Cosimo I de’ Medici and the Art of Flemish Tapestry
A Material Study of the Flemish Tapestry Production in Florence for Cosimo I de’ Medici between 1545-1553
Nelline Bogerd Student number: 3849902 RMA Thesis Art History of the Low Countries Utrecht University August 2018 Supervisor: Prof. dr. Sven Dupré
Summary
In 1545, Cosimo I de’ Medici invested in the instatement of two ducal tapestry ateliers in Florence. The so-called Arazzerie Medicee were directed by the Flemish master weavers Jan Rost and Nicolas Karcher. By this time, many Italian patrons had satisfying experiences with commissioning tapestries from Flanders. This arose the question as to why Cosimo decided to invest in having Flemish tapestries produced in his own city. This thesis investigates what aspects of the tapestries’ process of making may have incited Cosimo to introduce this craft in Florence. The approach to answer the question is based on the connection between archival records, iconography, and the artisanal knowledge that is embodied in the object itself. The first part describes the context in which the Flemish-Florentine production came to exist by examining the history of Italian patronage of Flemish tapestry, the circumstances in which the Flemish masters were to work, and the general process of making tapestries. The second part of the thesis describes the tradition of the imagery and explores the materiality of the figurative tapestries that Rost and Karcher made for Cosimo. The results of this research shed new light on the value of the craft of tapestry making in the Florentine context. Firstly, it demonstrated that the materiality of the tapestries was an important consideration from the very beginning of the undertaking. Secondly, it showed that the tapestry workshops can be connected to Cosimo’s interests in science and natural history, and that they may have been part of a larger plan of fostering technological advancements. The thesis provides an impetus for further investigation into the differences in the process of making and the dissimilar developments of Rost’s and Karcher’s tapestry workshops, and invites to further research artisanal exchange of products and knowledge in sixteenth-century Florence.
2
Table of Contents
Summary ...... 2 Introduction ...... 4 Part I ...... 12 Chapter 1 The Tradition of Flemish Tapestry in Europe and Italy ...... 13 Chapter 2 The Flemish Tapestry Workshops in Florence ...... 18 Chapter 3 Materials and Techniques ...... 29 Part II ...... 37 Chapter 4 The First Flemish-Florentine Tapestries ...... 38 Chapter 5 Bachiacca’s Grotesques and Months ...... 46 Chapter 6 The Stories of Joseph the Hebrew and Cultural Debates ...... 58 Conclusion ...... 69 Bibliography ...... 73 List of Archival Sources ...... 77 List of Illustrations ...... 78 Appendix I Additional Illustrations ...... 88 Appendix II Table of Dyestuffs Found in Tapestries ...... 101
3
Introduction1
When Cosimo I de’ Medici (1519-1574) was only seventeen years old, he became Duke of Florence after his predecessor was assassinated. In 1539 he married the Spanish Eleonora di Toledo (1522-1562). After their first child Maria was born in 1540, the family moved from Palazzo Medici Riccardi to Palazzo della Signoria, a place that was regarded as a symbol of the Florentine government of the past 250 years. The redecorations of the palace appropriated this history in a series of frescoes, which were comprised of many interpretative layers carefully spelled out by Giorgio Vasari in the Ragionamenti (1558-1559).2 An important part of the redecorations consisted of acquiring tapestries, which had become a growing trend at the major European courts, including that of Charles V and Henry VIII. While Cosimo I investigated the possibilities of purchasing these tapestries in Flanders, a confluence of events made him decide to invest in the establishment of two weaving workshops under the leadership of Flemish master weavers Jan Rost (?-1564) and Nicolas Karcher (1498?-1562). This thesis investigates what aspects of the artisanal practice of tapestry making may have incited Cosimo to introduce this craft in Florence. Being a young and inexperienced leader of an internally rivaling government forced Cosimo to demonstrate strong personal leadership.3 Although the Florentines were sceptical at the beginning, he proved to be able to give a new boost to the Tuscan economy that had been waning after years of continuous war. Cosimo attracted new industries and developed a policy of tolerance towards foreigners who wanted to practice their craft in the service of the new government. His cultural politics turned Florence into the focal point of innovation in crafts, arts, literature, and many other forms of skillful expression. One of the Duke’s cultural investments was the 1545 introduction of the Arazzerie Medicee, the ducal tapestry ateliers. Besides the obvious advantage of having direct control over the production for the redecoration of Palazzo Vecchio (as Palazzo della Signoria was later
1 For this research I have been able to travel to Florence thanks to the financial support of the GWO foundation, to whom I am very grateful. I sojourned at the Dutch Institute for Art History in Florence (NIKI) and had a very informative and fruitful stay. I visited the Florentine State Archive (ASF), I was introduced to literature that was not accessible in the Netherlands, and I analyzed some tapestries in various Florentine collections to get a feeling of the material, albeit that these did not include the case studies of the present study. Since most of the tapestries discussed here are currently not on view to the public and held in depots, I have had to base my research largely on photographs, some of which were not reproduced in books or articles. I am grateful tso Felicia Else and Robert La France for sending me photographs of the Grotesques and Months sets. 2 Elisa Goudriaan, Giordio Vasari.I Ragionamenti. Verklaringen van Giorgio Vasari, Schilder En Architect Uit Arezzo, Bij de Inventies Die Door Hem Werden Geschilderd in Het Paleis van de Doorluchtige Hoogheden in Florence, Gericht Tot de Zeer Verheven En Illustere Don Francesco De’ Medici, 2006 (1559). 3 Konrad Eisenbichler, The Cultural Politics of Duke Cosimo de’ Medici, Aldershot 2001, pp. xi-xiii.
4
called), many other reasons seem to have been at play. First of all, the relatively harmonious coexistence between the various states on the Italian peninsula provided the social and financial stability for investment in new industries. The tapestry production in Brussels provided work for around 15,000 people, if we are to believe Bernardo Saliti, who proposed the idea of introducing this craft in Florence to Cosimo.4 A vivid vision of a native industry that could eventually compete with that of Brussels in the supply of tapestries on the Italian peninsula must have appealed to Cosimo.5 There was hope that this new product of Flemish-Florentine tapestries would be cheaper than the Netherlandish imports, which would consolidate Florence’s position in the international tapestry market.6 The considerations were, however, not limited to the economic. It is likely that Cosimo saw tapestry production as a way to demonstrate that he was a serious player in the European political field. He wanted to follow the example of the major Northern European courts of Charles V in Flanders, Henry VIII in England, and Francis I in France, who had already invested in the local production of tapestries. Furthermore, there were examples of fruitful commissions of Flemish tapestries by Italian patrons (including those by Medici Popes Leo X and Clement VII). In addition to the economic and political considerations, it is likely that the artistic value of local tapestry production attracted Cosimo. Countless studies have investigated the difference in aesthetic between Northern and Italian sixteenth-century art. Since the making of a tapestry is based on cartoons created by painters, the idea arose that a weaver who was present in Italy (whether of Flemish or Italian origin) could better understand the styles represented in the Italian cartoons that were to be made into tapestries.7 Candace Adelson emphasizes her reservations about the assumption that the different aesthetic was a decisive factor, because during the fifteenth century many Italian patrons had sent their designs to Flanders in order to be woven and they all seemed pleased with the results.8 This implies that there was no need to bring the Flemish weavers to Florence to receive satisfying results.
4 Candace Adelson, The Tapestry Patronage of Cosimo I de’Medici: 1545-1553, New York 1990, p. 499 (ASF, MdP 1170a, insert II, busta 10, fol. 31r-v). 5 Thomas P. Campbell, Tapestry in the Renaissance: Art and Magnificence, New York (The Metropolitan Museum of Art) 2002, p. 382, Adelson 1990 (see note 4) (see note 4), p. 82. 6 The Italian tapestries turned out to be more expensive than the Netherlandish ones regarding the large figurative tapestries. Adelson demonstrated that the ‘ready-made’ Creation set, bought by Cosimo I in Brussels around 1551, actually cost less per ell than the ones he had made in Florence. See Adelson 1990 (see note 4) (see note 4), p.30 and 82. 7 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 31. 8 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 31.
5
Until now, it has been demonstrated that the interest in having Flemish tapestries made after Italian designs can be seen as a confluence of various economic, political, and artistic considerations. However, since the Flemish weavers seemed to have been capable of creating satisfying tapestries for the Italian market from their native lands, it remains unclear why Cosimo de’ Medici decided to invest in having Flemish tapestries produced in his own city, aside from the prospect of the possible economic spur it could have brought. Therefore, the current study investigates what aspects of the artisanal practice of tapestry making may have incited Cosimo to introduce this craft in Florence. Central in this thesis are the process of making and the materiality of the Flemish-Florentine figurative tapestry sets. It is focused on the early phase of the Florentine tapestry establishment, ranging from 1545, when the weavers arrived, until 1553, when Karcher’s contract ended and he departed Florence for Mantua.
Historiography The most important study on the developmental phase of the Florentine weaving establishment is the publication of Candace Adelson’s 1990 dissertation.9 In it, she investigates the role of the tapestry commissions of Cosimo I in the early years of the Flemish-Florentine tapestry ateliers.10 She catalogued the tapestries and their archival documentation. It is a meticulous study, essential to anyone investigating Medicean tapestries. It consists of four volumes: the first provides a historical analysis of the establishment of the workshops, the first years of weaving, and a chronology of the production and purchases between 1545-1553; the second is a catalogue of these tapestries; in the third volume, she provides transcripts of all of the documents that refer to these tapestries; the fourth contains illustrations. These illustrations are, unfortunately, very low quality black and white reproductions. Thanks to Adelson’s careful study of the archival sources we now have a rather complete overview of the first few years of the Florentine local production. This investigation was taken further by Lucia Meoni, who put effort into collecting and describing all of the Medicean tapestries present in the collections of Florentine museums. In the 1998 catalogue, she described the origins of the Medicean collection, the introduction of the Flemish tapestry weaving manufactories, and the evolution
9 Candace Adelson, The tapestry patronage of Cosimo I de’ Medici 1545-1553, New York,1990. This dissertation also includes chapters based on her previous publications in the 80s. 10 Adelson 1990 (see note 4).
6
of these Flemish workshops into the Creati Fiorentini, whose workshops remained functional until 1737.11 Thomas Campbell discussed the tapestry production in Italy between 1490-1560 in the catalogue accompanying the 2002 exhibition Tapestry in the Renaissance-Art and Magnificence held at the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York.12 The book provides the most complete survey yet presented of European Renaissance tapestries. It emphasizes and beautifully portrays the geographical shifts in production from North to South. It also includes technical notes on the amount of warp threads per centimeter, and in some instances presents preparatory drawings and modelli. Campbell devoted the last chapter before the epilogue to the developments of tapestry production in Italy between 1520 and 1560. This chapter is largely based on the writings of Meoni and Adelson for Florence, and those of the experts Nello Forti Grazzini, Clifford M. Brown, and Guy Delmarcel for traditions in Ferrara and Mantua, the cities where Rost and Karcher had been working before they went to Florence.13 The Stories of Joseph the Hebrew set is the most thoroughly studied series created by Rost and Karcher. It was designed by the Mannerist painters Agnolo Bronzino (for the largest part), Jacopo Pontormo, and Francesco Salviati. The twenty tapestries were specifically made for the Sala dei Duecento of Palazzo della Signoria. Since 1882 the series has been divided in half between Rome and Florence. In 2010 an exhibition was organized to celebrate the conclusion of the thirty-year restoration process of the ten Roman tapestries, a publication appearing alongside it.14 A similar book on the ten Florentine tapestries was published in 2013, as their restoration treatment ended three years after that in Rome.15 In 2015, a major exhibition showed the complete set together, traveling to Rome, Milan and Florence.16 In the course of my research for this thesis, it became known that as of this year (2018), the ten tapestries that have been kept at the Palazzo del Quirinale in Rome will be reunited with the ten in Florence for the
11 Lucia Meoni, Gli Arazzi Nei Musei Fiorentini, La Collezione Medicea, Catalogo Completo, I. La Manifattura Da Cosimo I a Cosimo II (1545-1621), Livorno 1998, pp 35-62. A short version of the history is found in Lucia Meoni, La Nascita dell’Arazzeria Medicea: Dalle Botteghe Dei Maestri Fiamminghi Alla Manifattura Ducale dei ‘Creati Fiorentini’ (exh. cat. Palazzo Pitti, Florence, 7 April-28 September 2008), Livorno 2008. 12 Campbell 2002 (see note 5). 13 Nello Forti Grazzini, L’Arazzo Ferrarese, Milano 1982, Clifford Malcolm Brown, Guy Delmarcel, and Anna Maria Lorenzoni, Tapestries for the Courts of Federico II, Ercole, and Ferrante Gonzaga, 1522-1563, New York 1996. 14 Loretta Dolcini and Lucia Meoni (eds.), Giuseppe Negli Arazzi Di Pontormo E Bronzino: Viaggio Tra I Tesori Del Quirinale, Rome (exh. cat. Palazzo Del Quirinale) 2010. 15 Innocenti, Clarice and Gianna Bacci (eds.), Gli Arazzi Con Storie Di Giuseppe Ebreo per Cosimo I de’Medici. Il Restauro, Firenze 2013. 16 Godart, Louis (ed.), Il Principe Dei Sogni. Giuseppe Negli Arazzi Medici Di Pontormo e Bronzino, Milano 2015.
7
coming three years. They will be exhibited at Palazzo Vecchio in rotation, showing four pieces at a time.17 Restoration projects and accompanying publications, like the ones mentioned above, always provide important information on the material-technical side of artworks and tell us much about their process of making. One other example of this is the publication by restorers Clarice Innocenti and Gianna Bacci on three tapestries created by the workshop of Karcher based on designs by Francesco Salviati, printed alongside their restoration.18 It concerns the tapestries depicting the Resurrection (between 1545-1549), Lamentation (1546) and Ecce Homo (1549). Next to a short history of the display of these tapestries at the Uffizi, it provides important material and technical information on their process of making. Other secondary literature on the tapestries is found in studies on the painters who created the tapestry cartoons, often focusing on the tapestries’ iconography and stylistics. For example, Robert La France investigated the role of various painters at the Medici court, including Bachiacca19 and Bronzino.20
Methods and Sources Most of the studies mentioned by now have investigated the tapestries made in the workshops of Nicolas Karcher and Jan Rost in Florence based on archival sources, stylistics and iconography, or are written for a public specialized in art conservation. Information on materials and techniques is present in the publications on restoration treatments, but this almost never gets connected to art-historical questions, even though the study of the objects themselves provides a rich source of information. In this thesis, I follow Pamela H. Smith’s approach in investigating artisanal knowledge based on the study of the object.21 Since craft is productive knowledge, the artwork is seen as a record of artisanal practices and as a repository of knowledge.22 It is an accumulation of belief systems, organized practices, networks, and
17 Ilaria Ciuti, ‘Gli Arazzi Dei Medici Tornano a Firenze’, La Repubblica, 17 April 2018
8
operational knowledge. This approach stretches our understanding of historical objects beyond the traditional approach of the artwork as a manifestation of an immaterial idea: the study of objects’ materiality is a way to investigate the artisanal knowledge that enabled its production. Ann-Sophie Lehmann provided a methodological toolbox for the art-theoretical study of materials, which serves as the framework of the current research.23 The first tool is the analysis of the network in which the object’s materials exist and (inter)mediate. The materials’ network can be explored by considering art theory, scientific analyses, historical art technological sources, recipes, contracts, guild charters et cetera.24 Adelson’s archival research has uncovered some of these documents that can now be further examined in relation to other sources in the network of the materials, including the contracts and Charles V’s Ordinances that regulated the tapestry weavers’ Guilds in Brussels and Florence.25 The first part of the thesis is to be seen through this framework, in which I trace the tradition of the relation between Flemish tapestry and Italian patronage (Chapter 1); investigate the arrangements of the weaving ateliers in Florence (Chapter 2); and trace the raw materials and techniques that were used to create the Flemish-Florentine tapestries (Chapter 3). The second part of the thesis is based on case studies and aims at demonstrating that the materiality of the tapestry is just as important as the imagery in determining its significance. The chapters 4, 5, and 6 first focus on the background of the commission and the tradition of the imagery. This is followed by an analysis of the materials and techniques, and how these are used to achieve painterly effects and convincing depictions. Lastly, the purposes for which the tapestries were made and how they were used by the Medici family is assessed to further determine the esteem in which the locally produced tapestries were held. Even though the archival sources indicate that Rost and Karcher produced a vast amount of tapestries in their Florentine workshops, not all of them are still known today and thus available for material and technical study. Many weavings were made for daily use, like covers for mules and special objects. They were made to protect, not to be protected. The large
23 Ann-Sophie Lehmann, ‘The Matter of the Medium: Some Tools for an Art Theoretical Interpretation of Materials’, in: Christy Anderson, Anne Dunlop, and Pamela H. Smith (eds.), The Matter of Art: Materials, Technologies, Meanings 1200-1700, Manchester 2015, pp. 21–41. 24 Lehmann 2015 (see note 23), p. 30. 25 This was not much more than a renewal of the already existing Brussels regulations of 1528. For the 1528 Ordinances, see Alphonse Wauters, Les Tapisseries Bruxelloises. Essai Historique Sur Les Tapisseries et Les Tapissiers de Haute et de Basse-Lice de Bruxelles (Brussels, 1878) accessible via
9
figurative tapestries that are discussed in this thesis were, in fact, kept safe thanks to their precious materials. As will be noted, these tapestries were only used on special occasions. When they were not on display, they were kept in the Duke’s special guardaroba, where large parts of his collection were stored. There, they were not exposed to damaging factors like sunlight and dust from the air. These figurative tapestries form the basis of this research. Since this thesis aims to better understand Cosimo’s interests, I have assessed only his commissions (and possibly his wife Eleonora’s), and not those by outside parties (like the tapestries for Paolo Giovio’s collection).26 Both Karcher and Rost have contributed to the sets of tapestries discussed in the current research.27 Only the cases discussed in chapter 4 are not necessarily part of a series, but their inclusion is rather straightforward given that the chapter considers the first tapestries that were commissioned by Cosimo. The two sets that form the basis of chapter 5 (Grotesque spalliere and the Months) were both designed by Bachiacca and demonstrate the relation between tapestry and Cosimo’s interest in natural history and sciences. It is impossible to discuss Rost and Karcher’s achievements without looking at the Stories of Joseph the Hebrew series, which is generally regarded as one of the most spectacular tapestry series of the sixteenth century because of their size and the value of the used materials. This selection of case studies covers all of the sets of figurative tapestries that Rost and Karcher made for Cosimo de’ Medici between 1545-1553 that are still known today. In order to answer the question as to what aspects of the Flemish tapestry production might have appealed to Cosimo, the following will be discussed. The first part of the thesis focuses on the context in which the Flemish-Florentine tapestry production came to exist. The first chapter traces the history of Italian patronage of Flemish tapestry. It shows that there was much interest in this art, but no Flemish weaver had established a long-lived tapestry atelier there. The activities of Nicolas Karcher and Jan Rost in Italy would fill a gap in the market. In chapter 2 I examine how Cosimo acted in order to establish the craft in a way that could outlive the weavers themselves. Furthermore, the relation between this craft and other artisanal practices is discussed, showing that this undertaking may have been part of a broader cultural- political aim of connecting various Florentine artisanal practices based on the materials and techniques they utilized. These materials and techniques and other aspects of the process of making are discussed in the third chapter.
26 Paolo Giovio’s tapestries are discussed in Adelson 1990 (see note 4), pp. 416-467. 27 References to artists in this thesis must be understood as references to their workshops. The masters’ names are used because they were responsible.
10
The second part of the thesis describes the tradition of the imagery and explores the materiality of the figurative tapestries that Rost and Karcher produced for Cosimo. Chapter 4 is focused on how the first Flemish-Florentine productions were received. Chapter 5 demonstrates the relation between the Grotesque and Months series by Bachiacca and Cosimo and Eleonora’s connections to Nature. Chapter 6 focuses on possibly the best-known series of the entire Florentine tapestry productions, the Stories of Joseph the Hebrew tapestries. Not only were they impressive in their size and splendor, they also have to be seen in relation to larger cultural debates, evidencing the relevance of the tapestry production in Florentine culture.
11
Part I
12
Chapter 1 The Tradition of Flemish Tapestry in Europe and Italy
Nowadays tapestries are often regarded as mere decoration, but back in the fifteenth century they were among the most esteemed pieces of art that one could own. Tapestries radiated splendor, wealth, and power. There were many types of tapestries in use besides the large figurative series that are discussed in this thesis. Weavers created all sorts of coverings, like packing cases for mules and objects, portiere (covering doors and window frames) and spalliere (wall coverings hanging at shoulder level), some in single pieces, others in series.28 The large sets covering the walls of entire rooms were not only aesthetically pleasing, but also served to keep the rooms warm during winter and cool during summer. Their easy transport was an advantage to patrons who inhabited a variety of residences throughout the year, hence their nickname ‘mobile frescoes of the North’. The most admired and valuable pieces were made in the North of France and Flanders.29 The employment of Jan Rost and Nicolas Karcher as masters of the tapestry ateliers that Cosimo opened in Florence in 1545 was the result of a long tradition of interest in Flemish tapestry.
Flemish Tapestry Production in Italy before 1545 Even though the growth of the Florentine economy during the fifteenth century had been based on the trade of wool and silk, the main materials for tapestries, no weaving workshop is known to have been active on a permanent basis there.30 However, there was sporadic weaving activity in Florence and its surrounding cities, as has been carefully analyzed by Hillie Smit.31 For instance, Livino di Giglio set up a workshop in Ferrara around 1457, where weavers had been active since at least 1436. He had previously been working in Florence, where he created so- called ringhiera tapestries, which were hung around the façade of Palazzo della Signoria during public ceremonies.32 The designs were made by Vittorio di Lorenzo Ghiberti, Neri di Bicci, and
28 Caneva and Bacci 2000 (see note 18), p. 22. 29 One of the major tapestry cities in France was Arras, from which the Italian term for tapestry ‘arazzo’ probably derived. 30 Richard A. Goldthwaite, The Economy of Renaissance Florence, Florence 2009, p. 394, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 17. 31 Hillie Smit, ‘Flemish Tapestry Weavers in Italy C. 1420-1520. A Survey and Analysis of the Activity in Various Cities’, in: Guy Delmarcel (ed.), Flemish Tapestry Weavers Abroad. Emigration and the Founding of Manufactories in Europe, Leuven 2002, pp. 113–30. 32 Gert Jan van der Sman and Bouk Wierda, ‘Wisselend Succes. De loopbanen van Nederlandse en Vlaamse kunstenaars in Florence, 1450-1600’, in: Frits Scholten, Joanna Woodall, and Dulcia Meijers (eds.) Art and
13
young painters from the area. The series took years to produce and the results were highly appreciated.33 There had been some Flemish weaving activity in other Italian cities as well, mostly in the northern part of the peninsula. In Siena, Flemish tapestry weavers had been active, of which the most well-known are Rinaldo di Gualtieri (Aernt van Dussen, also called Arnaldo or Rinaldo Boteram) and a certain maestro Giachetto.34 Giachetto received a commission from Pope Nicolas V for a series of six tapestries depicting the Life of Saint Peter. The project was executed in Siena between 1451 and 1453. After Pope Nicolas V had died, as well as his successor Pope Calixtus III, a member of the Sienese Piccolomini family rose to power as Pope Pius II in 1458. As he was probably familiar with the skills of maestro Giachetto, he engaged him to work at the papal wardrobe to restore and rework tapestries from the papal collection until at least 1463.35 In Milan, during the reign of Duke Francesco Sforza (between 1452 and 1466), four master weavers from the Low Countries were active at his court, although nothing of their hands is known today. In Bologna there was a weaver called Zoane Tedesco who created a small tapestry for the church of San Petronio, where it is still to be seen in the Museo della Basilica di San Petronio (see figure 1). In the cities of Siena, Ferrara, Perugia and Bologna, weavers are known to have agreed to teach their craft to pupils.36 However, none of these enterprises seem to have been as durable as the sixteenth century Florentine Arazzeria Medicea proved to be.
Figure 1 Zoane Tedesco, San Petronio, 1503, Museo della Basilica di San Petronio, Bologna
Migration. Netherlandish Artists on the Move, 1400-1750, Leiden 2013 (Netherlands Yearbook for Art History 63), p. 174. 33 Van der Sman and Wierda 2013 (see note 31), p. 174-175. 34 Smit 2002 (see note 31), p. 113–30, Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 85-97. 35 Smit 2002 (see note 31), p. 121. 36 Smit 2002 (see note 31), p. 127-128.
14
Flemish Tapestries Imported to Italy based on Italian Design Instead of having their wall-hangings produced locally, Italian patrons reached out to Flanders for the acquisition of figurative tapestries. Many Italian rulers sent purveyors to the Low Countries to buy ready-made decorative series. 37 The Antwerp market was renowned for the distribution of tapestries from surrounding towns and cities. In order to have the tapestries exactly fit the demand of the patron, he could send designs and cartoons produced in Italy to Flanders. In 1515, Medici Pope Leo X commissioned Raphael (1483-1520), who was at the height of his career, to make tapestry cartoons that would be woven by Pieter van Aelst, a Brussels tapestry master-merchant.38 They are said to have cost 2,000 golden ducats a piece.39 When Raphael’s cartoons arrived in Brussels people must have been impressed by the different stylistics, posing challenges to the weavers.40 The Flemish weavers had proven themselves to be more than capable, and when the first seven tapestries arrived in Rome on December 26, 1519, they were considered the finest of their kind.41 The iconography was intended to complement the frescoes of the Sistine Chapel, as well as to celebrate Pope Leo as Christ’s representative on earth. The series has been copied at least 55 times and is thought to have greatly influenced tapestry design in Flanders through Bernart van Orley and Pieter Coecke van Aelst, two of the most important Netherlandish tapestry designers.42 Through many copies in various media (engravings as well as copied tapestries), the Italian High Renaissance style was made known throughout Northern Europe.
Locally Produced Tapestries at Other European and Italian Courts The fame of the Brussels tapestries spread in Italy, and had also sparked the interest of other European patrons. Not only did they decorate their own palaces with them, they also presented them as gifts to other rulers, further enhancing Brussels’ reputation as a hub for quality tapestry production. Among the collectors was Henry VIII, king of England, who by the time of his
37 Paula Nuttall, From Flanders to Florence: The Impact of Netherlandish Painting, 1400-1500 (New Haven, 2004), p. 77-83. 38 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), pp. 187-223. 39 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 196. 40 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 197. 41 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 187. 42 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 187. The artistic influence of Raphael’s tapestry design has been traced in John Shearman and John White, Raphael’s Tapestries and Their Cartoons, New York 1972.
15
death in 1547 possessed more than 2,700 tapestries, of which more than three hundred sets of wall hangings consisting of three or more pieces.43 In 1539, king Francis I of France established a tapestry workshop at Fontainebleau, where many artists and craftsmen had grouped to decorate the newly built palace. It has been suggested that the establishment of this weaving workshop had been encouraged by Rosso Fiorentino (born in Florence) and Francesco Primaticcio (born in Bologna), who are regarded as the founders of the Mannerist school of painting at Fontainebleau. They are known to have had close connections to the Ferrarese and Mantuan courts, where tapestry workshops had been established only a few years earlier.44 The Ferrarese tapestry workshop had in fact been the first Italian place of employment of Nicolas Karcher and Jan Rost. The tapestry workshop in Ferrara established by Ercole II d’Este was the first major Flemish weaving atelier in Italy in the sixteenth century. Before the installation of a true workshop lead by Nicolas Karcher, his father Luigi Karcher had probably been working with the d’Este tapestry collection for years already. His two sons Nicolas and Giovanni are thought to have been active in Ferrara from 1517.45 They were probably hired to restore the D’Este family collection of tapestries, which was based on the pieces that Ercole inherited from Alfonso I and Ippolito d’Este. From 1536, Ercole started to commission tapestries after cartoons by local Ferrarese painters like the brothers Dosso and Battista Dossi and Giulio Romano. Nicolas Karcher had eight workers coming over from Brussels, amongst whom was possibly Jan (Giovanni) Rost.46 Rost was most likely an independent master in Brussels already at this time, as was demonstrated by Adelson: a tapestry depicting The Rest after the Hunt (Musée Marmottan, Paris) bears the signs of a roast on a spit, Rost’s professional mark, next to the Brussels city mark.47 In 1539, Nicolas Karcher moved to Mantua to set up a tapestry workshop at the service of the Federico II Gonzaga, the Duke of Mantua.48 He was back in Ferrara in 1541, but he
43 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p.3. 44 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 466. 45 Forti Grazzini 1982 (see note 13), p. 56. 46 Forti Grazzini, 1982 (see note 13), p. 61. 47 Candace Adelson, ‘Documents for the Foundation of Tapestry Weaving under Cosimo I de’ Medici’, in: Andrew Morrogh (ed.), Renaissance Studies in Honor of Craig Hugh Smyth, Florence 1985, p. 7. 48 It has been suggested by Forti Grazzini that the employment of Karcher in Mantua had to do with the presence of his father Luigi in Italy, Nello Forti Grazzini, ‘Flemish Weavers in Italy in the Sixteenth Century’, in: Guy Delmarcel (ed.), Flemish Tapestry Weavers Abroad. Emigration and the Founding of Manufactories in Europe, Leuven 2002, p. 145. Luigi Karcher seems to have made up his will in Casale, where he lived and worked. Casale (a city in Piedmont) was under the rule of the Paleologhi, the family of Margherita Paleologa, who married Federico Gonzaga in 1531.
16
remained in close contact with the Gonzaga court, as is evidenced by the fact that, after a period of approximately eight years in Florence, he returned to Mantua. Given the strong connections between the Ferrarese and Mantuan courts, it is probable that he was active in both cities, serving both patrons at the same time. There is not much known about the working circumstances of the Flemish weavers in Ferrara and Mantua since there are no surviving contracts or other regulatory documents. There is, however, a record stating that Nicolas Karcher had been exempted from taxes on meat, wine, and everything else he bought when he worked for the Duke of Mantua.49 Furthermore, it is known that the weavers were allowed to work for outside parties. The business must have been kept running after Karcher and Rost left for Florence, since Karcher received payments in 1551 (while he was still in Florence) for tapestries that were commissioned by the Gonzaga. There were probably many pupils and other workers who continued their activities in the workshop during Karcher’s absence, probably under the direction of Nicolas’ brother Giovanni Karcher. It is noteworthy that the weavers had been working in Ferrara before they went to Florence, given that there was an ongoing dispute between the Este and the Medici families on the question of seniority. Centuries-long family history was important since it reinforced the power of the noble status. This precedenza discussion blew up in 1541 with Ercole II d’Este’s claim that his family and city were older and nobler than the Medici and Florence and therefore deserved diplomatic precedence.50 It has been suggested that this rivalry was one of the reasons for Cosimo I to make the decision to lure these particular weavers to Florence, although Adelson emphasized that he was probably not even aware that the weavers he was about to employ were engaged in weaving activities in Ferrara.51 However, it might have delighted him when he found out about this. The above has demonstrated that there clearly was a market for Flemish tapestries in Italy. During the fifteenth century, Italian patrons could buy ready-made tapestries from the Antwerp market, or commission Italian painters to design cartoons to be woven in Flanders. In the course of the sixteenth century, major players in the European political field chose to invest in private tapestry ateliers. The tapestry workshops of Cosimo in Florence were soon to follow.
49 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), vol. 3, doc. 6: Archivio di Stato di Mantova (ASM), Decreti 1538-1542, fol. 56. 50 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 38-39. 51 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 41-42.
17
Chapter 2 The Flemish Tapestry Workshops in Florence
After Cosimo recovered the citadels of Florence, Pisa, and Livorno in 1544, he focused on renewing the Tuscan economy by various initiatives, starting with the reopening of Pisa’s university and the expansion of Livorno’s port town. His firm politics went hand in hand with artistic patronage and gifted artists were willing to place their abilities at his service. Cosimo attracted and supported new industries and welcomed foreign craftsmen based on a policy of tolerance allowing them to find a home and a market regardless of their race or religion.52 Not always did this turn out the way that Cosimo had envisioned it, but in some instances it resulted in thriving workshops where foreign crafts were passed on to the Florentine youth, as was the case with the craft of tapestry making.
Cosimo’s Interest in Artisanal Crafts and Technologies Cosimo made use of the influential network of Florentine merchants abroad to consolidate his power in Europe, since he had no family ties to the major European courts.53 Through this extensive web of merchants he could find the right persons and they helped him in creating the circumstances that would persuade foreign artists and artisans to set up shop in Florence. For instance, in 1547 Flemish printer Lorenzo Torrentino (Laurens van den Bleeck in Dutch) was lured to Florence from his former workplace Bologna.54 The newly reopened university in Pisa created a demand for books, and Torrentino had the experience and the contacts to set up an efficient shop in Florence. He arrived in the summer of 1547 and stayed until his death in 1563, after which his sons kept running the shop for a few more years.55 Cosimo also attracted many Germans in various crafts in the fields of mining and the iron and steel industries. He trusted their metallurgical practices enough to allow them to work in his new silver mines near Pietrasanta.56 The establishment of a workshop where Florentine pupils could be educated in the foreign craft was an important aspects of Cosimo’s politics, since the knowledge of craftsmen
52 Eisenbichler 2001 (see note 3), p. xiii. 53 Eisenbichler 2001 (see note 3) p. xv. 54 Antonio Ricci, ‘Lorenzo Torrentino and the Cultural Programme of Cosimo I de’ Medici’, in: Eisenbichler 2001 (see note 3), pp. 103–19. 55 Frans Slits, Laurentius Torrentinus: Drukker van Cosimo Hertog van Florence, +/- 1500-1563, Gemert 1995. 56 Suzanne B. Butters, The Triumph of Vulcan: Sculptors’ Tools, Porphyry, and the Prince in Ducal Florence Florence 1996, p. 259.
18
was mostly operational and passed on from one generation to another in the workshop. Not always were the foreigners willing to do this. For example, Cosimo invited a maestro armorer from Brescia with his own team of men to set up a Brescian-style oven for smelting iron ore in 1543.57 The Brescians came to Florence, but refused to take on Florentine pupils and are known to have had agents going to Brescia to find masters to work in the Tuscan steel industry still sixty years after their first arrival. In 1544, Cosimo attempted to invite armorers from Milan, but Marchese del Vasto, the Imperial Governor, refused them to permanently leave the city, which meant that they could not set up a shop in Florence. The same held true for Venetian glassmakers.58 The Venetian Republic protected its own glass-industry by strictly forbidding workmen from Murano to carry either raw materials or tools employed in the manufacture of their products out of the country. Anyone who did was seen as a traitor. Even though various artists refused Cosimo’s offer, he did manage to attract many highly skilled and artistically talented craftsmen to the city of Florence, creating a tradition of craftsmanship that, one could say, still shows through today.
Saliti’s Letters Bernardo di Zanobi Saliti was one of Cosimo’s international contacts. This silk merchant, active in the German city Nuremberg, suggested the idea of having Flemish weavers establish their workshops in Florence.59 His recommendations can be traced by three letters, written on 31 January 1545 to Nicolo Boni, on 1 April 1545 to Bongianni Gianfigliazzi, and again on 23-25 June 1545 to Boni.60 The letters imply that Cosimo was exploring two possibilities of acquiring tapestries to decorate the new Palazzo Vecchio at that moment. He could either send Italian cartoons to Flanders to be woven in the workshop of a Flemish master, or he could invest in establishing Flemish tapestry production in his own city.61 This idea might have appealed to the above-mentioned ambitions of promoting state industries through foreign artisanal crafts and technologies.62
57 Butters 1996 (see note 55), p. 256. 58 Butters 1996 (see note 55), p. 256-257, note 148. 59 Goldthwaite 2009 (see note 29), p. 394-395. 60 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 498 (ASF, MdP 1170a, insert II, busta 10, fol.30r-v), p.499 (ASF, MdP 1170a, insert II, busta 10, fol. 31r-v), and p. 504-505 (ASF, MdP 1170a, insert II, busta 10, fol. 32 r-v). 61 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 5. 62 Goldthwaite 2009 (see note 29), p. 395.
19
In his first letter, Saliti writes that he had been written by befriended Flemish tapestry weavers who desired to settle in Italy with 50-60 workers. He implies that the initiative he proposes to Cosimo came from the weavers themselves, even though it is not known for sure whether this is true and if so, what reasons they could have had for wanting to leave their shops. Since Karcher and Rost eventually came to Florence, one can assume that Saliti writes about these two masters. However, their previous work experience in the cities of Ferrara and Mantua is not mentioned at all. Instead, Saliti continuously emphasizes the masters’ Flemish background, even though the weavers that eventually set up shop in Florence were already active in Italy for almost 30 years when Saliti was writing this letter. It is possible that the plan originally included other unknown weavers. An alternative explanation is that Saliti was in fact writing about Rost and Karcher, but intentionally emphasized the Flemish background of their craft because of its reputation. One phrase in the letters is recurring and seemingly presents the most convincing argument: that this art would make Florence the main selling center of tapestries for the Italian peninsula. Italian patrons (including Cosimo himself) would not have to import their tapestries from the Low Countries anymore. The Florentine production could provide in the demand of tapestries from Rome and the Kingdom of Naples as well, since these tapestries would not only be cheaper than the imported tapestries from Flanders, but they would also be of a design that Saliti expected they preferred over the Flemish style. The argument must have appealed to Cosimo given his vision for the Tuscan economy. Saliti’s introduction to his second letter indicates that the previous one was shown to Pierfrancesco Riccio, Cosimo’s major-domo, who in turn discussed the idea with Cosimo. The Duke’s interest in the project is shown by the notes in the margins that are by his hand. One of these marginal notes concerns a remark on the taxes on wool that the weavers would be importing from Flanders. This evidences that Cosimo may have regarded the tapestry workshops as a way to reinstate the consolidated commercial network of raw material supply, which before served traditional Florentine textile production. The commercial network could now be put in the service of the new tapestry ateliers as well.63 In the notes, the Duke requested more information on the type of wool. This indicates that the tapestries’ materials were an important consideration in Cosimo’s decision to invest in this craft.
63 Meoni 1998 (see note 11), p. 36.
20
In the third and final letter, some last guarantees are given to Nicolo Boni, who would later be named as a guarantor in Karcher’s contract, next to Bernardo Saliti himself. In this letter, Saliti gave Boni some of the same reassurances about the weavers as he had given in the previous letter. He wrote that the only problem at that point seemed to be the certification of the quality and quantity of the masters and workers. The quality Saliti could assure with his own eyes, while the quantity would be determined by the wants and needs of the Duke. Since the weavers had expressed their wishes to become Florentines and to establish their craft in this city the best they could, Saliti could only hope that the Duke would go in with ‘buone gambe’. The discovery of these three letters by Adelson in the 1980s has provided a better perspective on the establishment of weaving ateliers in Florence. The trade network in wool and silk between Flanders and Florence could be stimulated by this investment, and the assurance that the weavers would pass on their skills to a next generation of Florentine weavers resulted in the vision of a flourishing tapestry industry in Florence. This economic boost, in combination with the practical advantages of having direct control over the tapestries that would decorate his new palace must have spurred Cosimo to make the decision to invest in this craft in Florence.
The 1546 Contracts Thanks to Saliti’s diplomatic skills, the weavers came to the city of Florence in 1545. They did not arrive together. It is known that Rost was in Florence by 28 August 1545, when he went to the Poggio a Caiano Medici villa to meet with Cosimo I personally.64 Karcher’s arrival was announced on 26 October 1545.65 They were weaving for a year already before they signed their contracts in October 1546. Rost and Karcher’s contracts are similar in set-up and content. The fact that they were both contracted independently proves the idea posed by Adelson that there were two separate and rival ateliers from the start.66 The Duke promised both weavers their own workspace and 24 looms on which they were to work with their masters and pupils. The contracts stated that Cosimo would provide enough commissions to keep at least 12 of those looms working in both workshops. They were each to receive a yearly salary of 600 scudi, and would be paid per delivered tapestry in addition to it. The prices per piece were not fixed, but they would be based
64 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 42. 65 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 43. 66 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 56.
21
on the fineness of the piece. The weavers were allowed to work for outside parties, selling those pieces at their own price. The contracts were made up for three years. Another clause in the contracts obligated the weavers to train apprentices in their workshops and to sustain their living. Where many other foreign craftsmen refused or were prohibited to share their craft secrets, the Flemish weavers agreed to not refuse any pupil who wanted to learn to weave. These terms were generous when compared to the terms to which printer Torrentino agreed in April of 1547.67 Torrentino received a yearly stipend of 100 scudi, on which he would probably also had to have sustained his family and other employees. However, he only had two presses to work on, which indicates that this enterprise was much smaller compared to the tapestry workshops and their 24 looms. Unlike the weavers, who were legally bound to their contracts for three years, Torrentino signed with the Duke for twelve years. During those years, he was granted monopoly over the market, and no books from Germany or France were allowed to be imported to Tuscany, except for judicial texts. In his contract, there was no mention of teaching pupils, and there was no reference to other kinds of regulations. Even though Rost and Karcher’s contracts are similar in content, the placement of their workshops was remarkably different. Karcher’s workshop was placed at the Via de’ Cimatori, an area where the shearers of wool worked. Rost’s workshop was placed much more prominently near the sculpture garden at San Marco. The Medici owned multiple buildings in this area, which had become a breeding ground for the arts under the rule of Lorenzo il Magnifico (1469-1492). During the reign of his grandson (also named Lorenzo de’ Medici, ruling between 1513-1519), all kinds of artistic and artisanal workshops had been brought together here, including a distillery, an apothecary, a glass workshop, a goldsmith’s workshop, a pietre dure workshop, a stones and gems workshop, a metal workshop, a porcelain workshop, and there was also room for botany in a hortus. This remained an important place of artisanal exchange during the reign of Cosimo I (1537-1574) and his successor Francesco (1574-1587).
The Flemish Example In the contracts, explicit reference is made to the regulations that Charles V instated in Flanders regarding the production of tapestry. Since regulations for tapestry workers did not exist in Florence, the weavers were supposed to obey the rules of their country of origin, while being under the direct control of the Florentine Arte della Lana (Guild of the Woolworkers). The Arte
67 Slits 1995 (see note 54), p. 60-64.
22
della Lana apparently received a copy of the Ordinances from Flanders. It would make sense that Cosimo opted for using Charles V’s Ordinances regarding tapestry making instead of having them made up himself. First of all, they served as a way to maintain the highest quality possible. However, it may also have been done out of respect to the Emperor, since Cosimo I was indebted to Charles’ support for his power over Tuscany.68 After all, Charles had helped him find a proper wife, Eleonora, the second daughter of his viceroy in Naples, the wealthy and powerful Pedro de Toledo.69 Additionally, Charles made him knight in the Order of the Golden Fleece in 1546, which presented Cosimo with much prestige.70 These connections, combined with the reputation of Brussels’ tapestries within the European tapestry market, the Flemish background of the weavers, and the lack of regulations concerning tapestry weaving in Florence explain that the production regulations from Flanders were instated in Florence as well. The basic outlines of the workshops in Florence are comparable to those in Flanders. In both situations, it was rather normal that one workshop would work primarily for one patron (as some did in Brussels for Charles V), but they could also take on work for other parties at the same time. It was rather common in Brussels that large commissions were divided between various workshops, as was the case with many of Cosimo’s commissions in Florence. Furthermore, it became common in Flanders to include the town mark and the principal weaver’s personal mark on tapestries larger than 6 ells. The same is done in some of the Florentine tapestries, though in varying forms. The weavers also at times included their personal marks: Rost had a rebus of his name, a figure of a roast on a spit (see figure 2a), while Karcher sporadically used a monogram of his name (see figure 2b). The placement of the FF mark (for Factum Florentiae or Fatto a Firenze) on their tapestries is generally seen as a derivative form of the Brussels city mark of a red shield flanked by two B’s.71
Figure 2a and 2b Personal weaver’s mark of Jan Rost (a) and Nicolas Karcher (b).
68 Lucia Meoni, ‘Portraits of Michelangelo and Other Famous Men in the Medici Joseph Tapestries Woven by Jan Rost and Nicolas Karcher and Designed by Pontormo, Bronzino and Salviati’, in: Philippe Bordes and Pascal-François Bertrand (eds.), Portrait e Tapisserie = Portrait and Tapestry, Turnhout 2015, pp. 51, 52, 57. 69 Henk Th. van Veen, Cosimo I de’ Medici and His Self-Representation in Florentine Art and Culture, Cambridge 2006, p. 2. 70 Van Veen 2006 (see note 69), p. 13. 71 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 52, 65.
23
The main difference between Flemish workshops and the Florentine situation was that in Flanders, the master weavers were also the owners of their workshop equipment, while in Florence, the ownership of the atelier and all of its material components remained in the hands of Cosimo. This meant that even though Rost and Karcher were allowed to work for outside parties, they remained dependent on Cosimo’s goodwill for the very existence of their ateliers.
Differences between Rost’s and Karcher’s Renewed Contracts In 1549, Rost’s contract was extended, and in 1550 Karcher’s was as well. There are salient differences between Rost and Karcher’s contract renewals. Firstly, Rost was appointed for another ten years, while Karcher was allowed to stay for four more.72 Secondly, there appear to have been differences between the two workshops already, since Rost was promised to receive another twelve looms on top of the 24 that already were active, while Karcher got six on top of the twelve that were already there, adding up to a total of eighteen looms. Apparently, not all of the 24 looms that were promised Karcher in his first contract were actually installed. Both weavers would receive a reduced salary. Rost went from 600 scudi a year to 500 scudi a year, while Karcher went from 600 scudi to 200 scudi. It should be taken into account that the yearly stipend surely was shared with the workers in the ateliers. According to a census of 1552 on ‘hearths, men, women, workers and slaves’, Rost had 83 people working and living in his quarters with four hearths, while he also had a separate house. 73 Karcher had one hearth and shared this place with four women, four workers, and a slave. Rost’s contract makes mention of a sum of two scudi per month for every pupil that would stay at his workplace for over three years, while Karcher would receive 200 scudi a year in general for his pupils. These variations signal that the two workshops functioned and developed independently. An addition to the renewals of the original contracts is a clause about the duties of a pupil. It states that no pupil or worker of any kind is allowed to part from his master without his permission. Reference is made to the Regulations of Flanders regarding the punishment. Article 18 of the Ordinances states that an employee cannot work for another master before he has finished his work for the first. There is also mention of a punishment for the master taking on another master’s employee in article 25 of the Ordinances. It is striking that this is the only violation that is discussed explicitly in the contracts, which implies that a similar situation had occurred in Florence.
72 In the contract, tre was written down but crossed out and replaced by a 4. 73 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 80-81, p. 627.
24
Novel Terminology in the Renewed Contracts There is a fundamental difference between the initial contracts and the renewals in the phrasing of the weavers’ main task. Where the initial contracts talk about ‘the art of weaving’, the renewals (both that of Rost and that of Karcher) call it ‘the art of weaving, and dyeing, and all of the other secrets that are part of the making of tapestry’ (figure 3). This salient rephrasing has not received any scholarly attention, while the terminology is striking in terms of history of technology. It becomes clear that the craft of weaving in the sixteenth century does not only concern the weaving itself, but also processes of dyeing and other unidentified secrets. It is not clear why the weavers’ tasks have been rephrased in the renewed contracts. It could be an extension of their services from this moment on, but it is to be expected that more elaborate processes had been carried out in the preceding years already, even though this was not fixed in the initial contracts. Cosimo may have grown aware that the creation of the splendid tapestries that he desired required extensive knowledge of colors and fibers, and whatever other secrets. All of this would have to be passed on to the next generation of Florentine weavers. It is also remarkable that Rost was allowed to build a guardaroba and a tintoria in the garden (figure 4). This enabled him to store the precious materials that were part of the workshop practice, like the silk and silver- and gilt-metal-wrapped threads. As stated in the contract, the tintoria would allow him to dye the desired colors more easily. This clause is not present in Karcher’s renewed contract, which could mean that Cosimo decided that this investment only concerned the larger atelier of Rost, or it simply was not taken up as a contractual clause. Even though other scholars have noted that Rost’s contract renewal granted him a broader range of workspaces in the form of a guardaroba and tintoria, no one has ever investigated what this clause implies and what it tells us about the process of making of Flemish tapestry. Therefore, an investigation of the art of dyeing in Renaissance Italy is necessary.
25
Figure 3 Part of the renewed contract of Karcher, where it is stated that he is obliged to teach and let be taught this craft of making tapestry, dyeing and all other secrets of it (“[…] esso maestro si oblige ad insegnare et fare insegnare detto mestiero di fare arazzerie et tintura et à tignere d’ogni sorte colore opportune et necessario à tale arte et fare d’ogni sorte lavoro et tintura et ogni altra cosa et segreto à tale mestiero et tintura attenente con ogni prestezza attentione et diligenza possibile.”).
Figure 4 Part of the renewed contract of Rost where it is stated that he is allowed to build a Tintoria where he can, at his own expense, create every color that he needs (“Et più una tintoria con caldaia et suoi fornimenti dove decto maestro Giovanni (a sue spese nondimeno) possi piu commodamente tignere dogni colore necessario allarte sua”).
Dyeing and Secret Knowledge Dyeing was regarded as chemistry in sixteenth-century Florence, a term that covered a variegated tradition of non-mechanical arts where (al)chemical processes develop. In the writings of Vannoccio Biringuccio, the alchemical is defined as a generic domain for the arts of fire, the so-called ‘perfective arts’.74 It included pharmacy, metallurgy, glass making, agriculture, the preparation of colors for painting and drawing, and most interesting to this
74 Andrea Bernardoni, ‘Artisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci and Vannoccio Biringuccio’, in: Sven Dupré (ed.), Laboratories of Art. Alchemy and Art Technology from Antiquity to the 18th Century, Cham 2014, pp. 54, 56.
26
thesis, the art of dyeing.75 Even though these crafts may not be regarded as traditional alchemical transmutation, which usually only concerns the transformation of metals, they do concern the transformation of matter as a result of artisanal processes. These processes are an intertwining of theoretical and practical knowledge. Before there were independent scientific laboratories, one could find chemical operations in every place where perfective arts were practiced. Because of this, processes of substance transformation were found in every artist’s workshop in Renaissance Florence. Even the artists that are most renowned today are known to have been involved in such workshop activities like the preparation of colors, glues, solvents, waxes, acids, alloys, and similar materials.76 Being involved in alchemical processes was inherent to working in an artist’s workshop. For the art of dyeing, which we know was executed in Rost’s workshop at least after his contract renewal in 1549, a fire was indeed needed. The process of dyeing fabric is shown in figure 5, where uncolored fabrics (on the left) were put into a vessel which was placed on top of an enclosed furnace. The dyers, wearing protective aprons, steer the fabric with large sticks. An example of the final product, blue-dyed fabric, lies in front of this furnace and vessel, next to the sticks that are the fuel for the fire.
Figure 5 Wool dyers at work, British Library Royal MS 15.E.iii, f. 269, 1482.
Prior to the sixteenth century, the art of dyeing was a secret technology that was passed on from one generation to the next.77 This changed, however, with the arrival of books on dyeing and other secrets, of which the Plictho seems to have been the first. This book was
75 Bernardoni 2014 (see note 74), p. 53-78. 76 Bernardoni 2014 (see note 74), p. 57, who mentions Michelangelo and Verocchio. 77 Sidney M. Edelstein and Hector C. Borghetti (trans. and ed.), The Plictho of Gioanventura Rosetti: Instructions in the Art of the Dyers […], Cambridge/Massachusets/London 1969 (1548), p. xiv.
27
written in Venice in 1548 by Gioaventura Rossetti, an employee of the Venetian arsenal. It contains a broad range of recipes for dyeing, assembled from all over the world and various places in Italy. It was not written in Latin, as was common for books, nor in his Venetian dialect, but in a form of Italian that derived from the Tuscan language.78 One can assume that this trend of sharing what had previously been regarded secrets, like dyeing recipes, made Rost feel more comfortable in teaching his pupils the secrets of his craft.79 Apparently, he did not fear the competition that would flow from revealing his shop secrets, as did the Venetian glass-makers and Milanese armorers.80 Even though there had always been strong ties between arts and science at the Florentine court, they grew into a more stabilized form as a result of Francesco de’ Medici’s efforts in the establishment of the Casino di San Marco (1567-1574), which was situated close to Rost’s tapestry workshop. The Casino di San Marco was positioned at a symbolic place, right across the street of the Convent of San Marco, which was built under the patronage of the pater patriae of the Medici family, Cosimo il Vecchio (1389-1464). Even though the installation of Francesco’s Casino postdates the activities of the Flemish master weavers (Rost remained active in Florence until his death in 1564, Karcher returned to Mantua in 1554, where he died in 1562), there is mention of tapestry weavers in the documents reporting on the salaries of the artists and alchemists active at the Casino under Francesco. The record mentions Tanai de’ Medici (who oversaw the tapestry productions since 1545) as proveditore de’ tapezieri, receiving 4 scudi, and a certain Maestro Antonio portoghese tappeziere (‘Portuguese weaver’), receiving 10 scudi.81 The Casino represented Francesco’s promotion of technical innovation in the arts, receiving ambassadors, aristocrats and intellectuals.82 The Casino hosted various artisans and alchemist. The crafts that were conducted here concerned, among others, the making of porcelain and majolica, glass, silver and rock crystal, ruby making and carving, metallurgy and, as said, alchemy.83 The Flemish weaving and dyeing activities thus developed from an imported foreign craft to become part of a broader cultivation of shared craft technologies in Florence.
78 Edelstein and Borghetti 1969 (see note 77), p. xiii. 79 Candace Adelson pointed out to me via e-mail that this passing on of the secrets of the tapestry weaving craft to the Florentine apprentices may have caused quite the scene in Brussels. 80 Butters 1996 (see note 55), p. 256-257. 81 ‘Stipendiati del Casino San Marco’ (1580), reproduced in Marco Beretta, ‘Material and Temporal Powers at the Casino Di San Marco (1574–1621)’, in: Sven Dupré (ed.), Laboratories of Art. Alchemy and Art Technology from Antiquity to the 18th Century, Cham 2014, p. 143, ASF, MdP 616, ins. 20, fol. 377. 82 Beretta 2014 (see note 81), p. 145. 83 Beretta 2014 (see note 81), p. 143.
28
Chapter 3 Materials and Techniques
General Materials and Techniques The practice of tapestry weaving is based on the interplay between warp and weft threads (figure 6). Nowadays, many textiles are called tapestry, while in the sixteenth century it regarded figurative weft-faced textiles, woven by hand on a loom.84 The loom was set up with warp threads stretched out between two rollers. Depending on the direction of these rollers, the warps were stretched horizontally (on the low warp loom) or vertically (on the high warp loom). The Flemish weavers in Italy probably used low warp looms (figure 7). The difference is indeterminable in the final product. The tapestries under examination in this research were woven from side to side, instead of from top to bottom. This means that the warp threads are the horizontal threads, which gave the tapestry more stability when it was hung. Weavers were responsible for specific parts of the composition and worked side by side on the tapestry. Since the completed segments were rolled up during the process, the weavers did not get to see the overall composition during its weaving.85 They could only control the part they were working on at that moment.
Figure 6 Schematic representation of warp Figure 7 Weaving on a low-warp loom as portrayed in and weft threads. Eygentliche Beschreibung aller Stände auff Erden, hoher und nidriger, geistlicher und weltlicher, aller Künsten, Handwercken und Händeln […], Jost Amman and Hans Sachs, Frankfurt am Main, 1568.
84 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 5. 85 Caneva and Bacci 2000 (see note 18), p. 35.
29
The cartoons fabricated for a low warp loom were cut into pieces and placed behind the warp threads. Even though it damaged the cartoon, this practice enabled the weaver to closely follow the lines and colors of the design with the weft threads. Since the weaver was working on the backside of the tapestry, the design of the cartoon had to be made in reverse. The weaver created an opening between the even and uneven warp threads, through which he pulled a handheld shuttle with colored threads wound around it (figure 8). This act would be repeated until all of the warp threads were covered by the various colored weft threads. The weaver would regularly beat down the wefts to make sure that the warps were indeed fully covered. There were many technical variations to the way that the warps were being covered, from which a range of different patterns could result. To create chromatic effects, the weaver could not, like the painter, add colors on top of each other to create intermediate tones. Through the fine interlocking of triangles of colors (hatching), the mixing of various colors and materials into one thread (as is demonstrated in figure 9), and other tricks, the weaver could still recreate a broad range of textures and painterly effects in the tapestry. The weavers closely followed the colored masses of the cartoon. In doing this, slits were sometimes left between zones of differing colors. These are the weakest spots of the tapestries, since the threads are not strongly connected to each other.86 These slits were not always filled up because they had an effect of subtle shading.
Figure 8 The back of a tapestry in the process of Figure 9 Macro photograph that demonstrates being woven. The bobbins carry the weft threads the use of wool, silk, mixtures of both, and gilt through the warp threads. thread. The threads are interlocked by hatching.
86 Caneva and Bacci 2000 (see note 18), p. 36.
30
In some instances, the choice of materials can tell us about the function of the tapestries. Historically, wool was most often used for tapestries, since the material was easily available in Europe and its characteristics were fundamental for the purpose that they would serve, which was to regulate humidity and temperature. When the function of tapestry shifted from practical to aesthetic the warp threads were often woolen still, but one can find more silk in the wefts, which is a more precious and expressive material (figure 10).87 Different types of silk were employed, with varying light-refracting qualities that created variations in their brilliance. The tapestries created in the workshops of Rost and Karcher are made of wool, silk, and silver- and gilt-wrapped threads. However, after Vasari came to direct the Duke’s decoration program in 1555, most of the tapestries for Cosimo were made of wool entirely. They were supposed to be more stable and strong and their production more economical. These tapestries probably served more functional purposes again. Where the tapestries that are discussed below were almost always in storage, the later tapestries of the Creati Fiorentini (as the Florentine masters Giovanni Sconditi and Benedetto Squilli were called) probably covered the palace walls on a more permanent basis. Sconditi and Squilli probably fabricated more tapestries in quantity compared to Karcher and Rost, but because of their regular use, not as many survived. 88
Figure 10a and 10b Macrophotographs of threads, demonstrating the different material qualities of a yellow silk thread (a) and a blue woolen thread (b), especially in the absorption and reflection of light and the thickness of the thread.
87 Caneva and Bacci 2000 (see note 18), p. 38. 88 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 333.
31
A method that many scholars use to indicate the fineness of the weave is the warp count per centimeter. In the cases of Part II of the research, what counts most turned out to be the amounts of wefts per centimeter. The counting of threads is understandable as a method of determining the fineness of the weave comparing weaving to a computer or television screen: the screen consists of single colored dots called pixels. The more pixels in the screen, the higher its resolution, and the sharper the resulting image is. Just as with computer screens, the finer the colored points are, the higher the quality of the image. Wool threads are generally thicker than silk threads, which results in a direct relation between the choice of materials and the fineness of the weave. The patron had a large play in the quality of his tapestry, since he was usually the one to provide the materials.89 The quality of the tapestry is, however, not only based on the fineness of the materials that are used. Producing tapestries was a collaborative effort, which meant that the skills of various workers influenced the final outcome. The master weaver usually had family members, pupils, and freemen working with him. It was common that about three weavers worked on one loom at a time.90 It was the responsibility of the master weaver to choose the right colors and to apply the most fitting techniques, but the workers needed to be able to employ these as well. Another variable that determined the quality of the tapestry was the skill of the painters who designed the cartoons. After all, painters were not always accustomed to creating tapestry designs, which was a skill in its own right.
Supply of Materials Even though the archival records evidence that Cosimo supplied materials to the weavers, the records are not specific about the type of materials. When payments for wool, silk and metal- threads are taken up in the account books, no specification of their origin, colors, or other characteristics is given. Therefore, it is not known where the materials were from and in what state they arrived at the workshop; whether they were ‘raw’ or already processed to a certain degree. In the aforementioned letters by Saliti, Cosimo inquired as to what kind of wool the weavers would import from Flanders. There is mention of them wanting “[…] to be able to conduct oily or purged spun yarns in Florence […]”.91 Furthermore, it is known that when Rost and Karcher were working in Ferrara, Giovanni Karcher once went to Flanders to get wool for
89 Van Ysselsteyn 1936 (see note 25), p. 221. 90 This was at least the amount of weavers that Saliti counted per loom, as he states in a letter discussed above. Adelson mentions this as a rare discussion of workshop practice, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 26. 91 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 499, ASF, MdP 1170a, insert II, busta 10, fol. 31r-v, my translation.
32
the tapestries. It thus seems that it was common to import wool yarns from the Low Countries, that could be further processed in the workshop. Since there is mention of a tintoria in the renewed contract of Rost, one can assume that it was or became common for the weavers to dye the threads in Florence themselves. This could have been common practice from the very beginning of their Florentine ateliers, or it could have been done from 1549 (after it became part of Rost’s contract). Based on the archival records, it is impossible to determine whether the weavers dyed their own threads, or whether they had them dyed by wool and silk dyers in Florence before 1549. It is also not known whether the workshops of Karcher and Rost proceeded in similar ways regarding their materials. From Karcher’s activities in Mantua there is one record that tells where the materials came from. It refers to the materials that Karcher used for his 1541 production of the Story of Moses series for the Duke of Mantua: the wool came from the Low Countries, the silk was Veronese, and the gilt-metal-threads were from Milan.92 It is not known whether these threads were already colored, or whether the weaver performed the dyeing himself in Ferrara. The metal-threads were colored beforehand, since gilded silk threads generally contained a yellow dyed core while silver threads were usually dyed white.
Dyes in the Flemish-Florentine Tapestries A method to find out more about the materials and dyestuffs that have been used in the Flemish- Florentine tapestries is to scientifically investigate them, as is what happened during the course of extensive restoration projects. As mentioned, the Joseph series and three of the so-called sacred hangings have recently been restored and publications were printed alongside it. In general, dyes were most often extracted from plants and insects. An overview of the dyestuffs as raw materials can be found in Appendix II. Material technical analysis of the Joseph tapestries has shown that a rich variety of raw materials and advanced dyeing techniques were used to obtain the broad range of colors seen in the threads of these tapestries.93 The research showed that the red dyes were based on extracted color from madder, tannin, and cochineal. Cochineal was mixed with safflower as well to create pink threads. This was exceptional in this time and place; this dye was well- known in the East, but little in the West. As far as the restorers knew, it was the first time that
92 Brown, Delmarcel, and Lorenzoni 1996 (see note 13), p. 90-94, docs. 12-13, Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p.489. 93 Innocenti and Bacci 2013 (see note 15), pp. 127-132 and pp. 255-285.
33
safflower had been identified in a sample of Western historical textile.94 The blue threads were dyed with indigo and woad. The yellows are made with weld, and with the wood of a plant called ‘dyer’s sumach’ or smoketree (scotano in Italian). The bright green threads were dyed with woad and tannin, while in the browns a mixture of tannin and smoketree was found. The dyeing of the fabric always has a damaging effect on the material, mostly because of the high temperatures and the mordant that is needed to fix the color on the threads.95 Often, one dye bath was not enough to get the color as it was needed and the damaging process of dyeing was repeated multiple times. Especially the making of black and browns contained a promise of future damage. Since iron-holding materials were used to fix these colors, the dyestuff would oxide over time. This often damaged the black and brown colored threads and the threads in the area close to them. The same holds true for beige, for which salt metals were used, which would oxide over time as well. That is why especially black, brown, and flesh colored pieces of the tapestries are often in a relatively bad state, as one will see in Part II of this study.
Gilt Thread The golden and silver threads are in fact silk-cored threads with silver- or gilt-metal wrapped around it. Metal yarns are made of a silk core with a metal (gilt- or silver foil) strip around it. This has proven to make the threads rather stable. Since the silk cores are dyed in colors similar to gold (yellow) and silver (white), the threads still show color even now that the gilding has lost its shimmer and structure (figure 11). One of the most common methods in sixteenth-century Italy to make gilt-threads was the beaten-and-cut method.96 This method has been described in De La Pirotechnia (Venice, 1540), which was written by the sixteenth-century metallurgist Vannoccio Biringuccio97 First, a bar of silver and gold is soldered together and is hammered until it is as thin as desired. Then it gets cut into narrow strips, which are twisted around the core thread. The result of this process is a thread where the outside is gold, while the inside of the metal-part of the thread is silver. However, there was another sixteenth-century process of making gold metal yarns. In this second case, a piece of silver wire was dripped in gold before being wound around the (yellow)
94 Innocenti and Bacci 2013 (see note 15), p. 274. 95 Innocenti and Bacci 2013 (see note 15), p. 49. 96 Cyril Stanky Smith and Martha Teach Gnudi (trans. and eds.), The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biringuccio: The Classic Sixteenth Century Treatise on Metals and Metallurgy, New York 1990, p. 382. 97 Carugo, Adriano (trans. and ed.), De La Pirotechnia di Vannoccio Biringuccio, Milano 1977 (1540).
34
silk core. With this technique, both the inside surface and the outside surface are gold. Research on the Joseph tapestries has demonstrated the presence of threads with gold-wrap, gilded-silver- wrap and pure silver.98 The threads that are wound with pure gold foil are the most expensive and the most precious.
Figure 11 Macrophotographs of a gilt thread with a silk core.
Ordinances Relating to Materials and Techniques As described above the vacuum of regulations for tapestry makers in Florence was filled with the introduction of the Ordinances of Charles V for the tapestry industry in Brussels in 1544. While it is true that the 1544 Ordinances were mostly an extension to cover in all of Flanders what was already official regulation in the city of Brussels in 1528,99 the 1544 document is much more elaborate, especially on the process of making.100 Whether the Florentine ateliers strictly obeyed these rules is another question, but it does provide insight into issues that were at matter in the process of making tapestry. The regulations regarding expensive tapestries were rather strict. The warp yarns had to be of wool from Lyon, Aragon, or Spanish sayette, flax, or similar high-quality fabrics.101 The use of black and white dyes was forbidden; the use of hemp or a brown green of yellow weld and blue was promoted instead. Large tapestries were not to be made out of silk only, or with single yarn silk threads.102 All parts of a tapestry in the higher price range had to be made of the same quality and the same firmness, the upper parts as well as the lower parts, the borders
98 Innocenti and Bacci 2013 (see note 15), p. 266. 99 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 82, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 64. 100 See note 25. 101 Ysselsteyn 1936 (see note 25) erroneously listed the number XXXIII twice. 102 Interestingly, the Months tapestries were entirely made of silk, the consequences of which are described in Chapter 5.
35
as well as the principal parts. It appears that weavers sometimes used finer materials for the sections that were to hang at eye-level. Furthermore, tapestries had to be made in one piece on one and the same loom: it was forbidden to have weavers separately create parts of the tapestry to be sewn together in the end. These articles all underline the idea that the most valued pieces were supposed to be made of the highest quality materials, which was warranted through these strict regulations. There seems to have been a quarrel about the practice of afzetten, which is the additional coloring of certain parts of the tapestry after the weaving was finished. It was an easy way for the weaver to make it seem as if he used the best and most brilliant colored threads, while in fact the colors would have been added afterwards with the use of chalk or other colorants. Only authorized workers were allowed to carry out these activities. They were not to use wet coloring materials on the fabric. They could deploy this kind of added coloring only to enhance the profiling of the portrayed fruits, vegetables, and people, without adding parts to the tapestry that were not woven. They were only allowed to use white, red and black chalk to enhance the depictions of nude parts. It had frequently been encountered that, as a shortcoming of the dyers or the weavers, the colors of blue, purple, yellow, green, and others did not turn out as beautiful as they should have been. In order to fix problems of this kind, the weaver was allowed to use separate threads dyed in the right color to enhance the appearance of the colors on his tapestry. Apparently, it was becoming rather common to add figurative elements to the tapestries that were not woven but later painted on. These articles focused on prohibiting this and allowing the weaver to make use of these techniques only to enhance the appearance of what was already woven. In this way, the buyer would not be betrayed. The fact that Cosimo ordered his first commissioned tapestries to be assessed by the Brussels Guild can be seen as a check of the quality of the Florentine tapestry production in the Brussels framework. Since quality control was one of the chief responsibilities of the Guild, they were often consulted in disagreements between the weaver and the patron on the value of the tapestry. The Florentine tapestry workshops fell under domain of the Arte della Lana, and quarrels of this kind would probably have been settled with the Florentine Guild, instead of in Brussels. The fact that Cosimo sent the first tapestries produced in Florence to Flanders might therefore be interpreted as a promotional campaign to show that high-quality tapestry was now produced in Florence as well. Still, the action evidences that the Brussels tapestry production was seen as the qualitative standard that the Florentine production had to meet, which they seemed to have done, as will be demonstrated in the following part of the research.
36
Part II
37
Chapter 4 The First Flemish-Florentine Tapestries
Before Cosimo started to commission large series of tapestries, he wanted to see what Rost and Karcher could do and how they would work together with the court’s painters. On Cosimo’s demand, Rost created an allegorical tapestry based on a cartoon by Bronzino (figure I), while Karcher wove a religious scene after designs by Francesco Salviati (figure IV). Both of these tapestries were shown to Cosimo and appear to have been taken to Flanders to be examined by the masters of the Brussels Guild. Since Cosimo continued his commissioning, we can be sure that he saw potential in their work. This chapter focuses on how the first two (and some related) tapestries by the Flemish masters for Cosimo were regarded and found a place in Florentine culture.
Rost and Bronzino’s Abundance The first tapestry that Cosimo I de’ Medici commissioned was a portiera, a hanging covering a door or doorway. It was presented to Cosimo in December 1545. It was the first time that the Florentine painter conceived cartoons for tapestries. He depicted a view through a window- or doorframe, with in the foreground on the right a woman holding a plant and a putto that plays with a turtle on the floor. In the center, there is a peacock, while further in the back people seem to be working and playing. The far back shows a large building and the view over a harbor (possibly of Livorno). Even though the imagery has been interpreted as an allegory on spring in the past, it is now commonly known as an allegory on the wealth that the rule of Cosimo promised to bring to the city of Florence, hence the title Abundance (Dovizia).103 It can be seen as representing a microcosm, depicting a range of plants and flowers, old and young people, landscape and architecture et cetera. The depiction of a wide view through a frame was not very common in Florence in this time, and it seems like Bronzino may have gotten the inspiration for his first major tapestry design elsewhere. The borders of this design do not have the normal Flemish verdure depictions (as do the following designs of the Justice Vindicating Innocence, figure II, and Spring, figure III). They do, in fact, recall the Scuola Nuova tapestry series, designed by Raphael and woven in Brussels by Pieter van Aelst. It also resembles a tapestry with Vertumnus and Pomona as a subject, which was woven in Brussels in the 1530s and may have been seen by Rost or his
103 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 495.
38
employees. The resemblances in style and composition between the Abundance tapestry and pieces like the Metamorphosis (woven by Karcher in Ferrara for the D’Este family), Vertumnus and Pomona and the Scuola Nuova series (woven in Brussels), indicate that tapestries created around the mid-1540s had taken on a comparable character throughout Europe. It is thought that the woman carrying the plant is a reference to the fruits of the newly installed botanical garden in Florence in 1545 after the 1539 one in Pisa .104 This tapestry may allude to the introduction of the garden in Florence, an enterprise almost contemporary to the instatement of the weaving workshops. Botany and natural history had been great interests of the Medici family and of Cosimo in particular.105 Suzanne Butters describes his extensive knowledge of plants and the benefits of herbs, which he would use for medical oils that he made himself and distributed among friends and political contacts.106 Cosimo demonstrated that his dedication to botany and distillation was sincere by reforming laws on public health, by personally appointing the new chair of botanical studies in Pisa, and by the foundation of two botanical gardens: one in Pisa in 1539 and one in Florence in 1545, enabling Tuscans to excel in the theoretical and practical study of plants.107 Furthermore, he invested in a fonderia, which literally translates as ‘foundry’, but is better understood as an apothecary. By 1556 he had both an old and a new fonderia, the first of which was probably the one at the Casino di San Marco, while the second was placed in the new Uffizi. There were very strict regulations around the fonderie: outsiders were only allowed to enter the first room (where the medicines were distributed) and no medicine could be made outside the fonderia. The production as well as the orders were to be kept secret and nothing was to be made without the permission of a doctor or the Duke.108
The Evaluation A letter from Pierfrancesco Riccio, Cosimo’s major-domo, to one of Cosimo’s secretaries in Pisa announces the arrival of Rost’s portiere, accompanied by Bronzino’s designs for comparison. The weaver would come over as well to discuss the outcome with the Duke.109 In the letter Riccio writes: ‘per dirne il vero il maestro medesimo non ne resta molto sodisfacto,
104 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 495, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 106. 105 Dolcini and Meoni 2010 (see note 14), p. 175. 106 Butters 1996 (see note 55), p. 245. 107 Butters 1996 (see note 55), p. 246. 108 Fanny Kieffer, ‘The Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance Florence: Some Material Aspects’, in: Sven Dupré (ed.), Laboratories of Art. Alchemy and Art Technology from Antiquity to the 18th Century, Cham 2014, p. 116. 109 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 517, doc 40, ASF, MdP 375, fols. 58r-v, 76 r-v.
39
promettendo di migliorar […]’.110 This passage has been discussed in literature because of the ambiguity of the reference ‘il maestro medesimo’, since shortly before Giovanni Rost as well as Bronzino has been named. The general assumption is that it concerns Bronzino, since his following designs have a significantly different character than this first one (see figures I, II, and III).111 Even though I disagree, Adelson does provide some interesting reasons as to why Bronzino could have been disappointed. He may have been discontented with the way the architecture was rendered in the tapestry: flat and unreadable. 112 Bronzino worked in the typical fifteenth-century Florentine pastel palette, contouring with yellow next to purples and pinks. This is not the way contours are achieved in tapestry, where they are usually made with darker colors like brown and black. Many effects that would have worked well in drawing and painting did not seem to contribute to the visual appeal of this tapestry: the colored as opposed to contrasted modeling and the minute surface details result in a seemingly scattered and, according to Adelson, not integrated tapestry.113 At the same time, it is fairly possible that Rost was not content with the first product of his new atelier either. While he took up the challenge of recreating Bronzino’s virtuoso design, following subtle hues and color modeling, the final result of this way of proceeding may have disappointed him as well, making it just as plausible that the ambiguous reference in the letter concerns the weaver. From a linguistic point of view, one could say that the ‘maestro medesimo’ must be Rost, since where Riccio wrote about the weaver, he refers to him as ‘M[aestr]O Janni rosth’, while he refers to Bronzino only by the mention of his designs as ‘il cartone del bronzino’.114 The use of the word maestro that is previously connected to Rost makes it plausible that when the word is used for the second time shortly thereafter, it refers to Rost as well.115 Furthermore, the letter continues with a note by Riccio, stating that he thinks there is too much gold in the tapestry, which would soon turn black. Even though he mentions that his opinion was not requested, he wanted to make clear that he was aware of the Duke’s intentions with the tapestry workshops. Apparently, the Duke had intended to use a certain amount of gold thread in the tapestry commissions, and Riccio wanted to make sure that Cosimo was aware of
110 ‘to tell the truth about it, the master himself does not remain very satisfied with it, promising to improve’ (my translation). 111 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 51, Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 495. 112 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 98-112. 113 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 101. 114 This close reading analysis is based on Adelson’s transcript of the letter. I have not been able to analyze the letter itself. 115 This is also what convinced Robert La France on Rost being the disappointed maestro, La France 2013 (see note 20), p 69.
40
the implications that this could have for the outcome. Given this note on the choice of materials, which were choices made by the weaver, it is my opinion that the reference to the ‘maestro medesimo’ is in fact to Rost and that he is the one who promises to improve. Still, one may assume that the weaver and painter discussed this project with each other and could not but conclude that something had to change in the following productions.
Salviati and Karcher’s Lamentation
Unlike Bronzino, Francesco Salviati, who collaborated with Karcher on their first trial piece, did have experience in designing tapestry. He had already produced cartoons for a set with the Story of Alexander for Pier Luigi Farnese in the late 1530s or early 1540s.116 Furthermore, his father is known to have been a fluweelwever, which may have provided him with a fair understanding of textiles.117 He was also already acquainted with Cosimo as a patron and the Palazzo Vecchio as a destination, since he had been working on the Story of Furius Camillus fresco series in the Sala dell’Udienza of Palazzo Vecchio between 1543-1545. The tapestry under examination here is titled Pietà in early archival sources, though later it is known as the Lamentation (figure IV). This seems to be more accurate, given that it does not only depict Christ and his mother Mary, but also Mary Magdalene and a male figure identified as either Joseph of Arimathea or Nicodemus. Inventories mention that the Lamentation was destined for the altar of the Cappella dei Priori (the main chapel of Palazzo della Signoria) and on the altar of Eleonora’s private chapel, although it was probably only used on special occasions. The Lamentation was designed and woven in the first half of 1546. The square shape of the two by two meters tapestry is typical of small European devotional tapestries of this period.118 The border has a double frame, the outer one in a more Flemish style with fruits, vegetables, and leaves, while the inner frame recalls the chessboard motif of rugs from the Near-
116 Campbell 2002(see note 5), p. 275, 496, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 35. There is discussion on whether these tapestries have been woven in the Low Countries, as had been mentioned by Vasari, or in Italy. Based on the bright coloring and accurate rendering of the artist’s style, it was thought to have been manufactured in Florence. However, Adelson argues that the overall coolness and lack of variety and fire in the coloring, combined with a certain harshness in the draperies and physiognomies, make it more typical for the Flemish weaving style. She refers to Charles V’s Ordinances, which allow weavers to heighten the flesh tones after the weaving, as mentioned in chapter 3 of this study. Still, it is now assumed by most scholars that the piece in Museo Capodimonte in Naples was woven in Brussels and that a copy of the series was woven in Florence in the 1580’s. This example is often used to demonstrate the Flemish weavers’ abilities in reproducing Italian designs into tapestry. 117 Caneva and Bacci 2002 (see note 18), p. 42. 118 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 131.
41
East or Egypt, which had made their appearance in Florence in about 1545.119 Passion symbols, the Medici-Toledo coat of arms, and the Capricorn (Cosimo’s ascendant sign) are added to it in small frames. For the main subject, Salviati adapted a composition he had employed before in painting (figure V) to the demands of tapestry by heightening the chromatic tones and replacing the background figures with a landscape setting, leading up to a depiction of Calvary. The design includes elaborate draperies and a variety of textures, allowing the painter as well as the weaver to demonstrate their skill in this artistic medium.
Materials and Techniques of the Weaving Karcher obtained painterly effects in various ways according to what was demanded in the sections of the composotion.120 Color transitions in the flesh tones and clothing were usually created by hatching. For flesh tones, there are three colors used to obtain a realistic effect of volume (figure 13). This, in a sense, is comparable to painting, where the flesh is also built up from a base color in combination with a slightly lighter and a slightly darker tone. In the clothing and other draperies, two colors prevail with often a metallic thread added to it. For the face of Christ, Karcher chose to work with silk only, while for the faces of the other figures he also used wool.121 The shimmering silk in Christ’s face would make him stand out in the composition when candles were lit in the chapel. Even though the weavers were probably aware of the way that black dye would damage the threads over time (since it is discussed in the Ordinances, as described above), Karcher did not refrain from using it. Especially in the borders of the Lamentation, black parts are used as heavy shading to create an effect of relief (figure 14). A different way he created relief was to juxtapose a variety of materials and techniques (figure 15a and b). He applied different forms of crapautage, meaning that the weft thread covers more than one warp thread (figure 12). There are subtle color transitions and various melanges in the beige stroke underneath the red and blue contours in figure 15b. There is ample use of metal thread in the parts of the shoe, where metal was probably used in real life as well. This way a variety of techniques and the juxtaposition of various materials create an effect of relief.
119 Meoni in Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 528, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 144. 120 Caneva and Bacci 2000 (see note 18), p. 43-46. 121 Caneva and Bacci 2000 (see note 18), p. 68.
42
Figure 12 Schematic representation of crapautage (1) and arondissement (2).
Figure 13 Detail of Lamentation, Nicolas Figure 14 Detail of Lamentation, Nicolas Karcher and Francesco Salviati, 1546, Karcher and Francesco Salviati, 1546, demonstrating the use of varying hues in the demonstrating the use of black as a pictorial skin tones. effect to create relief.
Figure 15a and 15b Details of the Lamentation, Nicolas Karcher and Francesco Salviati, 1546, demonstrating the variety of techniques and the effect of juxtaposing wool, silk and metal thread.
43
Medici use and Related Tapestries Like all of the valuable pieces of tapestry, this devotional hanging was probably used for special occasions only. It was recorded in the Guardaroba segreta in 1553, where Cosimo conserved the most precious pieces of his collection.122 While the guardaroba later became known as the room with Cartography, the preexisting guardaroba consisted of a series of small rooms in Palazzo Vecchio, containing a large part of the antiques, gifts, and artworks not otherwise on public display.123 The Duke had various employees taking care of the collection in these rooms, repairing damaged furniture, cataloguing the collection, and registering items entering or leaving the rooms.124 The 1553 inventory indicates that there was a small reception room, a larger room, and four small chambers for travelers who had business with the guardaroba. The tapestries are recorded in ‘armario’, which can be translated as closets. The Lamentation is often seen in relation to three tapestries similar in size and related in subject (Ecce Homo, figure VI, Resurrection, figure VI, and Entombment figure VIII). The Resurrection was originally made for Benedetto Accolti, the Cardinal of Ravenna, but Cosimo inherited it in 1549 and had the coat of arms changed into that of the Medici. The tapestry has been used by Medici cardinals until at least 1587.125 The Ecce Homo tapestry was used in the villa chapels in the country house, which may have been Poggio a Caiano, but this is not noted.126 Two versions of tapestries with an Ecce Homo subject have been delivered to the guardaroba, the first of which was on 12 October 1547, but this one was considered ‘guasto’, faulty, and was probably carried out by Nicolas Karcher’s workers instead of by the master himself.127 A second version was made with silk wefts only. The third tapestry with a related subject is the Entombment. It bears the mark of Rost and is generally considered to have been woven much later.128
In spite of the disappointing results of the first tapestry by Rost and Bronzino, and the wrongly woven Ecce Homo by the workshop of Karcher, Cosimo kept on sustaining both tapestry workshops. He must have seen potential in the first productions. One may assume that Karcher’s Lamentation trial piece was a success, given the prominence of the place where it
122 Meoni 1998 (see note 11), p. 44; Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 661-666, doc. 259, AdS GM 28. 123 Mark Rosen, The Mapping of Power in Renaissance Italy, Cambridge 2014, pp. 79-89. 124 Rosen 2014 (see note 122), p. 82. 125 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 135. 126 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 132. 127 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 546-547, doc. 83. 128 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 362.
44
was hung on special occasions (the main chapel of Palazzo Vecchio) and the similar commissions that followed. The tapestries that followed Rost and Bronzino’s trial piece took on a different character, with added Flemish style verdure borders that must have appealed to Cosimo’s botanical interests. Many more references to Cosimo in relation to nature are found in the major tapestry series that followed.
45
Chapter 5 Bachiacca’s Grotesques and Months
The tapestries under consideration in this chapter were designed almost contemporarily to the Joseph series (discussed in the following chapter), but have received much less attention. Discussed in this chapter is the relation between Bachiacca and Cosimo’s interests in sciences and natural history. Bachiacca was one of Cosimo’s most valued court artists thanks to his specialization in naturalistic representations of animals. The second series discussed here, with the labors of the months, seems to have been a special commission, since it was woven entirely in silk and metal thread. The chapter will examine the background of the commissions, the materiality of these two series, and their relation to Cosimo’s interest in natural history.
Bachiacca as a Painter of Nature Francesco Ubertini, called ‘il Bachiacca’ had been a court painter to Cosimo I de’ Medici since 1540.129 He specialized in depicting nature, both in the sense of landscapes as well as in the depiction of a great variety of plants and animals. He was recalled by Benedetto Varchi as a relevant factor in the sciences because of his detailed and naturalistic representations.130 He was the son of a goldsmith and the grandson of an apothecary. His brothers were also active as artists: the eldest, Bartolommeo (called Baccio) was a painter. His youngest brother Antonio (also called Bachiacca) was an embroiderer but may also have been active as a painter and merchant of materials for the art of embroidery, like dye, wool, and silk.131 He was also working as a Medici court artist. Not only were the Bachiacca brothers involved in painting and tapestry design, but they also fabricated costumes and masks.132 Francesco Bachiacca was apprenticed in the workshop of Perugino and continued his training with Andrea del Sarto. Together with him, Franciabigio and Pontormo, he worked on the major commission of decorating the bedchamber of the Borgherini, which is now considered one of the most sumptuous decorative schemes of the sixteenth century.133 From 1540 onwards
129 In the Epilogue to his book La France connects Bachiacca’s nickname to the verb abbacchiare, meaning to strike with a pole. He argues that his name derived from the chestnut harvests on the Mugello family property, which he inherited. He further argues that his name is metaphorically referring to his artistic practice, harvesting the fruits of the orchard of imagery that appealed to his courtly clientele, La France 2008 (see note 19), pp. 123- 130. 130 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 80. 131 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 31-32. 132 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 84. 133 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 33.
46
he was a court painter in the service of Cosimo I. Between 1542 and 1543 he worked on the fresco decorations of Cosimo’s scrittoio. These include highly realistic depictions of flora and fauna, and ‘Netherlandish-style’ landscapes.134 His plant and animal studies were not only seen as a pleasure for the eye, but they were regarded objects for study as well. On 6 October 1545, he was contracted to paint cartoons to be woven by Rost, who arrived only a week prior to this.135
Grotesque Spalliere
The Grotesques set consists of ten pieces, of which six are presently on display at the Italian Embassy in London. These pieces are in a fairly good condition since they have been protected by glass for a long time (though not at present). The other four pieces are in Florence. Three of them are part of the collections of Palazzo Davanzati, while the last one decorates the house of the Florentine prefect. As is commonly acknowledged nowadays, the Grotesque spalliere were designed to be hung at shoulder level, right under the freshly painted frescoes by Salviati in the Sala dell’Udienza (1543-1545), just like in figure 16.136 The spalliere contain a broad variety of figures on a yellow silk background. All kinds of naturalistically represented species of birds, fish, and other animals are portrayed next to fruits, shells and allegorical figures. Many of them are emblematic and refer to the virtues of the Medici and Toledo houses, like the Capricorn and goat referring to Cosimo, and the peacock as a symbol of Juno, referring to Eleonora. Other allegorical figures are the personification of Agriculture as a suggestion to Eleonora’s interests in gardening and an allegorical representation of Charity. Furthermore, there are many all’antica and fantasy figures that combine elements of humans and animals. The representation of grotesques like these, with fantastical figures, trompe-l’oeil niches, and garlands, was not entirely new at this time. They are found in the frescoes in the Sala di Costantino at the Vatican as commissioned by Pope Leo X (Giovanni de Medici) and executed by the workshop of Raphael.137 The sphinxes and the garlands recall prints by
134 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 80-81. 135 Even though there is no explicit mention of the subject of the tapestries, it is fairly safe to say that the early documents referring to commissions for tapestry-designs regard the Grotesque series. Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 214. 136 This is based on the research by Adelson, who found an inventory referring to ten panels with grottesche that serve to hang in the room painted by Cecchino Salviati. The Sala dell’Udienza is the only room that was completely painted by Salviati. It was often referred to as the Sala dipinta. Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 206- 207. 137 Meoni in Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 516.
47
Domenico del Barbiere, who was active in Fontainebleau between 1539 and 1565.138 The cartouches and garlands in Salviati’s fresco decoration in this room seem to have derived from the same source.139 Decorating with cartouches had become a recurring motif and artists were urged to keep creating new variants of them. The room’s sense of harmony is partly thanks to Bachiacca and Salviati’s use of similar iconographic motifs such as from these prints.140
Figure 16 The Grotesques as they were meant to hang in the Sala dell’Udienza in Palazzo Vecchio.
The way that Bachiacca represented the animals, and especially the fish, was, however, the real novelty of these Grotesque tapestry designs.141 He was well known for his abilities in representing animals as if they were alive (figure 17). Since Cosimo was interested in natural history, he was attracted to Bachiacca’s skills as he had demonstrated in the decoration of Cosimo’s scrittoio in the same grotesque style. Cosimo took a great interest in the publication of translated editions of ancient books on natural history, including Pliny’s Natural History in Cristoforo Landino’s translation, which was revised by Antonio Brucioli in 1543. He presented these books and examples of preserved fish from his collection of naturalia to Bachiacca as sources for his designs. This has resulted in naturalistic representations of nature’s abundance,
138 Meoni in Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 515. 139 Domenico del Barbiere may have visited Florence, and Salviati may have been at Fontainebleau, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 231-240. 140 Meoni in Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 517. 141 Felicia M. Else, ‘Globefish, Sturgeon and Trout: Duke Cosimo I de’ Medici, Bachiacca and the Consuming of Fish’, Medicea 9 (2011), pp. 20–29.
48
but the allegorical and fantastical figures at the same time testify of Bachiacca’s fantasia. The repetition of certain motifs in Bachiacca’s designs not only allowed him to work faster, but it also functions to create harmony and recognition in his work.
Figure 17 Detail of the Grotesques with Fish, Jan Rost and workshop and Bachiacca, ca. 1549, demonstrating how the juxtaposition of materials creates a relief effect, while the different hues of colors make the fish appear naturalistic and unique.
The Designs Woven into Tapestry Even though the designs were made by Bachiacca, the final tapestries are the results of the efforts of the weavers, who reproduced the cartoons as faithfully as possible in order to rightfully convey the naturalism of the designs. For the warps of the Grotesque series, the weavers made use of wool threads, while most of the wefts are silk. Metal threads are not used as often as in many of the other tapestries, probably because of the yellow background. They are found, however, in some of the shiny details, such as the reproduction of the shimmering skin of the fish (figure 17) and in certain highlights (figure 19). Bachiacca’s designs challenged the weavers in the recreation of the naturalistic figures, which they achieved in multiple ways. Next to the use of an extensive array of hues (figure 18), the weavers exploited the different material characteristic of the wool and silk and put them into contrast to create a sense of relief. By the use of wool, the pinkish and yellow motifs on the fish in figure 17 seem to bulge out a little. In all of the figures there are darker areas creating chiaroscuro effects, while the parts in metal thread function as highlights. Figure 20 demonstrates that Karcher recreated the eyebrows of the putto by juxtaposing dark threads for the hairs and light threads for the skin that shows through. His weaving skills were incredibly
49
challenged by Bachiacca in reproducing the effect of a ball of soap (?) in figure 21. The combination of materials and techniques resulted in a display of unique creatures that stand out against the neutral yellow background. The readability of the images is the result of the very fine weave, with an average of approximately nine to eleven warp threads and between 20 to 60 weft threads per centimeter. The fineness of the weaving enabled the weavers to juxtapose many slightly differing colors and materials.
Figure 18 Detail of the Grotesques with Fish, Jan Rost and workshop and Bachiacca, ca. 1549, demonstrating the slight differences in hue that give the duck a naturalistic appearance.
Figure 19a and b Detail of the Grotesques with Fish, Jan Rost and workshop and Bachiacca, ca. 1549, demonstrating the subtle use of metal threads for highlighting the feathers.
50
Figure 20 Detail of the Grotesque Spalliera with a Putto Under a Half -Baldachin on the Right, Nicolas Karcher and workshop and Bachiacca, before 1553.
Figure 21 Detail of the Grotesque Spalliera with a Putto Under a Half- Baldachin on the Left, Nicolas Karcher and workshop and Bachiacca, before 1553. Purpose of the Set As described above, it is now assumed that the tapestries were designed for the Sala dell’Udienza. During Florence’s Republican time, this room (built in 1470) had functioned as the audience room for Florentine judicial events.142 In the Ragionamenti, the book where Vasari explains the entire redecoration project of Palazzo Vecchio in light of Cosimo’s newly installed rule, it is mentioned more than once that Cosimo did not want to destroy the past, but aspired to build upon it and use it as an example to create a promising future.143 This is evident in Salviati’s frescoes depicting the story of Furius Camillus as told by Livy and Plutarch. It is commonly acknowledged that these frescoes refer to the early events of Cosimo’s reign, since both rulers replaced a tyrant and brought peace, though with a firm hand. Next to the frescoes and tapestries, the decorative project included stained-glass windows with the coats of arms of
142 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 208-209, Van Veen 2006 (see note 69), p. 14. 143 Goudriaan 2006 (see note 2).
51
the Medici and Charles V, reinforcing again Cosimo’s lineage and the stability of his reign. Everything in this room alluded to Cosimo’s capabilities as a leader. The function of the tapestries within the iconography of this room is not clear. According to La France the tapestries were hung to demonstrate Cosimo’s intention to be seen as the ruler over the whole of nature.144 It has been thought that the Sala dell’Udienza was used as the winter dining room by the Medici family. The iconography of the Grotesques, with its many representations of animals and fish, seemed very fitting for a room with this purpose. La France, however, rejects this view, jokingly stating that “sphinxes, porcupines, and hunting dogs were not on the Medici menu”.145 These allegorical figures, along with the other animals, should be seen as elements referring to Cosimo’s cosmos. Besides, it is now thought that the ‘winter dining room’ was a room in Eleonora’s apartments, often called the Salotto. The Sala dell’Udienza was mainly used as a reception room. Cosimo would receive visitors here while sitting under a baldachin, just like the putti on the tapestries. 146 Although the iconography of all of the little figures remains puzzling, it is sure that this series was made to impress the audience.
The Months Series
Just like in the Grotesque tapestries, Nature plays a role in the second series designed by Bachiacca, generally known as the Months. It consists of four pieces: March, April and May (figure XIX) from the workshop of Karcher, and June and July (figure XX), August, September, November and October (figure XXI), and December, January and February (figure XXII) from the workshop of Rost. Adelson assumes that Bachiacca first finished the designs for the Grotesques, which means that he probably started with the Months in 1550. The scenes represent the labors of the months and contain many astrological references. The tapestries in this series have to be read counterclockwise. The theme of the labors of the months is a mostly Northern European iconographic tradition, deriving from book miniatures and German prints by Hans Sebald Beham. A tradition for the theme in tapestry can be found in the Trivulzio months, a series commissioned by Gian Giacomo Trivulzio and woven in 1509 in Vigevano by a certain Benedetto da Milano from cartoons by Bramantino. This set has strong astrological overtones and illustrates the ruling
144 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 232. 145 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 234. 146 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 256.
52
pagan gods evoking the main agricultural occupations of the months. The Doria Months, probably woven in the 1520s in Brussels, show more traditional labors and seem to be based on the Northern European print tradition. The labors are placed in an oval in the center of the tapestry, with Zodiac signs and grotesques in the backgrounds. A third precursor is found in the Hunts of Maximilian which is now at Musée du Louvre. They present hunting scenes placed in a landscape topped with a Zodiac sign that represents the month in which the scene took place. This series was probably created by Bernard van Orley around 1530. Giovanni Karcher (Nicolas’ brother, who took over the ducal workshop in Ferrara) also wove a series depicting agricultural activities. Even though the scenes in Cosimo’s Months can be regarded as truthful illustrations of the activities that were taking place, there are also many links to the astrology that caused the changing seasons, just as in the tradition traced above. There is probably some fantasia in the series as well. Adelson analyzed the connection between Hans Sebald Beham’s prints and the representation of the labors of the months by Bachiacca and found many resemblances.147 It is striking that in these tapestries the figures take up less space in the composition than in the more typically Italian Stories of Joseph tapestries. Adelson concluded that Bachiacca took inspiration from the Northern prints but elaborated them to fill the larger surface of the tapestry. Furthermore, he adjusted the content, making them representative of the labors of the months as they occurred in Tuscany as opposed to what occurred in Northern Europe.
The Effects of Weaving Without Wool The use of materials (only silk threads, gilt-silk and spun silver) indicates that it is a special series. It was very uncommon to use silk for the weft threads for tapestries of this size. One can assume that a specialized master would lead the project. Interestingly, Vasari writes about this series and claims that it was woven by a certain “Marco di Maestro Giovanni Rosto fiammingo”. While it has been argued that Vasari made a mistake here or that he referred to a son of Rost,148 Adelson suggests that it was likely to have been one of Rost’s workers, maybe even a weaver specialized in this minute kind of weaving.149 The archival records evidence that one of the tapestries from this set was created in the workshop of Karcher, which Vasari completely fails to mention.
147 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 275-277. 148 He was in fact called Giovanni, like his father. 149 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 266-267.
53
The Months tapestries are probably the finest woven pieces ever produced in Florence.150 As mentioned above, the designs of the tapestries are largely based on Northern prints. The very minute detailing and the smallness of the figures in relation to the entire composition asked for a fine approach. This may have been the main reason why silk was used for the warps, since this enabled the weavers to create the smallest of figures. There is no wool used in the entire set. There are between thirteen and fourteen warps per centimeter, approximately 42-44 weft threads per centimeter in parts with silk, and 36-38 wefts per centimeter in the zones that contain metal threads. In the parts that are now largely ruined, the yellow silk warps are often still visible. The metals are mostly utilized to highlight the draperies, as is well visible in figure 22. The use of brown and black dyes have caused deterioration of the tapestry. Not only did the chemical reaction of the oxidation destroy the weft threads, but also the silk warp threads in their close surrounding. As a result, many of the small figures that were outlined by brown or dark shading have completely fallen out of the tapestry. This further demonstrates the fragility of a tapestry with silk warps. Their extremely fine weave and the use of precious materials that once made them a highly valued piece of tapestry are now the cause of their fragile state (figure 23a and b). While they were protectively kept in the guardaroba for most of the time under the rule of Cosimo and his successors, the material deteriorated greatly when the tapestries were exposed in the Uffizi Gallery (between 1945-1988). Furthermore, one piece (December, January and February by Rost) has been the subject of controversial restoration treatment. Restorers experimented with various techniques, some of which involved the threads being taken out and rewoven repeatedly. The tapestry has suffered from this.151
150 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 253, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 263. 151 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 411.
54
Figure 22 Detail of December, January and February, Jan Rost and Bachiacca, before 1553, demonstrating the extensive use of metal threads in the garments.
Figure 23a and b Details of December, January and February, Jan Rost and Bachiacca, 1553, demonstrating the frail state of the tapestry and the showing through of the yellow base.
55
Purpose and Medici use The archives do not provide information on the destination of the Months series. It is remarkable that there are no explicit references to the Medici family. This might indicate that it was made for a private room. La France’s suggestion that the series may have decorated more than one room seems rather unlikely, since all of the series woven by Karcher and Rost were specifically designed for a single space, after Northern practice. Furthermore, the dimensions of the four tapestries in the set vary, which indicates that it was probably made for a specific room. La France argues that it may have been used in Eleonora’s Camera Verde, the room in her private apartments to which her chapel is attached.152 While Adelson agrees that they were probably designed for a private apartment, she thinks it may have been the Duke’s.153 La France’s arguments for the connection to the Duchess’ private apartments is linked to his interpretation of the tapestries as being an expression of Eleonora’s duties, who cared for the Medici lands and supported initiatives that stimulated Tuscan agriculture. Among the investments she was involved in were the production and selling of cheese, grains, and textile products like flax and wool, and other pursuits like beekeeping and raising silkworms.154 Almost all of these activities are depicted in the Months series, which might well link it to Eleonora as the patron. Furthermore, La France argues that the tapestry woven by Karcher’s workshop contains the portrait of Eleonora, her servants, and a figure that has been identified as Morgante, the Medici dwarf. This would further strengthen his argument that the tapestries were commissioned by Eleonora as a metaphor for her leadership. This hypothesize can be strengthened by the deviant use of materials for the warp threads in relation to other tapestries, which could be a sign of personal preferences, although this would have to be confirmed by future research. One of these tapestries served as a sample of Rost’s capabilities when Pope Paul IV was considering the establishment of a workshop in Rome (in 1558). Cosimo sent Rost to Rome to show Justice Liberating Innocence together with one of the Months (probably December, January, and February) to advertise his skill. This evidences the high regard in which Cosimo must have held this series.155 The pontiff apparently deemed the tapestries ‘stupendi’,156 and
152 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 256. 153 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 407. 154 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 256. 155 Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 500. 156 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 256.
56
inquired about the costs per braccia of tapestries in silk and in wool.157 Thus, even though he must have appreciated the imagery by Bronzino and Bachiacca, he was also impressed by the variation in materials and techniques that were used in these sumptuous and excellently manufactured Flemish-Florentine tapestries.158 Unfortunately, it could never come to a commission because the pope died in 1559.
Bachiacca’s tapestry designs are not only successful as titillating decoration of walls, but they also serve to display a political message of ducal power and the benefits of the Medici-Toledo rule to the region of Tuscany. Bachiacca was in many ways a perfect painter for designing tapestries that needed careful representations of naturalistic elements.159 The fact that he was aware of Netherlandish iconographic traditions and his exceptional skill in reproducing nature made him an ideal designer of Flemish tapestry. The Months tapestries represent his skill in combining Northern European and Italian design. The exceptionally fine weave and the use of precious materials demonstrate the outstanding skills of the weavers in interpreting them.
157 La France 2008 (see note 19), doc 122, p. 369, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), doc. 300, p. 704. AdS, MdP, 3277, fol. 366r-v. 158 La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 256, note 245. 159 According to La France, the staffs that are held by some of the figures in the Months tapestry could serve as a witty monogram, along the lines of Rost’s rebus, La France 2008 (see note 19), p. 253.
57
Chapter 6 The Stories of Joseph the Hebrew and Cultural Debates
Cosimo’s commission of the Stories of Joseph the Hebrew set for the Sala dei Duecento demonstrates the lengths he would go to in order to rival the major Italian and European courts. The Sala dei Duecento was traditionally the hall where the city council would meet and is part of the oldest section of Palazzo Vecchio. While the tapestry series of the Acts of the Apostles (designed by Raphael and woven in Brussels by Pieter van Aelst between 1517-1520) had previously been regarded the most splendid of tapestry commissions, the Joseph series surpassed it in number of panels, richness of materials, and total surface, which was almost its double (almost 428 square meters). Vasari tells us that the total costs of the project approximated 60,000 scudi, although this was probably exaggerated in an attempt to mock the project. He knew he could never surpass it with his own decoration schemes.160 Adelson calculated the salaries and costs for supplies and cartoons, and concludes that it was probably not even half of what Vasari claimed.161 Still, it was a valuable investment, which guaranteed that the tapestries were treated with much care, ensuring their survival until today. The present chapter examines the background of the commission and the materiality of the Joseph tapestries and provides an analysis of the differences between Rost’s and Karcher’s production.
The Designs and Iconography The theme of the series is the life of Joseph the Hebrew as presented in the Old Testament of the Bible (Genesis 37-50). There are three general themes: the first are the tapestries related to Joseph’s childhood. Four tapestries illustrate this: Joseph’s Dream of the Sheaves of Grain (figure XXIII), Joseph Telling the Dream of the Sun, Moon, and Stars (figure XXIV), The Sale of Joseph (figure XXV) and Jacob’s Lament (figure XVI). The second group is related to what happened to Joseph after he was in the Pharaoh’s prison. It includes: The Temptation of Joseph (figure XXVII), Joseph Fleeing Potiphar’s Wife (figure XXVIII), Joseph in Prison and the Banquet of Pharaoh (figure XXIX), and Joseph Interprets Pharaoh’s Dreams of the Fat and Lean Kine (figure XXX). The other twelve tapestries relate to Joseph’s deeds as the viceroy of the Pharaoh. These are: The Distribution of Grain to Joseph’s Brothers (figure XXXI), Joseph Taking Simeon Hostage (figure XXXII), Joseph Receiving Benjamin (figure XXXIII), The
160 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 190. 161 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 192.
58
Banquet of Joseph for his Brothers (figure XXXIV), The Discovery of Joseph’s Cup in the Benjamin’s Sack (figure XXXV), Joseph Arresting Benjamin (figure XXXVI), Joseph Reveals Himself to his Brothers (figure XXXVII), Joseph Forgives his Brothers (figure XXXVIII), Reunion of Joseph and Jacob in Egypt (figure XXXIX), Pharaoh Presents the Land of Goshen to Jacob and his Family (figure XL), Jacob Blesses the Sons of Joseph (figure XLI), and the Burial of the Bones of Jacob (figure XLII).162 As with many other artworks Cosimo commissioned, the series of tapestries on the life of Joseph has to be seen as an allegory on the virtue of the return of the rule of Cosimo and the Medici family over Florence.163 Just like Joseph in the Bible book Genesis, the Medici were once betrayed by their own family, but when they came back they showed mercy and acted as the ‘enemy’s’ benefactor, as did Joseph. Philo Judaeus had written about the allegorical reading of stories from the Old Testament in ancient times, a philosophy known in Florence in the early sixteenth century.164 The main idea was that the story of Joseph was to be read as an allegory on the education of a good statesman, which explains why the stories that relate to his kingship have the upper hand in the series. Referring to biblical or mythological figures’ rule in an allegorical sense was in fashion in this age among the great European leaders. Cosimo followed this trend, not only with this series of tapestries, but also in Salviati’s frescoes of the Story of Fructis Camillus in the Sala dell’Udienza and Bronzino’s frescoes of the Life of Moses in Eleonora’s chapel. The cartoons for the Stories of Joseph tapestries were created by three well known Florentine Renaissance painters. Francesco Salviati designed Joseph Interprets Pharaoh’s Dreams of the Fat and Lean Kine, while the cartoons for The Temptation of Joseph, Jacob’s lament, and Joseph Arresting Benjamin have been attributed to Pontormo. Vasari, however, recalls Pontormo having invented only two cartoons: one in which Jacob is told about the death of Joseph, while his blood-stained cloths are shown to him, and one where Joseph flees from Potiphar’s wife, leaving his robe behind. 165 Vasari writes that the Duke nor the weavers deemed the cartoons appropriate for the tapestry medium. Therefore, according to Vasari, Pontormo decided to quit making them. It is thought today that Pontormo was also responsible for the
162 Graham Smith, ‘Cosimo I and the Joseph Tapestries for the Palazzo Vecchio’, Renaissance and Reformation 6 (1982) nr. 3, pp. 183–196. Smith argues that it is the burial of Joseph, as can be read in (Joshua 24:32). However, I think it refers to the burial of Jacob, Joseph’s father, since one of the other tapestries relates to Jacob being ill. 163 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 162. 164 Smith 1982 (see note 161), Meoni in Campbell 2002 (see note 5), p. 521, Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 152. 165 Henk van Veen, Giorgio Vasari. De Levens van de Grootste Schilders, Beeldhouwers En Architecten. Deel I & II, Gekozen En Ingeleid Door Henk van Veen, 5th edition, Amsterdam 2013, pp. 455-456.
59
cartoon of Joseph Arresting Benjamin and that Vasari was not accurate in his writings in this regard. The remaining sixteen cartoons were conceived and executed in the workshop of Bronzino. Since he could not bear the workload on his own, he asked Cosimo for assistance in the form of Rafaello del Colle, with whom he had worked together at the Imperial Villa in Pesaro shortly before. Alessandro Allori, Bronzino’s cousin and pupil, executed many of the border designs. Even though the borders were conceived separately, they were woven in one piece with the main subject, which was obligatory. The corresponding borders are what make the whole series a harmonious unit, despite the many different designers and weavers. The borders of the series on Joseph recall the traditional Flemish verdure tapestries. Bronzino may have been inspired by them when familiarizing himself with a medium that was still relatively new to him. His designs of the fruits and vegetables are extremely naturalistic (see figures 24 and 25) and many of the different varieties can still be determined today. He added Italian imagery to the borders, including classicizing architectural elements and mascaron motifs. There are also symbolical references to Cosimo on every tapestry in the form of the Capricorn and the ram, referring to Cosimo being the lucky astrological ascendant and the bringer of a new Spring under his rule.166 Bronzino’s emulation of the decorative verdure was possibly acknowledged in light of the paragone debate on the primacy of Flemish versus Italian art.167 The painters of the Joseph series also had another paragone debate in the back of their minds while designing the cartoons, which was that between the art of sculpting and the art of painting. The Joseph designs are made to show off the painters’ abilities, and to challenge the weavers in reproducing a broad range of painterly effects by their use of chiaroscuro and sfumatura, and in the varietà of surfaces represented. Examples of this are manifold in almost all of the tapestries. For instance, in Bronzino’s design of Joseph fleeing from Potiphar’s wife (figure XXVIII), one can determine various kinds of stones, including marble in a geometrically inlaid floor, a grisaille in the lunette, a variety of sculptures, different kinds of draperies (including clothes, curtains and bedlinens), a male and female body, and even Grotesque tapestries recalling the ones contemporarily designed by Bachiacca.
166 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 166. 167 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 165.
60
Materiality One of the weavers’ tricks to make the variety of substance expressions look convincing in weaving was to make use of the different characteristics of the materials. For example, flesh tones are often made of wool. Wool, as mentioned before, does not have a high reflective power and absorbs most of the light. Since human skin is usually not very shiny, this could be better represented in wool than in silk of metal thread. However, in most of the tapestries there are some figures that have been rendered in silk. These parts would shine brighter than the wool and would, therefore, make the figure in silk stand out. In some instances it is rather clear that the use of silk is related to the importance of the figures in the composition, for instance in the faces of Jacob and Joseph when they meet each other in Egypt (figure 24). It shows again that the choice of materials serves as a natural highlight in the composition.
Figure 24 Detail of Reunion of Joseph and Jacob in Egypt, Nicolas Karcher and Bronzino, 1550-1553, demonstrating the use of silk in the faces and draperies.
61
For the stars in Joseph explains the Pharaohs Dream of the Sun, Moon, and Stars (figure XXIV), Rost made use of metal thread and the crapautage technique to make the stars stand out. The silver used to recreate the stars in the tapestry allude to similarities in their material characteristics. They are firm, solid, unbreakable, inflexible and, most importantly, they both reflect light and make a bright shine. Rost’s use of the crapautage technique, covering more than one warp thread with his silver weft thread (figure 25), results in a subtle relief. This makes the light break differently on every stitch, making it more sparkly than it would have been if it was woven regularly. The effect is enhanced by the golden rays that shine from the center of the star.
Figure 25 Detail of Joseph Telling the Dream of the Sun, Moon, and Stars, Jan Rost and Bronzino, before 3 August 1549, demonstrating the use of crapautage to create relief and shine.
Figure 26a Detail of Joseph Fleeing Potiphar’s Wife, Nicolas Karcher and Bronzino, before 1549, and 26b, where the yellow marks areas of wool, blue areas of silk and grey areas of metal thread.
62
Another example of the deliberate choice of materials is seen in the detail of Joseph Fleeing Potiphar’s Wife. The part of the tapestry that is reproduced in figure 26 is almost entirely made of silk and metal thread; wool is found only in the dog’s head and in some shadow parts. The sumptuous bedlinens are made of silk, alluding to the softness and movement of the sheets. The metal thread in the draperies on Potiphar’s wife would have made her garment look shiny and opulent. It has lost much of its shine over the years, but its extravagant and seductive appearance remains. Figure 27 is a splendid illustration of the technical use of materials and their different hues to make a figure convincing. The hatching in the neck recreates the shadow from the man’s face. The ear has a strong line which is darker in the lower part and lighter in the higher part, where more light is reflected. The shade in and under his eyes is very natural and has a sfumatura sense thanks to the nuances in colors. Even though the man would be typified as blonde, one can find white, brown, beige, yellow and even orange-pink threads in these parts. The subtle color transitions in this figure contribute greatly to the way that the human brain connects the tapestry to reality, giving it a high degree of naturalism and lifelikeness.
Figure 27a Detail of Joseph Taking Simeon Hostage, Nicolas Karcher and Bronzino, before September 1547, and 27b, demonstrating the different hues in the hair.
63
The examples above have demonstrated that the materiality of the tapestries is related to the portrayed materials. The naturalism of the figures and surface expressions is further enhanced by the way that the materials are used in juxtaposition and by the variety in techniques employed by the weaver. His abilities in this regard are paramount in establishing a relation between the materials and the represented figure or surface.
Comparing Rost and Karcher By closely studying the tapestries’ materiality, one can point out differences between the tapestries from Rost’s workshop and those from Karcher’s workshop. While Karcher pushes the limits of the technique when rendering details, Rost tends to more clearly outline the chiaroscuro, which sometimes results in geometric boundaries of chromatic areas. This has been characterized as a more prudent way of proceeding.168 The differences are very well visible in the borders, which display many similarities in their imagery (figures 28 and 29). Those by Karcher look more vivid, more colorful, reach better chiaroscuro effects, and have more definition. The differences are often visible in the faces as well. Compare, for example, figures 30 and 31. The dark man on the left (by Karcher) looks alive and active. He is more colorful, there are splashes of red in his face that are missing in the man on the right (Rost). In the second example (figure 32 by Karcher and 33 by Rost) the first figure is more expressive, looks more human. Rost’s portrait has harsh lines, there is a lack of tonal nuance, and there is no natural shadow in his face. Even though there is a general variety of quality between and within the tapestries as well, Rost’s figures often look more geometrical and rigid, their eyes fixed instead of suggesting movement. Karcher’s figures are softer, there is more variation in pose and facial expression, and the figures are more individualized.169
168 Innocenti and Bacci 2013 (see note 15), p. 65. 169 In some instances these differences in appearance are the result of conservation treatments.
64
Figure 28 Detail of the border of Joseph Figure 29 Detail of the border of the Sale of Fleeing Potiphar’s Wife, Nicolas Karcher Joseph, Jan Rost and Bronzino, before 15 July and Bronzino, before December 1549. 1549.
Figure 30 Detail The Dream of the Figure 31 Detail of The Distribution of Sheaves of Grain, Nicolas Karcher and Grain to Joseph’s Brothers, Jan Rost and Bronzino, before August 1549. Bronzino, before 16 August 1547.
Figure 32 Detail of Joseph Interprets Pharaoh’s Figure 33 Detail of Joseph Telling the Dreams of the Fat and Lean Kine, Nicolas Dream of the Sun, Moon, and Stars, Jan Rost Karcher and Salviati, before 16 May 1548. and Bronzino, before 3 August 1549.
65
Portraiture Some faces are individualized so clearly that it has been possible to identify them as portraits of Medici court relations. First and foremost, Joseph in Prison and the Banquet of Pharaoh may contain the portraits of Duchess Eleonora (figure 34a) and Duke Cosimo (figure 34b) themselves, who are served by what is possibly a representation of the dwarf Morgante. Meoni argued that there are more portraits of prominent cultural figures of this time included in the Joseph series. 170 An interesting example are the possible portraits of Michelangelo Buonarotti (figure 35a) and a self-portrait of Francesco Salviati (figure 35b) in the design by the latter of Joseph Interprets the Pharaoh’s Dreams of the Fat and Lean Kine. Meoni interprets this as an allusion to contemporary cultural life, and specifically to the debate of the paragone on the hierarchy of the arts, putting forth his design of the tapestry as an exposure of the wide range of surfaces that could be represented in painting. Other possible portraits are those of Pier Francesco Riccio (who oversaw the tapestry ateliers) and Charles V in Joseph’s Cup Found in Benjamin’s Sack.171 There may be many more portraits included in the tapestries that have not been identified yet, since many of the faces seem to have very characteristic and individualistic traits. These portraits of Cosimo, his family, and his court indicate that the tapestries are indeed alluding to discussions in a broader cultural context, as do the representations of intellectuals and painters of the court, who were active in Florence’s cultural life and participated in lively debates.172
170 Meoni 2015 (see note 68), pp. 49-59. 171 Meoni 2015 (see note 68), p. 56-57. 172 For example on the Questione della lingua, a literary discussion on which language to use, Meoni 2015 (see note 68), p. 58. Cosimo was fairly aware of the role of language in the cultural context. He fostered the study of the Florentine language and promoted its use in literature and scientific publications, as well as encouraged the translation and publication of various texts that had until then only been published in Latin, Eisenbichler 2001 (see note 2), p. xiii.
66
Figure 34 a and b Details of the portraits of Eleonora (a) and Cosimo (b) in Joseph in Prison and the Banquet of Pharaoh, Jan Rost and Bronzino, 1546-1547.
Figure 35 a and b Details of what may be the portraits of Michelangelo Buonarotti (a) and Francesco Salviati (b) in Joseph Interprets Pharaoh’s Dreams of the Fat and Lean Kine, Nicolas Karcher and Salviati, before 16 May 1548.
67
History of Medici Use Even though the tapestries are clearly made for the specific location of the Sala dei Duecento in Palazzo Vecchio, this is not the only place where they have been demonstrated. The archives mention that Cosimo desired to show the six already finished pieces of the Joseph set to Prince Philip of Spain in Genoa in October 1548. He had planned to go to Genoa himself, but he eventually sent his son Francesco. Another trip had been planned to take the (by then nearly finished) series to Genoa in 1551, but it seems like this idea was never carried out.173 In Florence, they were at times displayed outside the palace. On special occasions, the series hung outside or inside the Duomo, along with other fine pieces from the Medici collections, including the Creation set bought by Cosimo in 1551 (woven in Brussels).174 To celebrate the festival of San Giovanni (the city’s patron saint), the tapestries covered the ringhiere of Palazzo Vecchio in 1591, while a series on San Giovanni was displayed in the Loggia dei Lanzi, right next to the Palazzo. The tapestries have been restored after this occasion, although the mends were probably not high, since no mention of yarns used for this project is taken up in the archives.175
The Joseph tapestry series can be seen as one of the most successful Italian tapestry sets. It is the result of impressive, large scale designs by the most appreciated Florentine Renaissance painters, but also of the exceptional skills of the weavers in translating the designs into their woven forms. The high degree of naturalism and lifelikeness enables the public to connect what is seen in tapestry to real life. It is likely that these large figurative tapestry sets were seen as cultural enactors in their own right, for example by being a point of discussion in the various paragone debates.
173 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 74. 174 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 194. 175 Adelson 1990 (see note 4), p. 195.
68
Conclusion
While the tapestry enterprises of Cosimo I de’ Medici did not result in a thriving market for Florentine tapestries in Italy, as Saliti had presented it, it can still be seen as a successful business that held its head up-right for almost two centuries. The Flemish masters passed on their craft by teaching all of its secrets to a next generation of Florentine weavers, but the heydays of the Arazzeria Medicea were between 1545 and 1553. The combination of the skills of the Flemish masters and of Cosimo as their patron proved invaluable for the production of high-quality hangings. The Months series was among the last commissions that Karcher and Rost worked on, made only of silk, silver and gold. Tapestry production remained important when Vasari ran the decoration program of the Duke in 1555, although the materiality of the tapestries changed drastically. The later tapestries created under the direction of Tanai de’ Medici and, from 1588, Guasparre Papini, consisted mostly of a coarse wool. They were not brilliant and shiny, they were practical and functional. Cosimo’s interest in tapestry had been sparked by a general trend among the European courts. As has been demonstrated in the first chapter, tapestry grew more popular from the fifteenth century onwards. In the sixteenth century, tapestries served all sorts of purposes. However, their practical function became less important when their aesthetic function grew. Tapestry production was one of Flanders’ main industries, and even though some ateliers popped up in various cities in Europe, no master had yet set up shop permanently on the Italian peninsula. Some Italian patrons had successfully sent cartoons by Italian masters to Flanders to be made into tapestry, the most famous being the 1515 Acts of the Apostles designed by Raphael for Pope Leo X. In 1536, however, the first long lasting Flemish tapestry workshop was set up in Ferrara under the patronage of Duke Ercole d’Este. The atelier was mastered by Nicolas Karcher. Jan Rost, an independent master from Brussels, was one of his employees. In 1545, they both received workspaces in the city of Florence. At this time, Cosimo was working hard to prove his abilities as a leader. Investing in new and foreign industries was one of his ways to spur the Florentine economy. Since he had no family ties to the major European courts, he relied on the extensive web of Florentine merchants abroad. Bernardo di Zanobi Saliti was one of these merchants. In three letters he was able to pitch his idea and convince Cosimo that tapestry industry would be a craft fitting for the city of Florence. In 1545 the two weavers independently arrived in Florence, where they both received a place to work and materials to work with. They were expected to oblige the same
69
rules as their colleagues in Brussels, which warranted the quality standards. The weavers, on the other hand, promised to teach their craft to a new generation of Florentines. At the time that their contracts were renewed (in 1549 Rost’s and in 1550 Karcher’s), Rost’s workshop had 36 looms working, while Karcher had eighteen. Their workshops were growing, and so were their responsibilities of teaching. As they promised to pass on the art of weaving, dyeing, and all of the secrets that were part, they agreed to share knowledge that was usually not revealed outside the (family) workshop, at least not until the publication of books with ‘secret knowledge’ became more common. This was the way in which Cosimo ‘imported’ the craft of Flemish tapestry weaving and made it a durable establishment that could outlive the Flemish weavers themselves. As Saliti had already mentioned in his letters, the basic material that the weavers intended on using was wool that they would import from the Low Countries. It is not known where the silk and metal threads for these tapestries exactly came from. Even though the very basics of weaving are not complicated, special skills were needed to create figurative tapestries like the ones discussed here. Unlike painters, weavers could not add layers of color and they employed contrasted instead of colored modeling. Therefore, it was important to use threads dyed in the exact right hue of a color, enabling them to make transitions in a sfumatura way. Since Rost was allowed to build a tintoria, it is likely that he dyed his own threads. It remains unknown exactly which tasks were performed by the weavers in their workshops and which materials were bought ‘ready-made’. Karcher and Rost’s ways of working proved to be successful and Cosimo was satisfied with the first pieces of tapestry that came from their workshops. Already in the first piece, the Abundance by Rost and Bronzino, a connection between botany and tapestry is established through its iconography. Even though it did not turn out as the patron, weaver, and painter had expected, Cosimo decided to continue the commissions. Karcher and Salviati’s first piece, the Lamentation, was well received and used on special occasions in the main chapel of Palazzo Vecchio. More ‘sacred’ hangings were commissioned after this one. The weavers’ skills in reproducing cartoons in a lifelike manner is greatly visible in the tapestries by Bachiacca, the court painter specialized in scientific representation of nature. In the Grotesque spalliere, the weavers were able to convey the uniqueness of each of the represented figures by their choices of colors, by employing specific techniques, and by the juxtaposition of various materials. The Months series, based on Northern Netherlandish prints, challenged the weavers to work meticulously, which they did by employing silk warp threads.
70
However, what once was the foundation of their splendor is presently the main cause of their deterioration, since the yarns did not resist the oxidation process of the metals. Not only were the tapestries a way for Cosimo to demonstrate his interest and knowledge of science and natural history, they also showed his position in larger cultural debates. This is most clear in the Stories of Joseph the Hebrew tapestries, by which Cosimo presents himself as a just statesman. Since the borders of all of the tapestries in the set were created by (the workshop of) Bronzino, one could easily make the comparison between the tapestries made by (the workshops of) Rost and Karcher. Where Karcher’s figures showed more color, depth, individualism, and movement, Rost’s figures were more fixed, geometrical, and sometimes rather flat. All in all, however, the tapestries were very much appreciated, and they were displayed to the broader public outside the palace as well.
Taking the process of making and the materiality of the tapestries as a point of departure to investigate why Cosimo was interested in ‘importing’ the artisanal practice of this craft has proven to be rather fruitful. It is unfortunate that I was not able to investigate the tapestries with my own eyes, since most of them are in storage and therefore not accessible. However, this research has demonstrated that the study of an object’s materiality goes much further than empirical observation only. The materiality of the tapestries was important to the patron from the very beginning of the enterprise, as was evidenced by the notes in the letters from Saliti, inquiring what kinds of wool the weavers would use. The import of wool from Flanders fitted into a traditional trade network between Florence and the Low Countries. Furthermore, the gold and shiny silks breathed a sense of splendor that must have appealed to Cosimo, who aspired to represent his power via art. As demonstrated in the discussion of Abundance, major-domo Riccio implied that Cosimo intended to use large amounts of gold in the tapestries. Even though they were aware that the metals would oxide and turn black rather quickly, the weavers kept using the material freely in the tapestries that followed. Materiality, thus, was an important point of consideration for the investment in this foreign craft. Diving deeper into the tapestries’ materiality has resulted in the discovery of other ties between the process of making of tapestry and Cosimo’s patronage. There are overt links between Cosimo’s interest in nature and the tapestries’ iconography, which in all cases includes plants, animals, and references to other forces of nature. This connection is also found in the placement of the workshops, especially that of Rost. His workshop was close to the later Casino
71
di San Marco, a breeding ground for artistic and technological development. It was a place where many different artisanal practices came together. It is possible that Cosimo chose this place with a vision in mind of artisanal exchange between the weavers and other craftsmen. Future research could focus on investigating the various interdependencies of specialized craftsmen and on their ways of collaborating and sharing knowledge. The study of the 1549 and 1550 contracts pointed to salient differences between the workshops of Rost and Karcher, evidencing a dissimilar development of the independent workshops. Their different yearly stipends and the amount of looms have often been discussed in literature. Scholars also noted that Rost was allowed to build a tintoria and a guardaroba, but no scholar has investigated the consequences that these innovations would have on the process of making of Rost’s tapestries and on his competitive position in relation to Karcher. One can assume that Rost, after having built his tintoria, dyed (at least parts of) the yarns for his tapestries within his own workshop. It is not known where Karcher had his yarns dyed, if this was in Florence or elsewhere. It is possible to see differences between the productions of the two workshops from photographic reproductions, as was outlined in chapter 6. Scientific data on the different dyes and fabrics could provide further insight into the differences in the process of making between the two workshops, which might also explain their dissimilar developments. One could track the relations between the tapestry weavers and other artists and artisans even further by, for example, investigating who created the looms that they worked on or where they bought their metal threads. In a world where many of the objects that surround us in daily life are disposable and where large parts of the processes of making are automatized, it can be hard to grasp the importance that operational knowledge of materials and techniques would have in the sixteenth century. I believe that the materiality approach to art history can shed new light on the broader network in which the materials of artifacts existed and how these materials were connected to the everyday reality.
72
Bibliography
Adelson, Candace, The Tapestry Patronage of Cosimo I de’Medici: 1545-1553, New York 1990.
———, ‘Documents for the Foundation of Tapestry Weaving under Cosimo I de’ Medici’, in: Andrew Morrogh (ed.), Renaissance Studies in Honor of Craig Hugh Smyth, Florence 1985, pp.3-12.
Beretta, Marco, ‘Material and Temporal Powers at the Casino Di San Marco (1574–1621)’, in: Sven Dupré (ed.), Laboratories of Art. Alchemy and Art Technology from Antiquity to the 18th Century, Cham 2014, pp. 129–56.
Bernardoni, Andrea, ‘Artisanal Processes and Epistemological Debate in the Works of Leonardo Da Vinci and Vannoccio Biringuccio’, in: Sven Dupré (ed.), Laboratories of Art. Alchemy and Art Technology from Antiquity to the 18th Century, Cham 2014, pp. 53–78.
Brown, Clifford Malcolm, Guy Delmarcel, and Anna Maria Lorenzoni, Tapestries for the Courts of Federico II, Ercole, and Ferrante Gonzaga, 1522-1563, New York 1996.
Butters, Suzanne, The Triumph of Vulcan: Sculptors’ Tools, Porphyry, and the Prince in Ducal Florence, Florence 1996.
Campbell, Thomas P., Tapestry in the Renaissance: Art and Magnificence, New York (The Metropolitan Museum of Art) 2002.
Caneva, Catarina, and Gianna Bacci, Meraviglie Tessute Della Galleria Degli Uffizi: Il Restauro Di Tre Arazzi Medicei, Firenze 2000.
Carugo, Adriano (trans. and ed.), De La Pirotechnia di Vannoccio Biringuccio, Milano 1977 (1540).
Chiarelli, Caterina (ed.), Gli Arazzi Dei Granduchi. Un Patrimonio da Non Dimenticare, Livorno 2006.
Ciuti, Ilaria, ‘Gli Arazzi Dei Medici Tornano a Firenze’, La Repubblica, 17 April 2018
Dolcini, Loretta, and Lucia Meoni (eds.), Giuseppe Negli Arazzi Di Pontormo e Bronzino: Viaggio Tra i Tesori Del Quirinale, Rome (Palazzo del Quirinale) 2010.
Edelstein, Sidney M., and Hector C. Borghetti (trans. and ed.), The Plictho of Gioanventura Rosetti: Instructions in the Art of the Dyers […], Cambridge/Massachusets/London 1969 (1548).
Eisenbichler, Konrad, The Cultural Politics of Duke Cosimo de’ Medici, Aldershot 2001.
73
Else, Felicia M., ‘Globefish, Sturgeon and Trout: Duke Cosimo I de’ Medici, Bachiacca and the Consuming of Fish’, Medicea 9 (2011), pp. 20–29.
Forti Grazzini, Nello, ‘Flemish Weavers in Italy in the Sixteenth Century’, in: Guy Delmarcel (ed.), Flemish Tapestry Weavers Abroad. Emigration and the Founding of Manufactories in Europe, Leuven 2002, pp. 131–62.
———, L’Arazzo Ferrarese, Milano 1982.
Godart, Louis (ed.), Il Principe Dei Sogni. Giuseppe Negli Arazzi Medici Di Pontormo e Bronzino, Rome/Florence/Milan 2015.
Goldthwaite, Richard A., The Economy of Renaissance Florence, Florence 2009.
Goudriaan, Elisa (trans.), Giorgio Vasari, I Ragionamenti. Verklaringen van Giorgio Vasari, Schilder En Architect Uit Arezzo, Bij de Inventies Die Door Hem Werden Geschilderd in Het Paleis van de Doorluchtige Hoogheden in Florence, Gericht Tot de Zeer Verheven En Illustere Don Francesco de’ Medici, 2006 (1559).
Innocenti, Clarice and Gianna Bacci (eds.), Gli Arazzi Con Storie Di Giuseppe Ebreo per Cosimo I de’Medici. Il Restauro, Firenze 2013.
Innocenti, Clarice (ed.), Il Restauro Degli Arazzi, Firenze 2016.
Kieffer, Fanny, ‘The Laboratories of Art and Alchemy at the Uffizi Gallery in Renaissance Florence: Some Material Aspects’, in: Sven Dupré (ed.), Laboratories of Art. Alchemy and Art Technology from Antiquity to the 18th Century, Cham 2014, pp. 105–27.
La France, Robert G., Bachiacca: Artist of the Medici Court, Florence 2008.
———, ‘Bronzino and Friends. The Medici-Toledo Tapestries’, in: Andrea M. Gáldy (ed.), Agnolo Bronzino: Medici Court Artist in Context, Cambridge 2013, pp. 67–80.
Lehmann, Ann-Sophie, ‘The Matter of the Medium: Some Tools for an Art Theoretical Interpretation of Materials’, in: Christy Anderson, Anne Dunlop, and Pamela H. Smith (eds.), The Matter of Art: Materials, Technologies, Meanings 1200-1700, Manchester 2015, pp. 21–41.
Meoni, Lucia, Gli Arazzi Nei Musei Fiorentini, La Collezione Medicea, Catalogo Completo, I. La Manifattura Da Cosimo I a Cosimo II (1545-1621), Livorno 1998.
———, La Nascita Dell’Arazzeria Medicea: Dalle Botteghe Dei Maestri Fiamminghi Alla Manifattura Ducale Dei ‘Creati Fiorentini’, Livorno 2008.
74
———, ‘Portraits of Michelangelo and Other Famous Men in the Medici Joseph Tapestries Woven by Jan Rost and Nicolas Karcher and Designed by Pontormo, Bronzino and Salviati’, in: Philippe Bordes and Pascal-François Bertrand (eds.), Portrait e Tapisserie = Portrait and Tapestry, Turnhout 2015, pp. 49–59.
Nuttall, Paula, From Flanders to Florence: The Impact of Netherlandish Painting, 1400-1500, New Haven 2004.
Ricci, Antonio, ‘Lorenzo Torrentino and the Cultural Programme of Cosimo I de’ Medici’, in: Konrad Eisenbichler (ed.), The Economy of Renaissance Florence, Aldershot 2001, pp. 103–119.
Rosen, Mark, The Mapping of Power in Renaissance Italy, Cambridge 2014.
Shearman, John, and John White, Raphael’s Tapestries and Their Cartoons, New York 1972.
Slits, Frans, Laurentius Torrentinus: Drukker van Cosimo Hertog van Florence, +/- 1500-1563, Gemert 1995.
Sman, Gert Jan van der, and Bouk Wierda, ‘Wisselend Succes. De loopbanen van Nederlandse en Vlaamse kunstenaars in Florence, 1450-1600’, in: Frits Scholten, Joanna Woodall, and Dulcia Meijers (eds.) Art and Migration. Netherlandish Artists on the Move, 1400-1750, Leiden 2013 (Netherlands Yearbook for Art History 63), pp. 171–239.
Smit, Hillie, ‘Flemish Tapestry Weavers in Italy c. 1420-1520. A Survey and Analysis of the Activity in Various Cities’, in: Guy Delmarcel (ed.) Flemish Tapestry Weavers Abroad. Emigration and the Founding of Manufactories in Europe, Leuven 2002, pp. 113–30.
Smith, Cyril Stanky, and Martha Teach Gnudi (trans. and ed.), The Pirotechnia of Vannoccio Biringuccio: The Classic Sixteenth Century Treatise on Metals and Metallurgy, New York 1990.
Smith, Graham, ‘Cosimo I and the Joseph Tapestries for the Palazzo Vecchio’, Renaissance and Reformation 6 (1982) 3, pp. 183–96.
Smith, Pamela H., ‘Making and Knowing: Craft as Natural Philosophy’, in Pamela H. Smith, Amy R. W. Meyers, and Harold J. Cook (eds.), Ways of Making and Knowing. The Material Culture of Empirical Knowledge, Ann Arbor 2014, pp. 17–47.
Veen, Henk van (ed.), Giorgio Vasari. De Levens van de Grootste Schilders, Beeldhouwers En Architecten. Deel I & II, Gekozen En Ingeleid Door Henk van Veen, 5th edition, Amsterdam 2013.
Veen, Henk Th. van, Cosimo I de’ Medici and His Self-Representation in Florentine Art and Culture, Cambridge 2006.
75
Wauters, Alphonse, Les Tapisseries Bruxelloises. Essai Historique Sur Les Tapisseries et Les Tapissiers de Haute et de Basse-Lice de Bruxelles, Brussels 1878.
Ysselsteyn, G.T. van, Geschiedenis Der Tapijtweverijen in de Noordelijke Nederlanden. Bijdrage Tot de Geschiedenis Der Kunstnijverheid, Leiden 1936.
76
List of Archival Sources
ASF NA = Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Notarile Antecosimiano ASF MdP = Archivio di Stato di Firenze, Mediceo del Principato
Saliti Letters: From Bernardo Saliti in Ferrara to Nicolo Boni in Florence, 31 January 1545. ASF, MdP 1170a, insert II, busta 10, fol. 30r-v.
From Bernardo Saliti in Ferrara to Bongianni Gianfigliazzi in Florence, 1 April 1545. ASF, MdP 1170a, insert II, busta 10, fol. 31r-v.
From Bernardo Saliti in Ferrara to Nicolo Boni in Florence, 23 and 25 June 1545. ASF, MdP 1170a, insert II, busta 10, fol. 32r-v
The letters have been digitized by the Medici Archive Project and are accessible via http://www.medici.org/.
Contracts: Contract Jan Rost, 20 October 1546 ASF, NA G.299, ser Giovan Battista Giordani, 1546-1547, 131r-133v.
Contract Nicolas Karcher, 20 October 1546 ASF, NA G.299, ser Giovan Battista Giordani, 1546-1547, 127r-129r.
Renewed Contract Jan Rost, 3 September 1549 ASF, NA G. 299 Ser Giovan Battista Giordani, 1549-1550, fols. 71r-75r.
Renewed Contract Nicolas Karcher, ASF, NA G. 299 Ser Giovan Battista Giordani, 1549-1550, fols. 366r-369r.
77
List of Illustrations
Chapter 1
1. Maestro Zoanne Tedesco, Saint Petronius, fragment of lectern cover, tapestry woven in Bologna in 1503, Museo di San Petronio, Bologna (Photo: author).
Chapter 2
2. Schematic Representation of the Monograms of Jan Rost and Nicolas Karcher (Photo: Helen Churchill Candee, The Tapestry Book, New York 1935). 3. Detail of the renewed contract of Karcher, ASF, NA G299, ser Giovan Battista Giordani, 1549- 1550, fols. 366r-369r (Photo: author). 4. Detail of the renewed contract of Rost, ASF, NA G299, ser Giovan Battista Giordani, 1549- 1550, fols. 71r-75r (Photo: author). 5. Dyeing wool cloth, Bartholomaeus Anglicus, Livre des propriétés des choses, 1482. British Library Royal MS 15.E.iii, folio 269 (Photo: http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/utk/england/popup/wool.htm, accessed 18 August 2018).
Chapter 3
6. Schematic representation of warp and weft threads (Photo: scan from Catarina Caneva and Gianna Bacci, Meraviglie Tessute Della Galleria Degli Uffizi: Il Restauro Di Tre Arazzi Medicei, Firenze 2000, words ‘warp’ and ‘weft’ and arrows added by author). 7. The Weaver, Jost Amman and Hans Sachs, Eygentliche Beschreibung aller Stände auff Erden: Der Weber, Frankfurt am Main 1568 (Photo:https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Eygentliche_Beschreibung_Aller_St%C3%A4nde_auff_E rden:Der_Weber, accessed August 2018). 8. The back of a tapestry in the process of being woven (Photo: Thomas P. Campbell, Tapestry in the Renaissance: Art and Magnificence, The Metropolitan Museum, New York 2002, p.5). 9. Macrophotograph of figure XXIX (Photo: Clarice Innocenti and Gianna Bacci (eds.), Gli Arazzi Con Storie Di Giuseppe Ebreo per Cosimo I de’Medici. Il Restauro, Firenze 2013, p. 63). 10. Macrophotographs of figure XL (Photo: Clarice Innocenti and Gianna Bacci (eds.), Gli Arazzi Con Storie Di Giuseppe Ebreo per Cosimo I de’Medici. Il Restauro, Firenze 2013, p. 268).
78
11. Macrophotographs of a gilt thread with a silk core. (Photo: Clarice Innocenti and Gianna Bacci (eds.), Gli Arazzi Con Storie Di Giuseppe Ebreo per Cosimo I de’Medici. Il Restauro, Firenze 2013, p. 267).
Chapter 4
12. Schematic representation of crapautage and arondissement. (Photo: Catarina Caneva and Gianna Bacci, Meraviglie Tessute Della Galleria Degli Uffizi: Il Restauro Di Tre Arazzi Medicei, Firenze 2000). 13. Detail of Lamentation, see figure IV. (Photo: Thomas P. Campbell, Tapestry in the Renaissance: Art and Magnificence, The Metropolitan Museum, New York 2002, p.529). 14. Detail of Lamentation, see figure IV. (Photo: Catarina Caneva and Gianna Bacci, Meraviglie Tessute Della Galleria Degli Uffizi: Il Restauro Di Tre Arazzi Medicei, Firenze 2000). 15. a Detail of the Lamentation, see figure IV. b See figure 15a (Photo: Catarina Caneva and Gianna Bacci, Meraviglie Tessute Della Galleria Degli Uffizi: Il Restauro Di Tre Arazzi Medicei, Firenze 2000).
Chapter 5
16. The Grotesques as they probably hung in the Sala dell’Udienza in Palazzo Vecchio. (Photo: https://theaitalianjob.blogspot.com/2017/05/renaissance-tapestries-and-textiles.html, accessed 18 August 2018). 17. Detail of Grotesques with Fish, see figure XIII (Photo: Felicia Else). 18. Detail of the Grotesques with Fish, see figure XIII (Photo: Felicia Else). 19. Detail of the Grotesques with Fish, see figure XIII (Photo: Felicia Else). 20. Detail of the Grotesque Spalliera with a Putto Under a Half-Baldachin on the Right, see figure XVII (Photo: Robert G. La France). 21. Detail of the Grotesque Spalliera with a Putto Under a Half-Baldachin on the Left, see figure XII (Photo: Robert G. La France). 22. Detail of December, January and February, see figure XXI (Photo: Robert La France). 23. a and b Detail of December, January and February, see figure XXI (Photos: Clarice Innocenti (ed.), Il Restauro Degli Arazzi, Firenze 2016).
79
Chapter 6
24. Detail of Reunion of Joseph and Jacob in Egypt, see figure XXXIX.
25. Detail of Joseph Tellling the Dream of the Sun, Moon, and Stars, see figure XXX.
26. a. Detail of Joseph Fleeing Potiphar’s Wife, see figure XXVIII.
b. Schematic representation of the distribution of wool, silk, and metal threads in Joseph
Fleeing Potiphar’s Wife, see figure XXVIII
(Photo: Clarice Innocenti and Gianna Bacci (eds), Gli Arazzi Con Storie Di Giuseppe Ebreo per
Cosimo I de’Medici. Il Restauro, Firenze 2013, p. 224).
27. a. and b. Details of Joseph Taking Simeon Hostage, see figure XXXII
28. Detail of the border of Joseph Fleeing Potiphar’s Wife, see figure XXVIII.
29. Detail of the border of The Sale of Joseph, see figure XXV.
30. Detail Joseph’s Dream of the Sheaves of Grain, see figure XXIII.
31. Detail of The Distribution of Grain to Joseph’s Brothers, see figure XXXI.
32. Detail of Joseph Interprets Pharaoh’s Dreams of the Fat and Lean Kine, see figure XXX.
33. Detail of Joseph Telling the Dream of the Sun, Moon, and Stars, see figure XXIV.
(Photo: Clarice Innocenti and Gianna Bacci, eds., Gli Arazzi Con Storie Di Giuseppe Ebreo per
Cosimo I de’Medici. Il Restauro, Firenze 2013, p. 209).
34. a. Possible portrait of Eleonora in figure XXVIII.
b. Possible portrait Cosimo in figure XXVIII.
35. a. Possible portrait of Michelangelo Buonarotti in figure XXIX.
b. Possible portrait of Francesco Salviati in figure XXIX.
80
List of Figures Appendix 1:
I. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Abundance (Dovizia), 8 September 1545, warp: wool, 8-10 per cm, weft: wool, silk, spun silver, silver-gilt threads, 32-40 per cm, 2.4x1.5 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 540, Florence (Photo: http://archive.artic.edu/medici/55.html, accessed August 2018).
II. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Justice Vindicating Innocence, 22 April 1546, warp: wool, 7-9 per cm, weft: wool, silk, spun silver, silver-gilt threads, 30-80 per cm., 2.42x1.69 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 539, Florence (Photo: Thomas P. Campbell, Tapestry in the Renaissance: Art and Magnificence, The Metropolitan Museum, New York 2002, p. 519).
III. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Spring (Primavera), 15 May 1546, warp: wool, 7.5-9 per cm., weft: wool, silk, spun silver, silver-gilt threads, 32-over 60 wefts, 2.35x1.68 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 541, Florence (Photo: https://www.gettyimages.nl/detail/illustratie/flora-tapestry-by-jan-rost-on-board- by-agnolo-stock-afbeelding/540777419, accessed August 2018).
IV. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco Salviati (design), Lamentation, 31 July 1546, warp: wool, 9-10 threads per cm., weft: wool, silk, spun silver, silver-gilt thread, 36-over 44 wefts per cm, 2.02x1.985 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 773, Florence (Photo: Thomas P. Campbell, Tapestry in the Renaissance: Art and Magnificence, The Metropolitan Museum, New York 2002, p. 527).
V. Francesco de’ Rossi, called Salviati, Lamentation over the Dead Christ, 1539-1541, oil on canvas, 3.22x1.93m., Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan. (Photo: https://pinacotecabrera.org/en/collezione-online/opere/compianto-sul-cristo-morto/, accessed 18 August 2018).
VI. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco de’Rossi called Salviati (design), Ecce Homo, 12 October 1547, warp: wool, 9-11 threads per cm., weft: silk, 32-over 50 threads per cm., 2.22x2.15 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 60 (on deposit to the Galleria degli Uffizi), Florence. (Photo: https://www.akg-images.com/archive/- 2UMDHUJ1FHOW.html, accessed 18 August 2018).
81
VII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco de’Rossi called Salviati (design), Resurrection, between 1545-1549, warp: wool, 9-11 threads per cm., weft: silk, 32-over 50 threads per cm., 2.28x2.18m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 59 (on deposit to the Galleria degli Uffizi), Florence. (Photo: Catarina Caneva and Gianna Bacci, Meraviglie Tessute Della Galleria Degli Uffizi: Il Restauro Di Tre Arazzi Medicei, Firenze 2000).
VIII. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco de’Rossi called Salviati (design), The Entombment, before 1561, warp: wool, 9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, spun silver, silver-gilt thread, 1.08x0.93m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 582 (on deposit to the Museo degli Argenti), Florence. (Photo: Caterina Chiarelli (ed.), Gli Arazzi Dei Granduchi. Un Patrimonio da Non Dimenticare, ed. by Caterina Chiarelli, Livorno 2006).
Grotesques
IX. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque Spalleria with a Figure of Charity at the Center, ca. 1549, warps: wool, 7-9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 30-70 threads per cm, 2.345x7.4 m, Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 499 (Palazzo Davanzati), Florence (Photo: Robert La France).
X. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque Spalliera with an Allegorical Figure (Fortune?) at the Center, ca. 1549, warps: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 40 threads per cm, 2.26x5.3m. (original width: 5.23-5.30 m.), Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 500), On deposit to the home of the Prefect of Florence, Florence (Photo: Robert La France).
XI. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque Spalliera with a Bust of a Woman at the Center, ca. 1549, warps: wool, 9-10 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 32 – over 60 threads per cm, 2.31x3.47m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 39), Florence (Photo: Robert La France).
82
XII. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque Spalliera with the Threshing of Grain at the Center, ca. 1549, warps: wool, 8-9.5 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 40-over 50 threads per cm, 2.24x4.07m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 38), Florence (Photo: Robert La France).
XIII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque with a Putto under a Half-Baldachin at the Left, before 1553, warps: wool, 8-10 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.72x1.43 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 498), On deposit to the Italian Embassy, London (Photo: Robert La France, this was the most complete image of this tapestry I could find).
XIV. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque Spalliera with a Fish at the Center, before 1553, warps: wool, 9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.2x2.78m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 501), On deposit to the Italian Embassy, London (Photo: Felicia Else).
XV. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque with Peacock at the Center, before 1553, warps: wool, 9-10 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.2x2.455m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 502), On deposit to the Italian Embassy, London (Photo: Robert La France).
XVI. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque Spalliera with Two Putti under a Baldachin, before 1553, warps: wool, 9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.19x2.55m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 503), On deposit to the Italian Embassy, London (Photo: Robert La France).
XVII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque Spalliera with an Eel in a Globe of Water at the Center, before 1553, warps: wool, 9-10 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.3x2.15m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 496), On deposit to the Italian Embassy, London (Photo: Robert La France).
83
XVIII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca (design), Grotesque Spalliera with a Putto under a Half-Baldachin at the Right, before 1553, warps: wool, 9- 11 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.32x1.45 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 497), On deposit to the Italian Embassy, London (Photo: Robert La France, this was the most complete image I could find of this tapestry).
Months
XIX. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca, Months of March, April and May, before September 1553, warp: silk, weft: silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.69x4.39, Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 526), Florence (Photo: Robert La France).
XX. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca, Months of June and July, before September 1553, warp: silk, weft: silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.69x3.18m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 524), Florence (Photo: Robert La France).
XXI. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca, Months of August, September, October, and November, before May 1552, warp: silk, weft: silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 2.7x5.34m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 527), Florence (Photo: Robert La France).
XXII. Jan Rost (weaving) and Francesco Ubertini, called Bachiacca, Months of December, January, and February, before September 1553, warp: silk, weft: silk, silver- and gilt- metal thread, 2.63x4.25m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici (IA 525), Florence (Photo: Robert La France).
84
Stories of Joseph the Hebrew
XXIII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Joseph’s Dream of the Sheaves of Grain, August 1549, warp: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt- metal thread, 36-40 threads per cm., 5.74x2.96 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 730, Florence.
XXIV. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Joseph Telling the Dream of the Sun, Moon, and Stars, August 1549, warp: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt- metal thread, 36-44 threads per cm, 5.71x4.85 m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 731, Florence.
XXV. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), The Sale of Joseph, 1548-1549, warp: wool, 6-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 5.68x5.03m., Quirinal Palace (115), Rome.
XXVI. Jan Rost (weaving) and Jacopo Pontormo (design), Jacob’s Lament, 1553, warp: wool, 8- 9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 5.67x2.9m., Quirinal Palace (111), Rome.
XXVII. Jan Rost (weaving) and Jacopo Pontormo (design), The Temptation of Joseph, 1546- 1547, warp: wool, 8,5-10 threads per cm., weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 5.7x2.73m., Quirinal Palace (110), Rome.
XXVIII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Joseph Fleeing Potiphar’s Wife, 1549, warp: wool, 8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 26-40 threads per cm, 5.81x4.65m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 729, Florence.
XXIX. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Joseph in Prison and the Banquet of Pharaoh, 1546-1547, warp: wool, 8-9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, Quirinal Palace (118), Rome.
85
XXX. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Francesco de’ Rossi called Salviati, Joseph Interprets Pharaoh’s Dreams of the Fat and Lean Kine, 1548, warp: wool, 7 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 34-40 threads per cm., 5.73x4.46m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 728, Florence.
XXXI. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), The Distribution of Grain to Joseph’s Brothers, 1547, warp: wool, 9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 32-38 threads per cm., 5.73x4.37m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 727, Florence.
XXXII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Joseph Taking Simeon Hostage, 1547, warp: wool, 8.5-10 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 5.81x2.7m., Quirinal Palace (117), Rome.
XXXIII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Joseph Receiving Benjamin, 1550- 1553, warp: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 34- 40 threads per cm., 5.74x3.0m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 725, Florence.
XXXIV. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), The Banquet of Joseph for his Brothers, 1550-1553, warp: wool, 8-9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt- metal thread, 5.765x5.28m., Quirinal Palace (113), Rome.
XXXV. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Discovery of Joseph’s Cup Benjamin’s Sack, 1550-1553, warp: wool, 8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 5.79x5.06m., Quirinal Palace (114), Rome.
XXXVI. Jan Rost (weaving) and Pontormo (design), Joseph Arresting Benjamin, 1546-1547, warp: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 5.67x2.69m., Quirinal Palace (109), Rome.
XXXVII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Joseph Reveals Himself to His Brothers, 1550-1553, warp: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt- metal thread, 34-40 threads per cm., 5.57x2.83m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 726, Florence.
86
XXXVIII. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Joseph Forgives His Brothers, 1550- 1553, warp: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 34- 40 threads per cm., 5.73x4.57m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 724, Florence.
XXXIX. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Reunion of Joseph and Jacob in Egypt’, 1550-1553, warp: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt- metal thread, 32-40 threads per cm., 5.68x4.57m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 723, Florence.
XL. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Pharaoh Presents the Land of Goshen to Jacob and His Family, 1553, warp: wool, 7-9 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 5.74x4.24m., Quirinal Palace (112), Rome.
XLI. Nicolas Karcher (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Jacob Blesses the Sons of Joseph, 1550-1553, warp: wool, 7-8 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 34-40 threads per cm., 5.8x4.68m., Soprintendenza per i Beni Artistici e Storici, IA 732, Florence.
XLII. Jan Rost (weaving) and Bronzino (design), Burial of the Bones of Joseph (or Jacob), 1553, warp: wool, 7-8.5 threads per cm, weft: wool, silk, silver- and gilt-metal thread, 5.81x2.8m., Quirinal Palace (116), Rome.
(All photos of the Stories of Joseph the Hebrew via: http://exibit.quirinale.it/2015_arazzigiuseppe/tour_arazzigiuseppe.html, accessed 17 August 2018).
87
Appendix I Additional Illustrations
Figure I
Figure III Figure II
88
Figure IV Figure V
Figure VI Figure VII
Figure VIII 89
Figure IX
Figure X
Figure XI
90
Figure XII
Figure XIII
Figure XIV
91
Figure XV
Figure XVI
92
Figure XVII
Figure XVIII
93
Figure XIX
Figure XX
94
Figure XXI
Figure XXII
95
Figure XXIV Figure XXIII
Figure XXV Figure XXVI
96
Figure XXVII Figure XXVIII
Figure XXIX Figure XXX
97
Figure XXXI Figure XXXII
Figure XXXIII Figure XXXIV
98
Figure XXXV Figure XXXVI
Figure XXXVII Figure XXXVIII
99
Figure XXXIX Figure XL
Figure XLI Figure XLII
100
Appendix II Table of Dyestuffs Found in Tapestries
Picture of the Raw Material Name
Weld
Safflower
Woad
Smoketree (Cotinus coggygria)
Cochineal (to make carmine)
Indigo
101