcoitia and the Convento de Santa Clara a was deduced that the static problems were due to the Tolosa (Astiazarain 1988, 2: 29–40). Lecuna also took architectural structure of the dome itself (insufficiently up similar themes, though in small amounts, as evi- attached, almost semicircular) as well as to the exces- denced by the ratablo del Cristo Crucificado, de San sive weight of the lantern. Consequently, he decided to Ignacio y San Francisco Javier in Oyarzon. The dis- reinforce the entire double shell with steel cables, tinctive trait of this system of altars resides mainly in which are still present and visible today (Cabases 2001, the decoration framed by twisted columns, immensely 34). detailed and articulated, which inserts this work in its 13. Archivo Historico de Loyola (AHL), Libro de las own right into the Spanish Baroque (Astiazarain 1988, Cuentas, 1–4–1, c. 37r, January-February 1730: «ytem 1: 202–205). 180 Rs. que carga el oficio de Madrid por dados a tres 19. Garcia y Bellido 1929, 48–50; Kubler 1957, 138–150; Maestros que vieron la traza de la Media Naranja y di- Blasco Esquivias 2006, 6–23. In the New World, espe- eron su parecer»; AHL, Diario Historico de Loyola cially in Mexico and Latin America, the phenomenon (1713–1763), 1–5–10.1, 1730: «[...] comuinieron en el of hyper-decoration went on to find a strong foothold, parecer que dieron acerca de la Media Naranja interior giving rise to hybrid and quite detailed solutions, such y su construcciòn, que fuesse de piedra differente a la as, the façade of the Dolores Hidalgo Cathedral in caliza de que se forma la hobra». Cfr. De Hornedo Zacatecas. 1989a, 144. 20. Externally, the dome spans a width of about 24 meters 14. They are, starting from the one holding the Commu- and concludes at its apex with an oculus, sealed closed nion in its hands, and in counterclockwise direction: by a heavy lantern of about 6.5 m in diameter, illumi- Faith (with the Eucharist), Charity (with two babies by nated by windows and crowned by a large and richly her womb), Hope (with her eyes lost in the sky), Reli- decorated fleuron. The overall height of the interior of gion (with the cross), Temperance (with a horse-bit in the basilica reaches 50 m but, by adding the dimen- her hand), Justice (with scales), Prudence (with a snake sions of the lantern, it arrives to a total height of 65 m. wrapped around her arm), and Fortress (with a spear (Cabases 2001, 11–35). and shield). 21. This was a published drawing by Flemish Bollandist 15. These two were Adventureros. They were generally re- Fathers Giovanni Vinnio and Guglielmo Cupero, who ferred to as artists trying their luck in foreign countries visited the Loyola Sanctuary while under construction even without an official position. In particular, Pace along their journey to Madrid. In fact, they were busy came from a family of Italian sculptures, who moved to at the time collecting the necessary information to Portugal probably following the reformatory wave un- complete the sanctorale for the figure of St. Ignatius. dertaken by King John V (1689–1750), eager to em- Specifically, the publication shows an intermediate so- brace and promote artistic culture in this country, as lution between the design of the plan from the Busiri- well as Roman architecture. Indeed, the entire Iberian Vici Collection (identified by H. Hager) and the actual Peninsula then proceeded in this direction. Thus, a situation, which permits the hypothesis that, at that large number of different Italian artists arrived to the time, there must have existed an executive design; Portugal and Spanish courts: Andrea Procaccini (1671– however, there had already been modifications imposed 1734), Filippo Juvarra (1678–1736) and Giacomo Bo- during the consultation, which took place in 1720 navia (1705–59), plus a multitude of stone masons, la- (Hager, 1974, 280–289; De Hornedo 1989a, 139–142). borers and master builders (Sugranyes 1999, 90). 22. See I. Benincampi, Carlo Fontana e il Santuario di Lo- 16. In fact, he was principally a tallista (a wood carver), yola: progettazione italiana e pratiche costruttive spa- while Lecuna looked like a technical expert. Conse- gnole, in progress. In particular, great interest lies in

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 118282 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 The Sanctuary of St. Ignatius of Loyola and its dome 183

the sense of the warning by the Provincial Father of Astiazarain, M. I. 1988. Arquitectos Guipuzcoanos del Sig- Castile Alenςon, who in 1696 invited Martin de Zaldua lo XVIII, 2. San Sebastian: Diputacion Foral de Guipùz- «hazer el Maestro traza ajustada de la Yglesia segun koa. està planeada con la mudanza hecha del ensache mayor Astiazarain, M. I. 1989. El Santuario de Loyola. San Sebas- de los pasadizos de las capillas, […]» (AHL, 1–4–3, tian: Diputacion Foral de Guipùzkoa. Libro de Visitas 1684–1765, p. 19, 20 November Astrain, A. 1920. Historia de la Compañia de Jesus en la 1696). This indicates not only the willingness to modi- Asistencia de España, VI: 24–32. Madrid: Razón y Fe. fy the design already underway but, above all, suggests Aterini, B. 2002. La Stereotomia e i metodi di rappresenta- the probable subsequent existence of a variation to the zione. Materia e Geometria, 12: 183–191. design, later implemented. (Hager 1974, 284; De Barbé-Coquelin De Isle, G. 1977. Tratado de arquitectura Hornedo 1989, 131). de Alonso de Vandelvira, 1–2. Albacete: Publicacion de 23. The many examples are deeply rooted in the time: from la Caja de Ahorros Provinciales de Albacete. the case of San Marco in Venice to the dome of St Pe- Benincampi, I. 2015a. Gli archi del Santuario di Loyola. Le ter’s in Rome, as well as Santa Maria del Fiore in Flor- relazioni tra la progettazione romana e le pratiche ence. costruttive spagnole. ArcHistoR, 4: 26–49. 24. The repeated linear staggering of the joints helps to re- Benincampi, I. 2015b. Il portico del Santuario di Loyola e duces the possibility of the appearance of cracks. la fortuna di un modello romano in Spagna. Quaderni 25. However, the old building was already taken into con- dell’Istituto di Storia dell’Architettura, 63: 26–49. sideration by Bernini in the design of the church of Blasco Esquivas, B. 2004. Los Borbones y la renovaciòn de la Sant’Andrea al Quirinale (from 1656); but not so much arquitectura cortesana en España. In Per la storia dell’arte in terms of construction-structure, but rather in relation in Italia e in Europa, Studi in onore di Luisa Mortari, edi- to the formal possibilities that such a ruin offered to re- ted by M. Pasculli Ferrara, 390–399. Rome: De Luca. solve long-standing problems of combining the central Blasco Esquivias, B. 2006. «Ni fatuos ni delirante»s, José area with the needs of a lengthways extension of the Benito Churriguera y el esplendor del barroco español. Christian-Catholic liturgy. Fontana, perhaps, studied Lexicon, 2: 6–23. this temple from the Roman world for its load distribu- Braun, J. 1913. Spaniens alte Jesuitenkirchen. Freiburg: tion, which was resolved by a ribbed dome buttressed Herder. also through the use of the chapels. Coudenhove-Erthal, E. 1930. Carlo Fontana und die Archi- 26. In reality, the transition from a plan with lateral chapel tektur de römischen Spätbarocks. Vienna: Schroll. passageways to the actual annular nave was not excep- Cabasés, F. J. 2001. Introduccion al Santuario de Loyola, tional to the construction of Loyola. In fact, the Jesuits historia y descripcion de sus elementos para los compa- had proposed this same transformation at least to one ñeros huespedes de hogar primordiales y para los ami- other site during construction in those same years, the gos de Loyola. Loyola: Sanctuary of Loyola. church of St. Vitus in Rijeka (the ancient Fiume), trans- Calvo Lopez, J. 2009. El manuscrito Cerramientos y trazas formed in 1725 when the new project manager B. Mar- de Montea de Gines Martinez de Aranda. Archivo Espa- tinuzzi converted the secondary chapels into a continu- ñol de arte, 325: 1–18. ous passageway. Castro Villalba, A. 1996, Historia de la construccion arqui- 27. Based on the document ‘Donazione’ from the Compag- tectonica. Barcelona: UPC. nia di Gesù society, the Holy House of Loyola could Crescenzi, C. 2002. Stereotomia, glossario. Materia e geo- not be altered in any way, which implied the need for a metria, 12: 193–203. search of an ad hoc solution that would allow it to be De Hornedo, R. M. 1956. La Basilica de Loyola. Miscela- incorporated within the religious complex. The Busiri- nea Comillas: revista de ciencias humanas y sociales, Vici plan, in this regard, is not represented, which has 25: 383–430. raised many doubts about whether or not Fontana took De Hornedo, R. M.; Eguillor, J. R.; Hager, H.; 1989. it into account while designing the project (Astrain Loyola, historia y arquitectura. San Sebastian: ETOR. 1920, 26; De Hornedo 1989a, 130–131). De Hornedo, R. M. 1989a. La construccion del Real Cole- gio e iglesia de Loyola desde su comienzo en 1688 hasta su interrupcion en 1767, in Loyola, historia y arquitectu- ra, edited by R. M. De Hornedo y J. R. Eguillor y H. REFERENCE LIST Hager, 127–161. San Sebastian: ETOR. De Hornedo, R. M. 1989b. La fundacion del real colegio e Astiazarain, M. I. 1988. Arquitectos Guipuzcoanos del Sig- iglesia de San Ignacio de Loyola, in Loyola, historia y lo XVIII, 1. San Sebastian: Diputacion Foral de Guipùz- arquitectura, edited by R. M. De Hornedo y J. R. Egui- koa. llor y H. Hager, 67–77. San Sebastian: ETOR.

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 118383 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44 184 I. Benincampi

Defilippis, F. 2012. Architettura e stereotomia. Rome: Gan- Gutierrez De Ceballos, A. R. 2006. La arquitectura conven- gemi. tual, tipologias y espacios, in Celosias, Arte y piedad en Eguillor, J. R. 1977. La intervencion de Joaquin de Churri- los conventos de Castilla-La Mancha durante el siglo de guera en la construcción de la basilica de Loyola. Boletin El Quijote, 92–116. Toledo: Comunidad Castilla-La de la Sociedad Vascongada de Amigos de Pais, XXXIII: Mancha. 441–450. Hager, H. 1974. Carlo Fontana and the Jesuit Sanctuary at Eguillor, J. R. 1982. El Santuario de Loyola, Sintesi histori- Loyola. Journal of Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, ca. In II Semana de Estudios de Historia Eclesiasticas XXXVII: 280–289. del Pais Vasco, 249–276. Vitoria: Facultad de Teologia. Kubler, G. 1957. Ars Hispaniae: Arquitectura de los siglos Eguillor, J. R. 1989. Los Maestros Ibero de Azpeitia en la XVII y XVIII. Madrid: Editorial Plus-Ultra. construccion del Santuario de Loyola, in Loyola, historia Palacios Gonzalo, J. C. 2003. Trazas y cortes de canteria en y arquitectura, edited by R. M. De Hornedo y J. R. el Renacimiento español. Madrid: Munilla-Leria. Eguillor y H. Hager, 163–171. San Sebastian: ETOR. Pecoraro, I. 2005. I primi trattati di stereotomia e la loro in- Fontana, C. 1694. Templum Vaticanum et ipsius origo. fluenza sull’architettura salentina di Età Moderna. In Ac- Rome: typography Giovanni Francesco Buagni. tas del Cuarto Congreso Nacional de Historia de la Garcia, R. 1866. Noticia Historico-descriptiva del Colegio Construcción. (Cádiz, 27–29 january 2005), 841–849. de Loyola. Madrid: Imprenta y libreria de D.E. Aguado- Madrid: I. Juan de Herrera. Pontejos. Rabasa Diaz, E. 2000. Forma y construcción en piedra: de Garcia y Bellido, A. 1929. Estudios del barroco español. la canteria medieval a la estereotomia del siglo XIX. Avances para una monografia de los churrigueras. Archi- Madrid: Akal. vo español de Arte y Arqueologia. V: 48–50 . Schubert, O. 1908. Geschichte des Barock in Spanien. Guadalupi, G.; Gutierrez de Ceballos, A. R.; Berchez, J.; Stuttgard: Esslinges. 2002. El santuario de Loyola. Bologna: F. M. Ricci. Sale, G. 2003. Ignazio e l’arte de gesuiti. Milano: Jaca Book. Gutierrez De Ceballos, A. R. 1971. Los Churriguera. Ma- Sugranyes, S. 1999. Le maestranze d’arte italiane nella Ma- drid: Instituto Diego Velázquez del Consejo Superior de drid dei primi Borboni. Annali del Barocco in Sicilia, 6: Investigaciones Cientificas. 87–91.

AActasctas VVol.ol. 11.indb.indb 118484 113/11/173/11/17 9:449:44